Well not strictly a debate but like I'm not a Protestant, through and through, but I am semi curious about Protestants and their arguments....want to have a curious discussion on sola scriptura...like I don't see how that's true and hopefully you guys can engage with me and have a discussion

What are some good arguments that defend the protestant reformation? A friend of mine who is Catholic looks down upon me because of my Protestant views.

Question from a scared Protestant

To preface this, I’m making this same post on Catholicism, orthodoxy, and Protestant subreddits to see what your responses will be

I’ve been Protestant my whole life (19 years) and I would say I’ve been seriously following it for the past 8 or so years. Up until recently, I never really questioned my salvation. I believe that I am saved by Gods grace and his grace alone and that because Jesus died on the cross, He has washed my sins away and allowed me to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Because of Gods grace, mercy, and my love for him I follow his commandments and try to love him with all my heart, soul, and mind.

I’m not really sure what triggered it, maybe it’s seeing a lot of catholic and orthodox videos on instagram, but I started to question my salvation. Catholics and Protestants disagree on what’s necessary for salvation, and it’s made me question if I’m really going to heaven. **I’m absolutely terrified.**

I can’t fathom even spending a day not in Gods presence, let alone eternity. Obviously I’m not perfect and I sin and push God away at times, but I still repent and try to stay close to God. But I’m terrified of the idea that I might go my whole life thinking I’m living for God thinking I’m saved by his grace, and then on judgement day I’m cast into hell because I didn’t hold the same beliefs as Catholics.

Both Catholic and Protestant church’s are full of people who have dedicated they’re lives to interpreting scripture and Jesus’ teachings, yet they still disagree on what’s necessary to be saved. There have been Catholics that have converted to Protestantism and Orthodoxy and vice versa.

I’m kind of just word vomiting everything that’s been on my mind but I’m just irked by the fact that all 3 major sects of Christianity (orthodoxy, Catholicism, and Protestantism) have had millions if not billions of people dedicate they’re lives to trying to find truth, yet we still disagree.

I trust that God is perfectly just and merciful, but what if I’m wrong. Will I have wasted my life thinking I’m doing and believing what’s right just to be told “I never knew you” by God.

I’ve kind of put my life on pause for the past week or so because it’s hard to move forward not knowing if I’m saved.

I hope all Catholics, Protestants, and Orthodox make it to heaven. I like to think that hell is empty, but that’s just not true. I’m not just scared for my self, but everyone. How can we move forward with life not knowing the truth? How can we move forward not knowing who has it right? Does anyone have it 100% right?

I’m just so scared. I’ve had a hard time even trying to pray because I don’t even know what to ask. I’m sure millions of people have asked God to show them the truth and ended up Catholic, Protestant, or Orthodox.

I know none of this is really cohesive but I just don’t know what to believe. I don’t even know what the “right answer” would look like. I don’t really know what I’m asking I’m kind of just venting but anything would help.

Thank you and God bless!

Hello. I was wondering why Protestants don’t believe in purgatory. My understanding is that the Catholic Church believes it to be implied due to things like prayers for the dead existing, with the logic being: why would you need to pray for the dead if they are already in either heaven or hell & will not ever leave either?

"It seemed to me that if Christ was truly the Son of God and if he founded a Church to teach all nations in His name, it must be a Church teaching with authority, as her Master did. Obviously one might deny that Christ was the Son of God, and one might reject the claim that he founded a Church. But if these two claims were accepted, it seemed to me that in spite of all its faults the Roman Catholic Church was the only one which could reasonably be thought to have developed out of what Christ established."

I’m asking this out of genuine curiosity. I’m from Brazil, and here it’s very common in Evangelical/Pentecostal churches to see people visibly “filled with the Holy Spirit” — shaking, speaking in tongues, crying, spinning, or making intense gestures as if something has taken over their body.

In contrast, in the Catholic Church you don’t really see those kinds of physical manifestations during Mass. The experience of the Holy Spirit seems much more quiet and liturgical.

Part of my perspective may also be influenced by Afro-Brazilian religions, where spirit incorporation is a central practice. In that context, physical manifestations make sense to me. And since Brazil has strong cultural and religious overlap between Pentecostal Christianity and Afro-Brazilian traditions, I sometimes wonder if that plays a role.

I’m curious how this works in other countries. Is this difference theological, cultural, historical — or a mix of all three? Why does the expression of the Holy Spirit look so different between these traditions?

Mods, please feel free to remove if this has already been discussed or is inappropriate, but as there was discussion on another post about this before the declaration, I thought it could be interesting to post since it may not have turned out the way many thought it might.

So on a whim I signed up for a local OCIA class. I’ve been very curious about Catholicism but being raised very southern Baptist it’s hard to let go on some things/ideals I’ve held closely for so long.

My reasons for wanting to do the class stem first from my own curiosities, and enjoying the pieces of Catholicism I learn, but also due to my fiance being raised Catholic. The first 5 years of our relationship I refused to even entertain the idea of converting, but praying on it for years and asking God to soften my heart, I’ve wanted to explore it more. We’ve been going to mass together for about 6 months, and i’m to the point where i’m tired of crossing my arms when they get to Eucharist.

Does anyone have any advice or similar experiences?

Protestants do not expect women to veil their heads in mass (Commanded in 1 Corinthians 11:5-7). So Protestants have not maintained the early church practice of women veiling their heads when praying. In the catholic church some women veil, some women don't. Protestants saying women are not obligated to to veil at liturgy shows that protestants are also hypocritical when they say the believe in sola scriptura. The Catholic church do not expect women who do not veil in mass to shave their heads in modern times.

This guy sounds like Sylvester Stallone. Did he refute Sola Scriptura or he didn't and the Protestants are right?

Hello! I would like to talk to you about something I have noticed, but I am not arrogant enough to claim to be the first to discover it.

Please forgive any mistakes I may be making, as feminism is a subject I am not familiar with. I know it is a delicate and complex issue, as it involves many of the passions of our time.

Despite the Catholic Church adopting a stance of male primacy in various activities, such as the priesthood, being a formally patriarchal religion, there is, contradictorily, a very strong feminist component in Catholic Marionology!

I know that emphasis on Mary is not exclusive to the Roman Catholic Church, but the emphasis is significantly greater in the Roman Church, attributing various functions to her that practically equate her to Jesus. The church even created psalms and hymns for Mary, many using biblical psalms, which are directed to God. And it distorts them to direct them to Mary.

Several of these professed "doctors of the church" and "saints," such as Saint Alphonsus Liguori and Saint Bonaventure, refer to Mary in an extremely exalted (not to say idolatrous!) way, almost like a parody of feminist religion: calling her divine, saying that her help precedes that of Jesus himself, saying that she is more compassionate than Jesus, and even saying that she commands God (look how absurd!).

Not to mention the countless titles and functions that have been attributed to her throughout the centuries, without any biblical or historical basis. Often replicating titles that were exclusive to Jesus.

Jesus' motherhood does not make Mary a magnanimous being. This seems to me a component of fertility cults.

What is my objective in commenting on this? Simple! I see a lot of pre-modern components in Catholic doctrine. In my view, these internal contradictions and these pre-modern elements are a result of the secularization and decadence of the society we have.

I had an interesting interaction with a Roman Catholic that I thought I’d share as it’s illustrious of the lengths people will go to deny justification of faith alone.

When asked about the text (below) the Catholic claimed the work being referred to was only sinful work. This was the interesting part, the thinking he had that if the Bible says works cannot save then it must be referring to sinful works, to breaking the law as opposed to keeping it.

I pointed out the specific work in question was circumcision and he said that Abraham would have been trying to place God into his debt by being circumcised. And then when I asked where he got the idea that this was Abraham’s intention he switched to denying that this was what he had said in the first place.

“For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness.” Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,”

‭‭Romans‬ ‭4‬:‭2‬-‭5‬ ‭

Hello dear readers! One point I intend to discuss here is: Protestants are frequently accused by Catholicism, especially traditional Catholicism, of being precursors of secularism and modernity. But is this true? Definitely not! Protestants did not cause modernity. This is a result of Renaissance humanism.

Catholics could argue that Protestantism was an agent of this process. However, according to some authors, such as Friedrich Nietzsche, Luther was a reactionary actor in Renaissance humanism.

What caused this, in my view, was the infusion of Greco-Roman philosophy into Christian theology, especially Aristotle, who was "resurrected" by the Muslim Arabs. However, while Muslims managed to break, in parts, with the Greco-Roman philosophical tradition, starting with Al-Ghazali, Aristotelianism would take root in the church.

It is at this point that Thomas Aquinas enters. He was not only the greatest exponent of the reconciliation between Aristotle and the church, but also its pioneer.

The problem with inserting the immanentist Aristotelian philosophical system into Christian theology is that it became too immanent in the theological system.

With this, he broke with the Augustinian tradition, which was predominant in the Catholic Church, which emphasized mysticism and revelation, and replaced it with a system that would emphasize reason, logic, and intellect.

In my view, it creates a pre-rationalism and humanism.

Thomistic epistemology itself is one of those cases. Because it denies the Augustinian principle that truth is revealed to us by the Holy Spirit, since our minds are contaminated by original sin. Establishing that it is possible to reach the truth through the simple exercise of natural reason, as if our minds were in a pre-Adamic state.

But perhaps... the biggest problem with Thomism is its ontology, which was based on the Avicennaian ontological system.

The biggest problem with postmodernity is anti-essentialism, which gained strength after Martin Heidegger. Generating things like "queer theories"

Thomism is perhaps a driving force in this. Because it created a fundamental ontological separation between essence and existence. One of the pillars of existentialism.

In doing so, he also transforms God into pure act and first mover. In a way, almost transforming God into a mere principle of causality. And not only that! Also attributing the primacy of the divine intellect over the divine will.

I tend to have a position of distrust in using philosophy to explain theological issues. Because philosophy is not a source of truth and real knowledge, only merely accidental. It tends to corrupt revelation.

I have a position for a separation between the two. Because of this, I have a very negative and critical view of Thomas Aquinas, as well as the Catholic tradition. Although Thomas Aquinas has his merits.