A few questions for Protestants

[Fidelibus]

I definitely addressed your post that I quoted in my post #908 above.

Sorry, but you definitely did not. All you did was to give your personal and fallible interpretation/opinion of this passage. Which you, as an adherent to the belief of sola scriptura would (or should) agree, that your fallible interpretation/opinion of this passage is subject to error, (in other words) you could be wrong! Correct?

Your subject was against the Sola Scriptura idea (Scripture only). And God already answered you with that Isaiah 2:22 verse I quoted to you, and asked you about.
But since you don't care to explain how our Heavenly Father meant that Isaiah 2:22 verse, then you can go on about your deceptions as to who actually has authority to know what the Truth is.

No, what I did ask was...."For a Christian, what is the pillar and ground of the truth - i.e., the upholder and foundation of the truth? Is it the Bible? Yes or no?"

Now I suggest you go take a look at 1 Timothy 3:15, copy this passage, post it here in it's entirety, then we will see what it says, and we will go from there.

Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Albion]

Now I suggest you go take a look at 1 Timothy 3:15, copy this passage, post it here in it's entirety, then we will see what it says, and we will go from there.

That's kind of a diversion, isn't it?

The pillar and foundation/ground is the people of God. The Bible is God's revelation which guides the believers' doctrinal orientation.

The two are not identical, nor are the terms and verses interchangeable.

And you have a blessed day, too.

 

[Buzzard3]

And what was that gospel? Was it things like the real presence in the Eucharist and veneration of Mary?

Yes. The "gospel" is the same as "all truth" in John 16:13, which comes from the Church ... which is the "pillar and foundation of the truth" (1Tim 3:15) and the "fullness" of Christ (Eph 1:22-23).

 

[Buzzard3]

We recited the Nicene Creed in Methodist Church

How ironic. Who created the Nicene Creed?

Hint: It wasn't Protestants.

 

[Albion]

Yes. The "gospel" is the same as "all truth" in John 16:13, which comes from the Church

Actually, it's divine revelation, not something originating with a church decree.

which is the "pillar and foundation of the truth" (1Tim 3:15) and the "fullness" of Christ (Eph 1:22-23).

You're referring to all the people of God, the believers in Christ as Lord.

It was they whom Our Lord was saying he was counting on to keep the cause true and strong after his return to heaven.

 

[renniks]

Yes, but would you not agree there are many varieties of Protestantism, and among these varieties there is an enormous amount of theological diversity? For example, would you not agree the core distinctives on which Protestantism is based, like sola fide and sola scriptura are understood in markedly different ways?

Also, would you agree there are some Protestant groups, (Baptists for instance), that reject all "Creeds" on principle? ("No creed but the Bible") Would you consider them as a cult? I'm pretty sure they don't consider themselves as a cult.

Just because they don't recite the creed doesn't mean baptists don't believe everything in it. As far as diversity, sure, but I have been in a lot of churches and the core doctrines are the same. Liberals that affirm abortion and sane sex marriage, I can almost guarantee, also don't take the Bible as their authority.

 

[renniks]

Recited"? Meaning as in past tense, they no longer recite the Nicene Creed? Or meaning you are no longer a Methodist?

I was never officially a Methodist. I attended some Methodist churches once a month because my kids played piano and organ for those churches.

 

[renniks]

So are you saying that Baptism would be put in the "Non essentials" category?

Not baptism per say but the question of it being essential or symbolic. Most churches I've been in don't believe water saves anyone, which I would agree with. The idea that water saves surely leads a lot of people to hell.

 

[timothyu]

Yes. The "gospel" is the same as "all truth" in John 16:13, which comes from the Church ...

So Jesus' Gospel of the Kingdom wasn't good enough and was a stumbling block to institutionalized religion?

 

[renniks]

How ironic. Who created the Nicene Creed?

Hint: It wasn't Protestants

It was the universal church. Methodists generally retain some ritualistic practices like episcopalians and Catholics do. It has not helped them. A lot of Methodist churches are dying.

 

[Albion]

Just because they don't recite the creed doesn't mean baptists don't believe everything in it. As far as diversity, sure, but I have been in a lot of churches and the core doctrines are the same.

That seems like a good point. Although they and others don't go in for formal creeds, they are in agreement with most of the tenets of the famous creeds.

The Trinity, the two natures of Christ, his life on Earth, his death, resurrection, and ascension, the validity of Scripture, the second coming, the final judgment, and so on are all to be found in the Nicene Creed. Meanwhile, there is no mention there of the Lord's Supper, or of the clergy, Popes, Purgatory, or saint veneration.

 

[Fidelibus]

I think it would be safe to deny the accuracy of that statement, yes.

Well, being you pride yourself as being a "factchecker" you should have no problem showing my inaccuracies, yes.

That is correct, but of course you're referring to a minority of Protestants there and there isn't any reason to expect any church to be identical to any other church just because a loose classification term like "Protestant" is applied to them.

So as a "factchecker" could you provide a list of the minority of Protestant churches or sects you would deem as a cult?

That's the same with the various church classified as "Catholic," not one of which agrees doctrinally with the other churches of that same classification.

Irrelevant and off topic in regards to this thread. This is a thread for non-Protestants to ask Protestants of the many various churches and sects questions about their Protestant church or sect teachings and beliefs. It is not a thread to compare such teachings and beliefs of non-Protestant churches with that of many various Protestant churches or sects.

As far as the Catholic Church goes, feel free to start a thread on it, and I'm sure many of my fellow Catholics and I would be happy to dispel any of the misinformation, myths, and out right fallacies you may feel compelled to post of it.

Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Fidelibus]

That's kind of a diversion, isn't it?

Not at all. I asked him a simple question that he failed to answer. What he did do though, was post his personal and fallible interpretation/opinion on Isaiah 2:22. An interpretation and opinion you would agree is subject to error, yes?

The pillar and foundation/ground is the people of God.

Again, as a Catholic, I believe what the Bible says 100%! However, that does not mean I believe in your personal and fallible interpretation/opinion of 1 Timothy 3:15. Again, something you would (or should) agree could be in error, yes?

The Bible is God's revelation which guides the believers' doctrinal orientation.

As an adherent of sola scriptura, and self proclaimed factchecker, could you show the book, chapter and verse that says "The Bible is God's revelation which guides the believers' doctrinal orientation"?

The two are not identical, nor are the terms and verses interchangeable.

Who says this, and by what authority?

Have a Blessed Day!

 

[Albion]

So as a "factchecker" could you provide a list of the minority of Protestant churches or sects you would deem as a cult?

Yes.

This is a thread for non-Protestants to ask Protestants of the many various churches and sects questions about their Protestant church or sect teachings and beliefs.

This forum is also supposed to be about a denomination. "Protestants" is not a denomination.

Nevertheless, I'll accept your protest. I had thought it was permissible to correct factual errors made by others, simply for the sake of having the discussion evaluate actual beliefs and practices rather than stereotypes, misperceptions, or the like.

 

[Fidelibus]

Just because they don't recite the creed doesn't mean baptists don't believe everything in it.

I don't really know any Baptists, so, you could be right.

As far as diversity, sure, but I have been in a lot of churches and the core doctrines are the same.

Could you give some examples?

Liberals that affirm abortion and sane sex marriage, I can almost guarantee, also don't take the Bible as their authority.

Almost guarantee?

 

[Fidelibus]

Not baptism per say but the question of it being essential or symbolic.

Interesting. Could you be a little more specific on what you mean?

Most churches I've been in don't believe water saves anyone, which I would agree with.

I'm pretty sure Methodists believe that baptism is a sign of regeneration and new birth. And they accept all modes of baptism. That being sprinkling, pouring, and immersion as valid. I also think they preform infant baptisms. Could you give a short list of the churches you've been in that do not believe in baptismal regeneration?

The idea that water saves surely leads a lot of people to hell.

Well, I am pretty sure Protestant churches like the Anglicans, Lutherans, Presbyterians, and Methodists to name a few would argue that. If I remember correctly, even the early fathers of the Reformation believed in Baptism. So when was it that this changed (date/year) among the different Protestant churches beliefs like your own? And who changed this original belief of the Protestant reformation fathers? And by who's or what authority? Especially being all these Protestant churches and sects abide in the same bible?

Have a Blessed day

(p.s. Have you given any thought on my questions regarding the essentials and non-essentials of Protestant beliefs?)

 

[Buzzard3]

Actually, it's divine revelation, not something originating with a church decree.

The dogmas of the Catholic Church are divine revelation.

From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
“88 The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes in a definitive way truths having a necessary connection with them.”

 

[Fidelibus]

That seems like a good point.

Would you also agree with renninks post #948,

"Most churches I've been in don't believe water saves anyone, which I would agree with. The idea that water saves surely leads a lot of people to hell.

being a "good point" as well?

 

[Buzzard3]

You're referring to all the people of God, the believers in Christ as Lord.

It was they whom Our Lord was saying he was counting on to keep the cause true and strong after his return to heaven.

Pope Pius XII asserts in Mystici Corporis Christi that they “walk in the path of dangerous error who believe that they can accept Christ as the head of the Church while not adhering loyally to his vicar on earth (the Bishop of Rome, aka the Pope). They have taken away the visible head, broken the visible bonds of unity, and left the mystical body of the Redeemer so obscured and so maimed that those who are seeking the haven of eternal salvation can neither see it nor find it."

 

[Buzzard3]

The Holy Spirit isn't an emotion. He certainly can cause emotional experiences however.

Are you saying emotions are your guide to finding "all truth" (John 16:13)?

Is your church full of people who are born again or people who are only following rituals, thinking that's the way to get to heaven because that's what thier denomination teaches?

I hope Catholics are doing what their Church tells them, because the Catholic Church is the “fullness” of Christ (Eph 1:22-23) and holds the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” (Matt 16:19).