How does protestant settle issues concerning enterpretation of Scriptures when these issues arise?

[BrianH]

NEWS FLASH: Heretics and schismatics disagree with the Church! Film at eleven.
:whacky:

I do not believe the Catholic Church believes the Eastern Orthodox are heretics? Do they?

 

[wisdomseeker]

I do not believe the Catholic Church believes the Eastern Orthodox are heretics? Do they?

I dont think you understand what the CC says.
the Church has called for new evangelization. do you know what this means?

 

[1holycatholic]

I do not believe the Catholic Church believes the Eastern Orthodox are heretics? Do they?

Who said they were?

 

[BrianH]

Who said they were?

You said

Canon was definitively established in the late fourth century.

I gave a link that shows the different Apostolic Churches and their different canons and the disputes in certain areas later than the 4th century.

You then said that heretics disagree with the Catholic Church. Who were you talking about then?

 

[DorianGregorian]

There were also some real doubts as to the Canonicity of the New Testament. Clement of Alexandria cites every New Testament work except James, 2 Peter, and Philemon. He cited the New Testament over 2,000 times.

This is why we can only accept as Canonical those works which have been without dispute since the Apostles. Everything that the Apostles taught was necessary for Salvation is in Scripture. In the Early Church, tradition and scripture were one in the same.

Also if tradition is always right, then how come the Quartodecimans claimed that they had the Apostolic tradition. Both could claim it goes back to the Apostles. I could make other views such as how the RCC and the Orthodox Church claim to be the one true Church from the Apostles. It’s why Scripture is the best moderator in discussion.

 

[1holycatholic]

I gave a link that shows the different Apostolic Churches and their different canons and the disputes in certain areas later than the 4th century.

You gave a link listing heretics and schismatics.

You then said that heretics disagree with the Catholic Church. Who were you talking about then?

You have a gift for eisegesis. I wrote:
Heretics and schismatics disagree with the Church! Film at eleven.
:whacky:
The various Orthodox groups are considered schismatics by the Church. The other groups listed in the article such as the Nestorians are heretical.

 

[1holycatholic]

There were also some real doubts as to the Canonicity of the New Testament. Clement of Alexandria cites every New Testament work except James, 2 Peter, and Philemon. He cited the New Testament over 2,000 times.

It would have been hard for Clement of Alexandria to dispute the Canon since he died nearly two centuries before it was infallibly defined by the Catholic Church. :doh2:

This is why we can only accept as Canonical those works which have been without dispute since the Apostles.

You only accept the books your denomination’s namesake didn’t succeed in throwing out of the Bible because the conflicted with his heretical theology. :hypno:

Everything that the Apostles taught was necessary for Salvation is in Scripture.

Not only is that not in the Bible or Sacred Tradition, it’s explicitly contrary to them.

In the Early Church, tradition and scripture were one in the same.

That’s not in the Bible or Sacred Tradition and it’s explicitly contrary to the writings of the Early Church Fathers.

Also if tradition is always right, then how come the Quartodecimans claimed that they had the Apostolic tradition. Both could claim it goes back to the Apostles. I could make other views such as how the RCC and the Orthodox Church claim to be the one true Church from the Apostles. It’s why Scripture is the best moderator in discussion.

You reject Sacred Tradition and the teaching authority of the Church which are explicitly described in Scripture and then appeal to Scripture? :doh2:

 

[DorianGregorian]

1holy Could you please cite your claims where appropriate?

Also the Canon was defined at Trent by the RCC, I hold to the position that the Canon is determined by God, not man.

 

[1holycatholic]

1holy Could you please cite your claims where appropriate?

Also the Canon was defined at Trent by the RCC, I hold to the position that the Canon is determined by God, not man.

I agree with you: the Canon was determined by God through His infallible Catholic Church.

The Canon was defined in the late fourth century. The Canon was reaffirmed in response to the denial of Scripture by Protestants.

Establishment and promulgation of the Canon:
The Decree of Pope St. Damasus I - Council of Rome (382 AD)
Synod of Hippo (393 AD)
Councils of Carthage (397, 419 AD)

Reaffirmation of Canon:
Council of Florence (1431-1445 AD)
Council of Trent (1545-1563 AD)

 

[DorianGregorian]

Right, I understand the dates and decrees of Councils. However, it’s obvious that the Canon was being debated amongst Theologians up to and including Trent, or was Florence countering the Protestant heretics also .

No Church of men determine the Council, the Holy Spirit does that for us, through the Church, the Body of Christ. And when I meant cite your claims, I meant about the Church fathers. I’ve already sighted several quotes from the Church Fathers which shows they believed in the authority of Scripture, not tradition as they were one in the same.

DG

 

[1holycatholic]

Right, I understand the dates and decrees of Councils. However, it’s obvious that the Canon was being debated amongst Theologians up to and including Trent, or was Florence countering the Protestant heretics also .

Dissenters from the Church which is the pillar and foundation of truth do not change the teaching of Christ’s Catholic Church.

No Church of men determine the Council, the Holy Spirit does that for us, through the Church, the Body of Christ. And when I meant cite your claims, I meant about the Church fathers. I’ve already sighted several quotes from the Church Fathers which shows they believed in the authority of Scripture, not tradition as they were one in the same.

DG

The One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church was established by Christ. He did not create 30,000+ individual denominations all teaching different things with no authority. The Church is the pillar and foundation of the truth, not the pillar and foundation of untold numbers of conflicting teachings taught with no authority to an invisible congregation of “true believers” known only to God.

There are no Protestant Early Church Fathers. They’re all Catholics, every last one… with Popes, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, seven Sacraments, Sacred Tradition, apostolic succession, etc. etc. etc…

The ironic thing is that Sola Scriptura fails it’s own benchmark. Not only is Sola Scriptura not in the Bible, it’s explicitly denied in the Bible! Further, Sola Scriptura can’t even determine what constitutes the Bible! And the icing on the cake is that the Catholic Church has authoritatively decreed which books are inspired by the Holy Spirit and therefore canonical. The Bible is the Catholic Church’s book.

The reason Protestants can’t resolve disputes regarding Scripture is because they have no authority to do so! They are not the Church established by Christ, in fact they are not properly called churches at all.

 

[1holycatholic]

Right, I understand the dates and decrees of Councils. However, it’s obvious that the Canon was being debated amongst Theologians up to and including Trent, or was Florence countering the Protestant heretics also .

No Church of men determine the Council, the Holy Spirit does that for us, through the Church, the Body of Christ. And when I meant cite your claims, I meant about the Church fathers. I’ve already sighted several quotes from the Church Fathers which shows they believed in the authority of Scripture, not tradition as they were one in the same.

DG

Theologians have no authority.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Theologians have no authority.

exactly, at least not in the CC.

i believe that they are the ones who enterprets Scriptures for protestants.

 

[gregorynyssa]

we Know that Jesus said to take to the Church. we know that is what Catholics do.

how about protestants, how do you settle those issues when discordia on Scriptures arises?

i appreciate productive discussions with truth to back up. you must speak the Truth, nothing but the Truth on this issue. no insults please.

St. Paul called the Church the “body” of Christ, not the “soul” of Christ. Bodies are visible and souls are invisible. John Salza

Within a particular Protestant group (denomination, sub-denomination or local church), members or leaders may put such issues to a vote. However, with very contentious issues, this often results in fracturing of the group into two sub-denominations or two local churches. Ultimately, there seems to be no established authority to which individual opinion is accountable. If your church is not to your liking it is common to move into a different church. If no church is to your liking, it is not uncommon to start another church. This is why we see so many hundreds of distinct Protestant groups.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Within a particular Protestant group (denomination, sub-denomination or local church), members or leaders may put such issues to a vote. However, with very contentious issues, this often results in fracturing of the group into two sub-denominations or two local churches. Ultimately, there seems to be no established authority to which individual opinion is accountable. If your church is not to your liking it is common to move into a different church. If no church is to your liking, it is not uncommon to start another church. This is why we see so many hundreds of distinct Protestant groups.

i got it. they dont have anyone wiht authority to settle the issue. it is either done by majority vote or the issue can never be resolved. thank you.

 

[Mosacked]

Wisdomseeker, allow me to intrude. Firstly I must say that you have asked a very good question. Many ‘protestant’ churches have committees that decide the fate of her believers. On what benchmarks and on what foundational beliefs is often subjective because humans err and many church leaders have ‘personal interests’. That’s how things sometimes go awry and the church (protestant or catholic) goes towards the direction of corruption and sin. And once you head there, you only go deeper in, because sin blinds people to sin even more and the entire church gets condemned, never to get out.

That’s why God often says that He’d rather we be hot or cold NOT lukewarm. You cannot be a half-christian or half-hearted church go-er. What that really means is you’re fooling yourselves and others and creating opportunities to creep into the church with your sinful decision making (especially when you are in leadership).

Now, on what authority do these people decide members’ fate? On the organizational level, there’s no question. Since they are elected leaders, THEY decide. The same way governments put you in jail or fine you after you elect them. Are the catholics’ system therefore valid? The answer is, if you ask me, NO. Cos, like I always said, Peter never officiated the position of Pope, neither did he officiate any succession. Its all just the catholic’s ‘claims’ of history. Nothing more.

The apostles never had one greater than the other, no leader. INSTEAD. Jesus said, the biggest is the servant. Whoever wants to be greatest in the kingdom must be the SERVANT of all. Only JESUS is the Head. The rest are all MEMBERS of that body.

Where is the church? The Bible says that those who are His knows Him and are stamped with the Holy Spirit. The church is spiritual in nature bonded by His Spirit with real persons, real humans, not demarcated with physical boundaries (not church A or church B or church C…but one that encompasses members who obey God yet may be dwelling in different ''churches"). We will ONLY know who will be saved on the day of judgement.

Who is our brother in Christ? The one who hears and obeys His voice.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com
.

 

[DorianGregorian]

And there aren’t Catholics that disagree with authority? Catholics for Choice, FutureChurch and all those other groups (which I realize are CINO).

At any rate the Catholic Church is deeply divided and has been in a crisis it seems for the past Century. Look at the Schism and Schismatic attitudes of many who call themselves “Catholic.” Maybe 15% of all “Catholics” actually follow the religion by the book?

And did the Early Church have extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion? Did they have people screaming on microphones as if it were a revival meeting? No, in reality the Lutheran, Anglican, and Orthodox Churches are much more close to Apostolic Tradition than the modern day Catholic Church. Yes these abuses happen but they are reprimanded, not sanctioned by the highest authority.

There is no testimony that Peter claimed supremacy, he had a Primacy which I’d be more than happy to give to the Bishop of Rome. Read the Scriptures, Tradition can be guarded, but not created. Neither did Peter claim to be the head of the Church, because Christ is the head.

 

[1holycatholic]

And there aren’t Catholics that disagree with authority? Catholics for Choice, FutureChurch and all those other groups (which I realize are CINO).

At any rate the Catholic Church is deeply divided and has been in a crisis it seems for the past Century. Look at the Schism and Schismatic attitudes of many who call themselves “Catholic.” Maybe 15% of all “Catholics” actually follow the religion by the book?

And did the Early Church have extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion? Did they have people screaming on microphones as if it were a revival meeting? No, in reality the Lutheran, Anglican, and Orthodox Churches are much more close to Apostolic Tradition than the modern day Catholic Church. Yes these abuses happen but they are reprimanded, not sanctioned by the highest authority.

There is no testimony that Peter claimed supremacy, he had a Primacy which I’d be more than happy to give to the Bishop of Rome. Read the Scriptures, Tradition can be guarded, but not created. Neither did Peter claim to be the head of the Church, because Christ is the head.

:ehh:

The faith handed down by the apostles includes the primacy of Peter given by Christ and does not include lesbian bishops or Sola Scriptura.

 

[DorianGregorian]

:ehh:

The faith handed down by the apostles includes the primacy of Peter given by Christ and does not include lesbian bishops or Sola Scriptura.

Read: Anglican, not Episcopalian.

Not that the Catholic institution itsself is like that, just many of their members it seems.

 

[Mosacked]

Wisdomseeker, allow me to intrude. Firstly I must say that you have asked a very good question. Many ‘protestant’ churches have committees that decide the fate of her believers. On what benchmarks and on what foundational beliefs is often subjective because humans err and many church leaders have ‘personal interests’. That’s how things sometimes go awry and the church (protestant or catholic) goes towards the direction of corruption and sin. And once you head there, you only go deeper in, because sin blinds people to sin even more and the entire church gets condemned, never to get out.

That’s why God often says that He’d rather we be hot or cold NOT lukewarm. You cannot be a half-christian or half-hearted church go-er. What that really means is you’re fooling yourselves and others and creating opportunities to creep into the church with your sinful decision making (especially when you are in leadership).

Now, on what authority do these people decide members’ fate? On the organizational level, there’s no question. Since they are elected leaders, THEY decide. The same way governments put you in jail or fine you after you elect them. Are the catholics’ system therefore valid? The answer is, if you ask me, NO. Cos, like I always said, Peter never officiated the position of Pope, neither did he officiate any succession. Its all just the catholic’s ‘claims’ of history. Nothing more.

The apostles never had one greater than the other, no leader. INSTEAD. Jesus said, the biggest is the servant. Whoever wants to be greatest in the kingdom must be the SERVANT of all. Only JESUS is the Head. The rest are all MEMBERS of that body.

Where is the church? The Bible says that those who are His knows Him and are stamped with the Holy Spirit. The church is spiritual in nature bonded by His Spirit with real persons, real humans, not demarcated with physical boundaries (not church A or church B or church C…but one that encompasses members who obey God yet may be dwelling in different ''churches"). We will ONLY know who will be saved on the day of judgement.

Who is our brother in Christ? The one who hears and obeys His voice.

muslimsopenyoureyes.blogspot.com
.