A Protestant.....?

[MeekandHumble]

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

Protestant a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth; broadly : a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

With an exception of a few, we/you/they/some/most etc… (as in protestants/not of the catholic faith) share some, if not all of the beliefs of the catholic church. Example, hell, purgatory, Sunday, infant baptism and so on. If you are a protestant, what exactly are you protesting?

One can’t be on both sides of the fence. You can’t say that the CC is not the true church yet hold their doctrine as truth.

This brings up a few questions (for a later discussion). If most of the world keeps the same common views, then when does Revelation 13:3 come into existence?

Revelation 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Who will the world follow? I mean, if the majority follows the CC (most beliefs) then who will this beast be?

 

[AJTheMan]

The Protestant reformation was not just a rejection of the Pope. Each group that reformed also had it’s list of doctrines that it disagreed with.

 

[MeekandHumble]

The Protestant reformation was not just a rejection of the Pope. Each group that reformed also had it’s list of doctrines that it disagreed with.

So what is happening today?

 

[BrianH]

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

Protestant a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth; broadly : a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

With an exception of a few, we/you/they/some/most etc… (as in protestants/not of the catholic faith) share some, if not all of the beliefs of the catholic church. Example, hell, purgatory, Sunday, infant baptism and so on. If you are a protestant, what exactly are you protesting?

One can’t be on both sides of the fence. You can’t say that the CC is not the true church yet hold their doctrine as truth.

This brings up a few questions (for a later discussion). If most of the world keeps the same common views, then when does Revelation 13:3 come into existence?

Revelation 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

Who will the world follow? I mean, if the majority follows the CC (most beliefs) then who will this beast be?

Um…why? Listen historically speaking, the exact nature of when particular doctrines became standard practice or “developed” (and they did develop) is pretty imprecise in many cases. On another note, doesn’t your question presuppose a form of infallibility which…you may or may not know…not everyone agrees with or to the extent they do agree!? Catholics are one of those groups that take a very very high view if you will of the whole infallibility issue…obviously.
Let me be summarize my undecided friend in bold for emphasis, ITS MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT
At least I think it is.

 

[MeekandHumble]

Um…why? Listen historically speaking, the exact nature of when particular doctrines became standard practice or “developed” (and they did develop) is pretty imprecise in many cases. On another note, doesn’t your question presuppose a form of infallibility which…you may or may not know…not everyone agrees with or to the extent they do agree!? Catholics are one of those groups that take a very very high view if you will of the whole infallibility issue…obviously.
Let me be summarize my undecided friend in bold for emphasis, ITS MORE COMPLICATED THAN THAT
At least I think it is.

Do you, as a methodist, hold cc doctrine as truth? I mean, the common things?

 

[Cable]

Protestants except Catholic tradition which determined the group of books in the Bible as well as Catholic doctrines like the blessed Trinity w/ Jesus fully God and fully Man. Some of their other doctrines can be traced back to somebody like Calvin or Luther. Accepting the authority of the RCC on some matters, but not on others, - resembling cafeteria Catholics.

 

[MeekandHumble]

Protestants except Catholic tradition which determined the group of books in the Bible as well as Catholic doctrines like the blessed Trinity w/ Jesus fully God and fully Man. Some of their other doctrines can be traced back to somebody like Calvin or Luther. Accepting the authority of the RCC on some matters, but not on others, - resembling cafeteria Catholics.

Tradition has nothing to do with the Bible being put together.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Tradition has nothing to do with the Bible being put together.

It seems to me that you’re imagining “tradition” in a different sense than he’s using it. Historically speaking, the Apostles write the books which will later become the New Testament, but the early Church is far from unanimous as to which precise books are canonical and which ones are not. The plurality view in the early Church was the modern Catholic canon (most famously held by St. Augustine), and that’s the one officially confirmed by the Church: first at regional Councils (Hippo and Carthage) and shortly thereafter, affirmed by the pope, who instructed St. Jerome to create a Latin version, which became known as the Vulgate. Tradition, to Catholics, doesn’t mean like celebrating New Year’s every year by opening crackers, nor does it generally mean passing stories down orally.

So that’s a super-short version of what we believe. What do you believe?

 

[nuntym]

Tradition has nothing to do with the Bible being put together.

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

Main Entry: tra·di·tion
Pronunciation: rə-ˈdi-shən
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tradicioun, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French tradicion, from Latin tradition-, traditio action of handing over, tradition — more at treason
Date: 14th century

1 a : an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or a social custom) b : a belief or story or a body of beliefs or stories relating to the past that are commonly accepted as historical though not verifiable
2 : the handing down of information, beliefs, and customs by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without written instruction
3 : cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions
4 : characteristic manner, method, or style

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tradition

MeekandHumble, the Bible did not fall from Heaven fully assembled. Christians compiled the books, choosing them with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, without any written instructions on how to do that or what books to choose. Therefore, the Bible was assembled by Tradition under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Besides, in your life MeekandHumble, how did you come to know the Bible? Wasn’t it from another person?

 

[MeekandHumble]

Merriam-Webster’s online dictionary:

Main Entry: tra·di·tion
Pronunciation: rə-ˈdi-shən
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English tradicioun, from Middle French & Latin; Middle French tradicion, from Latin tradition-, traditio action of handing over, tradition — more at treason
Date: 14th century

1 a : an inherited, established, or customary pattern of thought, action, or behavior (as a religious practice or a social custom) b : a belief or story or a body of beliefs or stories relating to the past that are commonly accepted as historical though not verifiable
2 : the handing down of information, beliefs, and customs by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without written instruction
3 : cultural continuity in social attitudes, customs, and institutions
4 : characteristic manner, method, or style

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tradition

MeekandHumble, the Bible did not fall from Heaven fully assembled. Christians compiled the books, choosing them with the guidance of the Holy Spirit, without any written instructions on how to do that or what books to choose. Therefore, the Bible was assembled by Tradition under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

Besides, in your life MeekandHumble, how did you come to know the Bible? Wasn’t it from another person?

The Bible is not tradition. It is the Word of God.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

The Bible is not tradition. It is the Word of God.

Right. Well, Sacred Tradition, which is the kind of tradition we’re talking about, is the Word of God, expressed both in written and spoken Apostolic teachings. The written teachings we call the Bible, the spoken teachings are reflected in the writings of the early Church Fathers and early Church art.

Where did you think the Bible came from?

 

[MeekandHumble]

Right. Well, Sacred Tradition, which is the kind of tradition we’re talking about, is the Word of God, expressed both in written and spoken Apostolic teachings. The written teachings we call the Bible, the spoken teachings are reflected in the writings of the early Church Fathers and early Church art.

Where did you think the Bible came from?

Again, the Bible is the word of God and came from God.

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Again, the Bible is the word of God and came from God.

Sure. But it’s not as if God wrote it Himself. Christ didn’t even leave a paper trail during His earthly life, although He easily could have. It was all done through the Church. I’m not saying it’s not inspired. I’m saying that God works through others frequently. Look at Jesus’ first miracle: the water into wine at Cana in John 2. He never even touches the water: the servants do the actual physical labor. The same thing is occurring here. Saying “God did it” describes the Supreme Author, but not the hand at which Holy Scripture was dictated, or penned, or compiled.

 

[MeekandHumble]

Sure. But it’s not as if God wrote it Himself. Christ didn’t even leave a paper trail during His earthly life, although He easily could have. It was all done through the Church. I’m not saying it’s not inspired. I’m saying that God works through others frequently. Look at Jesus’ first miracle: the water into wine at Cana in John 2. He never even touches the water: the servants do the actual physical labor. The same thing is occurring here. Saying “God did it” describes the Supreme Author, but not the hand at which Holy Scripture was dictated, or penned, or compiled.

I get what you are saying, but that does not make the Bible tradition. Tradition can or cannot be passed down, it can be done away with, it is man-made, tradition can change. These are not the characteristics of God word.

 

[Chris_S_1]

I get what you are saying, but that does not make the Bible tradition. Tradition can or cannot be passed down, it can be done away with, it is man-made, tradition can change. These are not the characteristics of God word.

A definition of Sacred Tradition would be teachings that came from God through the Apostles, and the Bible certainly fits this definition. Now you may define tradition as something else, but according to the definition I gave, the Bible is Tradition.

 

[MeekandHumble]

A definition of Sacred Tradition would be teachings that came from God through the Apostles, and the Bible certainly fits this definition. Now you may define tradition as something else, but according to the definition I gave, the Bible is Tradition.

Matthew 15:2,3 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

If you read the two verses, you will see that there is a difference between tradition and the word of God.

Here are more.

Mark 7:8,9 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Tradition is man made. God’s law is not man made, but put together through me.

 

[nuntym]

The Bible is not tradition. It is the Word of God.

You haven’t answered my question, MeekandHumble.

In your life MeekandHumble, how did you come to know the Bible? Wasn’t it from another person?

Matthew 15:2,3 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

If you read the two verses, you will see that there is a difference between tradition and the word of God.

Here are more.

Mark 7:8,9 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Tradition is man made. God’s law is not man made, but put together through me.

Ah, but how did God’s Word come to us? Did the Bible fall from the heavens, all bound up? Is not Scripture written down by men, albeit guided by the Holy Spirit? And did not men also decide which of all the writings available then which books will comprise the Scriptures, again guided by the Holy Spirit?

And is it not also written:

So then, brethren, stand firm and hold to the traditions which you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by letter. (2 Thess 2:15)?

 

[Belloc_Fan]

Matthew 15:2,3 Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?

If you read the two verses, you will see that there is a difference between tradition and the word of God.

Here are more.

Mark 7:8,9 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Mark 7:13 Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye.

Colossians 2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

Tradition is man made. God’s law is not man made, but put together through me.

You’re half-right. There are two types of tradition: man-made tradition and Sacred Tradition. That’s why in every one of the verses you just provided, the Bible is quick to note “the tradition of men” or “your tradition,” rather than tradition generally.

In 2 Thessalonians 2:15, Paul says, “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle.” So the Bible says pretty clearly that there are two forms of Sacred Tradition which we are called to keep: the Bible (Tradition by epistles) and Sacred Tradition orally delivered. We know what was orally delivered because the early Christians commented on it. So the Bible considers the Bible to be Tradition, and considers there to be binding Tradition outside the Bible. Whatever you were taught about how all tradition is bad is just itself a tradition of men not based on what the Bible actually teaches here.