Protestantism teaches new doctrines ... so it is not from God.

[ufamtobie]

You are creating a strawman. Something that does not exist actually. You take a term, Protestant, and attack it for not being unifed; when the term itself has nothing to do with such. This concept is bizarre to me. There is no Protestant Church.
Divisions began with Catholicism; not the other way around. The Catholic Church started it all. Its like a mother blaming her kids for bickering and not getting along when she and Dad split up 500 years before…

Brian H.

You sure don’t know your History.

Divison began with Martin Luther, etc… Who do you think wrote the bible that you read today even if it is the King James version It came from the early Church Fathers whom themselves were Catholics. However Martin Luther, took things out from the King James version, therefore the King James version is incomplete is incomplete.

How can the First Church “Catholic” that ever was be the one to start divisions when the word Catholic means “Universal”

united methodist, baptist, southern baptis, lutherans, evangelicals, calvinists, calvary, etc… the list goes on and on, now all these churches are Protestant churches. The word Protestant mean all those who go against the Catholic Church,
for they are protesting agaisnt the One True Church.

Brian, tell me this, why is there so many protestant churches that came from Matin luther, Martin Luther started chaos, confusion in christiandom, reason why there is so much protestant churches.

As for the Catholic Church, the true church that Jesus Christ founded has not devided.

this concept is bizzare to you because you are blind to the Truth and Holy Spirit has not guided you to understand it. pray to the Holy Spirit that you will.

God Bless you on your journey HOME to the Catholic Faith, I mean that is why you are here at this Catholic Site.

Ufamtobie

 

[backfrmthebrink]

I see you did research on cults .In your opinion is the Catholic Church a cult and why?

see now CC you did it again. Actually I did do my research on this particular cult I was working with and it was sometime ago. However to answer your leading question, Yes it is. I am sure that is going to raise a ton of responses but I will say for now I will not reply to any of them. The CC is complicated in that it is so accepted in our communitiesone of the largest business around. largest land owner and at one time the largest distillery.
The first rule in establishing a cult is to alter the Word of God the next to either discredit it or to make their writingsa equal to it as such allowing to add or change the message. Oncew that happens there is trremendous control and almost a complete inability to argue with reason. The area where it does not fit in type as you would usually find is that it does not prohibit its members of protein, essential for cognitive functioning. It will however establish a head and one that can claim exclusicve authority and therby power.
I know I am in trouble. but don’t worry you are in good company with Jehovah Witnesswes, Mormanism and Christian Science to name a few community accepted cults. Ok there. I can hear the guns clicking.

 

[celticcrusader]

see now CC you did it again. Actually I did do my research on this particular cult I was working with and it was sometime ago. However to answer your leading question, Yes it is. I am sure that is going to raise a ton of responses but I will say for now I will not reply to any of them. The CC is complicated in that it is so accepted in our communitiesone of the largest business around. largest land owner and at one time the largest distillery.
The first rule in establishing a cult is to alter the Word of God the next to either discredit it or to make their writingsa equal to it as such allowing to add or change the message. Oncew that happens there is trremendous control and almost a complete inability to argue with reason. The area where it does not fit in type as you would usually find is that it does not prohibit its members of protein, essential for cognitive functioning. It will however establish a head and one that can claim exclusicve authority and therby power.
I know I am in trouble. but don’t worry you are in good company with Jehovah Witnesswes, Mormanism and Christian Science to name a few community accepted cults. Ok there. I can hear the guns clicking.

Like I said in my last post I was off topic so I started a new thread so you could state your case there.

 

[SIA]

Fr. Corapi often said that what God teaches is immutable or unchanging. This teaching has been preserved in the Church for over 2,000 years. Anything concerning moral and faith is immutable.

In Protestantism which started in 1530 by Martin Luther, he teaches two doctrines faith alone and Scripture Alone. None of these were taught in the Jesus Christ, his Apostles, the Apostolic Fathers, and the ECF. Faith Alone and Scripture are new doctrines that divides the revelation of God.

I often heard from James White, a Baptist apologist accused the Catholic Church as Sola Ecclesia. That is a false accusation. The Church operates in three principles. It teaches divine revelation through Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Magisterial Teachings (The interpreter). None of these three can be separated or be taken apart.

Fr. Corapi said it best. Where ever there is Sacred Scripture, there is also Sacred Tradition, and Magisterial teaching. Where ever there is Sacred Tradition, there also Sacred Scripture and Magisterial Teaching. Where ever there is Magisterial Teaching, there is also Sacred Tradition and Sacred Scripture. It operates like, wherever there is the the Son, there the Father and Holy Spirit will be.

The Protestantism doctrine of Sola Scripura and Sola Fideli divides. It is a new doctrine and therefore it is not from God. Rather it doctrine are man-made as a result of selfish men on both sides.

Fr. Corapi also said, and I quote, “It is better to be a good Protestant than a bad Catholic”.

 

[purduekenn]

I think the problem is falling to understand bible authority as most denominations (including the Roman Catholic Church). These denominations don’t follow plain bible teaching and the clear example of the New Testament Church as described in the bible. You can pick any subject you want to demonstrate this. For example baptism. It is a burial in water for the forgiveness of sins not a sprinkling for babies. Baptism is a burial read Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 it is in water Acts 8:36-38 and it is only for believers in the Lord Jesus Christ Matthew 28:18-20.

 

[purduekenn]

Some of the posts on this thread claim that division started with the protestant reformation and that is not true. Consider the Gnostic sects that believed Christ did not come in the flesh. This occured in the New Testament Church and he Apostle John wrote about that in 1John 4 read the following (below) . This is only one example and notice that John is warning us to test the spirits. The only way we can test them is from the bible the word of God. If it is not in the bible it is a false doctine.
**1Jn 4:1 ** Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, **for many false prophets have gone out into the world. **
1Jn 4:2 By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God,
**1Jn 4:3 ** and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. This is the spirit of the antichrist, which you heard was coming and now is in the world already.

 

[celticcrusader]

so are you saying babies shouldn’t be baptized? look at 1Cor.1:16, Acts 16:14-15 & 18:8 when household is talked about I assume it ment every one in the house young ,old , free, servent ,slave.

 

[PaulDupre]

For example baptism. It is a burial in water for the forgiveness of sins not a sprinkling for babies. Baptism is a burial read Romans 6:4 and Colossians 2:12 it is in water Acts 8:36-38 and it is only for believers in the Lord Jesus Christ Matthew 28:18-20.

Where does the bible state that infants should not be baptized? That is just a man-made tradition.

St. Paul taught that baptism has replaced circumcision (Col. 2:11–12). In that passage, he refers to baptism as “the circumcision of Christ” and “the circumcision made without hands.” Of course, usually only infants were circumcised under the Old Law; circumcision of adults was rare, since there were few converts to Judaism. If Paul meant to exclude infants, he would not have chosen circumcision as a parallel for baptism.
-From the Catholic Answers Library “Infant Baptism”

Was circumcision only for believers in the Law of Moses? No, it was normally for infants.

 

[backfrmthebrink]

Most reactions will be blunt and loaded with truth. But I trust that is what you want… the truth.

Probably the best reference (fair and balanced ) on your theory is
amazon.com/Not-Faith-Alone-Biblical-Justification/dp/1579180086

I encourage you to investigate.

Or

At the very least, use the seach feature and you will find lots of threads on the subject… many with much better arguments than you have given.

.

see you do not get it. That is just another catholic deception. The best resource is the Bible in which it is clear. The problem is that catholics cannot justify anything scriputrally and they have to resort to "authority in interpretation, or additional writings. Based on scripture alone you stand or fall and the cc falls

 

[purduekenn]

You are making an assumption that babies were baptized and there is not one example of a baby every being baptized in the New Testament. I can assume that all of these households were adults. So my thought is to go to the bible to answer this question.**Consider Mark 16:15-16 **Christ said proclaim the gospel and **whoever believes **and is baptized will be saved.
Question how can a baby believe the Gospel?
Mar 16:15 And he said to them, "Go into all the world and **proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. **
Mar 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Also Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.
Again how can a baby believe the Gospel?

 

[purduekenn]

I agree that what God teaches is immutable or unchanging. However we need to consult the bible for authority not man. Consider what Isaiah said:
**Isaiah 2:22 Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he? **
However, the Catholic Church has added the will of man not God to the worship. Read the New Testament for yourself and see if the same teaching by the apostles is the same as the Catholic Church. **For example Peter was married **see
**1Corinthians 9:5 ** **Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? ** Note Cephas is Peter. Priests used to get married untill 1123 and Celebacy was inforced. There are many examples of the Catholic Church changing doctrine and beliefs .
Also not that the Apostle Paul talks about the brothers of the Lord and the Catholic Church will tell you that Christ had no brothers. I think we should do what the bible says as Christ said his words would not pass away and Where can we find his words? Only in the bible.
**Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. **

 

[purduekenn]

If you read that book of Acts we only have examples of believers being baptized. That is why Christ said in Mark:
Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned
**How can a baby believe? **
Also we have to have authority for what we do in the church. Infant baptism came from man not from God as it was never authorized in the bible. Notice what Christ says in Matthew 21
Matthew 21:23 And when he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, “By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”
Matthew 21:24 **Jesus answered them, “I also will ask you one question, and if you tell me the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. Mat 21:25 ** The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?”
So we all need to ask where did the authority come from to add infant baptism? or any other thing that is not in the bible but comes from the mind of man? Consider Proverbs 14:12
There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.

 

[ckempston]

If you read that book of Acts we only have examples of believers being baptized. That is why Christ said in Mark:
Mark 16:16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned
**How can a baby believe? **
Also we have to have authority for what we do in the church. Infant baptism came from man not from God as it was never authorized in the bible. Notice what Christ says in Matthew 21
Matthew 21:23 And when he entered the temple, the chief priests and the elders of the people came up to him as he was teaching, and said, “By what authority are you doing these things, and who gave you this authority?”
Matthew 21:24 **Jesus answered them, “I also will ask you one question, and if you tell me the answer, then I also will tell you by what authority I do these things. Mat 21:25 ** The baptism of John, from where did it come? From heaven or from man?”
So we all need to ask where did the authority come from to add infant baptism? or any other thing that is not in the bible but comes from the mind of man? Consider Proverbs 14:12
There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.

Do deceased babies go to heaven? If your answer is yes, you just added to the Bible.

 

[Ziv18]

I agree that what God teaches is immutable or unchanging. However we need to consult the bible for authority not man. Consider what Isaiah said:
**Isaiah 2:22 Stop regarding man in whose nostrils is breath, for of what account is he? **
However, the Catholic Church has added the will of man not God to the worship. Read the New Testament for yourself and see if the same teaching by the apostles is the same as the Catholic Church. **For example Peter was married **see
**1Corinthians 9:5 ** **Do we not have the right to take along a believing wife, as do the other apostles and the brothers of the Lord and Cephas? ** Note Cephas is Peter. Priests used to get married untill 1123 and Celebacy was inforced. There are many examples of the Catholic Church changing doctrine and beliefs .
Also not that the Apostle Paul talks about the brothers of the Lord and the Catholic Church will tell you that Christ had no brothers. I think we should do what the bible says as Christ said his words would not pass away and Where can we find his words? Only in the bible.
**Matthew 24:35 Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. **

1.Where did the bible come from? Did it fall from the sky as the book we know today?
2.Maybe I’m wrong but it sounds like you are equaiting his words in Matthew 24:35 “Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away”, with the bible, there was no NT as we know it today when Christ said those words. Just trying to understand.

 

[Mimi]

(Cribbing from By What Authority: An Evangelical Discovers Catholic Tradition by Mark P. Shea):

Important question for all non-Catholic readers (and actually Catholic readers as well):

Do you believe in the
–sanctity of human life (are you against abortion);
–do you believe polygamy is wrong and marriage should be between one man & one woman;
–do you believe in the Trinity (one God in Three Persons)?

These things are not very explicitly in the Bible and should be treated like extra-biblical (small t) tradition. So IF you are strictly going by the Bible alone, you cannot support these tenets.

However, all Christians believe in the Traditions above because they have been handed down as Sacred Tradition and are “non-negotiables” for believers.

Furthermore, these are the very issues (especially the 1st 2) which are almost constantly under attack in “postmodern” times.
Without the legacy of the Catholic Church to back these up, attack on these principles by Modernists doesn’t hold up.

For more detail on how Mr. Shea thought through this, please read the above book. This is Chapter Six: The Lens in My Eye.

BTW, Mr. Shea was Protestant, but in closely examining these and other issues, he was led to become Catholic.

God bless,
Mimi

 

[ckempston]

(Cribbing from By What Authority: An Evangelical Discovers Catholic Tradition by Mark P. Shea):

Important question for all non-Catholic readers (and actually Catholic readers as well):

Do you believe in the
–sanctity of human life (are you against abortion);
–do you believe polygamy is wrong and marriage should be between one man & one woman;
–do you believe in the Trinity (one God in Three Persons)?

These things are not very explicitly in the Bible and should be treated like extra-biblical (small t) tradition. So IF you are strictly going by the Bible alone, you cannot support these tenets.

However, all Christians believe in the Traditions above because they have been handed down as Sacred Tradition and are “non-negotiables” for believers.

Furthermore, these are the very issues (especially the 1st 2) which are almost constantly under attack in “postmodern” times.
Without the legacy of the Catholic Church to back these up, attack on these principles by Modernists doesn’t hold up.

For more detail on how Mr. Shea thought through this, please read the above book. This is Chapter Six: The Lens in My Eye.

BTW, Mr. Shea was Protestant, but in closely examining these and other issues, he was led to become Catholic.

God bless,
Mimi

I’m curious how often former Protestants or Catholics who have separated themselves from the church have later returned for similar reasons.

 

[Mimi]

I’m curious how often former Protestants or Catholics who have separated themselves from the church have later returned for similar reasons.

That’s why I am a fan of The Journey Home on EWTN TV!

Speaking for my husband, it was the history and the Eucharist. Shortly before he was rec’d into the Church, he asked me “Is the chain of Popes really an unbroken line?” I just went to the encylcopedia, and there was the list!

God bless,
Mimi