Arguing with a Protestant?

[guitar_mike]

Having been a Catholic turned protestant returned Catholic…BY THE GRACE OF GOD!
I would like to chime in on this discussion. I find it best to look for common ground when speaking with protestants. There are things that the Catholic faith and the protestant faith share…GASP!..The Apostles Creed is said in many protestant churches. Keep this in mind when discussing your faith with a protestant. This is the basics of the Catholic faith and the protestant faith. If any group does not believe this I would say that they are not orthodox (correct) in the faith and not a Christian church. The other matters that we argue over seem to be doctrinal. For instance SALVATION. Many evangelical protestants believe that you must publicly confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. WELL…When I was 13, I made a public confirmation of my faith in Christ and acknowledged my baptism. Sometimes it is just two sides of the same coin. We see things from our perspective but it is still the same thing. : ***“in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.” ***

PAX et VERITAS

 

[chero23]

I’m not sure, but I think chero23 meant to reply to the same post you were replying to, namely this one:

Yes i was not quoting her point, but the other post. Sorry for the confusion

 

[irisfromohio]

Having been a Catholic turned protestant returned Catholic…BY THE GRACE OF GOD!
I would like to chime in on this discussion. I find it best to look for common ground when speaking with protestants. There are things that the Catholic faith and the protestant faith share…GASP!..The Apostles Creed is said in many protestant churches. Keep this in mind when discussing your faith with a protestant. This is the basics of the Catholic faith and the protestant faith. If any group does not believe this I would say that they are not orthodox (correct) in the faith and not a Christian church. The other matters that we argue over seem to be doctrinal. For instance SALVATION. Many evangelical protestants believe that you must publicly confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. WELL…When I was 13, I made a public confirmation of my faith in Christ and acknowledged my baptism. Sometimes it is just two sides of the same coin. We see things from our perspective but it is still the same thing. : ***“in essentials, unity; in doubtful matters, liberty; in all things, charity.” ***

PAX et VERITAS

As a devout Catholic Convert from the African Methodist Episcopal Church, I must say in earnest, “I reemble that remark!” Most Protestants would find this point conclusively agreeable, but many so-called “Non Denominational Christians” do not. They even reject many Protestant faiths.

I recently wrapped up an online discussion with a gentleman of this pursuasion. He would blast me with Bible quotes and questions in rapid succession, thinking I couldn’t answer. He claimed the answers were all simple. When I responded, in my own words, but with cited documentation, he refused to listen, saying that I am brainwashed and quoting other peoples beliefs. Finally, he said he couldn’t answer all of my Scriptural support, I asked him why when that is what HE asked me for. Finally, he just asked me where was my Salvation, in Jesus or the Church. I answered “Jesus” (of course). Then he declared he didn’t know what we were arguing. I told him that he questioned my ability to understand Sacred Scripture… silence, but he rested satisfied with what you stated. What we share in common, Christ, is far more important than any doctrinal, semantcal and otherwise argument. So, I chose to rest on my laurels

Iris Marie

 

[stardog]

This thread is profoundly interesting to me.

I was raised in the South and attended the “Church of Christ” most of my life. This was not the same Church as the “National Churches of Christ”, but instead each congregation was totally independent from any national synod or organization, in fact, totally independent from other “Churches of Christ” within the same city. We were taught to “Speak where the Bible speaks, and be silent where the Bible is silent”. Through out my 60 plus years, I have attended most Christian Churches…(Baptist, Catholic, Methodist, Anglican, etc.) and highly respect the beliefs of the members of each of the different Churches, be they Protestant, Catholic or non-denominational. I was married to a Jew, who converted to Christ and attended the Episcopal Church before she passed, giving me quite an insight of the Jewish culture and tradition as well.

Just as the Catholic Church claims to be the “original” Church, so does the Church of Christ,… hence it’s name, (which actually is no name at all…but instead, claims to only be a description of the body of believers who meet in a building…hopefully I’m making some sense here). Some members of other Churches referred to us as “Camelites”…a mistaken take off of a theologian named Alexander Campbell who established The Church of Christ in attempt to get back to Christian basics in worship. Actually Campbell believed that he was re-establishing Christ’s original Church through scriptural doctrine, even to the point that instrumental music was/is deemed “non scriptural”. He, finding no reference in the New Testament of instruments being used in the worship service. (Perhaps he should have read Psalms 150)!

Fortunately, my job required extensive overseas travel, and I have been blessed to have had good bit of exposure to a variety of Christians of different faiths, in many countries through out the World. The Greek Orthodox Church lays claim to the title of “the oldest original Church”, according to their members, and each one of them will profess this with their last dying breath…and each one, that I’ve met, claim to be able to prove this! I’m not agreeing or disagreeing here, so I’m not trying to stir up an argument.

It disturbs me to read the occasional comment from Catholics, in this thread, concerning what some “professed” Christians say about the Catholic Church! Please do not make the mistake thinking that most Protestants are cynical and rude towards differing Christian beliefs. I have not found this to be the case. My sole intent, here, is the truth. By that comment, I mean the true teachings of Christ and the apostles as it pertains to worshiping of our Father in Heaven. In that search, this thread as well as this website has truly been a blessing to me. By reading the contributions made here by all of you, I am getting quite the education on the Eucharist, infant baptism and other differences that distinguish us, and perhaps coming away with some different views than previously held.

Honestly, I am still troubled with the vision in my mind of the early 1st century Christian worship service vs. how we worship God today, not only in Spirit but also in form. It’s like comparing Notre Dame and Westminster Cathedrals with the caves and catacombs used by the early worshipers of Christ. In my mind’s eye, I find it difficult to vision Peter, Paul, or John in flowing crimson robes, studded with jewels, calling followers to worship. Instead, I vision these men dressed in modest street clothing of the day, humbling themselves before Christ and his followers in prayer, all the while serving, administering to the flock, and delivering the true Gospel to the Church. I am aware that the persecution of the early Christians contributed to more of an “underground” movement, hence the use of caves and tombs for worship (not cathedrals) , but I’m struggling with the fact that I feel that the present day Church leaders, dressed as kings, is not exactly what Christ had in mind for us.

Thanks for lending an ear.

 

[pablope]

This thread is profoundly interesting to me.

Honestly, I am still troubled with the vision in my mind of the early 1st century Christian worship service vs. how we worship God today, not only in Spirit but also in form. It’s like comparing Notre Dame and Westminster Cathedrals with the caves and catacombs used by the early worshipers of Christ. In my mind’s eye, I find it difficult to vision Peter, Paul, or John in flowing crimson robes, studded with jewels, calling followers to worship. Instead, I vision these men dressed in modest street clothing of the day, humbling themselves before Christ and his followers in prayer, all the while serving, administering to the flock, and delivering the true Gospel to the Church. I am aware that the persecution of the early Christians contributed to more of an “underground” movement, hence the use of caves and tombs for worship (not cathedrals) , but I’m struggling with the fact that I feel that the present day Church leaders, dressed as kings, is not exactly what Christ had in mind for us.

Thanks for lending an ear.

Thank for your testimony, Stardog.

On Christian worship…I hope this link will enlighten you further…star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m1/splndr.html

As for the clothings worn…I think you should think this further…the clothes, the stoles, have meanings.

The flowing robes are not meant for the glory of the priest or the bishop or the pope…they are meant for the glory of God. During the Mass, as we get ready to worship…would you not like to present the most beautiful vestment before God as the priest is getting ready to offer the sacrifice at Calvary?

Have you been to the old missions in California? In display, the missionaries had their cassocks…and worn out garbs…but when they would get ready to say mass, they would put on these vestments.

 

[4tytwo]

Looks like you want a more than a 5 minute argument here. Perhaps we should make it a separate threat.

I’m not fully following what your saying here and to a extent feel like your leading this down a road (Marian) but I’m not sure that’s your intention. Obviously we believe that the wedding feast at Cana happened because of scripture that was orally passed down for 360 or so years. As to our lord turning water into wine yes that was his first miracle. As to cheap magicians tricks playing with Oh ( oxygen / hydrogen ) molecules … As someone who has a lot of knowledge on this I assure you it’s not that simple turning in water into wine is a miracle./QUOTE

Why would you ever think that Jesus created alcohol the first time he was going to do something on his way to change the world. Would you really think he needed to hoodwink people. Would he want to say “look I am Darren Brown and I can give you a religious experience”. You do Jesus a big discredit by declaring his first miracle was to change matter. He was here to change minds. As long as you believe in material miracles you are a materialist and are far from understanding what Jesus was about. What message would he have given us if he would have made alcohol in his first miracle. How could he ask us to take up our cross and follow him and what favour would he have done the couple by disguising the fact they could not afford to buy enough wine to have wedding celebrations, let alone that he was concerned most about them going away from the wedding with a lie in mind. How would the miracle have worked and on whom? Would you have thought Jesus needed to brag about “look hey see what I can do, I can turn wine into water” Jesus is not a Jim will fake it. He makes you face reality in a logic that is of God. What would you think would have been the best thing you could ever drink in the eyes of Jesus. If you are thinking of wine you are blind to his truth and trapped in material values. Look what he served, know why it was put where it was put and what they only could have put into those Jars. It was the living water. Why would you want to spoil it? Research the circumstances and see what happen if you put your trust in God
Jesus was logician, not a magician, he wanted us to see the truth. If it you need miracles to contort the logic that is God you indulge in unlimited power breaking his logic, not in the logic of his love.

 

[hope_7]

When argueing with a protestant .

If he is a conservative one, you may go through the pope sola acripture over tradition baptism the euchrist and so on. But thease are really not the point to him! What he is doing is trying to get you to see that dependance on anything but Jesus Christ is a deception and that you need to be born again which is shown in the scriptures. It is described in several places. This protestant believes that if you have not had this happen in your life that you are lost and are going to hell. When you tell him youve been baptised or you live a good life or that you are a member of a church he automatically will question your relationship with God . Not trying to condemn you or put you down but trying to find a way for you to recieve Christ as saviour. To Him being born again is everything and if one is not truely born again it dosent matter how dedicated to God that you may be you are still lost.

If as a catholic you can tell this protestant how this born again experiance took place in your life and describe how it happened and how Jesus has changed your life and how you have a relationship with God like you never had before, then all the other stuff like the pope and church tradition are more open to a posative discussion .The person who you are feeeling that you are defending your church to really wants you to go to heaven to have this wonderful relationship with God through Jesus His son. To really know that you are saved and have the peace og God in your hearts.

What seems you as catholic as an attack on you and your church may not be that at all. By defending what you believe when the real issue is have you been born again can also be a way of opposing yourself. This can work both was for the one that is protestant and for the one who is catholic.

 

[chero23]

When argueing with a protestant .

If he is a conservative one, you may go through the pope sola acripture over tradition baptism the euchrist and so on. But thease are really not the point to him! What he is doing is trying to get you to see that dependance on anything but Jesus Christ is a deception and that you need to be born again which is shown in the scriptures. It is described in several places. This protestant believes that if you have not had this happen in your life that you are lost and are going to hell. When you tell him youve been baptised or you live a good life or that you are a member of a church he automatically will question your relationship with God . Not trying to condemn you or put you down but trying to find a way for you to recieve Christ as saviour. To Him being born again is everything and if one is not truely born again it dosent matter how dedicated to God that you may be you are still lost.

If as a catholic you can tell this protestant how this born again experiance took place in your life and describe how it happened and how Jesus has changed your life and how you have a relationship with God like you never had before, then all the other stuff like the pope and church tradition are more open to a posative discussion .The person who you are feeeling that you are defending your church to really wants you to go to heaven to have this wonderful relationship with God through Jesus His son. To really know that you are saved and have the peace og God in your hearts.

What seems you as catholic as an attack on you and your church may not be that at all. By defending what you believe when the real issue is have you been born again can also be a way of opposing yourself. This can work both was for the one that is protestant and for the one who is catholic.

But you know that Protestants, even if some posts here by protestants say other wise, their out there trying to save Catholics. I have mentioned this before, but no human being no one is God’s score keeper. He will be who decides whether we go to his kingdom. So for protestants to say were going to save you, is kinda of hypocritical if you ask me. Protestant churches were done by man, man who say Were Bible only, but yet theirs 42,000 different Protestant Churches. Isn’t it ironic for that to be true, when Protestants talk about Sola Scriptura and they themselves can’t agree on the Bible’s message

 

[hope_7]

again I say the argument is not what you are saying but it is have you been born again This is what Jesus told Nicodemus in John 3. There is no protestant that can save anyone only Jesus can save

 

[DavidWJackson]

But you know that Protestants, even if some posts here by protestants say other wise, their out there trying to save Catholics.

This is why it is so important to invite people to Mass. They are being misinformed by zealous individuals who have never spoken with a Priest or visited a Catholic Mass. Yet they speak to others and some even write books of arguments aginst the Catholic Chuch as if they know everything about the Catholic faith. Once again never having spoken with a Priest or attended a single Mass in their life. People outside of the Catholic Church believe them because they speak and write with such great authority.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

Thank for your testimony, Stardog.

On Christian worship…I hope this link will enlighten you further…star.ucl.ac.uk/~vgg/rc/aplgtc/hahn/m1/splndr.html

As for the clothings worn…I think you should think this further…the clothes, the stoles, have meanings.

The flowing robes are not meant for the glory of the priest or the bishop or the pope…they are meant for the glory of God. During the Mass, as we get ready to worship…would you not like to present the most beautiful vestment before God as the priest is getting ready to offer the sacrifice at Calvary?

Have you been to the old missions in California? In display, the missionaries had their cassocks…and worn out garbs…but when they would get ready to say mass, they would put on these vestments.

If Stardog is concerned with the priestly vestments and accouterments of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just look back to Leviticus for the priestly traditions, worship and garb required by the Lord. The Tabernacle, vestements, sanctity of the priesthood and preistly purity are all there. Circumstances during severe persecutions did not allow for the faithful to carry out some of the traditions at that time, however, we are able to provide for the splendor that the Lord required and have done so for the greater glory of God and thanksgiving for giving us His only Son as the supreme and only acceptable sacrifice to atone for our sins. What you interpret as "overdoing it or showy is not that at all. It is reverent and what God expects from his creatures.

 

[Used2beSherryG]

If Stardog is concerned with the priestly vestments and accouterments of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, just look back to Leviticus for the priestly traditions, worship and garb required by the Lord. The Tabernacle, vestements, sanctity of the priesthood and preistly purity are all there. Circumstances during severe persecutions did not allow for the faithful to carry out some of the traditions at that time, however, we are able to provide for the splendor that the Lord required and have done so for the greater glory of God and thanksgiving for giving us His only Son as the supreme and only acceptable sacrifice to atone for our sins. What you interpret as "overdoing it or showy is not that at all. It is reverent and what God expects from his creatures.

Correction or addition. check the last chapter of exodus for the priestly vestments and adornments of the tabernacle. Then continue into Leviticus. Jesus came to fulfill the prophets, not to destroy the Jewish traditions. The Jewish Jesus converted the Jews by fulfilling His role as Messiah. somehow, all this seems to make perfect sense, doesn’t it?

 

[rfournier103]

TO THE OP:

Two things that I try to remember when dealing with Protestants…

1: We ALL believe in Jesus. He is the Son of God. He was of virgin birth, was crucified, died, rose on the third day, and performed many miricles. We all believe the Holy Bible is the INERRANT Word of God. We all believe you must believe in Jesus and God to be saved.

2: As Catholics… we believe all of the above and MORE. Transubstansiation, Apostolic Succession, and the Communion of Saints; just to name three.

Scott Hahn said something to the effect of; "Protestants read the menu (Bible) and Catholics enjoy the meal (Mass). Catholicism is a living, breathing, VERY FULL WAY OF LIFE. When practiced AS INTENDED, it is the most rewarding way of life there is. It is a Faith of celebration, and learning. The Catholics that go through the motions, are cheating themselves of something they cannot comprehend.

We just need to know our faith better. That’s all! I would even reccomend taking an RCIA class just to update your knowledge, and get your answers from the horse’s mouth.

There are BIBLICAL explanations for 99.999% of everything Catholic. Especially the BIG things like transubstansiation, and the Papacy. The apologetics forum here was and is a huge help to me. There are many great sites on the web that can help you get the answers you need. Also, get a good Catholic study Bible. Read it. Learn it. Our mission is two-fold. Worship God by praising Him and keeping His commandments, and enlightening others. If you take the time to learn for yourself, than sharing with others will be easy!

Please PM if I can be of any direct help to you.

 

[irisfromohio]

TO THE OP:

Scott Hahn said something to the effect of; "Protestants read the menu (Bible) and Catholics enjoy the meal (Mass). Catholicism is a living, breathing, VERY FULL WAY OF LIFE. When practiced AS INTENDED, it is the most rewarding way of life there is. It is a Faith of celebration, and learning. The Catholics that go through the motions, are cheating themselves of something they cannot comprehend.

.

I could have said this better myself! But, I didn’t. Thank you for one of the most concise yet complete summations of the real “Catholic Answer”.

+May God bless us with wisdom, discernment and knowledge+

Iris Marie

 

[m3rc3d3s190]

Was Jesus speaking to Catholics? Nope to the pharisees. Big difference.

We are looking at actions and the common themes that those actions represent. Please look at Mark 7:8, in which Jesus said “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.” Isn’t that what the Pharisees did centuries ago? Isn’t that what the Roman church has been doing and continues to do? How much of the Roman church’s so-called “sacred tradition” is clearly in direct contradiction with what is contained in the Bible? Look up Exodus 20:4, which is clear about not having statues or idols in any form. Then please read 2 Kings 18:4 which is the passage that describes why King Hezekiah destroyed the bronze serpent Moses made. That serpent is often used to justify the existence of idols in Catholic churches so why was it destroyed? What about 1 Timothy 2:5 which states there is one mediator between God and men? Where does Jesus come into the picture if the priests forgive sins and “mediate” between God and humans?

 

[m3rc3d3s190]

TO THE OP:

Two things that I try to remember when dealing with Protestants…

2: As Catholics… we believe all of the above and MORE. Transubstansiation, Apostolic Succession, and the Communion of Saints; just to name three.

Peter said in Acts 1:20 that someone would take Judas’s place. Peter knew about the prophecy in Psalm 109:8. He specifically referenced the Psalm, and he referenced Judas, whose place had to be taken by someone who had been physically associated with Jesus and His disciples when He was here on earth. This meaning is clearly evident when the very next verse (#21) is read. If this is a justification for “apostolic succession,” it’s a very weak one. Jesus’ disciples did miracles after He was no longer with them. Peter and John healed a lame man (Acts 3:1-8) and Paul brought a dead man back to life (Acts 20:10). Are there documented cases of Roman Catholic priests performing miracles? Jesus’ miracles were performed by Him and were witnessed by the general public, not just by His own disciples. It would help to know of miracles that are witnessed by entities other than the Roman Catholic church, which endorses its own miracles.

 

[fbl9]

We are looking at actions and the common themes that those actions represent. Please look at Mark 7:8, in which Jesus said “You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men.” Isn’t that what the Pharisees did centuries ago? Isn’t that what the Roman church has been doing and continues to do? How much of the Roman church’s so-called “sacred tradition” is clearly in direct contradiction with what is contained in the Bible? Look up Exodus 20:4, which is clear about not having statues or idols in any form. Then please read 2 Kings 18:4 which is the passage that describes why King Hezekiah destroyed the bronze serpent Moses made. That serpent is often used to justify the existence of idols in Catholic churches so why was it destroyed? What about 1 Timothy 2:5 which states there is one mediator between God and men? Where does Jesus come into the picture if the priests forgive sins and “mediate” between God and humans?

might had something there if the Church taught that we whorship these “idols”

2Kings18:4 has no relation to what you are saying.perhaps you can give me the correct verses.

The gospel according to St.John 20;23, Christ gave authority to the apostles to forgive sin, Christ disobeyed Himself???

 

[Cranch]

2Kings18:4 has no relation to what you are saying.perhaps you can give me the correct verses.

If you prefer the Douay-Rheims (as I do) remember 1 & 2 Kings in other bibles are called 1 & 2 Samuel. The reference above is to 4 Kings 18:4 in the D-R but it is still just as off-target. I’m guessing only a Protestant would think the Catholic Church cites Moses’ brazen serpent as “justification” for statues.

 

[Aschecte]

Looks like you want a more than a 5 minute argument here. Perhaps we should make it a separate threat.
Aschecte;10101682:

I’m not fully following what your saying here and to a extent feel like your leading this down a road (Marian) but I’m not sure that’s your intention. Obviously we believe that the wedding feast at Cana happened because of scripture that was orally passed down for 360 or so years. As to our lord turning water into wine yes that was his first miracle. As to cheap magicians tricks playing with Oh ( oxygen / hydrogen ) molecules … As someone who has a lot of knowledge on this I assure you it’s not that simple turning in water into wine is a miracle.

I didn’t want the 5 minute or the longer one lol !! I just didn’t understand the original point you were trying to drive home. The only other thing I will add to the longer argument you just provided here is another observation I have noticed over the years that you actually just strongly enforced. A lot if Protestant faiths not all but some allow for a vast amount of personal scriptural interpretation. Now you with all due respect are the first Protestant that has actually said to me at least in no uncertain terms that the wedding feast at Cana was a symbolic gesture to a deeper truth. No it was a miracle that not only the apostles saw and wrote in scripture what They witnessed but he said something important paraphrasing “they have runout of wine, what has this to do with me woman my time has not yet come” there were 6 stone water jugs that held 20-30 gallons in each " Mary told te head waiters to do as Jesus asked "… I don’t know this sounds like he made wine to me he also obeyed his mother Mary which is if utmost significance as well as raised marriage to the state of a sacrament. This is arguing with personal opinion not with Protestantism though it could be argued the later could influence the person.

 

[m3rc3d3s190]

If you prefer the Douay-Rheims (as I do) remember 1 & 2 Kings in other bibles are called 1 & 2 Samuel. The reference above is to 4 Kings 18:4 in the D-R but it is still just as off-target. I’m guessing only a Protestant would think the Catholic Church cites Moses’ brazen serpent as “justification” for statues.

Thanks for your response. I’m guessing only Roman Catholics can have idols all over their churches, bow down to them, and watch their bishops and cardinals lie down on the ground in front of Peter’s tomb, and still claim not to worship idols. In Acts 10:25-26, Cornelius fell down in front of Peter, and Peter stopped him from doing so. What justification would you like to provide for having statues in your churches? The brazen serpent argument was put forward by none other than a Roman Catholic, and that same person extended the idea to provide evidence of a so-called “new economy of images,” which is contained in the Catechism (#2131).