It's all Jesus, all the time. Without the narrow confines of protestant hermeneutics, i.e., sola scriptura which is what is truly from Lucifer. Unless you'd like to explain how a protestant individual could derive scriptural warrant for homosexual relationships and all manner of gross moral evil. Unfortunately, having no authority the protestant can't say, "you're doing it wrong" and it be of any consequence. That's the world protestants have made for us. It's a demonic mess of protestants in league with the devil. They should be the ones to clean it up.
I had to read this twice to be sure. I stopped at that point as the rest would be pointless as well.
Relying on the Bible is from Lucifer? Wow. Just wow.
Oh that's easy. They are as apostate as the Catholic Church.
>>It's a demonic mess of protestants in league with the devil.<<
It's the Catholic Church who began the process of incorporating Satan's paganism by their own admission One thing Catholics tend to ignore. The Protestants came out of the Catholic Church and retained many of her errors.
>>Unfortunately, having no authority the protestant can't say, "you're doing it wrong" and it be of any consequence.<<
The unfortunate part is that neither Catholics or many Protestants actually use the original Hebrew or Greek as God's word.
More propaganda and absurd Roman reasoning. The fact is that those who hold most strongly to Scripture being the supreme authority as the wholly inspired and assured word of God, accurate in all of the principles it teaches, are by far the most religious conservative group, and much more than the fruit of Rome.
And in reality, it is those Prot. churches that are most like Rome that are overall the most liberal, while the definition of "Protestant" includes those who deny core historical Prot. beliefs, even Protestants as a whole are more conservative than Catholics in America.
And talk about not having any consequences, Rome counts and treats even proabortion prosodomite pols as members in life and in death, sending a message to all others. And in the past she employed the sword of men in order to bring about conformity among members, which unScriptural means early Prots had to unlearn.
Moreover, holding Scripture as supreme sufficient and authoritative as literally being the word of God does not negate magisterial authority, but Scripture provides and establishes it, but not as the supreme infallible authority, which is never seen or promised in Scripture, despite RC extrapolative attempts to read it into Scripture.
And the fact is that it is abundantly evidenced that Scripture was the transcendent supreme standard for obedience and testing and establishing truth claims as the wholly Divinely inspired and assured, Word of God.
And which testifies (Lk. 24:27,44, etc.) to writings of God being recognized and established as being so (essentially due to their unique and enduring heavenly qualities and attestation), and thus they materially provide for a canon of Scripture (as well as for reason, the church, etc.)
Meanwhile, under the alternative to SS, that of church leadership being supreme (sola ecclesia) is seen the most critical heresies, that of cults, which fundamental evangelicals have historically contended against due to commitment to core truths cults deny, while also contending against inventions of Rome.
It is thus no wonder that both liberals and Rome have treated such evangelicals as their greatest threats.
And in contrast to the false dilemma of no centralized authority meaning moral anarchy, it is the failure to uphold the authority of unchanging Scripture as the assured word of God that is the problem, while the problem of a centralized autocratic authority being supreme is that when it becomes liberal in what it effectually teaches, then so do her subjects overall.
Evangelical Protestants are the most politically conservative Christian tradition. Within each tradition, those with literal views of the Bible are more politically conservative than is their tradition overall. Catholics that are Biblical literalists (11.8%) hold more conservative political views than the Catholic population in general does. The Biblical literalist Catholic is as politically conservative as the Biblical literalist who is Evangelical (47.8%) or Mainline Protestant. (11.2%) American Piety in the 21st Century, Baylor Institute for Studies of Religion http://www.baylor.edu/content/services/document.php/33304.pdf
Meanwhile this country was not founded with Catholic religion primarily being its basis, but Protestant.
Alexis de Tocqueville (1805—1859. French Catholic political thinker and historian; best known for his two volume, “Democracy in America”) — The sects that exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to the worship which is due to the Creator; but they all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man. Each sect adores the Deity in its own peculiar manner, but all sects preach the same moral law in the name of God...Moreover, all the sects of the United States are comprised within the great unity of Christianity, and Christian morality is everywhere the same...
In the United States the sovereign authority is religious, and consequently hypocrisy must be common; but there is no country in the whole world in which the Christian religion retains a greater influence over the souls of men than in America, and there can be no greater proof of its utility, and of its conformity to human nature, than that its influence is most powerfully felt over the most enlightened and free nation of the earth...
There is certainly no country in the world where the tie of marriage is more respected than in America or where conjugal happiness is more highly or worthily appreciated, In Europe almost all the disturbances of society arise from the irregularities of domestic life. To despise the natural bonds and legitimate pleasures of home is to contract a taste for excesses, a restlessness of heart, and fluctuating desires. Agitated by the tumultuous passions that frequently disturb his dwelling, the European is galled by the obedience which the legislative powers of the state exact. But when the American retires from the turmoil of public life to the bosom of his family, he finds in it the image of order and of peace...
The Americans combine the notions of Christianity and of liberty so intimately in their minds, that it is impossible to make them conceive the one without the other; and with them this conviction does not spring from that barren traditionary faith which seems to vegetate in the soul rather than to live...
Thus religious zeal is perpetually warmed in the United States by the fires of patriotism. These men do not act exclusively from a consideration of a future life; eternity is only one motive of their devotion to the cause. If you converse with these missionaries of Christian civilization, you will be surprised to hear them speak so often of the goods of this world, and to meet a politician where you expected to find a priest.
They will tell you that "all the American republics are collectively involved with each other; if the republics of the West were to fall into anarchy, or to be mastered by a despot, the republican institutions which now flourish upon the shores of the Atlantic Ocean would be in great peril. It is therefore our interest that the new states should be religious, in order that they may permit us to remain free." (Democracy in America, Volume I Chapter XVII, 1835; http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/religion/ch1_17.htm)
• There are certain populations in Europe whose unbelief is only equaled by their ignorance and their debasement, while in America one of the freest and most enlightened nations in the world fulfills all the outward duties of religion with fervor.
Upon my arrival in the United States, the religious aspect of the country was the first thing that struck my attention; and the longer I stayed there, the more did I perceive the great political consequences resulting from this state of things, to which I was unaccustomed. In France I had almost always seen the spirit of religion and the spirit of freedom pursuing courses diametrically opposed to each other; but in America I found that they were intimately united, and that they reigned in common over the same country. (Democracy in America, [New York: A. S. Barnes & Co., 1851), pp. 331, 332, 335, 336-7, 337; http://xroads.virginia.edu/~HYPER/DETOC/religion/ch1_17.htm)
And the Divine Being seems to have manifested His approbation of the mutual forbearance and kindness by which the different sects treat each other, and by the remarkable prosperity with which He has been please to favor the whole country. (Benjamin Franklin, "Information to those who would Remove to America" In Franklin, Benjamin. The Bagatelles from Passy. Ed. Lopez, Claude A. New York: Eakins Press. 1967; http://mith.umd.edu//eada/html/display.php?docs=franklin_bagatelle4.xml. Also, John Gould Curtis, American history told by contemporaries .... Volume 3, p. 26)
Then I guess Jesus was of the devil when He quoted SCRIPTURE at the devil in His temptation in the wilderness.
Jesus didn’t appeal to tradition or the authority of any governing religious body. He went right to SCRIPTURE and used that and that alone.
He did’t argue or debate with the enemy or try to reason with him. He was just quoting SCRIPTURE.
Looks like Protestants are keeping pretty good company with Jesus in relying on the word and its power.