The Great Protestant Fallacy

[Cutter]

An account of the special revelation of Christ to Paul hardly counts as a defense of individual interpretation.

Please be so kind to explain why not?

This account in Galatians is a defense of the Gospel message he preached against the teachings of those who would return to works righteousness.

So that lessens the experience? If so, how?
Give me answers, and enlighten me to your wisdom, please?

 

[Matt Black]

It is clearly logical to you, Matt, but I'm afraid not to me. Here are some possible meanings of your objection that occur to me. Are any of them correct, or do you mean something I haven't thought of?

1. Maybe you think that the passage about the Bereans searching the scriptures cannot apply to the subject under discussion, because they did not have the New Testament.

2. Perhaps you thought that because I said that the Bereans only had the Old Testament, I was saying that we too should only use the Old Testament. (If so, I must assure that I did not mean that).

3. Could it be that you believe the Bereans already had at least part of the New Testament?

I stress again that all I meant was that, for people living at the time of those Bereans, the only Scriptures they could have searched would have been the Old Testament. The verse I quoted was Acts 17.11:

11 These were more fair–minded than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness, and searched the Scriptures daily to find out whether these things were so.​

If we want to know what "these things" were, we only need to look back at Acts 17.1-3:

1 ¶ Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews.
2 Then Paul, as his custom was, went in to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures,
3 explaining and demonstrating that the Christ had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, "This Jesus whom I preach to you is the Christ."
​

Paul reasoned with the Jews from the Old Testament Scriptures, the New having not yet been written, concerning the person, the death and the resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ.

I have no desire at all to be "nit-picking". I'm just trying to understand what you meant.

Incidentally, I should add that I agree with what you wrote in reply to Chemnitz.

I guess it's a combination of #1 and #2, David: the Bereans passage is oft-cited by adherents of SS to support that doctrine, their point being "Well, Scripture alone was good enough for the Bereans so it ought to be good enough for us." I was merely highlighting the obvious problem with that, namely that since the 'Scripture' the Bereans had was only the OT, then citing that story would tend to suggest that 'we' should, like them, only use the OT in matters of faith, doctrine, etc....which...er...clearly can't be right, can it? Therefore, I'm saying that quoting the Bereans as an approach to Scripture is problematic.

 

[Chemnitz]

Please be so kind to explain why not?
So that lessens the experience? If so, how?
Give me answers, and enlighten me to your wisdom, please?

It is actually quite simple, "For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught [it], but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." rules out any chance of this passage being a defense of individual interpretation. Paul is recalling a direct revelation to him by Christ himself. This is in essence a defense of his apostleship, not some defense for individual interpretation. Paul is trying to distance himself from the Judaizers who are trying to impose human traditions upon the people by reminding them of his special circumstances. I would also like to point out that not once in the entirety of what you quoted does he ever say anything about spending time alone interpreting the scriptures, only that he recieved the revelation directly from God.

 

[Matt Black]

Paul was an Apostle; we're not. End of.

 

[Eliyahu]

If anyone cannot interpret the Bible, he or she is not qualified to debate with the True Christian believers who can interpret the Bible according to what the Holy Spirit revealed to them ( 1 Jn 2:27 ). Such poerson is none but the fake Christians, no matter how their titles at the churches are.

If any individual cannot interpret the Bible, who can interpret it?

According to the Majority of the Church? Is the Truth depending on the democracy?

According to the Priests and Popes? It is absolute heresy !

Who can interpret the Bible?

Is the Clergy system supported by the Bible?

Ridiculous Heresy ignoring the Truth that the all Truly Born Again believers are the Priests, King-ly Priests in front of God.

Jesus HATES teachings by Nicolaitanes ( Rev 2:6, 15) !

Only the Priests for the Idol Worshippers can interpret the Bible ?

 

[Matt Black]

So you're answer to this epistemological problem is....what, exactly?

 

[Eliyahu]

Salvation is a matter of Individual Faith, doesn't depend on which church or which denomination any individual belongs to, because the Holy Spirit works in the heart of the individual human being.

Therefore the study and interpretation by individual person is the ultimate basis though they are iencouraged to communicate each other thru fellowship.

Proverb 27:17
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

1 Cor 14
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

The church meetings are the place of fellowship where the individual believer can express what they studied individually and exchange the faith thru fellowship.

If any individual cannot interpret the Bible, who can interpret it ?

Only the holy papa? None but the Ony God is Holy Papa ! Others, if they are called Holy Papa or Holy See, are wicked Heretics !

Only the Priests?
Ridiculous ! All the Believers are Priests ! ( 1 Pet 2:5-9)

Only Thru Councils? Where is it? Was the Jerusalem Council convened with the agenda and notice? Wasn't it held just by the visit of Paul and Barnabas? How many churches were invited there? The visitors were only from Antioch and therefore the letters were sent to Antioch, to Syria, and to Cilicia as they were not represented. It was not a general assembly nor any council of current Catholic types.

Our head quarter is in Heaven and Jesus Christ Himself teaches us every day, every moment, and we learn from the Holy Spirit about every verse of the Bible, and NOBODY CAN PROHIBIT THE INDIVIDUAL LEARNING OF THE BIBLE. if ANYONE PROHIBITS THE INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATION AND LEARNING OF BIBLE, THAT PERSON AND/OR THAT CHURCH IS HERETIC, AND MUST BE CURSED ! ANATHEMA!

 

[Chemnitz]

Who said anything about preventing the individual from learning the Bible? For that matter, who said anything about the RCC top down model being correct?

 

[Matt Black]

Salvation is a matter of Individual Faith, doesn't depend on which church or which denomination any individual belongs to, because the Holy Spirit works in the heart of the individual human being.

Therefore the study and interpretation by individual person is the ultimate basis though they are iencouraged to communicate each other thru fellowship.

Proverb 27:17
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

1 Cor 14
31 For ye may all prophesy one by one, that all may learn, and all may be comforted. 32 And the spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets.

The church meetings are the place of fellowship where the individual believer can express what they studied individually and exchange the faith thru fellowship.

If any individual cannot interpret the Bible, who can interpret it ?

Only the holy papa? None but the Ony God is Holy Papa ! Others, if they are called Holy Papa or Holy See, are wicked Heretics !

Only the Priests?
Ridiculous ! All the Believers are Priests ! ( 1 Pet 2:5-9)

Only Thru Councils? Where is it? Was the Jerusalem Council convened with the agenda and notice? Wasn't it held just by the visit of Paul and Barnabas? How many churches were invited there? The visitors were only from Antioch and therefore the letters were sent to Antioch, to Syria, and to Cilicia as they were not represented. It was not a general assembly nor any council of current Catholic types.

Our head quarter is in Heaven and Jesus Christ Himself teaches us every day, every moment, and we learn from the Holy Spirit about every verse of the Bible, and NOBODY CAN PROHIBIT THE INDIVIDUAL LEARNING OF THE BIBLE. if ANYONE PROHIBITS THE INDIVIDUAL INTERPRETATION AND LEARNING OF BIBLE, THAT PERSON AND/OR THAT CHURCH IS HERETIC, AND MUST BE CURSED ! ANATHEMA!

Thanks. I understand. So, your answer is that epistemologically "everyone does as he pleases" just as in the time of the Judges; in other words, doctrinal anarchy. Thanks, but no thanks.

 

[Eliyahu]

Thanks. I understand. So, your answer is that epistemologically "everyone does as he pleases" just as in the time of the Judges; in other words, doctrinal anarchy. Thanks, but no thanks.

Governing by the Holy Spirit sounds like Anarchy to the unbelievers who never knew the Holy Spirit.

Human oppression against the Bible interpretation looks like Order to the paganists.

 

[Eliyahu]

Who said anything about preventing the individual from learning the Bible? For that matter, who said anything about the RCC top down model being correct?

The poster who call it Protestant Fallacy.

 

[Chemnitz]

The poster who call it Protestant Fallacy.

Oh, ok! So rather than engage in something intelligent like actual debate which requires you to read and understand somebody else's statements, you are just engaging in your typical anti RCC rantings.

I'd admit the title isn't 100% accurate, but I didn't think many would understand the term Bapticostal, it's kind of a Lutheran term.

 

[Eliyahu]

Oh, ok! So rather than engage in something intelligent like actual debate which requires you to read and understand somebody else's statements, you are just engaging in your typical anti RCC rantings.

I'd admit the title isn't 100% accurate, but I didn't think many would understand the term Bapticostal, it's kind of a Lutheran term.

I don't have to waste much time reading the heresies.

Who try to oppose to the Individual Interpretation of the Bible?

It's not only RCC but also any Hireling Pastors who run the Religious businesses, because it is the big obstacle to their business if the lay-people know a lot about the Bible.

Such heretics are many not only in RCC, but also in Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, COE, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Coptic Catholic, Assyrian Catholic, and any other Catholics.

Hireling pastors are very much eager to keep the lay people in the darkness and ignorance about the Bible Truth, because that's how they can continue cheat the people by heresies enjoying monopoly business as fake Christian hypocrites.

They will get angry if the people in the pews know a lot about the Bible and they interpret the Bible more accurately than what they lerned theoretically.

 

[BobRyan]

It is likely, I should call it the Great American Protestant Fallacy, but I am not as in touch with Protestants from other countries. Anyhow, this great fallacy is the insistance on individual interpretation. This is a false teaching. Interpretation should never be done in isolation of the Church Militant. The scriptures were not given for that purpose and in no place do you find that interpretation was done on an individual level in the historical accounts in Scripture. They always involved the rest of the church, hence the first Jerusalem council. Individual study and understanding is important and to be commended, but interpretation should always be informed and tempered by the church.

And when "the church" is in error as Christ found it to be in Mark 7 and as Martin Luther found it to be in the 15th century - should the "one" stand up "against the many" and point to their doctrinal error?

Is doctrine to be decided by "popular vote"?

When you stand before the 2Cor 5 10 judgment seat of Christ - does your priest answer for you?

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Chemnitz]

I don't have to waste much time reading the heresies.

Who try to oppose to the Individual Interpretation of the Bible?

It's not only RCC but also any Hireling Pastors who run the Religious businesses, because it is the big obstacle to their business if the lay-people know a lot about the Bible.

Such heretics are many not only in RCC, but also in Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox, COE, Episcopalian, Lutheran, Coptic Catholic, Assyrian Catholic, and any other Catholics.

Hireling pastors are very much eager to keep the lay people in the darkness and ignorance about the Bible Truth, because that's how they can continue cheat the people by heresies enjoying monopoly business as fake Christian hypocrites.

They will get angry if the people in the pews know a lot about the Bible and they interpret the Bible more accurately than what they lerned theoretically.

If you are unwilling to engage in honest debate why are you here?

I probably ought to ignore you, but I, for some reason, cannot stand by while somebody displays such grand ignorance. The fact that you would lump Lutherans (with the exception of ELCA) with RCC and Episcopalians, illustrates that ignorance.

I will once again state, just to be nice, I am not against people studying the Bible. I am against the idea that interpretation should be done in isolation. Interpretation should occur with in the community of the priesthood of believers. If I were against people studying the Bible I wouldn't be teaching three Bible Studies a week, or preaching the importance of studying the Bible on a frequent basis, but you didn't know that I do that, so I won't hold it against you. I rejoice in those who do not take scripture for granted and actually read it.

BTW, we do not have hireling pastors as you are want to call them in the Lutheran Church. We are called to the congregation we serve, we aren't hired. Besides your calling them hireling pastors is not even an accurate illustration. A hireling couldn't dominate a group, he would have to listen to his bosses. But we Lutherans don't even have to worry about that since we don't hire pastors.

 

[Chemnitz]

And when "the church" is in error as Christ found it to be in Mark 7 and as Martin Luther found it to be in the 15th century - should the "one" stand up "against the many" and point to their doctrinal error?

Is doctrine to be decided by "popular vote"?

When you stand before the 2Cor 5 10 judgment seat of Christ - does your priest answer for you?

in Christ,

Bob

Bob, rather than waste my time repeating myself, I am going to ask that you read the rest of the thread beyond the OP.

 

[Eliyahu]

If you are unwilling to engage in honest debate why are you here?

I probably ought to ignore you, but I, for some reason, cannot stand by while somebody displays such grand ignorance. The fact that you would lump Lutherans (with the exception of ELCA) with RCC and Episcopalians, illustrates that ignorance.

I will once again state, just to be nice, I am not against people studying the Bible. I am against the idea that interpretation should be done in isolation. Interpretation should occur with in the community of the priesthood of believers. If I were against people studying the Bible I wouldn't be teaching three Bible Studies a week, or preaching the importance of studying the Bible on a frequent basis, but you didn't know that I do that, so I won't hold it against you. I rejoice in those who do not take scripture for granted and actually read it.

BTW, we do not have hireling pastors as you are want to call them in the Lutheran Church. We are called to the congregation we serve, we aren't hired. Besides your calling them hireling pastors is not even an accurate illustration. A hireling couldn't dominate a group, he would have to listen to his bosses. But we Lutherans don't even have to worry about that since we don't hire pastors.

Now you are trying to retreat from the OP stance.
What is the church militant? Where is such statement in the Bible that the Individual should confer with Church militant?

Are you not paid by the church ?

The problem is that such claims are claimed by those who are paid by the church, for preaching the heresies of Nicolaitanes.

Sorry not to be cheated by your tactics.

If your statement meant so nice, then you didn't have to call it Great American Protestant Fallacy ! instead call yours Great Chemintz Deception !

OP

It is likely, I should call it the Great American Protestant Fallacy, but I am not as in touch with Protestants from other countries. Anyhow, this great fallacy is the insistance on individual interpretation. This is a false teaching. Interpretation should never be done in isolation of the Church Militant. The scriptures were not given for that purpose and in no place do you find that interpretation was done on an individual level in the historical accounts in Scripture. They always involved the rest of the church, hence the first Jerusalem council. Individual study and understanding is important and to be commended, but interpretation should always be informed and tempered by the church.

You don't understand the meaning of the Council despite much explanation by me, right?

 

[Eliyahu]

If I were against people studying the Bible I wouldn't be teaching three Bible Studies a week, or preaching the importance of studying the Bible on a frequent basis, but you didn't know that I do that, so I won't hold it against you. I rejoice in those who do not take scripture for granted and actually read it.

I wish your people read this thread and other threads on this board. You are far away from the Bible truth.
You shouldn't be teaching the people, but you should learn from the Truly Born Again Believers. Otherwise, Blindman is leading the Blindmen.
Your teaching the people cannot be a proof that you are promoting the Individual Interpretation of the Bible because you are already arguing that, and even in the Bible Study meetings you may have been prohibiting your people from interpreting the Bible for themselves so that they may stick to you only, which is the typical to the hireling pastors.
This is not a new thing when we read Acts 20:29-

29 For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30 Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Even at the Church of Ephesus, Paul noticed that there are some elders who tried to make the people follow themselves, not after the Lord Jesus Christ.

Are you teaching the people not to follow you but to follow Jesus Christ with the guidance by the Holy Spirit?

 

[Agnus_Dei]

I wish your people read this thread and other threads on this board. You are far away from the Bible truth.
You shouldn't be teaching the people, but you should learn from the Truly Born Again Believers. Otherwise, Blindman is leading the Blindmen.

All I hear from you Eliyahu is that only “truly ‘born again’ believers” can interpret Scripture and when someone challenges YOUR interpretation, it’s the “blind man leading blind men”. What a pompous statement!

Your fallacy is that each Protestant group is de-Christianized if they differ from you, b/c only you can rightly interpret Scripture since only you are ‘truly born again’. Now if your pompous statement was correct, that would leave only one group of Protestants that had rightly interpreted the Scriptures. But…which of the thousands of denominations could it be? Of course the answer depends upon which Protestant you’re talking with.

Can it be that the Plymouth Brethren whose roots run through heretical groups such as the Donatists or Montanists be the keepers of Truth?
-

 

[Eliyahu]

All I hear from you Eliyahu is that only “truly ‘born again’ believers” can interpret Scripture and when someone challenges YOUR interpretation, it’s the “blind man leading blind men”. What a pompous statement!

Your fallacy is that each Protestant group is de-Christianized if they differ from you, b/c only you can rightly interpret Scripture since only you are ‘truly born again’. Now if your pompous statement was correct, that would leave only one group of Protestants that had rightly interpreted the Scriptures. But…which of the thousands of denominations could it be? Of course the answer depends upon which Protestant you’re talking with.

Can it be that the Plymouth Brethren whose roots run through heretical groups such as the Donatists or Montanists be the keepers of Truth?
-

Do the protestant groups differ in the fundamental truth on the Salvation, on the Redemption and the Purgatory etc? NOPE !

They are truly in agreement to the Salvation, Redemption, Sola Scriptura, Objection to the Idolatry and Purgatory, Objection to Papacy and Obligatory Celibacy, Objection to the Penance by Priest, Objection to Catholic Mass which ask repeatedly the forgiveness of the sins which were forgiven already at the Cross, Objection to Church hierarchy, Objection to the prayer to the dead woman Mary, Mary worship, Objection to the prayer to the Dead, and Objection to all the heresies of Roman Catholic Reigion which is absoluitely pagan goddess worship.

They may differ each other especially in Eschatology and Church administration such as Pastor system which is not much problem when we see the greater picture of the Salvation.

Donatists, Montanists, Paulicians, Chatari, Albigenes, Waldensians, Bogomils, Lollards, Bohemian Bruder Gemeinde, Hutterites, Mennonites, Anabaptists are some of the True Believers group of Christians who opposed and refused the Heretic Roman Catholicism, keeping the commandments of Lord Jesus Christ.

Agnus, You'd better come out of the Harlot church, Church of Rome.