do doctrinal differences really matter?

[guanophore]

Doctrine can and does evolve yes. If you wish to call that evolution “change” so be it…

I think this is a dangerous statement to make, especially in a non-Catholic context. I say that because it can be easily misunderstood.

Doctrine was given to us by God, through the Apostles, and was committed to the Church “once for all”. Catholics call this the Divine Deposit of Faith, which cannot change or evolve. Nothing can be added or subtracted from the once for all deposit, which was considered closed at the death of the last apostle.

I think it is more accurate to say that our understanding of doctrine evolves, and that any “evolution” that occurs is not in the Teachings of Jesus, but in how we understand and apply them to the present age.

 

[JRKH]

Originally Posted by JRKH
Doctrine can and does evolve yes. If you wish to call that evolution “change” so be it…

You are quite correct here. That is a much better way to express it.
thanks for the correction.

Peace
James

 

[PRmerger]

I’ve never believed something because someone in authority told me to believe it.

This is not quite true, steve.

How so?

I have 27 reasons why I know you do indeed believe “something because someone in authority told you to believe it.”

You have no other reason to believe that the Gospel of Mark is inspired, as well as Hebrews, Philemon, 3 John, Titus, etc etc etc…

except for the authority

of the Catholic Church

which discerned this for you, infallibly, centuries ago,

under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

 

[PRmerger]

stevekehl:

There were a couple of mentions that the Trinity was not doctrinally defined until the second or fifth century, however, 1 John 5:7 clearly teaches the Trinity . While the word trinity is not in scripture, the divinity, unity, and separateness of the Father, Son, and Spirit is evident with a little Scriptural study. And understanding and believing in the Trinity is crucial for salvation, sorry jr.

I think the Jehovah’s Witnesses have a point when they ask, “If someone lived on a desert island and a bible was dropped in from above…from reading that bible, would he be able to conclude that God is a Trinity?”

:nope:

They are correct in asserting that if one reads the bible–1 John 5:7, et al–no thinking person would conclude that the bible asserts the Trinity.

 

[PRmerger]

I think this is a dangerous statement to make, especially in a non-Catholic context. I say that because it can be easily misunderstood.

Doctrine was given to us by God, through the Apostles, and was committed to the Church “once for all”. Catholics call this the Divine Deposit of Faith, which cannot change or evolve. Nothing can be added or subtracted from the once for all deposit, which was considered closed at the death of the last apostle.

I think it is more accurate to say that our understanding of doctrine evolves, and that any “evolution” that occurs is not in the Teachings of Jesus, but in how we understand and apply them to the present age.

Yes, this is correct.

The development of doctrine is, indeed, a Catholic concept, but it is something that must be understood and proclaimed with some nuance.

“The tradition which comes from the apostles develops in the Church with the help of the Holy Spirit. For there is a growth in the understanding of the realities and the words which have been handed down.”–Dei Verbum

Not to mention that the late, great Cardinal Newman wrote a magnificent explication on the development of doctrine.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[Pepband_Mom]

ABSOLUTELY doctrinal differences matter.

But some are bigger issues than others - particularly the Eucharist: some say symbol, RCC says in Truth WHO it is.

Remember: Satan can slip in 99 truths in order for people to believe 1 lie.