The quiet despair of Protestants

….and not to be overlooked is the fact that the Catholic churches don't agree with each other, either.

The issue is not one of thinking that there is no Biblical truth or that there is no way to determine it. It is only a matter of there being a number of different Protestant church bodies just as there are a number of different Catholic ones.

Unofficial Reverand Alex said:

Throughout the Old Testament, it can be said that the Prophets have infallibility.

Click to expand...

Again, men messed up.

See IN the TORAH, PROPHETS and PSALMS where the Prophets fell down, failed, made a mistake willingly or unwillingly, sometimes trying to get money ! ! ! Sometimes showing HOW TO get people TO SIN so that GOD WOULD CURSE THEM ! (this continued for the last 2000 years without debate, it seems)

Unofficial Reverand Alex said:

[I know this is somewhat of a long post, so I have a request to make for those of you who will skim it: If you only read 1 paragraph, read the one I've bolded. Thank you, and may God's blessings be ever in your soul!]

Since coming to college, I've gotten very involved in the Christian Campus House (CCH). Due to the demographic of the area, most of the people I know are Protestant. I've been involved in small groups with CCH for 2 years now, talked a lot with a lot of my Protestant friends, and occasionally they say something that should be deeply worrying to all Christians: They believe that we don't have a Biblical truth. We often discuss many theological issues, like the dispute of faith-alone or faith-and-works, where a thoroughly Biblical argument can be made for both. In my small group now, we're reading through Romans, and various verses point in either direction.

But it's very unsettling to hear how so many decently devout Christians so readily accept the idea that we just don't know how to settle issues like faith-alone or faith-and-works. We all believe the Bible has the truth; Catholics, non-denominationals, Orthodox, Jehova's Witnesses, Mormons, even the Christians often thought to be unbiblical are fierce in reverence to Holy Scripture holding the truth. But interpretations within Scripture vary wildly, and far too many Christians say that we'll never know how to settle theological issues, because everyone's interpretation of the Bible is different.

In some ways, this is correct. Sermons have applied Scripture to various parts of life for 2,000 years now, and applying a given verse or idea to various circumstances can yield different results. This is the flexibility of Scripture.

But to say there is no theological truth seems like a contradiction to the nature of God!

Jesus is the truth; no one here will deny that. But does the truth say that we are saved by faith alone (believe in me and be saved), or by faith and works (all will be judged according to their works)?

God knows the Bible was written by many different authors to different audiences from different time periods. He knows that the Bible can be hard to interpret. He also sent us the gift of the Holy Spirit to help us out. And as long as He's forming a Church, it's only logical that He would grant His Church guidance by the Holy Spirit to lead people to the truth.

And, as convert John Henry Newman noted, there's only 1 church that even claims to have guidance from the Holy Spirit: The Catholic Church.

The infallibility of the Papacy is vital to preserving the truth, and the framework for it is laid out in the Bible. Papal Infallibility | Catholic Answers

While we all have the Holy Spirit guiding us, we're imperfect in accepting it. Much of these forums would not exist if we all accepted the Spirit enough to be led to the truth, because these arguments wouldn't exist. Throughout the Old Testament, it can be said that the Prophets have infallibility. The Bible itself is believed to be true because of inspiration from the Holy Spirit. So it would logically follow that God would grant the modern Church infallibility on theological & moral issues!

And I'll state it again: Everything the Catholic church teaches is thoroughly Biblical. Getting into the apologetics for this would be far too long, but Dave Armstrong has a number of writings on the topic, after he converted from Evangelical Protestantism after doing an in-depth Bible study to disprove Catholicism.

Please remember the Spirit of Gentleness & self-control as you write your responses, and thank you for taking the time to read & think about this critical issue in the Church! May God bless us all, and remind us of our complete & total dependence on Him!

Click to expand...

There is No One Righteous
(Psalm 14:1-7)

9What then? Are we any better? Not at all. For we have already made the charge that Jews and Greeks alike are all under sin. 10As it is written:

“There is no one righteous,

not even one.

11There is no one who understands,

no one who seeks God.

12All have turned away;

they have together become worthless;

there is no one who does good,

not even one.

13Their throats are open graves;

their tongues practice deceit.c

The venom of vipers is on their lips.d

14Their mouths are full of cursing and of bitterness.e

15Their feet are swift to shed blood;

16ruin and misery lie in their wake;

17and the way of peace they have not known.f

18There is no fear of God before their eyes.”g

19Now we know that whatever the Law says, it says to those who are under the Law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20Therefore no one will be justified in His sight by works of the Law. For the Law merely brings awareness of sin.

Righteousness through Faith

21But now, apart from the Law, the righteousness of God has been revealed, as attested by the Law and the Prophets. 22And this righteousness from God comes through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no distinction, 23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24and are justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.

25God presented Him as an atoning sacrifice through faith in His blood, in order to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance He had passed over the sins committed beforehand.26He did this to demonstrate His righteousness at the present time, so as to be just and to justify the one who has faith in Jesus.

27Where, then, is boasting? It is excluded. On what principle? On that of works? No, but on that of faith. 28For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

29Is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles too? Yes, of Gentiles too, 30since there is only one God, who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through that same faith.

31Do we, then, nullify the Law by this faith? Certainly not! Instead, we uphold the Law.

All is ALL. Nobody is infallible.

the modern Church

Gods church is the body of believers who have received and follow the Lamb (his sheep). The called out ones ... and those people transcend all church organizations and encompass the globe.

John 10:14
I am the good shepherd. I know My sheep and My sheep know Me

John 10:16
I have other sheep that are not of this fold. I must bring them in as well, and they will listen to My voice. Then there will be one flock and one shepherd.

God Bless.

CodyFaith said:

Right, nor is anything changed by your angst and anger against it by calling it a club in a derogaitive manner.

Click to expand...

If you jumped to that conclusion, I am sorry. To me, there is nothing derogatory about a campus religious association being called a club, whether it is Intervarsity Christian Fellowship or the Newman Club or some other.

Unofficial Reverend Alex - There is much truth to the heading of this thread. There is no doubt that it would be wonderful to have one leader for all Christendom whom we could look to for moral authority. Yes. All Protestants should envy the position of Catholics in terms of their ability to feel confident that such is the case, assuming that they actually accept the Church's teaching on the Infallibility of the Pope and the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium. I congratulate you on being able to feel confident in your faith.

So, you may rightfully ask, why do I not convert and why should not all Protestants, as well as Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox convert, so we can have one true Church for all of Christendom? I cannot speak for others. As for myself, there is one absolutely major reason why I do not believe that the Catholic Church speaks with the authority of God via the Infallibility of the Pope and the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium. Pope Innocent IV issued a Papal Bull on May 15, 1252 which authorized the use of torture for eliciting confessions from heretics. This authorization stayed in effect until 1816, when Pope Pius VII finally forbade Catholic rulers from using torture to elicit confessions. Hence, we have a period of 564 years from 1252 to 1816 in which the Catholic Church officially approved the use of torture, even if just in the specific instance of eliciting confessions. How many Popes during that time could have revoked the 1252 authorization, but declined to do so? Too many for us to quickly count, I dare say. How many Catholic saints spoke out and said that torture was wrong? I know of none. If you can find any, please let me know. Did the Infallible Council of Trent revoke the authorization? No, Trent did not do so.

Yes, I know the position of Church theologians. They say that the authorization of torture was legislation and not doctrine. Hence, it is not covered by the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium. Sorry, I do not buy the distinction. That is splitting hairs to a level that is unbelievable. Even if one does want to buy the difference, does it really matter? Think about it. Jesus himself was tortured. I wonder what He thinks about the fact that the Church that claims to speak with His authority on faith and morals officially approved the use of torture for 564 years?

Pope Francis called torture a mortal/grave sin on June 26, 2018. I concur with his analysis. I also agree with the Catholic and Orthodox Churches that there are indeed degrees of sin and that certain sins do place our soul's salvation in jeopardy. Sorry though, I do not believe that confession to a priest is necessary to have a mortal/grave sin absolved. I am inclined to agree with the Catholic Church that there is some sort of purging needed after death, especially for some Christians. Very few Protestants will grant you that..... However, the traditional imagery of burning sounds too much like torture to me and not something that God would do to a soul that is bound for Heaven. I also concur with the Catholic and Orthodox Churches that we should pray for the dead and that our prayers can assist our dead loved ones.

Anyway, where does this leave us? It leaves us in a mess. Let's be honest, everyone.... You can be a Protestant and interpret Scripture anyway you want, right? However, look where that has left us, with hundreds of denominations and a variety of beliefs and practices. You can be a Catholic and believe in the Infallibility of the Pope and the Infallibility of the Ordinary Magisterium, but then you have to figure out how to explain and justify 564 years of the authorization of the use of torture, as well as the multiple Crusades and the fact that the Catholic Encyclopedia itself admits that a minimum of five Popes, and probably more, mandated that the civil authorities burn heretics at the stake, under pain of excommunication, if they failed to do so. You can be an Eastern Orthodox. They do not have the baggage of approving torture, but how does one explain the fact that they twice merged with the Catholics after the 1054 schism, but then changed their minds. Yes, you can accept their explanation of the populace not accepting that their leaders voted to merge, but that seems a little shaky. It almost appears as if the Oriental Orthodox have the strongest case of all, except they are the smallest group of Christendom, so where does that leave most Christians if we say that the OO best represents the one true Church.

The bottom line, my dear Christian friends, is that we are indeed in a mess. The Holy Spirit was to lead us in all truth, but somewhere along the way, something went wrong. Jesus prayed that we would all be one, but what happened? I guess it leaves all of us to look into our own consciences and believe what we feel we must. Personally, I have come to the conclusion that it matters little what we believe, as long as we love God and our fellow man and that we especially show mercy to the less fortunate.

Unofficial Reverand Alex said:

The Bible itself is believed to be true because of inspiration from the Holy Spirit.

Click to expand...

Actually the bible isn't believed to be true because of the Holy Spirit, but because it is demonstratabley true.

That's an excellent post you've made! Many a bold claim but I certainly agree with a lot of it, especially the first half which I think it's spot on in regards to Biblical interpretation and those of the Protestant variety are very easy to play the "clear" and "muddy" verses card. Furthermore, I think our division is a direct cause of our emphasise of belief rather than actual righteous living. I'll let a few of the more outrageous claims scattered in the post unchallenged as clearly others have done this job.

I also agree that God guides his church with the holy spirit and this is something that we can easily forget. Nevertheless, I cannot see how the Roman Catholic church upholds that title in any degree whatsoever. In fact, despite what Catholic apologists tell you, they certainly had many, many evil and despotic Popes. Furthermore, this concept of Mary worship wasn't even remotely known until one manuscript found in the mid 3rd century and not develop until the council of Ephesus in the early 5th century which I believe gave Mary the title of the Mother of God. In fact, there wasn't even a singular bishop in Rome until at the very, very earliest 115AD but more likely a 125-140AD is more appropriate.

The Catholic church does teach more correct doctrine than your average Protestant church though. I would agree with your view on Christ in the context of the Eucharist and even your faith and works (doctrinal, not in actual practice) but the Eastern Orthodox easily beats both on the basis of history and all fall shy on the actual church but again, it would probably take too long to have a formal discussion on such an important and large issue.

I'm not trying to build a sense of superiority because I was a Protestant myself not even a year ago and many of my former beliefs turned out to be historical and biblical manipulations, half truths and lies. Despite me clearly seeing evidence to those claims to the contrary, I never retracted them until I actually began researching such things on my own free will from unbiased sources rather than being told information or only seeking information that suited my position.


Very interesting post and it appears the replies are turning out to be quite intriguing.

Albion said:

If you jumped to that conclusion, I am sorry. To me, there is nothing derogatory about a campus religious association being called a club, whether it is Intervarsity Christian Fellowship or the Newman Club or some other.

Click to expand...

Apologies, misunderstood your posts. Disregard the responses.

In either case, I believe my first response to the OP was in line with what he was saying.

Basil the Great said:

Anyway, where does this leave us? It leaves us in a mess. Let's be honest, everyone.... You can be a Protestant and interpret Scripture anyway you want, right?

Click to expand...

NOT right. Why would you say such a thing?

QUOTE="Basil the Great, post: 73517369, member: 240502"]The bottom line, my dear Christian friends, is that we are indeed in a mess. The Holy Spirit was to lead us in all truth, but somewhere along the way, something went wrong. Jesus prayed that we would all be one, but what happened? I guess it leaves all of us to look into our own consciences and believe what we feel we must. Personally, I have come to the conclusion that it matters little what we believe, as long as we love God and our fellow man and that we especially show mercy to the less fortunate.[/QUOTE
==============================

HALLELUYAH !!!!!!!!!!!
amen.

Unofficial Reverand Alex said:

The infallibility of the Papacy is vital to preserving the truth, and the framework for it is laid out in the Bible

Click to expand...

Have you ever read Unam Sanctum, by Pope Boniface? Quite a piece of work, and there is no doubt he was invoking the authority of Peter.

Albion said:

NOT right. Why would you say such a thing?

Click to expand...

Well, Albion, I was being a little sarcastic, was I not? However, there is still a lot of truth to what I said, as we have so many different Protestant bodies and they all use the same Scriptures.

paul1149 said:

Have you ever read Unam Sanctum, by Pope Boniface? Quite a piece of work, and there is no doubt he was invoking the authority of Peter.

Click to expand...

Yes, I almost went to that famous/infamous Papal Bull and how it has effectively been overturned by the modern Church, but I decided to keep my argument centered on the authorization of torture. However, as famous/infamous as Unam Sanctum is, it pales in comparison to Cantate Domino, as it specifically condemned "heretics, schismatics, pagans and Jews".

Just Another User said:

That's an excellent post you've made! Many a bold claim but I certainly agree with a lot of it, especially the first half which I think it's spot on in regards to Biblical interpretation and those of the Protestant variety are very easy to play the "clear" and "muddy" verses card. Furthermore, I think our division is a direct cause of our emphasise of belief rather than actual righteous living. I'll let a few of the more outrageous claims scattered in the post unchallenged as clearly others have done this job.

I also agree that God guides his church with the holy spirit and this is something that we can easily forget. Nevertheless, I cannot see how the Roman Catholic church upholds that title in any degree whatsoever. In fact, despite what Catholic apologists tell you, they certainly had many, many evil and despotic Popes. Furthermore, this concept of Mary worship wasn't even remotely known until one manuscript found in the mid 3rd century and not develop until the council of Ephesus in the early 5th century which I believe gave Mary the title of the Mother of God. In fact, there wasn't even a singular bishop in Rome until at the very, very earliest 115AD but more likely a 125-140AD is more appropriate.

The Catholic church does teach more correct doctrine than your average Protestant church though. I would agree with your view on Christ in the context of the Eucharist and even your faith and works (doctrinal, not in actual practice) but the Eastern Orthodox easily beats both on the basis of history and all fall shy on the actual church but again, it would probably take too long to have a formal discussion on such an important and large issue.

I'm not trying to build a sense of superiority because I was a Protestant myself not even a year ago and many of my former beliefs turned out to be historical and biblical manipulations, half truths and lies. Despite me clearly seeing evidence to those claims to the contrary, I never retracted them until I actually began researching such things on my own free will from unbiased sources rather than being told information or only seeking information that suited my position.


Very interesting post and it appears the replies are turning out to be quite intriguing.

Click to expand...

Another note of import is that the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox do not have the terrible history of Catholic and Protestant lands of burning thousands at the stake for being declared witches.

Basil the Great said:

Well, Albion, I was being a little sarcastic, was I not? However, there is still a lot of truth to what I said, as we have so many different Protestant bodies and they all use the same Scriptures.

Click to expand...

Well, you know that it is not always easy to discern tongue-in-cheek comments from ones meant to convey exactly what is written. In this case, it sure looked to me that you think that Protestants can believe anything they want, especially because I have read that very comment from a number of other people who were NOT being sarcastic. But if you were, thanks for setting me straight about it.

I think the people the OP is asking about have failed to ask a basic question: what kinds of questions does Scripture answer? A lot of our problem is that it often doesn't answer questions we're interested in. There are several discussions going on about free will, open theism, etc. But Scripture doesn't give us a specific explanation of just how God's plan works. He expects us to make decisions. He responds to what we do. The prophets tell us he has both short- and long-term plans. But we don't have a detailed account of how this all works.

There are also practical issues we'd like solved. Should we baptize infants? Almost everyone is convinced that Scripture answers this question, but a critical look at their arguments makes it pretty clear that it doesn't.

This has led to different schools of thought, throughout history. It's not just Protestants that have wrestled with this. There have been viewpoints very similar to both Calvin and Arminius within the Catholic Church. Generally the Church accepted a range of theological speculation, as long as it didn't compromised our ability to follow Christ. And sometimes I think even that judgement was wrong.

I think the Christian community has an opportunity to show how we can have unity in Christ even though we disagree on many things. Indeed I think it is our role to show the world how even people who disagree can be part of the same community. There probably need to be limits, but probably the people the OP is talking about were all within those limits.

Albion said:

Well, you know that it is not always easy to discern tongue-in-cheek comments from ones meant to convey exactly what is written. In this case, it sure looked to me that you think that Protestants can believe anything they want, especially because I have read that very comment from a number of other people who were NOT being sarcastic. But if you were, thanks for setting me straight about it.

Click to expand...

Sorry, Albion. If it makes you feel better, I have always found you to be one of the best posters here at C.F.

My dad believes very similarly to I in that we believe there are many congregations in Christianity....

1. Messianic
2. Persecuted
3. Orthodox
4. Catholic
5. Protestant
6. Wesleyan / Pentecostal
7. Word of Faith / Charismatic

My dad sometimes attends three services

1. 9AM - Lutheran service
2. 10AM - Charismatic worship service
3. 11AM - Pentecostal Holiness worship service

And we will sometime visit the Catholic church on rare occasion. We went to the Catholic Christmas Mass Christmas morning and there on the special Christmas songbook were posted warnings not to partake of communion if you were not Catholic, also advertising that they were the only true church. I had a hard time with that and have no desire to go back. Because of the shortage of priests their priest was a Nigerian who was very difficult to understand.

My favorite holiday place this season was with the Lutheran church. During Thanksgiving they had a wonderful meal in which they invited the whole community. There was a large turnout with people from all kinds of denominations. We would identify our denomination, in which there were also Catholics, but that was the extent of our denominational talk. The meal was wonderful with the availability of large helpings of turkey, ham, potatoes, stuffing, bread, and desserts. And it was also enjoyed with wonderful fellowship with the people. And all the people looked and behaved themselves as Christian.

We invited the whole family to the Lutheran Christmas Eve service. It was a wonderful service with the Pastor taking time to delight in the children there. At the end of the Christmas Eve service they had communion in which we would all go and kneel at the altar until the pastor came by and served us the communion. All reverently done! And there was wonderful fellowship after the service as well.

The winner for the holiday season this year goes to the Lutherans. I loved the way they done their services and the Thanksgiving meal was wonderful. Also noting the wonderful Christian spirit that existed with the members there. I was most disappointing with the Catholic service, with no despair over not being one, amazed over the fact as they are still warring with Protestants which was made evident right there along with the Christmas Carols in bold print. And also noting that most of the carols they were singing came right out of Protestant churches. Especially noting that we were kind to the Catholics who attended the Lutheran events earlier in the season.

Basil the Great said:

Yes, I almost went to that famous/infamous Papal Bull and how it has effectively been overturned by the modern Church, but I decided to keep my argument centered on the authorization of torture. However, as famous/infamous as Unam Sanctum is, it pales in comparison to Cantate Domino, as it specifically condemned "heretics, schismatics, pagans and Jews".

Click to expand...

Yes, but did those torture bulls include the papal formula for infallibility? If not, Catholics will simply say it never carried the weight of infallibility. Unam Sanctum explicitly does pretend to have that authority.