Another Question For Protestants

[MaxPowerPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
you still have not really grasped the followup question to answer when you choose B. It is this: since Jesus and the aposltes taught 100% correctly, is it reasonable to assume that God doesn't care if we here and now are able to receive that same 100% correct interpretation of scripture/revelation?

[/ QUOTE ]

Scripture is sufficient. Isn't it great that the apostles taught 100% correctly and we still have their inspired words? We have the truth you are searching for, in scripture. We do not need a group of people or a governing council or clergy or anything else. Nothing stands between us and the 100% correct words of the apostles. Even the Bereans searched the scriptures for themselves to see if what the apostles were telling them was true. That's the same thing I should do. That's the same thing you should do.

[ QUOTE ]
Thus, is it reasonable to believe that having taught the 100% correct and entire truth in apostolic times that God would not necessarily provide that it be so today by there being one true denomination with the others only being partially right?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, rather than "one true denomination", he has given us his very words in scripture.

Let me be more specific. You and I both agree (I think) that the teaching of the apostles was 100% accurate. Their teaching is recorded for us in a book. We have that book. What do we lack? I know what you are thinking. "Why then are there so many different interpretations for the same scripture in protestant denominations?" Protestants could overcome that objection by picking a single group to interpret scripture, but that would not make their interpretation necessarily correct. Enter Rome. Just because there is a singular (more or less) source of interpretation in the Catholic Church, does not make that interpretation necessarily correct.

There, I've answered your question. Sounds very Protestant to me. Hope it's not mere protestantism that gets me ignored (I did not read the thread you linked because I didn't want it to influence my response).

[ QUOTE ]
So, is there one true denomination today that teaches the 100% correct and entire truth? (It is not necessary to specify which one.)

[/ QUOTE ]

100%? I doubt it. Scripture has that covered though.

[ QUOTE ]
Your answer to that determines whether I will ignore you in the future if you care. There is an important theological and logical point in this matter. If you did not read my earlier thread on this matter, What You Protestants Don't Seem To Get, you might wish to.

[/ QUOTE ]

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
It often seems Catholics conveniently forget that this era is generally considered the dark ages of human history and it wasn't until the Catholic grip began to loosen in the 1500s and 1600s that the western world was able to pick back up where the Greeks left off in terms of advancement and progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that you have fogotten (or perhaps didnt know) that the Catholic Chuch was in large part responsible for the preservation of what we now think of as 'Western Civilization'

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It often seems Catholics conveniently forget that this era is generally considered the dark ages of human history and it wasn't until the Catholic grip began to loosen in the 1500s and 1600s that the western world was able to pick back up where the Greeks left off in terms of advancement and progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that you have fogotten (or perhaps didnt know) that the Catholic Chuch was in large part responsible for the preservation of what we now think of as 'Western Civilization'

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "preserving", you mean "retarding its growth" for 1500+ years, then I'd agree.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
Let me be more specific. You and I both agree (I think) that the teaching of the apostles was 100% accurate. Their teaching is recorded for us in a book. We have that book. What do we lack? I know what you are thinking. "Why then are there so many different interpretations for the same scripture in protestant denominations?" Protestants could overcome that objection by picking a single group to interpret scripture, but that would not make their interpretation necessarily correct. Enter Rome. Just because there is a singular (more or less) source of interpretation in the Catholic Church, does not make that interpretation necessarily correct.

[/ QUOTE ]

We do agree that the apostles taught 100% correctly. But the very fact of differing interpretations shows that it is not sufficient for us that they did so, but that we too can be able to have a 100% correct interpretation of their teaching. That can only be the case with an authoritative interpreter. It is not enough to merely state that scripture in sufficient when it can be misinterpreted. When these differing interpretations are regarding what is necessary for salvation especially, they can be extremely detrimental. And these differing interpretations make much more difficult fulfilling the great commission. So I will restate the question: does God care enough that we have such a 100% correct and authoritative interpretation to insure that we do? Again, this is a matter of both logic and theology.

[VarlosZ]

[ QUOTE ]
It is not enough to merely state that scripture in sufficient when it can be misinterpreted.

[/ QUOTE ]

Scripture can be misinterpreted. An "authoritative" interpreter can also be misinterpreted -- why is it necessary for God to provide a 100% correct interpretation from a single source, but not necessary for him to provide a perfect interpretation of the interpretation?

In other words: due to the limits of language and the peculiarities of personality, no interpretation, no matter how perfect, will be understood in the same way by all who hear it. To communicate the same truth (instead of merely the same words) to each person would require personalized descriptions of all of the church's teachings (to say nothing of the ability to personalize these teachings effectively).

So: Why does scriptual misinterpretation require a doctrinal remedy by God, while doctrinal misinterpretation does not require a remedy?

[kuro]

[ QUOTE ]
So I will restate the question: does God care enough that we have such a 100% correct and authoritative interpretation to insure that we do? Again, this is a matter of both logic and theology

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a matter of logic? Catholics represent 1/6 of the population and protestants represent another 1/6. Clearly God cares enough to make sure humans understand his message. That's why the other 2/3 of the world chose to follow made up religions.

[MaxPowerPoker]

[ QUOTE ]
We do agree that the apostles taught 100% correctly. But the very fact of differing interpretations shows that it is not sufficient for us that they did so, but that we too can be able to have a 100% correct interpretation of their teaching.

[/ QUOTE ]

Interpretation is fundamental to communication. I ask you to interpret each time I write a response. Interpretation is necessary when I read my Bible. Interpretation is necessary when you read/hear the Roman Catholic Church's interpretation of scripture. VarlosZ makes a good point. Is your interpretation of the Catholic Church's interpretation of scripture 100% accurate? I agree with you that we need an authoritative and reliable source for God's revealed truth. What better than his very words as recorded in scripture?

Further, we are not asking the unbeliever to put their faith in the interpretive skills of a church. We ask them to put their faith in Jesus Christ who lived a perfectly righteous life, took our sin upon himself, was crucified and was resurrected. If we trust in Christ, he takes our sin and we are clothed in his righteousness in order that we might stand before God blameless. Again, salvation is not found in the interpretive skills of a church but in the man Christ Jesus.

[ QUOTE ]
does God care enough that we have such a 100% correct and authoritative interpretation to insure that we do?

[/ QUOTE ]

I reject your premise. Because the Roman Catholic Church is fallible in its interpretation of scripture does not mean that God does not care. He has cared enough to preserve his very words. He has cared enough to make the vital truths of the faith imminently accessible to all who hear his word. He has cared enough to give us his Holy Spirit as our helper to instruct us. Again, because the Catholic Church gets things wrong does not call into question God's love and mercy.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It often seems Catholics conveniently forget that this era is generally considered the dark ages of human history and it wasn't until the Catholic grip began to loosen in the 1500s and 1600s that the western world was able to pick back up where the Greeks left off in terms of advancement and progress.

[/ QUOTE ]

It seems that you have fogotten (or perhaps didnt know) that the Catholic Chuch was in large part responsible for the preservation of what we now think of as 'Western Civilization'

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "preserving", you mean "retarding its growth" for 1500+ years, then I'd agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your statement shows either a gross ignorance of or a willful disregard for the facts of the development of western civilization as we know it.