Why do Protestants think that they R closer to the early Christians when the early Christians were Catholics?

Question

If one reads the writings of the early Christians (not talking about the heretics), one will find that they believed all of the things that only Catholics believe today.

Answer 1

Because that's what they are brainwashed into thinking from their Southern styled church groups...
they are intimidated by the antiquity of Catholicism.

Answer 2

This is right up my alley as a history scholar who studies religion and Europe, with an emphasis on the Reformation amongst other things. Let me say up front that I am NOT trying to say whether or not Protestants or Catholics are right or wrong. My personal belief is that all major religions are valid in their own way.

The fact is that what you say is not necessarily true. The earliest Christians were not Catholics OR Protestants. Catholicism developed from the earliest Christians over a hundred years later, and even then only in specific locations (Eastern Orthodox Chrisitans would argue that THEY are closer to the earliest Christians). In addition to this, what constituted Catholicism in 300 AD is not the same as what constituted Catholicism at the time of the Reformation, which is when Protestants broke away from the Catholic church, nor is it the same as what Catholicism is right now.

When Protestants first broke away, they did so in response to aspects of Catholicism that developed AFTER the Catholic church first began. Some of the sacraments, the idea of purgatory, the authority of the Pope, and the use of indulgences at the time were things that were not in the Bible and did not originate with the earliest Christians. I am not questioning the validity of these things myself, but this is what the early Lutherans and Calvinists were fighting against. They believed that the earliest Christians shared a much more humble and simple worship experience than the Catholic Church was implementing. Their goal was to mimic the earliest Christians, as is described in the New Testament. You can argue whether or not they were any more successful, but that was their intention.

Much of the hostility, however, may have little to do with religious dogma. The fact is that at the time of the Reformation, the Pope and the Catholic church had a large bulk of political power. It may well be this that the Protestants were fighting against, moreso than the religious ideals. Upon their breaking away from the Church, many violent attempts to stamp them out occurred, resulting in hundreds of years of warfare all over the world. I cannot say as a fact, but I suspect the hatred that bred from these circumstances caused many Protestants to feel disdainful toward the Church, and vice versa.

In the end, you can read all the writings of the early Christians that you want, and they will appear to support your point of view. Protestants will read the same texts and come to completely different conclusions. Cultural historical, and societal biases permeate our perceptions. That is the nature of belief systems.

Answer 3

The Douay-Rheims Bible is the main precise English translation that exists, having been taken directly from the Latin Vulgate translation of St. Jerome, and for that reason is between the main suitable for serious pupils of the Bible. yet it actual isn't the least puzzling interpreting. For elementary on a regular basis interpreting, a translation like the hot American is a lot much less puzzling to study. by the form, the King James is the poorest English translation nevertheless in subject-loose use, with greater desirable than 3,500 translational blunders.

Answer 4

Where are you getting your information from? There was no "Pope" or even the concept of a Pope for over 400 years of Christianity, and then it came about slowly, and has never been universally accepted. Papal infallibility? No! The sale of ecclesiastical office (Simony)? No! Confession, Conformation, Infant baptism, Prayers to Mary or other "Saints?" No! Peter as the Bishop of Rome (1st Pope)? No!

You are not even close. Read eusebius' "Ecclesiastical History" for starters. Then Fox's "Book of Martyers." You might consider reading the New Testament also. You might learn something.

Answer 5

I'm afraid I must disagree with you. The early Christians were not Catholics. That came later. The early Christians did not follow many of the teachings of the Catholic church; teachings that appear nowhere in the Bible. Even the Catholic church itself admits that many of its rites and rituals came from a merging with worldly philosophies and non-Christian practices.

Answer 6

Actually the most early Christians were gnostic whom the Catholic church labeled as heretics and persecuted. There is not a christian denomination that teach the gnostic and transcedental wisdom that Jesus conveyed through his ministry.

Answer 7

No they were CHRISTians. Read the Word and not what Catholics were saying 150 years later.

Answer 8

Huh? Um, Catholics split from the Orthodox church so aren't the Orthodox Churches actually "closer" to the first "church"?

Anyways, I am the church. I am the temple of the spirit. We all make up the "church". It's not a building or religion. It's not the traditions of man but about relationship with Jesus.

Answer 9

That's sooo untrue. Here's what Catholics believe vs. the truth:

*The Pope is God's only rep here on earth. The Holy Father.
**Actually, those who are born again all have God's spirit w/in them. God is the only one that can be called "Holy Father" and Jesus is his only begotten Son.

*Mary was blessed b/c she was special.
**No, she was special b/c she was blessed.

*That being "born again" is a sin.
**The bible commands us to be born again.

*If you do X # of works, you're a saint.
**The Bible clarifies saints are born again believers. It's not about works.

Any more? Re-read the New Testament.

Answer 10

Man's pride continues to be his folly. A Blessed New Year to you.