Protestants, why?

  • Thread starter Thread starter enickman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Taestron said:
Just a thought. From the Protestant end we look at the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church, and we see two Churches that have their roots in early Christianity. How can we tell which one begat who? Did the Catholic Church begat the Orthodox or visa versa? Or did the OHCA Church contain both proto-EO and proto-RC in the same institution, and that Church cannot really be called Catholic in the same sense of the Catholic Church today? I would think that many of us would hold to the latter opinion. And thus it wouldn’t be technically correct to say that all Christian thought flows from the Catholic Church. But certainly all Protestant thought can trace its lineage back to Catholicism.
Click to expand...
I often see Protestants bring up this question: *well, what about the EO vs the CC? If I were to convert, which one ought I convert to? How do I know?

…and that means I get to stay Protestant because of the fact that there are 2 Churches that are in schism, giving validity to my remaining Protestant.*

I also often see Atheists bring up this question: * Well, what about the tens of thousands of divisions of Christianity? Which one ought to I convert to? How do I know?

…and that means I get to stay an Atheist because of the fact that there are tens of thousands of different versions of Christianity, giving validity to my remaining an Atheist.*

While I find the questions posed by both the Atheist and the Protestant to be a valid one–you guys are right. If not for the unity between [EO/CC or Christianity in general] you would be a Believer, right?

So, sadly, I have no answer for you except to say that if that’s what’s keeping you from joining, don’t let it be a barrier. Choose one and jump on in! The water’s -]fine! /-] holy! Whichever Church you join!
 
PRmerger said:
I often see Protestants bring up this question: *well, what about the EO vs the CC? If I were to convert, which one ought I convert to? How do I know?

…and that means I get to stay Protestant because of the fact that there are 2 Churches that are in schism, giving validity to my remaining Protestant.*

I also often see Atheists bring up this question: * Well, what about the tens of thousands of divisions of Christianity? Which one ought to I convert to? How do I know?

…and that means I get to stay an Atheist because of the fact that there are tens of thousands of different versions of Christianity, giving validity to my remaining an Atheist.*

While I find the questions posed by both the Atheist and the Protestant to be a valid one–you guys are right. If not for the unity between [EO/CC or Christianity in general] you would be a Believer, right?

So, sadly, I have no answer for you except to say that if that’s what’s keeping you from joining, don’t let it be a barrier.** Choose one and jump on in! The water’s -]fine! /-] holy! Whichever Church you join**!
Click to expand...
So, you’re saying its ok to join a schismatic church?

Jon
 
JonNC said:
The problem, PR, is which one is that?
Click to expand...
From my POV, either one–trace them back to the Apostles who have kept the One Faith, given once for all to the saints.

There is no difference, essentially, in theology, so come to either table, friend!

But from your posts you seem to be proclaiming the primacy of Peter in the past, so it seems that the Catholic Church is your guy!
 
PRmerger said:
From my POV, either one–trace them back to the Apostles who have kept the One Faith, given once for all to the saints.

There is no difference, essentially, in theology, so come to either table, friend!

But from your posts you seem to be proclaiming the primacy of Peter in the past, so it seems that the Catholic Church is your guy!
Click to expand...
Actually, I’m of the inclination to say his primacy is, in the early Church, more along the lines that the EO views it. But, they (and I) could be wrong.

Jon
 
Porknpie said:
You are saying: “I can’t figure out which church, EO, RC or OO, is the church founded by Jesus so I’ll belief in something “completely different” I’ll believe in a man made tradition 1500 to 2000 years after Christ that believes that everyone can self interpret the bible and I’ll throw out the teachings of the church since apostolic times. Even those teachings where the EO, RC and OO churches are united. I’ll substitute the believe in 7 sacraments for a believe in two sacraments, maybe even less … and move away from the truth.”
Click to expand...
It’s not that I think that one of these traditions is truth and cannot figure out which. It is that I cannot figure out which one of these traditions are correct in claiming that they are the one true Church and so I doubt them all when they claim this. Does that make more sense?
CopticChristian said:
Taestron,

That is certainly a valid opinion and a reason to embrace a theology that commenced 500 years ago.👍
Click to expand...
I disagree with the word “commenced,” but point taken.
40.png
PRmerger:
While I find the questions posed by both the Atheist and the Protestant to be a valid one–you guys are right. If not for the unity between [EO/CC or Christianity in general] you would be a Believer, right?

So, sadly, I have no answer for you except to say that if that’s what’s keeping you from joining, don’t let it be a barrier. Choose one and jump on in! The water’s fine! holy! Whichever Church you join!
Click to expand...
It’s not exactly barring me from action. Merely, when other issues are resolved, it will give me pause to make sure I join the correct tradition to the best of my knowledge. So I wouldn’t say it “justifies” me staying a Protestant, merely gives me reason to doubt the authority of these churches.
 
Taestron said:
It’s not that I think that one of these traditions is truth and cannot figure out which. It is that I cannot figure out which one of these traditions are correct in claiming that they are the one true Church and so I doubt them all when they claim this. Does that make more sense?
Click to expand...
No, it doesn’t.

It’s like the Atheist saying, “I can’t figure out which Christian denomination is correct, so I’m going to doubt them all.”

Now, clearly, the Atheist is WRONG, yes?

Because there are tens of thousands of Christian denoninations he’s going to conclude that they are all wrong and that, just as he has stated in the past, there is no God!
 
PRmerger said:
No, it doesn’t.

It’s like the Atheist saying, “I can’t figure out which Christian denomination is correct, so I’m going to doubt them all.”

Now, clearly, the Atheist is WRONG, yes?

Because there are tens of thousands of Christian denoninations he’s going to conclude that they are all wrong and that, just as he has stated in the past, there is no God!
Click to expand...
And I could not fault the atheist for coming to that conclusion. The plurality of denominations is an absolutely wretched scar on Christianity and detracts from the viability of our message. So no, the atheist is not wrong for doubting based on that reason.
 
Taestron said:
And I could not fault the atheist for coming to that conclusion.
The plurality of denominations is an absolutely wretched scar on Christianity and detracts from the viability of our message. So no, the atheist is not wrong for doubting based on that reason.
Click to expand...
Well, this is how I would put it: it’s a valid barrier to see the tens of thousands of Christian denominations. It rightly gives the Atheist pause.

However, for the Atheist to conclude, “Therefore, I am right to stay here in my Atheism” is clearly false.

It’s a false paradigm to proclaim: Because there are tens of thousands of Christian denominations, the conclusion must be that there is no god.

Similarly, it’s an absolutely wretched scar on Christianity to have the schism between the EO and the CC, and it detracts from the viability of our message.

However, for the Protestant to conclude, “Therefore, I am right to stay here in my Protestantism” is clearly false.

It’s a false paradigm to proclaim: Because there are 2 Churches that claim to have apostolic succession, the conclusion must be that neither is true.

Pick one (Christian denomination), Atheist.
Pick one (EO or Catholcism), Taestron.

I don’t care, as long as you do pick one!
 
Whether or not you believe Mary was immaculately conceived, was a perpetual virgin, or has appeared in visions…

GOD created Mary.

GOD hand-picked Mary to carry JESUS.

GOD trusted Mary to raise JESUS.

To those of you who say Mary is no one special and deserves no reverence (NOT worship):

You know better than GOD how important Mary is??..
 
XianThinker said:
No, you should ask the Holy Spirit to reveal to you which books are inspired since he guides everyone into all truth. Then, you will know who is right.

If the HS reveals to you that the seven books in questions aren’t inspired, you can make statements like these ones I found online:

Those who hold to the Apocryphal books as being inspired are not led by the Holy Spirit, for He will guide into all truth (Jn. 16:13).

“For a Catholic Council like Trent or Vatican I to declare inspiration for these books shows that God is not controlling these councils.”

I believe in Lordship salvation (which states that one must accept Jesus as both Lord and Savior). Most Protestants I know believe in free grace salvation (which states that one only needs to accept Jesus as their Savior). I often hear stuff similar to these statements I found online:

“According to MacArthur, one’s salvation is DEPENDENT upon the life he or she lives. This is the damnable heresy of Lordship Salvation! Mr. MacArthur is of the Devil” and a “false prophet.”

Augustine said, “there are some who have departed this life, not so bad as to be deemed unworthy of mercy, nor so good as to be entitled to immediate happiness.”(8) This statement infers works for salvation which is refuted by Eph. 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; Rom. 4:4-6 and 2 Tim. 1:9. Consequently, one can therefore conclude that Augustine was NOT a Christian but instead a minister and servant of Satan, 2 Cor. 11:13-15!"

Being told I wasn’t a Christian because I didn’t have the Holy Spirit (since if I had, I would have agreed with the true believers who had the HS) is a big part of why I stopped going to church.
PRmerger;9710743:
I* think*
Click to expand...
you’re being sarcastic here, yes?
Click to expand...
I was trying to explain why I stopped going to church. Too many people told me I didn’t have the Holy Spirit (and therefore wasn’t a Christian) because I disagreed with their beliefs. They “knew” they were right because the Holy Spirit was guiding them into all truth. They told me if I really believed and had more faith, I’d get the Holy Spirit too and would agree with them.
 
Taestron said:
It’s not that I think that one of these traditions is truth and cannot figure out which. It is that I cannot figure out which one of these traditions are correct in claiming that they are the one true Church and so I doubt them all when they claim this. Does that make more sense?
.
Click to expand...
Taestron -

IMHO, and with love, I can understand it being hard to figure out. I can understand doubt. I would suggest examining the differences and reading:
  • the bible
  • the early church fathers
  • the catechism(s)
  • the current church writings
  • each churches beliefs on faith and morals
  • additional scholarly writings on the differences including postings on this website.
Either the Catholics or Orthodox are Christ’s church as they are the only ones claiming apostolic succession. To venture off from here because you are perplexed or uncertain leads down many different paths (38,000), paths blanketed in more division and confusion, with a wide variety of error in faith and morals.

What current church is the “Church” referenced in scripture and what current church is the “you” ? For the first 1,000 years of Christianity? For the first 1,500 years? For 2000 years? They are fair questions to ask and important questions to answer.

Christ said:
“upon this rock I shall build my church (singular)”
“whoever listens to you (singular) listens to me”
“what you (singular) bind on earth will be bound in heaven…”

St. Paul said:
“the church (singular) is the pillar and foundation of truth”
 
XianThinker said:
I was trying to explain why I stopped going to church. Too many people told me I didn’t have the Holy Spirit (and therefore wasn’t a Christian) because I disagreed with their beliefs. They “knew” they were right because the Holy Spirit was guiding them into all truth. They told me if I really believed and had more faith, I’d get the Holy Spirit too and would agree with them.
Click to expand...
Xian,

You stopped going to church because of uncertainty. I have no idea who has the Holy Spirit nor would I care to comment or judge that. The question would be, is it possible that the Holy Spirit was a cause of your uncertainty and only you may know. Less Faith? Do you mean less agreement. Paul had great Faith and people disagreed with him and wanted to kill him.
 
Taestron said:
It’s not that I think that one of these traditions is truth and cannot figure out which. It is that I cannot figure out which one of these traditions are correct in claiming that they are the one true Church and so I doubt them all when they claim this. Does that make more sense?

I disagree with the word “commenced,” but point taken.

It’s not exactly barring me from action. Merely, when other issues are resolved, it will give me pause to make sure I join the correct tradition to the best of my knowledge. So I wouldn’t say it “justifies” me staying a Protestant, merely gives me reason to doubt the authority of these churches.
Click to expand...
Taestron,

If you do not like the word commenced, what word would you choose?
 
CopticChristian said:
Xian,

You stopped going to church because of uncertainty. I have no idea who has the Holy Spirit nor would I care to comment or judge that. The question would be, is it possible that the Holy Spirit was a cause of your uncertainty and only you may know. Less Faith? Do you mean less agreement. Paul had great Faith and people disagreed with him and wanted to kill him.
Click to expand...
Catholics believe the Holy Spirit guides the Pope and Church into the truth. Therefore, if you disagree with the Church, you are wrong.

Many Protestants I know believe the Holy Spirit guides individual believers into all truth. If you have enough faith and pray, the HS will reveal the truth and you will have the correct doctrines on essential issues like salvation. Therefore, if you disagree with them on salvation, they will tell you that you must be wrong and don’t have the Holy Spirit and therefore aren’t a Christian.

I believe in Lordship salvation (you have to accept Jesus as Lord and Savior) but most non-denominational churches (I don’t like denominations) around here teach free grace/easy believism which means you just have to accept Jesus as your personal Savior and don’t have to follow anything Jesus taught.

Here’s an example. A Christian told me that Jesus forgave all his sins (past, present, future) when he became a Christian. Therefore, he can get drunk, cheat on his spouse and never repent and he’s still going to Heaven. I disagreed. He told me if I had more faith and prayed, the HS would reveal the truth he told me about salvation. My disagreement indicated that I didn’t have the HS because I wasn’t guided into the truth. I’ve heard stuff like this many times.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top