Dear Protestants, if the "Holy Spirit" leads you in interpreting the Bible...

[Daegus]

Then why is it that there are so many different things that you cannot agree upon amongst yourselves? Surely the HS doesn’t teach multiple truths on the same issue.

Example: 2 Protestant friends claim that they have the guidance of the HS leading them, but each have come to different conclusions about different moral topics. One Protestant claims that abortion, euthanasia and masturbation are morally acceptable while the other say that they are always moral evils.

Because Penelope and Patrick (that’s what we’ll call our Prot’ friends for now) claim to be led by the HS and hold 2 opposing views, we know that 1 of them mug be wrong because both of their views can’t be true.

How are you supposed to know who’s right when the words ‘euthanasia’, ‘abortion’ and ‘masturbation’ aren’t to be found anywhere in the Bible? With no one to speak infallibly on behalf of scripture interpretation, how will your dispute ever end?

Thanks
Daegus

 

[Sufjon]

How are you supposed to know who’s right when the words ‘euthanasia’, ‘abortion’ and ‘masturbation’ aren’t to be found anywhere in the Bible? With no one to speak infallibly on behalf of scripture interpretation, how will your dispute ever end?

Thanks
Daegus

Good question Daegus. But first, I think the problem is that the question categorizes Protestants as one church, but they are not. There are many different Protestant churches under the broader category of Christian, a sub-category of which is Protestant. Each might have a different view, or so it would appear. From an outside point of view of one like myself who is learning about Christianity, the question is broader and not confined to the differences between Protestants, but in the body Christian as a whole. of which your church is a part. To me, your church in in the same mix. So, taking a step back and looking at all Christians as part of this group of churches, the question you asked applies across the board - how do you know? I’m sure your church has a stand on these, as do the other churches. My guess is that you’ll say that your church is guided by the Holy Spirit. I am guessing they will say the same. How do you know? It is indeed a very good question that you’ve asked.

Your friend
Sufjon

 

[Daegus]

Good question Daegus. But first, I think the problem is that the question categorizes Protestants as one church, but they are not. There are many different Protestant churches under the broader category of Christian, a sub-category of which is Protestant. Each might have a different view, or so it would appear. From an outside point of view of one like myself who is learning about Christianity, the question is broader and not confined to the differences between Protestants, but in the body Christian as a whole. of which your church is a part. To me, your church in in the same mix. So, taking a step back and looking at all Christians as part of this group of churches, the question you asked applies across the board - how do you know? I’m sure your church has a stand on these, as do the other churches. My guess is that you’ll say that your church is guided by the Holy Spirit. I am guessing they will say the same. How do you know? It is indeed a very good question that you’ve asked.

Your friend
Sufjon

How can the “one” body of Christ that is the Church be divided with contradicting opinions? Both can’t be right if both views say completely different things about a certain topic. Besides, what makes your exegesis anymore credible than someone else’s? Both of you claim to have the HS on your back, but only 1 of you has it right. The issue is also that since you have no one to speak infallibly for you no one can truly be certain of anything regarding their faith.

On another note, I was going to mention that the hypothetical Protestants were respectively Presbyterian and Episcopalian (as an example) but I didn’t think that it mattered so I left that info out. I know that not all Protestants are the same (which is pretty much the whole point of this topic). I think it’s also fair to say that Jesus only really established ONE church upon Peter to teach ONE truth. Since the Bible also says that the Church is the pillar and the foundation of truth I think it’s equally fair to say that Jesus did not intend to establish a body of mystical believers divided in opinion, but an actual physical Church where the truth could be taught.

 

[Edmundus1581]

This question was one which got me questioning protestantism very soon after I became a Christian!

In my time as a protestant I heard three different answers to this:

1. The different interpretations are all like different “facets of a diamond”, and they don’t really contradict, but are “reconciled in Christ”. The people who said this nevertheless also believed that those who disagreed with them on matters which were important to them(eg. ordination of women, creationism, whatever…) were just plain “wrong”.
2. We shouldn’t attempt to “interpret” scripture - we should just accept what is actually written. That is where most new denominations come from - they believe that their current denomination is “interpreting” scripture, rather than obeying it as written. Most of the 30,000 protestant denominations describe themselves as “pure scripture” and “bible believing”. (the rofl is also appropriate here)
3. The “bible believing” Christians are all arriving at a concensus of doctrine, and will eventually be united in one “bible believing” church. The current confusion arose because “biblical Christianity” was suppressed by the Roman church since and it has taken some time to recover “the truth”.

Of course, these three positions are each internally inconsistent, and inconsistent with each other, but I have heard the same people citing all three, at different times.

 

[tabbey48]

Daegus asked:

How are you supposed to know who’s right when the words ‘euthanasia’, ‘abortion’ and ‘masturbation’ aren’t to be found anywhere in the Bible? With no one to speak infallibly on behalf of scripture interpretation, how will your dispute ever end?

From what I have read in the forums at CATHOLIC ANSWERS and elsewhere, there seems to be a variety of opinions among Catholics too. Many of the topics introduced here generate much more heat than light.

Perhaps we should take an honest look at ourselves before we start judging others. That’s just my opinion

 

[Reservoir_Dog]

Prot’ friends

What do you like to be called?

 

[Sufjon]

How can the “one” body of Christ that is the Church be divided with contradicting opinions? Both can’t be right if both views say completely different things about a certain topic. Besides, what makes your exegesis anymore credible than someone else’s? Both of you claim to have the HS on your back, but only 1 of you has it right. The issue is also that since you have no one to speak infallibly for you no one can truly be certain of anything regarding their faith.

On another note, I was going to mention that the hypothetical Protestants were respectively Presbyterian and Episcopalian (as an example) but I didn’t think that it mattered so I left that info out. I know that not all Protestants are the same (which is pretty much the whole point of this topic). I think it’s also fair to say that Jesus only really established ONE church upon Peter to teach ONE truth. Since the Bible also says that the Church is the pillar and the foundation of truth I think it’s equally fair to say that Jesus did not intend to establish a body of mystical believers divided in opinion, but an actual physical Church where the truth could be taught.

Hi Daegus: I simply broadened your context. You say that all Protestants are not the same, that there are divergent beliefs among Protestants. That is true. I expanded that to include the observation that there are diverse beliefs among Christian sects across the board. From that broader view, Catholics are part of the sample. As for what Jesus had in mind precisely when He said Church, I couldn’t say. Did He mean one sect in particular or did it indicate a broader following that included all of the permutations that eventually formed? One group claims this, while another claims that. It is hard to sort out. My sense is that all of them might be acceptable in their own way. It seems that the New Testament intimates that Jesus left Peter in charge of all that. Peter in turn said: “Truly I perceive that God shows no partiality, but in any nation any one who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to Him.” Sounds like a wide open playing field to me. From that point of observation, your question seemed like a good one - how do you know you are right? How do you know who is wrong? Christianity, like anything else in the physical universe has been in a state of evolution from the start. Where was that evolution supposed to end? With the first Christian Creed which was simply the three words “Jesus is Maschiach,” or the next expanded 93 word statement that was called the Apostles Creed, which first circulated in late second or early third centuries, or the final 206 word creed that came out of the Nicene meetings 300 years after Christ? There is evolution going on from the start. When is the stop point where no more evolution was to take place? In Rome 300 years after Jesus? In Greece a few decades after His death? with Martin Luther? With Joseph Smith? Did Peter mean that all of these were acceptable? If not , where did he mean to draw the line if He said all were acceptable? When Jesus said Church, did He mean some of you or all of you? Which ones believe in vain? If no one believes in vain, then great. If someone does, then who? I don’t have a side in all of this, because I don’t belong anywhere in the picture, but I think the debate is fascinating.

Your friend,
Sufjon

 

[Daegus]

Daegus asked:

From what I have read in the forums at CATHOLIC ANSWERS and elsewhere, there seems to be a variety of opinions among Catholics too. Many of the topics introduced here generate much more heat than light.

Perhaps we should take an honest look at ourselves before we start judging others. That’s just my opinion

First of all, just because there are varying opinions among some ‘Catholics’ doesn’t make those opinions right. We have the Pope and Churh Magisterium to define our faith for us. Those who do not conform to the faith fully are not considered to be n full communion with the Church. If one ‘Catholic’ wants to support abortion, he can certainly do that, but he cannot receive communion or be accepted as a full member of the Churh.

Second of all, I love it how you’re making this situation out to be as if I’m judging others when I clearly haven’t done any such thing. If you’re not going to contribute to the topic and derail it, I’m sure you’ll have a more pleasant conversation with a moderator.

 

[JonNC]

Then why is it that there are so many different things that you cannot agree upon amongst yourselves? Surely the HS doesn’t teach multiple truths on the same issue.

Example: 2 Protestant friends claim that they have the guidance of the HS leading them, but each have come to different conclusions about different moral topics. One Protestant claims that abortion, euthanasia and masturbation are morally acceptable while the other say that they are always moral evils.

Because Penelope and Patrick (that’s what we’ll call our Prot’ friends for now) claim to be led by the HS and hold 2 opposing views, we know that 1 of them mug be wrong because both of their views can’t be true.

How are you supposed to know who’s right when the words ‘euthanasia’, ‘abortion’ and ‘masturbation’ aren’t to be found anywhere in the Bible? With no one to speak infallibly on behalf of scripture interpretation, how will your dispute ever end?

Thanks
Daegus

It is a vexing question.

Here’s another.

A Catholic and Orthodox disagree on the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, on which is the one true Church, the Filioque? How can this be, as the both claim to be led by the Holy Spirit?

Jon

 

[Daegus]

What do you like to be called?

Whatever you want. If you want to abbreviate my name like I abbreviated the word Protestant because I was typing on an iPod keyboard and my fingers were starting to hurt then feel free

 

[Daegus]

It is a vexing question.

Here’s another.

A Catholic and Orthodox disagree on the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, on which is the one true Church, the Filioque? How can this be, as the both claim to be led by the Holy Spirit?

Jon

It’s unfortunate that the Orthodox can’t claim infallibility because they have no single, authorative head to speak for them whereas we do so we cn truly be sure of leadership. However, I think it would be fair to say that it is possible for their Church to be led by the Holy Spirit, considering the Orthodox doesn’t really old any practice that the Roman Church doesn’t accept.

History is also on the side of our Church, seeing as how the Orthodox Churh wasn’t really anything until the great schism of 1054.

 

[JohnnyReb]

It is a vexing question.

Here’s another.

A Catholic and Orthodox disagree on the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, on which is the one true Church, the Filioque? How can this be, as the both claim to be led by the Holy Spirit?

Jon

Yeah, the arguement cuts both ways. Its a double edged sword.

 

[masuwerte]

I think it’s also fair to say that Jesus only really established ONE church upon Peter to teach ONE truth. Since the Bible also says that the Church is the pillar and the foundation of truth I think it’s equally fair to say that Jesus did not intend to establish a body of mystical believers divided in opinion, but an actual physical Church where the truth could be taught.

If I agreed with you on this point, I would be Catholic or Orthodox, or maybe Mormon I guess.

 

[Daegus]

If I agreed with you on this point, I would be Catholic or Orthodox, or maybe Mormon I guess.

Are you saying that our Orthodox friends aren’t Catholic? If you are then I can understand why you would say this. Otherwise, I would say the choice is Catholic or Mormon.

In the case of Catholic or Mormon, I think the choice is obvious if you believe in the divinity of Jesus and there only being one God. It’s too bad we can’t come to an agreement on this issue though.

 

[tabbey48]

First of all, just because there are varying opinions among some ‘Catholics’ doesn’t make those opinions right. We have the Pope and Churh Magisterium to define our faith for us. Those who do not conform to the faith fully are not considered to be n full communion with the Church. If one ‘Catholic’ wants to support abortion, he can certainly do that, but he cannot receive communion or be accepted as a full member of the Churh.

Second of all, I love it how you’re making this situation out to be as if I’m judging others when I clearly haven’t done any such thing. If you’re not going to contribute to the topic and derail it, I’m sure you’ll have a more pleasant conversation with a moderator.

We all know that Catholics do disagree with the Church’s stand on abortion and many other important issues and still receive communion. Several well-known politicians have made headlines doing it.

I am not trying to derail anything. But there are Protestant denominations who could say the same thing about their church that you said about Catholics: “…just because there are varying opinions among some ‘Catholics’ doesn’t make those opinions right…Those who do not conform to the faith fully are not considered to be in full communion with the Church…”

I’m very sorry that I seem to have offended you. I still maintain that Catholics should deal with their own problems before pointing out the problems of other churches.

 

[Miriam1947]

We all know that Catholics do disagree with the Church’s stand on abortion and many other important issues and still receive communion. Several well-known politicians have made headlines doing it.

I am not trying to derail anything. But there are Protestant denominations who could say the same thing about their church that you said about Catholics: “…just because there are varying opinions among some ‘Catholics’ doesn’t make those opinions right…Those who do not conform to the faith fully are not considered to be in full communion with the Church…”

I’m very sorry that I seem to have offended you. I still maintain that Catholics should deal with their own problems before pointing out the problems of other churches.

It would be great if only there were no sinners in church. /s

 

[po18guy]

It is a vexing question.

Here’s another.

A Catholic and Orthodox disagree on the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, on which is the one true Church, the Filioque? How can this be, as the both claim to be led by the Holy Spirit?

Jon

There is actually less disagreement on the Bishop of Rome than we might think. The Orthodox are not as united as we think. They each have their own Patriarchs, but exist in semi-isolation from one another. I believe that is is only the influence of the Holy Spirit which preserves them from separating further than they have. The filioque point of contention I view as almost manufactured, since the Nicene creed does not countermand the Orthodox view, and also preceded the great schism.

 

[Nicea325]

It is a vexing question.

Here’s another.

A Catholic and Orthodox disagree on the universal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome, on which is the one true Church, the Filioque? How can this be, as the both claim to be led by the Holy Spirit?

Jon

Not exactly. Not so much an issue of the HS,but of pride,arrogance and ignorance and pointing fingers.

 

[Daegus]

I’m very sorry that I seem to have offended you. I still maintain that Catholics should deal with their own problems before pointing out the problems of other churches.

Yes, maybe we should deal with our own problems before we condemn others. Thankfully, there aren’t any problems in Protestant Churches because no one sins!

(Just kidding )

The Church isn’t a perfect museum for saints, but it’s a hospital for sinners. If Protestants are allowed to criticize the Church then why shouldn’t we, the Church faithful, be able to question certain Protestant beliefs and practices? I didn’t actually make this thread to start an argument, but to get people thinking, and see different view points. Although there already seems to be a tiny pinch of hostility in this thread which I never initially wanted. (Maybe I’m to blame for that I guess )

 

[Nicea325]

Then why is it that there are so many different things that you cannot agree upon amongst yourselves? Surely the HS doesn’t teach multiple truths on the same issue.

Example: 2 Protestant friends claim that they have the guidance of the HS leading them, but each have come to different conclusions about different moral topics. One Protestant claims that abortion, euthanasia and masturbation are morally acceptable while the other say that they are always moral evils.

Because Penelope and Patrick (that’s what we’ll call our Prot’ friends for now) claim to be led by the HS and hold 2 opposing views, we know that 1 of them mug be wrong because both of their views can’t be true.

How are you supposed to know who’s right when the words ‘euthanasia’, ‘abortion’ and ‘masturbation’ aren’t to be found anywhere in the Bible? With no one to speak infallibly on behalf of scripture interpretation, how will your dispute ever end?

Thanks
Daegus

Precisely why the HS cannot be guiding every single person with an infallible interpretation or else there would not be thousands of different denominations. The HS only professes ONE truth,not many or small versions of the truth or half-truths.