|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1464 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Catholicism versus Protestantism down the centuries | |||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: He was also rather upset that they wouldn't convert and join his church, as he expected. (I would add that it is not entirely clear who the Talmudic passages are talking about.)
quote: That sounds very unlikely.. From what I've read the original title was rather longer and meant "Four and a Half Years of Struggle against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice." Do you have anything other than the title to support your claim ? Especially as Hitlers ideas on race (excepting the anti-semitism) are derived from Gobineau, who published a few years before Darwin's Origin.
quote: Hitler was nominally Catholic, but his relations with the Church seem to be somewhat ambiguous (to say the least). (And I would add that it's quite likely that the Catholic Churches feelings on him were mixed, too). And we should also consider that it's very likely that many of his public statements were more aimed at gathering support from the largely Christian Germany than reflecting his real beliefs. He was a politician, after all.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Aren't there also passages which suggest that there are people who beleive they are saved - but aren't. Try Matthew 7:21-27 In fact read the whole chapter.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Really ? You can cast out demons and prophecy just by assenting to a list of doctrines ?
Consider this. Matthew 7:26 (KJV)
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
I thought that a major part of the Reformation was getting rid of the burden of tradition and authority, not replacing them with different traditions and authorities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
The Catholic Church had traditions in addition to the Bible, and the Church authorities were to be deferred to in the interpretation of the Bible. (Dealing with the latter is one of the reasons the Protestants favoured translating the Bible into the native languages of the people instead of using the common Latin translations).
Yet you keep appealing to traditions, and to authorities (and ignoring the Bible). In fact you are claiming that jar is not a Protestant BECAUSE he does not defer to a Protestant authority.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
I think the problem is that you don't know what you REALLY believe...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
If the Protestant authority is the Bible, and not your authorities' interpretation of the Bible you can't insist that a man isn't a Protestant simply for disagreeing with your authorities' interpretation of the Bible. Why is that so hard to understand ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Since when is accepting Protestant authorities as dictating the interpretation of the Bible one of THE principles of Protestantism? I thought that rejection of that sort of authority was one of THE principles of Protestantism.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
It comes done to some guy telling you what the Bible "really" means, as opposed to reading it for yourself. According to you Protestants should agree with Protestant commentaries even if their own reading disagrees. Isn't that contrary to the founding principles of Protestantism ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
That's all very well, but you take disagreeing with commentaries as good reason to hold that jar is not a Protestant. Even when the commentary is engaging in rather obvious eisegesis.
And when I see your hatred of a biblical scholarship, both with regard to the text of the Bible and to the authorship (essential to correctly interpreting the Bible by your own preferred method) I really can't take you seriously whenever you talk about the Bible being the primary authority.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Well, no, that's not what she's saying. She's saying that ALL Protestants must interpret Matthew 16:15.20 in a particular way, based only on commentaries (and even her argument there is questionable, as we shall see).
see Message 411 which I quote in full here.
You are sure no Protestant. Jesus did not say PETER is the rock, He said that Peter's TESTIMONY BY THE HOLY SPIRIT THAT JESUS IS THE CHRIST is the rock. All who believe that are founded on the rock and part of the true Church. Not what I say, what ALL true believers say.
The relevant text is Matthew 16:15-20
15 He saith unto them, But who say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. 17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jonah: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father who is in heaven. 18 And I also say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it. 19 I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 20 Then charged he the disciples that they should tell no man that he was the Christ.
The "rock" is a pun on "Peter", so in fact it seems that Faith's interpretation is wrong. The Amplified Bible renders verse 16 as:
18 And I tell you, you are [e]Peter [Greek, Petrosa large piece of rock], and on this rock huge rock like Gibraltar I will build My church, and the gates of Hades (the powers of the [g]infernal region) shall [h]not overpower it [or be strong to its detriment or hold out against it].
Even the commentary she quotes in Message 413 agrees, although she chose not to quote this section:
As "Peter" and "Rock" are one word in the dialect familiarly spoken by our Lord--the Aramaic or Syro-Chaldaic, which was the mother tongue of the country--this exalted play upon the word can be fully seen only in languages which have one word for both. Even in the Greek it is imperfectly represented. In French, as WEBSTER and WILKINSON remark, it is perfect, Pierre--pierre.
Part that she did quote - with my bolding, instead of Faith's - says:
... I will build my Church--not on the man Simon-Barjona; but on him as the heavenly-taught confessor of a faith.
It still acknowledges Peter as the foundation, even if his role is preaching the "heavenly-taught" faith, as of course it must if "Peter" is the "rock".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I guess that you're missing the point. It's not that Faith is necessarily wrong, it that she says that ALL Protestants MUST interpret that short passage as she does. Now I have to say that freedom to interpret the Bible is rather more important to Protestantism than agreeing with the interpretation of these verses that Faith happens to like. Do you disagree ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
If you aren't interested enough in an argument to understand what's being discussed then I don't think that you should try to explain it.
But surely the fact that even Faith agrees that rejection of non-Biblical traditions and opening up interpretation of the Bible was one of the core drives behind the Reformation is of interest. Abuses like the selling of Indulgences were another important one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
Well maybe this will be of interest. A translation of Luther's 95 Theses.
Indulgences seem to be a major point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: You didn't show that - and quoting a commentary couldn't show that (especially when it didn't even fully agree with your "consensus"). And I've seen other commentaries that hold to yet ANOTHER view. And if course, in the post that I actually quoted jar's interpretation wasn't even an issue - simply disagreement with the interpretation that you prefer.
quote: At that point I mistakenly assumed that the commentary actually agreed with you...
quote: You are happy to suggest that others should defer to expert opinion when it suits you - but when the experts disagree with you out comes the hate and the slanders. Hardly Christian behaviour.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024