Why do Protestants have Such a Different view on Rules?

In the Catholic mind, if something isn't enforced and you're not forced to do it, it's optional whether it's cultural or not. In the Protestant mind, if it's in the culture you have to do it.

In the Catholic mind, if something isn't banned you can do it. In the Protestant mind, if something isn't permitted explicitly you can't do it.

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

Tip Your Landlord Shirt $21.68

Mike Stoklasa's Worst Fan Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Please tell me you don’t actually listen to anything this moronic cum hunter says to his gaggle of 14 year old poltards

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I don't see him as infallible but he's an example of how you can pretty much be any politics you want and be Catholic without excommunication. That's why Catholics online have such extreme views in politics going both ways.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Kill youself beaner

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Catholics end up extreme in either direction because they don’t take their religion seriously. Nick Fuentes is an excellent example of a cultural Catholic who actually doesn’t give a shit about being Catholic.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's impossible to take seriously because it's inherently contradictory. It's a pedo cult that exists to fulfill the prophecy in Revelations.

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >In the Protestant mind, if it's in the culture you have to do it.
    >In the Protestant mind, if something isn't permitted explicitly you can't do it.
    Ask me how I know you know nothing about Protestantism.
    t. Catholic

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Prots are always saying things like "You have to have the same Mariology as Montfort" without knowing it's not mandatory or say things "You aren't allowed to have a rosary" or "You can't have a Christmas tree" without those things being infallibly banned in their Bible.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >you cant have a Christmas tree
        Those aren’t protestants, those are judaized americans. Religion invented by israelites and sold to boomers, who parrot it.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I’ve never heard a Protestant say any of those things and i have a Protestant wife and have been to multiple Protestant churches.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >In the Catholic mind, if something isn't enforced and you're not forced to do it, it's optional whether it's cultural or not. In the Protestant mind, if it's in the culture you have to do it.
    Catholics literally worship demons like Pachamama because it's "cultural", while evangelicals fight against idolatrous cultural practices.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Where is bowing to pachamama mandated lol?

      I’ve never heard a Protestant say any of those things and i have a Protestant wife and have been to multiple Protestant churches.

      I hear them say it all the time. Christmas trees bad, alcohol bad, gambling bad, liturgical vestments bad....

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Where is bowing to pachamama mandated lol?
        It's not mandated, it's a cultural practice that's normative for Catholics in many parts of the world.

        [...]

        >I'm saying Protestants have the idea if a saint does something it's mandated in the whole church
        You are moronic.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >It's not mandated, it's a cultural practice that's normative for Catholics in many parts of the world.

          If it's not mandatory I don't have to do it

          Nta, I grew up as a protestant and have never heard such things once.

          I hear it all the time. Prots never get off your case. They also complain about Catholic cathedrals being rich but also complain if someone raises the minimum wage.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I, too, just scapegoat and make shit up as I go sometimes.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nta, I grew up as a protestant and have never heard such things once.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Gambling is bad, and drunkenness is bad, but there is nothing wrong with Christmas trees or liturgical vestments. In fact, my church uses vestments and I'm a protestant. A couple of different protestant denominations wear vestments, like Lutherans and Anglicans.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Evangelicals worship Israel.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        So do post-VII Catholics. Nostra aetate condemns racism and antisemitism btw.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          The Vatican declared Palestine a state in 2015.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Wow, so did Sweden

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You can deny the Holocaust yet still be in communion with Rome though. You can also be super zionist and be in communion too.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I feel like people keep coming up with ways to be different from the other sect. Like, someone wouldn't believe a certain thing if it was the same as the people they are against. Contrarianism.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For example?

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >In the Catholic mind, if something isn't banned you can do it.
    So you think it's perfectly reasonable to dig up corpses, and eat them?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Catholic authority has to have written something against that at some point.

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Catholic rules
    >Optional

    Wasn't this way in the Middle Ages. And that's a good thing.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because nothing says “Christian” quite like burning to death anyone who disagrees with you

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nothing says "Christian" quite like being part of a denomination that looks nothing like early Christianity

        >Infant baptism
        Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)

        https://toeternity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Infant-Baptism.pdf

        >Baptismal regeneration
        "Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp are silent on the issue,[8] however the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, Theophilus, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian among others connected following Christ in baptism with salvation.[9][10] Baptismal regeneration was also affirmed by Origen[11] and Augustine.[12] "

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptismal_regeneration#Early_Church

        >Sola Scriptura
        "So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

        >"All Scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for training in righteousness;" (2 Timothy 3:16)

        Where in this quote does it say 'scripture ALONE' or does it say scripture is 'sufficient'. The adjective/descriptive word 'beneficial' in greek is: ὠφέλιμος (ophelimos). Which is a conjugation of "ophelos", which means "profit" or "advantage" in all contexts found.
        https://biblehub.com/greek/3786.htm
        The only adjective for what scripture says to do is "profit" "advtantage", where does it say "sufficient"?

        No where does a verse say that scripture is "sufficient": https://www.openbible.info/topics/sufficiency_of_scripture

        The greek word for "alone" is "monon", https://biblehub.com/greek/monon_3440.htm. Can you find a verse where it says "scripture alone" or "what is written alone" is to be followed or god breathed? Infact, where does it say scripture is the only "god breathed" authority? https://biblehub.com/greek/2315.htm

        Can you find that?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          regeneration
          I will go further and add this:

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >word concept fallacy.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Sophistry

            You saying it is a fallacy doesn't make it a fallacy. Where was this 'fallacy' shown and do you have an argument defending anabaptist beliefs or would you just criticize and throw stones?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Where in this quote does it say 'scripture ALONE' or does it say scripture is 'sufficient'.
            >word concept fallacy.
            I’ve already discussed scripture alone and you’re just a blithering moron. I already blew your ass open about Romans 3 so I’m fine with just throwing stones.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Max cope. And max denial. I had a feeling you were that guy from the other thread. (You) lost, you didn't reply at all. Or, all I recall was a little pipsqueek of a fart of a response which basically said "no you're wrong" (it was less than 10 words in response to a whole 2000 word maxed IQfy post). You've failed to make your case, and you continue to live in a delusional state of unrepented confidence. Being wrong is fine so long as you repent. But, all heretics are condemned for their stubbornness. The stubbornness here is evident by posting memes proclaiming anabaptist victory while being utterly wrong.

            You didn't blow anything. You got shown for being a sophist, willing to corrupt scripture- just like Martine Luther- for your own suppositions, and had nothing else to say for your incorrectness.

            in this quote does it say 'scripture ALONE' or does it say scripture is 'sufficient'.
            >>word concept fallacy.

            The meme indicates that the Timothy verse indicated "Sola Scriptura", which doesn't just mean "Scripture is infalliable", but Sola Scripture means "Scripture is the ONLY infalliable source of authority". Where in the verse does it say that? And how do you have confidence in your interpretation? What is the way one interprets scripture definitely with the ambiguity of language and how is that decided? And where does it say in scripture that people outside of the apostolic church, can interpret scripture infalliably? What is the historical evidence that people who make up their institutions are just as valid as those within? Was Pelagius, the gnostics, or Donatists endowed with the 'deposit of faith'?

            Supposing God exists, does it make sense that God would allow the church to say they are the only infalliable source of authority in interpretation and decision making, for 1400 years? Would God do that? If God doesn't do that, where in the 1400 years from Christ to the reformation, was there a movement successful enough in saying...

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Max cope. And max denial. I had a feeling you were that guy from the other thread. (You) lost, you didn't reply at all. Or, all I recall was a little pipsqueek of a fart of a response which basically said "no you're wrong" (it was less than 10 words in response to a whole 2000 word maxed IQfy post). You've failed to make your case, and you continue to live in a delusional state of unrepented confidence. Being wrong is fine so long as you repent. But, all heretics are condemned for their stubbornness. The stubbornness here is evident by posting memes proclaiming anabaptist victory while being utterly wrong.

            You didn't blow anything. You got shown for being a sophist, willing to corrupt scripture- just like Martine Luther- for your own suppositions, and had nothing else to say for your incorrectness.

            in this quote does it say 'scripture ALONE' or does it say scripture is 'sufficient'.
            >>word concept fallacy.

            The meme indicates that the Timothy verse indicated "Sola Scriptura", which doesn't just mean "Scripture is infalliable", but Sola Scripture means "Scripture is the ONLY infalliable source of authority". Where in the verse does it say that? And how do you have confidence in your interpretation? What is the way one interprets scripture definitely with the ambiguity of language and how is that decided? And where does it say in scripture that people outside of the apostolic church, can interpret scripture infalliably? What is the historical evidence that people who make up their institutions are just as valid as those within? Was Pelagius, the gnostics, or Donatists endowed with the 'deposit of faith'?

            Supposing God exists, does it make sense that God would allow the church to say they are the only infalliable source of authority in interpretation and decision making, for 1400 years? Would God do that? If God doesn't do that, where in the 1400 years from Christ to the reformation, was there a movement successful enough in saying...

            ....in saying "there is no one true church", the "church isnt an institution", and "all outside the church may be saved assuredly"?

            Does it make sense God would just sit for 1400 years and not correct something leading millions of people into error and possibly hell?

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Does it make sense God would just sit for 1400 years and not correct something leading millions of people into error and possibly hell?

            (See tmstmp 13:16)

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nothing says "Christian" quite like being part of a denomination that looks nothing like early Christianity

        >Infant baptism
        Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)

        https://toeternity.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Infant-Baptism.pdf

        >Baptismal regeneration
        "Clement of Rome, Ignatius of Antioch and Polycarp are silent on the issue,[8] however the Epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermas, Theophilus, Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian among others connected following Christ in baptism with salvation.[9][10] Baptismal regeneration was also affirmed by Origen[11] and Augustine.[12] "

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptismal_regeneration#Early_Church

        >Sola Scriptura
        "So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold on to the traditions which you were taught, whether by word of mouth or by letter from us." (2 Thessalonians 2:15)

        >"All Scripture is inspired by God and beneficial for teaching, for rebuke, for correction, for training in righteousness;" (2 Timothy 3:16)

        Where in this quote does it say 'scripture ALONE' or does it say scripture is 'sufficient'. The adjective/descriptive word 'beneficial' in greek is: ὠφέλιμος (ophelimos). Which is a conjugation of "ophelos", which means "profit" or "advantage" in all contexts found.
        https://biblehub.com/greek/3786.htm
        The only adjective for what scripture says to do is "profit" "advtantage", where does it say "sufficient"?

        No where does a verse say that scripture is "sufficient": https://www.openbible.info/topics/sufficiency_of_scripture

        The greek word for "alone" is "monon", https://biblehub.com/greek/monon_3440.htm. Can you find a verse where it says "scripture alone" or "what is written alone" is to be followed or god breathed? Infact, where does it say scripture is the only "god breathed" authority? https://biblehub.com/greek/2315.htm

        Can you find that?

        Furthermore, where in scripture does it say "the Gospel of Thomas" is not scripture? Do you have a verse for that? What makes the Gospel of Thomas, Epistula Apostolorum, not scripture?

        Afterall, they both claim authorship of the apostles? Does this not satisfy the "deposit of faith"? Oh, and, wait a minute! What makes the epistle of Hebrews scripture? Was it written by Paul. If not, why is it scripture? Where in scripture does it say that it is God breathed? Where does it say Acts or Luke for the matter is scripture! After all, it was written by Luke the Evangelist. NOT Luke the apostle.

        Or, does all your 'scripture' rest on tradition. And if it rests on tradition, then is not the canon infalliable? After all, "scripture interprets scripture" and "scripture alone is the final authority".

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm Baptist and my church teaches that neither communion nor baptism saves. maybe I was blessed with a decent leader group of pastors and elders?

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Braindead denomination (Im not Lutheran btw):

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    online jesuits really like to make themselves obvious

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Better safe than sorry. “Protestants” just have an over-fear of God perhaps.

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Going on a date with a catboy is not banned in Catholicism?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *