Help a Catholic understand Protestantism better please

[notuptome]

Why did he refuse to marry you?
If it's not too personal.

If it was because you're protestant, he made a mistake.
You should have gone to the Bishop.

Because I would not agree to raise the children in the catholic church. I was just a plain old heathen back then and my future in-laws lobbied him to decline to marry us. My wife was disappointed with her parents latter when she found out.

I've had to witness the "good catholics" go through divorces and premature deaths.

God has greatly blessed and my wife is a born again believer who knows the truth and has eternal life.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

How can you make the assumption that this member is probably married to a Catholic?

Her blind eye to the open sin of Romanism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[oldethennew]

yeah Cyberman,
I know all about all the problems.

I've spoken to about 3 priests I know personally and have suggested doing more teaching during the homily.
All 3 told me it's a Mass not a classroom. I understand what the Mass is, I know what they mean. But I've seen priests on EWTN do exactly what I have in mind and it doesn't interfere at all with the Mass.

Another idea would be to do the Mass a little faster, everything the same but say the prayers quicker, except at the Consecration of course, and then do just 10 MINUTES of catechism. I bet most would like to learn their faith and it might even get more people to go to Mass.

The problem is that folks won't go to bible study. I've heard that they don't understand why it's necessary.
So, they're just starting to explain why it's necessary.

Better late than never, right?

==============================================

why would anyone have to explain why Bible-Study is 'necessary'???

don't think I could go along with 'anyone' telling me to hurry and get my 'PRAYERS-over'...

the biggest problem is being put into a 'religious' BOX-finding it out-then making excuses to stay there,
out of fear...

 

[Seekingfamily]

I am confused about "choose"...Can you explain this better to me? I don't understand why this was written about choosing. Thank you

[h=1]Joshua 24:15King James Version (KJV)[/h]15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

 

[Willie-T]

I am confused about "choose"...Can you explain this better to me? I don't understand why this was written about choosing. Thank you

[h=1]Joshua 24:15King James Version (KJV)[/h]15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

What do you mean, you "don't understand why that was written"?

 

[Seekingfamily]

It was asked to a post, that I thought said we can not choose to do what God wants. When I read the scripture I posted, I believe it says we can choose. Was just asking about the not being able to choose, just in case I missed scripture somewhere.

 

[Willie-T]

It was asked to a post, that I thought said we can not choose to do what God wants. When I read the scripture I posted, I believe it says we can choose. Was just asking about the not being able to choose, just in case I missed scripture somewhere.

OK. I didn't see that post. I thought maybe you were losing your mind. LOL

 

[WimpyPete]

this is the document it self


16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related to the People of God in various ways.[18] There is, first, that people to which the covenants and promises were made, and from which Christ was born according to the flesh (cf. Rom. 9:4-5): in view of the divine choice, they are a people most dear for the sake of the fathers, for the gifts of God are without repentance

what people is this talking about

read that artile above and you know what It is

the article is just a translations for this document my friend

Correct, that part is from Lumen Gentium, however your previous passage which interpreted the document as saying that their is salvation outside of Christ was not from Lumen Gentium.

But if you want to focus on this passage in particular, this quote says nothing about the Jewish people not needing Jesus for salvation. It merely says that they "are related to the People of God in various ways", meaning, they believe in the God of the Abraham and Moses and David. It affirms that since "Christ was born from this people" and since they are the people of "the divine choice" they are therefore "a people most dear" to us. The document is talking about the relations of other religions to the Catholic Church. In this particular paragraph it is not talking about how they are to be saved and it in no way intends to imply that they are not in need of Christ for salvation.

I think most true Biblical scholars agree that when we interpret the Scriptures we must read each passage according to the context of the book or letter it is written within as well as in accordance with the intentions of the author. That is just good exegesis. I think the same principles apply in exegesis of theological texts as well, and in this case perhaps you are not taking into account the intentions of the document, the context of the passage, nor how it fits in with the larger world of already established Church teaching which it assumes.

 

[Magenta]

Correct, I agree, Christ is the fullness of revelation, the "image of the invisible God", but we only know of this revelation through the Bible and Tradition which we have received through the Church. That is my point, it is in no way to undermind the centrality of Christ but simply to say that Christ seems to have chosen to use instruments such as His Word and as I believe His Church to communicate Himself to us.

But you have to admit that you only know of Christ because of His Word in the Scriptures and Tradition. What I mean is, if you grew up in some rural area of Africa and never heard of Christ you would most likely not have been able to come to such a clear understanding of Him and relationship with Him; you would only be able to know Him in the vague way that Paul speaks of in Acts 17 for instance...

You reject what I say and attempt to overwrite my experience with your beliefs and it does not fly. I do NOT only know of the revelation of Christ through Scriptures. I do NOT only know of Christ through traditions, least of all the traditions of men and the heretical RCC. Please read again what I said. My foundation is the revelation of Christ through the working of the Holy Spirit of God in my life. It is personal revelation.

 

[Magenta]

The reason some always include the term 'Roman' when describing Catholics because in their way of thinking that makes it sound more evil.

There is also the fact that catholic means universal, whereas saying Roman Catholic is perfectly proper and places the word in context, removing any doubt as to how the word is being used (though not in the way you say. I never heard that one before).

 

[Jackson123]

Correct, that part is from Lumen Gentium, however your previous passage which interpreted the document as saying that their is salvation outside of Christ was not from Lumen Gentium.

But if you want to focus on this passage in particular, this quote says nothing about the Jewish people not needing Jesus for salvation. It merely says that they "are related to the People of God in various ways", meaning, they believe in the God of the Abraham and Moses and David. It affirms that since "Christ was born from this people" and since they are the people of "the divine choice" they are therefore "a people most dear" to us. The document is talking about the relations of other religions to the Catholic Church. In this particular paragraph it is not talking about how they are to be saved and it in no way intends to imply that they are not in need of Christ for salvation.

I think most true Biblical scholars agree that when we interpret the Scriptures we must read each passage according to the context of the book or letter it is written within as well as in accordance with the intentions of the author. That is just good exegesis. I think the same principles apply in exegesis of theological texts as well, and in this case perhaps you are not taking into account the intentions of the document, the context of the passage, nor how it fits in with the larger world of already established Church teaching which it assumes.

vatican issue the document, so vatican is the most qualifide to interprate

let me quote vatican It own interpratition

The Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews released a document outlining developments in the church's stance towards Judaism, including that Jews do not need to be converted to Catholicism to find salvation since God did not revoke his covenant with Israel.

 

[WimpyPete]

You reject what I say and attempt to overwrite my experience with your beliefs and it does not fly. I do NOT only know of the revelation of Christ through Scriptures. I do NOT only know of Christ through traditions, least of all the traditions of men and the heretical RCC. Please read again what I said. My foundation is the revelation of Christ through the working of the Holy Spirit of God in my life. It is personal revelation.

Are you meaning to say that you could have come to know Christ without ever having heard of Him in the Scriptures or even through teaching? I guess I am just wondering how we could even know who Christ is without an explicit Revelation of Him.

I guess I also don't understand the point of this whole discussion, why are we against the historical Revelation of Christ? It is not opposed to also having a real living encounter with Him personally, as it sounds like you certainly have.

But Christianity does seem to be based on Christ's historical birth, death and resurrection. Anyways I am not trying to belittle your experience, I just think we have to guard against a total subjectivising of Christianity because I believe we need God's objective revelation to guide our knowledge of Him.

 

[WimpyPete]

vatican issue the document, so vatican is the most qualifide to interprate

let me quote vatican It own interpratition

The Vatican's Commission for Religious Relations with Jews released a document outlining developments in the church's stance towards Judaism, including that Jews do not need to be converted to Catholicism to find salvation since God did not revoke his covenant with Israel.

What I am saying Jackson, is that those words were not issued by the Vatican. This is a commentary about a commission within the Vatican called "the Comission for Religious Relations". This quote however is not a quote by that comission. Maybe you could cite your sources here, but this is a passage interpreting the statement by this comission, it is not a statement by the comission itself.


On another note, I am still perplexed why so much of the discussion on this forum is marked with tones of hostility. Do I really have to be such an enemy for you all? Why can a Baptist see a Methodist or an Evangelical as a brother but not a Catholic when there are also divisions within these denominations. Anyways, I am not trying to fight with you all, I hope you get that. I am ok with the idea of mutually seeking the truth in love. I too ask God for mercy for my great weaknesses, and beg His grace, and long for Him to illuminate me with His Truth. Anyways...

 

[Jackson123]

What I am saying Jackson, is that those words were not issued by the Vatican. This is a commentary about a commission within the Vatican called "the Comission for Religious Relations". This quote however is not a quote by that comission. Maybe you could cite your sources here, but this is a passage interpreting the statement by this comission, it is not a statement by the comission itself.


On another note, I am still perplexed why so much of the discussion on this forum is marked with tones of hostility. Do I really have to be such an enemy for you all? Why can a Baptist see a Methodist or an Evangelical as a brother but not a Catholic when there are also divisions within these denominations. Anyways, I am not trying to fight with you all, I hope you get that. I am ok with the idea of mutually seeking the truth in love. I too ask God for mercy for my great weaknesses, and beg His grace, and long for Him to illuminate me with His Truth. Anyways...

compare with the document itself, the article is in the right tract.

the context of this fragment of the document is what catholic believe for those who not resieve the gospel.
are they save

than the document explain, why Jews save without accept Jesus,

it it say because of covenant (with abraham) and because Jesus born from jews

You can google and you find hundreds of article that say vatican believe not to convert Jews for salvation

about your question why most protestan not consider catholic is brother in the Lord,

to me I believe the Lord want me to love catholic

love mean to tell them the road to salvation

and it is in the Bible, not in the catholic doctrine that is again the Bible

On the document said Islam and abraham share the same God

let me reapet my question

if so why Allah not tell Mohammad that Jesus is God.

in other word catholic accused that God is liar

and this is again the Bible, God is not a liar

 

[WimpyPete]

compare with the document itself, the article is in the right tract.

the context of this fragment of the document is what catholic believe for those who not resieve the gospel.
are they save

than the document explain, why Jews save without accept Jesus,

it it say because of covenant (with abraham) and because Jesus born from jews

You can google and you find hundreds of article that say vatican believe not to convert Jews for salvation

about your question why most protestan not consider catholic is brother in the Lord,

to me I believe the Lord want me to love catholic

love mean to tell them the road to salvation

and it is in the Bible, not in the catholic doctrine that is again the Bible

On the document said Islam and abraham share the same God

let me reapet my question

if so why Allah not tell Mohammad that Jesus is God.

in other word catholic accused that God is liar

and this is again the Bible, God is not a liar

So I think that this is the last reply I can give on this topic because I can do no more than repeat what I have already said.

The paragraphs you quoted from the document do not say that the Jews do not need Jesus, only that we share a special relation with them because Christianity grows out of Judaism as its fulfillment.

The only thing you cited as saying that the Jews do not need Jesus is not from the document Lumen Gentium nor is it from the Comission for Religion Relations, and it does not represent the authentic position of the Church.

If you want a fuller treatment of the Church's teaching on the matter you can look at something like Pope Benedict's writings in "Many religions, One covenant", which would spell out the idea in detail. But I don't think there is much more I can say to clarify the matter.

The Church simply does not believe or teach what you are accusing it of

 

[WimpyPete]

compare with the document itself, the article is in the right tract.

to me I believe the Lord want me to love catholic

love mean to tell them the road to salvation

I do appreciate your concern for my salvation though thanks, pray for me brother

 

[Adstar]

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

You seem to be equating all protestants to be calvinists... I would say most protestants are not calvinists.. I am certainly not a clavinist. But i am an ex-catholic who now believes in salvation by Grace alone, through Jesus alone, by Faith alone..

Christians believe that people are incapable of living up to the standards of God and thus all people are doomed to be rejected by God on the day of judgement if they are relying on justifying themselves through reaching an acceptable standard of goodness that God requiores to justly grant a person eternity in His perfect eternal existence..

Therefore ALL human beings requior to be Justly forgiven by God for all their transgressions against his will.. No matter how few. No matter how minor. God is perfect and therefore He cannot allow any sins to go unpunished..

But God has a way to justly gift foreignness to transgressors of His standards if they acknowledge they have unjustly transgressed His will and embrace the atonement of the LORD Jesus Christ who paid the penalty of their sins by suffering death upon the cross..

Christians enter into eternity with God, Not by being good enough.. But by being forgiven all the things that make them unworthy and thus they are justly deemed to be worthy through being justly forgiven..

PS:: While humans are hopeless sinners we have the ability to either love our sinning or we can hate our sinning.. We can proudly seek to justify our sins.. Or we can be ashamed of our sins.. We can love, the Love of God.. Or we can mock the love of God or declare the love of God evil as some do when they reject the atonement of Jesus as being stupid or immoral..

So in the end God has made it that it is not our sins that see us doomed and it is not our acts of righteousness that see us accepted.. It is our response to the loving gift of Gods mercy ( thought the atonement of Jesus ), which in turn is influenced and determined by our attitude to our own sins and our attitude to the standards of God which reveal our sins..

 

[Jackson123]

So I think that this is the last reply I can give on this topic because I can do no more than repeat what I have already said.

The paragraphs you quoted from the document do not say that the Jews do not need Jesus, only that we share a special relation with them because Christianity grows out of Judaism as its fulfillment.

The only thing you cited as saying that the Jews do not need Jesus is not from the document Lumen Gentium nor is it from the Comission for Religion Relations, and it does not represent the authentic position of the Church.

If you want a fuller treatment of the Church's teaching on the matter you can look at something like Pope Benedict's writings in "Many religions, One covenant", which would spell out the idea in detail. But I don't think there is much more I can say to clarify the matter.

The Church simply does not believe or teach what you are accusing it of

that paragraph is about what catholic believe, is Jews save without Jesus,

and comission for religion relation is one of the vatican department it speak for vatican in this subject.

if vatican not agree with that statement, she must declare

for example US ministry of foreign affair represent US in foreign affair. What he officially said is represent US government

And if you want me to read What Pope Benedict said, than I suggest you read how pope Francis said Atheist may go to heaven

is pope not represent catholic?

 

[Jackson123]

I do appreciate your concern for my salvation though thanks, pray for me brother

You welcome, and I will pray for your salvation brother

dear Jesus, speak to my brother WimpyPete, on the real way of salvation, tell him what is you way and what is not

in the name of Jesus, the owner of heaven and earth, an the only Ruler who is entitle to issue rules on how to enter to heaven

amen

 

[WingsOfFidelity]

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

Your welcome!