Catholic vs protestant

[gohjedrek]

I think I will change that. Essentially, I was referring to Matthew 18:3-5. “Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted and become as little children, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven. Therefore, whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven. Whoever receives one little child like this in My name receives Me.”

Humility and virtues are important and I would go for the church that place emphasis on humility and virtues.

 

[Mishakel]

Who gets to make that judgement? Are you saying someone who has been “really” saved is unable to commit serious sin? A saved person can never commit a sexual crime against a child? (There is more sexual abuse by clergy in Protestant churches than there is in the Catholic Church by.)

I really don’t understand the comparison of sins but I will answer your overall question.

God gets to make that decision ultimately.

Ephesians 1:4 just as He chose us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love,

1 Peter 1:3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, 4 to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled and that does not fade away, reserved in heaven for you, 5 who are kept by the power of God through faith for salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

John 6:44 No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.

If you believe a person can be born again and lose salvation you are granting humanity more power than God.

I will give you an example using the Old Testament even. Was David considered righteous prior, during, or after he committed adultery and had Bathsheba‘a husband killed???

The answer is he never lost his righteousness. Do you consider adultery or murder mortal sin? David, because he was righteous, begged God for forgiveness and it was granted. God punished David but he never condemned him for eternity.

 

[OddBird]

I don’t disagree with you, actually. I would have chosen a very different example if I had wanted to show what willfully rejecting God is like. Or maybe no examples at all, because I’m not sure they are not inherently flawed for that kind of discussion.

 

[JonNC]

The OSAS is a Protestant invention and has no place in the Catholic Church. I have been clear about that fact all along.

To be clear, OSAS is not a “Protestant” invention. It is an outgrowth of the Calvinist Perseverance of Saints, which is soundly rejected by Lutheranism.
Regarding practice and doctrine, use of the term Protestant is folly.

 

[adf417]

Horton:

The OSAS is a Protestant invention and has no place in the Catholic Church. I have been clear about that fact all along.

To be clear, OSAS is not a “Protestant” invention. It is an outgrowth of the Calvinist Perseverance of Saints, which is soundly rejected by Lutheranism.
Regarding practice and doctrine, use of the term Protestant is folly.

I will have to disagree with you on this one Jon. Saying “OSAS is a Protestant invention” does not equal “OSAS comes from All Protestants” unless you want to concede ALL protestants are equal.

Peace!!!

 

[JonNC]

I will have to disagree with you on this one Jon. Saying “OSAS is a Protestant invention” does not equal “OSAS comes from All Protestants” unless you want to concede ALL protestants are equal.

When phrased the way the poster phrased it, there is an implication, albeit unintentional, that it is a universal Protestant belief. As you know, that is simply not true.
Similarly, we could say that infant baptism is a Christian belief and practice, but we know that not all Christians believe or practice it.

 

[adf417]

When phrased the way the poster phrased it, there is an implication, albeit unintentional, that it is a universal Protestant belief. As you know, that is simply not true.

The poster certainly did not imply it was a universal Protestant belief. He simply said it was a Protestant belief and since it most certainly came from a Protestant, the statement is true.

As you and others have rightly corrected many posters here on CAF that all Protestants do not believe the same things. This simple fact allows for the statement OSAS can indeed come from a Protestant when if fact it does unless you can prove it comes from a non-Protestant.

Can you give us an alternative way of saying what the poster said that would not include the whole of Protestantism?

Peace!!!

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Yes I do.

Maybe He doesn’t, maybe He created people with ever intentions of them spending eternity in the Garden of Eden, but free will changed that

Exactly my point. God knows what we CAN choose but because of free will, He can’t be sure what we will choose. In other words, He knows and is ready for every possibility but one can not say God knows we “would” do something. One could choose not to repent if he survived death, or to do so. There is no way to tell which it is. If God allowed death it simply means He had a reason for it. If repentance did not happen one can not take fruit for it. However, one can repent before death without Confession or outward sign- that is entirely different story. And as Bible tells us, sins are forgiven even in the afterlife.

I do know He does everything possible for us not to go to hell, for us change that path. He gave us His Only Begotten Son, then left us with The Holy Spirit to guide us.

Yes. He is most merciful. He is also most just.

The Church that will never be destroyed by Satan is The Living Word, Jesus Christ.

That is not Catholic teaching. Mostly because Church means “Assembly” and not “Word”. Church wrote infallible Bible when guided by Holy Spirit and Church called infallible Councils and promulgated other infallible documents when guided by Holy Spirit. Bible is not where Church ends (and nor where it began).

That is, scripture is infallibly normative, an equal leg of Truth, with the magisterium leg (fallible men guided infallibly to interpret an infallible book) per Catholic teaching as I see it.

Magisterium once wrote the Bible. Taking Bible without Magisterium is not plausible from Catholic view as much as it is not plausible to take Ecumenical Council without Magisterium.

This is the possibly the biggest issue I have with monergism.

It is probably not a coincidence that in past few days I have been looking into predestination and free will, and through Scripture and logic I have kinda managed to come to conclusion where is my opinion on all that. Now this topic emerged here.

God gets to make that decision ultimately.

God calls us all, because He loves us all. Basically, what Scripture tells us that no one converted solely or primarily based on their free will. At the same time, that final (yet small in comparison to all other) step was ours to take.

To be clear, OSAS is not a “Protestant” invention. It is an outgrowth of the Calvinist Perseverance of Saints, which is soundly rejected by Lutheranism.

Good to know. I thought Lutherans believed this too. Thanks for debunking that. Some Evangelicals of Augsburg Confession (do they count as Lutherans?) in my country tend to use that language too.

 

[mcq72]

Magisterium once wrote the Bible. Taking Bible without Magisterium is not plausible from Catholic view

Well this is somewhat true for others also. What the CC does differently than all others is make her magisterium Magisterium, as in equal not only to an apostles writing, but God’s writing , and that infallibly.

Again others do not deny “magisterium”, even tradition, just that we do not elevate ourselves to be equal infallibly to God’s written word…key word infallible.

Yes, CC claim giving the world the bible yet the more politically correct attitude according to Vat 2 is to say God gave us the bible.

This is what I mean by ORAR (once right always right) of CC: that for example she gave us the bible, therefore why bite the hand that fed you, afterall she was right on back then as she then must be right on now according to His promises.

Again disagree with some of this presumption, as you disagree with some of presumption of once saved always saved, which is also reasoned as being " according to His promises".

 

[JonNC]

The poster certainly did not imply it was a universal Protestant belief. He simply said it was a Protestant belief and since it most certainly came from a Protestant, the statement is true.

It is inaccurate, because it implies a universal Protestant belief, which it is not.

As you and others have rightly corrected many posters here on CAF that all Protestants do not believe the same things. This simple fact allows for the statement OSAS can indeed come from a Protestant when if fact it does unless you can prove it comes from a non-Protestant.

It is a belief that comes from a tradition that is loosely categorized as Protestant, but it is not a Protestant teaching. In fact, even the phrase “Protestant teaching” lacks clarity. I’ve seen it used here for many years, and I believe it provides a false impression.

Can you give us an alternative way of saying what the poster said that would not include the whole of Protestantism?

Sure. Identify the specific traditions/ communions/denominations that teach a particular teaching. For example, I could accurately say that one of the tenants of Lutheranism is that infants should be baptized.
Does that make it a Protestant tenant, since Lutheranism is Protestant? Obviously not.

 

[JonNC]

Good to know. I thought Lutherans believed this too. Thanks for debunking that. Some Evangelicals of Augsburg Confession (do they count as Lutherans?) in my country tend to use that language too.

If they profess the Augsburg Confession, here it is:

Article XII: Of Repentance.
[1]](http://www.bookofconcord.org/augsburgconfession.php#article12.1) Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted [2]](and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these [3]]two parts: One is contrition, that is, [4]]terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of [5]]the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts [6]].6) the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.
[7]]They condemn [those] who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such [8]]perfection in this life that they cannot sin.

 

[OrbisNonSufficit]

Thank you. I remembered something like that being in Augsburg Confession. Last time I read it, I did think that Lutherans have very similar beliefs to Catholics in many areas. Thank you.

 

[adf417]

It is inaccurate, because it implies a universal Protestant belief, which it is not.

Sorry Jon it does not imply a universal Protestant belief. He use the word [a] protestant invention because it came from [a] protestant.

Peace!!!

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

It is inaccurate, because it implies a universal Protestant belief, which it is not.

Sorry Jon it does not imply a universal Protestant belief. He use the word [a] protestant invention because it came from [a] protestant.

Peace!!!

You can defend the (unintentional) inaccuracy this way as you wish.

 

[JonNC]

They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost.

It is awkward replying to my own post, but it has been pointed out to me by PM that the belief spoken of here does necessarily apply to some Anabaptists today. By posting the AC article, i only meant to show that Lutherans reject OSAS.
I certainly did not mean to claim that current Anabaptists believe or don’t believe what the Lutheran reformers claimed.

 

[Horton]

full of lies can apply to the Catholic church

But we know the Catholic Church is protected from lies by the Holy Spirit. Can people in the Church lie, certainly, but the Church herself can not.

I’m just saying is that God would know you would have been repented that sin, had you not died. For all you know you did seconds before you died. He would have known what you did was not deliberate, that you didn’t go out with deliberate intent on killing someone, killing yourself, because God knows you. That’s what I meant, so you would have been saved, because God would have saved you

As I’ve explained before, my bad choices in that scenario are not on God. He had given me everything I had ever needed to make good decisions and I failed to do so. It is possible God could have saved me, anything is possible, but I’m not going to live my life as though I can do anything I want, make poor choices, harm others, because I don’t really believe what our Lord has said about sin and just punishment.

I do know He does everything possible for us not to go to hell, for us change that path. He gave us His Only Begotten Son, then left us with The Holy Spirit to guide us.

And he gave us a Church. A Church founded by Christ.

I thought the book was inspired by the Holy Spirit… it is man who makes mistakes. The Church that will never be destroyed by Satan is The Living Word, Jesus Christ.

The canon of the bible, assembled by the Catholic Church, was inspired by the Holy Spirit. In the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 & 419) the canon was settled on the books in the bible, 73 books accepted as inspired writings. The bible was not written as one book, in a continuous manner, as events were happening. There were many more writings that were not included in the bible.

 

[Horton]

I’m sorry you feel insulted by my post. Several times I have stated I know not all Protestant churches have unity in their beliefs. I think it is a fair statement to say such a belief came from a Protestant tradition.

 

[JonNC]

The canon of the bible, assembled by the Catholic Church, was inspired by the Holy Spirit. In the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397 & 419) the canon was settled on the books in the bible, 73 books accepted as inspired writings.

As an aside, Hippo, Carthage and Rome were local councils not binding on the whole Church, evidenced by the fact that Eastern Orthodox jurisdictions have always had more books in their canons.

 

[JonNC]

I’m sorry you feel insulted by my post. Several times I have stated I know not all Protestant churches have unity in their beliefs. I think it is a fair statement to say such a belief came from a Protestant tradition.

Goodness. I’m not insulted or offended at all. I was clear that I thought the implication was unintentional.
I think your phrasing here is just fine.

 

[Horton]

Considering the audience and the current discussion what I said is valid. Protestant (not being familiar with ALL Protestant traditions, I will say most) being Bible alone compared to Catholic being Sacred Scripture, Scared Tradition, and the Magisterium.