So, the grocery store we went to had been toilet paper hoarded, with many bare shelves, overall. I was informed this was the case with the major local stores. But, I have a 'secret' smaller store source that had the 'gold plated, diamond studded' tp.
Sad when a successful shopping day is purchasing toilet paper...
---
Facebook has in error blocked my second Blogger website, Satire Und Theology from posting entries on my Facebook business page, Russell Norman Murray, PhD. Facebook falsely claims I violated community standards with a recent entry where Kenneth Copeland is on a YouTube video stating...
Quote: The Devil's tryin' to give me the flu
Further, the Blogger entry and the associated Facebook entry contained the following comments from me:
Presumptive theology in regards to God, Satanic beings and humanity, and making money in the process.
---
Obviously, my entry was not supporting Kenneth Copeland's claim.
I will double post my Satire Und Theology entries until Facebook fixes this mistake on their part, in order for my work to appear on my Facebook business page. I have reported this Facebook error to Facebook twice now. I have not yet received any reply.
Tuesday, March 17, 2020
Monday, March 16, 2020
The Orthodox Study Bible: Filioque
The Orthodox Study Bible: Filioque

Nicene Creed section
Nihil Obstat. September 1, 1909. Remy Lafort, Censor. Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Cited
The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.
The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.
Preface
This article was originally published 20200316, revised as the primary article for an entry on academia.edu on 20240902.
My review of this fine academic text continues.
Proceeding from: FILIOQUE-Pronounced FILLY O QUE or QAY (LATIN)
---
Orthodoxy
Within this Bible there is a Glossary from Reverend John W. Morris, Ph.D.
Is a Latin word meaning 'and the Son.' (798). Western churches added this word to the Nicene Creed (325 AD, my add) several centuries after it was originally written. (798).
This "filioque clause" is judged by the Orthodox Church as error because it is contrary to what Jesus taught (John 15: 26); thus, it confuses correct belief concerning the Holy Trinity. The addition of the filioque in the West was a major factor contributing to the Great Schism in A.D. 1054.
The 1054 schism was between the Western Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
Is a Latin word meaning 'and the Son.' (798). Western churches added this word to the Nicene Creed (325 AD, my add) several centuries after it was originally written. (798).
This "filioque clause" is judged by the Orthodox Church as error because it is contrary to what Jesus taught (John 15: 26); thus, it confuses correct belief concerning the Holy Trinity. The addition of the filioque in the West was a major factor contributing to the Great Schism in A.D. 1054.
The 1054 schism was between the Western Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church.
'In the Western Church consciousness, the Holy Spirit is subordinate to the Son of God. It is sufficient to leaf through Western theological texts in order to be convinced as to what an insignificant place Catholic theologians allocate to the activity of the Holy Spirit in the world, in the Church and in the life of individual men. The Filioque places the Holy Spirit in a state of subordination to the Father and the Son, and it distorted the teaching on the Church in the West (of this, we shall speak separately). Every false teaching about the Holy Spirit is a blow against the dogma about the Church. Because the place of the Holy Spirit in the life of the Church and in God's plan concerning man was ignored in Western theological thought, the Church gradually began to be accepted as an earthly institution, organized and administered according to the principles of worldly authority and juridical law.'
V. Potapov 1996-98, Filioque, Russian Orthodox Cathedral of St. John the Baptist
https://stjohndc.org/en/orthodoxy-foundation/filioque
---
My Orthodox icon (art piece) from Bulgaria
Nicene Creed section
Cited sections from the Nicene Creed 325 AD
And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.
And in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the Creator of life, Who proceeds from the Father, Who together with the Father and the Son is worshipped and glorified, Who spoke through the prophets.
---
My short article is focusing on Filioque and not on the development of the Nicene Creed, 325, or on the 1054 schism. But the difference in theologies can be seen here with the two different versions of the Nicene Creed, I provided. In contrast to Orthodoxy, within traditional Western Theology, Roman Catholic and Protestant traditions, the Holy Spirit is understood as proceeding from both the Father and the Son.
---
Protestant
Based on the New Testament, is the Filioque clearly a false teaching? Both God the Father and God the Son sent the Holy Spirit in John 15: 26.
Bromiley (1996: 415) further mentions that the Holy Spirit is called the Spirit of Christ (Son in Galatians) in Romans 8: 9 and Galatians 4: 6 which both support the same idea.
New American Standard Bible (NASB)
26 “When the [a]Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father, namely, the Spirit of truth who comes from the Father, He will testify about Me, 27 and [b]you are testifying as well, because you have been with Me from the beginning.
Footnotes
a) John 15:26 Or Comforter, Advocate, Intercessor
b) John 15:27 Or (command) testify, you as well
It can be reasoned the Holy Spirit proceeds from both God the Father and God the Son. I can deduce that as God the Son became, Jesus Christ/God incarnate, as a human being he was emphasizing in John's Gospel, his human submission to the Father, without denying his own deity in sending the Holy Spirit.
G.W. Bromiley states that the term ‘and from the Son' was not in the original 325 Nicene Creed or 381 Constantinople Creeds and was likely added to the Third Council of Toledo of 589. It was officially endorsed in 1017. Bromiley (1996: 415). It did, in the minds of some historical commentators, in part, led to a split between the Western and Eastern Churches with the Eastern Churches rejecting it. Split in 1054.
The Pocket Dictionary explains that Filioque is the Latin term meaning 'and the Son' (52). Filioque was an addition of the Western Churches in the sixth century to the Nicene Creed which was therefore, not in the original version. (52). Erickson also writes that the original form of the Nicene Creed had not contained the words 'and the Son'. (852).
Roman Catholic
Key sources from that Roman Catholic, theological, website:
Maas, Anthony. "Filioque." The Catholic Encyclopedia. Vol. 6. New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1909. .
'Filioque is a theological formula of great dogmatic and historical importance. On the one hand, it expresses the Procession of the Holy Ghost from both Father and Son as one Principle; on the other, it was the occasion of the Greek schism. Both aspects of the expression need further explanation.'
Cited
Cited
'The dogma of the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from Father and Son as one Principle is directly opposed to the error that the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Father, not from the Son. Neither dogma nor error created much difficulty during the course of the first four centuries.'
Cited
'At any rate, if the double Procession of the Holy Ghost was discussed at all in those earlier times, the controversy was restricted to the East and was of short duration.'
Cited
'The rejection of the Filioque, or the double Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and Son, and the denial of the primacy of the Roman Pontiff constitute even today the principal errors of the Greek church.'
(I agree with Orthodoxy in denying the primacy of the Roman Pontiff)
Cited
'As to the Sacred Scripture, the inspired writers call the Holy Ghost the Spirit of the Son (Galatians 4:6), the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9), the Spirit of Jesus Christ (Philippians 1:19), just as they call Him the Spirit of the Father (Matthew 10:20) and the Spirit of God (1 Corinthians 2:11). Hence they attribute to the Holy Ghost the same relation to the Son as to the Father. Again, according to Sacred Scripture, the Son sends the Holy Ghost (Luke 24:49; John 15:26; 16:7; 20:22; Acts 2:33; Titus 3:6), just as the Father sends the Son (Romans 3:3; etc.), and as the Father sends the Holy Ghost (John 14:26).'
Cited
'The only Scriptural difficulty deserving our attention is based on the words of Christ as recorded in John 15:26, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father, without mention being made of the Son. But in the first place, it can not be shown that this omission amounts to a denial; in the second place, the omission is only apparent, as in the earlier part of the verse the Son promises to "send" the Spirit.'
---
Cited
Two further selected English translations...
King James Version 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, [even] the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me:
American Standard Version 15:26 But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall bear witness of me:
Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
otan de elqh o paraklhtoV on egw pemyw umin para tou patroV
(When but (But when) comes the helper (paracletos) whom I will send to you from the Father)
Bible Hub
Hort and Westcot
otan elqh o paraklhtoV on egw pemyw umin para tou patroV
(When comes the helper (paracletos) whom I will send to you from the Father)
Stephens 1550 Textus Receptus
(When but (But when) comes the helper (paracletos) whom I will send to you from the Father)
Bible Hub
Hort and Westcot
otan elqh o paraklhtoV on egw pemyw umin para tou patroV
(When comes the helper (paracletos) whom I will send to you from the Father)
Theological leanings
Personally, I hold to the Protestant position, not primarily because I am Reformed but because of the Biblical text. I do not think this places Orthodox Eastern Christians in the category of cultic (outside of the faith) on this point. But I do I think it is a questionable position to take. The Holy Spirit, with the Father and the Son together are worshipped and glorified; God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all worshipped and glorified. The Holy Spirit is equally God within the trinity.
Boice explains that the Spirit is a person because He has knowledge, feelings and will and this is what is stated of God the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. Boice (1981: 376). Boice further explains that the definition of the Holy Spirit as Counselor (Helper ESV) in John 14 from Christ is certainly that of one person describing another. Boice (1981: 376).
Following are some key examples where God the Holy Spirit is demonstrated as being fully God in glory as are the Father and Son. We have noted that Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and Son is John 15. The Holy Spirit as God is of course equally part of the Baptism formula at the ending of Matthew (28: 19). Acts 2 and Pentecost we see the Holy Spirit is given to the Church along with manifestations in many Biblical cases. The arrival of the Counselor as God the Son promised.
The disciples received the Holy Spirit in John 20: 22 post resurrection. Acts 5 lying to the Holy Spirit equals lying to God. Ananias and Sapphira. who spoke by the prophets; and we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church; Not the Roman Catholic Church in context which evolved in time, but the universal Church of the triune God in Christ that has been delivered through the Apostles of Christ such as Peter, John, James and Paul. The Holy Spirit of course spoke through the Prophets, Apostles and Scribes in the development of the Old and New Testaments.
---
BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1981) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP Press.
BROMILEY, G.W. (1996) ‘Filioque’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.) Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
Personally, I hold to the Protestant position, not primarily because I am Reformed but because of the Biblical text. I do not think this places Orthodox Eastern Christians in the category of cultic (outside of the faith) on this point. But I do I think it is a questionable position to take. The Holy Spirit, with the Father and the Son together are worshipped and glorified; God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are all worshipped and glorified. The Holy Spirit is equally God within the trinity.
Boice explains that the Spirit is a person because He has knowledge, feelings and will and this is what is stated of God the Holy Spirit in the New Testament. Boice (1981: 376). Boice further explains that the definition of the Holy Spirit as Counselor (Helper ESV) in John 14 from Christ is certainly that of one person describing another. Boice (1981: 376).
Following are some key examples where God the Holy Spirit is demonstrated as being fully God in glory as are the Father and Son. We have noted that Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and Son is John 15. The Holy Spirit as God is of course equally part of the Baptism formula at the ending of Matthew (28: 19). Acts 2 and Pentecost we see the Holy Spirit is given to the Church along with manifestations in many Biblical cases. The arrival of the Counselor as God the Son promised.
The disciples received the Holy Spirit in John 20: 22 post resurrection. Acts 5 lying to the Holy Spirit equals lying to God. Ananias and Sapphira. who spoke by the prophets; and we believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church; Not the Roman Catholic Church in context which evolved in time, but the universal Church of the triune God in Christ that has been delivered through the Apostles of Christ such as Peter, John, James and Paul. The Holy Spirit of course spoke through the Prophets, Apostles and Scribes in the development of the Old and New Testaments.
---
BOICE, JAMES, MONTGOMERY (1981) Foundations of the Christian Faith, Downers Grove, IVP Press.
BROMILEY, G.W. (1996) ‘Filioque’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.) Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
BRUCE, F.F. (1987) Romans, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
CALVIN, JOHN (1552)(1995) Acts, Translated by Watermark, Nottingham, Crossway Books.
COAD, F. ROY (1986) ‘Galatians’, in F.F. Bruce (gen.ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Marshall Pickering/ Zondervan.
COURSON, JON (2005) Application Commentary, Thomas Nelson, Nashville.
CRANFIELD, C.E.B. (1992) Romans: A Shorter Commentary, Grand Rapids, William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
DUNNETT, WALTER M. (2001) Exploring the New Testament, Wheaton, Crossway Books.
ELLISON, H.L. (1986) ‘Matthew’, in F.F. Bruce (ed.), The International Bible Commentary, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
ELWELL, WALTER AND YARBROUGH, ROBERT W., Third Edition (2013) Encountering The New Testament, Grand Rapids, Baker Academic.
ERICKSON, MILLARD (1994) Christian Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Book House.
FRANCE, R.T. (1985) Matthew, Grand Rapids, IVP, Eerdmans.
GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.
GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.
GUNDRY, ROBERT (1981) A Survey of the New Testament, Grand Rapids, Zondervan.
HANSON, Rev./Dr. B.B.M.J. Mackenzie-Hanson (2005-2006), Arian/Arianism
http://www.arian-catholic.org/arian/arianism.html
KNIGHT, KEVIN (2012) Filioque, New York, New Advent.
http://www.arian-catholic.org/arian/arianism.html
KNIGHT, KEVIN (2012) Filioque, New York, New Advent.
New Advent: Filioque
MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.
MOUNCE, ROBERT H. (1995) The New American Commentary: Romans, Nashville, Broadman & Holman Publishers.
SLICK, MATTHEW J. (2012) Arianism, Nampa, Indiana, Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry.
Friday, March 13, 2020
Puritanism, in brief, is not a denomination
![]() |
Ernest Hepnar photo |
Puritanism and the Puritans are subjects I have not significantly dealt with within any of my academic work, offline or online. But, Pastor Michael Phillips, that has presented many beneficial sermons online, that I have reviewed, discusses Puritanism and the Puritans often. He is significantly influenced by the movement, it seems.
God-willing, Puritanism, may or may not be a subject I will build research on academically, as I have done with several subjects within Biblical Studies, Theology, Philosophy of Religion, over the years, especially related to theses work, but certainly not just theses work. This approach can be viewed through searches in the archives. This Google/Blogger website format works excellently for building scholarship through various articles over time, gaining increased knowledge through research and writing and by not 'reinventing the wheel', but by editing, revising and building on previous articles.
Unlike most of Pastor Phillips' sermons, even while I searched the two websites that usually offer the text versions, I see none available for this particular sermon. However, the YouTube version is below. Therefore, I will not be directly quoting Pastor Phillips within this article, unlike my other sermon reviews from Pastor Phillips.
Puritanism
Collinson explains puritanism... 'Many distinct and mutually discordant movements reflecting the influence of their personal founders are embraced within historic Puritanism.' (484).
M.A. Noll writes the Puritanism is 'A loosely organized reform movement originating during the English Reformation of the sixteenth century. The name came from efforts to 'purify' the Church of England from who felt that the Reformation had not yet been completed.' (897). The Puritans also attempted to purify the Church and society. (897).
Further from Noll:
'Convictions. Puritanism generally extended the thought of the English Reformation, with distinctive emphases on four convictions: (1) that personal salvation was entirely from God, (2) that the Bible provided the indispensable guide to life, (3) that the church should reflect the express teaching of Scripture, and (4) that society was one unified whole.' (898).
The Puritans made theological contributions to the 'Reformed idea of salvation'. (898).
In his evaluation, Noll explains that the Puritans, are theologically similar to other separate Christian groups such as the Franciscans, Protestant Reformers, Jesuits and Anabaptists, the early Methodists and Reformed Dutch of the late nineteenth century (900), who forsook the world system for the gospel and God.
These Puritans were stated as 'transfixed by the glories of redemption and who went far in redeeming the world around themselves.' (900). In agreement with these other groups, the Puritans sought first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness. (900).
These explanations are in a basic agreement with the sermon as (paraphrased) Phillips teaches that Puritanism is not a denomination, such as Anglican, Presbyterian or Baptist, but is various theological movements that influence followers within various denominations.
It seems to me this would be similar to Evangelism, as a movement and not a denomination, which is within various movements within several denominations.
Those that are Puritans would have some basic similarities such as from Collinson: 'Puritan piety rested upon scripture and was in only a few instances mystical.' (484). Similarly, those within Evangelism have in common the preaching and teaching of the good news. Evangelical, Evangelicalism is derived from evangelion: gospel, good news, states Fackre (191).
This evangelical approach, as opposed to, for example, the church-state model of Christendom in the middle ages which emphasized obedience and allegiance to institutionalized, politicized, Christianity sanctioned by the state (s).
Bible Hub
Cited
Strong's Concordance euaggelion: good news
Original Word: εὐαγγέλιον, ου, τό
Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter Transliteration: euaggelion Phonetic Spelling: (yoo-ang-ghel'-ee-on) Definition: good news
As I am theologically Reformed, I agree with Puritanism in that salvation is from God within the Reformed umbrella of understanding.
This is something I particularly studied within my British theses degrees. Salvation being caused by God in regeneration (Titus 3, John) through the atoning and resurrection work of God the Son, Jesus Christ, applied to believers. Believers embrace and accept (philosophically, a secondary cause, of sorts, as opposed to God as the primary cause, as in belief by grace through faith only, to avoid force and coercion) the gospel and salvation, they do not cause belief and salvation to occur in the sense of creation and application. There is no human works righteousness, for salvation, including justification and sanctification, only acceptance of the gospel, through regeneration, outside of divine force and coercion. Rather divine transformation occurs which should lead to a life of Christian living (Ephesians 1-2, James, as examples).
The Scripture, within my Reformed model, is my final authority on religious and spiritual matters and my ultimate life guide. It is not, however, a scientific or medical textbook, for example.
I agree that the Christian Church should primarily be biblical.
Society is not unified. The Kingdom of God is as not yet culminated on the new earth and new heavens and it was presented by Jesus Christ in the gospel in an initial stage only. This realm can be influenced by the gospel through movements such as Puritanism, agreed. However, this realm for which the gospel was presented in, is fallen (Genesis 1-3, Romans) and will not be primarily transformed into the Kingdom of God by the works of any Church movement, but by the recapitulation work of the Lord, himself with his people being in attendance (Revelation 21-22, 2 Peter 3).
COLLINSON, P. (1999) 'Puritanism', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
NOLL, M.A. (1996) 'Puritanism', in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
FACKRE, GABRIEL (1999) 'Evangelical, Evangelism', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
Tuesday, March 10, 2020
Dogma!
Preface
On the weekend, I attended a fine choir performance featuring Mr. Charles Nelson Chuckles at an impressively built Vancouver church. Some adherents within this overall church tradition, not just the particular denomination, emphasize love and respect for others, for which I am in agreement. Some within this tradition also reject the idea of theological Dogma.
Dogma
Blackburn in his philosophy text has two definitions for dogma.
The first is in general, a belief held to with undefended certainty. (109).
The second is within the Christian Church via a belief communicated through divine revelation and explained by the Church. (109).
In an orthodox Christian, biblical theology and worldview, from the first definition, I reject the term 'undefended'. Biblical Christianity properly defended should not exercise excessive use of faith, in other words, it should not be fideistic. It should never favour faith at the expense of reason. The second definition for me is more agreeable.
Pocket Dictionary opines that within Protestant circles dogma is nearly synonymous with doctrine. (40). Both are connected to theological training. (40). In Roman Catholic and Orthodox circles, dogma is considered official doctrine and teaching of each Church. (40).
As there are various Protestant churches, there are various dogmas, from various theologians, whereas within the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches it is firmly set doctrines. (My own ideas concerning comments from page 40). The term dogmatics refers to summarizing and systemizing bible and theology. (40).
I can agree that dogma in a Protestant context often flows more from particular theologians, although still within a historical context; as opposed to Catholicism and Orthodoxy with more set historical, theological, institutionalized systems.
Interestingly, my 'The Orthodox Study Bible: New Testament and Psalms', contains no entry for Dogma. It calls Doctrine, the teaching of the Church. (797).
The British, A New Dictionary of Christian Theology documents, 'dogma' as being Greek for opinion. (162). Dogma was applied, historically, to various historical philosophical movements. (162). The author opines that the New Testament was not originally dogmatic, but that dogma was imposed through Church history and Church Councils, such as the Council of Nicea in 325 and Council of Chaldedron in 451, regarding the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ were done through interpretation. (162).
It is stated: This means that dogmas cannot and should not be treated as ultimate norms. (162).
In regards to primary New Testament doctrines, the New Testament contains certain teaching and theology that is considered primary, revealed, divine doctrine, and even, in a sense, dogma, such as for example, the trinity, the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ and his gospel work, human sin, the fall and corruption of humanity. The Church in Councils, historically, further documented these theologies in agreements, creeds and dogma. It could be stated that the New Testament doctrines became more systemized.
Secondary and tertiary doctrines, such as ones that lead to different churches and denominations can still be could considered dogmas, but here I can agree that many of these should not be considered as ultimate norms; for example, in regards to the musical style of Church worship music.
The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology writes that from the Greek refers to decree, ordinance, decision or command. (327). Early Christian theology as did Greek philosophy, used the term 'dogma' in the sense of 'propositions of faith.' (327). In the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church had the view of depositum fidei (deposit of faith) (327), where the Church used dogma through papal and Church teaching. (327).
In Protestantism, papal and ecclesiastical dogma has been rejected. The dogmas, doctrines, theology of theologians and teachers should be tested via Scripture, (327) in particular via the New Testament.
The interpretations of dogma within the Protestant tradition do not come with papal and ecclesiastical infallibility. (327). But, I would add that within various forms of biblical Christianity, including Protestant, Reformed and Evangelical (where these are actually biblical), the original New Testament autographs are considered infallible. I hold to divinely inspired, theologically and factually infallible, original documents.
It seems to me within this very non-exhaustive researched article, that doctrine and dogma indeed are not quite synonymous. There are doctrines and there are dogmatic doctrines that can be considered dogma. For a church, often progressive and liberal, to claim that they have no dogma (separating themselves from supposedly offensive biblical Christian faith with dogma) and instead have various doctrines from different perspectives; they risk the danger of overlooking the premise that a theological prohibition against dogma may in itself be considered dogma.
It is reasonably certain that some (not all) within these traditions will hold this belief rejecting dogma...dogmatically.
GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.
O' COLLINS, GERALD (1999) 'Dogma', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
MC KIM, D.K. (1996) ‘Arianism’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.
On the weekend, I attended a fine choir performance featuring Mr. Charles Nelson Chuckles at an impressively built Vancouver church. Some adherents within this overall church tradition, not just the particular denomination, emphasize love and respect for others, for which I am in agreement. Some within this tradition also reject the idea of theological Dogma.
Dogma
Blackburn in his philosophy text has two definitions for dogma.
The first is in general, a belief held to with undefended certainty. (109).
The second is within the Christian Church via a belief communicated through divine revelation and explained by the Church. (109).
In an orthodox Christian, biblical theology and worldview, from the first definition, I reject the term 'undefended'. Biblical Christianity properly defended should not exercise excessive use of faith, in other words, it should not be fideistic. It should never favour faith at the expense of reason. The second definition for me is more agreeable.
Pocket Dictionary opines that within Protestant circles dogma is nearly synonymous with doctrine. (40). Both are connected to theological training. (40). In Roman Catholic and Orthodox circles, dogma is considered official doctrine and teaching of each Church. (40).
As there are various Protestant churches, there are various dogmas, from various theologians, whereas within the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches it is firmly set doctrines. (My own ideas concerning comments from page 40). The term dogmatics refers to summarizing and systemizing bible and theology. (40).
I can agree that dogma in a Protestant context often flows more from particular theologians, although still within a historical context; as opposed to Catholicism and Orthodoxy with more set historical, theological, institutionalized systems.
Interestingly, my 'The Orthodox Study Bible: New Testament and Psalms', contains no entry for Dogma. It calls Doctrine, the teaching of the Church. (797).
The British, A New Dictionary of Christian Theology documents, 'dogma' as being Greek for opinion. (162). Dogma was applied, historically, to various historical philosophical movements. (162). The author opines that the New Testament was not originally dogmatic, but that dogma was imposed through Church history and Church Councils, such as the Council of Nicea in 325 and Council of Chaldedron in 451, regarding the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ were done through interpretation. (162).
It is stated: This means that dogmas cannot and should not be treated as ultimate norms. (162).
In regards to primary New Testament doctrines, the New Testament contains certain teaching and theology that is considered primary, revealed, divine doctrine, and even, in a sense, dogma, such as for example, the trinity, the deity and humanity of Jesus Christ and his gospel work, human sin, the fall and corruption of humanity. The Church in Councils, historically, further documented these theologies in agreements, creeds and dogma. It could be stated that the New Testament doctrines became more systemized.
Secondary and tertiary doctrines, such as ones that lead to different churches and denominations can still be could considered dogmas, but here I can agree that many of these should not be considered as ultimate norms; for example, in regards to the musical style of Church worship music.
The Evangelical Dictionary of Theology writes that from the Greek refers to decree, ordinance, decision or command. (327). Early Christian theology as did Greek philosophy, used the term 'dogma' in the sense of 'propositions of faith.' (327). In the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic Church had the view of depositum fidei (deposit of faith) (327), where the Church used dogma through papal and Church teaching. (327).
In Protestantism, papal and ecclesiastical dogma has been rejected. The dogmas, doctrines, theology of theologians and teachers should be tested via Scripture, (327) in particular via the New Testament.
The interpretations of dogma within the Protestant tradition do not come with papal and ecclesiastical infallibility. (327). But, I would add that within various forms of biblical Christianity, including Protestant, Reformed and Evangelical (where these are actually biblical), the original New Testament autographs are considered infallible. I hold to divinely inspired, theologically and factually infallible, original documents.
It seems to me within this very non-exhaustive researched article, that doctrine and dogma indeed are not quite synonymous. There are doctrines and there are dogmatic doctrines that can be considered dogma. For a church, often progressive and liberal, to claim that they have no dogma (separating themselves from supposedly offensive biblical Christian faith with dogma) and instead have various doctrines from different perspectives; they risk the danger of overlooking the premise that a theological prohibition against dogma may in itself be considered dogma.
It is reasonably certain that some (not all) within these traditions will hold this belief rejecting dogma...dogmatically.
GRENZ, STANLEY J., DAVID GURETZKI and CHERITH FEE NORDLING (1999) Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms, Downers Grove, Ill., InterVarsity Press.
O' COLLINS, GERALD (1999) 'Dogma', in Alan Richardson and John Bowden (eds.), A New Dictionary of Christian Theology, Kent, SCM Press Limited.
MC KIM, D.K. (1996) ‘Arianism’ in Walter A. Elwell (ed.), Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Grand Rapids, Baker Books.
The Orthodox Study Bible, New Testament and Psalms, (1993) Saint Athanasius Orthodox Academy, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)