Protestant Doctrine

[a_ntv]

In our primitive human nature would our sheperd make it impossible for his sheep to find their way home? My opinion (no way)

In our primitive human nature, after the original sin, we are almost like animals....

Our primitive human nature fights against the Truth teached by Christ, that bc the flesh is under the kingdom of Satan, while the spirit should be under the kingdom of Christ.

So I really hope that the sheeps dont follow their primitive human nature, but enter in the very narrow and difficoult way that leads to Christ:
- dont say: take form the scripture only what you want, but follow the teaching of the church in order to take also what you dont like
- dont say: it is enough to believe, but use each moment and each action of yout life to glorify and honor Christ
- dont say: I dont need other help, but use all the helps, including the sacraments and Mary, given you by the Lord
- dont say: it is useless to repeat prayers, but go on praying whole nights and days, as Jesus teached us
- dont say: Im already saved, but consider yourself as unworthy to be saved and go on praying
- dont say: do not mortificate yourself bc the faith is enough, but go on in denying yourself, and take his cross and follow Him.
- dont say: I have received directly by God a very particular and important mission, bc it is your pride that gave you such a mission! God wants you to be humile and say to Him: Im a useless servant.

I know that most of the sheeps are losen in the way, but we shall try to continue with the help of the Lord on this narrow way.

 

[ksen]

In light of the above history, we can see the dispute between Boniface and Philip had nothing to do with "Protestants" (they did not exist),

Yes, they did.

They may not have been known as Protestants at the time but there have always been dissenters from the Catholic church from the time Constantine founded it.

 

[ksen]

I am sorry you do not see the difference
I am sorry if you think that I misrepresented the number of denominations. I was merely taking what I read from neutral websites that showed Christian statistics. I do pray that one day all the members of Christs body will be one just like Jesus prayed for unity. I do pray that some day protestants (not to mean all feel this way) will not see the Catholic Church as the enemy, but as brothers and sisters in Christ. We would have so much more credibility as Christians in the world if we were one.

Please take a moment and read this article dealing with the original source of the number of Protestant denominations.

I may start another thread with this article so as not to derail this thread any further.

http://www.sxws.com/charis/apol44.htm

 

[calmcoolandelected]

That Advocate was given to all who believe - we all have the Advocate if we are in Christ.

Jhn 14:16 "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;
Jhn 14:17 {that is} the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, {but} you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.



Rom 8:26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for {us} with groanings too deep for words;
Rom 8:27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to {the will of} God.
Rom 8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to {His} purpose.

I thought that I had defined that somewhere in this thread -- parakletos.

Let me see if I can find it, but I'm pressed for time this morning.

CC&E

 

[Lynn73]

Keeping in mind that Catholics acknowledge that protestants are PART OF the Catholic Church...
Here is exactly what the Catechism says:

"Outside the Church there is no salvation"

846 How are we to understand this affirmation, often repeated by the Church Fathers?335 Re-formulated positively, it means that all salvation comes from Christ the Head through the Church which is his Body:

• Basing itself on Scripture and Tradition, the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation: the one Christ is the mediator and the way of salvation; he is present to us in his body which is the Church. He himself explicitly asserted the necessity of faith and Baptism, and thereby affirmed at the same time the necessity of the Church which men enter through Baptism as through a door. Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.336

847 This affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church:

• Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation.337

848 "Although in ways known to himself God can lead those who, through no fault of their own, are ignorant of the Gospel, to that faith without which it is impossible to please him, the Church still has the obligation and also the sacred right to evangelize all men."338

Now, see, I find this to be rather condescending. It's not our fault we're not Roman Catholic, we're just ignorant of the gospel and what the true church is? I'm not ignorant of the Roman Catholic church and I reject it. Nor am I ignorant of the gospel or the true nature of Christ's catholic (universal) church. I know Christ and I know HIs church because I and every other believer are His church. The RCC limits Christ's church to itself, the Bible doesn't. I also reject the idea that I'm part of the RCC whether I like it or not. I'm not part of the RCC but I'm most definitely part of Christ's church.

 

[calmcoolandelected]

I thought that I had defined that somewhere in this thread -- parakletos.

Let me see if I can find it, but I'm pressed for time this morning.

CC&E

Out of time, will try to look for it later today.

CC&E

 

[JJB]

Please take a moment and read this article dealing with the original source of the number of Protestant denominations.

I may start another thread with this article so as not to derail this thread any further.

http://www.sxws.com/charis/apol44.htm

Now, that's an interesting article!

I predict an attempted dismissive cry of "anti-Catholic, biased article" will follow.


Anyone in this thread should read the article, as that exact topic comes up often.

 

[Lynn73]

2 peter 1:20 Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation,

Now let us see what the apostle Peter meant by saying that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. To do so, we must open our Bible and read that verse in its context and employ the familiar rules of language to discover its meaning. In other words, we must interpret the Bible for ourselves! The apostle Peter writes:

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit" (2 Peter 1:20-21).
​

The verb "is" in verse 20 is the translation of the word 'ginomai' which according to Strong's Lexicon means, "to cause to be, to become, come into being." Hence the sense of this verse is this: "no prophecy of Scripture 'came into being' by any private interpretation." The apostle Peter is here speaking about the process by which the Scriptures came into being, namely, their origin, and not about the understanding of Scripture already given.
Peter says that no scripture came into being by 'private interpretation' - that is by one's own explanation. Whom does he have in mind? Is it the reader, or the men who penned the Scriptures? Since Peter is speaking about the origin of Scripture, it seems likely that he is talking about the prophets themselves. In other words, Peter is saying that the Scriptures did not originate in the prophets' own understanding. This could be confirmed if we read the following verse since the apostle Peter gives the reason why scripture did not come into being of the prophets' own understanding, "for" he continues, "prophecy never came by the will of man." The prophets did not invent the scriptures. Rather, they were God's instruments to write his Word: "...holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit."
So, rather than discourage us from reading and understanding the Bible for ourselves, this verse give us full confidence why we should trust the Scriptures. Though written by men, the Scriptures do not have their origin in the human mind but in the mind of God the Holy Spirit. The Bible is the Word of God!

from: http://www.justforcatholics.org/a79.htm

 

[nephilimiyr]

Please take a moment and read this article dealing with the original source of the number of Protestant denominations.

I may start another thread with this article so as not to derail this thread any further.

http://www.sxws.com/charis/apol44.htm

Hi Ksen,

Yes, please do make another thread on this because it is interesting and the truth needs to get out about this 25,000 to 30,000 or more Protestant denominations.

In short, Roman Catholic apologists have hurriedly, carelessly - and, as a result, irresponsibly - glanced at Barrett's work, found a large number (22,189), and arrived at all sorts of absurdities that Barrett never concluded. One can only hope that, upon reading this critique, Roman Catholic apologists will finally put this argument to bed. The more likely scenario, however, is that the death of this argument will come about only when Evangelicals consistently point out this error - and correct it - each time it is raised by a Roman Catholic apologist. Sooner or later they will grow weary of the embarrassment that accompanies citing erroneous figures in a public forum.

Might I add that it will be quite difficult to put this arguement to bed when it has already enbedded itself into the minds of so many people.

Thanks!

 

[cathmomof3]

There's no new "rule of faith" there though. As 2 Tim. 3:15-17 says, ALL we need to know for salvation and the subsequent Christian life is taught in the Scriptures.

But we believe that the depth of the scriptures were revealed to us over time through the holy spirit. Sort of like when you peel layers from an onion.

 

[cathmomof3]

What a wonderful list. Its true then in black and white; Catholic doctrine is against God's word. Thank you.

Those aren't doctrines though, they are practices. There is a huge difference.

 

[cathmomof3]

That Advocate was given to all who believe - we all have the Advocate if we are in Christ.

Jhn 14:16 "I will ask the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may be with you forever;
Jhn 14:17 {that is} the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it does not see Him or know Him, {but} you know Him because He abides with you and will be in you.



Rom 8:26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for {us} with groanings too deep for words;
Rom 8:27 and He who searches the hearts knows what the mind of the Spirit is, because He intercedes for the saints according to {the will of} God.
Rom 8:28 And we know that God causes all things to work together for good to those who love God, to those who are called according to {His} purpose.

Yes, I agree with you that we do all have the Holy Spirit, but the advocate was given to the apostles in a different way. Note in John 14 that he was speaking to his apostles.

 

[cathmomof3]

Please take a moment and read this article dealing with the original source of the number of Protestant denominations.

I may start another thread with this article so as not to derail this thread any further.

http://www.sxws.com/charis/apol44.htm

I see our two articles disagree...The figures are probably somewhere in the middle...I don't even remember the point of the discussion??

 

[nephilimiyr]

So are we supposed to be talking about Catholic beliefs in this thread or Protestant beliefs?

 

[cathmomof3]

Now, see, I find this to be rather condescending. It's not our fault we're not Roman Catholic, we're just ignorant of the gospel and what the true church is? I'm not ignorant of the Roman Catholic church and I reject it. Nor am I ignorant of the gospel or the true nature of Christ's catholic (universal) church. I know Christ and I know HIs church because I and every other believer are His church. The RCC limits Christ's church to itself, the Bible doesn't. I also reject the idea that I'm part of the RCC whether I like it or not. I'm not part of the RCC but I'm most definitely part of Christ's church.

Believe as you wish..I was just stating the Catholic's positions b/c of the posts stating "Outside of the Catholic Church there is not salvation" - We do not believe that protestants are outside the Church.

 

[ksen]

Hi Ksen,

Yes, please do make another thread on this because it is interesting and the truth needs to get out about this 25,000 to 30,000 or more Protestant denominations.


Might I add that it will be quite difficult to put this arguement to bed when it has already enbedded itself into the minds of so many people.

Thanks!

Done!

 

[ksen]

I see our two articles disagree...The figures are probably somewhere in the middle...I don't even remember the point of the discussion??

I started a new thread on this topic. Would you mind reposting a link to your article in that thread?

Thanks cathmomof3.

 

[ThePilgrim]

The point I was making is that Catholicism is not the one, big, unified, happy, monolithic family that most Roman Catholics try to protray it to be.

Well, if you're going to make the point, it's important to make it accurately. If you're claiming that Russian Orthodox is different than Eastern Orthodox, and that the SSPX is sedevacantist, such a claim shows a general lack of understanding that makes it harder to take the point seriously.

Grace and peace,
John

 

[ThePilgrim]

While this is true, those that truly hold to what the SSPX believes could be called schismatic at best - let us not even get into the worst.

You'd get further dealing with this topic if you were talking about the Neocatechumenal Way or some of the other sillier variations of Catholicism.

That being said - we all hold the same fundamentals though the praxis may be a bit foreign.

Well, I hardly think that's the best they could be called, since it's not what Rome says about them. Rome says that there is separation, but that they are not in schism.

And I read the link you provided, and it doesn't show what you said, ie that they require rebatism of those who join them. It shows only that they do conditional baptism when there is serious doubt as to the validity of the original baptism, and that this doesn't happen very often.

 

[ThePilgrim]

I have certainly found it to be the case, as most SSPXers I know, which is not a small number, consider Rome to be apostate.

Are you sure they're not SSPV?