Some one explain to me how some Christians can blatently ignore historical facts?


#1

There is a class of Protestant Christians or what they may label themselves as Born Again that do not believe in history. It seems as though they believe the Bible is a mystical book with cosmic origins that fell from the firmenent to the earth and into the hands of the Christian people.

I watched or rather listened to a debate on youtube that had Dave Hunt and Keaton in a debate. Hunt said something to the effect that the first century Christians were not christians. So basically not even the echo of the apostles sometimes refered to as the Apostles apsotles or second generation apostles were christian. He said that from the first century Church and on the Church was not “Christian”. He also stated that the Bible was the only source. Keaton made good points but I felt he should have not just cited the Church Fathers but also scripture because he kinda made Hunts point that he wouldn’t use the Bible to argue his points. Keaton did use some scripture but not ebough in my opinion.

Keaton could have ended the debate by simply saying that since the first century Church and their clergy were not true Christians and were so there after that the third and fourth century Christian Church was just herectical as the first. If the third and fourth century Church was herectical and what would later become the RCC and the OC’s and they formed the Bible that would mean the Bible was herectical and any one reading from it was herectical as it was collected by herectical Christians as the Church had been herectical from after the deaths of the first apostles and begining of the first century church age. This would mean Dave Hunt and the rest of Christianity was herecticall and a false religion.

This seems almost like a form of mental illness.
I have no problem with Protestants since I’m married to one and my Best friend is one and many of people I love are. I believe they are just as Christian as Catholics and Orthodox Christians. I believe many of them will go to heaven. I worry more about the Calvinistic ones who adhere to assurance of salvation in the form of once save ways saved as it is presumptious and doesn’t allow for there to be any examination of conscious or any spiritual growth in living a gracefull life through abstaining from sin.

My best friend is of this persuation and although he does believe in OSAS as do many Christians today especially attending Non Denominational Churches I don’t worry about him so much because I know he at least regularly repents his sins. He also is very Godly and a good husband and family man.

For me its frustrating with these types Christian Protestants who reject Bibical history as I have known so many well balanced and versed protestants. My wife and her family are Nazarene that’s a Wesleyan denomination branched off from Methodist and then from Pentecostal to the form it became minus speaking in tongues. They read some of the writings of the Church fathers or at least the Pastors who go through Seminary. From what I understand is that Much of their Seminary involves reading Catholic material. I’ve generally had good experiences with them and when I was younger and not a true practicing Catholic I was baptised a second time. It was a pretty amazing experience. I felt a sense of cleanlyness an purity. So I guess I’m a born again revert.
Confirmed in 2010 been practing since 2011. Got my Mariage reconized in 2012 and working on getting all my Children baptised.

Anyways how do you deal with this behavior along with those who only believe th KJV has authority or other obscurities?
What is the reasoning behind rejection of Church and Bible History?


#2

I think this goes back to the Reformation. According to most Protestants (and also pseudo-Christian groups such as the JW and LDS), sometime between the apostles and the Reformation, the Church went astray and no longer was the Church that Jesus Christ founded. They call this the “Great Apostasy”. Most Protestants believe this happened shortly after Constantine decided to tolerate Christianity, and definitely soon after Theodosius made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire. This is why these Protestant groups read and research the Church Fathers - most of the writings of the Church Fathers occured prior to Constantine.

On the other hand, some Christian groups (plus the JW and LDS) pretty much believe that the “Great Apostasy” happened shortly after Jesus ascended into Heaven. As such, these groups believe that the writings of the Church Fathers occured after the “Great Apostasy”, and as such, they believe that the Church Fathers were not Christian. Of course, the problem is that the canon of the New Testament was compiled by the Catholic Church (with the usage of the Greek Septuagint for the Old Testament). In order to reconcile the fact that the Bible is the Christian Holy Book with their belief that the Church after Jesus’s Ascension was not the “True Church”, they pretty much end up believing that God sent down the Bible right after the Ascension but no one really paid attention to what it really said for centuries afterwards.


#3

It’s important, first of all, to be charitable here. Christians are humans. They can be deceived and, because they have not been taught any better or, through faith or other means, will reject anything outside of their early Christian worldview teaching.

Shortly after becoming Catholic myself, I had this same epiphany. I call it my “Grass! We’re all eating grass!” moment based on a “The Far Side” comic where a cow suddenly gains sentience and realizes a truth. My epiphany was that the United States is heavily influenced on Protestant Christianity.

Have you ever believed in something so strong that reason becomes clouded over the subject? This is the dark side of faith where doctrines and texts are taken too far out of the context in which they were generated. History becomes anecdote. Anecdote becomes legend. Legend becomes myth and is then dismissed.

You don’t seem to be speaking of any specific acquaintance here, so I center on a principle when speaking to other Christians and quasi-Christians such as the Mormons.

[LIST=1]
*]Have them remember our history. Christianity’s advantage, its proof, versus most other faiths is that it is firmly grounded in historical events. While Scripture sets the stage and the players, non-Christian documents, eyewitnesses (both Christian and not) confirm the existence of Christ, His Apostles and their followers, years before what became the New Testament ever existed. A Christian with a solid faith can show reasonable proof by their faith not from a collection of books that weren’t codified until 300 years after Christ, but show support of their faith through history.
*]Have Christian friends concentrate on the origin of Scripture. Most Christians are never asked “Who wrote the Bible?” If they say “God wrote it,” then, based on the historicity of Christianity and Judaism, they should be able to show proof. They can’t with that answer. Rather, direct them to the writings of St. Paul, to start. These were letters to many early communities to straighten them out in many aspects of faith, written by St. Paul. These letters obviously were not written by God Himself. However, the early Christians could see the Holy Spirit’s inspiration throughout St. Paul as he wrote. Centuries later a series of Catholic bishop councils were guided by the Holy Spirit to acknowledge these and many other writings of the early Church as inspired by God and to be collected into the series of books we know as the Bible. In short, the Christian that says that the Bible is the inspired word of God has the Catholic Church to thank for the book as they collected and approved all the books that person reads–and seven other books that aren’t found in most Protestant Bibles. You can use that point to ask why their Bible is smaller than it should be, given what books were canonized in the 4th Century and used for many more before the Reformation era. One council of that era has a document that is the only source for an extra-biblical table of contents of what books comprise the Bible.
*]Use reason and test, as St. Paul asked us. Remind your friend that, while you are never questioning their faith in Christ, they should question their sources of faith. Christ did not leave a book as he Ascended. He left us a living Church, with ministers He ordained to spread the Gospel (at that time, only orally passed on until at least 30 years after Christ, where many of those stories become written down as well). Remind your friend that the Bible as they know it did not exist for nearly four centuries. Even then, most people were illiterate and books were completely handmade until the printing press would arrive over 1500 years later. How could their faith be based on a book that almost all Christians could not own nor read nor exist for the masses until only 500 years or so? The answer comes from the existence of the Catholic Church from the very start and the worship in the Mass where the Biblical writings were told to all for centuries to today.
[/LIST]


#4

On this point, I think its very troubling that some Christians are basically in agreement with the new atheism in that if the world isn’t 6,000 years old, Christianity can’t be true. I think that it exposes the flaw of the Bible alone approach. The problem is that the evolution issue is emotional for many Christians. I think it is our duty to help others come to an understanding of the different genres of scripture. The more Christians stack out the 6,000 year position as a creed of the faith, the more souls we lose.


#5

I agree.

Somethings you can believe in but it can be dangerous to revolve your faith around certain Biblical or doctrinal beliefs.

For instance it can go both ways the earth may have been made in seven days because all thing’s are possible through god.
It’s also possible god designed nature and the cosmos and from there what he imagined was built over time sort of like setting up task for the game sim’s or setting your coffee machine.
The main thing is god created everything and is in everything the message doesn’t change.

Was Mary an ever virgin?
Catholics and Orthodox Christians hold to this belief as does early Christianity.
I believe this but if some evidence came out that said other wise it wouldn’t shake my faith if Mary and Joseph did have children of there own.
It doesn’t take away from the Miracle of the Virginal Conception or even from Christ divinity or Mary being pure of heart and the most important woman in history who was given the greatest blessing and privilege of all the Saint’s.

There’s no proof they had children though so the favor goes into the traditional belief she remained virginal.

My stance is I’m indifferent if these thing’s are proved one way or another there either here nor there the message remained the same my belief in God and Jesus and the Trinity is unshaken.

The problem is that people take it in a literal direction there is no room for WHAT IF?
So you have Christians who think Jesus rode Velociraptors and Brontosaurus and Adam and Eve probably had a pet similar to Dino and the Flinstones is a Conservative fundamentalist Christian show.

The Bible was formed through the cosmos on a sunny Sunday in a rainbow full of lighting and thunder and it fell from the firmament and to the earth into the hands of the early Christians. It was made of Leather and the pages of Gold and inked in wine.

No one has ever said that but it sure as heck sounds like some people think this book fell from the sky fully published.

History is very important it shouldn’t be ignored there so much in the Catholic and Orthodox churches you can spend a lifetime researching it all.


#6

they, just sadly forget sometimes that the Church still gives them Traditions that other christians often use such as the holy Bible.

God bless


#7

:thumbsup: Great post.
It wasn’t my friend who said that I was just generalizing although I’m sure as much as I love him he could possibly be ignorant of the history behind how the Bible was formed.
He doesn’t want anything to do with organized religion and ive never tried to Convert him it’s not really my calling to be a person who converts ill leave that in the hands of better people but I can be a good example of the Catholic faith.
I have very mildly explained that Non Denominational is not really Non Denominational. Most follow a perverted version of Calvinism usually based of sort of the Baptist Church. OSAS minus Predestination.

What’s interesting is that so many of the early Documents and writings almost ended up in the Bible. We could have had the Didache or the Martyrdom of St polycarp.


#8

Dave Hunt is well known for making things up. In fact, some of his latter books quotes himself as an expert from his older books.

Simply, ask someone like that how do you know? where do you get that from? If the church was “corrupt” why should you even trust the biblical manuscripts themselves?


#9

This site should answer some of your Bible related questions:
www.catholicbibleanswers.com


#10

=Governator;11679419]There is a class of Protestant Christians or what they may label themselves as Born Again that do not believe in history. It seems as though they believe the Bible is a mystical book with cosmic origins that fell from the firmenent to the earth and into the hands of the Christian people.

I watched or rather listened to a debate on youtube that had Dave Hunt and Keaton in a debate. Hunt said something to the effect that the first century Christians were not christians. So basically not even the echo of the apostles sometimes refered to as the Apostles apsotles or second generation apostles were christian. He said that from the first century Church and on the Church was not “Christian”. He also stated that the Bible was the only source. Keaton made good points but I felt he should have not just cited the Church Fathers but also scripture because he kinda made Hunts point that he wouldn’t use the Bible to argue his points. Keaton did use some scripture but not ebough in my opinion.

Keaton could have ended the debate by simply saying that since the first century Church and their clergy were not true Christians and were so there after that the third and fourth century Christian Church was just herectical as the first. If the third and fourth century Church was herectical and what would later become the RCC and the OC’s and they formed the Bible that would mean the Bible was herectical and any one reading from it was herectical as it was collected by herectical Christians as the Church had been herectical from after the deaths of the first apostles and begining of the first century church age. This would mean Dave Hunt and the rest of Christianity was herecticall and a false religion.

This seems almost like a form of mental illness.
I have no problem with Protestants since I’m married to one and my Best friend is one and many of people I love are. I believe they are just as Christian as Catholics and Orthodox Christians. I believe many of them will go to heaven. I worry more about the Calvinistic ones who adhere to assurance of salvation in the form of once save ways saved as it is presumptious and doesn’t allow for there to be any examination of conscious or any spiritual growth in living a gracefull life through abstaining from sin.

My best friend is of this persuation and although he does believe in OSAS as do many Christians today especially attending Non Denominational Churches I don’t worry about him so much because I know he at least regularly repents his sins. He also is very Godly and a good husband and family man.

For me its frustrating with these types Christian Protestants who reject Bibical history as I have known so many well balanced and versed protestants. My wife and her family are Nazarene that’s a Wesleyan denomination branched off from Methodist and then from Pentecostal to the form it became minus speaking in tongues. They read some of the writings of the Church fathers or at least the Pastors who go through Seminary. From what I understand is that Much of their Seminary involves reading Catholic material. I’ve generally had good experiences with them and when I was younger and not a true practicing Catholic I was baptised a second time. It was a pretty amazing experience. I felt a sense of cleanlyness an purity. So I guess I’m a born again revert.
Confirmed in 2010 been practing since 2011. Got my Mariage reconized in 2012 and working on getting all my Children baptised.

Anyways how do you deal with this behavior along with those who only believe th KJV has authority or other obscurities?
What is the reasoning behind rejection of Church and Bible History?

We PRAY for them:thumbsup:

It took me many years to understand this passages:

Lk.8:10 " To whom he said:** To you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God;** but to the rest in parables, that seeing they may not see, and hearing may not understand."

Eph. 3: 20 " Now to him who is able to do all things more abundantly than we desire or understand, according to the power that worketh in us"

True Faith is a gift from God Through Grace offered and received

God commits Himself to OFFER “sufficient grace” to everyone so they might know Him. Not all grace is accepted and rightly applied. So I have come to understand that it is God’s
withholding additional graces necessary for RIGHT understanding, from those outside the Church until they turn towards the One True God. and His One faith:o

There is a book you ought to get and read by the founder of CAF called
**CATHOLICISM and FUNDAMENTALISM **

Its a great read on this precise issue.:thumbsup:

Keep in mind that we are not to even try to force our beliefs on others. Plant the seeds of truth as God presents the opportunities and then alow God to do the rest.:slight_smile:

God Bless you.
Patrick


#11

Ive been reading through this thread and I think there is a bit of ‘straw man’ going on here. Admittedly Prods are not as not quite as au fait with the church fathers as what Caths are but they don’t say they were not Christians.

Perhaps you are reading from the extreme edge of the protestant movement. If you were listening into a mainline protestant seminary history class they would be more critical of the medieval Church than you might be. But they would acknowledge that true Christians were to be found within (and without) of the Catholic Church during the centuries.

True, Prods are not admirers of the medieval papacy. However, they usually speak well of the work done by the various monastic orders during the middle ages. Im guessing you are reading stuff from the protestant fringe.


#12

I was specifically refering to the far extreme.

Yes most protestants do aknowledge the Church fathers.

My wife is Nazarene here’s a link to a forum I found looking into the similiarities

christianforums.com/t3313170/t

Check out the post by
vicarius
Member


#13

I will state that the fringe groups most always follow Calvinistic doctrines
It also seems the groups that teach Catholics aren’t Christians or a different religion are mostly Calvinistic.

I can’t say I hear a lot of negativity from many of the Wesleyan Churches.

I find that the OSAS doctrine is too liberal and many who believe in it contrdict themselvews by saying things like once saved always saved no amount of sin can ever seperate you from God.
Then they will say you have to believe in assurance of salvation in order to receive it.
That contridicts the first statement in that belief alone in Christ saves one soul and no amount of sin can seperate us from God.
Well if one believe in Christ he is saved if he doesn’t believe in assurance of salvation and that’s how salvation works he comitts a sin. His sin can not damn him to hell because he met the first criteria of salvation by belief and grace.

At best OSAS is selective.
It works when people want it to.
All you have to do is believe in Jesus Christ as your lord and savior and you are saved.
I’m Catholic of course I believe in Christ.
Catholics aren’t saved…And there not Christian

Another thing is they will say their relative lead a life of sin and died in that state but they were saved.
Then you ask them well what if someone comitts a murder spree are they saved then.
Well it doesn’t work like that or well anyone who sins will be punished but they can’t loose their salvation.

Sounds kinda like a belief in purgatory…hmm

John Calvin himself believe and taught predestination.
Once saved always saved but if you sin after you were saved you were never saved and justified to begin with.
The far extreme believe that.

If some of these non denomination Churches knew all of what John Calvin taught they wouldn’t believe in OSAS.
There is no hope in it and it basically damns every human alive except those given grace to live Sainted lives.
Not too many of those now who live in constant states of grace.

I can agree a lot of what the Wesleyan brothers taught but Calvinist not so much and I kinda tread lightly around them.

I just think OSAS doesn’t help Christians get or stay rooted and it gives persons permision to judge others and not follow Christ most important second comandment because the person thibks there sainted and justified.

So I find stability in Anglicans, Lutherans and Weslyans.


#14

Notice that fundamentalism arrived shortly after a certain Anglican convert made the salient point: “To be deep in history is to cease to be protestant.”

Plainly stated, to avoid confronting history remains willful ignorance - a state of denial - the same general cognitive process used by non-believers and others in support of self-satisfying beliefs.


#15

Well, I personally know 2 lecturers in my college who are Calvinists and they know a lot about Church History and the Church Fathers. Of course, they belong to Mainline Protestantism such as Anglicanism(Not the Anglo-Catholic part) and Presbyterian. These lecturers are really respectable and while I don’t agree with their Theology, I do not ridicule them for being Calvinists as they are not the boastful types and don’t shove things down other people’s throats, these are really godly Calvinists which I personally have a deep respect for.

Of course, on the other hand, I do know Protestants who are quite ignorant of Church History and the Church Fathers but regardless of that, they still respect me for my beliefs and regard me as a Christian, though they still have the misconception that Catholics and Orthodox Christians worship Saints and Relics, I didn’t need to argue and get into a mad debate with them but rather explain it to them in a non confrontational manner. Then again, these Protestants that I know of are from the Mainline Churches and none of these Protestant friends of mine are from the Fundamentalist sects, it is usually them(Fundamentalists) that blatantly ignore History and Facts just like for example, John MacArthur


#16

When it’s appropriate, ask of your friend of the illogical prospect of being involved with *disorganized *religion.

That phrase always gives pause. Religion is all about gaining a sense of order, not disorder. What’s challenging is that a bunch of disorderly humans are charged in propagating it. But a disorganized people is very different from the organized teachings they posit.


#17

[quote=Governator]I will state that the fringe groups most always follow Calvinistic doctrines …
[/quote]

Not really. The most anti-Catholic fringe of Protestantism is the Adventist movement which is anti-OSAS also.

[quote=Governator]So I find stability in Anglicans, Lutherans and Weslyans.
[/quote]

They are a nice bunch. Actually, I belong to a church that has a Calvinist background but we dont make a big thing about it these days. If there are any hyper-Calvinists around they are usually found on the “Church of the Internet.” lol :wink:


#18

Yes and I wasn’t saying Calvinist are bad people. Many of them live good live are good Christian people and I’m sure will go to heaven.

My Best friend is Calvinist he’s non denominational and believes in OSAS.
He prays to god repents his sins asking for forgiveness he just doesn’t believe he can loose his salvation. Him and his wife a very good friends of mine.

That’s just the pattern I’ve notices with fundamentals.

I’m not making an Absolute statement that all Calvinist are ignorant or radical.
I was saying that there is a group of Radical Protestants and that they usually hold to Calvinism.
I was also pointing out the problems with the doctrine of OSAS.

I mean no disrespect of ridicule.


#19

My first thought when I read “the apostles were not Christian” was “Yes, they were Jews, still worshipping within the synagouges, going to the Temple, continuing their very Jewish lives with the belief that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah” The gospels were written in the period where those who came to be called “Christian” still worshipped in the synagouges, still followed the Jewish liturgical calendar, read the Hebrew scriptures that cooresponded with the liturgical calender. The gospels were “reinterpretations” of the Jewish liturgical year, which can be demonstrated through the gospels themselves…well at least the synoptics can.

It wasn’t until the fall of Jerusalem, in 70CE that those called “Christians” “lost” their Jewish identity and the leadership of this fledging movement moved from Jewish leaders to Gentile leaders.


#20

I’m not rying to pick on Protestants considering my wife is.

I believe you about Adventist just can’t say I’ve heard or read a lot of their comments.

My worst an really only negative experience in life not all the stuff online was Guarding a Presbyterian Church.

Took me a long time after that to be comfortable telling people what Church I go to.

To heck with them if they don’t like me.

I actually do admire how simple Protestant faith is compared to Catholic.

I think for me what kept me frome being completley Catholic for a few years after becoming Catholic was all the devotionals that aren’t very scriptual and have sort of unscriptual promises and some of the Marian Apparations.

I still don’t care for a lot of it but its not a part of the deposits of faith.

The only devotional I really dfo is the Rosary and I pray it more as a meditation on Christ than a intercesory prayer to Mary.

I’m kinda a born again revert I guesse.


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.