Doesn’t scripture itself establish truth?I was curious if any of my Protestant brethren could tell who or what establishes objective truth found in Scripture in the Prostestant world. I was in dialogue with a gentlemen who runs a website called justforcatholics and he stopped responding to my emails when we got to this topic. I would be greatly interested in hearing what any person has to say on the subject.
Pax
depends on the interpretation. that’s why there are so many versions among our protestant brethren.Doesn’t scripture itself establish truth?
ahhhh, but here is the flaw in your statement. it still all starts with YOUR interpretation. you have just changed the starting place. according to your personal interpretation, you believe the catholic church to teach absolute truth and nothing but truth. because you start with that interpretation, you don’t feel the need to interpret any further. but you still rely on a personal interpretation.me, I’m not smart enough to determine such things. I rely on the Catholic Church to show me how objective truth, derived from both Scripture and Tradition, applies to my life and my journey to Heaven.
I never go to the Bible itself to find objective truth. I go to the Catechism, which as you know is full of Scripture and references to Tradition.
Actually the teachings that we simple laymen need to get us to Heaven are very simple. Many years ago I was a protestant getting directions from various sources, such as “pastors” and tv preachers, plyus my own defective interprettations of what I was reading in the Bible. some of the Bible made perfect sense to me in those days, but an awful lot of it didn’t. I wasn’t able to connect the dots. only since going Catholic and getting my teachings out of the Church has the Bible really started to come alive for me and make sense. not that I don’t still have questions arise in meanings. Just yesterday at Mass I got a question in my mind about the Gospel reading. But at least now I know where the authoritative source of answers is, and will go there for it.
i would say there are those who would not deny those statements but still deny they are “objective” truths. there have been times in history where Christians taught that it was objectively true that some races were “higher” than others. they would say it was an objective truth that it was wrong to marry some one of a different race. their "objective truth was wrong.Bengal,
Would any Protestant deny these objective Truths as found in Scripture?
I can go on, but I think that just these 6 would be considered readily accepted Objective Truths from the Bible.
- God created the universe
- Man sinned but God had a plan for redmption
- God never forgets His people
- God is Eternal
- Jesus is the Son of God
- God so loved the World that he Sent Jesus to die so that whoever believes in him might have eternal life
Nothing can be objective with the bible. Doesnt matter if you are a protestant, a catholic or a jew.I was curious if any of my Protestant brethren could tell who or what establishes objective truth found in Scripture in the Prostestant world.
Then is there Truth? If there is no objective truth, all must be subjective. Can Truth be subjective and still be “True?” Is there not a danger of becoming Pilot, asking “What is Truth?”i would say there are those who would not deny those statements but still deny they are “objective” truths. there have been times in history where Christians taught that it was objectively true that some races were “higher” than others. they would say it was an objective truth that it was wrong to marry some one of a different race. their "objective truth was wrong.
my point is not that i don’t believe the things you listed (i do), but that none of those can be proven true in an objective way. subjectively they can. experientially they can. but not objectively (imo). i believe those statements are true because i have found them to be true in my life. but i always have to be humble enough to know that i could always be wrong. if i am not always willing to admit that… i have then made myself god and limited the true God.
I’m not sure what your question is.I was curious if any of my Protestant brethren could tell who or what establishes objective truth found in Scripture in the Prostestant world. I was in dialogue with a gentlemen who runs a website called justforcatholics and he stopped responding to my emails when we got to this topic. I would be greatly interested in hearing what any person has to say on the subject.
Pax
JC then you are confirming your interpretation of what objective truth is as coming from the RCC.me, I’m not smart enough to determine such things. I rely on the Catholic Church to show me how objective truth, derived from both Scripture and Tradition, applies to my life and my journey to Heaven.
But the Catechism is still written by man and not inspired by GOD. The only thing we know that is inspired by GOD is scripture. If you believe the Catechism then again you are still making a fallible interpretation that the Catechism is correct.I never go to the Bible itself to find objective truth. I go to the Catechism, which as you know is full of Scripture and references to Tradition.
I would definitely agree the teachings we need to get to Heaven are simple and straightforward. But to claim the RCC is more authoritative than any Protestant religion to completely interpret and teach the Bible is again relying on your own interpretation which you assume is correct.Actually the teachings that we simple laymen need to get us to Heaven are very simple. Many years ago I was a protestant getting directions from various sources, such as “pastors” and tv preachers, plyus my own defective interprettations of what I was reading in the Bible. some of the Bible made perfect sense to me in those days, but an awful lot of it didn’t. I wasn’t able to connect the dots. only since going Catholic and getting my teachings out of the Church has the Bible really started to come alive for me and make sense. not that I don’t still have questions arise in meanings. Just yesterday at Mass I got a question in my mind about the Gospel reading. But at least now I know where the authoritative source of answers is, and will go there for it.
It is so much less circular than this.JC then you are confirming your interpretation of what objective truth is as coming from the RCC.
But the Catechism is still written by man and not inspired by GOD. The only thing we know that is inspired by GOD is scripture. If you believe the Catechism then again you are still making a fallible interpretation that the Catechism is correct.
I would definitely agree the teachings we need to get to Heaven are simple and straightforward. But to claim the RCC is more authoritative than any Protestant religion to completely interpret and teach the Bible is again relying on your own interpretation which you assume is correct.
To make the claim the RCC is infallible would mean you have to be infallible. Why? Because the only way someone can recognize that someone else is infallible is to first know all infallible teachings. If you are fallible then you can never claim someone to be infallible. It’s like trying to say who the smartest person in the world is. You can’t win that argument because you will always find someone who knows more than you, or the person you thought was the smartest to begin with.
If the RCC is infallible but only at the level of Pope and Magisterium, then you have a situation where fallible clergy are trying to learn infallible teachings to then turn around and teach infallibly. And those teachings are being received by the fallible laity like you and me. That means somebody is going to get something wrong.
The Bible tells us that GOD gives each of us gifts. Preaching, teaching, serving etc. HE never states the gift of teaching is solely within the RCC or solely at the level of pope and magisterium.
Sorry to barge in ralpinal but yes there is truth. We know the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth as Jesus plainly stated. Truth can be subjective and still be truth. We may not be able to prove it though.Then is there Truth? If there is no objective truth, all must be subjective. Can Truth be subjective and still be “True?” Is there not a danger of becoming Pilot, asking “What is Truth?”
Thank you. Please allow me to ask in another manner. 2+2=4. That is objective truth. There is no way it is different for different people. Now, I cannot prove that God exists. I have faith that He does. I see certain signs that point that way. I cannot show it to be true as I can a math problem. Now, is the statement that God exists objective or subjective truth? Subjective. Someone else may come to different conclusions. Subjective truth is an opinion or a statement of facts as seen by one person that may not represent reality. It cannot be described as “truth” however, as truth is a statement of universal fact that cannot be disputed. If there is no objective truth, there is no truth.Sorry to barge in ralpinal but yes there is truth. We know the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth as Jesus plainly stated. Truth can be subjective and still be truth. We may not be able to prove it though.
I can’t prove objectively that Jesus rose from the dead. I can only subjectively read scripture and any other evidence that suggests that truth. But then it’s only mine and yours subjective opinion that what we are reading is truth. I can’t prove objectively that Jesus is the only way to GOD. If I could or if anyone could then the whole world would believe. So that’s why we call it Faith.
PEACE
The manuscript evidence of the New Testament is stronger than any other documentary source of the same period. The non-Scriptural corroboration of early Christianity is also corroborative. The case for the Resurrection is by no means entirely subjective.Sorry to barge in ralpinal but yes there is truth. We know the Holy Spirit guides us to the truth as Jesus plainly stated. Truth can be subjective and still be truth. We may not be able to prove it though.
I can’t prove objectively that Jesus rose from the dead. I can only subjectively read scripture and any other evidence that suggests that truth. But then it’s only mine and yours subjective opinion that what we are reading is truth. I can’t prove objectively that Jesus is the only way to GOD. If I could or if anyone could then the whole world would believe. So that’s why we call it Faith.
PEACE
hi ND. not so much my interpretation, but acceptance of authority. in the field of religion, morality, doctrine, yes I accept that the RCC teaches infallibly. I couldn’t prove that, but I accept the claims made by the Church, because according to my limited study those claims make the most sense when compared to the claims made by others.JC then you are confirming your interpretation of what objective truth is as coming from the RCC.
yes, the Bible is also written by man. The Catechism contains huge amounts of Scripture, so if we accept that the Bible is inspried, which I sure do, then at least those parts of the Catechism are inspired. It is true that the Catechism contains interpretations. the Church is the authorized interpreter of Scripture and Tradition.But the Catechism is still written by man and not inspired by GOD. The only thing we know that is inspired by GOD is scripture. If you believe the Catechism then again you are still making a fallible interpretation that the Catechism is correct.
again, not my own interpretation, but an acceptance of the authority claims made by the RCC. To me it is a matter of authority. hundreds of protestant denominations and nondenominations claim authority to interpret, but it is apparent to me that few if any of them do have the authority because they are all split up along doctrinal lines. I agree with the RCC that the authority of Jesus resides int he teaching magisterium of the RCC. I am not smart enought to disagree with what they teach. The more I study it, the more it makes sense to me.I would definitely agree the teachings we need to get to Heaven are simple and straightforward. But to claim the RCC is more authoritative than any Protestant religion to completely interpret and teach the Bible is again relying on your own interpretation which you assume is correct.
i disagree. the fact of my fallibility is obvious. I don’t have to be infallible to submit to the authoirity of the Catholic Church. That is part of the beauty of the thing. a protestant has to always be on the lookout for proper interpretations. Things shift constantly and easily. One teacher teaches this, another teaches that. many protestants bounce from one thing to another, in and out of this denomination and that.To make the claim the RCC is infallible would mean you have to be infallible. Why? Because the only way someone can recognize that someone else is infallible is to first know all infallible teachings. If you are fallible then you can never claim someone to be infallible. It’s like trying to say who the smartest person in the world is. You can’t win that argument because you will always find someone who knows more than you, or the person you thought was the smartest to begin with.
I think you’re picking it apart out of context. the infallibility is narrowly defined. You need to dig into it a little and find out exactly what infallibility means. it isn’t that every word that proceeds out of the mouth of a priest or pope is infallible, not even close to that.If the RCC is infallible but only at the level of Pope and Magisterium, then you have a situation where fallible clergy are trying to learn infallible teachings to then turn around and teach infallibly. And those teachings are being received by the fallible laity like you and me. That means somebody is going to get something wrong.
the Bible suppports the magisterial authority to teach, to interpret Jesus, and carry Jessu to the world. The Bible is a Catholic book. it is the Church that is the pillar and foundation of truth, not the Bible, by which I hardly mean to diminish the Bible at all. i love the Bible and depend on it at all times. But out of the context of the Church which wrote it, assembled it, protected it for 2 thou years, the Bible is easily distorted to mean anything any crazy guy wants to twist it to mean. The Bible can be a very dangerous thing in the hands of the wrong people. present it as the Word of God (which it is) and then distort its message, and you end up with cults.The Bible tells us that GOD gives each of us gifts. Preaching, teaching, serving etc. HE never states the gift of teaching is solely within the RCC or solely at the level of pope and magisterium.