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

[Jon_S_1]

Why is it that if not such and such an interpretation is valid then there is no other interpretation ??? Last i heard there are plenty of trespasses going around amongst the body to one another so Matt 18 has a purpose

And ? Sin does break a law and possibly a covenant.

No. Libel is indeed a “trespass”. A brother or more can intervene not define the dipsuted doctrine but to determine if indeed the shoe fits, if one is a heretic or not. Don’t need slander.

.Personal trespass is Matt 18. There are other scriptures dealing with heretics and may even follow the final venue of the “church” handling it, but that only indirectly reflects Matt 18 but not as primary meaning. How do you think personal, non-doctrinal disputes should be settled ? Matt 18 ? Do you have authority ? Do two of have authority on such a matter ? If so why ? Matt 18?

Frankly Ben hur,

You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You said Matt 18 dealt with the mosaic law, if so, it would not have much application,now you say personal trespasses but not heresy.

You say, the church can step in to see “if the shoe fits”.

But this is exactly what has happened countless times in Protestant history. A church decided that yes the shoe fits stop teaching x, y, z. Then the individual disagrees and starts his own church. Some of these are “non denominational” others morph into new denominations.

So there is no authority in your scenario. Simply opinions. Yet Matt 18 describes a church with authority. A final arbiter of truth.

The point being is that Matt 18 is irrelevant to Protestantism…if Protestants try to enforce something the individual simply leaves and declares the church wrong.

If there was a single church it would be abundantly clear that such an individual was acting outside the Christian Faith. Instead today, it’s seem as just another possible opinion.

 

[benhur]

Frankly Ben hur,
You are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You said Matt 18 dealt with the mosaic law, if so, it would not have much application,now you say personal trespasses but not heresy.

Well ask marywarfield about the intertwining of the OT and NT. I mentioned Mosaic law and whatever “law or trespass” there could be in NT. Covering all the bases is not speaking out of both sides of the mouth (unless of course both sides are right).

But this is exactly what has happened countless times in Protestant history. A church decided that yes the shoe fits stop teaching x, y, z. Then the individual disagrees and starts his own church. Some of these are “non denominational” others morph into new denominations.

Actually P’s are only continuing what has happened since form the beginning. Why do you think you have the orthodox and other churches , not to mention the continuance of heretical sects thru out history ?

So there is no authority in your scenario. Simply opinions. Yet Matt 18 describes a church with authority. A final arbiter of truth.

My scenario ? I asked you do you have authority, or two together ? to resolve a trespass issue ? Was Jesus lying ? Was He being rhetorical in Matt ?

The point being is that Matt 18 is irrelevant to Protestantism…if Protestants try to enforce something the individual simply leaves and declares the church wrong.

You paint a broad stroke. What you suggest has happened since the begining of the church, even the beginning of history.

If there was a single church it would be abundantly clear that such an individual was acting outside the Christian Faith. Instead today, it’s seem as just another possible opinion.

By God’s design ? If, if, if. Your definition of church is hard to fit our reality. (though the CC tries with luciem gentum or something) Why did He allow for divisions in Judaism, the then light of the world ? Fear not, He is in control. The Bride is right on schedule and will be delivered, as sure as Judaism delivered the Savior of the world.

 

[JonNC]

Hi Jon. Yes it would be better to suggest that hopefully one can identify a Christian body of believers as opposed to a Jewish, Islamic, Buddhist etc body of believers either in deed or attitude or doctrine ceremony/service even building…I agree with how you think joe meant it , just offering the other paradigm as to just what Jesus started and that it indeed it still exists and is identifiable. The tares have always been in with the wheat. To suggest the field was mostly only wheat till Luther is inaccurate.

I would obviously agree with your last sentence. But a question, how does one recognize the Church Christ established? For the Lutheran, we see the Church as the congregation of believers where the word is preached and the sacraments administered. What say you?

Jon

 

[benhur]

I would obviously agree with your last sentence. But a question, how does one recognize the Church Christ established? For the Lutheran, we see the Church as the congregation of believers where the word is preached and the sacraments administered. What say you?

Jon

Could it be so simple ? I think so, a congregation of believers, those called out by the voice of the Shepherd, the “ecclesia”. Yes, the word preached in truth and spirit and “eucharisting” .

 

[Jon_S_1]

Could it be so simple ? I think so, a congregation of believers, those called out by the voice of the Shepherd, the “ecclesia”. Yes, the word preached in truth and spirit and “eucharisting” .

So the Mormons are a valid ecclesia? At least to them they are?

 

[Jon_S_1]

You paint a broad stroke. What you suggest has happened since the begining of the church, even the beginning of history.

So in your mind. The church Christ founded is unknowable. Indeed the countless divisions are untraceable to a church that looks anything like the church Christ founded…in Protestantism at least.

If that is true, then Christ was not all knowing, for he describes the opposite.

 

[JonNC]

Could it be so simple ? I think so, a congregation of believers, those called out by the voice of the Shepherd, the “ecclesia”. Yes, the word preached in truth and spirit and “eucharisting” .

The forgiveness of sin through Baptism, Absolution, and the Eucharist.

Jon

 

[benhur]

The forgiveness of sin through Baptism, Absolution, and the Eucharist.

Jon

OK, OK, I am chuckling cause I thought you wanted some more. I was going to mention baptismal rite, but technically that is as far I’ll go bro.

 

[benhur]

So in your mind. The church Christ founded is unknowable. Indeed the countless divisions are untraceable to a church that looks anything like the church Christ founded…in Protestantism at least.

If that is true, then Christ was not all knowing, for he describes the opposite.

Well how did the first church know ? How did John know to write, " they left us cause they were not of us, but we know all things and have an unction form the Holy One ? Those that left, did they go into oblivion upon immediately departing apostolic tradition ? Did they form heretical sects ? Did not a few survive for a bit , some even to now ? Did not the Orthodox do what you claim P’s do , just disagree and continue on their own path ? That is all I am saying ( it is not just a new problem, since Luther). How did you know in 1000 A.d which was true, east or west ? Was Christ taken by surprise ? For some reason the wheat and tares remain. For some reason God allowed Eve to eat , and Cain to slay and for Lot to pitch his tent facing Gamorah and for Ishmael to be conceived and for Israel to have a king like it’s neighbors, and for Christ to speak in parables lest people be… well, that is to be discerned isn’t it ? Are we sheep or are we goats ?

 

[benhur]

So the Mormons are a valid ecclesia? At least to them they are?

yes to themselves. How do you know they are not ? The same way I do probably.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Well how did the first church know ? How did John know to write, " they left us cause they were not of us, but we know all things and have an unction form the Holy One ? Those that left, did they go into oblivion upon immediately departing apostolic tradition ? Did they form heretical sects ? Did not a few survive for a bit , some even to now ? Did not the Orthodox do what you claim P’s do , just disagree and continue on their own path ? That is all I am saying ( it is not just a new problem, since Luther). How did you know in 1000 A.d which was true, east or west ? Was Christ taken by surprise ? For some reason the wheat and tares remain. For some reason God allowed Eve to eat , and Cain to slay and for Lot to pitch his tent facing Gamorah and for Ishmael to be conceived and for Israel to have a king like it’s neighbors, and for Christ to speak in parables lest people be… well, that is to be discerned isn’t it ? Are we sheep or are we goats ?

The point is that the Holy Spirit was sent to “remind them of all that was taught”. To "guide them in truth ". The apostles and their successors and the church whole holds this truth. East and West hold this truth. Orthodox and Catholics. Yes, some details are debated, but the core is there in both East and West.

Protestants have no apostolic roots, they have no laying on of hands and no tradition dating to the apostolic period. It is a complete free or all with every Protestant pastor looking “for a new angle” to grow HIS church, not Christ’s. Churches in Protestantism form around men with Christ as a necessary side note.

I hate to be blunt, but it’s true.

Yes their have always been wheat and tares. Why are you ok being a tare?

It was clear throughout history who heretics were over and over condemned by the church as a whole through the bishops.

It was only once the Bible replaced the church (final stage if Matt 18 being take it to the Bible and if you disagree there then form two churches), that heresy became confused and undefinable.

After all, who are you or I to say Mormons are wrong? It’s all opinion with the idea of a knowable truth being a fantasy unable to be realized.

In Catholicism and Orthodoxy that is not the case.

 

[benhur]

The point is that the Holy Spirit was sent to “remind them of all that was taught”. To "guide them in truth ". The apostles and their successors and the church whole holds this truth. East and West hold this truth. Orthodox and Catholics. Yes, some details are debated, but the core is there in both East and West.

Protestants have no apostolic roots, they have no laying on of hands and no tradition dating to the apostolic period. It is a complete free or all with every Protestant pastor looking “for a new angle” to grow HIS church, not Christ’s. Churches in Protestantism form around men with Christ as a necessary side note.

I hate to be blunt, but it’s true.

Yes their have always been wheat and tares. Why are you ok being a tare?

It was clear throughout history who heretics were over and over condemned by the church as a whole through the bishops.

It was only once the Bible replaced the church (final stage if Matt 18 being take it to the Bible and if you disagree there then form two churches), that heresy became confused and undefinable.

After all, who are you or I to say Mormons are wrong? It’s all opinion with the idea of a knowable truth being a fantasy unable to be realized.

In Catholicism and Orthodoxy that is not the case.

Ahh, the old go make lay people out of the nations, and sew up the veil that was wrent in two by Calvary, and OT model of priesthood . I sensed you might not get the “you” in “you know all things and have an unction from the Holy One”…Details ? Core belief’s ? Yes I agree to core belief’s as foundation for judging but I can not insitutionalize God’s flow. I see your physical laying of hands as proof succession as good as circumcision was for Judaism and Israel. That is a ritual does not guarantee effectualness, as paul and peter point out. Why do you lay such a burden on others, this succession, especially when we have detailed differences but similar core of faith, at least historically ? Did not david once make an offering without a priest and some poohed pohed him? See what i mean by institutionalize God’s method of choosing leaders ? To say one has no apostolic roots is Ok if one were a Hindu. Even the CC says somewhat that we have roots, to the CC which supposedly is apostolic, we sprang from CC. Many reformers were ordained. I think what you mean is that the details of our differences don’t have your roots but certainly our shared core belief’s do…The wheat and tares allowed seems to indicate that he allows true believers to mix with the false on an individual level, but perhaps secondarily one might apply maturity differences and levels of truth and spirit behind our doctrinal /practice differences. The field is not pure and we are not to get bent out of shape about it . Do you really think we would be more mature if all were perfect in unity, with no differences, even minor ones as you say are between east and west ? So how do we act till that great day when we are truly homogenized, the bad and ugly done away with?..I have yet to hear anyone agree the individual has discerning capabilities even authority per Mat 18 . The individual , then two , then the church are guided today by the bible at least. There has always been the challenge to balance the authority of scripture
with tradition (bible vs church as you say). This is not new because of P’s.

 

[Jon_S_1]

There is a difference between having theological debate and discussion within the church, and just completely recreating your own religion with some ideas taken from the church.

For example all Jews worshiped in the one temple. They had an institution whether you define it as the nation, or the prophets, or the chief priest or perhaps a combination.

But some non jewish nation who observed the practices and picked and chose some and started their own “Jewish religion” would not be considered Jewish by the Jewish people. It would be seen for the cheap copy it is and for the falsehood that it is.

Your position seems to indicate all Christian religions are equal and God sows confusion intentionally.

No God IS. GOD IS TRUTH and there is one truth. Us humans are the ones sowing confusion.

Protestants do it by trading Gods authority in his church for the Bible, denying Gods oral teaching for the written, and by relying on men instead of Christ.

 

[marywarfield]

Ahh, the old go make lay people out of the nations, and sew up the veil that was wrent in two by Calvary, and OT model of priesthood . I sensed you might not get the “you” in “you know all things and have an unction from the Holy One”…Details ? Core belief’s ? Yes I agree to core belief’s as foundation for judging but I can not insitutionalize God’s flow. I see your physical laying of hands as proof succession as good as circumcision was for Judaism and Israel. That is a ritual does not guarantee effectualness, as paul and peter point out. Why do you lay such a burden on others, this succession, especially when we have detailed differences but similar core of faith, at least historically ? Did not david once make an offering without a priest and some poohed pohed him? See what i mean by institutionalize God’s method of choosing leaders ? To say one has no apostolic roots is Ok if one were a Hindu. Even the CC says somewhat that we have roots, to the CC which supposedly is apostolic, we sprang from CC. Many reformers were ordained. I think what you mean is that the details of our differences don’t have your roots but certainly our shared core belief’s do…The wheat and tares allowed seems to indicate that he allows true believers to mix with the false on an individual level, but perhaps secondarily one might apply maturity differences and levels of truth and spirit behind our doctrinal /practice differences. The field is not pure and we are not to get bent out of shape about it . Do you really think we would be more mature if all were perfect in unity, with no differences, even minor ones as you say are between east and west ? So how do we act till that great day when we are truly homogenized, the bad and ugly done away with?..I have yet to hear anyone agree the individual has discerning capabilities even authority per Mat 18 . The individual , then two , then the church are guided today by the bible at least. There has always been the challenge to balance the authority of scripture
with tradition (bible vs church as you say). This is not new because of P’s.

Haha! Touché Benhur! BUT- you knew that was coming?

We can’t poo poo an institutionalized apostolic succession
just because it is OT.
We keep to it because we keep everything OT except
what Christ Himself changed. He had no intention
of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

So now on to the two and three. I love this one and here’s
why:

Me and two people sit down and pray in the Holy Spirit.
Technically Christ is with us yes?

But two or three come in and sit next to us and
they pray in the Holy Spirit. Christ is with them as well yes?

So they are praying over papal authority.
One groups says yes to papal primacy
and one group says no.

What to do Ben Hur? Christ doesn’t talk out of both
sides of His mouth?

How is this resolved?

 

[Jon_S_1]

Haha! Touché Benhur! BUT- you knew that was coming?

We can’t poo poo an institutionalized apostolic succession
just because it is OT.
We keep to it because we keep everything OT except
what Christ Himself changed. He had no intention
of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

So now on to the two and three. I love this one and here’s
why:

Me and two people sit down and pray in the Holy Spirit.
Technically Christ is with us yes?

But two or three come in and sit next to us and
they pray in the Holy Spirit. Christ is with them as well yes?

So they are praying over papal authority.
One groups says yes to papal primacy
and one group says no.

What to do Ben Hur? Christ doesn’t talk out of both
sides of His mouth?

How is this resolved?

Excellent question!

What they do is bicker amongst themselves, throw scriptures at each other, attack each other’s holiness (the spirit must not be speaking to YOU). Then they separate and form separate churches.

 

[marywarfield]

Excellent question!

What they do is bicker amongst themselves, throw scriptures at each other, attack each other’s holiness (the spirit must not be speaking to YOU). Then they separate and form separate churches.

you forgot to add they start
Internet forums . but maybe Benhur has an alternative?

 

[benhur]

Haha! Touché Benhur! BUT- you knew that was coming?

We can’t poo poo an institutionalized apostolic succession
just because it is OT.
We keep to it because we keep everything OT except
what Christ Himself changed. He had no intention
of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

So now on to the two and three. I love this one and here’s
why:

Me and two people sit down and pray in the Holy Spirit.
Technically Christ is with us yes?

But two or three come in and sit next to us and
they pray in the Holy Spirit. Christ is with them as well yes?

So they are praying over papal authority.
One groups says yes to papal primacy
and one group says no.

What to do Ben Hur? Christ doesn’t talk out of both
sides of His mouth?

How is this resolved?

Well , in the OT…the Saducees sat next to the Pharisees and praised God. Yet one group believed in the resurrection and the other did not . The Almighty Spirit speak not in forked tongue. What did they do ?

 

[benhur]

There is a difference between having theological debate and discussion within the church, and just completely recreating your own religion with some ideas taken from the church.

Yes. Are P’s a new religion ?

For example all Jews worshiped in the one temple. They had an institution whether you define it as the nation, or the prophets, or the chief priest or perhaps a combination.

Jews had/have a nation. Jews have had a temple but not always.
Jews were still Jews with great variety of doctrines allowed. They flexed but did not break, at least as to their faith/religion ( the nation split then dissolved). I suppose they look at us in the same way, as flexing but not breaking . We are all Christians to them.

But some non jewish nation who observed the practices and picked and chose some and started their own “Jewish religion” would not be considered Jewish by the Jewish people. It would be seen for the cheap copy it is and for the falsehood that it is.

Well not sure anyone did that but for sure there were "half breeds’’- Samaritans-, a mix of Judaism and gentile beliefs. Again P’s are a new religion?

Your position seems to indicate all Christian religions are equal and God sows confusion intentionally.

Your statement is a reflection only of the eye of the beholder. Your statement is misrepresentative.

Protestants do it by trading Gods authority in his church for the Bible, denying Gods oral teaching for the written, and by relying on men instead of Christ.

Yes, that is what is hurled to us frequently from across the channel, an age old channel made because doctrine and practices evolve and are difficult to show apostolicity (that is what we hurl back)…oh the vanity of us all.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Yes. Are P’s a new religion ?

Jews had/have a nation. Jews have had a temple but not always.
Jews were still Jews with great variety of doctrines allowed. They flexed but did not break, at least as to their faith/religion ( the nation split then dissolved). I suppose they look at us in the same way, as flexing but not breaking . We are all Christians to them.
Well not sure anyone did that but for sure there were "half breeds’’- Samaritans-, a mix of Judaism and gentile beliefs. Again P’s are a new religion?
Your statement is a reflection only of the eye of the beholder. Your statement is misrepresentative.

Yes, that is what is hurled to us frequently from across the channel, an age old channel made because doctrine and practices evolve and are difficult to show apostolicity (that is what we hurl back)…oh the vanity of us all.

Yes, I think for all intensive purposes, Protestants are a new religion.

Lutherans are the religion created by Luther
Reformed by Calvin
Anglicans by Henry VIII
Mormons by Joseph Smith
Methodist by Wesley
Baptists by Zuingli and others.

Etc etc.

The Mormons at least figured out their founder needed to be a prophet to set them aside and give them the authority other Protestants lack. But if Protestants were honest with themselves, they would acknowledge that their authority is not the Bible but their founders interpretation of the Bible.

In addition:

The Jews did not give the Samaritans any authority and they were not considered to be Jewish or allowed to worship in the temple. My reformed Jewish friends today view Christianity as one religion that “has no truth and caters to whatever people want”. When my friend told me this about Catholics it floored me! Then after digging I realized he meant Christianity in general. And he’s absolutely right. To the Jews we look like a bunch of clowns with no doctrine, no beliefs, just opinions with an occasional I Love Jesus.

 

[Nicea325]

Yes, I think for all intensive purposes, Protestants are a new religion.

Lutherans are the religion created by Luther
Reformed by Calvin
Anglicans by Henry VIII
Mormons by Joseph Smith
Methodist by Wesley
Baptists by Zuingli and others.

Etc etc.

The Mormons at least figured out their founder needed to be a prophet to set them aside and give them the authority other Protestants lack. But if Protestants were honest with themselves, they would acknowledge that their authority is not the Bible but their founders interpretation of the Bible.

In addition:

The Jews did not give the Samaritans any authority and they were not considered to be Jewish or allowed to worship in the temple. My reformed Jewish friends today view Christianity as one religion that “has no truth and caters to whatever people want”. When my friend told me this about Catholics it floored me! Then after digging I realized he meant Christianity in general. And he’s absolutely right. To the Jews we look like a bunch of clowns with no doctrine, no beliefs, just opinions with an occasional I Love Jesus.

Amen! What I always ask my non-Catholic friends is this:

If a person who has never heard of Jesus and wants to become part of His Mystical Body-which church would he or she choose and with what certitude does he or she know it is the church Christ founded?

Evidently thousands of denominations all cannot be right or else thousands would not exist!