Neither Catholic or Protestant

[Amazed@grace]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

As a child my first church was of a creed I cannot recall. I was but 2 years old.
Later and until I could decide for myself, we were Baptists.

Today, I am non- denominational though I do defend when called, Protestants. Especially when they are assailed by those comited to to trolling in the name of the Roman Rite.

 

[James the Rabbit]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

I say 'this looks like a controversial thread, rife with possibility for dissension and ruin, sir.'

 

[Illuminator]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

You are a Seventh Day Adventist.

 

[Daniel Veler]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

I say you stand for nothing. You can’t speak the truth in Christ without offending some one. You no doubt spend most of your time entertaining each other.

 

[Butch5]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

I agree

 

[Desire Of All Nations]

I ceased subscribing to any form of Romanism once i learned how most of its dogmas and customs oppose what is taught in the Bible. A major problem with the Catholic and Protestant religions is that there is a lot of pretension of authentic Christianity without any of the actual substance that comes with practicing authentic Christianity(2 Tim. 3:5), and it's all because they simply won't allow the Bible to determine what they're supposed to believe and practice.

 

[Illuminator]

I ceased subscribing to any form of Romanism once i learned how most of its dogmas and customs oppose what is taught in the Bible. A major problem with the Catholic and Protestant religions is that there is a lot of pretension of authentic Christianity without any of the actual substance that comes with practicing authentic Christianity(2 Tim. 3:5), and it's all because they simply won't allow the Bible to determine what they're supposed to believe and practice.

(Deus Vult: The Geopolitics of the Catholic Church, 2010), the Church runs 5,500 hospitals, 18,000 clinics, 16,000 homes for the elderly and those with special needs, with 65 percent of them located in underdeveloped and developing countries.

Consider Caritas, the confederation of Catholic aid agencies that spent billions of dollars for poor humanity. Then sum up all the small-scale charitable projects of more than 200,000 Catholic parishes around the world and those of individual religious orders such as the Franciscans, Jesuits, Dominicans, Opus Dei, Vincentians, and others.

Christians are only following the footsteps of Christ. The historical Jesus had a social mission, in addition to His mission of evangelization. The total liberation of the human person was foremost in the life and death of Him crucified, who was indeed never indifferent to the sufferings of others.

Catholic Church: World’s biggest charitable organization (inquirer.net)

I ceased subscribing to any form of Romanism...

Did you cease breathing too???

 

[Curtis]

The church today is in the mess it is in because it chooses to ignore what the scriptures teaches us. I have spoken to denominational leaders and in every case when I presented what the scriptures say about church life they all said yes but....

What that says to me is that the Bible has all we need to know but it is subservient to denominational teaching and demands. To put it another way, OUR CHURCH takes president over HIS CHURCH.

What they don't want to know is that Jesus said he would build HIS church not ours. That means that any church is only as good as the bloke running it. If he ain't much good neither is the church. I guess that is why so many churches are doing nothing more than maintaing the status quo because the guy at the top has run out of ideas or he doesn't want to rock the boat in case the money stops coming in.

I am convinced that in so many churches, the Holy Spirit is standing at the door waiting to be invited in but he walks away in the end because no invitation is forthcoming. Who needs the Holy Spirit when we have a programme that is infallible. I mean we have been doing things like this for 50 years so why change it?

Having been part of a church that invited the Holy Spirit in every meeting, I can tell you now what I would consider to be the best of the best. And it ain't maintaining the status quo.

If you want to get completely biblical and technical, Jesus never said He will build a church, since the word for church - kuriakos - isn’t in that Matthew 16 passage.

The Greek word there is ekklesia, which is defined as a congregation, or an assembly of people.

Thus Jesus isn’t talking about building a church hierarchy of pope, cardinals, bishops, and priests, etc, but increasing the size of the congregation of His followers via the confession of faith Peter had just made, that Jesus is the Christ and the Son of the living God - and not about constructing an organization.

 

[Curtis]

I ceased subscribing to any form of Romanism once i learned how most of its dogmas and customs oppose what is taught in the Bible. A major problem with the Catholic and Protestant religions is that there is a lot of pretension of authentic Christianity without any of the actual substance that comes with practicing authentic Christianity(2 Tim. 3:5), and it's all because they simply won't allow the Bible to determine what they're supposed to believe and practice.

That’s because both Catholicism and the Calvinism that came out of the Protestant reformation, are opposite ends of the spectrum of error.
The RCC is at one end of the pendulum swing and Calvinism is at the opposite end of the pendulum swing, with biblical truth being found in the middle.

 

[Curtis]

If you're a non-Catholic, non-Orthodox Christian - you are a Protestant, by definition.
Protestants who reject the term, "Protestant" are simply revisionists.

This is not a condemnation of Protestants - just a fact.

The term Protestant came from Roman Catholics who tried to get the RCC to reform its error, but finally left it in protest of their church - such as the first and most famous protestor against the RCC, the Catholic priest named Martin Luther.
Therefore only ex Catholics can be Protestors against the RCC, aka Protestants.

 

[Addy]

.

 

[Waiting on him]

Paul says things like denominations is division in the body of Christ. Being nondenominational I am neither Catholic or Protestant, I am biblical.

what say you?

Well, Protestants are merely protesting Catholics.

 

[BreadOfLife]

The term Protestant came from Roman Catholics who tried to get the RCC to reform its error, but finally left it in protest of their church - such as the first and most famous protestor against the RCC, the Catholic priest named Martin Luther.
Therefore only ex Catholics can be Protestors against the RCC, aka Protestants.

You mean, like the way "Roman" Catholic Church and "RCC" came from Henry VIII'S Protestant England?
It was a name used to differentiate the "Catholic" Church of England with the Catholic Church of Rome when he broke away.

You're confusing the term "Heretic" with "Protestant". Only a Catholic can be a heretic - like your Protestant Fathers, who were Catholics.
As for the term "Protestant" - it is a term that describes ANY Christian who is not a Catholic or Orthodox Christian.

 

[Curtis]

You mean, like the way "Roman" Catholic Church and "RCC" came from Henry VIII'S Protestant England?
It was a name used to differentiate the "Catholic" Church of England with the Catholic Church of Rome when he broke away.

You're confusing the term "Heretic" with "Protestant". Only a Catholic can be a heretic - like your Protestant Fathers, who were Catholics.
As for the term "Protestant" - it is a term that describes ANY Christian who is not a Catholic or Orthodox Christian.

That’s your claim. But I’ll stick with the facts - only ex Catholics are Protestants against the corrupted doctrine of the Catholic church, like Martin Luther, the first Protestant and catholic priest to leave that Roman sect under protest.

 

[FHII]

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary
Definition of protestant
prot·es·tant | \ ˈprä-tə-stənt
a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth
broadly: a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

Going off this definition, an independent Church (which is one I attend) would not NECESSARILY be a Protestant Church because it is not part of a denomination. Is it a denomination itself? Not according to Webster's definition of a denomination:

": a religious organization whose congregations are united in their adherence to its beliefs and practices"

They are a religious organization, but there are not more than one congregation. That's a very legalistic answer, isn't it?

Well, thats the first of two answers I wanted to give. The second is no as well. But its based on whether God sees such as Protestant or Catholic. I don't think he does. Man looks at it that way, so if I'm called one (even if I don't consider myself one), so be it. I am more focused on Him, his Word and truth than I am about this 500 year controversy.

 

[joshua.lucier]

I am a christian and am neither protestant nor catholic nor evangelical. Just Christian. To me protestants are just another denomination of catholics.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Going off this definition, an independent Church (which is one I attend) would not NECESSARILY be a Protestant Church because it is not part of a denomination. Is it a denomination itself? Not according to Webster's definition of a denomination:

": a religious organization whose congregations are united in their adherence to its beliefs and practices"

They are a religious organization, but there are not more than one congregation. That's a very legalistic answer, isn't it?

Well, thats the first of two answers I wanted to give. The second is no as well. But its based on whether God sees such as Protestant or Catholic. I don't think he does. Man looks at it that way, so if I'm called one (even if I don't consider myself one), so be it. I am more focused on Him, his Word and truth than I am about this 500 year controversy.

It's not a 500 year old "controversy".
It's about the splintering - the perpetual splintering of the Body of Christ that began 500 years ago.

And, as long as we're going by Webster's definitions . . .

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary
Definition of protestant
(Entry 1 of 2)

1Protestant

b: a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth
broadly : a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

 

[BreadOfLife]

That’s your claim. But I’ll stick with the facts - only ex Catholics are Protestants against the corrupted doctrine of the Catholic church, like Martin Luther, the first Protestant and catholic priest to leave that Roman sect under protest.

No - it's not MY claim - it's a fact.

A heretic is a CATHOLIC who espouses heresy.
If you were never a Catholic - you cannot be a heretic because you never knew the truth and ONLY knew heretical teachings.

As for the definition of what a Protestant is - take it up with Webster's and virtually every other dictionary.

 

[FHII]

It's not a 500 year old "controversy".
It's about the splintering - the perpetual splintering of the Body of Christ that began 500 years ago

Yes it is a splintering, but I don't feel I am wrong about calling it a controversy. Would you tell me it isn't controversial? If so, why is this thread going on?

And, as long as we're going by Webster's definitions . . .

Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary
Definition of protestant
(Entry 1 of 2)......
broadly : a Christian not of a Catholic or Eastern church

Yes... In a broad sense, as the definition implies. But relax... I wasn't being all that serious about that answer to begin with.

That's a very legalistic answer, isn't it?

I put a smiley face emoji after that, but for some reason it didn't show up. But still, this comment I made should've indicated I didn't intend for it to be taken seriously... My bad... Just my weird sense of humor.

My second answer was serious though... I don't think God is that concerned if we are Catholic, Protestant or independent; I think he's more concerned with proper doctrine and where we stand in adhering to it.

Overall, I used to get upset over being called a Protestant, because I no longer am interested in protesting the Catholic Church. But now... Say what you want about it. I really don't care. I am working on what God has to say about me, and again... I don't think he is concerned about such terms.

 

[Curtis]

Going off this definition, an independent Church (which is one I attend) would not NECESSARILY be a Protestant Church because it is not part of a denomination. Is it a denomination itself? Not according to Webster's definition of a denomination:

": a religious organization whose congregations are united in their adherence to its beliefs and practices"

They are a religious organization, but there are not more than one congregation. That's a very legalistic answer, isn't it?

Well, thats the first of two answers I wanted to give. The second is no as well. But its based on whether God sees such as Protestant or Catholic. I don't think he does. Man looks at it that way, so if I'm called one (even if I don't consider myself one), so be it. I am more focused on Him, his Word and truth than I am about this 500 year controversy.

His definition absolutely ignores the origin of the word, and who it applied to.