"Protestant" not a valid term?

[ralphinal]

I will respond to you since you seem reasonable and do not come out with outrageous distortions that are provokative (there are some Catholics on this board that I would be delighted to have as neighbors in eternity…there are others that I hope God puts on the other end of town from me…but then again there are Protestants that I am embarrassed to be associated with).

I am not sure that every Protestant denomination believes that the Catholics place too much emphasis on Communion of Saints. Even if that is a true statement, there is no requirement that this be so (there theoretically could be such an entity.

Come to think of it, there are Protestants here that agree with Catholics with respect to Communion of Saints and have adopted Catholic practices in this regard. As far as I know the denominations these Protestants belong to are probably neutral as to the practice.

If you neglect liberalism (which is a separate problem) I would say that the belief that Jesus died for our sins is common to all Protestants. The problem here is the Catholic and Orthodox believe this also. Thus the belief does nothing to distinguish Protestants.

The only belief that I can come up with that distinguishes Protestants and that they all hold is that they do not believe that the Bishop of Rome is the head of Christ’s church. But to me that is saying that Protestants are not Catholic; it doesn’t really tell you anything.

…and come to think of it, the Orthodox hold that belief also.

Thanks for calling me resonable. I try to be. Sometimes, I fail, but such is the human condition.

I dislike using Protestant to cover every denomination, but I feel that there is no better way. I know that the various denominations have such heterodox beliefs that it is disingenuous to call them by one name. The only reason that I use the terms as a blanket term to cover all non-Catholic, non-Orthodox Christians who are not in unity with Rome is simplicity and shortness. I am too lazy to type all that out every time.

I wish that there was a simpler way to codify denominations. Even the actual groups may vary greatly in doctrine.

 

[JamesN]

Show me where every denomination cannot in some way trace themselves back to a “reformer,” whether he be Luther, Calvin, Zwingli or Henry VIII.

Pace e Bene
Andrew

Many Baptists claim the Baptist movement to predate the earliest reformers, indeed that it was in existence even in the earliest days of the church. This web page gives an example of some of the “proof” offered to back this claim up.

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer’s%20Corner/why_baptists_are_not_protestants.htm

If you Google “baptists are not protestants” you’ll come up with a whole bunch more.

 

[LDNCatholic]

Many Baptists claim the Baptist movement to predate the earliest reformers, indeed that it was in existence even in the earliest days of the church. This web page gives an example of some of the “proof” offered to back this claim up.

Why Baptists are NOT Protestants!

If you Google “baptists are not protestants” you’ll come up with a whole bunch more.

Yes a number of groups claim this, unfortunately for them they never seem to have much proof and always rely on the same excuse-’‘THE CATHOLIC CHURCH SUPPRESSED US FOR 1500 YEARS!!!’’

God Bless

Peter

 

[JMBNH]

Why Baptists are NOT Protestants!

That site is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen, if I didn’t know better I’d assume it was a spoof:

Their only claim is that at every age in church history there have been groups that have held to the same doctrines that Baptists hold today. These groups may or may not have been connected and they have been known by various names. There were the Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novatians (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.), Albigenses (1022 A.D.), Waldensians (1170 A.D.), and the name Anabaptists came into prominence just before the time of the Protestant Reformation

Someone doesn’t know their heresies well.

The whole site is full of things just as ridiculous

 

[Joe_Kelley]

That site is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen, if I didn’t know better I’d assume it was a spoof:

Their only claim is that at every age in church history there have been groups that have held to the same doctrines that Baptists hold today. These groups may or may not have been connected and they have been known by various names. There were the Montanists (150 A.D.), the Novatians (240 A.D.), Donatists (305 A.D.), Albigenses (1022 A.D.), Waldensians (1170 A.D.), and the name Anabaptists came into prominence just before the time of the Protestant Reformation

Someone doesn’t know their heresies well.

The whole site is full of things just as ridiculous

Well, if that is their pedegree they were wrong on a lot of things, but they were consistent in always being wrong.

 

[inthecloud]

Many Baptists claim the Baptist movement to predate the earliest reformers, indeed that it was in existence even in the earliest days of the church. This web page gives an example of some of the “proof” offered to back this claim up.

What about “You shall not bear false witness”?
Is not longer on their Bibles?
The Baptist are teologicaly and historially very, very protestant.

 

[JMBNH]

What about "You shall not bear
The Baptist are teologicaly and historially very, very protestant.

far more so than Anglican, Lutherans, Methodists and even Presbyterians.

 

[TDiGaetano]

www.Dictionary.com

Prot·es·tant (prŏt’ĭ-stənt) Pronunciation Key
n.

1. any Western Christian who is not an adherent of a Catholic, Anglican, or Eastern Church. ← Some Catholics will argue about anglicans though there is plans for mass acceptance of anglicans back into the church. Welcome Home
2. an adherent of any of those Christian bodies that separated from the Church of Rome during the Reformation, or of any group descended from them.
3. (originally) any of the German princes who protested against the decision of the Diet of Speyer in 1529, which had denounced the Reformation.
4. (lowercase) a person who protests.

–adjective 5. belonging or pertaining to Protestants or their religion.

1. (lowercase) protesting.

Based on the definitions above anyone who is not part of the Catholic Church but believes that Jesus Christ is God and the only way to Heaven and the only authority is the Holy Bible is a Protestant.

That is why JW and Mormons are not Protestant this is because they claim to have authority which is God given.

Some Protestants are trying to establish an authoritive group such as the Baptist but that has already split in half with conflicting views.

I think the main issue Catholics have with Protestants is how they simplify salvation. There are some good Protestants who strive to understand the whole truth just for what ever reason they see Catholics in the same light as the JW’s and Mormons.

Only way for people to understand Christanity and who holds the truth of salvation is to follow history and the outcomes and actions and reactions to world events and how each Christian group has reacted to prove that there is truly a God that exists.

By this it is important to look at each of these groups and how they reacted and what morality they held during the Dark Ages, times of War, modern day, and at the time of Christ.

I think the best question a non-christian could ask a christian is if your God died for your sins(wrong doings) then why do you continue to sin?