Saturday, February 25, 2017

"Infallibe Church Hierarchy" Is Circular Reasoning

  • Introduction:
          -Professing Christians who believe that we need an infallible interpreter of Scripture, and the members who belong to their particular group constitutes "the one true church" build their arguments off unverifiable assumptions (as will be discussed in the article). Groups who embrace this idea would include the Roman Catholic Church, Mormons, and the Jehovah's Witnesses. These folks believe that the Christian church should be governed by some sort of a "teaching Magisterium" (of their own choice). But we who deny such (Sola Scriptura) know that they cannot be infallibly guided by the Holy Spirit because they all contradict each other. 
  • Illustrating Circularity Through A Series Of Questions:
          -If the Bible is insufficient in itself, a corrupted body of revelation, or if we do not have the necessary "authority" to investigate doctrinal claims for ourselves, then how can we possibly know whether all these "teaching authorities" are right or wrong? What is the difference between interpreting the inspired words of Scripture and the allegedly inspired words of cult leaders? On what basis can they claim that their words are any easier to understand than the words of the Bible? Who gives the infallible interpretations of the infallible interpreter, if people still do not understand the proclaimed messages of that inspired teacher? Who are we supposed to turn to if divisions arise? Who's interpretations of that allegedly infallible interpreter's words are correct? Who or what are we supposed to submit to, if we do not have a universal standard of doctrine set in stone (Scripture)? What a circular system of deception that these church hierarchies have created for themselves!
  • "We absolutely must have an infallible interpreter of Scripture...":
          -Consider, for example, that the Roman Catholic Church claims that only it can correctly interpret the Bible. In other words, the Church's interpretations of Scripture are correct because it declares them to be such. How inconsistent is that, especially when we are supposedly forbidden from examining the truthfulness of that particular religious organization's claims!
          -People who believe in the concept of an infallible church hierarchy basically argue that we who reject such cannot interpret Scripture because their church is always correct. Not only is this assertion unproven, but it also is makes obvious the condemnation of independent thinking. Pseudo-Christian denominations tend to argue by appealing to themselves and to their own sources. This mindset prevents those entrapped from discovering truth.
  • "Only true church...":
          -A hierarchical church system that proclaims itself infallible tends to argue in favor of itself being the absolute source of authority in a religious person's life by claiming that its interpretation of Scripture is correct because it comprises the only true body of believers. Once again, we are morally obligated to ask on what basis such claims can be established? Not only is this logical framework based on a fanciful whim, but it also is a paragon of grandiloquence. It is erroneous to the highest degree. Christianity is comprised of all people who agree with all essential biblical teachings, and is located throughout the world.

1 comment:

  1. Well, the RCC just claims there authority by a made up line to the Apostle Peter, ergo the supposedly got their teaching direct. Of course there is absolutely no evidence for that claim, so that claim in itself is circular reasoning -- We got it direct because we say so.