@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer Where does the Bible say the traditions and church are not divinely ordained? Seems like a heretic invention of the 16th century
English
Casper Gaust
3.1K posts
@CasperGaust @JayDyer The traditions are not divinely ordained in the same way as scripture. The church is, but not as a source of authority, but as a place of fellowship.
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer You don't follow the scriptures, because your reject the oral traditions that the scriptures tell you to follow, you also don't trust jesus to have appointed people who would have kept the traditions and church preserved
English
@CasperGaust @JayDyer And we don’t claim that authority. At least we follow the scriptures in that regard instead of pretending we have authority which we don’t have.
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer The protestant church literally cant claim to have doctrinal authority, the scriptures were written and compiled 1400 years before it existed.
English
@CasperGaust @JayDyer I simply agree to disagree there. It’s a very valid argument. The Protestant church does not claim to have doctrinal authority. The Catholic and Orthodox churches do.
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer What's blasphemous is claiming the book is an infallible gift from God and in the same breath calling his church and traditions man made. They are equally gifts from God and they work together to reveal God to his people.
English
It’s not about failing to be perfect. It’s that the Catholic/Orthodox churches made the claim that the authority of the church is on par with the infallible word of God. Which is blasphemous and heretical. Men are fallible. They cannot be trusted to make infallible doctrine. Only God can do that.
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer Jesus didn't give you a book, it didn't fall from the sky, the liturgy mirrors the same traditions Jesus followed and the apostles. Reducing the church to fellowship is highly absurd
English
This is a classical example of heresy by tradition. Nothing in the Bible says this. You may be able to make an argument for the church on the basis of fellowship, but not on church authority.
But as far as doctrine goes, only the scripture has been explicitly stated to be divinely inspired and useful for instruction. Tradition is just someone making claims or rituals that may or may not be useful and has no basis in scripture to have authority.
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer The entire book your consider authoritative was brought into existence by the very thing you're arguing against.
The book also says the oral traditions are to be taught and followed, if you don't have enough faith in christ to preserve those things, what is it you believe in?
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer And im not trying to whataboutism prots to EO's by saying that, im just merely pointing out why its an invalid point and is the whataboutism
English
What’s this “trinity”? lol We don’t recognize the authority of a body of clergymen because they have proven themselves to make heretical doctrine. Like false prophets, they push the words of men over the word of God.
The whole reason the Protestant movement exists is because church authority has a proven track record of blasphemy and heresy.
English
@JakenKy1 @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan I call into question what exactly it is you even have faith in, it seems to be only what you can personally comprehend from a plain reading of a book laden with prophetic metaphor and parables and super natural events and figures, I don't believe you're equipped to do it
English
@CasperGaust @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan You're making a category error because of course you are. Killing is an action. Not a charge. Murder, manslaughter, etc, are all legal charges. No matter what he is charged with, the fact that the guy killed the dude remains the same. Kill means the same thing in each instance.
English
Funny Jay is coming to this conclusion now. My bishop on Sunday told me very kindly that I should defend my faith if I need to, but to steer away from apologetics online if I can. (He also hinted at how others are far better at it than I, which is true for sure.)
Jay Dyer@JayDyer
Riding the line between talking theology / doing debates, and all the other issues like geopolitics, lit, satire has been an odd thing. For some it is confusing, for others, not an issue. However, after 10 years of mixed content, I feel that the time of online theology debate for me has come to a close. No one has of yet told me to say this - it’s a decision I’ve pondered for a while. I would rather focus on other topics I find interesting and religion is authentically at the parish level, not online anyway. It seems as if online theology debate is pretty much done. Onward to producing fun content on the other subjects!
English
@JakenKy1 @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan Can you really when have faith in Christ if you don't even believe he would preserve his church and traditions until 1500 years after his death which would result in 1000s of contradictory doctrines?
English
@JakenKy1 @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan Murder requires killing but killing isn't the same as murder, killing can be justified murder can't.
The same is true of salvation through justification by faith alone or if your faith without works is dead, or if faith comes packaged with following the church and traditions
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer The argument is actually if scriptures can be separated from their trinity with church and tradition, and you haven't made a case for why they can when the scriptures point to an upheld oral tradition and a visible church.
English
The subject of debate here, however, is whether the scriptures should be held up as the supreme authority outside of any divine revelation.
If you want to argue over issues of division by interpretation, then, as I pointed out, the Catholic and Orthodox churches are just as guilty of such divisions. It only stands out more in Protestant churches because we don’t abide by a rigid hierarchy.
English
@JakenKy1 @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan The conversation would be had on the difference between murder and kill, self defense, manslaughter, aggravated, all other kinds of things that could be related.
Just as it is with grace through faith, you and I differ on what this one word entails.
English
@CasperGaust @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan Ok. Then support your understanding from Scripture. If a defendant was asked "did you kill Joe," and he responded, "we have different understandings of the word kill," that would be asinine.
These words were spoken to illiterate people and you act like they're indiscernible.
English
English
@William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @CasperGaust @PageauJonathan Can a person be saved if they leave EO for a Baptist church?
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer I never said it did, what changes is the interpretation.
So now we're stuck with how do we know which one of your thousand denoms actually has it right.
Surely its going to be whichever one you currently practice
English
The text hasn’t changed. If it had, we would be able to debunk later alterations with the originals.
And you confuse interpretation with the text itself. There are many denominations because even with an unchanging text, not everyone agrees on the interpretation. (Something which the Catholics and Orthodox churches are just as guilty of by the way).
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer How do you know the Canon is complete or there are books that shouldn't be if the thing in question is the Canon? This is circular.
English
@CasperGaust @JayDyer I trust the cannon because the scriptures do not conflict. The many oral traditions however conflict with scripture. Scripture over oral tradition
English
@DarthKirby009 @JayDyer So can the text, that's why there's 1000s of prot denominations. Some of you believe in real presence, others believe its merely symbolic, some of you think baptism is necessary, others think its publicly boasting you're a believer.
Clearly its not so black and white.
English
The text itself can be examined. And tested. An oral tradition is nebulous and can be argued over endlessly because it can change in accordance to the needs of the individual arguing for it.
While oral tradition can be passed on reliably, it can also be readily changed with no evidence to show that it hasn’t changed.
English
@JakenKy1 @William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @PageauJonathan My answer would be the same if not similar to yours, by grace through faith, but as I said previously, our understanding of that phrase is entirely different, so we only agree on the words and not the meaning.
English
@William_TM_ @OddlyGeometric @CasperGaust @PageauJonathan The problem with Ortho folks is they don't want to answer direct questions. You guys always parry.
"How are you saved?" Rather than answering, the response is "Do you even know what my church teaches?" It's exhausting.
"What's 2 +2?"
" Do you even know the epistemological.."
English
@JakenKy1 @PageauJonathan I have read them, and also thessolonians as well as the rest of the Canon.
English
@CasperGaust @PageauJonathan well, read Ephesians and Galatians and see what you think it's saying. It'd take you 40 minutes.
English