Where's the ecumenical council in protestantism?

[concretecamper]

Wow, Christianity is doing great after all!

so sad you view division that way.

 

[concretecamper]

I hope you realize your statement is on a slippery slope; it's one that is but a toe's breadth away from defying the SOP for this thread. Maybe keep that in mind.

not a slippery slope at all. I'm nowhere close to breaking any rule

 

[2PhiloVoid]

not a slippery slope at all. I'm nowhere close to breaking any rule

Good to know, then! I guess as long as you're not disparaging the spiritual quality and authority of other non-Catholic Christians, everything's copacetic.

 

[Jesusthekingofking]

Hi the method you choose to study the scriptures will determine much of your doctrine. for instance literal vs allegorical will have you miles apart at the start. How about history is it a reliable history or just stories inspired to learn by here again we will be mile apart based on this. How about future vs historical with Revelation? So there are many many forks in the road at which you can go left or right or maybe more than one fork on some issues. The scriptures are going be true and we are warned of private interpretations and told to study for ourselves to rightly divide the word of truth. If you take a corporate interpretation you will blindly accept their errors. To think that you have no errors is vain and the letters to the 7 churches prove it. 5 out of 7 are rebuked and this is a 1st century letter that notes false doctrine, practices and moral failure and blindness were already present at that time. Good luck trying to bring everyone under the counsels.

So you're saying all of us have high chance not getting it right? You pointed out the problem do you have the solution?

 

[concretecamper]

Good to know, then! I guess as long as you're not disparaging the spiritual quality and authority of other non-Catholic Christians, everything's copacetic.

just stop

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

So you're saying all of us have high chance not getting it right? You pointed out the problem do you have the solution?

Hi I think that the scriptures support a historical and literal view and indeed the prophecies of the end times are future. That view gives the word the authority for what is says and we are to believe it and make the right applications. I have found that many who hold this view have very similar beliefs coming from many different places and many are self taught and derive the teachings on basic reading comprehension and comparing scripture with scripture when it seems to be talking about the same ideas.

The LORD put in the scriptures an emphasis on some points more than others and in studying the whole bible we will get the ratio of teaching God intends. In the end we are all accountable for our lives and will stand before the LORD and in that regard we will be rewarded or judged on a righteous standard that the LORD holds. God knows 1st of all who has saving faith as He is the one who discerns our thoughts and the intents of our hearts.

I think when we address our differences we need to do so with humility and grace. There are going to be many areas where good scholars are on opposite ends such as is there going to be a rapture or has the church replaced Israel. This can be contentious but in this arena those are not essential doctrines. However there are hundred of related issues stemming off of these two points. Paul warned that wolves would come in after he left and not spare the flock. We are told to test the spirits and also told that in the end times even doctrines of demons would be brought in. So I cannot produce a church where we will all agree but I can encourage everyone to check his heart and wait for the LORD who will bring in such unity when He comes in power and glory. Until then keep studying and sharing your views and be able to learn and grow in your faith and love for the LORD.

 

[concretecamper]

authority of other non-Catholic Christians

the bible is the Authority for protestants (which is non scriptural). I beleive that this man made nonsense is the causes division. Some on this thread think it is great...do you?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

the bible is the Authority for protestants (which is non scriptural). I beleive that this man made nonsense is the causes division. Some on this thread think it is great...do you?

Not exactly. With Christian Smith [formerly Protestant, now Catholic], I agree that some Protestants go a bit overboard in their affirmation of Sola Scriptura. However, conversely, I think a number of my fellow Christians who are Catholics and also Orthodox sometimes exaggerate the weight of Church Tradition.

Personally, I'm an advocate of the concept of Prima Scriptura rather than of Sola Scriptura. But whatever the case may be, I don't see the need to nix my fellowship and Trinitarian based solidarity with brethren who think "I'm wrong."

 

[Eloy Craft]

The protestant will affirm the early few ecumenical council. but later, since they split so much among themselves, they have bishop/leader in their own denomination... then the followers of these leader fight with each other with different theological stands.

so it's like you can choose you can side which side with your own conscience but for the leaders, it's like 'I say this is truth and I believed it as this is what the bible says, here's my argument...' and each of them claim they're right...

since the truth isn't subjective but objective, there can't be 2 contradicting doctrines are both right.

wouldn't all the participants be required to agree to an authority or authoritative body over the council? Wouldn't the participants have to include as many denominations as possible? And may fall short?

 

[Jesusthekingofking]

wouldn't all the participants be required to agree to an authority or authoritative body over the council? Wouldn't the participants have to include as many denominations as possible? And may fall short?

nowadays (or even back then) each denomination don't care for other group, that's why you'll see groups like the calvinist debate in heat with other groups defending their doctrine

 

[Jesusthekingofking]

Not exactly. With Christian Smith [formerly Protestant, now Catholic], I agree that some Protestants go a bit overboard in their affirmation of Sola Scriptura. However, conversely, I think a number of my fellow Christians who are Catholics and also Orthodox sometimes exaggerate the weight of Church Tradition.

Personally, I'm an advocate of the concept of Prima Scriptura rather than of Sola Scriptura. But whatever the case may be, I don't see the need to nix my fellowship and Trinitarian based solidarity with brethren who think "I'm wrong."

Sola Scriptura has been misused, the first protestant group - lutheran use 'Sola Scriptura' but did refer back to the church fathers, they are magisterial reformers, hold strong in tradition.. but other new group aka non denominal turn worship into concert alike, i bet most of those group don't know who are the church fathers or even martyrs.

 

[Jesusthekingofking]

Hi I think that the scriptures support a historical and literal view and indeed the prophecies of the end times are future. That view gives the word the authority for what is says and we are to believe it and make the right applications. I have found that many who hold this view have very similar beliefs coming from many different places and many are self taught and derive the teachings on basic reading comprehension and comparing scripture with scripture when it seems to be talking about the same ideas.

The LORD put in the scriptures an emphasis on some points more than others and in studying the whole bible we will get the ratio of teaching God intends. In the end we are all accountable for our lives and will stand before the LORD and in that regard we will be rewarded or judged on a righteous standard that the LORD holds. God knows 1st of all who has saving faith as He is the one who discerns our thoughts and the intents of our hearts.

I think when we address our differences we need to do so with humility and grace. There are going to be many areas where good scholars are on opposite ends such as is there going to be a rapture or has the church replaced Israel. This can be contentious but in this arena those are not essential doctrines. However there are hundred of related issues stemming off of these two points. Paul warned that wolves would come in after he left and not spare the flock. We are told to test the spirits and also told that in the end times even doctrines of demons would be brought in. So I cannot produce a church where we will all agree but I can encourage everyone to check his heart and wait for the LORD who will bring in such unity when He comes in power and glory. Until then keep studying and sharing your views and be able to learn and grow in your faith and love for the LORD.

I see end time is not an issue if we differ. I'm more concerned with the calvinist group where they say God chose some to be saved and some before the foundation of the world. They have weird way of reading eph 1:4, contrast to most of the chrisitan groups. I challenge their doctrine of Christ intent to save some but didn't die to the world to match patristic teaching, but I felt they are groundless for that doctrine and like to argue how they read the scripture. this is the problem when you distant yourself from other groups, you end up doing your 'own' way..

 

[concretecamper]

Not exactly. With Christian Smith [formerly Protestant, now Catholic], I agree that some Protestants go a bit overboard in their affirmation of Sola Scriptura. However, conversely, I think a number of my fellow Christians who are Catholics and also Orthodox sometimes exaggerate the weight of Church Tradition.

considering Christ commands us to listen to the Church and never tells us to listen to the Bible, I'd say Catholics and Orthodox got it right and protestants got it gravely wrong.

Personally, I'm an advocate of the concept of Prima Scriptura rather than of Sola Scriptura.

both are man made doctrines not supported by Scripture of Tradition

 

[2PhiloVoid]

considering Christ commands us to listen to the Church and never tells us to listen to the Bible, I'd say Catholics and Orthodox got it right and protestants got it gravely wrong.

And might I ask where Christ commands that we listen to the Church and only to the Church?

both are man made doctrines not supported by Scripture of Tradition

And when is a doctrine not "man-made" in your estimation?

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

I see end time is not an issue if we differ. I'm more concerned with the calvinist group where they say God chose some to be saved and some before the foundation of the world. They have weird way of reading eph 1:4, contrast to most of the chrisitan groups. I challenge their doctrine of Christ intent to save some but didn't die to the world to match patristic teaching, but I felt they are groundless for that doctrine and like to argue how they read the scripture. this is the problem when you distant yourself from other groups, you end up doing your 'own' way..

This issue is contentious but it does not have to be. I went to one church on a visit and they did a series 8 weeks on this as they had strongly taken a side. A pastor name Chuck Smith weighed in on this and covered in 8 minutes. He showed for sure we are elect if we are saved. God elects based on foreknowledge and does not violate our free will. So we choose God and that is how we know we are elect. Since we do not know who is elect or not we need to share the gospel with them and give them there chance to make the choice that God already knew they would make or not. God is not willing that any should perish.. This is clear that those who chose poorly will see they had opportunity.

 

[concretecamper]

And might I ask where Christ commands that we listen to the Church

on Matthew's gospel and Paul's letter to Timothy.

and only to the Church?

if you could point to where scripture tells us to listen to the bible, now would be the time to post it.

And when is a doctrine not "man-made" in your estimation?

when it comes directly from Jesus would be a good example

 

[2PhiloVoid]

on Matthew's gospel and Paul's letter to Timothy.

So, let me get this straight. You said previously that:

"Christ commands us to listen to the Church and never tells us to listen to the Bible."​

But, aren't Matthew's Gospel and Paul's letters ..... a part of the Bible?

if you could point to where scripture tells us to listen to the bible, now would be the time to post it.
when it comes directly from Jesus would be a good example

No, you've already done that for me.

 

[concretecamper]

"Christ commands us to listen to the Church and never tells us to listen to the Bible."

yep

But, aren't Matthew's Gospel and Paul's letters ..... a part of the Bible?

they are since the late 4th century.

No, you've already done that for me.

so you have nothing. I knew it. I typically know the answer before I ask the question.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

yep
they are since the late 4th century.

Since the 4th century ??????

so you have nothing. I knew it. I typically know the answer before I ask the question.

It's probably best for you to not jump to conclusions, brother Concrete.

 

[Fidelibus]

Yes you are right. Albion is wrong. He loves to perpetuate this falsehood.

lol! you got that right Zippy!

He thinks that because there is a group like the "Old Catholics" therefore Catholics include multiple denominations.

“And so, lastly, does the very name of 'Catholic', which, not without reason, amid so many heresies, the Church has thus retained; so that, though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house.”-------St. Augustine


Have a Blessed day!