Roamer_1: All of them, to varying degrees, and because they cling to the lies propagated by Rome, rather than relying upon YHWH and His Word...
Well, making the errors of Rome your reference point is one way to go. That once was mine. Then came a time when I had to look at my own beliefs – not only the content but also where they originated.
The sola scriptura assertion that I had embraced without question began to trouble me because my religious tradition (Baptist and nondenom Bible church) was pretty good at pointing out the erro.rs of not only Rome, but also the Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Charismatics, etc. Yet, they ALL affirmed sola scriptura.
I was left with two alternatives:
1. There was deception – they did not all follow the sola principle
2. The sola principle was flawed.
I recognized that human sinfulness could account for my #1. Yet, why did I not see examples of sola believers coming together? Should not constant Bible study and the leading of the Holy Spirit be tending towards more unity? Note well what our Lord prayed in John 17:21.
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Why is the trend exactly the opposite that we see under the banner of sola scriptura? ; i.e. more fragmentation?
I have yet to see that question answered. The sola principle is flawed.
I commend you in that - So many would never even begin to really look at such things. I too had such a moment, where I had to throw everything on the altar to see what burned and what did not. What is funny about that is that we two, faced with the very same dilemma, wound up so diametrically opposed. : )
The sola scriptura assertion that I had embraced without question began to trouble me because my religious tradition (Baptist and nondenom Bible church) was pretty good at pointing out the erro.rs of not only Rome, but also the Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians, Charismatics, etc. Yet, they ALL affirmed sola scriptura.
I am technically a Calvinist, so I get that... probably better than a Baptist would! : )
I was left with two alternatives:
1. There was deception – they did not all follow the sola principle
2. The sola principle was flawed.
So far, so good.
I recognized that human sinfulness could account for my #1. Yet, why did I not see examples of sola believers coming together? Should not constant Bible study and the leading of the Holy Spirit be tending towards more unity?
I think that is not quite right - Unity in Yeshua is not necessarily signified by a singular organization, anymore that YHWH's creation is made up of one single specie. There is GREAT diversity in everything YHWH does, and I think it is very healthy that Protestants/Evangelicals have such a wide and varied form.
Note well what our Lord prayed in John 17:21.
That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me.
Unity for unity's sake is not what He meant - If we are all one in apostasy, what profit is there? That is, after all, what the accuser would most certainly prefer. And at the end, there cannot be perfect unity without unity in Spirit and in truth.
That is not to be found in the Roman church - That much I know to be true, without any reservation... And while I respect the Orthodox quite a bit more (by an order of magnitude) her close kinship to her sister only leads me to the obvious conclusion that the great apostasy must surely have been ancient, certainly originating before the schism (no offense meant, just my look-see on it).
Why is the trend exactly the opposite that we see under the banner of sola scriptura? ; i.e. more fragmentation?
That assumes that such fragmentation is an unhealthy thing. That fragmentation can often be very healthy. PresbyterianUSA is no longer the principal organ of Presbyterian orthodoxy. Even though it is the largest and oldest Presbyterian denomination, it has fallen deep into apostasy, not only against the Word of YHWH, but even against it's own confession. And it is hemorrhaging members because of it.
Unlike the hierarchy maintained by Rome, the ability and penchant for fragmentation allows Protestants to deal with such a thing - They just 'come out of her', just like they did to Rome... Two relatively new shoots have sprung up, The Presbyterian OPC and the PresbyterianPCA (among others), which are fed from the same Westminster root, but lacking the rottenness of the old tree, which will certainly be nothing but a stump before long... But Westminster lives on in those young shoots.
There is a lesson in that. Try to find where the prophecy is to affirm the 'He shall be called a Nazarene' claim. No where is Yeshua called a Nazarene in the OT. The prophecy does not exist. What was misinterpreted is the root of 'Nazarene' which is 'Netzer'. And a 'Netzer' is a very specific type of shoot which comes up at a distance (both in time and space) from the old tree, but is the continuation of the old tree's root. Such a shoot could indeed be considered a fragment, but the root is the same, and the resulting tree is exactly the same as the old one, right down to the DNA. All it is missing is age and rottenness.
Those same up-springing shoots are now evident coming from the Lutherans and Anglicans too... How then can it be bad to be a 'Netzer'?
And I would add that the old hierarchical tree of Rome has no ability to shed itself of it's apostasy - It may be better at withstanding it from entering in, but if and invariably when it does, it has no means of sending forth a new shoot. And because of that, it must surely end as a rotten old stump.
'Consider the Olive tree', indeed!
But in saying that, I admit my own reasoning against your listed conclusion above: I have to conclude that '1. There was deception – they did not all follow the sola principle' is the correct answer: Too much Rome remains within them...
So for me, the lesson of the Netzer goes to something purer and older than Rome or it's Protestants. Yeshua as a Netzer must certainly be of the older root - The same root that has always been, as His Tree will be exactly what has always been, less the rot of apostasy... *NOT* something new. So tell me FRiend, which church do you see that looks like that? Certainly not those springing from Rome or Greece.