Misconceptions about Protestants

[razeontherock]

Define "Godhead".

In relation to Col 2:9 - yeah, go ahead. Specifically wrt the "Baptismal formula" I've been asking about.

So, the early Church had the authority to define orthodoxy and say what was heresy but the modern Church does not? Why?

You're attempting to move the goalposts here. That is not what I said!

This thread is supposed to be about clearing up misconceptions about Pr's. RC's seem to think it's ok to go about yelling "heresy!" Well, in Georgia there's a law that you can't yell "snake!" within City limits. Likewise, it will generally be considered poor form to use the word "heresy" when in company w/ Pr's.

This is directly on topic for this thread, while your steadfast campaigning for RC (and against Pr) is not.

Just imagine if there were something that could be done or said that would make your skin crawl, and possibly elicit actual violent reactions from you. Would it be a loving thing for others to knowingly do this in your hearing? How about if they did it repeatedly, and insisted they were "right?" Are there no Scriptures that come to bear in such a situation?

Now I've been quite accommodating, to grant that clear-cut examples of specific issues dealt with conclusively by the Church long before any Crusades took place, may be exposed in terms of "heresy," provided the basics are spelled out in your own words. And you agree that essentially any such ideas are ancient, and well over 1400 years old. That is a long time!

I really think you should be able to see that my request is reasonable, and a reasonable compromise. And you are free to use the word "heresy" as copiously as you choose in your RC - only Bible studies and forums

A little wisdom and understanding never hurt anyone.


And again, for everyday conversation, words like "error and "false teaching" carry all the ominous undertones anyone could ever need, w/o conjuring up images of crazed lunatics hell-bent on torturing, maiming and murdering fellow believers over their Faith

In summary, the idea of "thought police" could be seen as what Pr's protest against. G-d is still perfectly capable of correcting and chastising His children as he sees fit.

I suppose your parents read you Foxe's Book of Martyrs every night before you went to sleep, huh?

I doubt either of them even know what the book is, to this day. "Pillars of the church" that they were. (Seriously!) And while I do appreciate the musical education they imparted to me, I'd gladly trade all of that for a Mom like Kathryn Kuhlman.

Do you object to capital punishment in general or simply to the methods of capital punishment (and torture) that were used in those days?

While a reasonable question, that's actually completely besides the point. Let's even go so far as to leave out the torture and MAIMING. (I mean, do you know the ghastly things they did to women?) Let's just pretend for the sake of civil discussion that the only penalty was a humane lethal injection, or bullet to the head.

Penalty for WHAT? Thought Police.

That's the objection. Your equal, for whom Christ died. Who committed no crime. Didn't even do anything wrong?! The US FF had a wonderful concept: "matters of private conscience." Ultimately these things come down to being btw us and G-d, but we should be able to discuss them with fellow believers w/o threat of punishment. That you choose to belong to a Church that infringes on those rights? I can respect your right to do so. How about a little consideration in return?

 

[razeontherock]

When I was a Protestant I struggled with the question of how I could determine true doctrine. Christ correctly observes that the Scriptures are often difficult to understand, and the ignorant and unstable distort them to their own ruin. Since the ignorant and unstable don't know that they're ignorant and unstable, how was I to know that I wasn't one of them?

I could search the scriptures more diligently, but, being ignorant and unstable, that couldn't give me any more assurance than before. I could rely on teachers wiser and more learned than I, but to find them I'd have to make judgments of their teaching based once more on my ignorant and unstable understanding of Scripture. Again, this couldn't help.

Ultimately I fell back on the understanding that I didn't need to worry about it, because having given myself to Christ He would lead me within myself to a correct understanding of Scripture. In retrospect it's obvious that in doing so I was assuming that my understanding of the relevant Scriptures wasn't subject to the problem of ignorance and instability, but at the time I (perhaps subconsciously) decided to ignore that.

That began a period of bouncing from one congregation and denomination to another, the decision to jump ship being made by the fact that the congregation or pastor taught things that contradicted my understanding of the meaning of Scripture. Was it possible that the pastor or congregation was correct, and I was wrong?... NO, because I knew that the Holy Spirit would lead me, individually, to a correct understanding of Scripture.

In other words, I believed that as a follower of Christ I was protected by the Holy Spirit from coming to erroneous conclusions about the meaning of Scripture, to the point that I could confidently shake the dust off my feet as I left one congregation and denomination after another. What I believed was precisely what the Catholic Church teaches about the Pope: that I was protected by a charism of the Holy Spirit that would protect me from error in matters of determining revealed truth.

And I am far from the only Protestant to believe that. In fact I've never met a single non-Catholic who would accept a difficult teaching that contradicted their own understanding, merely because they recognized that the person attempting to teach them had the authority to tell them "because I said so and God has placed me in doctrinal authority over you".

That's what is meant by "protestants are their own popes" - and it's not a misconception. I would have denied it vehemently if anyone accused me of it, but it was true nonetheless.

This is a perfect description of someone who actually feels called to RC. Bless you

We are not all wired the same.

 

[razeontherock]

Oh good grief.

That's post #354 folks. A response like that gets an "oh my" at least, in lieu of true feelings.

 

[Deleteriousnonsense]

Yep, this subject is pretty much exhausted. Catholics and Protestants, for all practical purposes, are brothers in Christ. The Lord knows his own. Our differences are human differences, and I doubt they matter one whit to Him who loves us each.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

So to say "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, which is the name of Jesus," does not refer to the Trinity - according to you. Thank you for answering the question!

Why do you not find this unneccesarily divisive?

you missed what Peter wrote in the scriptures about being established in the "present truth"

 

[sunlover1]

Misconceptions about "Protestants"

"Protestants worship the bible

 

[Tyndale]

Misconceptions about "Protestants"

"Protestants worship the bible

technically that could be correct. no need for a Vatican wordsmith as of yet, but Christ is described in Rev as 'the word', and the word is the bible

 

[DanuckInUSA]

The Bible is called God Breathed Word.
God=Check
Breathed=neuma=Spirit=Check
Word=Christ=Check

Worthy of worship indeed.

 

[mark46]

How about, "Protestants believe that the bible is necessary for salvation (justification)" Oops, there is another thread where many Protestants agree with this misconception.

Misconceptions about "Protestants"

"Protestants worship the bible

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Yep, this subject is pretty much exhausted. Catholics and Protestants, for all practical purposes, are brothers in Christ. The Lord knows his own. Our differences are human differences, and I doubt they matter one whit to Him who loves us each.

Don't forget about our brethren of the EOC

http://www.christianforums.com/t5805969-86/#post37210170
What would it take for Orthodoxs to come under Pope

Orthodox Heritage

The Papacy and Its Unholy State: A Worldwide W a k e - u p C a l l to Orthodox Leaders

Pope Benedict XVI reasserted the "universal primacy" of his Roman Catholic church, approving a document released on Tuesday, July 10, 2007, proclaiming that Orthodox Churches are "defective."
This was the Pontiff’s latest manner of insulting Jesus Christ and His True Church...............

 

[chilehed]

You know though that this type of individualism isn't necessarily part of Protestantism. The earliest Protestant groups saw the authority to determine doctrine as lying in the ecclesiastical community, and many would still argue that.

And yet they rejected the authority of the very Church hierarchy that esisted since the time of the Apostles. There was and is no evidence for any other.

Now, you could argue that the rampant individualism is the ultimate and necessary conclusion of what those communities believed - Luther complained about it so it was a pretty early development.

It's ironic that Luther complained about people doing the exact same thing he did himself. Radical individualism is the necessary conclusion, and it happened immediately.

 

[chilehed]

You betcha, and how do you know you're not ignorant even now?
Personally, I am not ignorant OR unstable.
I have power and love and a strong mind. In fact, I do have the mind
of Christ, holding the thoughts and purposes of Christ in my heart.
God has energized me and given me ALL things that I need for life
and for godliness...
He actually said to STUDY to show yourselves approved.. (Maybe you
didn't study enough??)


You've been reading the wrong book.. The one you shoulda been studying
woulda fixed this dilemma for you.

Seriously, Let God's curse fall on anyone, including us or even an angel from
heaven, who preaches a different kind of Good News than the one we preached to you.

Nobody is infallible.
His Word abides forever....

The words of one who is his own Pope.
You proved my point admirably.

 

[darlingrose]

I've always been curious as to what that accusation meant exactly. It never seemed to make sense to me, considering the many protestant denominations that don't even have ordained clergy.

Non Catholics don't think like Catholics. Saying one is thier own Pope must be a catholic phrase for a person asking for God's salvation, praying, and living through Jesus Christ, Not the Pope.

 

[sunlover1]

The words of one who is his own Pope.
You proved my point admirably.

Tell me then chilehed,
where might i find every verse of the bible
interpreted by your church, so that i don't
have to try to read and understand God's
words myself (and be subjected to the name
calling above).

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

Oops! Sorry, no carnal 'rational' please. Just answer the question from scripture if you would? Thanks

Is this a misconception about Protestant or a true observation -- that Protestants (in particular Evangelicals/Fundamentalists) are irrational fideists?

Not a fake church sign, but a real one -- it is a quote from Martin Luther's "Table Talk". Here is the context:

The anabaptists pretend that children, not as yet having reason, ought not to receive baptism. I answer: That reason in no way contributes to faith. Nay, in that children are destitute of reason, they are all the more fit and proper recipients of baptism. For reason is the greatest enemy that faith has: it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but – more frequently than not – struggles against the Divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God. If God can communicate the Holy Ghost to grown persons, he can, 'a fortiori', communicate it to young children. Faith comes of the Word of God, when this is heard; little children hear that Word when they receive baptism, and therewith they receive also faith.

 

[Mr Dave]

Is this a misconception about Protestant or a true observation -- that Protestants (in particular Evangelicals/Fundamentalists) are irrational fideists?

Not a fake church sign, but a real one -- it is a quote from Martin Luther's "Table Talk". Here is the context:

You get a bad egg in every bunch. On the whole I'd say it's an absolute misconception. Most Protestants are rational people. Some denominations (seen as there are differences, we're not all the same, and by some I mean my own ) promote reason/rational thought - The Methodist Church of Great Britain | The Methodist quadrilateral

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

So to say "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, which is the name of Jesus," does not refer to the Trinity - according to you. Thank you for answering the question!

Why do you not find this unneccesarily divisive?

Because Jesus came to reveal God to us in a greater fullness. Therefore we have an obligation to the pure and unadulterated reception and transmission of that revelation.

If somebody, therefore, holds something which is contrary to what Christ has revealed, it is not the orthodox who are being "unnecessarily divisive" but rather the heterodox who have separated themselves from us.

I wonder that you are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ, unto another gospel. Which is not another, only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach a gospel to you besides that which we have preached to you, let him be anathema. As we said before, so now I say again: If any one preach to you a gospel, besides that which you have received, let him be anathema.

Is that "unnecessarily divisive" or necessarily divisive?

For I am jealous of you with the jealousy of God. For I have espoused you to one husband that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. But I fear lest, as the serpent seduced Eve by his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted, and fall from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Christ, whom we have not preached; or if you receive another Spirit, whom you have not received; or another gospel which you have not received; you might well bear with him.

Little children, it is the last hour; and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many Antichrists: whereby we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they were not of us. For if they had been of us, they would no doubt have remained with us; but that they may be manifest, that they are not all of us.

We must hold to what has been revealed by Christ to the Apostles and transmitted to us today through His Church. To be contrary to the teaching of the Church is therefore to be contrary to Christ Himself who established His Church to be His spotless Bride, a chaste virgin, without the corruption of false teachers.

There are threescore queens, and fourscore concubines, and young maidens without number. One is my dove, my perfect one is but one, she is the only one of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her. The daughters saw her, and declared her most blessed: the queens and concubines, and they praised her. Who is she that cometh forth as the morning rising, fair as the moon, bright as the sun, terrible as an army set in array?

So yes, there must be divisions between the orthodox and the heterodox -- between those who hold to and preach what Christ has revealed and those who go their own way, leading people into darkness and confusion.

For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you.

But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not.

Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. How narrow is the gate, and strait is the way that leadeth to life: and few there are that find it! Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.

Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops, to rule the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. I know that, after my departure, ravening wolves will enter in among you, not sparing the flock. And of your own selves shall arise men speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.

Saying that Jesus is the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is contrary to the Gospel, which holds that Jesus is the Son of God. Therefore, a baptism under that formula is not a true baptism because it fundamentally attacks the teaching of who Jesus is and preaches "another Christ".

Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world

 

[MKJ]

And yet they rejected the authority of the very Church hierarchy that esisted since the time of the Apostles. There was and is no evidence for any other.

It's ironic that Luther complained about people doing the exact same thing he did himself. Radical individualism is the necessary conclusion, and it happened immediately.

You need to understand that the reformers were utterly convinced that the Catholic Church had erred in matters of doctrine. That is what the whole program of SS etc came out of. Of course anyone who is Catholic disagrees - but OTOH you presumably chose Catholicism, in an era when the Catholic Church is actually in reasonable shape.

The Reformers lived in a time which was in many ways much worse - I dare say the vast majority of modern Catholics would not stand for the same kinds of things - and I mean serious pious Catholics.

In any case, the Reformers were not being disobedient, in the sense that they became convinced that the Catholic Church was not what it said. They may have been mistaken, but that is not really the same as being disobedient.

 

[MKJ]

Is this a misconception about Protestant or a true observation -- that Protestants (in particular Evangelicals/Fundamentalists) are irrational fideists?

Not a fake church sign, but a real one -- it is a quote from Martin Luther's "Table Talk". Here is the context:

You know, I don't think Luther is saying the same thing that the sign is.

 

[boswd]

Is this a misconception about Protestant or a true observation -- that Protestants (in particular Evangelicals/Fundamentalists) are irrational fideists?

Not a fake church sign, but a real one -- it is a quote from Martin Luther's "Table Talk". Here is the context:

I love the huge irony here that a Baptist Church (which lives and breathes by believers baptism) chose to cherry pick a quote from Martin Luther when he was speaking about the need for baptizing infants.