You're right. It's petty of me to jump on you for 1 verse difference. I just thought it was rather ironic that you said you were going to keep quoting 2 Timothy 3:16 when it doesn't say that.
Last edited:
Protestantism: Critique and Debate Thread
- Thread starter Lawrence87
- Start date
You're right. It's petty of me to jump on you for 1 verse difference. I just thought it was rather ironic that you said you were going to keep quoting 2 Timothy 3:16 when it doesn't say that.
I still don't understand your original swipe. The "Complete Jewish Bible" doesn't have the word complete in verse 16 either. Why did you even bring that up? Are you insinuating that I'm Jewish?
I guess I should have typed 2 Timothy 3:16-17.
Last edited:
Protestant Churches still teach about fasting. Although my Church isn't as 'fire and brimstone' as I'd like, the pastor encourages fasting. The bulletin has disclaimers however to consult your physician if you have a medical condition that might make it unsafe for you to fast. Welcome to 2023.
How do you interpret John 6:53 where Christ says Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you?
Can you elaborate? What do you mean by your pastor encourages fasting? Is it up to every individual to determine what that looks like or does he give them a standard? If the latter, what does that standard look like?Protestant Churches still teach about fasting. Although my Church isn't as 'fire and brimstone' as I'd like, the pastor encourages fasting. The bulletin has disclaimers however to consult your physician if you have a medical condition that might make it unsafe for you to fast. Welcome to 2023.
Anyone who thinks Jesus is talking about the Lord's Supper in John 6 is already approaching that text with the Sacrament in mind. He hadn't instituted the Lord's Supper yet. He defines eating and drinking as coming to Him and believing in Him in verse 35.
Christ many times refers to something that is yet to come to pass. Just because he hasn't instituted the Eucharist doesn't mean he can't allude to it.
Loaded or not that's the claim you're making. You are holding forth that the entire Christian community radically invented unapostolic, ungodly and heretical teachings and a false church immediately after the apostles died.
That is the claim you want me to make, that is not the claim I am making. I called your language loaded because it was designed to trap me into a claim no one is even making.
The link Abouila provided clearly shows the word complete absent from virtually every popular translation of the Bible. If you search for complete, you get reference to the "Complete" Jewish Bible down in the trademark section of the page.
He was joking with you but also pointing out that no one here has any idea what you're talking about. Not a single translation of that line has the word complete in it. The vast majority of translations have "profitable" or "useful," which means that scripture alone is not sufficient but it is extremely valuable to have.
I guess where I'm most confused by Protestant's beliefs is that there was an age of Apostles, who could do incredible miracles such as heal the sick and blind, wrote the Bible, created the Church, lived a martyr's life, yet in spite of this tremendous holy power they did not have the ability to pass their Holy Spirit onto their Bishops?
How is that congruent?
How is that congruent?
The unfamiliarity with 2 Timothy 3 is self-evident. I should have typed 2 Timothy 3:16-17. I will do so the next time it is downplayed to not say what it actually says.
2 Timothy 3:16-17; the full sentence, says that the Scriptures are profitable to make you complete in doctrine, reproof, correction, righteousness. Not "the Scriptures are useful but unable to make you complete in doctrine, reproof, correction, righteousness."
That is a rationalization. Is there anywhere in the New Testament that says "the Holy Spirit is transferred generation to generation through the Bishops?"
The part where Jesus said his Apostles would have the power to bind or loosen things from this world with their words. Thus if they bound other men with the power of bishophood through their words, and told them they could also do the exact same things to create more bishops, it follows Apostles were able to create such a system because Christ gave them the power to do so.
No one is disputing the authority of the Apostles. What words did they write?
The "tag, you're it" inerrancy is not found in the text.
The words of St. Ignatius, among many others. Just like Jesus had his Apostles record his words, so too did the Apostles have others record their Acts so they could focus on Christ and His Church.
He wasn't an Apostle. And it's clear from the Early Church Fathers that they did not understand themselves to have the same powers as the Apostles.
Don't believe me? Believe Ignatius: "I am not enjoining [commanding] you as Peter and Paul did. They were apostles, I am condemned.”
While their powers were lesser, they were still able to write and record the Acts of the Apostles, just as the Apostles were able to record the acts of Jesus. Thus Jesus gave the Apostles the power to bind and loosen, and they bound bishops into this world to carry on the mission of Christ's church, which is recorded by the students of the Apostles themselves, just as the story of Jesus was recorded by his students (the Apostles).
By the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, yes. The men themselves were not inerrant, they were "carried along" by the Holy Spirit.
The Apostles also wrote the Scriptures in order to correct those bishops when they fell into error.
And now you know how Apostolic succession has been working for the past 2000 years.
Absolutely, to protect the flock from potential false prophets, just as Christ commanded.
Scripture always take precedence over the word of men, but translating and interpreting Scripture is very difficult because it is a foreign text almost 2000 years old.
It depends on who you're asking. I think we both agree that it isn't working in Rome. For me, Apostolicity is marked by adherence to what the Apostles wrote.
Amen, and yes, it can be difficult, but I believe that the Scriptures are able to accomplish what they were set out to accomplish, because they say that they can.
