Why do Protestants become Catholic?

[Brian_C]

I echo what previous posters have said, I guess. I feel like I got a wonderful background in the bible from my baptist upbringing but felt like we were a boat without a rudder. There was never any crystal clear doctrine or dogma. Just when you thought you’d figured out what a passage meant or had a theological question settled, someone would come along with a different interpretation. No one ever came forth and said firmly, this is what we believe.

. I am also a bit of a historian so learning a bit more about early Christianity and the early Church helped make up my mind. I, like so many protestants, no doubt, thought the mass was simply something concocted by a bunch of medieval monks or something. I read up on what Catholics actually believe (that’s Mr. Keating, among others) and it made me realize how much I’d misunderstood things.

The death of John Paul II and the election of Benedict XVI is was what pushed me over the edge, though. After that, I decided I needed to act upon my newfound understandings and feelings.

 

[NiceFundamental]

rciadan:

If you are a fundamentalist, believing in scripture alone, then how is it that you say that accepting God the Fathers Son as your Savior is what makes you a child of God? Where is that in the Bible? Where in the Bilbe is the phrase “accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior”? I’ll save you time. It’s not there.

John 1:11-13 “He came to his own, and his own received him not. **But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:**Which were born, born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God”

I would assume our interpritations of this scripture are different. That is without a doubt. No need to argue or debate over it. You are happy with yours and I am happy with mine.

My thesaurus on my MS Word gives “receive” when you type in “accept”. Looks like open and shut case to me. Unless your thesaurus gives you “baptised as infant” when you put in the word “received”? Sorry for being kinda snitty, but the “arrogant” position I sensed - from a Catholic or a Fundamentalist - I am getting tired of. The fact of the matter is - as all these threads indicate - people have different interpretations of scripture. It is a never ending debate. The Holy Spirit has convicted me and I am comfortable with my rendering of it.

I do not know why books written by mere mortals are always suggested? No infallibility there. Why not always refer the source to the Bible. And then just ask them to read it, and read it, and pray and pray…that is the only way the real understanding of scripture will come - from the Holy Spirit. Not from a mortally written book. Again, just my two bits.

The origianl question was about if the Catholic faith believed “all” or “everyone” are “sons of God”? I take the answer from you to be “no” and that in order to be “sons of God” one needs to be baptised. Thank you for your (name removed by moderator)ut.

rciadan:

That’s because Jesus is your Lord and Savior whether you accept Him or not!

Luke 6:46 “And why call me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?”

Sounds like he is not Lord to everybody.

MAtt. 7:21 "“Not everyone that says to me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of Heaven;”…“And then I will profess to them, I never knew you: depart from me, you that work iniquity”

Sounds like those do not really have Jesus as their Lord either. They profess it but not so. I know our interpretations on that verse are different to. You see it as clearly defining someone not “Catholic” not baptised…I see it as someone not “Born Again”…no Holy Spirit in them.

 

[VociMike]

mumof5:

Just curious about one thing…if baptism is to forgive sins, why did Jesus get baptised? Purely example?

One reason I’ve heard, and which I find very sacramental in concept, is that by being baptized in water, Jesus was sanctifying water for its future use in Christian baptism. The waters of baptism did not change Jesus, but by being baptised Jesus changed the waters of baptism. I like it!

 

[jim1130]

NiceFundamental:

John 1:11-13 “He came to his own, and his own received him not. **But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:**Which were born, born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God”

I would assume our interpritations of this scripture are different. That is without a doubt. No need to argue or debate over it. You are happy with yours and I am happy with mine.

My thesaurus on my MS Word gives “receive” when you type in “accept”. Looks like open and shut case to me. Unless your thesaurus gives you “baptised as infant” when you put in the word “received”? Sorry for being kinda snitty, but the “arrogant” position I sensed - from a Catholic or a Fundamentalist - I am getting tired of. The fact of the matter is - as all these threads indicate - people have different interpretations of scripture. It is a never ending debate. The Holy Spirit has convicted me and I am comfortable with my rendering of it.

Peace.

I do not think that you should rely on a modern Thesaurus to help you define and interpret the Bible. My suggestion would be for you to go to the original Greek text.

NiceFundamental:

I do not know why books written by mere mortals are always suggested? No infallibility there. Why not always refer the source to the Bible. And then just ask them to read it, and read it, and pray and pray…that is the only way the real understanding of scripture will come - from the Holy Spirit. Not from a mortally written book. Again, just my two bits.

The Bible is your sole source of proof. Fair enough. But what if the Bible did not exist? Would you believe in God, Christ, the Holy Spirit? How would you know and prove the existence of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit?

Peace.

 

[JSmitty2005]

malachi_a_serva:

TrustInTheLord:

We are all God’s children.

Is this Catholic teaching/doctrine/belief? I realize the poster is now a Protestant, just wondering if it is a belief the Catholic Church holds to.

As for a Fundamentalist, we believe not everyone is a child of God, just those who accept God the Father’s Son as their Savior…then you become a child of God. Just curious.

I think that the Church teaches that members of the Church are made children of God through baptism.

 

[Lazerlike42]

NiceFundamental:

The fact of the matter is - as all these threads indicate - people have different interpretations of scripture. It is a never ending debate.

Doesn’t that tell you something about the idea of using the Bible only?

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” 1 Corinthians 14:33

 

[NiceFundamental]

jim1130:

Peace.

I do not think that you should rely on a modern Thesaurus to help you define and interpret the Bible. My suggestion would be for you to go to the original Greek text.

Not define - demonstrate another “English” word for it. A definition would be from a dictionary. Regardless, in the verse it does not give, “Baptised as a baby” as an option.

jim1130:

The Bible is your sole source of proof. Fair enough. But what if the Bible did not exist? Would you believe in God, Christ, the Holy Spirit? How would you know and prove the existence of God, Christ, the Holy Spirit?Peace.

The Bible does exist.

 

[NiceFundamental]

Lazerlike42:

Doesn’t that tell you something about the idea of using the Bible only?

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints” 1 Corinthians 14:33

I hear ya. But I don’t just use the Bible, I use the insperation of the Holy Spirit. So I guess I use the Bible and God.

 

[jim1130]

NiceFundamental:

Not define - demonstrate another “English” word for it. A definition would be from a dictionary. Regardless, in the verse it does not give, “Baptised as a baby” as an option.

Peace.

I think that you are missing the point. The Bible was not originally translated and written in English. To take a word in English and then refer to a Theasaurs to “demonstrate” another meaning to justify your interpretationis inaccurate.

NiceFundamental:

The Bible does exist.

Yes, the Bible does exist. Thank you for avoiding the question I posed. Fortunately for you, you were born after the 4th century. Had you been born before that time there would not have been a Bible as you know it so my quesiton is legitimate. You base your faith on the Bible alone. Without the Bible, how do you base your faith?

Also, how did the Bible come into existence?

Peace.

 

[montanaman]

NiceFundamental:

I hear ya. But I don’t just use the Bible, I use the insperation of the Holy Spirit. So I guess I use the Bible and God.

So I guess we can conclude that you think you’re infallible then? After all, your sectarian brethren also think the Holy Spirit is enlightening them, too, and you all don’t come to the same conclusions. Should we just take your word for it that you’re right, or have you been “sent” by an apostle?

 

[NiceFundamental]

jim1130:

Also, how did the Bible come into existence?Peace.

Wow, prove a belief IS in the Bible and look at the attacks. I am familiar with all the debates about how our Bible came to be. You can accept what you wish. I know that God has provided it too us and did so in his time so I do not question why he didn’t do it a differnet way, or before, or sooner…I just aceept what he has done. Or we could critique why he does anything. Why not send his Son sooner? Why speak in parables?..you get me point.

For you, are you ready to accept what you read and disregard what people say it means? Acctually it should be directed at rciadan he erroneously eluded to the incorrect fact that this statement was not in scripture, yet it is.

John 1:11-13 “He came to his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:Which were born, born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God”

 

[jim1130]

NiceFundamental:

For you, are you ready to accept what you read and disregard what people say it means? Acctually it should be directed at rciadan he erroneously eluded to the incorrect fact that this statement was not in scripture, yet it is.

Peace.

Does this means I get to be my own infallible authority?

Peace.

 

[NiceFundamental]

montanaman:

So I guess we can conclude that you think you’re infallible then? After all, your sectarian brethren also think the Holy Spirit is enlightening them, too, and you all don’t come to the same conclusions. Should we just take your word for it that you’re right, or have you been “sent” by an apostle?

You are right, the Holy Spirt can only leads us in truth and to truth. With so many interpretations, yes obviously some are wrong. But the logic that allot of others are wrong does not prove my interpretation is wrong as well, nor does it prove that yours is correct.

I cannot speak for everyone elses interpretation.

 

[jim1130]

NiceFundamental:

You are right, the Holy Spirt can only leads us in truth and to truth. With so many interpretations, yes obviously some are wrong. But the logic that allot of others are wrong does not prove my interpretation is wrong as well, nor does it prove that yours is correct.

I cannot speak for everyone elses interpretation.

Peace.

So, how do you come to the conclusion that your interpretation is accurate and someone else’s interpretation is inaccurate? The Holy Spirit cannot provide contradictory interpretations.

Peace.

 

[NiceFundamental]

jim1130:

Peace.

So, how do you come to the conclusion that your interpretation is accurate and someone else’s interpretation is inaccurate? The Holy Spirit cannot provide contradictory interpretations.

Peace.

I trust that God the Father will lead me to all truth. So if I am incorrect about something, he will enlighten me. Until then, conviction and faith in the Holy Spirit that dwells inside of me. How do I determine others are incorrect? The same way, and I assesss their “fruit of the spirit”…no fruit, then I doubt they have the truth.

 

[NiceFundamental]

jim1130:

Peace.

Does this means I get to be my own infallible authority?

Peace.

My interpretation has nothing to do with it. I read, I read, I pray for wisdom and guidance and the ability to discern. If I were to use my mere mortal heart, It would lead me astray.

I let the Holy Spirit convict me. Guide me. He does and it is wonderful.

You? You may do anything you wish.

 

[NiceFundamental]

I don’t mean to be rude. It was a pleasure but house chores are calling.

 

[john_ennis]

NiceFundamental:

My interpretation has nothing to do with it. I read, I read, I pray for wisdom and guidance and the ability to discern. If I were to use my mere mortal heart, It would lead me astray.

I let the Holy Spirit convict me. Guide me. He does and it is wonderful.

You? You may do anything you wish.

I’ll do as the Etheopian responded to Philip.
How can I understand unless there is someone to explain it to me?

Peace.
John

 

[Eden]

NiceFundamental:

. The Holy Spirit has convicted me and I am comfortable with my rendering of it.

Has the Holy Spirit given you the gift of infallibility?

 

[Eden]

NiceFundamental:

I see it as someone not “Born Again”…no Holy Spirit in them.

John 3:5 is specifically referring to baptism. We are born again in the spirit through the transformation that takes place on our souls at baptism. This is not referring to “accepting Jesus as your Lord and Savior” and saying the “Jesus Prayer” to be “born again”.

There are no early Christians who understood “born again” the way you do:

catholic.com/thisrock/1999/9907frs.asp

catholic.com/library/are_catholics_born_again.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2000/0012fea5.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2005/0502fea5.asp

catholic.com/thisrock/2003/0304sbs.asp