the over and incorrect usage of the word "Protestant"

[TriuneUnity]

Yes, the reason is that, as I stated in my post, they count the Catholic Church in each country as a separate denomination. It’s not the best method, but it doesn’t make the statistics worthless. You just have to recognize their limitations.

Yeah, and divide them by about 190 as well as a whole different mathematical equation. If Catholics ceased citing the numbers in order to prove an apologetic point, we honestly wouldn’t care what that encyclopedia says. However, Catholics continue to cite it as if it is accurate when they know it is not.

The last time I checked, that involves the sin of deception.

 

[Carl_Nicholas]

Yeah, and divide them by about 190 as well as a whole different mathematical equation. If Catholics ceased citing the numbers in order to prove an apologetic point, we honestly wouldn’t care what that encyclopedia says. However, Catholics continue to cite it as if it is accurate when they know it is not.

The last time I checked, that involves the sin of deception.

Hey TriuneUnity,

An apologetic point??? As if the " number of protestants " makes any differnce at all. NO, the apolgetic point is that ANY number, be it 2,000, 5,000, 30,000, or 5,456,989,021, is that they are still splinters or branches from the very tree that was erected 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ. This " flavor of the day " or pick the one that is most desirable for us sinners IS THE POINT and lends itself directly to the reason we brethren seem to get caught up in this " hair splitting " of how many rather than seeing the 850 pound gorilla in the room.

God bless,
Carl

 

[TriuneUnity]

Hey TriuneUnity,

An apologetic point??? As if the " number of protestants " makes any differnce at all. NO, the apolgetic point is that ANY number, be it 2,000, 5,000, 30,000, or 5,456,989,021, is that they are still splinters or branches from the very tree that was erected 2000 years ago by Jesus Christ. This " flavor of the day " or pick the one that is most desirable for us sinners IS THE POINT and lends itself directly to the reason we brethren seem to get caught up in this " hair splitting " of how many rather than seeing the 850 pound gorilla in the room.

God bless,
Carl

Okay…and are Protestants responsible for the split that occurred 500 years before that? How do you explain that one, given the presuppositions you’ve used above?

 

[ndismyhome]

Let me restate my intent, apparently I wasn’t very clear on it. What I intended to convey by this post is that I find it incredibly ignorant to see people state “Protestants believe X” about something that Protestants don’t agree on. That aside, I would not include 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. generation “Protestant” churches in the mix, as they are no longer making a protest against the Roman church, instead it is usually some other paltry reason.

 

[Pong]

That aside, I would not include 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc. generation “Protestant” churches in the mix, as they are no longer making a protest against the Roman church, instead it is usually some other paltry reason.

If they were not making a protest against the CATHOLIC CHURCH, they would become Catholic and be done with it.

 

[mark_a]

As the thread above states, the word Protestant is over used in this forum, as almost everywhere else. By the colloquial usage of the word, it can apply from very conservative Lutheran and Anglican churches that are almost identical in Theology to the Roman church, all the way to the most radical of fringe cults. Anyways, please be aware that anytime you make a general critique of Protestants or general assumption about their Theology, you are probably wrong, as the sheer diversity of views most likely provides a ready counter example to your point.

I agree in the sense that “protestant” is just too general.

I also think the word “Rome” or “Roman” are overused in the uh, um, hmmmmm, er, non-Catholic world.

 

[Feedmysheep]

Let me restate my intent, apparently I wasn’t very clear on it. What I intended to convey by this post is that I find it incredibly ignorant to see people state “Protestants believe X” about something that Protestants don’t agree on.

On this, you have a very valid point. One of the most troubling aspects of Protestantism is that there IS such a melange of theologies. I wholeheartedly agree with you on this point- saying “Protestants believe X, Y, or Z” is going to be met with 20 different Protestants saying “No, at my church we don’t believe that at all”.

But, your thread title, and original post, is about the use of the label “Protestant”, and not about the error of making blanket statements about what Protestants believe.

 

[RobHom]

Since everyone loves getting unsolicted advice, I thought I would give some.

I think if not the representatives of all these groups, but at least all the fourm members who pick one to represent each group, would spend 8 hours together, you may see a huge change.

The day would go like this:

No bibles, or clothing with any religious stuff on it, no speaking of religion at all allowed. No praying, or any other thing christians do.
No singing religious songs.
Nothing at all.

Just, unlimited golf, barbeque contests, games (catholics get to run the bingo) lots of food, non religious music, a stocked bar, a pool, and did I say food?

then, at the end of the day, you all can go back to this: :nope: :crying: :whacky:

I bet all this would shake out nicely if you did try it.

Monica… I have a feeling that your “monniker” is inappropriate, because I think you may have just stated a very significant “truism”!!

 

[RobHom]

I agree in the sense that “protestant” is just too general.

I also think the word “Rome” or “Roman” are overused in the uh, um, hmmmmm, er, non-Catholic world.

I have also been on sites where “RCC” or “HRC” is used… Its almost like it supposed to be a “spooky/evil” acronym…

 

[Ruthie]

I promise to use the phrase “some Protestants” from now on.

Ruthie