An Apology

[Palladio]

You have a very narrow view of Protestantism. Not all Protestants believe in OSAS, not all have altar calls, etc. Accepting Christ as one’s saviour does not make one a Protestant.

Not quite sure of the last claim.

But I’ll agree it does not, but does not make one Catholic, either. It makes one, well, you tell me.

Ordinarily, one hear’s that claim repeated ad nauseum by low church or no church Protestants, also by Bible Christians (e. g., non-denominationalists, as if there were not in itself yet another denomination).

But all such claimants are at least, in the U. S. break aways from Protestantism, whatever else they want you to believe.

We are still off topic.

 

[rr1213]

Without a unified belief they can’t be called the same denomination. So if a group of Baptists differ on OSAS or the necessity of Baptism they all can’t fall under one denomination. They can call themsevles one denomination, but in reality they differ significantly on very important doctrinal issues making them seperate and distinct denominations. In protestantism the local Pastor is basically the Pope, the elders the Bishops, and the Church is typically its own denomination altogether.

You’re getting overly technical here. I said denominational families. Yes, there are differences between denominations even within a family but they still hold much more in common from a belief standpoint than they differ on. Every time I hear a Catholic say “I can’t understand Protestantism because there are 33,000 Protestant denominations and I can’t keep up with all of them”…I just want to scream. That’s a cop out. The differences between the Churches where most Protestants worship are real but not so great that you couldn’t get a decent grip on them by casual observation or a little reading.

 

[Zooey]

I don’t think all protestants believe in OSAS (that’s my point), they are all so divided they really have no right to call a group "non-Christians based on differing beliefs. How can a Protestant discount Mormons as Christians over their belief (or lack thereof) in the Trinity? The Trinity is not explicitly taught in the Bible, so how could a protestant call a Mormon a non-Christian?

Because not believing in Jesus Christ as the only-begotten Son of the Father, as the 2nd Person of the Trinity, is the breaking point. It’s the reason that Mormons (& I assume, JWs) have to be rebaptized when they become Catholics.
Mormons are **not **Christians because they do not believe in the historic creeds, which contain the bare minimum that one must believe in order to be Christian. They are **not **Christians because they are not baptized Christians. Mormons just got very wet, but they were NOT baptized; they just think they are.
Don’t take my word for it; check your own Catholic teachings. To be Christian requires adherence to the creeds, and the proper form of baptism. Anything less, is a sect, a cult, a reversion to paganism.

 

[lukewarm]

Because not believing in Jesus Christ as the only-begotten Son of the Father, as the 2nd Person of the Trinity, is the breaking point. It’s the reason that Mormons (& I assume, JWs) have to be rebaptized when they become Catholics.
Mormons are **not **Christians because they do not believe in the historic creeds, which contain the bare minimum that one must believe in order to be Christian. They are **not **Christians because they are not baptized Christians. Mormons just got very wet, but they were NOT baptized; they just think they are.
Don’t take my word for it; check your own Catholic teachings. To be Christian requires adherence to the creeds, and the proper form of baptism. Anything less, is a sect, a cult, a reversion to paganism.

But again says who? Protestants reject the Communion of Saints and that is in the oldest creed we have the Apostles Creeed. Are Protestants not Christians because they reject the ancient creeds too?

When you set up your own definition as to who is Christian and who isn’t of course you can claim Mormons aren’t Christian. But since protestants reject portions of the Ancient Creeds too, under what authority can they say who is Christian and who isn’t? I’ve met Pentacostals who rejcted everyone as Christian who didn’t speak in tongues.

Especially when the rationale for a Protestant claiming Mormons aren’t Christian is the Mormon view of the Trinity (which is not explicitely taught in the Bible anyway)… So going by sola scriptura protestants shouldn’t profess a belief in the Trinity either.

 

[rr1213]

So going by sola scriptura protestants shouldn’t profess a belief in the Trinity either.

You misunderstand sola scriptura. The concept does not preclude reasoning from Scripture. Scripture contains numerous references to the three persons of the Trinity and, from those references, the Trinity can be properly understood.

 

[lukewarm]

You misunderstand sola scriptura. The concept does not preclude reasoning from Scripture. Scripture contains numerous references to the three persons of the Trinity and, from those references, the Trinity can be properly understood.

Like I said give 1,000 Amazonian natives a Bible and see if ONE comes up with the idea of the Trinity after reading it cover to cover. See if one coes up with anything resembling Christianity at all. The Trinity simply doesn’t exist in the Bible, and wouldn’t exist at all without the Apostolic tradition of the early Churches. So how could Bible only Christians reject a Mormons claim to Christianity because Mormon’s reject a belief that is extra-Biblical like the Trinity?

To believe that the Bible teaches that God is One God in three persons and the Son is consubstantial with the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified is a real stretch for me to accept.

The Trinity IMO doesn’t contradict the Bible but that is a long ways from saying the Trinity is taught in the Bible.

 

[rr1213]

Like I said give 1,000 Amazonian natives a Bible and see if ONE comes up with the idea of the Trinity after reading it cover to cover. See if one coes up with anything resembling Christianity at all. The Trinity simply doesn’t exist in the Bible, and wouldn’t exist at all without the Apostolic tradition of the early Churches. So how could Bible only Christians reject a Mormons claim to Christianity because Mormon’s reject a belief that is extra-Biblical like the Trinity?

To believe that the Bible teaches that God is One God in three persons and the Son is consubstantial with the Father and the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son, who with the Father and the Son is worshiped and glorified is a real stretch for me to accept.

The Trinity IMO doesn’t contradict the Bible but that is a long ways from saying the Trinity is taught in the Bible.

Assuming your Amazonians are literate, they must certainly would have a basic understanding of Christianity from reading the bible.

As for the Trinity, just off the top of my head…“he who has seen me has seen the father”, “the father and I are one”, “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son”, “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God”, “and the Spirit of God was on the waters”, “he shall send you a comforter”, “the comforter, which is the Holy Ghost”, etc., etc.

 

[lukewarm]

**Assuming your Amazonians are literate, they must certainly would have a basic understanding of Christianity from reading the bible. **

As for the Trinity, just off the top of my head…“he who has seen me has seen the father”, “the father and I are one”, “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son”, “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God”, “and the Spirit of God was on the waters”, “he shall send you a comforter”, “the comforter, which is the Holy Ghost”, etc., etc.

No they wouldn’t IMO, not even close…

And no those verses do not explicitly teach the doctrine of the Trinity as modern Christians define it today. I can say my wife and I are one. A reader wouldn’t assume I mean my wife and I are one being consubstantial, yet two persons. They would assume I’m speaking metaphorically or in a spiritual sense, something Jesus was a large fan of.

 

[rr1213]

No they wouldn’t IMO, not even close…

And no those verses do not explicitly teach the doctrine of the Trinity as modern Christians define it today. I can say my wife and I are one. A reader wouldn’t assume I mean my wife and I are one being consubstantial, yet two persons. They would assume I’m speaking metaphorically or in a spiritual sense, something Jesus was a large fan of.

you’re entitled to your opinion

 

[Palladio]

Assuming your Amazonians are literate, they must certainly would have a basic understanding of Christianity from reading the bible.

As for the Trinity, just off the top of my head…“he who has seen me has seen the father”, “the father and I are one”, “God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son”, “in the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God”, “and the Spirit of God was on the waters”, “he shall send you a comforter”, “the comforter, which is the Holy Ghost”, etc., etc.

I used to think something like this, that there is understanding of basic Christianity, and that this could be achieved by reading the NT: I now believer neither is possible. No person unchurched could possibly hit upon such a notion as basic Christianity. Nor is there really such a notion, as the TLS reviewer noted in passing in reviewing the latest book by the present ABC: she rightly used the word “impossible.”

In rereading Paul, I have been struck by how the early church was uncertain and, like all of us, wayward, even as they had, as Paul writes, the gospel! If they, so much nearer to the event, could be wrong, and were, how much more so would a nonbeliever reading the NT for the first time.

The deeper problem, fomented by Protestantism, is that everybody and anybody claims the adjective Christian who accedes to that ‘basic Christianity’ claim or claims. Assuming the church was one, Paul at the end of Roman pointed to unacceptable divisions and warned of “the simple-minded” being mislead by charlatans who falsifie “doctrine.” We have convenient targets in LDS, JWs, etc. Yet, as others have pointed out, you can do nothing to deny them their claims, because they have their ‘basic Christianity’ down pat.

And there are more to come and already here among so-called progressive Christians, who deny the divinity of Christ but base their moral outlook on Him nonetheless and quote scripture as proof.

False prophets: Christ used the plural form of the noun!

 

[Zooey]

But again says who? Protestants reject the Communion of Saints and that is in the oldest creed we have the Apostles Creeed. Are Protestants not Christians because they reject the ancient creeds too?

Reject the creeds? Not at all!! I don’t know who these people are, that you speak of, but I can tell you right now, that belief in the creeds is essential & basic.
Protestants believe the creeds. If there are any who reject the creeds, they are in deep trouble, because those are the very basis of all Christian belief.
Certainly, in the Methodist tradition, we not only believe the creeds, we recite them in our corporate worship.
I can honestly say, I have never met anyone who was a practicing Christian of any kind, who did not stand by the truth of every point of the creeds.
Or, do you mean that some don’t recite them? I know that; not everyone has the same rubrics for public worship. That doesn’t mean that the creeds are tossed out.
I honestly…I’m sorry, but:shrug: you either know a very peculiar bunch of people, or you have as confused a picture of Protestants, as James White & Co have of Catholics.

When you set up your own definition as to who is Christian and who isn’t of course you can claim Mormons aren’t Christian. But since protestants reject portions of the Ancient Creeds too, under what authority can they say who is Christian and who isn’t?

My definition is the same as that of the Catholic Church… which I pointed out in my last post.

I’ve met Pentacostals who rejcted everyone as Christian who didn’t speak in tongues.

Some Pentacostals do believe that you cannot go to Heaven without speaking in tongues. That is peculaiar, certainly, but it’s far from believing that you aren’t Christian. They use the word “Christian” to mean what Catholics mean when you say “in the state of grace”.
I am not a pentacostal. Far from it!!

Especially when the rationale for a Protestant claiming Mormons aren’t Christian is the Mormon view of the Trinity (which is not explicitely taught in the Bible anyway)… So going by sola scriptura protestants shouldn’t profess a belief in the Trinity either.

Methodists don’t believe in sola scriptura.:nope: Never have, never will.
In fact, I can’t think of one of the solas that we do believe in.
Furthermore, you are actually arguing against your own Catholic Catechism when you say what you say here. By this line of reasoning, the Catholic Church stands condemned by her own catechism & her requirements & definition of the sacrament of Baptism…Do you really want to go there???
Honestly, I am used to people who hate Catholics more than they love Jesus Christ; it has been a long, long, time since I met a Catholic who:tsktsk: hates Protestants enough to :tsktsk: insult Our Lord the way you are doing in this thread.

 

[Singinbeauty]

Anyway obviously just believing in Christ is not enough to unify us, since pelenty of folks believe in Christ and despise Catholics. How could I be unified with those that hate me? I’ve read the Bible cover to cover and frankly without Apostolic tradition of the historical Catholic Church you guys wouldn’t even have a religion.

No way does a reader independently come up with the Trinity just by reading the Bible, absolutely no way. Give the Bible to 1,000 people with zero knowledge of Christianity, have them start at Genesis and end at Revelation. I would guarantee that not only would you not get anything resembling Christianity, but you would get 1,000 completely different religions. Some would be stoning sons for backsassing their Father. Some would be offering their daughters as a burnt offering like in Judges. It would be anarchy, kind of like what we see in modern day protestantism.

It’s so sad what little belief you have in how big God really is. Do you not think that someone can pick up the bible, and if they are totally open to Him, can understand what He is conveying through scripture because He is there with them? I believe my God can. You put Him in a box and rely too much on humans to tell you who God is rather than asking Him yourself it seems. Not that church isn’t needed for guidance but it seems like a lot of catholics put the church in between them and God when they can go to Him themselves.

And I must say, the bolded statement saddens me even more. I guess Christ isn’t enough for you…

 

[Singinbeauty]

Honestly, I am used to people who hate Catholics more than they love Jesus Christ; it has been a long, long, time since I met a Catholic who:tsktsk: hates Protestants enough to :tsktsk: insult Our Lord the way you are doing in this thread.

I totally agree Zooey!

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

Furthermore, you are actually arguing against your own Catholic Catechism when you say what you say here. By this line of reasoning, the Catholic Church stands condemned by her own catechism & her requirements & definition of the sacrament of Baptism…

Zooey,

I don’t understand your statement (which I boldened above)
Could you elucidate us dull bulbs on this one?

And I do not think Lukewarm is insulting Jesus in this thread, either. I can see what he means (although he does jump about in places) but I think that statement is a little harsh.

Robert

 

[Rbt_Southwell]

It’s so sad what little belief you have in how big God really is. Do you not think that someone can pick up the bible, and if they are totally open to Him, can understand what He is conveying through scripture because He is there with them?

I believe my God can. You put Him in a box and rely too much on humans to tell you who God is rather than asking Him yourself it seems. Not that church isn’t needed for guidance but it seems like a lot of catholics put the church in between them and God when they can go to Him themselves.

And I must say, the bolded statement saddens me even more. I guess Christ isn’t enough for you…]

Singinbeauty,

We do not ‘need’ the Bible. It is not a ‘how-to-be-a-Christian’ book. The early Church did very well without a collection of books. Every thing that Jesus taught was to be HEARD.

To assert that one can randomly open a Bible and “are totally open to Him” and know what EXACTLY what taught post-Resurrection to the Apostles and disciples?

You have just put forth what Lukewarm and others (myself included) argue about regarding ‘personal interpretation of Scripture.’

Your statement leads to everyone ‘claiming’ the Holy Spirit is leading them (look at all the whack-head sects that drank Kool-Aid and lived with Koresh and waited for Hale-Bopp to pick them up) and that what God tells YOU about the Bible is of more value than what Christ’s Church has taught millions about it throughout the centuries.

We Catholics do not put God in a “box.” He is in the Eucharist. Unfortunately, many well-meaning folks think he is in a book.

Robert

 

[lukewarm]

It’s so sad what little belief you have in how big God really is.** Do you not think that someone can pick up the bible, and if they are totally open to Him, can understand what He is conveying through scripture because He is there with them? I **believe my God can. You put Him in a box and rely too much on humans to tell you who God is rather than asking Him yourself it seems. Not that church isn’t needed for guidance but it seems like a lot of catholics put the church in between them and God when they can go to Him themselves.

And I must say, the bolded statement saddens me even more. I guess Christ isn’t enough for you…

LOL oversimplify much?

Sure God could do that, but I don’t think He does, otherwise we wouldn’t have 30,000+ different interpretations of the same text. Heck if that was the case all Christ had to do was drop a book on Earth and forget the Apostles altogether.

Forget it I think I’m over your head, if you read what I wrote without any presumption of what I am, and take it strictly on its own merit, you may actually be able to engage in a grown up dialogue instead of just judging my intent and belief in Christ.

 

[lukewarm]

Reject the creeds? Not at all!! I don’t know who these people are, that you speak of, but I can tell you right now, that belief in the creeds is essential & basic.
Protestants believe the creeds. If there are any who reject the creeds, they are in deep trouble, because those are the very basis of all Christian belief.
Certainly, in the Methodist tradition, we not only believe the creeds, we recite them in our corporate worship.
I can honestly say, I have never met anyone who was a practicing Christian of any kind, who did not stand by the truth of every point of the creeds.
Or, do you mean that some don’t recite them? I know that; not everyone has the same rubrics for public worship. That doesn’t mean that the creeds are tossed out.
I honestly…I’m sorry, but:shrug: you either know a very peculiar bunch of people, or you have as confused a picture of Protestants, as James White & Co have of Catholics.

My definition is the same as that of the Catholic Church… which I pointed out in my last post.
Some Pentacostals do believe that you cannot go to Heaven without speaking in tongues. That is peculaiar, certainly, but it’s far from believing that you aren’t Christian. They use the word “Christian” to mean what Catholics mean when you say “in the state of grace”.
I am not a pentacostal. Far from it!!

Methodists don’t believe in sola scriptura.:nope: Never have, never will.
In fact, I can’t think of one of the solas that we do believe in.
Furthermore, you are actually arguing against your own Catholic Catechism when you say what you say here. By this line of reasoning, the Catholic Church stands condemned by her own catechism & her requirements & definition of the sacrament of Baptism…Do you really want to go there???
Honestly, I am used to people who hate Catholics more than they love Jesus Christ; it has been a long, long, time since I met a Catholic who:tsktsk: hates Protestants enough to :tsktsk: insult Our Lord the way you are doing in this thread.

Plenty of protestants disregard the Creeds, Baptists for one, also you may recite the creeds but you most certainly deny the Communion of Saints.

Anyway I haven’t insulted our Lord at all, I’m having a dialogue but you are incapable of it I see. You aren’t following simple logic.

 

[Olivermax]

It’s so sad what little belief you have in how big God really is. Do you not think that someone can pick up the bible, and if they are totally open to Him, can understand what He is conveying through scripture because He is there with them? I believe my God can. You put Him in a box and rely too much on humans to tell you who God is rather than asking Him yourself it seems. Not that church isn’t needed for guidance but it seems like a lot of catholics put the church in between them and God when they can go to Him themselves.

I think you can get some idea of how to follow Jesus just by picking up the Bible, but you won’t know exactly how he wishes you to worship him. You won’t know when to get baptised, exactly what He means when He says confess your sins, what the nature of the Trinity is–what exactly is the Lord’s Supper and how do you enact it. Is it merely a symbol? Is it transubstantiation, consubstantiation, etc. Do you have priests and bishops or do you elect pastors? What day is the Sabbath? These issues, along with many others, are not spelled out in the Bible. For that matter, you couldn’t know how to be a good Jew just by reading the OT. Much of what you would have needed to have known was passed down orally, generation to generation by the priests.

 

[lak611]

We do not ‘need’ the Bible.

What do you mean? Catholics need Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. Catholics cannot throw away the Bible. After all, we use it in every Mass.

 

[lukewarm]

What do you mean? Catholics need Scripture, Tradition and the Magisterium. Catholics cannot throw away the Bible. After all, we use it in every Mass.

I’m sure he has the utmost respect for the scriptures but you have to understand the Church and the Apostles words existed before the first Gospel or Apistle was ever written.

Without the Church, Holy Spirit, the Magesterium, and Apostolic Tradition the Bible is only as good as the person who is interpreting it. And all you have to do is look at the world today and come to the conclusion that many times that ain’t much…