A Historical Dare to Protestants

[Tomster]

Let us say hypothetically that the ecclesiastical divisions amongst Protestants is not what God designed when He designed the church.

It does not necessarily follow that one and only one denomination is exclusively the church of the Lord Jesus Christ, much less that your denomination is it.

There is nothing hypothetical about it. The divisions within Protestantism are a scandal. Christ founded only one Church (cf. 1Timothy 3:15).

 

[christian77]

God’s will is that we choose to love him freely.

Love cannot be forced.

God wants us all to love him, but he won’t force us.

This is God’s will.

Well, I think Augustine would disagree with your position. Could your try to support your position with Scripture and/or sacred tradition references too?

 

[MrS]

What I DO claim, however, is basically this:

1: The measure of a “true church” is not it’s organization, not even its history. It is its theology. Are its teachings in accordance with Scripture? In my view, the gates of Hell did overcome the RC church during certain periods in time, which led to unbiblical doctrines and abuse of the offices of the church.

2: I do not consider any one denomination (and yes, I claim the RC church as a Christian denomination. Don’t derail this thread by trying to start an argument over that…) to be the Church Catholic (“kat holikos” = “for all” = “universal”), which is what Jesus spoke of in Matt 16.The Church Catholic is the spiritual unity between ALL believers - regardless of denominations.

Are its teaching in accordance with Scripture??? Are you suggesting that Scripture predates the Church?

There is the big distinction. The Bible, Scripture, is the book of the Catholic Church. The Holy Spirit, as promised, will guide those chosen into all Truth… as Jesus told the Apostles. And this guidance of the Holy Spirit includes the inspiration to write down the Truths presented in Scripture… canonized by only the Catholic Church… and properly interpreted only by the Catholic Church… for all, universally, to accept or reject.

The Church is the Pillar of Truth, not the Bible… and the Bible, the Book of the Catholic Church… affirms this.

As to the spiritual unity between all believers… agreed.

If you do not believe ALL of John, including John 6, you simply have walked away as they did when the Words were first spoken. That would not sound to me like one is a real believer… but rather a real selector.

I feel for those, including many in my own family, who love the Lord but have chosen to either walk away, or to prefer the private interpretations of their pastors, founders, leaders, etc.

How fortunate I am to be given, and to have accepted, the gift of the Catholic Church, with all its Truths, all its problems, all its sinners… all overshadowed by the Real Presence.

.

 

[Tomster]

Please tell me you’re not OSAS? I’ve read my full share of heresy today, thank you very much.
God wants all to be saved - “for the Bible tells us so”. In a forum where there is very little fact, and many opinions (more or less valid), this is one view that is ACTUALLY factual.

One Protestant for OSAS! Another, against! Case closed.

 

[With_Questions]

Jesus wants us to be one as he and the father are one.

Do you think they have any disagreements as to what is the truth?

Unless there is a single acknowledged truth, there cannot be unity.

Comment: This single acknowledged truth has to in fact be the truth. Unity around untruth is not the unity that Jesus had in mind. I have severe doubts whether some points of “truth” that your denomination is allegedly unified around is in fact “the truth”.

But that is a separate issue that is not a part of this thread.

Anyway, even if I accept this, it does not follow that exclusively one denomination today is “the church” (and everyone else is of lesser status) let alone that your denomination is it.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Well, I think Augustine would disagree with your position. Could your try to support your position with Scripture and/or sacred tradition references too?

No problem:

1 Tim 2
3This is good, and pleases God our Savior, 4who wants all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.

Matt 22
37Jesus replied: " ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ 38This is the first and greatest commandment.

St. Augustine

But since there are some persons who so defend God’s grace as to deny man’s free will, or who suppose that free will is denied when grace is defended, I have determined to write somewhat on this point.

Now He has revealed to us, through His Holy Scriptures, that there is in a man a free choice of will. But how He has revealed this I do not recount in human language, but in divine. There is, to begin with, the fact that God’s precepts themselves would be of no use to a man unless he had free choice of will, so that by performing them he might obtain the promised rewards.

What is the import of the fact that in so many passages God requires all His commandments to be kept and fulfilled? How does He make this requisition, if there is no free will? What means the happy man, of whom the Psalmist says that his will has been the law of the Lord? Does he not clearly enough show that a man by his own will takes his stand in the law of God? Then again, there are so many commandments which in some way are expressly adapted to the human will; for instance, there is, Be not overcome of evil, Romans 12:1 and others of similar import, such as, Be not like a horse or a mule, which have no understanding; and, Reject not the counsels of your mother; Proverbs 1:8 and, Be not wise in your own conceit; Proverbs 3:7 and, Despise not the chastening of the Lord; Proverbs 3:11 and, Forget not my law; Proverbs 3:1 and, Forbear not to do good to the poor; Proverbs 3:27 and, Devise not evil against your friend; Proverbs 3:29 and, Give no heed to a worthless woman; Proverbs 5:2 and, He is not inclined to understand how to do good; and, They refused to attend to my counsel; Proverbs 1:30 with numberless other passages of the inspired Scriptures of the Old Testament.

 

[MrS]

sighs

I’m reaching the end of my rope here. I know there are intelligent RCs outthere - why don’t y’all show yourselves a bit more?

Now be nice.

Other than sin, which we all share, one of the biggest problems in finding an “intelligent” Catholic (Roman refers to the rite, not the Church), is that too many Catholics are not well versed in their own faith and in their own Book… The Bible,

The strongest, most “intelligent” Catholics include a huge number of converts who know Scripture well, who know the history well, and who found out that Truth, in its fullness, is only found in the Catholic Church.

.

 

[With_Questions]

There is nothing hypothetical about it. The divisions within Protestantism are a scandal. Christ founded only one Church (cf. 1Timothy 3:15).

Let us say I agree with you. It still does not follow that one denomination and one denomination only is the one church that Christ founded, much less to say that you are it.

In other words, the crux of the arguments I am reading reading is “you are wrong, therefore I am right”. That does not necessarily follow.

Just because Protestants are wrong, it does not necessarily follow that Catholics are right. You totally neglect the possibility that both are wrong.

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Comment: This single acknowledged truth has to in fact be the truth. Unity around untruth is not the unity that Jesus had in mind. I have severe doubts whether some points of “truth” that your denomination is allegedly unified around is in fact “the truth”.

But that is a separate issue that is not a part of this thread.

Anyway, even if I accept this, it does not follow that exclusively one denomination today is “the church” (and everyone else is of lesser status) let alone that your denomination is it.

Here’s the issue. We agree that there is unity in the Truth, whether or not we agree as to what that truth is.

Given this fact, and the fact that protestant Churches disagree with eachother as to what is the truth, we can be assured that unity and truth are not contained in protestantism as a whole.

You can claim that a single protestant denomination is united in truth, but not protestantism.

Catholicism can make this claim.

In addition to being able to make this claim from a purely logical analysis, I believe the historical case is equally strong.

Jesus promised his disciples to lead them into all truth. If the Catholic Church is not true, then for centuries the Church was not led in all truth.

 

[MrS]

Let us say I agree with you. It still does not follow that one denomination and one denomination only is the one church that Christ founded, much less to say that you are it.

In other words, the basis of the arguments are reading is “you are wrong, therefore I am right”. That does not necessarily follow. It is possible for both to be wrong.

Correct.

Hence the problem with so many non-Catholic faith communities. (yes I refrain from calling any of them a Church)

The disagree on some issues that they themselves term basic, or critical, or fundamental.

Hence we can assume that at the very least, ALL but one of them is wrong.

.

 

[LutheranDK]

Are its teaching in accordance with Scripture??? Are you suggesting that Scripture predates the Church?

I claim that Scripture predates the RC church, yes.
And the reason that makes sense is that I don’t see the RC church as being the church Jesus founded.

There is the big distinction. The Bible, Scripture, is the book of the Catholic Church

That is another thing which is a matter of belief. I do NOT believe this, otherwise I would join the RC church

. The Holy Spirit, as promised, will guide those chosen into all Truth… as Jesus told the Apostles. And this guidance of the Holy Spirit includes the inspiration to write down the Truths presented in Scripture… canonized by only the Catholic Church… and properly interpreted only by the Catholic Church… for all, universally, to accept or reject.

Again - statements, no arguments. Please give me the reasoning behind those statements, that:

1: The Bible was compiled by the RC church (which means: Convince me that the Roman-Catholic was the church Christ founded)

I was going to add a #2 and #3, but they both hang on #1, so if you could adress this first, please

The Church is the Pillar of Truth, not the Bible… and the Bible, the Book of the Catholic Church… affirms this.

I would agree, if we agreed on what the “Church” is. You think that it is the RC church, I do not.

As to the spiritual unity between all believers… agreed.

At least there’s something we agree on

If you do not believe ALL of John, including John 6, you simply have walked away as they did when the Words were first spoken. That would not sound to me like one is a real believer… but rather a real selector.

sigh
Please cut that kind of talk. It makes you sound like a stubborn teenager.
1: You have no basis for insinuating that I do not believe ALL of John, or all of the Bible for that matter. I may not (nay: I DO not) draw the same conclusions as you have, but I believe that the Bible is the Word of God.

I feel for those, including many in my own family, who love the Lord but have chosen to either walk away, or to prefer the private interpretations of their pastors, founders, leaders, etc.

[bolding mine]
I could say the very same thing about the RC church, but let’s quit the mudslinging and act like adults, shall we?

 

[With_Questions]

Correct.

Hence the problem with so many non-Catholic faith communities. (yes I refrain from calling any of them a Church)

The disagree on some issues that they themselves term basic, or critical, or fundamental.

Hence we can assume that at the very least, ALL but one of them is wrong.

Maybe all are wrong to some extent or the other.

That does not mean you are right.

Maybe your denomination is about the same as all other denominations, wrong in some things and right in others.

 

[LutheranDK]

Now be nice.

Other than sin, which we all share, one of the biggest problems in finding an “intelligent” Catholic (Roman refers to the rite, not the Church), is that too many Catholics are not well versed in their own faith and in their own Book… The Bible,

The strongest, most “intelligent” Catholics include a huge number of converts who know Scripture well, who know the history well, and who found out that Truth, in its fullness, is only found in the Catholic Church.

.

I try, but when being nice and outgoing is responded to with sneers and bites, it gets harder to not get frustrated

And secondly, I use the term “Roman-Catholic” to set what you call the “Catholic” church apart from what I call the “Church Catholic”, which is the universal community of ALL believers.

 

[LutheranDK]

Maybe all are wrong to some extent or the other.

That does not mean you are right.

Maybe your denomination is about the same as all other denominations, wrong in some things and right in others.

Oh no!
You called the RC church a denomination

prepares for the derailing of the thread

 

[With_Questions]

Here’s the issue. We agree that there is unity in the Truth, whether or not we agree as to what that truth is.

Given this fact, and the fact that protestant Churches disagree with eachother as to what is the truth, we can be assured that unity and truth are not contained in protestantism as a whole.

You can claim that a single protestant denomination is united in truth, but not protestantism.

I could care less about “Protestantism”. “Protestantism” is just a tem of convenience to lump Christian denominations that are not Catholic or Orthodox under.

Catholicism can make this claim.

So can every other denomination.

But these claims are irrelevant unless these denominations can prove that the truth that they are allegedly unified around in fact is the truth.

In addition to being able to make this claim from a purely logical analysis, I believe the historical case is equally strong.

Of course the Orthodox could say the same thing.

Jesus promised his disciples to lead them into all truth. If the Catholic Church is not true, then for centuries the Church was not led in all truth.

B does not necessarily follow from A here.

 

[Hisalone]

" . . . so that, if I am slow in coming, thou mayest be in no doubt over the conduct that is expected of thee in God’s household. By that I mean the Church of the living God, the pillar and foundation upon which the truth rests." - 1 Timothy 3:15.

Please interpret, if you will.

Eklessia in your bible has been translated “church” eklessia is not church it is assembly or congregation. The assembly of God is the pillar and foundation on which the truth rests.

 

[Hisalone]

I think you are having a problem with the visible and invisible elements of the Church. Additionally, some of your Protestant brethren would have a problem with the idea that Christ founded a Church. How would Protestant theology reconcile your view with theirs?

How can you ever reconcile that The Church is not what you have been taught iit is?

 

[CHESTERTONRULES]

Of course the Orthodox could say the same thing.

 

[Hisalone]

You are the one that is defining “Church” to be “Your denomination”.

I have absolutely no reason to accept your definition.

Every Catholic needs to read and to understand this!

 

[With_Questions]

Oh no!
You called the RC church a denomination

prepares for the derailing of the thread

Yeah I know. Horrors, Gads, and Zounds.

The problem is that the English dictionary I use agrees with me.

And I have not yet been supplied an alternative word that has the same meaning. So I will continue to use the word denomination.