The standard argument which Catholic and Orthodox apologists alike normally use to promote their position over Protestantism is a consequentialist argument. They fault the Protestant rule of faith because it leads to “chaos.” It’s every man for himself. Every man does right in his own eyes. The synonyms vary, but the argument remains the same.
Now, on the face of it, this argument is fallacious. Suppose we were to apply it to the Mosaic covenant. By that logic, we could argue that the Mosaic covenant was a failure, and, hence, uninspired, for the Mosaic covenant resulted in national apostasy.
But, to approach this issue from another angle, let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that we can judge the true rule of faith by its consequences.
A further problem with the consequentialist argument is that it cuts both ways. It’s only as good as the alternative. Do the competition offer a superior alternative?
As I say, I think this is a fundamentally wrongheaded way to frame the question, but let’s play along with it for a while.
Catholic and Orthodox apologists remind me of salesmen who tell homeowners, “Here’s your chance to get out of that dump you’re living in and moving into our wonderful new housing development!”
They have a slick website (“Desert Springs”) with glossy mockups of dream homes in a gated community—complete with a community pool, golf course, tennis court, gym, and so on.
“Here’s your chance,” the sales pitch continues, “to get in on the ground floor. Buy your dream home while presold units are still available!”
And as long as we compare the “dump” we’re living in with the virtual paradise on the website, well…there’s simply no comparison.
But some of us don’t think it’s especially prudent to buy a house sight-unseen. Some of us have driven to the construction site.
We’ve seen the termites, cockroaches, and mildew, the cracked foundations, leaky roofs, leaky gas lines, dripping faucets, open sewers, drafty rooms, loose plaster, broken windows, buckling walls, sagging ceilings, bare wires, combustible insulation, peeling paint, and piles of rat-infested garbage.
Thanks for the offer, but we like our “dump” better than your dump.
For those who are new to this blog, you may want to consult the archives from earlier this year, especially March through May. Orthodox is repeating arguments that were refuted at length in previous discussions, discussions he often left without interacting with what we had written in response to him.
ReplyDeleteFirstly, Steve assumes that the Mosaic covenant inevitably led to apostasy. Or does he assume that protestantism doesn't inevitably lead to apostasy?
ReplyDeleteThe Mosaic Covenant did, in fact, lead to national apostasy, Orthodox, in no less than 3 separate generations: the wilderness generation, the Exile generation, the generation that crucified the Lord. Hebrews is also rather clear that the consistent Jew, in order to avoid apostasy, must enter and persevere in the New Covenant. Not to enter the New Covenant, for the Jew, is to apostatize from the Mosaic Covenant.
I would say that Israel had problems with apostasy because of their hard hearts, whereas protestants are in chaos because sola scriptura isn't enough to define the rule of faith. The problem isn't (always) protestants with hard hearts, it is just that they are not sure what the Christian faith is and disagreeing with what other people think. A rather different problem to Israel.
On the contrary, Israel did, in point of fact, very often disagree within itself regarding Scripture's proper interpretation. The prophete themselves rather frequently correct those interpretations coming from the Levitical priesthood. Rabbinic tradition is full of such disagreements.
But did not Ezekiel say: 'And I will give them ONE heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God."
Israel's problem was their heart of stone which led to apostasy. We should not necessarily expect this problem again.
But according to you, true believers can, indeed apostatize.
God promises that in the future his people will have ONE heart.
In context, is this talking about numerical unity around a single, visible church called the Eastern Orthodox Church vs. various denominations? No.
Rather, it's talking about an undivided heart, as opposed to a hypocritical, idolatrous one. The focus is not on the unity of an organization. Rather, the focus is ethical, focusing on the cessation of idolatry by those who receive this one heart.
Thirdly, there is the scriptural teaching that "you will know them by their fruits". To say that consequences are irrelevant to knowing who is the people of God would be decidedly unbiblical.
In context, this is also ethical. It isn't directed as a consequentialist argument against a rule of faith that allegedly causes "chaos."
orthodox said...
ReplyDeleteIf we're both living in a dump, at least our dump is a community dump, whereas your dump has a never ending civil war raging and a never ending series of palace coups.”
At least we’re waging a bloodless civil war, whereas the Orthodox have a long history of bloody persecution against monophysites, the Old Believers, and anyone else whom they anathematize.
“What with every generation having to decide whether the previous generation got it right or not.”
What’s wrong with that, exactly? According to Orthodox’s logic, if you were born to a Klansman, you should be a Klansman; if you were born to a Muslim, you should be a Muslim; if you were born to a monophysite, you should be a monophysite.
To the contrary, Christianity is new to every new generation, and every generation needs to rediscover and personally appropriate the faith.
“Now Steve seems to think that the standard and the bar is set at the worst level that Israel got to.”
A straw man argument. My argument is that if we applied a results-oriented criterion to religious claims, then we’d have to conclude that the OT cultus was a false religion.
“Firstly, Steve assumes that the Mosaic covenant inevitably led to apostasy.”
Once again, no part of my original argument.
“Or does he assume that protestantism doesn't inevitably lead to apostasy?”
Perhaps I’m assuming that Orthodoxy inevitably leads to apostasy.
“Secondly, Steve assumes that we should not expect the 2nd covenant to be any different to the first.”
So, according to Orthodox, the OT Jews were unregenerate. I already dealt with that fallacious interpretation the last time Dave Armstrong and I went toe-to-toe.
“Israel's problem was their heart of stone which led to apostasy. We should not necessarily expect this problem again. God promises that in the future his people will have ONE heart.”
To the contrary, Orthodox is quite insistent that born-again Christians can lose their salvation. So there’s nothing, in principle, to keep the entire Orthodox communion from committing apostasy.
“Thirdly, there is the scriptural teaching that ‘you will know them by their fruits’. To say that consequences are irrelevant to knowing who is the people of God would be decidedly unbiblical.”
i) Another straw man argument. I was discussing the rule of faith, not faith in the rule.
ii) But since he raises the issue, let us, by all means inspect the fruit of Orthodoxy. As Timothy Ware recounts:
“At this juncture I received a powerfully-worded letter from an English Orthodox priest with whom I was in correspondence, Archimandrite Lazarus (Moore), at that time resident in India. With reference to the Orthodox Church, he wrote:
‘Here I must warn you that the outward form of the Church [i.e., the Orthodox Church] is desperately wretched, in a word crucified, with little cooperation or coordination between the various national bodies, little deep use and appreciation of our spiritual riches, little missionary and apostolic spirit, little grasp of the situation or of the needs of our times, little generosity or heroism or real sanctity. My advice is: Look not at the things that are seen... Letter of April 11, 1957’.”
http://www.geocities.com/trvalentine/orthodox/ware_conversion.html
So what are the fruits of Orthodoxy? “Little cooperation or coordination between the various national bodies, little deep use and appreciation of our spiritual riches, little missionary and apostolic spirit, little grasp of the situation or of the needs of our times, little generosity or heroism or real sanctity.”
Couldn’t put it better myself.
ReplyDeleteORTHODOX: But not inevitably to apostasy.
Their apostasy was decreed. The Mosaic Covenant republishes the Covenant of Works and administers grace via the levitical code.
GENE: On the contrary, Israel did, in point of fact, very often disagree within itself regarding Scripture's proper interpretation.
ORTHODOX: But which had nothing to do with the apostasy.
I didn't say it did. I was merely pointing out that this statement of yours is patently false:
I would say that Israel had problems with apostasy because of their hard hearts, whereas protestants are in chaos because sola scriptura isn't enough to define the rule of faith. The problem isn't (always) protestants with hard hearts, it is just that they are not sure what the Christian faith is and disagreeing with what other people think. A rather different problem to Israel.
Israel did if fact do just that, and it was precisely that sort of disagreement and/or misunderstanding that brought about national apostasy at the time of the Exile and again when they crucified Christ. It was this very sort of thing that Christ exploited when interacting with the religious leaders, for He would cause them to fight among themselves, thereby hardening them and resulting in apostasy.
GENE: But according to you, true believers can, indeed apostatize.
ORTHODOX: The verse is in the plural, not the singular
If true believers can apostatize, Orthodox then it is YOU, not we who is making the assumption that the New Covenant is like the Old.
ORTHODOX: Again, it's in the plural. So the undividedness between true and false is in the context of the people of God.
Yes, I will give them one heart. This is not about institutional oneness, Orthodox, it's about ethical purity. They will put aside their idols. So, this fails as an argument against organizational disunity, since, in context, it has nothing to do with it.
Anyway, the point is it is false to assume the old covenant is the same as the new.
A. That isn't the assumption.
B. Reformed theology does not teach that. It would help if you'd familiarize yourself with basic covenant theology from our side of the aisle.
ORTHODOX: When the only ones advocating said rule of faith are the ones with said infighting, I think we've got a fruits problem.
Oh, really, so there has never been infighting among the Orthodox?
And notice that, yet again, Orthodox does not interact with the text he cites.
STEVE: Here I must warn you that the outward form of the Church [i.e., the Orthodox Church]
ReplyDeleteORTHODOX: The outward form? Man looks at the outward appearance, but the LORD looks at the heart. (1 Sa 16:7).
Of course, Steve was quoting Timothy Ware...
Here is a list of previous Triablogue articles dealing with EO.
ReplyDelete