Altar Calls-Non-Catholic/Orthodox

[Nicea325]

Originally Posted by Nicea325
But apparently many do believe there exist multiple meanings or else thousands of denominations would not be popping up. Okay,but who decides or determines the correct interpretation?

Itwin:

Divisions do not exist because Christians believe there can be multiple meanings to Scripture. Divisions exist because Christians believe there is only one meaning to Scripture, and when that meaning becomes disputed division results.

Are you sure? JW’s and Mormons evidently interpret Scripture with totally different lenses. How about the Arians? How about the Montanists? Luther and Calvin had a different understanding of the Eucharist based on what? Their own interpretations of Scripture.

Protestant churches do have methods for making decisions for their own bodies about how they interpret Scripture. However, if people feel that these decisions are wrong there is no civil power who will persecute and suppress them. They are free to start their own organization to propagate their rival interpretation.

And a dangerous position because it only encourages divisions,no preventive measures are taken to stop further divisions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Which may also be very detrimental to one’s salvation,if he or she is misinterpreting Scripture? Who then is accountable? The provider of the Word or the receiver of the Word?

Both are accountable. The provider is accountable for what he preaches. The receiver for what he hears.

How is the receiver accountable when he/she truly believes the person providing-teaching is correct? It would be like if a teacher is teaching the students circles and triangles are the exact same shapes. How are the students accountable,if they are barely learning about shapes?

 

[ltwin]

Are you sure? JW’s and Mormons evidently interpret Scripture with totally different lenses. How about the Arians? How about the Montanists? Luther and Calvin had a different understanding of the Eucharist based on what? Their own interpretations of Scripture.

And they all believed their interpretation was the correct one. Therefore, they did not believe there was multiple meanings. They believed their interpretation was the right one and that the other ones were wrong.

And a dangerous position because it only encourages divisions,no preventive measures are taken to stop further divisions.

What does the Catholic Church do when groups split from them? What “preventive measures” are possible in the world we live in when anyone can start their own church if they want to?

Yeah, its messy. But its better than being burned at the stake because you disagree with the “establishment.”

How is the receiver accountable when he/she truly believes the person providing-teaching is correct? It would be like if a teacher is teaching the students circles and triangles are the exact same shapes. How are the students accountable,if they are barely learning about shapes?

If the preacher says, “Christ is cursed,” then the student will be held responsible if they believe that what the preacher says is correct. Anyone saying “Christ is cursed” directly contradicts Scripture.

 

[ltwin]

So what would prevent him from marrying a person who’s been previously divorced?

I don’t know specifically. It would probably be a case by case basis.

 

[PRmerger]

And they all believed their interpretation was the correct one. Therefore, they did not believe there was multiple meanings. They believed their interpretation was the right one and that the other ones were wrong.

But the Protestant Sola Scriptura paradigm allows for this, and has no recourse when someone disagrees with another’s interpretation. All the JW/Mormon/Westboro Baptist church member has to say is, “I am doing exactly what you do: reading the Bible and coming to a conclusion about what it means.”

The Catholic, however, says, “You cannot read the Bible apart from the faith which gave you this Bible. You need the guidance of the Church to interpret it…and when you have departed from their teachings, you have divorced yourself from the faith given, once for all, to the Apostles.”

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t know specifically. It would probably be a case by case basis.

Interesting. So again it is up to the individual pastor’s application of the Word of God. A fallible interpretation.

He may, in his error, decide it’s okay to marry* a divorced person.
Or, erroneously declare that it’s forbidden to marry* a divorced person.

Based on some unknown or unknowable criterion.

(Even when Scripture clearly states that divorce and re-marriage is adultery. Jesus’ words.)

*“witness” the marriage or perform the ceremony

 

[PRmerger]

What does the Catholic Church do when groups split from them? What “preventive measures” are possible in the world we live in when anyone can start their own church if they want to?

Well, in the Protestant paradigm anyone who starts a church if he wants to is being a good Protestant.

But in the Catholic paradigm we look at that as a departure from the One True Faith.

A Protestant is being a good Protestant when he says, “I cannot agree with my fallible pastor’s interpretation of the Bible. The Holy Spirit has told me how to interpret that verse, and my interpretation is in direct contradiction to my pastor’s, therefore I am bound to leave this erroneous teaching. That is what a good Bible Alone Christian does.”

A Catholic is being a bad Catholic when he says, “I cannot agree with the infallible Church’s interpretation of the Bible. The Holy Spirit has told me how to interpret that verse, and my interpretation is in direct contradiction to the Magisterium.” The Catholic Church would say this person is bound to give religious assent to the teaching that he disagrees with. That is what a good Catholic does.

 

[ltwin]

Interesting. So again it is up to the individual pastor’s application of the Word of God. A fallible interpretation.

He may, in his error, decide it’s okay to marry* a divorced person.
Or, erroneously declare that it’s forbidden to marry* a divorced person.

Based on some unknown or unknowable criterion.

(Even when Scripture clearly states that divorce and re-marriage is adultery. Jesis’ words.)

*“witness” the marriage or perform the ceremony

If you want to know Pentecostals believe about divorce and remarriage, I discussed this on another thread: #173, #179, #195, #197, #199, #201, #205.

 

[PRmerger]

If you want to know Pentecostals believe about divorce and remarriage, I discussed this on another thread: #173, #179, #195, #197, #199, #201, #205.

But that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s what your pastor believes, right? He’s certainly free to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and declare something different than what you believe, right?

 

[ltwin]

But that doesn’t necessarily mean that’s what your pastor believes, right? He’s certainly free to be inspired by the Holy Spirit and declare something different than what you believe, right?

My pastor is a Pentecostal pastor. He comes at things from a Pentecostal perspective. My church’'s approach is generally #2 listed in post 179.

In those posts, I am not advocating my own beliefs on marriage but those that are held within the Pentecostal community generally. That is why I cite an Assemblies of God position paper.

 

[Nicea325]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
Are you sure? JW’s and Mormons evidently interpret Scripture with totally different lenses. How about the Arians? How about the Montanists? Luther and Calvin had a different understanding of the Eucharist based on what? Their own interpretations of Scripture.

Itwin:
And they all believed their interpretation was the correct one. Therefore, they did not believe there was multiple meanings. They believed their interpretation was the right one and that the other ones were wrong.

Hhhm? Well if they believed their interpretation was the correct one, evidently they had a different understanding/meaning to specific terms, hence a different interpretation from orthodoxy. If they didn’t then it would not be called heterodoxy. Again, Luther and Calvin never saw eye-to-eye about the Eucharist and why?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
And a dangerous position because it only encourages divisions,no preventive measures are taken to stop further divisions.

What does the Catholic Church do when groups split from them? What “preventive measures” are possible in the world we live in when anyone can start their own church if they want to?

Yeah, its messy. But its better than being burned at the stake because you disagree with the “establishment.”

Well yes, I picked a bad choice of words there. I mean, division is always bad. Aaahh…let us not generalize “burning” at the stake as only a Catholic practice. I can provide you plenty of stake burnings conducted by Protestants.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicea325
How is the receiver accountable when he/she truly believes the person providing-teaching is correct? It would be like if a teacher is teaching the students circles and triangles are the exact same shapes. How are the students accountable,if they are barely learning about shapes?

If the preacher says, “Christ is cursed,” then the student will be held responsible if they believe that what the preacher says is correct. Anyone saying “Christ is cursed” directly contradicts Scripture.

Okay,but I do not think the above truly answers my argument. Again, it would be like a teacher, teaching the students circles and triangles are the exact same shapes. How are the students accountable,if they are barely learning about shapes?

 

[PRmerger]

My pastor is a Pentecostal pastor. He comes at things from a Pentecostal perspective. My church’'s approach is generally #2 listed in post 179.

In those posts, I am not advocating my own beliefs on marriage but those that are held within the Pentecostal community generally. That is why I cite an Assemblies of God position paper.

But what I am saying, ltwin, is that he is not bound by any of those positions that you espouse.

He can, at any point, declare: the Holy Spirit has inspired me to interpret the verses in Scripture in a way that is contradictory to yours.

And because of your paradigm, you can only say, “Well, you are doing it the way we both espouse. We both say that we can and must read the Bible and follow the directives of the Holy Spirit.”

Catholics, however, do not follow this paradigm. If a pastor comes to a conclusion that is different than the Magisterium, he is bound to correct his contrary view.

 

[PRmerger]

If you want to know Pentecostals believe about divorce and remarriage, I discussed this on another thread: #173, #179, #195, #197, #199, #201, #205.

I see on post #173 that you said that some Pentecostal denominations forbid divorce. Some do not.

That is about as nebulous as saying, in response to the question: “What is the Republican party’s position on immigration?”

“Some like it. Some do not.”

 

[JonNC]

=PRmerger;10867772]But the Protestant Sola Scriptura paradigm allows for this, and has no recourse when someone disagrees with another’s interpretation. All the JW/Mormon/Westboro Baptist church member has to say is, “I am doing exactly what you do: reading the Bible and coming to a conclusion about what it means.”

That isn’t the SS paradigm, however.

The Catholic, however, says, “You cannot read the Bible apart from the faith which gave you this Bible. You need the guidance of the Church to interpret it…and when you have departed from their teachings, you have divorced yourself from the faith given, once for all, to the Apostles.”

A good Lutheran doesn’t read the scripture apart from the confessions. And from Martin Chemnitz: We also gratefully and reverently use the labors of the fathers who by their commentaries have profitably clarified many passages of the Scripture. And we confess that we are greatly confirmed by the testimonies of the ancient church in the true and sound understanding of the Scripture. Nor do we approve of it if someone invents for himself a meaning which conflicts with all antiquity, and for which there are clearly no testimonies of the church.

Jon

 

[ltwin]

But what I am saying, ltwin, is that he is not bound by any of those positions that you espouse.

He’s not bound by what I espouse.

He can, at any point, declare: the Holy Spirit has inspired me to interpret the verses in Scripture in a way that is contradictory to yours.

And because of your paradigm, you can only say, “Well, you are doing it the way we both espouse. We both say that we can and must read the Bible and follow the directives of the Holy Spirit.”

Catholics, however, do not follow this paradigm. If a pastor comes to a conclusion that is different than the Magisterium, he is bound to correct his contrary view.

My pastor only has so much freedom to interpret the Bible. He can be removed by the church if he teaches contrary to Scripture.

 

[JonNC]

Itwin:

Are you sure? JW’s and Mormons evidently interpret Scripture with totally different lenses. How about the Arians? How about the Montanists? Luther and Calvin had a different understanding of the Eucharist based on what? Their own interpretations of Scripture.

Luther’s was based on so much more than scripture:
"Who ever read in the Scriptures, that my body is the same as the sign of my body? or, that is is the same as it signifies? What language in the world ever spoke so? It is only then the devil, that imposes upon us by these fanatical men. Not one of the Fathers of the Church, though so numerous, ever spoke as the Sacramentarians: not one of them ever said, It is only bread and wine; or, the body and blood of Christ is not there present.
Surely, it is not credible, nor possible, since they often speak, and repeat their sentiments, that they should never (if they thought so) not so much as once, say, or let slip these words: It is bread only; or the body of Christ is not there, especially it being of great importance, that men should not be deceived. Certainly, in so many Fathers, and in so many writings, the negative might at least be found in one of them, had they thought the body and blood of Christ were not really present: but they are all of them unanimous.”

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

That isn’t the SS paradigm, however.

No, not the Lutheran def of SS.

But some other denominations’ def of SS, indeed it is.

 

[PRmerger]

He’s not bound by what I espouse.

Exactly. So I still am wondering what your pastor’s position is on divorce and re-marriage.

And it appears that you also are unclear about it. You do not know whether he would or would not marry a man who had been previously divorced.

I know what my Church’s pastor would do. Exactly.

My pastor only has so much freedom to interpret the Bible. He can be removed by the church if he teaches contrary to Scripture.

If I were that pastor I would vehemently fight any removal from my office with this statement: but I am only doing that which the Bible Alone advocates declare I can do.

 

[ltwin]

But the Protestant Sola Scriptura paradigm allows for this, and has no recourse when someone disagrees with another’s interpretation. All the JW/Mormon/Westboro Baptist church member has to say is, “I am doing exactly what you do: reading the Bible and coming to a conclusion about what it means.”

The Catholic, however, says, “You cannot read the Bible apart from the faith which gave you this Bible. You need the guidance of the Church to interpret it…and when you have departed from their teachings, you have divorced yourself from the faith given, once for all, to the Apostles.”

Believing that someone can interpret the Bible privately does not mean that a person’s interpretation is not subject to some kind of authority. Protestants submit to the authority of their churches just as much as Catholics submit to their. As a Pentecostal, I don’t agree with everything my church does, but I stay there because I recognize that I need spiritual leadership.

Any Protestant or Catholic can refuse to submit to the authority of their church. That doesn’t make them “good Protestants” or “good Catholics.” It makes them Protestants or Catholics who refused to submit to their church’s authority and left.

 

[JonNC]

=PRmerger;10867829]Well, in the Protestant paradigm anyone who starts a church if he wants to is being a good Protestant.

But in the Catholic paradigm we look at that as a departure from the One True Faith.

A Protestant is being a good Protestant when he says, “I cannot agree with my fallible pastor’s interpretation of the Bible. The Holy Spirit has told me how to interpret that verse, and my interpretation is in direct contradiction to my pastor’s, therefore I am bound to leave this erroneous teaching. That is what a good Bible Alone Christian does.”

If I disagree with my fallible pastor, I take it to him, then perhaps onto the Elders of the parish, then the Synod. IOW, I take it to the Church.

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

If I disafree with my fallible pastor, I take it to him, then perhaps onto the Elders of the parish, then the Synod. IOW, I take it to the Church.

Jon

Yes! That is the Catholic paradigm!

The Church is the authority when one disagrees with what Scripture means.