Protestantism might just be Christianity

[Distruzio]

First, I am a protestant Christian, and I have similar concerns about Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians as you have about me.

Here's why: The Catholic Church (for instance) has changed its traditions. Some things, such as indulgences and the execution of heretics, it has fortunately left behind. However, this means that the authority of the Popes contradicts. We also know that some popes (such as the Borgias) were pretty nasty and unchristian. So tradition fails us as tradition changes. The authority of men on earth to speak God's word turns out to be corruptible, and unlike the prophets of old, there's no handy rule about stoning those who get prophecies wrong (nor should there be).

What doesn't change though? The bible. It stays constant. But aha! What translation to choose? Well, the bible as it was originally written stays constant. Sadly, there are some problems with translating and even transcribing 2-4 thousand year old documents written in ancient languages. Sometimes numbers don't add up (which is not surprising, considering how rough Hebrew is when it comes to numbers). So the bibles we should use are the bibles that provide the most accurate translations. At best, we'd read it in the original languages.

The thing is that some church traditions are correct (such as the Trinity), and I know this to be so because the bible makes many statements that back up this position. Other practices, like praying to saints or Mary, aren't so easily backed up by Scripture. In fact, the bible is pretty clear about who we should be praying to, and that's God.

As for putting ourselves above God or His authority for believing in the bible, I disagree. To put a man above the bible seems even more dangerous. To add to the bible seems even more dangerous. If anything, it takes humility to submit to the Word of God however little we understand it and whether or not we agree with it. I don't claim to know it all for sure. I just claim to know the important bits because the bible (which I believe is true for a variety of reasons) says so.

So what about Christians who we think have it wrong (in our infinite wisdom)? Well, you don't have to have perfect theology to be a Christian. If you do, we're all in big trouble. There are some (non-exhaustive) important things though:

- One God.
- Jesus is God in the Flesh (oh, here we get into Trinity stuff...)
- People are sinful, God is not
- Jesus was born of a virgin
- Jesus died on the cross
- Jesus rose from the dead three days later
- His sacrifice provides us the only way we can be saved from our sins
- All of this in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, thus completing a thread begun at Adam

Paul was once asked by a jailer in Acts 16, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
Paul answered, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved."

Putting our trust in Jesus Christ the Son of God is all it really takes. The rest is just coming to a fuller, more wonderful relationship with God.

This goes quite a long way in doing precisely what I asked for in the OP. Rather than trumpeting "nu uh!" like so many others, you actually took the time to answer. I appreciate that.

[Lalaki]

All Protestant denominations have their own take on Christianity. I understand arguments about apostolic succession and the history of Christianity. However, Catholic Christians and Orthodox Christians have different interpretations of these very things. Under your framework, it would make sense to only endorse one church over all, as only one approach can be 100 percent correct. And that is something I wouldn't want to do.

You're mistaken. Neither the Catholic nor Orthodox maintain opposing interpretations of apastolic succession or the history of Christianity. We both agree. Where we differ is the authority of the Pope over other bishops, the filioque, and certain innovative and recent dogmatic statements (that are held in minor contempt as these dogmatic statements have yet to be exercised to any great degree). In this capacity, I cannot nor would I make a claim that this or that expression of Christianity is the true expression. From my perspective, the legalistic mind is attracted to Catholicism (both Anglo- and Roman) and the mystical mind is attracted to Orthodoxy (both Eastern and Oriental).

The anarchist mind is attracted to Protestantism.

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

[The 93rd Coalition]

First, I am a protestant Christian, and I have similar concerns about Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians as you have about me.

Here's why: The Catholic Church (for instance) has changed its traditions. Some things, such as indulgences and the execution of heretics, it has fortunately left behind. However, this means that the authority of the Popes contradicts. We also know that some popes (such as the Borgias) were pretty nasty and unchristian. So tradition fails us as tradition changes. The authority of men on earth to speak God's word turns out to be corruptible, and unlike the prophets of old, there's no handy rule about stoning those who get prophecies wrong (nor should there be).

What doesn't change though? The bible. It stays constant. But aha! What translation to choose? Well, the bible as it was originally written stays constant. Sadly, there are some problems with translating and even transcribing 2-4 thousand year old documents written in ancient languages. Sometimes numbers don't add up (which is not surprising, considering how rough Hebrew is when it comes to numbers). So the bibles we should use are the bibles that provide the most accurate translations. At best, we'd read it in the original languages.

The thing is that some church traditions are correct (such as the Trinity), and I know this to be so because the bible makes many statements that back up this position. Other practices, like praying to saints or Mary, aren't so easily backed up by Scripture. In fact, the bible is pretty clear about who we should be praying to, and that's God.

As for putting ourselves above God or His authority for believing in the bible, I disagree. To put a man above the bible seems even more dangerous. To add to the bible seems even more dangerous. If anything, it takes humility to submit to the Word of God however little we understand it and whether or not we agree with it. I don't claim to know it all for sure. I just claim to know the important bits because the bible (which I believe is true for a variety of reasons) says so.

So what about Christians who we think have it wrong (in our infinite wisdom)? Well, you don't have to have perfect theology to be a Christian. If you do, we're all in big trouble. There are some (non-exhaustive) important things though:

- One God.
- Jesus is God in the Flesh (oh, here we get into Trinity stuff...)
- People are sinful, God is not
- Jesus was born of a virgin
- Jesus died on the cross
- Jesus rose from the dead three days later
- His sacrifice provides us the only way we can be saved from our sins
- All of this in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, thus completing a thread begun at Adam

Paul was once asked by a jailer in Acts 16, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
Paul answered, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved."

Putting our trust in Jesus Christ the Son of God is all it really takes. The rest is just coming to a fuller, more wonderful relationship with God.

This. Exactly this.

This too.

[Todlichebujoku]

First, I am a protestant Christian, and I have similar concerns about Catholics and Eastern Orthodox Christians as you have about me.

Here's why: The Catholic Church (for instance) has changed its traditions. Some things, such as indulgences and the execution of heretics, it has fortunately left behind. However, this means that the authority of the Popes contradicts. We also know that some popes (such as the Borgias) were pretty nasty and unchristian. So tradition fails us as tradition changes. The authority of men on earth to speak God's word turns out to be corruptible, and unlike the prophets of old, there's no handy rule about stoning those who get prophecies wrong (nor should there be).

What doesn't change though? The bible. It stays constant. But aha! What translation to choose? Well, the bible as it was originally written stays constant. Sadly, there are some problems with translating and even transcribing 2-4 thousand year old documents written in ancient languages. Sometimes numbers don't add up (which is not surprising, considering how rough Hebrew is when it comes to numbers). So the bibles we should use are the bibles that provide the most accurate translations. At best, we'd read it in the original languages.

The thing is that some church traditions are correct (such as the Trinity), and I know this to be so because the bible makes many statements that back up this position. Other practices, like praying to saints or Mary, aren't so easily backed up by Scripture. In fact, the bible is pretty clear about who we should be praying to, and that's God.

As for putting ourselves above God or His authority for believing in the bible, I disagree. To put a man above the bible seems even more dangerous. To add to the bible seems even more dangerous. If anything, it takes humility to submit to the Word of God however little we understand it and whether or not we agree with it. I don't claim to know it all for sure. I just claim to know the important bits because the bible (which I believe is true for a variety of reasons) says so.

So what about Christians who we think have it wrong (in our infinite wisdom)? Well, you don't have to have perfect theology to be a Christian. If you do, we're all in big trouble. There are some (non-exhaustive) important things though:

- One God.
- Jesus is God in the Flesh (oh, here we get into Trinity stuff...)
- People are sinful, God is not
- Jesus was born of a virgin
- Jesus died on the cross
- Jesus rose from the dead three days later
- His sacrifice provides us the only way we can be saved from our sins
- All of this in fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy, thus completing a thread begun at Adam

Paul was once asked by a jailer in Acts 16, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"
Paul answered, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved."

Putting our trust in Jesus Christ the Son of God is all it really takes. The rest is just coming to a fuller, more wonderful relationship with God.

This goes quite a long way in doing precisely what I asked for in the OP. Rather than trumpeting "nu uh!" like so many others, you actually took the time to answer. I appreciate that.

I hope this means you will provide a response that actually holds some water.

[Bolrieg]

Yep that's religion for you "If you don't worship our specific method of worship at this specific style of place you're going to go to hell" It's never been about faith in a deity it's always been about profit and power. If you're religious read your holy book for yourself and do whatever it is you interpret from it, as long as it isn't hurting others, don't just pay someone to read it for you as quite often they have their own agendas.

[Neo Rome Republic]

You're mistaken. Neither the Catholic nor Orthodox maintain opposing interpretations of apastolic succession or the history of Christianity. We both agree. Where we differ is the authority of the Pope over other bishops, the filioque, and certain innovative and recent dogmatic statements (that are held in minor contempt as these dogmatic statements have yet to be exercised to any great degree). In this capacity, I cannot nor would I make a claim that this or that expression of Christianity is the true expression. From my perspective, the legalistic mind is attracted to Catholicism (both Anglo- and Roman) and the mystical mind is attracted to Orthodoxy (both Eastern and Oriental).

The anarchist mind is attracted to Protestantism.

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

People may not act the same way, in one area of life, that they do in another.(Not siding with OP, btw).

[Parhe]

This goes quite a long way in doing precisely what I asked for in the OP. Rather than trumpeting "nu uh!" like so many others, you actually took the time to answer. I appreciate that.

Not surprising, seeing as the OP is basically just saying "you aren't what you believe you are" with a condescending attitude using arguments that need to be interpreted and are only clear to the ones that are "in."

[Mesrane]

Yep that's religion for you "If you don't worship our specific method of worship at this specific style of place you're going to go to hell" It's never been about faith in a deity it's always been about profit and power. If you're religious read your holy book for yourself and do whatever it is you interpret from it, as long as it isn't hurting others, don't just pay someone to read it for you as quite often they have their own agendas.

Nooo. Protestants don't think Catholics or Jews will go to hell. And you could flip that. Jews don't think Catholics or Protestants will go to hell for not being Jewish. Of course, there are always the nutjobs, like the Islamist extremists.

[Tlik]

Once you all have figured out a consistent definition of Christian come tell me please, it is kinda hard keeping track.

Someone who can acknowledge the nicene creed as authoritative. The apostles creed is also an alternative definition.

And every church that I know of acknowledges both the Nicene and Apostolic creeds, and many include the third one as well that I can't remember the name of. Your definition includes Protestants. Try again.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Yep that's religion for you "If you don't worship our specific method of worship at this specific style of place you're going to go to hell" It's never been about faith in a deity it's always been about profit and power. If you're religious read your holy book for yourself and do whatever it is you interpret from it, as long as it isn't hurting others, don't just pay someone to read it for you as quite often they have their own agendas.

Nooo. Protestants don't think Catholics or Jews will go to hell. And you could flip that. Jews don't think Catholics or Protestants will go to hell for not being Jewish. Of course, there are always the nutjobs, like the Islamist extremists.

Well some Protestants probably do, since Protestantism isn't a united body, but a term for many different denominations that share the similar origins, but nothing more.

[Mesrane]

This goes quite a long way in doing precisely what I asked for in the OP. Rather than trumpeting "nu uh!" like so many others, you actually took the time to answer. I appreciate that.

Not surprising, seeing as the OP is basically just saying "you aren't what you believe you are" with a condescending attitude using arguments that need to be interpreted and are only clear to the ones that are "in."

Yeah, Distruzio, you are basically calling Protestants people-who-are-Catholic/Orthodox-but-don't-recognize-it.

[Avenio]

That's more than a bit of an oversimplification of the Protestant Reformation. There was as much secular politics involved in the wars and upheavals associated with the Reformation as there was in the English Reformation, and yet you bend over backwards to try and wave away the English Reformation as being superficial and 'political'. That suggests that you're more interested in finding a reason to accept the Anglicans (whose aesthetics you agree with) as Christians and find the rest of Protestants (whose aesthetics you don't like) not Christians than you are in actually having a historically-informed viewpoint.

... there might be some truth that I like the aesthetics of the Anglo-Catholics but you're raising a non sequitur, here. I didn't delve into the ins and outs of why I accept Anglo-Catholics but reject other Protestants because that wasn't the subject. If that's something you're interested in, you could just ask. The OP was clearly about what I said.

The topic of the thread is why you don't consider Protestants to be Christians. The fact that you explicitly make an exception for Anglicans - who are self-identifying Protestants - is perfectly relevant to the thread. Doubly so considering that your reasoning for rejecting the rest of Protestantism is that they represent a theological departure from the rest of Catholicism while simultaneously glossing over Anglicanism's departure as being merely political.

[Mesrane]

Nooo. Protestants don't think Catholics or Jews will go to hell. And you could flip that. Jews don't think Catholics or Protestants will go to hell for not being Jewish. Of course, there are always the nutjobs, like the Islamist extremists.

Well some Protestants probably do, since Protestantism isn't a united body, but a term for many different denominations that share the similar origins, but nothing more.

Don't get me wrong, there is the odd insane pastor who might think that, but then the same goes for the odd Catholic or Orthodox priest who thinks the same thing. And the odd Rabbi and so forth. There are always outliers. But the vast majority of Christians do not think that people of other religions will go to hell for not being Christian, which was my main point.

[Ayreonia]

You're mistaken. Neither the Catholic nor Orthodox maintain opposing interpretations of apastolic succession or the history of Christianity. We both agree. Where we differ is the authority of the Pope over other bishops, the filioque, and certain innovative and recent dogmatic statements (that are held in minor contempt as these dogmatic statements have yet to be exercised to any great degree). In this capacity, I cannot nor would I make a claim that this or that expression of Christianity is the true expression. From my perspective, the legalistic mind is attracted to Catholicism (both Anglo- and Roman) and the mystical mind is attracted to Orthodoxy (both Eastern and Oriental).

The anarchist mind is attracted to Protestantism.

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

The US isn't the world. In Europe, Protestant states are often more socially and culturally liberal than Catholic or Orthodox ones.

[Archegnum]

Hi there!

I am Distruzio, NSG's resident American Royalist (former anarcho-capitalist/anarcho-monarchist) and libertarian monarchist (although paleomonarchist would be more accurate). I am also an Eastern Orthodox Christian.

For those of you unfamiliar, the Orthodox Church along with the Latin/Roman (Catholic), Oriental Orthodox, and Anglo- Catholic Churches (although this is hotly contested, I admit that this particularity is my own perspective and should not be considered the universal position of all the Eastern, Oriental, Latin/Roman, or even the Anglo-Catholics*), can show, through Apostolic Succession, inheritance of the spiritual, ecclesiastical and sacramental authority, power, and responsibility that were conferred upon the Disciples by the Apostles - who, in turn, received their spiritual authority from Jesus Christ. In other words, it was the Orthodox, and those previously mentioned, who wrote the New Testament (all authors of the individual books within the NT were Orthodox/Catholic priests and bishops) and compiled/cannonized the Bible into the book we all know today. It was us who handed down the Creed and established what a Christian is to believe and how a Christian is to believe in order to avoid heresy against the Faith and Word.

*'Anglo-Catholic' is the term I will here be using to describe those Christians within both the Anglican Communion and within the Continuing Anglican Tradition

We - those mentioned above - are not, however, sola scripturists.

Many Christians consider the Protestants mere schismatics - not necessarily heretics. I however, struggle to maintain even this modicum of neutrality on the status of Protestantism and Christianity and I, quite often, give in to the temptation to label Protestants, by and large, idolators. More specifically, bibliolators - worshippers of the Bible. They, in my opinion, deny the authority of Christ and the Holy Spirit - they deny God and supplant him with themselves.

This thread will be my attempt to explain this position in order to both avoid future threadjacks and better organize my thoughts on the matter. But before I delve into the meat of the topic, I should make some very important disclaimers: I do not dismiss Protestants (or members of any other faith or lack thereof) as though they are unworthy of redemption, salvation, or propriety; I do not think ill of the Protestant tradition or faiths; and, finally, I am aware that, in this regard, I am a bigot towards Protestants. I do not shy from this label; but I am aware of the issues it raises both for my faithful expression of Christianity and for my relationships with individual Protestants. I confess but repentance is something that comes hard for me. It's a weakness.

This weakness is the purpose of this thread: I hope that someone will finally be able to argue me out of this stubborn refusal to acknowledge Protestant traditions as part of Christianity. In order to do this, however, I must lay out precisely why it is that I believe that Protestantism is not Christianity.

So let me be very clear: this is not a topic attacking the character or individual traits of any particular Protestant or Protestant denomination. Such things do not, necessarily, a Christian make or unmake. You are not Christian because you're a "good" person. You are not Christian because you "believe" that Christ exists/existed. Therefore, merely being a "good" Lutheran or a "good" Presbyterian is not a justifiable reason to proclaim oneself a Christian. No one would say that a "good" atheist counts as a Christian, would they? Why not? Because the atheist, in being labelled atheist, is merely expressing their faith/lack of faith. To say that the atheists of the world "are not Christian" is no more an insult than saying they "are not firetrucks." They simply aren't. And saying this, in no way, is a reflection of their individual character or the value of their beliefs or lack of beliefs. So, too, is the statement that Protestants are not Christian.

I'm not saying that Protestants are going to hell. I'm saying that Protestants aren't firetrucks. I'm saying that firetrucks aren't Christian.

A Protestant is, in large part, an individual who rejects the authority of Apostolic Succession, the Patriarchal Consensus, and the Holy Tradition that so defines the history of Christianity. My argument is not, necessarily, that the Protestant is not Christian because of theological and doctrinal conflicts but, rather, that the Protestant is not Christian because the Protestant, by definition rejects basic historical fact concerning the Church, issues of theology and science, and social milieus and outlooks.

How many critics of fundamentalist nutbags stand in awe of just how disconnected from reality they seem? From my perspective, I see the same thing with all Protestants - however wonderful and beautiful they may be, to say they are Christian is to deny reality. Not that all Protestants are fundamentalist nutbags, mind you. It's just that they're doing themselves and Christians the world over a great disservice to say, "I'm a Christian but that Pope guy? Fuck him. Also? Fuck Mary. And Icons. And Peter. And anything looking like 'tradition'. Fuck it all."

The reality is that that "Pope guy" is a very real authority. As are all Bishops. As is the Church - that physical entity that safeguarded the scriptures for centuries until consensus could be found on just which scriptures were to be relevant to the message of Christ. Jesus didn't burst from His mothers womb with a complete Bible in hand and thump it from the corner at every passing stranger. The Bible didn't exist. For nearly a thousand years the Bible did not exist as we know it. In fact, the Bible that Protestants use is not the Christian Bible at all. It's different. As different as the Satanic Bible is from the Koran. Sure there are books and characters within that can be found in other holy books and traditions but, the fact remains, changing the message of the scripture by removing entire books and inconvenient verses changes the thing utterly.

Would we argue that the cliffs notes version of Romeo and Juliet is the same thing as the actual script for the play?

What I'm saying is that only those who profess the one universal Faith and are united with the Mystical Body of Christ (the Church) are members of the Church of Christ. Only those individuals can legitimately bear the title of Christian.

With the exception of Anglo-Catholicism (which started as a political dispute between England and Rome), Protestantism was a rebellion against Christian theology and biblical history 1500 years old at the time. The Protestant rejects Peter and the other Apostles but accepts Christ. How can one be a Christian by doing this? A Protestant, therefore, is no mere schismatic - they are a heretic. They are as much a heretic against Christianity as the Christian is a heretic against Judaism.

But, of course, I'm failing to justify this argument in the only rhetoric a Protestant will understand. No matter how logical and verbose I make myself, the Protestant is a sola scripturist. The Protestant believes that "if the Bible says it, it's true." So what do I do? Which Bible do I use? Of course my Bible will justify my argument. So how about the Protestant Bible?

He who hears you [Peter] hears me, and he who rejects you, rejects me, and he who rejects me, rejects him who sent me (Lk 10:16).

And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven (Matt 16:19).

If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed (Gal 1: 9).

These three verses seem to be very clear. If even the Protestant Bible argues in favor of the collegiate of Bishops that typifies Christianity, then what is the Christian to do? How should we react to the assertion that Protestantism is Christianity? How do we respond to someone who denies the authority of the Chair of Peter (although the Orthodox remain in schism with Rome, we do not deny the authority of the Pope - we merely point out that his authority does not extend over other bishops and patriarchs)?

By rejecting that assertion.

So, if I am saying that the Protestant is not Christian, then how do I treat Protestants?

With respect. The same way I treat the democratist and the homophobe - respectfully. I'm not a dick. I am a bigot. A Protestant is not a Christian.

Can you dissuade me? I hope so. Because this perspective puts me at odds with a large swath of both Orthodox and Catholic believers. The Orthodox Church teaches that Protestants are heretical Christians. To my mind, a heretical Christian is not a Christian. They are a heretic. This is a failing of mine, I'm sure of it. It's a good thing Jesus forgives me - because I don't. Maybe that's my ego refusing to step aside? I don't know. I can only hope that someone can figure out a way to break through my stubbornness and convince me that Protestantism is a part of Christianity. Until you can though, I'm convinced that a firetruck better fits the definition.

Hello!

I am a Protestant. To be more specific, an evangelical Protestant.

I have to say that I am no expert on history, biblical or otherwise. However, from what I have heard and learned, the Protestant movement was a breakaway from the Roman Catholic Church (well, dur). Their reason (I mean true Protestants, not those who did it for convenience like Henry VIII) I believe, was that they believed that the Pope and his Bishops, Abbots etc had been given more power than what Christ had commanded. Apparently it had something to do with the increase in Bibles translated into Europeans native languages rather than Latin, bringing access to the Word to everyone. Some people (e.g. Martin Luther), when reading these translated Bibles, realized that the Pope had been introducing new laws etc into Christianity that were not stated in Scripture, which suggested that the Pope himself was not following the very verse you quoted:

If any man preaches any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed (Gal 1: 9)

This evidently rather irritated some people(!), leading to the growth of Protestantism in Western Europe. Essentially, people thought Catholicism was wandering away from Biblical truth, and were trying to get back to what Christ had originally said.

I apologise for what is likely a very flawed and badly written history - sorry

By the way, I don't think denominations mean much nowadays. Some people I knew from my own denomination (evangelicalism) were very clearly not saved, sadly. I believe what the Bible says (at least the versions I read, NIV, SEV, etc.), that to be saved you must repent and follow Jesus. Anyone who has done so, I believe to be saved.

I hope I have help to persuade you that Protestantism is part of Christianity, although you have heard my own doubts about the denominations.

Do you know where I could get hold of a Catholic Bible? If it is so different from a Protestant one, I would like to read it and see the differences.

Thanks for reading

[Lalaki]

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

The US isn't the world. In Europe, Protestant states are often more socially and culturally liberal than Catholic or Orthodox ones.

I was more countering his last sentence. I didn't intend for it to be a stand-alone argument.

[The Union of the West]

No True Scotsman. [/thread]

^ This.

Also, a question for you, Distruzio: If a Protestant is not a Christian, what is a Protestant?

[Tlik]

Well some Protestants probably do, since Protestantism isn't a united body, but a term for many different denominations that share the similar origins, but nothing more.

Don't get me wrong, there is the odd insane pastor who might think that, but then the same goes for the odd Catholic or Orthodox priest who thinks the same thing. And the odd Rabbi and so forth. There are always outliers. But the vast majority of Christians do not think that people of other religions will go to hell for not being Christian, which was my main point.

The vast majority of Christians, as far as I am aware, do believe that. Universalism, at least within the Protestant denominations, is a highly controversial theme. Of course, what Hell consists of, and what sort of punishments are administered is very much up for debate, but the whole "I am the way, truth, light" thing is generally considered to be fairly exacting.

[Ahvulon]

One thing that concerns me about the Catholic Church is how you pray to men? Other than that, I can almost guarantee some Catholics are heaven-bound others are hell-bound, but that's with nearly any sect within Christianity.

As long as you follow what the Bible says about it:

Accept Jesus as your savior
Live your life as the Bible instructs
Pray to God
(Those are the basics)

Then yes, you're a Christian. Many attend Churches, and recognize THE 'Church' as a spiritual authority, not a physical one.

[Parhe]

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

The US isn't the world. In Europe, Protestant states are often more socially and culturally liberal than Catholic or Orthodox ones.

To be fair though the US has the world's largest protestant population, and I believe about equal to that of Europe. So yeah, generalizing Protestantism at the "anarchist mind" is a bit misleading. Though yes it does differ by location. In Korea for example Christians in general tend to be more liberal than expected.

[Neo Rome Republic]

Well some Protestants probably do, since Protestantism isn't a united body, but a term for many different denominations that share the similar origins, but nothing more.

Don't get me wrong, there is the odd insane pastor who might think that, but then the same goes for the odd Catholic or Orthodox priest who thinks the same thing. And the odd Rabbi and so forth. There are always outliers. But the vast majority of Christians do not think that people of other religions will go to hell for not being Christian, which was my main point.

You sure it's the "vast majority"? While I agree that all Christians don't think alike. I'm not sure the Fundies are really that small of a group. Though I never mentioned a specific percentage to begin with.

[Todlichebujoku]

Look at Protestantism in the United States. Many tough-minded conservatives are Protestant, firmly believing in a traditionalist interpretation of the Constitution.

The US isn't the world. In Europe, Protestant states are often more socially and culturally liberal than Catholic or Orthodox ones.

Mexico is Catholic and most of Canada is Protestant as well, echoing Europe.

[Ahvulon]

Well some Protestants probably do, since Protestantism isn't a united body, but a term for many different denominations that share the similar origins, but nothing more.

Don't get me wrong, there is the odd insane pastor who might think that, but then the same goes for the odd Catholic or Orthodox priest who thinks the same thing. And the odd Rabbi and so forth. There are always outliers. But the vast majority of Christians do not think that people of other religions will go to hell for not being Christian, which was my main point.

Actually, doesn't the Bible say unless you accept Jesus Christ as your savior and live a Christian life, then you will? Other religions worship other gods, which is a sin in the eyes of God, and no sin will enter into Heaven.

[Mesrane]

One thing that concerns me about the Catholic Church is how you pray to men? Other than that, I can almost guarantee some Catholics are heaven-bound others are hell-bound, but that's with nearly any sect within Christianity.

As long as you follow what the Bible says about it:

Accept Jesus as your savior
Live your life as the Bible instructs
Pray to God
(Those are the basics)

Then yes, you're a Christian. Many attend Churches, and recognize THE 'Church' as a spiritual authority, not a physical one.

Yes. The Bible says to pray to God and no other.

[Mesrane]

Don't get me wrong, there is the odd insane pastor who might think that, but then the same goes for the odd Catholic or Orthodox priest who thinks the same thing. And the odd Rabbi and so forth. There are always outliers. But the vast majority of Christians do not think that people of other religions will go to hell for not being Christian, which was my main point.

Actually, doesn't the Bible say unless you accept Jesus Christ as your savior and live a Christian life, then you will? Other religions worship other gods, which is a sin in the eyes of God, and no sin will enter into Heaven.

Well, I stand corrected.