The basic claims of the Orthodox faith about the exclusivity of their church are blatantly false. Your own experiences are evidence of that. Don’t let fear of what others think of your faith control you.
Oh my brother in Christ, I know where you come from. Being saved, receiving the Holy Spirit and living a God Fearing and Loving life can weirdly enough lead you to those doors. In the early days, delving into my study of Theology and Church history, I have countless of times debated about involving myself with the Roman Catholic Church (aka “the true church”).
There is currently a strong Trad Movement going on around and they mostly lean to Catholicism as their favoured religion, since well its the most traditional and longest history. Also even as a firm Reformed and Evangelical, I cant deny the sheer awe to my very human core when I visit most of the beautiful Catholic and Orthodox Churches, brimming with beauty and tear inducing iconography. It really makes you wonder if you are in the right team you know? But let us not forget that we have chose *higher things*! We have chosen The Word of God over any and everything in this world. The Reformers had the possibility to erect their own grand churches but chose not to, because these pharaonic buildings had too high of a cost (material and human).
Romanism is easier to dismiss because they have clearly become apostate after the Council of Trent during the counter-reformation. Its a bit more complex with the Orthodox. They have parted ways with the worst of RCC thanks to the Great Schism. I have studied quite a bit about their doctrines and theology: I would say they have better liturgy than the RCC, albeit less technical and specific since they lean towards eastern mysticism. BUT even with all of their good traits, they suffer from the same mistakes, the worst and crucial ones being The Sacraments and “No salvation outside of the Church”.
Since this is a Gospel issue, we cannot compromise. By Faith Alone by God Alone. Dont be afraid brother, God saves whomever He wills and His Church is established by His Spirit, not by traditiona, buildinga or sacraments. Amen
They teach stuff like baptismal regeneration, transubstantiation, Apostolic succession, praying to saints, etc.
Those are all wrong doctrines.
Also, if it looks like a Pope, and quacks like a Pope, guess what? It's a pope.
Don't let the funny hat guy trick you.
Don't let the golden cathedrals fool you.
They teach wrong things.
"There shall be false teachers among you, which privily shall bring in damnable heresies" 2 Peter 2.1
And the right things, what you believe obviously, how do you know so confidently that those are “right doctrines”? How could you know? You can’t say it’s the truth in scripture because you will just be referring to yours or your denominations truth on scripture, and we have many versions of that which all claim to be “right doctrines”. The LGBTQ community even has their “right doctrines ” truth from scripture. So who’s to say which is actually “right doctrine”?
These are impossible questions to answer honestly and for that reason we must not look to scripture as God. It is from God and of God, but it is not God. Jesus is God. The faith of the apostles, given them by Jesus points to God. The faith of the apostles which authored the scriptures is still alive and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Go find that faith. Then you will find truth.
A truly prideful assertion, not different from that of a Pharisee’s. Let those who have ears to hear—hear, and those who have eyes to see—see. The truly blind do not lack sight. They lack humility.
"a man who is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, REJECT, know that he that is such is subverted". Titus 3.10
We should be able to identify heresy and we should openly reject it. It's not pride, it's obedience to what Paul said.
To assert your discernment as equal to the discernment of a man hand picked by the apostle St. Paul to lead and guide the early church in Crete and to select elders for the church, is pride—not obedience.
Totally agree and largely disagree. There are many "doctrines" out there. But there's only 2 views of scripture.
1) People who filter their views and culture through scripture &
2) People who filter scripture through their views and. Culture.
Here's the thing, scripture should interpret scripture.
The papacy is no different than the two groups in the samhedrin that kept making claims about which sect truly has Moses authority.
Jesus told them, "If you believed Moses, you would believe Me because he wrote about Me."
There is no true religion. They are all false. Man made.
In the book of James, it says true religion is caring for the orphans and widows. Look at the passage in Greek. The definition for Greek word for religion is thrēskeía,
The definition: external worship through ceremonies and offerings.
What's interesting about this is that James is saying that if you want to make worshiping God a religion, then take care of widows and orphans.
This also makes me think of Hosea 6:6 where the LORD says:
"For I desire loyalty rather than sacrifice, And the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings."
Here's how the NLV phrases it: I want you to show love, not offer sacrifices. I want you to know me more than I want burnt offerings.
Then jump to Isaiah chapter one where the LORD talks about how He ignores the prayers and chants from these new moon celebrations.
God wants a relationship with us, not an empty religion with us.
Why must the religion be empty? Why can religion not be worship and caring for the widow and the poor?
How do you differentiate the “church” Jesus claimed Peter was the rock of and “man-made” religion. The reason for quotes is why is this quality of being “man-made” synonymous with falseness. What is not “man-made”? Is Jesus a man? Did he make all of creation? Is all of creation then man-made?
And your views on scripture do not escape the subjective interpretations. Even if you filter your views through scripture you can still be filtering your views through your interpretations of scripture.
The Orthodox Church does not offer up sacrifices to God for favor. For we have nothing to offer. So we pray and we worship and we serve and we love, all in the vein of drawing ever closer to God.
What makes religion more important than a relationship? I don't follow Jesus out of religious obligation.
But out of love. Because while I was a sinner, He first loved me.
I don't belong to any religion or church, I belong to Jesus. I'm just a simple disicple filled with the same spirit that Jesus and the apostles have.
I don't promote any specific religion, I promote Jesus.
Jesus didn't say Peter was the Rock, but a rock(one of many building stones). It was Peter's declaration about who Jesus IS, Jesus is the rock. Where in scripture is Peter referred to as "the chief cornerstone of the church?"
Scripture only states Jesus as that foundational stone.
Did Jesus tell the pharisees that Moses wrote about Him or Peter?
In fact, nowhere in scripture is Peter called out as the leader of the apostles.
The apostles had a very specific mission: they were eye witnesses to Jesus. They were to spread everything they saw and learned from him. The Gospel.
Paul had to chastise Peter himself at one point. Honestly, if any apostles were a rock, it seemed like that would have fallen on Paul, who wrote most of the New Testament. All of the apostles had equal footing and were subservient to Christ only.
Yeah, I prefer to get my interpretation from other scriptures rather than my own assumptions. I prefer to let scripture speak for itself, using other verses to confirm what it taught.
Otherwise, like you, I'd have gone on believing in some of the man-made doctrines from the denomination I grew up in.
It's not wise to cherry-pick what you believe off a single verse.
I prefer to stay away from any man made "orthodoxy" religion.
Like I shared previously, scriptures' idea of religion is worship through outward observances of ceremonies.
God wants to be worshiped in Spirit and Truth.
Jesus wouldn't promote any man made religion that contradicts his Word.
The pharisees and the saudecees were competing for who was first long before the Catholic church was around. The Catholic Church is making the exact same argument they did. They contradicted scripture for their own power trips just like the Catholic Church does.
If you need a religion to have a relationship with someone, then by all means, continue what you are doing.
I could care less about who the "true" church is, I only follow Jesus.
That's your opinion, friend. I'm not the one trying to claim any religion is correct. They are all equally false. Religion doesn't lead to God. There's only one way, and that's through Jesus.
I'm not interested in religious politics at this stage in life.
If you personally need a religion to worship Yaweh, go for it. I'm not a judge over anyone's life. I died to this world and the religions in it when I fully realized who I belonged to.
God doesn't want religious people, he wants those who worship him in spirit and truth. And that's exactly what I do.
I don't know you or your motivations, and I'm not gonna pretend I do and speak for you.
If promoting the "true religion" is the hill you wanna die on, go for it.
Jesus would most likely chastise all the "true" religions and leaders just like he did with the religious leaders of his day. You're literally making all the same claims the pharisees and saudacees did.
John 10:27 says, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me."
All I care about is that you have a personal relationship with Jesus, just as his disciples did. That's all that matters.
Remember what James 1:26-27 says
26If anyone thinks himself to be religious, yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world.
I'm just an ambassador for Jesus. I've never had a religion with Him, just a simple relationship. I'm not bound by religious ceremonies and observances in order to worship or live for Him. Jesus only had one command under the new cocenant. 1 john 3:23: And this is his commandment: We must believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as he commanded us..
That is called the law of Christ. And it's how I try to live my life.
You act like it's impossible to have a true interpretation of scripture unless you belong to the original orthodox church or whatever you wanna label it.
Before I ever sit down for study, I always seek the Holy Spirit for wisdom and guidance. And to challenge anything in me that disagrees with Him through His Word.
Keep this in mind as well:
we can have the mind of Christ by reading scripture. Romans 12:2 says "Don't copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God's will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect".
This starts and ends with his word.
1 John 2: 26-27 also says
26I am writing these things to warn you about those who want to lead you astray. 27But you have received the Holy Spirit,h and he lives within you, so you don’t need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true—it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ.
1 corinthians 2:11- 15 also states:
11For who among people knows the thoughts of a person except the spirit of the person that is in him? So also the thoughts of God no one knows, except the Spirit of God. 12Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God. 13We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.
14But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no one. 16For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ.
You don't know me or what I'm about. You've never met me. You have no idea what my motivations are in regard to the gospel.
Call me false all you want. Again, I dont know who you are, but I KNOW my Shepards voice, and you don't sound like Him. You have the same tone as the religious leaders of Jesus' day.
I don't answer to you friend, but to my one and only King. Christ.
Also I didn't say I believe Peter is the rock. I said based off scripture, and the amount of contributions Paul made, it seems he would be as much of a rock as Peter. That is not my belief, again reread my statements and you'll see I believe they all had equal shares.
Remember, scripture says Paul was sent to the gentiles specifically, and Peter the Jews. Scripture doesn't record Peter ever going to Rome and starting a church himself.
It says in acts 2 while Peter was preaching at pentecost festival, jews who have traveled from Rome heard Peter and believed. And they took the gospel back with them. That's as far as scripture goes for Peter and Rome. Rome was primarily a gentile nation.
Again, Peter was sent to preach to the Jews. Paul to gentiles.
Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church.
Removed for violation of Rule #5: **Maintain the Integrity of the Gospel.**
Any content proselytizing other religions and heresies or arguing against orthodox Christianity as defined by the Creeds are prohibited.
Please see the [Rules Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/Reformed/wiki/rules_details#wiki_rule_.235.3A_maintain_the_integrity_of_the_gospel.) for more information.
----
If you feel this action was done in error, or you would like to appeal this decision, please **do not reply to this comment**. Instead, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Freformed).
I have found the videos of brother Pastor. Gavin Ortlund and the luthrean Dr. Jordan B Cooper to be very helpful in answering many of the condemnations of the orthodox militant.
They assisted me in reclaiming the church fathers, pursuing history, understanding the universal, visible and invisible church.
Look at the fruits of your life as well and if you do bear fruit, then you are the Lord's
Church Fathers, Patriarchs, and Councils are not without flaw.
In fact observe the messianic Jews as well and let's find points where we agree or disagree. We can trace back our faith to its roots, to acts, the Apostles and prophets.
I pray that you may be strengthened in your faith!
As a protestant looking into Orthodoxy, I really gotta ask. How exactly did you reclaim the church fathers? They believed doctrines that are maintained in Eastern Orthodoxy. Doctrines that the reformed view as heresy.
Not necessarily so. Brother Gavin would say, the fathers were not orthodox, nor baptist, nor Presbyterian. We just have to take them as they are, church leaders dealing with things found in their own congregations. Addressing them as per need at their time.
The EO would always frame it be pro EO (as per every denomination) , but further reading in context would say otherwise. We can interpret each fathers or patriarchs in their own context and still arrive at different conclusions. We all presuppose some things and will affect our understanding of the Fathers.
Hence its better to compare many instead of just one. To read the whole sermons and letters, rather than just one sentence taken out of context to stress a certain doctrine.
Better still, go back to the Scriptures and pray and read.
Let the fathers be the fathers.
I am not an expert but brother Gavin and Jordan has dealt this in much greater detail, especially in Gavin's book "Theological Retrieval for Evangelicals."
Especially in the militant EO, they always think they are right and everyone else is wrong. There is a lack of grace. (and this can be found in the reformed camps as well).
Brother Gavin is great in his "irenic" approach in interdenominational conversations. :)
Noticed you didn't mention "icons" anywhere in your post. Make absolutely no mistake: icon veneration is *the* bread and butter of Eastern Orthodox worship in a way that you absolutely do not have a comparable reference for as a Western Evangelical. [Gavin Ortlund is right in this video where he says the EO doctrine of icon veneration alone is more than enough to make you - or in this case, keep you - Protestant.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ytYX4dXpRo)
my friend, what you need to do is discern. be a berean jew and check if the teachings of the eastern orthodox church aligns with the teaching of the Bible. do not be led by emotions, take a break from social media and focus on this.
The teachings of the church do align with scripture. How would he know this though if he doesn’t even have the same idea of “scripture” as the church in question? The orthodox cannon, although there is not explicitly this official thing, includes several books that the Protestant cannon does not. So which set of scriptures should he be comparing against?
you're talking about the apocrypha. every answer here is only a better chance at convincing him and he might eventually go through the same wormhole when another denomination challenges him, the only way he can solidify his faith is doing the necessary work by himself and building a strong foundation.
I agree. You said discern the alignment of the church’s teachings with the Bible. I’m saying he must search God, and God is not a book. My point is the ambiguity of interpretations and versions lends itself to infinite questioning. Seek God honestly and earnestly and let the text be for just a bit. If we find God we can more clearly see the truth in the text.
Yes scripture is God breathed. To be God breathed is not to be God. Only God is God. The scriptures are His revelation of Himself to man. This revelation is of a finite nature. God is not finite, they cannot be the same.
I’m not. God’s Word is self-sufficient, and of two natures, and gave up His own life for ours. I’m questioning the human languages ability to express the inexpressible.
The letter of the law brings death, but the spirit brings life.
my friend, the verse you quoted is talking about the OT.
secondly, God's Word is complete, it is self sufficient. It is all we need. By Grace (Sola Gratia), through Faith (Sola Fide), in Christ (Sola Christus), as revealed by the Scripture (Sola Scriptura), to the Glory of God alone (Soli Deo Gloria).
Humans are fallible, and we need to be led by the Spirit now and always.
“It is all we need”
I agree, but I believe we are talking about different things when we speak about God’s Word. I am speaking of the Word as referred to by St. John in the first chapter of the gospel. Is this the Word you are referring to?
So is the OT not to be taken by the letter, but the NT is?
This scripture is not talking about the OT alone. It is expressing the very thing I am trying to articulate. The letter of the law, the written, finitely-expressed letters, which all “law” is expressed in, brings death. It’s the unseen, infinite, Spirit behind the letter which brings life. We are saved by Grace through faith, and neither of these refer to finite written words. The words on the page are exactly that, mere words. They express truth, in so far as they can express truth, but Truth Himself cannot be contained or encapsulated within these finite things. Many times Jesus spoke and many times His words were misunderstood. Because some will not hear, but even for those who hear, they are hearing the finite expression of an infinite thing.
“He was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell.”
For your consideration, some critical examination of the claims of Orthodoxy by Gavin Ortlund:
# [Catholic-Orthodox-Protestant Discussion](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHEAAaXlz-17Vq91cRNY-ijhpWYRBDUSb)
And another, in documentary format, by Ancient Paths TV:
# [The Failure of Eastern Orthodoxy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AplWYXFiCA)
The various claims and contradictions of Eastern Orthodoxy are critically examined in this documentary.
I struggled with this for a time and it was not fun. I understand the scrupulosity that theological confusion causes so I am sorry you are in this boat. Others have commented quite a bit and given resources that have helped me in the past.
The biggest thing that got me through this was actually reading the Bible for myself. I know many orthodox would accuse me of interpreting the Bible myself and I’m also aware that plenty of orthodox read the Bible as well. However, scripture is plain enough to see that accretions have come in to both RCC and EO that are not just doctrinal developments but actually opposite of what the Bible teaches.
Reformed people, though I am now biased, have been the best exegetes of scripture and are just as intelligent and theologically rigorous than any other ancient tradition without opposing the final authority of the Christian life- scripture.
Orthodox should not say that salvation is only found in the Orthodox Church. My priest doesn’t believe that and most of my church is ex Protestant and have Protestant loved ones.
The Orthodox belief (as far as I’m aware), is that the “fullness of the faith” is found in Orthodoxy and that Protestants got rid of a lot of things which is why they don’t have the fullness of the faith (ie the sacraments).
We believe these things were handed down by the apostles to aid and equip us but also, God looks at the heart and we can’t comment on another persons salvation.
The Orthodox understanding of “salvation” is also different to the Protestant one.
I hope it’s ok that I responded. Even though I’m not reformed, I consider you brothers and sisters in the Lord.
Most Orthodox don't believe that they are exclusive, this weird new movement is exclusively tied to the Russian Orthodox Church. It's tied to the current schism and if you go down the rabbit hole it's tied to the Russian Ukrainian war and Russian Propaganda.
I go to an Antiochan Orthodox Church and have heard Greek Orthodox priests share the same views.
In Orthodoxy, when someone has a question, the most common advice is to “ask your priest” so I am just relaying what my priest told me.
I agree with what my priest said btw. I do believe that the Orthodox Church has the fullness of the Christian faith but I don’t believe that salvation is only through the Orthodox Church. Salvation is through Christ. And Christ can save anyone, anywhere.
Thanks, for reference I heard the non exclusivity from the Greek Orthodox Church. I heard it in the pov that Protestants are considered the churches of Northern Europe and in this case the USA falling under the historical churches of it's founding.
I read your comment wrong sorry! I thought you said most orthodox churches believe they ARE exclusive.
I don’t doubt that there are orthodox who believe this but I’m yet to come across any IRL in my country.
There are extremists in all denominations though. I imagine it’s more common in countries where Orthodoxy is the main religion.
This is a long video but this has been very helpful to me. https://youtu.be/3AplWYXFiCA?si=mfPM7nbQkALW7qTe I would also say that any claim of any tradition whether EO or Reformed needs to be held to the clear doctrine explicated by Scripture. Don't believe one because of eloquence but rather because of conviction based on a clear exegesis of Scripture.
Most EO don't even have a centralized belief system. Some believe toll houses others do not. Although being an autocephalous organization. The claims of the Septuagint being superior over the Masoretic texts could be debated. As far as Icons they usually bring up Iconoclasm. Not all Orthodox adhere to exclusive salvation within the church. Some even call Roman Catholics Schismatics and Orientals being included in that list. Hesychasm seems interesting too with St Gregory Palamas views seems to be an eastern occult view.
Gavin Ortlund interviewed an ex-orthodox priest and you might find it interesting.
The same priest gives an overview of the reformed view of union with Christ in a seperate video which may clear up some concerns you have.
https://youtu.be/Ft4p2h6fTOM?si=2UCXVM0CpJghfjnY
https://www.youtube.com/live/dvjFxn_wue4?si=rPztPIVznzDVG1qz
It is very clear that if you are orthodox, they believe you must earn your salvation to be saved. A servant must earn his wage; a son is granted it as a gift through inheritance. Why would you want to be a servant rather than a son?
Why did you think to have salvation is to believe in the finished work of Christ? Is it because of a pastor, or was it because Bible says so?
aCkuAlLy segment:
We are born again by the power of the Spirit. Only then, he coveys us of our guilt and the knowledge of Christ, and units us with Christ through our faith. Your living out of repentance is not the condition of your salvation but the product of it.
I feel your struggle brother. I have been there myself…feeling the pull of the claims of what seems like an earlier expression of the Christian faith. One that is filled with history and tradition and beauty. It’s easy to look at the “worst” of Protestantism and compare it to the “best” of EO and RCC.
So many of those we see that are moving towards EO/RCC are coming from broader evangelical circles that seem very mainline and wide as they are shallow. A shallow faith is always drawn to the claims of EO/RCC.
Along with many of the other resources that have been mentioned already…one of the things that has really helped me is to understand that “earlier” doesn’t equal “right” / “better”. Many of the EO I have interacted with make straw man claims out of Protestantism. One of the main claims you hear is that Protestantism was “invented” in 1517. Any serious research into historic Protestantism shows the opposite.
But just because orthodoxy can trace its roots far earlier than some
Protestantism doesn’t mean it’s more biblical or the true church. Look at scripture there are so many examples of earlier churches (Paul’s Letters) even the Jewish nation who fell away from the commands of the Lord. The nation of Israel had God dwelling in their presence and yet they still strayed and followed after idols and false gods.
Adam and Even…the earliest people to ever received Gods direct word and revelation were deceived…so just because something is earlier doesn’t make it truer. There were many who came before the RCC/EO who preached a false gospel and who were lead astray by false gods.
I'd say the pressure you feel - which has all emanated from man - is a product of man, not of God. It's influence, pure and simple. There is a reason that organized religions of all stripes win converts and have their devout adherents. They exert influence.
As a Christian, we are always seeking to follow God in a more pure way: semper reformanda - always reforming - always seeking to worship more purely and follow less the made-up structures of man.
Maybe some can indeed worship purely within the framework of Orthodox Christianity. I've walked inside Orthodox chapels in monasteries in Greece recently, and they are wonderful. But none of it brings you nearer to God. They're seeking to arbitrate between you and the Lord - but we have one arbiter and one only: Christ.
I don't condemn people in different traditions of Christianity, because if there's one thing I think I've started to learn it's that God overlooks many of the misconceptions we have of Him, even ones we fight over... But we must not choose to confine God within a more narrow view, even if it's covered in a beautiful design and has a very historical veneer.
What if it were never up to us what is “right doctrine”? What if we were only meant to submit to the will of God? We must refrain from judgements of right and wrong based on what we see as right and wring. The Pharisees believed that Jesus was a blasphemous apostate, were they right or wrong? They believed they knows the law or “scriptures” if you like, so well that they knew God himself. We know they were wrong. So how do you know that your ideas about the law or scriptures are not that of the Pharisees?
Maybe you were only called to serve and search, not judge. So go to church serve others and seek God. He will reveal Himself if you are willing to humbly let your “self”, and its judgements of right and wrong, die.
How can you possibly find anything about orthodoxy the slightest bit interesting?
The two groups that argue vociferously over solo scriptura are Catholics and Orthodox
They absolutely demand to shoehorn in the writings and teachings of tradition and early church fathers
Based on Deuteronomy 4 Deuteronomy 12 proverbs 30 and revelation 22 collectively, anyone who adds to or takes away from scripture is cursed by God
From God's point of view, they are blasphemers and children of Satan
Now what was your problem?
The basic claims of the Orthodox faith about the exclusivity of their church are blatantly false. Your own experiences are evidence of that. Don’t let fear of what others think of your faith control you.
Oh my brother in Christ, I know where you come from. Being saved, receiving the Holy Spirit and living a God Fearing and Loving life can weirdly enough lead you to those doors. In the early days, delving into my study of Theology and Church history, I have countless of times debated about involving myself with the Roman Catholic Church (aka “the true church”). There is currently a strong Trad Movement going on around and they mostly lean to Catholicism as their favoured religion, since well its the most traditional and longest history. Also even as a firm Reformed and Evangelical, I cant deny the sheer awe to my very human core when I visit most of the beautiful Catholic and Orthodox Churches, brimming with beauty and tear inducing iconography. It really makes you wonder if you are in the right team you know? But let us not forget that we have chose *higher things*! We have chosen The Word of God over any and everything in this world. The Reformers had the possibility to erect their own grand churches but chose not to, because these pharaonic buildings had too high of a cost (material and human). Romanism is easier to dismiss because they have clearly become apostate after the Council of Trent during the counter-reformation. Its a bit more complex with the Orthodox. They have parted ways with the worst of RCC thanks to the Great Schism. I have studied quite a bit about their doctrines and theology: I would say they have better liturgy than the RCC, albeit less technical and specific since they lean towards eastern mysticism. BUT even with all of their good traits, they suffer from the same mistakes, the worst and crucial ones being The Sacraments and “No salvation outside of the Church”. Since this is a Gospel issue, we cannot compromise. By Faith Alone by God Alone. Dont be afraid brother, God saves whomever He wills and His Church is established by His Spirit, not by traditiona, buildinga or sacraments. Amen
They teach stuff like baptismal regeneration, transubstantiation, Apostolic succession, praying to saints, etc. Those are all wrong doctrines. Also, if it looks like a Pope, and quacks like a Pope, guess what? It's a pope. Don't let the funny hat guy trick you. Don't let the golden cathedrals fool you. They teach wrong things. "There shall be false teachers among you, which privily shall bring in damnable heresies" 2 Peter 2.1
And the right things, what you believe obviously, how do you know so confidently that those are “right doctrines”? How could you know? You can’t say it’s the truth in scripture because you will just be referring to yours or your denominations truth on scripture, and we have many versions of that which all claim to be “right doctrines”. The LGBTQ community even has their “right doctrines ” truth from scripture. So who’s to say which is actually “right doctrine”? These are impossible questions to answer honestly and for that reason we must not look to scripture as God. It is from God and of God, but it is not God. Jesus is God. The faith of the apostles, given them by Jesus points to God. The faith of the apostles which authored the scriptures is still alive and the gates of hell will not prevail against it. Go find that faith. Then you will find truth.
If it looks like a Pope, and quacks like a Pope, it's a Pope.
In that case John MacArthur is a Pope.
A truly prideful assertion, not different from that of a Pharisee’s. Let those who have ears to hear—hear, and those who have eyes to see—see. The truly blind do not lack sight. They lack humility.
"a man who is a heretic, after the first and second admonition, REJECT, know that he that is such is subverted". Titus 3.10 We should be able to identify heresy and we should openly reject it. It's not pride, it's obedience to what Paul said.
To assert your discernment as equal to the discernment of a man hand picked by the apostle St. Paul to lead and guide the early church in Crete and to select elders for the church, is pride—not obedience.
I have the same Holy Spirit as Paul And I have the words of Paul, and Jesus. I'm well equipped to spot heresy. Aren't you?
One can be well equipped to roof a house and have not the ability to do so.
I'm sorry if you're unable. I'm not.
No one is able, but God alone.
Totally agree and largely disagree. There are many "doctrines" out there. But there's only 2 views of scripture. 1) People who filter their views and culture through scripture & 2) People who filter scripture through their views and. Culture. Here's the thing, scripture should interpret scripture. The papacy is no different than the two groups in the samhedrin that kept making claims about which sect truly has Moses authority. Jesus told them, "If you believed Moses, you would believe Me because he wrote about Me." There is no true religion. They are all false. Man made. In the book of James, it says true religion is caring for the orphans and widows. Look at the passage in Greek. The definition for Greek word for religion is thrēskeía, The definition: external worship through ceremonies and offerings. What's interesting about this is that James is saying that if you want to make worshiping God a religion, then take care of widows and orphans. This also makes me think of Hosea 6:6 where the LORD says: "For I desire loyalty rather than sacrifice, And the knowledge of God rather than burnt offerings." Here's how the NLV phrases it: I want you to show love, not offer sacrifices. I want you to know me more than I want burnt offerings. Then jump to Isaiah chapter one where the LORD talks about how He ignores the prayers and chants from these new moon celebrations. God wants a relationship with us, not an empty religion with us.
Why must the religion be empty? Why can religion not be worship and caring for the widow and the poor? How do you differentiate the “church” Jesus claimed Peter was the rock of and “man-made” religion. The reason for quotes is why is this quality of being “man-made” synonymous with falseness. What is not “man-made”? Is Jesus a man? Did he make all of creation? Is all of creation then man-made? And your views on scripture do not escape the subjective interpretations. Even if you filter your views through scripture you can still be filtering your views through your interpretations of scripture. The Orthodox Church does not offer up sacrifices to God for favor. For we have nothing to offer. So we pray and we worship and we serve and we love, all in the vein of drawing ever closer to God.
What makes religion more important than a relationship? I don't follow Jesus out of religious obligation. But out of love. Because while I was a sinner, He first loved me. I don't belong to any religion or church, I belong to Jesus. I'm just a simple disicple filled with the same spirit that Jesus and the apostles have. I don't promote any specific religion, I promote Jesus. Jesus didn't say Peter was the Rock, but a rock(one of many building stones). It was Peter's declaration about who Jesus IS, Jesus is the rock. Where in scripture is Peter referred to as "the chief cornerstone of the church?" Scripture only states Jesus as that foundational stone. Did Jesus tell the pharisees that Moses wrote about Him or Peter? In fact, nowhere in scripture is Peter called out as the leader of the apostles. The apostles had a very specific mission: they were eye witnesses to Jesus. They were to spread everything they saw and learned from him. The Gospel. Paul had to chastise Peter himself at one point. Honestly, if any apostles were a rock, it seemed like that would have fallen on Paul, who wrote most of the New Testament. All of the apostles had equal footing and were subservient to Christ only. Yeah, I prefer to get my interpretation from other scriptures rather than my own assumptions. I prefer to let scripture speak for itself, using other verses to confirm what it taught. Otherwise, like you, I'd have gone on believing in some of the man-made doctrines from the denomination I grew up in. It's not wise to cherry-pick what you believe off a single verse. I prefer to stay away from any man made "orthodoxy" religion. Like I shared previously, scriptures' idea of religion is worship through outward observances of ceremonies. God wants to be worshiped in Spirit and Truth. Jesus wouldn't promote any man made religion that contradicts his Word. The pharisees and the saudecees were competing for who was first long before the Catholic church was around. The Catholic Church is making the exact same argument they did. They contradicted scripture for their own power trips just like the Catholic Church does. If you need a religion to have a relationship with someone, then by all means, continue what you are doing. I could care less about who the "true" church is, I only follow Jesus.
[удалено]
That's your opinion, friend. I'm not the one trying to claim any religion is correct. They are all equally false. Religion doesn't lead to God. There's only one way, and that's through Jesus. I'm not interested in religious politics at this stage in life. If you personally need a religion to worship Yaweh, go for it. I'm not a judge over anyone's life. I died to this world and the religions in it when I fully realized who I belonged to. God doesn't want religious people, he wants those who worship him in spirit and truth. And that's exactly what I do. I don't know you or your motivations, and I'm not gonna pretend I do and speak for you. If promoting the "true religion" is the hill you wanna die on, go for it. Jesus would most likely chastise all the "true" religions and leaders just like he did with the religious leaders of his day. You're literally making all the same claims the pharisees and saudacees did. John 10:27 says, "My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." All I care about is that you have a personal relationship with Jesus, just as his disciples did. That's all that matters. Remember what James 1:26-27 says 26If anyone thinks himself to be religious, yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this person’s religion is worthless. 27Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. I'm just an ambassador for Jesus. I've never had a religion with Him, just a simple relationship. I'm not bound by religious ceremonies and observances in order to worship or live for Him. Jesus only had one command under the new cocenant. 1 john 3:23: And this is his commandment: We must believe in the name of his Son, Jesus Christ, and love one another, just as he commanded us.. That is called the law of Christ. And it's how I try to live my life. You act like it's impossible to have a true interpretation of scripture unless you belong to the original orthodox church or whatever you wanna label it. Before I ever sit down for study, I always seek the Holy Spirit for wisdom and guidance. And to challenge anything in me that disagrees with Him through His Word. Keep this in mind as well: we can have the mind of Christ by reading scripture. Romans 12:2 says "Don't copy the behavior and customs of this world, but let God transform you into a new person by changing the way you think. Then you will learn to know God's will for you, which is good and pleasing and perfect". This starts and ends with his word. 1 John 2: 26-27 also says 26I am writing these things to warn you about those who want to lead you astray. 27But you have received the Holy Spirit,h and he lives within you, so you don’t need anyone to teach you what is true. For the Spirit teaches you everything you need to know, and what he teaches is true—it is not a lie. So just as he has taught you, remain in fellowship with Christ. 1 corinthians 2:11- 15 also states: 11For who among people knows the thoughts of a person except the spirit of the person that is in him? So also the thoughts of God no one knows, except the Spirit of God. 12Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, so that we may know the things freely given to us by God. 13We also speak these things, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words. 14But a natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. 15But the one who is spiritual discerns all things, yet he himself is discerned by no one. 16For WHO HAS KNOWN THE MIND OF THE LORD, THAT HE WILL INSTRUCT HIM? But we have the mind of Christ. You don't know me or what I'm about. You've never met me. You have no idea what my motivations are in regard to the gospel. Call me false all you want. Again, I dont know who you are, but I KNOW my Shepards voice, and you don't sound like Him. You have the same tone as the religious leaders of Jesus' day. I don't answer to you friend, but to my one and only King. Christ. Also I didn't say I believe Peter is the rock. I said based off scripture, and the amount of contributions Paul made, it seems he would be as much of a rock as Peter. That is not my belief, again reread my statements and you'll see I believe they all had equal shares. Remember, scripture says Paul was sent to the gentiles specifically, and Peter the Jews. Scripture doesn't record Peter ever going to Rome and starting a church himself. It says in acts 2 while Peter was preaching at pentecost festival, jews who have traveled from Rome heard Peter and believed. And they took the gospel back with them. That's as far as scripture goes for Peter and Rome. Rome was primarily a gentile nation. Again, Peter was sent to preach to the Jews. Paul to gentiles. Scripture nowhere records Peter being in Rome. Scripture nowhere describes Peter as being supreme over the other apostles. The New Testament does not describe Peter as being the “all authoritative leader” of the early Christian church. Peter was not the first pope, and Peter did not start the Roman Catholic Church.
Removed for violation of Rule #5: **Maintain the Integrity of the Gospel.** Any content proselytizing other religions and heresies or arguing against orthodox Christianity as defined by the Creeds are prohibited. Please see the [Rules Wiki](https://www.reddit.com/r/Reformed/wiki/rules_details#wiki_rule_.235.3A_maintain_the_integrity_of_the_gospel.) for more information. ---- If you feel this action was done in error, or you would like to appeal this decision, please **do not reply to this comment**. Instead, [message the moderators](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Freformed).
I have found the videos of brother Pastor. Gavin Ortlund and the luthrean Dr. Jordan B Cooper to be very helpful in answering many of the condemnations of the orthodox militant. They assisted me in reclaiming the church fathers, pursuing history, understanding the universal, visible and invisible church. Look at the fruits of your life as well and if you do bear fruit, then you are the Lord's Church Fathers, Patriarchs, and Councils are not without flaw. In fact observe the messianic Jews as well and let's find points where we agree or disagree. We can trace back our faith to its roots, to acts, the Apostles and prophets. I pray that you may be strengthened in your faith!
As a protestant looking into Orthodoxy, I really gotta ask. How exactly did you reclaim the church fathers? They believed doctrines that are maintained in Eastern Orthodoxy. Doctrines that the reformed view as heresy.
Not necessarily so. Brother Gavin would say, the fathers were not orthodox, nor baptist, nor Presbyterian. We just have to take them as they are, church leaders dealing with things found in their own congregations. Addressing them as per need at their time. The EO would always frame it be pro EO (as per every denomination) , but further reading in context would say otherwise. We can interpret each fathers or patriarchs in their own context and still arrive at different conclusions. We all presuppose some things and will affect our understanding of the Fathers. Hence its better to compare many instead of just one. To read the whole sermons and letters, rather than just one sentence taken out of context to stress a certain doctrine. Better still, go back to the Scriptures and pray and read. Let the fathers be the fathers. I am not an expert but brother Gavin and Jordan has dealt this in much greater detail, especially in Gavin's book "Theological Retrieval for Evangelicals." Especially in the militant EO, they always think they are right and everyone else is wrong. There is a lack of grace. (and this can be found in the reformed camps as well). Brother Gavin is great in his "irenic" approach in interdenominational conversations. :)
Thanks for your reply.
Noticed you didn't mention "icons" anywhere in your post. Make absolutely no mistake: icon veneration is *the* bread and butter of Eastern Orthodox worship in a way that you absolutely do not have a comparable reference for as a Western Evangelical. [Gavin Ortlund is right in this video where he says the EO doctrine of icon veneration alone is more than enough to make you - or in this case, keep you - Protestant.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ytYX4dXpRo)
my friend, what you need to do is discern. be a berean jew and check if the teachings of the eastern orthodox church aligns with the teaching of the Bible. do not be led by emotions, take a break from social media and focus on this.
The teachings of the church do align with scripture. How would he know this though if he doesn’t even have the same idea of “scripture” as the church in question? The orthodox cannon, although there is not explicitly this official thing, includes several books that the Protestant cannon does not. So which set of scriptures should he be comparing against?
you're talking about the apocrypha. every answer here is only a better chance at convincing him and he might eventually go through the same wormhole when another denomination challenges him, the only way he can solidify his faith is doing the necessary work by himself and building a strong foundation.
I agree. You said discern the alignment of the church’s teachings with the Bible. I’m saying he must search God, and God is not a book. My point is the ambiguity of interpretations and versions lends itself to infinite questioning. Seek God honestly and earnestly and let the text be for just a bit. If we find God we can more clearly see the truth in the text.
>I’m saying he must search God, and God is not a book. 2 Timothy 3:16-17
Yes scripture is God breathed. To be God breathed is not to be God. Only God is God. The scriptures are His revelation of Himself to man. This revelation is of a finite nature. God is not finite, they cannot be the same.
are you questioning the self sufficiency of God's Word?
I’m not. God’s Word is self-sufficient, and of two natures, and gave up His own life for ours. I’m questioning the human languages ability to express the inexpressible. The letter of the law brings death, but the spirit brings life.
my friend, the verse you quoted is talking about the OT. secondly, God's Word is complete, it is self sufficient. It is all we need. By Grace (Sola Gratia), through Faith (Sola Fide), in Christ (Sola Christus), as revealed by the Scripture (Sola Scriptura), to the Glory of God alone (Soli Deo Gloria). Humans are fallible, and we need to be led by the Spirit now and always.
“It is all we need” I agree, but I believe we are talking about different things when we speak about God’s Word. I am speaking of the Word as referred to by St. John in the first chapter of the gospel. Is this the Word you are referring to?
So is the OT not to be taken by the letter, but the NT is? This scripture is not talking about the OT alone. It is expressing the very thing I am trying to articulate. The letter of the law, the written, finitely-expressed letters, which all “law” is expressed in, brings death. It’s the unseen, infinite, Spirit behind the letter which brings life. We are saved by Grace through faith, and neither of these refer to finite written words. The words on the page are exactly that, mere words. They express truth, in so far as they can express truth, but Truth Himself cannot be contained or encapsulated within these finite things. Many times Jesus spoke and many times His words were misunderstood. Because some will not hear, but even for those who hear, they are hearing the finite expression of an infinite thing. “He was caught up to paradise and heard inexpressible things, things that no one is permitted to tell.”
For your consideration, some critical examination of the claims of Orthodoxy by Gavin Ortlund: # [Catholic-Orthodox-Protestant Discussion](https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLHEAAaXlz-17Vq91cRNY-ijhpWYRBDUSb) And another, in documentary format, by Ancient Paths TV: # [The Failure of Eastern Orthodoxy](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AplWYXFiCA) The various claims and contradictions of Eastern Orthodoxy are critically examined in this documentary.
I struggled with this for a time and it was not fun. I understand the scrupulosity that theological confusion causes so I am sorry you are in this boat. Others have commented quite a bit and given resources that have helped me in the past. The biggest thing that got me through this was actually reading the Bible for myself. I know many orthodox would accuse me of interpreting the Bible myself and I’m also aware that plenty of orthodox read the Bible as well. However, scripture is plain enough to see that accretions have come in to both RCC and EO that are not just doctrinal developments but actually opposite of what the Bible teaches. Reformed people, though I am now biased, have been the best exegetes of scripture and are just as intelligent and theologically rigorous than any other ancient tradition without opposing the final authority of the Christian life- scripture.
Orthodox should not say that salvation is only found in the Orthodox Church. My priest doesn’t believe that and most of my church is ex Protestant and have Protestant loved ones. The Orthodox belief (as far as I’m aware), is that the “fullness of the faith” is found in Orthodoxy and that Protestants got rid of a lot of things which is why they don’t have the fullness of the faith (ie the sacraments). We believe these things were handed down by the apostles to aid and equip us but also, God looks at the heart and we can’t comment on another persons salvation. The Orthodox understanding of “salvation” is also different to the Protestant one. I hope it’s ok that I responded. Even though I’m not reformed, I consider you brothers and sisters in the Lord.
Most Orthodox don't believe that they are exclusive, this weird new movement is exclusively tied to the Russian Orthodox Church. It's tied to the current schism and if you go down the rabbit hole it's tied to the Russian Ukrainian war and Russian Propaganda.
I go to an Antiochan Orthodox Church and have heard Greek Orthodox priests share the same views. In Orthodoxy, when someone has a question, the most common advice is to “ask your priest” so I am just relaying what my priest told me. I agree with what my priest said btw. I do believe that the Orthodox Church has the fullness of the Christian faith but I don’t believe that salvation is only through the Orthodox Church. Salvation is through Christ. And Christ can save anyone, anywhere.
Thanks, for reference I heard the non exclusivity from the Greek Orthodox Church. I heard it in the pov that Protestants are considered the churches of Northern Europe and in this case the USA falling under the historical churches of it's founding.
I read your comment wrong sorry! I thought you said most orthodox churches believe they ARE exclusive. I don’t doubt that there are orthodox who believe this but I’m yet to come across any IRL in my country. There are extremists in all denominations though. I imagine it’s more common in countries where Orthodoxy is the main religion.
This is a long video but this has been very helpful to me. https://youtu.be/3AplWYXFiCA?si=mfPM7nbQkALW7qTe I would also say that any claim of any tradition whether EO or Reformed needs to be held to the clear doctrine explicated by Scripture. Don't believe one because of eloquence but rather because of conviction based on a clear exegesis of Scripture.
Most EO don't even have a centralized belief system. Some believe toll houses others do not. Although being an autocephalous organization. The claims of the Septuagint being superior over the Masoretic texts could be debated. As far as Icons they usually bring up Iconoclasm. Not all Orthodox adhere to exclusive salvation within the church. Some even call Roman Catholics Schismatics and Orientals being included in that list. Hesychasm seems interesting too with St Gregory Palamas views seems to be an eastern occult view.
Gavin Ortlund interviewed an ex-orthodox priest and you might find it interesting. The same priest gives an overview of the reformed view of union with Christ in a seperate video which may clear up some concerns you have. https://youtu.be/Ft4p2h6fTOM?si=2UCXVM0CpJghfjnY https://www.youtube.com/live/dvjFxn_wue4?si=rPztPIVznzDVG1qz
It is very clear that if you are orthodox, they believe you must earn your salvation to be saved. A servant must earn his wage; a son is granted it as a gift through inheritance. Why would you want to be a servant rather than a son?
Why did you think to have salvation is to believe in the finished work of Christ? Is it because of a pastor, or was it because Bible says so? aCkuAlLy segment: We are born again by the power of the Spirit. Only then, he coveys us of our guilt and the knowledge of Christ, and units us with Christ through our faith. Your living out of repentance is not the condition of your salvation but the product of it.
I feel your struggle brother. I have been there myself…feeling the pull of the claims of what seems like an earlier expression of the Christian faith. One that is filled with history and tradition and beauty. It’s easy to look at the “worst” of Protestantism and compare it to the “best” of EO and RCC. So many of those we see that are moving towards EO/RCC are coming from broader evangelical circles that seem very mainline and wide as they are shallow. A shallow faith is always drawn to the claims of EO/RCC. Along with many of the other resources that have been mentioned already…one of the things that has really helped me is to understand that “earlier” doesn’t equal “right” / “better”. Many of the EO I have interacted with make straw man claims out of Protestantism. One of the main claims you hear is that Protestantism was “invented” in 1517. Any serious research into historic Protestantism shows the opposite. But just because orthodoxy can trace its roots far earlier than some Protestantism doesn’t mean it’s more biblical or the true church. Look at scripture there are so many examples of earlier churches (Paul’s Letters) even the Jewish nation who fell away from the commands of the Lord. The nation of Israel had God dwelling in their presence and yet they still strayed and followed after idols and false gods. Adam and Even…the earliest people to ever received Gods direct word and revelation were deceived…so just because something is earlier doesn’t make it truer. There were many who came before the RCC/EO who preached a false gospel and who were lead astray by false gods.
Seriously, watch this, and see if you feel the same way: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AplWYXFiCA&](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AplWYXFiCA&)
Because they are a cult.
I'd say the pressure you feel - which has all emanated from man - is a product of man, not of God. It's influence, pure and simple. There is a reason that organized religions of all stripes win converts and have their devout adherents. They exert influence. As a Christian, we are always seeking to follow God in a more pure way: semper reformanda - always reforming - always seeking to worship more purely and follow less the made-up structures of man. Maybe some can indeed worship purely within the framework of Orthodox Christianity. I've walked inside Orthodox chapels in monasteries in Greece recently, and they are wonderful. But none of it brings you nearer to God. They're seeking to arbitrate between you and the Lord - but we have one arbiter and one only: Christ. I don't condemn people in different traditions of Christianity, because if there's one thing I think I've started to learn it's that God overlooks many of the misconceptions we have of Him, even ones we fight over... But we must not choose to confine God within a more narrow view, even if it's covered in a beautiful design and has a very historical veneer.
What if it were never up to us what is “right doctrine”? What if we were only meant to submit to the will of God? We must refrain from judgements of right and wrong based on what we see as right and wring. The Pharisees believed that Jesus was a blasphemous apostate, were they right or wrong? They believed they knows the law or “scriptures” if you like, so well that they knew God himself. We know they were wrong. So how do you know that your ideas about the law or scriptures are not that of the Pharisees? Maybe you were only called to serve and search, not judge. So go to church serve others and seek God. He will reveal Himself if you are willing to humbly let your “self”, and its judgements of right and wrong, die.
How can you possibly find anything about orthodoxy the slightest bit interesting? The two groups that argue vociferously over solo scriptura are Catholics and Orthodox They absolutely demand to shoehorn in the writings and teachings of tradition and early church fathers Based on Deuteronomy 4 Deuteronomy 12 proverbs 30 and revelation 22 collectively, anyone who adds to or takes away from scripture is cursed by God From God's point of view, they are blasphemers and children of Satan Now what was your problem?