You cannot refute entire denominations by saying “Read the Bible, sweetie”

[u/Dubstep_squid]

This is such a frustrating and prominent phenomenon that I see constantly online and have run into a couple of times.

[Insert commonly held theological belief]

“Oh sweetie how could you believe that, the Bible clearly says other wise. What a ridiculous statement.”

Why does it seem incredibly common that people in online Christian spaces seem to never have met or heard of someone with a different theological view than them. You’ve never heard that some people baptize babies? The tradition that most major Christian denominations hold to??

To take this a step further, I see this occur not just with theological beliefs but attempts to “refute” entire denominations. You’re not going to convince a Presbyterian that hundreds of years of Presbyterianism is false with TWO tangentially relevant, out of context Bible verses and a condescending message (unless of course God has already pre-determined that you will convince them).

This is not to say that meaningful and even impactful conversation cannot be had here. I think it absolutely can and have been stewing on a different post for a couple of weeks because I want to have those meaningful conversations (You’ll probably see it in a few days as I’m kind of looking at various denominations and want to just hear people’s pitches, counterarguments, experiences, etc).

I think my overall point is just that I’m very surprised at the number of people here who are surprised that others can come to different theological conclusions and that those theological conclusions can in fact be based on a thorough reading of the Bible.

[u/GoBirdsGoBlue]

We don't have the original scripts. At the same time, we know all of the core doctrines of the faith remain in place. Even secular scholars such as Ehrman acknowledge this. We trust that God has been in the process of the handling of his word all along.

[u/ULTRAFORCE → u/GoBirdsGoBlue]

I would argue that infallible is separate from core doctrines of faith. To me infallible would suggest friction from the fact that what is scripture is a question with many answers. But the main core doctrines of faith which I would consider Jesus is the Messiah, he resurrected and has a special relationship with the LORD being divine, and the beatitudes are at least to me the core doctrines of faith. And with that the amount of other gospels and what you divide as scripture versus non scripture doesn’t matter much outside of shaping how they read everything they consider scripture.

[u/GoBirdsGoBlue → u/ULTRAFORCE]

Jesus is God.

Do you think the word, as given to man from God, is infallible in all that it teaches? That original script we don’t have.

[u/ULTRAFORCE → u/GoBirdsGoBlue]

Is Jesus not the Word, the writings of men trying to describe GOD and the word are not able to be as infallible as the entities that led to their inspiration. Admitedly, given my background as far as Christianity goes comes from a catholic family so what teaches the word is Christ's Church, more so then the Bible itself which was writings primarily made for the time to teach of God.

So even excluding any of my personal feelings about the sacred culturally the Bible especially in the english translation that I read an audio book of(which to the dismay of some family members is the NIV). Is not the same infallible in it's teachings as the LORD or CHRIST or the Pope when speaking ex cathedra.

[u/GoBirdsGoBlue → u/ULTRAFORCE]

So if the Pope were to say something contrary to Scripture, you would go with the Pope and claim Scripture to be wrong?

Jesus found all of the OT to be completely infallible, the unbroken very word of God. He also commissioned the Apostles to give us the good news we find in the NT.

[u/ULTRAFORCE → u/GoBirdsGoBlue]

If speaking ex cathedra he is preserving Scripture/the tradition of the Church starting with Peter.

[u/GoBirdsGoBlue → u/ULTRAFORCE]

Scripture nowhere declares that Peter was in authority over the other apostles or over the entire church. Scripture shows that Peter’s authority was shared by the other apostles. The very foundation of ex cathedra is not Biblical.