Who Has the Final Authority?

[lyrikal]

I would like to pose this question for our Protestant brothers and sisters. I am not posing this question for debate reasons (though I won’t refrain from discussing with the posters), but I am posing this question to get an understanding of where you’re coming from.

Who has the final authority (on earth) with regards to the interpretation of the Bible? If two Protestants disagree on an interpretation of a Scripture passage such as “Take, eat, this is my Body…” who would have the final authority to say who is right? Who has the final authority to tell us what the essentials are, let alone give us the correct understanding of the essentials?

Please feel free to give Scripture passages/Patristics/Councils to back up your claim.

God bless.

 

[Pfaffenhoffen]

I would like to pose this question for our Protestant brothers and sisters. I am not posing this question for debate reasons (though I won’t refrain from discussing with the posters), but I am posing this question to get an understanding of where you’re coming from.

Who has the final authority (on earth) with regards to the interpretation of the Bible? If two Protestants disagree on an interpretation of a Scripture passage such as “Take, eat, this is my Body…” who would have the final authority to say who is right? Who has the final authority to tell us what the essentials are, let alone give us the correct understanding of the essentials?

Please feel free to give Scripture passages/Patristics/Councils to back up your claim.

God bless.

I am in a Protestan Forum (CF) and put the same question.
No one understood the question and there was big confusion.
One kind brother explained to me that I was thinking in a Catholic Was, that there should be “one interpretation”. No, there is no need for that.

Register in Catholic Forum and you will see the differences between the Protestam Wy of Thinking and ours. Tell you it is pretty hard to discover and I am still at a loss.

Most of the times, I was explained that i was thinking in a Caholic Way… Some Catholics there, veterans, would explain to me and I would understand better through their eyes. Others were a bit too much: “Ours is the True Church, he he he!”. Not very ecumeical…

 

[Ahimsa]

If two Protestants disagree on an interpretation of a Scripture passage such as “Take, eat, this is my Body…” who would have the final authority to say who is right?

Jesus.

 

[Ginger2]

The Holy Spirit is our guide on Earth.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Now before you ask why do some Protestants believe different things, I would suggest it is for the same reason some Catholics don’t believe everything the RC teaches.

 

[Ginger2]

Jesus.

Agreed! (1 John 5:8 )

BTW, what is a “Jesus Buddhist”?

 

[ltwin]

It seems to me that Catholics seem to think that the Church must have a visible head on earth, the successor of Peter, and that unity means being institutionally connected and adhering to a perfect doctrinal conformity. Protestants don’t think in that way. We believe that all Christians are united spiritually. We may not agree on everything, but if our faith is based on Christ and his atoning sacrifice, then we are the Church.

There is one head of the Church who is Christ. He has sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church. However, there will never be complete unity until Christ returns, because sin and flesh get in the way of perfect obedience to Christ.

Bishops and councils can and may err. We all do. Protestants place emphasis on self study, which isn’t perfect. There is a need to look to others, especially those who have dedicated their lives to studying and teaching the Word. So the final authority is Jesus. We know his will because He has left us His Word. Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, we believe the Word of God can be understood and lived out. The Bible contains all things necessary for salvation. It is the standard of Christian life and practice.

 

[Roman_Catholic_1]

The Holy Spirit is our guide on Earth.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Now before you ask why do some Protestants believe different things, I would suggest it is for the same reason some Catholics don’t believe everything the RC teaches.

Your example doesn’t work. With Catholics who, as you say, “don’t believe everything the RC teaches” they know (or can know) the truth of what the Church teaches but decide not to follow what it teaches. For modern American Evangelicals they can believe different things that the Bible teaches (more often than not contradictory things) and say that they were lead by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation. It’s not a case of them both knowing the correct interpretation and just one simply refusing to believe it but, rather, both of them totally believing that they are correct and were guided by the Holy Spirit. So your left with either the Holy Spirit being the author of confusion or one of them are wrong even though they are both claiming the guidance of the Holy Spirit. How does one decide which is correct?

Besides a Catholic would agree that the Holy Spirit is the final authority the problem becomes when two Protestants both say they are being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretations. Where are they to go when to settle the matter?

A note of clarification and charity, this problem is much less a of a problem in Protestant Churches that recognize a Church’s tradition in interpretations such as Lutheranism. This is why I used the phrase,“modern American Evangelicalism” to avoid lumping all Protestants together as Sola Scriptura mean different things to different Protestants.

God bless

 

[GaryTaylor]

Your example doesn’t work. With Catholics who, as you say, “don’t believe everything the RC teaches” they know (or can know) the truth of what the Church teaches but decide not to follow what it teaches. For modern American Evangelicals they can believe different things that the Bible teaches (more often than not contradictory things) and say that they were lead by the Holy Spirit in their interpretation. It’s not a case of them both knowing the correct interpretation and just one simply refusing to believe it but, rather, both of them totally believing that they are correct and were guided by the Holy Spirit. So your left with either the Holy Spirit being the author of confusion or one of them are wrong even though they are both claiming the guidance of the Holy Spirit. How does one decide which is correct?

Besides a Catholic would agree that the Holy Spirit is the final authority the problem becomes when two Protestants both say they are being led by the Holy Spirit in their interpretations. Where are they to go when to settle the matter?

A note of clarification and charity, this problem is much less a of a problem in Protestant Churches that recognize a Church’s tradition in interpretations such as Lutheranism. This is why I used the phrase,“modern American Evangelicalism” to avoid lumping all Protestants together as Sola Scriptura mean different things to different Protestants.

God bless

Agree’d

 

[UNITE_MY_WILL]

It seems to me that Catholics seem to think that the Church must have a visible head on earth, the successor of Peter, and that unity means being institutionally connected and adhering to a perfect doctrinal conformity. Protestants don’t think in that way. We believe that all Christians are united spiritually. We may not agree on everything, but if our faith is based on Christ and his atoning sacrifice, then we are the Church.
This is one I don’t understand…If one comes from “the Bible is the sole authority” stance, how do you reconcile multiple verses of being one one teaching? 1 Corinthians 1:10-13 “Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?” John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep thRomans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
rough thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. Ephesians 4:1-7 I therefore, the prisoner of the Lord, beseech you that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye are called, 2 With all lowliness and meekness, with longsuffering, forbearing one another in love; 3 Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. 2 Corinthians 13:11 Finally, brethren, farewell. Be perfect, be of good comfort, be of one mind, live in peace; and the God of love and peace shall be with you. John 17:20-26 “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me. Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world. O righteous Father, the world hath not known thee: but I have known thee, and these have known that thou hast sent me. And I have declared unto them thy name, and will declare it: that the love wherewith thou hast loved me may be in them, and I in them.”. There are more I could post…

There is one head of the Church who is Christ.Agreed He has sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church. But which Church? Unless there are many differing truths… the Holy Spirit can only be guiding one Church, “a light for the world, a city on a hill not to be hidden. However, there will never be complete unity until Christ returns, because sin and flesh get in the way of perfect obedience to Christ.
Bishops and councils can and may err. We all do. Protestants place emphasis on self study, which isn’t perfect. There is a need to look to others, especially those who have dedicated their lives to studying and teaching the Word. So the final authority is Jesus. We know his will because He has left us His Word. Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, we believe the Word of God can be understood and lived out. The Bible contains all things
necessary for salvation. It is the standard of Christian life and practice. This sounds great, however we all know this is not reality. If we all “know his will” and had “illumination through the Holy Spirit” there would be no division. It also isn’t completely biblical, while scripture is"useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”, “the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth.” It’s not an either/or but a both/and.
Peace,
T

 

[Wesley7]

The Church interprets the books of the Bible.

 

[lyrikal]

Jesus.

And we Catholics agree.

Notice my question has to do with who has authority on EARTH. Granted, the answer would still be Jesus. But the question is: How does Jesus communicate this authority to us? Like I said, if two people disagree on what Jesus meant by “this is my body” then who do I believe? Who did Jesus give His authoritative message to? The one who thinks that the bread is the Body of Christ or the one who thinks that the bread is a symbol of the Body of Christ? How do I know Jesus told you what he told you? Sorry, but, saying “Jesus” does not solve anything but only creates more issues such as the ones that I have presented in this post.

If two disagree on something essential, who do I believe? How do I determine who to believe? How do I determine who is right?

 

[Ahimsa]

Agreed! (1 John 5:8 )

BTW, what is a “Jesus Buddhist”?

This thread will answer all of your questions – I hope!

 

[Ahimsa]

If two disagree on something essential, who do I believe? How do I determine who to believe? How do I determine who is right?

Ask Jesus. If Jesus points you to the Magisterium, then so be it.

 

[lyrikal]

Agreed! (1 John 5:8 )

BTW, what is a “Jesus Buddhist”?

Let’s show the passage:

[7] And the Spirit is the witness, because the Spirit is the truth.
[8] There are three witnesses, the Spirit, the water, and the blood; and these three agree.
[9] If we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater; for this is the testimony of God that he has borne witness to his Son.

Where does this passage teach that we are to come up with the truth by studying the Bible on our own? You’ve basically read your beliefs into the passage rather than letting the passage shape your belief.

I can use this passage to say that the Spirit is the witness for the Church (Bishops and those in authority) and it is those Bishops who communicate the truth to the lay. This was the practice in the Early Church and also the practice in the Bible.

What happened in the book of Acts when there was a dispute among the Christians? Did they all say “figure it out yourselves and do your best! Good luck!”? Or did they gather in a council together (Acts 15) as a Church, proclaimed the truth that the Spirit of Truth taught them? I suppose if your theory is correct, then we would find each Apostle continuing with whatever teaching he believes to be the right one. We don’t find this in Scripture. Not only that, but we would expect the laymen who are not Apostles to be told to “do your best and figure it out on your own! The Spirit of Truth is with you!” But do we find this at all? On the contrary, we find the Church coming together to hold a council to proclaim what is true.

That is how the Church operated in the 1st Century. If you read the writings of the Early Church Fathers, you will see that the Church took upon this same structure to teach the truth. There were Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and Laymen.

Can you show a passage that teaches your way of Christianity? And how can your way be reconciled with the council in Acts 15? Can you also provide an Patristic writings to show that Christianity operated the way you think they did?

Grace and peace.

 

[lyrikal]

Ask Jesus. If Jesus points you to the Magisterium, then so be it.

And if Jesus points you to your own authority, then so be it? What if the Magisterium says that the bread IS the Body of Christ and your own authority says that it is a symbol of the Body of Christ? Is Christ contradicting Himself here? There is ONE truth, not 2, not 3, not 20,000. How do we find this one truth if Jesus is telling us two different things?

 

[lyrikal]

The Holy Spirit is our guide on Earth.

John 16:13 Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, [that] shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.

Now before you ask why do some Protestants believe different things, I would suggest it is for the same reason some Catholics don’t believe everything the RC teaches.

“Roman_Catholic” gave you an excellent answer.

I would also like to ask you: How does the Holy Spirit guide you to the truth here on earth?

We all agree that the Holy Spirit is the guide but the question is HOW does He guide us? Scripture and Patristics would be nice.

 

[waxwing]

I’ve never gotten a satisfactory answers to this question. From the Protestants I know I can think of two answers (both still unsatisfactory).

1. The individual has the final authority and will seek a church that affirms his interpretations, if this church changes its theology the individual will find another church.
2. No one as final authority - its not essential to have a final authority. Two reasonable Protestants will use the agree to disagree cliche and move on, unless its essential doctrine, then who knows.

• Frankly I would respect leaders within Protestantism if they said the words “I don’t know” more often, admit its one Protestantism inherent weakness but even with this flaw that they prefer it to the concept of Papal Authority, I can respect the honesty in that answer.

 

[lyrikal]

It seems to me that Catholics seem to think that the Church must have a visible head on earth, the successor of Peter, and that unity means being institutionally connected and adhering to a perfect doctrinal conformity.

That is correct. But we don’t come up with this on our own, we believe it is how God runs things.

See Exodus 18 where Moses sits in a chair and judges. He is clearly the leader of all. He appoints other men to lead the people so that he won’t have to do it alone; however, these men are to judge the small matters. The big matters are to be brought to Moses. He is clearly in authority over ALL while the others have authority over a certain amount of people.

Also see Exodus 28 where there are consecrated priests and these priests are to have successors.

Also, what do you do with this passage?

[1]

Then said Jesus to the crowds and to his disciples,

[2] "The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat;
[3] so practice and observe whatever they tell you, but not what they do; for they preach, but do not practice.
[4] They bind heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on men’s shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with their finger.
[5] They do all their deeds to be seen by men; for they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long,
[6] and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues,
[7] and salutations in the market places, and being called rabbi by men.

This is how God ran things and there is nothing in the New Testament that suggests that there is now no need for authoritative men on earth. If there is, please provide the passages.

I have plenty of Patristic writings giving witness to the practice of the Early Church. If you’re interested, I’ll be more than happy to provide them for you. Do you have any that you can show me, please?

Protestants don’t think in that way. We believe that all Christians are united spiritually. We may not agree on everything, but if our faith is based on Christ and his atoning sacrifice, then we are the Church.

Please show me where this teaching can be found in Scripture. Scripture teaches that unity in the teachings is important. Your belief is merely modern. The early Church would cringe at such a belief. Here is something from St. Iranaeus who is writing in the late 2nd Century:

1. As I have already observed, the Church, having received this preaching and this faith, although scattered throughout the whole world, yet, as if occupying but one house, carefully preserves it. She also believes these points [of doctrine] just as if she had but one soul, and one and the same heart, and she proclaims them, and teaches them, and hands them down, with perfect harmony, as if she possessed only one mouth. For, although the languages of the world are dissimilar, yet the import of the tradition is one and the same. For the Churches which have been planted in Germany do not believe or hand down anything different, nor do those in Spain, nor those in Gaul, nor those in the East, nor those in Egypt, nor those in Libya, nor those which have been established in the central regions of the world. But as the sun, that creature of God, is one and the same throughout the whole world, so also the preaching of the truth shines everywhere, and enlightens all men that are willing to come to a knowledge of the truth. Nor will any one of the rulers in the Churches, however highly gifted he may be in point of eloquence, teach doctrines different from these (for no one is greater than the Master); nor, on the other hand, will he who is deficient in power of expression inflict injury on the tradition. For the faith being ever one and the same, neither does one who is able at great length to discourse regarding it, make any addition to it, nor does one, who can say but little diminish it.
   -Against Heresies 1, 10, 2

There is one head of the Church who is Christ.

We agree that Christ is the Head. But Christ is also the one who intercedes to the Father on our behalf. Does that mean that we are not to pray for eachother? Christ is also the High Priest, but that doesn’t mean there is no more need of priests. If you don’t believe that, then you’re 1500 years removed from the practice of the Early Church.

He has sent the Holy Spirit to guide the Church. However, there will never be complete unity until Christ returns, because sin and flesh get in the way of perfect obedience to Christ.

Please provide Scripture to back up this claim. I am not talking about unity between laymen. You’re right, there will always be disunity between laymen. I am talking about unity between the laymen who are devoted to the teachings of the Church. The Church teaches one truth, not 20,000. Protestants are allowed to disagree with each other on numerous matters. That is relativism and it promotes disunity. Catholics are not allowed to go outside what the Church teaches. That promotes unity. Now, there are Catholics who don’t like this but that doesn’t mean there is disunity in the Catholic Church. That just means that those are not true Catholics. With Protestants, even though there are disagreements, they are all still regarded as Christians.

There is nothing in the Scriptures that tells us that we can disagree on doctrinal matters but as long as we are united in our hearts, then it is ok.

 

[lyrikal]

Bishops and councils can and may err.

It was a council that gave you the canon of Scripture. Can that council err? If so, then does that mean you may be reading a Bible that contains somethings that are not the Word of God? If it didn’t err, then that means you are picking and choosing which council is right and which isn’t based on how you want it to be. Which means YOU are now the final authority and YOU are the judge of what council is in error and which isn’t. You like the Council of Nicea (Trinity/Divinity of Christ), but you may not like a council that proclaims doctrines that you don’t believe in. Which now makes you the pope of your beliefs instead of the Holy Spirit. Actually, you are now claiming to have more authority than the Catholic Pope can claim for himself. For not even the Catholic Pope can change what the Ecumenical Councils have taught.

We all do. Protestants place emphasis on self study, which isn’t perfect.

If it isn’t perfect then you are not guided into All Truth just as Jesus promised in John 16:13.

There is a need to look to others, especially those who have dedicated their lives to studying and teaching the Word.

And we call these men Bishops/theologians/popes.

So the final authority is Jesus.

Actually, the final authority would be what you interpret Jesus to be saying. So really, YOU are the final authority.

We know his will because He has left us His Word.

I assume by “His Word” you mean the Bible? If so, where does the Bible teach what the canon of Scripture is? Do you realize that “His Word” is passed down orally as well as written? See 2 Thess 2:15.

Through the illumination of the Holy Spirit, we believe the Word of God can be understood and lived out.

If that were the case, I would expect one Protestant church with the same beliefs. The Word of God is not the issue here. The interpretation of the Word of God is the issue. Your interpretation can be different than your neighbor’s. Who settles the matter?

The Bible contains all things necessary for salvation. It is the standard of Christian life and practice.

If it contains all things necessary for salvation, then I would expect to find a canon of Scripture in there somewhere. Don’t you think a canon is something essential in knowing what the written Word of God says? Since you say the Bible has all things necessary for salvation, please provide a chapter and verse of the canon of Scripture in the Bible. If you can’t (which you can’t) then your statement “Bible contains all things necessary for salvation” fails.

God bless.

 

[lyrikal]

I’ve never gotten a satisfactory answers to this question. From the Protestants I know I can think of two answers (both still unsatisfactory).

1. The individual has the final authority and will seek a church that affirms his interpretations, if this church changes its theology the individual will find another church.
2. No one as final authority - its not essential to have a final authority. Two reasonable Protestants will use the agree to disagree cliche and move on, unless its essential doctrine, then who knows.

• Frankly I would respect leaders within Protestantism if they said the words “I don’t know” more often, admit its one Protestantism inherent weakness but even with this flaw that they prefer it to the concept of Papal Authority, I can respect the honesty in that answer.

Exactly. What amazes me isn’t the two “answers” that are given or the lack of answer that is given; rather, what amazes me is how anyone can remain in such a belief system. What is the difference between Secular Relativism and Protestantism. They BOTH promote relativism.