Difference between Catholic and Protestant.

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
8,121
2,764
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I think sometimes people are just trying to survive in this fast paced world. And I think God knows that. Thanks for the info though. I'll try to avoid some fast food restaurants. But I really don't eat out very often. I'm on a tight budget.

An interesting note is that they found a link between smoke and cancer also. They found that people that ate smoked meats regularly had a much higher risk of stomach cancer. So that's something to eat sparingly.

And the smoke of course was also present as a danger in cigarettes and second had smoke. It also was linked to air pollution. And as soon as they said breathing air could cause cancer I tuned them out and just decided to trust in the Lord. ;)
Dr. Kellogg, an early member of the SDA church, founded the breakfast cereal industry. There are a number of books from EGW such as "The Ministry of Healing" which will teach anyone how to be healthy, written in a time before medical science had confirmed the directions put forth in her writings.

Some argue, "oh, she was a plagurist who simply copied and pasted everything that was already being said in her day." Look, in the 19th century, the fact is that everything under the sun was being spread abroad as "sound medical advice" from the great institutions to the snake oil peddlers.

How did a woman with a 3rd grade education know which things to collect as truly sound and which to leave behind as faulty information? Nevertheless, her counsel on health today stands proven true, and that's all that matters.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2018
27,359
14,803
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Difference between Catholic and Protestant.
OP^

Catholic ~ Historical discouragement and sought after to punish transcribers and burn their books of Biblical transliterations into native languages.

Protestant ~ Historically encouraging of Biblical transliterations into native languages and distribution thereof.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Alfredthefifth

Raccoon1010

Well-Known Member
Jul 14, 2020
15,376
17,881
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Difference between Catholic and Protestant.
OP^

Catholic ~ Historical discouragement and sought after to punish transcribers and burn their books of Biblical transliterations into native languages.

Protestant ~ Historically encouraging of Biblical transliterations into native languages and distribution thereof.
Is there a historical account that is posted online that I can read about regarding that subject? Thanks.
 

Philip James

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2018
4,281
3,101
113
Brandon
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
"For although almost all churches throughout the world celebrate the sacred mysteries on the Sabbath of every week, yet the Christians of Alexandria and at Rome, on account of some ancient tradition (satanic Sun worship), have ceased to do this." - 5th century church historian Socrates Scholasticus

Pssst... That discission is specifically about Holy Week,
'Rome' celebrates the sacred mysteries every day except Holy Saturday before sundown.
How often do SDA celebrate the sacred mysteries?

Pax et Bonum
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raccoon1010

Raccoon1010

Well-Known Member
Jul 14, 2020
15,376
17,881
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Pssst... That discission is specifically about Holy Week,
'Rome' celebrates the sacred mysteries every day except Holy Saturday before sundown.
How often do SDA celebrate the sacred mysteries?

Pax et Bonum
Yes that is one thing I like about the Catholic church. Accessibility to it's services.
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,198
113
73
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
What Bible are you reading?

"And the dragon (Satan) was wroth with the woman (Christ's church) and went to make war with the remnant of her seed (Christ's end time church) which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ". Revelation 12:17 KJV
My mistake. the remnant of her seed includes the Israelites, not the church in isolation. You are forcing it to mean "church" when it doesn't say that, so you are adding to the Bible. I accept the polyvalent nature of this verse. That means "the woman" can have 3 meanings: Isreal, the Church, and a woman. 5 And she was delivered of a son, a man child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and unto his throne. So Jesus' mother obviously gave birth to a son, a man child, which is a much stronger interpretation (but not the only one) than a collective giving birth to a Person. I won't use the "M" word, some people get violent over it. Rev. 12:17 and Genesis 3:15 are the only two verses in Scripture that contain a woman and a dragon. Think about it.​
I'll do better than that. I can show you from the Bible that the New Testament church was a Sabbath-keeping church.
That's an evasion, not an answer. "Then you should be able to find, and name, any Sabbatarian in the 2nd century. Cite any Ph.D. early church historian that agrees with your myth making." You can't, because none exists.
Even Hebrews 4:9 in Lamsa's Peshitta goes beyond the KJVs mere "rest" and accurately translates "Sabbatismos" as it should be: "It is therefore the duty of the people of God to keep the Sabbath."
Then Jesus violated the Peshita by rising on Sunday and not Saturday. Jesus appeared to the Apostles mostly on SUNDAY! The nerve!!!
Let's stick to the facts, OK?
But you refuse to stick to the facts. A Saturday Sabbath was for the JEWS. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath, not your 'pope' E.G. White, who thinks man was made for the Sabbath, and not the other way around. .
Christ church kept the Sabbath day, in some cases, all the way into the second millennium.
I'm still waiting for scholarly evidence of 2nd century Christian Sabbatarians. You're stumped.
It was only after Constantine's 4th century edict that cowardly men who huddled in fear while the true saints of God were being thrown to wolves and burned at stake rushed forward and hijacked Christianity and drove these same dear saints from public view.
First, the Edict of Milan was in 313 A.D., and it was a civil edict, not a Christian edict, and it was mostly about giving back property the Romans stole from the Christians. You can find the edict on line.
Second, you can't name any 2nd or 3rd century martyr. A NAME please. The first 39 popes were killed by pagan Romans, that is a historical fact, but it is obvious how you like to butcher history. That's 2 questions you won't, or can't answer.
They would go on to establish the "papacy" in 538 A.D. and where ever the tentacles of this apostate Whore of Babylon stretched out, Sabbath was done away with and Sunday was set up:
This kind of stupid hate speech is why discussion with you is impossible.

 
Last edited:

Taken

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2018
27,359
14,803
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
First, the Edict of Milan was in 313 A.D., and it was a civil edict, not a Christian edict, and it was mostly about giving back property the Romans stole from the Christians. You can find the edict on line.
Second, you can't name any 2nd or 3rd century martyr. A NAME please. The first 39 popes were killed by pagan Romans, that is a historical fact, but it is obvious how you like to butcher history. That's 2 questions you won't, or can't answer.

This kind of stupid hate speech is why discussion with you is impossible.

“Hate speech” .... a hokey modernized, politicalized, term simply meaning...Someone disagrees with you....and you get to decide why!

The term was used by men whose own selves felt marginalized and inferior, because they felt unlikeable, by they deciding the other did not LIKE THEM BECAUSE of their race, their beliefs, their reputation, community standing, etc.

Matt 23:
Jesus called men;
Hypocrites, Fools, Blind, Full of dead mans bones, unclean, on an on.

Curious....Have you had a talk with Jesus about “His” ....

stupid hate speech

?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brakelite

Raccoon1010

Well-Known Member
Jul 14, 2020
15,376
17,881
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I looked up and found a difference in the sacrament of bread and wine between Catholic and Protestant denominations.

Although the Catholic Church teaches transubstantiation, which states that the bread and wine are literally changed into the body and blood of Jesus Christ, Protestant churches acknowledge that the bread and wine are simply symbolic. Because Jesus stated that his words were "spirit and life" and that “the flesh is of no avail” in John 6:63, many Protestant churches conclude that Christ meant the receiving of the bread and wine took on a spiritual symbolism, not that it literally became his body or blood. Protestant Communion Bread & Wine | Synonym

I think it's important that a church baptize and confirm it's members and give them communion. So that was nice to find out that protestants do this.

And again there are differences between the Catholic and Protestant sacrament. Hmm. I don't really know which is correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Alfredthefifth

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
My mistake. the remnant of her seed includes the Israelites, not the church in isolation. You are forcing it to mean "church" when it doesn't say that, so you are adding to the Bible. I accept the polyvalent nature of this verse. That means "the woman" can have 3 meanings: Isreal, the Church, and a woman. 5 And she was delivered of a son, a man child, who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron: and her child was caught up unto God, and unto his throne. So Jesus' mother obviously gave birth to a son, a man child, which is a much stronger interpretation (but not the only one) than a collective giving birth to a Person. I won't use the "M" word, some people get violent over it. Rev. 12:17 and Genesis 3:15 are the only two verses in Scripture that contain a woman and a dragon. Think about it.​

That's an evasion, not an answer. "Then you should be able to find, and name, any Sabbatarian in the 2nd century. Cite any Ph.D. early church historian that agrees with your myth making." You can't, because none exists.
Then Jesus violated the Peshita by rising on Sunday and not Saturday. Jesus appeared to the Apostles mostly on SUNDAY! The nerve!!!
But you refuse to stick to the facts. A Saturday Sabbath was for the JEWS. Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath, not your 'pope' E.G. White, who thinks man was made for the Sabbath, and not the other way around. . I'm still waiting for scholarly evidence of 2nd century Christian Sabbatarians. You're stumped.
First, the Edict of Milan was in 313 A.D., and it was a civil edict, not a Christian edict, and it was mostly about giving back property the Romans stole from the Christians. You can find the edict on line.
Second, you can't name any 2nd or 3rd century martyr. A NAME please. The first 39 popes were killed by pagan Romans, that is a historical fact, but it is obvious how you like to butcher history. That's 2 questions you won't, or can't answer.
This kind of stupid hate speech is why discussion with you is impossible.

If the Sabbath wasn't being observed from the first century on, why did the council of Laodicea in the 4th century find it necessary to reaffirm the church's abhorrence of Sabbath observers by calling them judaizers?
 

Ronald David Bruno

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2020
4,629
2,320
113
Southern
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Magical creationism is for Pharisaical literalists.
The supernatural power of God to create something I'm an instant, finished is not magic. No, God is not a magician. Magicians don't perform miracles, what they do is what appears to be real but is not, it's slight of hand. Botanically were created on the third, a 24 hour day. Man was created and finished on day six. If you you question that Genesis 1-2 should be taken literally, the that will lead not taking other parts of the Bible literally, not just the beginning, but the ending. And Catholics err in interpreting Revelation.

So you are saying God is not capable of using evolution in His Creation?
God is and does what the Bible says, and much more. Macro- evolution nor Theistic evolution work. They are based on guesswork, imagination, as if nature has a mind yo choose beneficial mutations over time to form what we see today. Staunch evolutionists are atheists and have corrupted have of the Christians out there with their theory. Catholics have. compromised, fornication with these atheists to produce a hybrid offspring. Satan distorts the truth about reality.

By your own admission, you have little in common with the historic Church of the 1st, 2nd and third centuries. Where is the consistency?
False. Catholism didn't really form till the 4th century. The First century Church looked nothing like your church does. Sorry I am a first century Christian. I don't pray to Mary or Saints, don't believe in Purgatory either and lots more.

, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.
See, you aren't sure about what God said He did.

Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms,
Yes, the Catholic Church allows for many additions to their theology that isn't in the Bible.

We have opened up a can of worms - which is a futile argument. So let's just stop. I accept Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. If you don't accept Protestants as Christians, born again, in Christ and part of the Body, then that is you error.
 

Brakelite

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2020
9,899
7,170
113
Melbourne
brakelite.wordpress.com
Faith
Christian
Country
Australia
Every reformer, from the 12th to the 18th century, from Wycliffe to Luther, from Calvin to Cranmer, and dozens in between, pointed their collective fingers at Rome and proclaimed the Roman papacy as the Antichrist of prophetic scripture. Were they right? Judging by today’s views, the reformation was a major mistake, and the reformers all religious radicals deceived and influenced by the times in which they lived. If they were right, then why do so few proclaim it today? If however they were wrong, then why don’t we all forsake the title “protestant” (who’s protesting today anyway?) and return to Rome?

From the time of Wycliffe (known as the morning star of the reformation) there were some who held the view that the papacy was the antichrist of prophetic scripture. A follower of John Wycliffe, one John Purvey, wrote a commentary on the book of Revelation, this being nearly 150 years before Luther. In 1528 Luther reprinted or republished this commentary, and inserted the following preface.

“This preface, noble reader, you may understand was written by us for this reason–that we might make known to the world that we are not the first to interpret the Papacy as the kingdom of the Antichrist. For many years prior to us, so many and so great men (whose number is large, and their memory eternal) have attempted this so clearly and openly, and that with great spirit and force, that [those] who were driven by the fury of the papal tyranny into the farthest boundaries of the earth, and suffering the most atrocious tortures, nevertheless bravely and faithfully persisted in the confession of the truth.”


In a statement from the Westminster Confession of Faith, ratified by the British parliament in 1647:
“There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ: nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin and son of perdition, that exalteth himself in the church against Christ, and all that is called God.”
(Phillip Schaff, The Creeds of Christendom–With a History and Critical Notes, vol. 3, pp 658, 659)

In his book, All Roads Lead to Rome, (pp205,206) Michael de Semlyen says:
“Wycliffe, Tyndale, Luther, Calvin, Cranmer; in the seventeenth century, Bunyan, the translators of the King James Bible and the men who published the Westminster and Baptist Confessions of Faith; Sir Isaac Newton, John Wesley, Whitfield, Jonathan Edwards; and more recently, Spurgeon, Bishop J. C. Ryle and Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones; these men among countless others, all saw the office of the Papacy as the antichrist.”
 

Illuminator

Well-Known Member
Jan 11, 2020
3,389
1,198
113
73
Hamilton
Faith
Christian
Country
Canada
False. Catholism didn't really form till the 4th century. The First century Church looked nothing like your church does. Sorry I am a first century Christian. I don't pray to Mary or Saints, don't believe in Purgatory either and lots more.
DEVELOPMENT* does not mean "addition" and it does not mean "change". Your 4rth century theory is not supported by the facts of history. Censoring the Early Church Fathers is dishonest, IMO.
See, you aren't sure about what God said He did.
I think I made it very clear: if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.
Yes, the Catholic Church allows for many additions to their theology that isn't in the Bible.
Again, development does not mean "additions". Sola scriptura and sola fide are additions. If you want to go there, we can, hopefully, have a civilized discussion in another thread. Customs and rubrics ARE NOT DOCTRINES.
We have opened up a can of worms - which is a futile argument. So let's just stop. I accept Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. If you don't accept Protestants as Christians, born again, in Christ and part of the Body, then that is you error.
But we do accept Protestants, somehow that bothers some of them. Here's proof:
... CCC 818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272 (272 UR 3 § 1.)
full context

*Development of Doctrine: A Corruption of Biblical Teaching?
last 2 paragraphs:
By and large, Protestantism merely asserts “sola Scriptura” without much consideration of the seriously-flawed implications of the same, and judges all doctrines accordingly. Therefore, those which are deemed to be either outright unbiblical or insufficiently grounded in Scripture to be authoritative, are jettisoned: the Marian doctrines, Purgatory, Penance, the papacy, etc. Apart from the question of Tradition as a legitimate carrier (alongside and in harmony with Scripture) of Christian belief, much more biblical support can be found in Scripture for these “Catholic” doctrines than Protestants suppose.

One simply needs to become familiar with Catholic biblical apologetic arguments. The idea of doctrinal development is a key, in any case, for understanding why the Catholic Church often appears on the surface as fundamentally different than the early Church. Thoughtful Protestants owe it to themselves and intellectual honesty to ponder this indispensable notion before lashing out at the allegedly “unbiblical excesses” of Catholicism.
Development of Doctrine: A Corruption of Biblical Teaching?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler

Phoneman777

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2015
8,121
2,764
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Pssst... That discission is specifically about Holy Week,
'Rome' celebrates the sacred mysteries every day except Holy Saturday before sundown.
How often do SDA celebrate the sacred mysteries?

Pax et Bonum
Pssst....the point was to show that churches universally were still keeping the seventh day Sabbath in the 5th century. The Coptic Christians kept it into the 2nd millennium. Saint Patrick kept the seventh day Sabbath and, like the intrepid Martin Luther, opposed Rome's unBiblical positions.

Why did Rome and Alexandria abandon the seventh day Sabbath? "...on account of some ancient tradition (satanic worship of the Sun on the "venerable day of the Sun"), refuse to do this."
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,656
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ignatius is insignificant to me and my faith! The Pope is not significant to me and my faith in Christ. I came to Christ apart from the Catholic Church. They tried when I was a young boy and nothing stuck. Went to Catechism, was confirmed and received Communion ... and nothing. Twenty years later, Jesus knocked and I opened the door. So please, don't try to push your "Catholic only" faith to me or anyone. You have a faith and praise God.
I can quote Pope Francis too! Will he go down in history and be quoted like Ignatius? [ Pope Francis issued a statement at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences that "Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation," warning against thinking of God's act of creation as "God [being] a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything."] He believes in this "theistic evolution", as many Catholics have followed and it is not true. God's act of creation did not involve evolution. He made finished humans, finished animals, finished botanicals. They did not evolve. Changes within the species occur but that is just adaptive mechanisms programed into the genetic code. No changes from one kind to another has occured.
But go ahead and hold onto all these false teachings. Just make sure you have true faith in Jesus and you will be saved! None of the other stuff will save you or forfeit your soul. One can believe in aliens from outer space too, but as long as one's faith is real, they will find out when they get up there that aliens from other planets do not exist!
The writings of Ignatius give us a window into what the 1st century Church looked like.
So, whether you like him or not – his writings ARE important to Christians today.

YOU’VE simply chosen to wear historical blinders because of your deranged hatred of the Catholic Church. The word for that is “DENIAL” . . .
 

Ronald David Bruno

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2020
4,629
2,320
113
Southern
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
But we do accept Protestants, somehow that bothers some of them. Here's proof:
... CCC 818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."272 (272 UR 3 § 1.)
Good!
But you must wonder the path of faith and salvation came through a Protestant denomination, and God ordained it, then how can they claim a separation? The Church IS a THE BODY OF CHRIST. WE ARE IN CHRIST. THOSE IN CHRIST ARE NOT SEPARATED FROM EACHOTHER. The answer to this division is due to your so called developments of your theology that we argue are not in scripture! We are divided not spiritually but doctrinally.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,656
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You can hope all day long, or face the truth.

Luke 12;
[51] Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
What a bankrupt and ignorant interpretation of the Word of Christ.
In this passage, He is NOT saying, “I came here to cause division within my Church – and that’s a GOOD thing!”

He is saying that those who follow Him will be ostracized from their loved ones who DON’T follow Him. The “division” He’s talking about here is NOT among His followers – but between His followers and the REST of the world.

The CONTEXT is found in the following verse:
John 15:118
“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.


STOP
quoting Scripture until you understand what it MEANS . . .
 

Ronald David Bruno

Well-Known Member
Nov 7, 2020
4,629
2,320
113
Southern
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The writings of Ignatius give us a window into what the 1st century Church looked like.
So, whether you like him or not – his writings ARE important to Christians today.

YOU’VE simply chosen to wear historical blinders because of your deranged hatred of the Catholic Church. The word for that is “DENIAL” . . .
Commentaries outside of the Bible are helpful, but scripture tells us what the first century and every century was to believe and follow.
" Deranged hatred?"Your accusation is wrong and offensive to me. You do not know me. In my post, I claimed that I value Catholics as my brothers and sisters - even though some of you are boneheads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wrangler

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
21,656
3,591
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Sorry, but there's no way Catholicism qualifies as God's "remnant" church, as defined in Revelation 12:17 KJV.

A "remnant" is identical to that which was there in the beginning, such as you would find at a "remnant sale" at a clothing material shop. Your church by its own admission claims to enforce commandments that are contrary to those of Christ:

"Reason and common sense demand the one or the other of the two alternatives. Either Protestantism and the keeping holy of Saturday, or Catholicity and the keeping holy of Sunday. Compromise is impossible." - The Catholic Mirror, 1893​

Their claim to have changed the 4th commandment makes tracing Catholicism back to the church Jesus founded as impossible. The church Christ founded kept the Ten Commandments as written, and was driven from public view by tyrannical papists who serve at the pleasure of the god of this world, only to emerged right on time, according to Biblical eschatology.
If you’re are looking for a Church that is “identical” to the 1st century Church – then you are looking for the WRONG thing.
Christ’s Church is the Mustard Seed that because the large Mustard Plant – the Acorn that because the Oak.

It CANNOT and SHOULD NOT look like the Church in the 1st century – but it should have the same BELIEFS. HIS Church has been growing and spreading for 2000 years. To expect it to look the same is beyond silly.

When Ignatius of Antioch describes the Church of the 1st century – he describes –
- Following your Bishop
- Obeying the clergy
- Celebrating the Eucharist - which is the SAME body and blood of Jesus that was crucified and raised up again
- The “Catholic Church”

The Church didn’t “change” the Commandments – anymore that Jesus “abolished” the Law.
In BOTH cases, it’s a matter of FULFILLMENT, as Paul describes in Colossians:
Col. 2:16-17
Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon OR A SABBATH. These are a SHADOW of the things to come, but the substance belongs to Christ.


It's time for you to embrace Christ.
 

Taken

Well-Known Member
Feb 6, 2018
27,359
14,803
113
United States
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What a bankrupt and ignorant interpretation of the Word of Christ.
In this passage, He is NOT saying, “I came here to cause division within my Church – and that’s a GOOD thing!”

He is saying that those who follow Him will be ostracized from their loved ones who DON’T follow Him. The “division” He’s talking about here is NOT among His followers – but between His followers and the REST of the world.

The CONTEXT is found in the following verse:
John 15:118
“If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you.


STOP
quoting Scripture until you understand what it MEANS . . .

What a louf. I can quote Scripture to my heart’s desire WITHOUT your approval or permission!

I didn’t give an interpretation......YOU attempted to give one FOR me...
And per usual when you speak for others...it’s a FAIL!
 

Wrangler

Well-Known Member
Feb 14, 2021
18,228
7,600
113
56
Shining City on a Hill
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
By and large, Protestantism merely asserts “sola Scriptura” without much consideration of the seriously-flawed implications of the same, and judges all doctrines accordingly. Therefore, those which are deemed to be either outright unbiblical or insufficiently grounded in Scripture to be authoritative, are jettisoned: the Marian doctrines, Purgatory, Penance, the papacy, etc. Apart from the question of Tradition as a legitimate carrier (alongside and in harmony with Scripture) of Christian belief, much more biblical support can be found in Scripture for these “Catholic” doctrines than Protestants suppose.

One simply needs to become familiar with Catholic biblical apologetic arguments. The idea of doctrinal development is a key, in any case, for understanding why the Catholic Church often appears on the surface as fundamentally different than the early Church. Thoughtful Protestants owe it to themselves and intellectual honesty to ponder this indispensable notion before lashing out at the allegedly “unbiblical excesses” of Catholicism.
Development of Doctrine: A Corruption of Biblical Teaching?
This is great and I hope you make it a separate thread; An Analysis of Sola Scriptura from a Catholic Perspective. A nice subset of that apology would be Development of Doctrine: A Corruption of Biblical Teaching?

Like you, I am tired of the inter-denominational squabbles. Somebody makes a point. Another responsds, "That sounds like denomination X. Do you belong to denomination X" Then proceed to unleash a litany of criticisms against denomination X. I much prefer discussing and debating ideas, such as you presented here. :)

Have you read CK Chesterton, In Defense of Orthodoxy?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.