Protesting WHAT? Is Protestantism Against Or Just Back To Basics?

[Bruce S]

The term PROTEST, means being against. Protestant, derives from that word.

We went back to what the founders considered the basics. Eliminated most of what the founders considered accumulated "baggage" of centuries of additions to the simple faith.

Now for my reason for this post.

I was estranged from God for most of my adult life. Drinking, porno, you name it, I had it all, and more.

I came to a massive crisis in my life last year and this one. Things impacted my business, family, wife, money, and recovery issues. This included several incidents with the law, some of my own doing, others not.

I needed God. But my past, [denomination unimportant here, but not Protestant] kept me in bondage. I could not go back there, there were too many issues that kept me out.

I tried a few Protestant denominations. Liked them all. They were close to God, they were good people, they didn't have the things associated with them that I fought with in my past.

I have long thought why "IT" finally kicked in for me.

I guess it was the burning need, and it was the SIMPLE faith, the use of only the Bible as authority, a clergy that was more approachable [IMHO only] and the emphasis on Jesus alone without the need for intercessary intermediaries.

So, the question here is [PLEASE only my fellow Protestants] what brought YOU to the faith, what was the reason you chose to be a Protestant. And what does that mean to you?

 

[Bruce S]

Sorry, duplicate posting. Removed this one. Wish they would have a DELETE POST option.

 

[Lanakila]

Catholics call Baptists Protestants, but Baptist swear up and down historically they never were part of the Catholic church, so that term doesn't fit them. That they were actually alongside the Catholic church prior to and after the reformation (Anabaptists).

I never was a Catholic, nor anything as a child, athough I did believe in the existence of God. I visited church a few times and heard the gospel of Jesus, became convicted of my sinfulness, repented and turned to God. This all happened in a Baptist Church 17 almost 18 years ago.

But, since I have changed my position from Calvinist to Arminian, and a few other things, I term myself as an Evangelical.

 

[Fiskare]

From the 1913 Websters-

1. \Prot"es*tant\, n. [F. protestant, fr. L. protestans,

-antis, p. pr. of protestare. See {Protest}, v.] One who protests; --originally applied to those who adhered to Luther, and protested against, or made a solemn declaration of dissent from, a decree of the Emperor Charles V. and the Diet of Spires, in 1529, against the Reformers, and appealed to a general council; -- now used in a popular sense to designate any Christian who does not belong to the Roman Catholic or the Greek Church.

 

[Bruce S]

From the 1913 Websters-

1. \Prot"es*tant\, n. [F. protestant, fr. L. protestans,
-antis, p. pr. ofprotestare. See {Protest}, v.]
Onewhoprotests; -- originallyappliedtothosewhoadhered
toLuther, andprotestedagainst, ormadeasolemn
declarationofdissentfrom, adecreeoftheEmperorCharles
V. andtheDietofSpires, in 1529, againsttheReformers,
andappealedtoageneralcouncil; -- nowusedinapopular
sensetodesignateanyChristianwhodoesnotbelongtothe
RomanCatholicortheGreekChurch.

MY OP thread had this to say, and I wished it would have been followed. Again, we have people here that are NOT Protestants, "teaching" us on what we are, or are not.

My request was:

So, the question here is [PLEASE only my fellow Protestants] what brought YOU to the faith, what was the reason you chose to be a Protestant. And what does that mean to you?

It really WAS there to stop others from intruding on a thread designed for US to discuss, amoung OURSELVES, what we are, why we came to where we are, and what we found in the Protestant denomination we joined.

 

[Fiskare]

MY OP thread had this to say, and I wished it would have been followed. Again, we have people here that are NOT Protestants, "teaching" us on what we are, or are not.

...and? Who is telling you what you are, and what you are not? Does it matter?

The dictionary definition was very precise- originally a protestant was one thing- and now it is something different.

My request was:

[/font]

It really WAS there to stop others from intruding on a thread designed for US to discuss, amoung OURSELVES, what we are, why we came to where we are, and what we found in the Protestant denomination we joined.

I came to the "protestant" faith (if you can call it that) because I saw that the clear texts of the scripture regarding justification and sanctification were best expressed in the protestant confessions of faith, and also largely because I came to know of Christ as my personal saviour through the witness of protestants, including my own father, who is a pastor. Thus, I was introduced to Christianity in the protestant tradition, and it stuck. However, as I learned more, I became less "mainstream bapti-costal" (as I call it) and more "catholic" (Not Roman) and this was enforced when I attended seminary prior to my ordination, as the scriptures came to teach (to my mind) a more historically oriented faith through learning the original languages of the Bible. Now I would consider myself both evangelical and catholic, and by definition to some at least, that makes me historically protestant.

 

[BBAS 64]

Catholics call Baptists Protestants, but Baptist swear up and down historically they never were part of the Catholic church, so that term doesn't fit them. That they were actually alongside the Catholic church prior to and after the reformation (Anabaptists).

I never was a Catholic, nor anything as a child, athough I did believe in the existence of God. I visited church a few times and heard the gospel of Jesus, became convicted of my sinfulness, repented and turned to God. This all happened in a Baptist Church 17 almost 18 years ago.

But, since I have changed my position from Calvinist to Arminian, and a few other things, I term myself as an Evangelical.

Lanakila,

I am some what intrested in this Baptist / anabaptist thing and a refusal to be called protestans. Are all Baptist Calvinist I know I go go an independant Baptist church and they do not teach Calvin salvation TULIP. For some reason they think that the refromation may have been started by Baptist thinking of the time. Later " Baptist" wereo by killed by the hands of Calvin.


For His Glory Alone!
BBAS

 

[Lanakila]

There is a little book called the trail of tears that is supposed to prove Baptistic succession back to the Apostles, and another one I cannot remember from my Baptist history class in like 91. (getting old) Baptist successionists trace their history back prior to Constantine, and alongside the Catholic church. There are some problems with this though. 1st, some of the groups they claim to be historically Baptistic, aren't at all. For example the Montanists were very Charismatic, similar to modern day Pentecostals. Also, there are numerous gaps in history, because of the underground, persecuted nature, prior to the uniting of church and state under the Emporer Constantine, that you are really stretching to say all those groups are Baptist. Christianity as a whole was part of the Catholic church for centuries, and trying to deny that historically is quite a stretch.

BTW, this is not meant as an offense to anyone, but is just a little church history lesson. (without digging out my books, its incomplete, and not precise)

Not all Baptist are Calvinists. Freewill Baptists are entirely Arminian. Most Baptists are 1 or 2 point Calvinists, not all 5 points of the Tulip. Most are very strong on Eternal Security.

 

[jimtech]

Protestantism does protest a strain within the mindset of legalism that undoes that which rings true. As a raised Catholic, and an attempted 'revert' to Catholicism, I can say with no less than astonishment and shock that Catholicism has at its heart a desire to cross every "T" and dot every "I" -- and in the process it undoes the heart of the the connection between a soul and God. I know I desired, and I know of many baby boomers who made good, valid attempts at wanting to know God and do His will....only to be crushed by the legalism of Catholicism. And I wanted nothing more than to be a good Catholic. Even the worst of Protestantism's myriad of wacky ideas is no match for someone who loses confidence and faith in God because of the fear of continually losing grace, and the attempts to regain it by works. The soul, my soul, is continually unsettled because I cannot forget the lifelong teachings of the Catholic Church, and how the ignorant violation of one crucial rule can undo one's foundation of faith.
Getting booted out of the Catholic Church (by default) even after doing what one thinks is God's will...is devastating. I wonder if a "relationship" is even possible with God...if God is even knowable. Yes...let there be no mistake about it--it was legalism Jesus was trying to defeat. When the Jews under the law didn't "get it" -- God gave the message to someone else, the Gentiles. When the Catholic Church became so ingrained in Self-Aggrandisment, so conscious of always asserting authority over the believer -- I think God had to get the message "back out there."
Protestantism is also saying to the world...."we think God speaks to the heart of the believer, and doesn't hold Himself back mysteriously from those who love Him." If Catholicism was only the Mass it would be a very beautiful means of God's expression of Himself. Unfortunately, as I found out the hard way, that is not the case.

 

[Blackhawk]

I am taking Baptist history at seminary now so I can remember the theories of Baptist beginnings. I need to write them down since I am old and will probably forget them soon.

A. Succcession theories.

1. Organic succession theory- this is what Lanakila was speaking about. The Trail of blood (I think that is the title) was written by Carroll and tried to prove that there were Baptists since the birth of the church. That john the Baptist was the 1st baptist. Problem with this theory is simply the historical facts are against it.

2. Spiritual succession theory- That there were people that held beliefs similiar to Baptist since the birth of the church and that the Baptists today are the end result of this. This one is a little better but many of those that are assaerted as having beliefs like Baptists because of some of their views hold views drastically different in other areas.

NonSuccession theories

3. The english dissent theory- Baptist grew out of the dissent from the church of England. They did this by a study of the Bible themselves and were not heavily influenced by the AnaBaptists until after they became Baptists. This one is a good one but I think that very possibly the Anabaptists had a real influence. I think that this one maybe has Baptists living in a too sheltered of enviroment.

4. The anaBaptist influence theory- This one is similiar to the one above but in this one the Anabaptists played a pivotal role in influencing Baptists to hold typical baptists beliefs. This one runs into problems because some of the Anabaptists beliefs Baptists reject. Baptists took oaths and believed Christians could be magistrates. However I think this theory is a good one.

I like the last 2 theories and really can't decide which one is better. I think the first 2 rely on Apostloic succession and not in real truth. I think that they were produced because the Church of Christ was taking too many Baptists away from the church at the time they were produced. So I would say one of the last two is correct.

Oh and the first Baptists were actually Armininian. They were the genreal Baptists which started in 1609. The Particular Baptists who were Calvinsitic appeared later. I forget the exact year but it was later. So the first were Arminian but pretty much since the beginning Baptists have had both Calvinist and Arminians. And that is why I love the Baptist church. It does not really promote either 100%.

 

[Blackhawk]

So, the question here is [PLEASE only my fellow Protestants] what brought YOU to the faith, what was the reason you chose to be a Protestant. And what does that mean to you?

I was basically born into an evangelical church. The Evangelical Free Church to be exact. My ancestors are from Sweden and have a rich heritage of being Christian and loving God. So I was raised a protestant. I have from time to time questioned Christianity, Protestantism, evangelicalism, and my Baptist faith but I feel that they are the closest to what I believe the Bible states as the truth. i am not very dogmatic (comapred to most others) in any of these except the basics of the Christian faith. I am very eccumenical and feel that many other Chrisitian traditions besides Baptist do things in some ways better than Baptists. At least that they have perspectives that sometimes Baptists do not see because of their bias.

 

[Bruce S]

Protestantism does protest a strain within the mindset of legalism that undoes that which rings true. As a raised Catholic, and an attempted 'revert' to Catholicism, I can say with no less than astonishment and shock that Catholicism has at its heart a desire to cross every "T" and dot every "I" -- and in the process it undoes the heart of the the connection between a soul and God.

I know I desired, and I know of many baby boomers who made good, valid attempts at wanting to know God and do His will....only to be crushed by the legalism of Catholicism. And I wanted nothing more than to be a good Catholic. .

Amen. That was STOPPED me too, the myriad "requirements" that seemed to me to be a barrier to me being ONE WITH God. I know this is only my personal experience, I have many, many good friends who are good C's and they are fine with faith and a loving relationship.

But the empasis on things I have found to be barriers to faith, kept me on the sidelines as I stuggled with them.

Freeing me from the past was needed for me to step out and come to oneness with a loving God.

I too, stongly, see the C situation as an extension of the Legalism that pervaded the Jewish faith, and still does. This is only my take, I know that there are millions around the world that are getting closer to God with the C faith, and there is much one can learn [and I do, I watch EWTN nightly] from the rich heritage of the C faith.

And what is gratifying to me as an ex C, is that the C religion seems to be slowly unburdening themselves from the things that have held them to the past, changes such as a more approachable service, music incorporation, more emphasis upon the Bible, etc are good to see, and welcome.

Other things I might wish to see change, most likely will change. I see a married priesthood as a necessity, if they want to have enough clergy to serve, that will happen, doctrine aside, if they wish to have enough young men coming in, especially in the USA and Europe, without that, congregations will have to be served with imported clergy from third world nations.

The Charismatic movement seems to be dying off with the C's, that is a shame, since it seemed to bring the best of both Pentacostalism, and C'ism into one practice. However, my C friends tell me that there a few Carismatic C's anymore and that was a movement of the 70's and not so much now.

Wonder why that happened?

 

[porky]

Hey, what are you're feelings on evolution. See, I'm doing a school mproject about it. I want outsider info, you know.

 

[porky]

that's project, not mproject