Is Protestantism even Christian?

[Sha'irullah]

Warning: Lengthy rant! I apologize if my sarcasm is unbearable but it is how I talk in person as well as online; so if I am overstating my case just take it as exaggeration. My post is merely my attitude toward Protestantism but you do not have to read it and can merely respond about your own views or you can rant like me . I just thought this was a good conversation to have and I also do not hate Protestants, I just think the religions have little in common.

@Deidre, do you just feel good religion or to be challenged, to grow, to struggle and grapple with things, to develop discipline?

This brilliant quote by our RF's lovely Franky has summed up my attitude towards Protestant Christianity or what I have often been calling Protestantianity. To me the Protestant movement is a mixture of separate religions splintering from an old and more classical religion known as Christianity which has only 2 very dominant sects known as Catholicism and Orthodox. I have taken the time to study these denominations and see how they all mesh and my only opinion on it is that of scorn. I cannot acknowledge Protestantism as anything remotely Christian.

I was raised in a non-denomination house and was always taught that long ago in America came Christianity and Catholicism splintered off around 200 years ago and moved to Mexico where it has caused us trouble ever since. A 3rd grade education in history can easily solve that blunder in history right up for you. Oh boy was I shocked to find the opposite of everything I was taught by the people around me.

The protestant movement can easily be summed up by a mixture of Evangelicals and New Age woo wrapped into one low quality Taco Bell burrito. Protestantism at face value is about as hostile to Jesus as Gandhi was opposed to wielding an AK-47.

Within Christianity I find these historical establishments of faith and discipline and when looking at Protestant religions I see well . . . a different religion. Not even my college history professor would call Protestantism a Christian movement but instead called it a "multiplicity of religions that emerged from another religion." This women I should add was not even religious. When she was further asked by a student, why in all her years of studying European history she regarded Protestantism as a different religion her response was that it had no bearing in Christian theology. I was in the front row of the class so I had to contain by laughter obviously.

Every saturday I would turn on my TV and see these American ministers ramblings like stroke victims on quaaludes and all I can think to myself is, "holy****, these men must be in the wrong comedy club because nobody is laughing." It is as if they have no understanding of historical Christianity or the piety of Catholics and Orthodox Churches and how they brought their preaching into practice. Yet with Protestants all we see is men in 3 piece suits who are more interested in winning over congressmen than trying to say anything of remote religious or moral value.

Even when looking at centuries old Protestant movements all I can find is radical groups being spawned due to political motivations or the need to strategically target a group of people for reasons of greed or grandeur. Baptists, Methodists, Calvinists and Pentecostals are all a weird amalgamation of cults like spawnings that are based off some weird man's ramblings in order to stir crows and start a spiritual riot. I can literally through Scientology and the Unification Church in the same pot as Protestantism and be intellectually accurate with how I treat them all the same. Their backgrounds, theological progression and assessment in the world is no different.

Protestantism repulsed me from Christianity and I can easily tell you how. My minister growing up was this very charlatan:

For 10 years I went to this church every agonizing Sunday listening to Frederick KC Price and attended this football stadium . . . *cough* I mean "church" known as the Faith Dome.

 

[Deidre]

lol ''faith dome''

It looks like a UFO

Well, the split from the Catholic Church, or so the story goes, was because the RCC was abusing doctrine and its authority and Luther was seen as preserving the faith. I really think once ''churches'' started realizing all of the opportunity that could be had with money from naive congregants, it (Christianity) just became something that seemed very far from following Jesus, and Christianity became a business.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

If you are defending the "Christianity" that was embodied in the Catholic (either Roman or Orthodox) against Protestantism, why not have a read of Luther's "95 Theses," nailed to the door of a church in Wittenberg. Luther's starting position was basically, "priests -- and not even the Pope -- can accept money and thus compel God to lessen one's time in purgatory, or avoid hell."

High up among the ideas that arise out of that stance is the notion of "sola scriptura" -- that scripture contains what you need to know. And that, of course, also means that no human -- not even the Pope -- can stand as "Vicar of Christ" and speak for God.

Do you find those notions unchristian? (By the way, I'm a disinterested atheist.)

 

[Brickjectivity]

Fred Price is one of many pastors whose sons have inherited their ministries. I agree its an evil and think it is worse than rape. Anyone can become a pastor, hang up a shingle and do nothing for six days a week if they will run a show on Sunday and say what they are expected to say. Here's Fred Price who's done it for decades and has a fine cash cow to hand down to his son. Pat Robertson is another, plus that fellow who runs Crystal Cathedral. Several local ministers here are doing it. I wish it were an unspeakable evil, but its necessary to talk about it. Today's villains don't tie damsels to railroad tracks. They own ministries.

 

[Kenny]

The protestant movement can easily be summed up by a mixture of Evangelicals and New Age woo wrapped into one low quality Taco Bell burrito. Protestantism at face value is about as hostile to Jesus as Gandhi was opposed to wielding an AK-47.

I hope you feel better after your rant.. but I only read personal opinions and viewpoints.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I figure people deserve whatever they get.

Pastors and their congregations are made for each other.

 

[Sha'irullah]

I hope you feel better after your rant.. but I only read personal opinions and viewpoints.

Of course, as I said before I just think that the original spirit of Christianity is lost in Protestantism. I am not saying that people who are Protestants cannot do so obviously. For example no Protestant I know of has ever fathomed a vow of poverty or to live a life of simplicity. The oldests churches encourages this although they had their hands in a fair amount of bloodshed and decadence, I am not trying to shift blame here at all.

I just see so much of what Protestant practices is based on that it has no roots in conceptual Christianity. All I see is cringy Christian rock now, along with mega church that look like cinemas. I see no rejection of worldly affairs in the modern practices of Protestantism anymore. I know for a fact that if I trace earlier Protestant teachings back to their start this will not be the case especially in the case of Baptists.

So like I said before, I am not trying to attack you personally but I am obviously not accepting to Protestant denominations as traditional;y Christian.


. . . On a side note going back earlier you will find that Christianity was a very loose set of Jews under Roman rule who were merely wanderers in pursuit of rejecting worldly affairs. So even Catholicism and Orthodoxy is lost on this to some degree. Christianity was a very ascetic religion and has had more in common with Buddhism than traditional Judaism.

 

[Socratic Berean]

Warning: Lengthy rant! I apologize if my sarcasm is unbearable but it is how I talk in person as well as online; so if I am overstating my case just take it as exaggeration. My post is merely my attitude toward Protestantism but you do not have to read it and can merely respond about your own views or you can rant like me . I just thought this was a good conversation to have and I also do not hate Protestants, I just think the religions have little in common.



This brilliant quote by our RF's lovely Franky has summed up my attitude towards Protestant Christianity or what I have often been calling Protestantianity. To me the Protestant movement is a mixture of separate religions splintering from an old and more classical religion known as Christianity which has only 2 very dominant sects known as Catholicism and Orthodox. I have taken the time to study these denominations and see how they all mesh and my only opinion on it is that of scorn. I cannot acknowledge Protestantism as anything remotely Christian.

I was raised in a non-denomination house and was always taught that long ago in America came Christianity and Catholicism splintered off around 200 years ago and moved to Mexico where it has caused us trouble ever since. A 3rd grade education in history can easily solve that blunder in history right up for you. Oh boy was I shocked to find the opposite of everything I was taught by the people around me.

The protestant movement can easily be summed up by a mixture of Evangelicals and New Age woo wrapped into one low quality Taco Bell burrito. Protestantism at face value is about as hostile to Jesus as Gandhi was opposed to wielding an AK-47.

Within Christianity I find these historical establishments of faith and discipline and when looking at Protestant religions I see well . . . a different religion. Not even my college history professor would call Protestantism a Christian movement but instead called it a "multiplicity of religions that emerged from another religion." This women I should add was not even religious. When she was further asked by a student, why in all her years of studying European history she regarded Protestantism as a different religion her response was that it had no bearing in Christian theology. I was in the front row of the class so I had to contain by laughter obviously.

Every saturday I would turn on my TV and see these American ministers ramblings like stroke victims on quaaludes and all I can think to myself is, "holy****, these men must be in the wrong comedy club because nobody is laughing." It is as if they have no understanding of historical Christianity or the piety of Catholics and Orthodox Churches and how they brought their preaching into practice. Yet with Protestants all we see is men in 3 piece suits who are more interested in winning over congressmen than trying to say anything of remote religious or moral value.

Even when looking at centuries old Protestant movements all I can find is radical groups being spawned due to political motivations or the need to strategically target a group of people for reasons of greed or grandeur. Baptists, Methodists, Calvinists and Pentecostals are all a weird amalgamation of cults like spawnings that are based off some weird man's ramblings in order to stir crows and start a spiritual riot. I can literally through Scientology and the Unification Church in the same pot as Protestantism and be intellectually accurate with how I treat them all the same. Their backgrounds, theological progression and assessment in the world is no different.

Protestantism repulsed me from Christianity and I can easily tell you how. My minister growing up was this very charlatan:

For 10 years I went to this church every agonizing Sunday listening to Frederick KC Price and attended this football stadium . . . *cough* I mean "church" known as the Faith Dome.

Fair enough. Fred Price has long preached a version of the unbiblical prosperity gospel and has just last month stepped down from his position in church leadership over issues he has yet to divulge. For whatever reasons you were led to sit under the tutelage of unbiblical teachings, and for whatever reason you coasted along in a state of biblical illiteracy (a common phenomenon in church today, and no reflection on you personally), why would you then discount sound, biblical Protestant teachings altogether?

 

[Sha'irullah]

Fair enough. Fred Price has long preached a version of the unbiblical prosperity gospel and has just last month stepped down from his position in church leadership over issues he has yet to divulge.

My aunt told me his health was degrading and he was using a walker last year, he is quite older than what he looks like but his youth is just a result of money mostly *cough cough.* He loves using the prosperity gospel which to me is a blatant insult against 99.99% of the Bible and the remaining decimal I save for exception of Suliman.

I really dislike his son as a minister and his attempt to bring elements in his preaching that do him a disservice for the crowd. He loved bringing up Greek culture in his earlier work which I find just weird especially when he got everything he said wrong.

For whatever reasons you were led to sit under the tutelage of unbiblical teachings, and for whatever reason you coasted along in a state of biblical illiteracy (a common phenomenon in church today, and no reflection on you personally), why would you then discount sound, biblical Protestant teachings altogether?

I am not discounting Protestant teachings, at least not in mass. I understand its reaction to the Catholic church but I also not understand its revolt against more classical Christian thought. I see things like the Manifest Destiny being used in early Protestant culture in the Americas and I can only think to myself how can such an abhorrent thought be accepted en masse by Protestants. This notion that Protestant faith will be used as a catalyst for conquering other people and the promotion of true Christianhood as people like John Adams recounted it is just bizarre and lacking Biblical foundation by mere example.

It would seem that Protestant faith would have derived itself to return to the simplicity of early Christianity but instead seeks to drive Christianity in a more expansionist route. I guess history and the current social climate is to thank to this but to connect it to the Bible and the teaching of Jesus is to literally do the reverse as you see set as an example.

You never see the earlier churches seeking materialism as a product of their faith and you never witness great humility in Protestantism unlike the ascetics of Eastern Orthodoxy. The most Christian like behavior and theology I can find is in the Quakers and fringe groups in American history.

 

[The Holy Bottom Burp]

What is Christianity at all? I'd challenge anyone to give an accurate summary that describes what you should believe and how you should behave to justify the tag "Christian". I'd recommend Bart Ehrman's "Lost Christianities" to anyone interested in the development of the religion. Christian groups with differing theologies and Christologies sprung up very early in church history, some gnostic, some really quite Jewish in nature, some who even denied Yahweh was god of the universe. If there is one thing consistent in the history of the religion, it is disagreement about who Jesus was, what his life and death meant, and what you have to do (or believe) to be saved. It would be interesting to be able to go back in time and see how the earliest "Christians" behaved and what they believed, alas it is lost in the mists of time so we'll never fully know.

 

[Kenny]

Of course, as I said before I just think that the original spirit of Christianity is lost in Protestantism. I am not saying that people who are Protestants cannot do so obviously. For example no Protestant I know of has ever fathomed a vow of poverty or to live a life of simplicity. The oldests churches encourages this although they had their hands in a fair amount of bloodshed and decadence, I am not trying to shift blame here at all.

Yes, many took a vow of poverty making a life simple. Yet the question would be, is a vow of poverty a sign of religiosity and a tradition that makes the word of God of none effect? Or is it a truth that was clearly delineated in scripture.

There are things, such as a vow of poverty, which when done as unto God is acceptable and if you don't unto God is still acceptable (Romans 14)

I just see so much of what Protestant practices is based on that it has no roots in conceptual Christianity. All I see is cringy Christian rock now, along with mega church that look like cinemas. I see no rejection of worldly affairs in the modern practices of Protestantism anymore. I know for a fact that if I trace earlier Protestant teachings back to their start this will not be the case especially in the case of Baptists.

No doubt there will always be (in any sphere of influence) a variety of outgrowths from what was started as a seedling and, because of humanity, abuses thereof. Even the apostles had problems in that area.

But this is what I see in the above statement:

1. You have a more traditional viewpoint of what church should look like. (Not wrong, but just your personal viewpoint
2. You have a personal viewpoint of what worship looks like. (Many of the older hymns that are so venerated today were actually based on tunes sung in bars and rejected by many of the churches). So, what I see is more of a personal viewpoint of what music should sound like
3. There are worldly practices that can happen in churches, but it would appear that you have become the judge of what is worldly. (a dangerous position if not handled property.

So like I said before, I am not trying to attack you personally but I am obviously not accepting to Protestant denominations as traditional;y Christian.

LOL - at age 63, it takes a lot to feel that you have attacked me personally. But my big brother, Jesus, can handle any attacks on me... I just smile through it.

. . . On a side note going back earlier you will find that Christianity was a very loose set of Jews under Roman rule who were merely wanderers in pursuit of rejecting worldly affairs. So even Catholicism and Orthodoxy is lost on this to some degree. Christianity was a very ascetic religion and has had more in common with Buddhism than traditional Judaism.

If I go to the earliest of Christianity, I find they weren't wanderers who rejected the world's paradigm of heart purpose for doing things but were fully engaged with the world to reach the world and used finances to accomplish it. Some were notorious in creating and multiplying wealth and then leveraging it for the promulgation of the gospel.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Yet with Protestants all we see is men in 3 piece suits

The Popes's shoes probably cost more than those suits, just sayin' ...

For example no Protestant I know of has ever fathomed a vow of poverty

No sense making a vow for something economic policy will ensure.

All I see is cringy Christian rock now, along with mega church that look like cinemas.

So, because Catholic and Orthodox's mega churches are prettier, that makes it better?

On a side note going back earlier you will find that Christianity was a very loose set of Jews under Roman rule who were merely wanderers in pursuit of rejecting worldly affairs. So even Catholicism and Orthodoxy is lost on this to some degree. Christianity was a very ascetic religion and has had more in common with Buddhism than traditional Judaism.

This I will agree with.

My aunt told me his health was degrading and he was using a walker last year, he is quite older than what he looks like but his youth is just a result of money mostly *cough cough.* He loves using the prosperity gospel which to me is a blatant insult against 99.99% of the Bible and the remaining decimal I save for exception of Suliman.

Amen!

I see things like the Manifest Destiny being used in early Protestant culture in the Americas

American Protestants didn't invent "let's move in and kill other people and take their land".

 

[metis]

Yes, many took a vow of poverty making a life simple.

I took a vow of poverty when I got married.

 

[metis]

When 30 (I'm now 72 years young ), I had to make a decision as to whether to join my wife's Catholicism or to go back to the Protestantism I grew up in, so in order to make that decision I began to read just about anything I could get my hands on dealing with the early church, how it saw itself, and what did it actually believed and taught.

To make a very long story short, I converted to Catholicism, even with all its flaws, largely because it and the Orthodox churches and a couple of Scandinavian Lutheran churches could trace their leadership lineage back to the apostles, which is called "apostolic succession": Apostolic succession - Wikipedia

Also, the canon that Christians read all over the world was selected by the Catholic church back in the latter part of the 4th century and first part of the 5th century, so if the CC was supposedly so evil as so many Protestants have claimed over the centuries, why use that canon?

Also, over and over again Paul said the church is to be "one body", not a multitude of bodies, plus the scriptures have it that the church, which means "community", would be guided by the HS until the end of times.

However, this doesn't mean that those in the church, including the leadership, are somehow immune from sinning. But also remember that so were the apostles guilty as well, not to excuse what's happened with the CC over the centuries of course.

So, for me, I feel comfortable in my wife's church-- flaws and all-- even though I don't belong to it. My "theology" is way too liberal for me even to consider reconverting back (see my faith statement below as to why).

 

[Kenny]

I took a vow of poverty when I got married.

ROFL

Someone said that "It gets better when your children fly the coup"! OBVIOUSLY that person NEVER had grandchildren!!!

 

[Nakosis]

Warning: Lengthy rant! I apologize if my sarcasm is unbearable but it is how I talk in person as well as online; so if I am overstating my case just take it as exaggeration. My post is merely my attitude toward Protestantism but you do not have to read it and can merely respond about your own views or you can rant like me . I just thought this was a good conversation to have and I also do not hate Protestants, I just think the religions have little in common.

IMO what happened is that the Protestants no longer accepted the authority of the Pope and each Christian became their own authority on God. Protestants believe themselves to be instructed by the Holy Spirit. So whatever theology comes to mind must have been put there by God via the Holy Spirit.

I don't see myself that the Pope has any actual authority to speak for God but at least from one individual you're more likely to get a consistent message.

Now, through personal experience or via the internet people become disillusioned from these authority figures claiming to speak for God. So either go looking from a religion that meets up with their own ideology about God, go solo as their own authority or turn atheist.

 

[metis]

Someone said that "It gets better when your children fly the coup"! OBVIOUSLY that person NEVER had grandchildren!!!

Amen to dat, and we've got 8 of 'em!

 

[RabbiO]

I took a vow of poverty when I got married.

When 30 (I'm now 72 years young....

You've been using that poverty quote since the 1929 stock market crash. It's worked for awhile, but I hear that Josie is beginning to wonder why all the mattresses in the metis household seem to be getting lumpier and lumpier.

When I was just a youngster in elementary school, one of the first things that I was taught in English class was that the words "metis" and "young" cannot appear in the same sentence without the use of a negative qualifier. In that regard, I note that you left out of your response the number 10 which is supposed to appear, in smaller font, immediately to the right, and slightly above, of the number 72.

 

[metis]

You've been using that poverty quote since the 1929 stock market crash. It's worked for awhile, but I hear that Josie is beginning to wonder why all the mattresses in the metis household seem to be getting lumpier and lumpier.

I keep telling her that it's not the mattress-- it's me.

When I was just a youngster in elementary school, one of the first things that I was taught in English class was that the words "metis" and "young" cannot appear in the same sentence without the use of a negative qualifier.

You're right, as "metis" actually means "terrifically handsome", but I don't like writing the latter because of my extreme humbleness.

In that regard, I note that you left out of your response the number 10 which is supposed to appear, in smaller font, immediately to the right, and slightly above, of the number 72.

No, that's my IQ-- dah!

 

[Kenny]

Amen to dat, and we've got 8 of 'em!

Congratulation grandpa!!

We are working on our #10 to make sure we still have a human footprint on the climate change!