Protestants: how do you know that your interpretation of the Bible is the right one?

[elvisman]

These were “disciples” of Jesus. They chose to stop following Jesus because they didn’t like what he taught.

I don’t deny the Eucharist. I believe in the real-presence. This is just one more example of Catholics judging non-catholics based on false assumptions.

And don’t forget how that chapter begins, 1 "Stop judging, that you may not be judged.
2 For as you judge, so will you be judged, and the measure with which you measure will be measured out to you.
3 Why do you notice the splinter in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the wooden beam in your own eye?

Ahh, but you left out the part that says:

***"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves. ***
***By their fruits you will know them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? ***
***Just so, every good tree bears good fruit, and a rotten tree bears bad fruit. ***
***A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a rotten tree bear good fruit. ***
*Every tree that does not bear good fruit will be cut down and thrown into the fire. *
So by their fruits you will know them." (Matt. 7:15-20)

He tells us that we can judge by a person’s fruits.
Those who speak against his Church are these people.
We are called upon to judge rightly (Luke 12:56-57).

PS - If you believe that the Eucharist consecrated by the Catholic Priest is the body, blood, soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, then you believe in the Real Presence.**

 

[Bill_Pick]

I’m not quoting from a specific site, Bill. I found the Polish Catholic Church by doing a search awhile back. And I read from several sites on the 22,000 denominations.

If you look up the original source, I’m sure it says “denominations”. To a Catholic this means non-catholics as the RC recognizes all it’s rites as one church. But that is not the belief of the author.

But in one final attempt to get my point across, I will offer you this:

The first split from the Christian church is found in John 6:60 When many of his disciples heard this, they said, “This is a difficult statement. Who can accept it?”

Whether the split is from Protestant or Catholic or Jesus himself, there have always and will always be those who seek a religion that suits their own desires. It is not the fault of any church. It is a choice of each individual to either accept or deny Christ.

Now, here is the part where Catholics will be tempted to accuse Protestants of denying Christ, for not following with them.

to this I give you:

Luke 9:49-50 John said, “Master, we saw someone driving out demons in your name. We tried to stop him, because he wasn’t a follower like us.”
Jesus said to him, “Don’t stop him! Because whoever is not against you is for you.”

Bill, I am not against you.

Ginger

Ginger I am not against you ,in fact I enjoy most of your post,did you go to the site that has the 33,000 denominations

 

[Ginger2]

[Luke]
"Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.

“False prophets who come in sheep’s clothing” This is not people who opening deny God or curse the church. “Sheep’s clothing” indicates they are pretending to be one of you. For Catholics, this would be someone who poses as a Catholic. That is why we are told:

By their fruits you will know them.

You can’ t tell the saved from the unsaved by what church they attend or how much money they give to the poor or how they praise God with their lips.

Those who speak against his Church

Those who openly speak against the church are not “in sheep’s clothing” are they. When an atheist says, “God does not exist.” You know he is an atheist.

Ginger

 

[Ginger2]

May I share with you a story of a woman who thought she was a medium? She believed she could help people contact their spiritual guides to help them in life.

I spoke with her and told her this was forbidden in Scriptures because we have no control over what spirit we contact.
She confidently told me, “In all the years I’ve done this, I’ve never encountered an evil spirit.”

I asked, “How would you know? The Bible tells us even satan masquerades as an angel of light.”

Her face went dim and she asked, “How can we tell, then?”

I said, “That’s why we’re not supposed to do it!”

 

[Ginger2]

Those who are deceived don’t know it. That is a scary thought!

I wondered, how anyone know for sure? I want to follow Christ with all my heart, but if we can be deceived and not even know it, how can anyone be sure?

I read: 1 Cor 12:3 Therefore, I tell you that nobody speaking by the spirit of God says, “Jesus be accursed.” And no one can say, “Jesus is Lord,” except by the holy Spirit.

So, I said out loud, “Jesus Christ is my Lord and Savior.” This was more than a test, it was my declaration to God.

What else do we have but God? We are dependent on Him for everything, even to believe.

 

[Catholic1954]

Ok, 104 posts later, no one has given a straight answer to the question: How do you KNOW that YOUR interpretation of the bible is the correct one when there are dozens of others just as convinced that THEIR interpretation is the correct one?

 

[elvisman]

“False prophets who come in sheep’s clothing” This is not people who opening deny God or curse the church. “Sheep’s clothing” indicates they are pretending to be one of you. For Catholics, this would be someone who poses as a Catholic. That is why we are told:

You can’ t tell the saved from the unsaved by what church they attend or how much money they give to the poor or how they praise God with their lips.

Those who openly speak against the church are not “in sheep’s clothing” are they. When an atheist says, “God does not exist.” You know he is an atheist.

Ginger

Wolves in sheeps clothing are also those who preach a different message than what Jesus taught and left to his Church.

By the way - you can’t tell the saved from the unsaved anyway because salvation is a process. You’re not equipped to be able to tell who is saved and who is not - only God is.

You can tell who is a follower of Christ by the one who does his will - his fruits.
This doesn’t seem to encompass those who pick and choose what they want to believe because some things are just too hard for them swallow. Those in his Church - not all - but those who have chosen to accept everything he taught and left are doing his will.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Ok, 104 posts later, no one has given a straight answer to the question: How do you KNOW that YOUR interpretation of the bible is the correct one when there are dozens of others just as convinced that THEIR interpretation is the correct one?

no one will say I WAS WRONG they will argue to the end and then they will know what is right just like the rest of us

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Ginger I am not against you ,in fact I enjoy most of your post,did you go to the site that has the 33,000 denominations

Bill, you crack me up! You’re great.

 

[Always_For_Him]

Those who are deceived don’t know it. That is a scary thought!

I wondered, how anyone know for sure? I want to follow Christ with all my heart, but if we can be deceived and not even know it, how can anyone be sure?

It is mighty scary, isn’t it? The problem began when, as a result of the reformation, men - on their own authority - changed the teachings of Christ to mean something different than it had ALWAYS meant for over 1,500 years. That is still happening today. Men, continuing to think they have any authority at all, breaking off from their church to found new ones teaching different doctrine. Over the course of 500 years and many generations later, everyone who is part of these churches don’t know anything other than what they have been taught - a lot of truth, but also, a lot of error, thousands of conflicting meanings. There is only ONE!! The fact that the Bible says that it is not for one’s own personal interpretation should be enough, but people self-interpret and actually think they are correct because it agrees with their church’s interpretation. What was the Apostolic understanding of any particular teaching? The ECF’s knew what that contextual interpretation was because they were given that teaching by the Apostles themselves. There are more than enough writings by the ECF’s to teach you what Scripture actually meant to the early Church. That is all ANY of us have to go on. The Oral and Sacred Tradition of the Church IS what the ECF’s tried to spell out and what the Catholic Church STILL teaches written down or not.

Jesus gave ONE Deposit of Faith - to HIS Church. The Apostles and their successors (the ECF’s) through the power of the Holy Spirit orally taught Jesus Teachings and phyically lived the things Jesus taught them to do for centuries before they were ever compiled into what we now know as the Bible. Not all was written. Teachings can be written, Traditions are taught and practiced. All the letters were scattered and not brought together until until in the late 100’s. The combination of Oral and Sacred Tradition - Catholic teaching - is WHAT was recorded as the BIBLE. You can’t separate them. The Bible was never meant to be interpreted separate from the Church that wrote it. When man, on his own, takes the Bible away from 2,000 years of tradition and contextual understanding and reads it on his own without knowing the context/deeper meaning of the words used at the time, he can and will interpret it wrong.

Luther never had a problem with the Church’s teachings/interpretations of faith and morals. His issue, and rightfully so, was the erroneous sale of indulgences. This flagrant misuse of power was by a few men, and NEVER was approved of by the Church, and it NEVER affected/changed the Church’s teachings on faith and morals. Men can and will error in their actions, Christ’s Church can’t fail - because HE said so. Christ protected His Church from TEACHING error then and He is now, just like He said He would do until the end of time. The counter-reformation had begun way before Luther’s formal excommuication from the Church. As Luther gained power and political influence, he started thinking he knew better than Christ’s Church what the teachings of Christ actually meant. He was full of himself, that is evident in his writings. Luther was teaching heresy, and as the Church had always protected Jesus Deposit of Faith against heresy, formally excommunicated Luther and denounced His teachings as heretical to separate that error from Christ’s Truth. Who gave him the authority to change anything? Who gave the hundreds/thousands of men since, that didn’t agree with a certain teaching here or there, to change it and found a new church to teach that as truth?

Christ founded a Church - the Catholic Church

You HAVE been deceived by men teaching their own private interpretation/feeling of Scripture. It is just that 100, 200, 300 years later, the teachings have changed so much from Apostolic teaching that you don’t know. There is SOOO much that Jesus did and taught that you have never been taught because your church is not in unity with Apostolic teachings. You canl only find this rich, full understanding of Jesus’ Deposit of Faith in the Catholic Church because she has preserved it. The sacraments WERE Jesus’ give to us so we can experience His Grace on earth until His return. They are beautiful, rich, loving. Learn more about them. If you ever experience them in their glorious, grace giving way, you will NEVER leave them. Please, just open your heart. I am asking you to PLEASE put any pre-conceived notions about the Catholic Church aside and just LEARN what it is we really teach and why. You will be forever changed.

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

It is mighty scary, isn’t it? The problem began when, as a result of the reformation, men - on their own authority - changed the teachings of Christ to mean something different than it had ALWAYS meant for over 1,500 years. That is still happening today. Men, continuing to think they have any authority at all, breaking off from their church to found new ones teaching different doctrine. Over the course of 500 years and many generations later, everyone who is part of these churches don’t know anything other than what they have been taught - a lot of truth, but also, a lot of error, thousands of conflicting meanings. There is only ONE!! The fact that the Bible says that it is not for one’s own personal interpretation should be enough, but people self-interpret and actually think they are correct because it agrees with their church’s interpretation. What was the Apostolic understanding of any particular teaching? The ECF’s knew what that contextual interpretation was because they were given that teaching by the Apostles themselves. There are more than enough writings by the ECF’s to teach you what Scripture actually meant to the early Church. That is all ANY of us have to go on. The Oral and Sacred Tradition of the Church IS what the ECF’s tried to spell out and what the Catholic Church STILL teaches written down or not.

Jesus gave ONE Deposit of Faith - to HIS Church. The Apostles and their successors (the ECF’s) through the power of the Holy Spirit orally taught Jesus Teachings and phyically lived the things Jesus taught them to do for centuries before they were ever compiled into what we now know as the Bible. Not all was written. Teachings can be written, Traditions are taught and practiced. All the letters were scattered and not brought together until until in the late 100’s. The combination of Oral and Sacred Tradition - Catholic teaching - is WHAT was recorded as the BIBLE. You can’t separate them. The Bible was never meant to be interpreted separate from the Church that wrote it. When man, on his own, takes the Bible away from 2,000 years of tradition and contextual understanding and reads it on his own without knowing the context/deeper meaning of the words used at the time, he can and will interpret it wrong.

Luther never had a problem with the Church’s teachings/interpretations of faith and morals. His issue, and rightfully so, was the erroneous sale of indulgences. This flagrant misuse of power was by a few men, and NEVER was approved of by the Church, and it NEVER affected/changed the Church’s teachings on faith and morals. Men can and will error in their actions, Christ’s Church can’t fail - because HE said so. Christ protected His Church from TEACHING error then and He is now, just like He said He would do until the end of time. The counter-reformation had begun way before Luther’s formal excommuication from the Church. As Luther gained power and political influence, he started thinking he knew better than Christ’s Church what the teachings of Christ actually meant. He was full of himself, that is evident in his writings. Luther was teaching heresy, and as the Church had always protected Jesus Deposit of Faith against heresy, formally excommunicated Luther and denounced His teachings as heretical to separate that error from Christ’s Truth. Who gave him the authority to change anything? Who gave the hundreds/thousands of men since, that didn’t agree with a certain teaching here or there, to change it and found a new church to teach that as truth?

Christ founded a Church - the Catholic Church

You HAVE been deceived by men teaching their own private interpretation/feeling of Scripture. It is just that 100, 200, 300 years later, the teachings have changed so much from Apostolic teaching that you don’t know. There is SOOO much that Jesus did and taught that you have never been taught because your church is not in unity with Apostolic teachings. You canl only find this rich, full understanding of Jesus’ Deposit of Faith in the Catholic Church because she has preserved it. The sacraments WERE Jesus’ give to us so we can experience His Grace on earth until His return. They are beautiful, rich, loving. Learn more about them. If you ever experience them in their glorious, grace giving way, you will NEVER leave them. Please, just open your heart. I am asking you to PLEASE put any pre-conceived notions about the Catholic Church aside and just LEARN what it is we really teach and why. You will be forever changed.

 

[Bill_Pick]

God used and led the Catholic Church to bring forth Sacred Scripture (the CC deciphered with the help of the Holy Spirit to recognize inspired scripture), so in that sense the CC did give you the Bible. Even Martin Luther admitted as much.

And what is your interpretation of the Bible? Are you alone in this interpretation of yours, or do you follow an already known interpretation, as per your denomination?

You are right in saying that the Holy Spirit guides you, but the Holy Spirit guides me too, who is to say you have it right or that I do?

The answers you provide are too pat/trite and not deep enough to grasp the reality of the current protestant/christian situation.

The gosple accorting to hisalone more of his/her private interpretations

 

[josie_L]

Bill,

Why do Catholics adhere to myths to support their beliefs? Let me briefly demonstrate the folly of your accusation:

Here are a few categories of the Catholic church denominations as listed within Barrett’s Encyclopedia of 22,000 denominations. (31,000 according to the Catholics who arbitrarily upped the number)

Roman Catholics (242 denominations)
Armenian (Eastern-rite Catholic)
Bulgarian (Byzantine rite)
Chaldean (Eastern Syrian rite)
Coptic (Alexandrian rite)
Ethiopic (Alexandrian rite)
etc. (edited for space)

Orthodox (781 denominations) :
Albanian/Greek-speaking Orthodox
Arabic or Arabic/Greek-speaking Orthodox
Armenian Orthodox (Gregorian)
Bulgarian Orthodox
Coptic Orthodox
etc. (edited for space)

Anglicans (168 denominations):
Anglo-Catholic
Central or Broad Church Anglican
Ecumenical (Anglican/Protestant/Orthodox joint parishes)
Anglican Evangelical, Evangelical Anglican
High Church Anglican (Prayer Book Catholic)
etc. (edited for space)

The list goes on and on. As I read, I noticed a very large percentage of denominations had first split directly from the Catholic church.

In order to reach the 22,000 protestant denominations number, all the splits coming from splitting with the RC are counted as Protestant splits. - even those before Luther and including those who still consider themselves Catholic and every heretical group and cult know to man!

Ginger

The mistake you made was believing the information that you posted was true. It was derived by an author who had no knowledge of how the RC worked, and assumed that each Country wherein the RC resided was considered autonomous, that is, to say, a national church, kind of what we see with the Orthodox and the Anglicans. For example, the RC in France was considered one denomination, the RC in England another, and so on and so forth. The Catholic Church is and always has been one; having always been under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, the person we call Pope, and for our anti-catholic friends, the anti-christ.

In future make sure that you subject your “research” to rigorous testing.

P.S. I believe I came across this bit of propaganda on James White’s website (alpha and omega ministries), a very well known anti-catholic.

 

[Bill_Pick]

The mistake you made was believing the information that you posted was true. It was derived by an author who had no knowledge of how the RC worked, and assumed that each Country wherein the RC resided was considered autonomous, that is, to say, a national church, kind of what we see with the Orthodox and the Anglicans. For example, the RC in France was considered one denomination, the RC in England another, and so on and so forth. The Catholic Church is and always has been one; having always been under the leadership of the Bishop of Rome, the person we call Pope, and for our anti-catholic friends, the anti-christ.

In future make sure that you subject your “research” to rigorous testing.

P.S. I believe I came across this bit of propaganda on James White’s website (alpha and omega ministries), a very well known anti-catholic.

GINGER TRY world christians encyopedia

 

[josie_L]

GINGER TRY world christians encyopedia

Bill, I meant to relay that the Alpha and Omega ministries used this faulty information (for propagandic purposes and more than likely aware of the error) from the same source that Ginger took it from, the World Christian Encyclopedia (information derived by Barrett himself). But Barrett made a mistake when stating RC denominations as 242, here’s why:

“Now 73, Barrett recently culminated his oddly remarkable career with publication of the second edition of his global accounting of faiths and the faithful – trends, details and his **best estimated count of believers of all religions in each of 238 nations and territories.” **

Do you see how the 238 nations and territories almost exactly corresponds to the 242 denominations for RC, the extra 4 may more than likely be excommunicated catholic
groups like SSPX or Sedevacantists and such.

Barrett made a big bobo! And for unsuspecting Catholics this should be rectified. It sure threw me for a loop.

 

[josie_L]

I also wanted to add this, it’s by the Catholic Answers board, taken from statistics in the World Christian Encyclopedia:

David Barrett, et al, does indeed refer to “over 33,000 distinct denominations in 238 countries…” (Table 1-5, vol 1, page 16). This refers to his unique definition of a “Christian denomination” but does not include small ones (congregations of a couple hundred or less), which would dramatically increase this number beyond all imagination. Barrett also states there are 242 total Roman Catholic denominations (year 2000 numbers). So I looked into what he believed these denominations were.

Barrett breaks down his encyclopedic reference by country. So I looked up how many Roman Catholic denominations are within the U.S. according to Barrett. Much to my surprise, Barrett shows ONLY ONE Roman Catholic denomination for the United States.

So I wondered where the heck are these 242 denominations? I looked in Barrett’s reference for Britain, and again he listed ONLY ONE Roman Catholic denomination. I thought surely that of the 238 countries within his encyclopedic reference there must be a country that had more than ONE Roman Catholic denomination. There wasn’t. I could not find one country listed by Barrett that had more than ONE Roman Catholic denomination.

So, what does Barrett mean when he states there are 242 Roman Catholic denominations? It seems Barrett is counting each country as it’s own denomination. So, for Barrett, the Roman Catholic Church of the USA is a different denomination than the Roman Catholic Church of Canada. I don’t know how he got 242 denominations from 238 countries listed, however. Some numbers from Barrett’s…

Denominations / Paradenominations:

1970: 26,350
1995: 33,820

Under U.S. Country Table 2, of the 6,222 US denominations, there’s only ONE Roman Catholic denomination listed, and there’s 60 Orthodox denominations. Barrett labels the rest of the denominations: Protestant, Anglican, Independent, and Marginal. The more commonly accepted classification of Christianity used even by Protestant scholars, such as Leslie Dunstan in his book Protestantism, Christianity consists of: (1) Catholic, (2) Orthodox, and (3) Protestant. So, using this more commonly understood classification…

Number of U.S. Denominations

Catholic 1
Orthodox 60
Protestant 6,161

               **Your Total "Christian Denominations" Count for today is 40544 
                Please pray for Christian unity (John 17; Eph 4:5; Matt 16:18) **

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Eph 3:4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ

This says “when we read we can understand” what we are reading.

Act 17:2 And Paul, as his manner was, went in unto them, and three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the scriptures, 4 Some of the Jews were persuaded …

This says Paul he explained/interpreted the Scriptures to them. Some accepted the truth and some denied it.

Those who believed did not believe in the Scriptures because Paul explained the Scriptures (ie infallible interpretation) - **They believed what Paul said because the Scriptures proved **Paul was telling the truth.
Those who did not believe, denied because they choose not to believe.

This demonstrates the RC’s “infallible interpretation” is useless.
Faith is a matter of choice and understanding only comes from God.

God reveals Himself to whom He will - with or without the help of any man.

Ginger

Gabriel of 12:
Paul was explaining the old testament scriptures to the Jews; that Jesus had already revealed “All” to his disciples, the others who did not believe are like “YOU” today not the Catholic church, because you choose not to believe what Jesus revealed to his apostles and his Catholic church. We are not talking Catholic interpretation of scripture, we are talking Jesus interpetation of scripture to the Apostles who handed down by Sacred Tradition to the Catholic church.

Paul is instructing the Ephesian church, when they read, what Paul has already revealed to them what was handed down to Paul from Jesus and the apostles, they will understand Pauls knowledge in the mystery of Christ. How are you going to understand the mysteries of Christ (especially in the mysteries (Sacraments) Jesus instituted), unless the Catholic church teaches you, sacred Scripture and sacred Tradition?

If your gonna come along 1500+ years later and profess Jesus gave you the authority,and he built his church upon you and gave you the keys to the kingdom of God, not to mention Jesus personally interpreted “All” the scriptures to “YOU” that pertained to him. Then lets hear your gospel other than the four God already gave us. Jesus revealed the Father to his apostles and his church he built upon “Peter”. The Catholic church maybe 2000 years old, but she is still ready and able to reveal these mysteries to anyone who seeks God and wants to know him personally.

 

[Hisalone]

Speaking of fruit, if you show a Protestant an apple, he’ll say it is a pear. Even though it is clearly an apple.

Dont know what you are getting at
Can you give a specific example.

 

[Hisalone]

Now, you’re playing games.

You were equating God’s healing power being used through a person here on earth and I was speaking about the Bible being written, compiled and declared canon by the Church.

I know it’s hard for many Protestants to accept this - but many other Protestant evangelists have accepted the fact that the Catholic Church was the one who compiled and declared the New Testament canon.

No games both the gift of healing and the bible come/came through God and neither can human take credit for. It is that simple.

 

[Hisalone]

Ok, 104 posts later, no one has given a straight answer to the question: How do you KNOW that YOUR interpretation of the bible is the correct one when there are dozens of others just as convinced that THEIR interpretation is the correct one?

First rule of hermanutics is the bible interprets the bible.