Why do protestants have such varied understanding of what the Bible say's and actually means?

[PJM]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

 

[Xavierlives]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

Man’s meddling.

 

[schaick]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

Catholics tend to lump all Protestants in together when there should really be a distinction. Are you including Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Oneness Penatcostals, Christdephlians ,etc. in with Protestants? These groups aren’t really Christians in the true sense of the word.

They either have multiple GOD’s, Jesus is a mnor god or simply GOD with no Trinity.

AND it might help us find the answer if you tell us what differences you are talking about.

 

[manualman]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

Of course not. Human sinfulness is the root of division. And there is plenty to go around on both sides of the Tiber. Jesus plainly expressed his will that the church be one. It is the height of sophistry to pretend that he only meant it in a non-visible spiritual sense.

People need to see the apostles as the infant church and recognize that the church Jesus founded does NOT necessarily have impeccable behavior and sinless leaders, but they ARE still ONE church. They weren’t separate with incompatible beliefs and they had a structure and practice for resolving disputes (theological and otherwise). We still do, actually…

 

[Worthy5]

PJM;6402439]I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

This poster does not believe your question has been answered. The reason why there are multiple interpretations of the scripture is simply due to the nature of written language. Language itself is indeterminate. Not to mention the problem of what meaning is lost in any passage given scripture is translated from the original text.

 

[Karmartia]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

I guess you could say that the diversity of modern Protestantism has resulted primarily from historical influences.
findingdulcinea.com/guides/Religion-and-Spirituality/Protestantism.pg.html

 

[Spencerian]

I do not wish to began another debate on how many Christian denominations are actually in existence. Many would agree that the number is “too many.”

Is the Bible the root of these diffferences? If not what is?

Hi.

Yes. The Bible is at the heart of many, though not all, of the root differences.

Some may say that the Protestant Reformation was due to availability of the Bible to many to read and interpret themselves. (There were few Bibles, yes, because the printing presses were not quite ready to make many copies–and the Bible was in Latin, with few people not a clergyman to read it.)

As the Protestant thing hit its stride, which created the first English translations of the Bible, errors in interpretation (both accidental and forced by Luther and others) came about.

The Catholic Church, not to be undone, made it’s own English translation: The Douay and Rheims translations. It is still a difficult tome to read with all the “thys” and “thous” and “thees”. Today, you can get differing translations for Catholic bibles, but most hold themselves proper in theology.

The first King James Bible put the deutrocanonicals in the rear of the Bible as an appendix. To save printing costs, some publishers eventually omitted them altogether. Today, some Protestants think that Catholics have a radically different Bible (as the Mormons and JW’s have) while, in fact, it’s the full canon.

And we can have a whole topic about hermeneutics–the study of the methods of interpretions of Scripture.

 

[Libertarian_FL]

Man’s meddling.

Exactly theologians that removed over two dozen gospels from the early Christian movement was meddling and assembled the Bible.

Popes, pastor generals, cardinals, bishops, priests, ministers, pastors etc. meddle all the time.

Councils of men (Moderator removed) in most cases, depending of the denomination meddle.

So yes was the meddling of men and women into the faith at the outset that was the problem not the Bible or other books and gospels of the period.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Catholics tend to lump all Protestants in together when there should really be a distinction. Are you including Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Oneness Penatcostals, Christdephlians ,etc. in with Protestants? These groups aren’t really Christians in the true sense of the word.

They either have multiple GOD’s, Jesus is a mnor god or simply GOD with no Trinity.

AND it might help us find the answer if you tell us what differences you are talking about.

There are many differences, baptism, infant baptism, real presence or symbolic, holy orders or self appointments, tongues or no tongues, once saved always saved or possible to ‘backslide’, abortion or not, homosexualtiy or not, pre-marital sex or not, prosperity gospel or not, singing/music in the Church or not, drinking allowed or not, the list can go on and on.

Even if we ignore the above distinctions, as I’ve listed them, look at those you ‘separate’. Aren’t they of different faiths due to interpretational differences?

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Exactly theologians that removed over two dozen gospels from the early Christian movement was meddling and assembled the Bible.

Popes, pastor generals, cardinals, bishops, priests, ministers, pastors etc. meddle all the time.

Councils of men (literally humans with penises) in most cases, depending of the denomination meddle.

So yes was the meddling of men and women into the faith at the outset that was the problem not the Bible or other books and gospels of the period.

Really Libertarian, we know what men are without your graphic description. :tsktsk:

 

[PJM]

=schaick;6402511]Catholics tend to lump all Protestants in together when there should really be a distinction. Are you including Jehovah Witnesses, Mormons, Oneness Penatcostals, Christdephlians ,etc. in with Protestants? These groups aren’t really Christians in the true sense of the word.

They either have multiple GOD’s, Jesus is a mnor god or simply GOD with no Trinity.

AND it might help us find the answer if you tell us what differences you are talking about.

Actually I was speaking of only Christian secs, not those with there own version of the Bible and there idea of god.

Thanks for asking.

 

[PJM]

=Karmartia;6402932]I guess you could say that the diversity of modern Protestantism has resulted primarily from historical influences.
findingdulcinea.com/guides/Religion-and-Spirituality/Protestantism.pg.html

Could you further explain this view? I’m not at all sure what your saying? Sorry

 

[PJM]

=Libertarian_FL;6403067]Exactly theologians that removed over two dozen gospels from the early Christian movement was meddling and assembled the Bible.

Popes, pastor generals, cardinals, bishops, priests, ministers, pastors etc. meddle all the time.

Councils of men () in most cases, depending of the denomination meddle.

So yes was the meddling of men and women into the faith at the outset that was the problem not the Bible or other books and gospels of the period.

So where does this iformation come from?

And what does it have to do with the OPQ?

 

[BrianH]

Because it is hard to interpret and people have different views about scripture itself (think conservative versus liberal views).
That is the main reason in my estimation.

 

[TriuneUnity]

Because it is hard to interpret and people have different views about scripture itself (think conservative versus liberal views).
That is the main reason in my estimation.

It’s all John Wesley’s fault

 

[schaick]

Exactly theologians that removed over two dozen gospels from the early Christian movement was meddling and assembled the Bible.

Popes, pastor generals, cardinals, bishops, priests, ministers, pastors etc. meddle all the time.

Councils of men () in most cases, depending of the denomination meddle.

So yes was the meddling of men and women into the faith at the outset that was the problem not the Bible or other books and gospels of the period.

So you don’t think GOD was capable of making sure HIS Word, the only true infallible, inerrant guide to our salvation be revealed to us exactly as HE wanted it?

 

[schaick]

There are many differences, baptism, infant baptism, real presence or symbolic, holy orders or self appointments, tongues or no tongues, once saved always saved or possible to ‘backslide’, abortion or not, homosexualtiy or not, pre-marital sex or not, prosperity gospel or not, singing/music in the Church or not, drinking allowed or not, the list can go on and on.

Even if we ignore the above distinctions, as I’ve listed them, look at those you ‘separate’. Aren’t they of different faiths due to interpretational differences?

If we are talking trinitarian Christians these are simply different applications of our one faith.

We know there are various agreements and disagreements in just the Catholic Church about all the Catholic Church doctrines.

Where Trinitarian Christians see unity in the one faith of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ and diversity in celebrating that faith, Catholics simply see division and confusion.

 

[PJM]

=BrianH;6403479]Because it is hard to interpret and people have different views about scripture itself (think conservative versus liberal views).
That is the main reason in my estimation.

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the perceptive insight.

Your answer seems to beg a follow-up question.

Ought there to be more than one way of understanding the bible? Certainly, how it applies to ones current circumstances seems reasonable; but ought there to be also ONE common, acceptable by everyone understanding?

Is that not what the authors had in mind?

Love and prayers,

Pat

 

[schaick]

I guess you could say that the diversity of modern Protestantism has resulted primarily from historical influences.
findingdulcinea.com/guides/Religion-and-Spirituality/Protestantism.pg.html

From the link provided:

Although the various denominations differ on many religious tenets, they do share similar Protestant foundations. The emphasis on faith over good works, the preeminence of the Scriptures and the use of only two sacraments are some of these shared features. Use the links below to learn more about Protestant beliefs and practices.

They lumped in Mormons-non-trinitarian christians into the equation!!!

Then say:

It’s debatable whether Mormonism is a Protestant denomination.

 

[Poco]

Language itself is indeterminate. Not to mention the problem of what meaning is lost in any passage given scripture is translated from the original text.

Language certainly does have its limitations! Just think how many times someone may have to rephrase a statement to get their idea fully understood.

schaick:

…diversity in celebrating that faith

I’m not sure there is supposed to be a “diversity in celebrating that faith”. It seems to me that is why a hierarchy was established and the Apostles kept check to make sure the proper teachings and traditions were being followed.