Protestants, why are you not Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter HeadingBackHome
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
drblank1 said:
Yes, which is the Word of God is our chief Authority.
Click to expand...
Actually, the chief authority of what belongs in the Word of God is the Church.

You defer to her, at least as it applies to the NT, each and every time you quote from Hebrews, for example.

For there is no other way for you to know that Hebrews is the Word of God…except that you defer to the chief authority of the Church.
 
Kliska said:
And there you go; those examples you give are no more an indictment on the true idea and teaching of Sola Scriptura because protestants disagree with one another.
Click to expand...
When Protestants disagree with each other on what the Scriptures mean (to the tune of tens of thousands of differing denominations), they are being true to the SS paradigm. SS tells them that they can read the Bible and decide for themselves what it means.

In fact, SS tells them that they do not even need the Church to tell them what belongs in the NT, that they can use their own “text crit” and decide for themselves that, say, the Epistles of Paul are satanic.

When Catholics dissent, they are being bad Catholics.
 
PRmerger said:
Then, I suppose, your Nazarene pastor never asks for the congregation to pray for one another?

For would that not put individuals in your church as mediators?
Click to expand...
No, you are confusing mediation with intercession. Christ is our only mediator and is the go-between us and God. We can ask others to pray for us. That is intercession.

But to my original point. My wife will pray to a saint or Mary for a specific need (intercession). My question to her is why? I go to the Lord for the same need. It’s kind of like going to your manager to effect some needed change in the workplace, or presenting you case directly to the CEO. I chose the latter.

Plus, there is no Biblical evidence that Mary nor the saint can hear prayers.
 
Kliska said:
Respectfully, I’ve just joined CAF. My knowledge comes from study of the CCC, history, personal experience, and discussing things with RC’s… yes, practicing Catholics, but in the main probably not ones “in good standing” with the RCC. What I have gained here at CAF is the perspective of those RC’s actually in good standing with the RCC… as well as more info on Lutherans, Orthodox, Anglicans, etc… I’ve always had access to the RCC’s teachings via the CCC and other documents as well as the 'net, TV, books, and podcasts.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Although I will say that there have been numerous things you’ve gotten wrong about what we believe, but I will leave that alone for now.
This is the point I’m making; it is the same as you telling those “wayward” RC’s that they are not inline with the RCC. I most certainly can tell anti-Paulinists they are in error, just as you can wayward RC’s. Then, it is up for them to believe it or not, with the help of the Spirit.
Click to expand...
So you get to be the magisterium to these anti-Pauline folks, but do not care for that being returned to you.

 
Kliska said:
Have you ever been lead by the Spirit? If so, it’s a lot like that… as that is what it is. There are also descriptions from different perspectives in scripture.
Click to expand...
If one is lead by the Spirit to say baptism is an ordinance, how does he know if he’s correct?

I still don’t understand how this paradigm works.
Yep, “even” then.
Click to expand...
So, again, you are reserving for yourself what you deny to others. You get to research and study and pray, and come to conclusions that have departed from the One Faith…and that’s fine with you. Your “research” tells you that you are correct.

But when someone else does that (here, read the anti-Pauline folks), you say that “they are in error.”

That is an inconsistency that is astonishing to me.
Well, you’ve been here longer than me, but in my short time I’ve witnessed quite a bit of difference in teachings. Researching it has been quite enlightening. Also, let’s not rush past the idea of primacy, that is a huge difference in its implications.
Click to expand...
As far as I can tell, the difference in teachings is merely semantics. 🤷
Again, have you ever felt lead by God? Have you ever felt convicted, have you ever become convinced of something that did not come from you or your own understanding? Yeah, like that. We do “our part” by prayer, study (including other POV’s), and a serious delving into scripture, OT and NT and seeking God’s teaching and will instead of our own or what we wish were true.
Click to expand...
Is this what you believe the anti-Pauline folks are using to support their decision to reject his epistles?

(I’m pretty sure the answer is: yes!)
If we show someone the Light, and they reject it, that’s on their head. If you show the gospel and someone spits on it, whose fault is it? Theirs.
Click to expand...
True, dat.
 
PRmerger said:
When Protestants disagree with each other on what the Scriptures mean (to the tune of tens of thousands of differing denominations), they are being true to the SS paradigm. SS tells them that they can read the Bible and decide for themselves what it means.
Click to expand...
Again, I keep seeing this “tens of thousands,” 30,000, 40,000 denominations, you do understand if counted that way in a consistent manner there are hundreds of Catholic denominations?

Anywho, again, no. There are no protestants that I know of that say that any interpretation that THEY want goes. Now, I have seen “Christians” of all sorts willfully manipulating the text to get it to say what they want it to say, OR to manipulate other humans.
In fact, SS tells them that they do not even need the Church to tell them what belongs in the NT, that they can use their own “text crit” and decide for themselves that, say, the Epistles of Paul are satanic.
Click to expand...
Yes, and they are wrong. You say they are wrong, I say they are wrong. I say they are wrong from my studies and the guidance of the Spirit. You say they are wrong because of the magisterium. And, the magisterium says they are wrong because of their studies and the guidance of the Spirit.
When Catholics dissent, they are being bad Catholics.
Click to expand...
Never-the-less. This still shows forth the same issue when dealing with humans and any authority. Tradition/scripture/logic/magisteriums. This is why I would bet we both believe a person, an individual, is responsible for the views they espouse and teach others.
 
PRmerger said:
If one is lead by the Spirit to say baptism is an ordinance, how does he know if he’s correct?

I still don’t understand how this paradigm works.
Click to expand...
Have you been lead by the Spirit, if yes, how did you know it was the Spirit leading you?
So, again, you are reserving for yourself what you deny to others. You get to research and study and pray, and come to conclusions that have departed from the One Faith…and that’s fine with you. Your “research” tells you that you are correct.
Click to expand...
But when someone else does that (here, read the anti-Pauline folks), you say that “they are in error.”
Click to expand...
That is an inconsistency that is astonishing to me.
Click to expand...
Your words here don’t really compute, I don’t mean that snarkily, but just in a logic sense. There is Truth. Absolute truth means that someone that agrees with it is right, and someone that contradicts it is wrong.

If I tell you plants are green because of chlorophyll, am I right or wrong and how do you know? If I tell you Jesus is God, am I right or wrong and how do you know? If I say 2 added to 2 is 4, am I right or wrong and how do you know? This all goes into the lovely world of epistemology and metaphysics.
As far as I can tell, the difference in teachings is merely semantics. 🤷
Click to expand...
So you are publicly saying that the only difference between Catholic beliefs and Orthodox beliefs are semantic in nature? But, the differences between Catholic beliefs and Protestant beliefs are what in nature? This is an interesting question in regards to the “Should I become Catholic or Orthodox” thread.
 
PRmerger said:
Actually, the chief authority of what belongs in the Word of God is the Church.

You defer to her, at least as it applies to the NT, each and every time you quote from Hebrews, for example.

For there is no other way for you to know that Hebrews is the Word of God…except that you defer to the chief authority of the Church.
Click to expand...
I actually agree with you. But you believe the Catholic (with a capital “C” has that authority). While the rest of the catholic church (with a little “c”) does not agree with that stance. The only difference between the Catholic church and the rest of the church on canon is the Apocrypha which was added at the council of Trent in response to the Protestant movement. Yes it was an addendum to the Bible but disagreed within the early church of its inspiration.
 
drblank1 said:
I actually agree with you. But you believe the Catholic (with a capital “C” has that authority). While the rest of the catholic church (with a little “c”) does not agree with that stance. The only difference between the Catholic church and the rest of the church on canon is the Apocrypha which was added at the council of Trent in response to the Protestant movement. Yes it was an addendum to the Bible but disagreed within the early church of its inspiration.
Click to expand...
Apocrypha is a misnomer.

There were three sets of books. The Canon, the Deuterocanon, and the Apocrypha. The Apocrypha was tossed out. The Canon and the Deuterocanon are what was accepted by the Council. The Deuterocanon is often referred to as “the apocrypha”, when, in fact, it is not 😉
 
Kliska said:
Have you been lead by the Spirit, if yes, how did you know it was the Spirit leading you?
Click to expand...
I have felt led the Holy Spirit, and have also felt led by what I thought was the Holy Spirit.

That’s the dilemma for the human person, is it not? We can’t tell sometimes if it’s the HS, or just our own personal agenda.

How do we discern which it is?

I know my answer as a Catholic.

What is your answer?
 
Kliska said:
. So you are publicly saying that the only difference between Catholic beliefs and Orthodox beliefs are semantic in nature?
Click to expand...
Yes, I am.

Every objection that has been brought up (usually by Protestants) has to do with a different way of presenting the same teaching. To wit: Original Sin. And the Immaculate Conception. Transubstantiation.

When you look at the teachings of the Orthodox, even if they don’t call it Original Sin or the IC, what they profess about OS and the IC is quite Catholic.
But, the differences between Catholic beliefs and Protestant beliefs are what in nature? This is an interesting question in regards to the “Should I become Catholic or Orthodox” thread.
Click to expand...
Well, as there are tens of thousands of Protestant denominations, I would have to answer: some differences are minor. Some are quite substantive.
 
PRmerger said:
Then the Bible is not your authority, but men.
Click to expand...
Nope. Men are led by the Spirit on what is the Word of God. And I don’t believe the Catholic church is the cheif authority just because it claims it is. My beliefs come from scripture and not man-made traditions. If it is not based in the 66 books of the Bible, it is not a part of my core faith.
 
drblank1 said:
Nope. Men are led by the Spirit on what is the Word of God.

But you just said that you defer to the authority of men to tell you that Hebrews is the Word of God.

Or is there something in the Bible that tells you that Hebrews is theopneustos but that the Epistle of Barnabas is not?

Otherwise, you are going by some other authority–the authority of men, led by the Holy Spirit–but NOT by the Bible.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top