Help a Catholic understand Protestantism better please

[Magenta]

why did Jesus have to be born of a virgin.
Adam and eve were covered with the skins of animals. all of us are born covered, with the skins of animals covering us. else we would all die immediately, by God's word " You will surely die" Jesus had to pass through the blood to get to us. Hence the virgin birth
May God bless you in you endeavors

Jesus was born of a virgin to fulfill prophesy.
* * *
There is absolutely nothing in Scripture to cause us to assume Mary needed to be sinless so that Jesus could be sinless; that Mary was immaculately conceived; that Mary never sinned; that Mary remained a virgin throughout the rest of her life following the birth of Jesus; that Mary never died; that Mary was bodily assumed to heaven; that Mary should be prayed to and will intercede on your behalf in heaven. Roman Catholicism teaches these things and their heresies cannot stand side by side with the truth.

 

[trofimus]

Everything you stated about Calvinism is correct.

I just hope you don't believe that every Protestant is Calvinistic in belief system.

Calvin was wrong all around as was Luther regarding this...
BTW, it's called Double Predestination.

Even Catholics believe in predestination, but not in the way Calvin did.

I agree with you 100%. If Calvin is right, which he was not, it would change God into a monster.....

I think it will be good if you make a note in your replies that you are Roman Catholic, not protestant.

So that the author of the thread is not confused by your views

 

[NoNameMcgee]

Why respond to a post that you only read the first line of?

lol my bad

youre not wrong for thinking thats messed up

i just saw a whole bunch of words from a catholic


and he was asking about protestants reasons for not acception catholic doctrine

(Protestantism is a form of Christianity which originated with the Reformation, a movement against what its followers considered to be errors in the Roman Catholic Church)


i figured listing some of the lies of the catholic church would be the right thing to do

im sorry

it was super early my time
and i hadnt had my coffee yet

 

[NoNameMcgee]

accepting*

 

[WingsOfFidelity]

Because as he stated, he's at work, and didn't have time to read the whole post..

Then why respond? Why not wait till he has time to read all of it first? Responding before reading all of it just makes one seem childish and causes confusion as is what happened. Maybe if some will actually think before posting there wouldn't be so much confusion.

 

[notuptome]

I appreciate those who are trying to actually engage these questions and have a discussion. For the others, I don't understand why as soon as you hear the word Catholic you have to start screaming about Mary and the Pope and the evil deceiving church.


I assume that people on this forum are devoted Christians and have a real love for the Lord. I assume that you love and read the Bible. I don't know why you can't believe the same for Catholics and realize that we are simply dealing with different interpretations of the Bible.


That being said, I think the topic I am proposing is a simple and narrow one. It hinges on if salvation is by grace alone or if co-operation is required. My question is, if salvation does not allow for our co-operation (through grace), then how does it not result in predestination where God damns certain people to hell with no chance of salvation.

How does a condemned man cooperate? What can the condemned man offer?

No it Gods mercy and grace alone that is sufficient. Christ made the atonement demanded by God and satisfied Gods judgment through which Jesus stayed the wrath that was due us.

The gospel is not a negotiation it is a declaration. Our self righteousness is unworthy of Gods consideration. We are confronted by Gods declaration that we are sinners, we have no righteousness and we justly deserve condemnation. We are given the opportunity to repent and receive Jesus as our Savior or perish in the lake of fire for eternity.

Cooperation after salvation but not as a part of or a contributing factor to becoming saved.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[WingsOfFidelity]

lol my bad

youre not wrong for thinking thats messed up

i just saw a whole bunch of words from a catholic


and he was asking about protestants reasons for not acception catholic doctrine

(Protestantism is a form of Christianity which originated with the Reformation, a movement against what its followers considered to be errors in the Roman Catholic Church)


i figured listing some of the lies of the catholic church would be the right thing to do

im sorry

it was super early my time
and i hadnt had my coffee yet

This was a much better response.

 

[maverich]

magenta. so what i got from your come back is that you have no clue of what i said.
never said mary was sinless never said she remained a virgin, nerver said worship mary, because i like mary gave birth to a baby Jesus, unfortunately like many here, i for 20 years let the older harlot have her. that way my baby wouldn't be cut in half. I got my baby back in 2013. and The Jesus in me is growing big and strong.

 

[Magenta]

Then why respond? Why not wait till he has time to read all of it first? Responding before reading all of it just makes one seem childish and causes confusion as is what happened. Maybe if some will actually think before posting there wouldn't be so much confusion.

It is often better to respond one point at a time to reduce confusion.

 

[WimpyPete]

If I may? It appears all you have really read about is Calvinism. Would we Protestants know about Catholics if all we read about was Jesuits?

Each are just a slim sect of the overall.

You are right, I certainly acknowledge that there are many different strains of Protestantism and I don't mean to presume that all believe the same thing. This is why I specifically cited Calvin and Luther, although I did so because they are the two primary leaders of the Reformation and I guess I am trying to see how much the various branches of Protestantism still follow them.

Also, the difference with the Jesuit example is that the differences between Jesuits and Franciscans etc is a difference of spiritualities, such as styles of prayer and apostolic service. Doctrinally the various groups all agree, which is the prerequisite of being Catholic. Any disagreements doctrinally mean that one is stepping outside of Catholicism

 

[grif101]

I noticed that was out of character for you! Maybe you should have your coffee BEFORE going into the BDF.

 

[Magenta]

magenta. so what i got from your come back is that you have no clue of what i said.
never said mary was sinless never said she remained a virgin, nerver said worship mary, because i like mary gave birth to a baby Jesus, unfortunately like many here, i for 20 years let the older harlot have her. that way my baby wouldn't be cut in half. I got my baby back in 2013. and The Jesus in me is growing big and strong.

I included asterisks to separate my response to you from the rest of what I said about why Roman Catholic teachings are so reprehensible to protestants. Sorry you were so confused by that.

 

[loveme1]

Hello, I am a Catholic, I come in peace simply seeking understand Protestant thought a bit more from Protestants themselves.

This is what I understand of Protestant anthropology and soteriology, at least according to the primary reformers i.e. Luther and Calvin. Please let me know if I am correct:

The original sin of Adam and Eve destroyed the goodness of man's nature and thereby destroyed the ability of his reason to know God or supernatural things, and also destroyed the freedom of his will thereby rendering him incapable of free moral actions.

Because of man's total depravity of mind/will he is unable to participate in any way in his salvation and thus salvation is a matter of grace alone.

Now the consequence of this which Luther never seems to deny and Calvin affirms outright is that because salvation is by grace ALONE then the difference between those who are saved and those who are damned depends not on human responsibility but on God, hence Calvin's doctrine of predestination.

My first question is, have I understood this correctly?

Secondly my question is this: How does such a theory avoid altering radically both God and man in such a way that God seems to be unavoidably monsterous for creating people who have absolutelly no chance of salvation, and man seems to no longer be a responsible moral agent since he can neither know the good nor does he have any power (even assisted by grace) to co-operate in doing good? If man does not even have the power to co-operate how can we speak of him as a responsible moral agent? And if God, as Calvin insists, is ultimately the only agent in human actions, how is it that man and not God is responsible for sin?

If someone can please help me to understand better I would appreciate it, thanks

Greetings Pete? I ask this question in peace.. Have you read the Bible Genesis to Revelation? Page upon page...

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I noticed that was out of character for you! Maybe you should have your coffee BEFORE going into the BDF.

hahahaha

 

[loveme1]

Oh would it not be good for a man to forget the Pope and idolatry and seek the Truth that will save him. Look not to Luther or any of the protesters.... Seek GOD through Faith in the Messiah. Be Baptized with Holy Spirit. Oh May it be so.

 

[Huckleberry]

I praise God that when I was searching Him out and discerning various belief systems
that I didn't cross paths with some of you, lest I'd gotten poisoned by your vile bites.
At one time in his life Mahatma Gandhi was interested in Christianity,
but asps masquerading as doves drove him away from Christ.
He was later quoted as saying, "I’d be a Christian if it were not for the Christians."

To the OP, I live in a very Catholic area, so I've had many opportunities for discussion.
The main recurring difference between us seems to be security.
When I ask them if they are going to Heaven when they die, they can't or won't affirm it.
They'll answer something like, "I hope so", or "I'm trying
to be good enough", or, "that can't be known for sure".
Then I'll explain my position of security based on Scripture,
and they'll insist that it's just "my interpretation" of it.
Then the conversation usually moves away from religion,
because I don't like arguing with people about it since it's futile.
I just plant seeds and pray that God works it out with them.

 

[WimpyPete]

Wingsoffidelity, thanks for your thoughtful post, I appreciate the dialog

 

[DustyRhodes]

Setting all the denominations and factions aside, who will have eternal life and who
won't. Jesus asked Peter 3 times "Do you love me Peter". Three times Peter replied
and the third time he said "Yes Lord, You know everything, You know I love you."
Then Jesus said Peter feed my sheep. Pretty simple. In our final judgement, I don't
believe God will as which denomination we were; He will not give us a hundred question
bubble test to verify what we know. He will only ask us the question "Do you love Me."
That is all He wants to hear. All the rest He already knows. So why would He suddenly
become a God of retribution rather than a God of reconciliation and redemption. He just
wants to hear us say "Yes Lord Lord I love You". The entirety of scripture is the way that leads
us to say those 4 words. I doubt that anyone will get there by arguing who will or who won't
go, let's leave that to God.

 

[Depleted]

Hello, I am a Catholic, I come in peace simply seeking understand Protestant thought a bit more from Protestants themselves.

This is what I understand of Protestant anthropology and soteriology, at least according to the primary reformers i.e. Luther and Calvin. Please let me know if I am correct:

The original sin of Adam and Eve destroyed the goodness of man's nature and thereby destroyed the ability of his reason to know God or supernatural things, and also destroyed the freedom of his will thereby rendering him incapable of free moral actions.

Because of man's total depravity of mind/will he is unable to participate in any way in his salvation and thus salvation is a matter of grace alone.

Now the consequence of this which Luther never seems to deny and Calvin affirms outright is that because salvation is by grace ALONE then the difference between those who are saved and those who are damned depends not on human responsibility but on God, hence Calvin's doctrine of predestination.

My first question is, have I understood this correctly?

Secondly my question is this: How does such a theory avoid altering radically both God and man in such a way that God seems to be unavoidably monsterous for creating people who have absolutelly no chance of salvation, and man seems to no longer be a responsible moral agent since he can neither know the good nor does he have any power (even assisted by grace) to co-operate in doing good? If man does not even have the power to co-operate how can we speak of him as a responsible moral agent? And if God, as Calvin insists, is ultimately the only agent in human actions, how is it that man and not God is responsible for sin?

If someone can please help me to understand better I would appreciate it, thanks

I really have to get some work done, so if you don't see me come back to answer your questions in one day, please feel free to PM to remind me. (I also have a brain like a sieve, so am apt to forget. lol)

BUT, I did want to start with one minor correction. You have split the "factions" into two divisions: Catholics and Protestants. Yes, Protestantism started by protesting what the Catholic Church was teaching at that time. But, just as the RCC changed, so did Protestantism. Nowadays, most Christians aren't agreeing with Calvin nor Luther. Most aren't reformed, so, you're asking a group of people questions as if we are of one accord, when we ain't.

That said, yeah, you got what we reformed Protestants are pretty well. I will have to do a little rearranging of what you have in that scene of the Fall (when I come back), and then will answer your bigger question.

Just wanted you to know that much, because a whole bunch of people are going to blow up because you dared lumped us all into one old basket. I'm still in that basket, but many have jumped into others. lol

 

[mailmandan]

Salvation hinges on cooperation.

From beginning "have been saved through faith" (Ephesians 2:8) to end "receiving the end of your faith--the salvation of your souls" (1 Peter 1:9) salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works.

Catholicism teaches Justification and Ongoing Justification. It can also be called Sanctifying Grace.

Catholicism confuses Justification with Ongoing Sanctification because works are "thrown in the mix" or "infused" with "salvation by grace through faith" in Catholicism.

I do like how Protestantism divides the two concepts...

JUSTIFICATION and
SANCTIFICATION

Justification is by grace alone.
Ephesians 2:8

Sancstification is an ongoing process which requires the cooperation of man.
CCC paragraph no. 1993.

Salvation happens at Justifiction.

Some protestants do not like to talk about Sanctification because they do not like the idea that man has to WORK to keep his salvation. This is incorrect even in protestantism and is a result of the hyper grace movement.

What WORK must man accomplish and "add as a supplement" to Christ's finished work of redemption in order to keep his salvation? Ongoing Sanctification is not about working to keep our salvation. That is type 2 works salvation. Ongoing Sanctification is about working OUT our salvation and NOT working FOR our salvation.