Question for all protestants

I asked this on another site and its got me thinking!:newidea: Oh NO!

Okay here it is. What makes one Protestant Preachers version of the Truth correct or incorrect over another Protestant Preachers version.

Lets say I go to one Protestant Church and the Preacher teaches me that this is what the word of God is saying, and then the next says this, and so on and I go to 10 different Protestant Preachers and get ten meanings. Who do you feel is right?

And how do you know which one is right?:confused:

Well, it depends how “Romans 14” your question is? On a scale from 1-10 would you say it’s very related to Romans 14 (being 10) or not at all related to Romans 14 (1)?

Perhaps you can give two examples of two Protestant Churches disagreeing on two different doctrines.

Infant baptism.
Ordination of women.
Real Presence v. Symbolic Commemoration.
Baptismal Regeneration.
Eternal Security.
Predestination of the Elect.
The Rapture.

And I’m just getting started…

There is one church in my area call church by the glades, and another one call Calvary chapel, By the glades is doing a Bible “study” call attack of the zombies or something like that, and the other hand Calvary have a :study" find them, feed them, According what i hear is that this both churches are kind the same, and use the same “style” of worship, I’m not looking for a Church (thank God) But if someone is which one he would pick, the zombies, were not perfect people is allowed or the other one?

This would be easier to discuss if Catholics completely understood why they baptize infants and what happens if they don’t.

This one boggles my mind. My Church does not ordain women but I really couldn’t care less if a woman teaches me something about Christ or a male does. I don’t think women are lacking in any intelligence that they could not stand in front of a group and preach Christ. I also don’t believe that many people can’t come to Christ through the Holy Spirit working through a woman.

I imagine that if my preacher (who is excellent, very intelligent and theologically sound) was a woman I would still listen to such a person.

This is the only relevant one imo.

Again, a doctrine that gets extremely convoluted when discussing with Catholics. There are just far too many variables.

This one really depends. It’s doubtful that any Church teaches “OSAS therefore go sin as much as you want!” As long as one is utterly working to do the will of God, I don’t think it matters.

Same answer as above… Who cares?

You see, this is exactly what I was talking about in my first post. It just doesn’t matter, why do we get all bent out of shape about doctrines not related to Salvation.

Because this thread is so general there’s a good chance it’s either going to turn into a giant meta thread with 8 Catholic replies per 1 Protestant reply or one topic will dominate another and it will turn into just another, “baptism” thread. Or something.

I agree. That (and a lack of time) is why I’m not contributing a response to the question.

Again, a doctrine that gets extremely convoluted when discussing with Catholics. There are just far too many variables.

You asked for “examples of two Protestant Churches disagreeing on two different doctrines”, and I have given you several important doctrines about which Protestants famously disagree.

Now, you are switching to Catholic v. Protestant questions. That’s not what you asked for. :nope:

That’s a fair answer and you are correct. The reason I bring Catholicism into it is that I don’t understand why Protestants can be compared to each other and yet Catholics can’t. Either way the answer eventually ends up with, “Well, we have Scripture and we haven’t made an infallible proclamation so we can assume but can’t say for sure”

I would say that most Protestant Churches believe that a baby who dies before Baptism will still go to Heaven. I know this is what my Church teaches and I believe all Evangelical Churches teach the same. We’ll quote passages like:

Matthew 19:14Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of heaven belongs to such as these.”

Matthew 18:3And he said: "Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.

Protestants could say, “Well we can’t say for sure because we’re not God and we can’t judge” but that comes across as a much more insensitive answer to a sincere inquirer. All such an answer does is leave the possibility of original sin leaving them damned to hell for all of eternity or in some type of limbo through no fault of their own. I think Catholics and Protestants equally agree that this is unlikely; but nothing has been defined.

I do believe it makes sense that a baby who dies without being able to choose Baptism because they either didn’t have time, or didn’t understand it will go to Heaven. It makes sense, but sure I can’t judge. The Catholic response is similar, “We can’t judge and we leave it up to God.” So what’s the difference?

dronald -
I think that things are drifting from the OP’s question though…

The question is this

“What makes one Protestant Preachers version of the Truth correct or incorrect over another Protestant Preachers version?”…

I do think this is a valid question and we need not get sidetracked on any one of the examples that Randy supplied…

So - How would you answer the OP’s question?

Peace
James…

My answer is that most of the disagreements between Protestant Churches are not worth arguing over.

I think the most legitimate one is Real Presence vs Symbolic Presence. I believe that most Protestant Churches believe that the Eucharist is a complete mystery in that we could never fully comprehend it, while some other Protestant Churches take it symbolically. Oddly though, we are all grounded by Paul’s words that if we take it in an unworthy manner we condemn ourselves, so we’re all careful that only Christians may partake. I don’t think the mystery behind the Eucharist is defined entirely by most Protestant Churches and we trust God that we should examine ourselves and place all Faith in Him before partaking.

What we understand about the mystery of the Eucharist doesn’t change what the Eucharist is really about. When taken by Protestants we must trust God that He’ll guide us and not rely on our own understanding. This is another matter of not arguing over something but rather trusting in God.

Baptism is another; although it makes complete sense to me that one must understand why they are getting Baptized before being Baptized if a Protestant Church teaches that one ought to be Baptized at birth it’s not as if we believe they are damned to Hell. And I don’t believe other Protestant Churches believe that those who profess Faith in Jesus Christ before being Baptized are damned to Hell if they die before being Baptized sooner.

Are we praying and asking for God to guide us? If we do and fully trust in Him anyone who says God won’t pull through is a liar. Infant Baptism, Eucharist, what we eat, what days we worship, etc.

Fair enough…Of course the question is not about “arguing over”.
Rather the question is about a process of determination.
How one determines that one view is correct and another view is not.

While I respect the view you hold above, I don’t really see it as answering the question asked in the OP.

Peace
James

And that’s fine if someone doesn’t find my answer suitable. That’s why I quoted Romans 14 as my answer; I prefer to answer how I think Paul would have answered. He would write about how many people argue over one thing or the next and they need to drop it and look to God, that’s what every Protestant Church does their best to do.

cbglades.com/events/zombies/

dronald
What did you think about this? just want to know

Oh come on now!
You know that Protestant divisions vary amongst one another, that they disagree.
No example is necessary.
Before the Presence of God, there is no scale of 1-10, there’s just Truth-False.

From a non-religious viewpoint, the church that doesn’t violate it own documents (scripture, creeds, confessions) and isn’t in conflict with it’s own history is probably the correct one.

Just about everything that the various Protestant churches squabble over is easily solved by opening a bible and reading it in light of how the church has understood it before.

If the church couldn’t stand the scrutiny of the historical church then amends need to be made.

I think they’re following a Halloween themed style of preaching; I would have to listen to the sermon and make a judgement. What do you think of it?

I know… I was saying that the question is unanswerable because some people are “fully convinced in their own mind” of certain things. It’s up to us to be accepting of little differences like observance of days, types of foods, and many little disagreements. It’s up to us to seek the Lord first and stop stroking our egos over who is right and who is wrong.

Thanks. I agree with this approach though probably not in the same way that many protestant churches do.

Anyway - I hope that there are non-Catholics can share their process of discernment here. I think it would be interesting.

Peace
James

This isn’t hard. See which teacher is backing up what they say with scripture. If they’re not then that’s a pretty good hint. Women ordination, baptismal regeneration, etc etc can ALL be backed up biblically. When people start ordaining women (or having them in authoritative positions in the church) then you can see quite plainly how that contradicts the written word.

I’m watching it now. The Pastor seems pretty cheesy, idk if that sort of thing would work in Hamilton but maybe it works for Florida haha.

He hasn’t said anything anti-Catholic or strange yet; he just sounds like he’s trying to preach Jesus and have some fun with it through a Halloween theme. I suppose I’ll keep watching to see if he slips in any hateful or anti-Catholic remarks, which I would disagree with.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.