Where's the ecumenical council in protestantism?

[zippy2006]

And in any case, all of this is nothing more than what that particular denomination likes to think about itself.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

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.

... or you can just do what I do and don't worry about choosing denominational sides. It's NOT really like you HAVE to choose one. Just recognize they're all out there, all trying to express their faith in Christ imperfectly... just like I do.

 

[J3thekingofking]

No, no they don't.

For example, if a Catholic bishop or the Roman Pontiff excommunicates you, then you're not Catholic. It doesn't matter what your "beliefs and practices" look like. Another point: Anglicans walk and quack a bit like Catholics, but they aren't Catholic. Everyone knows this, including the OP. Even you know it when you're being honest with yourself. It's why you labeled yourself an Anglican rather than a Catholic.

Well we can also say or claim the anglican church is the true Catholic church of the west, we split from Rome because the pope perverted the gospel hehe

 

[J3thekingofking]

... or you can just do what I do and don't worry about choosing denominational sides. It's NOT really like you HAVE to choose one. Just recognize they're all out there, all trying to express their faith in Christ imperfectly... just like I do.

Liberalism? Don't care what are the differences and it's just all about Jesus?

 

[Brian Mcnamee]

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.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

how does the EO teach justification by faith? the scripture is clear for that on Roman and Galatians.

Quite simply, we never had that argument in the East, so it's not part of our theology. Augustine's writings didnt get translated into Greek until I think the 10th century and has minimal impact on our theology. Anselm of Canterbury's Cur Deus Homo satisfaction theory is rejected by us.

He was incarnate that we might be made god" (Αὐτὸς γὰρ ἐνηνθρώπησεν, ἵνα ἡμεῖς θεοποιηθῶμεν). - Athanasius

We are called to be "partakers of the divine nature" by St. Peter, so the incarnation, the crucifixion, and the glorious resurrection was all done so that we can become united to God through the God-man, Jesus.

 

[Albion]

Well we can also say or claim the anglican church is the true Catholic church of the west, we split from Rome because the pope perverted the gospel hehe

Don't you just love it when someone says "everyone knows this"...after having floated some ridiculous yarn?

When I see that, I know that the writer must absolutely have realized that it was hokum or else he wouldn't have felt the need to include a disclaimer.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Liberalism? Don't care what are the differences and it's just all about Jesus?

I wouldn't call my position one of 'Liberalism.' Rather, it's one of historically informed recognition and personal decision. One of the various points of recognition for you and me in all of this 'denominational babble' is that we live in the day and time that we do. Another point is that we (in Western Culture) pretty much all have access to the New Testament Scriptures. We often have the ability to also read and to think for ourselves. We can also see that a number of Christians over the last 2,000 years have become leaders and some of them have implored the common Christian to abide by that leader's asserted authority.

So, the question for us to discern is: Where and when does authority actually manifest itself within the Church?

The question isn't so much "Which denomination is the most right?"

 

[Dave L]

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.

The Protestant Creeds unify.

 

[Silly Uncle Wayne]

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.

Any Christian, whether leader or otherwise who says their doctrine is the total and absolute truth and encourages others to follow them is probably nowhere close to the truth.

In practise I have particular takes on doctrines where I agree with lots of other and some where I agree with a few others, but I'm open to good reasoned arguments.

Ultimately we will only know which of us was right when we go to be with God... and then it won't actually matter.

 

[tz620q]

I wouldn't call my position one of 'Liberalism.' Rather, it's one of historically informed recognition and personal decision. One of the various points of recognition for you and me in all of this 'denominational babble' is that we live in the day and time that we do. Another point is that we have access to the New Testament Scriptures. We often have the ability to also read and to think for ourselves. We can also see that a number of Christians over the last 2,000 years have become leaders and some of them have implored the common Christian to abide by that leader's asserted authority.

So, the question for us to discern is: Where and when does authority actually manifest itself within the Church?

The question isn't so much "Which denomination is the most right?"

This seems to lead to a rather interesting take on doctrine where true doctrine is my belief system based on my authority. I've found the Catholic take on this is that the Church sets doctrine and we are asked to believe it. So the authority in theological matters is with the church, not the individual. Now I am sure others will point to various Catholics like our new President Biden who openly speak against doctrine of the Church and yet call themselves Catholic. I am sure Biden feels that he has informed his conscience to be somehow truer than the Church; but in truth all he has done is bend to public will and modern relativism.

 

[concretecamper]

That's what I'm trying to say, the reformers can't have a council, they have way more disagreements than ever, that's why we have so many churches that teach different things in different denominations although we have the essential in common.

The easiest answer is that there needs to be an Authority. Protestantism doesn't have that Authority. "The Bible" will be put up as the Authority but as you already know, that Authority doesn't work since that approach has resulted in 120,000 different denominations.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

This seems to lead to a rather interesting take on doctrine where true doctrine is my belief system based on my authority. I've found the Catholic take on this is that the Church sets doctrine and we are asked to believe it. So the authority in theological matters is with the church, not the individual. Now I am sure others will point to various Catholics like our new President Biden who openly speak against doctrine of the Church and yet call themselves Catholic. I am sure Biden feels that he has informed his conscience to be somehow truer than the Church; but in truth all he has done is bend to public will and modern relativism.

[EDITED]

I understand that what I've said above sounds as if it could lead to the conclusion that a loose confederation of concepts about Jesus within a person's head may lend itself to a reliance upon theological self-authority. The problem here is that this argument, while pertinent, is somewhat crippled if those who are otherwise autonomous individuals voluntarily appeal to the same (or approximately the same) N.T. (and O.T.) documents that other Christians do.

Those same autonomous individuals can recognize that they did not write the N.T. books--some other Christian minds from long ago in the past did. In that recognition, any of us as individuals can and usually will understand that there is an implied limitation upon our own personal conceptions regarding where ultimate authority lies as we seek to be a part of the Church at large. Where Christianity is concerned, ultimate authority does not lie with the 'self' alone. However, it also might not necessarily lie with any one specific Christian Institution, either.

Moreover, the solidarity among those who sincerely hold the Christian faith and recognize similar boundaries for their autonomy usually minimizes the inroads the surrounding non-Christian public's 'will' attempts to make. Christian faith doesn't conceptually permit a free for all. The only way it would be a free for all is if we ignore everything we think we know about the 1st Century Church and what it taught about Jesus Christ. And as far as I know, no one who is robustly attempting to be Christian is ignoring any of this (... ... ... except for those who have only a tentative hold upon and a shallow identity with Christianity, or those who have none at all).

 

[DamianWarS]

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.

ecumenical agreement is essentially what defines what a denomination is. denominations have bi-laws and general conferences with their members where they decided upon things. they don't call it ecumenical councils but in essence, it is just that among a collection of specific churches

 

[Llewelyn Stevenson]

No leader? Then who's preaching every Sunday? Their claim is false but in practice they do have leader.

We take turns and respect the elders as the Scriptures suggest. There is no one person preaching every meeting as we believe in "body ministry"

1Co 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.

And then we follow the pattern of decently and in order. The songs we sing are picked from among us, usually 4; one person is given "the floor" for that meeting and then after we share among each other about things that have been on our mind that week [or since we last met] after we have broken bread [The Lord's Supper] and while we feast together. As the feast progresses talk may turn to things other than the Scriptures like health, food, gardening: general interest stuff. After this we part. Usually we are together about 2 hours.

None among us are called bishop or pastor though it is recognised that some may fill this position in Christ. It is not raised as an issue, nor does it need to be since we honor one another in Christ.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

The easiest answer is that there needs to be an Authority. Protestantism doesn't have that Authority. "The Bible" will be put up as the Authority but as you already know, that Authority doesn't work since that approach has resulted in 120,000 different denominations.

Your answer is too easy, I think.

 

[Albion]

None among us are called bishop or pastor though it is recognised that some may fill this position in Christ. It is not raised as an issue, nor does it need to be since we honor one another in Christ.

?? Some may...but none actually do?

 

[concretecamper]

Your answer is too easy, I think.

nah, the simplest answers are normally correct.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

nah, the simplest answers are normally correct.

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.

 

[Albion]

The easiest answer is that there needs to be an Authority. Protestantism doesn't have that Authority. "The Bible" will be put up as the Authority but as you already know, that Authority doesn't work since that approach has resulted in 120,000 different denominations.

So now we're suddenly up to 120,000 different denominations?!. Wow, Christianity is doing great after all!