Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I Am The World Created In Tishri.
The Woman In Me
Something Funny
About Me
- The Blogger Formerly Known As Lvka
Arad, Romania
A failed perfectionist,
blossoming into a perfect failure...
Search And Ye Shall Find
Recommended Readings
- Early Church Fathers
- Fathers Of The Church
- From Theology To Philosophy In The Latin West
- Napoleon Never Existed!
- On Becoming And Remaining An Orthodox Christian
- Original Sin According To Saint Paul
- Prayers Of Jews To Angels And Other Intermediaries During The First Centuries CE
- The Descent Of Christ Into Hades In Eastern & Western Theological Traditions
- The River Of Fire
5 comments:
Are you referring to the error in translation from Greek that they were discussing, or the discussion of the canon?
I was thinking that, if the canon was arbitrarily defined at Trent, then why do the Orthodox (largely) have the same canon? Or am I wrong on that? One could make the argument that one of us copied it from the other, I suppose, but I think one of Father Kimel's discussion rules applies (in my opinion): if East and West agree on it, it is true and we don't need to bother discussing it.
I wish I possessed all the charity that Theo guy has. I wil pray for it.
I was just speaking generally, obviously. I like to occasionally throw some mud in my adversaries, belittle them from time to time, a few blows bellow the belt here and there, etc. Makes me feel good. (Suckers!) >:) [Ain't I a stinker or waht?]. ;D
why do the Orthodox (largely) have the same canon?
LOL :-) Not to mention the Monophysites, with whom we haven't seen eye to eye for the last one-and-a-half millenium, or so ... (including such Pope-controled, Rome-abiding and Trent-tatooed arias like, errr ... India and Ethiopia). :D Well, You know what they say in chronical cases such as these: dream on, baby! :D
Oh, and my favorite part in the canon discussion was when theo asked how Protestants define the canon. Somebody gave him a link title which didn't work. Theo complained and the guy simply pasted in the address of the great, canon-defining authority he was using to back up his argument:
It was a link to Triablogue! That's not an authority! That's just a bunch of guys hanging out and talking about God. What are these, the Wikipedia rules of research authentification? If he had referred to some 16th century council of newly protestant priests and bishops, he would at least be able to begin an argument. I don't see how the guys at Triablogue trump ecumenical councils.
newly protestant priests and bishops
And that just sums up the whole problem: no Bishop anywhere endorsed any of Luther's views: no Bishops, not even the faintest chance of even faking Apostolic continuity for his newly established movement. :-) And what magic solution does he find from this self-created impasse: the long gone and forgotten Priesthood of all belivers! (taken from Peter's Epistle), which destroyed the Old Testament Priesthood, blah-blah-blah ... it didn't even seem to bother him that Peter was actually quoting Exodus. :-) Funny guy that Moses fellow: destroying in Exodus the Priesthood that he was gonna found later on, in his next book, entitled Leviticus. :-)
Post a Comment