Why does it take so long for some Protestants to become Christians

[Daniel Peres]

Many protestants view salvation with a clear and definable starting point that has greater value past an age of accountability. They often will seek a salvation moment and feel incomplete if they can't articulate one and strongly desire to know when they were born again. It could be when they said a specific prayer, raised a hand or walked to the front of a church in response to a savaltion call. They feel a sense of urgency to the call, and their response to it becomes their moment of salvation that they articulate. It is common to even count the years since that moment and say I have been saved for x amount of years.

It's a difference of culture and perspective across faith communities and I wouldn't worry too much about the semantics or labeling. We don't do the saving part, God does and the labels we give it may have a psychological impact but God sees through the labels to the heart and is the final authority no matter how you articulate it.

When we view the disciples at which point did they become "saved"? It's more of a journey than a single moment, yet disciples like Mathew still do have a definable moment of responding to Christ's call of "follow me" (even if he didn't fully grapsed what that entailed) a failure of protestants is too strong of focus on a salvation moment. I get it can be beneficial as a clear identity as an individual but the language could probably shift to focus on responding to Christ's call over a salvation moment.

I grew up in a evangelical home, I cannot remember a moment of salvation that is so typical of an evangelical experience. But I do have many milestones of choosing to follow Christ, so for me it's a journey that goes back as far as my memories do, but it is an active call that I need to respond to daily. I don't like to package salvation or reduce it to a single moment so I try and stay away from that language but I'm big enough to know how to contextualised the labels to someone else's perspective of salvation without the need to debate it.

I can agree with your post. In fact, Catholics don’t usually say they have been saved. I always tell people, “I have been saved! I am being saved! And I will be saved!”

 

[Clare73]

Look, there are times when Protestants have legitimate disagreements with Catholics. For instance, some Protestants disagree with infant baptism, and they are correct, Catholics do believe in infant baptism. But on the other hand, I am constantly seeing Protestants misunderstanding Catholicism and attacking us for believing we can earn our salvation, s belief which is repulsive to us. So sometimes there is disagreement, but often their is misunderstanding, and I’m sure Catholics are guilty of the same with Protestants. So, don’t worry I know the difference between disagreement and misunderstanding.

Do you think you can speak for all Catholics?

Some think that requiring works for salvation is not adding works to faith.

 

[Maria Billingsley]

You never did answer my question about your "occupation."

Yes or no?

Interior designer.

 

[Daniel Peres]

I don’t know if this is common knowledge among Protestants, it certainly isn’t among Catholics, in early Christianity is was very common for people to postpone their Baptism.

It’s related to something Protestants don’t believe in that the belief that even though God forgives for a sin, to still have to deal with the temporal effects of the sin, either in this life or after death during purification which I am fully aware Protestants don’t believe. My purpose in this post is just to mention s practice that occurred among many early Christians. Well there is an ancient Christian belief, which is actually still held, though not practiced, by all of the Apostolic churches.

You see not only did Baptism save and forgive your sins, it also wipes away all of the temporal effects from your sins. I can think of two famous cases where the person believed and accepted Jesus as their savior, yet they postponed their baptism for years.

The first is St. Augustine of Hippo. Prior to becoming a Christian he had led a very immoral life, he especially was unable to control his lust for women. So even though he accepted Jesus as his Lord and Savior, he postponed his baptism. He did this because he knew he was not yet able to give up women, and he didn’t want to get married either. So he decided he would postpone his baptism until he knew could control himself, and when he did finally get baptized, all of his sins along with their temporal effects would be wiped away.

The second case is that of the Roman Emperor Constantine. Even after he legalized Christianity it took him years to accept Jesus as his Lord and Savior. However, he did the same as Augustine and postponed his baptism, but he took the practice of postponing baptism to an extreme, and he almost wasn’t baptized.

Constantine waited until he was sick and dying. He had a strong desire to get baptized in the Jordan river where Jesus had been baptized by John the Baptist. He knew he didn’t have much time left so he set of on his journey to the Jordan river to get baptized. Unfortunately for Constantine, during his journey he became even more sick, so he had to stop and have some bishop baptize him.

Under this ancient belief about baptism, the fact that he was baptized immediately prior to his death meant that he probably had no temporal effects from sin that required him to go through purification. My guess is this is why the Eastern Orthodox Church venerates Constantine as a saint.

One last thing about Constantine’s baptism. When I read the account about his baptism I was very moved. Not because of Constantine but how his baptism related to the crucificarían of Jesus. You see, just before he was baptized, out of respect for Jesus, Constantine removed his royal purple robe. I just thought to my self, “This is amazing how the Roman Emperor had removed his royal purple robe out respect for Jesus, and yet at Jesus’ crucifixion, the Romans had mocked Jesus’ royalty by placing a purple robe on him. I guess that mocking joke turned out not to be a joke at all. It turned out that even the Roman Emperor knew that only Jesus was worthy of a royal purple robe.”

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I didn’t I ask this question to debate theology and whether or not Jesus was referring to amniotic fluid when he was talking about water and being born again.

I wasn't even referring to that.

You asked "So, I am confused when I hear many Protestants say they didn’t become a Christian until there teens or later. I’d there something I am not understanding? Just curious."

The answer I provided was: it is because to a protestant, you aren't a Christian until you are born again by the Holy Spirit. Being born into a Christian family and being psychologically conditioned to love Jesus is not the same thing.

A lot of churches are in decline today because they are unable to tell the difference.

 

[Daniel Peres]

Do you think you can speak for all Catholics?

Some think that requiring works for salvation is not adding works to faith.

Well of course I am not speaking for any heretics. I’m just speaking for Orthodox Catholicism. Using your logic, it would be wrong of me to say that according to Catholicism homosexual acts are sinful, because we currently have some disgusting popes who are claiming homosexual acts are not sinful.

BTW, although there are Catholics that erroneously believe sexual immorality is not sinful, I have never known of a Catholic that believes what you claim. It certainly is possible that one could exist , but one could say the same thing about your too.

The fact is that no Catholics have taught or believed a Christian can earn their salvation with good works since the the fifth century. It was belief that would eventually be known as Pelagianism, and they belief was even worse than the belief you accuse Catholics of having. You see, in Pelagianism, not only did they believe a Christian could earn salvation, they also believed a zChristian could earn their salvation without God’s grace.

Anyway, Pelagianism was declared a heresy in 425 and that permanently put an end the heretical belief that one could earn salvation. I don’t know if you are aware of this, but once an ecumenical council of bishops or pope makes an infallible declaration that a particular teaching is a heresy, that teaching is banned forever.

So if you ever do meet a Catholic that believes he can earn his salvation with good works, then you are talking to a heretic and his belief has nothing to do with Catholicism.

 

[Clare73]

Well of course I am not speaking for any heretics. I’m just speaking for Orthodox Catholicism. Using your logic, it would be wrong of me to say that according to Catholicism homosexual acts are sinful, because we currently have some disgusting popes who are claiming homosexual acts are not sinful.

BTW, although there are Catholics that erroneously believe sexual immorality is not sinful,
I have never known of a Catholic that believes what you claim.

Does Eastern Orthodox count?

It certainly is possible that one could exist , but one could say the same thing about your too.

The fact is that no Catholics have taught or believed a Christian can earn their salvation with good works since the the fifth century. It was belief that would eventually be known as Pelagianism, and they belief was even worse than the belief you accuse Catholics of having. You see, in Pelagianism, not only did they believe a Christian could earn salvation, they also believed a zChristian could earn their salvation without God’s grace.

Anyway, Pelagianism was declared a heresy in 425 and that permanently put an end the heretical belief that one could earn salvation. I don’t know if you are aware of this, but once an ecumenical council of bishops or pope makes an infallible declaration that a particular teaching is a heresy, that teaching is banned forever.

So if you ever do meet a Catholic that believes he can earn his salvation with good works, then you are talking to a heretic and his belief has nothing to do with Catholicism.

 

[Daniel Peres]

Does Eastern Orthodox count?

Sorry, I am not sure what you’re asking about the Eastern Orthodox Church. I can probably answer your question, but I need you to rephrase it.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

the temporal effects from your sins.

FYI - The Romans 7 understanding of sin (that it is a quantity that causes creation to malfunction) is not taken literally amongst most protestants.

 

[Clare73]

Sorry, I am not sure what you’re asking about the Eastern Orthodox Church. I can probably answer your question, but I need you to rephrase it.

There is an Eastern Orthodox poster here who proposes what you say you have never heard a Catholic claim.

 

[Daniel Peres]

I wasn't even referring to that.

You asked "So, I am confused when I hear many Protestants say they didn’t become a Christian until there teens or later. I’d there something I am not understanding? Just curious."

The answer I provided was: it is because to a protestant, you aren't a Christian until you are born again by the Holy Spirit. Being born into a Christian family and being psychologically conditioned to love Jesus is not the same thing.

A lot of churches are in decline today because they are unable to tell the difference.

I was born again when I was baptized in water by the Holy Spirit when I was infant. Now, you may say I am not born again. But my belief has always existed in Christianity, and yours is a very new belief. You say you have the Protestant belief, but that’s not true for all Protestants. Martin Luther and John Calvin were both Protestants, and they both believed in infant baptism, and they both believed a person was born again through baptism.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I was born again when I was baptized in water by the Holy Spirit when I was infant. Now, you may say I am not born again. But my belief has always existed in Christianity, and yours is a very new belief. You say you have the Protestant belief, but that’s not true for all Protestants. Martin Luther and John Calvin were both Protestants, and they both believed in infant baptism, and they both believed a person was born again through baptism.

Protestants typically do not get baptized as infants, so maybe that's the answer to your question.

It's all perceptory though, whatever you find out, it will be in that arena.

 

[Daniel Peres]

There is an Eastern Orthodox poster here who proposes what you say you have never heard a Catholic claim.

I am not sure if you are saying an Eastern Orthodox poster claims he can earn his salvation or if the Eastern Orthodox poster claims Catholics believe in earned salvation. Either way, both Catholics and Eastern Orthodox are obligated to believe the declaration at the Council of Carthage in 425, which declared that the teaching that a Christian can earn his salvation is a heresy. Even though the Eastern Orthodox are no longer in union with Rome, they are still bound to the authority of the ecumenical councils that took place prior the the split.

Does that answer your question?

 

[John Caldwell]

This might sound like a crazy question, but hear me out. I’m always hearing Protestants say they came to Jesus at age 15, 20, 30, etc. Even though they were raised in a Christian household. However, this baffles me, because I have no memory of becoming Christian. I am fortunate in, that unlike most people, my memories go back to just under three. Anyway, I simply don’t remember not loving Jesus. There is no beginning point where my love began. It’s the same thing with my parents and older sister, I began loving them before I was able to form memories. So, I am confused when I hear many Protestants say they didn’t become a Christian until there teens or later. I’d there something I am not understanding? Just curious.

There is a difference between not remembering when ones love for Christ began and that love not having a beginning. Your experience is much like mine. While I say I came to know Christcat about age 10, I really can't say when. I grew up in a Christian household learning about Christ. Typically Protestants, like me, look to a time when that love materialized in a mature articulation of a personal faith.

 

[Daniel Peres]

Protestants typically do not get baptized as infants, so maybe that's the answer to your question.

It's all perceptory though, whatever you find out, it will be in that arena.

Well I baptized my son in a Lutheran church.

 

[Saint Steven]

Well receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life is not about loving God/Jesus. And it is also not a corporate act, meaning just because a Mother and Father are believers does not means their child or children will be.

Growing up in a christian home accounts for nothing if the members in that family never trust in The Messiah for God's free gift of Eternal Life.

Receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life is something each individual person will have to do themselves.

That's a good description of where I was at with it. Easy to get caught up in the us and them mentality and not realize that we need to make an individual decision to have a relationship with God. Here's how I came to the realization.

At eight years of age I was attending a Summer Bible camp in Wisconsin. In a morning chapel service the man speaking did as they always did, he gave an invitation to receive Christ. He asked that all heads be bowed and all eyes closed. But I found myself peeking to see if any of these "lost sinners" would raise a hand. At that moment God spoke to me. Though it was a supernatural event, it seemed as natural to me as anything. I knew who it was and wasn't frightened, or disturbed by it. What I heard was mind-blowing. It came like a tap on my shoulder. The message clear and direct. "If you think it is so important, why haven't you done it?" I was speechless. I answered with my feet. I knew the drill. I rose to my feet and pushed my way to the aisle to go forward before we were even asked to do so.

When I was a young adult I made a connection about this event that had not been apparent to me at the time. The man who "led me to Christ" was the son of the man that led my father to the Lord. A Christian Alliance missionary that went from farm to farm inviting people to Sunday School and sharing the gospel in the area where my father grew up. Basically in the middle of nowhere. Such a wonderful mystery, the workings of our great God.

 

[Saint Steven]

I was raised by both parents and my paternal grandmother. Since, I don’t know how it happened I can’t explain it, but since my first recorded memory, I have always had a profound love for Jesus as well as God the Father. Both my parents were Cuban so I learned the faith in Spanish (although English was my first language because of my sister) Anyway I can reme calling God the Father, Papa Dios, just like Jesus called him Abba. I have to admit that it took me a little longer to understand the Holy Spirit.

Something else that I find interesting about my family raising me to love Jesus concerns my life my life as an atheist in my twenties. The love for Jesus that my family had ingrained in me still remained. Unlike any other atheist I have ever know of, the person I admired most in world history remained Jesus.

I hope it is a misunderstanding on my part, but it sounds as if you hold Jesus at arms length, as something distant to admire, "love" as you put it. There is much value in a personal relationship with the savior.

What can you tell us about that? Thanks.
I hope I have not offended you in any way. Apologies if my question came off wrong.

And the relationship aspect is key to understanding Protestant conversion.
The point at which Christ was invited into your life on a personal level.

 

[Saint Steven]

I don’t know if this is common knowledge among Protestants, it certainly isn’t among Catholics, in early Christianity is was very common for people to postpone their Baptism.

We call it believer's baptism. The Apostle Peter said it best.

Acts 2:38 NIV
Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[Daniel Peres]

I hope it is a misunderstanding on my part, but it sounds as if you hold Jesus at arms length, as something distant to admire, "love" as you put it.

I spent several years as an atheist who still admired Jesus more than any other person in history. I think it would be accurate to say that when I was an atheist I kept Jesus at arm’s length. But not when I was young and certainly not now. He abides in me, and I in him is the way feel.

There is much value in a personal relationship with the savior.

I am very happy to hear you say that. I have been attacked by several Protestants for saying a Christian must have a personal relationship with Jesus. Many Protestants got really angry with me, and said I was adding Faith. They insisted that Justification was by faith alone, and that a personal relationship with Jesus is not necessary. After those attacks, it’s wonderful to see your post.

What can you tell us about that? Thanks.
I hope I have not offended you in any way. Apologies if my question came off wrong.

And the relationship aspect is key to understanding Protestant conversion.
The point at which Christ was invited into your life on a personal level.

Like I said above, I have been attacked by many Protestants on this forum about the need for a personal relationship with Jesus, and insisted that this contradicted Sola Fide.

 

[Tigger45]

Well I baptized my son in a Lutheran church.

Well that would make for an interesting story.