Re: Question For Protestants
Thanks for the response. I do see what you're saying and I follow your logic, but I have to agree with my atheistic comrade about what I now see is your premise:
[ QUOTE ]
Since God is truth, then surely it is obvious that it is critical that His divine revelations be interpreted correctly. If every man was a competent interpreter of scripture, then all would have the same unified interpretation of God's eternal truths.
[/ QUOTE ]
I do not think this is obvious. I would liken it to saying this: Since God is Good, then surely it is obvious that it is critical that His divine commandments be followed correctly. If every man was a competent performer of deeds, then all would universally do the Good.
Wouldn’t you say that a person’s sins are between him and god? (Oh maybe not, you believe in confession of sins to a priest. OK let me rephrase…) Not even a priest is a more competent judge of whether an action is a sin or not than the sinner himself, wouldn’t you say? Hmmm, maybe you wouldn’t.
OK it’s a bad analogy. It just leads to more disagreements between us. OOO said that you (BT) were assuming that:
[ QUOTE ]
- You know what God cares and does not care about
- God's desire is to have to his message interpreted correctly.
- God cares that specific doctrinal points are interpreted correctly, rather the overall 'message'.
[/ QUOTE ]
But I think it’s more than that…Let’s focus on the original syllogism, rephrased so:
1. God is truth itself
2. God wants man to know the truth
3. He appointed some men to be better at discovering his truth than others
3 is not implied by 1+2, is it? I would say instead:
1. God is Truth itself
2. God wants man to know the truth
a. but they are incapable of being forced to Know
b. inasmuch as they cannot be forced to do Good.
c. for we have free will in knowing as well as doing
3. All men partake of God as much as they are able
In many ways it comes down to this question:
What is a soul?
If you believe that a soul contains all within it, including a grain of Truth, then no expert or authority is needed to find it, and in fact can often confuse or harm the soul by trying to impart a different truth to it. Truth can only be discovered, not taught. That kind of thing.
Now, when it comes to this statement:
[ QUOTE ]
“And I don't mean how some biblical passage applies to your life right now, but regarding core christian doctrines that are obviously disputed among various denominations including the catholic church.”
[/ QUOTE ]
I have to admit I am a weak Christian. I don’t believe that anything that doesn’t apply to my life right now is worth caring about. So as to whether I kneel or sit or stand or plié or whatever I just don’t think God cares. But that goes back to what I see as the original fallacy in the precepts you and anyone who demands spiritual authority: As Truth with a capital T, God cannot be wholly understood or accessed, therefore all amounts are the same.
Probably not convincing, but I'm also not really a good representative of all Protestants, being 1/2 Quaker and 1/2 Episcopalian=All Wuss.
|