I have had similar situations, in tryign to explain even a differign poitn fo view held by other Protestants and widely accepted.

It is so with many , as another said in this thread before me, that they become investe dboht in thei own ebelifs and in hat thy think others beleive that they cannot, or refuse to, see the alternate position. Even for the sake of argument, or dialouge.


As a result, I have been told my own beelifs do not go with the Bible, for I am an Amillenialist. I discussed this in another thread of ocruse, but in hshort I do not follwo the Rapture theory. There is no Tribulaiton of Seven YEars and Reign of Anti-CHrist, and no Rapture of the Church.

Of coruse not all Protestants beleive this, least of all thsoe still teahcign tradiionally as they have and that predate th 19th century, uch as Lutherans and Presbyterians.

Yet to many Baptists and Evangelicals, it si a dogma that is plainly and clealry taught in the Scriptures. Even if most can't relaly show you ewhere. THose who can can cite certian verses and have you flip about to connect hem, but an show no reaosn to intepret the evrses in this way.

This wa son the Rapture of the Church, mind you.

Or recall how I told of the same sort of thing when told the Cahtolic CHurhc added to the Bible in 1546, at Trent? The Deuterocannon was added then.

I'm afraid that Evangelicals and Baptiusts of certain stripe arn't accustomed to detaield Bible study. The vibrant faith they get, and Bible study htey do, is geared toward personal feelign and quick, easy explanatiosn of scripture. They tend to be givne expanaitosn by Pastors or Study Bibles or resoruce books that give them the correct unrstandign of scriture, and know a few arguments here and there to defned the positiosn they take, but havent' studied the material independantly and indeed cannot see any other view, as they are condiitoned to de only there own.

This is not true of all Baptsts or Evangelicals of coruse, but a good nmber of them have this pattern s thheir own.

The result is that the teachigns are "Obvious" to them, and shoudl be "Obvious" to everyoen else who syudies scripture honeslty and sincerely.

This beign said, ghey are also taugt abotu other groups in a Semi-Apologetic fahsion, concentratign ont he errors of that group form an Evangelcial standpoint. Sicne the goal of the authros of the Evangelical books and studies aim was to discredit the other groups, the arguments concentrat eon why Evangelcial theology is right and why the other party is wrong.Little effort to acuratley udnerstnd the psotion and why the position isbeleived by the oponant is given, and indeed little for the evangleical. It is simply asusmed the Evangelcia one is right, and scriptural,and the other is wrong.


THis is blidnly accepted by the Evangelical since it conforms to what hey alreayd beelive,and let sthem see the other as obviosuly wrong.

Given thatthe student adpts he spirit fo the teache they follow, the combative nature of the exchanges I fdar is tracable to her study mateirals which show why Cahtolsisim is wrong, and perhaps her own need to validate her conversion away form Cahtolsisim and into Evanvelisism.

"I am convinced these two factors are still not fully appreciated in the life of the Catholic Church in America, whatever the rite. There are positive signs, such as greater availability for the Tridentine Mass at RC churches, but there is still too much emphasis on short services and too little pressure educate all members, of all ages, in the meat of our faith."

Amen NorseRuthenian,

I missed your post. This last Sunday I was on a different side of town in desperate need of fulfilling my Sunday obligation. I attended a Youth Mass (the only afternoon masses held at parishes in that area were of that type).

After that Mass I told Rachel that we will be waking up early enough next Sunday to make the 8am Tridentine Mass at our parish. Between all the praise music and socials, what disturbed me most was that the extraordinary ministers did not genuflect when they passed the tabernacle. They walked without reverence.

This parish had eight extraordinary ministers serving about 150 people, I've been in masses where that number could be served by a priest and a deacon. And I had to flinch every time I saw the Host passed to the hands (I am not going to argue this doctrinally, it is a matter of private judgment for me). The problem I had at being at that mass was that I could not pray with a focused mind.

Every time I attend this type of mass, I find myself in a place where praying is difficult. I either have to completely focus and block everything out or I end up "going with the flow" of mass and not praying. I want to pray the Creed, I want to pray the Our Father with my heart and not just my tongue. I may be repeating myself, but that is what I like most about mass.

Terry

"I'm afraid that Evangelicals and Baptiusts of certain stripe arn't accustomed to detaield Bible study. The vibrant faith they get, and Bible study htey do, is geared toward personal feelign and quick, easy explanatiosn of scripture."

Perhaps this reflects a trait common to a majority of Christians of any tradition, that we tend to find solace in membership even if it means acting the part. That the priorities are on belonging rather than the private pursuit of wisdom and truth. For those who do bridge across that cavern and take the hard road in pursuit of wisdom and truth, it is a matter of personal grace when they walk the narrow path and seek Christ.

Terry