Best Argument Against Eastern Orthodoxy?

[BaileyKeys]

I spoke to a Russian Orthodox priest this Sunday, and one of the questions I ask him was “Is the Bible infallible in your church?”. Obviously he said No. But he also said the west has become overly scholastic in their way of interpreting scripture, relying on their own understanding rather than leaving it all up to “mystery” and “its all up to God”.

What is an appropriate response for this answer? Also overall, what is the best argument against Eastern Orthodoxy? Please go in detail as possible!

 

[RamistThomist]

I spoke to a Russian Orthodox priest this Sunday, and one of the questions I ask him was “Is the Bible infallible in your church?”. Obviously he said No. But he also said the west has become overly scholastic in their way of interpreting scripture, relying on their own understanding rather than leaving it all up to “mystery” and “its all up to God”.

What is an appropriate response for this answer? Also overall, what is the best argument against Eastern Orthodoxy? Please go in detail as possible!

I'm surprised by his answer. Most would say yes, but not the only model. He might be confusing solo scriptura with sola scriptura. Biblicists do the same thing.

There is no one single argument against EO. I can think of a number of definitional differences, each of which could take up hours:

Filioque
Apostolic succession
Verifying oral tradition
Icons
Bishops (although their view is better than Rome's).

The late Steve Hays has some great material on EO.

Three views of eastern orthodoxy-2

"Protestants themselves are selective with regard to the contents of the Bible, which Martin Luther demonstrated by rejecting, as a ‘book of...

triablogue.blogspot.com

Hermeneutical pedigree

Grano: Good lord, one hardly knows where to begin... SH: That’s one thing we both agree on. Grano: First of all, as Chrysostom’s reading of ...

triablogue.blogspot.com

Orthopods

Some Orthodox epologists have been piling on Josh Brisby over at his blog: http://joshbrisby.blogspot.com/2008/04/debate-weastern-orthodox-p...

triablogue.blogspot.com

https://bayouhuguenot.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/prima-facie-problems-with-orthodox-claims/ (yours truly)

Some quick responses to some thoughtless questions

There is still some discussion going on at Dan Wallace’s blog. Eric Todd, who visited the comments here, has provided some staccato-form qu...

triablogue.blogspot.com

 

[BaileyKeys]

I'm surprised by his answer. Most would say yes, but not the only model. He might be confusing solo scriptura with sola scriptura. Biblicists do the same thing.

There is no one single argument against EO. I can think of a number of definitional differences, each of which could take up hours:

Filioque
Apostolic succession
Verifying oral tradition
Icons
Bishops (although their view is better than Rome's).

The late Steve Hays has some great material on EO.

Three views of eastern orthodoxy-2

"Protestants themselves are selective with regard to the contents of the Bible, which Martin Luther demonstrated by rejecting, as a ‘book of...

triablogue.blogspot.com

Hermeneutical pedigree

Grano: Good lord, one hardly knows where to begin... SH: That’s one thing we both agree on. Grano: First of all, as Chrysostom’s reading of ...

triablogue.blogspot.com

Orthopods

Some Orthodox epologists have been piling on Josh Brisby over at his blog: http://joshbrisby.blogspot.com/2008/04/debate-weastern-orthodox-p...

triablogue.blogspot.com

https://bayouhuguenot.wordpress.com/2012/08/02/prima-facie-problems-with-orthodox-claims/ (yours truly)

Some quick responses to some thoughtless questions

There is still some discussion going on at Dan Wallace’s blog. Eric Todd, who visited the comments here, has provided some staccato-form qu...

triablogue.blogspot.com

No way you’re from Monroe? I’m from Ruston!

 

[RamistThomist]

No way you’re from Monroe? I’m from Ruston!

Awesome. I know some people at the PCA church there.

 

[BaileyKeys]

Awesome. I know some people at the PCA church there.

A couple years ago I probably played some of your students in basketball if you teach at Sterlington High School

 

[chuckd]

I spoke to a Russian Orthodox priest this Sunday, and one of the questions I ask him was “Is the Bible infallible in your church?”. Obviously he said No. But he also said the west has become overly scholastic in their way of interpreting scripture, relying on their own understanding rather than leaving it all up to “mystery” and “its all up to God”.

What is an appropriate response for this answer? Also overall, what is the best argument against Eastern Orthodoxy? Please go in detail as possible!

Are ecumenical councils infallible? I thought they believed that. Does it make sense that Holy Scripture can error, but councils cannot?

Also, their definition of what constitutes a council "ecumenical" (and therefore infallible) is "because we say so". Many councils disagree with each other so they have to go that route.

 

[RamistThomist]

Also, their definition of what constitutes a council "ecumenical" (and therefore infallible) is "because we say so". Many councils disagree with each other so they have to go that route.

That's a thorny issue. The easy (and original) answer is the Emperor. He called the council. Since there is no longer an emperor, who calls the council? The Ecumenical Patriarch thinks he does, but no one will follow him. Moscow has a better claim, but there are issues there.

 

[joebonni63]

I used to talk to this Catholic Preist and show him in the Bible where he might be in error ......... Without getting crazy about what we would talk about he was very receptive to scripture. It's not always going to be like this but if you become friends with the Preist of these types of Churches it would really help to move forward. Most of all this is not going to change over night we have to be patient. Although you would here more Reformed things in his preaching.

 

[RamistThomist]

I used to talk to this Catholic Preist and show him in the Bible where he might be in error ......... Without getting crazy about what we would talk about he was very receptive to scripture. It's not always going to be like this but if you become friends with the Preist of these types of Churches it would really help to move forward. Most of all this is not going to change over night we have to be patient. Although you would here more Reformed things in his preaching.

This is true to an extent, but many EO would shrug and say, "You aren't reading the bible with the phronema of the church because you lack nous."

 

[joebonni63]

This is true to an extent, but many EO would shrug and say, "You aren't reading the bible with the phronema of the church because you lack nous."

you know what that is a great point thats why this forum is great to feel things out.

 

[chuckd]

That's a thorny issue. The easy (and original) answer is the Emperor. He called the council. Since there is no longer an emperor, who calls the council? The Ecumenical Patriarch thinks he does, but no one will follow him. Moscow has a better claim, but there are issues there.

Council of Hieria was called by Emperor Constantine V.

 

[RamistThomist]

Council of Hieria was called by Emperor Constantine V.

Except when it doesn't count.

 

[Phil D.]

Moscow has a better claim, but there are issues there.

OK, I'll bite... How so?

 

[ZackF]

There are no silver bullet "best" arguments against poor expressions of Christianity because people are in those systems for different reasons.

 

[RamistThomist]

OK, I'll bite... How so?

They would say they are the Third Rome. I don't buy that idea, but they seem to like it. And there has long been suspicion that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is controlled by either Turks or the CIA or Freemasons (or probably all of them). However you gloss the situation, no one is calling an ecumenical council. The Council of Crete, for example, was supposed to happen a few years ago and it was a splash in the ocean.

 

[Phil D.]

They would say they are the Third Rome. I don't buy that idea, but they seem to like it. And there has long been suspicion that the Ecumenical Patriarchate is controlled by either Turks or the CIA or Freemasons (or probably all of them).

If the politicization of a patriarchy or metropolitanate is disqualifying, then Moscow has no better claim. Arguably worse. Macarius and Ivan the Terrible were co-conspirators in many politicoreligious intrigues. And Kirill and Putin are as thick as thieves in fomenting political imperialism and butchery.

 

[RamistThomist]

If the politicization of a patriarchy or metropolitanate is disqualifying, then Moscow has no better claim. Arguably worse. Macarius and Ivan the Terrible were co-conspirators in many politicoreligious intrigues. And Kirill and Putin are as thick as thieves in fomenting political imperialism and butchery.

I'm not defending them. I'm just saying what they think.

 

[Phil D.]

I'm not defending them. I'm just saying what they think.

OK, but I was responding to your statement that Moscow has a better claim.

 

[RamistThomist]

OK, but I was responding to your statement that Moscow has a better claim.

That might just be my perspective given my own jaundiced view of the EP and GOARCH.

 

[RamistThomist]

That might just be my perspective given my own jaundiced view of the EP and GOARCH.

Moscow might have a more brutal history, but in terms of world leadership among the Orthodox, especially in terms of a national church, Moscow might have a better claim. Constantinople really can't marshal a good claim; even the fabled see of Byzantium isn't one of the original sees. It was made so at Nicea.

 

[Phil D.]

Moscow might have a more brutal history, but in terms of world leadership among the Orthodox, especially in terms of a national church, Moscow might have a better claim. Constantinople really can't marshal a good claim; even the fabled see of Byzantium isn't one of the original sees. It was made so at Nicea.

I might agree in terms of a national church, but I don't see how that reasonably translates to world leadership among the Orthodox. The ROC can't even hold on to their own close-at-hand historical minions - the attempted regaining of which is a big reason for their current syndicate with Putin and his oxymoronic Pax Russica.

Interesting historical fact as relates to the imperial rights within EO nations: Thomas Palaiologos was the heir apparent to the last Byzantine emperor, Constantine XI, and he indeed briefly ruled a few Byzantine remnants in the Peloponnese, before fleeing to Italy to escape the Ottoman invasion of 1461. After his own death in 1465, Thomas' claim was passed to his eldest son Andreas, who for the sake of his own twisted power play willed the imperial titles over to the papist sycophants Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain. History is stranger than fiction...

 

[Phil D.]

However you gloss the situation, no one is calling an ecumenical council.

Agreed.

 

[RamistThomist]

Different people will find different arguments persuasive. One of the things that did it for me was the amount of Fathers that seemed to affirm the Filioque.

 

[arapahoepark]

I used to talk to this Catholic Preist and show him in the Bible where he might be in error ......... Without getting crazy about what we would talk about he was very receptive to scripture. It's not always going to be like this but if you become friends with the Preist of these types of Churches it would really help to move forward. Most of all this is not going to change over night we have to be patient. Although you would here more Reformed things in his preaching.

Haven't read the controversial thread yet have you...?

 

[Egoshev]

One of the things that did it for me was the amount of Fathers that seemed to affirm the Filioque.

Mr. Jacob, could you please elaborate and provide specific evidence?

 

[RamistThomist]

Mr. Jacob, could you please elaborate and provide specific evidence?

Westminster Theological Journal had an article on it about fifteen years ago. I'll look for it.

 

[Phil D.]

Westminster Theological Journal had an article on it about fifteen years ago.

Not to preempt any response from Jacob, but I've attached what I think is probably the article he was referring to.

I read the article some time ago, and one paucity in reference to patristic writers (pp. 163-165) is that when it comes to the early theologian that most developed the doctrine of the Filioque it gives no sources, but simply states, “Augustine’s teaching on the Holy Spirit proceeding from both the Father and the Son is, of course, well-known.” If one wants to read Augustine’s extensive arguments on the topic they can be found in his De Trinitate (Book 4, Ch. 20.29; Book 5, Ch. 11.12, 13.14, 14.15; Book 15, Ch. 17.29, 26.45, 26.47, 27.48).

On a sad note, the author of the article was raised RCC, converted to the Reformed faith in college, became a promising Reformed scholar, but then swam back over the Tiber just two years after he wrote the article.

 

[PointyHaired Calvinist]

Council of Hieria was called by Emperor Constantine V.

Hieria has a much better pedigree than Nicea II. Not that it’s huge but I see Hieria as the true seventh, and Dorat as the eighth.

 

[Ulster Fry]

Gavin Ortlund has some great material speaking against some of the central claims of EO (and the RCC). The online world went ballistic at this video he made on icons showing quite demonstrably in my view that Nicaea II is at odds with the early church. This is a big deal for the EO because they seem to claim an unbroken chain of apostolic tradition. He made further videos responding to EO and RCC apologists and he fares very well in my opinion.

 

[Ploutos]

@RamistThomist can you tell where the concept of the 7 ecumenical councils came from? Was Nicaea II really given the same credence in the west as in the east?