What percentage of Protestant theology is based on the Bible?

[po18guy]

I must point out that this line of reasoning makes no sense. Truth is not malleable. It is fixed, identifiable and has been revealed to and through the Church which Christ founded. Other than the Catholic and Orthodox Churches, each and every other has man-made beliefs and doctrines mixed in - some are serious departures from Christianity.

Example: If you are Methodist, you thereby proclaim Lutherans to be in error. If you are a Congregationalist, then you proclaim the Baptists to be in error. Church of Christ, Pentecostal, it goes on and on with each of those 200+ identified denominations and thousands of “non-denominations” - each of which use the exact same scripture to arrive at their disagreeing beliefs.

The bible tells you that it can be twisted - do you not believe the bible when it says this? If you do believe that the written word can be twisted as the bible says, why is your take on it infallible and all the rest simply wrong?

This proves the fatal error of bible alone.

 

[JonNC]

Feel free to play apologist for heretics all you want. I have only an interest in Truth, not playing petty word games with you.

Luther was a historical idiot. That before we even bother entertaining the merits of his personal character. If I want to use him to personify the reformation. Be sure that I will.

Jesus Christ is the undisputed founder of the Church. Some pseudo-interpretation of a thousand years later, by ‘lunch buffet’ theologians no less, is irrelevant.

What you think about my way of expressing that statement doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Because yes, people can respond in kind.

Be sure I will listen to the Legacy of Jesus and those that followed. Long before I listen to stroppy old men, so deluded that they would strip books from cannon; just to win an argument that doesn’t stand alone.

It sounds more like you have far more interest in name-calling than Truth. And the fact that you don’t care what others think of your approach is indicative of the fact that you really don’t care how your words reflect on your communion

 

[JonNC]

I have come to believe that the more one subscribes to Sola Scriptura, the more one has to rely on Church authority to declare what writings are truly Scripture and which were not.

The Canonization of Scripture was not so simple at all. But to be able to say “This is the Word of God, nothing less, nothing more!” necessarily would mean assuming the authority to speak on behalf of God.

I have no argument with this. Scripture, after all, vests authority in theChurch.

 

[guanophore]

Lutherans would certainly consider themselves sola scriptura. They would also tell you that sola scriptura doesn’t exclude tradition by any means

I think this position is markedly different than that of most fundamentalists and evangelicals, who often seem to be more Solo Scriptura.

 

[JonNC]

Who all hold essentially the same beliefs and doctrines, as opposed to Protestantism, which… does not

So, you’re saying there are 240 some different Catholic Churches distinct by nationality? Because that is the same formula that produced the 30,000 denominations number

 

[GML3]

Stupid question. Is Protestant any denomination, church, or person that doesn’t agree with the current teachings of the Catholic Church?

 

[guanophore]

Feel free to play apologist for heretics all you want.

It is not appropriate to use the term “heretic” for modern day non-Catholics.

Luther was a historical idiot.

I am not sure what you mean by this, but certainly it is not helpful to lapse into name-calling. And a correct grammatical construction would be “an historical”. Luther was trained for DECADES in ecclesiastical history by Catholics, so if this is an accurate statement, it may say more about his formation as a monk and a priest than it does about Luther.

What you think about my way of expressing that statement doesn’t bother me in the slightest. Because yes, people can respond in kind.

If you don’t care what others think, why are you posting on a public forum? And why would you stoop to the level of bad behavior on the part of others? Do you have any Christian Charity?

Long before I listen to stroppy old men, so deluded that they would strip books from cannon; just to win an argument that doesn’t stand alone.

I think you might be putting the blame here in the wrong place. It was publishers who decided to remove the books. Luther did not strip them.

Besides a cannon is a device used to throw weapons. :-}

Actually, we are united on those doctrines defined in scripture as “essential”.

I would really like to see a list of these. I have been told about these for years, but so far as I can tell, their existence is an extra-biblical human tradition.

I don’t see why a protestant can’t appreciate the writing of the Church Fathers, they also read modern religious writers to help explore their faith.

The Fathers write in the tradition of the faith, which is Catholic. The Early Fathers are especially fraught with Catholicism. Those who want to believe that these Catholic beliefs developed at some point later in time, AD 400 or later will really get a wrench thrown into their theology by reading them. I know I did!

 

[guanophore]

Is Protestant any denomination, church, or person that doesn’t agree with the current teachings of the Catholic Church?

I think that is how the word is being used in this topic, yes. It is certainly a broad brush.

Stupid question.

I would assert that there are very few of these, and this issue of how much of non-Catholic theology is “bible based” is particularly relevant.

 

[po18guy]

100% of the uniquely Protestant doctrines are based on personal opinions regarding the meaning and intent of scripture. This disregards and counteracts the authoritative Church which Christ founded. However well-intended, it opposes the principle which our Lord established for the handing on of the faith.

 

[JonNC]

100% of the uniquely Protestant doctrines are based on personal opinions regarding the meaning and intent of scripture. This disregards and counteracts the authoritative Church which Christ founded. However well-intended, it opposes the principle which our Lord established for the handing on of the faith.

The same can be said for uniquely "Roman Catholic " doctrines

 

[Vonsalza]

100% of the uniquely Protestant doctrines are based on personal opinions regarding the meaning and intent of scripture. This disregards and counteracts the authoritative Church which Christ founded. However well-intended, it opposes the principle which our Lord established for the handing on of the faith.

This is why I hold the mildly controversial view that Protestantism - particularly the American evangelical formulation of it - is ultimately self worship. The Laws of God are, ultimately, whatever the evangelical thinks they are.

 

[rcwitness]

rcwitness:

I have come to believe that the more one subscribes to Sola Scriptura, the more one has to rely on Church authority to declare what writings are truly Scripture and which were not.

The Canonization of Scripture was not so simple at all. But to be able to say “This is the Word of God, nothing less, nothing more!” necessarily would mean assuming the authority to speak on behalf of God.

I have no argument with this. Scripture, after all, vests authority in theChurch.

When you say “the Church” does that imply a universal Church?

 

[JonNC]

When you say “the Church” does that imply a universal Church?

Yes, generally. Specifically the Church Militant

 

[rcwitness]

And how does that Church declare matters of the faith?

 

[JonNC]

And how does that Church declare matters of the faith?

Councils, historically. Prior to the Great Schism

 

[LostSheep7]

I think you’d have a hard time proving this. While some may not be moved to read the ECF’s, they probably read lots of contemporary writers. Christian book stores sell more books than Bibles.

I recognize it may be different in the United States, but here where I live (Brazil) the vast majority of Protestants don’t read any religious book but the Bible, the only exception being some calvinists

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

I think you’d have a hard time proving this. While some may not be moved to read the ECF’s, they probably read lots of contemporary writers. Christian book stores sell more books than Bibles.

I recognize it may be different in the United States, but here where I live (Brazil) the vast majority of Protestants don’t read any religious book but the Bible, the only exception being some calvinists

That’s sad. They’re missing so much

 

[AugustTherese]

First, there is no such thing as “Protestant” theology.

all Protestants utilize Sola Scriptura

(Characters!!!)

 

[Kei]

Short answer: it depends. Protestant theology is not unified and all of their interpretations are going to be through their own biases and what not.
Also, @ErraticFaith , you sound very catholic but profile says non denominational. Why not be Catholic?

God bless

 

[AugustTherese]

The same can be said for uniquely "Roman Catholic " doctrines

Except that the Catholic Church is the Church Christ founded and gave authority to properly interpret and safeguard that proper interpretation of Scripture. Even 2,000 years worth of personal opinions and false claims cannot even touch the Church’s authority, because that authority is divine.