Are Protestants dead?

[BNR32FAN]

2 Corinthians 3
6 who also made us adequate as servants of a new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life.

Many wacky and convenient concepts and theologies have been developed solely based on Paul with misinterpretations. No wonder Martin Luther wanted James, Hebrews and Revelation to be removed from the canon.

What books do you think God wants removed?

 

[thecolorsblend]

Protestant do partake. Just not in the ceremonies way the Catholics do. We also do not believe that it actually transforms into the Body and blood of Christ.

Which means you do not partake of the Eucharist. Having the "Lord's Supper" as some sort of commemorative thing is fine, I guess. The OP badly summarized the Catholic viewpoint on this but the point I (and others) raised was that Protestants don't have and can't have the Eucharist.

 

[W2L]

Wthe point I (and others) raised was that Protestants don't have and can't have the Eucharist.

Dont need it either.

 

[BukiRob]

James is more reliable than Paul since he associated with Jerusalem church right from the beginning and headed that. Paul was a rank outsider who took short cuts against the directive of Jesus.
Salvation is from the Jews.

I believe in many cases when the word 'work/s' is mentioned in the NT,it refers to the OT rituals, and it doesn't forbid good works and charity.

I COMPLETELY disagree with you. Paul was a scholar and wrote like one. In all of his writings, there is the assumption of a base understanding of the Torah he assumes you KNOWS these things.

If you go to a university and attempt to take a 500 or 600 level mathematics course and you have not taken the prerequisites you will likely be completely lost. Similarly, with Paul, if you have a warped or misinformed role of what the Torah is to the believers walk you will distort and twist what Paul is saying... JUST LIKE PETER SAID WOULD HAPPEN

 

[Righttruth]

What books do you think God wants removed?

God is not bothered about the exclusive written material. All may be referred to for understanding Jesus and His words with the help of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Righttruth]

I COMPLETELY disagree with you. Paul was a scholar and wrote like one. In all of his writings, there is the assumption of a base understanding of the Torah he assumes you KNOWS these things.

If you go to a university and attempt to take a 500 or 600 level mathematics course and you have not taken the prerequisites you will likely be completely lost. Similarly, with Paul, if you have a warped or misinformed role of what the Torah is to the believers walk you will distort and twist what Paul is saying... JUST LIKE PETER SAID WOULD HAPPEN

Jesus deliberately chose fishermen of no repute in scholarship so that they can share His life, way and truth by witnessing without any scholarly speculations. Jesus preaching was easy to understand but difficult to practice.
The very fact that Paul chose on his own to confine to Gentiles shows that he wanted to avoid Jews who were knowledgeable in Torah. So he started please-all-propaganda with his sugar coated goodies to push his agenda with ignorant Gentiles deviating from the sublime essence of the teaching of the Master.

 

[BukiRob]

Jesus deliberately chose fishermen of no repute in scholarship so that they can share His life, way and truth by witnessing without any scholarly speculations. Jesus preaching was easy to understand but difficult to practice.
The very fact that Paul chose on his own to confine to Gentiles shows that he wanted to avoid Jews who were knowledgeable in Torah. So he started please-all-propaganda with his sugar coated goodies to push his agenda with ignorant Gentiles deviating from the sublime essence of the teaching of the Master.

Utter rubbish. You make a deeply flawed argument. Men were ALL highly literate in Israel at the time.

Your warping of Paul shows you have a fundamentally flawed view of Paul and James testifies DIRECTLY against you AS DOES PETER

 

[BNR32FAN]

Jesus deliberately chose fishermen of no repute in scholarship so that they can share His life, way and truth by witnessing without any scholarly speculations. Jesus preaching was easy to understand but difficult to practice.
The very fact that Paul chose on his own to confine to Gentiles shows that he wanted to avoid Jews who were knowledgeable in Torah. So he started please-all-propaganda with his sugar coated goodies to push his agenda with ignorant Gentiles deviating from the sublime essence of the teaching of the Master.

If your beliefs don’t coincide with ALL of the scriptures they are wrong. If you have to pick and choose scripture and disregard others to fit your beliefs then your beliefs are wrong.

 

[Righttruth]

Utter rubbish. You make a deeply flawed argument. Men were ALL highly literate in Israel at the time.

Your warping of Paul shows you have a fundamentally flawed view of Paul and James testifies DIRECTLY against you AS DOES PETER

Literacy is based on comparison. You can't say Peter was in the same footing as that of Paul in scholarship and knowledge of the scripture. James and Peter clearly testify against the Paul's claims.

 

[Righttruth]

If your beliefs don’t coincide with ALL of the scriptures they are wrong. If you have to pick and choose scripture and disregard others to fit your beliefs then your beliefs are wrong.

I can't beat Christendom in this regard with their pick and choose techniques,including piece-wise verses too for undue advantage!

 

[mark kennedy]

Utter rubbish. You make a deeply flawed argument. Men were ALL highly literate in Israel at the time.

Your warping of Paul shows you have a fundamentally flawed view of Paul and James testifies DIRECTLY against you AS DOES PETER

And so it was with me, brothers and sisters. When I came to you, I did not come with eloquence or human wisdom as I proclaimed to you the testimony about God. For I decided to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified. (1 Cor. 2:1-2)
​

Yes Paul was well read, Peter not so much and John uses the simplest Greek in the New Testament. Still they all had the same message.

​

 

[mark kennedy]

Your warping of Paul shows you have a fundamentally flawed view of Paul and James testifies DIRECTLY against you AS DOES PETER

Literacy is based on comparison. You can't say Peter was in the same footing as that of Paul in scholarship and knowledge of the scripture. James and Peter clearly testify against the Paul's claims.

James and Peter do no such a thing:

Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. (2 Peter 3:15-16)​

 

[Righttruth]

James and Peter do no such a thing:

Consider also that our Lord’s patience brings salvation, just as our beloved brother Paul also wrote you with the wisdom God gave him. He writes this way in all his letters, speaking in them about such matters. Some parts of his letters are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction. (2 Peter 3:15-16)​

James said faith without works is dead contradicting Paul's faith only. Notice Peter doesn't call Paul as an apostle and simply says Paul wrote according to wisdom--not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Micah888]

Many wacky and convenient concepts and theologies have been developed solely based on Paul with misinterpretations. No wonder Martin Luther wanted James, Hebrews and Revelation to be removed from the canon.

Luther had some strange ideas about some of the books of the NT (as well as other strange ideas). But just because some (or many) come up with false teachings based on the writings of Paul does not have a bearing on which books belong in the NT. Peter -- writing by divine inspiration -- put all of Paul's epistles alongside the Hebrew Scriptures and regarded them as the Word of God. And so do all Bible-believing Christians.

 

[mark kennedy]

James said faith without works is dead contradicting Paul's faith only. Notice Peter doesn't call Paul as an apostle and simply says Paul wrote according to wisdom--not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

That's not a contradiction, just a bogus cross reference. James and Paul are talking about the exact same thing in James 2 and 1 Cor. 11. The rich are mistreating the poor in the love feasts that went with the communion at the time. Paul says some of you are sick and some of you sleep, James even says is this even saving faith. Do you ever read these passages before you start jumping to conclusions? Everyone was on the same page, at the Council of Jerusalem and there was never a problem between James, Peter and Paul. Read those passages in context, they are saying the exact same thing.

Ask yourself a simple question, what are the works James is referring to in James 2, then read 1 Corinthians 11 in it's natural context and compare. It's really that simple.

 

[mark kennedy]

Luther had some strange ideas about some of the books of the NT (as well as other strange ideas). But just because some (or many) come up with false teachings based on the writings of Paul does not have a bearing on which books belong in the NT. Peter -- writing by divine inspiration -- put all of Paul's epistles alongside the Hebrew Scriptures and regarded them as the Word of God. And so do all Bible-believing Christians.

Luther wasn't the only one who objected to Hebrews and Revelations. To this day we don't really know who wrote Hebrews and Revelations has less then 600 manuscripts which makes it the least supported from the manuscript evidence. Luther didn't like the book of James because he felt it contradicted the Pauline doctrine of justification by grace through faith apart from works. It doesn't, the works James is referring to are works of righteousness which all New Testament writers affirm are the result of saving faith, including Paul.

 

[Micah888]

Notice Peter doesn't call Paul as an apostle and simply says Paul wrote according to wisdom--not inspired by the Holy Spirit.

There's no need to misrepresent what Peter said regarding Paul's epistles.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

What were "the other Scriptures"? Everything in the Hebrew Tanakh (the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms). What we call "the Old Testament".

What does the word "other" imply? That the "first" Scriptures he is talking about are "all his epistles". All of Paul's epistles are being compared to, and equated with, the other Scriptures.

So is over half of our New Testament also the Word of God? Absolutely.

The "wisdom" mentioned by Peter should be taken to mean the wisdom given to Paul under the total control of the Holy Spirit so that what he was writing would be inerrant and infallible.

There are many today who claim for their own warped purposes in some cases Paul was merely expressing his personal opinions, therefore Christians can blithely disregard them. That is utter nonsense.

 

[mark kennedy]

There's no need to misrepresent what Peter said regarding Paul's epistles.

15 And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;

16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

What were "the other Scriptures"? Everything in the Hebrew Tanakh (the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms). What we call "the Old Testament".

What does the word "other" imply? That the "first" Scriptures he is talking about are "all his epistles". All of Paul's epistles are being compared to, and equated with, the other Scriptures.

So is over half of our New Testament also the Word of God? Absolutely.

The "wisdom" mentioned by Peter should be taken to mean the wisdom given to Paul under the total control of the Holy Spirit so that what he was writing would be inerrant and infallible.

There are many today who claim for their own warped purposes in some cases Paul was merely expressing his personal opinions, therefore Christians can blithely disregard them. That is utter nonsense.

Paul often quoted the Septuagint which I must admit, used to drive me up the wall. Paul did elaborate expositions but if you can get past the Septuagint being different then modern translations the expositions are actually very straight forward. Peter is saying Paul sometimes works with some fairly difficult doctrinal issues and some would take his delicate and hard to understand teachings and twist them to their own destruction. Peter understood Paul just fine, him and John extended the right hand of fellowship to Paul at Jerusalem during the Council of Jerusalem:

The apostles and elders met to consider this question. After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.” (Acts 15:6-11)
​

Justification by grace through faith wasn't a Pauline doctrine, it's not an invention of the Protestant Reformation. The entire church including all the Apostles affirmed it in no uncertain terms.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Micah888]

Luther wasn't the only one who objected to Hebrews and Revelations. To this day we don't really know who wrote Hebrews and Revelations has less then 600 manuscripts which makes it the least supported from the manuscript evidence....

But just as the Spirit bears witness with our spirits that we are the sons of God, the Spirit bears witness that Hebrews and Revelation are from the Holy Spirit.

And as far as many Christians are concerned, the internal testimony of Hebrews confirms that Paul wrote that epistle, while there is absolutely no question about who wrote Revelation.

The title of Hebrews in the original KJV was "The epistle of Paul the apostle to the Hebrews". The translators would have had sufficient reason to give it that title, although you won't see it in the KJB any more.

 

[Micah888]

Justification by grace through faith wasn't a Pauline doctrine, it's not an invention of the Protestant Reformation. The entire church including all the Apostles affirmed it in no uncertain terms.

Absolutely right. And this is confirmed in Hebrews 11, which further establishes the divine inspiration of Hebrews.