‘Bible Answer Man’ Hank Hanegraaff Chrismated Into Eastern Orthodoxy

CHARLOTTE, N.C. — Hank Hanegraaff, also known as the “Bible Answer Man,” was chrismated into the Orthodox Church on Sunday, the well-known radio host and author has confirmed.

A photo had been circulating since Sunday of the 67-year-old Hanegraaff being received into Eastern Orthodoxy at Saint Nektarios Greek Orthodox Church in Charlotte, along with his wife and two of his children, prompting questions and online chatter.

On Monday, a listener to Hanegraaff’s radio broadcast called in to inquire if he had indeed converted to Orthodoxy. He advised that he has been attending Saint Nektarios for more than two years, but is just now becoming a member.

“I am now a member of an Orthodox church, but nothing has changed in my faith,” Hanegraaff said. “I have been attending an Orthodox church for a long time—for over two years, really, as a result of what happened when I went to China many years ago.”

He said that in witnessing the simplicity and passion of Chinese Christians, he was led to study Watchman Nee and theosis (a teaching of the Eastern Orthodox regarding union with God) and felt drawn to the days of the early Church.

“I saw Chinese Christians who were deeply in love with the Lord, and I learned that while they may not have had as much intellectual acumen or knowledge as I did, they had life,” Hanegraaff explained. “I was comparing my ability to communicate truth with their deep and abiding love for the Lord Jesus Christ.”

“One man … said to me, ‘Truth matters, but life matters more.’ In other words, it is not just knowing about Jesus Christ; it is experiencing the resurrected Christ,” he said. “As a result of that, I started studying what was communicated by the progeny of Watchman Nee with respect to theosis and that drove me back to the early Christian Church.”

  • Connect with Christian News

Hanegraaff says that since then, he’s “been impacted by the whole idea of knowing Jesus Christ, experiencing Jesus Christ, and partaking of the graces of Jesus Christ through the Eucharist or the Lord’s Table.”

Hanegraaff had interviewed Greek Orthodox priest Themistoclese Athony Adamopoulo on his radio broadcast last April, and discussed theosis on his show in March. On April 4th, a listener  asked why he seemed to have such an interest in Eastern Orthodoxy.

“In the present, just as the Eastern Orthodox Church has been impacted by our ministry, I’ve been impacted by Eastern Orthodox people who have a very keen sense of Church history and have absolute fidelity to the essentials of the historic Christian faith,” he said. “And so, this is all part of championing mere Christianity and learning.”

Some applauded the news, including blogger John Sanidopoulos of the Mystagogy Resource Center.

“I had heard Hank had been a catechumen for some time, which surprised me, but when his chrismation has been confirmed for me … I was even more astounded. It was something I had always hoped for him, but never really expected,” he wrote on Sunday.

But others are concerned about the development as they believe that the Orthodox are not really orthodox in doctrine.

“The Orthodox Church is a false expression of Christianity, much like the Roman Catholic Church, that is highly driven by graven images and denies the biblical doctrine of salvation by grace alone through faith alone, and instead, trusts in meritorious works and a sacramental system for salvation,” wrote Jeff Maples of Pulpit and Pen on Monday.

Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis had expressed worriment about Hanegraaff in 2003, after the author and speaker seemingly denied that the serpent in the Garden of Eden was literal, and suggested that the Leviathan in Job was simply a “metaphysical reality.”

“Eve was not deceived by a talking snake. Rather, Moses used the symbol of a snake to communicate the wiles of the Evil One who deceived Eve through mind-to-mind communication,” Hanegraaff wrote.

Hanegraaff is known for his books “Counterfeit Revival,” “The Authentic Christian Life,” “The Apocalypse Code,” “The Farce of Evolution” and “The Creation Answer Book.”


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, because of your generous support, we have received enough funds to send many audio Bibles to Iraqi and Syrian refugees displaced by ISIS in the Middle East. Many have been distributed and received with gladness. While we provide for the physical needs of the people, we seek to provide the eternal hope only found in Jesus Christ through the word of God. Would you join us by making a donation today to this important work? Please click here to send an audio Bible to a refugee family >>

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • George Caco

    Hank Hanegraaff goes after the fullness of the Christian Truth, wherever it may be attained. If only I could be as courageous as Hank.

    • Amos Moses

      too bad he left Sola Scriptura …….. for more ….. when there is no more ….. net loss …. /SMH ….

      • Kevin Bullard

        Sola what? The Church gave us the scriptures, unless you are a Gospel of Thomas man…

        • Charles

          No God gave us the Scriptures.

          • Kevin Bullard

            So you are LDS?

          • Charles

            ha. ha.. No.

          • Charles

            I’m with the WOG denomination.

          • George Caco

            In Christianity, the Word of God is Christ. It is Muslims who believe that God gave us a book directly from Heaven.

          • Charles

            If the Word of God comes from Jesus (God). It comes from above does it not? I don’t care what Muslims believe.

          • George Caco

            Jesus’ sayings are heavenly but they have to be properly translated. You have to go to the Greek Koine Bible to get a solid rendition of what Jesus actually said and of what Paul actually wrote. For example, the root word “liturgy” and its derivative words were expunged from all English translations.

          • Charles

            Yes. Thank you. I reference the Greek regularly. God always leads to the correct place.

          • George Caco

            So you are attending a liturgical church as per Scripture?

          • Charles

            I fellowship with other Christians.

          • George Caco

            One can fellowship with other Christians during social events but do you liturgically worship with other Christians as per the Greek Bible?

          • Charles

            The Church is a people. Not a brick building. Most Brick Churches (Sorry to say) don’t preach the Word. They are more interested in Pot Luck.

          • George Caco

            You’re not answering my question. Are you following the Greek NT in worshiping liturgically?

          • Charles

            Where is this “Missing” word you speak of?

          • Charles

            Incorrect. Six instances of the word is used in the KJV.

        • Amos Moses

          Nope …. the church did not give us the scriptures ….. the church ACCEPTED Gods cannon …. but the church had no part in Gods creation of His cannon ….. the church just agreed ….

          • Kevin Bullard

            A quick read of where we got the scriptures might be found interesting…God didn’t have them buried in upstate NY in some Reformed Egyptian language to be interpreted with peep-stones.
            Bishops got together and decided it.

          • Amos Moses

            No …. Bishops got together and AGREED WITH GOD ….. Gods cannon is HIS …. all we can do is agree or disagree ………..

          • Kevin Bullard

            Good story, but again, there is history and facts. Your version is rather close to LDS storyline on when JSmith found those plates in Palmyra…hmm.

          • Amos Moses

            NOPE ….. each scripture was given to men under unction of the Holy Spirit ….. that is SCRIPTURE ……… not a story …. SCRIPTURE ….. it was given by GOD …

            John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
            1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
            1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
            1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
            1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

            2Tim 3:16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

            Gal 1:11 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man.
            1:12 For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.
            1:13 For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it:
            1:14 And profited in the Jews’ religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.

          • RWH

            Interesting. What Scripture was Timothy referring to? Much of the New Testament had not been written yet. When Timothy wrote this, did he assume that he was writing Scripture?

            One can’t get away from the fact that the Church Fathers gathered together in 313 AD to hammer out what was part of Scripture and what was not. Why is the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas not part of Scripture?

          • Charles

            Scripture was established and known well before the Catholics got a hold of it. Whatever did the 1st Century Christians do? Give me a break. Timothy was fulfilling God’s Word, whether he knew it or not. Doesn’t matter.

          • RWH

            And your proof is exactly what? How do you know that Scripture was established before the Church assembled in 313? What about books claiming to be the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas? These were accepted by parts of the Church before this council.

          • Charles

            Early Church writings, that’s how I know. They were assembled pretty much by the end of the 2nd Century. The Gnostic Gospels were written around the early 3rd Century and were never accepted as inspired. The Catholics use the Apocrypha to this day. Not the same as the KJV Bible. Catholics put together their version around 390 AD.

          • RWH

            It is a misnomer to refer to “Catholics” until after the 1054 church split when Rome separated herself from the other church centers. Before that, she was considered an equal with the Imperial City of Constantinople, Antioch, Jerusalem, and Alexandria. The Council of 313 was necessary because a lot of people accepted the Gnostic Gospels as Scripture. The Church hammered out the doctrines of the Trinity, doctrines which all accept today (who are not cults) precisely because the Church had to fight against the Gnostics on one hand and the Arians on the Other.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Did you know the KJV had all 73 books prior to 1885?

          • Charles

            Did you know prior to 200 AD and even later it didn’t? The early Church knew which books were true, and which ones weren’t. In fact many of the heresies of today were cultivated very recently in the early to late 1800’s.

          • Amos Moses

            “What Scripture was Timothy referring to?”

            all of them ……… OT and NT ….. although the NT was being written concurrently ………..

            “Why is the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas not part of Scripture?”

            because they were not recognized as part of the cannon ….. men can only accept or reject what God has said ….. they relied on the Holy Spirit to guide them …. and He did …..

          • Leslie

            12 copies of The Book of Isaiah was found by archeologists dating to 132BC a couple of years ago so I don’t think Bishops were all that involved with the whole Bible. They found New Testament scriptures from 200 AD And the KJV and the 1611 were King James way of going back to the original texts, historical documents, Jewish writings to circumvent that issue. The Catholic Church did cut out books like Enoch, The Book of Giants, The Book of Seers, etc so I’ll give you that since the KJV did the same.

          • RWH

            So, the canon just appeared out of nowhere. It just dropped out of the heavens. The very bishops and fathers of the Church who gathered to determine Scripture also suffered persecution for the cause of Christ. On the other hand, people around here sit by their computers with a bag of potato chips and pass judgement on people who really suffered for the Faith.

          • Amos Moses

            “So, the canon just appeared out of nowhere”

            what a silly statement ……..

            “The very bishops and fathers of the Church who gathered to determine Scripture also suffered persecution for the cause of Christ.”

            they did not determine anything ….. they accepted or rejected under the unction of the Holy spirit ……

            “On the other hand, people around here sit by their computers with a bag of potato chips and pass judgement on people who really suffered for the Faith.”

            my guess is …… that includes you ………….. what flavor of chips do you like ….. and is Grandma up stairs while you are in her basement on her beanbag chair …………. and did you get enough Mountain Dew today …..

          • RWH

            Amos. Have you ever read anything scholarly about the Seven Ecumenical Councils, especially the one at Ephesus in 313, or do you just make up this stuff out of thin air?

          • Amos Moses

            i read scripture ….. the early church history is in Acts …… what the councils did was RECOGNIZE scripture …. and no more ….. each time an apostle wrote an inspired book ….. it was cannon …… councils had not one thing to do with that ….. the apostles all acknowledged that the words they wrote were not their words but were the Holy Spirit working through them ……….

            1 Thes
            2:12 That ye would walk worthy of God, who hath called you unto his kingdom and glory.
            2:13 For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.

            1Th 1:5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance; as ye know what manner of men we were among you for your sake.

            1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
            1:2 The same was in the beginning with God.
            1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
            1:4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
            1:5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

            1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
            1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
            1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

            again ….. truth is either accepted or rejected …… there is no proof required …. and even if there was ….. if a person rejects truth …. they will reject any proof whatsoever ….. if you are not of his sheep and His sheepfold ….. then you are never going to accept the truth ….. which is a person ….. Christ Jesus ……….

          • RWH

            Amos, You’re still dancing around, spouting off Scripture that does not even come to proving your point. Show me where the authors of any of the books of the New Testament were aware of what the New Testament Canon would be. You can’t because the Church had to finally deliberate what was to be Scripture and what was not. You can’t get around that as there were many books that people claimed had the authority of Scripture but were not included in the New Testament Canon. To prove your point, there must be a verse that authenticates all of the books by name.

          • Amos Moses

            “spouting off Scripture that does not even come to proving your point.”

            NOPE ….. scripture proves my point ….. you reject scripture …….. and it was not the NT authors canon ….. It Was Gods ….. It Was Christs ….. It Was The Holy Spirits canon …… and the early councils ONLY RECOGNIZED Gods words …. and NOTHING else …….

          • RWH

            So, you apparently don’t care to do any research into the deliberations that occurred within the Council of Ephesus. Just keep in repeating this fairy tale about how the Bible dropped out of the sky as the Church Fathers stood by idly.

          • Amos Moses

            “Just keep in repeating this fairy tale about how the Bible dropped out of the sky as the Church Fathers stood by idly.”

            the church fathers were under the unction OF THE HOLY SPIRIT …….. that is not “idly by” …. and it led to the RECOGNITION of the canon …..which existed ….. WHETHER THEY RECOGNIZED IT OR NOT ………..

          • RWH

            Amos. Why don’t you do some serious research to see what criteria the Church Fathers used to determine Scripture rather than blow a lot of bubbles in the air and duck behind a lot of smoke and mirrors.

          • Amos Moses

            Jn 1:3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.

            God did it …….. He says so ………. He is sovereign … NOT US ……..

          • Charles

            Clearly, you need to research. I already told you Sun Worshipers it was the Council of Hippo 390 AD.

          • Amos Moses

            “people around here sit by their computers with a bag of potato chips and pass judgement on people who really suffered for the Faith.”

            2 “To the angel of the church in Ephesus write: These are the words of him who holds the seven stars in his right hand and walks among the seven golden lampstands. 2
            I know your deeds, your hard work and your perseverance. I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false

            did you get that last part ………… “I know that you cannot tolerate wicked people, that you have tested those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false” …… it is our JOB to test them ……..

          • RWH

            Amos. You can dance around this all you like and call people all sorts of names and quote all sorts of Scripture. When Timothy penned his book, the New Testament as we know it did not exist. Much of it had yet to be written. Unless you can prove to me that John the Divine, author of Revelation and Timothy knew exactly what was to be in the New Testament, you’re wasting your breath. You would do well to consult some sources about the Council of Ephesus and how the Church Fathers determined what was to be the new Testament–what writings they included, and what writings they excluded.

          • Amos Moses

            “When Timothy penned his book, the New Testament as we know it did not exist”

            when Timothy penned 1 Timothy ….. UNDER UNCTION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT ….. The Holy Spirit ….. the AUTHOR …. KNEW what it was …. NOTHING is a surprise to God/Christ/Holy Spirit ……….. they are OMNIPOTENT and OMNIPRESENT …… THEY knew what was being done and that it was canon …………..

          • RWH

            Then, it is your obligation to show us that Timothy knew that there would be such a document known as the New Testament and that he knew the identity of all of the books within it. All you can do is to cite Bible verses that talk about inspiration in the generic sense, but you can’t prove that anyone knew exactly what would comprise the New Testament. Dancing around the Scriptures certainly beats doing some solid research as to how the New Testament came to be.

          • Amos Moses

            “Then, it is your obligation to show us that Timothy knew that there would be such a document known as the New Testament”

            no …. it is not ….. THE HOLY SPIRIT knew ….. as the HOLY SPIRIT is the author ……. OF ALL SCRIPTURE ……….. AND THE CANON …….

          • RWH

            Lots of platitudes but no solid answer. Look up the Council of Ephesus, and you might actually learn something. If we all had your intellectual curiosity and your desire to actually learn something, society would still be in the dark ages.

          • Amos Moses

            you reject scripture …. what else needs to be said ……….

          • RWH

            It’s not a matter of rejecting Scripture. It’s a matter of your magical thinking. Rather than do some research into how the New Testament was assembled, you just prefer to wallow in ignorance. You can take anything that exists and simply state that God did it. Figuring out the dynamics of how things exist take some work, and you apparently are not willing to do that work.

          • Amos Moses

            “It’s not a matter of rejecting Scripture”

            it most certainly is ….. WHERE IS THE AUTHORITY ……

          • RWH

            Why don’t you look up an article in Wicopedia to discover how the New Testament came about. There was a bit of disagreement historically as to what books constituted Scripture and what books did not. Interestingly enough, The Council of Trent plus early Protestant assemblies discussed the canon of the New Testament and affirmed what should be included. The New Testament didn’t miraculously assemble itself without the careful deliberation of the various church councils.

          • Amos Moses

            “Why don’t you look up an article in Wicopedia to discover how the New Testament came about.”

            Why ….. the books were written …. the AUTHOR of scripture is the Holy Spirit ….. that is either ACCEPTED OR REJECTED ………. any of those councils did just that …… ACCEPTED OR REJECTED ……….. what else is needed to know ……….. NOTHING …….

          • Amos Moses

            WIKIpedia ……. or Wicked-Pedia …… IS NOT MY AUTHORITY ….. Scripture IS ……….

          • JDV

            Peter’s assessment of Paul’s writings in 2 Peter 3:15-16 certainly speak towards this point.

          • Johndoe

            John the Divine did not write the two letters to Timothy.

            PAUL did.

            You’ve never even seen a Bible.

          • Catherine Nicolopoulos

            God’s Canon? Where and when did God write His Canon? In what language did He write it ?

          • Amos Moses

            the OT and the NT …… they are His canon …. if we do not have Gods word … His word being His canon …. then there is no truth in this world ….. all you have then is just another man-made, man-centered religion ….. and there is then absolutely no truth in this world …

            THOSE ARE THE ONLY ALTERNATIVES …….

      • twodaughters

        Orthodoxy is the fullness of the faith of Christ. Congrats, Hank! Welcome. <3

        • Amos Moses

          yeah … no …. the orthodoxy is SCRIPTURE ….. and HH has left that building …….. /SMH ….

          • George Caco

            Amos, don’t tell me that you are part of the anti-Church Church or that you are part of a non-Denominational Denomination.

          • Amos Moses

            ok … i will not tell you that ….. but i do belong to a church …… a protestant reformed church ………..

          • George Caco

            So you’re saying that God’s Church was reformed by protestors culminating in 30,000 protesting factures? Are you ok with that?

          • Amos Moses

            not even sure what that means …… unity for unitys sake is death …….. and BTW ….. that number keeps changing with the person quoting it ….. i believe in the five solas ….. that SCRIPTURE is our final and only authority and it is Gods word delivered to us …… and if it is not …… then there is no truth in this world ….. SCRIPTURE … GODS WORD says there MUST be heresies ….. and that it is to make Gods word stand out …………

            1Cor 11:19 For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you.

          • George Caco

            Which scripture, Amos? Is it the KJV or the NIV or the NSRV or the ….?

            So you are ok with fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands of splinters. I wonder how many Protestants are ok with this utter mayhem?

          • Amos Moses

            in any question of what any scripture is saying ….. i return to the Greek and Hebrew …..

          • Kevin Bullard

            So what you say the Bible means is what it means then. Ahh. I see.

          • Amos Moses

            i did not write the bible ….. in Greek or Hebrew ….. but we have the original texts ….. we have Gods promise to protect His word ….. and He has done so ….. or do you dispute that also ………..

          • Amos Moses

            What God wrote through the Apostles and Prophets is what it means …….

          • Catherine Nicolopoulos

            Amos, how far back do Christianity’s roots go, and how recently was Protestantism created? Orthodoxy has retained the 2000+ year old original faith and tradition that was delivered ONCE to the Apostles and their successors through to this day – and it is not changed or altered, nor has it splintered into thousands (!!!!) of disagreeing factions, ALL of them claiming to have the Truth. I assume you guys are expecting the Lord to choose one of those thousands on His Judgment Day??
            You did well to break away from heretical Papism, but why in God’s name didn’t you return to the original faith, but preferred to generate a whole army of disagreeing sub-divisions of Protestantism?

          • Peter Stone

            You are WRONG!!!—not all Christian churches are Protestants who came out of the Catholic Church during the 16th century. And Roman Catholicism (later Eastern Orthodox, etc.) only started after the 4th Century when Emperor Constantine in AD.325 promoted a mixture of Christianity & Roman Paganism in attempt to unite the Roman Empire. True Bible believing Christians never joined this church and that’s why they were severely persecuted. (Please read the history of the Christian church from a neutral source). Anyway, a large number of independent Bible Baptist and Evangelical churches today trace their roots back to the Apostles and not to the Protestant Reformation.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            There wasn’t a New Testament canon in AD300.

          • George Caco

            You said, “Emperor Constantine in AD.325 promoted a mixture of Christianity & Roman Paganism”. If that’s the case then why did Constantine 1) make Christianity all legal (not just the portion that could be merged with paganism), 2) move the Empire capital to Constantinople in order to get away from all of the pagan shrines & temples in Rome? Those two actions are complete breaks from paganism. Your statement just doesn’t follow. It’s time that you viewed history logically and objectively.

          • RWH

            By the way, **The Trail of Blood** has been discredited by many reliable conservative theologians. Bob Jones University is one of the leading authorities that have discredited the “Baptist Bride” theory propagated by the ToB.. The various groups did not know each other, and nobody can prove that they were aware of each other. One of the groups mentioned by the ToB later converted to Islam. The others had beliefs that were hardly Baptist in nature. All the ToB can claim is that these groups existed. Their individual doctrines were not clear, nor did they conform between groups.

          • Peter Stone

            Where is your evidence?

          • Amos Moses

            you want to frame this in a false paradigm ……. this is about AUTHORITY ….. Who has the AUTHORITY ………. is scripture the AUTHORITY ….. or not ……….

          • Kevin Bullard

            Not – the Church collected and established the canon and it is the interpreter of said writings. The church way predates the Bible, unless the internets are wrong…Ask a Southern Baptist or A-0f-G believer about women’s ordination and then ask a United Church of Christ or Anglican/Episcopalian believer the same question.

          • Amos Moses

            “the Church collected and established the canon and it is the interpreter of said writings”

            ok ….. so where is it ….. who is the interpreter … the person or persons ….. give us the names …..

            “The church way predates the Bible”

            it most certainly does not ………. or there would have been nothing to be “collected and established” ……… so you have to straiten out your self contradiction ………… FYI …. the CHURCHES …. established by all the apostles ….. had no central authority and existed independent of all the others ….. Paul wrote to them that He established …. as did Peter …. and others ….. but it was a very loose knit group … and as hard as i look ….. i cant find the office of pope or any other office outside of Bishop being the highest office ….. DEFINITELY no “priests” ……. and the OT is just as much the inspired, God breathed, theopneustros as the NT …… and it PRE-EXISTED what you refer to as the CHURCH ………

          • Kevin Bullard

            It is part of the Authority.

          • Kevin Bullard

            So you worship and follow Jan Calvin?

          • Amos Moses

            ummmmm ….. and you worship the pope? ……..

          • GLT

            “So you worship and follow Jan Calvin?”

            I am of what you would label a ‘protestant’ and I do not follow John Calvin. Calvin was merely a man and therefore fallible. One should follow Paul’s advice in 1 Corinthians 3.

      • BuckeyePhysicist

        There’s no basis in Scripture for Sola Scriptura but you know what’s funny? Protestants saying “Bible alone” in Latin…..

        • Amos Moses

          and please tell us what Sola Scriptura is ………….

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Of course. Sola Scriptura is Latin for “only the Bible.” Many Protestants cite this as their core belief.

          • Amos Moses

            sure …. got that ….. What does it MEAN …… i am not asking for the translation of the words …… WHAT IS Sola Scriptura …………. what belief are we talking about ……..

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Sola Scriptura is an invention from Luther which states the words in the Bible are the only source of divine revelation.

          • Amos Moses

            not exactly correct ………. sorry ….. and BTW …. what other source is there …… and how do you know that source has any credibility ……….

    • “Where ever it may be attained…” The fullness of Christian truth is fully and completely revealed in scripture. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
      This reminds me of those who would have a “personal relationship”, but don’t pause to place their faith on Christ alone, nor submit to the form of relationship he instructs us to have.

      • George Caco

        Which scripture, David? Is it the KJV or the NIV or the NSRV or the ….? And which one of the 30,000 Protestant denominations are you with? Sola Scriptura has produced mayhem.

        • No George, there is only one scripture. The Greek Orthodox church, for all their many flaws are not as many, which corrupt the word of God. King James only – or learn to speak Greek like a Greek, and Textus receptus only. Don’t you know that Codex Sinaiticus is a modern fraud, and ALL the modern English “bibles” are tainted by its tiny evil corruptions?

          • George Caco

            So you’re a KJV-only advocate. Did you know that the KJV was derived from a compromise of Anglican, Calvinist, and Catholic interested parties?

          • If God has not kept his word, if Christ’s words have passed away, all all we have is evil communications, then let us eat and drink, for to morrow we die.

          • George Caco

            Who said that God has not kept his word? Through Textual Critical Analysis, we have gotten back very closely to the Greek Koine originals, You mentioned the Textus Receptus. You are on the right path. Just compiling all verses mentioned by the Early Church Fathers can bring us back to the originals. I personally stick with the Majority Text version which is very very close to the Textus Receptus. All I’m saying is be very careful with translations. They should all be accountable to the Majority Text/Textus Receptus Greek Bible.

          • When you said “NIV” and added uncertainty, you indicated that God has not preserved his word. I’m glad this is not your actual position. Textual Critical Analysis, however, is a complete mess, because it has been run by deceivers that gladly incorporate corruption and then sell their own work as if it is the word of God.

    • Gary Whiteman

      What’s “courageous” about it, doofus? People switch churches all the time. No big deal. Good riddance, you can have old senile fool.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    This is a sad news. Hank Hanegraaff should have stayed with the Biblical denomination instead of joining the Eastern Orthodox. What does it mean “chrismating,” as if he wasn’t Christian before? Man’s heart cannot be trusted; only the Word of God alone is eternally true. “There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all…” (Ephesians chapter 4)

    • Jeffrey Ignatius Turner

      Baptism is when you become a Christian. Chrismation is when you become a member of the Orthodox Church.

      Therefore when a non-Christian is received into the Orthodox Church he is baptized and chrismated. When someone who is already a baptized Christian (like Hank) is received into the Orthodox Church he is only Chrismated.

      Baptism (as you probably already know) is immersion in water. Chrismation is announting with oil (called Chrism).

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Not a Biblical practice. He shouldn’t have been chrismated into the Eastern Orthodox. I understand his sentiment, but the truth cannot be traded with anything. He should have tried to make the Orthodox Christians return to the Word of God, not the opposite.

        • Jeffrey Ignatius Turner

          Anointing is not a biblical practice? What Bible are you reading? It’s definitely in the Christian one.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Anointing into a church membership? Where in the Holy Bible or in the Early Church?

        • Jeffrey Ignatius Turner

          Also I’d point out that just because something isn’t explicitly stated in the text of Holy Scripture doesn’t necessarily make it “wrong.”

          Just for a couple of examples; scripture does not say that churches should have choirs, or that grape juice should be substituted for wine in communion. Yet lots of churches do these things. Does it make these things “wrong” just because they are not “Biblical”? Of course not.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            The Orthodox Church have doctrinal problems in the light of the Holy Scripture, not just worship service formats. (Galatians chapter 2) There must be many true believers within the Orthodox Church, but decently-learned Bible scholors should not join it.

    • RWH

      And, according to the Orthodox Church, Grace, you are outside of the body of Christ.

      • George Caco

        According to EO Metropolitan Episkopos Kallistos Ware, nobody can claim to know where the Body of Christ does not reside.

      • Malleus

        How old are you anyway?

    • Amos Moses

      Amen

    • Kevin Bullard

      Protestants talking word of God is always interesting.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        Protestant churches( not-including the Western mainliners who are universalists and endorse homosexuality) follow God more accurately than the Catholics or Eastern Orthodox Church do. You must read the Word of God and trust in Jesus’ atonement alone for your salvation.

        “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.” ( Ephesians chapter 2)

        • Kevin Bullard

          Says who? I know Rev Moon dislike Orthodoxy.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            Who is Moon? He is dead if you are talking about the Korean cult head. The Holy Bible is the truth. No humans are. I hope Hank Hanegraaf will regret his decision and return to the Biblical denomination.

  • Jose Plascencia

    Congrats Hank!

  • Amos Moses

    So from Sola Scriptura ….. to Sola Ecclesia …… sad …. /SMH ………… guess the “smells and bells” were more attractive ….. /SMH …………

    • George Caco

      Concerning your “smells and bells” statement: the Orthodox faith is non-Platonic. It values highly the physical world and its ability to point the way to Christ.

      • Amos Moses

        but there is the bells and the incense ……. and that is a draw to many ….. the “traditions” …. as if that has any thing to do with scripture ….. look …. i have no problem with orthodoxy ….. it is essential to christianity ….. but that is not what the use of that word in a number of churches is referring to …….

        • George Caco

          You’ll need to remove the incense references from within the Book of Revelation so that it aligns with your view of traditions.

          • Amos Moses

            “You’ll need to remove the incense references from within the Book of Revelation so that it aligns with your view of traditions.”

            no …. what i am talking about is the chills and goose bumps and liver quivers many get from that and think that is somehow related to God when it is just a fleshly desire for religion and not the word of God ……….

          • George Caco

            If you made a derogatory remark against incense and then you realized it is referenced in the Book of Revelation. You are a chameleon of many colors.

          • Amos Moses

            i made a comment about the activities inside many churches ….. and if you misunderstood …. that is your problem …. not mine ……..

          • George Caco

            So tell me: does your Church make use of incense as per the Bible or are you a member of an anti-Bible Church?

          • Amos Moses

            show me where the use of incense is a requirement for a church service …… or is that a tradition that is not written down ……… there was in the Temple ….. but the Temple was not a church as we understand it today and it had specific meaning in the Temple ….. but all that was fulfilled in Christ …… FYI, i have nothing against the use of incense …. i like the smell of Frankincense and Myrrh ……… but again ….. that is not what i was talking about and you are just bringing up STRAW MAN argumentation ………. FAIL …… burn baby burn …. i always carry my Zippo …….. comes in handy for such occasions ……

          • George Caco

            Here is another example of the Iconoclastic Platonic Attitude of Protestant Churches that despise all things physical in their worship service.

          • Amos Moses

            so you got nothing ……… no scripture ….. not even a “tradition” that you can enunciate …. sad ….

          • George Caco

            The Church did just that from 33AD to about 50AD (when the first Epistle came out). So you’re telling me that the first Christians in Christianity’s first decade were wandering aimlessly because they had no scriptures? Amos, please break away from the anti-historical stance of Protestantism and come over to the Christian Truth.

          • Amos Moses

            CHRIST referred to the scriptures often …. so obviously they existed ……….. during His lifetime ……..

            Mat 21:42 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord’s doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

            Mat 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

            Mat 26:54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?

            Mat 26:56 But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled.

            Rom 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

            1Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
            1Cor 15:4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:

            17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews.
            17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.
            17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
            17:13 But when the Jews of Thessalonica had knowledge that the word of God was preached of Paul at Berea, they came thither also, and stirred up the people.

            THEY SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY ………….

          • George Caco

            They are all referring to OT writings. We all know that the OT existed then but it was the NT did not exist from 33AD to about 50AD. So you’re telling me that the first Christians in Christianity’s first decade were wandering aimlessly because they had no NT scriptures?

          • Amos Moses

            “They are all referring to OT writings.”

            and yet they were scriptures …. and your falacious claim of “So you’re telling me that the first Christians in Christianity’s first decade were wandering aimlessly because they had no scriptures?” …. is just that …. FALACIOUS ……. and a straw man argument ……… they HAD scriptures …. the OT and the NT ….. were not recognized until later ….. but that has not one thing to do with the scriptures existence …. the church did not invent it …. it was already …… they just RECOGNIZED Gods canon …. as i said ……….

          • George Caco

            So it is the OT scriptures that your reformed church is using? Let me guess, your church’s name is the Reformed OT-Scriptures Church.

          • Amos Moses

            Straw man argument ……….. burn baby burn ….. gosh i like this Zippo …. so useful ……..

          • Kevin Bullard

            Except for TV preachers

          • George Caco

            You’re right! TV Preachers love physical money coming in during their worship service!

          • Kevin Bullard

            Is that what it is? I don’t get goosebumps.

      • Laurence Charles Ringo

        The “physical world”does’nt lead anyone to Christ–Only the Father does.(According to Jesus,of course.)–The Gospel of John, chapter 6…Read it,George.

    • Ryan Matzke

      Thats…………a lot of ……………. unnecessary ……………………….. periods.

      …………….. ……………..///SMH……………………. not to mention these: /

      • Amos Moses

        your objections as to form are noted ….. i do not care …………..

  • Royce E. Van Blaricome

    This is almost comical. A couple of years ago “The Bible Answer Man” left the Bible and its Creation account. And now what, he’s leaving Salvation by Grace Along Through Faith Alone”? I haven’t listened to Hank is quite some time so I have no idea what he’s espousing now but on the surface this ain’t looking good.

    In order to not disobey John 7:24, I’ll withhold judgment for now but given what Hank has said about the RCC this surely is perplexing. We are definitely in some interesting times.

    • Turbulance

      Salvation by grace alone, through faith alone? First of all ‘through faith alone’ does not appear in the original Greek. Inserting ‘alone’ into any verse in order to change the meaning of the verse to promote your doctrinal bias is at the same level of evil that was committed by the Jehova’s Witnesses when they inserted ‘a’ in John 1:1. Revelation 22:18 has a clear message in this regard. ‘Justification by faith alone’ and ‘justification by faith’ mean two vastly different things and who denies this, is intellectually dishonest.

      The hypocrisy and ignorance contained in ‘In order not to disobey John 7:24, I’ll withhold judgement……’. A Pharisee publicly displaying his/her righteousness before the people. I am speechless and sad. Every Protestant ends up being their own pope due to all the ‘sola’s’ selectively sneaked into the Bible.

      And one last thing: Protestant idolatry and hypocrisy in this regard. Scripture is NOT the Word of God! Jesus Christ is the Logos, the Word of God. Let that sink in! It almost sounds like Scripture is the fourth person of the Trinity, the way some hammer sola scriptura. And then the Orthodox are accused of idolatry for venerating icons. Using an exlusive title belonging to the Second Person of the Holy Trinity and applying it to a book (regardless how holy, true and valuable it is) and then worshiping the book more than the Person, has spiritual consequences that are visible across the Protestant world.

      “Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me.” *

      Martin Luther

      • Charles

        “”Protestant idolatry and hypocrisy in this regard. Scripture is NOT the Word of God! “”

        Yet the Bible contradicts what you state..

        (2Ti 3:16) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

        • Turbulance

          I am afraid you are not getting it. Read the next sentence to get the full meaning.

          Jesus Christ is the Logos, the Word of God.
          The texts you provide as counter arguments does not address the issue at all.

          Oh and by the way, the proof text for sola scriptura at the top of your list, does not support sola scriptura. Profitable in no way carries the same meaning or weight as ‘sola’ which means: only or indispensable to.

          • Charles

            No I get it. You don’t believe God can preserve his Word fully intact.

          • S.L. Hansen

            You *don’t* get it. JESUS is the Word of God. See John 1:1.

          • Charles

            Correct. Fulfilled as in the Scripture.

          • James Staten

            Charlie, You did good!!!!!! In the whole discourse. Bless You

          • Charles

            Thank you James. There is attack after attack from Satan and his minions here. But it keeps the Saints sharp. 🙂

          • Ryan Matzke

            So, riddle me this Charley:

            Are the Coptic Christians killed on Palm Sunday (May God bless them!) by ISIS part of “Satan and his minions”? Because they died for their faith, and are Orthodox to the core, ever since St. Mark the Apostle converted them 2000ish years ago.

            What suffering have you ever endured for your FTW internet “faith”? Not much, I can almost guarantee. Mostly “attaboys” from other keyboard theologians (James Staten).

            And then, what of the Muslims? Are they doing God’s work by removing said minions? Or are they part of Satan’s Minions (the answer is yes), but killing some other minions? You are acting the fool Charles.

            The next time you hear of Christians dying for their faith at the hands of the Mohammedan know that they are not like you, they know you are a heretic, a Nicolaitan. So don’t you dare shake your head and click your tongue and say, “what a shame” when you see them Glorified in martyrdom on TV from you recliner. For you have condemned them when you condemn us! You know not of what you speak.

            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES
            LORD JESUS CHRIST, HAVE MERCY ON CHARLES

            ISIS doesn’t fear you, nor any Protestant “Church”, you have already been divided, thus you are easily conquered. They fear us. The devil fears The Church, not “Solas”. For we hold the fulness of the faith. That is why Orthodox are butchered whilst you grow fat on delusion.

          • Charles

            “”Are the Coptic Christians killed on Palm Sunday (May God bless them!) by ISIS part of “Satan and his minions”? Because they died for their faith, and are Orthodox to the core””

            I don’t know. Did they die for Jesus or for the Church? By the way, I have no doubt there are believers in God in the Church, but they are moving away from it. God pulls them out. Happens all the time.

            “”What suffering have you ever endured for your FTW internet “faith”? Not much, I can almost guarantee. Mostly “attaboys” from other keyboard theologians (James Staten).””

            I expect this rubbish from a Catholic. You people don’t even know what actual works are. I suffer everyday as Christian, just like the rest who believe and follow the Lord. EVERY SINGLE DAY IS A BATTLE AGAINST THE ENEMY.

            “”And then, what of the ISIS? Are they doing God’s work by removing said minions? Or are they part of Satan’s Minions (the answer is yes), but killing some other minions? You are acting the fool Charles.””

            Well only God would no that. I’m not the one making assumptions about their deaths. So……..

            “”The next time you hear of Orthodox Christians dying for their faith at the hands of the Mohammedan (or anyone else) know that they are not like you, they know you are a heretic, a Nicolaitan. So don’t you dare shake your head and click your tongue and say, “what a shame” when you see them Glorified in martyrdom on TV from you recliner. For you have condemned them when you condemn us as minions of the enemy! You know not of what you speak.””

            I’m speaking to the Church. If you are part of the Church, well you get the idea. God decides who’s saved and who isn’t. Do you feel the same way about the millions your Church slaughtered? Under the most horrific tortures imaginable? Christians have been dying for sometime now. Did you just get the news?

            “”ISIS doesn’t fear you, nor any Protestant “Church”, you have already been divided, thus you are easily conquered. They fear us. The devil fears The Church, not “Solas”. For we hold the fulness of the faith. That is why Orthodox are butchered whilst you grow fat on delusion.””

            I’m not part of a denomination. I listen to God and his Word, because I know that’s the only real truth man has in salvation through Christ Jesus. Did you know Mohammed’s wife was a Catholic? Did you know he was surrounded by many Catholics? Bet you didn’t know that did you. Your Church I’m afraid was made by the Satan. Just like your Sun Worshiping founder Constantine. Did you know he was worshiping the Sun God right up until his death.. Did you know that? The vain babbling isn’t going to do you anymore good. I’m quite aware of who my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ is. He is with me everyday.

          • James Staten

            Charles, I’m not a Keyboard Theologian. Just a layman, a pointer to the Good News of the Gospel.

          • Charles

            I know that. I was quoting the above person. I double quote them.

          • James Staten

            Sorry, I should have read a little better, but either way just a layman. I read a lot also. I noticed upon coming to your comment, someone named Delectable. He doesn’t pull any punches. Blessings, James

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Time to exercise Matt. 7:6 and Mark 6;11

          • Kevin Bullard

            Does His voice sound a lot like yours, in your head?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            See Matt. 7:21-23. You’re standing in line. And while you’re at it, look up when God doesn’t hear the prayers of those who profess His name. SMH…

          • James Staten

            Charles, they don’t get it. I am on the blog now writing. They would rather cling to their tradition. They don’t understand Paul writes to the Body of Christ during this dispensation of Grace. Mysteries, New Revelation given to him from the Ascended Lord from glory…this new creation is the Church, the Body of Christ. Paul says it is My Gospel, and one day every man will be judged by this Gospel….Keep Looking Up, James

          • Jeffrey Ignatius Turner

            “Cling to the traditions we have taught you, whether by our written word or by our preaching.”

            – Saint Paul, 2 Thess 2:15

            As you can plainly see, Holy Scripture instructs us to cling to both the Biblical and extra-Biblical traditions of the Apostles. Do you obey Holy Scripture by keeping both, or do you reject Holy Scripture in favor of the “Bible alone” approach?

            It’s a bit ironic, really, that if you believe in the “Bible alone” you are actually going against the Bible.

          • James Staten

            This will be my last comment on this subject. I am glad you quote the Apostle Paul. If you were to spend some time on my comments, you would see that I lean toward Paul during this dispensation of Grace. In other scripture he makes it clear that scripture written beforehand was written for our learning, not for doctrine. Paul also makes it quite clear that we once knew a man after the flesh, but we know longer know him. Paul was given mysteries which had never been revealed before to any man, not even during the Lord’s earthly ministry. Even Peter in his last epistle wrote that Paul’s writings are hard to understand, but listen to Paul. There is a reason he authored half the New Testament, the Risen Savior from glory gave new revelation. It seems to me that from the beginning on this blog, several of us just came by to say, “You can have Hank”, and that we had thrown our hands up years ago about him. It then spiraled into a “religion” war. There is only One Church per Paul and that is the Body of Christ, a New Creation composed of Jews and Gentiles, baptized into the Body by the Holy Spirit during this dispensation of Grace by believing the Gospel (1 Corinthians 15:1-4), and that is not your religion or mine. That’s Paul’s Gospel by which every man will one day be Judged…Hope this helps

          • George Caco

            2 Th 2:15 totally destroys the vain human tradition of Sola Scriptura.

            The only Sola Fide (Faith Alone/Only) is in James 2:24 which says, “You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.”

            The Truth of the Bible Prevails!

          • James Staten

            George, I replied but they have it held by moderator. Read the first verse of James, which Tribe are you? Another day, another study!!!

          • James Staten

            George…Update. Did you see that Hank got booted off probably the largest Christian broadcaster?

          • George Caco

            I’ve known that since Monday. I told a Representative of that Station that I refuse to listen to Christian Radio that plays politics. I’m now listening to Pop Rock Stations which are less vindictive and less political.

          • James Staten

            OK…George

          • GLT

            “As you can plainly see, Holy Scripture instructs us to cling to both the Biblical and extra-Biblical traditions of the Apostles.”

            You can’t get that out of 2 Thessalonians 2:15 outside of performing linguistic gymnastics. Paul was referring to what was known and being shared at the time, both oral and written preceding the time of the Apostles. The verse in no way justifies the acceptance of any and all oral traditions to come in the future.

          • The General

            Sorry, but a Bible-less Christianity is not Christianity.

          • Kevin Bullard

            So for the first several hundred years after Christ, where we had the church but no real Canon of Scripture…What was that?

        • RWH

          And exactly what Scripture was Timothy referring to? Much of what is in the Bible was yet to be written when Timothy penned this. Did Timothy understand that he was writing something that would be part of the New Testament Canon? According to tradition, both Peter and Thomas wrote Gospels. Why is it that they were not included in the Bible? The Church Fathers determined what was to be included in the Canon of the Bible in 313, way after Timothy died.

          • Charles

            Scripture was established and known well before the Catholics got a hold of it. Whatever did the 1st Century Christians do? Give me a break. Timothy was fulfilling God’s Word, whether he knew it or not. Doesn’t matter.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            The very fact that no other book in all History has undergone the attacks to discredit it is prima facia evidence that Scripture is the Word of God.

          • RWH

            When you’re dealing with textual criticism, you don’t deal with would-of, should-of, could-of. You deal with facts. Timothy knew that the Old Testament existed in both the Hebrew Text and the Septuagint. He did not know that a New Testament would exist because it was put together formally in 313. Don’t get into speculation. The question is what Timothy understood as Scripture..

          • Charles

            Already explained above.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            If you haven’t figured it out by now, RWH is a constant troll on here who likes to deceive and lie and attempt to draw people away from the Truth. What’s amazing is that in his ignorance and empty attempts he always shows just how little he thinks about what he’s saying.

            He actually says, “You can’t go about making Timothy saying something that he didn’t clearly say.” What’s THAT tell ya???

            Then he previously asks the question as to how Timothy couldn’t have written about something that didn’t even exist at the time. Well, THAT tells you right there that he doesn’t even know who wrote Timothy AND that his subsequent repeating it wasn’t just a “mistake”. AND it tells ya that he evidently has never heard of prophecy either.

            He’s a troll, he’s here to do Satan’s bidding, and he has no desire for Truth.

          • Peggy Summers

            How can you speak of textual criticism when you don’t even comprehend the fact that Paul wrote the letters to Timothy???
            1 Tim. 1:1-2 – “Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ, by the commandment of God our Savior and the Lord Jesus Christ, our hope, to Timothy, a true son in the faith….”
            And again, in 2 Tim. 1:1-2 – Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ…To Timothy, a beloved son….”

          • RWH

            OK. So I got the title of the book mixed up with the author of the book. If you expressed some Christian charity, you should have realized this. Did you ever get something confused and then have people go after you like a bunch of attack dogs? However, the question still remains. What was Paul referring to when he referenced All Scripture? The New Testament Canon was not formed yet, nor were all the books of the NT written yet. The problem with Evangelicals is that they like to pretend that church history ceased to exist after Christ died and resumed at the Protestant Reformation. They have a great deal of difficulty with the fact that there was a great deal of discussion over a number of years between the Church Fathers as to what is part of the NT canon and what is not.

          • RWH

            But it does matter. You can’t go about making Timothy saying something that he didn’t clearly say. You can cite nice platitudes, but they don’t support your position if you can’t prove that Timothy was aware that a complete New Testament would exist as we know it today.

          • Laurence Charles Ringo

            Dude,seriously…stop displaying your ignorance! The great Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, not the other way around; it’s called the Epistle TO Timothy! What is wrong with you? Paul,as well as all the writers of the New Testament, had the Tanakh as guide; all any literate has to do is read the Book of Acts to ascertain that.SHEESH,people; use your God-given sense instead of being lazy and allowing yourselves to be led around by long-dead individuals who in many instances were no more spiritually astute that you are(or should be)—-I know: Why don’t we all seek Almighty God Himself; He still speaks you know, according to Proverbs 3rd chapter,vss..5-6.Always works for me…😊PEACE IN CHRIST!

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Good point about Paul writing TO Timothy. I’ve pointed out the same. And I don’t disagree with the rest of what you said either but it is important to point out that God commands us to be in a local body of Believers and submit to the authorities over us within that Body.

          • RWH

            OK, so I got authorship mixed up with the book itself. That does not make me ignorant, an all-encompassing term. We were discussing “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.” Show me what Paul was referring to when he cited Scripture. The Canon of the New Testament was yet to be completely written, and there were other authorities out there who wrote things down. Otherwise, Paul wouldn’t be going after the Judiazers. If you’re gong to claim that Paul was referring to something which was to exist a couple of hundred years after his death, you will have to show us concrete proof. Since Protestants believe in Sola Scriptura, point out from the NT what books belong in the NT. By the way, while I may be rather direct in my answer, you should notice that I am treating you with respect. I haven’t made any all-encompassing evaluations of your intelligence.

        • RWH

          You keep on citing II Timothy as if the entire New Testament existed when he penned Timothy. Much of the New Testament was not written yet. So, tell us exactly what Timothy had in mind. What did he consider Scripture? He can’t endorse something that didn’t exist yet.

          • Charles

            God endorsed it. It’s amazing. He can create the Sun, Moon, Earth, and stars, but incapable of preserving his Word. You just hate God. Just admit it… That’s why you are alway in conflict.

          • RWH

            In other words, you can’t answer the question. So rather than admit that Timothy had no idea that such a thing as the New Testament would come into existence, you just babble off breezy platitudes and then curse out the other rather than do some critical thinking.

          • Charles

            (Isa 40:8) The grass withereth, the flower fadeth: but the word of our God shall stand for ever.

          • RWH

            Rather than trying to pull a rabbit out of a hat, why don’t you do some research to see how the Fathers of the Council of 313 determined what goes into the Canon. Those that are contemptuous of the Church Fathers find it hard to admit that they owe it to the Orthodox Catholic Church for the Canon of the New Testament. Rather, they cherry-pick all sorts of Scripture that doesn’t answer the question. The Word of God in Isaiah 40:8 stands for God, the Word, not a piece of paper.

          • Charles

            I suggest you do your research as the books were assembled at the Council of Hippo in 390 AD. I love how your arrogant claims to Gods Words (Like you had some part in writing it) verify your man made cult. Funniest part is the Catholics have been against God from the start. Including your founder the Sun worshiping Pagan Constantine. Lest we forget the hundreds of millions brutally tortured by your vicious cult for simply wanting to read the “WORD” for themselves.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            You just keep right on with your “critical thinking” (when it’s really nothing more than Prov. 14:12) and ignoring the fact that it is the inspired (God-breathed) Word of God. (I’m quite certain God appreciates you trying to limit Him and put Him in a box. NOT!!)

            Oh, and btw, how is it do you ‘spose that Isaiah and the writer of Job knew the Earth was round WAY BEFORE it was known to be other than flat? Nevermind, I don’t really wanna hear what your answer is. Just thought I’d throw that out there for others to see the idiocy in your remarks.

          • RWH

            Actually, the idiocy comes from those who claim things that are not there. Isaiah and Job knew nothing about macro-geography. A sphere is a two-dimensional figure. This is what happens when we have amateur theologians who have no use for those who have addressed this through the centuries. They come up with all sorts of unique and loony pronouncements. Moreover, it doesn’t matter what the English says. It is the original Hebrew. The English words are products of those who translated the Word.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “Moreover, it doesn’t matter what the English says. It is the original Hebrew. The English words are products of those who translated the Word.”

            Thank you. Your deception did not escape my discernment. That’s just another one of your deceiving ways of undermining God’s Word as you consistently do on here.

            Go ahead and try to turn Isaiah and Job into something it’s not with your “two-dimensional distractions and diversions. It’s not gonna work and you’re still gonna wind up where all those who twist God’s Word and speak falsely for Him will.

            Then we’ll see who’s really loony.

            Oh, and just like all your previous comments the distraction didn’t serve its purpose because we can all see that you still attributed the book of Timothy to Timothy and not Paul.

            So it’s pretty obvious who the amateur theologian is! LOL

          • Peggy Summers

            RWH, apparently you know nothing of macro-geography either. Or mathematics. A sphere is a three-dimensional object; a circle is a two-dimensional figure.
            I agree that Eastern Orthodoxy is pretty much Catholicism in a different wrapper.

          • RWH

            Peggy. Did the writers of the Old and New Testament understand modern definitions, or are you just going for the attack? What counts is what these people knew. If they were so all-knowing, why did they believe that the sun went around the earth? If they had such an understanding of a sphere, they surely would have realized that the earth went around the sun.

            Concerning the Orthodox Church, you might want to do some research into theology. The Orthodox have quite a different understanding of a lot of cardinal doctrines than does the west. For starters, it would make Protestants realize how much they inherited from the Catholic Church, yet claim as their own. Start with the meaning of original sin, what it is, and how we inherited it. Then, deal with the meaning of the Eucharist and what we are really observing when we celebrate the Divine Liturgy. Then, look at the role of Mary in the Church. To top it off, see who inherited the keys given to St. Peter. Only Evangelicals will claim that both are the same. Talk to any Catholic or Orthodox theologian, and they will tell you that the whole approach to Christian doctrine is different. Then, take a look at the Synaxis of Orthodox saints who died at the hands of the Catholics because they would not give up the faith.

          • GLT

            “Moreover, it doesn’t matter what the English says. It is the original Hebrew. The English words are products of those who translated the Word.”

            So, you’re argument is God ensured the proper writing of the Hebrew but did not or could not ensure a proper translation into English, thus we have only the words of the translators. I hope you realise the folly of such an argument.

          • RWH

            Sorry. The folly is yours. We have the King James, the New King James, the Standard, the Revised Standard, the Douay, the official translation of the Orthodox Church in English, and a variety of other translations. None of them translate the words of the Hebrew, the Greek, et al. the same way. Unless you can point to one of these as the really, really, true Word of God, you’re just full of beans.

          • GLT

            ” We have the King James, the New King James, the Standard, the Revised Standard, the Douay, the official translation of the Orthodox Church in English, and a variety of other translations. None of them translate the words of the Hebrew, the Greek, et al. the same way.

            So, your argument is indeed that God was either unwilling or unable to ensure a proper translation of his word into English. Interesting. I guess that means only those who understand Greek and Hebrew can really know what the Bible teaches.

            That is absolute, unadulterated, palpable nonsense.

          • RWH

            Well, if my opinion is nonsense, you should be able to tell us which translation is the definitive Word of God. Or are you one of those KJV only types who want to prove that the KJV is even more reliable than the original languages? The KJV may be a good translation, but the language has shifted enough that many have a hard time deciphering the language. So, my point stands. We have different translations, and people will stand by those translations as the best rendering of the Word of God. If you don’t realize this, you’re a fool.

          • GLT

            “you should be able to tell us which translation is the definitive Word of God.”

            Translations vary according to time period and common language usage over the world. To argue these differences result in the adulteration of the word of God in and of themselves is nonsense. Again, you are simply arguing God cannot or will not ensure the faithfulness of his word.

            There are certain versions such as The New World Translation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses that are clearly adulterated, but that does not mean all translations are wrong simply due to minor grammatical differences.

            No, I am not a KJV only. I read the NIV as well as KJV, NKJV, ASB and several others. I don’t find myself struggling to understand God’s word at all.

            “and people will stand by those translations as the best rendering of the Word of God.”

            Most people I know are intelligent enough and mature enough in their faith to understand slight linguistic differences do not lead to the corruption of God’s word.

          • RWH

            Then I don’t understand all of this psycho-babble you’re giving me. No translation is an exact translation. Often word choices reflect the biases of the translator. Wycliff learned this with his earliest translation. He tried to render the original languages in exact form and got an English translation that was unreadable. In the KJV, the he Greek word *baptizo* was rendered as baptism because King James I didn’t want to rock the ecclesiastical boat. Churches, both Catholic and Anglican, believed in sprinkling. He was about as high Anglican as you can get, and he was under the influence of Archbishop Laud, who actively persecuted dissenters. So, you can take this accurate rendering of yours and sell it to people who don’t understand anything about translation. You will never get an exact translation between any language to another.

          • GLT

            “You will never get an exact translation between any language to another.”

            Where did I even imply that? All I said was God is capable of protecting the fidelity of his word. Do you believe that or not?

          • RWH

            Unless you can point out a translation that is 100% exact in the meaning of the original, you don’t have fidelity. That’s why there is so much argumentation and ran-coring over translations. I’m not interested in playing games with you. Translations are approximations at best, but none will be exact.

          • GLT

            “Unless you can point out a translation that is 100% exact in the meaning of the original, you don’t have fidelity.”

            You can’t demonstrate the meaning is not accurate, so you have no argument.

            “That’s why there is so much argumentation and ran-coring over translations.”

            The reason there is so much rancor over translations is because there are so many people who wish to promote their personal agendas when it comes to the scriptures and modes of worship. Scripture becomes their means to an end and if that means demeaning a particular translation they will gladly do it. An example being the Eastern Orthodox church pushing their agenda that one can only be saved by following the doctrine they promote and that all those outside of the orthodox church are not truly saved.

            Ask yourself, do you really believe God restricts himself to your little view of the world and what you see as the only true and correct way to worship? Do you really believe God honours only the Eastern Orthodox form of worship and rejects the sincere devotion of millions who don’t see the need for icons, veneration of men, incense, artifacts, liturgy and so on?

            “I’m not interested in playing games with you.”

            I’m not interested in games either, only in pointing out your hypocrisy.

          • RWH

            The Russian Orthodox Church withstood seventy years at the precipice of the Gates of Hell under Communism where hundreds of bishops and tens of thousands of clergy were slaughtered. We can certainly withstand a self-righteous pipsqueak who understands nothing of doctrine but is quick to judge. I have been in churches in Russia, and I have seen a level of spirituality that one rarely sees in the west. By the way, if you don’t like incense, you’ll hate heaven. What do you think that the angel threw down to earth in Revelation? A football?

            Interesting use of the word hypocrisy. Your definition of the word can’t be found in any dictionary.

          • GLT

            “The Russian Orthodox Church withstood seventy years at the precipice of the Gates of Hell under Communism where hundreds of bishops and tens of thousands of clergy were slaughtered.”

            Yes, many Christians have suffered over the centuries for their faith and they should be remembered for it. However, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

            “We can certainly withstand a self-righteous pipsqueak who understands nothing of doctrine but is quick to judge.”

            Again you have become judgemental and condescending. Instead of doing so, why not try to defend your position? Is it because it is actually you who does not understand doctrine so you must resort to personal attacks.

            “I have been in churches in Russia, and I have seen a level of spirituality that one rarely sees in the west.”

            As the church in the west does not face the level of persecution it does in other areas of the world that is to be expected. We in the west do have it relatively easy, I do admit. However, you do not know that the church in the west would not also endure if persecuted, so again you have shown hints of being judgemental.

            “By the way, if you don’t like incense, you’ll hate heaven.”

            I never said I didn’t like incense, I only said it wasn’t necessary for worship.

            “Interesting use of the word hypocrisy.”

            hypocrisy: “the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform;”

            You accuse others of being inferior in their Christianity which is judgemental, yet you accuse others of being judgemental. That is the very definition of hypocrisy.

          • Laurence Charles Ringo

            Seriously,dude? The great Apostle Paul wrote to Timothy, not the other way around. Answer this question: What Scriptures did Jesus and Paul plus the Apostles preach from? I await your reply.

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        Where is the word Trinity in the original Greek? I didn’t “insert” any word into any verse in order to change the meaning of the verse. That’s a FALSE accusation so I guess we all know where that came from.

        “The hypocrisy and ignorance contained in…”

        Another false accusation followed by a faux omniscience by those who climb up on the throne and think they are GOD. You’re more than speechless and sad. You’re pathetic. But it has come to be expected that when one can’t address the message they attack the messenger.

        ” Scripture is NOT the Word of God!”

        Thank you. No more needs to be said. It’s always appreciated with Satan’s minions come out and reveal themselves and completely discredit themselves in such a way as to know that nothing they say should be given any consideration.

        I’ll say this for ya, you’re moniker is quite fitting. We’ll see how that works for ya in Eternity.

        • George Caco

          Muslims say the same thing about the Quran that you say about the Bible. What Turbulance is saying is that Jesus is the Word of God, plain and simple. Can you believe that, yes or no?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            If I remember correctly the Muslims don’t say that the Quran is the Word of God but rather the word of the Prophet.

            Secondly, it’s foolishness to say that it’s “plain and simple” to say Jesus is the Word of God. Do you believe that in a literal sense, yes or no? Is that all Jesus is – a word “of” God? Not as far as the Bible is concerned. Jesus IS God.

            The word “logos” is used over 300x in Scripture and only 7x is it referring to Christ. So IF Jesus were the Logos, then what is being done the other 300x?

            80x in the Gospels Jesus quotes from more than 70 chapters from 24 different OT books and not once did Jesus ever downplay the significance of Scripture. He never doubted the authority of God’s Word in any way. He never questioned the veracity of it and he never insinuated in any way, shape, or form that it was anything but true.

            Do you believe 2nd Tim. 3:16 is true or not? Plain and simple, yes or no.

            If not, then God’s Word is not the final Authority by which you govern your life and that leaves only you as your own authority and you’ve called God a Liar.

          • George Caco

            Muslims will never ever say that the Quran is the word of Muhammad. Never. They will go to extremes to tell you that he was illiterate and as such the Quran is literally the Word of God. This single vision of a book being the (and I emphasize “the”) Word of God has been adopted by Protestants. Why? Were they influenced by Islam during their formative stages?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Is that a rhetorical question or are you just trying to show your stupidity?

          • George Caco

            Ad hominem. That’s all you say in your defense? Pitiful.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Defense? You’ve mistaken me for someone else. The last thing in the world I need to do or feel in any way whatsoever compelled to do is defend myself to some God-hating troll and minion of Satan.

            AND let it not be missed that you FAILED to answer ANY of my questions or respond to the Scriptures and facts I set forth in the previous post.

            So you’ll just have to get over yourself and the fact that I chose to exercise Matt. 7:6

          • George Caco

            You vomited out the “God-hating troll and minion of Satan” slander. Even your rants sound Muslim. May you and your Muslim ways be happy with each other.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            By definition Truth is not slander. Do you actually claim to be a Christian and follower of Jesus Christ?

          • George Caco

            Eastern Orthodoxy is definitely Christian and most definitely a follower of the Uncreated Son of God and Word of God Jesus Christ. We hold the Greek Koine Bible in very high esteem. We esteem the Bible so much that our Liturgies are chock full of OT and NT direct quotes. In fact, our Liturgies are more Biblically based than most Protestant sermons where subjective thoughts oftentimes overwhelm the Biblical message.

            Are you a Christian?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “Eastern Orthodoxy is definitely Christian and most definitely a follower of the Uncreated Son of God and Word of God Jesus Christ.”

            Since you said “we”, I can ask “Do you believe that one is saved by Grace along thru Faith alone?”

            “We esteem the Bible so much”

            How much is “so” much? Is the Bible the Word of God and inerrant, infallible, and timeless as originally written?

            “In fact, our Liturgies are more Biblically based than most Protestant sermons”

            Cite your evidence for that.

            “Are you a Christian?”

            Yes. Absolutely.

          • George Caco

            You asked, “Do you believe that one is saved by Grace along thru Faith alone?” Reply: Justification is by grace alone through faith alone but faith with works is dead.

            You asked, “Is the Bible the Word of God and inerrant, infallible, and timeless as originally written?” Reply: Of course the Greek Koine NT is inerrant, infallible, and timeless. Do you read the Greek Koine Bible?

            Pick up any Eastern Orthodox Liturgical book and try to show even one place where the Liturgy is not Biblical or is not Early Church based.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Thanks for pointing out my typo. Appreciate that and I did go fix it.

            Now, God’s Word doesn’t say that “Justification” is by grace alone. It says Salvation is. And I’ll return the favor. Pretty sure you meant “without”.

            Ok, good. It looks like we’re getting somewhere and perhaps even on the same page. I assume from your remarks that you also include the Hebrew OT and that Aramaic as well as the Koine Greek. The answer to your question is yes, as best I can. Now, are you saying that is the ONLY trustworthy source from which we can rely upon? Are you saying that NO other translation is trustworthy?

            To your last paragraph, let’s look at just a few things.

            1) Do you believe infant baptism is salvific?
            2) Can one who places their complete trust in Christ alone without ever having done any “good works” still be saved? And, within this vein, does Eastern Orthodoxy teach Sacerdotal Salvation? The doctrine of salvation based upon the dispensation of sacraments by the church? (i.e. Eucharist)
            3) Does the Eastern Orthodox church believe it is the “One True Church”? (Which the RCC also does.)
            4) Does the Eastern Orthodox church believe that Protestants have departed from the faith? (As the RCC announced in the Council of Trent)
            5) Does the Eastern Orthodox church put extra-Biblical sources on an equal basic with Scripture? (i.e. “Liturgy”, traditions, extra-Biblical writings, councils, etc.)

            I could go on but those should suffice as they are fundamentally and foundationally based.

            I guess I should also ask what you mean by “Early Church based”?

          • George Caco

            Thanks for the “without” typo fix.

            After a quick run through the NT, I noticed that James 2:24 says, “You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” My stance concerning Salvation and Justification is now that they are both attained by faith and by good works. Who am I to argue against Saint James?

            The originals, as far as they’ve been recaptured, are infallible. That includes the Hebrew OT and the Greek Koine NT. I am a follower of the Majority Text/Textus Receptus writings. All translations must be held accountable to the Greek & Hebrew writings.

            1) All Baptisms are salvific as far as one has kept his baptism pristine. As far as infants who die prematurely are concerned, I believe that they are saved irregardless of whether or not they’ve been baptized. So then why should an infant be baptized you might ask. For the same reason Jesus was baptized: to receive the Holy Spirit.

            2) First of all, Orthodox are Trinitarians so there’s no such thing as “Christ alone”. How can anyone be saved without the Holy Spirit who is the Giver of Life? Now to your question about the Eucharist. We truly believe that since Jesus is God then he is omnipresent, especially in the Eucharist, but this is beneficial only as far as one has faith. How that stacks up with “Sacerdotal Salvation” I do not know.

            3) First of all, Christ’s Body is One so by definition the Church is One. Now where is that One Church to be found? The Eastern Orthodox Church knows where is the Body of Christ BUT it does not know where it is not. Only God knows the affairs of man and can pass judgment on whether or not he is a member of the Body of Christ.

            4) Orthodox view Protestantism as an attempt to recapture the faith that the Catholics had compromised. Unfortunately and generally speaking, what happened with Protestantism is that the baby was tossed out with the bath water to one degree or another. Protestants threw out many Apostolic/Early Church Oral Practices and pegged the Bible as its only authority. Evangelicals coming into the EO Church are viewed as those who have attained the faith that Catholics have compromised.

            5) Holy Tradition is everything that has been handed down to us from the Apostles and the Early Church. Those Holy Traditions include the Greek Koine Bible, the Liturgies, the Eucharist, the Seven Ecumenical Councils, and Icons. I see Sola Scriptura (the Bible as the only authoritative tradition) and its effects as the central difference between Protestants and Orthodox. That to me that is the issue. Do you agree and what is your beliefs about Sola Scriptura?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Yes, James 2:24 is an often cited passage for that reason. There have been many that point to it as one of the obvious contradictions in the Bible when juxtaposed with Paul’s writings. Specifically Romans 4, Galatians 2, and Ephesians 2.

            There are many good articles, commentaries, and videos on the web so I’m not gonna flesh it out here. Suffice it to say I’m quite comfortable with my position and there being no contradiction between the two of them at all.

            To your question about who are you to argue with James, I would only ask what about “Saint Paul”? One good rule of thumb when exegeting Scripture is to always interpret the unclear thru the clear. Paul wrote extensively in Romans on Salvation as well as the other books. In fact, Galatians which is overwhelming an answer to the Judaizers, Paul specifically says, “But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to what we have preached to you, he is to be anathema!” And, in fact, he said it TWICE back to back.

            We don’t actually have any originals. I don’t remember who it was now but if you Google “Apologetics Forum of Snohomish County” and then do a search on there, you will find a forum last year where we had a Speaker that was an expert on the Bible. He knows about the manuscripts etc. James White is also pretty knowledgeable on that stuff.

            Here’s what I know and can remember. The Byzantine manuscripts are the oldest. The Alexandrian are the most complete. Between the two they agree either 98% or 99% of the time and there is NO major doctrinal differences between the two at all.

            I use about 2dz Bibles and at least that many Commentaries. I could go on but I’ll leave it there and address each of your points briefly.

            1) NO baptisms are salvific. Not only do they have NOTHING to do with leading one to Salvation but they have NOTHING to do with Salvation whatsoever. Evidence: Thief on the Cross.

            Moreover, you say, ” I believe that they are saved irregardless of whether or not they’ve been baptized.” That would contradict your statement that baptism is salvific. To your belief, we simply can’t say what happens to infants as Scripture is not clear. What we can say is that God is Love and is Just and He can determine rightly and justly on the issue. And lastly, Jesus did not get baptized “so He could receive the Holy Spirit”. A Believer receives the Holy Spirit the moment He is regenerated. Baptism comes after. Evidence: John the Baptist and all those that the Holy Spirit came upon in the OT.

            2) Protestants are Trinitarians as well and there is such a thing as placing ones trust in “Christ alone”. There is a mystery in the Trinity that I’m not even going to attempt to explain. As if anyone really can. Suffice it to say that I assume you are referring to the Nicene Creed and granted it is the Holy Spirit that regenerates. However, Jesus said He is the Life and whoever abides in Him has life. And Jude 25 clearly says that it is God who saves thru Christ.

            To answer your question, one could say I suppose that it is the work of the Holy Spirit to cause one who has placed their trust in Christ alone to be Born Again. In short, it is The Father who draws, Christ who intercedes having atoned, and the Spirit that regenerates so therefore God who saves thru Christ.

            “We truly believe that since Jesus is God then he is omnipresent, especially in the Eucharist”

            That sounds like Pantheism to me. All I can say is if you think that Jesus is actually in a piece of bread or a sip of wine/grape juice, I really don’t know what to say to ya.

            3) So just to be clear you are saying that the Eastern Orthodox church does not say that there is no salvation outside of the Eastern Orthodox church?

            4) So I can take that as a yes? That EO believes Protestants are outside the faith and therefore outside the church?

            5) So, again, I can take that as a yes? That the EO puts traditions on equal par with Scripture.

            No, I don’t agree. But, tell us, how do you define “Greek Koine Bible”? What specifically are the “Liturgies”? I would submit that Communion was not handed down to us from the Apostles but rather from Christ Himself but we’ve already established there is a real difference between our views on the bread and wine. As to the 7 Ecumenical Councils, to be honest, I haven’t studied them well enough to really comment on them except to say I don’t buy into the veneration of icons, would wanna look into the “Mother of God” in greater detail, and most of all I would NOT put anything that came out of any of them on par with Scripture.

            My view on Sola Scriptura is pretty simple. It simply means the Bible contains all truth necessary for salvation and spiritual life is taught either explicitly or implicitly in Scripture. And, as such, it is the highest and final ultimate Authority by which we must govern our lives. Meaning, anything said, read, or heard that contradicts Scripture is to be dismissed as contrary to God.

            I believe exactly what 2nd Tim. 3:16 says. When one has that nothing else is needed. And when one rejects Scripture as the Final Authority and the very Word of God that governs our lives then the only thing that does is oneself.

          • Ruth

            I agree with everything you stated here Royce. Great insight.

          • George Caco

            I agree with the Evangelicals that the work that Christ did on the Cross can only be accepted by faith. That is a given. What James is warning against is that henceforth we should not sit on our hands and still expect justification. Only by doing charitable works can we have a living faith that leads to salvation.

            Paul refers to two different “works”: 1) “works of the Law” and 2) “work of faith” or “good works”. The “works of the law” message are targeted towards Judaizes who wanted their works steered clear of any faith in Christ. The only Church that even comes remotely close to this “works of the Law” error or at least observes the 10 Commandments is Armstrongism, and it exists no more. I’ve never seen a 10 Commandments plaque in any EO Churches. Have you? Which present-day Church is guilty of “works of the Law”? Tell me that. Now the 2nd set of works is works that is permeated with faith. That is exactly what the story of Abraham promotes. It teaches that it is the combination of faith and works that justifies. Faith is never ever pitted against Christian works. There is no such thing as Sola Fide in the entire Bible.

            1) Matt 20:22-23 refers to a baptism that many will undergo, a Baptism of the Cross or Martyrdom in other words. That’s the Baptism that the confessing Thief underwent, a Baptism of Martyrdom, confessing his belief in Christ.

            If as you say “Jesus did not get baptized so He could receive the Holy Spirit” then it would have been a total shock to Jesus when the skies were rented (torn) by the Holy Spirit. Also, John was told prophetically to look out for the One upon whom the Spirit would descend on. The Holy Spirit was the reason for everything in Jesus’ Baptism.

            2) You said that Jesus’ omnipresence in the Eucharist sounds like Pantheism to you. When the Disciples were given eyes that could truly see reality then they saw Jesus as he truly is: Transfigured. When Moses was given eyes to see then he saw the Burning Bush. If we would be given eyes then we would exclaim alongside with the Angels “the Earth is full of God’s Glory!” Don’t limit yourself to what you can presently see, have faith in the Bible.

            3) The Eastern Orthodox church does not say that there is no salvation outside of the Eastern Orthodox church. But the Christian is not just to escape from something (salvation), it is also to grow into something (theosis). Granted, the word theosis is not in the Bible (as the word Trinity is not in the Bible) but both can be drawn out from the sayings of the Bible.

            4) I can tell you only what I see and perceive. Protestants do not have all of the Apostolic handed-down traditions. They have the Bible (as far as it agrees with the Koine Greek Bible) but they do not have all the other Apostolic traditions such as the Apostolic Liturgy and Practices. Does that mean that they are outside the faith and church (the Body of Christ)? I’ll let God decide if you don’t mind.

            5) There are two things wrong with your “EO puts traditions on equal par with Scripture” assumption. Scripture is a handed-down tradition. You’re making a false dichotomy between Tradition and Scripture. Secondly, the Greek Koine Bible has first place in the Apostolic list of Traditions. This can be confirmed by the fact that our Liturgy is chock full of OT & NT Koine Greek passages and our walls are chock full of Icons depicting Biblical characters and Biblical scenes. There is complete synergy between the Koine Greek Bible and all other handed-down traditions.

            You asked, “how do you define Greek Koine Bible?” Basically, it is the Greek Majority Text/Textus Receptus NT Manuscripts and the OT Septuagint from which the Apostles quoted from.

            You asked, “What specifically are the Liturgies?” I could never do justice to such a vast topic. Just let me say that it is basically a carryover of a Hebrew practice that has been Christianized and is now a form of worship that performs a lot of functions. The Study of the Liturgy comes under the name of Liturgics. There are a lot of wonderful books about Orthodox Liturgies out on the Internet.

            You said that the Bible “is the highest and final ultimate Authority by which we must govern our lives.” I agree that it is the highest authority, possibly the final authority but Jesus is the ultimate authority.

            You said that you believe what 2 Tim. 3:16 says but do you practice what is written in English Bibles that is properly translated from the Greek Koine OT (Septuagint) & NT (Majority Text)? Do you believe that:
            1) We are to hold fast to both spoken and written traditions handed down to us? (2 Th 2:15)?
            2) We are Icons of God and that Jesus is the ultimate Icon of God?
            3) We are to continue the Apostolic Liturgy as recorded by Paul and in Acts? That Jesus is the Holy Liturgist (Heb 8:2)?
            4) Unless a man is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God?
            5) Unless one eats the flesh of the Son of Man, and drinks His blood, he does not have life in himself?
            6) Faith without good works is dead?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “What James is warning against is that henceforth we should not sit on our hands and still expect justification. Only by doing charitable works can we have a living faith that leads to salvation.”

            Actually, you have it backwards. And THAT is the PROBLEM. THAT is what lies at the root of the difference between the true Gospel that saves and a false Gospel that results in Eternal Damnation. And THAT is precisely why so many have a problem with RCC and EO.

            You’ve also completely missed the actual point that Paul was making. What Paul was actually preaching against is “Christ + Works”. Anytime “Christ +” is preached, it’s wrong.

            Your “1)” is complete eisegesis and nonsense. It in NO way deals with “baptism” as presented in your previous argument nor throughout the various passages in Scriptures which talk about baptism.

            “If as you say “Jesus did not get baptized so He could receive the Holy Spirit” then it would have been a total shock to Jesus when the skies were rented (torn) by the Holy Spirit.”

            That actually got a true LOL outta me. Oh yeah, I’m sure that God of very God would’ve been shocked to encounter the Holy Spirit. And Mark is the only one of the four gospels that uses the word “Schizo” which can be translated “rented” but not always. All the other gospels use the word “anoigo” which simply means “opened”. Nothing in the context of the passages lend to any idea that there was some catastrophic, mind-blowing event that occurred whereby Jesus would have been “shocked” and there is NO mention of the crowd being astonished by what they were watching which most certainly would’ve been record by at least one of the writers had the skies being rented (torn) by the Holy Spirit as you claim.

            It is more likely that John already having the Holy Spirit and Jesus already being God were the only two that saw the “Heavens opened” and heard God say, “This is my beloved Son”. Just as the skies being opened when the exact same thing happened in Acts. 7:56. Some commentators say this is synonymous with “the clouds parting” so that one can see farther into the Heavens than would otherwise be clouded.

            “The Holy Spirit was the reason for everything in Jesus’ Baptism.”

            False. Just as I previously gave evidence for. Further evidence is given by the words of Jesus Himself: “Permit it at this time; for in this way it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.”

            Numerous Commentaries give a variety of explanations for what it means to “fulfill all righteousness” but none of them address my own particular take on it. My own take on it is that Jesus being our High Priest is simply living out the ceremonial washing that He handed down to the Levites and the High Priest as part of their purification process. Not that Jesus needed to be purified for any reason but solely to identify Himself to the others that He was their High Priest.

            “If we would be given eyes then we would exclaim alongside with the Angels “the Earth is full of God’s Glory!” Don’t limit yourself to what you can presently see, have faith in the Bible.”

            Don’t be an arrogance, pompous jackass. I have complete faith in the Bible and I also have the eyes to see that a piece of bread is NOT Jesus!!!!!!!

            And with that I’m done here.

          • George Caco

            You said, “You’ve also completely missed the actual point that Paul was making. What Paul was actually preaching against is “Christ + Works”. Anytime “Christ +” is preached, it’s wrong.”

            So you’re telling me that the following “Christ + Works” passages are wrong?:
            Rom 16:3: Salute Prisca and Aquila my fellow-workers in Christ Jesus,
            Rom 16:9: Salute Urbanus our fellow-worker in Christ, and Stachys my beloved.
            2Co 8:23: Whether any inquire about Titus, he is my partner and my fellow-worker to you-ward; or our brethren, they are the messengers of the churches, they are the glory of Christ.
            Gal_5:6 For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through love.
            Eph_2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God afore prepared that we should walk in them.
            Eph_4:12 for the perfecting of the saints, unto the work of ministering, unto the building up of the body of Christ:
            Php_2:30 because for the work of Christ he came nigh unto death, hazarding his life to supply that which was lacking in your service toward me.
            1Th_1:3 remembering without ceasing your work of faith and labor of love and patience of hope in our Lord Jesus Christ, before our God and Father;
            2Th_3:12 Now them that are such we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ, that with quietness they work, and eat their own bread.
            Phm_1:1 Paul, a prisoner of Christ Jesus, and Timothy our brother, to Philemon our beloved and fellow-worker,
            Mar 16:20: And going out, they proclaimed everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the Word by miraculous signs following. Amen.
            Act 13:2: As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, So, then, separate Barnabas and Saul to Me for the work to which I have called them.
            Act 20:35: I have shown you all things, that working in this way we ought to help the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, that He Himself said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.
            1Cor 9:1: Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? Are you not my work in the Lord?
            1Cor 15:58: So that, my beloved brothers, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your labor is not without fruit in the Lord.
            1Cor 16:10: But if Timothy comes, see that he is with you without fear, for he works the work of the Lord, even as I do.
            Col 1:10: that you might walk worthy of the Lord to all pleasing, being fruitful in every work and increasing in the knowledge of God,
            Rev 14:13: And I heard a voice from Heaven saying to me, Write, Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on. Yes, says the Spirit, they shall rest from their labors, and their works follow them.

            You might claim that all the above passages are not talking about salvation. In that case what do you say about Phil 2:12 which says, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling”?

            You said that Matt 20:22-23 “in NO way deals with “baptism” as presented in your previous argument nor throughout the various passages in Scriptures which talk about baptism.” Baptism is baptism is baptism, my friend. If you have a problem with that then you have to take it up with our Lord. Here is just one more case where the Lord’s words do not fit your Protestant Mind.

            You said, “Jesus did not get baptized so He could receive the Holy Spirit”. I am still shocked that you are still holding that position. Your Sola Christi view continues to strip away all references to the Holy Spirit. I’m beginning to wonder if in fact you’re really Trinitarian.

            You said, “I also have the eyes to see that a piece of bread is NOT Jesus!!!!!!!” Your statement flies in the face of Jesus’ words when he said, “Take, eat; this is my body …” (1 Cor 11:24). Here is another case where the Lord’s words do not fit your Protestant Mind.

            You vomited out your “arrogance, pompous jackass” accusations at me. Name calling will not win you any argument. Don’t let your emotions overwhelm your thinking process.

            I see you chose not to answer any of my questions. Is that what you do when you debate – you just walk away?

          • James Staten

            George, I replied to you about an hour ago…I gave links for scripture, and it went to the moderator and it was held? There is only “One Church Affiliation” during this dispensation of Grace, the Body of Christ. Ephesians 4:5 and 1 Corinthians 12:13. I believe these verses make it quite clear, if one is to believe black ink on white paper? I think you are confusing the mystery of this New Creation the Body of Christ revealed to the Apostle Paul from the Ascended Lord in glory with man made denominations. Hope this helps!!!!

          • George Caco

            What are your opinions about the topics that Royce and I are debating?

            Everyone knows that there is only one Body of Christ. Are you able to tell me where the Body of Christ is not present? I’m not able.

          • James Staten

            George, Seriously, since this article is about Hank the Bible Answer Man. Why don’t you ask him, or if it were possible to ask George Carlin, maybe he now has the answer to his question. Can God make a rock big enough that He can’t lift? There is Biblical reality and your theological philosophy.

          • George Caco

            George Carlin? Saying silly jokes is no way to go through life.

          • George Caco

            How can you claim to be serious when you mention George Carlin in your defense? Get serious.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Matt. 7:6, 7:15-20, and Mk 6:11.

            You also lied and bore a false accusation against me. “I dare you to reveal it”. Matt. 15:18, Lk 6:45.

          • George Caco

            So I bore a false accusation against you by daring you to reveal your Church Affiliation? Let me ask again my question: Please reveal your Church Affiliation, tell us what beliefs/doctrines set it apart from all other denominations, and allow me to critique it according to the Greek Koine Bible and according to Early Church Practices.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            I already did. Well before you bore your false accusation and said I didn’t.

            Don’t know if you bothered to look at those previous Scripture references but here’s another one for ya: Matt. 7:21-23. I suggest you meditate on that one for awhile because you’re standing in line.

            And no, baptism is not baptism. I don’t know who the “our Lord” is that you speak of but it’s not the Lord Jesus Christ. Your sounding more and more like the RCC with each post.

          • George Caco

            You said, “baptism is not baptism”. Violating fundamental rules of logic is no way to go through life.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Like I said. Matt. 7:6. Oink Oink

          • George Caco

            And now you’re impersonating a pig? Stop being silly and get real.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Oink oink.

          • George Caco

            I’m trying to keep you from making a silly spectacle of yourself.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            What part of “we’re done” don’t you understand? You should be more concerned with yourself and spending Eternity in torment in the Lake of Fire for your idolatry.

          • Peggy Summers

            Armstrongism may be gone per se, but it did morph. Do a search for the Worldwide Church of God and you will find that it is now called Grace Communion International. They claim to be evangelical, but I honestly don’t know any specifics. Just throwing that out there.

          • GLT

            “Only by doing charitable works can we have a living faith that leads to salvation.”

            Wrong, you have made it justification by works. James is telling us our faith is meaningless unless we use it actively in serving Christ and serving others. He is not saying our salvation is lost.

          • George Caco

            No, James is telling us that our faith is DEAD without works. Misquoting the Bible is no way to go through life.

          • GLT

            “No, James is telling us that our faith is DEAD without works.”

            So, you’re saying salvation is by works and not by grace through faith in Jesus Christ. It is of yourself and not the gift of God. Interesting. Do you boast of your works as well?

            And you talk about others misquoting the Bible. I’ll retire to bedlam.

          • George Caco

            “So, you’re saying salvation is by works and not by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.” There you go, making false assumptions. You will see the truth only when you comprehend the Bible in its entirety. Pitting one verse against another another will get you as far as “bedlam”.

          • GLT

            “There you go, making false assumptions.”

            I’m not making false assumptions, I’m simply following your logic. You claim faith without works is dead means one’s faith is not sufficient for his salvation, he must perform works to gain salvation. That flies directly in the face of Paul’s statement in Ephesians 2 that salvation is through grace and not by works.

            If I am wrong you can demonstrate that by stating clearly whether you believe salvation is through grace alone or by grace plus works. Which is it?

          • Peggy Summers

            Good arguments, Royce. Christ being present in the elements of the Eucharist isn’t Pantheism; according to RC doctrine, they are the literal body and blood of the Lord Jesus, becoming such because the priest has called the Son of God down to the altar to be sacrificed again so that his body can be eaten and his blood can be drunk. This is such a heinous doctrine; it puts the Son of God to an open shame (refer to Heb. 6:6b).

          • RWH

            Peggy, If you read a catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, you would clearly read that the idea of Christ sacrificing himself again came from a lone Spanish Cardinal who claimed this, I believe more than a hundred or two years ago. The Catechism refers to this belief as an error and states that this was never a teaching. I may be Orthodox, but I believe in fighting fair.

          • Peggy Summers

            Not fighting fair? Really. I’ve never read the Catechism, but I’m quoting a Catholic priest here. This is a quotation from “The Faith of Millions: the credentials of the Catholic Religion” by John A. O’Brien (pp.255-256):

            “When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim.

            Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.”

            Can’t say that’s not blasphemy. Christ was offered once for all. It is His finished work that makes our salvation possible – not the repeated sacrifice and eating of his literal flesh and blood. If Christ has to be sacrified over and over, then His death on the cross wasn’t sufficient, it shames Him, it takes away His Priesthood and gives it to men, and there are many other problems that it creates. Christ is called “the Victim”, and how erroneous that is! Jesus said, “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.” – John 10:17-18

            Even if Jesus’ coming down to be sacrificed in the Mass were not the action being performed, there is still the obvious problem you have in eating the literal body and blood of Jesus, and that is that it is cannibalism. It also makes salvation something that depends on a rite (a work) performed many times in order to keep that everlasting life which Jesus offers to us freely by faith in Him.

            Rm. 10:9,10 –
            “For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast.”

            Rm. 6:8-10 –
            “Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him,  knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God.”

          • RWH

            Obviously, you decided not to check with the official catechism of the Roman Catholic Church. I’m not about to defend these people. Suffice it to say, the Catholics have always focused on the actual crucifixion of Christ, and the Mass is a reenactment of it. However, Catholics believe that Christ’s sacrifice was final. On the other hand, the Orthodox go back to the Last Supper when Christ offered the bread and wine. The Orthodox reach back into that night. Transubstantiation is the Catholic understanding. The Orthodox just consider this a mystery inasmuch as Christ multiplied the loaves and the fishes, he can do the same with the wine and bread.

            The Catholics have always focused more on the passion whereas the Orthodox focus on the resurrection. You will never see something like **The Passion of the Christ** published by an Orthodox theologian. Just a further tidbit to show you that Orthodoxy is not Catholicism in a different wrapper.

            Concerning John O’Brian, you provide no publisher, place of publication, nor date of publication, so you make it impossible to fact check. However, be that as it may, I’m not interested in defending Catholic understanding.

          • Peggy Summers

            I quoted from this book: James R. White, The Roman Catholic Controversy (Minneapolis, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1996), p. 161.

            Here is the biblio info for O’Brien’s book: John O’Brien, The Faith of Millions (Huntington, Ill.: Our Sunday Visitor Inc., 1974), pp. 255–256.

            The mystery to me is why anyone would come up with and purport a doctrine that espouses the idea that they should eat anyone, especially Jesus. How many times in the Gospels does Jesus use the word “bread” as a metaphor? It doesn’t make sense to base a central doctrine on one scripture. It is not supported by other Scriptures.

            I have one last comment, and then I’m leaving this discussion. I pray that the Lord will show you the truth of the Gospel, and that you will accept Jesus by faith as your Savior. John 17:3 – “And this is eternal life, that they may know You, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom You have sent.”

          • RWH

            It is not used as a metaphor in John 6:51-59. We have the truth of the Gospel, and we survived 70 years of Communist oppression. Too many people go to your churches to be entertained. Take away your rock music your clubs and other forms of entertainment, and we’ll watch your churches perish should you endure what we went through. Too many people on list like this one sit back and pass judgment on others. I doubt whether they would withstand what we went through. But you can take your smug attitude that only people who think like you will enter heaven.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Yes, I know that RC doctrine is different than that which GC says and I agree that the calling down of Christ to be sacrificed again is perhaps even more heinous than relegating Christ to a piece of bread because “Jesus is God then he is omnipresent, especially in the Eucharist”.

          • George Caco

            So you don’t believe Jesus when he says “take, eat; this is my body” in Mark 14:22? – especially when you consider that Jesus is God and therefore omnipresent? Or is it that you do not believe that Jesus is God?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            It’s you who don’t believe Jesus. You’ve created a Jesus in your own imagination according to your will and your ways. That’s idolatry. Idol worshippers will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.

          • George Caco

            So you don’t believe that Jesus is God and omnipresent? That’s heresy.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Your faux omniscience is failing your and your false accusations are only heaping up further judgment on you.

      • Winston Chan

        You need help

        • George Caco

          James 2:24 says, “You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” Therefore, Justification (& Salvation) are both attained by faith and by good works. Who are we to argue against Saint James?

          • Laurence Charles Ringo

            So,in clear contradict to the Apostle Peter’s words in Acts 4:12, you would have us believe that James is positing works as a co-Savior with Christ? Explain how that works. I await your reply

          • George Caco

            Where is the contradiction? It is Faith in Jesus and “work of Faith” in Jesus that together lead to salvation. Again, where is the contradiction?

          • George Caco

            There’s no contradiction in that we are all “fellow-workers” in Christ (Rom 16:3, 16:9, 2Co 8:23, Phm 1:1). More to the point, Phil 2:12 says, “work out your own salvation with fear and trembling” so good works is in fact a requirement of salvation.

          • Winston Chan

            Who are we to argue against Jesus? It is clear that good works follows Faith. Do not bring your paganism into this

      • Timothy Jones

        Your post is interesting. You seem to be of the Catholic or Orthodox faith. I’m unsure where you live but when I lived in Europe (for seven years) I had the privilege to get to know several Catholic priests, abbots, and bishops. They emphatically told me that their church does, in fact, pray to icons (as well as Mary and saints). Two of those priests and one bishop saw Mary as co-redemptrix! So, while you may find praying near icons soothing in some fashion, the official church as expressed in both Spain and Germany, do pray to icons for help/answers. This is the definition of idolatry. As for “faith alone” being verbatim in the Greek I believe you are correct. However, Paul makes it abundantly clear in Romans 4 (in the Greek btw) that salvation is by faith only – nothing else (see also Ephesians 2:8-10 – the good works Paul refers to here are after salvation, which comes by grace/faith alone). He goes on to make the particular point that works can not and will not save or help to save anyone. The Reformers merely used “sola fide” as a way of simplifying that expression. As for Protestants “worshipping” the Bible, I know of only one small Protestant sect that venerates the Bible as a book (although they do not take it to the extent of actual worship). As for Protestants being “their own pope” I’m unsure of what you mean. Any good Bible student (Protestant, Catholic, Coptic, or Orthodox) engages in solid hermeneutics to gain greater understanding as to what scripture actually says. Are there those who mishandle/misuse scripture? Absolutely. But to lump all Protestants into that camp is as bad as some fundamentalists saying that there NO Christians within the Catholic Church. That’s disingenuous and poor reasoning (let alone poor scholarship). Life is simply not that tidy and neither is history.

        Instead laying out generalized and vague accusations please try using actual facts to bolster your position. It makes it easier to know what you are attempting to argue.

        Thank you for reading.

        Blessings,

    • Charybdis69

      BibleGateway

      Keyword Search/Search Results

      Bible (0)

      Topical Index (99)

      0 Bible results for “”faith alone”.”

      Sorry, we didn’t find any results for your search. Please try the following:

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        BibleGateway

        Keyword Search/Search Results

        Bible (0)

        Topical Index (3)

        0 Bible results for “Trinity”

        Sorry, we didn’t find any results for your search. Please try the following:

        GET SAVED AND INDWELT WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT. BECOME A NEW CREATION IN CHRIST AND STOP TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE BIBLE WHEN YOUR LOST AS SIN.

        Would you like me to post the search results for a few other things like the word Bestiality? Pedophilia? Andromimetophilia, Anthropophagolagnia, Autoandrophilia, Autogynephilia, Autonepiophilia, Autopedophilia, Autoplushophilia, Chronophilia, Coprophilia, Ephebophilia, Exhibitionists, Gerontophilia, Gynandromorphophilia, Gynemimetophilia, Hebephilia, Infantophilia, Necrophilia, Pederasty, Pedophilia, Peodeiktophilia, Pedovestism, Piquerism, Raptophilia, Scoptophilia, Stigmatophilia, Toucherism, Transvestophilia, Troilism, Urolagnia, Urophagia, Zoophilia, and a whole bunch more????

        A wise man once said it is better to keep your mouth shut and not show your ignorance than open it and remove all doubt. You should work on your wisdom a bit.

        “Wise men speak because they have something to say, fools speak because they have to say something” – Plato

        • George Caco

          James 2:24 says, “You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.” Therefore, Justification (& Salvation) are both attained by faith AND by good works. Who are we to argue against Saint James?

  • George Caco

    Concerning “Sola Scriptura”: 2 Th 2:15 promotes oral traditions so the concept of Sola Scriptura needs to be critically analyzed against 2 Th 2:15.

    Concerning the “Sola Ecclesia” statement: this is a false statement. Orthodox Liturgy is chock full of OT and NT quotes.

    Concerning the “smells and bells” statement: the Orthodox faith is non-Platonic. It values highly the physical world and its ability to point the way to Christ.

    Concerning the “outside of the body of Christ” statement: this is a false statement. According to Timothy Ware, nobody can claim to know where the Body of Christ does not reside.

    Concerning the “Salvation by Grace Along Through Faith Alone” statement, the Orthodox do believe in Justification by grace through faith alone. What sets Orthodox apart is their belief in the Bible when James 2:20 says that faith without works is dead.

    • crossnote

      It is rather self defeating using Scripture (2 Th 2:15) in order to argue against Sola Scriptura. HH has gone down the ‘experience over Scripture path’ plain and simple. Protestantism has that path with it’s charismania, Rome has that path and EO has that path, nothing new here.

      • George Caco

        2 Th 2:15 is not talking about human experiences, it is talking about oral traditions that were handed down to us by the Apostles and the Apostolic Churches they planted. The Apostolic Creed, the Apostolic Liturgy, the Apostolic Church, everything Apostolic. Where is all that to be found now? Certainly not in Platonic Protestant Churches.

  • James Staten

    If only Hank knew how to rightly divide the Word of God.

    • George Caco

      Explain yourself. You made a statement, where is your support?

      • James Staten

        First, Someone must have understood what I wrote because they Up-Voted it? This is a short version, but 2 Timothy 2:15 comes to mind. I often ask people how many groups is Paul addressing in 1 Corinthians 10:32? You would be amazed how many different answers I get. Hank seems to lack an understanding of the Apostle Paul and the mysteries revealed to him from the Risen Savior in Glory.

        • George Caco

          2 Timothy 2:15: To properly divide the Word of Truth you have to go to the Greek Koine Bible to get a solid rendition of what
          Jesus actually said and of what Paul actually wrote. For example, the
          root word “liturgy” and its derivative words were expunged from all
          English translations.

          1 Corinthians 10:32: The Eastern Orthodox gives such little offense to all others that it’s been labelled the biggest secret in Christianity. If it can be faulted at anything it can be faulted there.

          • James Staten

            The tradition of men make void the Word of God.

          • George Caco

            The human tradition of Sola Scriptura (which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15) makes void Scripture.

          • Charles

            (2Th 2:15) Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

            Both are written.

          • George Caco

            1) Words (λογου) are spoken and can be written (Epistles).
            2) Are you saying that everything that Paul said was written?
            3) Your understanding makes 2 Th 2:15 speak redundantly.

          • Charles

            (2Ti 3:16) All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

            graf-ay’
            From G1125; a document, that is, holy Writ (or its contents or a statement in it): – scripture.

            I’m sure everything Paul said wasn’t written. Anything pertaining to what God wanted said was written.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            2 Timothy 3:16 proves the Old Testament to be inspired. To believe the New Testament was inspired, you have to trust the Catholic Church.

          • Charles

            Learn some history. New Testament was established long before the Apostate Catholic church.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Are you familiar with the Early Church Fathers or do you fast forward about fifteen centuries?

          • Charles

            I am. That’s why you should go back and read some more history.

          • Kevin Bullard

            Smarten me up with your timeline pls…

          • Charles

            I can tell you simply regurgitate what you been taught. You clearly didn’t verify the English version had those words present. Unfortunately, your understanding is flawed.

          • George Caco

            You changed the subject from 2 Th 2:15 to 2 Tim 3:16.You either need to learn how to focus or you have no comeback which is why you changed the subject.

          • Charles

            Didn’t change a thing. You stated that the English lacks the word Liturgy.. You were incorrect. 2 Timothy states the words are “God Breathed”. Not good enough for you? Maybe the real problem with you ritualistic Catholics (Because that’s essentially what you are) just can’t get by without it because you lack the Holy Spirit. In other words. There isn’t anything else present, so you require rituals, and blasphemous idols, and works of the hands to get anything out of it.

          • George Caco

            We’re mixing up 2 subjects here.

            One subject is that 2 Th 2:15 flies in the face of Sola Scriptura. So Sola Scriptura is a human tradition.

            The other subject is that the Greek root word λειτουργία and its derivatives such as λειτουργὸς. Hebrews 8:2 properly translated would refer to Christ as the Holy Liturgist (ἁγίων λειτουργὸς). Learn some Greek. Educate yourself. Iconoclastic is no way to go through life.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            …and nullifies John 20:30-31 too.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            “By word” is oral.

          • Charles

            Can be written or oral.

          • James Staten

            so we are back to Hank, and his program.

          • George Caco

            Yes, we are back to courageous Hank.

          • GLT

            “The human tradition of Sola Scriptura (which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15) makes Scripture void.”

            “So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold to the teachings we have passed on to you, whether by word or by letter.”

            Really? How on Earth do you come to that conclusion?

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Sacred Tradition is of God. The “tradition of men” is not the same thing.

          • James Staten

            I am sure there are many Believers in the Body of Christ that will glad to hear that.

          • crossnote

            So let me understand this. Only those who know Koine Greek ‘can get a solid rendition of what Jesus actually said and of what Paul actually wrote’? That is truly news to me.

          • George Caco

            Didn’t your denomination teach you that the original NT was written in Koine Greek? What have they been teaching you, that the NT was written in Aramaic or that Jesus was linguistically challenged and spoke Aramaic only? Tell me what revisionist history lessons were you taught.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            So you’re saying that the original manuscripts contain ONLY Koine Greek? No Hebrew and no Aramaic? Wow!

            So according to YOU Matthew 27 and Mark 15 shouldn’t be in the Bible.

            Thanks for that! I think we can see now who the “revisionist” is.

          • George Caco

            You’re telling me that Mark would suddenly switch languages in his epistle? To do so ist nicht σωστός comunicación.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            I’m not telling you anything anymore because to do so would be a violation of what the Lord has said and would be casting pearls before swine. Take the hint!!

            Next thing you’ll be doing is trying to explain how all Creation didn’t occur in 6 days like Hank has done (even though God said it did) and how we involved from monkeys.

            So time for you to run along false teacher and apostate. You’ll be given no quarter here.

          • George Caco

            Skipping Astronomy classes is no way to go through life.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Neither is going thru life being spiritually-dead or believing that you evolved from a monkey.

          • Chris

            When I was studying history my professor said ‘if you can’t read the text in the original language you’re just playing games with it.”

            Why? Let’s discuss the translator’s dilemma. Any translator who is translating a text has to choose between a literal translation and a translation of the meaning of the text. If he translates the literal meaning then it may result in a text which is difficult, if not impossible, to follow. If he gives the meaning of the text then how far can he go in this without merely giving an interpretation and not a translation at all. Most translators try for a middle course, which isn’t easy even for the best.

            This translator’s dilemma is why a translator once wrote ‘every translation is a betrayal of the text.’ To truly understand what the writer of a text is getting at you have to be able to put it into its linguistic, historical and theological context.

          • GLT

            “To truly understand what the writer of a text is getting at you have to be able to put it into its linguistic, historical and theological context.”

            That is the role of the discipline of hermeneutics. To claim one must be able to read and understand Greek in order to comprehend the meaning of a text is nonsense. A proper translation allows for these factors. One can read an accurate translation and glean the meaning properly without knowing the original language. This type of arguments goes back to the days when the Bible was only available in Latin, allowing only those who understood Latin to dictate to the people what the Bible taught. It was brave men such as Tyndale who defied the church and translated the Bible to the common tongue allowing all to read the word of God.

          • Chris

            “That is the role of the discipline of hermeneutics.”

            Partly correct. It’s also the role of historians and archaeologists.

            “To claim one must be
            able to read and understand Greek in order to comprehend the meaning of
            a text is nonsense. A proper translation allows for these factors. One
            can read an accurate translation and glean the meaning properly without
            knowing the original language.”

            Ok let’s test that hypothesis.

            Jesus’s words ‘It is finished’

            Should it be understood as:
            1) IT is finished
            2) it IS finished
            3) is is FINISHED

            Please pick one as well as provide your evidence. Thank you.

            “This type of arguments goes back to the
            days when the Bible was only available in Latin, allowing only those who
            understood Latin to dictate to the people what the Bible taught.”

            Not really. Different intent. The Roman Catholic Church wanted the bible kept in Latin because of what they feared would happen if it was read in the language of the people. The fear was that the readers would get a bunch of kooky ideas and Christianity would fragment. Hmmm, looking around they may have had a point.

            Scholars holw that the original langes MUST be known for several reasons. 1) I have read fundies making a BIG point about the use of one word in the bible when that word isn’t actually used in the text.
            2) Turns of phrases can’t really be translated since they rely on a knowledge of culture.
            For example there’s one story of a man who typed in ‘the flesh is willing but the spirit is weak’ into a translator program, translated it into Russian and then back into English. What he got back was ‘the vodka is strong but the meat is rotten’.

          • GLT

            “Partly correct. It’s also the role of historians and archaeologists.”

            They are factors of hermeneutics.

            “It is finished.” A clear and concise statement on the completion of his mission to bear the weight and penalty of our sins. Your attempt to make it something of a mystery is noted, but refuted. Changing the emphasis from one word to the other does nothing to change the meaning of the sentence.

          • Chris

            “Your attempt to make it something of a mystery is noted, but refuted”

            It isn’t my attempt it was written of by a translator. Secondly you haven’t refuted anything merely contradicted me. Do you understand the difference?

            “Changing the emphasis from one word to the other does nothing to change the meaning of the sentence.”

            Actually it does but only slightly.
            1) IT is finished = IT [whatever it is] is over.
            2) it IS finished = Emphases added.

            3) it is FINISHED = it isn’t started, it’s done.

          • GLT

            “Actually it does but only slightly.
            1) IT is finished = IT [whatever it is] is over.
            2) it IS finished = Emphases added.
            3) it is FINISHED = it isn’t started, it’s done.”

            There is no change in the meaning of the statement.

            You made the claim there was a difference, therefore you must defend that claim. All you have done is make an assertion with nothing to back it up. Demonstrate how changing the emphasis on a word would fundamentally change the meaning of the statement.

          • Chris

            “There is no change in the meaning of the statement.”

            I beg to differ.

            “You made the claim there was a difference, therefore you must defend that claim.”

            I have by giving the differing meanings. Please explain why each of those are EXACTLY the same.

            “All you have done is make an assertion with nothing to back it up.”

            On the contrary you’ve just quoted me backing it up.

            “Demonstrate how changing the emphasis on a word would fundamentally change the meaning of the statement.”

            I don’t have to prove any such thing. In fact my quote actually says “actually it does [change the meaning] but only SLIGHTLY.” [emphasis mine]

          • GLT

            “I have by giving the differing meanings.”

            But the meanings are not different. It is a straight forward statement; “it is finished.” Changing the emphasis from one word to the other does not change the meaning. Changing the emphasis does not change it from a statement of fact to a question, for example.

          • Chris

            “Changing the emphasis from one word to the other does not change the meaning.”

            Well both the translator and I beg to differ. However since we seem unable to agree we will have agree to differ on this point.

            “Changing the emphasis does not change it from a statement of fact to a question, for example.”

            Correct. Which is why I said the meaning changes SLIGHTLY.

          • GLT

            “However since we seem unable to agree we will have agree to differ on this point.”

            I’m fine with that. That is what we should do as brothers in Christ when it comes to issues such as this. 🙂

          • Chris

            Since you’ve emphasized hermeneutics so strongly do you have a degree in it or are you relying on another’s work?

          • GLT

            “Since you’ve emphasized hermeneutics so strongly do you have a degree in it or are you relying on another’s work?”

            No, I do not have a degree in hermeneutics. Is that a major problem?

            The discipline is vital to any and all research regarding historical manuscripts, it is practised by all reputable scholars and historians in all fields related to manuscript translation and interpretation.

          • Chris

            “No, I do not have a degree in hermeneutics. Is that a major problem?”

            Well since you were telling me about it…yes.

            “The discipline is vital to any and all research regarding historical manuscripts, it is practised by all reputable scholars and historians in all fields related to manuscript translation and interpretation.”

            I grant you that its vital. But if you think it’s so important I’m puzzled that you never learned it. Do you see the problem?

          • GLT

            “But if you think it’s so important I’m puzzled that you never learned it. Do you see the problem?”

            No, I do not see the problem. You asked me if I had a degree in hermeneutics, not whether I had studied the subject. Yes, I have studied it, it is a basic element of the study of history. I spent 5 years in university studying a range of subjects, including history.

            Do you have a degree in every subject you have ever studied?

          • Chris

            “Do you have a degree in every subject you have ever studied?”

            Touché

          • Chris

            “They are factors of hermeneutics.”

            Really? Could you provide evidence of this?

          • GLT

            “Really? Could you provide evidence of this?”

            The discipline of hermeneutics covers a range of topics and refers to many fields of study in order to form a picture of the world at the time a document was authored. This is common practice regards any historical document, not simply biblical documents.

            For example, findings in archaeology can shed light on the cultural dynamic in effect at the time a document was written which can then shed light on the content and meaning of the document. It is the same with history. One must understand the historical dynamics at play when a document was written. Who was in power, what nation dominated the region, what were the traditions of that nation, etc.

            Hermeneutics is not a discipline which functions in isolation, it must draw from many disciplines to construct an accurate picture of the environment in which the document originated.

          • Chris

            You have convinced me sir. And thank you for both your time and willingness to respond. You have given me much to think about.

          • GLT

            “You have convinced me sir. And thank you for both your time and willingness to respond. You have given me much to think about.”

            You’re more than welcome. Our spiritual growth should be a never ending process. I know I learn something new everyday.

            May God bless you abundantly.

          • Chris

            Thank you. And the same for you.

          • JDV

            You get a similar argument with some of the Hebrew roots adherents, that only those steeped in the Hebrew language have access to the truth of the meaning of the Scriptures.

            Thus, anytime there is a divergence of opinion, especially one for which their position is tenuous at best and errant at worst, they have a ready-made appeal and trump card in their view.

            The sad thing in both cases is how close such a perspective can veer towards the old Gnostic heresies said to have been opposed by John and others, in which secret knowledge available only to a chosen few was the arbiter of Scriptural truth.

          • GLT

            “For example, the root word “liturgy” and its derivative words were expunged from all English translations.”

            How about a little evidence to support this claim?

          • George Caco

            For example, Heb 8:2 refers to Jesus as αγιων λειτουργος (Holy Liturgist). In the Greek NT there are 15 NT occurrences of words derived from the root word liturgy, all poorly translated as either minister/ministry or service/servants.

          • GLT

            Those are acceptable translations of the word, sorry. Because it does not fit your particular interpretation does not make it in error.

            Besides, your claim was the word was expunged, not translated improperly. You said; “the root word “liturgy” and its derivative words were expunged from all English translations.” They clearly were not.

          • George Caco

            So you’re ok with a Poorly-Translated NT. Interesting.

          • GLT

            “So you’re ok with a Poorly-Translated NT. Interesting.”

            You made a claim that certain words were ‘expunged’ ie; removed; from certain English translations. It was pointed out to you these words were not expunged but simply translated in a manner of which you disapproved. Now your response is I am okay with a poorly translated NT.

            Are you incapable of admitting you were wrong?

          • George Caco

            I’ve already self-corrected myself from “expunged” to “poorly translated”. I’ve already demonstrated that I possess that ability. What else do you want? A public flogging?

            Anyways, the focus is on the English Bible and their poor translations. A poor translation is the basis for poor doctrine.

          • GLT

            “I’ve already self-corrected myself from “expunged” to “poorly translated”.”

            The problem is they are not poorly translated either. They are only translated in a way you don’t like.

          • George Caco

            I don’t like the fact that words like λειτουργος were translated according to their Pre-Christian meaning but you do. Many Greek Pre-Christian (Pagan) words were infused with new Christian meaning and to overlook that is perilous at best. You’re free to stay behind with your Pagan Translations.

          • GLT

            “You’re free to stay behind with your Pagan Translations.”

            It seems you simply cannot get past your tendency to be condescending and judgemental. Now you’re telling me how much more enlightened you are than us lowly, pagan protestants with our pagan translations of the Bible.

            I wish I was wrong, but all I sense from you is hatred and disdain for anyone who does not agree with your view that the Orthodox church is the only true church. You simply cannot see your way clear to accept the fact God’s love allows for diversity in worship. As C.S. Lewis said; “ If grace perfects nature it must expand all our natures into the full richness of the diversity which God intended when he made them, and Heaven will display far more variety than Hell.”

            But of course, C.S. Lewis is just another pagan, isn’t he.

            You and your cohorts would be better served loving your Christian brothers and sisters of the protestant persuasion rather than attacking them and denouncing them as somehow lesser Christians and pagans. Your air of pious superiority is as tiresome as it is unfounded.

          • George Caco

            Stop falling back to your Ad Hominem defenses. Keep your focus on the subject: The Poorly Translated state of all English Bibles.

          • GLT

            “Stop falling back to your Ad Hominem defenses.”

            Where is the ad hominem in the previous statement? Simply saying you are being condescending and judgemental does not constitute an ad hominem. Nor does the statement I sense hatred and disdain for all who disagree with you. Those are simply statements as to the elements I sense in your comments. If you feel they are ad hominems perhaps you need to consider how you are phrasing your comments, such as your earlier comment to me; ‘You’re free to stay behind with your Pagan Translations.’

            Am I supposed to take that as a respectful comment on my intelligence and my Christian beliefs?

          • George Caco

            Let’s both stick to the subject matter. So, I’ve established that there is at least one instance of a poor translation of a key Christian word. There’s more but one will suffice for now. The word Liturgy is not an inconsequential word. The Apostolic Liturgy is a significant part of what we inherited directly from the Apostles, the Bible being another item directly inherited from the Apostles. The Greek Apostolic Bible obviously is ranked first in authority within the totality of Apostolic Traditions. That’s a given.

          • Jim the Scott

            I just noticed GLT’s malfunction. He is butthurt over you believing the Orthodox Church is the True Church and over moi believing the Catholic Church is the True Church. Yet he has no problem believing both our Churches are wrong about Our Lady/The Theotokos praying for us? Why does he get to believe we are un-biblical and we cannot return the favor?

            I think he is both nuts and insecure in his own beliefs.

            Let’s be blunt. You think I am technically wrong on the 1% of doctrinal difference between us and I return the favor. I believe in Catholicism and you believe in Eastern Orthodoxy.
            We can agree to disagree or if we felt like it we could dispute and try to lovely “correct” the other. But one thing I will never say (& I think you would agree) is you are “judgmental and condescending” for believing and saying in public you believe the Orthodox Church is the One True Church of the Apostles. I might have a different candidate for that post but I respect and expect an Eastern Orthodox Christian to believe that and I salute you.

            May the prayers of the The Theotokos protect you always and may the Son of Mary save your soul. May you stand un-condemned before the dredge Judgment seat of Christ and may at the end of your life your soul be lead into the Mansions of the Just where Our Father Abraham dwells.

            May God do that for GLT too.

            Peace.

            Christ Has Risen!

          • George Caco

            The thing that sets Protestants apart is essentially their belief in Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide. These two human concepts/traditions have trashed/slashed a huge portion of what we received directly from the Apostles. For Protestants, gone are the Koine Greek Bible, Apostolic
            Liturgy, Apostolic Eschatology, Apostolic Practices, etc… Gone! Gone is the Apostolic Liturgy. Gone is the view that Saints can present prayers before our only mediator, Jesus Christ. Gone is the Apostolic Eschatology, replaced by the strangest ideas imaginable. Gone is the way towards Theosis. Gone. Gone. Gone.

            Thank you very much for your prayers. May the same be accorded to you and GLT.

            Indeed He Has Risen!

          • Jim the Scott

            Preach it brother!

          • GLT

            “I think he is both nuts and insecure in his own beliefs.”

            Wrong, on both counts.

          • Jim the Scott

            Whatever nutjob…

          • GLT

            “Whatever nutjob…”

            The last resort of the weak intellect, ad hominems. Sad really.

          • Jim the Scott

            What about morons like you who open with ad homonyms?

            Sad Hypocrite.

          • GLT

            “What about morons like you who open with ad homonyms?”

            The word is ad hominems, not homonyms.

            Show me where I used an ad hominem. Saying you were judgemental is not an ad hominem by the way, as it is not an attack on your character or your qualifications. So, if that is all you have, don’t waste your time.

          • Jim the Scott

            >Saying you were judgemental is not an ad hominem by the way, as it is not an attack on your character or your qualifications.

            Well then calling you a moron or an idiot isn’t an attack on your character either nor your abilities.

            That is what you sound like to me.

            You sound that stupid.

            Now drive on weirdo.

          • GLT

            “Well then calling you a moron or an idiot isn’t an attack on your character either nor your abilities.”

            Actually, you’ve provided a perfect example of an ad hominem. Well done.

            Please note, I never referred to you as an idiot or a moron.

          • Jim the Scott

            You last response proves you are an idiot. A really sick idiot.

            Get help.

          • GLT

            “You last response proves you are an idiot. A really sick idiot.”

            Has any body ever told you that when you find yourself stuck in a deep hole, the wise course of action is to stop digging?

          • Jim the Scott

            Would that you followed your own advice. You could cut your inherent hypocritical tendencies by 90%.

          • GLT

            “Would that you followed your own advice. You could cut your inherent hypocritical tendencies by 90%.”

            Keep digging. 🙂

          • Jim the Scott

            Why should i when I have you?

          • GLT

            “Why should i when I have you?”

            And deeper, and deeper,…

          • Jim the Scott

            …..you drift into insanity.

          • GLT

            And deeper and deeper Jim digs, never knowing when to stop. You don’t seem to be able to help yourself, so I will help you. I’m done replying to your silliness. Take care and may God bless you.

          • Jim the Scott

            Whatever……….

            PS . Hank is more Biblical now.

          • Jim the Scott

            >Am I supposed to take that as a respectful comment on my intelligence and my Christian beliefs?

            But you are neither intelligent nor respectful and if it wasn’t for the sacrament of Baptism then you wouldn’t be Christian either.

            So at least you have one out of three.

            OTOH prove me wrong. Give an actual intelligent answer to George’s question. If you don’t know the answer because you don’t understand the subject matter then just admit it. It won’t make him automatically right (thought I suspect he is right) but at least it will so you can be intellectually honest.

            Or maybe you can’t? Maybe you will always be an idiot.

          • Jim the Scott

            >It seems you simply cannot get past your tendency to be condescending and judgemental.

            So this is why you lashed out at me for no reason? George who I surmise is Greek Orthodox is embarrassing you with his native knowledge of Greek. You need to put down your KJV or NIV and read the original languages. Just saying…….

            >I sense from you is hatred and disdain for anyone who does not agree with your view that the Orthodox church is the only true church.

            I am Catholic and he has never shown me hatred. I believe the Catholic Church is the One True Church not the Orthodox. George and I don’t agree but I (unlike some insecure jerks who post here) wouldn’t hold it against him if he declared the EO the one true Church or even if he called the Catholic Church “schismatic”. Why would I expect an EO to believe differently? Unless he was a really bad and faithless EO. Unlike you I am secure in what I believe and wouldn’t call George “judgmental and condescending”. I would simply disagree. Try it sometime Mr. Uber “tolerant”.

            >You and your cohorts would be better served loving your Christian brothers and sisters of the protestant persuasion rather than attacking them and denouncing them as somehow lesser Christians and pagans.

            This coming from the twit that calls Catholic (& by extension EO) doctrine on Mary “un-biblical”. So much hypocrisy and such double standards.

            You are obviously really insecure in your Protestant beliefs. This either is God moving you in another direction or you just don’t know how to deal with uncertainty.

            Also how is disbelieving in Protestant doctrines and seeing them as error a judgement on the worth of a Protestant’s Faith?

            >Your air of pious superiority is as tiresome as it is unfounded.

            Pot=Kettle=black

        • Ryan Matzke

          And yet Hank has a reputation for “rightly dividing” and you are some anonymous keyboard warrior stuck in a dead tradition. If Hank cannot rightly divide, what of St. John Chrysostom, St. Ignatius of Antioch, St Polycarp, St. Gregory of Nyssa, or St. Basil the Great? Have you read a single church father? I doubt it, for they belong also to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church. As a non-member of The Church, St. Paul would never even have allowed you to see the Gospel of John, as it was written for Baptized Orthodox Catholic Christians.

          Also, I would like to point out that it wasn’t Reformed Baptists that ISIS bombed in Egypt on Palm Sunday–it was Orthodox Christians! If you want to find the Christian “Confession” (Orthodoxy is pre-denominational) that “takes up it’s Cross and follows Christ” even unto death, Orthodoxy is absolutely it. Protestantism creates martyrs by annihilating whole people groups (i.e. Native Americans), but produces scant few. It is estimated 10-20 Million Orthodox were killed, for their faith(!), last century alone. This century looks bloodier yet, but may God grant us peaceful times, many years, and a Christian ending to our lives, painless and blameless.

          Protestantism is dead, hollow, and cheap (to me, that is why I abandoned it as soon as I could drive a car). I personally refer to Protestantism as “Nicolaitanism”, for it cheapens Grace by injecting some random prayer not found in the Bible (Sola Scriptura my foot) as a means to salvation on the spot. No work. No striving. No running a good race. It’s ridiculous. It reduces the Holy Mystery of Salvation to reactionary contemporary christian music (barf), clever bumper stickers, and ugly “churches” held in empty warehouses or theaters where filthy rock or burlesque shows were held the night before.

          Where is the concept of Holiness found within any Protestant Tradition? Maybe Lutherans and Episcopalians? Maybe?

          The Bible belongs to The Church, not thousands of “churches”. If Christ came to found the church as his bride, then by the Protestant interpretation of “The Church” He did a horrible job. Do you believe Christ to be a failure, sir? Because I believe Protestantism to be so—utterly*.

          *Just because I believe an idea or ideology to be lacking does not, by any means, make me judge an individual’s faith or salvation.

          • James Staten

            If I had an opportunity to speak to Hank, I would tell him what I am about to tell you. Paul was the author of literally half the New Testament. He is the only writer in all of Scripture to address the Body of Christ, the New Creation during this Dispensation of Grace. I have listened to Hank many times, he doesn’t get it…The Pauline Epistles…information revealed to Paul that was never revealed before even during the Lord’s earthly ministry. Hope this helps!!!

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            A cursory reading of St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Polycarp of Smyrna proves you are absolutely correct. Both men were disciples of St. John.

          • GLT

            “A cursory reading of St. Ignatius of Antioch and St. Polycarp of Smyrna proves you are absolutely correct.”

            And yet the writing of neither appear in the scriptures. Interesting.

          • Ruth

            Ephesians 2:4-10
            4 But God, being rich in mercy, for his great love with which he loved us,
             5  Even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved.
            6  And raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
            7 That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus;
            8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
             9 Not of works, that no one would boast.
             10  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we would walk in them.

            Titus 3:4-8 
            But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
            Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
            Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
            That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
            This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

            The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ, and seeks to trace its origin back to the original apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Like Catholics and Protestants, however, Orthodox believers affirm the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as God the Son, and many other biblical doctrines. However, in doctrine, they have much more in common with Roman Catholics than they do with Protestant Christians.

            Sadly, the doctrine of justification by faith is virtually absent from the history and theology of the Orthodox Church. Rather, Orthodoxy emphasizes theosis (literally, “divinization”), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. What many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that “divinization” is the progressive result of salvation, not a requirement for salvation itself.

            Orthodox Church holds to some false doctrine. They observe seven sacraments, and they teach these sacraments are the means by which believers receive grace. Four of the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, and confession) are required or salvation, according to the Oriental Orthodox Church. Teaching that religious works are a means to receive grace amounts to a works-based salvation, in violation of the Bible’s teaching that salvation is all of grace, apart from human works (Romans 11:6). God forgives the debt of sin freely, for the sake of Christ (Luke 7:41–42; Romans 3:24). The Oriental Orthodox requirement of keeping the sacraments is “another” gospel and not the true gospel (see Galatians 1:6–9).

            Other Orthodox distinctives that are in conflict with the Bible include:
            The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
            Discouragement of individuals interpreting the Bible apart from tradition
            The perpetual virginity of Mary
            Prayer for the dead
            Baptism of infants without reference to individual responsibility and faith
            The possibility of receiving salvation after death

            While the Eastern Orthodox Church has claimed some of the church’s great voices, and while there are many in the Orthodox tradition that have a genuine salvation relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox church itself does not speak with a clear message that can be harmonized with the biblical gospel of Christ. The call of the Reformers for “Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone” is missing in the Eastern Orthodox Church, and that is too precious a treasure to do without.

            Colossians 2
            6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 
            7 Rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.
            8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 
            9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 
            10 And you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Oh, you mean interpret the Word, not divide. No one divides the Bible like a Thanksgiving turkey, giving dark meat to some and light meat to others.

      • James Staten

        You would be better served if you spent more time with the Pauline Epistles. You can lead a religion to water, but you can make it drink.

        • BuckeyePhysicist

          I’ve read them in three languages. What’s your point?

          • James Staten

            My point is you can go and sit in a garage and call yourself a car until the Lord Jesus comes, and you will never be a car. Just because you have have read the Greek, Hebrew, or English etc.does not make one a Believer. Just because one attends a Church that holds to tradition doesn’t make one a Believer. Many in Europe call themselves Christians because they were born. It is a relationship, one must be Born from Above. My whole point of writing on this blog was to say I have listened to Hank for hours, and he isn’t the Bible Answer man. He doesn’t get it, and neither does Tradition.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Europe? What’s wrong with Europe? English is my third language behind Italian and Spanish.

          • James Staten

            Your right. I should have broadened my perspective. Just because one calls themselves a Christian, doesn’t make it so. Regardless, if it’s a High Church or a Low Church!!!!

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            I’m American and I was born here. My parents were both legal immigrants. I learned the faith from their amazing examples. We not only read Scripture in Italian and Spanish and English, I learned to pray from them too. I learned to love the Mass from them.

          • The General

            Going to Mass doesn’t make anyone a Christian.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Does going to Bible study make someone a Christian? How about hootin’ and hollerin’ in a tent? Does that do it? Could someone become a Christian by praying a sinner prayer?

            I’m a Christian because I was born again of water and the spirit. My Church does that via baptism and Confirmation.

          • Peggy Summers

            The Mass can’t keep you a Christian. 1 Pet. 1:3-5 – “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.”

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            What’s your argument? You quoted Pope Peter very well.

          • Peggy Summers

            “…kept by the power of God through faith….” – Not kept by the Mass.
            Peter was an Apostle, but that doesn’t mean he was the first Roman Catholic. If he had been Pope and therefore infallible, then why was he reprimanded by Paul in Gal. 2:11-16?

            “Now when Peter had come to Antioch, I withstood him to his face, because he was to be blamed; for before certain men came from James, he would eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing those who were of the circumcision. And the rest of the Jews also played the hypocrite with him, so that even Barnabas was carried away with their hypocrisy. But when I saw that they were not straightforward about the truth of the gospel, I said to Peter before them all, “If you, being a Jew, live in the manner of Gentiles and not as the Jews, why do you compel Gentiles to live as Jews? We who are Jews by nature, and not sinners of the Gentiles, knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ and not by the works of the law; for by the works of the law no flesh shall be justified.”

          • GLT

            Demonstrate for us how Peter is the pope, outside of Roman Catholicism and orthodoxy simply applying the term to him.

          • GLT

            “The Mass doesn’t make you a Christian. It keeps you a Christian. You should try it sometime.”

            If you need mass to keep you a Christian you have serious problems, my friend. I find the grace and love of Christ sufficient to keep me a Christian. Not liturgy, not ceremony, not icons or veneration of saints, just a pure personal relationship with my saviour.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Where is the “personal relationship with my savior” quote in Sacred Scripture?

          • GLT

            “Where is the “personal relationship with my savior” quote in Sacred Scripture?”

            So, your argument is that I cannot have a personal relationship with Christ because that phrase does not appear in the Bible. If so, what kind of relationship with Christ am I able to have? Can I then only relate to him through the Orthodox church?

            Are you saying God is not not triune in nature because the word does not appear in scripture?

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Does going to Bible study make someone a Christian? How about hootin’ and hollerin’ in a tent? Does that do it? Could someone become a Christian by praying a sinner prayer?

            I’m a Christian because I was born again of water and the spirit. My Church does that via baptism and Confirmation.

          • Kevin Bullard

            I’ve seen a Klingon Bible and a Joseph Smith Translation too.

  • Mitch Bright

    I met Hank in person at Willowcreek, about 20 years ago… 10 years after I converted to Orthodoxy. I’d been a dedicated listener after leaving Sabellianism of the UPC and I told him at that time that I thought he’d eventually wind up embracing the Orthodox Church too. He smiled at me, dismissing the idea. I was fine with that. I completely understand the journey and the burden. may God grant Hank MANY years. This makes perfect sense for those of us who have found a home within Orthodoxy. I also understand why Evangelicals and Sola Scriptura folks are confused and frustrated. All I can tell you is, this is the normal end, when someone decides to be historically and biblically honest. That doesn’t mean *everyone* will embrace EO. But many, many will. I’ve seen hundreds come home to the Orthodox Church. Welcome Home, Hank.

    • Marek Wawrzyniak

      So, this is your fault Mitch? 😉

      • Mitch Bright

        Ha!

    • Gary Whiteman

      Willow Creek has condoned homosexuality. It is no longer a Christian church. You apostates sure do stick together.

      • Mitch Bright

        Relax Gary. He talked there… I went to listen.
        As I read all the comments here, I can’t help but think God has much more time for other tasks now, since judging the flock is being covered by many of the participants here.

  • Charybdis69

    Gotta love Jeff Maples on the outside looking in, assuming he represents to true historical faith of the original Church, when he’s actually just like the Pharisees who thought they held the keys to the Kingdom, but were just fooling themselves:

    “And whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted. But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in.” (Matthew 23:12-13)

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      If you want to be truly historical, Rome is that way…

  • david

    is hank still a preterist? does he still think there is no rapture? he vehemently opposes jan markal whose ministry ‘understanding the times’ exposes false teachers and keeping on eye on israel as end time prophecy is fulfilled right now. search ‘hank hannegraaf rapture ‘ or preterist’ . he thinks there is no literal thousand year reign of Christ.

    i stopped listening to hank over a decade ago for his compromise . those who love the truth will move toward it, those who are deceitful in their quest for truth find their golden egg of deceit mixed with truth and are content to dwell there.

    • crossnote

      I stopped listening to him a week after he took over the BAM show, a smooth operator.

  • crossnote

    Hank pulled some shenaningans in taking over CRI when Walter Martin passed, maybe he will pass on the same favor for the EO.

    • Amos Moses

      WM is spinning ………

  • Faith Alone

    The Greek Orthodox “church” is just another accursed harlot daughter from THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH, i.e., Roman Catholic “church”.
    Just like their mother, they preach a false gospel which damns people to an eternity in Hell.

    • RWH

      And what evidence do you have other than your own personal bigoted opinion? The Russian soil is soaked with the blood of the new martyrs of the Communist yoke, and today the cross of Christ shines brightly across the Russian land. And you sit by and presume to pass judgment. If the same thing happened here, you’d be hiding under your bed.

      • crossnote

        And this is why Putin who is a member of the R.O. has passed a law forbidding most of Christendom to share their faith in homes, online and in public? Good one. I’m sure that has God’s approval.

        • RWH

          There are churches other than the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia. However, just with any other church, the Russian Orthodox Church has the right to fight against heresy.

          • Kevin Bullard

            They need a good dose of All American Scientology!

    • Ryan Matzke

      If all Orthodox Christians are “HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS…etc”, then do you lament the deaths of Christians at the hands of ISIS, most recently in Egypt on Palm Sunday? Or do you yell at your huge flat screen TV, microwaved meat spraying from your mouth, “THEY GOT WHAT THEY DESERVE! THOSE DAMN DIRTY HARLOT DAUGHTERS! GO ISIS, DO GOD’S WORK!”

      Who do you think these Christians are—Lutherans?! I’m going to write it out for emphasis:

      SHAKING. MY. HEAD.

      Enjoy the comfort of your arm chair and your wifi. The Orthodox will be on the front line in the fight against the enemy. Don’t worry—we got this. CHRIST IS RISEN!

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’(Mat 7:21-23)

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Evangelicalism is a new invention within Christianity. The majority of the Christian world is Catholic and Orthodox.

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        “Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. (Mat 7:13)

    • Kevin Bullard

      You stole that like from Ian Paisley of Belfast

  • Faith Alone

    The Greek Orthodox church worships dead corpses. Google it and see a bunch of pictures of bones and body parts being paraded around in front of people. It is a satanic denomination.

    • George Caco

      1) The Roman Catacomb Church held liturgies over the grave of Saints. Now if you don’t like the Early Church and its practices then that’s your decision.
      2) The Holy Spirit doesn’t just pack up and leave a Saint’s body when the Saint has passed away. That’s how we know that a faith is true. Ask yourself: how many Saints has your denomination produced? If none then what does that tell you about your denomination?

      • Charles

        Anyone who believes and follows the Lords commandments are “Saints”.. You people are all confused.

        • Ryan Matzke

          So Charley, all Christian’s are equal in holiness with Paul? I do not believe that I am. Why is that?

          • Charles

            No man is more “Holy” than the other. All fall short of the Glory of God. Every man is a sinner.

            “”I do not believe that I am. Why is that?””

            Because you’ve been brainwashed by man. You venerate man, because if they didn’t you wouldn’t look to the Pope for your answers. Which, of course you shouldn’t. It’s all a orchestrated mind game by the church to elevate man above God.

          • George Caco

            So you would just as soon follow Hitler’s way because after all you said “No man is more “Holy” than the other.” You’re equating Hitler and Mother Teresa? Protestant Egalitarianism theology promotes the lowest common denominator potential of man.

          • James Staten

            There’s a reason after Mother Teresa’s death her journal revealed that for 50 yrs she felt her prayers never got higher than the ceiling. You can believe what I am about to share or you can reject it. I have friends that travel the world proclaiming the Gospel. Several years ago they were in India with another couple, and they decided to go by Teresa’s Headquarters. Right in the middle of the courtyard was a tree with little ribbons tying their prayers to the branches for Mary to answer. Peggy happened to see Teresa, she approached her and said Salvation is only through Jesus? Teresa said No it’s through Mary. As she walked away Peggy followed behind and asked her again about Salvation being only through Jesus, and Teresa’s head snapped around and said sternly No, It’s only through Mary.

          • Charles

            I’m not surprised a bit. Worse the Catholics “Sainted” her. All image, all lies. I’ve found, bit by bit just how much of a lie this world really is.

          • James Staten

            Sad

          • Charles

            Truly.

          • George Caco

            Anyways, my point is that Protestant Egalitarianism theology fails miserably in pointing the way to Theosis. It promotes the lowest common denominator potential of man.

          • James Staten

            George, Why don’t we cut to the chase? Life’s Only Question: What will you do with that dead Jew who got up and walked out of that Tomb? Nothing else matters!!!!

          • George Caco

            What will I do? I will fall at his feet, worshipping him as God. What will you do?

          • James Staten

            Yep, He’s the Savior, and the ground is level at the foot of the cross. Either you believe the Gospel, and the Holy Spirit baptizes you into the Body of Christ or your not. That is the Only Church. Regardless of you list

          • George Caco

            Once you ascend Mount Cavalry to Jesus then and only then is the ground level.

          • James Staten

            George, Grace is a Person. You keep doing your check list!!! Just so you and the others may know the KJV is Sufficient, and in your check list I hope you realize there is a thing called Paralysis of Analysis.

          • George Caco

            You said, “Grace is a Person.” Please explain.

          • Charles

            Coming from someone worshiping false idols and man made rituals, I’ll definitely not take that into consideration.

          • Darrell Early

            Charles you seem like a real Bible believer. Here is my email since I like how you are contending for the faith that was once delivered to the saints (Jude 3). dearly72@gmail.com-Darrell

          • George Caco

            Orthodox only worship God. We venerate Saints but we do not worship them. There is a world of difference between worship and veneration and I suggest that you educate yourself.

            Protestant Human Vain Traditions are as follows:
            1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15,
            2) Protestant Platonic Iconoclasm which despises the physical world during worship services,
            3) the Ahistoric attitude of Protestantism concerning the Early Church,
            4) Ignorance of the Greek Koine NT,
            5) the Joyful willingness that Protestants radiate in fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands and thousands of splinters,
            I can go on and on ad infinitum……

            Ignorant is no way to go through life.

          • Charles

            “”Orthodox only worship God. We venerate Saints but we do not worship them.””

            Yes. You venerate men. Where is that in the Bible again? That’s by design. It’s why you listen to what a mere man “The Pope” says. If I’m not mistaken you also pray for the dead. But God tells us the dead know nothing.

            “”1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15,””

            Does no such thing. You’ve already been exposed about your favorite word being absent in the English Bible.

            “”2) Protestant Platonic Iconoclasm which despises the physical world during worship services,””

            I don’t despise the physical world I just have to live in it. I know it’s not forever. I’m am grateful for every breath I take. But I am most grateful for the Lord, who brought me back from the dead. Eternity isn’t long enough to praise the Lord. Amen.

            “”3) the Ahistoric attitude of Protestantism concerning the Early Church,””

            The Catholic Church is a joke. Like I’ve stated several times. Your beloved founder was a Sun Worshiping heretic. That’s not even mentioning how incredible evil many of the Popes were, or the Saints murdered under this regime.

            “”4) Ignorance of the Greek Koine NT, “”

            God made the Bible for all languages. He knew that right? Oh wait, your God is impotent. I forgot. I’m aware of Greek. It’s very useful to study it. However, it’s not required to walk with the Lord.

            “”5) the Joyful willingness that Protestants radiate in fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands and thousands of splinters,””

            You keep treating the “Fractures” as a bad thing. This was destined to happed as it separates the wheat from the tares. Of course I’m glad I was never indoctrinated in a heretical cult. Who wouldn’t be?

            “”I can go on and on ad infinitum……””

            So can I………………………………………………….

            “”Ignorant is no way to go through life.””

            Truly. I hope someday that your eyes will be opened. Ditch the Idols, rituals, and venerating the dead…

          • George Caco

            “”Orthodox only worship God. We venerate Saints but we do not worship them.””
            Charles: Yes. You venerate men. Where is that in the Bible again? That’s by design. It’s why you listen to what a mere man “The Pope” says. If I’m not mistaken you also pray for the dead. But God tells us the dead know nothing.
            George: There are many occurrences of Saintly people prostrating themselves before others in the Bible. Nobody is being worshiped there.

            “”1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15,””
            Charles: Does no such thing.
            George: You’re correct only if you conflate the word λογου and the word epistle. It’s interesting how Protestants warp scripture in order to make it adhere to their human traditions.
            Charles: You’ve already been exposed about your favorite word being absent in the English Bible.
            George: I did respond to you yesterday about the word “liturgy”. Here it is again: The other subject is that the Greek root word λειτουργία and its derivatives such as λειτουργὸς. Hebrews 8:2 properly translated would refer to Christ as the Holy Liturgist (ἁγίων λειτουργὸς). Learn some Greek.

            “”2) Protestant Platonic Iconoclasm which despises the physical world during worship services,””
            Charles: I don’t despise the physical world I just have to live in it. I know it’s not forever. I’m am grateful for every breath I take. But I am most grateful for the Lord, who brought me back from the dead. Eternity isn’t long enough to praise the Lord. Amen.
            George: All I see is white-washed walls and maybe just maybe a Cross somewhere in a Protestant Church. Also, where is incense as mentioned in the Bible?

            “”3) the Ahistoric attitude of Protestantism concerning the Early Church,””
            Charles: The Catholic Church is a joke. Like I’ve stated several times. Your beloved founder was a Sun Worshiping heretic. That’s not even mentioning how incredible evil many of the Popes were, or the Saints murdered under this regime.
            George: I’m not Catholic. The EO Church is derived from the Early Church that was founded by the Holy Spirit in 33AD. Emporer Constantine merely legalized Christianity and planted its center in a new city called Constantinople.

            “”4) Ignorance of the Greek Koine NT, “”
            Charles: God made the Bible for all languages. He knew that right? Oh wait, your God is impotent. I forgot. I’m aware of Greek. It’s very useful to study it. However, it’s not required to walk with the Lord.
            George: The EO Church has the Koine Greek NT on its side. Which NT is on the Protestant side? Is it the NIV, no wait the ASV, no perhaps the NSRV, I know I know the KJV, etc….

            “”5) the Joyful willingness that Protestants radiate in fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands and thousands of splinters,””
            Charles: You keep treating the “Fractures” as a bad thing. This was destined to happed as it separates the wheat from the tares. Of course I’m glad I was never indoctrinated in a heretical cult. Who wouldn’t be?
            George: Most certainly farctures are a bad thing and the incredible thing is that Protestants are so willing to cause more factures.

          • Ruth

            The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ, and seeks to trace its origin back to the original apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Like Catholics and Protestants, however, Orthodox believers affirm the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as God the Son, and many other biblical doctrines. However, in doctrine, they have much more in common with Roman Catholics than they do with Protestant Christians.

            Sadly, the doctrine of justification by faith is virtually absent from the history and theology of the Orthodox Church. Rather, Orthodoxy emphasizes theosis (literally, “divinization”), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. What many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that “divinization” is the progressive result of salvation, not a requirement for salvation itself.

            Orthodox Church holds to some false doctrine. They observe seven sacraments, and they teach these sacraments are the means by which believers receive grace. Four of the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, and confession) are required or salvation, according to the Oriental Orthodox Church. Teaching that religious works are a means to receive grace amounts to a works-based salvation, in violation of the Bible’s teaching that salvation is all of grace, apart from human works (Romans 11:6). God forgives the debt of sin freely, for the sake of Christ (Luke 7:41–42; Romans 3:24). The Oriental Orthodox requirement of keeping the sacraments is “another” gospel and not the true gospel (see Galatians 1:6–9).

            Other Orthodox distinctives that are in conflict with the Bible include:
            The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
            Discouragement of individuals interpreting the Bible apart from tradition
            The perpetual virginity of Mary
            Prayer for the dead
            Baptism of infants without reference to individual responsibility and faith
            The possibility of receiving salvation after death

            Here are some verses to ponder, these are the proof that we are saved by grace alone through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

            Titus 3:4-8 
            But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
            Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
            Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
            That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
            This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

            Ephesians 2:8-10
            8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
             9 Not of works, that no one would boast.
             10  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we would walk in them.

            Colossians 2
            6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 
            7 Rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.
            8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 
            9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 
            10 And you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 

          • James Staten

            Jesus is the personification of Grace

          • Charles

            What was Paul before he was introduced to God? No man is “Good”. Only through Jesus are we saved. Through Grace. Not of ourselves. The Most High takes care of the rest. “Mother” Teresa is a terrible example. She was a know fraud. She had millions in the bank she withheld from the poor. Not to mention bowing to Godless Idols. She NEVER believed in God. Why stop at Hitler? Why not Stalin who killed 20 Million.. Or better yet how about Chairman Mao @ 60 Million? Or even the Catholic Church at 200 Million?

          • James Staten

            Charles, Look at my comment below yours about Teresa

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Typical no true scotman fallacy. False argument. That said, if Mother Teresa was relying on her good works for Salvation, she is in the same place that Hitler is. Although, just as there will be varying degrees of rewards in Heaven for what we have done so shall there be in Hell and the Lake of Fire.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Just to be more accurate, Believers are now Saints, children of the Most High God, co-heir with Jesus Christ, Born Again blood-washed New Creations and ALL of us have been “set apart”.

          • James Staten

            Royce, It has become obvious to me they don’t get it. Charles and I have been posting from day one.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Yes, it’s actually quite sad. I fear they’re standing in the Matt. 7:21-23 line. Not only is their theology messaged up but some of their comments have been way overboard.

          • James Staten

            Yes, or perhaps the scripture of having a form of godliness, but lacking the power thereof.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Evidently you don’t even know what the word “holy” means. If you did you would know the answer to that question is YES.

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        “2) The Holy Spirit doesn’t just pack up and leave a Saint’s body when a Saint passes away. That’s a solid way to know that a faith is true. Ask yourself: how many Saints has your denomination ever produced? If none then what does that tell you about your denomination?”

        Now you’re getting downright comical. LOL!! Oh yeah, I’m quite sure the Holy Spirit hangs around and indwells the dead rotting corpse of a Believer. LOL

        True Christians know that EVERY Unbeliever who is Born Again becomes a Saint. Ya gotta love it when these folks who tout they’re the one true church and they have the only true Bible don’t even know what’s in it!!

        Thanks for posting that!! Always appreciated when the Posers reveal themselves and completely discredit themselves by showing their ignorance of what God has said.

        • George Caco

          Why do you keep refusing to let the Bible enlighten you? Read the following:

          “Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.” (2 Kings 13:21)

          Come over to the Bible side, the Orthodox Faith.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Why do you keep refusing to let the Bible enlighten you? I am already on the Bible side. The true Word of God side and I’m already in the Orthodox Faith.

            Leave your false gospel and apostate faith!! Get saved while there is yet time.

          • GLT

            “Once while some Israelites were burying a man, suddenly they saw a band of raiders; so they threw the man’s body into Elisha’s tomb. When the body touched Elisha’s bones, the man came to life and stood up on his feet.” (2 Kings 13:21)”

            And your point is?

          • George Caco

            The Holy Spirit doesn’t just pack up and leave a Saint’s body the moment a Saint passes away.

          • GLT

            “The Holy Spirit doesn’t just pack up and leave a Saint’s body the moment a Saint passes away.”

            To whom are you referring, the man or Elisha?

          • George Caco

            “To whom are you referring, the man or Elisha?”

            I’m sure you’re intelligent enough to answer that question yourself.

          • GLT

            “I’m sure you’re intelligent enough to answer that question yourself.”

            Dodge, dodge, dodge, that is all you ever do. Answer the question. To whom were you referring, the man or Elisha when you said ‘the Holy Spirit doesn’t just pick up and leave a saint’s body at the moment a saint passes away’?

          • George Caco

            Do I have to state the obvious? Start using your intellect as I’m sure you are intelligent.

          • GLT

            “Do I have to state the obvious? Start using your intellect as I’m sure you are intelligent.”

            Dodge, dodge, dodge. Just answer the question. To whom are you referring, the man or Elisha? What is so hard about that? All you have to do is type one word, either ‘man’ or ‘Elisha’. Can you handle that or not?

        • JDV

          I read somewhere that God is not the God of the dead but of the living.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Good point. That’s Mark 12:27. One more evidence he doesn’t know his Bible. Or maybe the Holy Spirit hanging around in a dead man’s corpse is something unique to his Koine Greek Bible. Or more likely his Corny Greek Bible.

          • JDV

            I don’t know how we can even expect to discuss this matter in English if we take that train of logic to its conclusion.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            I don’t think I follow you.

          • JDV

            Basically, how can we even communicate in a language other than Greek and hope to have this secret knowledge that allows us to understand Scripture? (Insert “Hebrew” for the roots devotees).

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Well, Jesus said it best. You must be Born Again.

          • George Caco

            So God is no longer the God of all who have passed away? Where is that written in your English Bible?

          • JDV

            I’ll leave it to you to ponder the point that Jesus was making to the Sadducees.

          • George Caco

            As God is the God of Abraham (who dies many moons ago) then so is He the God of Elijah, even when he was just bones in his grave. So God is still the God of Believers even when they are dead.

    • Kevin Bullard

      That is the Greeks. Not all Orthodox are Greek.

  • Faith Alone

    He abandoned the bible for the vain traditions of men.

    • George Caco

      Hank abandoned the vain human tradition of Sola Scriptura for the Fullness of the Faith.

      • Laurence Charles Ringo

        The Fullness of the Christian Faith is centered in Jesus the Christ, not man-centered religious constructs and so-called”tradition”…Our Savior invited us to HIMSELF, not human speculation,guesswork,and hypotheses,much less created dogma and doctrine that have their origins in fallible human beings and their various-“isms””…you hold on to your man-centered religions,I’ll keep Jesus. PEACE IN CHRIST, ALWAYS!! 😀.

        • James Staten

          Amen

      • Kevin Bullard

        Nice

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Sacred Tradition is different than the traditions of men.

    • Aleksandr Pletnyov

      Sola Scriptura is a false teaching and the very reason protestants are so splintered. You claim to have divine revelation of biblical teachings until someone differs from your personal view point and then go off and create another church.

      • Kevin Bullard

        Now when has THAT ever happened? Just godly men listening to the Lord and reading their Bible acting on it. And none of the agree with the guy down the street. Hmm.

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      The Catholic and Orthodox Churches reject “the tradition of men” in Matthew 15. We embrace Sacred Tradition which is totally different.

  • Richard T.

    Watchmen Nee was not an Orthodox Christian. And Watchmen Nee was a real man of God, but he was not without errors as well. His followers had become very narrow minded and almost cult like in some instances. You can go to Mainland China and Taiwan today and still see the problem his Local Church has. The report does not provide more detail information about “theosis”, which I do not believe is from the teaching of Watchmen Nee. There are many questions need to be answered in my opinion.

    • George Caco

      Good question. I’m not well versed in Watchman Nee but I’ve got his “The Spiritual Man” book next in line to read.

    • Richard T.

      I understand what Hank Hanegraaf is saying about the Chinese Christians. The Christians in China don’t know too much in terms of intellectual knowledge. But what they have is true Christianity. They have faith, hope and love, and they have the power of the Holy Spirit, with miracles and signs and wonders that followed them, just like in the Book of Acts. But why would the reality of the Christ experienced by Christians in China lead Hank Hanegraaf to Orthodoxy? The Church in China is not Orthodox! I am not understanding what is going on here.

  • Jim the Scott

    Well speaking as a Catholic what he did is not perfect BUT is an improvement by an order of magnitude.

    Glad to see him become more Biblical.

    😉

    • George Caco

      Yes, the EO Church is definitely more Biblical than the Platonic Protesting Churches.

      • BuckeyePhysicist

        It will be easy to recognize Protestants in heaven. They’ll be the ones arguing with Jesus, “But the Bible says…”

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          Thanks for showing your heart. Matt. 15:18, Lk 6:45. If that’s the “respect” that you spoke of above, you can keep it to yourself and please don’t teach anyone else what it is!!

        • GLT

          Hey Buckeye, I’m still waiting for you to explain Leviticus 17:10-14 in light of your claim that communion is the literal drinking of Christ’s blood. All I’ve heard is crickets for 2 days.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            First of all, I work. I’m an actual physicist with a real job.

            The passage you cite from Leviticus 17 was no doubt in the minds of the very people listening to Jesus teach on the Eucharist in the sixth chapter of St. John’s gospel. Jesus spoke of the Real Presence and His listeners couldn’t believe it. Did Jesus recant? No. He doubled and tripled down on His Presence in the Eucharist, even saying His Body is real food and His Blood is real drink and saying we must consume Him to have life within us.

            In John 6:66 we see many of Jesus’ followers no longer following Him over His very clear teaching on the Real Presence. If Jesus was speaking figuratively there would not have been such commotion and people would not have left.

            Jesus then asks the disciples if they would go too, and St. Peter responds that they would stay because Jesus has the words of eternal life (cf. John 6:67-70).

            I’m staying with Jesus just like St. Peter and the disciples.

          • GLT

            “The passage you cite from Leviticus 17 was no doubt in the minds of the very people listening to Jesus teach on the Eucharist in the sixth chapter of St. John’s gospel. Jesus spoke of the Real Presence and His listeners couldn’t believe it. Did Jesus recant? No. He doubled and tripled down on His Presence in the Eucharist, even saying His Body is real food and His Blood is real drink and saying we must consume Him to have life within us.”

            This does not even approach the ball park as an answer. Wish to try again?

            “First of all, I work. I’m an actual physicist with a real job.”

            Good for you, but physics is not a lot of help to you in this discussion. The simple fact is Leviticus is quite clear in its condemnation of the drinking or eating of blood in any form. As such that creates a problem for you in your belief that communion involves the literal drinking of Christ’s blood. You might as well face the fact you have no way out of this. Either the wine in communion is simply representative of Christ’s blood or you have a blatant contradiction. Make your choice.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            I choose Jesus’ words of truth. He said, “This IS…” not, “This represents…”

          • GLT

            “I choose Jesus’ words of truth. He said, “This IS…” not, “This represents…”

            You have still failed to address the question. How do you align the claim communion involves drinking the actual blood of Christ with the prohibition of this activity in Leviticus 17:10-14? All you have done is dodge, dodge, dodge.

          • George Caco

            Why don’t you do start doing some aligning for a change?

            You will see the truth only when you comprehend the Bible in its entirety. Pitting one verse against another will only get you as far as “bedlam”.

          • GLT

            “You will see the truth only when you comprehend the Bible in its entirety.”

            I do see the Bible in its entirety. It is you and others who are promoting contradictory scenarios, such as your want to believe communion entails the actual drinking of Christ’s blood despite the clear teaching of Leviticus which condemns the drinking of blood in any form. You say I need to do some aligning, how about you start by aligning those opposing factors?

            I am not pitting one verse against another, I am pointing out the Bible clearly teaches drinking blood is forbidden by God while you’re taking a symbolic remembrance instituted by Christ and inserting a claim that he was teaching we should literally drink his blood and eat his body.

          • Jim the Scott

            >It is you and others who are promoting contradictory scenarios, such as your want to believe communion entails the actual drinking of Christ’s blood despite the clear teaching of Leviticus which condemns the drinking of blood in any form.

            Sorry buddy but Leviticus clearly condemns the drinking of animal blood in the eating and consumption of animals for food under dietary laws. It does not condemn the drinking of wine that has it’s substance changed into the blood of Christ while retaining it’s properties of wine.

            Animal blood is digested. Christ’s blood is not only the accidents of the bread and wine are digested. The Blood of Christ is now impassible with the resurrection.

            Didn’t they teach you anything?

            BTW the “it’s just a symbol” doctrine was invented by the so called Reformer Zwingli all the ancients teach the Eucharist is literally Christ’s blood.

            “Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead.”

            “Letter to the Smyrnaeans”, paragraph 6. circa 80-110 A.D.

            But what can I say? You are ignoring John 6 to prop up Zwingli.

          • GLT

            “Sorry buddy but Leviticus clearly condemns the drinking of animal blood in the eating and consumption of animals for food under dietary laws. It does not condemn the drinking of wine that has it’s substance changed into the blood of Christ while retaining it’s properties of wine.”

            So, are you saying the wine taken at communion literally becomes the blood of Christ but is actually still wine, and that it is okay to drink the human blood of Christ but we are forbidden to drink animal blood? Are you also saying the wine aspect of the communion drink is digested but the body retains the actual blood of Christ aspect?

            I just want some clarity on that. Also, I find it curious you resort to a letter in support of your opinion which was not included in the canon of Scripture by your own church fathers.

          • Jim the Scott

            >So, are you saying the wine taken at communion literally becomes the blood of Christ but is actually still wine,

            You really don’t get transubstantiation do you nutjob? But Then again you have a double standard on the propriety of calling things “unbiblicaL”. What you don’t know how to google?

            The substance or the essence (i.e. what a thing is) changes it’s properties do not. So the properties of the bread remain and they are subject to digestion. Once digestion takes place the Real Presence leaves.

            >and that it is okay to drink the human blood of Christ but we are forbidden to drink animal blood?

            Christ said it and I believe it and that is good enough for me. If you choose to put your god Zwingli (the author of your “it just a symbol” doctrine” above the words of Christ himself then that is your malfunction).

            BTW it is now Resurrected glorified blood which has taken on supernatural properties.

            >Are you also saying the wine aspect of the communion drink is digested but the body retains the actual blood of Christ aspect?

            The substance of Christ’s body and blood are not subject to digestion only the accidents/properties of the bread and once digestion takes place the real presence is gone.

            >I just want some clarity on that. Also, I find it curious you resort to a letter in support of your opinion which was not included in the canon of Scripture by your own church fathers.

            That letter was by a Bishop who learned the Gospel at the feet of Peter and John themselves and note he took them literally. Your Master Zwingli lived sixteen hundred years after the fact and was not taught by any of the Apostles personally yet you get your “Symbol Only” teachign from him. Even Luther told Zwingli he was going to Hell for denying John 6.

            Now I have a question for you. Why do you listen to Zwingli on this? How is an ex-Catholic priest more authoritative then a Bishop born in the first century who learned the Faith at the feet of the Apostles?

            Well tough guy? Do you have the guts to answer me?

            Well?

      • GLT

        My, aren’t we just a little self righteous.

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Hank can share Holy Communion with us!

    • GLT

      “Glad to see him become more Biblical.”

      How very condescending and judgemental of you.

      • Jim the Scott

        Not really. Hank has spent his life criticizing the doctrines of “cult” and other religions. Which is fine. Well I am Catholic and is my judgement from my perspective.

        • GLT

          “Not really.”

          Yes, really. How else would you explain your statement he has become ‘more Biblical’? If he has become ‘more Biblical’ then you are clearly stating he was ‘less Biblical’ in the past. Therefore, those still outside the Eastern Orthodox Church are likewise less Biblical has Hanegraaff was.

          There is no way to classify such a statement other than condescending and judgemental.

          • Jim the Scott

            I am Catholic. I believe Catholicism is Biblical. I believe Protestantism in all of it’s forms is un-Biblical. Since Eastern Orthodoxy is closer to Catholicism in doctrine by my reckoning it is more Biblical then Protestantism. You are shocked by this? You don’t think Hank has ever said in his life “Catholicism is unbiblical” or “Mormonism is unbiblical”? Or “Catholic Marian doctrine is unbiblical”(the later I know he has said since I used to read THIS ROCK)?

            Here is the bottom line. I believe Catholicism is Biblical and I will NEVER apologize for it. If there is a Baptist or Assemblies of God Christian out there who is ashamed to say he believes his sect is Biblical I don’t think I would want to know him or her even if I technically disagree.

            PS Don’t you think it’s silly to accuse me of being condescending and judgmental after having just judged me in a manner that comes off as a little bit condescending?

          • GLT

            “Catholicism is unbiblical” or “Mormonism is unbiblical”

            Mormonism is not Christian. Catholicism, though Christian, is often guilty of unbiblical teaching such as the veneration of Mary and the teaching that she intercedes for man.

            “I believe Protestantism in all of it’s forms is un-Biblical.”

            How about some examples?

            “Don’t you think it’s silly to accuse me of being condescending and judgmental after having just judged me in a manner that comes off as a little bit condescending?”

            No. You were the one who made the accusation that those outside the Catholic church were inferior Christians. And you have just repeated that accusation by saying protestants in all their forms are unbiblical. Such a statement is condescending and judgemental on its face. Why are you surprised when someone calls you on it? You judge the Christian commitment of all those outside the Catholic church and when someone stands up to you, you whine about be judged. What a hypocrite.

          • Jim the Scott

            >Mormonism is not Christian. Catholicism, though Christian, is often guilty of unbiblical teaching such as the veneration of Mary and the teaching that she intercedes for man.

            So now it is ok for you too say all of the above but I was “judgmental” when I said it? Seriously dude? (BTW FYI Marian doctrine is Biblical. Stop by Catholic Answers and read for yourself or Envoy).

            >How about some examples?

            Sola Fide?(James 2:24), Rejecting Tradition(2 Thes 3:6)

            >No. You were the one who made the accusation that those outside the Catholic church were inferior Christians.

            I never said “inferior Christian”. I said Hank is now more Biblical. BTW you just said above Catholics have “un-biblical” teaching. So by your own standards you just called me and my own “inferior”. You have one standard for me and another for yourself.

            You have what Jews call Chuzpah.

            > And you have just repeated that accusation by saying protestants in all their forms are unbiblical.

            You just called Catholicism “unbiblical” nutjob. In principle I don’t mind. I merely would disagree with your assessment but I find your double standard extremely offensive.

            >Such a statement is condescending and judgemental on its face.

            Coming from a condescending hypocritical sociopath like yourself it like being called ugly by a toad.

            >Why are you surprised when someone calls you on it?

            I would not be surprised if you merely disagreed with my doctrinal assessment or opinions. But acting like I did something morally evil (which you just did yourself) is….wow! Am I being punked?

            >You judge the Christian commitment of all those outside the Catholic church and when someone stands up to you, you whine about be judged. What a hypocrite.

            Now you are just a liar. I said not such thing and no rational person could conclude that from what I wrote.

            Get help!

          • GLT

            “So now it is ok for you too say all of the above but I was “judgmental” when I said it? Seriously dude? (BTW FYI Marian doctrine is Biblical. Stop by Catholic Answers and read for yourself or Envoy).”

            Mormons themselves are clear in their position that they do not hold to traditional Christian doctrine, in fact they revel in it, so how am I being judgemental? You really need to do some homework.

            How is Marian doctrine Biblical? Where does the Bible teach Mary is an intercessor between God and man? I know the Bible says no one comes to the Father but through Jesus Christ. Obviously you know something I do not, so please explain.

            “I never said “inferior Christian”. I said Hank is now more Biblical.”

            Explain the difference.

            “You just called Catholicism “unbiblical” nutjob.”

            Where did I say that? I specifically said Catholicism was Christian but promoted some unbiblical tenets. That has always been my position and I have over the years defended Catholicism against some very vocal critics. I am sorry to see you feel the need to distort what I said. That is a sure sign you feel you are losing the debate.

            “Coming from a condescending hypocritical sociopath like yourself it like being called ugly by a toad.”

            Resorting to personal attacks is another sign that you have no evidence to support your argument so you direct your hostility towards me.

            “Now you are just a liar. I said not such thing and no rational person could conclude that from what I wrote.”

            I see it is necessary to refresh your memory.

            I wrote; “You judge the Christian commitment of all those outside the Catholic church and when someone stands up to you, you whine about be judged. What a hypocrite.”

            You responded; “Now you are just a liar. I said not such thing and no rational person could conclude that from what I wrote.”

            As I said, it is necessary for me to refresh your memory. This is what you said in an earlier post; “I believe Protestantism in all of it’s forms is un-Biblical.”

            What is that if not a judgement on the beliefs and commitment of all protestants? Are you even aware of the content of your comments or do you write them by rote completely oblivious to their meaning?

            And you think I need to get help? Spare me.

          • Jim the Scott

            >Mormons themselves are clear in their position that they do not hold to traditional Christian doctrine, in fact they revel in it, so how am I being judgemental?

            That is not the point & you know it. The point is you grant yourself unlimited right to “judge” the orthodoxy of other religions you disagree with but don’t grant me the same courtesy that makes you a hypocritical nutcase..

            Also calling Hank an opportunist is equally vile.

            >How is Marian doctrine Biblical?

            Go read David Armstrong’s blog. He has dozens of links. (they don’t let me post them here.)

            >Where does the Bible teach Mary is an intercessor between God and man?
            Communion of the Saints Enjoy.

            Ditto

            >I know the Bible says no one comes to the Father but through Jesus Christ.

            Where does it say in any authoritative Tome of Catholic dogma or theology that Mary bypasses Jesus? Your assumption is flawed.
            No pun intended.

            >Explain the difference.

            You don’t know the difference between having one doctrine adhering closer to the Bible vs wither they are in a state of Grace or not? OTOH you don’t know the difference yet venture to judge what I said while simultaneously condemning me for judging? What is it like in that tiny brain of yours?

            >>”You just called Catholicism “unbiblical” nutjob.”
            >Where did I say that?

            Quote”Catholicism, though Christian, is often guilty of unbiblical teaching “END QUOTE.

            Dude don’t lie on the Net there is a record.

            >I specifically said Catholicism was Christian but promoted some unbiblical tenets.

            In other words it’s unbiblical. Like I believe Protestants are Christians who hold unbiblical human traditions made up by Luther and his pals(like Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura etc) . I never said Protestants are not Christian. That would be against the Council of Trent. Mormon baptisms have been declared invalid by the Congregation of the doctrine of the Faith so they aren’t Christian even if I find them more pleasant then your obtuse hypocritical arse.

            > That has always been my position and I have over the years defended Catholicism against some very vocal critics.

            I’ve done the same for Protestants. But the issue here is you grant yourself the right to call Catholicism unbiblical but don’t grant me the right to do so with Protestantism and you condemn me morally for something you do yourself.

            > I am sorry to see you feel the need to distort what I said. That is a sure sign you feel you are losing the debate.

            I sense you lost too many battles with theologically literate Catholics and you are a bit defensive. I wasn’t debating. I was responding too your slander against my character. You accused me of a fault you are clearly guilty of.

            >Resorting to personal attacks is another sign that you have no evidence to support your argument so you direct your hostility towards me.

            No it’s just my Scotish temper aimed at an idiot who doesn’t realize saying “Catholicism is often guilty of unbiblical teaching” is the same as saying it is “unbiblical”. Could you possibly sound more stupid?

            >I see it is necessary to refresh your memory.

            Yes take out this rope so you may continue hanging yourself. The Record helps me not you.

            >As I said, it is necessary for me to refresh your memory. This is what you said in an earlier post; “I believe Protestantism in all of it’s forms is un-Biblical.”

            How does Protestantism being unbiblical equal Protestants not being Christian or committed to Jesus? You said Catholicism was unBiblical?
            Yet you concede Catholics are Christians and can be committed to Jesus?

            Contradict yourself much?

            >What is that if not a judgement on the beliefs and commitment of all protestants?

            It is a judgment of their doctrines/belief that contradict the Holy Writ. Like Sola Fide or Sola Scriptura. Why do you get to judge my Marian doctrines/beliefs but I don’t get to judge your Sola Fide mishigoss? It is the galling hypocritical double standard I find most offensive. Are you really this obtuse?

            >Are you even aware of the content of your comments or do you write them by rote completely oblivious to their meaning?

            And you think I need to get help? Spare me.
            Wow you have zero self awareness. I think you really need help.
            BTW where does the bible teach Sola fide? It says we are justified “by Faith” but Paul never says “alone” and James says “Not by Faith alone”.
            Even based on Sola Scriptura I don’t see how you can believe such nonsense?

          • GLT

            “That is not the point & you know it. The point is you grant yourself unlimited right to “judge” the orthodoxy of other religions you disagree with but don’t grant me the same courtesy that makes you a hypocritical nutcase..”

            I am not judging Mormon theology, I am simply stating it. However, it is unorthodox as I am sure anyone of your bishops would quickly tell you. So you deal with that as you wish.

            “In other words it’s unbiblical.”

            I did not say that. Do not put words in my mouth. I have said repeatedly Catholicism is Christian. However, some unbiblical teachings have crept in over the years. Despite that, at its base it is Christian. So please, do not misrepresent what I said.

            “I sense you lost too many battles with theologically literate Catholics and you are a bit defensive.”

            Not a single one, sorry.

            No it’s just my Scotish temper,…”

            Then get it under control and you won’t make such silly statements. It is never wise to argue from anger.

            “You said Catholicism was unBiblical?”

            Once again, I did not say that. Quit distorting what I said, it only makes you look desperate.

            “Why do you get to judge my Marian doctrines/beliefs but I don’t get to judge your Sola Fide mishigoss?”

            Because your Marian doctrine is not founded on Biblical principles. I asked you to defend your Marian position and all you did was refer me to a website. In fairness I will check that out.

            “BTW where does the bible teach Sola fide?”

            “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith – and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God – not by works, so that no one can boast.” The Apostle Paul writing to the Ephesians.

            Pretty plain, laddie.

            “but Paul never says “alone”

            Simply an argument from silence. Also, your argument is based on eisegesis not exegesis. Paul says we are saved by grace through faith, and goes out of his way to emphasise it is not by works. So either Paul and James are contradicting each other, or 1) Paul is wrong or, 2) You are not interpreting James correctly.

          • Jim the Scott

            >I am not judging Mormon theology, I am simply stating it.

            Saying it is wrong or not Traditionally Christian is a judgement. Live with it. Just as you saying Catholic Marian doctrine is wrong or me saying distinctive Protestant doctrines are wrong/un-biblical is a judgement.
            You can’t cover up your hypocracy with special pleading and double standards here. You actions are hypocritical bordering on insane.

            >However, it is unorthodox as I am sure anyone of your bishops would quickly tell you. So you deal with that as you wish.

            So saying it is “unorthodox” is not a judgement? Then how is me saying distinctive Protestant doctrines are “unorthodox” or “unbiblical” also not a judgement. You don’t have a coherent thought in your head.

            >”In other words it’s unbiblical.”
            I did not say that. Do not put words in my mouth.

            It’s a distinction without a difference. If you literally called my mother a Prostitute and I objected by literally saying “How dare you call my mother a harlot” it’s not a defense to say “I said Prostitute not Harlot”. You called Catholicism un-biblical. Live with it. That I can forgive but getting in a huff for me acting the same as you here is obnoxous and you know it.

            >I have said repeatedly Catholicism is Christian. However, some unbiblical teachings have crept in over the years. Despite that, at its base it is Christian. So please, do not misrepresent what I said.

            I never said Protestantism was not Christian either so follow your own advice and stop pretending otherwise. I said Hank by virtue of becoming Eastern Orthodox from a Catholic perspective was now more biblical. follow your own advise.

            >Not a single one, sorry.

            You are delusional then.

            >Then get it under control and you won’t make such silly statements. It is never wise to argue from anger.

            Not if it’s rightous anger.

            >Once again, I did not say that. Quit distorting what I said, it only makes you look desperate.

            I never said Protestants where not Christian either. Again with the double standards.

            >Because your Marian doctrine is not founded on Biblical principles.

            Neither is your sola Scriptura or Sola Fide doctrines. Anyway you are begging the question. Disputing my doctrines is one thing. Morally condemning me for doing what you are doing is hypocracy.

            > I asked you to defend your Marian position and all you did was refer me to a website. In fairness I will check that out.

            Yeh I can’ t defend Quantum physics is 50 wword or less but that doesn’t make it untrue. Also this site doesn’t allow links and your question is a clear diversion. You need to man up and apologize to me for making moral judgement on my character just because I disagree with you on doctrine.

            >Simply an argument from silence.

            Much like your objections to Marian doctrine. So Sola fide need not be explicit in scripture but Marian doctrine has to be? You are a walking talking breathing incarnation of double standards.

            >Also, your argument is based on eisegesis not exegesis.

            Where does the bible say it may only be interpeted by Exegesis alone? If it doesn’t say that then by
            Sola Scriptura it’s not a binding principle now is it?

            > Paul says we are saved by grace through faith, and goes out of his way to emphasise it is not by works.

            Not by our own natural works obviously. Good works God does in us justify us as James teaches and Paul in Ep 2:10.

            > So either Paul and James are contradicting each other, or 1) Paul is wrong or, 2) You are not interpreting James correctly.

            Or rather you are not interpreting Paul correctly.

            Anyway none of this has anything with you acting like a hypocritical Jerk.

          • GLT

            “Saying it is wrong or not Traditionally Christian is a judgement.”

            Two points.

            First, the word judgemental can mean different things. It can mean one is condemning a certain position, either rightly or wrongly, and it can mean one is assessing a position and rightly describing that position. In the case of Mormon theology it is the latter.

            Second, judging a position or a doctrine is not always wrong. It would be insanity to say one should never be judgemental. Would you say it is wrong to be judgemental in regards to the actions of ISIS? Time to grow up and learn the proper use of language.

            “So saying it is “unorthodox” is not a judgement?”

            In relation to Mormon doctrine, of course it is not judgemental to say it is an unorthodox theology, they agree it is unorthodox, and that is fully what they intend it to be. They truly believe the Christian faith disappeared after the time of the apostles and they have restored the true faith. As such they view everything up until their arrival as heresy.

            “You are delusional then.”

            Nope, not a single time have I ever been bested by a Catholic in a debate. Not once. Live with it.

            “Not if it’s rightous anger.”

            Your latest post shows it is just plain anger. Unless you see calling me a jerk as righteous anger. All that displays is a lack of confidence in your position so you feel the need to start calling me names.

            “Where does the bible say it may only be interpeted by Exegesis alone?”

            So, your argument is going to be it is okay to insert your own ideas into Biblical interpretation. Obviously eisegesis is wrong when it comes to document interpretation, whether they be Biblical documents or just plain historical documents. Really, that should be obvious on its face.

            “Not by our own natural works obviously. Good works God does in us justify us,…”

            Ah, now we are changing our tune. It’s not our good works, but those God does in us. Much different story.

            “Anyway none of this has anything with you acting like a hypocritical Jerk.”

            Point out as time I was hypocritical.

          • Jim the Scott

            >First, the word judgemental can mean different things….

            Stop moving the goal posts, stop dodging and stop for the love of Mike trying to rationalize your double standards and blatant hypocrisy. You are so pathetic at this point. Bottom line! You attacked me personally(ie calling me condescending and judgmental) for saying Protestantism is unbiblical & Hank is now more biblical as an Eastern Orthodox while you yourself called Catholicism unbiblical and called Hank an opportunist.

            No amount of backflips can erase this hypocracy.

            >Time to grow up and learn the proper use of language.

            Time you learn to reason like a Christian and not use the base sophistry of cheap politicians.

            >>”So saying it is “unorthodox” is not a judgement?”

            >In relation to Mormon doctrine, of course it is not judgemental to say it is an unorthodox theology, they agree it is unorthodox,

            No idiot. They believe their doctrines are correct (i.e. meaning of the term orthodoxy) even if they are not. They merely admit their theology is not the classic Trinitarian theology of Nicaea-Constantinople which Catholics, Eastern Orthodox and Protestants all accept. You are so obtuse and uneducated.

            >They truly believe the Christian faith disappeared after the time of the apostles and they have restored the true faith. As such they view everything up until their arrival as heresy.

            Like the Protestants do. Except the Prots at least don’t deny the Trinity or are polytheists but in essence they are like the Mormons. The true faith disappears till Luther and his gang re-invent it. Substitute Smith for Luther and there you have it. Nobody invented Catholicism except Jesus Christ.

            >Nope, not a single time have I ever been bested by a Catholic in a debate. Not once. Live with it.

            Like I said delusional.

            >Your latest post shows it is just plain anger.

            Good! Cause you will see more righteous anger you hypocritical Jerk.

            >>”Where does the bible say it may only be interpeted by Exegesis alone?”
            >So, your argument is going to be it is okay to insert your own ideas into Biblical interpretation.

            That doesn’t answer my question. You claim I must show Marian doctrine in the bible and at the same time claim you don’t have to show Sola Fide? You claim exegesis is the only way to interpret the bible well where does the Bible authorize this? He who lives by the Sola Scriptura dies by it. All Protestants I argue with do this. I have to prove Catholic doctrine to the N’th degree down to the Pope’s white outfit and Sunday bingo but Prots can believe a host of “extra-biblical” stuff with impunity.
            I guess your double standards must trace too your religion eh?

            >Obviously eisegesis is wrong when it comes to document interpretation, whether they be Biblical documents or just plain historical documents. Really, that should be obvious on its face.

            Then how do I know Sola Fide isn’t eisegesis? Nobody before Luther taught it. You have to read Luther’s ideas & assumptions into the text to get it & throw out James(which Luther tried to do). Luther even went so far as to add words to Romans that where not in the Greek. Eisegesis thy name is Sola Fide.

            >Ah, now we are changing our tune. It’s not our good works, but those God does in us. Much different story.

            No it’s merely the historic doctrine of Justification and it is outlined in session VI of the Council of Trent. Sola Fide is Luther’s fantasy not Paul’s doctrine.

            Session VI Canon One condemns salvation by our own works. Look it up Genius.

            >Point out as time I was hypocritical.

            Geez and I thought my grammar and spelling where bad? Sure you are not getting angry?

          • Jim the Scott

            additionally:

            If I might address these points if only for my own amusement.

            >First, the word judgemental can mean different things. It can mean one is condemning a certain position, either rightly or wrongly, and it can mean one is assessing a position and rightly describing that position. In the case of Mormon theology it is the latter.

            So it is OK for you do this and it is not Ok for me to do it? That is hypocrisy pure and simple. I would really not mind if your first response too me was “No Hank is now more un-biblical then he was before” that I would not have minded. You are entitled to argue what you think is true Biblical doctrine. But calling me “Condescending and Judgmental” for it while doing it yourself (plus calling Hank an opportunist) is just plain sick behavior.

            Do you really not get that?

            >Second, judging a position or a doctrine is not always wrong. It would be insanity to say one should never be judgemental. Would you say it is wrong to be judgemental in regards to the actions of ISIS? Time to grow up and learn the proper use of language.

            Then based on the above you where out of line calling me “condescending and judgmental”. You could have said “You are wrong. Hank is now unbiblical” and I would not have minded. I would not have agreed but I wouldn’t mind.

            But you choose to be a hypocritical jackarse & attack me personally.

            This is all on you sir not moi.

          • George Caco

            GLT and his cohorts practice the art of Ad Hominem often and frequently.

          • Jim the Scott

            I can forgive the Ad Hominem but the rank obnoxious & obvious double standards are galling. Is he really this obtuse? This guy is a complete weasel. Here is the thing. If tomorrow I go insane or somehow beyond all rational probability, someone convinces me Catholicism in it’s particulars is unbiblical and Protestantism is the way to go….I would still say GLT is a dishonest and obtuse hypocrite who is ruled by a double standards.

            Hey I am not afraid to bag on my fellow Catholics if they make a crapy intellectually vacuous argument. Someone should give this nutter a quarter and buy a clue.

          • GLT

            “Is he really this obtuse?”

            Jim, you and George, should for once in your lives try addressing the arguments rather than attacking my character. You both whine about ad hominem arguments, yet the both of you are serial users of the technique. The hypocrisy is palpable. Neither of you over the last few days has been able to mount a cogent and logical defence of your position, so you now feel the need to start attacking me personally via comments to each other. What a pathetic, childish attitude. You should both be ashamed of yourselves, just pathetic. I’m done with both of you. If you wish to grow up and act in a manner consistent with a mature and intelligent adult I will be willing to continue, but not before that.

            You may go ahead and tell yourselves you won the debate, I really don’t care. Such an attitude would only be consistent with the character you have both displayed throughout this encounter.

            Take care, you are both my Christian brothers, but even brothers will sometimes disagree. May God bless you both.

          • Jim the Scott

            I don’t know what I find more amusing about you? Your Baghdad Bob shtick is fun to watch. But your delusional beta male hypocrisy & cowardice is even more satisfying. It must cause you great pain that I can pretty much answer your theological questions but you can’t answer even one of mine. Plus I know my history and like the typical Protestant you know to be deep in history is to risk ceasing to be Protestant. Your double standards I see leak into your false deformation theology as well as your manners. Now go and run away before I humiliate you even further. Take your condescending and judgmental nonsense elsewhere.

            PS I win!

          • GLT

            “I don’t know what I find more amusing about you? Your Baghdad Bob shtick is fun to watch. But your delusional beta male hypocrisy & cowardice is even more satisfying. It must cause you great pain that I can pretty much answer your theological questions but you can’t answer even one of mine. Plus I know my history and like the typical Protestant you know to be deep in history is to risk ceasing to be Protestant. Your double standards I see leak into your false deformation theology as well as your manners. Now go and run away before I humiliate you even further. Take your condescending and judgmental nonsense elsewhere.

            PS I win!”

            Nice own goal, you show in the above statement that your character is just as I described. Well done. I thank you.

            By the way, you never answered a single question, you simply made groundless assertions that you were right. Not at all adequate.

          • Jim the Scott

            You are the gift that keeps on giving Baghdad Bob. Your delusional responses are delicious.

            I answered you on the Eucharist, Sola Fide, Sola Scriptura & too a limited extend Mary (BTW you didn’t answer my question on what Tome or Compendium of Catholic doctrine says MAry can bypass Jesus and go straight to God) etc…..that you don’t have any type of intelligent rebuttal is your problem not mine.

            I am still waiting on the question I asked you about Zwingli & his Symbol doctrine. It is as I said you are too much of a coward to answer a single question. Which is why I win and you lose.

          • Jim the Scott

            PS

            >you show in the above statement that your character is just as I described.

            So you where being “judgmental”?

            >you simply made groundless assertions that you were right. Not at all adequate.

            And here you are “condescending”?

            Gorgeous!:D

  • Chel Zakar

    Poor Hank! Did EO pay him to do this? I am sick. I can’t believe he did this. I guess I need to start some serious intercessory prayer to get him out of that.

  • Ruth

    It’s not surprising, falling away is one of the end time signs.

    • Ryan Matzke

      There the Protestants go, looking for end times signs again… Will he make the rapture? Dun dun dun. Find out next time in Lee Strobel’s (No offense Lee) next crappy book.

      The Protestant Reformation (not to mention the FALLING AWAY of Rome in 1054) sound a lot like, well, falling away. Falling away is what happens EVERY TIME a new Protestant church starts. Which is happening now. And now. And, oops, it happened again. And again just now. I could go on…

      • Ruth

        Ephesians 2:4-10
        4 But God, being rich in mercy, for his great love with which he loved us,
         5  Even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ by grace you have been saved.
        6  And raised us up with him, and made us to sit with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus,
        7 That in the ages to come he might show the exceeding riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus;
        8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
         9 Not of works, that no one would boast.
         10  For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we would walk in them.

        Titus 3:4-8 
        But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
        Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
        Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
        That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
        This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

        The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ, and seeks to trace its origin back to the original apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Like Catholics and Protestants, however, Orthodox believers affirm the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as God the Son, and many other biblical doctrines. However, in doctrine, they have much more in common with Roman Catholics than they do with Protestant Christians.

        Sadly, the doctrine of justification by faith is virtually absent from the history and theology of the Orthodox Church. Rather, Orthodoxy emphasizes theosis (literally, “divinization”), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. What many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that “divinization” is the progressive result of salvation, not a requirement for salvation itself.

        Orthodox Church holds to some false doctrine. They observe seven sacraments, and they teach these sacraments are the means by which believers receive grace. Four of the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, and confession) are required or salvation, according to the Oriental Orthodox Church. Teaching that religious works are a means to receive grace amounts to a works-based salvation, in violation of the Bible’s teaching that salvation is all of grace, apart from human works (Romans 11:6). God forgives the debt of sin freely, for the sake of Christ (Luke 7:41–42; Romans 3:24). The Oriental Orthodox requirement of keeping the sacraments is “another” gospel and not the true gospel (see Galatians 1:6–9).

        Other Orthodox distinctives that are in conflict with the Bible include:
        The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
        Discouragement of individuals interpreting the Bible apart from tradition
        The perpetual virginity of Mary
        Prayer for the dead
        Baptism of infants without reference to individual responsibility and faith
        The possibility of receiving salvation after death

        While the Eastern Orthodox Church has claimed some of the church’s great voices, and while there are many in the Orthodox tradition that have a genuine salvation relationship with Jesus Christ, the Orthodox church itself does not speak with a clear message that can be harmonized with the biblical gospel of Christ. The call of the Reformers for “Scripture alone, faith alone, grace alone, and Christ alone” is missing in the Eastern Orthodox Church, and that is too precious a treasure to do without.

        Colossians 2
        6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him, 
        7 Rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.
        8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ. 
        9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily, 
        10 And you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority. 
        11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 
        12 Having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.
        13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses, 
        14 By canceling the record of debt that stood against us with its legal demands. This he set aside, nailing it to the cross.
        15 He disarmed the rulers and authorities and put them to open shame, by triumphing over them in him.
        16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. 
        17 These are a shadow of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ. 
        18 Let no one disqualify you, insisting on asceticism and worship of angels, going on in detail about visions, puffed up without reason by his sensuous mind,
         19 And not holding fast to the Head, from whom the whole body, nourished and knit together through its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.
        20 If with Christ you died to the elemental spirits of the world, why, as if you were still alive in the world, do you submit to regulations
         21“Do not handle, Do not taste, Do not touch” 
        22 (referring to things that all perish as they are used)—according to human precepts and teachings?
        23 These have indeed an appearance of wisdom in promoting self-made religion and asceticism and severity to the body, but they are of no value in stopping the indulgence of the flesh.

        2 Thessalonians 2
         1  Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 

         2  That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

         3  Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

         4  Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

         5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

         6  And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 

         7  For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

         8  And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

         9  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

         10  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

         11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

         12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

         13  But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

         14  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

         15  Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

         16  Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

         17  Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

        Grace, mercy and peace be unto you from God the Father and from Jesus Christ, our Lord and Savior.

        • Ryan Matzke

          We can volley scripture til the end of time. Do you have any of your own thoughts?

          • Ruth

            Everyone has an opinion on just about everything, I prefer the truth.
            The Word of God is the truth and the Bible is the word of God. Therefore it contains all the truth about what has transpired, what is happening now, and what is yet to come.
            If you do not believe in the Bible, I would not waste my time talking to you. If you do believe what has written in the Bible, you have an open mind and not fully blinded by the god of this world , the devil. Read the Bible, accept the truth and you maybe saved.
            Jesus said in John 5:39 “Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think he have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me.
            Apostle Paul said in 1 Timothy 4:1-2” Now the Spirit speaketha expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from faith, giving need to seducing spirits,and doctrines if devil’s, speaking lies in hypocrisy,having their conscience seared with hot irons.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Spoken well. Thanks for showing us all what the EO thinks of Scripture and where they place their emphasis. No wonder you deny Sola Scriptura.

            Much appreciated!

  • Anonymous

    I called Hank before and argued in defense of Orthodoxy, and even mailed a free copy of “Orthodox Dogmatic Theology,” by Father Michael Pomazansky, to CRI, and I might have also mailed “Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future,” by Father Seraphim Rose, as well. I wonder if I influenced him by planting the seed. My Youtube channel is TruthBeTold7.

    • George Caco

      “Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future” is indeed an excellent book. I highly recommend it. I would say that the book that most influenced me was the “Deification in Christ” book by Panayiotis Nellas – an utterly amazing book.

  • Alexei Blinov

    Eastern Orthodox Believers – This message is to you:

    2 Timothy 3:16-17
    16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

    If then Scripture is profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction and instruction in righteousness, if then the very words of the Bible are the words of God, then it is the foundation and it is to be used to judge all other things: all other doctrines, practices and traditions are to be tested against the scriptures. If the test fails, then the tradition fails. Out of this foundation does the “false tradtition” of Sola Scriptura come about: it is the word of God, it is profitable for CORRECTION, DOCTRINE, and as a consequence it is the main and only source by which we judge Christian practice, doctrine, etc… in fact it is the only reliable source by which to get to the knowledge of God: not men who can corrupt ideas, truths, with lies, etc…

    More so, since the Bible is the word of God, it is of God. Non biblical traditions of men are those of men: and not of God. Therefore if we take man to be a higher authority in dictating divine tradition, above God in his word, then we are glorifying man and not God.

    Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

    The saducees and pharisees also had their own traditions: which they placed above the word of God. The Orthodox and Catholic churches do the same, and so they are not truly Christian, they are just like the synagogues and corrupted religious temples of Jesus’ time, and, accordingly, Jesus would rebuke the Catholic church and the Orthodox church for nullifying the word of God with their traditions.

    More so, icon worship is a sin: it is idolatry. How much do you think Jesus would rebuke this icon worshiping cult? How much more would he rebuke the catholic harlot church which has a man who sits upon a throne and claims equivalence with Jesus/ God – blasphemy? All serious sins. Think about that. if Jesus rebuked the religious leaders and their traditions of his time for being corrupt, how much more would he rebuke the religious leaders, temples, buildings, organisations of idolatry and blasphemy which claim affiliance with Christ? As it is written:

    Matthew 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

    Luke 13:27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.

    More so, Jesus rebukes even the very early churches in Revelation 2! The early churches had their own problems which Jesus rebuked!

    Revelation 2
    18And unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write; These things saith the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his feet are like fine brass;

    19I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the first. 20Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.

    If then the early churches had fault, were in err, conforming to sins, idols, pagan things that are to be cut off but yet preserved (even as it is in the Catholic/ orthodox churches), do you really think, that the “early historical church” is preserved and perfect? Give me a break. Jesus would come down and rebuke all of the sins, idolatry and blasphemy of the Catholic and orthodox churches – even as he rebuked the sins of the very first churches. So don’t give me this appeal to authority and perfection of the “early historical church”. No the early historical church was Jewish, not a roman pagan corruption of a received Jewish faith which is what is seen in the Catholic/ Orthodox churches. What we see in modern orthodox / catholic churches is the pagan corruption of Judaism, even as Christianity is the good and pure and perfect Judaism unto the acceptance of the Messiah. The pagans? Maintain their idols, idolatry, gods and goddesses which they replace with saints, Jesus and Mary a goddess glorified in order to preserve their pagan traditions. They make rituals and sacraments out of these paganizations of a Jewish Christianity, and then claim authority – when they fail in light of the scriptures.

    No you don’t have any authority, a new point: the church is not a particular religious organization in a building, it’s the whole body of Christians who believe in Christ and his word: the Bible in full. When we give a church authority, we are giving men authority – they can create whatever manner of traditions, rituals and practices they want outside of the Bible. Therefore church authority = man authority, man made religious authority, Scripture authority = God’s authority even as the Scriptures are the word of God, inspired by the very Divine. This is the basis and foundation of Sola Scriptura: it gives God the authority first, and deprives man of his authority to dictate and make up pagan traditions, rituals and practices that are contrary to Scripture, the authority to undermine God and his authoritative word. Period. Eastern Orthodoxy = Unorthodoxy. Let God be true and every man a liar.

    • James Staten

      I can’t really improve on your dissertation, but if I might simplify. The Gospel is 1 Corinthians 15:1-4…. Paul declares the Gospel, which every man will one day be Judged. During this dispensation of Grace, it is open to Jew and Gentile alike. Once you believe the Gospel, the Holy Spirit takes up residence. A New Creation: the Body of Christ composed of Jews and Gentiles waiting for Our Blessed Hope. There is nothing Traditional about that..it was New Revelation given from the Ascended Lord to the Apostle Paul. One of the Mysteries revealed to the Apostle Paul… Keep Looking Up

      • Ryan Matzke

        I love how Protestants will never, unless pushed—hard—reveal what Church they attend. Orthodox are Orthodox, Roman Catholic are Roman Catholic. We show you ours, now show us yours. What church do you attend Mr. Staten and Mr. Blinov? It is easy for you to call us out, for you know who we are, as we are unashamed. What is your denomination? We, as Orthodox, have none, as we are pre-denominational. And don’t give me any of that “I just need the bible” garbage.

        • George Caco

          To Alexei Blinov (because Alexei’s post has no “Reply” option) Ryan, I hope you don’t mind me using your “Reply” option.

          First of all, I suggest you *Alexei) cut your words down by at least 75%. Verbosity is a sign of not being able to make your point directly and succinctly.

          Your last name (Blinov) gives me the impression that you’re Russian so you should already know that Orthodox do not worship icons. They venerate icons. There is a world of difference between worshipping and venerating and as a Russian (if you are one) you should know the difference. There is no excuse for that.

          Protestant Human Traditions are as follows: 1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15, 2) Protestant Platonic Iconoclasm which despises the physical world during worship services, 3) the Ahistoric attitude of Protestantism concerning the Early Church, 4) Ignorance of the Greek Koine NT, 5) the Joyful willingness that Protestants radiate in fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands and thousands of splinters, …. I can go on and on ad infinitum.

          • Amos Moses

            “already know that Orthodox do not worship icons. They venerate icons.”
            “Protestant Human Traditions are as follows:
            1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15, ”

            the contradictions are staggering …….. please tell us where Christ said to “venerate icons” …….. that is idolatry ….. and flies in the face of the 2 Commandment ………….. it is a graven image ………. WOW ….. and you use that as a defense ….. /SMH and a double face palm ………….

          • Amos Moses

            Veneration can be defined as “respect or awe directed toward someone due to his/her value or greatness.”

            The simplest definition of worship is to “ascribe worth.” Worship can be more completely defined as “showing respect, love, reverence, or adoration.” Based on the dictionary, no clear difference between veneration and worship exists. In fact, veneration and worship are often used as synonyms for each other.

            But dictionary definitions are not the point. It does not matter what it is called. The Bible nowhere instructs followers of Jesus Christ to offer worship, veneration, adoration, or anything similar to anyone but God. Nowhere does the New Testament describe any followers of Jesus Christ worshipping, venerating, or adoring anyone other than God.

          • George Caco

            The 2nd Commandment speaks only of Worship. It does not speak of Veneration. Do research, enlighten yourself, and then we can discuss this further.

          • Amos Moses

            idolatry is ANYTHING that comes between us and God ….. it can be shopping, TV, drugs, carnal sex, ….. oh yes …. and VENERATION of the dead …

          • George Caco

            You are certainly fast in your self-exaltation! Within passage 5:9 to “serve” is to worship. Like you serving your ego, your pride is your idol.

          • Amos Moses

            let me break it down for you ….. it says ….. 5:8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth

            the making IS the sin …. just like in Mat 5:21-22 ….. to call a person a fool … is murder ….. in Mat 5:28 …. to LOOK at a woman (or man) with lust …. IS adultery …. the thought is the sin …. and to make the graven image … just to make it ….. you have already broken the law …. to think to make it is breaking Gods law …. worship is not a part of it … that comes later …. and is actually part of the 1st commandment …..

            Christ RAISED the bar for sin in Matthew 5 ….. so that no man may boast ……

            5:21 Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and whosoever shall kill shall be in danger of the judgment:
            5:22 But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment: and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council: but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire.

            5:28 But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
            5:29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “You are certainly fast (but wrong) in your self-exaltation! Within passage 5:9 to “serve” is to worship. Like you serving your ego in your case, your pride is your idol.”

            You can always tell when one is losing a discussion and has no argument because they offer nothing but ad hominem and personal attacks.

            Thanks.

          • Amos Moses

            Graven images …. nothing about “worship” or “veneration” or if there is any difference …..

            20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth:
            20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;
            20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

            5:8 Thou shalt not make thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the waters beneath the earth:
            5:9 Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me,
            5:10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

            So FAIL …………

          • George Caco

            To “serve” is to worship, not to venerate. I don’t serve Icons and I don’t serve Saints. I serve God only.

            Next time please condense your response to at most 10 lines or else I will not read it.

          • Amos Moses

            icons are graven images ….. scripture says it is a sin to even create them ………..

          • George Caco

            If icons are graven images then so are paintings and pictures. Then why do you have a picture in your ID? By your logic, you are transgressing the 2nd commandment.

          • Amos Moses

            “Then why do you have a picture in your ID?”

            1. i have no “ID” …….. 2. that is not an image of a false God or an icon of God nor is that “ID” “venerated” by anyone that i know …. but most certainly not me ….. although the “selfie” is highly questionable ……….. 3. the “logic” you refer to IS GODS LAW and is called SIN ….. BY GOD …….. 4. Christ has said the thought of sin IS the sin so it does not even need to be actually created ………….. so FAIL ………

          • George Caco

            Icons are not an image of a false God either. Icons and pictures are of the same category, they are not worshiped. Only God is worshiped in Orthodoxy. This is the last time I will tell you that icons are not worshiped in Orthodoxy.

          • Amos Moses

            “Only God is worshiped in Orthodoxy.”

            body parts of dead “saints” are graven images …… the bible draws no distinction between “serving” and “worship” …….. icons of “saints” are graven images ……. and to even make them is a sin …. the thought of them being made is a sin ….. lighting a candle to them is a sin ….. saying a prayer to them is a sin ………

          • George Caco

            We light a candle for the Holy Spirit. Don’t you believe in the Holy Spirit?

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            So did God violate His own Commandment by commanding construction of the Ark of the Covenant?

          • Amos Moses

            God cannot be an idol unto Himself ….. silly straw man ……. burn baby burn …….

          • JDV

            This brings to mind 2 Kings 18:3-4: “And [King Hezekiah] did what was right in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his father David had done. He removed the high places and broke the sacred pillars, cut down the wooden image and broke in pieces the bronze serpent that Moses had made; for until those days the children of Israel burned incense to it, and called it Nehushtan.”

            Now here is something that God Himself commanded be created (Numbers 21:8) that all who looked upon it may live and be spared the results of a judgment sent upon Israel. In John 3:14-15, Jesus Himself referred to the significance of this event and what it foretold: And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life”.

            Yet, this object — created by man upon the order of God for a holy, just, and good purpose — was included in the destruction

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Well said. And, in fact, anytime “veneration” was shown in the Bible, it was denounced.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “1) Sola Scriptura which flies in the face of 2 Th 2:15″

            That’s a lie. God does NOT contradict Himself. 2Thes 2:15 says NOTHING about what those traditions are OR being inspired (God-breathed” OR being profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness so that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.” ONLY Scripture is said of that and therefore it is ONLY Scripture that can be used as the final authority.

            “Protestant Platonic Iconoclasm which despises the physical world during worship services”

            Another lie. As evidenced by the numerous churches that have a cross on the wall during the worship services.

            “3) the Ahistoric attitude of Protestantism concerning the Early Church”

            Another lie. As evidenced by by a simple Google search

            “4) Ignorance of the Greek Koine NT”

            Not only another lie but a completely ignorant statement on it’s face as evidenced by the numerous translations available today.

            “5) the Joyful willingness that Protestants radiate in fracturing the Body of Christ into thousands and thousands of splinters”

            Another lie and an outright false accusation of the Brethren. Lies are from the Pit of Hell and Satan. So I guess we know who you were following when you made that statement.

            Thank you for completely discrediting yourself and the EO. What a fine example you provided to show who the EO follow. Not at all unlike the RCC during the Reformation.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          “I love how Protestants will never, unless pushed—hard—reveal what Church they attend. Orthodox are Orthodox, Roman Catholic are Roman Catholic.”

          That’s a lie. And I can prove it. NOBODY is pushing me whatsoever, Let alone “hard”. I attend Christ’s Community Church. It’s non-denominational.

          Lies are from the Pit of Hell and Satan. So I guess we know who you were following when you made that statement.

  • Ryan Matzke

    Sola Scriptura is an oxymoron, as it is not found in scripture. The logical progression from Protestantism is Atheism. Praise God that this wise man found the Ancient Faith! Most lose theirs.

    Having been raised Free Methodist (whatever that means), leaving that church as soon as I could (because Christ wasn’t there) and now seeking toward Orthodoxy, I can tell you with complete confidence that anyone bashing Orthodoxy has never been to a Liturgy. I DARE you to attend Pascha this Saturday Night! I triple dog dare you! Service starts at 10 p.m., usually.

    CHRIST IS RISEN! (too early?)

    • GLT

      “The logical progression from Protestantism is Atheism.”

      What utter nonsense. It is comments such as this which earn Orthodoxy much of its scorn. The concept that one is only saved if they are in the Orthodox tradition is not only palpable nonsense but is also very divisive and judgemental. God demands we worship him in truth and in spirit, not in tradition liturgy or in the veneration of saints and icons
      and religious artifacts.

      As for attending a liturgical service, been there and done that. Found it to be totally empty of any sincere worship. Having said that, I don’t doubt that some may find this type of worship fulfilling and if they do, that is wonderful. However, orthodoxy does not have the right to claim it is the only form of true worship and all who do not participate are lost in their sins. Such an attitude betrays ignorance of the scriptures.

      Also, perhaps you should look up the meaning of oxymoron.

      • Ryan Matzke

        Fine, I’ll admit it’s not technically an oxymoron as long as you admit it’s not scriptural, and therefore not Christian. Deal? Or how about I make it one: “Only scripture” is non-scripturally scriptural.

        And if it is nonsense, why is the West becoming so godless and leaving the church en mass? Looks like Western Christianity has an Atheism problem to me…

        As for attending a Liturgy, which was it? For they are most certainly not created equal.

        Our icons help us pray without ceasing and acquire more of the Holy Spirit. And we have proof that our approach works in the lives of our Saints across both time (2000 years) and space (most of the globe). What do you have besides scripture? because we have that too.

      • Ryan Matzke

        Also, are you calling out the Protestant commenters calling the Orthodox “the Whore of Babylon” and “minions of satan”?

        Because you say my comment makes Orthodoxy “worthy of scorn”? What then do the comments I mentioned above say about Western Christianity?

        • GLT

          “Also, are you calling out the Protestant commenters calling the Orthodox “the Whore of Babylon” and “minions of satan”?”

          I don’t think that way about orthodox traditions and don’t support the use of such language in describing orthodox traditions. If someone was to direct a statement like to me I would respond that such language is unfounded. I hope that makes my position clear.

          “Because you say my comment makes Orthodoxy “worthy of scorn”?”

          i did not say that and to say I did is dishonest on your part. I was responding to your comment that protestantism was a logical step in the progress to atheism. Such comments do result in scorn for orthodox churches, but that is not saying orthodox churches are ‘worthy of scorn’ as you claim I said. The two statements a vastly different.

          • Ryan Matzke

            Somehow disqus didn’t post the first part of my reply. That’s what the “also” was adding to.

            I mention that western, formerly Protestant nations are literally turning into hotbeds of non-government dictated atheism. How is Protestantism not leading to Atheism? If it is not, why am I, as a youngish (Orthodox) Christian, a veritable pariah in the midst of godlessness? Can you not see that the fractalization of the faith is tantamount to its eventual obliteration?

            Also in there: I will admit Sola Scriptura isn’t technically an oxymoron if you admit it Isn’t scriptural. “Only Scripture” is unscriptural. There. Oxymoron. And so, by maybe the only thing agreed upon by most Protestants, “Sola Scriptura” fails its own test. Thus, Protestantism as an ideology is also a failure. I do not doubt your faith nor do I doubt your relationship to Christ. Nor do I make any remote claim on the state of your salvation. Come home my brother.

            Hank is just a sinner like the rest of us.

          • GLT

            “formerly Protestant nations are literally turning into hotbeds of non-government dictated atheism. How is Protestantism not leading to Atheism? If it is not, why am I, as a youngish (Orthodox) Christian,…”

            I’m not sure about your logic. Because you decided to join the Eastern Orthodox that is proof that being a protestant puts one on a continuum which inevitably leads to atheism. Pretty bizarre reasoning.

            As for the decline in belief in God, that is exactly what Scriptures tells us will be the condition of the world as Christ’s return draws nearer. Matthew 24:37

            “Only Scripture” is unscriptural. There. Oxymoron.”

            No, that’s not an oxymoron either. Because you change Latin to English does not suddenly make it an oxymoron. An oxymoron would be something to the effect of; we are all completely alone together, or; we must fear the living dead. An oxymoron is a statement containing contradictory terminology. Sola Scriptura is not a contradiction of terms, neither is Only Scripture.

            “Sola Scriptura” fails its own test.”

            Based on what?

            “Come home my brother.”

            I am at home. My relationship with Christ is sound and I have no doubt whatsoever of my salvation. I don’t need the trappings or rituals of orthodoxy, all I need is Christ.

          • Ryan Matzke

            Logic is in the eye of the logician, my brother!

            My point is that, as a young American male, my story is indicative of my generation.

            I have a comment from another young man who left Protestantism for Atheism, found an Orthodox YouTube channel, and realized he was opposed to Protestant doctrine. It is longish. He is Now Orthodox! I will try to copy and paste. Phone isn’t working well for this. Need to bust out laptop. I’ll have time later.

            Scripturally unscriptural is utterly an oxymoron! How is it not a conflict in terms? Now you are just distracting from the fact that it is really, truly nowhere in the Bible by arguing semantics. Don’t dodge the truth. It. Is. Not. In. The. Bible. Can you admit this to yourself?

            Yes, Scripture points to people believing in God less and less as time goes on. That’s exactly what I’m saying about Protestantism leading to Atheism! The Roman Schism, The Reformation and the subsequent fractalization of The Church into tens of thousands of “churches” are all leading to less and less credibility for Christianity (and ☦Christ☦) as a whole. Thus, less people believe. Thus more atheists, agnostics, apatheists, luciferians, neopagans, etc. Lawlessness and godlessness abound due to pride… God bless Hank’s humility!

            Have you read much on the Great Schism of 1054?

            All you need is Christ? Not Scripture? I thought you only needed Scripture? You don’t need the church? You don’t need other Christians within that church Worshipping corporately? Are you a hermit, then?

            I used to be a “lone wolf” Christian. It is not enough for the long haul, my beloved.

          • GLT

            “Logic is in the eye of the logician, my brother!”

            So, to you logic is just a matter of opinion? That explains a lot. How about truth, is it in the eye of the beholder as well?

            “I have a comment from another young man who left Protestantism for Atheism, found an Orthodox YouTube channel, and realised he was opposed to Protestant doctrine. It is longish. He is Now Orthodox!”

            And I have stories about young people who left orthodoxy because of its rigid ritualism and became atheists only to return to Christ in a protestant denomination. Now what?

            “Don’t dodge the truth. It. Is. Not. In. The. Bible.”

            This is nothing more than an argument from silence, a logical fallacy, But as we saw earlier, to you, logic is just based on one’s opinion. If, in your opinion you don’t like it, it’s illogical.

            “That’s exactly what I’m saying about Protestantism leading to Atheism!”

            You seriously believe atheists arise only via protestant denominations? How truly naive.

            “You don’t need the church? You don’t need other Christians within that church Worshipping corporately?”

            Nope. As helpful as they may be, my salvation comes from Christ alone, not the church and not corporate worship. The knowledge which leads to salvation and the guide to living comes from scripture alone, not ‘the saints’ and not tradition.

          • Ryan Matzke

            I worry, brother. There is no tenderness in your words. No terms of endearment toward a Christian brother. Or do you count me a pagan as the Mohammedan do also? Where is the love between us?

            Use your spiritual eyes! And your Nous! I am saying about logic, that, if logic is so inscrutable, why are there 30k Protestant denominations in U.S? They are all “bible loving” churches. Same Scripture. All logical in their own eyes.

            And absolutely truth is absolute! That is why I’m joining The Church with the best claim to be the original.

            You do know that, based on Ezekiel and Revelation, heaven will be liturgical, right? I prefer to practice now, that I may experience heaven here in earth. And I do believe I have tasted it already. In the Orthodox Church.

            Without the body and bride of Christ, Christ is not. Be careful, my beloved.

            Why didn’t Christ just write a gospel? Was he illiterate do you think? I certainly don’t. Why does John say at the end of his gospel:

            “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.† (John 21:25, OSB)

            I think those other things have value. Do you? Did you know that out of Jesus’ 3 year ministry (1000ish days), only a couple dozen of those days are mentioned in the New Testament? Do you think he was twiddling his thumbs the rest of the time? I do not. The Mother Church has some of these accounts. It is part of our Apostolic Tradition. And we will keep the trophies of our heroes and martyrs–the saints! We will not forget their greatness! As have some others. The Orthodox do not change!

            I also need only Christ, but in His great Mercy, He has given us so much more– The Kingdom of Heaven established here on the Earth!

          • GLT

            “Or do you count me a pagan as the Mohammedan do also?”

            No, not for a minute do I consider you a pagan. I have always been of the opinion that those in the orthodox and catholic traditions are my Christian brothers and sisters. We may disagree on some issues, but that is to be expected due to our human frailties.

            The down side of forums such as this is the chance the reader of a post may insert his own inflection unto a post which the writer of that post never intended.

            “why are there 30k Protestant denominations,…”

            Same as above, human frailties. People spend a lot of time and energy worrying about unimportant things such as mode of baptism, church governance, whether to call church leaders elders or deacons, etc.

            “That is why I’m joining The Church with the best claim to be the original.”

            I’m sorry, the orthodox church is not the original church or even the closest to it. We cannot be that church because we are not in that time. The first century Christians did not worship as the orthodox churches or the catholic churches do today. They met in secret, in houses or caves, keeping out of site of the authorities. They did not have elaborate cathedrals or professional clergy. They did not follow rigid liturgy or have formalised services. They met when they could and where they could, often choosing pagan holidays so as to not draw attention to themselves as those who would persecute them would be preoccupied.

            “Without the body and bride of Christ, Christ is not.”

            Christ is God incarnate, he needs nothing from us. I suggest you listen to a video produced by Bishop Robert Barron entitled The God Who Doesn’t Need Us. He states it much better than I can.

            “And there are also many other things that Jesus did, which if they were written one by one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that would be written. Amen.”

            The canon of scripture was settled long before the protestant reformation, so you must ask yourself why the early church fathers chose not to include much of the material to which that verse refers?

            “I think those other things have value.”

            Sure they have value, they are just not part of scripture and as such should not be regarded as scripture or inerrant. We have what God wished us to have to see the way to salvation through Christ.

            “The Kingdom of Heaven established here on the Earth!”

            The Kingdom of Heaven is not and will never be, on Earth. This world is corrupted by and dying in, sin. It will be destroyed and a new heaven and a new Earth will be the result.

  • Ryan Matzke

    The Protestants are bummed about this whole thing… Out come the Trolls! Or should I say dwarves—”The dwarves are for the dwarves!” Does anyone else remember the dwarves getting to Aslan’s country and not being able to see it? Sounds like a lot of people on this thread. The problem is, once you have heard about Orthdoxy from someone like Hank, and pass on it, you are going to have to explain that to Christ at his Fearful Judgement seat… You can’t un-see the True Faith!

  • Ryan Matzke

    For the sake of an equal playing field, I would ask that all Protestants on this board include what church they attend (if any) in the opening of their comments, and to what degree they are affiliated (i.e. baptized, members, elders, etc.). You know what we are, you can google our doctrines. If you would like to be taken seriously, be fair, be open, and be honest, be a Christian. Tell us where you attend, and if you don’t attend a church, why not?

    • Chris

      Fair enough. I’m a Zoroastrian.

      If I may be so impertinent I have a question for you and your fellow orthodox. What position did the orthodox church take during the holocaust? I’ve read little on this and am genuinely interested.

  • BuckeyePhysicist

    This isn’t just news: This is miraculous. Hank is welcome, as a Greek Orthodox Christian, to receive Holy Communion in the Catholic Church should he decide to honor us with a visit to Mass. As a Catholic Christian, I’ve been invited to share the Divine Liturgy with the Greek Orthodox and it’s mind-blowing, reverent, and authentic to the teaching of the apostles. This story made my Holy Week complete.

  • Amos Moses

    all very interesting …. does not alter the scriptural fact …… God is in control of His word ….. it is all theopneustros ……. God breathed ……..

    theopneustos
    theh-op’-nyoo-stos
    From G2316 and a presumed derivative of G4154; divinely breathed in: – given by inspiration of God.

    i never made any protestant claims …. although protestant thought has been there since the very beginning ………….. protestant being defined as those who hold the word of God as the final and only authority ……. and each church can either accept the 66 book canon …. and or other combinations …. many early churches would only use the 4 gospels …. and again ….. we either accept or reject Gods word …….

  • Delectable

    Can any Christian seriously believe that this charade is what Jesus meant when he spoke of “my church”? Men wearing dresses, burning incense, bowing in front of pictures of saints. What does any of this have to do with love of God and love of neighbor? This is performance art, not Christianity. Btw, the same goes for the RC too, and also the evangelical churches with their smoke machines. If you need “special effects” to make you a better Christian, you’ve got some serious spiritual issues. The Orthodox churches are about putting on a show during worship, and they’ve got nothing else – no missions, no evangelism, just a bunch of guys in long robes, just like the priests in the Jerusalem temple. It’s all show, zero substance. Can’t believe HH got sucked in by this costume party, but maybe his mind is going.

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Come to Mass and see. Listen, too, because in the Liturgy of the Word you’ll hear the Bible read in its proper setting.

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        Good point but I hope you’re not implying that others, specifically Protestants, don’t read the Bible in its proper setting. What exactly is a “proper setting” to you?

        • BuckeyePhysicist

          On a personal level, any time a person wants to read their Bible for study, it’s a proper setting. Now, as for how we Catholics read from the Bible in the Mass, we all read the same passages worldwide. It’s really wonderful because no matter where we go to Mass in the world, the same four Bible readings will be heard. During the Liturgy of the Word, we hear beforehand what the priest will cover in his homily. That’s our proper setting.

          As for Protestants handling the Bible in their services, it’s not for me to say how they should do it. I have plenty of disagreement with Protestantism but that doesn’t give me the right to spout off about how Protestants should worship. I sure wish we Catholics received the same respect.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            I totally agree. I have great disagreement with Catholicism but it is limited to their doctrines, and of course the pronouncement that I am anathema, but I don’t squabble over insignificant practices of liberty in now one worships.

            Now that is not to say I wouldn’t sharply criticize a practice that is of this world or fleshly under the guise of “worship” but rather to simply say there are far more significant matters to address. Such as Sola Scriptura and Sola Fide.

            But whether one reads from a prayer book and engages in responsive reading or such is something that I see as can be respected.

    • Aleksandr Pletnyov

      You’ve obviously never studied Orthodox christian traching, or the teaching of Christ, or the writings of the church fathers.

      You talk about the love of God and your neighbours but then bash the second largest group of (united) Christians in the world.

      What love is it to bash a people without a knowledge of their history, their church, their writings, or their theology?

      You chose instead to write an ignorant comment because we orthodox continue the religious traditions we were taught.

      You are the definition of a hypocrite.

      • Laurence Charles Ringo

        Maybe if your church concerned itself more with love of God and neighbor than it does with tradition(Whatever that even is.), Eastern Orthodoxy would get a fairer hearing.After all, isn’t that what Our Savior emphasized above incense and fancy dress? Ask your this: why is the Eastern Orthodox so little known among the population at large? Why does it take a situation like Hannegraaff’s to shed some light on the beliefs of this religious institution, given the extraordinary claims about yourselves,claims that rival Roman Catholicism’s hubristic nonsense. So…mull and reflect,my friend. PEACE IN CHRIST😊.

        • Aleksandr Pletnyov

          The church is known little because, inlikr the Catholics in the west the Orthodox were under the yolk of the yolk of the Ottoman Empire, then Communism, then al-qaeda and ISIS. A brief look at history will show this.

          We do, like most Christians, believe in christs two commandments but protestants feel they have a right to judge a church they’ve never attended from high up on their pedestal.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            “protestants feel they have a right to judge a church they’ve never attended from high up on their pedestal.”

            How is it that you don’t realize you just did exactly what Delectable did and slammed him for it?

            Might wanna go looking for a chainsaw.

          • Kevin Bullard

            That’s a good one. I am Orthodox and we do love excuses. Ottomans and Soviets have nothing to do with our lack of penetration of the US market.

          • George Caco

            Kevin, Orthodox like you and me are starting to vocally rise up. It only takes one righteous man (like Seraphim of Sarov) and thousands (if not millions) will be saved.

          • Laurence Charles Ringo

            That’s interesting,Mr.Caco…and here I am thinking that Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ was/is our Savior. I guess I should check my Scriptures again.By the way,who is Seraphim of Sarvo? I await your reply…😑.

          • George Caco

            The way that Protestants have fallen for Martin Luther’s heretical Sola Fide human vain tradition you’d think that he was the Lord and Savior.

          • Laurence Charles Ringo

            “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God,NOTas a result of works,so that no one should boast”…(Ephesians chapter 2,vss.8,9…I assume that the great Apostle Paul should take his place alongside the “heretical” Martin Luther,eh Mr Caco? I for one am GLAD to join them. So…since you avoided answering my last question(Who is Seraphim of Sarvo?),let’s try this one: Exactly how much work would it require to secure your salvation? Who would be the one to evaluate these works, you or Almighty God? What if you find out that at your Day of Judgement you would have NOT done enough works to insure your salvation? Where will that leave you? I await your reply(if any.)—PEACE IN CHRIST, ALWAYS!!! 😁😁😁.

          • George Caco

            1) 2 Th 2:15 totally destroys the vain human tradition of Sola Scriptura.

            2) The only Sola Fide (Faith Alone/Only) that can be found anywhere in the NT is in James 2:24 which says, “You see then how a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.”

            Looks like it is St Seraphim of Sarov who is the one alongside the great Apostle Saint Paul. Martin Luther is the Lord & Head of his own Schismatic Church.

          • RWH

            The Bolshevik Revolution had everything to do with the lack of penetration. The Russian Orthodox Church maintained a diocese in the United States, and thousands of Uniate Catholics were re-entering the Orthodox Church under St. Alexander Toth. However, the Russian Revolution shook the diocese down to its foundations as virtually the entire hierarchy was either imprisoned or slaughtered. The Patriarch was poisoned to death in 1925, and the Communists didn’t allow for the election of another. As a result, in the US, other Orthodox Churches started competing jurisdictions, and all turned inward. Until the early 70s, among the Russians, there was the Metropolia, the Russian Church Abroad, and the Patriarchal Church. My parents knew that there were Communist agents posing as Christians in most of the US churches, and these folks resorted to blackmail and possible kidnapping. Since the fall of Communism, the Church Abroad reunited with the Russian Orthodox Church. The Russians and the Antiochians are very missionary minded. The Greeks are to a lesser extent because many parishes still want to perpetrate Greek language and customs to the exclusion of anything else. Even in my city, people who visit the Greek church are often told that they would be happier in the Russian Orthodox Church in town, which is multi-national and services are in English (vs. Greek). Again, this differs in locality. If a Greek church is the only Orthodox church in a locality, the church will be multi-national and will have a number of American converts.

    • Charybdis69

      Since God Himself told Moses how to conduct the priestly offices, including how they were to dress, I guess that means you think God was just putting on a show involving “men in long robes” in Israel as well. What an misguided doofus you must think God was.

    • Laurence Charles Ringo

      Ouch,Delectable!! Thanks for bringing the hammer my friend; your comment stands by itself, God bless you.😊!!

  • Ruth

    Ryan Matzki

    The Word of God is the truth and the Bible is the word of God. Therefore it contains all the truth about what has transpired, what is happening now, and what is yet to come. Thus, I believe what were written in the Bible.
    It would be a waste of time talking to you if you don’t believe what has written in the Bible, I hope you would have an open mind and not fully blinded by the god of this world , the devil.

    Here’s what was written and has been prophesied in the Bible:

    1 Thessalonians 5
    1  But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you.

     2  For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.

     3  For when they shall say, Peace and safety; then sudden destruction cometh upon them, as travail upon a woman with child; and they shall not escape.

     4  But ye, brethren, are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.

     5  Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness.

     6  Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.

     7  For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.

     8  But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.

     9  For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ,

     10  Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him.

     11  Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.

    2 Thessalonians 2
     1  Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, 

     2  That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

     3  Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;

     4  Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

     5  Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?

     6  And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 

     7  For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

     8  And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:

     9  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

     10  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

     11  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

     12  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

     13  But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

     14  Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

     15  Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.

     16  Now our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and God, even our Father, which hath loved us, and hath given us everlasting consolation and good hope through grace,

     17  Comfort your hearts, and stablish you in every good word and work.

    1 Thessalonians 4
    13  But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope.

     14  For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.

     15  For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

     16  For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

     17  Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

     18  Wherefore comfort one another with these words. 

    1 Timothy 4:1-2
    Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from faith, giving heed to seducing spirits,and doctrines of devils, speaking lies in hypocrisy,having their conscience seared with hot irons.

    2 Timothy 2
     15  Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

     16  But shun profane and vain babblings: for they will increase unto more ungodliness.

     17  And their word will eat as doth a canker: of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus; 

     18  Who concerning the truth have erred, saying that the resurrection is past already; and overthrow the faith of some.

     19  Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 

     20  But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to dishonour.

     21  If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master’s use, and prepared unto every good work.

     22  Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

     23  But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.

     24  And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, 

     25  In meekness instructing those that oppose themselves; if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth;

     26  And that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will. 

    Read the Bible, accept the truth and you maybe saved.

    Jesus said in John 5:39 “Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think he have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me.

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      How do you know the books in your Bible are the ones which are supposed to be there?

      • Amos Moses

        hmmmmm …… ah …. BECAUSE THEY ARE THERE ………….

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          LOL!! Good one!!

        • S.L. Hansen

          So whomever put them there was correct?

          • Amos Moses

            Yep ………. CHRIST put them there …… so ….. YEAH ……….

          • Amos Moses

            24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.
            24:35 Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.

            13:30 Verily I say unto you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.
            13:31 Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not pass away.

            12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
            12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

            30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.
            30:6 Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar.

            22:18 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
            22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.
            22:20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus.
            22:21 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

      • Ruth

        Well the Books from the Bible which mostly Bible believing Christians are using because it has translated from the original Hebrew and Greek Language. Jesus said “Heaven and Earth shall pass away but my word shall not pass away.” Isaiah 40:7-8 The grass withers, the flower fades: because the spirit of the LORD blows upon it: surely the people is grass.
        The grass withers the flower fades but the word of our God shall stand for ever. Isaiah 55:8-11 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
        For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
        For as the rain cometh down, and the snow from heaven, and returns not thither, but waters the earth, and makes it bring forth and bud, that it may give seed to the sower, and bread to the eater:
        So shall my word be that goes forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
        The Lord Jesus Christ is the living Word of God, the Bible is the written word of God.
        God said it and I believe it, and that settles it.

        • BuckeyePhysicist

          That’s beautifully written — but that’s not my question.

          • Ruth

            Well that’s my answer to your questions, all the Books there that were written by the Patriarch, Prophets, apostles and disciples as instructed by God and inspired by the Holy Spirit that’s why they should be there.

            2 Peter 1:19-21 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
            Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
            For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

            2 Timothy 3:16-17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
            That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

            Revelation 22:18-19 For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
            And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            I’m not arguing these points; I agree with them all!

      • Royce E. Van Blaricome

        This isn’t the forum to be able to answer that question. I suggest you so some extensive research and study into the topic. I would think you’d find it quite edifying. Suffice it to say there were strict and stringent requirements and tests that had to be met.

        Of course, I think, much like Christianity of God Himself, there is an element of faith that is also required. To me it’s pretty simple. Why would a Holy, Righteous, and Just God hold one accountable to live by a set of standards and commands for which they will be judged against without providing those and instructions on how to live by them.

        • BuckeyePhysicist

          Actually I know the answer and I was being rhetorical. Council of Hippo. Council of Carthage. Pope Damasus.

  • Aleksandr Pletnyov

    “Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.”

    It’s a shame to see so many people criticize a church they know nothing about. You leave hateful comments and sit high on your pedestals pretending that you are wiser because of the religious tradition you came from. It’s a shame and morally unjustifiable.

    I congratulate him and wish him many years.

  • Blue Collar Catholic

    As a convert from Evangelicalism to Catholicism myself. I new Hank was headed towards Orthodoxy either in the Catholic or Orthodox church. You cannot study the scriptures as seriously as Hank and not come to the conclusion that Jesus meant what he said when he said, ”This is my body”. .

    • Ken

      You nailed it man. If Jesus said it, he meant it.

      What else did Jesus say?

      “I am the gate for the sheep.”
      “I am the vine, you are the branches.”
      “You are the salt of the earth.”

      Amazing, in 2017, that an adult can’t understand the difference between literal and figurative language.

      Go right on drinking that Communion wine, dude. If you want to pretend it’s the blood of Jesus, go for it.

      • George Caco

        Jesus is presenting physical icons that are saturated with spiritual realities. This is true Christian Eschatology. Whoever has faith will see the reality, whoever doesn’t have faith will see just the physical item.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          There’s that humility again. NOT!!

          • George Caco

            There’s that Ad Hominem again.

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Not really because there was no argument put forth. Rather just a prideful and erroneous statement.

          • George Caco

            How is Christian Eschatology not an argument?

          • Royce E. Van Blaricome

            Try reading what I said again. Take an English Class if needed.

      • BuckeyePhysicist

        If Jesus was speaking figuratively about the Eucharist, how do you explain John 6:66?

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          Really? You really need someone to explain that to you? Perhaps you can find your answer here:

          Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.” The Jews then said, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?” (John 2:19-20)

        • GLT

          If Jesus was speaking of literally drinking his blood, how do you explain Leviticus 17:10-14?

          • S.L. Hansen

            I explain it via Acts 10:9-15 and also transubstantiation. Through this miracle, Jesus makes it possible for us to truly drink His blood and eat His flesh (per John 6:53,54) while the accidental appearance of bread and wine remain.

          • GLT

            “I explain it via Acts 10:9-15,…”

            Are you serious? You are going to use this passage to support the idea of transubstantiation? This passage has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. If you think it does I would very much like to see your exegesis.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Acts 10:9-15 – Jewish dietary restrictions were lifted. So, just like you can eat pork now without qualms, and shellfish, you can also enjoy a blood pudding like they serve in England (not my favorite, but to each his own).

            So, Lev 17 doesn’t apply to what Christians eat.

          • GLT

            “So, Lev 17 doesn’t apply to what Christians eat.”

            So, you believe you are consuming the literal blood and body of Christ at communion?

            Because the English and others consume blood pudding does not mean it is proper. God’s commandment on the consumption of blood still stands. The vision of Peter did not refer to the consumption of blood, only animals considered unclean under Jewish law.

      • Blue Collar Catholic

        There were 20 words in Jesus language he could’ve used to mean figurative. But he chose to use the word that meant literally. The Apostle John records Jesus explaining this to his disciples in John chapter 6. As a result of this teaching many of Jesus disciples left him John 6:66. The church has believed this from the beginning . Even Martin Luther believed it. It wasn’t until 10 years after the reformation that the idea Jesus was speaking metaphorically became popular by Zwingly. The apostle Johns disciple , Ignatius of Antioch said the following; ” Take note of those who hold heterodox opinions on the grace of Jesus Christ, which have come to us, and see how contrary their opinions are to the mind of God….They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh that suffered for our sins and that the Father, in his goodness, raised up again. They who deny the gift of God are perishing in their disputes. Letter to the Smyrnaens 110 A.D. . Although this letter isnt scripture it has been proven to be authentic and shows us what the 1st century Christians believed. There are hundreds of these letters from men who were taught by the apostles. So who are you going to believe? Men that were there or men that came 1500 years later? Besides, the Catholic Church decided which books would be in the New Testament at the council of Carthage. So if you trust the Bible you must trust the Catholic Church.

    • Ruth

      The Orthodox Church claims to be the one true church of Christ, and seeks to trace its origin back to the original apostles through an unbroken chain of apostolic succession. Like Catholics and Protestants, however, Orthodox believers affirm the Trinity, the Bible as the Word of God, Jesus as God the Son, and many other biblical doctrines. However, in doctrine, they have much more in common with Roman Catholics than they do with Protestant Christians.
      Sadly, the doctrine of justification by faith is virtually absent from the history and theology of the Orthodox Church. Rather, Orthodoxy emphasizes theosis (literally, “divinization”), the gradual process by which Christians become more and more like Christ. What many in the Orthodox tradition fail to understand is that “divinization” is the progressive result of salvation, not a requirement for salvation itself.
      Orthodox Church holds to some false doctrine. They observe seven sacraments, and they teach these sacraments are the means by which believers receive grace. Four of the sacraments (baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, and confession) are required or salvation, according to the Oriental Orthodox Church. Teaching that religious works are a means to receive grace amounts to a works-based salvation, in violation of the Bible’s teaching that salvation is all of grace, apart from human works (Romans 11:6). God forgives the debt of sin freely, for the sake of Christ (Luke 7:41–42; Romans 3:24). The Oriental Orthodox requirement of keeping the sacraments is “another” gospel and not the true gospel (see Galatians 1:6–9).
      Other Orthodox distinctives that are in conflict with the Bible include:
      The equal authority of church tradition and Scripture
      Discouragement of individuals interpreting the Bible apart from tradition
      The perpetual virginity of Mary
      Prayer for the dead
      Baptism of infants without reference to individual responsibility and faith
      The possibility of receiving salvation after death
      Here are some verses to ponder, these are the proof that we are saved by grace alone through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
      Titus 3:4-8
      But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
      Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
      Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
      That being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life.
      This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.
      Ephesians 2:8-10
      8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God,
      9 Not of works, that no one would boast.
      10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared before that we would walk in them.
      Colossians 2
      6 Therefore, as you received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in him,
      7 Rooted and built up in him and established in the faith, just as you were taught, abounding in thanksgiving.
      8 See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
      9 For in him the whole fullness of deity dwells bodily,
      10 And you have been filled in him, who is the head of all rule and authority.

  • Kaz

    Honestly – “chrismated”?

    This is 2017, not the Middle Ages.

    • George Caco

      Actually it goes farther back than that. It goes all the way to the Early Church. Now if you don’t like the Early Church practices then you can stay with your modern human-innovated practices, whatever they are.

      • Kaz

        I don’t care if it goes back to the Stone Age, the EO has the same problem as the RC, most of its clergy are homosexuals, so it’s the familiar scenario of the bells’n’smells churches, they congratulate themselves for doing the “correct” rituals, but their religion has zero impact on their private lives, where they have the morals of pimps. I’m beginning to wonder if old Hank may be a little light in the loafers. He’s not stupid, he surely is aware of the pervasiveness of sexual perversion in the EO church, so we can only assume he other condones homosexuality or (more likely) practices himself.

        Funny, your use of “human-innovated practices.” I’d say the rampant sexual deviance in the EO is definitely “human-innovated,” but I guess that’s OK, you’ve got your chrism to get you into heaven. I have a hunch that at the Last Judgment a homosexual smeared with chrism is still going to end up in hell.

        • George Caco

          You vomited out a lot of accusations against the EO Church. All EO Priests I know are very happily married individuals. What happened? Were you violated by a Catholic Priest?

          • Kevin Bullard

            Happily may be a bit strong…

        • Kevin Bullard

          Most? Like 51%? Hmm. How is it you know this to be true?

        • RWH

          Are you aware that parish clergy in Orthodox churches are married? Unmarried ordained men are monastics. There are monastics who are parish clergy, but this is rare. The Catholics (both eastern and western rites) are the only ones who require celibate clergy.

      • GLT

        As for Eastern Orthodoxy going back to the early church, that would depend on how you define early. Does it go back to the first century? Most certainly not. Roman Catholicism and later, Eastern Orthodoxy can, at best, trace their history back to the years following the acceptance of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine. Claims that the practices of the Eastern Orthodox church mirror those of the first century church at the time of the Apostles are palpable nonsense.

        • RWH

          Have you ever read the writings of St, Ignatius of Antioch. He was a contemporary of the disciples. Also, the idea that a new church somehow formed under Constantine is a Protestant myth. The persecution certainly did not stop under Constantine. Subsequent emperors were often hostile to Christianity. The church evolved, but nobody speaks in terms or Catholic or Orthodox until after the 1954 split. Since then, the two churches have argued as to who split off of whom.

          • GLT

            I did not say the Eastern Orthodox church formed under Constantine, I said it came into existence sometime after Constantine’s acceptance of Christianity. Not at all the same thing.

          • RWH

            You’re playing word games. It is word play by Evangelicals who want to pretend that the true church was lost somewhere after the Disciples died and came about after the Protestant Reformation. The Church was there all along. It didn’t come into existence out of nowhere. There were seven Ecumenical councils before the 1054 split. None formally established the Orthodox or the Catholic Church out of something which was something else.

          • GLT

            “You’re playing word games.”

            No, I am not, you simply do not know history.

            No one said the church was lost after the Apostles, that is Mormon theology, not protestant.

          • RWH

            I hung around Baptist fundamentalists long enough to know what they think. What you are presenting is an interpretation of history, one that is not shared either by the Catholic Church nor the Orthodox. To say that doctrine evolved and was refined is not to say that a brand-new entity was established from something else. Their argument is who split from whom and who apostatized.

          • GLT

            “What you are presenting is an interpretation of history, one that is not shared either by the Catholic Church nor the Orthodox.”

            Naturally the Catholic Church and Orthodox Church do not accept that particular interpretation of history as it does not agree with their narrative that they are the only true church and no one can have salvation outside their denomination. It does not change the facts, however.

            Also, Baptists do not teach the church was lost after the Apostles. So, I do not know who you were hanging around with.

  • GLT

    Hank Hanegraaff is an opportunist, so you can be sure there is something in it for him.

    Hanegraaff assumed the mantle of The Bible Answer Man after basically performing a coup d’etat at CRI. He was brought in to be the business administrator of the ministry, nothing more. Walter’s vision for CRI included the involvement of many people working in the area of radio, seminars and teaching ministry as well as continuing research and monitoring into non-Christian cults and religions. He also wished to see CRI centres around the world.

    Unfortunately, that is not what happened. After Walter’s death Hanegraaff grabbed sole control of the ministry and removed everyone he saw as a threat to his authority. He set himself up as the Bible Answer Man after firing the man Walter chose to fill that position. He also forced out researchers carefully picked by Walter when they refused to kowtow to his demands.

    Under the direction of Hanegraaff CRI is a shadow of the ministry Walter Martin envisioned. Hanegraaff turned it into a one man show with himself as the star. He relies on the knowledge and work of others to present a facade of himself as The Bible Answer Man. He routinely claims for himself the work of others. I witnessed such an event myself when he took credit for writing a description of the crucifixion which was taken directly from a book written many years before entitled The Day Christ Died.

    Walter was my friend and I was greatly saddened when he died. I was further saddened when I saw what Hank Hanegraaff did to the ministry Walter poured his heart into for many years. Walter had hoped to leave behind a world wide ministry to help Christians combat the rise of false teaching and false religions which were and are sweeping the world. Instead one man chose to turn it into his private podium to indulge his personal ego.

    • George Caco

      Have you declared your allegations earlier? If not, then why not and why now?

      • GLT

        Regards the crucifixion account Hank presented, I approached him on the spot and asked him if he had written it himself. He said he had. When I pointed out to him it was in fact written by Jim Bishop in 1957 he simply tried to brush it off by saying his presentation was only similar in nature to Bishop’s. In reality it was virtually word for word.

        As for the other aspects of my comments, yes, they were known to the parties involved at the time and were the eventual reason I left the Board of Directors for CRI Canada, as did many other board members and employees. I have not been adverse to sharing the facts since that time.

        I know the nature of Walter’s plans for CRI as he and I spent much time over the years discussing them while driving or having dinner . Those plans did not call for Hank Hanegraaff to be The Bible Answer Man or for Hank to become the autocratic leader he became.

    • Let us pray for him and pray for those who because of what he is now doing may be shaken in their faith.

      • GLT

        You’re right, that is a serious concern.

      • BuckeyePhysicist

        This man is still a Christian is he not?

        • George Caco

          Absolutely Hank is a Christian. Hank is more Christian now than he’s ever been in his life.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            I agree!

        • George Caco

          Hank is more Christian now than he’s ever been in his life.

        • The Church which he has aligned himself with is very suspect.
          His history with Walter Martins is very controversial to say the least.

          As to his being a Christian also begs the question are all those attending churches which now accept gay marriages, abortion, praying to “saints”, vote for progressive socialist agendas, want to nullify the Constitution, want to allow terrorist into our homeland in spite of the violence and death that follows….are they Christians?

          We are now living in a time when deceptions and lies are rampant. Nations and their peoples are being purposefully turned on again another all of which we have been forewarned 2,000 years ago.

          The question could be worded:
          Are Christians – Christians, when they attend churches that water down or reject Gods Word?
          Are Christians – Christians, when they have been deceived into accepting doctrines that tickle their ears, make them fee part of the group, heightened emotions, join because of Peer pressure or in the heat of an spectacular extravaganza evangelical presentation, held in multi-million sports stadium….etc.

          Each will answer in light of their faith, understanding, and actions according to their perception of God.
          The only entity that can sort that all out is our Creator.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            Gay marriage is only done in Protestant cults. It will never be found in the Catholic and Orthodox Churches.

          • Timothy Jones

            Sadly, you are incorrect. Gay marriage has already been accepted in several Catholic and Orthodox churches here in Florida.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Gay “marriage” has NOT been accepted by the Catholic Church. If you know of a Catholic priest who is performing gay “marriage” rites, he should be reported to the bishop ASAP.

          • Ryan Matzke

            Which Orthodox Churches specifically? Please provide names and locations. Not Roman Catholic. Learn the gaping, vast, vast difference quick or get run off this board. Also, there are some weird churches with names like “Orthodox Baptist Assembly” in FL. I know for I visited recently from WA and google searched Orthodox Churches. Came up with some wacky results. It is impossible for an Eastern or Oriental Orthodox Church to remain Orthodox and conduct or condone gay marriage. Please provide the names of these churches so they can be anathematized. That’s how we roll.

          • Gay priest and male priest child molesters in the Catholic church do not get married because that would be a sin against Catholic/Orthodox rules.
            Think about that.

            This is my last post….if my advise means anything there is a scripture which states: “you must work out your own salvation”…..and seek the Holly Spirit our True Teacher, Guide, and Comforter along with Gods Word.

            I sincerely with you the best…Daniel

          • Ryan Matzke

            Orthodox Priests marry. The number of Orthodox child molesting priests is infinitesimal. Don’t lump us in with R.C. This mess all started when Rome left us. There is no love lost between Orthodox and R.C. Evangelicals have more in common with Rome than Orthodoxy does with either.

          • BuckeyePhysicist

            How is the Orthodox Church suspect? Like the Catholic Church, it dates from the time of the Apostles!

          • First century Christians would be appalled at what we now accepted as Christianity. What we now call Christianity does not follow God’s pattern for His Church. And least we forget the failures, abominations, and deceptions of the so called “Orthodox Church” for centuries ignited the Reformation.”

            But the Reformation did not shed all of the barnacles of mans self made worldly churches patterned after the world, even though the answer was clearly given in Scriptures for all to see.

            So what are we to do?
            Do we fabricate and piece together another man made denomination with self-ordained institutionalized priest or pastors to promote yet another Church?

            Do we bow to a mega religion which morphed into some kind of hybrid spiritual philosophy / science based trans-humanism / gender neutral / progressive / all inclusive / emotion driven / there is no sin / truth is relevant / right is wrong / technocracy / accept it or die Unified World Religion Alliance ….God forbid.

            Do you recall what occurred when Christ paid in full for our transgressions when he cried out

            “It is finished.” ? John 19:28-30 (KJV) “After this, Jesus “knowing that all things were now accomplished,” that the scripture might be fulfilled, said, I thirst. Now there was set a vessel full of vinegar: and they filled a sponge with vinegar, and put it upon hyssop, and put it to his mouth. When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, it is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.”

            The Temple Veil?
            What is the meaning of the temple veil being torn in two when Jesus died ? The freedom of the Believer in Christ? For as it was written behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two, from top to bottom.”

            In the Jewish temple the veil served as the barrier to the Holy of Hollies where it was believed God’s presence rested housed the Ark of the Covenant. Only the high priest could enter this area and then only one time each year to make atonement for the sins of Israel (Exodus 30:10).

            First Kings 6:2 records that Solomon’s temple was 30 cubits high. This would have been 45 feet tall. Note: The first century Jewish historian Josephus records that Herod extended the temple’s height to 40 cubits high, about 60 feet tall. He also records that the veil was four inches thick.

            Matthew 27:50-51 says, “And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit. And behold, the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom.” Notice the details: (1) Jesus died. (2) The enormous 45 to 60-foot high four inch thick curtain was torn. (3) The tear was from top to bottom clearly indicating the destruction was not of man but truly of God.

            This connection between the death of Jesus and the torn veil is not just about God’s power. It witnesses to us who Jesus Christ is, what the cross accomplished, and the access we now now have to God through Jesus Christ.

            Hebrews 8:1-2 “Now the point in what we are saying is this: we have such a high priest, one who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, a minister in the holy places, in the true tent that the Lord set up, not man.” Jesus Himself now serves as our high priest. There is no longer a need for a Jewish high priest to stand before the Lord and make atonement for our sins. Jesus has provided for our atonement through His death on the cross.

            In addition, the tearing of the veil also helped to mark the beginning of a new covenant. Hebrews 8:13 states, “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.”

            A powerful application of this change is described in Hebrews 4:14-16: “Since then we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus, the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. For we do not have a high priest who is unable to sympathize with our weaknesses, but one who in every respect has been tempted as we are, yet without sin. Let us then with confidence draw near to the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.” Instead of coming to a priest, we can directly and boldly come before God through Jesus Christ to receive mercy and grace. Jesus meets our needs and even identifies with our weaknesses. The tearing of the veil is profoundly significant and provides a pictorial foundation for how we can approach God today. God has torn down the barrier between Himself and us through the work of Jesus.

            ” Why then do we go to a mere man (or men), when we can go directly to God through His Son, our High Priest?

            We need to return to the pattern of the church as followed by first century Believers. ”

            This is the key which the Reformers overlooked and they neglected to follow Gods pattern for His Church. Christianity in the first century was: Jesus Christ and Born Again Believer having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit our true Teacher, Guide, and Comforter along with the Written Scriptures.”

            Mans re-imaged false church came later (the great falling away) and survives even today with it’s Orthodox and Denominational Churches which in our time are crumbling and beginning to unit to establish a one world religion. Oh by the way they had a meeting and decided we all worship the same god. This answers the question. Why did the Pope kiss the Koran.

            Best to you and your love ones.
            Daniel

          • Ryan Matzke

            This is wholly historically inaccurate. Martin Luther was in positive correspondence with the Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople during the early part of the Reformation. It is more or less a matter of Geography and politics that the reformers did not merely circumvent Rome and return to Orthodoxy. It took the better part of a year to exchange one letter. Before they could properly dialogue, the die had been cast. Martin Luther was extremely Liturgically inclined. He also lamented post Reformation, “What have I done? I’ve traded 1Pope for a thousand.”

          • springer

            You don’t accept liturgical churches? Do you know that the liturgy is taken from the Bible and is based upon historical Jewish worship?

          • Ryan Matzke

            Quite the contrary, sir: I am in process to become Eastern Orthodox! I LOVE the Orthodox Liturgy!

            I was pointing out that it was a matter of logistics that Luther did not merely return home to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church.

            Christ is Risen! ☦☦☦

          • springer

            I’m curious what you mean by ‘born again believer’. Please explain.

          • KmnH

            Funny how you act like you know what first century Christians practice without no historical proof at all and to add insult to injury the KJV is a corrupted version of the Greek Orthodox Bible with many errors.

            I suggest you read the writings of the early Church Fathers so you can see what 1st century Christians really believed in instead of comedy skits and loud yelling with guitars. The Orthodox have history on their side as proof instead of some foreign American meshugunah across the pond who injects his European American ideologies.from modern times.

          • RE: Your post…..

            (1) “Funny how you act like you know what first century Christians practice without no historical proof at all….”
            Answer: The New Testament defines His Church as Believers in Christ having the indwelling of the Holy Spirit our true Teacher, Guide, and Comforter along with written word. That is the Church.

            (2) “I suggest you read the writings of the early Church Fathers so you can
            see what 1st century Christians really believed in instead of comedy
            skits and loud yelling with guitars. The Orthodox have history on their
            side as proof …”
            Answer: Scriptures are clear. First century Christians were not concerned about building massive churches, establishing a man centered priesthood with all its pomp, ceremonies, and trappings.
            Why? Because what men built as Churches after the first century and what Martin Luther missed was Gods tearing of the Temple Vail from the top down when Christ died for us. Which is clearly defined in Scripture as signifying that the old covenant of men standing between men and God administrating sacrifices for sin was – OVER. Please look it up. Why should I go to men when I have Jesus Christ and His promise of the Holy Spirit to be my teacher, guide, and comforter.

            From that point on men we can go directly to God without an intermediary except Jesus Christ…mens assumed priesthoods are invalidated. As for theologians and proponents of various denominations…the constantly argue one against another causing confusion and pitting Believers one against another. Where Christ bids us to come to Him denominations and their promoters bid we come to them…enough already…

            Best to you and your loved ones.
            My hope is in Christ not any man, church, mans priesthoods, mans teachings, or so called spiritual organization.

          • springer

            Watering down scripture like Baptists and others do by teaching millennialism and the rapture and not believing in Holy Baptism or the Lord’s Supper? Many ‘Christian’ denominations have made up their own version of Christianity by using their human reasoning and not relying on Holy Scripture.

          • I would challenge all Believers (and non-believers) to study the early Christians who called themselves The Church Of God (do a bible search in the New Testament and it will appear several times) to come to an understanding as to how far we have fallen from the simple, practical,
            and profound message of Jesus Christ and how we should “live” as His followers. It’s so simple and profound that in todays world most will ignore or not believe it because it seems so out of place compared to what we have now accepted as the church?
            Best to you and your loved ones.

    • Peggy Summers

      It’s a shame that Hanegraaff has turned from the faith. I stopped listening to The Bible Answer Man shortly after he took over the show. He didn’t seem to have the heart for the people calling in that Dr. Martin had.

      • GLT

        Walter would do the show with just his Bible and anyone who called could ask any question they wished. Hank, on the other hand, had careful control over the questions so he would not be caught unprepared. That is in part what led to your sense of Hank not having the heart for the people who were calling. Everything was choreographed so there were no spontaneous encounters. It would have been different if the man Walter wanted to replace him as the Bible Answer Man had done so.

      • springer

        I don’t think you have to worry the Baptist (strange name for a denomination that doesn’t believe in Baptism) Bott organization has dropped his show. It interferes with its belief in millennialism, the rapture, and several other non-Biblical doctrines of the Baptist faith.

    • Freelance Writer

      ss this website through a search engine and have spent some time reading the comments. I would like to call them comments but unfortunately, it looks more like an intellectual wresting match. But on to the topic.

      Walter Martin was literally my first Bible teacher. I had the opportunity to attend his service at Melodyland School of Theology in California. And yes, I believe Hanegraaff failed to continue with Martin’s ministry.

      That said, I have heard a number of teachers over the years and realize there is only one Walter Martin. For the critics of Hanegraaff I would suggest you pause and consider that. I stopped listening to the Bible Answer Man shortly after Martin’s death and have no real interest in tuning in wherever he may be. I have thought over the years that there will never be another Walter Martin. That is true in many ways. That is the way God intended it to be.

      After reading the comments on this topic, I think Walter Martin would be more than disappointed. He always was for the unity of the body, and while openly disagreeing with others in the faith, I remember him saying that “we can agree to disagree agreeably.”

      Having had the good intention of engaging in active discussion on the Internet over the years, I have avoided it precisely for the reasons that are exemplified on this one topic alone. If I were an unbeliever I would not want anything to do with Christianity based on what I read here. Unbelievers almost certainly know nothing about theology, and I suspect most people who attend church don’t either. It’s not because they are willfully ignorant, but that when the see the tone used in discussions represented here, it is no surprise they want nothing to do with it.

      Walter Martin was a very formally educated man, yet what made his Bible Answer Man ministry what it was is that he avoided the intellectual, theological arguments that turn so many people away from the Church. Instead, he followed what Jesus did – explained the Scriptures in such a way it made sense to the common man.

      More than a few Christian care less about the Greek or the Hebrew because they have trouble reading English. Since I do not have access to the Book of Life, I tend not to tell someone whether they are saved or not. It will be more than a bit embarrassing for some of us when the final judgment comes and we meet people in Heaven we thought came from the Devil himself. I prefer to not be embarrassed.

      If I have learned anything from spending (and later will probably think is was wasting) my time reading the various comments, it is that I should have known better in the first place. Walter Martin had said of the Cult of Liberalism that the time is coming when they would not listen at all. Little did he know that his statement would be prophetic of the a large portion of the church.

    • empathylouis

      All of this sounds like sour grapes.

      • GLT

        “All of this sounds like sour grapes.”

        It would be interesting to know upon what type of evidence you base your comment. You know less than nothing about this situation as you were not there or involved in any way. You did not know Walter Martin or his plans for the ministry of CRI. You were not privy to any conversation which I had with Walter Martin or Hank Hanegraaff or any other individual involved. As such your opinion on the matter has absolutely no relevance whatsoever.

        Are you in the habit of passing judgement on situations you know absolutely nothing about?

        • empathylouis

          Still sounds like sour grapes to me.

          • GLT

            “Still sounds like sour grapes to me.”

            Still doesn’t matter. You really do have an annoying habit of commenting on things of which you know absolutely nothing. On what basis do you say it is sour grapes? Do you know what Walter Martin’s intentions were when Hank Hanegraaff joined CRI? Do you know what his plans were for the future of the ministry? Do you know who he wanted to assume the mantle of Bible Answer Man? These are the things you need to know in order to say my comments are sour grapes. You know none of these things. As such you are speaking out of ignorance. That is never a good idea.

          • empathylouis

            You place more value over your own relationship and your own perspective of your relationship with the departed Walter Martin over the relationship that he may have had with Hank.

          • GLT

            You continue to make comments and judgements on situations you know nothing about. Do you ever stop and consider how foolish that is?

            Do you have any knowledge about Water Martin’s plans for CRI? DO you have any knowledge of what he wished Hank to do in CRI when he brought him into the ministry? Do you know whom Walter designated to take over as the Bible Answer Man? Do you have any knowledge of my involvement in the situation at the time these things were occurring?

            We already know the answer to all these questions, and yet you sit there and arrogantly pass judgement on situations and relationships you know nothing about.

            Why don’t you try a little experiment? Go to CRI’s website and try to order Walter’s book the Kingdom of the Cults? See what happens and then get back to me.

          • springer

            I’ve never heard of Walter Martin but he was just a man like anyone else. He was not God.

        • springer

          I think he says sour grapes because you are not honest enough to state your name with all the personal accusations you are making.

    • S.L. Hansen

      LOL, what’s in it for him? Evangelicals stop buying his books. Yeah, that’s great.

      • GLT

        There is a big market in the orthodox tradition as well. 🙂

        • S.L. Hansen

          “Big”? There are fewer than 800k Orthodox Christians in the U.S., compared to about 62 million evangelical Christians…and he hasn’t written any Orthodox books yet.

          Still not seeing the “opportunity” for him here.

          • GLT

            “There are fewer than 800k Orthodox Christians in the U.S.”

            So, Hank only sells his books in the U.S.? Somehow I think not. Besides book sales may not be the motivator at all. But there will be something, of that I am sure, having dealt with the man personally.

      • springer

        Define ‘evangelical’.

        • S.L. Hansen

          I was using it in the colloquial sense as shorthand for Evangelical protestant which includes many different denominations.

    • Jim the Scott

      >Hank Hanegraaff is an opportunist, so you can be sure there is something in it for him.

      You are a real piece of work! You accuse me of being condescending and judgemental for saying Hank is now more biblical but you write this about him?

      You are a sick person.

      • GLT

        “You are a real piece of work! You accuse me of being condescending and judgemental for saying Hank is now more biblical but you write this about him?”

        I wrote it because I know it to be true. I was very much involved with CRI at the time the events surrounding Walter Martin’s death and Hank’s takeover of CRI occurred. As such I am speaking from first hand knowledge, not some distant view of the situation as I suspect you are.

        • Jim the Scott

          Your rationalizations, rank hypocrisy, obnoxious and blatant double standards & Calumny makes you thus far the most unpleasant Protestant Evangelical I have ever encountered on the Net. I’ve talked to Chick Comics enthusiasts who are less ridiculous then you.

          I mean what I said. Get help! God forgive you.

          • GLT

            “God forgive you.”

            Thank you, he does, everyday. May he also forgive you, as you too need it everyday.

          • Jim the Scott

            Thank you & Physician heal thyself.

    • springer

      … and yet you cannot put your name on this post. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

  • ez8888

    The only true Christian believes as I do. LOL

  • Amos Moses

    Hank Hanegraaff Rebrands As ‘Apostolic Tradition Man’ After Conversion To Eastern Orthodoxy
    April 14, 201

    • George Caco

      Apostolic Traditions include the Greek Koine Bible. What do you have against the Greek Koine Bible?

  • Thomas Branigan

    Yes, thank you for reminding me. Walter Martin was the original Bible Answer man. He gave definitive answers to questions and exposed the Christian cults for what they were. I remember listening to the program daily after Walter died. I was stunned when the man whom I thought was to take his place upon his death suddenly disappeared without any real reason given. Hank just took over. He often equivocated rather than giving answers. I also remember him taking forever to decide upon the end times theology. When he finally announced that preterism was the Biblical “answer” I was even more stunned. After having listened to the show faithfully for years,through Martin the transition period and then Hank. I stopped within a week or so after he became a Preterist. Now it makes more sense to me why he came up with such an unbiblical “answer” to such a huge question in the minds of most believers.

  • Christian

    Denominations are the work of the devil. Jesus isn’t the one that introduced denominations! Denominations are nothing more than division in the Body of Christ. This is exactly what Satan wants, Christians divided and fighting over theology.

    Truth be told each denomination has it’s strengths and weaknesses and errors and accuracies! Can any one of us say that we truly know and understand God 100% and that our theology is 100% accurate? NO! We as human beings are flawed and will not know His fullness until Christ returns or we die.

    I believe this is part of Satan’s plan. In dividing the church Christians are seen by outsiders as haters, crazy, hypocrites, etc. Take your pick on names they call us. A house divided can’t stand. At the very least, with the Christians divided and in-fighting they are distracted and not doing a thing to impact the world, address sin, and bring others to Christ. That’s not to say all Christians, but those that are so concerned with being the only ones right don’t have time to do the Great Commission. Christians at large (again not all, but a large number) need to wake up, unite, and take a stand against evil by following God’s Word and the leading of the Holy Spirit!

    Just read the other posts in this comment section alone! It proves the point.

    • Royce E. Van Blaricome

      How do you feel about being an abomination to the Lord? “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs 17:15).

      I suggest you take that seriously, confess, and repent from your sin. Have you NO fear of the Lord at all? While you’re at it, read a little bit of 1st John 3 and what Jesus says in Matt. 18 about comments like yours.

      Then you might study a little bit about how God feels about and deals with those who make false accusations against His children and bear false witness against His servants.

      Oh and for sure study up on what God does to those who think they have and can exercise His attribute of Omniscience which He retains for Himself.

      Then I’d suggest you read Matt. 7:21-23 because you may well be standing in line if you are practicing such posts as you just made.

      “Finally, brothers, rejoice. Aim for restoration, comfort one another, agree with one another, live in peace; and the God of love and peace will be with you.” (2Co 13:11)

      “I believe this is part of Satan’s plan.”

      Fine. Have your belief but you cannot substantiate it unequivocally with Scripture. And for you to denounce all denominations as the work of the devil is just a flatout abomination and false accusation. Would that Luther had thought like you we’d all still be Catholics!

      “In dividing the church Christians are seen by outsiders as haters, crazy, hypocrites, etc.”

      If you actually knew what God’s Word says you’d know that the “outsiders” would do that anyway because the hate God, love their sin, and connect us with Jesus who they hate. All one has to do is look at the plethora innumerable comments on here about fairy tale book, sky fairy, imaginary friend, murderous deity, etc.

      “At the very least, with the Christians divided and in-fighting they are distracted and not doing a thing to impact the world, address sin, and bring others to Christ.”

      Now THAT is the work of the Devil. Every hear of a little phrase “Accuser of the Brethren”????? I can assure you that is a false accusation and there are MANY Christians impacting the world, addressing sin (which I just did here), and bringing others to Christ. Even those who in your judgment (sinful as it may be) are only concerned about being right. As if the Truth doesn’t matter.

      :Christians at large (again not all, but a large number) need to wake up, unite, and take a stand against evil by following God’s Word and the leading of the Holy Spirit!”

      Thanks for being so unifying and showing us how the Holy Spirit leads. NOT!!!!!!!!!

      Now, let me ask you a question since you’ve just ragged on denominations so well. Are you in a church as part of a local Body of Believers where you have submitted to godly leaders to be properly discipled as Christ has COMMANDED???

      If so, outta pure curiosity what church and does it as a general rule slam all the other denominations as you do?

      If not, then since you are in open disobedience and rebellion to Christ, where do you get off saying any of that?

      • Christian

        I’m sorry for my lack of clarity in my post. My point is that there is not one denomination that is perfect. Satan uses the differences in denominations to divide Christians. Again, that’s not to say all. I’m not saying that every Baptist believes they are right and all Evangelicals are wrong, or that all Methodists believe that they’ve got it all right and Pentacostals are wrong, or that they can’t or don’t ever work together. However, it does happen on a larger scale than a lot of people realize. Matthew 12:25, Luke 11:17, Mark 3:24.

        The denominations themselves are not evil, but Satan uses them to drive a divide among Christians. That’s not to say that all fall into that trap, but I have met many that do. What denomination are you? Are you saying that yours is the only one that’s right? My background is Baptist. Even though I don’t have to answer your question, yes, I have a home church that I actively attend. I am involved in multiple ministries and outreach.

        Thank you for judging and condemning me so quickly! I see that I need to be sure to lace my words with more love, and be absolutely clear when communicating. I responded too quickly because I’m tired of the fighting that happens on these boards. Maybe my words will be successful at some point and cause people to think. John 7:24

        I’m glad to hear that you know many Christians, and you yourself are engaged in The Great Commission, but please realize that there are many more that claim to be born-again believers that merely sit on a seat every Sunday morning. They have not been transformed or produce fruit. Some will come in Sunday claiming to repent and walk out to do the same thing that afternoon with no intention of ever changing. They’ve been deceived by a watered down gospel that teaches nothing but grace. Matthew 7:21, Luke 6:46, Romans 2:13

        It wasn’t my intention to come across as condemning, but clearly yours was. I’m sorry I’ve offended you and pray that you will hear my heart on this. Christians that are hiding in the four walls need to wake up and get out of their churches to do and be all that Christ intends for them to do and be. Uniting with other Christians instead of backbiting or arguing over whether prophecy and miracles still exist, the timing of Christ’s return, or whether or not a person should speak in tongues. These things shouldn’t even be an issue.

        There are many things in denominational theologies that probably aren’t even our place to address. They tend to put God in a box that we can define and then we get offended when someone else’s definition is at all different. God can do whatever He wants! He’s still God! Jesus can come whenever He wants and it’s not for us to know when. Whether a person is truly saved is between them and God. Why do we argue over these things? Matthew 24:36

        Jesus died on the cross for my sins just as much as he did for yours or anyone else’s. He rose again on the third day and conquered death. I have eternal life because of Him as well as the gift of the Holy Spirit that allows me to proclaim Him as Lord. 1Corinthians 12:3 I am a new creation because I have surrendered my life to Christ. 2 Corinthians 5:17

        I have a healthy fear and reverence of the Lord. I know that I am not perfect, but I also know that He loves to use imperfect people! I am working out my salvation with fear and trembling as should you or any other believer. Philippians 2:12

        God bless and keep you. Thank you for showing me the error of my ways. I hope and pray that this post is clearer and doesn’t come across as condemning.

        • Ruth

          Good that you humble yourself enough to accept your mistakes. Next time be swift to hear and slow to speak. We are talking about a man who claim himself to be a follower of Jesus Christ, yet went back to a religion which teach the doctrines of men like rituals, good works,infant baptism, confession and etc. as means of salvation. Instead of pointing out divisions in denominations as the work of the devil, you should have studied first why there are many denominations? Why there’s division in many churches? What causes the divisions? What is the meaning of a church based on its original term and translation? Is it a building? Denominations are just name or title of religious institutions, like organizations, as an identification if what religious group do you belong. Like what you’ve said you’re a Baptist, so you belong to a Baptist Denomination, so you mean that a Baptist Denomination is a work of the devil?
          Royce is right, if Martin Luther didn’t protest and defect from Catholicism, we are still Catholic, then there will be no Protestants.

        • Royce E. Van Blaricome

          I agree there is no perfect denomination. I also agree that Satan uses differences to divide. Satan uses many good things and of God for evil purposes. Thus I also agree with the denominations themselves are not evil, but Satan uses them to drive a divide among Christians.

          I am a member of a non-denominational church and one of the things I love about it is that is hold to unity on the essentials and liberty on non-essentials. I suppose if one were to put me in a category it would be Protestant. As I adamantly oppose the idea that we are saved in any way whatsoever by works.

          I’m pleased to see that you are obeying The Word and part of a local body and active in it. There are many who have made same or similar comments as yours who do not belong to a local body and some have gone so far as to actually say Christ is calling His people out of churches because they’re all of Satan. Evidently never having read Revelation.

          Please note that I judged and condemned what you said. Not you. I understand your frustration. I do. I see it all the time. I’m also pleased to see you cite John 7:24. So many have NO clue that’s in the Bible but constantly regurgitate Matt. 7:1. (Obviously having never read to Verse 5 and seen the “and then”.)

          Trust me when I tell you I definitely ” realize that there are many more that claim to be born-again believers that merely sit on a seat every Sunday morning.” I would’ve cited Matt. 7:21-23 had you not. In fact, my experience interacting with many self-professed Christians is that MOST have NO idea at all just how Wide & Easy the path to destruction is and how VERY narrow the Gate is.

          I won’t belabor the point except to say that in Oct. 2013 God opened my eyes in a whole new way to the meaning of that passage thru a site called OKcupid. If you are single, you might wanna do a little research project sometime. Just look at only those profiles where one claims to be a Christian. My research shows only 2-3% of those who claim to be probably are.

          “It wasn’t my intention to come across as condemning, but clearly yours was.”

          No, not so clear at all. Correcting, reproving, and even rebuking but no condemnation. Don’t mistake conviction for condemnation. Many do.

          I hear you and I believe I do understand your heart on those things. But you are dead wrong when you say, “These things shouldn’t even be an issue.” How can I say such a thing? Easy. They wouldn’t be in God’s Word as they are if they should never be an issue. For example, Paul wrote 3 whole chapters on the issue of “tongues”.

          That said, I would tend to agree with your observation “There are many things in denominational theologies that probably aren’t even our place to address. They tend to put God in a box that we can define and then we get offended when someone else’s definition is at all different.” There are some things that I believe should not be attempted to be explained. I believe there are some issues/subjects where it is best to say, “God has not spoken on that and the ways of God are higher than Man’s.”

          However, I must take exception to your, “Whether a person is truly saved is between them and God.” That stands in direct opposition to everything Christ has said. To the Gospel. To the Great Commission. To many of the writings of all the NT writers. Just off the top of my head I’d point you back to Matt. 7:15-20. That should bring to mind several other like-type passages.

          Matt. 24:36 doesn’t really address all that you ask in that question but it does relate directly to discussions, debates, and yes – unfortunately – arguing over Eschatology. However, there is a very real difference between the two former and the latter. I’d refer you to YouTube and “A Night of Eschatology” with John Piper moderating. I find that to be a superb example of how things should be. Rigorous but loving.

          Praise God for the rest and may God bless and keep you as well.

  • Goldseth

    One only need read these comments to see how pervasive sin is…even believers struggle daily to model Christ.

    • George Caco

      Drive by comments are not very useful. Why don’t you list out some of the sins you see and let either the Protestants or Orthodox debate you?

      • Goldseth

        I’m referring to the way people are talking to eachother in the comments. Sin is a nature, not necessarily an act. These are supposed to be believers attacking eachother being short and curt with one another. One thing I remember about Hank was his gentle tone in teaching and correcting…the Bible clearly teaches this same manner of dealing with one another but that seems to have been lost online in many cases.

        • George Caco

          There have been occasions where some people have been quite slanderous but that’s ok because I’m not perfect. Who is perfect anyways? And the topics here are very personal, debated by very passionate people. We’re all big boys and big girls here and in the end we all ask forgiveness from each other.

  • Randy Rogers

    He’s been off in many ways for a good number of years. He has now denied the faith.

    • S.L. Hansen

      No, he hasn’t denied the faith. He’s followed the Faith to the fullest expression of Christianity.

      • Randy Rogers

        He removed from Reformed Christianity to sacramentalism.

        • S.L. Hansen

          Well, Wesley, Luther, et. al. gave us Reformed Christianity, and Christ gave us the Sacraments, so it looks to me like he went in the right direction.

          • Randy Rogers

            No he did not. Sacraments are not the same as dead formalism. He went. He’s been gone ever since he screwed over Walter Martin’s family.

          • S.L. Hansen

            LOL, so you think that human-born Reformed Christianity, which launched a movement that has very bad fruit per Jesus’ prayer in John 17, is better than the Sacraments Christ initiated Himself? Interesting.

            Nice vague charge you made against him in regards to Mr. Martin’s family. Got any proof? Or should I just assume you are bearing false witness because Hank Hanegraaff no longer does what you want him to do.

          • Randy Rogers

            He’s been off for decades and did rip off the Martin’s. Go light your candles, it’s the only light you will have. Burn your incense which was never commanded. Wear your vestments and say your meaningless repetitive prayers which were condemned by Christ.

            The Reformation returned to sola scriptura and teaching from the Bible. It wasn’t perfect and didn’t go far enough in my opinion.

          • S.L. Hansen

            I asked for proof about the Martins and all you did was make your accusation more specific. Interesting. Let me guess: You have no proof.

            Sola Scriptura is not a Biblical concept. There’s utterly no support for it in Scripture, and it totally falls apart once you admit that there is neither a canon of Scripture listed in Scripture nor a litmus test for determining what should be in Scripture and what shouldn’t, either of which would be required in order for Sola Scriptura to stand.

            Christ is my light! But I will light candles (Luke 12:35). And I will enjoy the sweet aroma of incense that represents our prayers rising to heaven (Rev 5:8, 8:4…see also Ex 30). I don’t wear vestments because I’m not a priest, but I know that God is okay with them because of Ex 28. And I don’t say meaningless prayers – I pray with all my heart, soul, mind and strength, and Jesus knows it.

          • Randy Rogers

            You’ve cast off your moorings then of your theology point bound by scripture. Traditions in the words of Jesus are often accompanied by the word vain, meaning empty.

          • GLT

            “Nice vague charge you made against him in regards to Mr. Martin’s family. Got any proof?”

            “I asked for proof about the Martins and all you did was make your accusation more specific. Interesting. Let me guess: You have no proof.”

            I was a personal friend of Walter Martin and can personally attest to the situation. Hank was brought into the ministry to be an administrator, nothing more. Walter had a detailed plan as to how he wished the ministry to be set up and who was to be responsible for the various aspects of the ministry. It was nothing at all like what the ministry has become under Hank’s leadership.

            Walter wanted CRI to be a worldwide ministry with offices not only in the US and Canada, but around the world. He wanted a staff of researchers in each of those offices to facilitate research which was relevant to the immediate area. He had a specific individual he had chosen to replace him as the Bible Answer Man. It was not Hank Hanegraaff.

            I know you doubt Randy’s claim, but ask yourself why Walter’s family retains control of Walter’s material? Why is Walter almost non-existent on the website of the ministry he founded and grew over the years? Why can you not buy Walter’s books on the website of the ministry he founded? Does that not seem strange to you? Why did so many staff and researchers quit or have themselves forced out of the ministry after Hank took over?

            As I said, I knew Walter personally and we spent hours talking about his plans for the ministry whenever we were together. I served on the board of CRI Canada during this time and as such was privy to many aspects of this situation which you and others commenting on here were not. In other words, I have the proof you claim Randy does not. As such I can speak form a position of knowledge on this subject which goes far beyond what you or anyone else can do.

            I’m sure Randy does not know all the details either, but he is right in his basic assertion, Hank did not honour the wishes of Walter Martin in the plans he had for the future of CRI. Instead he set himself up as the central figure of CRI and in so doing utterly destroyed the future Walter had planned for the ministry.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Thanks for the extra insight. If Walter Martin didn’t want Hank Hanegraaff, who put Hank in that position?

          • GLT

            “Thanks for the extra insight. If Walter Martin didn’t want Hank Hanegraaff, who put Hank in that position?”

            You’re welcome.

            It’s not that Walter did not want Hank involved, he did. However, he admired his administrative skills and it was those skills which he wished Hank to use in caring for the everyday business of running the ministry. Walter had carefully built a staff of individuals to handle the other areas of the ministry such as research, writing and The Bible Answer Man program. Hank was never intended to be involved in those areas.

            Hank is a dominant personality. When Walter died he simply used his personality to dominate the rest of the board, forcing out those on the board and the staff who did not kowtow to his dominance.

            It was very sad time for the ministry and for many people personally, including myself.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Sounds like it was a very difficult time. Although it seems to me that somebody whose role is administration has been given the power to make such changes.

          • GLT

            “Although it seems to me that somebody whose role is administration has been given the power to make such changes.”

            I regret using the term ‘administration’ as it is not completely accurate in describing what Hank was brought in to do. He was to be primarily a fund raiser and promoter for the ministry. That was the area which he was meant to administer, nothing more.There was someone already in place to be the overall administrator of the ministry.

          • Randy Rogers

            Christ gave us baptism and the Lord’s Supper.

            What else do you do? Lighting candles, fancy engraved steeple houses, long flowing robes, incense burning, idols made with men’s hands. Nice popery you’ve got going there.

          • George Caco

            Why do you ascribe to a Platonic or Gnostic Anti-Physicality view? I’m sure that if you had it your way even Water Baptism would be tossed out.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Christ gave us more than that, but as you’ve neglected to learn about historic Christianity, it probably won’t make sense to you.

            I’ve no problems at all with our “fancy” houses that we build for God. I can’t understand Protestant churches that are little more than shacks while their pastors live in very nice houses. God should have the best house in the neighborhood, and that’s what Catholics strive to give Him, even in the poorest areas of the world.

            And we don’t have idols, but thanks for yet another false accusation.

          • GLT

            “I’ve no problems at all with our “fancy” houses that we build for God. I can’t understand Protestant churches that are little more than shacks while their pastors live in very nice houses. God should have the best house in the neighborhood, and that’s what Catholics strive to give Him, even in the poorest areas of the world.”

            So fancy churches are important? I think not.

            “Our ancestors worshipped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.

            Woman, Jesus replied, believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshippers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshippers the Father seeks. God is spirit, and his worshippers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”
            John 4:20-24

            Sure doesn’t sound like fancy churches are all that necessary for worship in Christ’s opnion. Maybe if, in the poorest countries of the world, they took a little of the money spent on ‘the best house in the neighbourhood’ and spent it on housing, schools, hospitals, etc., these poor countries would not be so poor.

          • S.L. Hansen

            Did I say that fancy churches were IMPORTANT? No. I said I had no problem with God having the best “house” in the neighborhood.

            You might want to turn to Exodus 25 and read that and the next few chapters to get an inkling on what God teaches about how His “house” should look in any given community.

            BTW, the Catholic Church does more to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, minister to the sick, instruct the ignorant, tend to the dying, etc., etc. etc., than any other organization in the world, let alone any other church. In one Catholic mission that I know of in Haiti – I have friends who have gone there to work, and it’s called Kobano if you want to Google it – the church is a simple building with a tile floor and very few decorations, but it’s still the best “house” in the area. Meanwhile, what the priest down there does with the help of many others who finance and provide physical labor is a long list. Ready?

            – Putting in wood floors in all the homes
            – Repairing ceilings and walls so that homes are weather tight
            – Piping water to the community from a spring up the mountain (using gravity because they have no electricity to run pumps) so that people don’t have to spend a half day fetching water
            – Giving families livestock starters (in other words, the mission gives the family one male pig and one female pig, and when the family has bred a successful litter, they return one male and one female pig to the church, which is given to another family so that they can start their own herd)
            – Free education for the kids
            – Regular visits from missionary dentists and doctors, who not only treat people but train volunteers to help with minor care (i.e. fluoride treatments, first aid, midwifery, etc.)
            – Free seeds and garden tools so families can grow their own foods
            – Clothing, etc.

            So you see, even thought the Catholic church is the nicest house in the neighborhood, a whole lot of work has gone into helping the poorest of the poor.

            What’s your church doing?

          • GLT

            “BTW, the Catholic Church does more to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, minister to the sick, instruct the ignorant, tend to the dying, etc., etc. etc.,”

            Yes, they are to be commended for the work they do, but I would not claim they do more than anyone else, after all, serving Christ is not to be a competition. Many churches do a tremendous amount of work to help the less fortunate around the world. However, as the Catholic church is probably also the wealthiest church, more is to be expected. Also, I think you would agree that any poor country would do more with a new hospital or school than a fancy cathedral.

            “I have friends who have gone there to work,…”

            I also have friends around the world working to help the needy and they don’t care if they a Christian or not. They help everyone they can. So let’s not get into a competition over this subject as it does nothing to help us or the church in general.

            “What’s your church doing?”

            I belong to a fairly small congregation, less than 100 people. As a small group we support two missionary families in Africa. We also support various local ministries such as drug rehabilitation programs, programs for unwed mothers and various outreach programs to witness to those who are searching for meaning in life. We are small but we do what we can.

          • Randy Rogers

            No idols? Really?

          • S.L. Hansen

            Yeah, really. Catholics are just as forbidden from idol worship as any other Christians.

            If you don’t know the difference between religious artwork that inspires people to worship THE LORD and idols, I would be happy to explain it to you. But you seem to be a reasonably intelligent person, so you can probably figure it out for yourself.

          • Chris

            The bells’n’smells churches like the RC and Orthodox always attract the shallow-minded.

          • George Caco

            The shallow minded are those who practice Ad Hominem.

          • S.L. Hansen

            To the contrary, when all the senses are engaged, one’s mind is opened to greater depths of worship. My experience in evangelical churches was shallow, sound-bite preaching laden with once-saved-always-saved, name-it-and-claim-it, and other faddish “theology.”

          • S.L. Hansen

            Here are some excerpts from the Catholic Catechism on idolatry:

            2112 The first commandment condemns polytheism. It requires man neither to believe in, nor to venerate, other divinities than the one true God. Scripture constantly recalls this rejection of “idols, [of] silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but do not speak; eyes, but do not see.” These empty idols make their worshippers empty: “Those who make them are like them; so are all who trust in them.”(Ps 115:4-5, 8; cf. Isa 44:9-20; Jer 10:1-16; Dan 14:1-30;) God, however, is the “living God”(Josh 3:10; Ps 42:3; etc.) who gives life and intervenes in history.

            2113 Idolatry not only refers to false pagan worship. It remains a constant temptation to faith. Idolatry consists in divinizing what is not God. Man commits idolatry whenever he honors and reveres a creature in place of God, whether this be gods or demons (for example, satanism), power, pleasure, race, ancestors, the state, money, etc. Jesus says, “You cannot serve God and mammon.”(Mt 6:24) Many martyrs died for not adoring “the Beast”(Cf. Rev 13-14.) refusing even to simulate such worship. Idolatry rejects the unique Lordship of God; it is therefore incompatible with communion with God. (Cf. Gal 5:20; Eph 5:5)

            2114 Human life finds its unity in the adoration of the one God. The commandment to worship the Lord alone integrates man and saves him from an endless disintegration. Idolatry is a perversion of man’s innate religious sense. An idolater is someone who “transfers his indestructible notion of God to anything other than God.”

  • 2GBTG

    So sad that Hanegraff wants to experience in the flesh what is done in the Spirit.
    “What was begun in the Spirit shall it be completed in the flesh”
    No
    Like tongues, orthodoxy’s outward graven images and practices give the participant a false sense is “oneness” with our Risen Savior but are a counterfeit of the true work of Christ which is by with which the Lord God defines as the evidence of the things NOT seen…
    Hanegraff was always a poor substitute for Walter and I never could listen to him.
    I thank the Lord for keeping me as I did not discern this on my own or by anything I understood.
    I know the Lord protected all of His own and will continue to do so from unregenerate men who handle the Word but have not been given faith to believe Him themselves and will turn to those things that please their itching ears.
    May God have mercy

    • George Caco

      Why are you pitting our spirituality against our physicality? We are both physical and spiritual. Where does our physicality end and our spirituality begin? The only time our physicality is separated from our spirituality is when we die. That’s the state that all Platonists and Gnostics believe is the ultimate state, when our spirits are free from our bodies. Are you in that camp?

  • It’s time to return to the Church that God established after His pattern:

    Jesus Christ and Born Again Believers having the indwelling of the Holy
    Spirit our true Teacher, Comforter, and Guide and Gods Written Word.
    That is the Church.

    And if you want to know what first century followers of Christ called themselves do the following: Type in Church of God into your Bible search tool and see how many times it comes up.

    For more information on this subject:
    Follow my icon to my website.
    At the top of the home page click (The Church?) tab the scroll down to
    post 3 and 4 which specifically applies to Gods pattern for His Church.

    • George Caco

      All 1st Century Believers carried King James Version Bibles to Church and were all Sola Scriptura Born Again Protestants. Didn’t you know that?

      • I am assuming you are not serious in you reply.

        • George Caco

          What I’m serious about is the a-historicity (ignorance of history) of the Protestant Church.

          • Yes “our ignorance of true history” and the “purposeful manipulation of history instigated by evil men” will not be resolved this side of the coming of the Messiah who will reveal all truth.
            Now that will be something to behold.

          • GLT

            “What I’m serious about is the a-historicity (ignorance of history) of the Protestant Church.”

            In what way, exactly, are protestants ignorant of history? Simply because they do not agree with you and what you view to be proper history?

          • George Caco

            Next thing you’ll tell me is that if the King James Bible is good enough for Paul then it’s good enough for me. Right?

      • “As you wrote, “All 1st Century Believers carried King James Version Bibles to Church….”

        Really? Really?

        • George Caco

          There is a large segment of the Evangelical Community that actually believes that.

          • There you have it….proof positive we are indeed living in the latter days of deception.

          • Chris

            You’re an ignorant fool if you believe that.

  • Ryan Matzke

    Evangelicals and Protestants, please go learn the difference between Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy! Western Christianity (R.C.’S and Protestants) have more in common than R.C. And Eastern Orthodoxy.

    Read, then comment.

  • Chris

    He’s probably enough of an egotist to believe that this will lead to some mass movement of evangelicals into this bizarre denomination. I’m betting he’s going to be seriously disappointed.

    • George Caco

      Whoever sides with all things Apostolic (Koine Greek Bible, Apostolic Liturgy, Apostolic Eschatology, Apostolic Practices, etc…) will side with Hank.

    • S.L. Hansen

      Bizarre? Because it’s not like the “marketable” services you are accustomed to?

  • Ryan Matzke

    What effect could Christianity have in our world as one united body in Christ? Imagine almost 3 Billion people acting with one accord… Know what I’m getting at? ☦

    • BuckeyePhysicist

      Ut omnes unum sint.

  • springer

    Can a Christian believe in the ‘rapture’ a man-made theology that is not based in the Bible?

    Can a Christian believe in ‘millennialism’ which promotes that Jesus Christ did not do enough by dying on the cross and rising from the dead that a sacrifice must be made at the original site of the Jewish temple?

    Can a Christian ignore the saving grace of Holy Baptism and gift of forgiveness of sins in Holy Communion?

    Many so-called ‘evangelical Christians’ do. They ignore what the Bible says and make up their own Christian religion.

    I’m not thoroughly familiar with Hank Hanegraaff or the Eastern Orthodox Church but I do know that Baptists teach the Bible is wrong when it says that Baptism saves yet they re-baptize people who join their denomination.

  • BuckeyePhysicist

    How Luke 1:48 of you!

  • CrystalClearTruth

    he was always a frootloop to begin with. now it’s even more evident

  • linda

    wow, I always listened to him and trusted his word, now I second guess him. not good

  • linda

    personally I believe people need to get out of these church inside buildings. the church is the people, and their gathering together. Most Churches now days are about money and their programs.