Mainly For Those Not Roman Catholic: Whom Must You Obey?

[meltzerboy]

You are welcome to believe this but in the end it was Moses who wrote and you accept what he wrote as the ultimate truth, without error. So Moses was indeed infallible in his writings. I grant you that you believe this was the working of God and not Moses but Catholics would say the same of the Pope in his infallibility. It is nothing in and of himself but, rather, the guidance and protection of God. I took exception to you saying that Protestants and Judaism both have no notion of human infallibility with the understanding being that Catholicism does. I was trying to show you that your belief of Moses being free from error in his writings is much like Catholic’s belief in papal infallibility. It comes from God.

Even Protestants have a notion of infallibility, the writers of scripture.

I have to ask, when a Catholic says that be believes the Pope is infallible is this what you think? That this infallibility isn’t from God? If so you have a flawed understanding of it.

Then using your definition of human infallibility there isn’t one in Catholicism either therefore you not only have this in common with protestantism but also Catholicism.

God bless

If you re-read the original post of cooterhein (who is Protestant), it is s/he who points out the similarity between Protestantism and Judaism. I respond that s/he is correct to a certain extent, which means not entirely. I do not discuss several comparisons between Judaism and Protestantism, but only one; on the contrary, I point out the importance in Judaism of Oral Tradition in the Talmud as well as Rabbinical authority. This aspect of Judaism is indeed closer to Catholicism. And I surely do not, either explicitly or implicitly, suggest that Judaism and Protestantism both have no notion of human infallibility for the purpose of contrasting our similar beliefs to those of Catholicism, which does have that notion. In fact, I don’t even bring up Catholicism’s beliefs in my response. If this is what’s troubling you–that somehow I am accusing Catholicism of believing in the concept of human infallibility and contrasting this to the differing beliefs of Judaism and Protestantism–allow me to put your mind at ease by assuring you this was not my intention. Further, I realize Catholicism believes that the Pope is guided and protected by G-d in his speaking ex cathedra, and in no way do I think Catholicism says the Pope has some supernatural powers of his own. What I am saying is that Judaism does not like to use the term human infallibility when referring to people even when they are divinely inspired and speak or write as an instrument of G-d’s Will. This is one of several conceptual ideas that Judaism and Catholicism, as well as Protestantism, disagree with. Every religion has its own lexicon of words and ideas which have different denotations and connotations for those of other religions. Terms such as divine grace, Holy Spirit, Hell, Purgatory, and Satan have quite different meanings in Christianity and Judaism. So does human infallibility.

 

[meltzerboy]

Lemme give this a stab…

As a Christian in a relationship with God through Jesus Chrst, I am first and foremost accountable to obey God through Jesus Christ.

However, if I live it at that, there is a real danger in me creating my own God as what I would wish to believe and practice but not what is necessarily true. So I then look to where God has revealed Himself outside of where I sense and feel.

I find that in the pages of the Bible which claims itself to be the Word of God and inspired by God. That is sufficient authority of Scriptures.

But even though the Bible claims itself as the Word of God, no such claims are made as to my understanding of it. I do not want to be a victim of a nice new understanding of Scripture that has no historical basis. So for that I turn to a church to be taught the Word of God. And although I do not consider my church as incapable of being incorrect,
i do recognize that God has placed pastors and teachers within the church for the express purpose of teaching the Word of God.

This is all a very reasonable sequence: belief in G-d through Jesus Christ first, then the Bible for the revelation of G-d’s Word, and finally the Church and its practitioners for an authoritative interpretation of G-d’s Word. Is there any place in your faith for your own individual interpretation or individual conscience when you might disagree with authoritative understanding of Scripture?

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

If you re-read the original post of cooterhein (who is Protestant), it is s/he who points out the similarity between Protestantism and Judaism. I respond that s/he is correct to a certain extent, which means not entirely. I do not discuss several comparisons between Judaism and Protestantism, but only one; on the contrary, I point out the importance in Judaism of Oral Tradition in the Talmud as well as Rabbinical authority. This aspect of Judaism is indeed closer to Catholicism. And I surely do not, either explicitly or implicitly, suggest that Judaism and Protestantism both have no notion of human infallibility for the purpose of contrasting our similar beliefs to those of Catholicism, which does have that notion. In fact, I don’t even bring up Catholicism’s beliefs in my response. If this is what’s troubling you–that somehow I am accusing Catholicism of believing in the concept of human infallibility and contrasting this to the differing beliefs of Judaism and Protestantism–allow me to put your mind at ease by assuring you this was not my intention. Further, I realize Catholicism believes that the Pope is guided and protected by G-d in his speaking ex cathedra, and in no way do I think Catholicism says the Pope has some supernatural powers of his own. What I am saying is that Judaism does not like to use the term human infallibility when referring to people even when they are divinely inspired and speak or write as an instrument of G-d’s Will. This is one of several conceptual ideas that Judaism and Catholicism, as well as Protestantism, disagree with. Every religion has its own lexicon of words and ideas which have different denotations and connotations for those of other religions. Terms such as divine grace, Holy Spirit, Hell, Purgatory, and Satan have quite different meanings in Christianity and Judaism. So does human infallibility.

Thank you for your clarification. It is incorrect to say that Catholics believe the Pope to be infallible if your definition of infallibility is a human power. It is of course my belief that the Pope is infallible, not because of his own doing, but God’s.

God bless

 

[4Squarebaby]

AG is the single largest branch within Pentecostalism. Foursquare and Open Bible are smaller, but doctrinally almost identical. You’d be hard pressed much theological difference between us and conservative Baptists or Methodists except that we’re officially continuationist. I think of that group as the “non-wacky Pentecostals”, i.e. the ones who aren’t into snake-handling, Oneness theology, prosperity gospel or other weirdness.

Besides the infant baptisms Methodist churches administer.
Well there are the Full Gospel Baptist and many charismatics among them also

 

[AmateurPianist]

This is all a very reasonable sequence: belief in G-d through Jesus Christ first, then the Bible for the revelation of G-d’s Word, and finally the Church and its practitioners for an authoritative interpretation of G-d’s Word. Is there any place in your faith for your own individual interpretation or individual conscience when you might disagree with authoritative understanding of Scripture?

Good question.

Ultimately I am responsible for my relationship with God. So yes, in the end I own my beliefs and practices towards God, including how I understand and practice Scripture.

This does not negate the authority of my church to teach the Word of God. However, this authority does not rise to the level of being incapable of being incorrect.

I do not have the right to come up with some nice, creative interpretation of Scripture that nobody else has come up with for 2000 years. That is how errors such as gay marriage get started.

So yes, there is some room for individual conscience in these matters, but great care must also be exercised here.

How this plays out is yes there are a few relatively minor issues where I am not in 100% agreement with my church. What I choose to do is to table the disagreement and remain open. Who knows, in the future the lights might go on and I may change my mind.

 

[followingtheway]

The bible alone with the guidance of the Holy Spirit that Jesus our Lord promised us.

There are so many interpretations of the Bible, who is the Holy Spirit guiding? How does the Holy Spirit guide some Protestants denominations to believe this, other denominations to believe this, some Non-Denominational Fundamentalist Born Again Evangelicals to believe this, and Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons to believe this? Who is guided by the Holy Spirit? There are thousands of Protestant denominations that contradict each other, and you’re telling me the Holy Spirit’s guiding all those guys but not the Church united in one single undivided faith?

I love Protestants, and some of my family members and friends are Protestants, but I’m sorry Catholicism is the way to go.

 

[Selah123]

There are so many interpretations of the Bible, who is the Holy Spirit guiding? How does the Holy Spirit guide some Protestants denominations to believe this, other denominations to believe this, some Non-Denominational Fundamentalist Born Again Evangelicals to believe this, and Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons to believe this? Who is guided by the Holy Spirit? There are thousands of Protestant denominations that contradict each other, and you’re telling me the Holy Spirit’s guiding all those guys but not the Church united in one single undivided faith?

I love Protestants, and some of my family members and friends are Protestants, but I’m sorry Catholicism is the way to go.

Blessings

I believe that the Holy Spirit guides those who truly seek to know God no matter what denomination you belong to. There will be many in Heaven who did not live a perfect life. There were/are many men and women who are/were led by the Holy Spirit. They lived or attempted to live up to the knowledge of God that they had and I think that they will be rewarded justly for their actions. The bible plainly says that “And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” John 10:16

We know from the bible that you don’t have to belong to a specific denomination to make it to Heaven. God is our judge and He judges us based on our own individual life and relationship with Him and not whether we belong to the catholic church or the baptist or Methodist church.

 

[Kaninchen]

Torah has always been interpreted and debated - different groups in Judaism have different views as to the kind of context that Torah embodies.

It’s a mistake to think that Judaism ‘works’ like Christianity and has the same sorts of ‘correct belief’* preoccupations, it doesn’t. Basically, it’s about how to live ‘ethical monotheism’, we do that within the context of Torah and everything else, the rest of the Tanakh, Oral Torah and so on is, in a sense, commentary, a guide.

• Without wanting to exaggerate too much, Christians will take a piece of text and worry/row about what the correct belief is, Jews take a piece of text and worry/row about what the correct action is.

 

[followingtheway]

Blessings

I believe that the Holy Spirit guides those who truly seek to know God no matter what denomination you belong to.

But the Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion, why would the Holy Spirit send people in so many different directions.

and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd." John 10:16

ONE fold OLD shepherd! See not 33,000 folds or shepherds. There’s only one truth.

God bless,

David

 

[mark_a]

The way that the Southern Baptist Convention is set up, there is no central authority. The SBC is more of a loose confederacy of autonomous churches that may or may not hold all the points of the Baptist Faith and Message, yet still cooperate together for missions etc.

Generally, Southern Baptist churches are going to be somewhere in the spectrum of prima scriptura and sola scriptura. I think stating that one is in favor of strict sola scriptura is a bit nieve. Even the SBC defers to Church tradition for things like the date of Easter, the New Testament canon, and the existence of the trinity. So in reality, we’re probably mostly prima scriptura folks that believe that the Bible is the primary source for Truth, and that Church tradition is secondary and subject to scripture.

Great post. Thanks for sharing!

 

[Zenas]

You want to know who we should obey? Look in the Bible.

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account. Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you.

 

[meltzerboy]

Torah has always been interpreted and debated - different groups in Judaism have different views as to the kind of context that Torah embodies.

It’s a mistake to think that Judaism ‘works’ like Christianity and has the same sorts of ‘correct belief’* preoccupations, it doesn’t. Basically, it’s about how to live ‘ethical monotheism’, we do that within the context of Torah and everything else, the rest of the Tanakh, Oral Torah and so on is, in a sense, commentary, a guide.

• Without wanting to exaggerate too much, Christians will take a piece of text and worry/row about what the correct belief is, Jews take a piece of text and worry/row about what the correct action is.

Would you agree that Judaism is more an orthoprax religion than an orthodox faith? More attuned to right action than correct belief and less creedal than Christianity. As you say, the commandments of the Torah are designed to cultivate ethical behavior as a way of life. This focus is, perhaps surprisingly, similar to that of Buddhist teaching. Yet there is a basic dogma in the Thirteen Principles of Faith.

 

[Journey322]

Baptist…The Word of God

 

[Kaninchen]

Would you agree that Judaism is more an orthoprax religion than an orthodox faith? More attuned to right action than correct belief and less creedal than Christianity. As you say, the commandments of the Torah are designed to cultivate ethical behavior as a way of life. This focus is, perhaps surprisingly, similar to that of Buddhist teaching. Yet there is a basic dogma in the Thirteen Principles of Faith.

One shouldn’t really take these sorts of ‘belief’/‘doing’ criteria things too far - there are beliefs in Judaism (Rambam’s list isn’t exactly detailed and there’s huge room for our traditional ‘well, it all rather depends on what you mean by’), there are practical consequences of what Christians believe. I think we’re really talking about focus, what are the foci of the two religions?

As to why they’re different, I’d argue that it’s to do with developments in religious thought in the Middle East after the ‘Torah’ era.

 

[seeker57]

From what I’ve read about Roman Catholicism, the Pope’s statements ex cathedra are regarded by the Church as infallible, and perhaps at other times as well (please correct me here if I’m in error), and there are also the teachings of Church tradition and the Magisterium which must be followed. If you are not Roman Catholic, whose teaching in your religion is considered either authoritative or infallible? Is it the Church, the Bible, oral tradition, cultural practice, something other than these, or nothing at all? I’m addressing this question mainly (but not exclusively) to non-Roman Catholics, including Orthodox, Protestants of any denomination, Anglican Catholics, Quakers, Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Seventh-Day Adventists, Oneness Pentecostals, Unitarians, Christian Scientists, Religious Scientists, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Shintoists, Confucians, Pagans, followers of Wicka, Voodoo practitioners, Scientologists, New Agers, or any other religion, sect, or cult.

Well, obey is a pretty strong word. We rely on our principles and the teachings found in our belief system to guide us, but we obey only our own conscience.

These are our foundations, as taken from the UUA web site:

There are seven principles which Unitarian Universalist congregations affirm and promote:
• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Unitarian Universalism draws from many sources:
• Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
• Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
• Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
• Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
• Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
• Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.

These principles and sources of faith are the backbone of our religious community. We use them, both singly and as a congregation, to pursue knowledge and truth and covenant ourselves to them through works for others in the community.

We have no central authority, creed or dogma, unless of course you would consider the above to be something of a dogma, but many would argue it isn’t.

Peace,

Seeker
]

 

[JonNC]

But the Holy Spirit is not the author of confusion, why would the Holy Spirit send people in so many different directions.

Hi David,
You are absolutely correct. It isn’t the Holy Spirit’s guidance that leads in different directions. Its the blurring of our understanding by sin, and all have sinned -Catholic, Orthodox - Protestant.

ONE fold OLD shepherd! See not 33,000 folds or shepherds. There’s only one truth.

No argument, though I use the number 33,002.

Jon

 

[PRmerger]

Let me see if I can settle this discussion. G-d used Moses as the instrument to write the Word of G-d. It didn’t come from Moses’ own mind, but from the mind of G-d.

I was not aware of this belief among the Jews. It sounds similar to that which Islam proclaims regarding Mohammed. That is, Mohammed simply penned that which God dictated to him.

Catholicism views the Scriptures differently. We do not believe that God simply dictated His Word to the sacred writers, but that they were *theopneustos *and wrote that which was inspired.

 

[meltzerboy]

I was not aware of this belief among the Jews. It sounds similar to that which Islam proclaims regarding Mohammed. That is, Mohammed simply penned that which God dictated to him.

Catholicism views the Scriptures differently. We do not believe that God simply dictated His Word to the sacred writers, but that they were *theopneustos *and wrote that which was inspired.

As I’ve stated before, I am not an authority on this subject. My understanding is that Moses wrote what was in G-d’s mind; not exactly a matter of dictation, but also not one of voluntary control either. Perhaps more of a hypnotic trance state. If that is what is meant by inspiration, then all right. However, traditional Torah Judaism is reluctant to speak of the Holy Spirit within Man (although Hasidism and Kabbalah do suggest this and more with respect to the holiness of all creatures and inanimate objects as well), because it violates the essential Jewish tenet of the Unity of G-d.

 

[meltzerboy]

Well, obey is a pretty strong word. We rely on our principles and the teachings found in our belief system to guide us, but we obey only our own conscience.

These are our foundations, as taken from the UUA web site:

There are seven principles which Unitarian Universalist congregations affirm and promote:
• The inherent worth and dignity of every person;
• Justice, equity and compassion in human relations;
• Acceptance of one another and encouragement to spiritual growth in our congregations;
• A free and responsible search for truth and meaning;
• The right of conscience and the use of the democratic process within our congregations and in society at large;
• The goal of world community with peace, liberty, and justice for all;
• Respect for the interdependent web of all existence of which we are a part.

Unitarian Universalism draws from many sources:
• Direct experience of that transcending mystery and wonder, affirmed in all cultures, which moves us to a renewal of the spirit and an openness to the forces which create and uphold life;
• Words and deeds of prophetic women and men which challenge us to confront powers and structures of evil with justice, compassion, and the transforming power of love;
• Wisdom from the world’s religions which inspires us in our ethical and spiritual life;
• Jewish and Christian teachings which call us to respond to God’s love by loving our neighbors as ourselves;
• Humanist teachings which counsel us to heed the guidance of reason and the results of science, and warn us against idolatries of the mind and spirit;
• Spiritual teachings of earth-centered traditions which celebrate the sacred circle of life and instruct us to live in harmony with the rhythms of nature.

These principles and sources of faith are the backbone of our religious community. We use them, both singly and as a congregation, to pursue knowledge and truth and covenant ourselves to them through works for others in the community.

We have no central authority, creed or dogma, unless of course you would consider the above to be something of a dogma, but many would argue it isn’t.

Peace,

Seeker
]

Unitarian Universalism seems to me to be an amalgam of moral principles that derive from the wisdom of the ages, which are interpreted by the individual reason and conscience of each person. Does that basically sum it up?

Thank you for this information.

 

[PRmerger]

As I’ve stated before, I am not an authority on this subject. My understanding is that Moses wrote what was in G-d’s mind; not exactly a matter of dictation, but also not one of voluntary control either. Perhaps more of a hypnotic trance state. If that is what is meant by inspiration, then all right…

Do you have a source for this, meltzerboy? Not that I don’t believe you, but esp. since you acknowledge that you are not an authority on the subject, perhaps you could direct me to something that professes this is indeed what traditional Torah Judaism professes?