Re: Protestants: How do you determine which denomination holds the truth? 2

  • Thread starter Thread starter Tomyris
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JonNC said:
The canon is not expressly designated in the confessions, therefore leaving the canon, technically, open. For all intents and purposes, however, the Lutheran practice involves viewing books based on the level of attestation throughout the history of the Church: attested, disputed, rejected. Based on this standing, attested books of their own can be used to confirm doctrine, disputed books can be used to support attested books, and rejected books are not used for doctrine.

Jon
Click to expand...
And what are the attested, disputed, rejected books specifically?
 
JonNC said:
Hi Steve,
From our POV, we see things like Papal supremacy, and papal infallibility, among others, as innovations not found in the early Church.

Jon
Click to expand...
Hey, Jon.

Well, you know the Catholic position on these issues. I know from my own experience that I understand much more of what it means to be a father and a husband today than I did 20 years ago. That doesn’t mean that I was not a father and a husband 20 years ago. IOW, nothing has changed, we have just become more aware of the meaning of what Christ established. 🙂

God bless.

Steve
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
My apologies.

I do need your help, because I am missing something.

I can understand you being offended for editing your original post.

But I don’t understand your accusation of me being presumptuous. So can you please help me out?
Click to expand...
Correct me if I am wrong. But you presumed I have only studied church history post 1500, and read and studied the 66 book canon of scripture.

That’s not true at all.
 
JonNC said:
Hi Steve,
From our POV, we see things like Papal supremacy, and papal infallibility, among others, as innovations not found in the early Church.

Jon
Click to expand...
Jon,

Papal supremacy did not go into full effect until ~1079 and the Germanic Bishops were on board with it, in fact [all] of the Western Church was on board with it. Later, there was resistance to this agreement and separation followed in the Western Church.

Papal infallibility was defined in Vatican I, so that was after the separation.

On the same hand the you present Sola Scriptura as a hermeneutical practice of the Church. So doctrine is a hermeneutical practice of the Church. The problem is that one (doctrinal development) has always been present while the other one (SS) hasn’t.
 
SteveVH said:
And the, uh… Catholic Church? Why does 434 years impress you when the Catholic Church has 2000 years of unchanging doctrines? I mean, if this is the standard… 🤷
Click to expand...
I find the RC to be one of the most innovative denominations. It is adding new doctrine every few decades or so.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Correct me if I am wrong. But you presumed I have only studied church history post 1500, and read and studied the 66 book canon of scripture.

That’s not true at all.
Click to expand...
Indeed you are wrong.

Your post said: “X Protestant denomination”, that is a very general premise. In like manner my comment is a very general response. I have personally dialogue with people from several denominations and the general sense of Church history for them is: "The Church was corrupt and the reformation corrected it, the Church has used the Bible historically so it must be true. " That is the general consensus. Most Protestants that I talk to don’t have the knowledge of the Church Fathers, Councils of the Church, Historical Heresies, etc. Their version of Church history is actually from the 1,700’s. Very few, like most people I talk to on this forums, actually know about Church history and the history of Scriptures.

Further, I am not assuming anything about House Harkonnen because you are not talking about you specifically. But in general terms.

The 66 book bible is also a fact for the vast majority of Protestant translations: NIV, NASB, NKJV, HCSB, KJV, ESV (Although these last 2 do have versions with the DC’s), NLT, etc. In that manner, it would be incorrect of me to assume a 73 or 74 books version of the Bible because that would be the exception and not the norm.
 
SteveVH said:
Adding or explaining? Why don’t you give us an example of some of these “new doctrines”.
Click to expand...
A distinction without a difference.

Explaining something more than it has been previously, than declaring all Christians must hold to the new explanation or else is the same as adding new doctrine.

Sure, a relatively new doctrine is the doctrine of papal infallibility.
 
If your social circle is composed of people that either state the same belief as you or do not share their religious beliefs with you then the incompatible beliefs of others can be far more remote; the incompatible beliefs of other groups will be less discoverable.

For example, there are those that believe the Arch Angel Michael became Jesus after apotheosis. People that are not from the groups that teach that are probably not frequently confronted with it. So there it presents no known conflict to be resolved.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
I find the RC to be one of the most innovative denominations. It is adding new doctrine every few decades or so.
Click to expand...
Please give an example.

Certainly there is nothing like the Lutherans.

Birth control bad. Now it’s fine
Abortion bad. Now it’s fine
Homosexual sex is sin. Now gay marriage and gay clergy

Only male clergy. Now female and gay clergy.
 
Jon_S said:
Please give an example.

Certainly there is nothing like the Lutherans.

Birth control bad. Now it’s fine
Abortion bad. Now it’s fine
Homosexual sex is sin. Now gay marriage and gay clergy

Only male clergy. Now female and gay clergy.
Click to expand...
Confessional Lutherans all hold to the traditional teaching regarding those issues.
 
House_Harkonnen said:
Confessional Lutherans all hold to the traditional teaching regarding those issues.
Click to expand...
Well case in point I guess…there is no authority in the Lutheran Church, as they just split and divide and start new synods and groups…all claiming to hold the truth.

Please understand that it really does nothing for you to say we invented papal infallibility (which of course is false) when your own denomination has invented countless doctrines…the confessions themselves are pure invention of doctrine separate from what was held historically and apostolic ally (although I know you claim otherwise). It is a claim without weight as it is counter to the historical evidence.
 
Jon_S said:
Well case in point I guess…there is no authority in the Lutheran Church, as they just split and divide and start new synods and groups…all claiming to hold the truth.

Please understand that it really does nothing for you to say we invented papal infallibility (which of course is false) when your own denomination has invented countless doctrines…the confessions themselves are pure invention of doctrine separate from what was held historically and apostolic ally (although I know you claim otherwise). It is a claim without weight as it is counter to the historical evidence.
Click to expand...
there’s authority in my synod. But if you are interested in discussing divisions among Lutherans, Father K on another thread has discussed this very issue regarding Byzantine Christians, not all being in communion with each other. 🤷

Jon
 
House_Harkonnen said:
We all do it the same.

How is one different than another:
  1. “I researched scripture, and history, and prayed and came to the conclusion that X Protestant denomination is the correct one.”
  2. “I researched scripture and history, and prayed and came to the conclusion that the Catholic Church is the correct one.”
Click to expand...
The difference is in the phrasing of the question that is being answered, in so doing.

You can ask, “Which Church suits my lifestyle and agrees with my personal prejudices?” In this case, a search of history and a time of prayer and discernment will lead you to some form of Protestantism.

Or you could ask, “Which is the Church that Christ established on the Rock of Peter, in Matthew 16:18-19?” in which case, a search of history and a time of prayerful discernment will lead you to the Catholic Church.

The answer really does depend upon the question. 🙂
 
Jon_S said:
Well case in point I guess…there is no authority in the Lutheran Church, as they just split and divide and start new synods and groups…all claiming to hold the truth.
Click to expand...
That’s not a fair assessment of Lutheranism. In fact about 20 years ago, the most conservative synods joined into full communion starting the CELC and more recently the more liberal synods joined into full communion with the Anglican communion. From this I know that Lutherans are very interested in unity, and not division per your claims.
 
jmcrae said:
The difference is in the phrasing of the question that is being answered, in so doing.

You can ask, “Which Church suits my lifestyle and agrees with my personal prejudices?” In this case, a search of history and a time of prayer and discernment will lead you to some form of Protestantism.

Or you could ask, “Which is the Church that Christ established on the Rock of Peter, in Matthew 16:18-19?” in which case, a search of history and a time of prayerful discernment will lead you to the Catholic Church.

The answer really does depend upon the question. 🙂
Click to expand...
I don’t think that’s a fair assessment of the questions being asked.

Are you absolutely sure that no one has asked “which church suits my lifestyle and agrees with my personal prejudice” and then joined up with the RC denomination.

Or are you absolutely sure no protestant said “which Churhc is the one that Christ established” and joined up with some protestant denomination?

I can say I know for sure of both.

Even so, many Catholics hold personal preferences and prejudices and the found the church that agrees with them.
 

  1. JonNC said:
    Hi Jose,
    Why would you assume that, simply on the basis that HH is Lutheran, that he did not consider a 73 book (or 74 book) scripture? Why would you assume that, as a Lutheran, he didn’t consider the entire history of the Catholic faith?

    Jon
    Click to expand...
    Because, generally speaking, a Lutherans have embraced a truncated bible…and seeing hh previous posts…his church/parish is most likely usineg a 66 page bible…and he does not see anything positive in the cc prior to 1500 or so…is my assumption too…🤷
 
pablope said:


  1. Because, generally speaking, a Lutherans have embraced a truncated bible…and seeing hh previous posts…his church/parish is most likely usineg a 66 page bible…and he does not see anything positive in the cc prior to 1500 or so…is my assumption too…🤷
Click to expand...

  1. Because, generally speaking, a Lutherans have embraced a truncated bible…and seeing hh previous posts…his church/parish is most likely usineg a 66 page Bible.
    Click to expand...
    Indeed my parish uses the normal protestant canon. I personally use my old Catholic bible though for my own reading. It’s got sentimental value, it survived a flood and still has water damage on it. I never gave it up, the deuteros are not inspired IMO, but I still enjoy reading them from time to time.
    .and he does not see anything positive in the cc prior to 1500 or so…is my assumption too…
    Click to expand...
    That’s a wierd assumption. Where have I even HINTED at such a premise?
 
JonNC said:
Hi Steve,
From our POV, we see things like Papal supremacy, and papal infallibility, among others, as innovations not found in the early Church.

Jon
Click to expand...
And redefining the sacraments, rejecting the authority of bishops…calling the pope anti christ…as some examples…are this not innovations?

And how about the most damaging of all…ss and its variants…🤷
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top