Can anyone here who believes in the Protestant Christian doctrine which allows for "Personal Interpretation of the Bible" explain this?

[ChristianKnight]

Sigh. I wish people would quit saying Hitler was Catholic. He was born and baptized Catholic, yes.

So what?

So were much better men, like Martin Luther, who fell away. So were and are billions who didn’t fall away, like St. Francis, Blessed Mother Teresa, and John Paul the Great.

Hitler was a fallen-away Catholic - and a fallen-away Christian, for that matter. So quit with the “Hitler was Catholic” stuff. :banghead:

um No? The OP is implying that protestants are the reason for people who do wrong, or for some reason ‘influence’ that attitude which is a very wrong way to look at it, I am replying with the same reasoning he is.

 

[Jean_1958]

I think any sane person, Catholic or non-Catholic, would agree that the examples of cults/cult leaders as presented are “way out there” . These are extreme examples and do not accurately portray the vast majority of non-Catholics.

Anyone can be lead astray. Being Catholic is no assurance that one can not be lead astray.

ChristianKnight made a valid point in bringing up Hilter. Hitler was Catholic, but he quite obviously twisted religion to suit his own horrible agenda. He sought to make Nazism a state religion, he likened himself to Christ in speeches he made to the German people, and wanted to replace The Bible with Mein Kampf. Hitler is the CLASSIC example of a Catholic who turned away from God and became evil.

Unfortunately, the Devil is at work in this world to separate us from God. We must be vigilent.

Peace,

Jean

 

[Chancellare]

I think any sane person, Catholic or non-Catholic, would agree that the examples of cults/cult leaders as presented are “way out there” . These are extreme examples and do not accurately portray the vast majority of non-Catholics.

Anyone can be lead astray. Being Catholic is no assurance that one can not be lead astray.

ChristianKnight made a valid point in bringing up Hilter. Hitler was Catholic, but he quite obviously twisted religion to suit his own horrible agenda. He sought to make Nazism a state religion, he likened himself to Christ in speeches he made to the German people, and wanted to replace The Bible with Mein Kampf. Hitler is the CLASSIC example of a Catholic who turned away from God and became evil.

Unfortunately, the Devil is at work in this world to separate us from God. We must be vigilent.

Peace,

Jean

The argument that Hitler, being a Catholic, was also led astray -does not address the OP’s main point: That schism brought about by personal interpretation of Scriptures is a Protestant legacy.

Besides, we all know that using Hitler as example tend to imply a waning supply of sound arguments.

 

[ChristianKnight]

The argument that Hitler, being a Catholic, was also led astray -does not address the OP’s main point: That schism brought about by personal interpretation of Scriptures is a Protestant legacy.

Besides, we all know that using Hitler as example tend to imply a waning supply of sound arguments.

lol, the OP is trying to smear protestants by acting as if because protestants exist is the reason that things bad like that happen, that is just another way for him to attempt to smear protestants. I do not see any reason I shouldn’t make a obvious example of a Catholic who also did something wrong.

 

[Chancellare]

lol, the OP is trying to smear protestants by acting as if because protestants exist is the reason that things bad like that happen, that is just another way for him to attempt to smear protestants. I do not see any reason I shouldn’t make a obvious example of a Catholic who also did something wrong.

The fact that the doctrine of personal interpretation of Scriptures as praticed by protestantism produces schism is a logical and historical reality. I tend to look at it that way. No smearing.

 

[Crazy_Diamond]

The fact that the doctrine of personal interpretation of Scriptures as praticed by protestantism produces schism is a logical and historical reality. I tend to look at it that way. No smearing.

I think it’s too simple an analysis. The requirement for personal interpretation has also brought about a much stronger unity of heartfelt assent to shared beliefs than anyone expected five hundred years ago. Judging unity strictly by hierarchical authority structures has its own weaknesses.

Besides, the OP wasn’t limited to schism. The OP implied that personal interpretation led, as a “logical and historical reality,” to mass murder.

I still don’t like Goddard’s Law rearing its ugly head.

 

[Chancellare]

"Crazy[/RIGHT:

Diamond, post:126, topic:122570"]
The requirement for personal interpretation has also brought about a much stronger unity of heartfelt assent to shared beliefs than anyone expected five hundred years ago.

There are approx. 3500 different interpretations with many rejecting the rest. How can you call it ‘unity of heartfelt assent’?

"Crazy[/RIGHT:

Diamond, post:126, topic:122570"]

Judging unity strictly by hierarchical authority structures has its own weaknesses.

I’m not aware of anyone in this thread claiming that definition.​

 

[wanner47]

The problem I see with your criticism is this: RCC priests have molested children, Pope Benedict IX was rumored to have held bi-sexual orgies, other past popes have taken widow’s money in the form of abusing indulgences to line their own pockets, etc. It isn’t isolated to Protestants.

What does any of the above have to do with personal interpretation of the Bible?

Everyone sins. But this thread isn’t about sin, as I understand it. David Koresh et al didn’t think they were sinning; they honestly thought they were following God (or thought that they WERE God, maybe).

 

[RobbyS]

The fact that the doctrine of personal interpretation of Scriptures as praticed by protestantism produces schism is a logical and historical reality. I tend to look at it that way. No smearing.

Luther renounced the authority of the Church and relied on philology to interpret the Bible. However, that sceince does not lead to any real certainty; hence, the many divisions among Christians ending in vicious wars among Christians that discredited both Catholics and Reformers in the eyes of rational men like Montaigne and many others. The result was the growth of skepticism among the educated classes.

 

[ufamtobie]

Can anyone here, who believes-in, the Protestant, non-Catholic Christian doctrine, which allows for - “Personal Interpretation of the Bible”… explain this?

David Koresh and the non-Catholic “Christian” denomination, Branch Davidians

http://www.beyond.com.au/images/catalogue/mugshots - david koresh.jpg

Marshall Applewhite and the non-Catholic “Christian” denomination, Heaven’s Gate

http://interactivesermon.typepad.com/interactive_sermon/images/2007/12/14/image_2.jpg

Jim Jonesand the non-Catholic “Christian” denomination, the Peoples Temple

http://www.deathreference.com/images/medd_01_img0078.jpg

****Weren’t these tragic situations, created by bad…horrible… ****personal interpretations of the Bible?

My concern here is with the flawed doctrine of “personal interpretation”.

I know that the extreme cases above, do not represent the beliefs of most Protestant denominations; however, they do illustrate a point and that is that “personal interpretation” is a flawed doctrine, that can lead to disastrous results

Your Thoughts?

Jimmy,

I just had to LOL

You are correct as you know this is the reason for so many, many protestant churches out there with diferent interpretations of the Bible.

Ufamtobie