Orthodox Bridge: Open Letter to "Zone".

[Scotth1960]

Dear Zone: God bless you and keep you in grace in your confession of Christ. I can wish you believe John 15:26, but only God can persuade you of that; I'm just an unworthy witness to the EO teaching on John 15:26 and so forth.
If you are looking for an EO confession of faith that agrees with 85 to 95 percent of Lutheranism, and does not discuss at all the controversy over Filioque, over faith alone an justification, over the number and meaning of sacraments, or over scripture alone and the place of Luther in Christianity, I recommend Peter E. Gillquist's book "The Physical Side of Being Spiritual" to you: Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1979.
You were, at one time, I gather, Reformed (Calvinist) Presbyterian, etc. of some sort. You are moving out of Reformed Calvinism and the Five Points of Calvinism, into the Lutheran Confession on election and predestination, which is single predestination, not double predestination as in Calvinism, according to the Evangelical Lutheran Confessions, The Augsburg Confession, The Formula of Concord, in the Lutheran "church"'''s "Book of Concord", edited by Philip Melanchthon and others.
If you want to know more about the dialogue between Lutherans and the Eastern Orthodox Church, you can learn more about both the Lutheran tradition and how it's both the same, and somewhat different, from Eastern Orthodoxy, in the following excellent book.
Mastrantonis, George. Augusburg and Constantinople: the Dialogue between Ecumenical Patriarch Jeremias II and the Lutheran Tubingen Theologians in the 16th Century. Brookline, MA: Holy Cross Orthodox Press. If after reading this book you have any questions, ask NiceneChristian, or some other Orthodox Christian, and if you need insights into former Lutherans who are moving toward Eastern Orthodoxy, ask me, if you like.
You will find what I still like about Lutheranism: single predestination. The Lutheran view is the same as the Eastern Orthodox view. And what I don't like. Luther denied free will; the EO affirm free will.
Melanchthon was more moderate on the question of free will than Luther, and most Lutherans today follow Melanchthon's more open views on free will, that Luther's more Augustinian determinist stance.
God bless you.
Please see the following website and you will see how the Orthodox Church and Reformed Protestantism (which is similar to Lutheranism) dialogue.
http:// orthodoxbridge.com/

Orthodox-Reformed Bridge
Recent article
"Where's the Beauty? The Absence of Art in Reformed Theology posed by robertar on October 28, 2011

God bless you Zone. God bless the Lutherans. Amen.
In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[zone]

thank you very much scotty.
i haven't had a "zone call-out" thread in quite some time, so this was rather nice.

yes, i am familiar with the common denominators (its unfortunate they aren't openly considered).

but i will use the resources you've offered, particularly since you've taken the time to specifically list the hot-button issues (which are really non-issues). its quite refreshing.

as for leaving reformed theology....no.....not so. for Lutheranism does not attempt to overpower anything not clearly addressed by the scriptures themselves, leaving personal study within the realm of my christian liberty.

[if i reach a point where my convictions don't allow me to amen the Lutheran confessions, i'll stop in the confirmation process until i can affirm, or can not affirm. i reckon that's the best i can do]

much of reformed theology is in complete agreement with Lutheranism (though neither side would say so at this point.....and the Lutherans have a good reason overall for holding fast: the prefix"reformed" is used by anybody these days).

what i like about reformed theology is the willingness of their scholars to tackle some issues Lutherans prefer to leave alone - no problem with that (i'd rather something like eschatology be left alone than mangled).

re calvin: i never said i was of calvin, though much of what he taught i believe to be biblical. very much so.

i won't, however, be converting to EO scottster....and even if there is a bridge i shan't be crossing it....so we'll see if the scholar's leaning is toward ecumenism with an eye to conversion to EO, or if its just a matter of facts. i prefer facts.

i appreciate the open discussion, and this will be an interesting read.
i'll let you know as i go.
love zone.

 

[Scotth1960]

thank you very much scotty.
i haven't had a "zone call-out" thread in quite some time, so this was rather nice.

yes, i am familiar with the common denominators (its unfortunate they aren't openly considered).

but i will use the resources you've offered, particularly since you've taken the time to specifically list the hot-button issues (which are really non-issues). its quite refreshing.

as for leaving reformed theology....no.....not so. for Lutheranism does not attempt to overpower anything not clearly addressed by the scriptures themselves, leaving personal study within the realm of my christian liberty.

[if i reach a point where my convictions don't allow me to amen the Lutheran confessions, i'll stop in the confirmation process until i can affirm, or can not affirm. i reckon that's the best i can do]

much of reformed theology is in complete agreement with Lutheranism (though neither side would say so at this point.....and the Lutherans have a good reason overall for holding fast: the prefix"reformed" is used by anybody these days).

what i like about reformed theology is the willingness of their scholars to tackle some issues Lutherans prefer to leave alone - no problem with that (i'd rather something like eschatology be left alone than mangled).

re calvin: i never said i was of calvin, though much of what he taught i believe to be biblical. very much so.

i won't, however, be converting to EO scottster....and even if there is a bridge i shan't be crossing it....so we'll see if the scholar's leaning is toward ecumenism with an eye to conversion to EO, or if its just a matter of facts. i prefer facts.

i appreciate the open discussion, and this will be an interesting read.
i'll let you know as i go.
love zone.

Zone, If you don't believe in double predestination, then maybe your theology is Lutheran, which is belief in single predestination. In this case, the term Reformed means Calvinist only and only Calvinist, in distinction from both Lutheranism and from Methodism, and from Anglicanism (the Anglicans are divided between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists).
Calvinism and Lutheranism believe in sola scriptura and sola fide, but the Calvinists follow scripture alone plus John Calvin, and the Lutherans follow scripture alone plus Martin Luther. So that is why they are called Reformers: their teachers as to what the Bible alone means are Luther alone or Calvin alone, or the people who add upon Luther or add upon Calvin. John Knox and others added to Calvin, Philip Melanchthon and others added to Luther. I can understand that if you believe that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, you cannot become an EO Christian; if you believe the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, it is very difficult to resist wanting to become an Eastern Orthodox Christian. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS God bless you. Some Lutherans are dropping the Filioque, but retaining the other Lutheran distinctives. The traditional Orthodox would say, like Calvin, they learn from the Church Fathers, then shamelessly repudiate them. They pick and choose what they want to believe; they like the Bible, but only some of it, only the verses that bolster their misreading of the Bible by Protestant heresies.
It is not enough to merely reject the Filioque. We must also accept all of the other EO teachings and live an EO Christian life.

 

[zone]

Zone, If you don't believe in double predestination, then maybe your theology is Lutheran, which is belief in single predestination. In this case, the term Reformed means Calvinist only and only Calvinist, in distinction from both Lutheranism and from Methodism, and from Anglicanism (the Anglicans are divided between Calvinists and Non-Calvinists).
Calvinism and Lutheranism believe in sola scriptura and sola fide, but the Calvinists follow scripture alone plus John Calvin, and the Lutherans follow scripture alone plus Martin Luther. So that is why they are called Reformers: their teachers as to what the Bible alone means are Luther alone or Calvin alone, or the people who add upon Luther or add upon Calvin. John Knox and others added to Calvin, Philip Melanchthon and others added to Luther. I can understand that if you believe that the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son, you cannot become an EO Christian; if you believe the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone, it is very difficult to resist wanting to become an Eastern Orthodox Christian. In Erie Scott R. Harrington
PS God bless you. Some Lutherans are dropping the Filioque, but retaining the other Lutheran distinctives. The traditional Orthodox would say, like Calvin, they learn from the Church Fathers, then shamelessly repudiate them. They pick and choose what they want to believe; they like the Bible, but only some of it, only the verses that bolster their misreading of the Bible by Protestant heresies.
It is not enough to merely reject the Filioque. We must also accept all of the other EO teachings and live an EO Christian life.

hi scotty.
y-e-e-es.....reformed is anyone who came after luther.
and they reformed the reformed - (lutheran doctrines, each in some degree). i'm okay with that....in the cases you know about.

the LCC (as do i) frankly shakes their heads the the fuss over Filioque scott, and it is tedious and completely ridiculous to have caused a schism - unless (and this is the key) one institution wishes to ex-communicate the other. hmmm....i wonder.

Deuteronomy 6:4
Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

its that simple.

let's say i suddenly had a great conviction over Filioque and decided the issue was enough to reject Lutheranism (not) - i still wouldn't join EO....the problems are far greater than that single issue dear scott. but we have discussed this at least once. perhaps we will again?

love zone.