Was the Reformation an Experiment gone wrong?

[Pfaffenhofen]

That's right. And you call the other 1 billion Christians wrong. zzzzzz

Wrong that I call them wrong.

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

You asked the question before and I answered it. Protestants agree on core doctrine which is clear in the bible. Matters on peripheral doctrine are subject to interpretation and debate. We have spiritual unity on core doctrine and divisions on peripheral matters. These divisions are not based in any sense on tradition but differing interpretations on what the bible means. The divisions should not be significant, but they merely represent different practices for living the Christian life.

This always happens to me -- I explain something to Catholics on the Protestant position, and then, they go on as if it never was explained. Does this not in itself indicate that their belief system is based on delusion?

Core Doctrine= Tradition.
What is the Core Doctrine of the Protestant?

 

[MPaul]

Pfaffenhon,

It appears you are using different definitions for "tradition." When the Protestants rejected Holy Tradition, it was the rejection of authority not based on the bible, but on the authority of the RCC itself. Protestant positions are based on bible interpretations. These positions are not based on the authority of tradition (although in another sense of the meaning of tradition, which means essentially custom, they can be called such, referring to how different Protestant groups have applied their bible interpretations to practice). These positions are based on the authority of the bible. The bible represents the writings of inspired prophets -- they are the same thing

 

[Pfaffenhofen]

Hey, being as you have 1 billion people to fellowship with, why don't you people just focus on worshiping and serving God? Why does your focus have to be on what is wrong with Protestants? Hmmm.... is it that Protestantism has made too much sense to the world?

But remember my prior post, armies and finances from Protestant countries saved the Vatican in World War II. So think twice about getting rid of us.

Of course, I care for the Protestant and when I see so many denominations and the cause of Christ makes me sad.
I wish we would be united under one Shepherd and Ecumenism is dear to us. Simply we cannot give up on principles.
When the Anglicans started ordaining women there was a clamor inside the RCC, clamor of sadness for we saw our closest brothers slipping away from us. There was dissent even in the Anglicans.
Of course, you, Protestant mean much to us. You believe in Jesus Christ like us. You are different from Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and so on. You are our brothers in Jesus Christ.
Brothers fight for they love each other.
We want us to be united, but I see a great obstacle of unity: the free interpretation of the Bible. You cannot defend that and have unity at the same time.

 

[MPaul]

Core Doctrine= Tradition.
What is the Core Doctrine of the Protestant?

All Protestant churches set out in writing core doctrine, which a person has to agree to as his/her personal beliefs in order to become a member. They are essentially the same, but there can be minor differences. The doctrine refers to the authority of the bible, the existence of the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the meaning of salvation in the blood of Christ. Hmm.... the churches all state things a little differently, but it says the same thing. A lot of churches will add other doctrine on peripheral matters as being important to their particular church, but one always finds the core, or the church is not Protestant. The core is unambiguous in the bible.

 

[earagun]

the question is why don't you? do you not own a bible? none of these things are hidden or abscure, there laid out in simple to read text, you can either follow what it says or do what you have been doing since error crept in (we were also told this would happen too)

yeah I think both groups forgot those passages, the earliest letters told the saints the church would go astray, and here are to factions pointing fingers at each other and there both as guilty and off track as the other, Its probably a pride thing!

 

[MPaul]

Of course, I care for the Protestant and when I see so many denominations and the cause of Christ makes me sad.
I wish we would be united under one Shepherd and Ecumenism is dear to us. Simply we cannot give up on principles.
When the Anglicans started ordaining women there was a clamor inside the RCC, clamor of sadness for we saw our closest brothers slipping away from us. There was dissent even in the Anglicans.
Of course, you, Protestant mean much to us. You believe in Jesus Christ like us. You are different from Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and so on. You are our brothers in Jesus Christ.
Brothers fight for they love each other.
We want us to be united, but I see a great obstacle of unity: the free interpretation of the Bible. You cannot defend that and have unity at the same time.

There is nothing to be sad about. You have your mind too much on institutional unity. That is the focus of the Catholic church government. However, the bible refers to Christian unity as spiritual. Here is a link to one of my websites on the biblical view of Christian unity.
What Is the Non-Institutional Church?

Many people fought and died to have freedom of conscience. Be sad for that. But rejoice in the fact that unity exists as a spiritual matter, and that on peripheral issues we can debate as brothers. Never lose focus on the fact that our unity in Christ is spiritual. That is a wonderful thing. However, upholding that Christian unity must be institutional -- that is a very sad thing, and it has caused much abuse and violence.

 

[WinBySurrender]

Core Doctrine= Tradition.
What is the Core Doctrine of the Protestant?

Ridiculous. The core doctrine of most non-Catholic churches is salvation by grace alone, through faith. That also is the "core doctrine" of the Catholic church, but neither is by tradition. It is the fact according to God's word. There is no other "core" to be found in God's word.

 

[MPaul]

Ridiculous. The core doctrine of most non-Catholic churches is salvation by grace alone, through faith. That also is the "core doctrine" of the Catholic church, but neither is by tradition. It is the fact according to God's word. There is no other "core" to be found in God's word.

Ridiculous? That's interesting. Why don't you set out your church's statement of faith right here and right now. Let's see how it avoids mention of the bible as inspired and inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the meaning of the blood of Christ (all of which are necessary to have a doctrine of salvation by grace alone). Most churches now-a-days have a link to their statement of faith -- where is your church's link. Let's have a look. But if it neglects these positions, then the question will be if it is Protestant.

 

[Rick Otto]

Reformation set right what had been an experiment gone wrong.

 

[Rick Otto]

Ridiculous? That's interesting. Why don't you set out your church's statement of faith right here and right now. Let's see how it avoids mention of the bible as inspired and inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the meaning of the blood of Christ (all of which are necessary to have a doctrine of salvation by grace alone). Most churches now-a-days have a link to their statement of faith -- where is your church's link. Let's have a look. But if it neglects these positions, then the question will be if it is Protestant.

Try Magesterium.com & see if anything happens.
If that doesn't work, a catechism is documented evidence of what is being taught.

 

[MPaul]

Ridiculous. The core doctrine of most non-Catholic churches is salvation by grace alone, through faith. That also is the "core doctrine" of the Catholic church, but neither is by tradition. It is the fact according to God's word. There is no other "core" to be found in God's word.

I notice you post under the Baptist icon. I just checked google, and there are many Baptist churches' statements of faith. Here is a link to the Southwest Conservative Baptist Association as an example. Gee-- it is a statement of faith just as I described.

http://swchurchconnection.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Church-SWCC-Statement-of-Faith.pdf

 

[MPaul]

Reformation set right what had been an experiment gone wrong.

Amen!!!

 

[Albion]

Ridiculous? That's interesting. Why don't you set out your church's statement of faith right here and right now.

But to be fair, wasn't he just saying that Pfaffenhofen's pet argument that all Protestant churches are guided by Tradition and not by Scripture is ridiculous? Yes. And it is ridiculous.

 

[WinBySurrender]

Ridiculous? That's interesting. Why don't you set out your church's statement of faith right here and right now. Let's see how it avoids mention of the bible as inspired and inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the meaning of the blood of Christ (all of which are necessary to have a doctrine of salvation by grace alone). Most churches now-a-days have a link to their statement of faith -- where is your church's link. Let's have a look. But if it neglects these positions, then the question will be if it is Protestant.

You lose ...

What We Believe

What else ya got?

 

[MPaul]

You lose ...

What We Believe

What else ya got?

Your church's statement of faith is exactly what I said a statement of faith on core doctrine is about. It has positions on the bible being inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, salvation through Christ. Therefore, I win.... What else ya got?

 

[MPaul]

But to be fair, wasn't he just saying that Pfaffenhofen's pet argument that all Protestant churches are guided by Tradition and not by Scripture is ridiculous? Yes. And it is ridiculous.

Ok, I misread the post. I looked at it again. Sorry. But it was confusing to the train of thought.

 

[WinBySurrender]

Let's see how it avoids mention of the bible as inspired and inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, the meaning of the blood of Christ (all of which are necessary to have a doctrine of salvation by grace alone).

Your church's statement of faith is exactly what I said a statement of faith on core doctrine is about. It has positions on the bible being inerrant, the trinity, the divinity of Christ, salvation through Christ. Therefore, I win.... What else ya got?

Please note, your first post says the exact opposite of your second. Make up your mind. I still win.

 

[MPaul]

Please note, your first post says the exact opposite of your second. Make up your mind. I still win.

My statements are entirely consistent. Maybe, you cannot figure that out, because you were not actually following the train of thought in the thread. I think the problem is, you responded to a post on core doctrine, which was a reference to my posts on core doctrine. But you did so in a manner that did not make clear how your post related to what was being discussed on core doctrine. It was confusing. In essence, we were talking about two different things -- but they were being called the same thing. It really was not helpful at all making the response in that way. However, I already admitted I misread what you meant. Hmm... at least it got some examples out on what I actually was referring to. At any rate, enjoy your victory.

 

[WinBySurrender]

My statements are entirely consistent. Maybe, you cannot figure that out, because you were not actually following the train of thought in the thread. I think the problem is, you responded to a post on core doctrine, which was a reference to my posts on core doctrine. But you did so in a manner that did not make clear how your post related to what was being discussed on core doctrine. It was confusing. In essence, we were talking about two different things -- but they were being called the same thing. It really was not helpful at all making the response in that way. However, I already admitted I misread what you meant. Hmm... at least it got some examples out on what I actually was referring to. At any rate, enjoy your victory.

So we both fouled up. Wipe the slate clean and start again. My apologies for confusing the discussion.