Why not be RC or EO? Why accept the Bible that was put together by the early church, but not accept their traditions or liturgical practices? Help me not go RC or EO
Much of Protestantism is probably just altered or reinterpreted versions of selected Christian traditions depending on how it's looked at.
>>23825875Always Ready by Greg BahnsenIt's similar to In Defense of the Faith by Van Til, but with easier language. I highly recommend Bahnsen's lectures, they're probably exactly what you're looking for. Also check out Walter Martin.
>>23825875>Why accept the Bible that was put together by the early churchNow that I actually read your question, I wonder if it was asked in good faith. The early church didn't put the Bible together; the canon established the church.>not accept their traditions or liturgical practicesFor several reasons, one being that traditions were already warped and by the 2nd century i.e. read Irenaeus. We know that the Bible is God's word and even Orthodox Christians will tell you that it contains everything necessary for one to attain salvation. Moreover, the New Testament condemns the Pharasee for following the traditions of men over scripture. Btw, Speaking of the Orthodox, Jay Dyer plagiarized his entire apologetic from Bahnsen. "Ethics, Epistemology, and Metaphysics." Strange how the most bulletproof apologetic emerged from Reformed theologians. To leave Protestantism for Catholicism or "Orthodoxy" before discovering Bahnsen and Van Til would be a real shame.
>>23826379This anon makes a good point. The only gatekeeper to accepting salvation is the self.
Christ was humble, I don't get why his church has dudes wearing gold chains and jeweled rings and crowns and shit.. like that's crazy..
>>23826722Well humble is definitely the wrong word but you get the point.. like do you really need to even get into apologetics to want to distance yourself from those people if you're a true believer of scripture
>>23826379Can you recommend any reading material?I want to continue being a Protestant but I feel like the church gave us the canon. If they put together the Bible, why not follow their other teachings. I want to read more than this but everything has been less than satisfying.This question is in good faith.
>>23825875Dune
>>23825875Just read the reformers. After all, they wrote intending to answer exactly these types of questions.>Formula of Concord>Augsburg Confession>Helvetic Confessions>Scots Confession>The Heidelberg Catechism>Institutes of the Christian Religion>Luther's Commentaries>The Bondage of the Will>On True and False Religion>Arndt's True ChristianityThen go on and read some of the newer guys like Bavinck and Schleiermacher.
>>23827971>reading materialPossibly "Finding the Right Hill to Die On" by Gavin Ortlund. He's a PhD and has a youtube channel dedicated to giving Protestants reassurance. https://youtu.be/EBAK_Oc6SsI?si=NihzZUEc_YMon1d9I second what anon >>23828030 said, especially Luther's selection from his early writing, even though I don't agree with Luther on everything. I'd also add in the Westminster Confession.>why not follow their other teachingsThere's several different churches claiming to be "the one true church" and all have different liturgical practices. Maybe read pic related which has epistles from Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp so you can get a feel for what the earliest Christians believed. You'll find that they don't mention many of the traditions that churches today deem necessary. I've seen Eastern Orthodox and Protestants both appeal to Against Heresies by Irenaeus to bolster their position because there's a lot of nuance, but Irenaeus says that heretics have always appealed to tradition to subvert doctrine.
>>23825875The bible.Nothing condemns the Catholic heresy like reading the bible The "early church" is an imperial abomination.Wycliff? Good enough to get the ball rolling
>>23828390>>23828030What was it that convinced you Protestantism was the best course of action?
>>23829156Reading the Bible; and people telling me that my faith is inadequate unless I join their church, which is contrary to what Jesus and Paul taught. See John 3:15-18 also>Ephesians 2:8-9: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God - so that no one can boast.”We are saved by God's grace, not because we did a "good work" in picking the church we think is right. Therefore I pay no mind to the claims made by modern day Pharisees with subverted cultish clergies. I'd rather trust what's written in the Bible than in mere men trying to monopolize the body of Christ.
>>23825875The problem with Protestants is they're too Catholic. You should be independent, fundamental, King James-only, old hymns of the faith, soul-winning, radical ring-wing, conservative, chicken-eatin' baptist since baptists actually believe the Word of God as the authority rather than man and man's traditions and man's creeds as the authority.You might not be able to find a church with all of the check boxes, but it should be King James only since modern and catholic versions are really perversions of the word and translated from the wrong manuscripts anyway, it should be going out and winning souls, it should be fundamental and take the Bible seriously, it should have the old hymns of the faith instead of worldly music like the rock show fun centers you get with new evangelicals, charismaniacs, and many non-denom churches.Some other things to look for are family-integrated church services, it should do hard preaching, expository preaching, and topical preaching. No church or pastor is going to be perfect, since they're just sinful men too (but pastors should be men, and also married and have kids, since those are some requirements, you can look at the pastoral epistles for more details). The New Testament also teaches local churches rather than an organization which can be silenced on certain topics by pressuring its leaders or going above the pastor of the church to complain about a sermon.>>23827971>the church gave us the canon.They didn't give the Bible, God did. The Bible says all scripture is given by inspiration of God, not inspiration of a bunch of Roman Pagans putting a veneer of Christianity over their pagan rituals like infant "baptism" (baptism is full immersion and after getting saved, Acts 8:37) or idolatry and "queen of heaven" worship. Every book was written before Constantine started the Roman Cult, and if you want to believe the lie of Peter being a pope--well, he wasn't infallible--and most books were still written before him. Christ is the rock, God is the rock of salvation, not a man; especially not a literal antichrist like someone taking the name "vicar of Christ".>>23826403Jesus talked about people preventing others from entering heaven by their religion, and making them twofold more a child of hell than themselves. That would be anyone who preaches a different gospel than salvation by grace through faith.Every single false religion in the world includes works in salvation somehow. They either openly proclaim works are necessary or they backload works and claim you must work to maintain or they'll say "a saving faith has works" but the Bible says to him that worketh not but believeth, his faith is counted for righteousness in Romans 4 which also explains James 2 which the Lordship salvationists and other heretics twist.If you think you can lose your salvation, you're not saved. Because when it comes down to it, anyone who believes they can lose their salvation is trusting in their works to save them.
>>23830065I'd rather keep being "too Catholic." Better papist than calvinist
>>23830065>If you think you can lose your salvation, you're not saved.Exactly, if you "lost" your salvation you never had it to begin with.
>>23825875If you're a white man you should be inherently distrustful of guinea decadence.
