Religion The breakdown of doffrences between Christian denominations

[Zachowon]

This is an open forum of essays if need be for arguments to be made and overall discussion.
My second religion thread I have made on this forum.

From what I have seen recently there is hotly contested on Bible understanding based on depending on which section of it one follows.

Seeing the arguments by @King Arts and @LordsFire Have made this obvious thT there is some debate on the matter, and to make a proper thread here it is.

Now, I want to start off by going off the fact that Christianity has had multiple schism in its history, with even at one point having two separate popes.

So the prior argument can be contained here as well as more going into the differences between the sects

 

[TheRejectionist]

Might do Greta some good if she actually read a bit of Martin Luther. (Not necessarily that particular book of course)
Just saying.

You expect a Protestant to actually read scripture? That's like asking Latinos and Carribbeans to stop being promiscuos with anyone from 18 onwards.

 

[Zachowon]

You expect a Protestant to actually read scripture? That's like asking Latinos and Carribbeans to stop being promiscuos with anyone from 18 onwards.

@S'task

Protestants read scripture plenty

 

[LordsFire]

You expect a Protestant to actually read scripture? That's like asking Latinos and Carribbeans to stop being promiscuos with anyone from 18 onwards.

Are you from some kind of mirror universe or something?

 

[LordsFire]

Depends on where said people live. If they’re inner city, then that’s more than likely to be accurate from my knowledge.

Oh, there are plenty of Protestants both real and 'My parents took me to church as a kid but I haven't been in ten years' types which read the Bible little or not at all.

However, unlike the Catholic Church, Protestantism doesn't have a history of actively discouraging church members from reading the Bible.

 

[Bigking321]

Yeah...

Isn't one of their big things leaving the study and interpretation of scripture to the church appointed experts?

 

[Scottty]

You expect a Protestant to actually read scripture?

Luther's writings are not considered "scripture", even by Lutherans.

That's like asking Latinos and Carribbeans to stop being promiscuos with anyone from 18 onwards.

No comment.

 

[King Arts]

Oh, there are plenty of Protestants both real and 'My parents took me to church as a kid but I haven't been in ten years' types which read the Bible little or not at all.

However, unlike the Catholic Church, Protestantism doesn't have a history of actively discouraging church members from reading the Bible.

Yeah...

Isn't one of their big things leaving the study and interpretation of scripture to the church appointed experts?

It’s ok to read the Bible but you as a layman can’t effectively interpret it and you should trust a priests interpretation over your own.

American Protestant are some of the most backward people ever. I mean they love the constitution and they accept the authority of a learned body of experts to interpret it you know lawyers and judges. Instead of saying we should just remove the Supreme Court and everyone can interpret thee constitution. But here is the thing the US constitution is both shorter and easier to understand than the Bible which is a group of books written in another language much of it is poetry or allegory as opposed to the constitution which is very straightforward.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Doesn't the Constitution have like two hundred years worth of legal fanfiction added onto it though? There's a whole legal code and hundreds of Supreme Court cases and amendments and case law and the like etc... and plenty of American "Protestants" wanting to simplify the Constitution while the Supreme Court and Judiciary itself is largely made up of Catholics and...

Almost similar to that entire Bible thing... and the Church... with its many Councils and Schisms and Bulls and Decrees and KGB Agents and other indulgences it partook of.

Regardless the metaphor to the Constitution seems pretty retarded just on the base of it.

 

[King Arts]

Doesn't the Constitution have like two hundred years worth of legal fanfiction added onto it though? There's a whole legal code and hundreds of Supreme Court cases and amendments and case law and the like etc... and plenty of American "Protestants" wanting to simplify the Constitution while the Supreme Court and Judiciary itself is largely made up of Catholics and...

Almost similar to that entire Bible thing... and the Church... with its many Councils and Schisms and Bulls and Decrees and KGB Agents and other indulgences it partook of.

Regardless the metaphor to the Constitution seems pretty retarded just on the base of it.

You don’t think Christianity has 2000 years of history? WTF you think it’s just muh Bible and pastor Jim after Jesus ascended to heaven? lol.

And the point was that all Protestants support the existence of a Supreme Court they may not like its decisions but none of them want to abolish it, because “why do we need someone to interpret it, the people can read the constitution themselves.”

 

[Husky_Khan]

You don’t think Christianity has 2000 years of history? WTF you think it’s just muh Bible and pastor Jim after Jesus ascended to heaven? lol.

Lord Help You, You are So Predictable...

And the point was that all Protestants support the existence of a Supreme Court they may not like its decisions but none of them want to abolish it, because “why do we need someone to interpret it, the people can read the constitution themselves.”

So what your saying is that the Church added two thousand years of fanfiction to the Bible just like I said lawyers added two hundred years of fanfiction to the US Constitution?

WOW. It's almost like I can predict how you'll misread my post and strawman my argument.

You said American Protestants are the most backwards people ever because they accept a legal framework from the US Constitution and compared it to the Catholic Church or whatever. If that was your point, its a terrible point since as you stated, the Church has two thousand years of fanfiction added to it, while the US Constitution has two hundred years of fanfiction added to it. Both apparently require teams of specialists to interpret what were supposed to be simple documents. The metaphor is farcical. There's lots of Americans, protestants and otherwise, who want simplified laws and less bureaucracy. It's like a cornerstone of a lot of Conservative and Right Wing politics.

Though not Catholics and Orthodox apparently according to your metaphor.

 

[King Arts]

Lord Help You, You are So Predictable...



So what your saying is that the Church added two thousand years of fanfiction to the Bible just like I said lawyers added two hundred years of fanfiction to the US Constitution?

WOW. It's almost like I can predict how you'll misread my post and strawman my argument.

You said American Protestants are the most backwards people ever because they accept a legal framework from the US Constitution and compared it to the Catholic Church or whatever. If that was your point, its a terrible point since as you stated, the Church has two thousand years of fanfiction added to it, while the US Constitution has two hundred years of fanfiction added to it. Both apparently require teams of specialists to interpret what were supposed to be simple documents. The metaphor is farcical. There's lots of Americans, protestants and otherwise, who want simplified laws and less bureaucracy. It's like a cornerstone of a lot of Conservative and Right Wing politics.

Though not Catholics and Orthodox apparently according to your metaphor.

Are you illiterate? Legal precedents aren’t “fan fiction” They are actually necessary for a law code to exist because not everything can be written into ONE document.
Also I don’t care if you want to make the laws “simpler” or whatever that does not change my point you disagree with the judgements the courts have made but you accept the authority of the court to interpret what the constitution means. Unless you and your Protestants friends want to ABOLISH the entire Supreme Court. Is that what you want?

 

[Husky_Khan]

Are you illiterate? Legal precedents aren’t “fan fiction” They are actually necessary for a law code to exist because not everything can be written into ONE document.
Also I don’t care if you want to make the laws “simpler” or whatever that does not change my point you disagree with the judgements the courts have made but you accept the authority of the court to interpret what the constitution means. Unless you and your Protestants friends want to ABOLISH the entire Supreme Court. Is that what you want?

So your admitting that the Constitution is more then just a simple document as you originally proclaimed it to be in your trite metaphor comparing the Bible to the Constitution and there's a reason for a team of lawyers and legal scholars to interpret it?

And also its only American Protestants that care about legal simplification and the growth of the justice bureaucracy?

EDIT:

And hello my Protestant friends I apparently have. 🤗

 

[King Arts]

So your admitting that the Constitution is more then just a simple document as you originally proclaimed it to be in your trite metaphor comparing the Bible to the Constitution and there's a reason for a team of lawyers and legal scholars to interpret it?

And also its only American Protestants that care about legal simplification and the growth of the justice bureaucracy?

Nice pivot to avoid the question. So why don’t you answer it, do you support abolishing the Supreme Court and just having people interpret it themselves? Because that’s the Protestant position in regards to the church and Bible.

And no the constitution itself is relatively simple compared to the Bible.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Nice pivot to avoid the question. So why don’t you answer it, do you support abolishing the Supreme Court and just having people interpret it themselves? Because that’s the Protestant position in regards to the church and Bible.

And no the constitution itself is relatively simple compared to the Bible.

Yes the Constitution is relatively simple to the Bible.

Just the Bible.

And just the Constitution.

*hits your head with a Monstrance*

 

[King Arts]

Yes the Constitution is relatively simple to the Bible.

Just the Bible.

And just the Constitution.

*hits your head with a Monstrance*

Ok thank you just the constitution not including legal precedent is more simple than just the Bible not including biblical and other religious tradition.

So then the question is why do we need a team of intelligent trained individuals to interpret the simpler document but not the more complicated one?

Why were you fighting me on the first part?

 

[Scottty]

Nice pivot to avoid the question. So why don’t you answer it, do you support abolishing the Supreme Court and just having people interpret it themselves? Because that’s the Protestant position in regards to the church and Bible.

And no the constitution itself is relatively simple compared to the Bible.

Here in South Africa in the old days, when it came to the question of what the law actually meant, the final and infallible authority on the matter was the Appelate Division of the Supreme Court of Bloemfontein.
To quote one of those judges: "Our judgements are not final because we are infallible. No, they are infallible because they are final."

When it's man-made laws, what the court is really ruling on is not "What did the people who wrote this really mean?" but rather, in practical terms, "What interpretation of this document are we going to declare to the one the state will actually base its actions on?"
It's one thing to do that with man-made laws.

But when it comes to Divine revelation? No, we are not going to accept that whatever interpretation a bunch of corrupt old men in robes and funny hats invented just to get money out of people must be the true one. Especially if the people in robes and funny hats cannot even get their act together and agree all the time.
To quote Martin Luther: "I do not accept the authority of popes and councils, for they have contradicted each other in the past."

 

[Cherico]

You're not very patriotic if you don't froth at the mouth to serve and protect your country and people.
It's an embarrassment to the armed forces if retarded boomers on social media are a better example of patriotism than the world's strongest fighting force.

Id also say its not very realistic.

Fact is, if your a soilger for the most part your going to much prefer being stationed in the US then the middle east. You get more ammendities here, its easer to stay in contact with your family here, easier to be near your kids and get them a education here. In pretty much every way that matters. Being stationed to protect the boarder is going to be easier than doing a patrol in the middle east.

 

[Scottty]

Ok thank you just the constitution not including legal precedent is more simple than just the Bible not including biblical and other religious tradition.

So then the question is why do we need a team of intelligent trained individuals to interpret the simpler document but not the more complicated one?

Why were you fighting me on the first part?

KA you come across as horribly ignorant about Protestant Christianity in general.
What makes you think we don't have teams of intelligent trained individuals?
We do. We have Bible collages where people go to study in order to qualify for ministry, and there they must learn to read the Bible in the original Greek, learn a lot of other things etc etc.
But no sane person thinks any of that makes them incapable of error. And they certainly don't get to treat the Bible as something that they have the right to make mean whatever they wish, which is what the RCC implicitly claims for its people in robes and funny hats.

 

[stephen the barbarian]

So then the question is why do we need a team of intelligent trained individuals to interpret the simpler document but not the more complicated one?

you do realize that pretty much every protestant denomination has a clergy, right?