Generalizations of Protestants

  • Thread starter Thread starter robwar
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Faithdancer said:
Well, one rather major difference is that Matthew is Gospel, and 1 Timothy is not. By this I mean, of course, that the words of Matthew 18:20 are Christ’s very words recorded by an eyewitness, and in this case they are in the form of a declarative statement with no need for laborious exegesis.

By the way, 1 Timothy has six chapters.😉
Click to expand...
But that is a question I have had for years. It may
be your intention and you may think you are gathered
in His Name, but are you?

It seems to me especially with the proliferation
of self interpretation and sola Scriptura Protestant
A receives an oppositional message from scripture to
Protestant B. pretty soon people are arguing and
splitting and doing things oppositional to
each other.
Which makes the outsider look in and see Christ
as a confused and somewhat whimsical if not psychotic
God.
And I find nothing in Scripture that says Jesus wanted
to be so chaotic. And in fact I see that was something
He was trying to prevent. So how can it be in His Name?

Look at the title of this thread. Some Protestants are
objecting to being compared to other Protestants
and are insulted when the Church apologist does so.

In His Name?
I think not.
 
marywarfield said:
Oh for heavens sakes. Catholic Apologists have the
job, as all Catholics do, of explaining the faith. Period.
Which is what they do. Which is what KP is attempting
to do.
If the explanation isn’t needed by Protestant A then
Protestant A doesn’t have to listen to it but viewing
it as a “generalization” of Protestants or some sort
of blanket discrimination is absurd and gamey.

You know, the apologist announces the truths of
the Church, period. That is their job. It is not their
job to decide who understands it or welcomes it. That
is God’s job.

But even if the apologist responds to each seperate
Protestant individually, as is happening with KP
on this thread or me earlier, you object and run off and complain
to the moderator.

So it would seem your preference Robwar is that
Catholic apologetics not be discussed period, either
generally or individually. So I have to question
the motive in beginning this thread?
Click to expand...
please read my early posts on this thread about Catholic apologists in which I did list some logical reasons why there may be a tendency for a number of them to answer to the evangelical side or fundamentalist side of Protestantism which include the media, books and answering general criticism directed towards the Catholic Church. Derailing the thread about Mary or the Eucharist with what Protestants believe about Mary or the Eucharist is not what this is about. I think it is pathetic that the most contentious voices here are not from Protestants and we have a wide variety posting on this thread but Catholics that don’t understand and want to derail the thread with their own issues.
 
Faithdancer said:
Robwar, I am convinced that your intentions in starting this thread are positive and as a former Roman Catholic I, like some of the RC posters here, once believed that Protestants needed “fixing.” However, I now hold to Matthew 18:20 when it comes to doctrinal differences between Catholics and Protestants and between various Protestant groups. If Matthew 18:20 is true- and I believe it is- than all these differences are relatively minor. Unfortunately legalism- which Christ repeatedly condemned- continues to divide Christians today as much as ever.
Click to expand...
Thank-you for your understanding. It is appreciated.
 
robwar said:
please read my early posts on this thread about Catholic apologists in which I did list some logical reasons why there may be a tendency for a number of them to answer to the evangelical side or fundamentalist side of Protestantism which include the media, books and answering general criticism directed towards the Catholic Church. Derailing the thread about Mary or the Eucharist with what Protestants believe about Mary or the Eucharist is not what this is about. I think it is pathetic that the most contentious voices here are not from Protestants and we have a wide variety posting on this thread but Catholics that don’t understand and want to derail the thread with their own issues.
Click to expand...
This is untruthful Robwar. The reality is I was having a lovely
discussion with a Protestant evangelist who was
ASKING me questions about Mary that I answered and
you objected. In fact in one post by someone I was
referred to as a troll for answering questions.
So I politely left the thread. Contentious? I think not.

I’m not going to refuse to answer questions put to
me by Protestants.
 
Faithdancer said:
Well, one rather major difference is that Matthew is Gospel, and 1 Timothy is not. By this I mean, of course, that the words of Matthew 18:20 are Christ’s very words recorded by an eyewitness, and in this case they are in the form of a declarative statement with no need for laborious exegesis.

By the way, 1 Timothy has six chapters.😉
Click to expand...
What type of Christian are you that you only use the gospels that only the 2 apostles wrote and use no other part of the Bible?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top