Arguing with Protestants is a waste of time

  • Thread starter Thread starter KofC660
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, Curious, I can certainly understand the “negative” connotations. But I’ll stand by my word pictures if it helps Catholics to understand how to react to Protestants in a kinder, gentler way.
Cat, you are correct in that we all (Catholic and Protestant) need to react to each other in a kinder, gentler way. That is how Christians are to act. Yes, we need to speak the truth; but we must always speak the truth in love.👍
 
Have you tried John Martignoni’s site:

biblechristiansociety.com/

It is an apologetics site that defends the Catholic faith using Sacred Scripture.:bible1: There are a lot of other helpful resources on that site as well.

:blessyou:
 
The problem with Protestants is that when we DO prove some part of the Catholic Faith with references to Scripture, they do not accept it.

Purgatory is an example. There are many places in Scripture referencing support for Purgatory. But they do not acknowledge it.

Or, a common Protestant tactic/attitude. They will interpret the Catholic supporting verses differently, then claim that the Catholic view has no support whatsoever.
I’m struggling with this in particular! I have a non-Catholic friend, and whenever I find a passage that supports the Catholic views on things such as purgatory or the pope, he tells me I’m misinterpreting the bible! He’s told me that I’m misreading the entire book of James, that people who have faith but do not perform works are just “spiritually immature” and their faith is not dead. I’ve told him that it isn’t me interpreting, it’s 2000 years of Catholics before me who have explored and accepted this doctrine as well, and then he goes off and tells me that the bible is the one standalone reference that has any authority over Christians. When I asked him about how he accepted the authority of the Catholic Church to compile the bible out of the 50 some-odd gospels that were originally floating around, and various other letters that made it into the new testament he didn’t really have much of a response… just that the church is unnecessary. Is there anything I can do to show him how vital the church is?
 
I typically just keep it simple and ask the person if Jesus gave authority to an unfinished book (the bible was not complete yet) or to men.

Of course,
You will get more of the same responses you got leading up to this point.

No advice for that.
I’m struggling with this in particular! I have a non-Catholic friend, and whenever I find a passage that supports the Catholic views on things such as purgatory or the pope, he tells me I’m misinterpreting the bible! He’s told me that I’m misreading the entire book of James, that people who have faith but do not perform works are just “spiritually immature” and their faith is not dead. I’ve told him that it isn’t me interpreting, it’s 2000 years of Catholics before me who have explored and accepted this doctrine as well, and then he goes off and tells me that the bible is the one standalone reference that has any authority over Christians. When I asked him about how he accepted the authority of the Catholic Church to compile the bible out of the 50 some-odd gospels that were originally floating around, and various other letters that made it into the new testament he didn’t really have much of a response… just that the church is unnecessary. Is there anything I can do to show him how vital the church is?
 
Harmony1911, you’re going up against something that’s bigger than one Protestant.

The idea that the “church” is unnecessary is growing by huge leaps among Protestants.

Certain radio preachers are actually calling for Christans to “come out of the churches” because the “church age” is over and the remaining churches are evil.

And of course the ones fighting this idea are the churches, but since they’re “evil,” Christians shouldn’t listen and be fooled by them.

Protestants are forming home churches (dad is the pastor, mom and kids are the congregation). Sometimes these home churches include more than one family, but often, they are just one family.

The megachurches are looking less and less like “church” and more like theater or school. At the megachurch in our city, you don’t “go to church.” You attend a “worship experience.”

Even the traditional evangelical churches are looking for ways to be less like “church.” Many don’t call themselves “church” anymore. The large Assembly of God church in my city calls itself “The Community.”

Many of the evangelical churches in my city are offering “Traditional,” “Contemporary,” and “Alternative” services. My husband visited one of the “alternative” services at the large E Free church in our city. It’s basically a concert.

Traditional church is condemned as “the works of man.” Denominations are especially under fire.

So when your friend condemns “church,” he/she is only parroting back what they are hearing all over the place in the Protestant world.

It is my opinion that Catholic Churches need to be aware of this and waiting to catch all the escapees from this lunacy. Protestants who study their Bible and use their brains know that “the church” is not just a “tradition of man.” They are looking for a way out of this “no church” craze. There is a movement of Protestants back to traditional Calvinish; IMO, this demonstrates that Protestants are searching for “traditions,” not “churchlessness.”

But they will discover, as many have, that pure Calvinism is a bleak religion that does not hold a person accountable for their sins (because the elect are saved no matter what they do). So then where will the searcher go?

Like I said, the Catholic Church needs to be holding up the giant baseball glove and ready to catch all those who run screaming out of the maze of Protestantism!

I can hear it already. “That’s not what MY Protestant church is like!” Well, count your blessings and hang onto your pew. It’s coming to your town soon.
 
Yes, Curious, I can certainly understand the “negative” connotations. But I’ll stand by my word pictures if it helps Catholics to understand how to react to Protestants in a kinder, gentler way.
Hmph.

😉
 
i can’t imagine arguing with protestants been a difficult task. it cause me a good friendship once. but now imagine arguing with excatholics:eek: .sorryto said saw but some of them are so possess by this christian movements that they become close minded an just that they don’t listen. some of them go to this mega churches just for the music. in my opinion this mega churches are only interested in the money they can get. is like a business just do the persuasion and the customer will come.the sad thing that most of this ex catholic they left the church because of lack of understanding. personally i can’t find god in this mega churches. i don’t care about how good the music can be etc i prefer to be with God in a more quiet place, an experience Him completely in the eucharistic. 🙂 May the Sacred Heart of Jesus be Adored, Glorified, Loved & Preserved throughout the world, now & forever. Sacred Heart of Jesus, please pray for me. Saint Jude, Worker of Miracles, please pray for me. Saint Jude, Helper of the Hopeless, please pray for me. Amen."🙂
 
Debating with Catholics is not a waste of time. You, as a fellow human under the same disease as I, will hold yourself to the same orginization that leaves it’s followers in confusion as to whether or not they will go to heaven. The doctrine of purgatory allows the follower of the Catholic church to hang on to sins and suffer at a later time with the promise of heaven afterward. Not to far a teaching from the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Please think about that. Also, watering down the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ meaning that He did not finish His work on the cross for the sins of the sinner. Where does purgatory come in for the catholic if there is water baptizm for the infant. Yes I realize that there are a few points here. Let me ask this; are your children safe considering what has been going on in the leadership of the catholic church? Now I realize sexually immoral people are in many places. In fact, there are catholic churches that give the o.k. to homesexuals and allow them to be in leadership. Not mentioning lesbians and pedifiles. If you would consider your leadership and your commitment to this orginization and compare it to the Bible alone, you may find quit a condradiction in structure. So, my friend, debating with a catholic is not a waste of time. I protest against the pedifiles that the orginization of the catholic churches hide and move around so as not to cause harm. And to the simple that do not see or refuse to see the horrid abominations that have finally come into the open. And what a sinful nation that we live in. Do we dare not question leadership if they add to the word of God or take away from it?
 
Debating with Catholics is not a waste of time. You, as a fellow human under the same disease as I, will hold yourself to the same orginization that leaves it’s followers in confusion as to whether or not they will go to heaven. The doctrine of purgatory allows the follower of the Catholic church to hang on to sins and suffer at a later time with the promise of heaven afterward. Not to far a teaching from the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Please think about that. Also, watering down the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ meaning that He did not finish His work on the cross for the sins of the sinner. Where does purgatory come in for the catholic if there is water baptizm for the infant.
I am a cradle Catholic, meaning I was born and raised Catholic. In order to achieve Heaven my soul has to be spotless, there can be no stain of sin on it. In other words I would have to die in a sinless state. No minor or venial sins allowed. How many of us can claim we are absolutely perfect? If I die in a state of mortal sin, I would go straight to Hell. So since we cannot achieve Heaven without being perfect, Purgatory is a place for us to be purged of all minor sins, to perfect our souls so that we can be allowed into Heaven, as only perfection can be in Heaven.

Jesus died for our sins. That doesn’t mean that we didn’t keep on sinning. When we commit sins, there is a consequence. Even David (Old Testament) learned that. Yes, his sin was forgiven, but there were consequences.

How this Catholic teaching compares to the LDS is beyond me.
 
You were doing so well and, I thought, making wonderful sense. Then you got to “thus saith Peter”. If I remember Acts 15, it was more like thus saith James. And Peter and Paul both made reference to the work of the Holy Spirit, which we might consider scripture itself to also be.
Well read carefully Peter is the one with the saying of authority it is James who agrees with him, the assembly fell silent to the words of Peter. James as the Bishop of Jerusalem definitely played a primary rols as many bishops have done in ecunemical concils but here we see Peter with the words of ultimate authority and James agreeing saying Simeon says this with an authority on par with the prophets, James never referes to himself but Simeon ie Peter. There was no new testament that Peter and Paul were refererencing to the work of the Holy Spirit here was in the oral rulinngs Of Peter and Paul and of course the Holy Spirit worked through the Church Council all very Catholic things in fact these rulings contradicted the Old Testament dietary requirements.
The Scripture says after debate Peter spoke and the assembly fell silent there was no arguing against Peter’s authority in fact James appeals to Simeons authroity and agrees with it. James is on Peter’s side of the isssue its not as if James opposed him thus you have no valid arguement thus James judgement is for Peter and are one and the same side as is the case with church councils. Contrary to what you think other bishops are allowed to have their say in church councils and often more so than the see of Peter but in the end they do not contradict him and remain a valid council find me one and we can talk.

6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7** And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.** 8 And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” 12 And all the assembly fell silent;and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13 After they finished speaking, James replied, "Brethren, listen to me. 14 **Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, **
 
Don’t disparage the megachurches just because you prefer quiet.

Believe it or not, many people prefer noise and
excitement.

Both of my daughters prefer life in the big city. They have a saying–“Pure energy!”

I personally enjoy a big city with all the noise and people and rushing about more than I do a quiet place in the country. My husband and I live in the exact center of our city, and we are only a block from the busiest street in our city.

If you live a quiet life, perhaps staying home and keeping house, or working at a dull job, and not a whole lot of interesting stuff happens in your life, you often long for something “big.” That’s what megachurches provide. Music, theater, opportunity for involvement in the wide, wonderful world (through various missions).

Those of you who long for peace and quiet simply can’t comprehend this. But there’s nothing evil about enjoying noise! So please don’t criticize people who prefer a rock concert over a quiet chant, and spotlights rather than candles.

Now yes, of course, the important thing is “Where is Jesus?” Well, Jesus is truly present in the Catholic Church, and I agree, I would rather have the poorest building and themost liturgically-abused Mass in the world where JESUS is, rather than the most exciting, glitzy rock concert and speaker.

One more thing about megachurches–because they are “mega,” they have lots of power to accomplish good. Lots of money, lots of people, lots of energy. In our city, it was the megachurch that took the lead in organizing aid to Katrina/Rita victims. They organized a fantastic outreach. Our Catholic parish sent the youth to the megachurch to help out with sorting all the donations and loading them onto semi trucks that the megachurch rented.

The megachurch continues to help out in the community. They recently did a “fix up” of many of the older schools in our city (public schools). This probably saved the city a million dollars because the megachurch members donated all their services and materials.

So again, PLEASE don’t criticize megachurches. If they aren’t against us, they’re for us.
 
Arguing with anyone is a waste of time. What is needed in our conversations, especially with those of outher creeds, is compassion, tolerance and love.

Try these the next time.
 
Can I disparage megachurches because they’re soulless, mindless, McChurches instead?

I went to one of the largest of the megachurches—Saddleback Church, whose paster Rick Warren wrote the Purpose-Driven Life. Dumbed-down vaguely Christianist services which are like a really mediocre rock concert crossed with an infomercial taping is about the way I’d describe it. They actually hand out these cards there that you fill in like Mad Libs as the service goes on.

Different strokes for different folks and all, but at some point doesn’t is become less of a church service and more of something to do on a Sunday and still say you went to church?

It’s awfully hard to be reverent when you’re listening to a third-rate band play fourth-rate tunes to introduce watered-down Church of Oprah theology.

Sure sells some books, though.
 
Well read carefully Peter is the one with the saying of authority it is James who agrees with him, the assembly fell silent to the words of Peter.
I must have a defective Bible. My version says “The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul” (vs. 12). It doesn’t say anything about being silent when Peter spoke.
James as the Bishop of Jerusalem definitely played a primary rols as many bishops have done in ecunemical concils but here we see Peter with the words of ultimate authority and James agreeing saying Simeon says this with an authority on par with the prophets, James never referes to himself but Simeon ie Peter.
So, you think that as the Bishop of Jerusalem that James was basically making a “What he said.” sort of statement?
There was no new testament that Peter and Paul were refererencing to the work of the Holy Spirit here was in the oral rulinngs.
I must not have stated that point very well. My point was that what both Peter and Paul did in their discussion was to refer to the work of the Holy Spirit for substatiation of the view they expressed. So, when someone refers to scripture today to substatiate their view, I see that as much the same sort of way of thinking. The scriptures are the work of the Holy Spirit. Peter and Paul were able to refer to what the Holy Spirit had done, and today people can refer to what the Holy Spirit has done (when he inspired others to write)… So because we have access to scripture, we have the same guidance of the Holy Spirit available to us that was available to any previous generation.
Of Peter and Paul and of course the Holy Spirit worked through the Church Council all very Catholic things
I thought the word Catholic met universal. You seem to have used it differently here, something having to do with process. What do you mean by “all very Catholic things”?
The Scripture says after debate Peter spoke and the assembly fell silent there was no arguing against Peter’s authority in fact James appeals to Simeons authroity and agrees with it. James is on Peter’s side of the isssue its not as if James opposed him thus you have no valid arguement thus James judgement is for Peter and are one and the same side as is the case with church councils.
I never said that there was any opposition to anyone in the council. I said that it wasn’t “thus saith Peter” but “thus saith James” because that is how it reads in Acts itself. They talk, Peter, Paul, others make statements. In the end, according to scripture it was, “When they [all the others giving testimony in the case] finished”, James spoke up. It appears from the way the narrative is written that James is the ultimate arbitrator in this case. Scripture even goes on to have James say, “It is my judgment, therefore,…”
Contrary to what you think…
Contrary to what I think??? What do I think? Do you know me so well that you know what I think?
other bishops are allowed to have their say in church councils and often more so than the see of Peter but in the end they do not contradict him and remain a valid council find me one and we can talk.
Talk about what? I am just talking about what is reported in scripture.

By how much your wrote in response to a tinsy tiny comment I made, this must be extremely important to you. I could care less how the see of Peter operates. I wasn’t even talking about the see of Peter. I was just talking about one particular statement that was made with regard to the Council of Jerusalem. It wasn’t closed when Peter spoke. James hadn’t spoke yet.

You raise another point though that I had never considered until you menitioned it above. Other bishops are allowed to have their say, but one the see of Peter speaks then they may not contradict him. So, they may give whatever advise they want until he speaks. But once he speaks even if they would have given other advice prior to his speaking, they must now suddenly all become “Yes Men”? Is that how it is supposed to work?
 
6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7** And after there had been much debate, Peter rose and said to them, “Brethren, you know that in the early days God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe.** 8 And God who knows the heart bore witness to them, giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us; 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, but cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now therefore why do you make trial of God by putting a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we shall be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.” 12 And all the assembly fell silent;and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13 After they finished speaking, James replied, "Brethren, listen to me. 14 **Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, **
Peter wasn’t even the last person to speak, to give testimony. (vs. 13)
James is the one who then renders judgment. (vs. 19)
And lastly we see that it is the whole church that decided. (vs. 22)
If you don’t like those facts, your argument is not with me, it is with Luke for recording the story the way he did.
 
I must have a defective Bible. My version says “The whole assembly became silent as they listened to Barnabas and Paul” (vs. 12). It doesn’t say anything about being silent when Peter spoke.

So, you think that as the Bishop of Jerusalem that James was basically making a “What he said.” sort of statement?

I must not have stated that point very well. My point was that what both Peter and Paul did in their discussion was to refer to the work of the Holy Spirit for substatiation of the view they expressed. So, when someone refers to scripture today to substatiate their view, I see that as much the same sort of way of thinking. The scriptures are the work of the Holy Spirit. Peter and Paul were able to refer to what the Holy Spirit had done, and today people can refer to what the Holy Spirit has done (when he inspired others to write)… So because we have access to scripture, we have the same guidance of the Holy Spirit available to us that was available to any previous generation.

I thought the word Catholic met universal. You seem to have used it differently here, something having to do with process. What do you mean by “all very Catholic things”?

I never said that there was any opposition to anyone in the council. I said that it wasn’t “thus saith Peter” but “thus saith James” because that is how it reads in Acts itself. They talk, Peter, Paul, others make statements. In the end, according to scripture it was, “When they [all the others giving testimony in the case] finished”, James spoke up. It appears from the way the narrative is written that James is the ultimate arbitrator in this case. Scripture even goes on to have James say, “It is my judgment, therefore,…”

Contrary to what I think??? What do I think? Do you know me so well that you know what I think?

Talk about what? I am just talking about what is reported in scripture.

By how much your wrote in response to a tinsy tiny comment I made, this must be extremely important to you. I could care less how the see of Peter operates. I wasn’t even talking about the see of Peter. I was just talking about one particular statement that was made with regard to the Council of Jerusalem. It wasn’t closed when Peter spoke. James hadn’t spoke yet.

You raise another point though that I had never considered until you menitioned it above. Other bishops are allowed to have their say, but one the see of Peter speaks then they may not contradict him. So, they may give whatever advise they want until he speaks. But once he speaks even if they would have given other advice prior to his speaking, they must now suddenly all become “Yes Men”? Is that how it is supposed to work?
I’m sure you are a very intellegent, Godly person, but is it me or is it irrating to have a person pick apart posts…Jeeeeze:blush: There is always one on every board. Condesending is what it is…sorry…🤷
 
I’m sure you are a very intellegent, Godly person, but is it me or is it irrating to have a person pick apart posts…Jeeeeze:blush: There is always one on every board. Condesending is what it is…sorry…🤷
Did you read the whole thread?

Wisdom gave an opinion in response to another post:
Well it depends who you are talking to if the topic by you and protestant is to win an arguement than yeah it will be a waste of time. But if its about a true dialogue of truth and honest excahnge of ideas it need not be a waste of time but your on to something that needs to be clarfied before we play the Bible tennis game. I’ll show you my bible verse and you show me your bible verse which can be frustrating and fruitless. The first discussion should not be be that but the very notion of the sacred deposit of faith given to us by the apostles, how did they deposit that faith and through what sources can we find that deposit today. Was it by by means of both oral and written tradition and was the church the vessel both were revealed to us. If these are true than how does that affect our understanding of sola scriptura and is that a Reformation innovation or something we can find in the early church? Unless there is a sincere dialouge about this than there is little point about going on to the bible tennis game which every denomination plays and contradicts each other with. Something I doubt the apostles would want us to play as they did not play that but appealed to authority of apostolic councils see Acts 15. No argueing over scripture rather thus saith Peter its the decree of the Church and it stands a rather interesting thing I would say that contradicts sola scriptura.
I made a very small comment in response to that particular post:
You were doing so well and, I thought, making wonderful sense. Then you got to “thus saith Peter”. If I remember Acts 15, it was more like thus saith James. And Peter and Paul both made reference to the work of the Holy Spirit, which we might consider scripture itself to also be.
But then Wisdom made, in my opinion, a very detailed response to my short comment. Then yes, I did pick apart his second post. Why? Because he reported as true things that are not.

I wasn’t trying to display a superior attitude. But I also wasn’t willing to conceede faslehood being expressed as truth.
 
Debating with Catholics is not a waste of time. You, as a fellow human under the same disease as I, will hold yourself to the same orginization that leaves it’s followers in confusion as to whether or not they will go to heaven. The doctrine of purgatory allows the follower of the Catholic church to hang on to sins and suffer at a later time with the promise of heaven afterward. Not to far a teaching from the church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. Please think about that. Also, watering down the atonement of the Lord Jesus Christ meaning that He did not finish His work on the cross for the sins of the sinner. Where does purgatory come in for the catholic if there is water baptizm for the infant. Yes I realize that there are a few points here. Let me ask this; are your children safe considering what has been going on in the leadership of the catholic church? Now I realize sexually immoral people are in many places. In fact, there are catholic churches that give the o.k. to homesexuals and allow them to be in leadership. Not mentioning lesbians and pedifiles. If you would consider your leadership and your commitment to this orginization and compare it to the Bible alone, you may find quit a condradiction in structure. So, my friend, debating with a catholic is not a waste of time. I protest against the pedifiles that the orginization of the catholic churches hide and move around so as not to cause harm. And to the simple that do not see or refuse to see the horrid abominations that have finally come into the open. And what a sinful nation that we live in. Do we dare not question leadership if they add to the word of God or take away from it?
It is obvious you know about as much of Catholicism as you do about paragraph structure. I notice Protestants ramble like that.

Before you pick up stones to throw at the Catholic Church, take a good long look at the statistics about molestation and other crimes in YOUR church. They are not given the media attention because of the lack of importance of all these miner religions while the Catholic Church being great as it is is definitely news worthy.

I don’t want to take this thread any more off track but quit with the condescending comments when you refuse to glance in your own front porch.
 
Arguing with Protestants that insist Catholics prove some part of the Faith with references to the Bible is a waste of time. The Faith isn’t dependent on Sacred Scripture; Sacred Scripture depends upon the Faith!

Trying to answer such questions as “where is Purgatory mentioned in the Bible?” is pointless - Purgatory comes to us from the same source as the Bible itself: the Traditions of the Church. If the Protestant asking such a question were honest with himself, he would realize that accepting the Bible as Sacred Scripture, but not Purgatory as Sacred Tradition is contradictory. The Church, source of both Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, is either infallible, or it is not. If you throw out Sacred Tradition, you should be prepared to throw out Sacred Scripture (all of it, not just a few parts!)

So, as a note to any Protestant that may be reading this post: stop challenging the Catholic Faith by question extra-Biblical Tradition, and instead challenge yourself and your acceptance of parts of Sacred Tradition, which has brought to you Sacred Scripture, “the Bible”. Either you accept the infallibility of the Church, accept the Christian Faith, and become a Catholic (Universal) Christian, or you reject it outright and abandon your heresies and apostate yourself from the Faith entirely. Those are the only logical outcomes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top