Teaching that Protestants are damned

[RC_Matt]

So basically who knows? I wonder if we’re not full churches, are we half churches of Christ? Three quarters. Perhaps the Lutherans are seven eighths, us Presbyterians are three quarters, and Evangelicals are the unfortunate door number three at only a forty percent church. I guess we’re the body of Christ limping along on one leg (our other leg got blown off by a Catholic IED during the reformation).

I did find something unrelated to this topic in the Catechism that is quite interesting:

The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” (Para. 841).

I never heard that before? What about John 3:18

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

So how can Muslims be included in the economy of salvation?

I believe the word “Church” in that context is referring to faith communities that have valid apostolic succession and Sacraments, i.e., Catholic, Orthodox and some others. It’s really more semantics and it doesn’t impact the doctrine on salvation.

Virtually all of Christ’s teachings come from “love you neighbor as yourself.” If a non-Christian does his or her best to live their life in that manner, they are implicitly following Christ’s teachings and are therefore implicit members of the Body of Christ. Anything else would defy common sense. Some of the finest people I have ever known are not Christians; but the manner in which they live their lives, serve their neighbors and communities, are perfect examples of how Jesus taught us to live. Of course, at least for me and a whole lot of other people, it’s easier to live that way by being a Catholic and going to Mass, but no “good” people would be excluded from salvation simply because they’re not Catholic or don’t explicity profess to be Christian.

 

[DixiesFinest]

Who could blame the man for his mental state – look at the persecution he suffered by your church?

When I look at all the events that circled around Luther I see divine providence everywhere. Lightning strikes a man who is studying law, one of (if not the most) gifted students among his peers. He promises God to give his life to Him after surviving the lighting strike. Then he is befriended by another priest in his Augustinian order who sends him to that famous place in Wittenberg.

Then the next actor in this divine play is our good friend Johann Tetzel. “As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, a soul from purgatory springs.” And of course there is Pope Leo X. Descended from the Medici line of Italian aristocrats, who practically invented modern banking. Made bishop first at age 13 (but nahhh didn’t have anything to do with his family). A peculiar note was Pope Leo named Tetzel commissioner of indulgences for Germany. His commission was to raise money to pay back a loan taken by the church for the rebuilding of St. Peter’s Basilica. Almost like Cheney and Halliburton. Leo’s banker buddies made a tone at 8% interest, and Tetzel was their man to choke the money out of German peasants.

Oh yeah, boy Luther must of have been nuts to get angry at this debacle. Luther was naive enough to think he was serving the church by complaining about Tetzel. He never imagined Pope Leo was complicit in this scheme, by hey infallible not impeccable right?

I guess perhaps if there was prozac in those days maybe Luther would have went along with the scheme, maybe even pocketed some extra change for himself. But I guess he was crazy enough to actually believe in Jesus and what He stands for. In other words God found just the right guy for the job – like He always does. Hey He chose Paul right? A serial killer of Christians.

Then the coincidences of this divine play become even more fantastic. The printing press – good old Gutenberg (gotta give it to German innovation). There you have it – all the pieces of the puzzle are formed to make the perfect storm for Rome.

Luther was no less than probably the most committed Christian in his day. Moreover, he was perhaps one of a small handful of the greatest theologians who ever lived – that’s right ever lived.

But yeah you’ll going on saying to yourself ahh Luther was nuts, etc. etc. etc. Say what you want about the man … all I have to say is whatever!

Thanks for the history lesson, I had never heard any of that, my eyes are opened! Ha.

Leo X and Tetzel were anti-christs who did their best to destroy the true teaching of the Church which, as promised by Christ, survived their assault.

As for Luther’s mental problems…

“Martin Luther, though it wasn’t called this at the time, had obsessive compulsive disorder. Martin Luther was said to be scrupulous, literally asking for forgiveness more than twenty times a day for acts committed that day (Jamision, 1995)”

He could not bring himself to accept forgiveness.

newadvent.org/cathen/09438b.htm

Yes, it is a Catholic source, and it is long, but it brings in work and quotes from protestant scholars as well.

My Church was founded by the God-Man. It is from Him that I get my understanding of the word “church.” Who was yours founded by?

 

[DixiesFinest]

I’m not huge on the Pope idea, since for me I realize absolute power corrupts absolutely, like when we look back to Pope Leo X during the time of Martin Luther. Certainly the church is better than those days – but IMO that event is one that proves fallibility. I mean it’s hard to have a counter-reformation and change in reaction to protest and maintain infallibility? It just doesn’t make sense & I’m one of those guys who likes things to be logical.

You have an improper standing of Papal Infallibility.

May I recommend…

fisheaters.com/papolatry.html
or
catholic.com/library/Papal_Infallibility.asp

 

[KingAlfred]

Taking in CCC 847, it says that those who through no fault of their own don’t know Christ’s Church, can still be saved. That means that a tribe living on an Island that never recieced the gospoel, can still be saved if they act good.

Protestants, who are protesting Christ’s Church, and know about it, and have the choice to join it, are damned, since it is of their own fault, right?

EDIT: Benedict’s recent comments on Protestants being part of the Body and salvation possible, were not stated infallibly, were they? He was probably just saying it to build a bridge for them to easier come back under him, right?

Protestants aren’t damned; they’re just misguided, and damaging world Christianity with their inaccurate teachings. This idea of encouraging people to grab a Bible, interpret it any way they please, and charge off on a course all their own, based on those interpretations, is very irresponsible and hurts Christian Civilization over the long-run. Sure…they’ll deny doing this, but that’s the logical conclusion many of their adherents could reach, upon reflection. The Bible in the wrong hands and heads, is a dangerous weapon.

 

[KenEOTE]

Taking in CCC 847, it says that those who through no fault of their own don’t know Christ’s Church, can still be saved. That means that a tribe living on an Island that never recieced the gospoel, can still be saved if they act good.

Protestants, who are protesting Christ’s Church, and know about it, and have the choice to join it, are damned, since it is of their own fault, right?

EDIT: Benedict’s recent comments on Protestants being part of the Body and salvation possible, were not stated infallibly, were they? He was probably just saying it to build a bridge for them to easier come back under him, right?

Are you saying Benedict lied and made something up? Why would he do that… Why would he want to build a bridge to the damned? I would say they were stated infallibly. He was speaking on doctrine and that is where the Pope is infallible. Unless you think he was lying.

 

[BSHoop96]

But really, fellow Catholics, what the op is trying to say albeit in a round about way is that if Protestantism as a whole brings people to heaven apart from what we claim is the “One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church,” then we can no longer claim that we are the Church Christ founded.

Sure we can…it’s not the “protestantism” that brings them.

 

[Sabda]

I did find something unrelated to this topic in the Catechism that is quite interesting:

The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham, and together with us they adore the one, merciful God, mankind’s judge on the last day.” (Para. 841).

I never heard that before? What about John 3:18

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son.

So how can Muslims be included in the economy of salvation?

Look at the passage carefully. It says that they are included because they do believe in one almighty God, just as we do.

Muslims are included because they believe in the God of Abraham, like the Jews. If you deny the Muslims simply because they do not believe that Jesus is God than you must also deny the Jews, atheists, Buddhist and a whole host of other people. I’m not willing to do that and my Church does not teach that. My Church does teach that ALL faiths have some truth to them. The difference is in the number of degrees. From my limited experience Muslims do hold Jesus up as a great prophet, not as great as Mohammad but still one of the greatest prophets. They also hold the Blessed Virgin Mary in high esteem as well.

 

[sola_scriptura]

Are you saying Benedict lied and made something up? Why would he do that… Why would he want to build a bridge to the damned? I would say they were stated infallibly. He was speaking on doctrine and that is where the Pope is infallible. Unless you think he was lying.

Isn’t there actually a formal process for invoking infallibility? I don’t think infallibility has been used since like 1950 (the assumption doctrine). I think there is actually disagreement within the church itself over this doctrine (which itself was only instituted in 1870).

I think Benedict inferred in a statement that doctrine itself can only be created by counsel & infallibility (interpreting doctrine) must be somehow formerly invoked (but I could be wrong – there’s so much misinformation out there who knows). In other words if a Pope is invoking infallibility he must at least say so. Not every word he utters is considered infallible even if it has a nexus with doctrine (again, this is my impression from what I’ve read).

 

[sola_scriptura]

Look at the passage carefully. It says that they are included because they do believe in one almighty God, just as we do.

Muslims are included because they believe in the God of Abraham, like the Jews. If you deny the Muslims simply because they do not believe that Jesus is God than you must also deny the Jews, atheists, Buddhist and a whole host of other people. I’m not willing to do that and my Church does not teach that. My Church does teach that ALL faiths have some truth to them. The difference is in the number of degrees. From my limited experience Muslims do hold Jesus up as a great prophet, not as great as Mohammad but still one of the greatest prophets. They also hold the Blessed Virgin Mary in high esteem as well.

I don’t necessarily disagree that there could be other paths to salvation (i.e. Rev. 20 seems to infer such a possibility).

However, the position statement of the RCC in its Catechism (that I quoted earlier) seems to abrogate John 3:18 quite clearly.

It’s not saying, as you say, all people are somehow included in the economy of salvation – it refers only to Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism).

The support for thinking the Jewish people will be saved comes directly from Scripture (Romans 11) and the RCC Catechism quotes directly from the relevant part of that chapter in its treatment of Jews in the economy of salvation. However, there is absolutely no support for the idea of Muslim inclusion in the salvation matrix. In fact, again, John 3:18 directly abrogates such an idea.

It seems more like politically correct capitulation to me.

The proper treatment of Muslims, in my view, should be the same as atheists. Sure, there might be a very narrow path to the kingdom inferred by Rev. 20 – but that’s it (and frankly it’s quite hypothetical); but the Catechism erroneously gives them special treatment.

 

[bobzills]

The proper treatment of Muslims, in my view, should be the same as atheists. .

I think that they pray to God several times a day, and I don;t think that they are atheist at all.

 

[chris_molter]

Taking in CCC 847, it says that those who through no fault of their own don’t know Christ’s Church, can still be saved. That means that a tribe living on an Island that never recieced the gospoel, can still be saved if they act good.

Sort of.

Protestants, who are protesting Christ’s Church, and know about it, and have the choice to join it, are damned, since it is of their own fault, right?

Well, it depends on their personal level of culpability. Let’s say you were born into a highly religious and educated Presbyterian family. You grew up learning about the world and Scripture through the lens of Reformed Protestantism. Obviously, to you, the Catholic Church seems misguided and wrong on many levels. In order to “undo” all the preconceived notions that you’d have over a lifetime of being Protestant (through no personal fault), it would take a miracle, a Saint, or some serious hardware reprogramming! Can you be blamed for not being Catholic? Probably not. It’s difficult, sometimes impossible, to get someone who’s been raised and taught to think one way to go back and rethink through all those preconceived ideas and start from scratch. This is why we cannot condemn Protestants as a group, since they may or may not be personally culpable (or invincibly ignorant) for their heresies. (no offense to my separated brethren)

EDIT: Benedict’s recent comments on Protestants being part of the Body and salvation possible, were not stated infallibly, were they? He was probably just saying it to build a bridge for them to easier come back under him, right?

You DO believe what the Church teaches regarding the Sacraments, right? If so, then all these Protestants who are validly Baptized ARE part of the Body (although imperfectly) by virtue of that Baptism. Salvation is *possible *for ALL MEN.

 

[panoikei]

Well, we simply follow God and Christ, looking to Scripture for holy revelation. IMO it’s just more reliable. Paul does quite a nice job of laying out exactly how a church should be organized … why reinvent the wheel?

Give me a good orthodox leaning Presbyterian church & I’m good to go. However, I think the RCC is a fine church as are Lutherans, Baptists, Methodists, and a few others. However, there are certainly some churches that are just out of line with Apostolic teachings.

I’m not huge on the Pope idea, since for me I realize absolute power corrupts absolutely, like when we look back to Pope Leo X during the time of Martin Luther. Certainly the church is better than those days – but IMO that event is one that proves fallibility. I mean it’s hard to have a counter-reformation and change in reaction to protest and maintain infallibility? It just doesn’t make sense & I’m one of those guys who likes things to be logical.

I see that you’re sincere, but I also see that you just know understand the teachings of the Catholic Church. Nothingn new. It took me leaving the Church for 17 years to discover, kicking ans screaming on the way back in… But not everybody runs into what I’ve run into. I do realize that there have been many heretics in the Catholic Church as well as all of the Protestant Churches… thus the word “protest”. Understanding requires approaching the objective truth with an open mind willing to try to understand…something I lost somewhere along my path and thing the Holy Spirit began to work on my entire family at the same time. But this other heresy is just plain false teachings of the Church. This too was one of the many misunderstandings that lead me initially out the door. But my experience was much more complex than that. Long story…but probably boring to a non-Catholic.

 

[RC_Matt]

I don’t necessarily disagree that there could be other paths to salvation (i.e. Rev. 20 seems to infer such a possibility).

However, the position statement of the RCC in its Catechism (that I quoted earlier) seems to abrogate John 3:18 quite clearly.

It’s not saying, as you say, all people are somehow included in the economy of salvation – it refers only to Abrahamic religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism).

.

See paragraphs 843 and 847, those relate to non-Abrahamic faiths and state that they too may be saved. Nothing else would make sense even from pure logic.

 

[sola_scriptura]

I see that you’re sincere, but I also see that you just know understand the teachings of the Catholic Church. Nothingn new. It took me leaving the Church for 17 years to discover, kicking ans screaming on the way back in… But not everybody runs into what I’ve run into. I do realize that there have been many heretics in the Catholic Church as well as all of the Protestant Churches… thus the word “protest”. Understanding requires approaching the objective truth with an open mind willing to try to understand…something I lost somewhere along my path and thing the Holy Spirit began to work on my entire family at the same time. But this other heresy is just plain false teachings of the Church. This too was one of the many misunderstandings that lead me initially out the door. But my experience was much more complex than that. Long story…but probably boring to a non-Catholic.

You’re explaining what understanding means, which means you think I don’t know what it means. Sort of patronizing but I’ll forgive that. Well, let me give you a brief bio.

I have a law degree, have been studying theology for years, I’ve read everyone from Aquinas, to Augustine, to Calvin, Wesley, Luther, Barth, C.S. Lewis, you name it. I understand Catholic theology better than most Catholics – yet I still disagree. I’ve studied church history, Roman history, Greek philosophy, logic, hold on let me look at my book shelf, okay – physics, history, finance, political science, there’s more but I’ll stop.

Oh – must mention the most important book I study – the Bible. Not only do I study it I study the Greek and Hebrew words and biblical history and golly I can go on and on here to but I’ll stop.

All of this & I remain 100% reformed.

Not bragging, just thought you should know that all non-Catholics aren’t idiots.

 

[Reformed]

Taking in CCC 847, it says that those who through no fault of their own don’t know Christ’s Church, can still be saved. That means that a tribe living on an Island that never recieced the gospoel, can still be saved if they act good.

Protestants, who are protesting Christ’s Church, and know about it, and have the choice to join it, are damned, since it is of their own fault, right?

EDIT: Benedict’s recent comments on Protestants being part of the Body and salvation possible, were not stated infallibly, were they? He was probably just saying it to build a bridge for them to easier come back under him, right?

How about that Sacred Tradition called the Council of Trent?

 

[panoikei]

You’re explaining what understanding means, which means you think I don’t know what it means. Sort of patronizing but I’ll forgive that. Well, let me give you a brief bio.

I have a law degree, have been studying theology for years, I’ve read everyone from Aquinas, to Augustine, to Calvin, Wesley, Luther, Barth, C.S. Lewis, you name it. I understand Catholic theology better than most Catholics – yet I still disagree. I’ve studied church history, Roman history, Greek philosophy, logic, hold on let me look at my book shelf, okay – physics, history, finance, political science, there’s more but I’ll stop.

Oh – must mention the most important book I study – the Bible. Not only do I study it I study the Greek and Hebrew words and biblical history and golly I can go on and on here to but I’ll stop.

All of this & I remain 100% reformed.

Not bragging, just thought you should know that all non-Catholics aren’t idiots.

You law degree isn’t helping you then. And to understand theology better than most Catholics is like saying I know how to do Calculus better than most teenagers. I’m not trying to patranize you…I’ve just done some really indepth research.

I’ve studied scripture quite a bit in my former solo scriptura faith…I was on the way to becoming a preacher and prior to that a priest. Having all the knowledge in the world won’t prove anything. Theology doesn’t exist to prove anything but rather exists to show that something is plausible…rational. or that it is rational to believe.

Jesus gave us the Church not the bible. Your premises are fundamentally flawed. Some of the dummest people I know are attorneys and engineers. I work with a bunch of the most intellegent people around, but I would never seek wholesome advice from them…they’re all divorced and living like man HO’s… That’s not the criteria you use to convince someone you know what you’re talking about. What I mean is that I could have picked your statement apart rather easy dealing with the Papacy and fallible comments. It’s basic…101… but no one expects you to understand or accept. It took me a while before I began to understand. Initially I wanted to journey to become Orthodox, but the more I studied, the more I realized the early Church’s beliefs. Orthodox are beginning to admit the “primacy of the bishop or Rome”, but I wouldn’t go really that far to say that they accept it or would drop their arguments.

My point is that Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against it…did Jesus lie? Is this some kind of big joke? I won’t argue this online under this thread. I was just falling back into my desire to help even when help isn’t desired. Sorry about that.

But it’s interesting that you compare yourself with some of the most amazing personalities of human existence…and you’re wasting your time on this board . I’m not exactly the smartest, but I’m not exactly stupid either. Aren’t Presbyterians Calvinist…have you read Scott Hahn’s story and listened to his conversion story. He was far more read than you and after years of struggle with reality and attending mass, he saw the pages of scripture pop out of the pages in the Liturgy of the Mass. So go ahead and be your own guide…but that’s why there are so many different denominations in the world… We are a rebellious people with an inclination to sin. That’s cause from original sin. A better term for original sin would be original woundedness. All the things I used to beleive I understood as a seminarian have been torn down and rebuilt up. Most Catholics don’t know the Catholic faith. That’s the real tragedy. Some of its their own fault and some of it is the Church. But the Church has been trying to protect the flock especially since folks like Loraine Boettner and Jack Chick and all of those anti-Catholic have conjured up lies and misconceptions, propogating and defending them even when they know they are not true…probably well meaning too. But they’re still wrong. Or do you align yourself with these guys? I’m guilty… are you? But after reading the early church fathers I discovered things like the Eucharists for one…real presence… and many other things. I would never even think of myself as an expert… That’s just to arrogant… look at my writing…it’s horrible… but guess what…I’m an engineer… I used to be a planner but by degree is in Geography …I have way too much college under my belt for what I do. But ever since I left the seminary I’ve been lost…searching for God… He brought me Home. It’s my journey…my experience. No offense intended… But do yourself a favore and reserve that reading list for the courts… I’m sure you’ll find a lot more educated people here with PhD’s and law degrees. I met one the first time I got online. He’s Catholic… Fr. Vincent Serpa’s pretty smart… I’d bet on Jimmy Akin before I’d bet on anyone else here. That’s just a couple of names.

PAX Christi tecum

 

[sola_scriptura]

You law degree isn’t helping you then. And to understand theology better than most Catholics is like saying I know how to do Calculus better than most teenagers. I’m not trying to patranize you…I’ve just done some really indepth research.

I’ve studied scripture quite a bit in my former solo scriptura faith…I was on the way to becoming a preacher and prior to that a priest. Having all the knowledge in the world won’t prove anything. Theology doesn’t exist to prove anything but rather exists to show that something is plausible…rational. or that it is rational to believe.

Jesus gave us the Church not the bible. Your premises are fundamentally flawed. Some of the dummest people I know are attorneys and engineers. I work with a bunch of the most intellegent people around, but I would never seek wholesome advice from them…they’re all divorced and living like man HO’s… That’s not the criteria you use to convince someone you know what you’re talking about. What I mean is that I could have picked your statement apart rather easy dealing with the Papacy and fallible comments. It’s basic…101… but no one expects you to understand or accept. It took me a while before I began to understand. Initially I wanted to journey to become Orthodox, but the more I studied, the more I realized the early Church’s beliefs. Orthodox are beginning to admit the “primacy of the bishop or Rome”, but I wouldn’t go really that far to say that they accept it or would drop their arguments.

My point is that Jesus said the gates of hell will not prevail against it…did Jesus lie? Is this some kind of big joke? I won’t argue this online under this thread. I was just falling back into my desire to help even when help isn’t desired. Sorry about that.

But it’s interesting that you compare yourself with some of the most amazing personalities of human existence…and you’re wasting your time on this board . I’m not exactly the smartest, but I’m not exactly stupid either. Aren’t Presbyterians Calvinist…have you read Scott Hahn’s story and listened to his conversion story. He was far more read than you and after years of struggle with reality and attending mass, he saw the pages of scripture pop out of the pages in the Liturgy of the Mass. So go ahead and be your own guide…but that’s why there are so many different denominations in the world… We are a rebellious people with an inclination to sin. That’s cause from original sin. A better term for original sin would be original woundedness. All the things I used to beleive I understood as a seminarian have been torn down and rebuilt up. Most Catholics don’t know the Catholic faith. That’s the real tragedy. Some of its their own fault and some of it is the Church. But the Church has been trying to protect the flock especially since folks like Loraine Boettner and Jack Chick and all of those anti-Catholic have conjured up lies and misconceptions, propogating and defending them even when they know they are not true…probably well meaning too. But they’re still wrong. Or do you align yourself with these guys? I’m guilty… are you? But after reading the early church fathers I discovered things like the Eucharists for one…real presence… and many other things. I would never even think of myself as an expert… That’s just to arrogant… look at my writing…it’s horrible… but guess what…I’m an engineer… I used to be a planner but by degree is in Geography …I have way too much college under my belt for what I do. But ever since I left the seminary I’ve been lost…searching for God… He brought me Home. It’s my journey…my experience. No offense intended… But do yourself a favore and reserve that reading list for the courts… I’m sure you’ll find a lot more educated people here with PhD’s and law degrees. I met one the first time I got online. He’s Catholic… Fr. Vincent Serpa’s pretty smart… I’d bet on Jimmy Akin before I’d bet on anyone else here. That’s just a couple of names.

PAX Christi tecum

I have met many intelligent people here. I didn’t say what I said out of intellectual snobery, but merely to say I’m no idiot (since you were sort of patronizing, although polite, in your prior post).

Look I simply disagree that the RCC is the “one true church” or the church that “Christ built.” I believe the church (body of Christ) is a collective of all the faithful. The church is also visible, however, any local congregation is a valid church, just as it was in Polycarp’s day, before there were any Pope’s and princes.

As far as relying on myself to understand scripture, you act as if sola scriptura means we ignore history and tradition all together, this is not true. We do, however, recognize the priesthood of all believers (as scripture states) and we do view the Bible as the inerrant word of God, which is sufficient for reproof and correction, again as scripture states.

The administrative rules and doctrines for what constitutes a valid church of Christ (visible church congregation) is contained within the pastoral epistles. Peter ensured that Paul and James and the others created proper doctrine. His role in mediating between the Pauline gentile church and the church at Jerusalem (led by James) produced harmony between Paul and James that has given us proper doctrine. My church is in harmony with that tradition preserved by Peter, which is recorded in scripture for eternity. The devil can never succeed against the true church by extinguishing the word of God.

 

[BSHoop96]

You’re explaining what understanding means, which means you think I don’t know what it means. Sort of patronizing but I’ll forgive that. Well, let me give you a brief bio.

I have a law degree, have been studying theology for years, I’ve read everyone from Aquinas, to Augustine, to Calvin, Wesley, Luther, Barth, C.S. Lewis, you name it. I understand Catholic theology better than most Catholics – yet I still disagree. I’ve studied church history, Roman history, Greek philosophy, logic, hold on let me look at my book shelf, okay – physics, history, finance, political science, there’s more but I’ll stop.

Oh – must mention the most important book I study – the Bible. Not only do I study it I study the Greek and Hebrew words and biblical history and golly I can go on and on here to but I’ll stop.

All of this & I remain 100% reformed.

Not bragging, just thought you should know that all non-Catholics aren’t idiots.

Why are you all over these boards arguing with Catholics all the time? Just curious. Are you using this forum to try and “reform” Catholics?

 

[KingAlfred]

I’ve known numerous Protestants who didn’t attend church based on their individual interpretations of the Bible. Somehow, they came up with theories as to why they didn’t have to attend, based on their Bible studies. One of these people is a Baptist minister. His wife left him, and he quit his religion, yet won’t hesitate to quote the Bible at length in the teacher’s lounge. Strange.

 

[KenEOTE]

I’ve known numerous Protestants who didn’t attend church based on their individual interpretations of the Bible. Somehow, they came up with theories as to why they didn’t have to attend, based on their Bible studies. One of these people is a Baptist minister. His wife left him, and he quit his religion, yet won’t hesitate to quote the Bible at length in the teacher’s lounge. Strange.

Obviously this man is hurting. Something must have happened to him to turn him away from his Church. I find that most people who stop attending a service have been burned or hurt by judgemental people in the congregation the attend. Often they are immature in thier walk and wont go to the person but rather leave. We need to reach out to these people with love.