Question for all protestants

[Jon_S_1]

So, my discovery that Earth is round is only because of those who knew it before I?

I can’t just take evidence I have and make that conclusion without giving credit to the first person who claimed such a thing?

Sure you can.

The difference is.

Today you would rely on other peoples work that took centuries to determine the earth was round.

And you, despite brilliance, probably could not prove such a thing on your own.

Likewise you do the same with the Trinity.

There is not a Protestant Trinitarian church that arrived on that belief without looking at the church before it.

Yet another blow to Bible Alone.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

I’m not sure what your point is.

It’s Christian Agnosticism.

The belief in Jesus and the Bible and that we have no way in knowing the true Church, therefore any Christian Church is ok. Any claim by any other than Christ - in person I might add - is not believed.

History - doesn’t matter.
Succession - doesn’t matter.
How things came to be - doesn’t matter - this specifically will be avoided like the plague - because it will force an admission to something they don’t want to know, in order to stay in their comfort zone.

I’m telling you, we have yet to face such a challenge.

 

[dronald]

Sure you can.

The difference is.

Today you would rely on other peoples work that took centuries to determine the earth was round.

And you, despite brilliance, probably could not prove such a thing on your own.

Likewise you do the same with the Trinity.

There is not a Protestant Trinitarian church that arrived on that belief without looking at the church before it.

Yet another blow to Bible Alone.

Fiiiiineee.

Let’s just say we’re all united in yet another way and call it a night.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Fiiiiineee.

Let’s just say we’re all united in yet another way and call it a night.

See what I just said, PR?

 

[pocohombre]

You forget that Jesus promised God’s spirit would teach and direct the one church.

Didn’t forget. Jesus promised Israel and Abraham a few things in the OT. He saw them thru.That there were factions, differing views wasn’t Christ’s biggest issue. There were Saduccees and Pharisees, yet they were all “Israel/Jewish”. Why can’t you see that there are factions today, and that Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants all participate in His Body, the Church. To proclaims God’s desire for unity is fine, but then to declare all other churches as illegitimate, lost, dead in heart, that is something else.

That spirit guards the oral traditions and protects Them.

Which ones ? All of them ? I think not for some have fallen by the wayside (certain baptismal,confessing practices), and some have arisen (the rosary,papal voting etc.).,

If you don’t believe that, I’m not sure how you can believe the New Testament that was collected under this spirit based on purely tradition,

Purely tradition is inadequate to describe how we have scripture. Scripture was Spirit inspired when written, received, recited, copied, translaled, taught and understood.Every step must be led by the Spirit,not just the collecting/canonizing

do I understand how you can accept that Jesus did not really send the Holy Spirit to guard the church.

]
Don’t understand how you limit the church and HS guidance other than those of “Peter”. No where in scripture or in Revelations for example does Jesus insinuate allegiance to Rome to the seven churches as a sign of correctness. There is zero indication that once right a church is always right with those seven.There is no indication that cause you had a great start, even a great run (10 years,50 years ,500years)
that you will have a great finish. Certainly you know what is meant by the admonition to endure to the end (because it is possible you may not). There is plenty of indication that if a church lose or diminishes it’s candlelight, someone else will carry it on.

 

[jmcrae]

So, my discovery that Earth is round is only because of those who knew it before I?

Even the people who discovered that the earth was round were counting on it to be so, before they went up into outer space to make the discovery.

It was a very strong theory, widely held, before that.

I can’t just take evidence I have and make that conclusion without giving credit to the first person who claimed such a thing?

Nobody, when seeking to learn or to discover something, ignores the work of those who came before him, and it would be the height of insanity for any modern church organization to completely ignore the 2,000 or so years of research that has been done on these subjects by the Catholic Church, in favour of trying to re-do it all by themselves in one generation. (The “know-nothings” come to mind, but they are extinct.)

 

[PRmerger]

I can’t just take evidence I have and make that conclusion without giving credit to the first person who claimed such a thing?

If the “evidence” (here, read “Scriptures”) were conclusive that God is a Trinitarian God, then you would be correct.

However, it is quite “evident” that the Bible is essentially obscure about God being a Trinity.

You need the Church and the lens of Tradition to point you in that direction.

Otherwise, you become like this earnest but misguided young lady who regrets that she has to follow her heart and declare that she now rejects the Trinity.

 

[PRmerger]

There is not a Protestant Trinitarian church that arrived on that belief without looking at the church before it.

Yet another blow to Bible Alone.

Pithy.

Succinct.

'Nuff said.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Didn’t forget Jesus promised Israel and Abraham a few things in the OT.He saw them thru.That there were factions, differing views wasn’t Christ’s biggest issue. There were Saduccees and Pharisees, yet they were all “Isarael/Jewish”. Why can’t you see that there are factions today, and that Catholics, Orthodox and Protestants all participate in His Body, the Church. To proclaims God’s desire for unity is fine, but then to declare all other churches as illegitimate, los,t dead in heart, that is something else,even unGodly I would say.

The differences between Saducees and Pharisees was far less pronounced than Catholic and Protestant. They were more like The different Catholic Rites are different.

I never said other churches were illegitimate. They are not the church Christ founded and as such have no authority to settle Christian disputes or declare doctrine, but they have legitimacy in the truth they hold (for example the Trinity, or creeds, or baptism)

Which ones ? All of them ? I think not for some have fallen by the wayside (certain baptismal,confessing practices), and some have arisen (the rosary,papal voting etc.).,

All TRADITIONS given by the apostles. Big T traditions. Traditions related to doctrine and dogma. Other traditions can and do change.

Purely tradition is inadequate to describe how we have scripture. Scripture was Spirit inspired when written, received, recited, copied, transalted, taught and understood.Every step must be led by the Spirit,not just the collecting/canonizing.

No it’s not. I do not disagree that scripture was inspired from day one. But other than Peter mentioning Paul’s letters were scripture, we have no way of knowing what is scripture outside of a mix of Jewish tradition(Old Testament) and church tradition for the New Testament.

There was tradition as to what was read at church and this varied with location. It was not until the Synod of Hippo and subsequent councils culminating in the Vulgate, that brought the Bible together into a collection of books (which is what Bible means) for the church to read.

You owe a great deal of thanks to the Catholic Church for the Bible you hold.

do I understand how you can accept that Jesus did not really send the Holy Spirit to guard the church.

Don’t understand how you limit the church and HS guidance other than those of “Peter”. No where in scripture or in Revelations for example does Jesus insinuate allegiance to Rome to the seven churches as a sign of correctness. There is zero indication that once right a church is always right with those seven.There is no indication that cause you had a great start, even a great run (10 years,50 years ,500years)
that you will have a great finish. Certainly you know what is meant by the admonition to endure to the end (because it is possible you may not). There is plenty of indication that if a church lose it’s candlelight, someone else will carry it on.

This is your opinion, I get why you hold it, but nothing in Revelation, indicates that we should have factions or that the church would die and resurrect as something else.

Don’t make me quote the dozens of verses showing denominational ism to be wrong.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Oh why not here are some of the dozens of verses against the idea of denominations.

Scripture regarding denominationalism

Ephesians 4:4-6 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

Matthew 12:25 "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, andevery city or house divided against itself will not stand.

1Corinthians 1:10-13 Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

Phillipians 2:2 fulfill my joy by beinglike-minded, having the same love, being of one accord, of one mind.

Psalms 133:1-3 Behold, how good and how pleasant it is For brethren to dwell together in unity! It is like the precious oil upon the head, Running down on the beard, The beard of Aaron, Running down on the edge of his garments. It is like the dew of Hermon, Descending upon the mountains of Zion; For there the LORD commanded the blessing— Life forevermore.

Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?1Corinthians 4:6-7 Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other. For who makes you differ from another?…

Romans 16:17-18 Now I urge you, brethren, note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them. For those who are such do not serve our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly, and by smooth words and flattering speech deceive the hearts of the simple.

Jude 1:19 These are sensual persons,who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

 

[dronald]

See what I just said, PR?

I’m simply sick of this discussion as it’s a waste of time.

Way to passive-aggressively quote me to prove a point with another. Lovely.

 

[Jon_S_1]

Fiiiiineee.

Let’s just say we’re all united in yet another way and call it a night.

Yes. We are united in much and divided in much.

I hope discussions on what divide lead to there being more we understand.

 

[PRmerger]

I’m simply sick of this discussion as it’s a waste of time.

Way to passive-aggressively quote me to prove a point with another. Lovely.

Awww, don’t go away. :hug3:

No one is being passive aggressive, dronald.

 

[pocohombre]

There is not a Protestant Trinitarian church that arrived on that belief without looking at the church before it.
Yet another blow to Bible Alone.

Without looking ? Bible alone does not mean curling up in a ball clutching a bible Reformers all looked and at father writings and councils and traditions. Many were very knowledgeable on all three. Bible alone means all things are judged /ruled by it .It does not rule out tradition.magisteriums, councils, prophets,apostles, priests,parents, etc., for" in a multitude of council is wisdom". What it does say is all are subject or under authority of Scripture. All are under God’s Word. All must be true to God’s interpretation…As far as the Council at Nicea ,which gave us the foundation for trinity, only one thing and one thing alone was final authority, it was Scripture. So there is no blow to bible alone…We do not reinvent the wheel, yet it is for every generation to freely choose for themselves and “see” that the wheel is perfect for travel and scripturally sound. The context is this - it is bible alone as sole authority, even over tradition . as opposed to bible and tradition having equal authority Nobody, nobody is ruling out value of tradition, or the foundation every generation comes up to when starting out.

 

[PRmerger]

Without looking ? Bible alone does not mean curling up in a ball clutching a bible. Bible alone means all things are judged /ruled by it

Well, that’s perhaps your definition.

But it’s not everyone’s definition.

And without a magisterium to speak for what your Bible Alone definition means, your definition has no authority over someone else’s definition.

 

[dronald]

Yes. We are united in much and divided in much.

I hope discussions on what divide lead to there being more we understand.

Awww, don’t go away. :hug3:

No one is being passive aggressive, dronald.

It’s fine, it’s just…
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[PRmerger]

What it does say is all are subject or under authority of Scripture.

Which is, ironically, not Scriptural.

All are under God’s Word

Amen!

It’s just that God’s Word is not confined to the written word alone.

All must be true to God’s interpretation.

Where has God’s interpretation of Scripture been manifested?

…As far as the Council at Nicea ,which gave us the foundation for trinity, only one thing and one thing alone was final authority, it was Scripture.

If Scripture was the final authority, and Scripture was already codified at Nicea, then why was the council needed to speak authoritatively?

 

[dronald]

If Scripture was the final authority, and Scripture was already codified at Nicea, then why was the council needed to speak authoritatively?

I think Nicea is the one thing we can all agree on, so it’s often used.

 

[PRmerger]

It’s fine, it’s just…
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y113/Annie27/beatdeadhorse50dm.gif

We just want you to acknowledge what you already know in your heart, dronald.

You have gotten all the way there…but just can’t get yourself to say it.

It’s as if we are in a discussion (in an analogy I love to use):

You: I accept that all female mammals make milk. And I accept that cows make milk.

Catholics: So then cows are mammals, right?

You: Well, let’s just say that I agree that cows are animals that make milk. And all female mammals can make milk. But we’ll just have to agree to disagree that cows are mammals.

 

[dronald]

We just want you to acknowledge what you already know in your heart, dronald.

You have gotten all the way there…but just can’t get yourself to say it.

It’s as if we are in a discussion (in an analogy I love to use):

You: I accept that all female mammals make milk. And I accept that cows make milk.

Catholics: So then cows are mammals, right?

You: Well, let’s just say that I agree that cows are animals that make milk. And all female mammals can make milk. But we’ll just have to agree to disagree that cows are mammals.

I just don’t care, Lol. I get caught up in arguments that mean nothing to me for some reason. We both agree the Trinity is true and I’m done arguing about why I believe it. I can plainly see it in Scripture and the Catholic Church certainly existed before my Church. I don’t claim that your Church is the reason my Church believes it, nor do I claim the opposite; I just don’t care because it’s something we agree on regardless and I’m getting frustrated causing separation, frustration and sarcasm on a topic that is meaningless.

To expand on this, if I try to convince someone that the Trinity is Biblical, I won’t point to past councils and old beliefs but rather Scripture. Supposing the CC noticed it first and that’s the ONLY reason I can do so is irrelevant.