Why Be Protestant?

[rinnie]

You are correct, God’s truth does not change, that is why the Catholic Church has never changed its doctrine. Disciplines have changed, yes, but doctrines, no. When you claim that the Catholic Church has changed doctrine, most likely you are repeating what you have heard/been taught by protestants or taking scripture out of context, or are referring to disciplines. Typical protestant errors.

Correction. The Church was not corrupt. Some of the leaders and members were undoubtedly corrupt, but the Church was not.

Happens all the time. People love to tell us about our faith. And I would love to have this happen just once and then be able to know our faith.

 

[rinnie]

Not exactly. What he is saying is it takes faith in God to begin with. Then for Christians faith in the NT story of the Risen Christ Lord and Savior. Then for Catholic Christians for instance, faith in what the RCC teaches and Her compiled history. For Protestants, a faith and belief in needed reform. He is saying it takes a lot of faith steps to get to the point where someone might think and determine in their mind that they know their faith is the correct one. But take for instance eternal life and Christ’s 2nd Coming. Beliefs many of us Christians walk by in faith. Yet if we are truly honest with ourselves, we aren’t going to really know with 100% absolute certainty if our faith was true until we are at the stage of death or for those still alive, who see Him descending from the clouds. Until then we walk by faith not by sight. So he is just realisistic enough to admit faith and belief and knowing with 100% absolute certainty are not exactly the same things. He actually thinks others probably know it too but perhaps they just feel better to think they know with total certainty. And whatever works for them is fine with him. Hope that clarifies what he thinks. Peace to all on our faith journeys.

So tell me Matt what do you do with what Jesus promised then? Throw it out the window? You are sayig that Jesus was not Honest with us then and did indeed leave us Orphans?

Let me let you in on a little secret here Matt. Christ said that he was sending the Holy Spirit to the CHURCH to lead us into all truth. Now how can we possibly NOT know for all certainly that we have 100% of all truth?

The Holy Spirit CANNOT fail. Christ told us that. The Holy Spirit came to the CC at Pentecost Matt. The Holy Spirit has never left Matt. We have history, proof from the Apostles that this happened Just like CHrist said it would.

We have Apostolic Succession that can be traced to prove that it is still the same Church. What else do we need Matt? What is missing that the Holy Spirit did not reveal?

And when the time comes for something to be revealed you can bet the Holy Spirit will be the one to reveal it. Just like Christ promised. And it will be revealed as Christ said through the Pilar of All Truth. THe CHURCH.

Again here matt a simple statement that say’s what the RCC teaches. THe teacher is the Holy SPirit and protestants want reform. Yeah okay you are going to reform the Holy Spirit. Come on Matt!

Do you accept that the bible teaching that the Advocate the Holy Spirit came to the CC at Pentecost and would be here until the end of age or not. If you accept that teaching then you have to accept the teachings of the RCC.

If you reject this teaching you reject the word of God. You can’t have it both ways anymore. This is not acceptable.

 

[josephback]

Well, we agree on the Nicene Creed (in whatever version, I’m not too picky), so we have at least that in common.

I didn’t really decide to become Protestant. I decided to become Christian, and the Baptist flavor of it was the first I was acquainted with. Then I became acquainted with several other Protestant denominations, and eventually I found my present mainstream (i.e., trinitarian and non-wacky) Pentecostal flavor, which is not quite perfect but it rings true and fits well.

I didn’t know much about Catholicism 'til much more recently, but now I’m fairly well acquainted with it, thanks to this forum and to several favorite Catholic authors… and I’m still unconvinced by it. I have no problem with Catholicism being a valid version of Christianity, and there’s a lot I admire about it… but I don’t believe it’s better than my AG church, or that it’s more what Christ had in mind. I can agree with some 90% of the Catholic Catechism (which I have on the desk beside me), but the remaining 10%, not so much.

Jesus only founded ONE Church. That probably sounds arrogant, but Jesus warned against being led astray. Not every organization that calls itself ‘Christian’ really is. He said there would be ONE fold with ONE shepherd(John 10:16). Anyway, its good you’re looking. God be with you on your journey

 

[heathnprotstnt]

You are correct, God’s truth does not change, that is why the Catholic Church has never changed its doctrine. Disciplines have changed, yes, but doctrines, no. When you claim that the Catholic Church has changed doctrine, most likely you are repeating what you have heard/been taught by protestants or taking scripture out of context, or are referring to disciplines. Typical protestant errors.

So the RC Church has always held the beliefs, for example, that:

Mary was sinless and conceived immaculately?
Mary is the “Queen of Heaven” and the “Mother of the Church?”
Purgatory exists?
Transubstantiation “happens?”

These are not “practices.” - What you do during Mass based on these (and other RC beliefes) is driven by your doctrinal beliefs.

Further, where did the changes in practice (or “discpline”) come from? They are driven by doctrinal belief changes. It is worth noting, as an aside, that being consistent is only a virtue when you’re right

Correction. The Church was not corrupt. Some of the leaders and members were undoubtedly corrupt, but the Church was not.

How convenient. The RC Church is “infallible” only her leaders are “fallible”…puh-lease. Besides…the quote about the RC Church being corrupt was written by an RC author on the Coming Home Network…must have been Mrs. Robinson’s typical (former) protestant errors.

 

[heathnprotstnt]

Jesus only founded ONE Church. That probably sounds arrogant, but Jesus warned against being led astray. Not every organization that calls itself ‘Christian’ really is. He said there would be ONE fold with ONE shepherd(John 10:16). Anyway, its good you’re looking. God be with you on your journey

Not at all… What does sound arrogant is presuming you have the “fullness of the Truth” and that no other Christian church does. We are one body…even if you want to amputate us

 

[heathnprotstnt]

So tell me Matt what do you do with what Jesus promised then? Throw it out the window? You are sayig that Jesus was not Honest with us then and did indeed leave us Orphans?

Let me let you in on a little secret here Matt. Christ said that he was sending the Holy Spirit to the CHURCH to lead us into all truth. Now how can we possibly NOT know for all certainly that we have 100% of all truth?

The Holy Spirit CANNOT fail. Christ told us that. The Holy Spirit came to the CC at Pentecost Matt. The Holy Spirit has never left Matt. We have history, proof from the Apostles that this happened Just like CHrist said it would.

We have Apostolic Succession that can be traced to prove that it is still the same Church. What else do we need Matt? What is missing that the Holy Spirit did not reveal?

And when the time comes for something to be revealed you can bet the Holy Spirit will be the one to reveal it. Just like Christ promised. And it will be revealed as Christ said through the Pilar of All Truth. THe CHURCH.

Again here matt a simple statement that say’s what the RCC teaches. THe teacher is the Holy SPirit and protestants want reform. Yeah okay you are going to reform the Holy Spirit. Come on Matt!

Do you accept that the bible teaching that the Advocate the Holy Spirit came to the CC at Pentecost and would be here until the end of age or not. If you accept that teaching then you have to accept the teachings of the RCC.

If you reject this teaching you reject the word of God. You can’t have it both ways anymore. This is not acceptable.

Christ gave all the faithfull (1 Corinthians 3:16) the gift of the HS. The HS does indeed lead us in the Truth. Of course the HS does not fail. That is NOT the point.

By your “logic” we should be infallible, perfect and unchanging just like the RC Church. We should all know all truth, event though Christ Himself did not…only the Father. The HS no more makes the RC Church perfect than it does you and me.

I am sure you would agree that Paul was filled with the HS, right? Look at how he describes his own struggle between the spirit and the flesh. This is NOT a denial of God’s words. Further, given the history of some of your “Apostolic Succession” I would not be bragging about it.

 

[DElias]

Not at all… What does sound arrogant is presuming you have the “fullness of the Truth” and that no other Christian church does. We are one body…even if you want to amputate us

I have often felt this way as do some Catholic priests with whom I have spoken. Ephesians 2:22 says, “And in Him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.” Jesus healed many by their faith in Him alone. There was no catechism to learn in order to be saved.

I am not taking a jab at Catholicism. I am exploring the teachings of the Catholic church right now in my own journey of faith. I have just been taking a very open-minded approach through this journey.

 

[PhotographyLove]

Why be Protestant (or Baptist )?

What are Catholics missing by being Catholic?

Begin by considering the following creed which contains many of the fundamentals of our Catholic faith:

The Nicene Creed

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
Maker of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.

Through him all things were made.

For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.

For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.

On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.

He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.

With the Father and the Son he is worshipped and glorified.

He has spoken through the Prophets.

We believe in one holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

+++

Was anything significant omitted?

If not, why should someone leave the Catholic Church in order to become some variety of Protestant (or Baptist)?

My only issue with The Nicene Creed is the omission of everything between the lines of “he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, and was made man.” and “For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate”.

Which would be his life and teachings

 

[ESMDHokie77]

If Jesus is the Head of the Church, which is His Body, you severed yourself from the central nervous system, the modern day apostles united with the Bishop of Rome. We don’t want to amputate you. We want to put a band-aid on the nicks and cuts to the Body of Christ that doctrinal differences incur.

 

[heathnprotstnt]

If Jesus is the Head of the Church, which is His Body, you severed yourself from the central nervous system, the modern day apostles united with the Bishop of Rome. We don’t want to amputate you. We want to put a band-aid on the nicks and cuts to the Body of Christ that doctrinal differences incur.

I knew someone would comment on that. Must have been a “Protestant Freudian Typo” but I chose not the edit it. I meant more along the lines of “reject the red-headed step child”

I did not specify a “religion” on my user profile, as I do not consider it important. While I attend a denominational church, I do not tell people, “I am such and such.” I am a Christian. That is what I tell people. It is sad when folks SEEM to put more pride in being an RC or a fill in the blank. It seems to smack with the wrong kind of pride.

While I cannot accept that the Body of Christ is centered ONLY in Rome, we Christians (RC and P alike) are indeed one Body, as scripture states. We both need band-aids

 

[Randy_Carson]

Below you appear to be concerned that I would suggest the HS would contradict itselft in His teaching to the Church…but it is Ok to for Man (via the RC Church) to do so.

The Catholic Church does not teach anything that contradicts the Bible.

If you think otherwise, please cite your best example (just one for starters).

God’s truth does not change. Yet every church, including the RC has.

Only in the sense that an acorn becomes a mighty oak. However, it is the same organism.

Are you suggesting that the RC Church has not strayed from the Truth?

I will. The Catholic Church has never formally taught error in matters of faith or morals. Not once.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Does that include Protestants in “defective” churches?

Technically, the Protestant faith communities are not churches.

How many bodies does Jesus have? How many flocks?

One.

All Christians are members (to varying degrees of communion) with the one Church founded by Jesus upon Peter, the rock.

 

[Randy_Carson]

So the RC Church has always held the beliefs, for example, that:

Mary was sinless and conceived immaculately?
Mary is the “Queen of Heaven” and the “Mother of the Church?”
Purgatory exists?
Transubstantiation “happens?”

With varying degrees of clarity, yes.

Doctrine develops over time, but this does not mean that doctrine is “added” - only that complex issues take time to understand.

The Trinity and the canon of scripture were not understood in the first three centuries, for example.

Further, where did the changes in practice (or “discpline”) come from? They are driven by doctrinal belief changes.

Not at all. If the Church decides that Catholics may eat meat on Friday, this has nothing to do with doctrine. It is purely a discipline.

How convenient. The RC Church is “infallible” only her leaders are “fallible”…puh-lease. Besides…the quote about the RC Church being corrupt was written by an RC author on the Coming Home Network…must have been Mrs. Robinson’s typical (former) protestant errors.

Being corrupt on a moral level does not mean that the Church taught error. Infallibility was not affected at all by the moral laxity of the clergy. Jesus taught the same thing, btw.

 

[heathnprotstnt]

The Catholic Church does not teach anything that contradicts the Bible.

If you think otherwise, please cite your best example (just one for starters).

See 2 posts below - my orignal post (for starters).

Only in the sense that an acorn becomes a mighty oak. However, it is the same organism.

I will. The Catholic Church has never formally taught error in matters of faith or morals. Not once.

I am truly amazed at the consistency of the arrogance on this board. You are a consistent bunch, that’s for sure.

 

[heathnprotstnt]

With varying degrees of clarity, yes.

Doctrine develops over time, but this does not mean that doctrine is “added” - only that complex issues take time to understand.

Way too convenient.

Also, If the HS revealed all to Truth in its fullness to the RC Church, as others on this board have claimed, why would it take time or be complex? Surely nothing is too complex or hard for God?

Being corrupt on a moral level does not mean that the Church taught error. Infallibility was not affected at all by the moral laxity of the clergy. Jesus taught the same thing, btw.

Really? So immoral and corrupt men teach truths? D E N I A L. Why should we be worried about “wolves in sheeps clothing” then? Or are you suggesting in the “Apostolic Succession” the immoral ones were really not part of the RC Church and her teaching?

That being said…I’d be interested in the verses should you be so kind as to share them

 

[guanophore]

I agree.  We, however, no longer has the blessing of Apostles or Prophets.

Perhaps those of you who have rejected the communion of saints and the Apostolic Succession, but those who have not rejected these still enjoy the blessing of the Apostles and Prophets. The gifts and the call of God are irrevocable.

Scripture was HS inspired and is unchanging.

This is also true of the Church founded by Christ.

Scripture speaks much about the Church, her role, structure, etc. Compare that to all denominations of which RC and Protestant alike have changed over the years.

We are not at liberty to change that which was once for all committed to the Church by the Apostles. This fact rankles many modern CAtholics who think that the church should keep up with the times.

You sincerely hold the belief that the RC Church can contradict Christ’s teaching as the custodian of the Truth?

If you meant to say “can’t”, then yes. The Church was founded by CHrist, and He is her Head. SHe is ensouled by the HOly Spirit, and these divine elements prevent her from error. Jesus promised that the HS would lead the Church “into all Truth”, and we believe His promise.

Below you appear to be concerned that I would suggest the HS would contradict itselft in His teaching to the Church…but it is Ok to for Man (via the RC Church) to do so…[/qutoe]

No. When man contradicts the teaching of Jesus preserved infallibly in the Church by Christ he has left the Church.
heathnprotstnt;7808661:

What do you mean by that?

The Apostles taught that the Scriptures have material sufficiency, but nor formal sufficiency. This is why Christ founded the Church.

I am not suggesting that the HS would do anything of the kind. God cannot contradict Himself or His character. What I am stating very empahtically is that MAN and the Church can misinterpret something as having been “revealed” to him. MAN and Church can misinterpret scripture.

The Church cannot “misintrepret” anything. The Church is the Bride of Christ, and is preserved by Him from error. I do agree, though, that man can make mistakes.

God’s truth does not change. Yet every church, including the RC has.

The changes are not in the area of faith and morals. The changes are in disciplines, customs, canon law, etc. These are the human aspects. The Divine aspects don’t change.

I disagree.

Well, of course you have to disagree! If you were to accept what the Apostles believed and taught about the nature of the Church, you would have to become Catholic.

It reflects that truth as expressed in Romans.

This is one of the differences between Catholic faith and ecclesial communities called “bible churches”. You extract what you believe is correct doctrine from a verse, or collection of verses. This method is grossly deficient, and causes our separated brethren to stray away from what the Aposltes believed and taught.

We are all sinners and fall short.  Are you suggesting that the RC Church has not strayed from the Truth?

Without a doubt. God cannot stray from the Truth, and since He is the Head and Bridegroom, He has made her holy and pure.

I read on the Coming Home Network (Chris Robinson - How I Got This Way) that before the Reformation the RC Church was undisputably corrupt. The Apostles were a truly humble bunch and acknowledge their own failings quite clearly.

There were a great many corrupt persons attached to the Church. However, when a person falls into sin, such a one separates himself from the Body. There were also many wolves among the sheep at that time. However, fallen persons and wolves do not define the Church of Christ.

Does that include Protestants in “defective” churches?

Yes. Protestants who are members of defective ecclesial communities, if properly baptized, are members of the One Body of Christ.

 

[guanophore]

So the RC Church has always held the beliefs, for example, that:

Mary was sinless and conceived immaculately?
Mary is the “Queen of Heaven” and the “Mother of the Church?”
Purgatory exists?
Transubstantiation “happens?”

These are not “practices.” - What you do during Mass based on these (and other RC beliefes) is driven by your doctrinal beliefs.

Yes, all these are in scripture, and part of the Apostolic Teaching. You are right, liturgy is based upon doctrine.

Further, where did the changes in practice (or "discpline") come from?  They are driven by doctrinal belief changes.  It is worth noting, as an aside, that being consistent is only a virtue when you're right:D

Yes, changes in practice are based upon doctrine. Different practices for different times and places, same doctrine.

How convenient. The RC Church is “infallible” only her leaders are “fallible”…puh-lease.

I am sure that those who separate themselves from her through sin don’t find it very convenient. They no longer enjoy the blessings of His promises.

This inability to understand that the Church is more than her fallible members here on earth is one of the main reasons that ecclesial communities are deficient.

Besides…the quote about the RC Church being corrupt was written by an RC author on the Coming Home Network…must have been Mrs. Robinson’s typical (former) protestant errors.

Well, RC authors do not speak for the Church. They make mistakes too.

However, in the context of speaking about the wolves among the sheep, it is a correct statement. The visible part of the Church in Europe at the time was frought with corrupt clerics who were not teaching the Gospel and were fleecing the flock for their own benefit. Anyone who does such things is not acting in accordance with the One Faith preserved infallibly in the Church by the HS.

 

[guanophore]

Not at all....   What does sound arrogant is presuming you have the "fullness of the Truth" and that no other Christian church does.   We are one body...even if you want to amputate us:)

I agree that it woudl be arrogant if indeed it was a “presumption”, but it is not. The Church founded by Christ reflects the fullness of His revelation to mankind. Those who have separated themselves from her have done so by the nature and extent of the Apostolic Teachings they reject. This began during the Reformation and continues to this day.

Christ gave all the faithfull (1 Corinthians 3:16) the gift of the HS. The HS does indeed lead us in the Truth. Of course the HS does not fail. That is NOT the point.

It is our point. The Apostles taught that the HS is given to those who are properly baptized. And the promise of Christ that the Spirit would lead into “all Truth” was given to the Church. Those who separate themselves from her are no longer protected by the Promise. We are in agreement that the HS does not fail. That is why the Church remains pure and holy, in spite of those fallible persons attached to her that fall into disobedience and sin.

By your "logic" we should be infallible, perfect and unchanging just like the RC Church.

No, because we understand that Jesus was talking to His fledging Church when he made that promise. Individuals can only benefit from that promise if they remain in unity with her.

We should all know all truth, event though Christ Himself did not…only the Father. The HS no more makes the RC Church perfect than it does you and me.

Your rejection of God’s promises does not invalidate them for anyone but yourself. And the Catholic Church is not “Roman”.

I am sure you would agree that Paul was filled with the HS, right? Look at how he describes his own struggle between the spirit and the flesh. This is NOT a denial of God’s words. Further, given the history of some of your “Apostolic Succession” I would not be bragging about it.

Paul was Catholic.

The struggle he describes with the flesh parallels the human part of the Church with the Spirit of the Church. The Church is incarnational, just as Jesus is.

What is some of the history of the Apostolic succession that should not be “bragged about”. You seem to think telling the Truth is some how arrogant or bragging. If the Truth were based in humanity, that may be the case, but we are only stating the facts about the Church founded by Christ.

I have often felt this way as do some Catholic priests with whom I have spoken. Ephesians 2:22 says, “And in Him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit.” Jesus healed many by their faith in Him alone. There was no catechism to learn in order to be saved.

It is true that Jesus healed by faith, but that faith was never “alone”. In EVERY case where He told someone “your faith has saved/healed you” the person did something- acted on their faith. Their faith was perfected by their actions, as it says in James 2.

You maybe suffereing from a deficient understanding of salvation, which often accompanies the deficient understanding of the Church. Salvation is not something that occurs once in time, for all time.

Indeed there is a catechism to be saved. Look what the saved did immediately after they were baptized:

Acts 2:42
42 And they devoted themselves to the apostles’ teaching and fellowship, to the breaking of bread and the prayers.

Catechesis is learning the Apostles’ Teaching.

 I am not taking a jab at Catholicism.  I am exploring the teachings of the Catholic church right now in my own journey of faith.  I have just been taking a very open-minded approach through this journey.

I did not take it as such, and I appreciate your exploration. You are why we are here! May God richly bless your journey.

 

[guanophore]

heathnprotstnt:

I knew someone would comment on that. Must have been a “Protestant Freudian Typo” but I chose not the edit it. I meant more along the lines of “reject the red-headed step child”

Those who embrace heresies separate themselves. They are only excommunicated as a last ditch effort to get their attention, so they will renouce their errors and return to the Ark by which they are saved.

heathnprotstnt:

I did not specify a “religion” on my user profile, as I do not consider it important. While I attend a denominational church, I do not tell people, “I am such and such.” I am a Christian. That is what I tell people. It is sad when folks SEEM to put more pride in being an RC or a fill in the blank. It seems to smack with the wrong kind of pride.

I know there are some people who are prideful about their affiliation, but it is not a matter of pride to be in unity with the One Church founded by Christ. There is nothing we have to brag about “except Christ Jesus”. Many of us feel fortunate and blessed that we have the fullness of faith, but since it does not come from us, but from God, we can only be proud of what He has done for us.

heathnprotstnt:

While I cannot accept that the Body of Christ is centered ONLY in Rome, we Christians (RC and P alike) are indeed one Body, as scripture states. We both need band-aids

Jesus placed all that is needed for our healing in His Church. The more humanity separates from the Apostolic faith, the more fragmented the Body becomes. Division and Separation are the fruits of the Reformation. They are continuing to produce this fruit on an almost daily basis.

I had to LOL today when I heard John McCarthur say “those that insist on unity are teaching false doctrine”. Wonder if he could say that to an Apostle?
Phil 1:27-28

27 Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Christ, so that whether I come and see you or am absent, I may hear of you that you** stand firm in one spirit, with one mind **striving side by side for the faith of the gospel,

 

[rinnie]

So the RC Church has always held the beliefs, for example, that:

Mary was sinless and conceived immaculately?
Mary is the “Queen of Heaven” and the “Mother of the Church?”
Purgatory exists?
Transubstantiation “happens?”

These are not “practices.” - What you do during Mass based on these (and other RC beliefes) is driven by your doctrinal beliefs.

Further, where did the changes in practice (or “discpline”) come from? They are driven by doctrinal belief changes. It is worth noting, as an aside, that being consistent is only a virtue when you’re right

How convenient. The RC Church is “infallible” only her leaders are “fallible”…puh-lease. Besides…the quote about the RC Church being corrupt was written by an RC author on the Coming Home Network…must have been Mrs. Robinson’s typical (former) protestant errors.

What is your problem with the RCC teaching the Truth. The Holy Spirit appeared to the CC on the Day of Pentecost and is leading the Church by the Power of the Holy Spirit the same EXACT way as Christ promised. Read it its in the bible.

Where did Christ tell Peter and the Apostles that they would become God and be perfect? Where did he say that Peter or the Apostles would never have sin or never be wrong when they speak as humans which they are.

Christ said and let me repeat when you speak in MY NAME you will speak IN MY VOICE. Now if you cannot accept those words why are you blaming us for believing them.

Here we go again, are you saying that the Pope or the Bishops can over power God? If you believe that they can stand up and Speak in the name of God and lie then you are saying that Hades prevailed. Christ said hades would never prevail over his Church.

Again Christ promised us when they Speak in his Name they cannot lie. Its a promise from God. Our Father keeps his promises. What part of us believing in that do you have a problem with.

Or are you saying that the Pope and Bishops can over power God when they speak in his Name