Protestants; why won't you be CATHOLIC!?

[guanophore]

This is one of our major differences of opinion. I believe that the Bible comes from God through the Holy Spirit as inspired writings. Both to the old testament prophets and the new testament disciples and followers were inspired by the Holy Spirit to write the books of the bible.

This is Catholic faith. If you accept it,then we have no difference of opinion.

Also, we are promised the Holy Spirit will guide all believers to read and understand the word.

Actually, if you look at the context of this passage, you will see that it was made to the Apostles. Furthermore, the NT had not yet been produced, so the promise applies to Truth, written or unwritten. No promise is made to those who separate themselves from the Apostolic faith.

The truth is in the Word which is of God and is the only thing we can consider infallible on earth.

This concept is one of the most destructive elements of SS. The Scriptures cannot be “infallible”. Those who read them, believing that they are, instead unwittingly made themselves into “infallible” sources.

Christ said, "Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away" (Matthew 24:35). Through the centuries, many have tried to discred*it or destroy the Bible, "But the word of the Lord endureth for ever" (I Pet. 1:25).

His word is not confined to the Scriptures.

 

[Carlan]

I am not sure if posting the following material here is acceptable, if it isn’t excuse me.

I am posting this in the hopes it helps with understanding.

THE NEW TESTAMENT (N T)

The first word of the NT was written about AD50(1Thess),the last word between AD 90-100(Rev), for a total of 27 books, all of which are accepted as canonical and inspired by Catholics and Protestants alike.

The question is, who determined the NT canon of inspired books?
The Bible didn’t fall from heaven preprinted, so where did we get it?
How do we know we can trust every book?

Various bishops developed lists of inspired books:
Mileto, Bishop Sardis, Ad 175
St,Irenaeus, Bishop of Lyons,AD185
Eusevius, Bishop of Caesarea, AD325
Pope Damasus in 382,prompted by the Council of Rome, wrote a decree listing the present OT and NT canon of 73 books.
The Council of Hippo(in North Africa) in 393 approved the present OT AND NT canon of 73books
The council of Carthage in 397 approved the same OT and NT canon. This is the council which many Protestants take as the authority for the NT canon books.
Pope St Innocent1 (401-417)in 405, approved the 73-book canon and
Closed the canon of the Bible.

The canon of the Bible was officially determined in the fourth. century by Catholic councils and Catholic popes. Until the canon was decided, there was much debate. The formal Church decision settled the debate for the next 1100years.
Not until the Reformation was there any more debate about the contents of the Bible

Historically, the Catholic Church used her authority to determine which books belonged in the Bible, and to assure us that everything in the Bible is inspired. Apart from the Church, we simply have no way of knowing either truth.
Martin Luther himself admits that Christians owe their Bible to the efforts of the Catholic Church.
[We are obliged to yield many things to the Papists [Catholics]—that they possess the Word of God which we received from them, otherwise we should have known nothing at all about it.]

Luther’s statement supports our argument that without the decisions of the Church, we would not know which books of the Bible are inspired.

St Augustine puts it bluntly
I would put no faith in the Gospels unless the authority of the Catholic Church directed me to do so. St, Augustine recognizes that the only way to determine which books are inspired is to accept the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

CRUCIAL POINTS
Historically

 The Bible is a Catholic book. The New Testament  was written, copied and collected by Catholic Christians. The official canon of the books of the Bible was authoritatively

determined by the Catholic Church in the fourth century. Thus it is from the Catholic Church that the Protestants have a Bible at all.

Logically

 The Church with the authority to determine the infallible Word of God, must have the infallible authority and guidance of the Holy Spirit, As we have seen, apart from the declarations of the Catholic Church, we have absolutely no guarantee that what is in the Bible is the genuine Word of God.

To trust the Bible is to trust the authority of the Church which guarantees the Bible. It is contradictory for Protestants to accept the Bible and yet reject the authority of the Catholic Church that gave it to them.

Logically, Protestants should not quote the Bible as authoritative, for they have no way of determining which books are inspired- unless, of course, they accept the teaching authority of the Catholic Church.

source: San Juan Catholic Seminars

 

[LutheranDK]

D L , from what I understand It was the Protestants originally who tagged Roman to Catholic, more accurate would be, Apostolic Church,Why are you so cranky? all i would like to see you do really, is acknowledge the ones in this forum who point out a truth , when you and others tell us what we believe as Catholics is wrong , we have to speak the truth back to you. C

Why am I “cranky”? Well, maybe because most (but not all!) of the people I “debate” with here, including you, seems to think that I have the IQ of an office chair, since they keep showering me with non-sequiturs, baits, downright false information, etc, hoping that I’m too dumb to see through it.

And your twist away from what I originally replied to is just one example thereof. I pointed out a mistake, and you then try to change the subject, hoping that I’d forget all about the actual matter.

Being called stupid to your face, albeit subtly, tends to make people cranky, wouldn’t you say?

 

[LutheranDK]

Just think how different things would be had Pope Leo X made an effort to keep him in?
Alas, as we know, blame on all sides, and His Church and ministry suffers as a result.

I like the way you said this: flock, singular. So do we.

Jon

Indeed…Leo X was a catastophe for Western Christianity!
Imagine what would have happened if a man like the current Bishop of Rome had been in office during the Reformation…

 

[GodIsGracious]

Why am I “cranky”? Well, maybe because most (but not all!) of the people I “debate” with here, including you, seems to think that I have the IQ of an office chair, since they keep showering me with non-sequiturs, baits, downright false information, etc, hoping that I’m too dumb to see through it.

And your twist away from what I originally replied to is just one example thereof. I pointed out a mistake, and you then try to change the subject, hoping that I’d forget all about the actual matter.

Being called stupid to your face, albeit subtly, tends to make people cranky, wouldn’t you say?

I’ve been following this thread and a lot of your responses are mostly accusing others of how they are wrong or don’t say things correctly, or rather, your correctness. It’s an ad hominem attack. You’re not “debating” any better than anyone else here.

 

[kristine105]

There are Protestants or any other religio that does not want to be a Catholic.

• They said that through their religion, they knew and already received Jesus in their hearts…

But in Catholic, you can also receive Him and you can know Him further by this.

• The statues are kind of idolatry.

No, it’s not. I can relate the story of St. Bernadette in here. Mama Mary told her to build the statue of Immaculate Concepcion on the place where She appeared. And so as the story of the Ark of the Covenant.

• They only believe in only-bible theory by Martin Luther.

But before he inroduced the Protestantism, he was once a great theologian and a priest but he was not contented in the teachings of the Catholic that is why he tried to understand and make his own theory.

 

[Carlan]

Why am I “cranky”? Well, maybe because most (but not all!) of the people I “debate” with here, including you, seems to think that I have the IQ of an office chair, since they keep showering me with non-sequiturs, baits, downright false information, etc, hoping that I’m too dumb to see through it.

And your twist away from what I originally replied to is just one example thereof. I pointed out a mistake, and you then try to change the subject, hoping that I’d forget all about the actual matter.

Being called stupid to your face, albeit subtly, tends to make people cranky, wouldn’t you say?

Sorry Lutheran Dk, I was off the mark about the St Jerome comment back there, I’ve read more since then. Thought you might be interested to read the following Quote.

 He then embarked on the enormous task of producing a standard Latin text of the Bible, revised according to the meaning of the original texts, but not, apparently, an entirely new translation. He began on the Gospels and the Psalter; eventually he produced all, or nearly all, the Bible in what was later called the Vulgate version. He also wrote a number of influential commentaries on particular books such as the Prophets and the Epistles; that on Matthew's Gospel became a standard work.

    Yes , however , I didn't do that. I am sorry that I gave you that impression:imsorry:Carlan

 

[JonNC]

Indeed…Leo X was a catastophe for Western Christianity!
Imagine what would have happened if a man like the current Bishop of Rome had been in office during the Reformation…

Or any of his recent predecessors back to John XXIII. Perhaps there would have been no need for a reformation.
Jon

 

[estesbob]

Why am I “cranky”? Well, maybe because most (but not all!) of the people I “debate” with here, including you, seems to think that I have the IQ of an office chair, since they keep showering me with non-sequiturs, baits, downright false information, etc, hoping that I’m too dumb to see through it.

And your twist away from what I originally replied to is just one example thereof. I pointed out a mistake, and you then try to change the subject, hoping that I’d forget all about the actual matter.

Being called stupid to your face, albeit subtly, tends to make people cranky, wouldn’t you say?

While we may disagree on theology I notice we more than make up for it on the political theads!

 

[estesbob]

Indeed…Leo X was a catastophe for Western Christianity!
Imagine what would have happened if a man like the current Bishop of Rome had been in office during the Reformation…

Imagine what would have happened if Martin Luther had been a man like the currnet bishop of rome. imagine what would have happened if Henry the VIII hadnt lusted after Ann Boylen,

 

[JonNC]

Imagine what would have happened if Martin Luther had been a man like the currnet bishop of rome. imagine what would have happened if Henry the VIII hadnt lusted after Ann Boylen,

Imagine if Leo X hadn’t lusted after duckets, and had been more like Melanchton.
Ah well, we can imagine, and we can all work and pray a little harder for unity.

Jon

 

[estesbob]

Imagine if Leo X hadn’t lusted after duckets, and had been more like Melanchton.
Ah well, we can imagine, and we can all work and pray a little harder for unity.

Jon

or as the old adage goes;

twer ifs and buts
candy and nuts
we’d all have a Merry christmas!

I think there was a great chance for the Lutherans and Catholics to unify until the Lutherans started ordaining women.

 

[JonNC]

=estesbob;5499402]or as the old adage goes;

twer ifs and buts
candy and nuts
we’d all have a Merry christmas!

And a happy new year.

I think there was a great chance for the Lutherans and Catholics to unify until the Lutherans started ordaining women.

LCMS doesn’t. Let’s keep praying.

Jon

 

[Carlan]

And a happy new year.

LCMS doesn’t. Let’s keep praying.

Jon

And ‘God Bless ye Merry Gentle men’!:dancing:Carlan

 

[guanophore]

Indeed…Leo X was a catastophe for Western Christianity!
Imagine what would have happened if a man like the current Bishop of Rome had been in office during the Reformation…

I do imagine that! A German Shepherd! I think his holiness would have prevented the Reformation.

 

[Janet1983]

I do imagine that! A German Shepherd! I think his holiness would have prevented the Reformation.

That’s a good one…

 

[Sellers1]

Why am I “cranky”? Well, maybe because most (but not all!) of the people I “debate” with here, including you, seems to think that I have the IQ of an office chair, since they keep showering me with non-sequiturs, baits, downright false information, etc, hoping that I’m too dumb to see through it.

And your twist away from what I originally replied to is just one example thereof. I pointed out a mistake, and you then try to change the subject, hoping that I’d forget all about the actual matter.

Being called stupid to your face, albeit subtly, tends to make people cranky, wouldn’t you say?

They treat us as if we are stupid here and don’t understand basic priciples of Christianity but look at what many of them believe to be the standard.

• Protestants are all pretty much the same and who cares beyond that.
• Protestants cannot possibly fathom or believe in the Real Presence.
• Protestants don’t understand what the Mass really is.
• All Protestants believe in Bible only authority.
• Catholics are all in unity of beliefs.
• Protestants don’t have Sacrements and even if they do, they are invalid.
• Protestants can’t possibly understand Catholicism and if they did they would be Catholic.

Talk about stupid. There you go.

 

[estesbob]

They treat us as if we are stupid here and don’t understand basic priciples of Christianity but look at what many of them believe to be the standard.

• Protestants are all pretty much the same and who cares beyond that.

 

[jake23]

The answer to this thread is simply this: prideful opinions and fear of truth!

 

[JonNC]

The answer to this thread is simply this: prideful opinions and fear of truth!

Jake23,
So, after all the posts, and what everyone has said, you’re conclusion is you can read our hearts and know what our motivations are? And it is true of all of us? Just wondering.

Jon