Question to protestants about Faith Alone

[eleos1954]

So i was watching a random video on youtube featuring a guy named Jeff Durbin, who I eventually researched and found out he is a sidekick to James White's (i think he is at least). Anyway, i found him to be the typical arrogant protestant who just dictates, accuses, and insists what Catholics believe him no matter what is being told to him. I was listening closely as to what he thinks about the whole faith by works, and how he eventually tries to brag and praise himself about how he is the one truly saved because being a christian. So he speaks about the 7 sacraments, purgatory, and just how faith alone is just biblically true and tries to bully random catholics about it.

Here is the video for your reference:

So my question is this. If protestants believe that strongly about faith alone, then why do they care so much to the point that they feel the need to throw out condemnation, judgment, and demonizing at us for how we practice and worship God? Us doing the wrong thing like the sacraments, praying to saints, and whatever wouldn't mean much anyway since it's all about faith alone, right?

The five "solas" ... it's not one or the other ... it's all 5 of them that forms the foundation of protestant belief.

The five solas of the Reformation, which distinguished the Reformers from the teachings of Rome, include sola scriptura (Scripture alone), solus Christus (Christ alone), sola fide (faith alone), sola gratia (grace alone), and soli Deo gloria (glory to God alone).

The truth of the matter is ... the sheep are scattered across the globe and transcends all earthly church systems .... it is the condition of the heart and only God knows it. We do not know who is or is not saved ... we are not privy to that information (for the most part). The bible teaches what kind of character we are to have (like Christ). All judgement is up to Christ.

The Catholic belief is a "mesh" between biblical teachings and church tradition. Jesus warns of the tradition of men.

Mark 7:7-13 King James Version (KJV)For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Catholic belief - The level of substance from bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is called "transubstantiation." According to Catholic faith, we can speak of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because this transubstantiation has occurred.

In most Protestant churches, communion is seen as a memorial of Christ's death. The bread and wine do not change at all because they are symbols.

Catholics take the Lords supper and turns Christs words into the literal sense (Transubstantiation) whereas most Protestants take it as being symbolic.

Protestants reject the Catholic doctrine of papal supremacy, and have variant views on the number of sacraments, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and matters of ecclesiastical polity and apostolic succession.

There are many differences between the two views ... some of them major differences.

We are often unkind how we discuss these things (that's human nature)

People on both sides contain those that actually study the bible for themselves ... and some do not study at all and rely on whatever church they attend to "mold" their beliefs. Spoon fed (so to speak)

An interpretation of something is an opinion about what it means. Many different interpretations regarding biblical scripture ... MANY.

I am a proponent of people spending a lot of time in Gods Word with an open mind and study for themselves, rather than relying on the interpretations of others .... they can be considered but it only seems logical to me that each person should study themselves and formulate their opinions (beliefs) from their own study of the bible alone. Man's traditions are most certainly subject to error ... we are faulty.

When the Berean Jews heard the Word of God from Paul and Silas, they received the message with great eagerness . Crucially, they examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. As a result, many of them believed (Acts 17:11). Hearing the word of God is one thing and studying it for life is another thing. It also requires discipline.

There will always be disagreements regarding interpretation of scripture and people often get offended no matter how those disagreements are presented. It's a matter of how one allows those disagreements to effect them .... or not.

In the Catholic tradition, or what many would call the Catholic paradigm, it is not individual Christians who possess the ability (or authority) to intuit (to know and understand) the Bible's meaning, but the magisterial authority of the Church.

Study and think for yourself .... or not ??? People choose to ... or not.

Since in reality we do not know who is or is not saved we shouldn't act like we do ... we don't know a person's heart .... only Jesus does. Judgement is entirely up to Him.

Again .... it's not one sola or the other .... it's all of them that stand together.

 

[RandyPNW]

Sacramental Legalism.

That's the first time I've heard of that term, but it makes perfect sense in relation to what Jesus was dealing with with the Pharisee and Sadducee type Jews.

Yea, I never heard the term in just that way before either, but it seemed necessary to make my point. Thanks for giving me grace on the use of weird terms!

A lot of the same wrongful practices that those Jewish people did back then can be found in the more traditionalist types of today. The Jews back then created their own laws from the words of their elders, and used that to supersede GOD's law and words somehow whenever possible. A lot of that happens also today with the idea that certain denominations think they are the only true body of Christ, and that they have some sort of authority to rewrite sections of scripture and make GOD say something different.

There is nothing new under the sun.

True, I was reading to my wife from Isa 29-30 today about the temporary blindness the Hebrew leaders had brought upon themselves...

Isa 29.1 Add year to year
and let your cycle of festivals go on...
13 The Lord says:
“These people come near to me with their mouth
and honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
Their worship of me
is based on merely human rules they have been taught.
Isa 30.9 For these are rebellious people, deceitful children,
children unwilling to listen to the Lord’s instruction.
10 They say to the seers,
“See no more visions!”
and to the prophets,
“Give us no more visions of what is right!
Tell us pleasant things,
prophesy illusions.
11 Leave this way,
get off this path,
and stop confronting us
with the Holy One of Israel!”

 

[FireDragon76]

So i was watching a random video on youtube featuring a guy named Jeff Durbin, who I eventually researched and found out he is a sidekick to James White's (i think he is at least). Anyway, i found him to be the typical arrogant protestant who just dictates, accuses, and insists what Catholics believe him no matter what is being told to him. I was listening closely as to what he thinks about the whole faith by works, and how he eventually tries to brag and praise himself about how he is the one truly saved because being a christian. So he speaks about the 7 sacraments, purgatory, and just how faith alone is just biblically true and tries to bully random catholics about it.

Here is the video for your reference:

So my question is this. If protestants believe that strongly about faith alone, then why do they care so much to the point that they feel the need to throw out condemnation, judgment, and demonizing at us for how we practice and worship God? Us doing the wrong thing like the sacraments, praying to saints, and whatever wouldn't mean much anyway since it's all about faith alone, right?

It's often down to ignorance and anti-Catholic bias, not serious theological reflection.

Justification by faith alone has nothing to do with what church you go to. Being a Catholic doesn't prevent a person from having faith in Jesus and having assurance that their sins are forgiven.

There is a document called the Joint Declaration on Justification that is signed by both Catholics and global Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed Protestants (though not American Fundamentalists)., which states that there is alot of agreement between Catholics and Protestants about justification.

https://lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/Joint%20Declaration%20on%20the%20Doctrine%20of%20Justification.pdf

 

[d taylor]

-

​

Many Protestant denominations are not faith alone (free grace) but align more with what is called lordship salvation. Martin Luther and Calvin both would probably be a lordship salvation supporter.

The Reformation Had Lordship Salvation and Free Grace – Grace Evangelical Society

Saved by Faith, or by Faith Formed by Love? – Grace Evangelical Society

The Righteousness of God: The Heart of the Lutheran Reformation – Grace Evangelical Society

https://faithalone.org/blog/who-was-right-erasmus-or-the-reformers/

 

[rockytopva]

Pretty easy...

8 But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach;
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. - Romans 10

I believe also Catholics as saved Christians and would visit if I cared for joining.

 

[FireDragon76]

-

​

Many Protestant denominations are not faith alone (free grace) but align more with what is called lordship salvation. Martin Luther and Calvin both would probably be a lordship salvation supporter.

The Reformation Had Lordship Salvation and Free Grace – Grace Evangelical Society

Saved by Faith, or by Faith Formed by Love? – Grace Evangelical Society

The Righteousness of God: The Heart of the Lutheran Reformation – Grace Evangelical Society

Who Was Right, Erasmus or the Reformers? – Grace Evangelical Society

Those aren't the correct categories to understand Protestant theology.

Lutheran and Reformed preaching is based on dialectic between Law and Gospel.

Conceiving of proclamation as a choice between free grace or "lordship salvation" is instrumentalizing God's Word, and reflects a modern American consumerism that is quite alien to classical Protestant theology.

 

[d taylor]

Those aren't the correct categories to understand Protestant theology.

Lutheran and Reformed preaching is based on dialectic between Law and Gospel.

Conceiving of proclamation as a choice between free grace or "lordship salvation" is instrumentalizing God's Word, and reflects a modern American consumerism that is quite alien to classical Protestant theology.

-
​

It is simple either a person believes in faith alone or they believe in some type of faith plus something and most can fall under a lordship type approach to salvation. Or there is the other group made up of no faith at all, known as universalism

 

[Clare73]

So i was watching a random video on youtube featuring a guy named Jeff Durbin, who I eventually researched and found out he is a sidekick to James White's (i think he is at least). Anyway, i found him to be the typical arrogant protestant who just dictates, accuses, and insists what Catholics believe him no matter what is being told to him. I was listening closely as to what he thinks about the whole faith by works, and how he eventually tries to brag and praise himself about how he is the one truly saved because being a christian. So he speaks about the 7 sacraments, purgatory, and just how faith alone is just biblically true and tries to bully random catholics about it.
So my question is this. If protestants believe that strongly about faith alone, then why do they care so much to the point that they feel the need to throw out condemnation, judgment, and demonizing at us for how we practice and worship God? Us doing the wrong thing like the sacraments, praying to saints, and whatever wouldn't mean much anyway since

it's all about faith alone, right?

For clarification:

True belief has two parts:
1) faith,
2) conformity (works, actions).
Without both, it is not true belief.

However, it is only the faith/trust in Jesus and his atoning work for the forgiveness of one's sin which saves one from God's condemnation (Ro 5:18) on that sin (Eph 2:8-9).
And that is because salvation belongs to God alone, he alone gets the glory, man does/can do nothing, for he is (spiritually) dead
and must be raised to (spiritual) life by the sovereign (caused by nothing) new birth of the Holy Spirit (Jn 3:3-5), whose sovereign choice to new birth is as unaccountable as the wind (Jn 3:6-8).
However, in the life that follows salvation, conformity (good works, sanctification) is most necessary to grow in our salvation in Christ.

 

[Nagomirov]

So i was watching a random video on youtube featuring a guy named Jeff Durbin, who I eventually researched and found out he is a sidekick to James White's (i think he is at least). Anyway, i found him to be the typical arrogant protestant who just dictates, accuses, and insists what Catholics believe him no matter what is being told to him. I was listening closely as to what he thinks about the whole faith by works, and how he eventually tries to brag and praise himself about how he is the one truly saved because being a christian. So he speaks about the 7 sacraments, purgatory, and just how faith alone is just biblically true and tries to bully random catholics about it.

Here is the video for your reference:

So my question is this. If protestants believe that strongly about faith alone, then why do they care so much to the point that they feel the need to throw out condemnation, judgment, and demonizing at us for how we practice and worship God? Us doing the wrong thing like the sacraments, praying to saints, and whatever wouldn't mean much anyway since it's all about faith alone, right?

The five "solas" ... it's not one or the other ... it's all 5 of them that forms the foundation of protestant belief.

The five solas of the Reformation, which distinguished the Reformers from the teachings of Rome, include sola scriptura (Scripture alone), solus Christus (Christ alone), sola fide (faith alone), sola gratia (grace alone), and soli Deo gloria (glory to God alone).

The truth of the matter is ... the sheep are scattered across the globe and transcends all earthly church systems .... it is the condition of the heart and only God knows it. We do not know who is or is not saved ... we are not privy to that information (for the most part). The bible teaches what kind of character we are to have (like Christ). All judgement is up to Christ.

The Catholic belief is a "mesh" between biblical teachings and church tradition. Jesus warns of the tradition of men.

Mark 7:7-13 King James Version (KJV)For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do. And he said unto them, Full well ye reject the commandment of God, that ye may keep your own tradition.

Catholic belief - The level of substance from bread and wine into the Body and Blood of Christ is called "transubstantiation." According to Catholic faith, we can speak of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist because this transubstantiation has occurred.

In most Protestant churches, communion is seen as a memorial of Christ's death. The bread and wine do not change at all because they are symbols.

Catholics take the Lords supper and turns Christs words into the literal sense (Transubstantiation) whereas most Protestants take it as being symbolic.

Protestants reject the Catholic doctrine of papal supremacy, and have variant views on the number of sacraments, the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist, and matters of ecclesiastical polity and apostolic succession.

There are many differences between the two views ... some of them major differences.

We are often unkind how we discuss these things (that's human nature)

People on both sides contain those that actually study the bible for themselves ... and some do not study at all and rely on whatever church they attend to "mold" their beliefs. Spoon fed (so to speak)

An interpretation of something is an opinion about what it means. Many different interpretations regarding biblical scripture ... MANY.

I am a proponent of people spending a lot of time in Gods Word with an open mind and study for themselves, rather than relying on the interpretations of others .... they can be considered but it only seems logical to me that each person should study themselves and formulate their opinions (beliefs) from their own study of the bible alone. Man's traditions are most certainly subject to error ... we are faulty.

When the Berean Jews heard the Word of God from Paul and Silas, they received the message with great eagerness . Crucially, they examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. As a result, many of them believed (Acts 17:11). Hearing the word of God is one thing and studying it for life is another thing. It also requires discipline.

There will always be disagreements regarding interpretation of scripture and people often get offended no matter how those disagreements are presented. It's a matter of how one allows those disagreements to effect them .... or not.

In the Catholic tradition, or what many would call the Catholic paradigm, it is not individual Christians who possess the ability (or authority) to intuit (to know and understand) the Bible's meaning, but the magisterial authority of the Church.

Study and think for yourself .... or not ??? People choose to ... or not.

Since in reality we do not know who is or is not saved we shouldn't act like we do ... we don't know a person's heart .... only Jesus does. Judgement is entirely up to Him.

Again .... it's not one sola or the other .... it's all of them that stand together.

The following people believe in transubstantiation: Orthodox (Greeks, Russians, Bulgarians, Romanians, Serbs, Georgians, Antiochians), ancient Eastern churches (Copts, Armenians, Syrians, Ethiopians). In addition, all these churches consider the Eucharist to be a Propitiatory Sacrifice.

Protestantism denies the need for satisfaction from the believer, and Scripture, on the contrary, testifies. David is forgiven the sin of adultery and murder, but his child dies as punishment; David is forgiven his other sin, but as punishment in his country the plague spreads for three days; Moses and Aaron are forgiven the sin of unbelief, but as punishment they cannot enter the promised land. The hierarch of the Russian Church, Metropolitan Stefan (Yavorsky), in his book "The Stone of Faith", writes: "For those who have been absolved of mortal sin and eternal punishment, the inevitability of temporary punishment remains. The guilt of death and eternal punishment, following it, is released in the holy sacrament of repentance, and temporary punishment is carried out through penance. If someone dies without performing penance, his soul, separated from his body, bears the duty of temporary punishment after death". The Russian Saint Ambrose of Optina also wrote about the need for satisfaction for sins: "One should know that sins are forgiven not by confessing them alone, but satisfaction is also needed. The Lord Himself said to the robber on the cross (Luke 23:43): Today you will be with Me in paradise. But even after this promise, the robber did not immediately and not without difficulty pass into heavenly pleasure, but first had to undergo a fracture of the shins. So we, too, although our former sins were forgiven during the Sacrament of Confession and when adopting the monastic image, but by God's penance we must bear for them, that is, suffer illnesses, sorrows, inconveniences, and everything that the Lord sends us to cleanse our sins". According to Scripture and Tradition, we know that God forgives eternal punishment to the penitent, but a temporary punishment remains on the penitent, requiring satisfaction, in the form of fruits of repentance. Hence, by the way, the concept of purgatory, the need for prayers and alms for the dead.

 

[Nagomirov]

The totality of actions that the penitent must perform in order to satisfy for the guilt of sin and for the objective evil of sin, constitute, as it were, a punishment for sin (poena). So, in confession, the penitent receives with absolution of mortal sin and release from eternal torment; but the need to serve a temporary punishment for him and for his consequences remains in force. This teaching is in accordance with the word of God. It is evident, for example, from the words of the prophet Nathan to the repentant King David: "And the Lord has taken away (from you) your sin; you will not die; but since by this deed you have given the enemies of the Lord a reason to blaspheme Him, then the son born to you will die" (2 Kings 12:13-14).

From the book: sacred. Book A. Volkonsky "Catholicism and the Sacred Tradition of the East" (Paris, 1933).

 

[Nagomirov]

From a letter from Cyprian of Carthage to Fide: "Cyprian and other comrades who attended the Council, among 66, wish Fide, my brother, good health. We have read your letter, most beloved brother, in which you inform us that our comrade Ferapius prematurely and too hastily granted peace to the former presbyter Victor before he brought full repentance and satisfaction to the Lord God, before whom he had sinned. This matter greatly confused us, since peace was granted to him in violation of the importance of our definition, granted before the fulfillment of the lawful time of repentance and satisfaction, without his request and without the approval of the people, in the absence of any urgent infirmity and tedious necessity. However, after a long discussion, we found it sufficient to reprimand our comrade, Ferapius, for this reckless act of his and to convince him not to do anything like that later. Meanwhile, we did not consider it necessary to take away the peace that was once granted by the priest of God in any way, and therefore allowed Victor to use the communication provided to him."

 

[Nagomirov]

Satisfaction (satisfactio) is the performance of some action in compensation for the insult inflicted on God by sin absolved in the sacrament of repentance.

 

[Nagomirov]

Protestantism teaches that God forgives sin without punishing it with temporary punishment. Orthodox and Catholics, reading the Bible, see that this is not the case. We have many examples from the Holy Scriptures about temporary punishment. David is forgiven the sin of adultery and murder, but his child dies as punishment; David is forgiven his other sin, but as punishment in his country the plague spreads for 3 days; Moses and Aaron are forgiven the sin of unbelief, but as punishment they cannot enter the promised land; Every Christian is forgiven original sin in baptism, but death and the hardships of life remain as a temporary punishment.

 

[Nagomirov]

The Confession of the Orthodox Faith of the Eastern Church of Patriarch Dositheus:

"Those who fell into mortal sins, but did not die in despair, but repented while still in bodily life, although they did not bring any fruit of repentance by shedding tears, kneeling awake in prayers, contrition, consolation of the poor and generally expressing love for God and neighbor in deeds— by the fact that the Church with From the very beginning, she correctly called satisfaction (ἱκανοποίησις), — their souls go to hell and suffer retribution there for the sins they committed."

"But they <that is, those who died in repentance, but without worthy fruits of it> realize that they will be delivered from there <from hell>, and are freed by the highest Goodness (ἀγαθότης), thanks to the prayers of the priests and the good deeds that the relatives of each of them perform for the sake of their deceased; especially the bloodless Sacrifice has great power which everyone does separately for their deceased relatives, and the Church does daily for everyone in general."

Saint Mark the Eugenicist:

"[We say that] all such <those who have died in faith and love, but without worthy fruits of repentance> are helped by prayers and Liturgies performed for them, which are accompanied by goodness (ἀγαθότης) and the love of God, who immediately despise and release some of these <repentant, but not covered with fruits of repentance> sins, committed due to human infirmity, as the great Dionysius says in the “Consideration” of the “sacrament [performed] over the sacred dead” [14]; other [sins], after some time [spent] in just bonds, resolves and completely releases them, or grants those guilty of them relief until the Last Judgment."

The Confession of the Orthodox Faith of the Eastern Church of Patriarch Dositheus:

"It should be understood, however, that we do not know the time of [their] deliverance. For we know and believe that such will be freed from [this] terrible situation before the general Resurrection and Judgment, but we do not know when."

 

[Nagomirov]

The only difference with purgatory is that the Orthodox do not classify it as purgatory, but simply designate it as hell, in which souls are subject not only to eternal punishment, but also to temporary punishment. The second difference is that according to the Orthodox view, souls subject to temporary punishment are not punished with cleansing fire. It looks like purgatory, it's just that the Orthodox call it hell, where the souls of various sinners fall, including those who repented of mortal sins, but did not bear the fruits of repentance, so they can temporarily stay in hell. They are helped by the prayers of the Church, alms, and the Eucharistic Sacrifice. But the Orthodox also insist on the need for satisfaction, because this is a Biblical representation. There is a concept of satisfaction, God is not only Merciful, but also Just, it is necessary to bring satisfaction to Divine Justice. Therefore, the Sacrament of Confession provides for the practice of ἐπιτιμία.

 

[Nagomirov]

It's often down to ignorance and anti-Catholic bias, not serious theological reflection.

Justification by faith alone has nothing to do with what church you go to. Being a Catholic doesn't prevent a person from having faith in Jesus and having assurance that their sins are forgiven.

There is a document called the Joint Declaration on Justification that is signed by both Catholics and global Lutherans, Methodists and Reformed Protestants (though not American Fundamentalists)., which states that there is alot of agreement between Catholics and Protestants about justification.

https://lutheranworld.org/sites/default/files/Joint%20Declaration%20on%20the%20Doctrine%20of%20Justification.pdf

This document is criticized because it does not talk about the details, but only in the most general terms. The details of the Catholic concept of justification should be looked at in the theology of the Council of Trent.
The Joint Declaration avoids mention or treatment: "free will", "predestination", "original sin", "total depravity", "indulgence", "satisfaction", and "sanctification". (The Methodist Statement of Association with the Joint Declaration does include discussion of sanctification.)

 

[KevinT]

So my question is this. If protestants believe that strongly about faith alone, then why do they care so much to the point that they feel the need to throw out condemnation, judgment, and demonizing at us for how we practice and worship God? Us doing the wrong thing like the sacraments, praying to saints, and whatever wouldn't mean much anyway since it's all about faith alone, right?

There seems to be a common principle in life that where ever there is a division, there will be an "us vs them." If a railroad track goes through a town, then there will be a "wrong side of the tracks." And people then disparage "them" to enhance the tribalism of "us". Over and over I see this. North against South, Capitalism vs communism, Yankees vs Dodgers, Republicans against Democrats. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" can make one who shows how bad "those other guys" are seems like a really smart and powerful person. And thus, I'm not going to watch the video. I don't want to see some guy say that some other people are wrong -- especially if they are essentially saying, "See how smart I am as I show up those other dumb people." That is probably not fair to the actual person in the video, but I don't want to take the time to find out.

C. S. Lewis wrote about "Mere Christianity," pointing out that we all have great commonality in our belief in Jesus Christ. Are there differences in doctrine between denominations? Yes. Should they be carefully examined and debated? Yes. Should the divide the Body of Christ? No.

I am a member of a traditional "protestant" denomination. But I can't recall the last time the concept of "protesting" came up. It seems like a left-over concept from a time long ago. I don't believe in "faith alone", and am actually strongly opposed to it. It actually makes no sense to me -- like if a person where sick and they had "faith alone" in a medicine, but then left the medicine in the bottle untouched. If they believed in the medication, they would actually take it. So if I have faith, then I will do something in response to that faith. Having faith "alone" just seems like a broken concept to me.

KT

 

[BibleBeliever1611]

C. S. Lewis wrote about "Mere Christianity," pointing out that we all have great commonality in our belief in Jesus Christ. Are there differences in doctrine between denominations? Yes. Should they be carefully examined and debated? Yes. Should the divide the Body of Christ? No.

I think division is a good thing. We should divide ourselves very strongly from people who believe in false things, false doctrine, etc. Of course it makes no sense to divide over very small or trivial disagreements but just because someone claims to believe in Jesus is not enough to have any fellowship with them.

That's why the Bible said,
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

 

[KevinT]

I think division is a good thing. ... just because someone claims to believe in Jesus is not enough to have any fellowship with them. ...
I came not to send peace, but a sword."

Wow. I hope you have everything figured out correctly and don't make any mistakes before you start swinging a sword.

KT

 

[bbbbbbb]

I think division is a good thing. We should divide ourselves very strongly from people who believe in false things, false doctrine, etc. Of course it makes no sense to divide over very small or trivial disagreements but just because someone claims to believe in Jesus is not enough to have any fellowship with them.

That's why the Bible said,
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

The problem, of course, is that what for one person is a very trivial thing, such as honoring one day above another, is absolutely central to another's theology. How do you determine what is necessary for division versus what is not?