M
Why do Protestant Apologists feel the need to lie about history and the Catholic Church?
- Status
P
Protestant101
Guest
Yes; and you are lying when you say that ALL protestants who speak out against the Catholic Church are lying.But a lie is still a lie.
Oh yeah, still waiting for your promised Bible passage where Jesus says that He’s going to build His True Church on Ellen Gould White. This should be good.
The next lie is trying to say that I promised to give a Bible text saying that God is going to build His true Church upon Ellen G White.
You have not proved either lie. You have simply proclaimed them very assertively, but no matter how passionate you are in “sharing” this with us, they are still lies. You lie as soon as you say that ALL Protestants lie. I will grant you one thing. Some Protestants do lie when they talk about the Catholic Church. But not all.
P
pharmacistUH
Guest
Wow, just jumped into the thread and I have to say something. Protestant101, he did NOT say that all protestants lie, but that all protestant APOLOGETICS lie. If you do not know what apologetics are, they are people who know about the faith and can answer questions about it, etc. He says that they lie because they have to distort the teachings of the Catholic Church to make their own denomination look good. He then gave you a challenge to find ONE, just ONE protestant APOLOGETIC that does not distort the true teachings of the Church, and he would resend his statement. You, nor any other protestant, has yet to fine ONE apologetic that does not distort the teachings of the Catholic Church.Yes; and you are lying when you say that ALL protestants who speak out against the Catholic Church are lying.
The next lie is trying to say that I promised to give a Bible text saying that God is going to build His true Church upon Ellen G White.
You have not proved either lie. You have simply proclaimed them very assertively, but no matter how passionate you are in “sharing” this with us, they are still lies. You lie as soon as you say that ALL Protestants lie. I will grant you one thing. Some Protestants do lie when they talk about the Catholic Church. But not all.
Your second argument about how Peter is really a protestant can be refuted in a few sentences. Peter believed that the Eucharist was the actual Body and Blood of Christ, and that by oral Tradition (capital T) the Eucharist should be taken daily. Do any protestant denominations believe this?
There are only two things that I will accept from you now.
- You give me a link to a protestant apologetic that has his facts straight about the Catholic Church
- You prove to me that St.Paul, St.Peter, St.James, All the Apostles, and ALL of the Early Church Fathers did not believe that the Eucharist was the actual Body and Blood of Christ.
M
mgrfin
Guest
This whole thread on SDA is far out, and, I mean far out.
I would like to ask the moderators whether we should be engaging in this sort of apologetics?
I would like to ask the moderators whether we should be engaging in this sort of apologetics?
P
Petergee
Guest
So please, pretty please, give me a contrary example!! Just one will do! Then I’ll humbly apologise for casting aspersions on an eminently truthful protestant apologist arguing against Catholicism. Come on, what are you waiting for?.. I’m getting old here since I first asked this question.
You promised us in post 172 that you would give us “Chapter and verse” proving that “the SDAs were the true original Church founded by Jesus Christ in 30AD”, “just as soon” as we quoted the Bible verse which records Jesus Christ making the first leader of the CC the first leader of His Church. And no, I’m sorry but you won’t get very far with us claiming that some book written by a 19th century American is really “part of the bible.”
M
mgrfin
Guest
You cannot make a universal statement like 'all Protestant apologists feel a need to lie about the Catholic Church. It is not true, and even if it were, you can never prove it.
But lets take a look at Luther. He lead his followers in hatred of the Church, including lying. Lets look at a few examples:
Dr. Martin said that such Church Fathers as "Jerome, Chrysostom, Cyprian, Basil, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas fell into error, and were untrustworthy teachers, pools out of which Christians had been drinking impure and loathsome water”. Look at the list of Doctors and Saints of the Church whom he condemns. Such blasphemy makes my blood run cold.
Add this into his ravings: "Knaves, dolts, asses, and infernal blasphemers, knowing very little of the Gospel, easily deceived by the devil and deserving to be in hell rather than in heaven.” Nice.
The Fathers and the Doctors of the Church were against his program. They were, one and all, “asses, rascals, beasts, Antichrists” and “unworthy of a hearing.” He alone was right; he knew more than all of them put together; and, as they were “authors of impious things, empty declaimers, of no weight whatever, theological abortions, fountains of error”.
Now you may have some small idea where non-Catholics get their false ideas about the Church.
mgrfin
P
Petergee
Guest
I didn’t. As I said, I have no idea what needs they feel. And I made no comment about whether they lie about the Catholic Church when NOT arguing against Catholicism. I merely said that they apparently all lie about history and about Catholic beliefs and practices when putting arguments against Catholicism, because I have been begging repeatedly for an example of one who does NOT do this, with zero result.
And you know this…how?
I’m not trying to prove it. I merely asked for evidence against it.
S
Scarecrow
Guest
Peter you need to figure out the difference betwen lying and rationalizing details and events.
When someone lies they are intentionally telling something false when they know the truth.
Rationalizing is based on facts and can be correct or incorrect. This is why there are so many versions of events in history.
I wouldnt go to the level to say that Catholic apologists are lying. That is baseless and inflamatory.
When someone lies they are intentionally telling something false when they know the truth.
Rationalizing is based on facts and can be correct or incorrect. This is why there are so many versions of events in history.
I wouldnt go to the level to say that Catholic apologists are lying. That is baseless and inflamatory.
P
Petergee
Guest
I think I’ve got it figured out OK.
NONE of the protestant apologists’ lies quoted by me and others in this thread (e.g. “Catholics worship priests”, “Catholic priests know almost nothing of the Bible”, “Emperor Constantine founded the Catholic Church as part of his State” etc.) can be dismissed as mere rationalising or misinterpretations. I think it’s important when you see a lie to call it a lie.
Neither would I, and I’ve never seen an example of a Catholic apologist lying.
I agree.
S
ScottishColleen
Guest
And ALL “Protestant Apologists” say these things? Uh, no
first off, many of the sites that were listed at the beginning are not “apologists”…they are individuals. And many of them are so far on the fringe that some refuse to be associated with a church whatsoever (homechurching). Some are Independant Fundamentalists.
Secondly, please understand that to call these people “Protestants” is offensive and not accurate…most of these people are Separatists. Protestants would include the Reformed (Presbyterians, Covenanters, etc), Lutherans, Anglicans, and Episcopalians.
On the other hand, you can look at it like this. There were some reasons given why they believe something is heresy…they state, “it’s not found in scripture”. They need to be given an answer and one that comes directly from the Word of God.
J
jpaul
Guest
po18guy,
Peace and all-good!
According to Saint Paul, “I charge you to preach the word, to stay with this task, whether convenient or inconvenient…” (2 Tm 4: 2).
Then on Gal. 1: 7, “But there is no other. Some who wish to alter the gospel of Christ must have confused you. For even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel not in accord with the one we delivered to you, let a curse be upon him”.
Thank you bro!
Ave Maria!
jpaul
L
lavazza
Guest
The first thing is the claim we gave the world tjhe bible, there are 3Codex’s.
One would expect earlier manuscripts to be more reliable than later ones. And, indeed, nearly all of the earliest surviving manuscripts (A.D. 200-400) are Alexandrian in character. Some show Western influence, but not one is Byzantine.So, i suggest the Codex Sinaiticus (which was discovered in a monastery at Mt. Sinai), is the oldest, even beating the The Latin Vulgate. you make up your own mind. I just given you historical facts.
One would expect earlier manuscripts to be more reliable than later ones. And, indeed, nearly all of the earliest surviving manuscripts (A.D. 200-400) are Alexandrian in character. Some show Western influence, but not one is Byzantine.So, i suggest the Codex Sinaiticus (which was discovered in a monastery at Mt. Sinai), is the oldest, even beating the The Latin Vulgate. you make up your own mind. I just given you historical facts.
J
jpaul
Guest
Peace and all-good!
A non-Catholic who used anti-Catholic fictitious references like those of Dr. Alberto Rivera, is a liar.
And the father of lies is the devil. ( see John 8:44)
Ave Maria!
jpaul
L
Lischou
Guest
Another ‘line drawn in the sand’ of acceptable Protestants.And ALL “Protestant Apologists” say these things? Uh, no
first off, many of the sites that were listed at the beginning are not “apologists”…they are individuals. And many of them are so far on the fringe that some refuse to be associated with a church whatsoever (homechurching). Some are Independant Fundamentalists.
Secondly, please understand that to call these people “Protestants” is offensive and not accurate…most of these people are Separatists. Protestants would include the Reformed (Presbyterians, Covenanters, etc), Lutherans, Anglicans, and Episcopalian
Lisa
S
ScottishColleen
Guest
Another ‘line drawn in the sand’ of acceptable Protestants.
Lisa
sorry, the point was to request that people not broadbrush.
S
Scarecrow
Guest
so jpaul are you saying that he is the devil? seems like kind of a fundamentalist conclusion you are making here.
D
DB_AND_ALI
Guest
Just another reason why i will remain Catholic AND pray for those who STARTED the misinformation/disinformation. Remember it’s been going on for centuries , therefore it will take a long time to change indoctrinated mind sets. The church heirarchy should leave no stone unturned in trying to expand meaningful dialogue between the different denominations.
P
Petergee
Guest
No, they were just three examples of the hundreds of different lies they use. I repeat again for those who for some reason have great difficulty understanding this simple statement: I merely stated that all protestant apologists whom I have seen argue against Catholicism do so using lies about what Catholics believe and do, and/or lies about objectively indisputable historical facts.And ALL “Protestant Apologists” say these things? Uh, no
Fine, so show me a site by ANY non-Catholic, non-Eastern Orthodox Christian, which argues against Catholicism without using lies about what Catholics believe and do, and/or lies about objectively indisputable historical facts. No-one is demanding that these people must be “fringe” or of any particular group of non-Catholic non-Orthodox Christians. Anyone you name will do. I’m still waiting. I feel like Socrates going around with his lamp.
I repeat again, doctrinal differences have nothing to do with the topic and this comment is totally irrelevant. If you want to debate the scriptural basis of various doctrines, there are hundreds of other threads here you can do it on: go for your life, just not on this thread.
L
lavazza
Guest
i am a catholic, but you can not say all other religons, lie aboiut our church… there are many spirit filled people in those churches.
P
Petergee
Guest
Yes, indeed, that’s precisely why I **didn’t **say that.
And you think I have somehow contradicted this obvious fact?
- Status