A Protestant "comes out" (the effects of sola scriptura)

Little Catholic Bubble ^ | March 19, 2015 | Leila

[NYer]

For the first ten or fifteen years after my reversion, my main apologetical interest was in debating and discussing with Protestants. These days, I rarely engage the Protestant/Catholic debate, and I focus more on the "culture wars" by debating secularists and atheists. Protestants are fellow Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ, and the Church is very clear on that.

However, every so often, I revisit the issues that divide Protestants and Catholics because Truth matters, and because the Church is a stronger witness to the world when we are undivided. At the Last Supper, hours before His death, Jesus prayed that his followers all be one. Not some loosey-goosey "oneness of fellowship", but a Trinitarian oneness. True unity, no dissension, no separation. 

So, there was this epic thread that took place on my Facebook page the other day, and while I very much encourage you to read through all 700+ comments (get some popcorn and settle in; it's that good!), I have excerpted for you here some comments from a woman named Renee Joy, who jumped into the discussion and unexpectedly "came out" as a Protestant-turning-Catholic! She had been researching and praying and pondering this move privately, but this was her first public statement! 

Her insights and thoughts on this journey are truly compelling, and I think anyone on either side of the Protestant-Catholic divide will appreciate her intellect, sincerity, and deep faith. Please note, this is not a discussion about sin vs. sanctity (there are sinners and saints in both camps), rather, this is a discussion about doctrinal truth vs. doctrinal chaos.

Read the whole Facebook thread, here (it's public), and meanwhile, here's just a taste of what Renee Joy had to say (I've strung together several of her comments) as she primarily engaged a thoughtful Protestant named Allison. 

+++++++

After 38 years in the Protestant world -- growing up Southern Baptist, under the teachings of Adrian Rogers (and any good S.B. knows who that is), going to a Evangelical Christian school K-12 heavily dominated by Reformed Presbyterians and non-denominational Evangelicals and Southern Baptists in the heart of the Bible Belt, I was frustrated with "church" for many reasons.

A few years ago, I started meeting Catholics, and realizing, oh my goodness, they are not the cult I was taught, and hey, wait a minute -- they make a lot more sense than anything I've seen. If you've lived Protestant then you know that Protestants cannot agree on anything. Sola scriptura my big foot! That's the issue! Everyone interprets everything their own way, and it has led to a complete disaster.

There are more denominations and subsets of those denominations, than is even believable. Independent Baptists eschew the Southern Baptists, who of course teach that the Methodists and Presbys are completely off base, the Lutherans and Episocopalians are totally different, Church of Christ, Church of God, Assembly of God, COGIC, none of them agree on much of anything -- not the way they define the relationship of God the Father, Jesus and the Holy Spirit, not on baptism, not on what is considered "necessary".

Predestination? Huge point of contention -- so much so that most Baptist churches say that it's just a mistranslation, yet the Presbys insist it's foundational. Some allow female preachers, teachers, elders. Some allow homosexual marriage. The majority are fine with artificial birth control even though we all know that it risks causing miscarriage. The divorce rate is astronomical. The churches tend to be either dominated by men (with women in a completely subservient mode with no opinions or purpose) or dominated by women, mostly single mothers with kids, or married women whose husbands stay home. The average family size is tiny -- and their belief of "prolife" really just translates to anti-abortion. They don't agree on the proper method or function of baptism (sprinkle? dunk? indoor dunk or lake?). Even all the Baptists don't agree with the other Baptists -- you have Southerns, Independents (which can be very conservative or far out there), and a ton of little offshoots.

I've seen more Southern Baptist churches split over the dumbest things: a fight about the new carpet color (blue or burgandy???), adultery with the pastor/secretary, fights about what version of the Bible to use (and don't get me started on the nonsense that is the "Message" or the many discrepancies in the various translations), even one split occurred over the replacement of a steeple. And don't get me started on "cultural relevance" -- the turning of most Protestant churches into semi-heathen pep rally environments mixed with rock concerts, where trashy, revealing clothes are the norm, and the focus is on having a good time, getting "pumped up for the Lord" -- on "experiences" and "feelings", not Truth, not discipleship, sacrificial living, ministry.

I'm not Catholic yet -- but the more I walk, the closer Rome looks on the horizon. The dissension in the Protestant churches, for me, stems from the fact that yes, they were based on "protesting"-- someone saying "I don't like this, I'm taking it out". And ever since then, that's what they've done. Each denomination, purging out the things they don't want/like/understand, until they're all practicing some mutilated version of pseudo-Christianity that leaves the congregants unsatisfied, unguided, and unhappy.

Sola scriptura, which clearly is not supported by Scripture itself, since it would mean that we could only use the Old Testament, has resulted in at least a dozen different translations of the "Bible" -- many vastly different than the others, and hundreds, if not thousands, of tiny "churches", each thinking they have it all right, none in agreement with others, and a lot of folks walking around saying "I'm saved" but having lives that look no different in functionality than the people walking around saying "I don't believe in anything except being good to fellow man."

The confusion that has arisen from everyone trying to interpret things their own way, has led to a disaster. And if Protestants truly believed that the Holy Spirit alone interpreted Scripture, and that church meetings were for fellowship (let us not forsake assembly), then there wouldn't be preachers sharing anecdotes and interpretations. There wouldn't be denominations.

And I will say, my husband and I were both raised very heavily in the Southern Baptist/Protestant world -- with my husband's family in the ministry in multiple generations, both of us raised in private Protestant schools, etc. There's a lot of false teaching that we've received over the years, about Catholicism, that we're having to research and refute, if that makes sense. But the more Church history we read, the more we confront the reality of what we see happening in Protestant churches (like the claims that Catholics are wrong for reciting prayers, despite the fact that Protestant churches not only recite the Lord's Prayer, but also typically have an altar call where people are led through a "Sinner's Prayer" to "get saved," etc.), the chaos and collapse of so many families, the blatant disregard for so much of Scripture that Protestants just can't reconcile with their particular denomination's beliefs and so they just ignore/discard it. The more my husband and I talk about it and put it out there, the more obvious the answers are.

And if you ever ask a Protestant, how, if they believe the Catholic Church was in error all those years, and that the Apostolic traditions are invalid, how the Protestant churches went from the New Testament housechurch pattern, to the set-up that exists today, which is often more like a corporation with tiered levels of authority, or conversely, is completely separate from all other churches, neither of which is true to New Testament teaching, they have no answer. If they truly believe that the Bible alone defines everything, then how do they reconcile those differences? If teaching stopped with the books in the New Testament, then how can it be correct to have what they have now? They have no answer.

I think two of the biggest issues were the "Romans Road" (i.e., Cliff Notes version of the Bible?) and the reality of what "salvation" was described as being in the Southern Baptist church, versus the reality of how that played out. For one, if all we really needed to understand salvation and Christianity was the handful of verses from Romans that most Protestant groups use to persuade people into joining their church, then why did God provide all the other books? Why is everything else necessary or important? You can't whittle away at it, taking away all the rest, pulling things out of context, and expect it to mean anything.

I think to be a Protestant, you have to be able to just say "it doesn't make sense but that's ok." I'm serious. There's so much you can't question -- or you're treated like an outcast. There's no consistency, no firm answers. It's all subjective. To be honest, I was talking about this earlier with another Catholic convert, and she pointed out that being Catholic isn't easy. In contrast, being Protestant is. Especially Southern Baptist. Once you've "prayed the prayer" and "gotten saved" (which are very important phrases), then you have your fire insurance. Anything you do, from then on, well, do your best but it's ok regardless. You can't get "unsaved" in that denomination. You're good to go. It's easy, in so many ways.

For years, I was taught that Catholics believed and taught things contradictory to Scripture. Purgatory, for instance. The respect they have for Mary, as another thing. In fact, there was a whole list of "violations." So, I started digging- not just to see if Catholics were right or wrong, but to see if the denomination I belonged to was also right or wrong. Because I grew up influenced by so many different "religions" (paternal grandfather, Southern Baptist; paternal grandmother, Methodist; maternal grandmother, Roman Catholic; maternal grandfather, Church of Christ. Went to a school taught by Reformed Presbyterians, non-denominational Evangelicals, and Southern Baptists. Went to Southern Baptist church. Nannied for a Jewish couple, worked a college job for a Sikh, had Muslim customers in Saudi Arabia and UAE, etc., and had a few Mormon friends. Worked in the inner city, where most worshipped at COGIC or Missionary Baptist denominations. You name it, I've heard it) -- I knew they could not all be correct. Someone has to be wrong. I don't want to be part of the ones that are wrong!

So here's the thing: I agree there are false teachers within the religious world. No doubt. That's obvious. The question is, who are they? So I started looking at that specifically -- across the board.

Presbyterians rely on Calvin, and to be honest, Scofield. I have a Scofield Bible on my nightstand, actually, and had used it for years. They set the standard and wrote the belief systems, pulling out the Scriptures they needed/liked to formulate what was "right" vs. "wrong." But who gave them that authority?

Most independent Baptist churches are pretty insistent on KJV. Why? I've even been in a church where I was carrying my Scofield NIV, and the church elders politely informed us that we couldn't read aloud in the Bible studies from the NIV, we had to use the KJV, and to help us "no longer be in error" then they had purchased us KJV's and left them in our pew. What gave them that authority?

None of the Protestant denominations agree foundationally on the majority of their religion. Even though they might say that "anyone who believes in the Trinity, in the fact that we are all sinners in need of a savior, and then confesses the name of Jesus Christ as Lord" is "saved," do they practice that? Is there unity between the churches? NO. Not at all. They are fundamentally different, and if you stay in any denomination for very long, you'll hear how/why they believe they have the "correct" interpretation of Scripture. The problem is, they seem to evolve with time, with this cultural relevancy concept. I cannot fathom how a church can believe that homosexuality is fine, acceptable to God, that gay marriage should be performed -- and yet, last year, the Presbyterian USA voted to allow it, it's up to the individual churches. Without a standard of interpretation and teaching to hold to -- that "tradition" that is mentioned in 2 Thess 3:6 -- this is what happens. Everyone comes up with his own thing, something that suits him. And the scary thing is, they all contradict.

Every Protestant denomination thinks they have it right. They can all cite Scripture to support their own doctrines, often pulling things out of context, or ignoring other Scripture that clearly adds to/supports/mitigates the tiny little bit they've decided to pull out and build a religion on -- like the importance of baptism, or the function of taking the Lord's Supper. Without the teaching from the apostles to round things out, to explain things, it's like looking at the framework of a house being built. You need the drywall, the shingles, the wiring, the plumbing, to make it a home. That's why we're not supposed to forsake gathering together. that's why we're supposed to not just go off on our own and read the Bible and think that's sufficient.

When I first posted on my Facebook wall over a year ago that I was frustrated beyond belief with the Protestants, I had no desire to become a Catholic. None. I was firmly convinced that the Pope might be the anti-Christ, as I had been taught from the pulpit, that they worshipped Mary, talked to dead people like witchcraft, etc etc etc. I had trouble reconciling that with the Catholics I knew, though, including my grandmother and the many Godly, faithful, peace-loving, kind, inclusive, "die to self and live for Christ" women I had met through Reece's Rainbow. I was looking for the "best" Protestant denomination to join. But over and over, people in various Protestant churches were commenting and PM'ing and emailing me to say they had the same struggles -- and over and over Catholics were saying "I think you're looking for us" and "I think you're Catholic and don't know it yet" haha.

I started studying not to become Catholic, but to disprove it, to find that fatal flaw that allowed me to cross them off my list as a viable option. But the more I dug, the more I learned and the more it made sense. I had to learn to separate what I had drilled in my head for years, decades really, by the teachers/preachers in my life, the code phrases that were programmed in -- the "compare everything to Scripture" (but not necessarily Scripture in context, but Scripture as interpreted and presented by the leadership of that denomination, hence the major debate over sprinkling vs dunking, predestination vs foreknowledge, etc). It all really does come down to the apostolic tradition, and the verses in the New Testament that refer to that being relevant. How we interpret anything is dependent on who is doing the interpreting and what criteria they use, what bias they have. The fact that the Catholic Church can trace the Popes all the way back, and the fact that Jesus renamed Peter and then in the same sentence said that on that rock He would build His Church, is huge. It was minimized in the Southern Baptist church, written off as a coincidence of naming -- but why would Jesus do that? Why would God want to confuse us? He's not the one that's the author of confusion! If He had wanted to rename Peter, He could have done that at any point, and not followed that with "and upon (the new name I just gave you that means Rock, i.e. foundation that is not sinking sand) I build My Church". When I realized that -- realized that it made more sense that Peter was named Rock because he would be the first Pope, just like Abraham was renamed to "Father of Multitude" because that was his role -- it started all making sense....

+++++++

Renee knows more about Catholicism as a Protestant than most Catholics know about their own faith! Again, to read the entire thread, which includes a lot of other voices, go here. It was a real barn burner, and I heard from Protestants who enjoyed it and learned a lot. Go give it a look. And remember the words of Jesus to the Father on the night before He died, after consecrating the Apostles to go forth and teach in His name:

“I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me. The glory that you have given me I have given them, so that they may be one, as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become completely one, so that the world may know that you have sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me." -- John 17: 20-23

Trinitarian unity of Christians is what God desires, and it's what Christ chose to pray for for in the precious hours before His agony. It cannot be minimized. God bless Renee and the countless others who have heeded Jesus' call to unity, so that the world may believe that He is Lord, sent by the Father. 

[CynicalBear]

>>Is the Bible the sole "teaching from God?" No. The Bible Itself states that there are "oral" teachings and traditions that are to be carried on to the present-day<<

Catholic can't prove that what they teach as "tradition" is exactly what the apostles taught. Given that scripture says that whoever teaches something the apostles didn't teach should be considered accursed it remains that scripture is still the only infallible source.

[pgyanke]

So which is it: “More often than not” or “ALWAYS”?

Weather’s fine here too. Thanks.

[St_Thomas_Aquinas]

If you've lived Protestant then you know that Protestants cannot agree on anything.

She makes a valid point.

[NYer]

Catholic can't prove that what they teach as "tradition" is exactly what the apostles taught. Given that scripture says that whoever teaches something the apostles didn't teach should be considered accursed it remains that scripture is still the only infallible source.

Jesus didn’t tell the apostles to write down everything he had taught them. He simply commanded them to teach it. Much of this teaching later made its way into Sacred Scripture, but every bit of it was and still is considered Sacred Tradition.

John tells us as much at the end of his Gospel: "But there are also many other things which Jesus did; were every one of them to be written, I suppose that the world itself could not contain the books that would be written" (John 21:25). Some of Jesus’ teachings had not yet made it into written form by the date John finished writing his Gospel.

Turning to Luke, we see that the author begins his Gospel by explaining why he is writing it. Luke points out that others have already committed certain things to writing, and he thinks it is a good idea to write down what his reader has already been : (Luke 1:1-4)

Luke, then, commits to writing what has already been taught. That teaching is Sacred Tradition just as surely as Luke’s Gospel will later be recognized as Sacred Scripture.

Moving beyond the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, we find that Paul provides even more explicit evidence of Sacred Tradition in his writings. Here are three examples: (1 Cor. 11:2), (2 Thess. 3:6), (2 Thess. 2:15).

[RnMomof7]

"Protestants are fellow Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ, and the Church is very clear on that."

Nope..

"CANON 9:  "If any one saith, that by faith alone the impious is justified; in such wise as to mean, that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to the obtaining the grace of Justification, and that it is not in any way necessary, that he be prepared and disposed by the movement of his own will; let him be anathema." 

1. "Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin." (Rom. 3:20).
2. "Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus;" (Rom. 3:24).
3. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." (Rom. 3:28).
4. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Rom. 4:3).
5. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," (Rom. 5:1).
6. "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God;" (Eph. 2:8).
7. "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost," (Titus 3:5).

• CANON 12:  "If any one shall say that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in the divine mercy pardoning sins for Christ's sake, or that it is that confidence alone by which we are justified . . . let him be accursed"
  1. "But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name," (John 1:12).
  2. "Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law." (Rom. 3:28).
  3. 'For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Rom. 4:3).
  4. "Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. ²⁶For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; ²⁷Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the peoples: for this he did once, when he offered up himself." (Heb. 7:25-27).
  5. "For the which cause I also suffer these things: nevertheless I am not ashamed: for I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day." (2 Tim. 1:12).
• Canon 14: "If any one saith, that man is truly absolved from his sins and justified, because that he assuredly believed himself absolved and justified; or, that no one is truly justified but he who believes himself justified; and that, by this faith alone, absolution and justification are effected; let him be anathema."
  1. "For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Rom. 4:3).
  2. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," (Rom. 5:1).
• Canon 23: "lf any one saith, that a man once justified can sin no more, nor lose grace, and that therefore he that falls and sins was never truly justified; or, on the other hand, that he is able, during his whole life, to avoid all sins, even those that are venial,--except by a special privilege from God, as the Church holds in regard of the Blessed Virgin; let him be anathema."
  1. "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him." (John 3:36).
  2. "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:40).
  3. "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand." (John 10:28).
  4. "That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord." (Rom. 5:21).
  5. "They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with us: but they went out, that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 John 2:19).
  6. "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God," (1 John 5:13).
• Canon 24:  "If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema."
  1. "O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? ²This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? ³Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" (Gal. 3:1-3).
  2. "Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. ²Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. ³For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." (Gal. 5:1-3).
• Canon 30:  "If any one saith, that, after the grace of Justification has been received, to every penitent sinner the guilt is remitted, and the debt of eternal punishment is blotted out in such wise, that there remains not any debt of temporal punishment to be discharged either in this world, or in the next in Purgatory, before the entrance to the kingdom of heaven can be opened (to him); let him be anathema."
  1. "Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ," (Rom. 5:1).
  2. "And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; ¹⁴Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross." (Col. 2:13-14).
• Canon 33:  "If any one saith, that, by the Catholic doctrine touching Justification, by this holy Synod inset forth in this present decree, the glory of God, or the merits of our Lord Jesus Christ are in any way derogated from, and not rather that the truth of our faith, and the glory in fine of God and of Jesus Christ are rendered (more) illustrious; let him be anathema.
  1. This council declares that if anyone disagrees with it, they are damned.

[GreyFriar]

Ed,

you posted “...other radical protestants executed by other less radical protestants would therefore suggest that Protestants today are not brothers and sisters in Christ with other Protestants today....”

A good example of not Protestant Christian enough for other Protestant Christians, is in my own protestant family that was driven out of Basel, Switzerland to seek refuge in the Rhineland-Alsace (on the current French-Germany border) by more radical Calvinists Protestants in the mid-1600s.

[CynicalBear]

Now prove from an infallible source that what the Catholic Church teaches as tradition that is not found in scripture is exactly what the apostles called tradition that is not found in scripture.

[GreyFriar]

Thank you for reminding us about Jesus’ own words in Mark 9: 38-41, of which “39 Jesus replied, “Do not prevent him. There is no one who performs a mighty deed in my name who can at the same time speak ill of me.”

And your statement: “As a Catholic, we are with John in the Apostolic Succession. However, no one who professes the name of Jesus is my enemy.”

For me, any person who professes the name of Jesus is my friend and fellow Christian, without caveat.

[Teacher317]

This council declares that if anyone disagrees with it, they are damned.

The surest way to know if you are speaking with an absolute moron is if they make that very statement. Mohammed very clearly said the same exact thing about those who ever thought that he was wrong, or a liar.

[Jvette]

Jesus is eternal as is His sacrifice. The Last Supper was necessary so that He could show the Apostles how He could indeed give His flesh and blood for us to eat and drink.

This was so important that when He called and revealed Himself to St. Paul, He gave to Paul the exact words that He used at the Last Supper.

Christ’s blood is the ocean of God’s mercy which is endless and fathomless.

The same God that created the universe and all that is in it, who overshadowed a virgin and by so doing created the Son of God and Son of Man, is certainly capable of anything.

We in our humanity cannot understand the how, but we respond as the Apostles did when Jesus asked if they too would leave Him. “To whom shall we go, Lord. We believe that you are the Christ. You have the words of eternal life.”

[Jvette]

He says I will not drink again, but nowhere does Scripture say that He drank from the cup once He blessed it and spoke of it as His blood. Look again at the passage...

in Matthew, He blessed it and GAVE IT TO THEM saying....

in Mark, and He took the cup and He GAVE IT TO THEM.....

in Luke, 17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:

and then AFTER supper, when the meal was ended, He took bread and likewise the cup.

It does not say it, no matter how badly one may want it.

[ealgeone]

If teaching stopped with the books in the New Testament, then how can it be correct to have what they have now?

And just what new revelations have been given since the NT??

[Kandy Atz]

The article meanders all over the place with her reasoning. Her brief references to God’s Word reveals her limited spiritual growth, especially in what Jesus accomplished, and who Believers are IN CHRIST. This could be the result of poor preaching/teaching, but ultimately, its her lack of feeding on God’s Word. Nobody on a steady diet of the sincere milk of the Word would type something so flippant as, “Once you’ve “prayed the prayer” and “gotten saved” (which are very important phrases), then you have your fire insurance.”

I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt, but I would not be a bit surprised if this turns out to be a hoax.

Her thoughts reveal a spiritual immaturity, as well as ignorance of God’s Word, although she does seem to have a lot of religious knowledge. Changing denominational flavors will not fix this. Getting into God’s Word, BELIEVING HIS WORD, and listening to the Spirit, absolutely will. As long as her focus is on religion, whether Catholic OR Protestant, she is missing the boat. Religion can’t do anything for you.

[pbear8]

The Catholic "Jesus" is a perpetual helpless infant...He is ALWAYS depicted this way, or perpetually on the cross. The Jesus most non-Catholic Christians worship is high and lifted up, seated at the right hand of the Father

The Nicene Creed - "He ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of the Father"- Catholics have been praying this since it was written in 325 AD.

[Jvette]

And in these passages, God tells them that it is the blood that has life. That sacrifice was not for life, but for remission of sins of the people.

Jesus is the perfect sacrifice, the spotless Lamb and He says that His blood gives life.

Big difference.

God does not contradict Himself.

[Jvette]

I have listened to about half of the youtube link given in the comments, of the conversation between Tim Staples and Steve Gregg. I don’t know if the host, Mr. Gregg ever realized the irony of him saying several times, “This is just my take.....My take on this is.....I take this to mean.....

[ealgeone]

I think to be a Protestant, you have to be able to just say "it doesn't make sense but that's ok." I'm serious. There's so much you can't question -- or you're treated like an outcast.

Would love to be there when she asks her first question about Mary if she goes catholic.

There's no consistency, no firm answers.

Uh...yes there are consistent and firm answers.

It's all subjective. To be honest, I was talking about this earlier with another Catholic convert, and she pointed out that being Catholic isn't easy.

Yep...catholics pride themselves on how hard it is to be catholic. Lots to remember and lots to do hoping, just hoping you've done the right things and enough of them.

In contrast, being Protestant is. Especially Southern Baptist. Once you've "prayed the prayer" and "gotten saved" (which are very important phrases), then you have your fire insurance. Anything you do, from then on, well, do your best but it's ok regardless. You can't get "unsaved" in that denomination. You're good to go. It's easy, in so many ways.

Wow. She must not be paying attention or reading the Word. The security of the believer is taught in the Word. The Bible teaches that we have been sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise (Eph 1:13-14, 2 Cor 1:22). Do a Greek study of this passage and you will see these are legal terms. There is nothing in the NT that ever says we are unsealed.

If all of our sins, past, present and future are not forgiven, then Abraham, David and others have no hope of eternity. David expressed confidence he would see his little boy in Heaven. That means both have to be there. We know from the Bible that David messed up about every way you could...yet he was forgiven without having to do all the stuff catholics talk about. Same with Abraham. Abraham believed God and it was reckoned to him as righteousness. He was not circumcised at the time nor had the Law been given at that point.

His salvation was through faith. This is the argument Paul made against the Judaizers. Abraham believed God.

That is how we come to Him....through faith.

[GeronL]

That writer is ludicrously ignorant about protestants.

[GeronL]

Even JW’s miles by nazi camps can be called martyrs

[GeronL]

killed