Another Problem

[FaithT]

Okay, I’ve been studying a lot about the Protestantism and Catholicism to see if I’m in the right place. I was leaning toward going back to Catholicism but today I went to both services; Catholic and my LCMS Church, after having a nice visit with a priest this week.

After going to both services today I’ve decided I like the LCMS best. But here’s my problem. Catholics on the forums as well as the priest I spoke with say that Catholicism is the “truth”.
i need some words of wisdom from the LCMS posters here.

 

[BravoM]

Yeah, most of them "claim" their way is the only way. Screams narcissism and pride if anything.
"We are the one True way!"

 

[SuperCow]

1500+ different denominations. Those that don't claim to have everything correct? Probably less than 25.

 

[FaithT]

Yeah, most of them "claim" their way is the only way. Screams narcissism and pride if anything.
"We are the one True way!"

I think cult leaders say that all the time, too.

 

[Tigger45]

I grew up RC so I have an affinity for it but Lutheranism maintained all of the historical parts of the original church and proclaims the purest Gospel of any Christian tradition.

 

[FaithT]

I grew up RC so I have an affinity for it but Lutheranism maintained all of the historical parts of the original church and proclaims the purest Gospel of any Christian tradition.

Do you believe that Catholicism is the “truth”?

 

[Tigger45]

Do you believe that Catholicism is the “truth”?

I think they are Christian but have taken liberties with their developmental theology.

 

[FaithT]

I think they are Christian but have taken liberties with their developmental theology.

What do you mean?

 

[Daniel9v9]

I just replied to a direct message with the same question, but I'm glad to share it here as well in case anyone else can benefit from it:

We have to be very careful when playing the numbers game. That is, just because something is believed by many, it does not automatically follow what they believe is true, for often it's not! This is true for religion, politics, science, philosophy and every idea.

Now, we can rejoice in that God has given us a means of testing people's ideas, so let's consider it in brief:

How can we be absolutely certain that an idea or teaching is from God?
We can compare it with the Bible, which is the Word of God, for this is what God's prophets, apostles and Jesus Himself explicitly teach throughout the written Word.

What about teachings that come from tradition? Are they from God?
Here we can make the following distinctions:

(1) If something is neither commanded nor forbidden by the Bible, we call it adiaphora. Here the Christian has freedom in Christ to either exercise it or refrain from exercising in whatever way best serves our neighbour.

(2) If someone claims that a doctrine is from God via tradition, we can test it against the Bible with the following:
1. Is the teaching commanded in the Bible?
2. Are there any promises connected to the teaching in the Bible?
3. Are there any examples of the teaching in the Bible?

If the answer to answer to the above is "no, no, and no", then we can be certain that the teaching is not from God, but is either man-made or a doctrine of demons.

The difference between (1) and (2) above is that (1) is not believed to be from God, but is a man-made thing we can exercise for the sake of good order. (2), however, is something supposed to be from God. So (1) concerns things that are not of divine right, but (2) concerns things that someone claims are by divine right.

So let's put this to the test with a couple of practical examples:

Celebrating Christmas
The Bible does not command nor forbid that we should celebrate Christmas. Here we have Christian freedom. However, we believe it's always good to reflect on Christ, so we celebrate Christ in our freedom.

The sign of the cross
Is it commanded by the Bible? No. Is it forbidden by the Bible? No. Again, here we have Christian freedom. No one is saying that this is a command from God, but rather, it's a man-made symbolic gesture to reflect our faith in Jesus who was crucified for our sins, and that we are baptised in His name.

Prayers to Mary, saints, and angels
1. Does the Bible command us to pray to Mary, saints, or angels? No.
2. Are there any promises in the Bible that Mary, saints, and angels can receive our prayers? No.
3. Are there any examples of anyone in the Bible praying to Mary, saints, or angels? No.

Conclusion: This doctrine is not from God, but is man-made or a doctrine of demons. For not only does it lack any command, promise, or example in God's Word, but it is also plainly against God's Word, for overwhelmingly throughout the Bible, we learn that prayers are only to be directed to God. He commands us to pray to Him, and He promises to hear our prayers, and every prayer by God's people in the Bible is directed to God alone.

Now, since the Roman Catholic Church claims that God speaks through their church, what they teach, believe, and confess ought to be consistent with the written Word, but often it's not. The example of prayers above is just one example of this. The Lutheran Church, however, makes no claim that God speaks to us through tradition, but is instead firmly rooted in God's Word alone, for we know that in it, we have the full assurance of God's Word. In the Bible, we have God's Law and Gospel and everything we need to know for our salvation. Regrettably, our Roman Catholic friends go far beyond what is written on many accounts.

So, with all of this in mind, we can simply ask: Which of the two church bodies are most consistent with the Bible? I think any honest person who knows the Scriptures would have to say the Lutheran Church. Now, if the question was who is the most consistent with the Bible and the Roman Catholic Holy Tradition, then, of course, it would be our Roman Catholic friends. But in this, we see that their fidelity is to the Bible AND what they understand to be a tradition from God. Whereas we are compelled to uphold what the Bible teaches and reject that which is contrary to it.

There is a lot more I can say about this, but this post is already very long! If you interested in the Church, I've written an article here that considers what the Church is: The Church

Hope this helps! Blessings!

 

[FaithT]

I just replied to a direct message with the same question, but I'm glad to share it here as well in case anyone else can benefit from it:

We have to be very careful when playing the numbers game. That is, just because something is believed by many, it does not automatically follow what they believe is true, for often it's not! This is true for religion, politics, science, philosophy and every idea.

Now, we can rejoice in that God has given us a means of testing people's ideas, so let's consider it in brief:

How can we be absolutely certain that an idea or teaching is from God?
We can compare it with the Bible, which is the Word of God, for this is what God's prophets, apostles and Jesus Himself explicitly teach throughout the written Word.

What about teachings that come from tradition? Are they from God?
Here we can make the following distinctions:

(1) If something is neither commanded nor forbidden by the Bible, we call it adiaphora. Here the Christian has freedom in Christ to either exercise it or refrain from exercising in whatever way best serves our neighbour.

(2) If someone claims that a doctrine is from God via tradition, we can test it against the Bible with the following:
1. Is the teaching commanded in the Bible?
2. Are there any promises connected to the teaching in the Bible?
3. Are there any examples of the teaching in the Bible?

If the answer to answer to the above is "no, no, and no", then we can be certain that the teaching is not from God, but is either man-made or a doctrine of demons.

The difference between (1) and (2) above is that (1) is not believed to be from God, but is a man-made thing we can exercise for the sake of good order. (2), however, is something supposed to be from God. So (1) concerns things that are not of divine right, but (2) concerns things that someone claims are by divine right.

So let's put this to the test with a couple of practical examples:

Celebrating Christmas
The Bible does not command nor forbid that we should celebrate Christmas. Here we have Christian freedom. However, we believe it's always good to reflect on Christ, so we celebrate Christ in our freedom.

The sign of the cross
Is it commanded by the Bible? No. Is it forbidden by the Bible? No. Again, here we have Christian freedom. No one is saying that this is a command from God, but rather, it's a man-made symbolic gesture to reflect our faith in Jesus who was crucified for our sins, and that we are baptised in His name.

Prayers to Mary, saints, and angels
1. Does the Bible command us to pray to Mary, saints, or angels? No.
2. Are there any promises in the Bible that Mary, saints, and angels can receive our prayers? No.
3. Are there any examples of anyone in the Bible praying to Mary, saints, or angels? No.

Conclusion: This doctrine is not from God, but is man-made or a doctrine of demons. For not only does it lack any command, promise, or example in God's Word, but it is also plainly against God's Word, for overwhelmingly throughout the Bible, we learn that prayers are only to be directed to God. He commands us to pray to Him, and He promises to hear our prayers, and every prayer by God's people in the Bible is directed to God alone.

Now, since the Roman Catholic Church claims that God speaks through their church, what they teach, believe, and confess ought to be consistent with the written Word, but often it's not. The example of prayers above is just one example of this. The Lutheran Church, however, makes no claim that God speaks to us through tradition, but is instead firmly rooted in God's Word alone, for we know that in it, we have the full assurance of God's Word. In the Bible, we have God's Law and Gospel and everything we need to know for our salvation. Regrettably, our Roman Catholic friends go far beyond what is written on many accounts.

So, with all of this in mind, we can simply ask: Which of the two church bodies are most consistent with the Bible? I think any honest person who knows the Scriptures would have to say the Lutheran Church. Now, if the question was who is the most consistent with the Bible and the Roman Catholic Holy Tradition, then, of course, it would be our Roman Catholic friends. But in this, we see that their fidelity is to the Bible AND what they understand to be a tradition from God. Whereas we are compelled to uphold what the Bible teaches and reject that which is contrary to it.

There is a lot more I can say about this, but this post is already very long! If you interested in the Church, I've written an article here that considers what the Church is: The Church

Hope this helps! Blessings!

Thanks for your reply. The priest I spoke with gave me an example of something that is in the Bible with regards to Purgatory. So,I thought that maybe there are Biblical answers to these questions. Then again maybe it was out of context but didn’t seem to be. The quote which I can’t recall was 1 Corinthians 3: 11-15, I think

 

[Daniel9v9]

Thanks for your reply. The priest I spoke with gave me an example of something that is in the Bible with regards to Purgatory. So,I thought that maybe there are Biblical answers to these questions. Then again maybe it was out of context but didn’t seem to be. The quote which I can’t recall was 1 Corinthians 3: 11-15, I think

Yep, it's possible to read our own ideas into the Biblical text. To take an example, if a person reads the Bible with a mind on racism, he can import his own ideas into the text and make them be about race, when the text itself actually knows nothing of race as people commonly understand it in our time.

Likewise, Roman Catholic theologians read into the Biblical text the ideas of Purgatory etc. which are nowhere found in the Bible. But honest Roman Catholics will admit that Purgatory has no direct or explicit reference anywhere in the Scriptures, and so they have to appeal to tradition. And that tradition is on many accounts contrary to the Scriptures.

To read the whole doctrine of Purgatory from 1 Corinthians 3 is a wild stretch! It's not there. It's only assumed to be there if we believe the doctrine from tradition to be true, but the problem is that the Scriptures overwhelmingly talk about two ways: Life and Death; Salvation and Damnation. So, here we can apply another principle: Clear passages in the Bible must always govern unclear passages. Here's an example of what I mean:

Jesus says in Luke 14:26: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple."

If all we had from the Bible was this single verse, our image of Jesus would be very different. However, when we consider the context and everything else He says, we can rightly understand this passage. In the same way, then, when we read 1 Corinthians 3, we should consider the context and bear in mind everything the Bible says about heaven, hell, and salvation through Jesus. Simply, Purgatory does not fit into the Biblical framework at all. It fits into the Roman Catholic theological framework, but it's born out of tradition, and not the Bible. So, whenever Roman Catholic apologists explain Purgatory and prayers to saints etc. they always appeal to tradition as opposed to God's written Word, whereas we insist on the Word and reject all that is contrary to it.

 

[FaithT]

Yep, it's possible to read our own ideas into the Biblical text. To take an example, if a person reads the Bible with a mind on racism, he can import his own ideas into the text and make them be about race, when the text itself actually knows nothing of race as people commonly understand it in our time.

Likewise, Roman Catholic theologians read into the Biblical text the ideas of Purgatory etc. which are nowhere found in the Bible. But honest Roman Catholics will admit that Purgatory has no direct or explicit reference anywhere in the Scriptures, and so they have to appeal to tradition. And that tradition is on many accounts contrary to the Scriptures.

To read the whole doctrine of Purgatory from 1 Corinthians 3 is a wild stretch! It's not there. It's only assumed to be there if we believe the doctrine from tradition to be true, but the problem is that the Scriptures overwhelmingly talk about two ways: Life and Death; Salvation and Damnation. So, here we can apply another principle: Clear passages in the Bible must always govern unclear passages. Here's an example of what I mean:

Jesus says in Luke 14:26: "If anyone comes to me and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be my disciple."

If all we had from the Bible was this single verse, our image of Jesus would be very different. However, when we consider the context and everything else He says, we can rightly understand this passage. In the same way, then, when we read 1 Corinthians 3, we should consider the context and bear in mind everything the Bible says about heaven, hell, and salvation through Jesus. Simply, Purgatory does not fit into the Biblical framework at all. It fits into the Roman Catholic theological framework, but it's born out of tradition, and not the Bible. So, whenever Roman Catholic apologists explain Purgatory and prayers to saints etc. they always appeal to tradition as opposed to God's written Word, whereas we insist on the Word and reject all that is contrary to it.

I said something to him about how a lot of Protestants say that such and such isn’t in the Bible and he said something like the Trinity isnt mentioned in the Bible, either.

 

[Daniel9v9]

I said something to him about how a lot of Protestants say that such and such isn’t in the Bible and he said something like the Trinity isnt mentioned in the Bible, either.

Well, he's right in that the word "trinity" isn't in the Bible, but the teaching is clearly there. It's very explicit in the Great Commission, for example, where Jesus calls us to baptise in the name (singular!) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So, one God in three persons. The word "trinity" is simply a short-hand for this. So what the priest said, I regret to say is not a good or fair comparison. For the doctrine of Purgatory is not even found in concept in the Bible.

 

[FaithT]

Well, he's right in that the word "trinity" isn't in the Bible, but the teaching is clearly there. It's very explicit in the Great Commission, for example, where Jesus calls us to baptise in the name (singular!) of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. So, one God in three persons. The word "trinity" is simply a short-hand for this. So what the priest said, I regret to say is not a good or fair comparison. For the doctrine of Purgatory is not even found in concept in the Bible.

The priest seemed so sincere, though, and he did have a lot of years in the seminary before becoming ordained. How could he be so wrong?

 

[Daniel9v9]

The priest seemed so sincere, though, and he did have a lot of years in the seminary before becoming ordained. How could he be so wrong?

Yes, people can speak sincerely about many things, but that doesn't automatically mean that whatever they believe and teach to be good and true is good or true. An atheist can be very sincere in his own beliefs, same with a Buddhist, and the same with people of the different branches of Christendom. But this is precisely why we need the objective Word of God to guide us in the truth. This is why I always bring the conversation back to this simple confession: By what means can we be absolutely certain that God speaks to us? The Bible and only the Bible.

 

[TKA_TN]

I can sympathize with you. I’ve been on somewhat a journey the past few years, but I am firmly planted now in the Lutheran Church. I believe that the Lutheran Church teaches and confesses the catholic (little c) faith rightly. They kept what was good and threw out what was bad in the reformation.

Now, are there Roman Catholics who are saved? Absolutely. And many clergy and members are well-meaning people doing their best to follow Jesus. But whenever God’s people, dating back to OT days, stray from His Word, they’ve always gotten themselves into trouble. So as Lutherans, Scripture is what our Rule of Faith is and if we are true to that, we are true to the Triune God.

I’ll also add, and I have a tendency to this too, while these questions/issues are good to work out, we have to ultimately lean on faith and live the life Christ has commanded us to live. It’s easy to get bogged down in theology and wonder if we’re in the right place, but we need to also make sure we are loving our neighbors. I struggle with this a lot, but I think I’ve finally let go of a lot of it and am now just working on disciplining my children and loving those around me so that they know that Jesus is who my life is centered around.