Do hardcore Protestant think the Catholic Church are Anti-Bible?

[Mannyfit75]

Do all Protestant think the Catholic are Anti-Bible when in fact it isn’t?

Is this held by the majority of the Protestant community? Why do some have this view?

 

[Syele]

Maybe because of the way Sola Scriptura is so vehemently opposed. Some of the arguments Make Protestants feel like you don’t even think the Bible is a good thing.

I have no idea about if it’s the majority. I think tha majority of Protestants don’t even think about Catholics much.

 

[djrakowski]

Maybe because of the way Sola Scriptura is so vehemently opposed. Some of the arguments Make Protestants feel like you don’t even think the Bible is a good thing.

Then those folks need to consider reading more carefully. We simply oppose the insistence on the non-scriptural principle of sola scriptura, not scripture itself.

Syele:

I have no idea about if it’s the majority. I think tha majority of Protestants don’t even think about Catholics much.

I think you’re probably right about that. None of the mainstream churches I’ve attended could’ve cared less about the Catholic Church, and even though the evangelical church I attended was relatively anti-Catholic, it wasn’t mentioned much. To the credit of my former pastor, he simply concentrated on teaching his interpretation of the Bible.

 

[Della]

Do all Protestant think the Catholic are Anti-Bible when in fact it isn’t? Is this held by the majority of the Protestant community? Why do some have this view?

Not all Protestants think this way, but there certainly are those who do–especially the largest Protestant denomination in the USA, the Baptists. They do not like the idea that the Church reserves the right to interpret the Scriptures in matters pertaining to faith and morals. They think this means that the Church feels it is above God’s word–which is a gross misunderstanding, and rather ironic considering that those Protestants who believe this also believe that THEY are more than capable of interpreting the Bible for themselves, placing themselves “above” the Bible by their own definition, although they wouldn’t think of it that way. They think they are merely reading the words on the page and understanding them because the Holy Spirit lets them know what they mean. They little think that this is overly simplistic and can actually lead them in to serious errors.

 

[Syele]

Then those folks need to consider reading more carefully. We simply oppose the insistence on the non-scriptural principle of sola scriptura, not scripture itself…

I KNOW that you don’t oppose scripture itself but there are times in the sola Scriptura debate I have to leave the computer for awhile and calm down because some of the arguments REALLY sound anti-scripture. I have a hard time reminding myself of the truth sometimes. If someone like me who knows what Catholic really think about it still feels this way, it’s not at all surprizing that others with less knowledge of Catholics would think this.

I think you’re probably right about that. None of the mainstream churches I’ve attended could’ve cared less about the Catholic Church, and even though the evangelical church I attended was relatively anti-Catholic, it wasn’t mentioned much. To the credit of my former pastor, he simply concentrated on teaching his interpretation of the Bible.

I don’t think I have ever heard my pastor refer to Catholics at all. We have alot of ex-Catholics at my church, if anyone were to say something bad about Catholics… it would probably be referring to peoples family friends and their own pasts. Even previous churches I attended I never heard them mention Catholics at all.

 

[Turtullian]

I KNOW that you don’t oppose scripture itself but there are times in the sola Scriptura debate I have to leave the computer for awhile and calm down because some of the arguments REALLY sound anti-scripture.

Like what, declaring that the interpretation of scripture is not left up to private revelation and believing that the Church interprets Sacred Scripture through the Sacred Tradition given to her by the Apostles. I hardly find that Anti-scripture.

I have a hard time reminding myself of the truth sometimes. If someone like me who knows what Catholic really think about it still feels this way, it’s not at all surprizing that others with less knowledge of Catholics would think this.

True, but that doesn’t mean that Catholics by any means are anti-scripture. It was the Catholics themselves that preserved scripture by having it copied and translated for parishes by monks in a time where people couldn’t read or write and paper was extremely expensive.

 

[scylla]

It is a common misconception of hardocore Protestants that Catholics are anti-bible. This is usually propagated by the fact that many former Catholics had a poor understanding of the Bible and are easily lead to other belief systems. So they would say that they never read the Bible before they became non-catholic. Which probably is correct, most devout Catholics read the Bible, most nominal Catholics do not and in addition to that don’t really know why they are Catholic other than because they say so.

Some Catholics have come across as anti-bible in their arguements against people stating their own interpretation of the Bible as God’s truth.
This can be misconstrued as an aversion to the Bible when it is just a aversion to someone profaning God’s Word by misrepresenting it.

I think that usually it is much more effective to bring the discussion to authority rather than interpretation.

Or else it comes down to I say the Bible says this and someone else says differently.

In Christ
Scylla

 

[Syele]

Like what, declaring that the interpretation of scripture is not left up to private revelation and believing that the Church interprets Sacred Scripture through the Sacred Tradition given to her by the Apostles. I hardly find that Anti-scripture.

Sola Scriptura, by most protestant standards only requires the Bible to be authoritative and non-corrupt. So to most of us, our first response to statements like “Sola Scriptura is Wrong!!!” “Sola Scriptura isn’t even in the Bible.” is that you must think it is either 1. Corrupted or 2. not authoritative. Now as someone familiar with Catholics I know that you don’t see Sola Scriptura that way and are actually arguing something different. (Please don’t make this another sola scriptura debate… we have plenty of open threads on it already.)

True, but that doesn’t mean that Catholics by any means are anti-scripture. It was the Catholics themselves that preserved scripture by having it copied and translated for parishes by monks in a time where people couldn’t read or write and paper was extremely expensive.

You misunderstand me, I don’t think Catholics are anti-Bible. I am simply saying I’m not atll surprized that people sometimes get that impression.

 

[Turtullian]

Sola Scriptura, by most protestant standards only requires the Bible to be authoritative and non-corrupt. So to most of us, our first response to statements like “Sola Scriptura is Wrong!!!” "Sola Scriptura isn’t even in the Bible.

But if the Bible doesn’t teach Sola Scriptura, then Sola Scriptura by all logical reason has to be declared unbiblical. It’s not a matter anti-biblicism but simple logic.

" is that you must think it is either 1. Corrupted or 2. not authoritative. Now as someone familiar with Catholics I know that you don’t see Sola Scriptura that way and are actually arguing something different. (Please don’t make this another sola scriptura debate… we have plenty of open threads on it already.)

What you are doing is creating a false dichtomy and on purposefully interpreting what Catholics mean by being against Sola Scriptura. The Church itslf regards the Bible as the the inrerrent and inspired writings that is a living witness to both Covenants. If we believe that the Holy scriptures is inerrent and (name removed by moderator)sired thenw agree taht it us authoritative. But we reject the notion that it ALONE is authoritative as the Bible rejects this.

You misunderstand me, I don’t think Catholics are anti-Bible. I am simply saying I’m not atll surprized that people sometimes get that impression.

True.

 

[Syele]

But if the Bible doesn’t teach Sola Scriptura, then Sola Scriptura by all logical reason has to be declared unbiblical. It’s not a matter anti-biblicism but simple logic.

I just told you that most protestansts see sola scriptura as saying the Bible in NOT corrupt and is authoritative. Are you now saying that Bible dosn’t say that? The problem I was bringing up is that what tends to be argued is not really what tends to be believed.

What you are doing is creating a false dichtomy and on purposefully interpreting what Catholics mean by being against Sola Scriptura. The Church itslf regards the Bible as the the inrerrent and inspired writings that is a living witness to both Covenants. If we believe that the Holy scriptures is inerrent and (name removed by moderator)sired thenw agree taht it us authoritative. But we reject the notion that it ALONE is authoritative as the Bible rejects this.

What I am doing is answering the question “Why do protestants think Catholics are anti-Bible?” I didn’t say who was wrong or right, only what I see is causing the misconception.

True.

If you understand you misunderstood me why continue saying I’m wrong?

 

[Turtullian]

I just told you that most protestansts see sola scriptura as saying the Bible in NOT corrupt and is authoritative. Are you now saying that Bible dosn’t say that? The problem I was bringing up is that what tends to be argued is not really what tends to be believed.

I’m saying taht the Bible alone is not atught in scripture. There are no verses that support it. I see verses that support the inerrence of scripture and that holy scripture is inspired and it is a witnesses to the OT Covenant and the NT one but no verses taht say it alone is to be taken as the sole article of faith.

What I am doing is answering the question “Why do protestants think Catholics are anti-Bible?” I didn’t say who was wrong or right, only what I see is causing the misconception.

The arg

If you understand you misunderstood me why continue saying I’m wrong?

The problem is atht you are saying taht sola scriptura means taht the Bible is not corrupt and is authoritative but taht’s not all what sola scriptura conveys as I noted.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Hi,

No I do not think that is the general concensus among protestants. I think someone was right when they said most protestants dont even think about it. I never really thought about it much either until I got to know some ex-catholics who really berated the CC. So of course they influenced me in a bad way. My concerns when I started talking to catholics(friends) were that there were no bibles in church. I have always had a bible in every church I went to. So to me that was strange. Also, now that I have been studying the bible pretty extensively and becoming more comfortable talking about it I am finding out that my catholic friends dont have a clue about what I am talking about biblically. One of my friends takes a bible study in my home and told me that she now understands the Mass more clearly after studying the bible.

That could be where it stems from–a combo of ex-catholics bashing the CC–no bibles in church–and lack of bible study. Now this is just my observation based only on what I experience. I can only speak for myself.

Peace

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t think that the Catholic Church has the monopoly on members who don’'t read the Bible very much.

Even in the Bible-only churches I’ve been to, most of the people you talk to at coffee time aren’t regular readers of the Bible - they leave it to “experts” like their preachers and Sunday School teachers. (Which is probably why they tend to believe whatever they are told about the Bible without questioning it too much.)

But in the Catholic Church we don’t hinge our entire theology on the Bible, so if someone doesn’t read the Bible, no one will go out of their way to tell them, “The Bible says thus and so,” - so they don’t even have the kind of second-hand knowledge that a “Bible-only” non-reader would have.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

I don’t think that the Catholic Church has the monopoly on members who don’'t read the Bible very much.

Im a little confused. Are you saying it is ok not to read the bible and /or are you saying that the bible actually says it is ok not to read scripture?

Peace

 

[Syele]

I’m saying taht the Bible alone is not atught in scripture. There are no verses that support it. I see verses that support the inerrence of scripture and that holy scripture is inspired and it is a witnesses to the OT Covenant and the NT one but no verses taht say it alone is to be taken as the sole article of faith.

Where did I say I believe it’s the sole article of faith? The OP wanted to know why And I answered that it’s because most of us DON’T believe it as it is defined by Catholics, making typical Catholic arguments ineffective. All of the things you just agreed are in the Bible are the very things I believe about it.

The arg

I didn’t get all of that apparently.

The problem is atht you are saying taht sola scriptura means taht the Bible is not corrupt and is authoritative but taht’s not all what sola scriptura conveys as I noted.

I am saying that most protestants are taught that that is what it means. If you look around you will find MANY various definitions of what Sola Scriptura means. You cannot pick one thing that one small group of protestants believe and insist that all of us agree. I’m telling you that a significant group of Protestants believe it means it is not corrupt and is authoritative. These people are going to take it wrong if you make arguments without first defining what you are arguing about.

 

[ukfan]

Do all Protestant think the Catholic are Anti-Bible when in fact it isn’t?

Is this held by the majority of the Protestant community? Why do some have this view?

When I told some Protestant family members and friends that I was considering becoming Catholic some of them quite plainly told me that Catholicism was not ‘Scriptural’. It’s sad really…

 

[Turtullian]

Where did I say I believe it’s the sole article of faith? The OP wanted to know why And I answered that it’s because most of us DON’T believe it as it is defined by Catholics, making typical Catholic arguments ineffective. All of the things you just agreed are in the Bible are the very things I believe about it.

Even protestants can’t define what Sola Scriptura is. It’s like playing with sand. The Lutherans will say look to the thier confessions in addition to Scripture, the Calvinists will look to the Westminster Confessions, the Anglicans and thier 39 Articles, the Baptist will hold to whatever convention they adhere to with others proclaiming truly Bible Alone.

I didn’t get all of that apparently.

I am saying that most protestants are taught that that is what it means. If you look around you will find MANY various definitions of what Sola Scriptura means. You cannot pick one thing that one small group of protestants believe and insist that all of us agree. I’m telling you that a significant group of Protestants believe it means it is not corrupt and is authoritative. These people are going to take it wrong if you make arguments without first defining what you are arguing about.

If there are many deffinitions of Sola Scriptura, then it is a pick and choose kind of faith. I pick and choose how I choose to define things. It’s all based on feelings and what I find confortable with. This kind of theology is very me-istic. Then this begs the Question as to what is truth.

 

[MarkAA]

I feel comfortable saying this with some certainty, in regard to the question posed by this thread:

Most Protestants believe Catholics don’t read the Bible much if at all, and that Catholic leaders discourage the reading of scripture, other than in service. In fact, I’ve talked with some nonCatholics who are surprised to find out Catholics actually do read scripture in mass.

Most Protestants believe Catholics put their church’s doctrines, creeds and other “rules” – including the Pope’s “commands” far above anything in the Bible.

Most Protestants who are aware that the Catholic Bible has several more books than the “Protestant” Bible are disturbed by this and take it in a generally negative light, often that Catholics are intentionally keeping “heretical” books in the Bible.

Most Protestants have been told that Catholics either intentionally misuse Scripture for the doctrines, or have doctrines that are opposed to scripture. Depending on the Protestant’s particular opinion of Catholicism, they reason that either the Catholic Church is intentionally (Satanically) going against Scripture, OR more positively, I guess, that the Church is SO Biblically illiterate that it is following doctrines that are antiBiblical out of ignorance. (This is a major way Protestants try to draw Catholics out of Catholicism into Protestantism, by “proving” via scripture that the doctrines are antiBiblical to Catholics who aren’t very familiar with scripture.

Most Protestants are convinced that Catholics follow “works doctrines” meaning that they believe their own good works will earn them a place in Heaven. (Also known as Pelagianism, which was condemned as heresy by the Catholic Church 15 centuries, ironically). By misunderstanding the Catholic doctrines on salvation, they then accuse Catholics of being anti-Bible over works when the actual misunderstanding is on the Protestant side over this issue. Catholics and most Protestants do differ over the role of works in salvation, but the distinction isn’t nearly as clear cut as most Protestants think it is, and it isn’t because Catholics misunderstand the Bible as wildly as Protestants might believe they do.

Most Protestants would be Blown Away by the amount of Catholic Bible Study materials and the depth they go into. The Navarre Study Bible and the Ignatius Study Bible (and the many, many Scott Hahn tapes and courses) are just a few. Many Protestants mistakenly believe that because they don’t see many or any Catholic products in Christian Bookstores, there aren’t any. Really. I was one of them. Hard to admit to myself now that I know better.

MarkAA

 

[Mommyof02green]

Hi,

No I do not think that is the general concensus among protestants. I think someone was right when they said most protestants dont even think about it. I never really thought about it much either until I got to know some ex-catholics who really berated the CC. So of course they influenced me in a bad way.-

When people leave a church they tend to have negatives views. Not all, of course… but it does happen. So I don’t give it much creditability.

My concerns when I started talking to catholics(friends) were that there were no bibles in church. I have always had a bible in every church I went to. So to me that was strange.

Scripture is used during the Mass. Every Catholic Church that I have been to has some kind of “missal” in the pew, along with songbooks. The “missals” have the Bible passages that are being read that day. So anyone can pick up a missal and read the Scripture (Bible) passages.

The Sunday Readings are on a 3 year cycle…meaning every 3rd year they repeat themselves. The daily (Monday-Saturday) readings (there is mass every day) is on a 2 year cycle…meaning every other year they repeat themselves. Many Catholics, like, myself have our own PERSONAL missal that we bought and take it with us to Church.
For more info on the Missal click here: newadvent.org/cathen/10354c.htm There are several web pages, that sell Missals such as www.ewtn.com and catholicfamilygifts.com/index.asp

Also, now that I have been studying the bible pretty extensively and becoming more comfortable talking about it I am finding out that my catholic friends dont have a clue about what I am talking about biblically.

I still struggle to “know” where things are in the Bible. I know the stuff, but I can’t quote chapter and verse. Thank God for the Internet, and the many web pages, that allows you to type in KEYWORDS. With those aids, I have been able to find the actual verses!!! I knew it, I just didn’t know were to find it…

Sadly, I think that this is typical for most Catholics: To know what the Bible said, but not know where to find it. I think that this at times leads some Catholics to think they don’t know the Bible, because they can’t quote actually chapter and verse. Bible Study is the key to changing that!!! There are many parishes that do offer Bible Study. However, there are some that don’t. It’s hard to offer something, like Bible study, when you don’t have people willing to lead it.

Ex: My parish had to drop Sunday school for the 3 years old and 4-years old, because we had NO ONE willing to teach the kids.

Thank God, for the Internet! I have been able to find web-based, Catholic Bible Studies. That have help fill some of the void.

One of my friends takes a bible study in my home and told me that she now understands the Mass more clearly after studying the bible.

That is cool!!!
Here is a bible study that focuses on the Bible and the Mass. If any one is interested: salvationhistory.com/online/beginner/begcourse2_home.cfm

That could be where it stems from–a combo of ex-catholics bashing the CC–no bibles in church–and lack of bible study. Now this is just my observation based only on what I experience. I can only speak for myself. Peace

Again I don’t give much credit to those that are ex-members, because generally ex-members tend to have negative views. Sadly it goes both ways! Again the actual Bible may not be in the pews, but Scripture is there… Scripture is used. The Scripture that is being used that day are found in the “missal”. Every Catholic Church that I have been to have some kind of missal in the pew for the people to use.

 

[O.S.Luke]

What is a “hard core” Protestant?
What is a “hard core” Catholic?