Protestantism has done more harm than good.

Aussie Pete · Sep 22, 2020

parousia70 said:
Well, I know the difference between the Church governmental offices instituted by Christ and carried out by the apostles in succession, and the fallible men who come and go in the roles, who either live up to the Honor and integrity of the office, or not.

Do you?

Even Judas, Chosen By Christ personally to fill the role of "apostle", did not live up the honor and integrity of the Office, so what did the apostles do? Did they Eliminate the role and call into question the legitimacy of the role of "apostle"? No. They chose another to take his place in that God Ordained Role (Acts 1:20)

Christ and the apostles came to build a Church that would exist forever (Eph 3:21; Matt 16:18-19), and that Church had leadership contained in "offices" (1 Tim 3:1,10; Acts 1:20; Rom 11:13, 12:4).

Organizational authority and the "offices" set up within it, whether it be Bishops and Popes, Senators and Presidents, or PTA board members and PTA Presidents exist in the same legitimacy they were set up in, whether or not the individuals who come an go who hold the office temporarily, live up to the Honor of the office held. Just because we've had bad Popes doesn't negate the authority of the office itself, any more than the notion that because we had a bad apostle (Judas), it therefore negates the legitimacy of the office of Apostle, which seems to be your claim.

Catholic and Eastern Orthodox do claim apostolic succession and have both scripture and history to back them. I don't know of any protestant denoms that can claim this or do claim it. Protestants have to claim that the Church is "invisible" to try and maintain legitimacy as "the Church"--but this is biblically untenable, for the Church of the Holy Scriptures is not invisible but consists of a clear apostolic succession of ordained bishops that hold authority by virtue of their apostolic office (a calling that individuals may or may not live up to, just like the President of the U.S.A.). Quite simply, God created a visible Church and who can deny it from scripture. Protestantism, on the other hand, is 20,000 or more denoms that teach a myriad of different things, do not recognize each other's authority or doctrines, do not work together, compete against each other, etc.etc. It seems impossible to me that anyone could claim protestantism as a legitimate form of the one true Church of scripture (or history).

If you examine the doctrines of denominational protestant churches, you will find very little difference. I was in the Navy when I got saved. I spent 3 years on the ship and we went to many countries in our region. I visited churches in Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Hawaii as well as different cities in Australia. The differences were few. Denominations form because of ego far more than doctrine.

Again, I would rather have protestant freedoms than the tyranny of Rome. The visible church is everyone who is born again. Lord Jesus appoints gifts to the church, not a bunch of cardinals. I do not claim that protestantism is the one true church. I detest "isms" in general. A great many people who attend church are not born again and God does not recognised them. There is a thing that I call "Christianism". It has the appearance but not the reality of Christianity.

We are in the era that Paul warned about, where people do not endure sound doctrine. Protestant Christianity is fast losing the plot, focusing on experiences rather than the Lord Jesus crucified and God's word. Rome is inching closer to Islam. Tell me how this is possible? Christians rot in Pakistan prisons while the pope cosies up to Islam. Christians are being murdered by Muslims who think that they are doing God a favour. The "one true church" can't even recognise the antichrist spirit of Islam? Give me a break.

AV1611VET · Sep 22, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
I was in the Navy when I got saved. I spent 3 years on the ship and we went to many countries in our region. I visited churches in Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Hawaii as well as different cities in Australia.

Guam?

Saint Steven · Sep 22, 2020

Jesus is YHWH said:
were you born before 1960 ?

I probably have kids older than you.................

Yes, I was born before 1960. (1955)

Jesus is YHWH · Sep 22, 2020

Saint Steven said:
Yes, I was born before 1960. (1955)

1960 and saved in 1980

Saint Steven · Sep 22, 2020

Jesus is YHWH said:
1960 and saved in 1980

Born 1955 and saved in 1963.
Nothing to do with doctrine. - lol

GenemZ · Sep 22, 2020

Jesus is YHWH said:
where on earth did you grow up ?

I dated a catholic and I was a protestant in highschool. her best friend was a catholic in fact all her friends were and she went to a catholic school and we were all friends. I played baseball with lots of catholics and we hung out all the time.

I grew up in the 50's..

95% of all my friends while growing up were Catholic. I was the oddball Jew amongst them all. Had one spit on me when he heard I was Jewish. Other than that one Inquisitor? We all loved getting along. Been over some of their houses, and no problem. Had one or two Presbyterian friends. The Presbyterians got along great with Catholics, too. Dated almost exclusively Catholic girls. Baseball, like you. Same deal.

I am not sure what the problem was if someone was a Protestant. From what I have seen here, I think my family might have told me to steer clear of him too. :angel:

Artorius Lacomus · Sep 23, 2020

Saint Steven said:
I agree that there has been a move in the right direction. But decades early, this was NOT the case. When I was a child, the Catholic children were forbidden to have anything to do with us horrible Protestants. And I think there was animosity from the other direction as well. They have been fighting in Ireland for generations.

Actually it WAS the case decades ago. All bunches of mixed up denominations playing together at recess, no big deal, nobody cared. And nobody not allowed to not play with other denoms. Also, no such thing as an enemy Church. In truth I've never heard of an enemy Church until reading your post.

Full Site

Aussie Pete · Sep 23, 2020

AV1611VET said:
Guam?

No. Guam is not in Australia.

Artorius Lacomus said:
Actually it WAS the case decades ago. All bunches of mixed up denominations playing together at recess, no big deal, nobody cared. And nobody not allowed to not play with other denoms. Also, no such thing as an enemy Church. In truth I've never heard of an enemy Church until reading your post.

Full Site

I was raised in the UK. If a kid was Catholic, it was as if they had leprosy to non-Catholics. And they despised non-Catholics. Of course, that was brainwashing by the parents.

Saint Steven · Sep 23, 2020

Artorius Lacomus said:
Actually it WAS the case decades ago. All bunches of mixed up denominations playing together at recess, no big deal, nobody cared. And nobody not allowed to not play with other denoms. Also, no such thing as an enemy Church. In truth I've never heard of an enemy Church until reading your post.

Full Site

Are you aware that we have protected denominational areas here on this very forum? Why would we need that if everyone gets along just fine?

We have rules in place to prevent posters from making derogatory remarks against a particular denomination's beliefs.

If you don't believe me, go onto any denominational area and read the statement of faith. I picked this up from the Baptist denominational area.

House Rules:
All posts within this faith community must adhere to the site wide rules found here (Community Rules). In addition, if you are not a member of this faith group, you may not debate issues or teach against it's theology. You may post in fellowship. Active promotion of views contrary to the established teachings of this group will be considered off topic.

Saint Steven · Sep 23, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
If you examine the doctrines of denominational protestant churches, you will find very little difference. I was in the Navy when I got saved. I spent 3 years on the ship and we went to many countries in our region. I visited churches in Singapore, Hong Kong, Japan, Hawaii as well as different cities in Australia. The differences were few. Denominations form because of ego far more than doctrine.

Right. (except the ego part) Although that does happen.
In my view, each denomination focuses on a specific area or set of areas that they feel are most important. Denominations split when the focus changes.

The argument that, "There are thousands of denominations and none of them agree, they can't all be right.", is divisive nonsense.

parousia70 · Sep 23, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
The visible church is everyone who is born again. Lord Jesus appoints gifts to the church, not a bunch of cardinals.

Rather, Jesus appointed a GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE that Protestantism REJECTS.

Please address why you believe the Governmental structure of the Church, instituted by Christ and carried forward by His apostles, by the laying on of hands in ordination, is to be rejected by any Christian today.

Titus 1:5
5 For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that were wanting, and appoint elders in every city, as I gave thee charge;

Lord Jesus appoints gifts to the church

And how are those Gifts appointed?
By the laying on of Hands in ordination:

2 Timothy 1:6
6 Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands.

1 Timothy 4:14
14 Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.

not a bunch of cardinals.

Acts 1:20

For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

Albion · Sep 23, 2020

Aussie Pete said:
Again, I would rather have protestant freedoms than the tyranny of Rome. The visible church is everyone who is born again. Lord Jesus appoints gifts to the church, not a bunch of cardinals.

parousia70 said:
Rather, Jesus appointed a GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE that Protestantism REJECTS.

Well, there's no way to argue that cardinals are part of it!

And of course, it's not true that "Protestantism" rejects Apostolic Succession, etc., since the term "Protestantism" is a loosely-applied one which includes churches that retained that GOVERNMENTAL STRUCTURE as well as ones that chose not to.

BNR32FAN · Sep 23, 2020

Inkfingers said:
Essentially I'm wondering if hundreds of denominations, with dozens of versions of the Bible, has resulted in confusion and (in response) apostacy; whether into heretical denominations or fully out of any semblance of the Church whatsoever.

People keep telling me that scripture is protected but it cannot be protected when there are literally dozens of different versions of the Bible. Of course, they claim that their favourite one is the special version, but heck they can't all be right can they...

So I'm calling out Protestantism as doing more harm than good because it makes a chaos and confusion of matters that shatters the Church and drives people away.

What say you all?

I think the reason Protestantism began is a valid reason but unfortunately I think it’s founders focused too much on rejecting Roman Catholicism and in doing so did away with some important teachings.

parousia70 · Sep 23, 2020

Albion said:
Well, there's no way to argue that cardinals are part of it!

Of course there is.
Acts 1:20

For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishoprick let another take.

Apostolic Succession is historical and biblical. It can be traced by history, going all the way back generation by generation to Jesus.

Francis is, without question, the 266th successor of the Prime Minister of the King, Bishop of the Church of Rome, an apostolic Church which appears in our bibles.

Jesus clearly gave St. Peter "the keys of the kingdom" (Matthew 16:18-19), and the power invested in Peter was the same as when the O.T. kings bestowed the keys on their prime ministers. Please read Isaiah 22:15-24 to see what power was invested in the prime minister of Israel's king.

God has created a governmental order to the Church, and this has not been followed by protestants who broke away from the government of the Church and denied it existed.

No protestant denomination traces its history back to before about AD 1500. So, we know for a fact that no modern protestant sect has apostolic origins. Yet the catholic sect does, for it originated in the first century and continued in unbroken existence down to our times, exactly as prophesied (Matthew 16:18)

Albion · Sep 23, 2020

BNR32FAN said:
I think the reason Protestantism began is a valid reason but unfortunately I think it’s founders focused too much on rejecting Roman Catholicism and in doing so did away with some important teachings.

Such as...? You've left us with an intriguing question, you know.

Albion · Sep 23, 2020

parousia70 said:
No protestant denomination traces its history back to before about AD 1500. So, we know for a fact that no modern protestant sect has apostolic origins.

Uh, no. Of course you could make that claim if the Papacy were the issue, but the basic structure which you referred to in other terms previously still applies to many if not most Protestant church bodies.

The fact that the Roman Catholic Church refuses to acknowledge this is nothing but that church's opinion and does not go to the issue of these others having the structure you referred to or not.

BNR32FAN · Sep 23, 2020

Albion said:
Such as...? You've left us with an intriguing question, you know.

Well the necessity to walk in the spirit and remain in Christ. Now of course many protestants do believe these are necessary for salvation but there are also many who don’t believe these are necessary. Then there’s also some who believe that it’s not up to the individual at all and it doesn’t matter what you do.

parousia70 · Sep 23, 2020

Just as Jehovah Set up a governmental structure for OT Israel, Jesus is setting up His Governmental Structure for NT Israel, the Church.

The governmental structure of the New Israel is related to the Divine and historic government that existed before it. Bishops/shepherds were common names given to Israel's tribal leadership. So also "elder" was a common office of leadership over Israel. There were the kings of the monarchy, and there were prime ministers in Israel, second in command only to the reigning monarch. In a word, Israel always had a divinely instituted government, and this government was re-constututed under the New Covenant King in the first century. In the granting of the "Keys" to Peter (Matt 16:18-19/Isa 22:15-25), the appointment of the new 12 patriarchs (Matt 19:28; 10:1-4; Rev 21:12-14), and the ordination of bishops/elders and deacons, Jesus re-created Israel under the terms and conditions of the New Covenant order. Christ re-instituted the familiar leadership offices from Israel's history, and established the Twelve who expanded the Bishopric/Episcopate for New Israel. They went about ordaining men to offices in every city by the laying on of hands, and commissioned those appointees to continue this same practice also by the laying on of hands (a cardinal NT doctrine according to Hebrews 6:1-2). The establishment of the authorized bishopric can be traced throughout the New Testament scriptures, and is especially highlighted in Acts and the letters to the Bishops Titus and Timothy. The authorized government of New Israel is evidenced in Holy Scripture, and was maintained from Clement, Ignatius, Irenaeus and those that followed.

With respect, no one doubted the God Given authority of Peter and his successors until after the 1500s. The early Christians believed it and taught it. As they all understood, Jesus gave His own keys of the Kingdom to Peter (Mt 16:18-19), and the power this conferred upon Peter is detailed at Isaiah 22:15-24, when the O.T. kings gave the keys to their prime ministers.

Albion · Sep 23, 2020

BNR32FAN said:
Well the necessity to walk in the spirit and remain in Christ.

Really? You seriously think that Protestantism junked this ^??

Maybe you mean something other than it seems to the reader, but if not, it's a stunning comment.

Now of course many protestants do believe these are necessary for salvation but there are also many who don’t believe these are necessary.

"Many" is always going to be controversial. If you are referring to some sort of OSAS Christians they certainly are not typical of "Protestantism."

Albion · Sep 23, 2020

parousia70 said:
With respect, no one doubted the authority of Peter and his successors until after the 1500s.

Except for the whole of the Eastern Christian churches, including the Greek Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, the Arminian Church, and all the smaller ones there as well, plus the English church, the Ethiopian church, and ....

Protestantism has done more harm than good.

Well-Known Member

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE

You can call me Steve

my Lord and my God !

You can call me Steve

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

You can call me Steve

You can call me Steve

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Facilitator

He’s a Way of life

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Facilitator

Facilitator

He’s a Way of life

Livin' in yesterday's tomorrow

Facilitator

Facilitator

Similar threads