Talk:Eastern Orthodox theology

638:. As a result, the article started out as a mish-mash of text that was disjointed rather than flowing smoothly. I have worked to remedy some of that but it still needs work. I would like some fresh eyes to look at the article from the perspective of a reader coming to this article without any knowledge of the various components of the doctrine. My question is: does the article do an adequate job of presenting the key components of the doctrine? Of course, the details of each component should be covered in the subsidiary article on that component. The 209: 188: 80: 53: 90: 156: 22: 1214: 795:

The Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox Churches teach that both the elect and the lost enter into the presence of God after death, and that the elect experience this presence as light and rest, while the lost experience it as darkness and torment. the souls of the departed - in either Heaven or

399:

But this article is not entitled 'Orthodox theology', but 'Eastern Orthodox theology', and in English, 'Eastern Orthodox' refers to Orthodox Christianity, and not to Orthodox Judaism. It is simply not the case that there is any significant usage in English of referring to Orthodox Judaism as 'Eastern

312:

Thank you, I am aware of wikipedia etiquette. But actually, if you look at each edit one-by-one, you see that each is concerned merely with tidying up some poorly-turned phrases or removing stray comments. The fact that I made a series of such edits doesn't really affect the fact that each edit taken

520:

The lead sentence reads "The theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church is particular to that Christian communion." What is the intent of this sentence? Who would consider that the theology would not be "particular" to that communion? Or, conversely, what theology is not particular to the communion

539:

and I just want to say that when I added a ref (#8) to John Romanides' concept of Ancestral Sin I had noticed I deleted all that followed. I tried to fix it; to no avail. I apologize but if there is someone more tech savvy out there I beg you to restore the article w/ the rest of the text that was

808:

Here hades, not Hell, is being referred to. For Hell will begin after the Second Coming of Christ and the future judgement, while the souls of sinners experience hades after their departure from the body. According to the teaching of the holy Fathers, hades is an intelligible place, it is the

392:

Well, of course, when a Jewish context is given, then it makes perfect sense to speak of Orthodox Judaism as 'Orthodoxy' without any qualification. Similarly, given a Christian context, then to speak of Eastern Orthodoxy as 'Orthodoxy' without any qualification likewise makes perfect sense.

422:

usage alone may shift some of the arguments in your favor, it is neither here nor there, because as you have admitted, the words "Orthodox" and "Orthodoxy" can be confused causing confusion, which is the central problem I am grappling with here, and which should be clarified in

344:'Eastern Orthodox Church theology' is a confused locution. It may be grammatically confused (since 'Church' and 'theology' are both nouns), or it may mis-title the article, since the article is about Eastern Orthodox theology generally, and not simply about Eastern Orthodox 352:

A number of articles pertaining to Eastern Orthodoxy have been changed in this way. I suggest it would be better for such changes to be discussed before being made, and the most obvious forum for that would be the Eastern Orthodoxy wikiproject.

471:

I added the neutrality tag; I didn't see a dispute in the recent history. The language in the article appears to flip-flop between having a neutral discussion of theology and (accidentally?) making theological statements as fact, e.g.

803:

However, while reading about Orthodox theology, I've sometimes encountered a somewhat different view. For example, consider the following passage from the webpage that LoveMonkey links to in the section just above this one:

441:

Izak, I am weary of this. There is no ambiguity here, since, in English, no Jewish group is called 'Eastern Orthodox'. So there is nothing to be disambiguated. You are pretending an ambiguity exists when it does not exist.

487:

Is that necessary? One would think that on a page titled "Eastern Orthodox Christian theology," the views detaield therein would be representative of Eastern Orthodox Christian theology and not necessarily hard facts.

453:

ambiguous, since 'Eastern Orthodoxy' is not ambiguous. In the same way, to have an article entitled 'Union' would be ambiguous, but to have one entitled 'European Union' is not ambiguous. I'm sure you understand now.

790:

I'm a bit confused about the discussion of the Orthodox view of hell. I'm not an expert on Eastern Orthodox theology, so please correct me if I'm misunderstanding something here. The article says the following:

404:

well established in English to use the expression 'Eastern Orthodoxy' unqualified to designate Orthodox Christianity, and to use 'Eastern Orthodox' to designate that which pertains to Orthodox Christianity.

292:

are edits which fix things like grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. These were definitely major content edits, involving 38 separate edits and replacing and deleting a significant portion of content.

813:

If I understand this passage correctly, it says the following: the wicked experience a "foretaste" of hell immediately after death, but they do not experience hell until judgment day.

492:

I agree. It is obvious that any statements made in the article are about Eastern theology, and it would be most uneconomical to say "Orthodox belive that..." before every sentence.

1226: 540:

for some reason deleted. If you have the time, I would be more than happy to hear why I screwed up as to avoid making the same mistake in the future. Cheers and Happy New Year!

396:

And indeed, had this article been called 'Orthodox theology', without qualification, it would have been ambiguous whether it was about Orthodox Christianity or Orthodox Judaism.

478:

This first and third state something as fact, and the middle one is (correctly) presented as a tenet of Orthodox Theology. If I had a bunch of time, I would clean it up myself.

800:

As currently worded, the section seems to say the following: the wicked experience hell immediately after death, but they do not receive a final judgment until judgment day.

1267: 170: 475:

God is merciful to all. The Orthodox believe that there is nothing that a person (Orthodox or non-Orthodox) can do to earn salvation. It is rather a gift from God.

382:. In any case, what do the words "Eastern Orthodox" alone mean? Eastern Orthodox what? Is it not the Eastern Orthodox Church's theology that this article deals with? 750:"Eastern Orthodox Christology has not changed since the Christian Church started." Is this a neutral statement. I think it should be deleted as it cannot be shown. 1272: 1151: 1147: 1133: 1007: 1003: 989: 1257: 146: 136: 1262: 1287: 1277: 249: 259: 495: 165: 112: 63: 431:

and how best to set the names of articles so that they convey maximum clarity, when not everyone is an expert on "Orthodoxies" of varying kinds.

341:'Eastern Orthodox' is a standard and adequately specific means of adjectivally qualifying something as pertaining to the Eastern Orthodox Church. 1292: 1252: 704:

The Father is the eternal source of the Godhead, from Whom the Son is begotten eternally and also from Whom the Holy Spirit proceeds eternally.

816:

Do Orthodox theologians disagree about when hell begins? Or should we change the article to say that hell doesn't begin until judgment day? --

499: 338:'Eastern Orthodox theology' is the most commonly established usage in English for designating the theology of the Eastern Orthodox Church. 1103: 839: 627: 569: 556: 225: 945: 935: 925: 915: 905: 895: 885: 875: 865: 855: 1282: 1222: 1206: 103: 58: 1129:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

1069:, and seems to be in a poorer state thatn the present section overthere. May I suggest to replace this page with a redirect to 690:

Orthodox Christians believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah, Saviour and Son of God and that he was begotten before all ages.

955: 216: 193: 379: 1194: 1050: 635: 300: 33: 1082: 821: 503: 1150:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1119: 1006:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

208: 187: 653: 428: 334:

I have reverted the renaming of the article as 'Eastern Orthodox Church theology', for the following reasons:

281:

Thanks for the recent major edits to the article. They generally look good, although as is the case with the

573: 1185: 1111: 1070: 1066: 1041: 847: 552: 282: 601: 374:

Orthodoxy many times. Indeed, when mentioning "Orthodoxy" (the Jewish kind) the method is to dab it thus:

1169:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1157: 1025:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1013: 548: 39: 1110:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 846:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1218: 1229:

until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

1074: 980: 817: 776: 753: 565: 544: 946: