Critical thinking and religion.

[MoreCoffee]

Does your own religion encourage critical thinking about its official teachings?

 

[Stravinsk]

Yes, and so does yours, in numerous places.

Then again "official" used as an adjective to describe teachings implies one authority over something else that is considered authority.

 

[Josiah]

Does your own religion encourage critical thinking about its official teachings?

I left a denomination that foundationally, dogmaticly insisted that there is ONE (and only one) that is exempt from accountability, that is infallible and thus unaccountable, that we are to swallow whole, docilicly, whatever it itself alone currently says cuz it itself is and it itself says we are to.


In the same vain, I don't appoint one (ME) as the infallible, uncritical, unaccountable, All-Knowing-One who alone is guided by God, who alone is taught by God, who alone is protected from falsehood. I tend to hold to community.... I tend to look at the whole church rather than one egotistical part of it that (evidently feels SO vulnerable, SO frightened by accountability) as to equate self with God and Truth. And.... I tend to embrace a sense of mystery (not insisting that self is the one to correct God and add what God forgot to say - oops).


But we've been all over this, MoreCoffee.



- Josiah

 

[MoreCoffee]

Josiah, you didn't answer the first-post question. It's about your own religion. It is not about somebody else's.

 

[Josiah]

Josiah, you didn't answer the first-post question. It's about your own religion. It is not about somebody else's.

yes, my denomination accepts accountability and welcomes it. It does not claim that IT is the Authority but points to one entirely outside itself: the words appearing in Scripture. You will find no equal of CCC 87 in any Catechism of any major Protestant denomination.

 

[Stravinsk]

yes, my denomination accepts accountability and welcomes it. It does not claim that IT is the Authority but points to one entirely outside itself: the words appearing in Scripture. You will find no equal of CCC 87 in any Catechism of any major Protestant denomination.

The authority of Scripture as you (or I should say, your denomination and like minded denominations) hold it, rests on another authority - the authority that actually put the Canon of books together and declared them all Inspired. What you say is Scripture is based, in part, on a denomination of Christianity that you are openly hostile to.

Deists do not have this issue. I believe in the inspiration of a number of books of the bible - including some New Testament books. Rejecting other texts is not an issue because the assumption of Authority and thus Inspiration is not given where it is not plain to us.

 

[MoreCoffee]

yes, my denomination accepts accountability and welcomes it. It does not claim that IT is the Authority but points to one entirely outside itself: the words appearing in Scripture. You will find no equal of CCC 87 in any Catechism of any major Protestant denomination.

Could you remain a member in good standing in your denomination if you ceased believing in the holy Trinity and started believing that God the Father alone is deity and that Jesus is a created being? Can critical thinking extend as far as rejecting a teaching like that?

 

[popsthebuilder]

Could you remain a member in good standing in your denomination if you ceased believing in the holy Trinity and started believing that God the Father alone is deity and that Jesus is a created being? Can critical thinking extend as far as rejecting a teaching like that?

Though one might, through critical thinking, conclude that division of the faithful is many things, none of which are at this time pleasing to GOD. That isn't to say that one should be part of that division as a result.



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

 

[Rens]

Does your own religion encourage critical thinking about its official teachings?

Religion or church? Religion: yes. Paul said the Bereans were doing good. Church: no. About some things I keep my mouth shut in church.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Though one might, through critical thinking, conclude that division of the faithful is many things, none of which are at this time pleasing to GOD. That isn't to say that one should be part of that division as a result.



Sent from my Z988 using Tapatalk

The holy scriptures tell that divisions are inevitable precisely because not all in the Church are truly sons/daughters of God.

 

[Josiah]

Could you remain a member in good standing in your denomination if you ceased believing in the holy Trinity and started believing that God the Father alone is deity and that Jesus is a created being? Can critical thinking extend as far as rejecting a teaching like that?

You are confusing different things (obviously to dodge the issue)......


Of course, any organization can have standards of membership - and thus have the authority to dismiss people who do not meet those requirements. This has nothing to do with God or the church - it's what institions (such as the RCC or LCMS or LDS or UCC or UPC or UMC) can do. I said NOTHING about that (you just tried to evade what I DID say). If you are a member of The Porsche Car Owners Club of America and sell your Porsche, the club has the authority (I suppose) to dismiss you from membership. That has NOTHING to do with it itself claiming to be God or infallible/unaccountable or demanding all just swallow whole WHATEVER the club currently says or claims "with docility" BECAUSE that individual club currently says or claims it. Apples and oranges. Come on, MoreCoffee....


What I said is that there are individuals (persons or cults or denominations for example) which exclude the issue of this thread by self insisting that self exclusively CANNOT be wrong (in formal, official doctrine AT LEAST) and thus self foundationally insists that self uniquely is infallible and unaccountable, self insisting that when self alone speaks ERGO God Himself is (so self is just as unaccountable), that individual self insisting to all that all just swallow whole.... docilicily accept...... whatever that individual self currently says BECAUSE that self currently is. See for example the latest edition of the official Catechism of the Roman Catholic Denomination #87 and "The Authority of the Church" by LDS Apostle and Prophet Bruce McConkie. And note that NOWHERE, in ANY Protestant Catechism does the equal of that appear..... never...... not once.... in any Protestant Catechism. This DOES make the RCC is a whole other camp, an entirely different category in this regard. You know that. We both know you do.



- Josiah



.

 

[MoreCoffee]

If one cannot venture outside the standards for membership when engaging in critical thinking then one is in fact restricted in what is open to critical thinking, Josiah.

 

[Ackbach]

My denomination (the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, or OPC, or Only Perfect Church as we jokingly call it sometimes) is fearless of the truth, and encourages everyone to think critically about anything, though we would encourage that questioning to be sincere and respectful. We regard the Bible as the ultimate standard of truth, and we must ultimately appeal to them (in the original languages). J. Gresham Machen, a founder of this denomination, was the same way: a towering intellectual, completely fearless, and willing to answer about any question.

 

[MoreCoffee]

My denomination (the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, or OPC, or Only Perfect Church as we jokingly call it sometimes) is fearless of the truth, and encourages everyone to think critically about anything, though we would encourage that questioning to be sincere and respectful. We regard the Bible as the ultimate standard of truth, and we must ultimately appeal to them (in the original languages). J. Gresham Machen, a founder of this denomination, was the same way: a towering intellectual, completely fearless, and willing to answer about any question.

Would a member be able to remain a member in good standing if his critical thinking brought him to the conclusion that the bible is not the ultimate standard of truth?

 

[Josiah]

If one cannot venture outside the standards for membership when engaging in critical thinking then one is in fact restricted in what is open to critical thinking, Josiah.

OBVIOUSLY not. If you sold your Porsche, it just could be that the polity of the Porsche Car Owners Club of America would be that you coiuld no longer be a member of that institution. But obvious, that has NOTHING to do with forbidding you to critical thinking or to mandating that it itself individually is infallible, unaccountable, whatever it says/claims is to be docilicly swallowed whole BECAUSE it itself uniquely now says or claims it - as God Himself speaking. Apples and oranges, as you of course realize. You are confusing different things (obviously to dodge the issue)......


What I said is that there are individuals (persons or cults or denominations for example) which exclude the issue of this thread by self insisting that self exclusively CANNOT be wrong (in formal, official doctrine AT LEAST) and thus self foundationally insists that self uniquely is infallible and unaccountable, self insisting that when self alone speaks ERGO God Himself is (so self is just as unaccountable), that individual self insisting to all that all just swallow whole.... docilicily accept...... whatever that individual self currently says BECAUSE that self currently is. See for example the latest edition of the official Catechism of the Roman Catholic Denomination #87 and "The Authority of the Church" by LDS Apostle and Prophet Bruce McConkie. And note that NOWHERE, in ANY Protestant Catechism does the equal of that appear..... never...... not once.... in any Protestant Catechism. This DOES make the RCC is a whole other camp, an entirely different category in this regard. You know that. We both know you do.


The issue of this thread is NOT whether individual institutions may or may not have policies as to who may or may not be a formal, official member of said institution. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the issue of this thread, it's just a diversion to evade what is the issue of this thread. Obviously.



- Josiah




.



.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Josiah, could you remain a member of your denomination in good standing if you decided that Jesus is a created being?

 

[Josiah]

Josiah, could you remain a member of your denomination in good standing if you decided that Jesus is a created being?

See post # 11 where I already addressed your confusion and ploy.




.

 

[MoreCoffee]

See post # 11 where I already addressed your confusion and ploy.




.

A simple yes or now would suffice. I've already read post #11 and it did not answer the question I put to you. It obfuscated.

 

[MoreCoffee]

You referred to section 87 in the CCC, Josiah. I will produce it below and let the readers of this thread decide what it means.

III. The Interpretation of the Heritage of Faith

The heritage of faith entrusted to the whole of the Church

84 The apostles entrusted the "Sacred deposit" of the faith (the depositum fidei),[SUP]45 [/SUP]contained in Sacred Scripture and Tradition, to the whole of the Church. "By adhering to [this heritage] the entire holy people, united to its pastors, remains always faithful to the teaching of the apostles, to the brotherhood, to the breaking of bread and the prayers. So, in maintaining, practising and professing the faith that has been handed on, there should be a remarkable harmony between the bishops and the faithful."[SUP]46[/SUP]

The Magisterium of the Church

85 "The task of giving an authentic interpretation of the Word of God, whether in its written form or in the form of Tradition, has been entrusted to the living teaching office of the Church alone. Its authority in this matter is exercised in the name of Jesus Christ."[SUP]47 [/SUP]This means that the task of interpretation has been entrusted to the bishops in communion with the successor of Peter, the Bishop of Rome.

86 "Yet this Magisterium is not superior to the Word of God, but is its servant. It teaches only what has been handed on to it. At the divine command and with the help of the Holy Spirit, it listens to this devotedly, guards it with dedication and expounds it faithfully. All that it proposes for belief as being divinely revealed is drawn from this single deposit of faith."[SUP]48[/SUP]

87 Mindful of Christ's words to his apostles: "He who hears you, hears me",[SUP]49 [/SUP]The faithful receive with docility the teachings and directives that their pastors give them in different forms.

The dogmas of the faith

88 The Church's Magisterium exercises the authority it holds from Christ to the fullest extent when it defines dogmas, that is, when it proposes truths contained in divine Revelation or also when it proposes in a definitive way truths having a necessary connection with them.

89 There is an organic connection between our spiritual life and the dogmas. Dogmas are lights along the path of faith; they illuminate it and make it secure. Conversely, if our life is upright, our intellect and heart will be open to welcome the light shed by the dogmas of faith.[SUP]50[/SUP]

90 The mutual connections between dogmas, and their coherence, can be found in the whole of the Revelation of the mystery of Christ.[SUP]51 [/SUP]"In Catholic doctrine there exists an order or hierarchy 234 of truths, since they vary in their relation to the foundation of the Christian faith."[SUP]52[/SUP]

The supernatural sense of faith

91 All the faithful share in understanding and handing on revealed truth. They have received the anointing of the Holy Spirit, who instructs them[SUP]53[/SUP] and guides them into all truth.[SUP]54[/SUP]

92 "The whole body of the faithful. . . cannot err in matters of belief. This characteristic is shown in the supernatural appreciation of faith (sensus fidei) on the part of the whole people, when, from the bishops to the last of the faithful, they manifest a universal consent in matters of faith and morals."[SUP]55[/SUP]

93 "By this appreciation of the faith, aroused and sustained by the Spirit of truth, the People of God, guided by the sacred teaching authority (Magisterium),. . . receives. . . the faith, once for all delivered to the saints. . . the People unfailingly adheres to this faith, penetrates it more deeply with right judgment, and applies it more fully in daily life."[SUP]56[/SUP]

Growth in understanding the faith

94 Thanks to the assistance of the Holy Spirit, the understanding of both the realities and the words of the heritage of faith is able to grow in the life of the Church:
- "through the contemplation and study of believers who ponder these things in their hearts";[SUP]57 [/SUP]it is in particular "theological research [which] deepens knowledge of revealed truth".[SUP]58 [/SUP]
- "from the intimate sense of spiritual realities which [believers] experience",[SUP]59 [/SUP]The sacred Scriptures "grow with the one who reads them."[SUP]60 [/SUP]
- "from the preaching of those who have received, along with their right of succession in the episcopate, the sure charism of truth".[SUP]61[/SUP]

95 "It is clear therefore that, in the supremely wise arrangement of God, sacred Tradition, Sacred Scripture and the Magisterium of the Church are so connected and associated that one of them cannot stand without the others. Working together, each in its own way, under the action of the one Holy Spirit, they all contribute effectively to the salvation of souls."[SUP]62[/SUP]

45 DV 10 # 1; cf.I Tim 6:20; 2 Tim 1:12-14(Vulg.).
46 DV 10 # 1; cf. Acts 2:42 (Greek); Pius XII, Apost. Const.
Munificentissimus Deus, 1 November 1950: AAS 42 (1950), 756, taken along
with the words of St. Cyprian, Epist. 66, 8: CSEL 3/2, 733: "The Church
is the people united to its Priests, the flock adhering to its Shepherd."
47 DV 10 # 2.
48 DV 10 para 2.
49 ⇒ Lk 10:16; cf. LG 20.
50 Cf.⇒ Jn 8:31-32.
51 Cf. Vatican Council I: DS 3016: nexus mysteriorum; LC 25.
52 UR II.
53 Cf. ⇒ I Jn 2:20, ⇒ 27
54 Cf. . ⇒ Jn 16:13
55 LG 12; cf. St. Augustine, De praed. sanct. 14, 27: PL 44, 980.
56 LG 12; cf. Jude 3.
57 DV 8 # 2; cf. ⇒ Lk 2:19, ⇒ 51
58 GS 62 # 7; cf. GS 44 # 2; DV 23; 24; UR 4.
59 DV 8 # 2.
60 DV 8 # 2.
61 St. Gregory the Great, Hom. in ⇒ Ezek. 1, 7, 8: PL 76, 843D.
62 DV 10 # 3.​

 

[Ackbach]

Would a member be able to remain a member in good standing if his critical thinking brought him to the conclusion that the bible is not the ultimate standard of truth?

The OPC vows of membership are as follows:

1. Do you believe the Bible, consisting of the Old and New Testaments, to be the Word of God, and its doctrine of salvation to be the perfect and only true doctrine of salvation?
2. Do you admit you are a sinner and hating your sinfulness, do you humble yourself before God and trust for salvation not in yourself but in Jesus Christ alone?
3. Do you acknowledge Jesus Christ as your sovereign Lord and do you promise, in reliance on the grace of God, to serve him with all that is in you, to forsake the world, putting to death your old nature and to lead a godly life?
4. Do you agree to submit in the Lord to the government of this church and, in case you should be found delinquent in doctrine or life, to obey its discipline?

Combining numbers 1 and 4, I would say that the answer is "no", but that's a qualified "no". A member would never be thrown out of the OPC at the drop of a hat. It would be a process, a process with the goal of bringing the straying sheep back into the fold (the only correct goal of all church discipline).