'Bible Answer Man' converts to Orthodoxy

[Jedidiah]

Agreed! HOwever, supposed history does not necessarily guarantee truth.

No, but a lack of history pretty much guarantees a lack of truth.

It is quite reasonable to judge that in the intervening years error has crept into the older bodies. Thus something new could be a return to greater truth not lack of truth.

Keep in mind that I am not saying this is true, just that history does not guarantee truth, and a lack of history does not necessarily mean a lack of truth. In both cases it could go either way.

[One Bad Pig]

It is quite reasonable to judge that in the intervening years error has crept into the older bodies. Thus something new could be a return to greater truth not lack of truth.

Keep in mind that I am not saying this is true, just that history does not guarantee truth, and a lack of history does not necessarily mean a lack of truth. In both cases it could go either way.

Something new is necessarily NOT a return. I will readily grant that error could creep into older bodies. I refuse to believe, however, that the Church could be wrong for 2,000 years (or 1,500, for that matter).

[T-Shirt Ninja]

1. Many years to Hank!

2. Pulpit and Pen is as arrogant as it is ridiculous. Orthodox groups on Facebook have been having a laugh with how much they misunderstand our faith. It's a hoot.

3. Orthodoxy is the true faith and I'm happy to have a Christian apologist join our ranks.

[NorrinRadd]

Something new is necessarily NOT a return.

In Bibleworld, things can be both "A" and "not-A" at the same time (though not necessarily in the same sense). This specifically (but not necessarily exclusively) applies to "newness," as 1 John 2:7-8 show.

I will readily grant that error could creep into older bodies. I refuse to believe, however, that the Church could be wrong for 2,000 years (or 1,500, for that matter).

Well ok, that's the sort of position that can't be debated.

[One Bad Pig]

In Bibleworld, things can be both "A" and "not-A" at the same time (though not necessarily in the same sense). This specifically (but not necessarily exclusively) applies to "newness," as 1 John 2:7-8 show.

If a concept can be shown to be not new, then it's not something to which I'm referring here.

Well ok, that's the sort of position that can't be debated.

Sure. I was, perhaps, being that dogmatic to deliberately emphasize my point. It would take considerable evidence to change my mind, but it's conceivable.

[One Bad Pig]

Hank Hanegraaf has done a couple interviews reflecting on his experience over the last couple months and what Orthodoxy means to him.

[Sentient 6]

We can talk about the " rightness " of Hanks conversion, of course. But I think a even more pressing question is warranted. In light of Hanks faith in the truth of Eastern Orthodoxy, should not Hank now step down as the " bible answer man " and president of CRI ? Considering before that his role at CRI was based in a belief in Sola Scriptura and beliefs along the lines of the Founder, Walter Martin ?

[One Bad Pig]

We can talk about the " rightness " of Hanks conversion, of course. But I think a even more pressing question is warranted. In light of Hanks faith in the truth of Eastern Orthodoxy, should not Hank now step down as the " bible answer man " and president of CRI ? Considering before that his role at CRI was based in a belief in Sola Scriptura and beliefs along the lines of the Founder, Walter Martin ?

Good question. I don't know the exact terms of his employment with CRI. I'm fairly certain that he (and others at CRI) have given this some thought. I know I had to work through keeping my position here when I converted (as did other staff members who converted to EO here).

I don't recall Walter Martin being a preterist, so presumably there is some wiggle room.

[NorrinRadd]

Is there anything in CRI's Beliefs or "Essentials" incompatible with Orthodoxy?

[One Bad Pig]

Is there anything in CRI's Beliefs or "Essentials" incompatible with Orthodoxy?

There are some tensions in the Beliefs (e.g., penal substitution is not the traditional model of the atonement in Orthodoxy), but I don't see anything that goes against the rulings of the Ecumenical Councils, which are the standard.

[Littlejoe]

Are EO beliefs more along the lines of Christus Victor?

[One Bad Pig]

Are EO beliefs more along the lines of Christus Victor?

[Littlejoe]

I'm actually quite favorable to Christus Victor.

[Sentient 6]

Question. Was there a part in his chrismation where he had to renounce things he believed as a Protestant Evangelical ? If so, which ecumenical counsels are usually sighted as reasons for him having to renounce the main and basic principles of the Protestant Reformation ?

[One Bad Pig]

Question. Was there a part in his chrismation where he had to renounce things he believed as a Protestant Evangelical ? If so, which ecumenical counsels are usually sighted as reasons for him having to renounce the main and basic principles of the Protestant Reformation ?

No. He recited the Nicene Creed, and pledged to hold to the teachings of the ecumenical councils.