<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Stay Away From The Sand.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frantonios.org.au/2009/11/28/stay-away-from-the-sand/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frantonios.org.au/2009/11/28/stay-away-from-the-sand/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 25 Jul 2010 09:16:18 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: AA</title>
		<link>http://www.frantonios.org.au/2009/11/28/stay-away-from-the-sand/comment-page-1/#comment-431</link>
		<dc:creator>AA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 23:59:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frantonios.org.au/?p=136#comment-431</guid>
		<description>Hi Abouna,

I like your blog, but I must add that our church&#039;s own tradition is full of those who misinterpreted the Bible, and we recognize this. For instance, St. Augustine believed in a certain form of predestination, which not only heavily influenced the works and teachings of John Calvin, but is also contrary to our church&#039;s teaching on the link between human and divine will. I once brought this up to a Bishop, and, if I recall correctly, he told me that our church doesn&#039;t recognize all the teachings of St. Augustine. Origen is another classic example of an early church father&#039;s teachings that strongly oppose our Church&#039;s doctrine, although this probably isn&#039;t the best example as he was excommunicated. 

This begs the question, are we not just picking and choosing when we decide whose doctrine is right? We don&#039;t even believe in the teachings of Christendom&#039;s (post-Biblical times) most brilliant and influential mind: St. Augustine. What makes his interpretation of predestination any more wrong than our reading of Scripture on this topic? This is an example, but I reckon there are numerous early church fathers whose teachings we summarily reject. 

What I&#039;m saying is that our Coptic history is, in many ways, similar to that of Catholic church in that there were people in the heyday who, although we recognize today as being doctors of the church, taught doctrine contrary to what be believe. Another example is St. Ambrose, who strongly opposed that woman should put any makeup on.

What makes us so certain that our interpretation of scripture is so accurate when our history is one of constant conflict between different ideas? Is it because our church has a historical precedent? I would say that this notion alone certainly doesn&#039;t preclude from any church of believing false doctrine.  I would posit that the only thing we can be sure of, in terms of lack of corruption, are the words of the Bible. 

 We certainly don&#039;t believe that our pope is infallible, so whose to say that St. Augustine was actually wrong about predestination or that St. Ambrose took it a bit too far to say that woman shouldn&#039;t wear makeup? 

Or does it simply boil down to consensus and a vote?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Abouna,</p>
<p>I like your blog, but I must add that our church&#8217;s own tradition is full of those who misinterpreted the Bible, and we recognize this. For instance, St. Augustine believed in a certain form of predestination, which not only heavily influenced the works and teachings of John Calvin, but is also contrary to our church&#8217;s teaching on the link between human and divine will. I once brought this up to a Bishop, and, if I recall correctly, he told me that our church doesn&#8217;t recognize all the teachings of St. Augustine. Origen is another classic example of an early church father&#8217;s teachings that strongly oppose our Church&#8217;s doctrine, although this probably isn&#8217;t the best example as he was excommunicated. </p>
<p>This begs the question, are we not just picking and choosing when we decide whose doctrine is right? We don&#8217;t even believe in the teachings of Christendom&#8217;s (post-Biblical times) most brilliant and influential mind: St. Augustine. What makes his interpretation of predestination any more wrong than our reading of Scripture on this topic? This is an example, but I reckon there are numerous early church fathers whose teachings we summarily reject. </p>
<p>What I&#8217;m saying is that our Coptic history is, in many ways, similar to that of Catholic church in that there were people in the heyday who, although we recognize today as being doctors of the church, taught doctrine contrary to what be believe. Another example is St. Ambrose, who strongly opposed that woman should put any makeup on.</p>
<p>What makes us so certain that our interpretation of scripture is so accurate when our history is one of constant conflict between different ideas? Is it because our church has a historical precedent? I would say that this notion alone certainly doesn&#8217;t preclude from any church of believing false doctrine.  I would posit that the only thing we can be sure of, in terms of lack of corruption, are the words of the Bible. </p>
<p> We certainly don&#8217;t believe that our pope is infallible, so whose to say that St. Augustine was actually wrong about predestination or that St. Ambrose took it a bit too far to say that woman shouldn&#8217;t wear makeup? </p>
<p>Or does it simply boil down to consensus and a vote?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
