Protestant Excuses

[Ruthie_again]

Copied and pasted:
I had surgery on my left hand on Oct. 11th, which means I must hunt and peck with my right hand. That is so slow that I plan to desert my usual grammar and spelling for the next few days, until I can use my left hand a little. Thank you all for your patience!

this is simple:

And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. 19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
Matt 16:18-19 (KJV)

in v. 19 ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ are singular. english has no singular ‘you.’ Jesus was speaking to one person, Peter, not to everyone present there.

go here scripture4all.org/OnlineInterlinear/NTpdf/mat16.pdf and look at v. 15. the ‘you’ has a p next to it, meaning plural. He’s speaking to them all. on the line above it, the ‘pl’ also means plural. look above YE in the same; ‘sg’ means singular.

now look at v. 19. every single thee and thou - one person. Peter.

 

[enickman]

I’m sorry but this really frustrates me. I do not deny that the Catholic Church, through the Holy Spirit helped put together the Bible. However, it did not give us the Bible. The Bible is the Word of God. Not the word of man. The Bible is God breathed. Therefore, it is God who gave us the Bible. If God did not give us the Bible then it is not God’s word. Which means that the Bible doesn’t have to be infallible since it isn’t from God. Thank God that He did indeed give us the Bible.

Are you really saying if there were contradictions the Church would overrule the Bible? That is HIS Word. It is the Gospel of Salvation. The Word of life. Scripture says that man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord. Scripture is the word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.

I’m sorry but I definitely do not agree with you.

How didn’t it give us the Bible? The Church was around before the Gospels were written. The writers were apart of the Church itself before (and after) writing them. Thankfully, there are no contradictions, I was just pointing out the fact that the Church came first and that Jesus, while on earth, did not give us the Bible. There is no refuting that point, and it’s something a lot of people don’t know.

The Koran also claims to be the inspired word of God. Actually, if you say Muhammad is the author of it in Islamic countries, you run a great risk of being hurt or killed. It is the Church that canonized it and said it is true and inspired, that is why we believe in it. We rely on the Church’s canonization, that they made no error in putting a book in or leaving one out. I am guessing that you don’t believe in the Book of Mormon, which claims to be a New Testament found in America. Can you understand my point? Like someone said above, it didn’t form itself out of thin air.

 

[pismopal]

Sorry, put me in the bad Catholic category.

I have another more appropriate category for you …since you claim to be a Catholic and are obviously not…“dishonest”.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

The term Protestant is so fragmented it has become a useless label. When something has a infinate numbers of meanings it actually has no meaning.

I actually read a recent news report that protestants are no longer the majority in the united states. One of the reasons among acouple… “Non-denominational Christians can not really be considered protestant”. My non-denominational Christian Mother does not consider herself protestant. I wonder how many do or do not. But that is what I read in the news report.

 

[Eilrahc]

I actually read a recent news report that protestants are no longer the majority in the united states. One of the reasons among acouple… “Non-denominational Christians can not really be considered protestant”. My non-denominational Christian Mother does not consider herself protestant. I wonder how many do or do not. But that is what I read in the news report.

Those “non-denominationals” really need to read their history.

 

[LaughingBoy1503]

Those “non-denominationals” really need to read their history.

That is part of the reason why I knew that I needed to convert!

 

[pablope]

I’m sorry but this really frustrates me. I do not deny that the Catholic Church, through the Holy Spirit helped put together the Bible.

However, it did not give us the Bible.

 

[kbwall]

The Sacrament of Reconciliation is nothing new; it was around pretty much since the Church was founded, that is for 2,000 years. It’s not something the Pope just made up so preists can hear the juicy gossip or something; it had to be something the Apostles believed to be necessary.

If Jesus requires that the priest perform the forgiving of sins on His behalf, then one must conclude that Jesus is not able, or not willing to forgive sins Himself personally. We must conclude that Jesus is not alive, nor truly present in our lives, because a priest is required to perform the act of forgiving as a proxy for Christ

Well…yeah. Jesus is alive, but He isn’t corporeal enough to tell you on a regular basis that your sins are forgiven.

This is just like the Protestant claim that the Pope is redundant because all is needed is the Bible and the Holy Spirit will show the correct interpretation to all without a Pope. If that were true, there would not be so many Protestant denominations with so many varying beliefs.

As for Bible vs. Church argument. If there was a contradiction between the two, and I mean a real, true contradiction, not this stuff Protestants fabricate, then I would say both would be wrong and both would become useless. The Bible is infallible only because the Church says so. And if the Church deemed the Bible infallible, then went against it, the Church would no longer be infallibly lead by God and also be wrong. Infallibility is a bold claim, and if it is shown to be wrong in one matter, no matter how seemingly minute, then the infallibility is a lie and I have no reason to believe anything from that source.

Similar to the topic of Mary’s virginity. What difference does it make? Infinite, since it was deemed true by an infallible source. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link.

 

[Eilrahc]

Well it’s official… “Bible Christians” don’t interpret the bible literally word-for-word.

 

[Armor_of_Light]

I’m sorry but this really frustrates me. I do not deny that the Catholic Church, through the Holy Spirit helped put together the Bible. However, it did not give us the Bible. The Bible is the Word of God. Not the word of man. The Bible is God breathed. Therefore, it is God who gave us the Bible. If God did not give us the Bible then it is not God’s word. Which means that the Bible doesn’t have to be infallible since it isn’t from God. Thank God that He did indeed give us the Bible.

Are you really saying if there were contradictions the Church would overrule the Bible? That is HIS Word. It is the Gospel of Salvation. The Word of life. Scripture says that man lives by every word that comes from the mouth of the Lord. Scripture is the word that comes from the mouth of the Lord.

I’m sorry but I definitely do not agree with you.

Jesus came into the world through Mary…The Bible came into the world through the catholic church. Both from God through man.

 

[Eilrahc]

I’ve seen three verses in the Gospels where Jesus condemned remarriage after a divorce, but many Protestants think nothing of it:

Matthew 5:32
Matthew 19:9
Mark 10:11-12

Do they know about these verses? If so, then how do THEY interpret them?

 

[Reuben_J]

But we only know and believe that those particular books which we call the Bible are infallible b/c of the Catholic Church who decided it was so. If there was a contradiction between the Church and the Bible it would merely be the Church contradicting herself since the Church is the authority behind the Bible. The Bible did not fall from the sky but instead came out of the Church, who took those particular books and decided on them based on the faith that already existed. They did not pull the faith from the pages of the Bible like more recent Protestant groups have. The Bible was created in conformity to the Church (to the faith) and not the other way around. It is not logical therefore to say the Church should bend to the words of the Bible, b/c practically speaking those words have to interpreted, but mainly b/c the Church gave authority to the Bible. However, it is also illogical to say that there would be a contradiction between the Bible and the Church in the first place. It is not a matter of one taking precedent over the other but both being seen as coming from one and the same source, which is God’s revelation. This is why there is so much trouble when one seeks to separate the Bible from the Church as the protestants have.

I think some of the Protestants’ position regarding this is that the people (Church) who compiled the Bible is a one-off thing. Obviously they agreed that the Bible is compiled by a group of people, for us it was the Church, and they did not deny that. Probably they too agreed that those who were responsible for the canon were also Spirit inspired. But then that is as far as it goes after which no Church pronouncement can overrule the Bible and it will be the ultimate authority.

It is in that they err because the Bible does not explain itself and that is where they disagree with us. To them the Bible is self-explained and everyone is given the grace to understand the Bible. Now of course we know that when everybody has the Holy Spirit to interpret the Bible and what a plethora of interpretations there are.

The Church that had the authority to compile the Bible also therefore knows best its interpretation. If we take the Bible as the ultimate doctrine, then in the beginning it was meant to explain that doctrine which the Church holds.

 

[Stilldreamn]

I’ve seen three verses in the Gospels where Jesus condemned remarriage after a divorce, but many Protestants think nothing of it:

Matthew 5:32
Matthew 19:9
Mark 10:11-12

Do they know about these verses? If so, then how do THEY interpret them?

Divorce has always been considered as a serious sin - but as with other serious sins, with repentence there is also forgiveness. What I am struggling with, personally, is the issue of remarriage afterward. As you mention, it is very common because it is allowed legally in society (that makes it OK, right? ). Thirty years ago, I did not give serious consideration to my spouse’s divorce, and now I struggle with the implications…

 

[teslaeden]

There are some verses never mentioned in the Baptist church… “Give wine to the heavy-hearted”, “It is not those who are well that need a physician”, “Judge not lest yes be judged”, “Actions speak louder than words”, “Whatever you do into the least of mine you do into me”, and “Mind your own business and you will be independent.” Also I can’t remember verbatim but we are told not to force our beliefs on anyone lest we scare them awat.

 

[Eilrahc]

There are some verses never mentioned in the Baptist church… “Give wine to the heavy-hearted”, “It is not those who are well that need a physician”, “Judge not lest yes be judged”, “Actions speak louder than words”, “Whatever you do into the least of mine you do into me”, and “Mind your own business and you will be independent.” Also I can’t remember verbatim but we are told not to force our beliefs on anyone lest we scare them awat.

Many Fundies interpret “wine” as “grape juice”.

 

[pismopal]

And they say it with such childlike belief…not even considering the fact that grape juice begins to ferment without any act of man…prevented only by pasteurizing…not known until recent times.

And forgetting Bible verses…one of which admonishes us not to get too drunk on wine…hardly possible by drinking grape juice.

 

[Reuben_J]

Many Fundies interpret “wine” as “grape juice”.

It often fascinates me that when people try to deny the obvious they would seem ludicrous with their reasoning. As an aside, and it reminds me how Muslim apologists too would interpret wine that they are supposed to be rewarded with in heaven as ‘grape juice’ too. The truth is, wine was already part of the Christian’s culture in the Middle East and Arab Muslims too (those Arabs who would became Muslims later) in pre-Islamic time, and believe me, when they said wine, they meant it.

 

[TrueLight]

There are some verses never mentioned in the Baptist church… “Give wine to the heavy-hearted”, “It is not those who are well that need a physician”, “Judge not lest yes be judged”, “Actions speak louder than words”, “Whatever you do into the least of mine you do into me”, and “Mind your own business and you will be independent.” Also I can’t remember verbatim but we are told not to force our beliefs on anyone lest we scare them awat.

I don’t know which baptist Church YOU went to.

Anyway, what is the point of this thread? To make fun of Protestants?

 

[ThomasM79]

I don’t know which baptist Church YOU went to.

Anyway, what is the point of this thread? To make fun of Protestants?

I agree, even though some of things contained here are true, there doesn’t seem to be a charitable tone.

 

[Aslan10]

This is a very interesting thread. First I’d say everybody take a chill pill. haha. I’m currently Christian that goes to an anglican church (I was born and baptized in the Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church) and kinda tend to be a hybrid in my theology (I tend to have a Catholic theology minus a few things). But the question of confession is one that really does bother me, not in an adjetated or angry way but more in a confused sense. I see the biblical and historcal evidence for having it and I wish that I could go to confession. As someone that struggles with a lot of guilt after knowing I’ve disobeyed my Lord, being able to go to confession would make all the difference in the world! But at the same time, according to the Catholic doctrine, if I have never gone to confession, than all those times I have asked forgiveness from Christ are all void! So it is really hard for me to believe that the Lord I know and love wouldn’t grant me forgiveness if I asked him in prayer, instead of going to a priest in confession. That just doesn’t seem like Christ to me. So its not a question of theology for me, its a question of Christ’s character. But who knows, I’ve been thinking about becoming catholic for a while and it could happen and this whole thing wouldn’t be an issue in my life.

Peace be with you.