Why do so many churches that insist that the Bible is their foundation have such differing ideas?

[Unofficial Reverand Alex]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

 

[BobRyan]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines?

If you really can say "we don't need no bible to tell us what to believe - we just believe whatever our church magisterium tells us to believe" was the solution to getting all denominations including the RCC to agree -- then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that believe what their own magisterium says is true doctrine... would all agree??

If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist;

=========================================

Which is the same logic that the RCC offers against sola-scriptura

 

[Doug Melven]

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

Not everybody has the same background so interpret the same thing differently.
It shouldn't be this way, but it is.
And then some of these denominations are just wrong, they were not led by the Spirit.

Would you have the Catholic church go back to prereformation days? That would be a serious church split.
I am assuming you don't believe as they did back then.

 

[Albion]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines?

Not at all. But your proposition isn't what it seems anyway. All that it promises is a final answer, not that it is the correct answer.

Every cult with some sort of guru-like leader accomplishes that, permitting it to look down on all the other churches and religious societies, saying that they are a study in disunity etc.

 

[A_Thinker]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

For how many hundreds of years did the Church fathers and Councils debate issues of doctrine ?

There is nothing amiss with differing interpretations of some points of doctrine. It is in the essentials that we should agree. In the non-essentials, we should agree to disagree.

if all of the Church were under one human administration, ... then all of the Church would suffer from the same deficiencies ...

 

[HTacianas]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

Mainly because they don't read the bible, especially Matthew 18:19. Jesus gave his apostles the authority to make decisions for the church. The "two...agree" is a Hebrewism meaning " two out of three", or actually a majority vote. He also gave them the authority to "bind and loose".

The first exercise of that authority was at the Council of Jerusalem where the apostles "loosed" the requirement for circumcision among the gentiles. That is the way disagreements in the church are to be settled. The apostles handed their authority down to their successors, giving all future Ecumenical Councils their authority to make decisions for the church.

Some individuals over the years have usurped for themselves the authority rightfully reserved to the church and it has led to one heresy after another.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Why? "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." 1John2:19

1 Corinthians 11:19
And indeed, there must be differences among you to show which of you are approved.

 

[Albion]

Mainly because they don't read the bible, especially Matthew 18:19. Jesus gave his apostles the authority to make decisions for the church. The "two...agree" is a Hebrewism meaning " two out of three", or actually a majority vote. He also gave them the authority to "bind and loose".

The first exercise of that authority was at the Council of Jerusalem where the apostles "loosed" the requirement for circumcision among the gentiles. That is the way disagreements in the church are to be settled.

They weren't given carte blanche to just formulate doctrine at will, however.

 

[HTacianas]

They weren't given carte blanche to just formulate doctrine at will, however.

No Ecumenical Council has ever formulated doctrine at will.

 

[bcbsr]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

It's because there are different interpretations, Catholic theology being just one of the many interpretations. From a hermeneutical point of view, or even using basic reading comprehension skills, Catholic theology is one of the poorest in keeping in line with the scriptures. And it doesn't help that it doesn't allow its interpretations to be subject to scrutiny.

 

[John Bowen]

Cause they are like the lawyers who have taken away the key of knowledge that Jesus spoke about.Arguing over some mute point in the Bible just like the temple priests did then Jesus came across them.Who didn't accept the living Christ when he was right before them . Christ can't be put into words a mental box he can only be experienced .Right where Jesus told us the kingdom of God was within us. This is the church Jesus wants us to have based on his teachings guided by the Holy Spirit he told us he would send.So the living word can spoken through pastors , priests so Jesus can give us new teachings that he said people couldn't bare then.

 

[Steve Petersen]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

The ten million dollar question.

If their theologies and dogmas are mutually exclusive, they can't all be right; but they can all be wrong.

 

[dqhall]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

How can one trust the Roman Catholic Church theory of direct apostolic succession from Peter when a Pennsylvania grand jury found 300 priests abused 1000 children over the course of 70 years? Just because the priests attended mass does not mean they were heaven bound. It takes more than a homily to make one holy. It takes more than a sip of wine and bread wafer to become one with Christ. The Catholic Church is one church, but not everyone there is going in the right direction.

 

[Albion]

No Ecumenical Council has ever formulated doctrine at will.

I was referring to your concept of the authority given to the Apostles. The Ecumenical Councils aren't related to that, anyway.

 

[FireDragon76]

I am confident in my religious beliefs without having to have the claims of an infallible leader telling me what to believe. I don't think authoritarianism is all that compatible with Jesus' ethic.

There are so many churches because people are sinful. Jesus warned us that the path was narrow and that there would be false teachers.

 

[HTacianas]

I was referring to your concept of the authority given to the Apostles. The Ecumenical Councils aren't related to that, anyway.

The Ecumenical Councils are directly related to just that. The apostles chose their successors and handed down that authority to them. Those successors are the bishops and patriarchs who participated in the councils.

 

[Albion]

The Ecumenical Councils are directly related to just that.

I recognize that you have to hold to that theory because otherwise the idea that that the church can make up whatever doctrines it chooses as it goes along falls apart, but there is no need to reiterate it for my benefit.

 

[nonaeroterraqueous]

how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

The only way the debate on theology will ever go away is if people stop caring about theology. In that regard, I don't think that having a unanimous church is anything to brag about.



I'm not kidding, either. Before this forum, I spent my time mostly on a geocaching forum, where people debated endlessly on the proper way to hide a box in a bush. They were very adamant, and opinions were fractured all over the place, despite the fact that all subscribed to the same rule-making authority. They debate the finer points because they care.



When your people don't care enough to explore and debate their own faith, then you ought not broadcast this embarrassing fact.

 

[bling]

If you really can say, "We don't need a Pope, or bishops, or a magisterium at all, because the Bible/Christ is the head of our church!", then wouldn't it make sense that all the churches that say that would have the same doctrines? If it really is that simple, then most theological debates simply wouldn't exist; there would be no question about what the Bible means if anyone can say that we all can interpret it just fine!

This mentality was part of why the Reformation was so severe; under Luther's idea that the Holy Spirit will lead everyone to the truth without any authority, just a Bible (abridged by the Reformation, by the way), within his own lifetime other churches began to split in many different directions, and churches keep merging & splitting & reforming as everyone thinks they have a better interpretation of the Bible than everyone else (real nice spirit of humility).

So, this post is directed towards people who attend & appreciate churches that insist that the Bible or Jesus is their head, without any need for a human ruling authority: how can so many churches say that the Bible is their foundation, and yet disagree so sharply?

It is easy to have everyone say what they do not agree with, but that is not saying they agree on everything else.

You are making a bad assumption.

Do all Catholics agree on the doctrine of atonement?

Not every denomination leader is being led by the Holy Spirit all the time.

 

[Hank77]

Why? "They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us." 1John2:19

1 Corinthians 11:19
And indeed, there must be differences among you to show which of you are approved.

John was referring to groups who taught that Jesus was not the Messiah and the Son of God. In another scripture he speaks of other antichrists that taught that Jesus had not come in the flesh. Those are both a totally different Gospel.

1Jn 2:18 Little youths, it is the last hour; and even as ye heard that the antichrist doth come, even now antichrists have become many--whence we know that it is the last hour;
1Jn 2:19 out of us they went forth, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us, they would have remained with us; but--that they might be manifested that they are not all of us.
....
1Jn 2:22 Who is the liar, except he who is denying that Jesus is the Christ? this one is the antichrist who is denying the Father and the Son;

Christian denominations do not deny the Father and the Son, that Jesus was the Messiah, or that He came in human form/in the flesh.