Posted on 01/31/2015 8:43:45 PM PST by Morgana
My new book, The Protestant's Dilemma, shows in a myriad of ways why Protestantism is implausible. We sifted through many arguments to boil the book down to the most essential. A few chapters didn't make the cut but are still good enough to share. Here's one of them.
If Protestantism is true,
There's no way to know whether you're assenting to divine revelation or to mere human opinion about divine revelation.
Protestants and Catholics both believe that God has revealed himself to man over the course of human history, culminating in his ultimate self-revelation in Jesus Christ. But whereas Catholics believe that Christ founded a visible Church—which subsists in the Catholic Church—and has protected its doctrines from error, Protestants reject the notion of ecclesial infallibility, maintaining that no person, church, or denomination has been preserved from error in its teachings. Which means that anyone could be wrong, and no person or institution can be trusted with speaking the truth of divine revelation without error.
Universal Fallibility
“No one is infallible.” If Protestantism has a universal belief, this is it. Luther pioneered this idea when he asserted that popes and Church councils had erred. If they had erred, it meant God had not guided them into all truth; instead, he allowed them to fall into error and, worse, to proclaim error as truth.
And so the most a Protestant can do is tentatively assent to doctrinal statements made by his church, pastor, or denomination, since those statements, being fallible, could be substantively changed at some time in the future. We see this all the time in Protestantism, most commonly when a Protestant leaves one church for another due to doctrinal disagreement, especially after his church changed its position on an issue he considered important.
Consider the question of same-sex “marriage.” Until quite recently, all Protestant denominations taught this was a contradiction in terms. But now many have modified or even completely reversed this doctrine. Those Protestants who accept this new teaching believe that the old one was wrong—an erroneous human opinion that became enshrined in their church’s statement of faith. They can do this confidently, knowing that none of their fellow church members can plausibly claim that it contradicts an irreformable dogma that was infallibly revealed by God.
Ultimately, then, a Protestant (who remains Protestant) studies the relevant sources—Scripture, history, the writings of authoritative figures in his tradition—and chooses the Protestant denomination that most aligns with his judgment. But then, they say, Catholics do the same thing: studying the sources and then choosing the Catholic Church based on their own judgment. So they see no difference in this regard.
Because Catholicism is true,
Christians can know divine revelation, as distinct from mere human opinion, because God protects it from authoritatively teaching anything that is false.
How is the Catholic’s judgment different from a Protestant's, if at all? The difference lies in the conclusion, or finishing point, of the inquiry they make. Whereas the Protestant can ultimately submit only to his own judgment, which he knows to be fallible, the Catholic can confidently render total assent to the proclamations of the visible Church that Christ established and guides, submitting his judgments to its judgments as to Christ's.
And so a Catholic can know divine revelation, as distinct from human opinion, by looking to the Church, which speaks with Christ’s voice and cannot lie. For a Protestant, only the Bible itself contains God’s infallibly inspired words, so he desires to assent to that. But since the Bible must be interpreted by someone, the closest he can come to assenting to biblical teaching is assenting to his own fallible interpretation of it. And assenting to yourself is no assent at all.
The Protestant’s Dilemma
If Protestantism is true, all are fallible. So the Protestant must rely on his own judgment above that of his church. And the orthodoxy of the church itself is judged against his interpretation of the Bible. Thus is becomes impossible to distinguish between what divine revelation actually is versus what a fallible human being thinks it is. This fact makes the Catholic Church, philosophically speaking, preferable to Protestantism, since God’s truth can be known—and known with certainty.
The hatred Catholics have for him has made me like him more. Must be something right about him to evoke so much hatred.
>>Ultimately, then, a Protestant (who remains Protestant) studies the relevant sources—Scripture, history, the writings of authoritative figures in his tradition—and chooses the Protestant denomination that most aligns with his judgment.<<
And that is also EXACTLY what a Catholic does.
Catholics are not exempt from that charge either.
NOBODY is.
That’s how we all make our decisions.
So the writer using that to try to impugn non-Catholics only has those four fingers pointing back at himself.
When I have trouble sleeping, I get my remote to see if anything worth watching is on. I have come across masses. No wonder the people look like they are extremely bored. I would be too, if I had to sit through that. I love our SB services with the singing, sermon, and then more singing.
Wow! Did you intend to exhibit total lack of understanding or just repeating the twisted view of Catholicism>
A perfect, passive, participle can be described like this.
I completely emptied a 100 bushel wagon load of corn into an empty 1000 bu bin. It was done completely and perfectly. Now that I have it totally, completely, and perfectly unloaded the unloading is in the past and will forever remain in the past. The 1000 bu bin is however NOT "full of corn" as there is still 90% of that bin still without corn in it.
The correct translation of Luke 1:28 can NOT be "full of grace" any more than it can be said that the 1000 bu bin is "full of corn".
The word for full in Greek is pleres. It is NOT used in reference to Mary but is used in reference to both Christ and Stephen as being "full of grace". The Holy Spirit did NOT make a mistake in not using pleres when referencing Mary.
Thank you for telling the truth. it is needed.
Well, I never knew about the absolute hatred Catholics have for Protestants. When I was growing up, I knew 3 Catholic families and the kids were a few years older than I and one was years younger. I was really surprised and amazed to read stuff posted by Catholics on here. I never realized how hateful some can be. I also never realized they did not read the Bible as much as Protestants do. Some seem to have no clue what it says and they seem to depend on traditions a lot. Traditions can be wrong but the Bible is always right.
Any man or woman dead or living (Saints, Popes, preachers, ministers Disciples etc...) are not or never were sinless or infallible nor have they achieved sinlessness. Scripture clearly asserts that all human beings, believers included, must deal with the presence of sin as long as they live. There is no one on earth, believer or unbeliever, who does not sin Case closed.
1 Peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
Greek hierateuma - the act or office of priesthood
Now, please show where that word or a form of it was ever used in the New Testament for New Testament church leadership.
I'll help you a little. The Greek word for priest is hiereus and is used in the New Testament for Christ, Old Covenant Priests, all believers and priests of Zeus. Never once for New Testament church leadership.
Yep.
That is disgusting.
“come out of her my people lest ye be partakers of her plagues”.
“Traditions can be wrong but the Bible is always right”.
You’re right. The Bible is always right.
2 Thes 2:15 “Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle” Paul is saying that we continue in the doctrine which was delivered to us by the mouth and writings of the apostles, through the free good will of God, who comforts us with an invincible hope, and that we also continue in all godliness our whole life long.
2 Thes 3:6 “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us.” Paul is saying that if any refused to labour with quietness, or walk in the tradition or the oral instruction which he had given to them when present (2Th 3:10), and subsequently committed to writing (1Th 4:11, 12), they were to note him with censure, and to separate from his company, yet they were to seek his good by loving admonitions.
1 Corinthians 11:2 “Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you” Ordinances-Greek, “traditions,” that is, apostolic directions given by word of mouth or in writing (1Co 11:23; 15:3; 2Th 2:15). The reference here is mainly to ceremonies: for in 1Co 11:23, as to the Lord’s Supper etc. Traditions of public assemblies, containing three points, that is of the comely apparel of men and women, of the order of the Lord’s supper, and of the right use of spiritual gifts.
So true and some do not care
Why have you never proven that the “traditions” the apostles were talking about are exactly the traditions the Catholic Church claims? Or are you simply putting your trust in those men of the magisterium?
Perhaps the Greek speakers can address the word 'dead' in the phrase 'faith without works is dead'. As in never existing. So no, faith and works are not necessarily 'hand in hand'. Deeds with out faith are useless. Faith must come first in order for the deeds to be useful. Faith has works because they have been set before us to do. Those who do the same works civilly avail nothing because there is no faith.
Interestingly, people who cannot spiritually hear God do not seem to realize that they cannot or that that is what they lack.
But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned. - I Cor 2:15
Well done!
“Interestingly, people who cannot spiritually hear God do not seem to realize that they cannot or that that is what they lack.”
THIS.
Amen!
Of course this was written to Catholics to try to prevent them from leaving the religion...There aren’t any Protestants who would believe this dumbness...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.