Misconceptions about Protestants

[mark46]

Are you referring to Catholics, many of whom who take communion twice a year, at Easter and Christmas?

Yes Amish and JW's only have communion twice a year. Most protestants have communion once a month. So, yes it is indeed a misconception that Protestants have communion only twice a year.

Not far from the truth considering most may take it once or twice a year.

The early christian church took communion as often as every day.

 

[razeontherock]

Hopefully you can see the internal inconsistency in your own words, and correct that by aligning w/ Christ rather than by hardening your heart against your fellow man:

there is a big difference between mere toleration and actual positive legitimization or approval.

False religions are not ordered towards God, therefore they may be tolerated -- just as God has allowed them to grow rather than wiping them all out but yet the false religions, as such, do not have a right to exist.

Consider:

Acts 17:27 That they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him, and find him, though he be not far from every one of us:"


IOW, G-d's refusal to wipe them all out may have implications that differ from your current perspective, per the Scripture in C's tagline:

"A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench" (Mt 12:20, Is 42:3)

Can you add this to your zeal?

 

[razeontherock]

Yes, there have been sadistic people throughout history. Yes, some of them worked in government and their jobs were legitimized. What of it?

You say you think both homosexuals should be put to death or at least removed from society, and if heretics don't deserve the same fate they should at least be "punished." You don't think whoever is in place to (cough) "administer" such things would get a little slap happy?

Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. Peter lopping off the servant's ear doesn't address this perfectly to you? What was Jesus' response again?

 

[razeontherock]

Most protestants have communion once a month. So, yes it is indeed a misconception that Protestants have communion only twice a year.

My current Church has been having Communion every Sunday.

 

[Archivist]

My current Church has been having Communion every Sunday.

As does my church.

 

[razeontherock]

Carlisle, huh? I used to work for Carlisle Tire and Rubber do you know if they're still around?

 

[Meepy]

Well, would you let your children go to some Mormon church event or a Muslim school? Of course not. Why would you want your children to be taught things contrary to what you are trying to teach them? There are Catholic Vacation Bible Schools if you want your kids to participate in that sort of thing.




This is not to say that the Pope has a dictatorial authority over the Catholic Church really but more as that Protestants don't hold any sort of obedience to anyone but themselves with regards to any teach on faith, morals or any other practice. Nobody in a Protestant hierarchy of any particular denomination really claims any authority, it's just for administration purposes.

well, protestants do have certain kinds of authority. John Calvin was a pope like figure within Geneva and was an authority with regarding Calvinistic doctrine(Institutes of Christian Religion) and TULIP as well as regarding the city of Geneva which he had very high power in. Luther had some forms of authority, mostly regarding fellowship. King Henry VIII being the 'leader' of the Anglican Church was a forced type of authority. And most of the traditional protestant denominations have their own Catechisms.

Sadly protestants don't have a solid authority to go to that they can truly rely on. And thus you see many communities allowing things like contraception, abortion, gay marriage, female ordination, etc.

However the main thing protestants consider as their 'main' authority is sola scriptura. Which sadly is a self defeating and circular ideal. As they 'borrow' from the Catholic tradition and deposit(and then turn around and bash that same deposit), like the table of contents in the NT and the dogmas of things like the Trinity and the hypostatic union.

Opposition to the apostolic roman see was mostly started after 1000AD, and more closely to 1300 A.D with certain Italian sects, the Lollards, and Wycliff. For the first 1000 years the Church operated in good union within the 5 apostolic see's.

 

[razeontherock]

However the main thing protestants consider as their 'main' authority is sola scriptura.

We covered that misconception a long time ago - about #37. We're up to #74 now; do try to keep up?

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

I'll trump your Council of Trent with the first council in Jerusalem .

So the Apostolic Council was Antinomian? I don't think so...

The purpose of the Apostolic Council was the ritual law, which is why they discussed circumcision. It does not mean Christians are exempt from the moral law.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

So the Apostolic Council was Antinomian? I don't think so...

Love you too .

 

[Meepy]

We covered that misconception a long time ago - about #37. We're up to #74 now; do try to keep up?

post 37 didn't really say much. Although depending on which protestant denomination you go to I guess it would vary(prima vs sola). Then again if a protestant denies sola scripture they don't exactly have an apostolic deposit to go to for help. They are kinda struck between their KJV and a few reformers opinions. Unless they borrow from the Catholic deposit, like lotsa Calvinists do with Augustine or the Council of Nicea and Carthage.

They can always say that the Holy Spirit guides them towards the right interpretation. But if that was true we wouldn't have all these sects now, would we?

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

You say you think both homosexuals should be put to death or at least removed from society, and if heretics don't deserve the same fate they should at least be "punished." You don't think whoever is in place to (cough) "administer" such things would get a little slap happy?

Those who ignore the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it. Peter lopping off the servant's ear doesn't address this perfectly to you? What was Jesus' response again?

There is a difference between what someone may deserve and how we choose to actually deal with crime. Do I think cops even today are "slap happy"? It seems to be an axiom of justice that many who are in prison do not deserve it and many who do deserve it are not there. This is because we are imperfect people and thus our execution of justice is imperfect -- we even sometimes accidentally execute innocent people. Does that mean we should drop our entire judiciary, fire all the police and empty all the prisons? Of course not. We should rather seek to make our society more just.

I am not talking about trying to enforce all the Old Testament laws (Dominionism), I am just saying that no one can claim to have a right to sin and that even if we choose to limit our punishment or even allow certain criminals to roam free, that must only be as a consideration of the general good. We may still continue to preach against moral evils. Actively defending or embracing sin is a sin in and of itself.

In 2003, the US Supreme Court ruled that all sodomy laws in the United States that only applied to homosexuals were unconstitutional. Recently, there was the decision to overturn the military policy called "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) regarding homosexuals (which had replaced periodic "witch hunts" with mild toleration) and to allow homosexuals to serve openly. I am not speaking of things which are strange and not part of the current political scene, the debate over sodomy laws in Africa are still hot-button topics.

Regardless, I am not speaking of whether or not the actual execution of justice will be beneficial to the common good and equitable, only to the ideal that exists. Punishment of people for heresy is no different than punishing them for other forms of treason, you are trying to draw an unimportant and fuzzy distinction. How the State interrogates and punishes criminals is a different question (one which the Church addressed even at the time, though the judicial systems were still much more brutal than in developed countries today) but certainly the State has authority to do so for its authority derives from God.

 

[razeontherock]

which protestant denomination you go to I guess it would vary(prima vs sola). Then again if a protestant denies sola scripture they don't exactly have an apostolic deposit to go to for help. They are kinda struck between their KJV and ...

Wow, it's almost like you're saying a Christian needs to check his brain at the door ...

This isn't a false dichotomy you're positing here, it's a false unending series of dilemmas

I come to Jesus and He says "pick a denom?" That's not the Jesus I know.

"For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I [am] of Apollos; are ye not carnal?" (1 Cor 3:4)

You are of Rome, he is of Luther, she is of Calvin ... same-same.

 

[Standing Up]

post 37 didn't really say much. Although depending on which protestant denomination you go to I guess it would vary(prima vs sola). Then again if a protestant denies sola scripture they don't exactly have an apostolic deposit to go to for help. They are kinda struck between their KJV and a few reformers opinions. Unless they borrow from the Catholic deposit, like lotsa Calvinists do with Augustine or the Council of Nicea and Carthage.

They can always say that the Holy Spirit guides them towards the right interpretation. But if that was true we wouldn't have all these sects now, would we?

Quite right; hence, we have to acknowledge the role of Traditions of men. That's why we have RC, EO, OO, P, and others. The misconception about P is that the other sects are different from it

 

[razeontherock]

Does that mean we should drop our entire judiciary, fire all the police and empty all the prisons? Of course not.

Don't tell that to CA

We may still continue to preach against moral evils. Actively defending or embracing sin is a sin in and of itself.

I'd be more emphatic and change that "may" to "have the duty to." Even those areas where we disagree. My concern is when your preaching changes into the machinery of the State (read: punishment and war) inflicting harm. Not a single sentiment of Jesus supports this!

Regardless, I am not speaking of whether or not the actual execution of justice will be beneficial to the common good and equitable, only to the ideal that exists. Punishment of people for heresy is no different than punishing them for other forms of treason, you are trying to draw an unimportant and fuzzy distinction.

Please look at that! This is the mindset of the dominionists, which is something you apparently claim to disavow. Heresy could only be considered treason under a Theocracy. That could only happen in the US via trampling our Constitution under foot the rest of the way.

What you apparently still fail to consider is that the only way the execution of such justice could ever be beneficial to the common good, is with Christ reigning as King. History proves this!

We can NOT usher this in; it is up to Him to return. And when that happens, somehow I think any denom squabbles here will evaporate ...

 

[sunlover1]

Then again if a protestant denies sola scripture they don't exactly have an apostolic deposit to go to for help. They are kinda struck between their KJV and a few reformers opinions. Unless they borrow from the Catholic deposit, like lotsa Calvinists do with Augustine or the Council of Nicea and Carthage.

What if they were to pray thus:
"Dear Father and author of my faith, you said that if i asked for anything in faith, that I would have what I asked of you. I ask you to help me to understand this passage."

 

[sunlover1]

... The misconception about P is that the other sects are different from it

There ya go SUp.
Crazy stuff right here in GT for shizzle!

 

[PilgrimToChrist]

I'd be more emphatic and change that "may" to "have the duty to." Even those areas where we disagree. My concern is when your preaching changes into the machinery of the State (read: punishment and war) inflicting harm. Not a single sentiment of Jesus supports this!

So then what crimes should be punished by the State and what crimes should be exempt?

I find Christianity to be a much better rule of life for punishment of internal criminals and war against external enemies than our present secular-atheistic rules. Why should the State be atheistic? Rather it must acknowledge that its power and authority derives from God, not from mere force of arms. Thus, it needs to execute justice internally and externally based on Christian principles, not atheistic ones.

Please look at that! This is the mindset of the dominionists, which is something you apparently claim to disavow.

Dominionism is a specific subculture within Fundamentalist Protestantism. I only seek a return to government which actually acknowledges the Social Kingship of Christ.

Heresy could only be considered treason under a Theocracy.

"Theocracy" is a term that gets bandied about as an attack-word. You would have to be more clear if you want me to comment on whether it is a good or bad thing.

Historically, heresies have often been the intellectual support needed to justify attempts to overthrow rulers and have been promoters of anarchy, disorder and immorality. People's beliefs have consequences, they do not exist in an intellectual vacuum but determine how they will act. Heresy is an directed attack on the structure of society, therefore it is treason. It is also treachery against Christ the King. Therefore, heresy should be punished the same as treason.

That could only happen in the US via trampling our Constitution under foot the rest of the way.

I am listed as "Constitution Party" and I live in the United States, that is a practical matter, it doesn't necessitate American exceptionalism. We have to remember that the United States was founded by Deists and Freemasons. We do what we must to live under such a society, fighting for true liberty -- which is the freedom to do what is right -- and fight against the perversion of liberty to mean license -- which is the freedom to do whatever we want. Since liberty is the freedom to do what is right, there cannot be such a thing as religious liberty for non-Catholics and non-Christians to do what is wrong.

That the State must be separated from the Church is a thesis absolutely false, a most pernicious error. Based, as it is, on the principle that the State must not recognize any religious cult, it is in the first place guilty of a great injustice to God; for the Creator of man is also the Founder of human societies, and preserves their existence as He preserves our own. We owe Him, therefore, not only a private cult, but a public and social worship to honor Him. Besides, this thesis is an obvious negation of the supernatural order. It limits the action of the State to the pursuit of public prosperity during this life only, which is but the proximate object of political societies; and it occupies itself in no fashion (on the plea that this is foreign to it) with their ultimate object which is man's eternal happiness after this short life shall have run its course. But as the present order of things is temporary and subordinated to the conquest of man's supreme and absolute welfare, it follows that the civil power must not only place no obstacle in the way of this conquest, but must aid us in effecting it. The same thesis also upsets the order providentially established by God in the world, which demands a harmonious agreement between the two societies. Both of them, the civil and the religious society, although each exercises in its own sphere its authority over them. It follows necessarily that there are many things belonging to them in common in which both societies must have relations with one another. Remove the agreement between Church and State, and the result will be that from these common matters will spring the seeds of disputes which will become acute on both sides; it will become more difficult to see where the truth lies, and great confusion is certain to arise. Finally, this thesis inflicts great injury on society itself, for it cannot either prosper or last long when due place is not left for religion, which is the supreme rule and the sovereign mistress in all questions touching the rights and the duties of men. Hence the Roman Pontiffs have never ceased, as circumstances required, to refute and condemn the doctrine of the separation of Church and State. [Source.]

What you apparently still fail to consider is that the only way the execution of such justice could ever be beneficial to the common good, is with Christ reigning as King. History proves this!

We can NOT usher this in; it is up to Him to return. And when that happens, somehow I think any denom squabbles here will evaporate ...

We execute justice daily, imperfectly yes but we still strive.

 

[Catherineanne]

My apologies. I thought you were referring to that graven image with blood on it in the picture. That god. My misunderstanding. I'm glad you know that isn't Jesus mother.

If you think that Catholics mistake the image for the Prototype, then you certainly have a very low estimate of their intelligence.

Tell me, do you have a photograph of your mother? Have you ever looked at that photograph and mistaken it for the real thing?

Neither do we.

It is only when the image is invested with the qualities of the Prototype that idolatry is possible. As in, for example, ascribing the perfection of God to the Bible without any Biblical authority whatever to do so.

 

[Catherineanne]

I do realize that. Instead of finding comfort in it, I also see that bizarre type of intent in all the teachings of RC that I find objectionable: as if our own works could help G-d?

I see in the OT it was imperative that things be done w/o the works of our hands ...

I am not sure this is a valid objection to anything. There is no demonination that I know of which says, 'Go home and do nothing; God does it all.' Possibly because any minister that thought this, wouldn't bother turning up to church to say it.

God does indeed do it all, but he uses us in the process. This is no different in RC than anywhere else.