Simple Question to Non-Catholic Christians

[Callin]

If say a Baptist, Lutheran, Non-Denominational, Episcopal non-Catholic Christian hold a doctrine, like Infant Baptism, all differently, who is right? How would we determine who was right? I dunno if all the listed denominations agree or disagree with the particular doctrine or not, but as a for instance. 4 Different well meaning, God Loving, Bible Reading pastors teach different doctrine, whose right?

I was actually wondering this lately. Catholics always turn to our own source of authority, but what do two Protestants do if they get into a debate over a certain passage’s interpretation?

Unless one of them is obviously WAY off, I don’t see how anything could end conclusively. How could you know the author’s original intent without either a source of divine interpretation or some serious study regarding the author’s life?

Sorry if I seem ignorant. I’m trying to understand this.

 

[Rightlydivide]

I was actually wondering this lately. Catholics always turn to our own source of authority, but what do two Protestants do if they get into a debate over a certain passage’s interpretation?

Unless one of them is obviously WAY off, I don’t see how anything could end conclusively. How could you know the author’s original intent without either a source of divine interpretation or some serious study regarding the author’s life?

Sorry if I seem ignorant. I’m trying to understand this.

This has been addressed. Maybe the people addressing it are not being blunt enough.
They are two different denominations. They do the same thing that a Catholic and Orthodox do when they disagree. They disagree. They do the same thing anyone does.
Let me ask you a question. What happens when a Catholic and a Jehovah Witness disagree? How can that end conclusively?Oh by the way, most passages are not infallibly defined in Catholicism.

 

[slavko]

So this is a question on Authority, its super simple, but at the same time important.

If say a Baptist, Lutheran, Non-Denominational, Episcopal non-Catholic Christian hold a doctrine, like Infant Baptism, all differently, who is right? How would we determine who was right? I dunno if all the listed denominations agree or disagree with the particular doctrine or not, but as a for instance. 4 Different well meaning, God Loving, Bible Reading pastors teach different doctrine, whose right?

Again, I’m very interested in the non-Catholic Christian response, because we all know where we “silly” Catholic Christians would turn to, and what we believe about Authority. TIA

In Christ

We adhere to the advice of St. Vincent of Lerins and see what’s believed always, everywhere and by all.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

This has been addressed. Maybe the people addressing it are not being blunt enough.
They are two different denominations. They do the same thing that a Catholic and Orthodox do when they disagree. They disagree. They do the same thing anyone does.
Let me ask you a question. What happens when a Catholic and a Jehovah Witness disagree? How can that end conclusively?Oh by the way, most passages are not infallibly defined in Catholicism.

They disagree. Then who is the right Church? We all seek the right truth and do not want to be misled. We all wish to worship God as He wants us to worship Him. Disagreeing is not being of the same mind and judgment as St. Paul instructed.

Using Catholic and Orthodox is not really a good example, as the two are in communication with each other in hopes of resolving differences and becoming unified once again.

As for your statement about two denominations, there are thousands of Protestant denominations. Let me clarify my understanding of the definition of Protestant denomination. Any “Christian” Church started after Martin Luther’s reformation is a Protestant Church, especially if it, or the individual believers, protest against the Catholic Church being the one true Church Christ built.

One Church is scriptural.

**Joh 10:16 And I have other sheep, that are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will heed my voice. So there shall be one flock, one shepherd.

Eph 4:3 eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.
Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,
Eph 4:5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Eph 4:6 one God and Father of us all, who is above all and through all and in all.

Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brethren, to take note of those who create dissensions and difficulties, in opposition to the doctrine which you have been taught; avoid them**.

1Co 1:10 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.

Php 2:2 complete my joy by being of the same mind, having the same love, being in full accord and of one mind.

Rom 15:5 May the God of steadfastness and encouragement grant you to live in such harmony with one another, in accord with Christ Jesus,
Rom 15:6 that together you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth.
Joh 17:18 As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world.
Joh 17:19 And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth.
Joh 17:20 "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word,
Joh 17:21 that they may all be one; even as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be in us, so that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Joh 17:22 The glory which thou hast given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one,
Joh 17:23 I in them and thou in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved them even as thou hast loved me.

1Co 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body–Jews or Greeks, slaves or free–and all were made to drink of one Spirit.

Rom 12:4 For as in one body we have many members, and all the members do not have the same function,
Rom 12:5 so we, though many, are one body in Christ, and individually members one of another.

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call,

Col 3:15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful.

God Bless,

 

[fbl9]

Oh by the way, most passages are not infallibly defined in Catholicism.

you forgot to mention that none are infallibly defined by your group.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Prodigal Son1;4573195]They disagree. Then who is the right Church? We all seek the right truth and do not want to be misled. We all wish to worship God as He wants us to worship Him. Disagreeing is not being of the same mind and judgment as St. Paul instructed.

Using Catholic and Orthodox is not really a good example, as the two are in communication with each other in hopes of resolving differences and becoming unified once again.

It is as good as an example as any. Maybe they will be united. I doubt it. But regardless they are not now and they disagree on things. If you unite, I will drop that example. But my point is the same. You want to ignore, for the sake of your argument, that Catholics and Orthodox, Catholics and Mormons, Catholics and anybody else do not have someone to solve problems. You are no different in that regard than anyone else. You can assert all the authority you want. It does not mean much to groups that disagree with you.

As for your statement about two denominations, there are thousands of Protestant denominations. Let me clarify my understanding of the definition of Protestant denomination. Any “Christian” Church started after Martin Luther’s reformation is a Protestant Church, especially if it, or the individual believers, protest against the Catholic Church being the one true Church Christ built.

One Church is scriptural.

Facts are facts. Answer the question if you can. What do Catholics and Southern Baptists do when they disagree?
The scripture you cite apply to Bible believing churches not your church.
It looks like we disagree…

 

[Rightlydivide]

you forgot to mention that none are infallibly defined by your group.

No but we do not claim that. Dont give me that full disclosure garbage. I never claimed that my group did. You are the ones asserting that everyone else is wrong. Not me. Your infallible statments are convincing to…Catholics…well except the ones Catholics ignore…oh yeah full disclosure…people at my church ignore some of the teachings of the Bible. Present company included.

 

[fbl9]

No but we do not claim that. Dont give me that full disclosure garbage. I never claimed that my group did. You are the ones asserting that everyone else is wrong. Not me. Your infallible statments are convincing to…Catholics…well except the ones Catholics ignore…oh yeah full disclosure…people at my church ignore some of the teachings of the Bible. Present company included.

sounds like somebody is jealous that we as catholics can and do claim the God given authority of His Church…

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It is as good as an example as any. Maybe they will be united. I doubt it. But regardless they are not now and they disagree on things. If you unite, I will drop that example. But my point is the same. You want to ignore, for the sake of your argument, that Catholics and Orthodox, Catholics and Mormons, Catholics and anybody else do not have someone to solve problems. You are no different in that regard than anyone else. You can assert all the authority you want. It does not mean much to groups that disagree with you.

Facts are facts. Answer the question if you can. What do Catholics and Southern Baptists do when they disagree?
The scripture you cite apply to Bible believing churches not your church.
It looks like we disagree…

There’s a major difference in the Churchs that disagree. The Catholic Church is the oldest Church on this world. All the other Churchs you name were formed 1054 (Orthodox) and much later (Protestant Churchs forming in the 1500s and still being formed today). Until those Churchs formed, there was one with the same mind and judgment…and it’s still here today.

Simply stating, and accepting, that Churchs disagree, does not answer how Protestants reconcile which one is the real Church, among themselves?

 

[Rightlydivide]

Prodigal Son1;4573913]There’s a major difference in the Churchs that disagree. The Catholic Church is the oldest Church on this world. All the other Churchs you name were formed 1054 (Orthodox) and much later (Protestant Churchs forming in the 1500s and still being formed today). Until those Churchs formed, there was one with the same mind and judgment…and it’s still here today.

The argument is convincing for people who never actually read the Ante Nicene Fathers. The argument on the surface sounds convincing until you actually find out that no one writes about these additons to the faith until much later on.

Simply stating, and accepting, that Churchs disagree, does not answer how Protestants reconcile which one is the real Church, among themselves?

I believe until Orthodox, Catholic and Protestants all agree, which would mean a radical change for people from the first two groups but God is good and it can happen, you cannot just ask about the last group. Well you can, but it ignores the question.

 

[Rightlydivide]

sounds like somebody is jealous that we as catholics can and do claim the God given authority of His Church…

Lots of groups claim this. Groups claiming to the be the true church are plentiful. When I first converted to Christianity, I was interested in history and the Bible. It was tough to sort through what everyone believed. I remain fascinated by people who read the Bible but only see it through the lens of Peter and Mary. Likewise, I am also interested in the liberals but that is another forum and no need to mix the two.
I think as the largest denomination, it is important that you teach correct doctrine. I have essentially given up on that happening and instead need to make sure that Protestants follow correct doctrine and are not persuaded by selective history (which I believe the Catholic argument is).
I know my time on this forum is coming to an end. However, until it does, any soul set on the right path is worth it.
Have a good Sunday.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The argument is convincing for people who never actually read the Ante Nicene Fathers. The argument on the surface sounds convincing until you actually find out that no one writes about these additons to the faith until much later on.

Hmmm, the argument is convincing for those who have actually read the Ante Nicene Fathers. (All 38 volumes can be found at the link provided. )

Those “additions” as you call them, were at one time taken for granted by the men of the Church, in the respect that everyone believed in them and addressing them in writing was not necessary. When those particular issues were challenged, disputed, changed or otherwise contradicted, it became necessary to write about them so future generations would have a correct understanding as perceived by the Church. Otherwise, we could have had Gnostic type, or other incorrect, teachings creep into the faith unchallenged.

St. Ignatius, disciple of St. John and appointed by St. Peter, is one of my favorites (probably because it’s at the beginning of one of the volumes of Writings of the Early Church Fathers books that I own. )

Here’s a writing from St. Ignatius, believed to have been written around 106AD (Possibly while St. John was still alive).

See that ye all follow the bishop, even as Jesus Christ does the Father, and the presbytery as ye would the apostles; and reverence the deacons, as being the institution(55) of God. Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper(56) Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church. It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate a love-feast; but whatsoever he shall approve of, that is also pleasing to God, so that everything that is done may be secure and valid.(57)

Looks like the Catholic Church was written about around 1900 years ago.

I tried to be fair with the link I provided to the writings of the early Church fathers. That’s why I chose a Protestant source for their writings. Here’s a link to a Catholic source for those who feel it necessary to cross-reference between the two for accuracy.

I believe until Orthodox, Catholic and Protestants all agree, which would mean a radical change for people from the first two groups but God is good and it can happen, you cannot just ask about the last group. Well you can, but it ignores the question.

This has me thinking of posting a thread to list those things we believe in and agree upon.

There’s not as much that separates us all, as many would think, in my opinion.

God Bless,

 

[1edyson]

so then in the non-Catholic Christian world, is doctrine relative? That one denomination, or non-denomination’s doctrine is just as good as the others, and God will judge us on this relative Truth of our individual hearts?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The argument is convincing for people who never actually read the Ante Nicene Fathers. The argument on the surface sounds convincing until you actually find out that no one writes about these additons to the faith until much later on.

Rightlydivide,

Another thought came to mind, concerning your post.

You mentioned that no one writes about these additions to the faith until much later on. Could you please provide a dated source telling us when the addition of sola scriptura came about?

God Bless,

 

[bookgirl32]

This is such a great question. I think the best way to answer it personally is to say I don’t believe in private interpretation of scripture. That can be very dangerous and is why we have non-theological, non-seminary trained people like Joel Osteen preaching their brand of Christianity.

RC Sproul explains this issue so well. He states that the Church never really wanted the laity reading scripture for fear of exactly what we have today. Denomination upon denomination. Growing up Roman Catholic I can remember learning that the Bible wasn’t really meant for the lay person. Now that we have so many great english translations it’s much easier to read although still very tricky to interpret in some areas. Sproul preaches interpretation of scripture within the confines of the church not privately. There’s only one right interpretation of scripture although there could be thousands of applications of it.

One thing our church preaches is agreeing on the essentials and not worrying about the non-essentials. So then that begs the question what are the essentials for our salvation. Christ says to have faith like a child. I think if we take that approach and lead our lives in a Christ-like fashion we can never go wrong. I know I’m not directly answering your question as to who has the final say or who is the final authority. To that question I will say the final authority is GOD. HE alone is the final judge.

So although some denominations may mis-interpret scripture I believe GOD sees into our hearts and knows our true intentions. That’s what we will be judged upon. I don’t believe if someone is not submitting to the authority of the pope and the teachings of the magisterium that it impacts their salvation. Unless of course someone is outright rejecting Christ. But believing or not believing that Mary was a perpetual virgin, or sinless vs sinful has no impact on my salvation. The Catholic church itself admits that they have developed a further understanding of scripture and therefore create doctrine surrounding it. So then you can’t constantly hold people accountable for something that continues to develop. Hence the essentials vs non-essentials. I believe the essentials for salvation are clear and will never change. If they were always developing then that would mean GOD is withholding information from us. For folks then who believed in Christ right after HE died 2000 years ago it means they had less information than we do placing their salvation in jeopardy. I find that hard to believe.

Hope that helps

What happens if the denominations can’t agree on the essentials?
Who is right about them, and who is wrong?

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

What happens if the denominations can’t agree on the essentials?
Who is right about them, and who is wrong?

I think that was the point.

Many of today’s ‘christian’ denominations are but variations on an old theme.

There’s Neo-Albighensianism: denying the sacraments and the hierarchy, which is prevalent in the southern US, primarily Baptist churches.

Neo-Arianism: which teaches that Christ was not truly God but also a creature. Hmmmm. Sounds like mormonism.

Neo-Gnosticism: belief in a secret, underground ‘church’ that preserves Christ’s ‘real’ teachings.

Neo-Antinomianism: salvation by faith alone.

All these heresies were suppressed by the early Church, some violently. All of these heresies attempted to change the message and structure of the Church founded by Jesus.

So of course denominations cannot agree on “essentials.” Why? Because these sects have chosen to DENOTE one aspect over another or to DENOTE one tenet or more as being NON Christian.

Robert

 

[BrianH]

I have to agree with something that was written about the Ante Nicene writings.
There was a time I was trying to figure out the age old Catholic v Orthodox question. My best guess was to immerse myself in the Ante Nicene writings.
As hard as this will be for many to believe-although some of you will know what I mean-I looked around at my church and for all the things I had a problem with-I felt pretty good about it. I still think a little about Orthodoxy time to time.
BH

 

[BrianH]

What happens if the denominations can’t agree on the essentials?
Who is right about them, and who is wrong?

I think that question has been answered. Why should a Presbyterian and Anglican have to agree if Catholic and Orthodox do not agree either?
This whole thread seems to hint that Protestants have to have something that Catholics and all the variations of it do not have either.
Almost all of our denominations or churches have an authority. The underlying question behind the question is what authority.
But harder is when you agree that other groups have the authority but think they missed the boat on some things:blush:

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I think that question has been answered. Why should a Presbyterian and Anglican have to agree if Catholic and Orthodox do not agree either?
This whole thread seems to hint that Protestants have to have something that Catholics and all the variations of it do not have either.
Almost all of our denominations or churches have an authority. The underlying question behind the question is what authority.
But harder is when you agree that other groups have the authority but think they missed the boat on some things:blush:

In 1054 the Orthodox Church schismed from the Catholic Church, it’s known as the great schism.

Your argument seems to be, there’s a wrong so our wrong is ok. Two wrongs do not make a right.

It only appears repeatedly bringing up the first schism from the Catholic Church justifies the many schisms that have happened, not only from the Catholic Church but the many from Martin Luther’s Church as well. There are thousands of Protestant denominations. Even if one wants to argue that 35,000 is not a realistic number, because many denominations are somehow connected. There are still thousands if we only consider 10% of that number. This is still way too many and provides people a chance to shop theologically. That is to find a denomination that fits their lifestyle. Is this obedience to God?

As you say, almost all our denominations have authority, this is not an agreeing authority or an authority of one. They are not of the same judgment and mind, as St. Paul wrote about. Scriptures clearly instructs the Church to avoid those who create dissensions.

The original Church that suffered schisms of others is still around…

The question being avoided by Protestants in this thread is, how do you know which Church is the right Church? How could you convince us, or anyone else, your Church is the right Church?

 

[BrianH]

In 1054 the Orthodox Church schismed from the Catholic Church, it’s known as the great schism.

Your argument seems to be, there’s a wrong so our wrong is ok. Two wrongs do not make a right.

It only appears repeatedly bringing up the first schism from the Catholic Church justifies the many schisms that have happened, not only from the Catholic Church but the many from Martin Luther’s Church as well. There are thousands of Protestant denominations. Even if one wants to argue that 35,000 is not a realistic number, because many denominations are somehow connected. There are still thousands if we only consider 10% of that number. This is still way too many and provides people a chance to shop theologically. That is to find a denomination that fits their lifestyle. Is this obedience to God?

As you say, almost all our denominations have authority, this is not an agreeing authority or an authority of one. They are not of the same judgment and mind, as St. Paul wrote about. Scriptures clearly instructs the Church to avoid those who create dissensions.

The original Church that suffered schisms of others is still around…

The question being avoided by Protestants in this thread is, how do you know which Church is the right Church? How could you convince us, or anyone else, your Church is the right Church?

To be honest, I see it the other way. You guys have the inventions and new stuff, not them
I am not trying to convince you that your church is wrong or mine is right, so I am avoiding it because I dont think like that
Who does not want unity but you cannot expect people to go against their judgements just for the sake of unity. You have to believe it.
I am not part of Martin Luther’s church but you know that.