Protestants, why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter enickman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
““Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.” (James 1:4, NIV)”

I think James 1:4 is clear that patience is only one thing necessary
joe370;9691764:
By itself that passage seems to be telling the reader that he/she is complete, lacking nothing just as long as he/she possesses perseverance. 🤷
I interpreted it as perseverance being the last thing a person needs meaning that after faith, repentance, and baptism, a person needs to persevere in order to be complete.
 
That’s a good point. He can’t refer to the NT if it wasn’t written yet so it must be the OT.

As far as ECFs on sola scriptura, I haven’t read any that said it directly although I’ve heard Protestants quote from the ECFs to support it.

Basil of Caesarea is used to support sola scripture. He wrote, “If custom is to be taken in proof of what is right, then it is certainly competent for me to put forward on my side the custom which obtains here. If they reject this we are clearly not bound to follow them. Therefore, let God-inspired Scripture decide between us, and on whichever side be found doctrines in harmony with the Word of God, in favor of that side will be cast the vote of truth.”

I’d have to read everything else that Basil of Caesarea wrote in order to judge his intended meaning of the quote and I haven’t gotten up to him yet.
Many folks tend to cherry-pick when it comes to the ECFs. In the following words St. Basil endorses Sacred Apostolic Tradition:

"Of the dogmas and sermons preserved in the Church, certain ones we have from written instruction, and certain ones we have received from the Apostolic Tradition, handed down in secret. Both the one and the other have one and the same authority for piety, and no one who is even the least informed in the decrees of the Church will contradict this.👍
 
I interpreted it as perseverance being the last thing a person needs meaning that after faith, repentance, and baptism, a person needs to persevere in order to be complete.
A perfect example of scripture alone via individual interpretation (mine and yours) not working. I could be right or I could be wrong…🤷
 
Okay. Thanks for replying. You said 2Tim 3:15 doesn’t explicitly teach scripture alone. When I read, “the holy scriptures … are able to make thee wise unto salvation” I understand it as scripture is all we need to know what is required for salvation. How do you interpret it?
Xian…if I may…

When you read 2Tim3:15…read it from verse 14…which goes…

14 But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, 15 and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17 so that the servant of God[a] may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Reading this passage from v14 gives it a totally new meaning. V14 speaks of oral teaching and instruction…which Timothy received…to properly understand Scripture…so it is indeed not Scripture alone…but the guidance and instruction one receives to understand the Scripture.

And one other item overlooked…look at v17 and the term…servant of God…in other translations…this is stated as…“man of God”…if you take into account the context this epistle is addressed to…and the ancient understanding of the phrase…“man of God”…this refers to a man called to service, the ministry…the priesthood…to which Timothy was called to by Paul,

So, taking into account this context…this advice is really for someone called to ministry…oral instruction and scripture makes him whole…no Scripture alone. But we can also heed the message of this passage…we need oral guidance from an authority…the church…to properly understand scripture the way it was intended.

Hope this helps.
 
I’m trying to listen to all sides (Catholic and Protestant) to
  1. Do not go beyond what is written. (1Cor 4:6, NIV)" Seems to teach that Christians shouldn’t go beyond the written word of God. My Protestant friends quote this verse often and I don’t know how to interpret it.
Here’s the verses before and after 1Cor 4:6 so you can see the context. It appears Paul is quoting a saying that he heard from somewhere (I couldn’t find it in the OT or anywhere else in the Bible):1Cor 4:1-7 (NIV):
"So then, men ought to regard us as servants of Christ and as those entrusted with the secret things of God. 2 Now it is required that those who have been given a trust must prove faithful. 3 I care very little if I am judged by you or by any human court; indeed, I do not even judge myself. 4 My conscience is clear, but that does not make me innocent. It is the Lord who judges me. 5 Therefore judge nothing before the appointed time; wait till the Lord comes. He will bring to light what is hidden in darkness and will expose the motives of men’s hearts. At that time each will receive his praise from God.

aul quoted in support of Jesus being the Messiah.
1Cor4:6…explanation…courtesy of Eric Filmer…

If an examination of 1Corinthians 4:6 is done in the full context of the entire epistle then we see that it does not teach Sola Scriptura. I will now present some passages from 1Corinthians to be considered, and I will highlight the various “it is written…” statements in blue text to help one understand what Paul means in the broader context of this epistle. As a side note, I am using the RSV translation.

We start with 1Cor 1:10-17. Herein we see the first topic that 1Corinthians addresses. Paul is concerned over divisions that have occurred among the Christians in Corinth.

1Corinthians 1:10-17
[10] I appeal to you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree and that there be no dissensions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.
[11] For it has been reported to me by Chlo’e’s people that there is quarreling among you, my brethren.
[12] What I mean is that each one of you says, “I belong to Paul,” or “I belong to Apol’los,” or “I belong to Cephas,” or “I belong to Christ.”
[13] Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
[14] I am thankful that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Ga’ius;
[15] lest any one should say that you were baptized in my name.
[16] (I did baptize also the household of Steph’anas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized any one else.)
[17] For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Next we should consider sections of 1Corinthians where Paul teaches how to overcome prideful behavior so that unity can be restored.

1Corintians 1:18-25
[18]For the word of the cross is folly to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God.
[19] For it is written, “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will thwart.”
[20] Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
[21] For since, in the wisdom of God, the world did not know God through wisdom, it pleased God through the folly of what we preach to save those who believe.
[22] For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom,
[23] but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles,
[24] but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.
[25] For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God is stronger than men.

(1Cor 1:19 quotes Isaiah 29:14)

1Corinthians 1:26-31
[26] For consider your call, brethren; not many of you were wise according to worldly standards, not many were powerful, not many were of noble birth;
[27] but God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong,
[28] God chose what is low and despised in the world, even things that are not, to bring to nothing things that are,
[29] so that no human being might boast in the presence of God.
[30] He is the source of your life in Christ Jesus, whom God made our wisdom, our righteousness and sanctification and redemption;
[31] therefore, as it is written, “Let him who boasts, boast of the Lord.”

(1Cor 1:31 concludes Chapter 1 and it quotes Jer 9:24. Paul also uses this same quote from Jeremiah in 2Corinthians 10:17 wherein he tells the Corinthians to only be boastful within the limits God has apportioned.)

1Corinthians 3:18-23
[18] Let no one deceive himself. If any one among you thinks that he is wise in this age, let him become a fool that he may become wise.
[19] For the wisdom of this world is folly with God. For it is written, “He catches the wise in their craftiness,”
[20] and again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.”
[21] So let no one boast of men. For all things are yours,
[22] whether Paul or Apol’los or Cephas or the world or life or death or the present or the future, all are yours;
[23] and you are Christ’s; and Christ is God’s.

(1Cor 3:19 quotes Job 5:13 and 1Cor 3:20 quotes Psalm 94:11. Moreover, Paul’s opening statement of “For the wisdom of this world is folly with God” is a paraphrase of what he said in 1Cor 1:20, indicating that he is still addressing the disunity among Corinthians problem.)

1Corinthians 4:1-13
[1] This is how one should regard us, as servants of Christ and stewards of the mysteries of God.
[2] Moreover it is required of stewards that they be found trustworthy.
[3] But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged by you or by any human court. I do not even judge myself.
[4] I am not aware of anything against myself, but I am not thereby acquitted. It is the Lord who judges me.
[5] Therefore do not pronounce judgment before the time, before the Lord comes, who will bring to light the things now hidden in darkness and will disclose the purposes of the heart. Then every man will receive his commendation from God.
[6] I have applied all this to myself and Apol’los for your benefit, brethren, that you may learn by us not to go beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against another.
[7] For who sees anything different in you? What have you that you did not receive? If then you received it, why do you boast as if it were not a gift?
[8] Already you are filled! Already you have become rich! Without us you have become kings! And would that you did reign, so that we might share the rule with you!
[9] For I think that God has exhibited us apostles as last of all, like men sentenced to death; because we have become a spectacle to the world, to angels and to men.
[10] We are fools for Christ’s sake, but you are wise in Christ. We are weak, but you are strong. You are held in honor, but we in disrepute.
[11] To the present hour we hunger and thirst, we are ill-clad and buffeted and homeless,
[12] and we labor, working with our own hands. When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure;
[13] when slandered, we try to conciliate; we have become, and are now, as the refuse of the world, the offscouring of all things.

The question at hand is: What does Paul mean in 1Cor 4:6 when he tells the reader “not to go beyond what is written”? If you take a moment to read the above passages from 1Corinthians highlighted in blue text you will see that Paul writes, “It is written…” three times as an introduction to four quotes from the Old Testament. Each quote cautions people against the sin of pride. After making these statements, Paul states, in 1Cor 4:6:

“I have applied all this to myself and Apollos for your benefit, brethren…” (i.e., The teachers follow the same rules given to students)

“…that you may learn by us…” (i.e., “Follow our example”)

“…not to go beyond what is written,…” (I’ll come back to this in a minute)

“…that none of you may be puffed up…” (“Puffed up” means to be prideful)

“…in favor of one against the other.” (The ramifications of prideful behavior is division in the community)

In light of all this, I believe that when Paul tells the reader “not to go beyond what is written”, he is simply reminding them to adhere to the warnings about prideful behavior that he expressed earlier with the “it is written…” preludes (i.e., 1Cor 1:19, 31; 3:19, 20). After all, when we examine the entire verse from 1Cor 4:6, right after he tells the reader “not to go beyond what is written” he says the reason why: “…that none of you may be puffed up in favor of one against the other.” In other words, pride causes people to mistreat others (by favoring certain people over them), and this mistreatment results in divisions. Hence, we are to heed the warnings of the Old Testament against pride, treat people with the respect they deserve, and this will allow unity rather than disunity. Simply put, these various passages from 1Corinthians address the behavior of the Corinthians – Paul wants them to conduct in proper Christian behavior (the virtue of humility) in order to correct the dissension caused by their previous bad behavior (the sin of pride).

In light of all this, the context of 1Corinthians does not involve Paul teaching a general principle that people are not allowed to formulate doctrine outside of Scripture, and therefore he is not teaching Sola Scriptura. An attempt to read a Sola Scriptura statement into 1Corinthians 4:6 ignores the entire context of the rest of the epistle.
 
Okay. Thanks for replying. You said 2Tim 3:15 doesn’t explicitly teach scripture alone. When I read, “the holy scriptures … are able to make thee wise unto salvation” I understand it as scripture is all we need to know what is required for salvation. How do you interpret it?
Hey Xian,

Sorry I didn’t respond sooner. I had work til midnight. I read “the holy scriptures … are able to make thee wise unto salvation…,” as the Holy Scriptures … are able to…" I emphasize the ‘able’ phrasing here because that’s precisely it. The Holy Scriptures are able to make you wise unto salvation, but they won’t necessarily and without guidance bring you to a true understanding of God.

I want to point out that reading primarily from the NIV can be misleading at many times because it’s translation is in dynamic equivalence, or rather it attempts to use the modern vulgar English phrasing to approximate what was said in our own words. At times, this can leave entire chunks of scripture having lost all meaning and similarity to their parent language.

Second, I would like to make an addendum to my earlier claim that scripture likely doesn’t reveal much on sacred tradition because it may have seemed self-evident at the time. This would be incorrect for the sheer fact at the very least, the Gospels concern the life of Christ, which necessarily precedes all tradition and the founding of the Church by the apostles. Also, tradition as it began is, I think, implicit in John’s many letters. Either way, i think tradition is inescapable. I think. I can guess that any church you’ve been to, if you have indeed been, has had its own traditions which developed out of things implicit, but necessarily explicit in scripture, and that the breaking of those traditions was severely looked down upon. It’s natural. There is a difference, though, between small congregations and the Catholic Church.

The Catholic Church traces its legitimacy, its positions on Scripture, and its Tradition along a direct line to the Church Fathers, the men responsible, after Jesus’ death and ascension, for establishing the Church. Every priest traces his succession back to Peter. I don’t want to sound arrogant here so please try not to read the following as such. I can lay claim to your legitimacy as a Christian, but you cannot. What I mean by that is that without the Church, you have a tome with a rough idea that that tome was compiled roughly a little less the 2,000 years ago and that four of its books concern the events which we base our entire faith upon. History can teach us that what is described most likely occurred, or at least to some accuracy, with no reason to assume the miracles took place as they did. So everything you have faith in is merely based on faith. Not an unfaltering faith of knowing, but one which although it may come with great confidence, is like a blind faith that what you’re reading is true. Enter: Catholics. Without making a claim of superiority, we can at least argue that we can take it from tradition that every clergyman is a direct successor to the seat of Peter and therefore, we have that very faith of knowing because our understanding of Christian faith has been handed to us by Peter himself.

I do sincerely hope that makes sense to you. I’m not the greatest person to have these discussions with, but I hadn’t really seen anybody put it quite the way I would have.

As a side note to the other other participants in this discussion, for all our sakes, please leave your computer, pray a few prayers, breathe a little, and please do come back when you’re better ready to attempt to emulate Christ. Thank you.
 
I think James 1:4 is clear that patience is only one thing necessary

““Perseverance must finish its work so that you may be mature and complete, not lacking anything.” (James 1:4, NIV)”
'zactly!! :extrahappy:

You can see how silly it is to read a verse that talks about how [Concept A] makes you complete, or perfect, or “not lacking anything” and read that it means, literally, “Concept A is all you need for salvation”.

So why do you understand that for James 1:4, but apply a different paradigm to 2 Timothy?
“the holy Scriptures … are able to make you wise for salvation (2Tim 3:15, NIV)”
 
That Catholic Belief A is not formally defined until Moth, Day, Year, is not an indication that it only came to be believed on Month, Day, Year.
However, none before the “Month Day Year” who did not hold to them could be accused, even by Catholics. Luther held, generally to the Assumption before it was declared, but others did not, Catholic or otherwise. Additionally, I would contend that the early Church would not have stood for one patriarch to delcare a dogma without a true general council.

Jon
 
=pablope;9691118]

Hi…Jon…do you mean the heresies? Theologically…there were no variations as we have today.
I think the OO and EO would dispute this.
You know which one, friend…😃 I think the two were held by both east and west…for these were held and conducted by a church council.
Theotokos, sempre virgo, for sure are held by both. Assumption/Dormition have differences. IC is rejected, or at least considered unnnecessary by the East.
But that is not to say they were not believed prior to their proclamation after 1521.
Believed, sure. But the conscience of the believer was not bound to them.
Yes…in the making of the Bible…but it is still the same CC today…with an east and west lung.
OK, as long as you mean the undivided CC, and not exclusively those now in communion with the Bishop of Rome.
I would say, there was disobedience on the side of Luther…but certainly there was sin on both sides. Luther could have stayed and could have trusted in the Almighty to act…in His time and will.
Were Tetzel and Leo disobedient to the teachings of the Church?
If as you would say, there was disobedience on both sides…I think we have tried to correct these, with the reform of the Church at Trent…and the attempts to unity.
I think Vatican II may be a better example, and I agree. To the extent that Lutherans have participated, so have we.
Yes…that is why I said…that wholly true and complete Christian faith

Good, because I did not want other posters to construe your words as meaning you thought n-C’s were not Christian, as I know you better than that. 😉

Jon
 
…the early Church would not have stood for one patriarch to delcare a dogma without a true general council.
Jon,

Do you know whether or not this has ever occurred? I don’t think it has, but you might have an example in mind.
 
Every dogmatic declaration by Rome since the Schism.

Jon
The ecumenical councils are the reasons why you and I have such a profound faith in the one catholic church founded, doctrinally speaking, by Jesus, at least until the east- west schism. Why though…?

Scripture does not mention the need for ecumenical councils…Scripture tells us that Cephas is the key to doctrinal oneness and unity:

“Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades…”

Is there any chance that Jesus built His church on solid Rock…and in spite of the sin of man, made sure that His church, comprised of sinful fallible people, would be free of erroneous teachings?
 
You’ll have to first propose that there’s a Bible verse that says that everything we believe has to be found in the Bible.

Until you do that, what you are asking of us here is to submit to a tradition of men. *Your *tradition of men.
Because when you start believing things that appear nowhere in the Bible, you are relying on the word of man, not God. Man is inherently sinful. Man is not perfect. Man will interpret the Bible as he so desires. Which is why no Christian religion is perfect. That’s why God gave us his son–to overcome our sinfulness and imperfections. If we put our belief and trust in Jesus, it doesn’t matter if we light candles or sign hymns or practice the baptism of immersion–these are manmade traditions. Traditions of men are just that. My tradition or your tradition is immaterial. What matters is the glory of God in all things.
 
Because when you start believing things that appear nowhere in the Bible, you are relying on the word of man, not God. Man is inherently sinful. Man is not perfect. Man will interpret the Bible as he so desires. Which is why no Christian religion is perfect. That’s why God gave us his son–to overcome our sinfulness and imperfections. If we put our belief and trust in Jesus, it doesn’t matter if we light candles or sign hymns or practice the baptism of immersion–these are manmade traditions. Traditions of men are just that. My tradition or your tradition is immaterial. What matters is the glory of God in all things.
Is not individual interpretation of scripture the action of relying on man/woman…? Who can be trusted when it comes to interpreting the Holy Bible?
 
Which begs the question:

Then why the foundation of thousands of denominations? Still waiting to read where Jesus approved,encouraged or advocated divisions within His Body?
I believe the answer to this is the main difference between Catholics and Protestants. We are saved in Christ not because of tradition or ceremony or prayer. We are not saved because we give our lives to Christ or perform glorious works. We are saved because God provides the grace to save us. Otherwise, we could never hope to be pure enough to achieve heaven. As long as we believe and trust in Christ, He lifts us up from our sinful abyss and robes us in righteousness. Luther was a devout Catholic monk. He joined the order of the Observant Augustinians and tried desperately to purify himself in God’s eyes. He prayed fastidiously and fasted for long periods and deprived himself of all comforts to earn God’s favor. But he knew he was a sinful creature and could never obtain a state of no sin. After years of theological study and Biblical teaching he realized that no one could ever achieve heaven without God’s grace. God loves us beyond anything we could ever know and by His grace he will deliver us if we place our trust in Him and give our lives to Him.

The number of denominations does not matter. Religious traditions and culture are manmade (not God-made) creations. They can change–and will change–but Jesus is unchanging. As long as the church continues to make him the center of the church, and as long as the followers continue to serve and glorify Him, he will deliver each one.
 
=joe370;9693541]The ecumenical councils are the reasons why you and I have such a profound faith in the one catholic church founded, doctrinally speaking, by Jesus, at least until the east- west schism. Why though…?
Scripture does not mention the need for ecumenical councils…
Hi Joe,
As a teacher, one of the things I have learned is that there are times when modeling a practice or skill is much more effective than explaining a skill. In Acts, the early Church models how things are to be done via councils.
Scripture tells us that Cephas is the key to doctrinal oneness and unity:
“Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades…”
And yet St. Peter doesn’t seem to be in charge at that council in Acts, but James is. Peer’s clear leadership role in the Church does not seem to be a supreme role in scripture, nor does it seem to be in the early councils.
Peter may be central, but not supreme.
Is there any chance that Jesus built His church on solid Rock…and in spite of the sin of man, made sure that His church, comprised of sinful fallible people, would be free of erroneous teachings?
Are you speaking only of the Church Militant? The Church Triumphant is clearly free of erroneous teaching. We here strive for that, and seek mercy and grace when we do not succeed.

Jon
 
Is not individual interpretation of scripture the action of relying on man/woman…? Who can be trusted when it comes to interpreting the Holy Bible?
Yes. Exactly. Man has been interpreting the Bible for thousands of years, and continues to come up with new interpretations today. No one on earth can be trusted to interpret the Bible flawlessly because none of us are flawless. The only flawless person is Jesus. This is why we need to serve Him and place our trust in Him and adhere to the commandment that He said is the most important: Love. Love your neighbor. Love your enemy. Love the Lord God with all your heart. Read your Bible to know Jesus and know His message. And above all, love.
 
JonNC;9693776]Hi Joe,
As a teacher, one of the things I have learned is that there are times when modeling a practice or skill is much more effective than explaining a skill. In Acts, the early Church models how things are to be done via councils.
You are right. Councils are biblical, as is the Petrine office. 👍
And yet St. Peter doesn’t seem to be in charge at that council in Acts, but James is.
Peter was the head of Jesus’ earthly church; James was the head of Jesus’ church in Jerusalem…That’s how I saw it, and continue to see it…
Peer’s clear leadership role in the Church does not seem to be a supreme role in scripture, nor does it seem to be in the early councils.
Peter may be central, but not supreme.
This passage seems pretty compelling: :shrug:Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades…
Are you speaking only of the Church Militant? The Church Triumphant is clearly free of erroneous teaching. We here strive for that, and seek mercy and grace when we do not succeed.
The church triumphant is comprised of those who are with Jesus in heaven. Hades has no influence on those folks…👍 However, Hades hates and continues to attempt to destroy, doctrinally speaking, (or otherwise) Jesus’ church on earth…😦
 
No one on earth can be trusted to interpret the Bible flawlessly because none of us are flawless. The only flawless person is Jesus. This is why we need to serve Him and place our trust in Him and adhere to the commandment that He said is the most important: Love. Love your neighbor. Love your enemy. Love the Lord God with all your heart. Read your Bible to know Jesus and know His message. And above all, love.
Doctrinal truth, regarding Jesus’ teachings are unknowable…? OK. 🙂
 
=joe370;9693793]You are right. Councils are biblical, as is the Petrine office. 👍
But what is the jursidiction of that Petrine office, and why is it that the other patriarchates
have*** never*** undestood it in the way Rome claims it to be?
Peter was the head of Jesus’ earthly church; James was the head of Jesus’ church in Jerusalem…That’s how I saw it, and continue to see it…
So, Peter allowed James to be in charge out of courtesy?
This passage seems pretty compelling: :shrug:Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. And I tell you that you are Peter and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades…
It is compelling, and the early councils had access to that compelling verse.
The church triumphant is comprised of those who are with Jesus in heaven. Hades has no influence on those folks…👍 However, Hades hates and continues to attempt to destroy, doctrinally speaking, Jesus’ church on earth…😦
Clearly, for the gates of Hell to prevail, it must prevail against His whole Church. That won’t happen regardless of our divisions here on Earth.

Jon
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top