This is in response to a comparison between the Orthodox Study Bible and the Geneva Bible.
In regard to the claim that justification is an ongoing process.
Point 1: If we are justified (aorist) then how is it an ongoing state? At best that is vague language. The aorist tense suggests a completed action, not an ongoing one. It seems the OSB is conflating “salvation” with “justification,” but Protestants do not hold that. The study bible says,
Faith is more than the conviction that something is true
This is classic Reformed 101. Reformed define faith in a 3-fold way. This is further evidence that for all of the irenicism, Orthodox simply do not bother to understand what Reformed teach.
Stated: In its reaction to medieval Roman Catholicism Protestantism became allergic to the role of good works in salvation.
This is ironic since the Puritans are usually accused of being legalists. We simply deny that works are the instrumental and efficient causes in our salvation. How hard is that to understand?
About tradition: Quick question: give empirical verification that the traditions you have today are the same as the apostles’. Do not employ the fallacy of asserting the consequent.
About the real presence: essentially the Protestants are wrong because they are ambivalent on the real presence. Maybe so, but that’s not an argument that it is logically true. Also ironic is that the Scriptures suddenly become clear, objective, and literal when proving a pet doctrine. But I come back to a question: Is the divine nature present in the Eucharist? Presumably the OSB will say yes. Can the divine nature exist outside of a hypostasis, whether that of Father, Son or Spirit? The OSB will have to say no because of the doctrine of enhypostasis. This means logically that the hypostasis of Jesus is present. But this becomes problematic when multiple Eucharists are being celebrated at the same time, for then we will have multiple hypostases of Jesus! Nestorius didn’t even teach this!
Then there are the usual calls tha tProtestants need to own up to their own traditions. Have these people not heard of the presuppositional school? Of course Protestants know that. We also know that our understanding isn’t infallible.