Another Gospel

[ajcstr]

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Do non Catholics view Catholic teaching as “another gospel”? Do Baptists view Anglican teaching as “another gospel” Do Anglicans view Lutheran teaching as “another gospel”?

Do Catholics view ANY non Catholic teaching as “another gospel”?

Or do we back up and say because we are all Christians its the same gospel. I realize there are some that would say Catholics are not Christians so I know the answer to that one.

 

[benidict]

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Do non Catholics view Catholic teaching as “another gospel”? Do Baptists view Anglican teaching as “another gospel” Do Anglicans view Lutheran teaching as “another gospel”?

Do Catholics view ANY non Catholic teaching as “another gospel”?

Or do we back up and say because we are all Christians its the same gospel. I realize there are some that would say Catholics are not Christians so I know the answer to that one.

personally, i do view the protestant gospel, as another gospel. that being said, i leave the judgement to God as far as their standing with Him. when we reject the traditions handed down to us, through the apostles, we then are rejecting the Word of God. the fullness of the Gospel, is found in the bible+tradition. one deposite of faith. protestantism rejects the tradition of the apostles. therefore it is another gospel. peace

 

[Javl]

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Do non Catholics view Catholic teaching as “another gospel”? Do Baptists view Anglican teaching as “another gospel” Do Anglicans view Lutheran teaching as “another gospel”?

Do Catholics view ANY non Catholic teaching as “another gospel”?

Or do we back up and say because we are all Christians its the same gospel. I realize there are some that would say Catholics are not Christians so I know the answer to that one.

I view it as the same Gospel, but the Protestant version is incomplete. I also view the Book of Mormon as another Gospel.

Also, there is another Gospel that may be in use by Seventh Day Adventists.

Even though many Protestants view Catholics as non-Christian, I understand their reasoning. Many do not know or realize that they would not have a Bible, or even be Christians if it were not for the Catholic Church.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[ajcstr]

Would it be fair to say that most Protestant denominations do NOT veiw each other as following “another gospel” ?

really - not a trick question - just trying to get a pulse on how far different a belief system needs to be before its considered that different. I’m sure there is no one answer that we can come up with.

 

[jphilapy]

Would it be fair to say that most Protestant denominations do NOT veiw each other as following “another gospel” ?

really - not a trick question - just trying to get a pulse on how far different a belief system needs to be before its considered that different. I’m sure there is no one answer that we can come up with.

This is a hard question to answer. Calvinists would usually accuse Arminism of following a false gospel. But many protestants would just white wash their differences to try to give protestantism the appearance of unity. I have heard some Arminists deny being protestant. So enter another slippery topic.

But for the record, some protestants believe in justification by a faith that works (that is, it is a true saving faith because it works.) I believe this is primarily Lutheran and the reason why Catholics don’t see too much of a difference in views with them. But then there are those folks who believe in justification by faith regardless of any action what so ever. In short you could live a life of sin and still be justified. But it is really difficult getting a handle on protestantism concerning this topic as well as many other topics.

 

[traillius]

most noncatholic christians follow the canon of Jerome, which left out several books.
( taken away from )
The Watchtower society, the mormons, and muslims, have all added to it.
By scripture thus, all of these groups are either anathema or in danger of being removed from God.

 

[ajcstr]

But many protestants would just white wash their differences to try to give protestantism the appearance of unity.

Yes - this is also my impression.

 

[Izdaari]

IMHO, reasonably orthodox Christianity, whether Protestant, Catholic or Orthodox, is all the same gospel, with differences that we may think are important, but really aren’t in the eternal scheme of things. JW’s and LDS are a different matter.

 

[SteveVH]

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Do non Catholics view Catholic teaching as “another gospel”? Do Baptists view Anglican teaching as “another gospel” Do Anglicans view Lutheran teaching as “another gospel”?

Do Catholics view ANY non Catholic teaching as “another gospel”?

Or do we back up and say because we are all Christians its the same gospel. I realize there are some that would say Catholics are not Christians so I know the answer to that one.

If we are viewing the same gospel then we have the same gospel. The interpretation of that same gospel is what differs because the Protestant denominations do not have Sacred Tradition and the Magisterium in order to arrive at the fullness of that gospel.

The Mormons, Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah’s Witnesses would have “another gospel” because they each either claim another document as scripture or have changed the words in the gospel received from the Apostles, or both.

 

[JHow]

…I also view the Book of Mormon as another Gospel…

Yes, and uncannily enough, its title page bills it as “another testament of Jesus Christ”.

 

[Publisher]

Yes, and uncannily enough, its title page bills it as “another testament of Jesus Christ”.

Yes it does…but it does not claim to be “another gospel”…it claims to be another witness of Christ…not another gospel…not another “understanding”…but THE correct understanding.

 

[SteveVH]

Yes it does…but it does not claim to be “another gospel”…it claims to be another witness of Christ…not another gospel…not another “understanding”…but THE correct understanding.

It can claim whatever it wishes to claim, but it is, indeed, “another gospel” as it does not comport with the gospel given to us by the Apostles. All “other gospels” would, of course, claim to contain the correct understanding, but understanding occurs in the human mind and soul, not in a book.

 

[JHow]

Yes it does…but it does not claim to be “another gospel”…it claims to be another witness of Christ…not another gospel…not another “understanding”…but THE correct understanding.

Of course, but all I’m saying is, if I were running the “marketing dept.”, I might have chosen a different subtitle.

 

[Publisher]

It can claim whatever it wishes to claim, but it is, indeed, “another gospel” as it does not comport with the gospel given to us by the Apostles. All “other gospels” would, of course, claim to contain the correct understanding, but understanding occurs in the human mind and soul, not in a book.

I understand…but the poster made an assertion that “another witness” seemed somehow to equal “another gospel”…setting aside your personal belief in the BoM…it is no more a “second gospel” than “John” is a second gospel as opposed to “Luke”.

It’s doctrinal claims are not part of the discussion…it claims to be “a second witness”…another testimony…of the deity and work of the Saviour…not another “gospel”.

Your personal belief conerning the BoM is not in question…

 

[Publisher]

Of course, but all I’m saying is, if I were running the “marketing dept.”, I might have chosen a different subtitle.

I had just never heard of anyone “equating” a “second witness” to a “different gospel” before…must be because it’s “Mormon” and there seems to be a bias if not hostility toward Mormons on this board from what I have observed.

If I misunderstood your statemen, I apologize…just wonder how else to take it since were in a thread entitled "Another Gospel’…so you agree the BoM makes no claim to be another gospel…but a second witness to the deity and work of Christ?

 

[SteveVH]

I understand…but the poster made an assertion that “another witness” seemed somehow to equal “another gospel”…setting aside your personal belief in the BoM…it is no more a “second gospel” than “John” is a second gospel as opposed to “Luke”.

It’s doctrinal claims are not part of the discussion…it claims to be “a second witness”…another testimony…of the deity and work of the Saviour…not another “gospel”.

Your personal belief conerning the BoM is not in question…

Yes Publisher, but as a Catholic I believe that the canon of books which make up the gospel was given to us through the assistance of the Holy Spirit. We have many documents that contain truth outside of the Gospel, but they do not fall into the category of inspired writing. The Gospel is either sufficient or it is not. If it is then we need no other testimony, especially when that testimony conflicts with what we know to be Sacred Scripture.

 

[JHow]

I had just never heard of anyone “equating” a “second witness” to a “different gospel” before…must be because it’s “Mormon” and there seems to be a bias if not hostility toward Mormons on this board from what I have observed.

If I misunderstood your statemen, I apologize…just wonder how else to take it since were in a thread entitled "Another Gospel’…so you agree the BoM makes no claim to be another gospel…but a second witness to the deity and work of Christ?

I was reacting to the previous poster who gave his/her opinion that the Book of Mormon qualified as another gospel. The proscription against “another gospel” is well known. Clearly, no one peddling ‘another gospel’ would label it as such, but “another testament” comes close. Chalk it up to un-fortunate coincidence. All I’m saying is, if I were producing a new religious work, but wanted it to be seen in continuity with early Christianity, I would not call it “another” anything, anticpating the sort of criticism leveled by the poster.

 

[Nicea325]

“But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.”

Do non Catholics view Catholic teaching as “another gospel”? Do Baptists view Anglican teaching as “another gospel” Do Anglicans view Lutheran teaching as “another gospel”?

Do Catholics view ANY non Catholic teaching as “another gospel”?

Or do we back up and say because we are all Christians its the same gospel. I realize there are some that would say Catholics are not Christians so I know the answer to that one.

Yup! Jehovah Witnesses preach an entire different gospel foreign to ancient Christianity.For starters,the flat out denial of Jesus’ divinity.

 

[Javl]

Yes it does…but it does not claim to be “another gospel”…it claims to be another witness of Christ…not another gospel…not another “understanding”…but THE correct understanding.

Oh? It is? Do you know that the Mormons DO NOT believe in the same Jesus that we do, nor the same Trinity? Their “Gospel” may be similar but it IS NOT the same. Therefore they DO NOT have correct understanding! Their “Testament” IS another Gospel.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Javl]

I had just never heard of anyone “equating” a “second witness” to a “different gospel” before…must be because it’s “Mormon” and there seems to be a bias if not hostility toward Mormons on this board from what I have observed.

If I misunderstood your statemen, I apologize…just wonder how else to take it since were in a thread entitled "Another Gospel’…so you agree the BoM makes no claim to be another gospel…but a second witness to the deity and work of Christ?

As far as I am concerned I have no hostility towards Mormons, nor any “bias”. They are just as firm in their belief and devorion as we are. This is commendable, but it is misplaced.

I object to their plagarizing portions of the Judaeo-Christian Bible ( KJ version, verbatim, errors and all ) and incorporating them into the BoM and then passing it off as the true Testament concerning Jesus Christ. ThisIS another Gospel and is anathema.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem