What in theology prevent Protestant, Catholic and Orthodox from being simply "Christians"?

[pescador]

The word of God is true, but the knowledge of history, linguistics, and everything that puts the words of Scripture into proper context for Mr. Average Believer?...No.

Does a superficial understanding of Scripture, or even an incorrect one when it's about non-essentials mean that the overall message of the Gospel is lost or salvation lost? Also No.

However, being helped to a better understanding has been a part of Christian history for 2000 years, as it was for the Hebrews before Christ, and for good reason.

This is an excellent reason to use a modern translation instead of the antiquated King James, with its centuries-old Englyshe. The Bible was written in the common languages of the day and was meant to be understood by everyone, including the uneducated and illiterate.

 

[Albion]

This is an excellent reason to use a modern translation instead of the antiquated King James, with its centuries-old Englyshe.

Well, the KJV doesn't actually use that kind of spelling, you know.

But beyond that, if you suggest that a modern language version is helpful, you are moving away from what you said earlier, which was that all we need to do is depend on the Holy Spirit to make everything clear to us.

Using that reasoning, we might just as well read a French-language translation and wait until the Holy Spirit translates it for us.

 

[pescador]

Well, the KJV doesn't actually use that kind of spelling, you know.

But beyond that, if you suggest that a modern language version is helpful, you are moving away from what you said earlier, which was that all we need to do is depend on the Holy Spirit to make everything clear to us.

Using that reasoning, we might just as well read a French-language translation and wait until the Holy Spirit translates it for us.

Why are you trying to distort my meaning? We don't have the original manuscripts, and even if we did, few of us can read ancient Hebrew/Aramaic/Greek and even fewer can accurately translate those languages into modern English. When we read the Bible in our own language -- 21st Century English in my case and in many others' -- the Holy Spirit will assist us in our understanding.

John 16:13, "But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all the truth"

If you're so clever, why don't you read-write-speak the way people did 400+ years ago?

 

[thecolorsblend]

Why? Can't people read the Gospels for themselves? Is God incapable of enlightening people?

If He's enlightening people, why do they disagree with each other on virtually every point of doctrine even tho they're all using essentially the same Bible?

 

[prodromos]

Join the club!

In truth, I always respectfully acknowledge the person of someone that hears voices in their head, but I generally steer clear of them after a while unless they are getting psychiatric help. I'm not wanting to be judgemental as such, but voices in the head are more like someone/thing is taking over and controlling your mind. There's a medical term for a condition like that.

God hasn't spoken to me that way, but He has put thoughts into my mind, and I see Him marshalling me and others to cross each other's paths. And I see Him bless me when I have honoured Him by acknowledging His ways. I've seem Him punish those who treat me unfairly, even though He expects me to wear the unfairness, as Jesus had to wear it too.

The Holy Spirit for a Christian is represented by the Cloud by day and Fire by night, that led Israel through its desert walk after it had been brought out of bondage to Egypt.

Shalom

I did not imagine you were claiming to physically hear the Holy Spirit as an audible voice and I hope you understand that I was not speaking literally about voices.
As for your last paragraph, it was Christ who led the Israelites as a pillar of cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night.

 

[pescador]

If He's enlightening people, why do they disagree with each other on virtually every point of doctrine even tho they're all using essentially the same Bible?

They don't "disagree with each other on virtually every point of doctrine"; there are some points that are vague but nobody disagrees on the basic issues. Of course, popes-bishops-cardinals-priests are always 100% accurate about doctrine, etc., right? => Give me a break!! <=

 

[thecolorsblend]

They don't "disagree with each other on virtually every point of doctrine"; there are some points that are vague but nobody disagrees on the basic issues.

You can find Protestant bodies who believe baptism is necessary for salvation while other Protestant bodies deny that. You can find some that believe Our Lord performed miracles (i.e., a lot of Protestants) while others deny that He performed miracles (i.e., many Episcopalians in the US).

There is probably no single point of doctrine upon which all Protestant communities agree.

Of course, popes-bishops-cardinals-priests are always 100% accurate about doctrine, etc., right? => Give me a break!! <=

They at least have a catechism which codifies Catholic doctrine in an organized, systematic directory which all Catholics are expected to agree with. Meanwhile, Protestants probably can't even agree on how to make Kool-Aid.

 

[pescador]

You can find Protestant bodies who believe baptism is necessary for salvation while other Protestant bodies deny that. You can find some that believe Our Lord performed miracles (i.e., a lot of Protestants) while others deny that He performed miracles (i.e., many Episcopalians in the US).

There is probably no single point of doctrine upon which all Protestant communities agree.
They at least have a catechism which codifies Catholic doctrine in an organized, systematic directory which all Catholics are expected to agree with. Meanwhile, Protestants probably can't even agree on how to make Kool-Aid.

Point 1: The Bible is The Authoritative Word of God. Sola Scriptura.
Point 2: The church is the body of believers -- all of them.
Point 3: The priesthood is the entire body of believers, as the Bible states.
Point 4: The head of the church is Jesus Christ, not the Pope.

Additionally, there is no mention of the Catholic church, the Pope, Cardinals, or Bishops in the Bible.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Point 1: The Bible is The Authoritative Word of God. Sola Scriptura.

There are Protestants who do not believe that.

Point 2: The church is the body of believers -- all of them.

There are definitely Protestants who don't believe that, but instead subscribe to a "one true church" mentality.

Point 3: The priesthood is the entire body of believers, as the Bible states.

Most assuredly, there are Protestants who believe in some kind of ordained priesthood rather than just the universal priesthood.

Point 4: The head of the church is Jesus Christ, not the Pope.

Believe it or not, there are some Protestants out there who earnestly believe in unity and communion with Rome but don't do it for various reasons. During my year long layover in the Anglican world, I met a few Anglicans and Episcopalians who sincerely wanted to be reconciled to the Mother Church in Rome but would not do so for (in my opinion) kind of lame reasons.

So, virtually every point you raised is a matter of disagreement among Protestants. Got anything else?

 

[Tony B]

Point 1: The Bible is The Authoritative Word of God. Sola Scriptura.
Point 2: The church is the body of believers -- all of them.
Point 3: The priesthood is the entire body of believers, as the Bible states.
Point 4: The head of the church is Jesus Christ, not the Pope.

Additionally, there is no mention of the Catholic church, the Pope, Cardinals, or Bishops in the Bible.

Bishops are mentioned, but not in the context of them being a hierarchical authority in the body of Christ. Overseer, elder, pastor, bishop, shepherd....they're all synonyms of the same service to the church of God, carried out by men that have been set apart by The Lord to serve in that manner.

Pescador, contend with these posters as much as you feel it will benefit Christ. You have taken note in your review of previous posts that some appear close minded to the Spirit...hard headed in the same way the Jews were to Christ. They will wander around and around in circles as far as their arguments go, and continue to stray and be lost in ignorance. I pray that The Lord would lift the fog off their heads, and lead them to Him.

Do you have a group of like minded and like Spirited believers you fellowship with, or have you had to go it alone as far as human Christian company is concerned, as I have?

 

[pescador]

There are Protestants who do not believe that.

There are definitely Protestants who don't believe that, but instead subscribe to a "one true church" mentality.

Most assuredly, there are Protestants who believe in some kind of ordained priesthood rather than just the universal priesthood.

Believe it or not, there are some Protestants out there who earnestly believe in unity and communion with Rome but don't do it for various reasons. During my year long layover in the Anglican world, I met a few Anglicans and Episcopalians who sincerely wanted to be reconciled to the Mother Church in Rome but would not do so for (in my opinion) kind of lame reasons.

So, virtually every point you raised is a matter of disagreement among Protestants. Got anything else?

Pointing out that there are some few exceptions to the points that I raised doesn't mean anything. "There are definitely Protestants who don't believe that...", "there are Protestants who believe in some kind of ordained priesthood", "there are some Protestants out there who earnestly believe in unity and communion with Rome" show that there are a few Protestants that believe differently from the vast majority which proves ... they're not in 100% unity. So what? Catholics follow a fallible human being and rigid dogma, to their loss.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Pointing out that there are some few exceptions to the points that I raised doesn't mean anything.

I claimed that there is no single point of doctrine that all Protestants agreed upon. You denied that, listing off random doctrines... which I then documented that Protestants do not agree upon.

So yes, it means quite a lot that there is disunity and disagreement between Protestants on the issues you mentioned, as well as a host of others.

Catholics follow a fallible human being and rigid dogma, to their loss.

In the Traditional Theology forum (which is where we are), the Catholic policy of submitting to a divinely guided and inspired Church requires no defense.

 

[pescador]

There are Protestants who do not believe that.

There are definitely Protestants who don't believe that, but instead subscribe to a "one true church" mentality.

Most assuredly, there are Protestants who believe in some kind of ordained priesthood rather than just the universal priesthood.

Believe it or not, there are some Protestants out there who earnestly believe in unity and communion with Rome but don't do it for various reasons. During my year long layover in the Anglican world, I met a few Anglicans and Episcopalians who sincerely wanted to be reconciled to the Mother Church in Rome but would not do so for (in my opinion) kind of lame reasons.

So, virtually every point you raised is a matter of disagreement among Protestants. Got anything else?

My main point is that Protestants are not under the control and direction of one supposedly infallible person so there are bound to be some areas where people disagree.

Protestants think for themselves, and our thinking is Bible-based. Catholics are told what to think based on (fallible) human teaching.

 

[thecolorsblend]

My main point is that Protestants are not under the control and direction of one supposedly infallible person so there are bound to be some areas where people disagree.

I understand what your point is. I also understand that the reason you keep beating that drum is because you know I'm right.

Protestants think for themselves, and our thinking is Bible-based. Catholics are told what to think based on (fallible) human teaching.

 

[pescador]

I understand what your point is. I also understand that the reason you keep beating that drum is because you know I'm right.

View attachment 285731

Ha Ha Ha! I know that what you're saying is so wrong it's not worth debating. Have fun convincing yourself -- I won't respond to your fallacious reasoning any more.

 

[prodromos]

Protestants think for themselves, and our thinking is Bible-based. Catholics are told what to think based on (fallible) human teaching.

You forgot to insert "(fallible)" in your description of Protestants.

 

[Justin-H.S.]

Having a metaphysical worldview is important to grasp the teachings in the scripture. Biblical metaphysics goes beyond what is stated in the Nicene Creed. The Creed teaches us what the basic teachings are in being a Christian. The writers of the Bible were not modern day rationalistic materialists, afterall. They thought in ancient ways. The spiritual realm surrounded them.

There's a difference between Exoteric (outer) and Esoteric (inner) teachings.

• Exoteric is that which you would teach your children. Milk for babes.
• Esoteric is the spiritual aspects taught to the mature. "Meat"
• Exoteric tends to focus on what the Bible can teach us in its applicability to this life, here and now.
• Esoteric practices teach us by rote of habit how to redirect our nous to focus on our life in the throne room of God.

 

[dzheremi]

Good grief...is there a point in even having a Traditional Theology forum when it seems like every thread is filled beyond capacity with "I love Jesus, but hate religion/church"-type posts? Go away already with that. You mental midgets already have literally the rest of this website outside of the confessional forums on which to spread that particular poison.

Anyway...surprise, surprise, I agree with the only other OO person here that the answer is that these groups all have their own histories. So while it's possible to just say "Christian" (after all, Protestant, Catholics, and Orthodox are all Christians), it doesn't tell the whole story. And so being Protestant, Catholic, Orthodox, Nestorian, etc. means not just aligning your spiritual practices or theological beliefs with what is specific to whichever particular group you've aligned yourself with, but also imbibing their historical views, philosophical underpinnings, and so on. For example, as much as we love them as people and as fellow Christians (even when they often don't see us in that light), I recognize that I would not be a very good Oriental Orthodox Christian if I were to accept without question and adopt as my own view the standard Chalcedonian take on Christian history, just as the Chalcedonians usually avoid distinctly OO historical figures, including historians like Zacharias of Mytilene, Sebeos the Armenian, Jacob of Edessa, Joshua the Stylite of Zuqnin, etc.

And these things are perhaps not as removed from theology as we'd like to think they are. The Maronites, for instance (an ethnoreligious sect of Catholic Christians from the Levant), have as part of their liturgical calendar (I don't recall when) the celebration of a large group of martyrs of their faith who their tradition says were martyred at the command of St. Severus of Antioch, the Syriac Orthodox (Oriental Orthodox/non-Chalcedonian) patriarch of Antioch (512-538). There are some issues with the historicity of this account, to put it politely (see Matti Moosa's book The Maronites in History, 1986), but the important thing to know in the context of this celebration is that the Maronites are a traditionally Syriac-speaking Chalcedonian people (i.e., they accept the Christological definition promulgated as orthodox at that council in 451), and hence can be distinguished on that account from the other major Syriac-speaking population of the Middle East, the Syriac Orthodox. (Newer groups of Syriac Christians aligned with Rome don't have as much history, or their history is ultimately rooted in different conflicts, as is the case with the Chaldeans in Iraq, who arose from a 16th century dispute within the Nestorian Church, which both Chalcedonians and non-Chalcedonians anathematize.)

So their history is defined by the theological turns they've taken, same as anyone. A virtually identical paragraph could be written about the Coptic Orthodox Church and its people, the Armenian Apostolic Church, the Georgian Orthodox Church, the Roman Catholic Church (Latins), etc. Faith and history go together for everyone but those who claim to be "just Christian" and hence cut themselves off from the historical reality of what that means, from the earliest days when St. Paul was writing his epistles to the churches at various locations down to our own day.

 

[All4Christ]

I recommend all posters to read the Traditional Theology statement of purpose if they have not done so. In particular, the quoted part below is relevant.

The Six Principles of the Traditional Theology Forum:

• We hold each other up, supporting each other in discussion, and keep each other true to Theological principles.
• We promise to discuss honorably and in true fairness to all, even those we disagree with; no matter our theological differences.
• We decry ad hominem arguments; we will strive to never use them nor flame in return when attacked. We will debate fairly and respectfully at all times when others engage in them.
• This is a topic driven forum to bridge open discussion for those interested in all the ways traditional theology is expressed and lived around the world. Its not meant to exclude those who don't practice traditional theology but it is meant to be topic restrictive and non combative to traditional ideas and structure. If you need to prove traditional theology as unbiblical or incomplete, we respect your right to do this in the General Theology forum and not in this topical forum. This is a place to explore with in the defined topic not debate against it.
• We also help educate each other, to ensure we ourselves stay true to and better defend orthodox, timeless Christianity.
• We include all who wish to join, who can follow these stipulations.

Statement of Purpose - Traditional Theology Statement of Purpose

 

[The Liturgist]

Well, I and others like me are following The Lord Jesus, patterning our lives on His nature and character. Who or what are you following?

As a traditional Christian I am a member of the Body of Christ of which Jesus Christ our eternal and uncreated God and Savior, is the sole head. I follow His commandments when I celebrate the Eucharist, baptize infants, and proclaim the Gospel.