Just wondering about Protestantism...

[Radagast]

Whereas I would say that Protestants simply don't have the same philosophical tradition to ground their theology

That's just nonsense. The conservative Protestants in particular conserve theological tradition. That's why they're called conservative .

Taking that example, for Protestants to oppose female ministers in today's world would be like a small vessel to oppose the ocean currents.

I don't think you realise how many conservative Protestants there are.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church struggles to conserve even the words of baptism: Baptism controversy points to larger question of communion, says Australian archbishop

 

[Radagast]

I was saying that there are traditions, i.e. customs, among Protestants but they do not establish doctrine. That's the difference.

I would say that there were indeed doctrinal standards (the Creeds, the 39 Articles, the Westminster Confession, the Canons of Dordt), but that these did not establish doctrine, being founded on (and subordinate to) Scripture.

 

[Albion]

I would say that there were indeed doctrinal standards (the Creeds, the 39 Articles, the Westminster Confession, the Canons of Dordt), but that these did not establish doctrine, being founded on (and subordinate to) Scripture.

These Creedal statements don't establish doctrine, that's right. They are, as you indicated, summaries of the basic beliefs of the faith as taught in Scripture.

 

[Radagast]

These Creedal statements don't establish doctrine, that's right. They are, as you indicated, summaries of the basic beliefs of the faith as taught in Scripture.

I wasn't arguing with you; I was attempting to reword what you said to something we both agreed with.

 

[Albion]

I wasn't arguing with you; I was attempting to reword what you said to something we both agreed with.

Thanks. I was unsure about that. It seemed like agreement, but it looked to me like it could be taken the other way, too.

 

[SwordmanJr]

Not really. It was just a bit of curiosity arising from your first comment about being a Catholic but not being a Catholic.

In the future, please represent what I actually said, because being Catholic doesn't mean I have to be of the Roman stripe to be Catholic. The Roman Jesus cannot totally save from what I have read in their catechisms. They have to do works to finally arrive in Heaven once they have earned enough graces, or have them bestowed upon them, to get out of their man-made ideal of purgatory.

The Jesus I read about in the Bible paid it all, and does not have to be called down daily, according to Hebrews 9:26.

I have a photo of a roman catholics Jesus in San Juan, who is shown in a photo still laying in a glass case, needing peso donations from the poor to be buried. The understanding those people had when that was on display was that the body in the case is in fact the Jesus they think is called down for daily sacrifice for sins. Some of those folks still sacrifice chickens to their long past ancestors. They said the vatican has been well aware of that practice for about a century, and has had no problem with its continuance as long as they continue to pay their tithes and attend mass and confessions.

How long will be before the Anglicans and a number of others join with Rome in ecumenical unity under the same leadership structure? Do you foresee that happening soon?

Jr

 

[Albion]

In the future, please represent what I actually said, because being Catholic doesn't mean I have to be of the Roman stripe to be Catholic.

That's exactly what I took you to have told us, and that's why my curiosity was piqued regarding which denomination you might actually belong to or favor. However, that curiosity has since passed.

 

[SwordmanJr]

That's exactly what I took you to have told us, and that's why my curiosity was piqued regarding which denomination you might actually belong to or favor. However, that curiosity has since passed.

Your question did bring up an interesting topic of how programmed many are with thinking that offiicial groupings are somehow magically legitimized, and all others are lone-star renegades. I'm not saying that's your mindset, but it is reflective of the general consensus of many, most or all religionists who are not able to see broad-side of their heads for the blinders.

You never did answer my question as to when your religion/denomination will be one with the Romish system. Any thoughts on that?

Jr

 

[Albion]

Your question did bring up an interesting topic of how programmed many are with thinking that offiicial groupings are somehow magically legitimized, and all others are lone-star renegades.

It appears that there is a clear line of division on that issue with significant numbers of people and churches asserting that they are the only true church, with the other group taking the view that the "church of Christ" encompasses all believers and church bodies which hold to the essentials of the faith.

You never did answer my question as to when your religion/denomination will be one with the Romish system. Any thoughts on that?

The chances of that happening are infinitesimally small.

 

[hedrick]

.

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church struggles to conserve even the words of baptism: Baptism controversy points to larger question of communion, says Australian archbishop

Yikes. In the US there’s an agreement between the RCC and PCUSA that commits both churches to using the traditional wording.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church struggles to conserve even the words of baptism: Baptism controversy points to larger question of communion, says Australian archbishop

I realize this is off topic, but...

I've never understood the rationale behind changing the words of Baptism like this, it doesn't add clarity to what Christianity believes, it doesn't provide some kind of "gender neutral" way of talking about this; and not only that, it's straight up theologically errant.

Creator, liberator, and sustainer each can apply to all three Divine Persons. Yes, we confess the Father as "Maker of all things", but we also confess Christ the Word through whom all things were made and "by whom and for whom all things were made", as well the the Holy Spirit the Giver of Life; likewise yes Christ is our Savior, but the Father likewse is Savior and the Spirit; and it shouldn't be at all shocking that the Father sustains all things by His Word and Spirit, so calling only the Spirit "sustainer" is likewise wrong.

This should be basic Trinitarianism 101 stuff, something any ordained member of the clergy (regardless of church) should know.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Radagast]

I've never understood the rationale behind changing the words of Baptism like this, it doesn't add clarity to what Christianity believes, it doesn't provide some kind of "gender neutral" way of talking about this; and not only that, it's straight up theologically errant.

You're certainly getting no argument from me.

When Jesus gave us the words, it was because He meant us to use the words.

 

[zippy2006]

Meanwhile, the Catholic Church struggles to conserve even the words of baptism: Baptism controversy points to larger question of communion, says Australian archbishop

That's a remarkably false statement. You found one church in Australia that was baptizing with a strange formula, was corrected by the Catholic bishop, and was forced to return to the traditional formula? Yeah, clearly "The Catholic Church struggles to conserve even the words of baptism."

 

[BobRyan]

I’ve long been Protestant. But lately I’ve been questioning things. I note that the Catholic Church has maintained a strict view of traditional marriage, prohibits divorce and remarriage, prohibits use of contraceptives, is staunchly pro-life, rejects freemasonry, sticks to male led churches... many of these things have been watered down within some of the Protestant churches and I question and wonder why..
I would be interested in people’s different perspectives on these things...

I agree that the strengths of the Catholic church are many of the things you listed although it is moving more toward inclusiveness in the messages the Pope sends to the U.S. regarding alternate marriage and sexual orientation life styles.

And within the Protestant organizations there are some very conservative and also some very liberal examples.

But I don't compare a given catholic who might be saying "Bible does not matter" to a given Protestant saying "the Bible does not matter". Rather I would compare the most conservative of the two

 

[SwordmanJr]

It appears that there is a clear line of division on that issue with significant numbers of people and churches asserting that they are the only true church, with the other group taking the view that the "church of Christ" encompasses all believers and church bodies which hold to the essentials of the faith.

When it comes to any institution, any one of the models of institutions and denominations, it really matters not at all which among them lays claim to being the "only true church". The bottom line is that any and all doctrines that do not align with the Bible are either man-made, false.....or both. That's the beauty of having what is written because Jesus defeated Satan in the wilderness ONLY with, "It is written...," and He did not defer to anything outside what He, God, inspired to be written. In addition to that, we have what is written in 1 John 2:

[26-27 KJV] 26 These [things] have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

So, we are not limited to mere translations, but also possess the Spirit of God to instruct us that we may know the REAL Truth. Priests, pastors, teachers, et al, they ALL can teach errors. They ALL are fallible, and I do mean ALL, no matter what title/office may be attributed to him/them by men claiming that such came from upon high.

Jesus said of Himself:

[Jhn 10:11, 14 KJV] 11 I am the good shepherd (singular): the good shepherd (singular) giveth his life for the sheep. ... 14 I am the good shepherd (singular again), and know my [sheep], and am known of mine.

To those who are mature in the faith, all other voices are nothing more than voices piled upon voices into a roar of noise. In that storm, there is that still, small voice with that ring of the Divine, and that voice does not emanate from any earthly man, even though there are those who would claim he is speaking for God. God has already spoken, and needs no repeating, nor does the Lord give new revelation to any man.

I have that on good authority:

[Mal 3:6 KJV] 6 For I [am] the LORD, I change not;...

The enemy is therefore defeated only by what is written (past tense), not what will be written, or what is being written right now by those who presume to speak for God.

Jr

 

[bbbbbbb]

When it comes to any institution, any one of the models of institutions and denominations, it really matters not at all which among them lays claim to being the "only true church". The bottom line is that any and all doctrines that do not align with the Bible are either man-made, false.....or both. That's the beauty of having what is written because Jesus defeated Satan in the wilderness ONLY with, "It is written...," and He did not defer to anything outside what He, God, inspired to be written. In addition to that, we have what is written in 1 John 2:

[26-27 KJV] 26 These [things] have I written unto you concerning them that seduce you. 27 But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him.

So, we are not limited to mere translations, but also possess the Spirit of God to instruct us that we may know the REAL Truth. Priests, pastors, teachers, et al, they ALL can teach errors. They ALL are fallible, and I do mean ALL, no matter what title/office may be attributed to him/them by men claiming that such came from upon high.

Jesus said of Himself:

[Jhn 10:11, 14 KJV] 11 I am the good shepherd (singular): the good shepherd (singular) giveth his life for the sheep. ... 14 I am the good shepherd (singular again), and know my [sheep], and am known of mine.

To those who are mature in the faith, all other voices are nothing more than voices piled upon voices into a roar of noise. In that storm, there is that still, small voice with that ring of the Divine, and that voice does not emanate from any earthly man, even though there are those who would claim he is speaking for God. God has already spoken, and needs no repeating, nor does the Lord give new revelation to any man.

I have that on good authority:

[Mal 3:6 KJV] 6 For I [am] the LORD, I change not;...

The enemy is therefore defeated only by what is written (past tense), not what will be written, or what is being written right now by those who presume to speak for God.

Jr

Probably one of the most humbling things in one's life is not to merely recognize the extreme fallibility of others and their attempts to elucidate the truth, by our own extreme fallibility especially in our own attempts to elucidate the truth. As Jeremiah said, the heart is deceitful above all else and desperately wicked. Who can know it?

 

[SwordmanJr]

Probably one of the most humbling things in one's life is not to merely recognize the extreme fallibility of others and their attempts to elucidate the truth, by our own extreme fallibility especially in our own attempts to elucidate the truth. As Jeremiah said, the heart is deceitful above all else and desperately wicked. Who can know it?

Ahh, but the beauty of it is that I don't have to look for fallibility in others. That's already established by what is written:

[Rom 3:4 KJV] 4 ...yea, let God be true, but every man a liar;...

So, they can elucidate all they want because we have the Top Authority who promises that His Spirit within us gives to us all that we need where Truth is concerned. That's what it means for Christ to be the one and ONLY Head.

The idea of perpetual sheepdom is a man-made construct for ministers to ensure their careers. True ministers of God strive to raise the people up to maturity in the faith for full functionality for Christ Jesus rather than dependent upon ministers in perpetuity.

Jr

 

[concretecamper]

I’ve long been Protestant. But lately I’ve been questioning things. I note that the Catholic Church has maintained a strict view of traditional marriage, prohibits divorce and remarriage, prohibits use of contraceptives, is staunchly pro-life, rejects freemasonry, sticks to male led churches... many of these things have been watered down within some of the Protestant churches and I question and wonder why..
I would be interested in people’s different perspectives on these things...

You bring up alot of good points. I would encourage you to continue your study of history. The issue you raise are 100% correct.

You have also noticed that some protestants on this thread are attempting to confuse you by posting false statements. This can be used to your advantage. Look at replies and find out for yourself what the Church taught and now teaches. You will not find new novel ideas like so called women priest, acceptance homosexual clergy, changing God as Father, accepting contraception, accepting abortion, changing the idea of marriage (in many ways), too many man made innovations to post.

God bless you on you journey.

 

[hedrick]

I’ve long been Protestant. But lately I’ve been questioning things. I note that the Catholic Church has maintained a strict view of traditional marriage, prohibits divorce and remarriage, prohibits use of contraceptives, is staunchly pro-life, rejects freemasonry, sticks to male led churches... many of these things have been watered down within some of the Protestant churches and I question and wonder why..
I would be interested in people’s different perspectives on these things...

As far as I’m concerned these are all traditions not essential to Jesus message. They are actually my major objection to the Catholic Church, which otherwise has some real strengths.

 

[concretecamper]

I daresay you yourself do not know what your church teaches on a wide number of issues

?

Your own Pope is muddying the waters considerably, as you well know.

yep, some of his personal ideas are odd.