Protestantism just makes no sense to me.

  • Thread starter Thread starter kbwall
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
benjohnson said:
Indeed!

I do understand the Catholic teaching that Christ’s Church is perfect - I hope that my faith increases to such a point that I agree.
Click to expand...
Ben,

I do not understand that one. While the Body of Christ is the Church and Christ is Perfect I believe it is safe to say that the Church is on a journey towards perfection filled with the likes of you and I as saints and sinners.
Now I rejoice in what was suffered for you, and I fill up in my flesh what is still lacking in regard to Christ’s afflictions, for the sake of his body, which is the church.
Click to expand...
Paul pointed this out in Colossians…the OHCAC is not perfect yet…it is on a journey towards perfection…in eternity:thumbsup:

Until then we have to put up with each other:eek:
 
The Church is Holy, though having sinners in her midst, because she herself has no other life but the life of Grace. If they live her life, her members are sanctified; if they move away from her life, they fall into sins and disorders that prevent the radiation of her sanctity. This is why she suffers and does penance for those offenses’s. of which she has the power to free her children through the Blood of Christ and the Gift of the Holy Spirit!

Sinners are in the midst of the church. The weeds will be mixed with the good wheat until the end of time. United by Christ the Church is sanctified by Him, through Him and with Him she becomes sanctifying!

Perfect holiness is something yet to be aquired, each in his own way is called by the Lord to that perfection. Through the Lords love of the Church He established…CCC
 
kbwall said:
I’ve tried to wrap my head around it, but nothing about them makes sense. Forgive my bluntness, but to me the whole idea of protestantism just seems to stem completely from ignorance. Indeed, it is quite sad how many Protestants are so incrediblty ignorant of Catholicism, and see it as this weird “other” branch of Christianity. Some don’t even consider it Christianity, which is perhaps the most depressing part of it all.

I mean, most protestants go by Sola Scriptura. This means they trust the Bible, but they act as though the Bible just appeared out of thin air. It wasn’t, it was written and assembled by the early Church. Then, any Christian with a lick of common sense then must conclude that the Holy Spirit guided the early Church while they wrote and assembled the Bible. Even the most stubborn protestants must accept that the Catholic church was God’s true church. So, do protestants just think God abandonned the Catholic Church halfway through or something? I find this to be the biggest whole in Protestant logic. The Bible had to come from somewhere, and if it came from the Catholic church, then that must mean the Catholic church has authority from God.

There’s also the accusation of the supposed manmade traditions of the Church. If anything, Protestantism seems far more guilty of that than Catholicism. Protestantism picks and chooses what to do and what not to do. They decide that confession is wrong, because sin should be private, they decide the Eucharist is symbolic, the multitude of different doctrines based on different readings of scripture, etc. and unlike Catholics, they do not even claim the Holy Spirit is guiding them. For one thing, it’s not even possible for all these different interpretations to be true. If God is a real, true entity that we are to follow and obey (and not some ambiguous thing that people have mixed feelings about and can take or leave), then one would think that He would have only one ground set of rules. The Catholic Church is the only branch that claims to have that. From what I can tell, most branches of Protestantism seem to leave most major decisions up to individual interpretation. I’m sorry, but this just doesn’t seem the way an Almighty God would have us do things at all.

Christ talked about unification and the like. The Catholic church seems to be the only Christian Church that even has unity. If a Baptist or a Methodist or Lutheran stood up and made a bold and perhaps heretical statement, not many people care. He can be easily ignored for being a fanatic, even by other Baptists, Methodists, or Lutherans. However, if a Catholic preist or bishop says anything, people listen. Because he is part of an organization, and he has people to answer to. He represents the church anytime he speaks out in public. Because Catholic have unity. Protestants seem to be all over the place.

I just don’t see how so many people can be Protestant. Of course I love them and acknowledge them as Christians, and will continue to pray for them, But their logic just makes zero sense to me.
Click to expand...
kbwall,

The logic simply is that the bible contains all we need for church practice and doctrines and is a inerrant path to the Gospel taught by Christ and salvation. Protestants see that reflected in the early church and the ECFs.

They see no need for additions to that. The Reformers intended to return the church to the NT and the ECFs. It is not complicated. One may disagree but it is not without logic.

Rob
 
=submariner2;9411913]kbwall,
Click to expand...
The logic simply is that the bible contains all we need for church practice and doctrines and is a inerrant path to the Gospel taught by Christ and salvation. Protestants see that reflected in the early church and the ECFs.
Click to expand...
Rob,
Would you agree then, since the Bible places into the hands of the Church things like a teaching role, ther means of grace - the sacraments, that the Church is extremely important in the life of a Christian?
They see no need for additions to that. The Reformers intended to return the church to the NT and the ECFs. It is not complicated. One may disagree but it is not without logic.
Click to expand...
Can you give me an example of “additions”? Are the creeds, for example, additions?

Jon
 
Well, I think I’m a lot closer to your side than even mine – but I think one thing about Protestants is that especially in the more evangelical strands, it seems like anything that smacks of earthly authority or tradition – even their own traditions – is seen with extreme distrust. A ritual of any type is bad, a traditional song, the very idea of a cross (and God forbid a crucifix) as the centerpiece will be seen as a dead tradition in many churches.

(find the cross youtube.com/watch?v=raOaMCjSvUM&feature=related)

It’s kind of weird to me, though I come from a traditional protestant background. And it’s equally as hard for me to understand the emphasis placed on emotions – it’s like if you don’t have the emotions, it’s not real. If you didn’t feel an emotion and then walk forward to be baptised, you’re not really Christian to many of them. But I don’t know how many other relationships work that way – I don’t get warm fuzzies around my dad all the time. I don’t think that changes a real relationship. The question is spending time, doing stuff just to make my dad happy, stuff like that. Theor way seems like I’m supposed to have a feeling in his presence, yet never do a thing he asks, never spend time with him, never do something for him just 'cause it makes him happy. Do you love your mother if you tell her you love her every day, yet don’t want to take her out to lunch once a week 'cause it’s a ritual?
 
Why won’t any of you non-Catholics answer my questions? It seems to be because it has no answer.
 
I say this empathetically: when I realized they had no answer, I finally realized the Catholic Church is the one true church of God.
 
sdegutis said:
I say this empathetically: when I realized they had no answer, I finally realized the Catholic Church is the one true church of God.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if you can define and explain what infallibility is and where and how has the Church applied it you’d see more specific answers.
 
CopticChristian said:
KB,

When I commenced posting on this site I put up some posts similar to this. Go back and check my profile of threads I started. I believe one of them was something like “why I can’t be Protestant” followed by 2 very similar postings. You could learn by reading the responses to this.

I would suggest something to you that may cause you to learn. The first thing I would do, and I know you did not ask, is to be brief in your question on posting. It would make it easier to respond to. When you include paragraphs of what you don’t agree with it is difficult to read. You could have just put a few sentences up and then as people posted salt the thread with the remainder of what you wrote. That is just a suggestion.

Next I would ask you to think about what it would be like to post in a sea of Muslims. Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, etc I disagree with all of them however they all look to the same guy we do and perhaps not wrapping your head around it may be a good thing because you will stay put.

I could never be Reformed. I have learned that if I were to be Reformed that I would probably find myself dialoguing regularly with Radical. You may want to engage Radical every now and again. You could learn something.

I could never be Lutheran. I have learned that if I would become Lutheran I would probably dialogue with John NC. I suggest you read those posts and learn from them.

I could never be Evangelical. You will find Abide With Me posting on your site and you may learn something here as well.

More imporantantly I have learned that beliefs are seated deep within the mind. Beliefs can be changed. The only person that can change those beliefs for me, is me. The same is true for you. I do understand how beliefs are formed and if you are interested I recommend reading “Submodalilties…Going Meta” by L. Michael Hall. I am about 1/2 way done with this but it is the best explanation and understanding of how beliefs are formed and can change. The changes of course are directed at the reader and not to changing the minds of others.

There is a way to change beliefs if you want to and the first step is to question them. If you cannot wrap your head around Protestant thought then try to understand that when asking a Protestant to change a belief you are asking them to question, to doubt, and I don’t know about you but that for me is unsettling. Be prepared to be geared towards doubting of your beliefs and questioning your beliefs.

So how do you wrap your head around Protestant beliefs? Read what Radical writes, read what John NC writes, Abide With Me writes and others, and accept what you can and question what causes you to doubt and question your own beliefs.

Just a thought.🙂
Click to expand...
Gosh, Coptic. An incredibly thoughtful post. To the OP, read this post!

And thank you for the very kind words.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
I’m sorry. In which post did you ask the questions you wish a response to?
Jon
Click to expand...
The last 5 posts or so. But for your convenience let me summarize them:

If Scripture is the final authority, then to what authority do you appeal when interpreting Scripture is what’s in question?

By what means or measure do you believe Luther’s interpretation is the most correct rather than Calvin’s or whoever else’s, when all of them appeal to Scripture?

If Scripture is the final authority, and yet two different people come up with two conflicting, opposing interpretations of one verse in Scripture, and both are supposedly supported by other verses in Scripture, how do you know of the two are truly what God intended to speak to us through the authors?
 
=sdegutis;9412447]The last 5 posts or so. But for your convenience let me summarize them:
Click to expand...
If Scripture is the final authority, then to what authority do you appeal when interpreting Scripture is what’s in question?
Click to expand...
As Lutherans, to the Church. The basis of Lutheran doctrine is the Lutheran Confessions.
So, for example, if a parish had a pastor who was not fullfilling his ordination to teach in accordance with the confessions, that parish would turn to the synod to intervene.
By what means or measure do you believe Luther’s interpretation is the most correct rather than Calvin’s or whoever else’s, when all of them appeal to Scripture?
Click to expand...
Beyond the confessions, Lutherans appeal to the creeds, the early 7 councils, and ECF’s. Those writings are often cited as support for doctrine. And remember, it isn’t Luther the man. There are things Luther said that are his opinion, but not doctrine of the Lutheran Church. Luther was but a man. In the confessions, there are only three documents that Luther wrote - the Small and Large Catechism, and the Smalcald Articles.
The first section is limited to the three ancient creeds, and that isn’t by accident.
If Scripture is the final authority, and yet two different people come up with two conflicting, opposing interpretations of one verse in Scripture, and both are supposedly supported by other verses in Scripture, how do you know of the two are truly what God intended to speak to us through the authors?
Click to expand...
Scripture tells us to take it to the Church. For Lutherans, assuming you are referring to doctrine, that means the confessions and synod, starting with the parish pastor. Lutheran doctrine is fairly well set. You can’t reject infant baptism, the real presence, justification by Grace through faith, even the Holy Theotokos, etc., and claim to be a Lutheran.
In areas that are not doctrine, things may fall in the category of adiaphora, or things indifferent. So, for example, I very much believe in the Blessed Virgin’s perpetual virginity. I know Lutherans that do not. Since we consider this a pious belief, and not an article of faith, neither position is outside the bounds of what a Lutheran may believe.

Does that help?

Jon
 
Rob,
Would you agree then, since the Bible places into the hands of the Church things like a teaching role, ther means of grace - the sacraments, that the Church is extremely important in the life of a Christian?
Click to expand...
Ron,

Of course but the Reformers did not see the same sacraments as did the Catholic church of that time.
Can you give me an example of “additions”? Are the creeds, for example, additions?
Click to expand...
No. The creeds were not additions since they simply presented what was in scripture. The Reformers accepted the Nicene and Chalcedon creeds. Even the Evangelicals do that todday. My own church uses those creeds.

But a good example is the description of the eucharist. They did not see it as a sacrifice of Christ at all but rather as a remembrance and proclamation as taught by Paul. They believed the ECFs did not teach the eucharist as a sacrifice of Christ until near the 3rd century. They said there could be no offering of Christ except the original one on Calvery per the teachings of Hebrews.

Rob
 
Well, I think I’m a lot closer to your side than even mine – but I think one thing about Protestants is that especially in the more evangelical strands, it seems like anything that smacks of earthly authority or tradition – even their own traditions – is seen with extreme distrust. A ritual of any type is bad, a traditional song, the very idea of a cross (and God forbid a crucifix) as the centerpiece will be seen as a dead tradition in many churches.
Click to expand...
septimine,

Big external difference between the Evangelical churhes and the mainstream protestant churches.
It’s kind of weird to me, though I come from a traditional protestant background. And it’s equally as hard for me to understand the emphasis placed on emotions – it’s like if you don’t have the emotions, it’s not real.
Click to expand...
I will take up for those evangelicals at this point. To love God is an emotion and something we should never try to fool ourself about. It is Gods Law and should not be dismissed. Faith and love are emotions and the center of the christian religion and without them we are not christians. Otherwise we might be outside christians only. This is what the evangelicals are talking about. My church, the Methodist church, puts this first before all doctrines.
If you didn’t feel an emotion and then walk forward to be baptised, you’re not really Christian to many of them. But I don’t know how many other relationships work that way – I don’t get warm fuzzies around my dad all the time. I don’t think that changes a real relationship.
Click to expand...
You know if you love your dad or not.
The question is spending time, doing stuff just to make my dad happy, stuff like that. Theor way seems like I’m supposed to have a feeling in his presence, yet never do a thing he asks, never spend time with him, never do something for him just 'cause it makes him happy. Do you love your mother if you tell her you love her every day, yet don’t want to take her out to lunch once a week 'cause it’s a ritual?
Click to expand...
You know if you love your mother or not. But something is missing here. We are to love God with all our heart and mind and soul. We should face God directly and deal with that issue. We should not hide ourself before God whether we are protestant or Catholic.

Rob
 
CopticChristian said:
KB,

When I commenced posting on this site I put up some posts similar to this. Go back and check my profile of threads I started. I believe one of them was something like “why I can’t be Protestant” followed by 2 very similar postings. You could learn by reading the responses to this.

I would suggest something to you that may cause you to learn. The first thing I would do, and I know you did not ask, is to be brief in your question on posting. It would make it easier to respond to. When you include paragraphs of what you don’t agree with it is difficult to read. You could have just put a few sentences up and then as people posted salt the thread with the remainder of what you wrote. That is just a suggestion.

Next I would ask you to think about what it would be like to post in a sea of Muslims. Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, etc I disagree with all of them however they all look to the same guy we do and perhaps not wrapping your head around it may be a good thing because you will stay put.

I could never be Reformed. I have learned that if I were to be Reformed that I would probably find myself dialoguing regularly with Radical. You may want to engage Radical every now and again. You could learn something.

I could never be Lutheran. I have learned that if I would become Lutheran I would probably dialogue with John NC. I suggest you read those posts and learn from them.

I could never be Evangelical. You will find Abide With Me posting on your site and you may learn something here as well.

More imporantantly I have learned that beliefs are seated deep within the mind. Beliefs can be changed. The only person that can change those beliefs for me, is me. The same is true for you. I do understand how beliefs are formed and if you are interested I recommend reading “Submodalilties…Going Meta” by L. Michael Hall. I am about 1/2 way done with this but it is the best explanation and understanding of how beliefs are formed and can change. The changes of course are directed at the reader and not to changing the minds of others.

There is a way to change beliefs if you want to and the first step is to question them. If you cannot wrap your head around Protestant thought then try to understand that when asking a Protestant to change a belief you are asking them to question, to doubt, and I don’t know about you but that for me is unsettling. Be prepared to be geared towards doubting of your beliefs and questioning your beliefs.

So how do you wrap your head around Protestant beliefs? Read what Radical writes, read what John NC writes, Abide With Me writes and others, and accept what you can and question what causes you to doubt and question your own beliefs.

Just a thought.🙂
Click to expand...
That is indeed a very thoughtful and kind post, CopticChristian.
 
benjohnson said:
Thank you for the encouragment! But I’ll admit that I’m only mimicking the hospitably, charity, and kindness that I see here demostrated here by others.
Click to expand...
You’re welcome, Ben. I do try, like you, to keep in mind the example of the charity of other posters, even though I get irritated at times and let that come across in my words.

It’s personally encouraging and heart-warming to see someone act charitably in the midst of the squabbles that tempt us to forget we are interacting with people Christ gave Himself for.
 
JonNC said:
As Lutherans, to the Church. The basis of Lutheran doctrine is the Lutheran Confessions.
So, for example, if a parish had a pastor who was not fullfilling his ordination to teach in accordance with the confessions, that parish would turn to the synod to intervene.

Beyond the confessions, Lutherans appeal to the creeds, the early 7 councils, and ECF’s. Those writings are often cited as support for doctrine. And remember, it isn’t Luther the man. There are things Luther said that are his opinion, but not doctrine of the Lutheran Church. Luther was but a man. In the confessions, there are only three documents that Luther wrote - the Small and Large Catechism, and the Smalcald Articles.
The first section is limited to the three ancient creeds, and that isn’t by accident.

Scripture tells us to take it to the Church. For Lutherans, assuming you are referring to doctrine, that means the confessions and synod, starting with the parish pastor. Lutheran doctrine is fairly well set. You can’t reject infant baptism, the real presence, justification by Grace through faith, even the Holy Theotokos, etc., and claim to be a Lutheran.
In areas that are not doctrine, things may fall in the category of adiaphora, or things indifferent. So, for example, I very much believe in the Blessed Virgin’s perpetual virginity. I know Lutherans that do not. Since we consider this a pious belief, and not an article of faith, neither position is outside the bounds of what a Lutheran may believe.

Does that help?

Jon
Click to expand...
No, but it provides room for my same question to be rephrased more specifically:

Why do you give authority to any of the things you mentioned that are not Scripture? Why do they get any special authority of being a worthy interpretation of Scripture?

This excludes such interpretations as Oneness Pentecostals, who reject the Trinity, for example, yet they interpret this doctrine solely based on Scripture, and you’re interpreting it based on Scripture plus several councils and creeds, holding them to the same level of authority apparently.
 
septimine said:
Well, I think I’m a lot closer to your side than even mine – but I think one thing about Protestants is that especially in the more evangelical strands, it seems like anything that smacks of earthly authority or tradition – even their own traditions – is seen with extreme distrust. A ritual of any type is bad, a traditional song, the very idea of a cross (and God forbid a crucifix) as the centerpiece will be seen as a dead tradition in many churches.

(find the cross youtube.com/watch?v=raOaMCjSvUM&feature=related)

It’s kind of weird to me, though I come from a traditional protestant background. And it’s equally as hard for me to understand the emphasis placed on emotions – it’s like if you don’t have the emotions, it’s not real. If you didn’t feel an emotion and then walk forward to be baptised, you’re not really Christian to many of them. But I don’t know how many other relationships work that way – I don’t get warm fuzzies around my dad all the time. I don’t think that changes a real relationship. The question is spending time, doing stuff just to make my dad happy, stuff like that. Theor way seems like I’m supposed to have a feeling in his presence, yet never do a thing he asks, never spend time with him, never do something for him just 'cause it makes him happy. Do you love your mother if you tell her you love her every day, yet don’t want to take her out to lunch once a week 'cause it’s a ritual?
Click to expand...
I liked that song. It reminded me of some of the Psalms.

There’s a large cross centered on the front wall behind and above the singer, though it isn’t visible through most of the video just because of the camera angle. Septimine, I’ve been in a bunch of Evangelical churches and I haven’t seen any without a prominent cross.

Sure, Septimine, love is not just an emotion—learning that is an important part of growing up and developing a love for others as “others”, instead of just loving someone for how they make us feel. So it’s great that you’re learning that yourself. Perhaps the people in the church you’re talking about already know this, too, even if you don’t know that they know.

And emotions are good things, and not something to devalue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top