Protestantism

[ad_orientem]

I don't think we can disentangle reason from experience.  All humans are twin-hemispheric, we all integrate experience with abstraction, we cannot shut down our instinct to reason, our instinct to see a broader picture that goes beyond our own personal experience, this is fundamental to the essence of being human.  Scripture itself is full of contradictions that requires reason to sort through in order to come to something vaguely coherent surely ?

I'm not saying that there's no room for reason, just that revelation trumps reason. My gripe with Protestantism is that it places reason above scripture and tradition. It's approach to the faith is speculative, in fact that is the problem with western Christianity as a whole ever since the schoolmen.

[floo]

God revealed Himself in Christ.

Hmmmmmmmmm!

[Anchorman]

-
You might not believe it, but the Scriptures you claim to have read point to it!

[floo]

-
You might not believe it, but the Scriptures you claim to have read point to it!

So what? The Harry Potter books point to Voldemort existing and has much credibility as much of the Bible. Just because something is written down, doesn't necessarily mean it has any credence unless there is evidence to support it, for which there is none where the existence of god is concerned.

[bluehillside Retd.]

ad,

I'm not saying that there's no room for reason, just that revelation trumps reason. My gripe with Protestantism is that it places reason above scripture and tradition. It's approach to the faith is speculative, in fact that is the problem with western Christianity as a whole ever since the schoolmen.

"...revelation trumps reason" eh?

Well...

First, if not by reason then by what means do you establish that something has been "revealed" rather than written down and repeated?

Second, if you expect your claim to have had something revealed to you to be treated seriously, do you extend the same courtesy to anyone else who says that anything else has also been revealed to him - and, if you do, how would you avoid the problem that all such claims should thus be treated as equally (im)probable?

Third, does it not strike you as odd that the only people who have ever had something "revealed" to them are those already enculturated to whatever faith happens to do the revealing? You never for example find a previously undiscovered tribe in the Amazon jungle that also happens to know all about Christ and the resurrection. This is just as you'd expect it to be if your beliefs were actually memetic rather than revealed, but it would seem an odd way for god to behave - i.e., to "reveal" things only to those who happened to have been on contact already with the tenets of their religions. 

[torridon]

I'm not saying that there's no room for reason, just that revelation trumps reason. My gripe with Protestantism is that it places reason above scripture and tradition. It's approach to the faith is speculative, in fact that is the problem with western Christianity as a whole ever since the schoolmen.

As a principle, that leaves you in a quandary when dealing with conflicting revelations.  It's not like every Jewish prophet had the same experience of God, just look at the difference between Old and New Testaments. Surely when you have conflicting revelations, reason has to trump revelation otherwise that leaves disparate groups failing to communicate, each valuing their own private revelation grounds over seeking an understanding of others. This misappropriation of priorities gives us conflict and a divided world with Sunnis not talking to Shias, and Protestants not talking to Catholics (or Orthodox).

[ad_orientem]

As a principle, that leaves you in a quandary when dealing with conflicting revelations.  It's not like every Jewish prophet had the same experience of God, just look at the difference between Old and New Testaments. Surely when you have conflicting revelations, reason has to trump revelation otherwise that leaves disparate groups failing to communicate, each valuing their own private revelation grounds over seeking an understanding of others. This misappropriation of priorities gives us conflict and a divided world with Sunnis not talking to Shias, and Protestants not talking to Catholics (or Orthodox).

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

[torridon]

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

Does that not apply to pretty much all denominations ? Catholic priests tell of being called into ministry.   That is what all christians do when seeking guidance through prayer. And it seems the Holy Spirit guides half of the Anglican communion in a traditional direction, and the other half in an inclusive direction. A very confusing situation that derives from valuing personal revelation.

[Bubbles]

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

That Holy Spirit is also supposedly leading all the other churches as well.

Not to mention individuals.

https://youtu.be/_wZCifteHtc

Bizarre!

[bluehillside Retd.]

ad,

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

Something you believe to be true presumably because this too has been "revealed" to you. So when the African tribesman responds to the same question with, "but we have the indwelt spirit of the baobab tree who guides out beliefs, for instance in the words of the witch doctor" you would dismiss his claim how exactly given that "revelation trumps reason"?

[ad_orientem]

ad,

Something you believe to be true presumably because this too has been "revealed" to you. So when the African tribesman responds to the same question with, "but we have the indwelt spirit of the baobab tree who guides out beliefs, for instance in the words of the witch doctor" you would dismiss his claim how exactly given that "revelation trumps reason"?

That whatever or whoever revealed something to him it certainly wasn't by the one true God.

[bluehillside Retd.]

ad,

That whatever or whoever revealed something to him it certainly wasn't by the one true God.

And when the African tribesman says exactly the same thing about your claims of "revelation"? Why then should anyone else take either claim more seriously than the other, especially as you tell us that "revelation trumps reason"? 

[floo]

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

The HS is another mythical idea for which there is no evidence. Some of the so called 'spirit filled' Christians I have met in my life made no more sense than if they had drunk a whole bottle of a spirit, which actually exists, like gin, whisky, brandy or vodka at one sitting!

[ad_orientem]

ad,

And when the African tribesman says exactly the same thing about your claims of "revelation"? Why then should anyone else take either claim more seriously than the other, especially as you tell us that "revelation trumps reason"?

That's for everyone to work out, innit.

[ippy]

But we have the Holy Spirit who guides the Church, for instance in its liturgies, councils etc.

That's barmy A O, that's something you can't possibly know for sure, if you think you can explain this knowledge, you claim to have, why not let us all in with how you've come to acquire this knowledge.

If you can't explain the how, you could make and assert up anything you like and if you did it would be equally as (not) credible.

Why do you people bother with this so obviously man made load of old tosh?

ippy

[bluehillside Retd.]

ad,

That's for everyone to work out, innit.

No, because – in the absence of any other method – working something out requires reason. And you've already told us that "revelation trumps reason" so all that leaves you is a really strong personal opinion on the matter. Just like the African tribesman has.

And that's your problem if you expect anyone else to treat your and the tribesman's claims as anything other than equally culturally contextualised guessing.   

[Shaker]

Yeah? Well, do you fast on Wednesdays and Fridays? I thought not.

A poor effort.

I fast every single day - or rather night. Yay me.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So what? The Harry Potter books point to Voldemort existing and has much credibility as much of the Bible. Just because something is written down, doesn't necessarily mean it has any credence unless there is evidence to support it, for which there is none where the existence of god is concerned.

There is a lot of metaphor in Potter. In Dumbledore's warmth and mature talents I see Lane Craig.....
In Voldemort's vampiric lust for power and aesthetic obscenity I see (well, where to start?).

[torridon]

That's for everyone to work out, innit.

and 'working out' implies reason.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm not saying that there's no room for reason, just that revelation trumps reason. My gripe with Protestantism is that it places reason above scripture and tradition. It's approach to the faith is speculative, in fact that is the problem with western Christianity as a whole ever since the schoolmen.

I'm not sure that is the problem with Protestantism given the primacy of scripture. The problems are singular intellectual interpretation where a limited positional intellect has primacy. And small scale corporate literalism. Rather than mediation within the larger community and being led by scripture.
In protesting scripture can be used rather than lead.

[torridon]

My gripe with Protestantism is that it places reason above scripture and tradition. It's approach to the faith is speculative, in fact that is the problem with western Christianity as a whole ever since the schoolmen.

Protestantism, surely, is founded upon the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, the primacy of scripture, as Vlad notes.

[ad_orientem]

Protestantism, surely, is founded upon the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, the primacy of scripture, as Vlad notes.

The problem is interpretation. Protestantism removes the scriptures outside the context of the Church and subjects it to personal whim. Tradition is merely the scriptures properly understood within its proper context, the life of the Holy Spirit within the Church. This protects the scriptures, it's the guarantee against all arbitrariness.

[floo]

The problem is interpretation. Protestantism removes the scriptures outside the context of the Church and subjects it to personal whim. Tradition is merely the scriptures properly understood within its proper context, the life of the Holy Spirit within the Church. This protects the scriptures, it's the guarantee against all arbitrariness.

The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways, hence all the different doctrines, dogmas, sects and cults.

[ad_orientem]

The Bible can be interpreted in many different ways, hence all the different doctrines, dogmas, sects and cults.

99% of which come from Protestantism.

[torridon]

The problem is interpretation. Protestantism removes the scriptures outside the context of the Church and subjects it to personal whim. Tradition is merely the scriptures properly understood within its proper context, the life of the Holy Spirit within the Church. This protects the scriptures, it's the guarantee against all arbitrariness.

How do you know that 'tradition' yields up the 'proper' context of scriptures ?  Scripture predates Tradition. Scripture transcends tradition.  Tradition is derivative, not fundamental.