Do Protestants really follow the Bible alone?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Zenkai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CopticChristian said:
Rose,

Hast thou realized that this thread hast ast its title…“Do Protestants really follow the Bible alone”?

Shouldst thou thinkest perhapst thou speaketh for only thyself and thouist experienst in thy Anglican Church?
Click to expand...
😃 just as thou hast spoketh for the whole universal church am sureth pray thee…😃

😃 Indeed I thus saweth the title thread and henceforth have thus answered it direct each time i posteth :D:D:D
 
Zenkai said:
Lutherans follow the Bible along with the writings of Luther (Large Catechism, Small Catechism, etc). Reformed and Presbyterians follow the Bible along with the writings of John Calvin. Etc.
Click to expand...
Protestantism was created out of the pronouncement of the absolute literal truth and unerring fact of the Bible.

Where I live, the largest protestant (and “national”) church is protestant - the church of scotland.

This is Presbyterian, a denomination which has “scripture alone” as its doctine. And yet, in 2012, the Church of Scotland:
  • permits divorce and remarriage of its members (against what the bible says)
  • does not stone adulterers to death (against what the bible says)
  • has openly homosexual clergy who live with their partners (against what the bible says)
  • permits members to eat shellfish (against what the bible says)
  • permits members to wear garments of mixed fibers (against what the bible says)
to give a few brief examples, off the top of my head.

So it is easy and quick to see both that the “bible alone” stance is invalid, (surely reason and tradition must also feature, as per Catholicism), and that (at least some) protestantism does not “do what it says in the tin”.

If you look at the recent (last 60 years or so) history of protestantism - with the Church of Scotland again being a good example - you see that it is a history of gradually abandoning their principles and making accommodation after accommodation with the whims of the secular world.

They have done this (accepting divorce, homosexuality etc) to try and “remain relevant” but in fact they only advertise their own irrelevance, as shown by their collapsing numbers. They have reached a stage where membership of (one of) their organisation offers nothing which is not already available in the secular world.

A further lack of basic credibility is highlighted by the fact that opinion can veer wildly between protestant parishes, due to the lack of a centralised guiding authority (Pope). For example, one Church of Scotland parish happily voted in an openly gay (and sexually active) minister, while other parishes were outraged by this and some have left the C of S over it.

Therefore it is my opinion that mainline protestantism is today most groups of people who are attempting to be Christian, but they are not ‘following the Bible alone’ - they are largely “suiting themselves” morally, as they are unable to comprehensively reject secular morality in favour of what they themselves claim to be divine and infallible (the Bible).
 
  • permits divorce and remarriage of its members (against what the bible says)
Click to expand...
This is a debated issue. But if the divorce was for biblical grounds then there should be no problem. I know of several Roman Catholic couples who were married to other people before and yet got married in a Roman Catholic parish.
  • does not stone adulterers to death (against what the bible says)
Click to expand...
This was commanded to only national Israel under the law of Moses. No such command exist to stone adulterers in the New Testament Church. Then again the RCC itself does not stone to death members who have commited sexual immorality either today. Those who do these things are to be excomminicated if there is no repentence.
  • has openly homosexual clergy who live with their partners (against what the bible says)
Click to expand...
This comes from not following the Bible rather than follow Sola Scriptura. Guess you may not know what Protestants actually believe generally speaking. Then again there has been a few Roman Catholic clergy who likewise commited some sexual immorality . This is wrong when it happens.
  • permits members to eat shellfish (against what the bible says)
Click to expand...
That was given to national Israel and not to the New Testament Church. The RCC itself allows it’s members to eat shellfish. Seems you are using double standards. I personally dont like sea food very much. But thats just me. 🙂
  • permits members to wear garments of mixed fibers (against what the bible says)
Click to expand...
This again was commanded to the nation of Israel under the law of Moses. Whereas the New Testament church has no such command. The RCC itself permits the very same thing for it’s members. Guess more double standards.
So it is easy and quick to see both that the “bible alone” stance is invalid, (surely reason and tradition must also feature, as per Catholicism), and that (at least some) protestantism does not “do what it says in the tin”.
Click to expand...
What I see is your misrepresentation or misunderstanding of Sola Scriptura. Reason and tradition is held by Protestant but they hold that Scripture is supreme over it. Reason and tradition are not equal with Scripture. Instead of parroting propaganda maybe you should learn what Protestants believe and deal fairly with them instead of the manner that you have done. I am sure you would not like it if a Protestant misrepresented Roman Catholic teaching.
 
I’d say they often claim they are “Bible only”, but in reality someone is helping them interpret that Bible. I think many Protestants don’t really understand what a Catechism is. It is very backed up with Bible passages.
 
WingsOfEagles said:
I’d say they often claim they are “Bible only”, but in reality someone is helping them interpret that Bible. I think many Protestants don’t really understand what a Catechism is. It is very backed up with Bible passages.
Click to expand...
John 14:1; 6, Acts 4:12 John 8:24 contradicts point # 841 of the Catechism Of The Catholic Church. I consider a Catechism as being the equivalent of a Protestant systematic theology. Most often Roman Catholics do not know what a systematic theology is or familiar with it. The first step for any Protestant or Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox is to learn the creeds of the church.
 
Chafer_DTS said:
Reason and tradition is held by Protestant but they hold that Scripture is supreme over it. Reason and tradition are not equal with Scripture.
Click to expand...
Where in Scripture do you see it said that it, Scripture, is supreme over reason and tradition?
 
Chafer_DTS said:
Most often Roman Catholics do not know what a systematic theology is or familiar with it.
Click to expand...
Really? That’s kind of a broadbrush isn’t it?
You just got done saying:
Instead of parroting propaganda maybe you should learn what Protestants believe and deal fairly with them instead of the manner that you have done.
Click to expand...
Physician, heal thyself.
 
JustaServant said:
Where in Scripture do you see it said that it, Scripture, is supreme over reason and tradition?
Click to expand...
The very fact that human reason comes from us which is infinite and not inspired from God. Same thing with tradition as well not unless it came from the original apostles. The last time I checked we have no such prophets or apostles today. 🙂 So called unwritten tradition is not inspired by God. At least not today when we are not presently given new so called revelation from God unlike when the apostles were alive. I assume you would agree that Scripture is God’s Word at the very least. 🙂
 
Chafer_DTS said:
The very fact that human reason comes from us which is infinite and not inspired from God. Same thing with tradition as well not unless it came from the original apostles. The last time I checked we have no such prophets or apostles today. 🙂 So called unwritten tradition is not inspired by God. At least not today when we are not presently given new so called revelation from God unlike when the apostles were alive. I assume you would agree that Scripture is God’s Word at the very least. 🙂
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer the question.
 
JustaServant said:
Really? That’s kind of a broadbrush isn’t it?
Click to expand...
What I said is true of a majority of the laity. I would even say the same thing of a number of Protestants too. This is a problem that Protestants and Catholic have to face. They have to try and get people intrested in theological study.
Physician, heal thyself.
Click to expand...
What I said was correct. I play no favorites. 🙂
 
Chafer_DTS said:
What I said is true of a majority of the laity. I would even say the same thing of a number of Protestants too. This is a problem that Protestants and Catholic have to face. They have to try and get people intrested in theological study.
Click to expand...
Agree wholeheartedly.
👍
 
Chafer_DTS said:
Yes I did. Just because you may not like the answer in itself does not mean it was not answered. :confused:
Click to expand...
MMmmmnnnno you didn’t.

C’mon Chafer, we can do this. 😉

***Where in Scripture ***do you see it stated that Scripture is supreme over reason and tradition?
 
JustaServant said:
You didn’t answer the question.
Click to expand...
We are to reject so called unwritten oral traditions that contradict what is in Scripture . This principle is found in Matthew 15 in which claimed unwritten oral traditions that they claimed were passed down contradicted the Old Testament. I have no issue at all with real apostolic tradition.

As for so called human reason we need to look at such passages like Colossians 2:8 which warns us againist philosophy which contradicts Scripture.
 
JustaServant said:
MMmmmnnnno you didn’t.

C’mon Chafer, we can do this. 😉

***Where in Scripture ***do you see it stated that Scripture is supreme over reason and tradition?
Click to expand...
If you wish to close your eyes feel free to do so. I know the mind set of those like this all too well. 🙂
 
Chafer_DTS said:
We are to reject so called unwritten oral traditions that contradict what is in Scripture . This principle is found in Matthew 15 in which claimed unwritten oral traditions that they claimed were passed down contradicted the Old Testament. I have no issue at all with real apostolic tradition.

As for so called human reason we need to look at such passages like Colossians 2:8 which warns us againist philosophy which contradicts Scripture.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
But we are not talking about reason or traditions that ***contridict ***Scripture, but where specifcally is it stated that Scripture is supreme over reason and tradition that does not contrict Scripture?:
 
JustaServant said:
Agreed.
But we are not talking about reason or traditions that ***contridict ***Scripture, but where specifcally is it stated that Scripture is supreme over reason and tradition that does not contrict Scripture?:
Click to expand...
The very fact that it is the logical deduction since we are to reject human reasoning and traditions which contradict Scripture. Scripture is the voice of God whereas human reasoning and tradition are not. I have no issue with human reason or tradition so long as it does not contradict Scripture. This is why I say Scripture is supreme. I believe Scripture is the written voice of God . I would assume that you would at least agree with this. I argue for this by the nature and quality of Scripture. This is the positive case for my point. Where as you are asking me to disprove a universal negative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top