How come some Protestants really believe

[Celtic_Maiden]

The Most Fundamental (in my mind) Creed of Protestantism is that “The Roman Catholic Church is WRONG.” All or most of the other Christian Protestant sects though will all seem to get along, because they have one thing in common: Anti-Catholicism.

Seriously, when was the last time a Methodist
bashed on Lutheranism or the Lutherans bash
on the Southern Baptist Church and so on?

Catholicism is Christianity at its fullest expression.

Catholicism is pre denominational , WE ARE THE ORIGINALS.

Yes its amazing that people see the splinter in the Catholics eye, but don’t see the plank in there own, and there’s is man made.

I.e… Church of England (Anglican) Henry V111 who died of V.D. (Syphilis
ie. Mormon’s founded by Joseph Smyth who was put in Jail for fraud.
etc. etc, all are made up by a human person who suffered illusions of grandeur
Except for the Catholic Church when Christ appointed his Apostles to mind his sheep
and appointed Peter as the first Pope., every Ruler appoints a Prime Minister.
Hence the 33,000 Protestant denominations, perfect example.

The Christian identity is a belonging to the Church because to find Jesus outside of the Church is not possible. Pope Francis.

 

[BlueEyedLady]

I take great exception to your post. Living in west Texas I can assure you that Protestants were always, ALWAYS trash-talking the Catholic Church in my small town. The Protestant pastors were always saying the most horrible things. I lived this reality for 18 years. So please keep your uninformed comments to yourself.

Ever stop to think that 1. You live in Texas and 2. The ministers that you noticed were the ones making noise and that there were many others just quietly leading their congregations?

I spent decades in a Protestant church. By virtue of growing up in a small town a was forced to visit ones outside of my home church. The first college I attended was a Methodist college, I attended and later counseled church camps. I don’t think that I al uninformed. It does seem to me however that you are judging all Protestants or their leaders based on a few that get your attention. That’s kind of like how most people don’t notice catholic priests, except the ones that make the news for abuse.

 

[Patti_M]

Instead of uninformed, the possibility exists that you each have a reality, that is different from the other. Additionally, the very nature of a forum such as this is people do not keep their comments to themselves.

The fact is that different locales have different relationships. I was raised in Pa. Where there were large numbers of Catholics and Lutherans. Never, ever, in school, church, or the playground did I here trash talk between the two groups. We were friends at school, on the sports field and court, and where one went to church was a choice of one’s parents. My dad was a Lutheran pastor, and I promise you there would never be a trash comment in his house about another race or religion. Eastern Pa is not West Texas, I understand that. BlueEyedLady’s experience is different, too.

Jon

I apologize if I have broken any forum rules but please understand that although these things can be “regional” as you put, I was left with some very deep wounds from these experiences. I would love to have grown up being accepted by people of different faiths.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

Catholicism is Christianity at its fullest expression…

…Except for the Catholic Church when Christ appointed his Apostles to mind his sheep
and appointed Peter as the first Pope., every Ruler appoints a Prime Minister.
Hence the 33,000 Protestant denominations, perfect example.

That’s actually a message the Protestants miss entirely (John 21:15-17), that
the Pope is not a King, but a humble shepherd. The Pope, in my mind kinda, by
no means “rules” the Catholic Church, but is charged to take good care of it.

 

[JonNC]

I apologize if I have broken any forum rules but please understand that although these things can be “regional” as you put, I was left with some very deep wounds from these experiences. I would love to have grown up being accepted by people of different faiths.

I hurts me to know that some who would claim the name of Christian would treat you in a way He would not approve. I don’t think you broke any forum rules, but I’m hoping that your hearing of different experiences, more positive ones, will help you to let go of the negative ones of the past.

His peace be with you,
Jon

 

[Celtic_Maiden]

I hurts me to know that some who would claim the name of Christian would treat you in a way He would not approve. I don’t think you broke any forum rules, but I’m hoping that your hearing of different experiences, more positive ones, will help you to let go of the negative ones of the past.

His peace be with you,
Jon

Unfortunately I had the same negative anti Catholic remarks in the Protestant School I went to where there was different denominations there, it was said also by the Head Teacher which I was surprised at her bigotry of course at the time I did not care being Jewish, it was only later on when I became a Catholic I thought about all the very anti Catholic remarks she made day in day out, which must have had an effect on the rest of the pupils. Disgusting. I wish I could do a rewind, and I would let her have it.

 

[wmscott]

Yes, we are all sinners. We all sin. However, the difference between a Christian and a non-Christian is that Christians don’t stay in sin. They confess it and they resist it. Yes, it may be a battle, and you may have to shed many tears, seek pastoral or professional help, and pray through. Nevertheless, if you are in Christ and Christ is in you, you will overcome.

A backslider has made the conscious decision to sin and refuses to confess and reconcile himself to God. That is the difference.

When you say “Christians don’t stay in sin” because they are saved, can you name me any Christian today that can say in a state of perpetual grace meaning without any sin?

 

[Brandall]

I would share with you this reality: we as Lutherans probably have far more in common with Catholicism than we do with Baptist, or American evangelicalism.

Jon

You’re making me do it. You’re making me drag out this Flannery O’Conner quote

The Catholic finds it easier to understand the atheist than the Protestant, but easier to love the Protestant than the atheist. The fact is though now that the fundamentalist Protestants, as far as doctrine goes, are closer to their traditional enemy, the Church of Rome, than they are to the advanced elements in Protestantism.

 

[Brandall]

Let me explain it to you. Please, I’m going to be blunt so if this comes off as harsh or critical of Catholicism it is not. I’m just laying everything on the table and not beating around the bush.

First, you are not speaking about all Protestants (as you rightly point out). You are speaking about the “born again” types, also known as evangelicals. I’ll call them “born-again Christians” for short.

Second, what evangelicals believe is that a conscience conversion experience is necessary. This is called “being born again” or “getting saved.” Beliefs vary, but the simple idea is that after this conversion experience (if it was authentic) then the person has been born again and is a “new creation.” Fruits and evidence of this new birth should follow.

Third, “born-again Christians” believe that only those persons who can testify to having placed their faith in Christ are members of the church. You are not a Christian if you do not have faith in Christ.

Fourth, this means that, from the perspective of “born-again Christians”, those persons who:

have been baptized (at any age) without having put their faith in Christ

or who had their name listed on a church membership roll without having put their faith in Christ

or who made an inauthentic confession of faith (meaning they said they put their faith in Christ but they really never did)

or perhaps at one time they did have faith in Christ but later lost it and are now in a backslidden state

are not Christians. Either they never were saved or they lost their faith and apostatized.

This fourth point applies to any and all Christians. It applies to Catholics and it applies to other “born-again Christians.” “Born-again Christians” are strong believers that there are many unregenerate people in the churches. Everyone who is a member of the church is not saved. Your status in any particular church means nothing. You could be a the pastor, deacon, or Sunday school teacher and still be unregenerate. It doesn’t matter. Man looks at the outward appearance. God looks at the heart.

For many “born-again Christians”, the Catholic Church is one of those churches that places more emphasis on the outward things. They see the Catholic Church as believing things like: “if you’ve been baptized, you’re a Christian whether you have faith in Christ or not.” “Born-again Christians” would never lump all the members of their churches into the “Christian” category. They always recognize that while people may affect a Christian persona, they may not be truly regenerate.

I’m afraid you cradle Catholics and others with a high church backgroud will never understand backslidden.

Itwin, we in the Baptist church have always been familiar with that state and I remember feeling that many of other religions, and my own, “just didn’t get it.” I’m thankful for being away from that but honestly, that “judgey” feeling rises up in me again and again.

It might be “Christlike” as in he will be the ultimate judge, but it’s the kind of Christlike I prefer not to be.

There is enough of a deficit in my own life that I need to get right with god that it’s not a good use of time to worry about others.

 

[Brandall]

that Catholics won’t be in heaven because they aren’t “saved”…
Seriously, do they really believe that?

And why are Christian kids really “so much better” because they can recite Bible verses? ( got this little “dig” from my own DH’s aunt last night…)

I KNOW better than to believe this … I do not believe this at all…
But it still hurts…

I remember as a young baptist being encouraged to learn bible verses. It was to “combat the devil”. My thoughts have always been, if it’s written down, why memorize it.

I’ve taken that tactic into the Catholic Church too. I can juggle the hymnal and the missal at the same time. Why memorize any of it? If there is something that “you just have to find”, that’s just one more problem the computer and the internet has solved.

 

[Razanir]

I’m afraid you cradle Catholics and others with a high church backgroud will never understand backslidden.

Actually, let me try by drawing an analogy to Catholic theology. Catholicism sees 3 types of sin. Original Sin is simply sin passed down from Adam by our fallen human nature. In Catholicism, this is what Baptism is for. It saves us from Original Sin. In addition to that, there are 2 types of Actual Sin, meaning sin we commit ourselves (as opposed to being passed down from Adam). Mortal sin is complete separation from God. It requires grave matter (breaking the Ten Commandments, for example), knowledge, and consent. It’s what we go to Confession for. Anything else is a venial sin. It distances us from God, but doesn’t separate us completely. Venial sin is forgiven at every Mass during the Penitential Rite. Sorry if that was a bit lengthy of an explanation. I had to briefly describe different types of sin to help set up the analogy.

So as I think I understand your explanation of backsliding. You seem to acknowledge that even after your baptism that people will still sin. We are all sinners and all mess up. Some examples of things Catholics would consider venial sin and that I don’t think you would consider backsliding would be habitually swearing or telling a white lie. Some examples of things Catholics would consider mortal sin and that I think you would consider backsliding would be lying under oath or extramarital sex.

So to the best of my understanding, “backsliding” sounds similar to the Catholic concept of mortal sin. You sin gravely enough to lose your salvation, but that you can still be forgiven of if you repent.

 

[Brandall]

Actually, let me try by drawing an analogy to Catholic theology. Catholicism sees 3 types of sin. Original Sin is simply sin passed down from Adam by our fallen human nature. In Catholicism, this is what Baptism is for. It saves us from Original Sin. In addition to that, there are 2 types of Actual Sin, meaning sin we commit ourselves (as opposed to being passed down from Adam). Mortal sin is complete separation from God. It requires grave matter (breaking the Ten Commandments, for example), knowledge, and consent. It’s what we go to Confession for. Anything else is a venial sin. It distances us from God, but doesn’t separate us completely. Venial sin is forgiven at every Mass during the Penitential Rite. Sorry if that was a bit lengthy of an explanation. I had to briefly describe different types of sin to help set up the analogy.

So as I think I understand your explanation of backsliding. You seem to acknowledge that even after your baptism that people will still sin. We are all sinners and all mess up. Some examples of things Catholics would consider venial sin and that I don’t think you would consider backsliding would be habitually swearing or telling a white lie. Some examples of things Catholics would consider mortal sin and that I think you would consider backsliding would be lying under oath or extramarital sex.

So to the best of my understanding, “backsliding” sounds similar to the Catholic concept of mortal sin. You sin gravely enough to lose your salvation, but that you can still be forgiven of if you repent.

Like I said, you can’t understand and frankly, I’m not sure it’s important. If you want more of a clue, think of the Catholic that only goes to church once every five years or so. Otherwise, living an unholy life. Again though, it’s not important.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Actually, let me try by drawing an analogy to Catholic theology. Catholicism sees 3 types of sin. Original Sin is simply sin passed down from Adam by our fallen human nature. In Catholicism, this is what Baptism is for. It saves us from Original Sin. In addition to that, there are 2 types of Actual Sin, meaning sin we commit ourselves (as opposed to being passed down from Adam). Mortal sin is complete separation from God. It requires grave matter (breaking the Ten Commandments, for example), knowledge, and consent. It’s what we go to Confession for. Anything else is a venial sin. It distances us from God, but doesn’t separate us completely. Venial sin is forgiven at every Mass during the Penitential Rite. Sorry if that was a bit lengthy of an explanation. I had to briefly describe different types of sin to help set up the analogy.

So as I think I understand your explanation of backsliding. You seem to acknowledge that even after your baptism that people will still sin. We are all sinners and all mess up. Some examples of things Catholics would consider venial sin and that I don’t think you would consider backsliding would be habitually swearing or telling a white lie. Some examples of things Catholics would consider mortal sin and that I think you would consider backsliding would be lying under oath or extramarital sex.

So to the best of my understanding, “backsliding” sounds similar to the Catholic concept of mortal sin. You sin gravely enough to lose your salvation, but that you can still be forgiven of if you repent.

Yes–As a long time Evangelical Christian, I’d say you’ve pretty much understood “backslidden” as I’ve heard it explained. Someone who deliberately chooses to live in a state of unrepentant grave sin for a length of time, has turned their back on God until and unless they once again turn around and face Him in repentance.

Being a human can be complicated, though, and painful, and speaking for myself, I don’t consider it any of my business to call someone else “backslidden” unless they themselves state that they’ve purposely, arrogantly, walked away from God. “Don’t Shoot the Wounded.”

 

[AbideWithMe]

Like I said, you can’t understand and frankly, I’m not sure it’s important. If you want more of a clue, think of the Catholic that only goes to church once every five years or so. Otherwise, living an unholy life. Again though, it’s not important.

LOL…I think the “mortal sin/backslidden” comparison was pretty close. Except, I think of backslidden as grave, hardened unholiness over a length of time. Peter, denying that he knows Jesus one night, but then weeping bitterly…serious stuff, but not backsliding. The Prodigal Son, coming home but then deliberately leaving again, scorning the greatness of his father’s mercy, to squander callously all he’s been given= backsliding into the pig sty.

 

[AbideWithMe]

Mostly it is from his aunt, who used to be Catholic… fell away from the church…and now is a pretty new Baptist… maybe she is just so “into” what she is learning, yet still so “new” she feels the need to put us down… Yet Dh’s uncle ( her brother) is a Baptist minister… He doesn’t make us feel that way at all…though I remember when his kids were little, and we visited his church, they would ask, “Are you saved?” " Why not?":lol:

All in all I am strong in my beliefs…strong in my faith…and just feel saddened that others really believe that they are the only “right” ones…

Maybe it is indeed “new convert zeal” in your husband’s aunt. It’s sad that your having to be around that, be please just continue to love her and talk about Christ with her, and I bet she’ll come around.

Regarding memorizing Bible verses…I had to do that growing up, and I am so thankful for that discipline of memorization. It’s a very good thing to have stored in one’s mind. At the very least, who hasn’t memorized Psalm 23?

 

[pablope]

You’re making me do it. You’re making me drag out this Flannery O’Conner quote

The Catholic finds it easier to understand the atheist than the Protestant, but easier to love the Protestant than the atheist. The fact is though now that the fundamentalist Protestants, as far as doctrine goes, are closer to their traditional enemy, the Church of Rome,

than they are to the advanced elements in Protestantism.

What are these…“advanced elements in Protestantism.”? What is being referred to here?

 

[ltwin]

When you say “Christians don’t stay in sin” because they are saved, can you name me any Christian today that can say in a state of perpetual grace meaning without any sin?

OK, I think we are reading past each other. First, I never said anything about “sinless perfection.” When I wrote “Christians don’t stay in sin,” I was not implying that Christians ceased to sin. All I meant was that Christians to “stay in sin” as in repeat the same sins over and over again. Christians do not wallow in sin like pigs wallow in the muck and the mire. We are told in Scripture to turn from sin and to resist it.

Maybe the writer of Hebrews 10:26-31 can say it better than I can (emphasis added):

For if we go on sinning deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, but a fearful expectation of judgment, and a fury of fire that will consume the adversaries. Anyone who has set aside the law of Moses dies without mercy on the evidence of two or three witnesses. How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace? For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.
​

Backsliders do three things in their refusal to repent: 1) trample underfoot Jesus Christ, 2) profane the blood of the covenant, 3) offend the Holy Spirit. Now are all Christians insulting Christ, his blood, and the Holy Spirit? Of course not. If that were the case, all Christians would be under condemnation and judgment. He is obviously talking about people who know the truth but refuse to repent. This is made explicit when he writes, “has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified.” He is not talking about unconverted sinners. He is talking about people who had been sanctified (set apart for holy purposes), i.e. “church people.” This is backsliding!

Sinning is unavoidable. However, there is a difference between “sinning deliberately” (as the writer calls it) and sinning that arises out of human frailty. We cannot avoid the latter, but the former category of sin is within our power to resist. We do not have to “deliberately” persist in the same sins over and over.

 

[andrewstx]

Better question,

Why do they make these remarks about Catholics, but not about our Orthodox or Lutheran brothers who share in some of our beliefs that set us apart from the Evangelical crowd? It’s hypocritical. Or it just shows how little they know about where they came from.

I have found that in my life their are quite a number of Evangelicals that really are not aware of Orthodoxy’s existence.

I grew up in a place where the huge majority was fundamentalists and Orthodox were never spoken off.

It was not until I was a sophomore in college that I even saw an Orthodox church and that was in a town that had an Air Force base with a lot of greeks. In this part of the US Orthodox churches are small and about 150 miles apart and Eastern Catholic churches non existent.

 

[ltwin]

I’m afraid you cradle Catholics and others with a high church backgroud will never understand backslidden.

Itwin, we in the Baptist church have always been familiar with that state and I remember feeling that many of other religions, and my own, “just didn’t get it.” I’m thankful for being away from that but honestly, that “judgey” feeling rises up in me again and again.

It might be “Christlike” as in he will be the ultimate judge, but it’s the kind of Christlike I prefer not to be.

There is enough of a deficit in my own life that I need to get right with god that it’s not a good use of time to worry about others.

You’re right. We shouldn’t be judgmental. We should lift up those who are struggling in their faith in prayer and in other ways that build up rather than tear down.

However, I don’t think its judgmental per se to acknowledge that it is possible to backslide.

 

[ltwin]

Actually, let me try by drawing an analogy to Catholic theology. Catholicism sees 3 types of sin. Original Sin is simply sin passed down from Adam by our fallen human nature. In Catholicism, this is what Baptism is for. It saves us from Original Sin. In addition to that, there are 2 types of Actual Sin, meaning sin we commit ourselves (as opposed to being passed down from Adam). Mortal sin is complete separation from God. It requires grave matter (breaking the Ten Commandments, for example), knowledge, and consent. It’s what we go to Confession for. Anything else is a venial sin. It distances us from God, but doesn’t separate us completely. Venial sin is forgiven at every Mass during the Penitential Rite. Sorry if that was a bit lengthy of an explanation. I had to briefly describe different types of sin to help set up the analogy.

So as I think I understand your explanation of backsliding. You seem to acknowledge that even after your baptism that people will still sin. We are all sinners and all mess up. Some examples of things Catholics would consider venial sin and that I don’t think you would consider backsliding would be habitually swearing or telling a white lie. Some examples of things Catholics would consider mortal sin and that I think you would consider backsliding would be lying under oath or extramarital sex.

So to the best of my understanding, “backsliding” sounds similar to the Catholic concept of mortal sin. You sin gravely enough to lose your salvation, but that you can still be forgiven of if you repent.

That makes sense. Backsliders can be reconciled to God through confession of sin and true repentance.

As to the type of sin that would qualify as “backsliding,” it would be difficult to come up with a list. Generally, I think most people would say that backsliding would consist of both an element of degree and an element of longevity. What I mean by degree is how serious the sin is. What I mean by longevity is how long the person has gone without being reconciled to God through confession and repentance. The longer one goes resisting the conviction power of the Holy Spirit, the harder one’s heart gets to the influence of the Holy Spirit. At a certain point, a person may be at risk of committing the unpardonable sin against the Holy Spirit.