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

[guanophore]

He did however found a body of ideas that became a church.

What makes you think this?

My point is, where is the authority for this church to exist?

Lutherans see themselves as a valid continuation of the Western Church. The Church was founded by Christ, on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets.

If it is not founded by the apostles, by a prophet later, and is undeniably based on the works of a sixteenth century man and his compatriots, them with what authority does that church exist?

Whether you accept it or not, Lutherans do exist, and they are considered joined to the One Body through baptism, and they have the right to be called Christ ian, and they are Catholic siblings.

Is it your belief that Lutheranism is a valid, licit, and full expression of Christian Truth?

It is my believe that the Lutheran faith is not founded upon Luther.

 

[Jon_S_1]

What makes you think this?

Lutherans see themselves as a valid continuation of the Western Church. The Church was founded by Christ, on the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets.

Whether you accept it or not, Lutherans do exist, and they are considered joined to the One Body through baptism, and they have the right to be called Christ ian, and they are Catholic siblings.

It is my believe that the Lutheran faith is not founded upon Luther.

I guess we can agree to disagree then.

Lutheranism would not exist without Luther. I believe that is historical.

That they believe they are a continuation of the western church does not make it so. In fact I would say to claim it as true is to claim Catholicism as a departure from the western church.

I will not deny that they are Christian Brothers, but I am not understanding your defensiveness in place of the Lutherans.

Regardless, I have much respect for them but will continue to point out their error in rejecting the authority of the Bishop of Rome , and the Magesterium joined to him.

 

[guanophore]

Freudian Slip no doubt!

You must admit though that sola scripture played no part in the church for the first 300 years clearly.

On the contrary, it played an essential part. There were many that attempted to use the Scriptures to develop various alternatives, including Gnosticism, Arianism, and a number of others. These attempts to interpret the Scriptures apart from the Teaching Authority of the Church were a major factor in the development and definition of dogma. Eventually it was the development of the doctrines that led the Church to define which books belonged in the NT, and which did not. So one might say that, if it were not for SS, we might not have such doctrines as the hypostatic union, Trinity, Theotokos, etc.

 

[Jon_S_1]

On the contrary, it played an essential part. There were many that attempted to use the Scriptures to develop various alternatives, including Gnosticism, Arianism, and a number of others. These attempts to interpret the Scriptures apart from the Teaching Authority of the Church were a major factor in the development and definition of dogma. Eventually it was the development of the doctrines that led the Church to define which books belonged in the NT, and which did not. So one might say that, if it were not for SS, we might not have such doctrines as the hypostatic union, Trinity, Theotokos, etc.

Good point!

 

[guanophore]

Lutheranism and Jon NC is closer to us in that regard compared with most protestants, but it seems the frame of reference is still not quite on target.

Does such a judgmental stance really enhance dialogue? Of course, if you believed as JonNC does, you would be a Lutheran. However, the OP was asking “Protestants: How do you determine which denomination holds the truth?”

He is answering the question with honesty and integrity. There is no requirement that anyone else agree with him. Is it not possible for Catholics here to affirm the faith of our Christian siblings without constantly finding fault, deficiency, and disparagement?

 

[guanophore]

The bible is the inspired word of God. And sometimes His actual voice.

Deu5
24 And ye said, Behold, the Lord our God hath shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth.

Deuteronomy 8:20
As the nations which the Lord destroyeth before your face, so shall ye perish; because ye would not be obedient unto the voice of the Lord your God.
How can the Bible determine or tell you which has the truth and which has no truth?

Deuteronomy 13:18
When thou shalt hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep all his commandments which I command thee this day, to do that which is right in the eyes of the Lord thy God.

Jeremiah 7:28
But thou shalt say unto them, This is a nation that obeyeth not the voice of the Lord their God, nor receiveth correction: truth is perished, and is cut off from their mouth.

Hebrews 1
1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;

Sorry, daddyd, but none of these are references to books speaking words aloud. They are all references to the Word of God manifested in events that occurred, which are documented in the Sacred Writings.

 

[guanophore]

Well, again pablope, If there is nothing in these books that will lead me to salvation. That is not in the other 66 books, I don’t need them. Can you show me something that is?

You seem to have your own preconceived notions of what “salvation” is, and what will “lead you to salvation”. Your preconceived notions are a drastic departure from what the Apostles believed and taught. Therefore, no, I do not think it is possible to show you something that will convince you otherwise. You have already fallen for a truncated version of the truth.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Does such a judgmental stance really enhance dialogue? Of course, if you believed as JonNC does, you would be a Lutheran. However, the OP was asking “Protestants: How do you determine which denomination holds the truth?”

He is answering the question with honesty and integrity. There is no requirement that anyone else agree with him. Is it not possible for Catholics here to affirm the faith of our Christian siblings without constantly finding fault, deficiency, and disparagement?

Well I am the OP, and I was looking to have discussion on church authority.

JohnNC and PerCruceum and other Lutherans or Anglicans or orthodox have united together on many threads. Threads on the sacraments, or the canon, or the creeds, and a number of other things.

This is a thread where we can discuss out differences, and I feel the conversation has been respectful.

If it hasn’t , I apologize as it was not my intent.

 

[guanophore]

This is the stupidest idea for a test of what books should be in the Bible I have heard!

Seriously, Jon S., you need to work on your charity. I strongly recommend a prayerful reflection on the forum rules recently posted in another thread by our moderator.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Seriously, Jon S., you need to work on your charity. I strongly recommend a prayerful reflection on the forum rules recently posted in another thread by our moderator.

I did not call anyone stupid, nor did I disparage any one individual. To say that determining what books should be in the Bible based on if it has “material needed for salvation” is in my opinion a stupid idea.

I believe the person of the post, knows it is a silly idea and was posting it to inflame, anger, or frustrate people trying to dialogue with him.

If he feels offended, I apologize, He is welcome to report the post to the moderator for removal or infraction to me.

Perhaps my word of stupid was not the best. I will think of a better word to describe the total incoherence of such a method of canon determination.

I will take your advice and reflect on how my posts come across.

 

[guanophore]

What question?

You can use the little blue icon next to the name of the poster and it will take you back through the thread, where you will be able to see and count all of the questions you have not answered.

So do you

Yes but I suspect that the reasons, or foundation for why we believe the Bible is the Word of God are different. One of the questions you have not answered is where the list of books that ought to be in the Bible is located in the Bible (and I am not talking about the table of contents!)

So, you are saying that the bible is the word of God? You think it is a Catholic book I don’t , but** I don’t think it matters**.

Actually, it does matter, because if you do not know the origin of the book, and the faith which produced it, then it will be difficult to have a framework for discussion.

I have noticed that those who espouse Sola Scriptura, a doctrine also not found in Scripture, will say that it “assumes a canon of scripture”. This seems like a very convenient way to get out of confronting the facts of history. For Catholics, reality matters.

 

[guanophore]

No, I did not say that I don.t need the OT. That is your misinterpretation of what I said.

Ahh. Now we might be getting somewhere! So, we are in agreement that it is possible for someone to read, and misinterpret what was said, or meant.

 Really, pablope? Does not Jesus SPEAK to us through the words of the bible?

John8
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Indeed He does. Many questions have been posed to you in this thread about how God is speaking through the Scriptures. You seem to have missed them.

I find everything I need in my bible.

That being the case, one has to wonder what brought you to CAF.

One might wonder why you are on the internet at all, since your Bible does not instruct you to be here, and everything you need is in your Bible. Are you indulging some kind of lust of the flesh?

John14
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

This promise was made by Jesus to His One Body, the Church. How is it you believe you are part of that One Body? (this goes back to one of the questions you have not answered) How do you identify that Church?

 

[guanophore]

Correct? The bible is I’m sure you will agree a unique book in that it is the divinely inspired word of God. This book was designed by God to show us the way of salvation. For me that’s the KJV. If you find that in the Douay Rheims, that’s fine.

So it is ok for everyone to define their own Bible?

Why is the one you are using different than the one Jesus and the Apostles used?

Ok, you need to give a list of the things that are in those 27 books that is vital for salvation That is not in the 66 books of my bible. If you cannot then the information in my bible is sufficient and the point is moot.

This seems like a very odd request, especially since you already quoted the words of Jesus.

39 You search the scriptures, because you think that in them you have eternal life; and it is they that bear witness to me; 40 yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life.
Jn 5:39–40

Salvation is not found in a “list” but in the person of Christ! There is nothing anywhere in the Apostolic Teaching that reduces the One Faith to a “list of what is vital for salvation”. This is a modern invention that has no roots in the history of the Church.

Paul is not talking about the 27 books of the New Testament. There is no New Testament yet.

Paul is speaking about the Old Testament. And he specifically said that all] Scripture is breathed by God.

**So what do you think are the Scriptures that Paul is talking about? **

The KJV works for me.

This is just a blatant dodge, daddyd. You didn’t miss this question (which you might be able to use as an excuse for not answering the previous questions).

Since there was no KJV at the time of Paul, your answer is basically non-responsive. You have chosen to use a collection that is different from that used by Paul and the other Apostles.

Why is this more important?

Because it demonstrates just one of the many ways in which the doctrines you have embraced are a significant deviation from the One Faith of the Apostles.

I think that I did answer your question. The bible is inspired by God right?

The law and the testimony is just another name for scripture. So if you do not speak according to the what it says in the law and the testimony (the bible) You are not speaking according to the movement of God’s Holy Spirit.

True, but how is the determination made that one person is speaking according to the Holy Spirit, and the other is not?

One says that God hates divorce, and another says that it is ok with Jesus to separate what God has joined.

One group says women must wear veils in the Church, another says not. One group says there should be no instruments in Church, another does not. One group says there are 73 inspired books in the OT, the other says there are 66. They cannot all be speaking from the HS, since the HS does not contradict Himself.

 

[guanophore]

 If the reason for ‘divergent beliefs’ is actually ‘complex’, then please flesh out your thoughts on the matter, taking into account the massive denominalization that has occurred within the Sola Scriptura denominations.

This would most certainly be outside the scope of this thread.

Holding an opinion is a FAR CRY from deciding doctrinal matters on your own, which is exactly what started the ‘Reformation’.

I don’t see how it is different. Clearly, Luther’s opinions were very many and varied. Not all of them had to do with doctrinal matters, but there is no doubt that Luther’s opinions had a major role in the Reformation.

Our opinions and ‘votes’ on the matter are meaningless and are quite frankly, in indication of our fallen nature and our arrogance.

I find it ironic that you should say this, since you have been so vociferous on CAF with your opinions.

I very much appreciate the statement that you are willing to discuss Luther’s beliefs and opinions.

I certainly hope and pray you will not derail yet another thread by doing so here! :bigyikes:

 

[pablope]

No, I did not say that I don.t need the OT. That is your misinterpretation of what I said.

Really, pablope? Does not Jesus SPEAK to us through the words of the bible?

John8
31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

But first, you have to answer and avoid dodging a question i have asked several times…which Bible does Jesus speak through…the protestant 66 book bible or the 73 book catholic bible?

Which is the correct bible-the protestant one or the catholic bible?

 

[pablope]

Correct? The bible is I’m sure you will agree a unique book in that it is the divinely inspired word of God. This book was designed by God to show us the way of salvation. For me that’s the KJV. If you find that in the Douay Rheims, that’s fine.

Which goes back to the question…which Bible did God inspire…the 66 book protestant bible or the 73 book catholic bible?

And where is the chapter and verse that says God designed the bible to show the way to salvation?

 

[daddyd]

So daddyd, how do you carry out this commandment?

John14:
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

It’s commandments (plural) guanophore. Those commandments are the ten commandments. You keep them by doing what they say

15 “If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother. 16 But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, that every word may be confirmed by the evidence of two or three witnesses. 17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector. 18 Truly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven". Mt 18:15–18

How do you identify the church to which you are to go with this “telling”?

I have no problem identifying my church.

By the way guanophore you never did answer my question. Is there anything in your sacred tradition that is essential for salvation, that I won’t find in the bible?

 

[Jon_S_1]

John14:
15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

It’s commandments (plural) guanophore. Those commandments are the ten commandments. You keep them by doing what they say

I have no problem identifying my church.

So if your church allows divorce and remarriage, and I go to them to them because I want to remarry and they allow it that is God’s will and the Truth of scripture.

But then if I go into the church across the street with the same dispute and they say no, I cannot remarry, then that is God’s will and the Truth of scripture.

How can it be both ways?

Are you a relativist? That whatever floats your boat is the truth?

Another example. I confront someone that his wife should be silent in church. He disagrees, we take it to the church, they say she must be silent in the church. So the party that lost the battle goes to another church.

the church next store, a different 'Bible believing church" , says it is acceptable for women to speak in church and that the other church had it wrong.

Which church is right?

Both of them?

None of them?

Why would Christ give us this form of resolution if it had no weight behind it?

By the way guanophore you never did answer my question. Is there anything in your sacred tradition that is essential for salvation, that I won’t find in the bible?

I answered it in a previous post…please review

 

[daddyd]

This is a very interesting position, daddyd, and I would say, one which is indefensible. Basically you are declaring that you do not need the Scriptures that have been inspired by the Holy Spirit, and given to us for our instruction.

I have all the information that I need for my salvation in my bible.

The early Church relied entirely upon the OT (all 73 books) to preach the Gospel, and yet, you don’t believe God provided them to you for any important reason?

The early church relied mainly on the teachings of Jesus Christ, which would be the New Testament.

 

[daddyd]

Sorry, daddyd, but none of these are references to books speaking words aloud. They are all references to the Word of God manifested in events that occurred, which are documented in the Sacred Writings.

Did you really think that I meant that the books talked? They do in a sense. They tell us what God actually said.