Protestants: How do you determine which denomination holds the truth?

[pablope]

The one that follows what the bible says.

. The bible is.

But I do have a basis. It is called faith.

Rom.10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Oh by the way…which Bible?

The protestant 66 book Bible or the Catholic 73 book Bible?

 

[FathersKnowBest]

JonNC;12349495:

But no one in the East has ever practiced SS, or did they dismember any of the sacraments.

What I meant by extent of divisions is those who separated from the West…and adhered to SS.

As I asked, if not SS…then what do you think the cause of the divisions of those who practice SS?

My opinion is that the sin is the rejection of the divinely granted authority that Jesus bestowed on His Church. SS is a symptom of that authority, in that something needed to be invented to fill in the vacuum of authority once the Church’s authority, and especially that of the office of St. Peter, was rejected.

That it has backfired so dreadfully is a testament to the fact that men’s plans, especially those in opposition to God’s, are … faulty.

 

[pablope]

You are upholding and supporting the truth if you are not only upholding and supporting what the bible says but making it part of our lives.

As far as I know, the Bible has no voice of its own…so how can the Bible speak?

How can the Bible determine or tell you which has the truth and which has no truth?

Can you provide the chapter and verse for this?

 

[Jon_S_1]

pablope;12349565:

My opinion is that the sin is the rejection of the divinely granted authority that Jesus bestowed on His Church. SS is a symptom of that authority, in that something needed to be invented to fill in the vacuum of authority once the Church’s authority, and especially that of the office of St. Peter, was rejected.

That it has backfired so dreadfully is a testament to the fact that men’s plans, especially those in opposition to God’s, are … faulty.

 

[pablope]

My opinion is that the sin is the rejection of the divinely granted authority that Jesus bestowed on His Church. SS is a symptom of that authority, in that something needed to be invented to fill in the vacuum of authority once the Church’s authority, and especially that of the office of St. Peter, was rejected.

That it has backfired so dreadfully is a testament to the fact that men’s plans, especially those in opposition to God’s, are … faulty.

Catherine of Siena…

“Even if the Pope were Satan incarnate, we ought not to raise up our heads against him, but calmly lie down to rest on his bosom. He who rebels against our Father is condemned to death, for that which we do to him we do to Christ: we honor Christ if we honor the Pope; we dishonor Christ if we dishonor the Pope. I know very well that many defend themselves by boasting: “They are so corrupt, and work all manner of evil!” But God has commanded that, even if the priests, the pastors, and Christ-on-earth were incarnate devils, we be obedient and subject to them, not for their sakes, but for the sake of God, and out of obedience to Him.”.

 

[Jon_S_1]

As far as I know, the Bible has no voice of its own…so how can the Bible speak?

How can the Bible determine or tell you which has the truth and which has no truth?

Can you provide the chapter and verse for this?

 

[daddyd]

The question you dodge is who tells us who is doing it? Who tells us how to do it? If I was looking for guidance as a new believer and knocked on westboro’s door they would tell me one way. If I knocked on the door of your church you’d tell me a different way. If I went to my Catholic Church, a third way. On and on.

So which way is it? Surely God would not want me just guessing and subject to any idea in the wind?

Jesus and the apostles had a single unified clear message. Who carries their message today?

That’s just it you’re looking in the wrong place for clarity Do you really think that God leaves us to our own devises? We will never find the truth by looking to man. We must look to God.

John14:

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Is this you fallible opinion?

Yes

 

[daddyd]

You asked for an example on a way of reading scripture wrong. Here is one example.

You think that your way of reading 1Cor.11 and John 6 is wrong?

 

[Jon_S_1]

That’s just it you’re looking in the wrong place for clarity Do you really think that God leaves us to our own devises? We will never find the truth by looking to man. We must look to God.

John14:

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.

I do look to God, I look only to God and his word. God led me from Evangleical Protestantism to the Catholic Church. It was a pure miracle. I did not know a single Catholic, it was all by his grace and guidance.

This is how you are dodging questions.

You cannot answer the question, you just continue to point to Bible verses in the Catholic Bible.

Do you think we don’t read it? Do you think that in 2000 years there have not been volumes written by Catholics on every verse you post?

Yet, it is you who declare what is true. You who declares that the Bible is the Word of God.

You have absolutely zero ways of telling us what books belong in the Bible and which Books are part of the Bible without the Catholic Church, yet you quote it as if God handed it to you directly? And on top of that you don’t even have a complete Bible!!

I would love for you to honestly address the questions. I know you are new here, but thus far you think you are clever, but it is nothing we have not seen a million times. When we see arguments like yours we all just laugh and shake our heads at how silly you are being.

 

[Jon_S_1]

You think that your way of reading 1Cor.11 and John 6 is wrong?

Unless, you proclaim the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is truth, then you are reading it wrong, and that is not me saying it. That is the Scripture, the Early Church Fathers, and 2000 years of Theologians.

Thats a lot of evidence compared to your personal opinion or the idea handed to you by your pastor.

 

[daddyd]

Oh by the way…which Bible?

The protestant 66 book Bible or the Catholic 73 book Bible?

Are there thing in those 27 books that will lead me to salvation that I cannot find in the other 66 books? If there are not then I don’t need them.

 

[Per_Crucem]

Are there thing in those 27 books that will lead me to salvation that I cannot find in the other 66 books? If there are not then I don’t need them.

Is there anything in the book of Philemon that you need for your salvation? If not, then why do you need it in the New Testament?

 

[Jon_S_1]

Are there thing in those 27 books that will lead me to salvation that I cannot find in the other 66 books? If there are not then I don’t need them.

Perhaps you reject the entire Old Testament then?

What about 3rd John not much of value in there huh?

 

[JonNC]

=Topper17;12347767]Hi Jon,

Actually I am explaining the process that I undertook to decide whether the God’s Absolute Truth was to be found in the Catholic Church or in Protestantism. The first thing I had to do was decide among the two, being fully aware that if I concluded that I needed to be a Protestant,** I would have to then sift through the uncountable number of competing communions**.

And as you know, I have a baseline, and that is word and sacrament. With due respect, there are no communions in the Reformed or Anabaptist traditions that I could even consider. So, the “uncountable number of competing communions” gets boiled down rather quickly.

It was at that time a personal decision making process, and thus it was I and me who had to make it. I fully understand the point that you are trying to make, but the actual existence forced me to personally make that decision. That does not mean that God established thousands of competing denominations that we are supposed to choose from. The Reformation made that kind of decision a necessity – unfortunately.

See, that’s why I asked what communion you were in, because the considerations on my part already exclude the vast majority. Even some Lutheran synods are now outside my realm of consideration.

As for the Fathers, I disagree. If you look at their teachings on the authority of the Church as opposed to the Sole Authority of Scripture, you will find that the Fathers were VERY Catholic and NOT at all Protestant. In fact, the Fathers are very clear on that very fundamental issue.

We’ll have to disagree on the point.

You suggest that millions of ‘thinking Christians’ make these kinds of judgments all the time, but how can this possibly have been God’s Plan if we were called to be of one mind? Isn’t it much more likely that Christianity was more in line with God’s Plan during the first 1000 years when there was really only ONE unified Church? What is it that makes you think that all of these competing denominations with their sometimes wildly conflicting doctrinal beliefs is the way that it is ‘supposed to be’?

Its not, but if we humans, starting with Adam, had followed God’s plan in the first place…

I don’t see either term as being a slur. I am proud to be a Roman Catholic the vast majority of the Lutherans I have known are proud to be Lutherans. I do recognize when the term ‘Roman Catholic’ is meant to be a slur, but I usually just consider the source and move on. Personally, I have never considered the term ‘Lutheran’ to be a derogatory term.

My point was they started out that way. I generally do not use the term “Roman Catholic” because there are some here that don’t like it, but I don’t think of either as derogatory, either. somewhat inaccurate, but not derogatory.

As you well know, the term “Protestantism” has an actual meaning and is used by virtually all of the Scholars in the exact same way. I do realize though how many people would prefer not to be ‘included’ in the term. As for the Western Church, it was NOT ‘burdened’ by any lasting division in the first 1000 years.

Yes. Its meaning comes directly from the protest at the Second Diet of Speyer in 1529, which was not a protest against any Church doctrine.

As for why anyone would consider the Catholic Church? Because of the way that it has maintained unity among the 50+% which remain in the Church that Christ established at Pentecost. Contrast that with only God knows how many competing and doctrinally conflicting Protestant denominations which make up something less than 30% of Christianity. As I said earlier, Sola Scriptura is responsible for this doctrinal confusion. It was obvious right from the very beginning in the 16th century that it was going to cause disunity.

Every division in the west has its roots in the western Church.

OK, but then PRIOR to your deciding to limit your search to the ‘sacramental communions’, you actually did consider the others. It’s just that you weeded them out fairly quickly.

When I read this, my thoughts immediately went to Star Trek. How would Spock, or later Data describe the fraction of a second involved in “weeding them out”.

Jon

 

[pablope]

Are there thing in those 27 books that will lead me to salvation that I cannot find in the other 66 books? If there are not then I don’t need them.

The Bible was given totally by God, through the Church…both OT and NT.

So you are disregarding the OT then?

By the way…can you cite the chapter and verse where it says to disregard the OT?

If you cannot find one, then with you disregarding the OT…you following only a partial Bible.,and would you say then you are being unbiblical?

And you did not answer my question…which is the correct Bible, the protestant 66 Bible or the 73 book Catholic Bible?

There can only be one…so which is it?

 

[Jon_S_1]

And as you know, I have a baseline, and that is word and sacrament. With due respect, there are no communions in the Reformed or Anabaptist traditions that I could even consider. So, the “uncountable number of competing communions” gets boiled down rather quickly.

See, that’s why I asked what communion you were in, because the considerations on my part already exclude the vast majority. Even some Lutheran synods are now outside my realm of consideration.

We’ll have to disagree on the point.

Its not, but if we humans, starting with Adam, had followed God’s plan in the first place…

My point was they started out that way. I generally do not use the term “Roman Catholic” because there are some here that don’t like it, but I don’t think of either as derogatory, either. somewhat inaccurate, but not derogatory.

Yes. Its meaning comes directly from the protest at the Second Diet of Speyer in 1529, which was not a protest against any Church doctrine.

Every division in the west has its roots in the western Church.

When I read this, my thoughts immediately went to Star Trek. How would Spock, or later Data describe the fraction of a second involved in “weeding them out”.

Jon

I hope you can see by the vast number of I statements in your response, that it is in fact you who is the ultimate authority.

With me, it is the church. I will say there are plenty of things that I don’t like that much, or I don’t quite understand, but it is not I who decides, it is the Church.

 

[JonNC]

Or you could look at it the other way around.

Have you ever wondered, why those wanting to do the black mass attack the Roman Catholic mass, and not the Eastern divine Liturgy, or the Lutheran mass, or any of the protestant style services?

Why is there so much division in the west…could it be because that is the target of a dark force? But why target the western church?

If I were on the dark side, I, too, would attack the Catholic Church. Its the biggest, and has far more clout than any other Christian communion.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

I hope you can see by the vast number of I statements in your response, that it is in fact you who is the ultimate authority.

With me, it is the church. I will say there are plenty of things that I don’t like that much, or I don’t quite understand, but it is not I who decides, it is the Church.

I think, Jon, you will find that when it comes to the doctrinal teachings of my communions, I submit to those teachings, just as you do yours.

Jon

 

[Jon_S_1]

I think, Jon, you will find that when it comes to the doctrinal teachings of my communions, I submit to those teachings, just as you do yours.

Jon

Thats fair enough, the LDS submit to their communion as well, so it kind of brings us back to the real question of why does your communion have the authority for you to submit to it?

For me unless one says that Luther was a prophet of God, one cannot say that their is authority in Lutheranism It was such a departure from the apostolic faith held for 1500 years prior that it is either wrong and man made, or Luther was a prophet and God told him to change things.

In this respect, I feel the Mormons have a stronger position than the Lutherans because they in fact claim that Joseph Smith received divine revelation, which basically can justify any vast number of changes. They are wrong and fail on many levels, but at least on the issue of authority their t’s are crossed and their i’s dotted.