Has anyone else noticed that while Protestants maintain a Nestorian Christology, they seem to have an almost monophysite perspective on the authorship of Scripture? While the Orthodox (and the Roman Catholics afaik) see the authorship of Scripture as "100% man and 100% God", Protestants seem to think God just dictated it directly, as opposed to inspired it.
>>787418
>a Nestorian Christology
No
>almost monophysite perspective on the authorship of Scripture
I don't understand, monophysitism is about the nature of Christ
Most Protestants are not biblical literalists.
>>787418
>Nestorian
>Monophysite
Don't you have a stake you should be burning on, heretics?
>>787474
>No
Sure, any Protestant who says Mary is the Mother of the human Jesus but not the God Jesus.
>I don't understand, monophysitism is about the nature of Christ
It's the idea that Christ had no humanity, but was just divine. I think you understand what I mean when applying that conception to Scripture.
>Most Protestants are not biblical literalists.
Most that aren't super liberal are, yeah
>>787484
Don't you belong on /pol/?
>>787490
Pretty bad use of both terms. You are right though that most protestants are biblical literalists, but most don't think that the writers were audibly dictated each word. Most do, however, think that the words which ended up being read by us are all true.
I've been a devout Protestant for most of my life and grew up alongside Christians of countless denominations. 99% of what they believe is based on faith. You have to be clinically insane to try and reason exactly what rational purpose drives most to believe what they do.
>>788387
They'll read a verse, have a gut feeling that a certain interpretation is right, hear someone they respect hold the same position, and then have faith that their intuition and guidance are divine. They also pride themselves in having faith in something that seems irrational, a marker of how you've turned a blind eye to satanic temptation by giving in to the reason of an earthly body rather than the perfect understanding of the almighty.
This fucking board is plagued with religious imbeciles arguing against each other as if any position holds rational merit. Why is there not a board for religion? Why does history/ humanities have to get stuck with this shit.
>>787418
You conflating terms but your basic view is right and pretty awful.
I honestly blame the Protestant Revivals (great awakenings) for the modern scriptural view in America. Shit just fell apart.
Scripture is inspired by the Holy Spirit, not written by it.
>>787490
>Most that aren't super liberal
In the Netherlands, 2 percent of Protestant pastors and priests are atheist and 7 percent agnost
>>788419
I'm using the term "monophysite" figuratively here. I think you get what it's supposed to signify in relation to the Word of God as the Bible.
>>788450
By "liberal" I mean supporting stuff like gay marriage.
>>787418
>Protestants seem to think God just dictated it directly, as opposed to inspired it.
Do Protestants try to make the Bible into a Quran?
>>788996
>During the development of the Reformation, Protestantism and Islam were considered closer to each other than they were to Catholicism: "Islam was seen as closer to Protestantism in banning images from places of worship, in not treating marriage as a sacrament and in rejecting monastic orders".[7]
>Martin Luther also took note of the similarities between Islam and Protestantism in the rejection of idols, although he noted Islam was much more drastic in its complete rejection of images. In On War against the Turk, Luther is actually less critical of the Turks than he is of the Pope, whom he calls an anti-Christ, or the Jews, whom he describes as "the Devil incarnate".[16] He urges his contemporaries to also see the good aspects in the Turks, and refers to some who were favourable to the Ottoman Empire, and "who actually want the Turk to come and rule, because they think that our German people are wild and uncivilized - indeed that they are half-devil and half-man".[17]
>Martin Luther's ambivalence also appears in one of his other comments, in which he said that "A smart Turk makes a better ruler than a dumb Christian".[15] "It is part of the Turks’ holiness, also, that they tolerate no images or pictures and are even holier than our destroyers of images. For our destroyers tolerate, and are glad to have, images on gulden, groschen, rings, and ornaments; but the Turk tolerates none of them and stamps nothing but letters on his coins."
>The rejection of images in worship, although more prominent in Islam, is a common point in Protestantism and Islam. This was already extensively recognized from the earliest times, as in the correspondence between Elizabeth I of England and her Ottoman Empire counterparts, in which she implied that Protestantism was closer to Islam than to Catholicism.[85]
>>789029
Yeah, the Sunni mindset is pretty close to Protestantism, imo.
But it's funny to see Protestants today love Jews and hate Muslims.
Islam too has loads of extra-scriptural tradition.(Hadiths)
So Catholics are doctrinaly closer
>>787418
Has anyone noticed how Protestantism has a shit ton of different denominations with wildly different religious stances?
>>789051
Protestantism has plenty of extra-scriptural traditions, each denomination has their own.
