E
estesbob
Guest
More troubling is there are significant doctrinal differences between protestant denominations-hard to eplain given most of them accept Scripture as the final authority on what the Truth is.
- Status
J
Janet1983
Guest
The differences between Protestant denominations are Non-Essential…
D
DD2007
Guest
Well actually Calvin is the one who drew more from the ECFs than anyone else. Augustine was especially quoted often in the Institutes of the Christian Religion.
Calvin’s system is simply that the bible never contradicts itself, so if you think a passage means something you must first take into account the rest of the bible to make sure the meaning you are considering isn’t contradicted anywhere.
He drew upon many ECF’s for traditional understandings of scripture. The Reformation was supposed to be just that, but it became a break because of people on both sides.
But, I have found John Calvin to be an outstanding and pious exegete of scripture. I agree with his views more than the others and feel they are the least error ridden of anyone.
E
estesbob
Guest
Really?
Baptists beleive in salavtion by Faith alone and OSAS, SDAs beleive you have to fully immersed when baptized and have to worship on Satuday, Calvinists believe in pre-destination,Mormons believe you have to be baptized in their church and beleive joseph Smith was a prophet, Lutherans believe obedience to God & faith are necessary for salvation, Methodists believe that the truth is found in tradition and the Scriptures . One thing they do have in common is no resemblance whatsoever to what was beleived for the first 1500 years of Christianity
The Real Presence is an essential.
Infant salvific baptism is essential.
Confession and absolution is essential.
Jon
J
Janet1983
Guest
You call 100% of those Christians??
Primary Essentials
Stated specifically in scripture that these cannot be denied and still be a Christian. They deal with the nature of God, the atonement, and its method of salvation applied to the believer. Denial of any Primary essential constitutes lack of regeneration, lack of salvation.
Secondary Essentials
Not stated in scripture as essential, but are derivatively essential since they deal with accurately describing the true God and they are based, in part, on the Primary Essentials. Denial strongly suggests lack of regeneration.
If they do not agree with Primary and Secondary Essentials it is definitely hard to call them Christians…
Other issues and differences are Non-Essential.
J
Janet1983
Guest
Infant Baptism is essential? You would have to disagree with yourself if you then turn around and agree to have an adult get baptized…
J
Janet1983
Guest
Essentials that define whether or not someone is a Christian look a little bit different. They are essentials, not details.
Primary Essentials
Stated specifically in scripture that these cannot be denied and still be a Christian. They deal with the nature of God, the atonement, and its method of salvation applied to the believer. Denial of any Primary essential constitutes lack of regeneration, lack of salvation.
Secondary Essentials
Not stated in scripture as essential, but are derivatively essential since they deal with accurately describing the true God and they are based, in part, on the Primary Essentials. Denial strongly suggests lack of regeneration.
Primary Essentials (doctrines the scriptures explicitly declare are essential):
- Jesus is both God and man (John 1:1,14; 8:24; Col. 2:9; 1 John 4:1-4).
- Jesus rose from the dead physically (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 15:14).
- Salvation is by grace through faith (Rom. 5:1; Eph. 2:8-9; Gal. 3:1-2; 5:1-4).
- The gospel is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus according to the scriptures (1 Cor. 15:1-4; Gal. 1:8-9).
- There is only one God (Exodus 20:3; Isaiah 43:10; 44:6,8)
6) God exists as a Trinity of persons: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
7) Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary (nature of incarnation)
8) Jesus is the only way to God the Father (John 14:6).
Then there are also Non-Essentials… Not believing in those does not make anybody a non-Christian…
E
estesbob
Guest
So those who dont agre with your definition of the essentials dont qualify as “Christians”?
W
waynie11
Guest
Hi.
I like Catholics, I love the music, the buildings, the history/tradition, etc.
However, the reason I’m not Catholic is that a ‘a tree is judged by its fruit’.
In my research of every form of Christianity, I find that Quakerism is the closest there is to being non-hypocritical or contradictory. They were the first abolitionists, always against war/pacifist, always kind to the native Americans and did not betray them like others, never had an inquisition, etc.
To me, that means a lot. Catholic history is marred by some real atrocities, including WWII, treatment of Jews, the inquisition, etc. Protestantism in general has some real discriminatory practices as well, especially Martin Luther was a real anti-semite. But so far I’ve found nothing disagreeable even in the earliest history of Quakerism.
Wayne
I like Catholics, I love the music, the buildings, the history/tradition, etc.
However, the reason I’m not Catholic is that a ‘a tree is judged by its fruit’.
In my research of every form of Christianity, I find that Quakerism is the closest there is to being non-hypocritical or contradictory. They were the first abolitionists, always against war/pacifist, always kind to the native Americans and did not betray them like others, never had an inquisition, etc.
To me, that means a lot. Catholic history is marred by some real atrocities, including WWII, treatment of Jews, the inquisition, etc. Protestantism in general has some real discriminatory practices as well, especially Martin Luther was a real anti-semite. But so far I’ve found nothing disagreeable even in the earliest history of Quakerism.
Wayne
J
Janet1983
Guest
What would you call them? Take a look at the essentials…
In reference to post #545:
#1 is denied by JW’s, Christian Science and Christadelphians.
#2 is denied by JW’s and Christian Science.
#3 is denied by Mormons, JW’s, Christian Science and Christadelphians.
#4 is denied by Mormons and Christian Science.
#5 is denied by Mormons.
#6 is denied by Oneness Pentecostals, Mormons, JW’s and Christadelphians.
#7 is denied by Mormons (in practice, because they say that Elohim had intercourse with Mary and as he is a “god” she was still a virgin as she would have needed to have it with a man to lose her virginity.)
C
Carlan
Guest
Janet as a fallen away Catholic, I assume you were Baptized as an infant I
If you have forgotten about the doctrine of Baptism , allow me to refresh your Catholic memory.
Catholics believe the power is in the sacrament of Baptism, even though the**Power cannot be seen. **** That is why they baptise babies.
The way I understand Protestant belief on Baptism, is that for Protestants they have to have faith before they can believe in the power. So they only baptize adults.
Protestants have to believe in the sign first that is why they only baptize adults
For Catholics___ the faith is in believing the Power in the sign of Baptism.
Carlan
ba**
S
Sellers1
Guest
It’s a brash and rude thing to do to judge Christian denominations in such a way. I have never said that Catholics aren’t Christians even though I think that I would have good reason to.
J
Janet1983
Guest
Well in a list that includes Mormons it is a good question I presume… I was told that there are essential differences and Mormons were mentioned…
E
estesbob
Guest
I am a littrle confused-i thought you said Proestants agreed on the essentails-now you give us a detailed post proving they do not?
Do Baptists and Lutherans share the same doctrines on salvation? Sacraments? OSAS? How about Baptists and Methodists? How about Baptists and Church of Christ? How about Baptists and Quakers?
E
estesbob
Guest
So there were no Christians until the “reformation” ? What a totally (name removed by moderator)et god-let his son die on the cross and then waited 1,500 years to show people what was necessary for salvation
E
Earnest_Bunbury
Guest
This is not explicit in these texts. JW’s don’t agree with this and use scripture to refute what you assert. The reason you know Jesus is God and man is from Catholic council that defined this dogma at Nicea in 325 ad, Council of Constantinople 381 AD, and the Council of Chalcedon 451 AD. The Arians under the Bishop Arias looked at the same texts and concluded that Jesus was a created being. The first sola scriptura to be refuted. It took the Church’s authority to dispel this heresy and has been doing the same ever since. It is this authority that Jesus gave to the Church that one can believe in apart from personal opinion.
On the subject to works salvation, which is only an attack not based on truth to justify ones personal belief, one can see clearly that working for salvation apart from Christ is not the Catholic theology.
ancient-future.net/basics.html
G
guanophore
Guest
Such a statement reflects a deficient understanding of the nature of the Church. Of course people sin, but the church is not only the people who are members of her. It is the divine elements that make the Church pure, and holy. When men sin, they separate themselves from the Church.
G
guanophore
Guest
Well, His, you are trying to understand a phenomenon over 500 years old by using a modern american Dictionary. It is inappriate to insert modernism into history. If we are to understand history, we need to understand how the words were used at the time they were applied.
In fact, the Catholic Church was the only church. During the reformation, people invented their own doctrines, separating themselves from the Apostolic Church. Each denomination is defined by which parts of the Catholic faith it rejects.
G
guanophore
Guest
The Church does matter, Zundrah and you do believe that, or you would not be here. You know that you need to resolve yoru conflicts.My soul, divided; probably!
Myself, confused; no way! I have christ and that is all that matters, not the church.
I follow and believe in Methodist doctrine but I go to a Catholic chruch!? :whacky:
In fact, following Catholic doctrine is what brought you here, and what led you to enroll in RCIA. Frankly, I hope you dont’ “suddenly” change your mind. I hope you will take your sweet time, so that when you finally figure it out, you will not be casting back and forth in being double minded.I will not follow catholic doctrine but I will stay in the church because it is still early days Guanophore and I could suddenly change my mind.
Please remember that I have only been a christian for about two years now!
What do you think Jesus wanted us to do?
lol - we resolve it by splitting into denominations, obviously!
he, he…
No, this is not correct. First of all, it was not “we” who split. You are not responsible for the sins of your ancestors. Second, those who left the Catholic Church were pleased to cease being Catholic, because they believed the Catholic Church had become corrupt, and they no longer wanted to be part of it.…just thought that I would add to that; the catholic church split from itself, we did not split from it. Catholic became denominational, we did not.
Catholics are therefore just attacking them selves when they complain about protestantism!
I agree about the attacking, though, it serves no good purpose.
- Status