What is the difference between Evangelicals and Protestants?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
rrcn said:
Eastern Orthodox ? While they are considered a third branch of Christianity they seem to have kept it quiet.
Click to expand...

No Eastern Orthodox were very similar to the RCC in teaching. Most of these kind of churches I mean got nick named 'ana-baptist'. They didn't have that name for themselves, without denominational names. They were given names according to main leaders in their groups. Not all ana-baptists were sound in the faith, but among them were groups that stuck to a pure faith before the RCC and the Reformers.
 
Komentaja said:
I believe we are living in and witnessiing the great apostasy. Ironically, not only from truth, but even error. Even cults are watering down their doctrine. Catholics used to teach its ONLY our church and nothing else, now the pope is letting atheists into heaven as well if theyh are "goood people"
Click to expand...
Yes, time to pray and pray hard for spiritual revival to take place throughout the world - it sure needs it!
 
oyster67 said:
It is my understanding that some Protestants and most Baptists dropped the ball when Calvin came along and said evangelism is not necessary because God had already preselected who would go to Heaven and who would go to Hell. Those who wanted to distance themselves from Calvinism brought back evangelism and called themselves Evangelicals.
Click to expand...
Calivinists have been some of the most evangelistic in history. You need a refresher.
 
wattie said:
Interesting in church history there are groups of Christianity that go way way back that don't identify as Catholic or Protestant. They were around before Catholicism and didn't need to reform. They helped some of the reformers but weren't reforming their own teaching.
Click to expand...
Please tell me about "The Trail of Blood."
 
NightTwister said:
Please tell me about "The Trail of Blood."
Click to expand...

Well the Trail of Blood booklet by J.M.Carroll is a short summary of real history. It gets a bad wrap, but there are other much more exhaustive texts that elaborate on this real history. An example is My Church by J.M. Moody and the Battle for Baptist History by I.K.Cross.

A big issue is that most of church history is written by the persecutors themselves, so what they label as 'heretic' could be in some cases just straight out biblical doctrine. An example of this is baptism for believers only by immersion. That is dead on straight with the bible.. but is definitely not a practice of the RCC or for that matter many protestant denominations such as Anglicans and liberal Methodists. And these are the kind of people that have written the church history.
 
wattie said:
Well the Trail of Blood booklet by J.M.Carroll is a short summary of real history. It gets a bad wrap, but there are other much more exhaustive texts that elaborate on this real history. An example is My Church by J.M. Moody and the Battle for Baptist History by I.K.Cross.

A big issue is that most of church history is written by the persecutors themselves, so what they label as 'heretic' could be in some cases just straight out biblical doctrine. An example of this is baptism for believers only by immersion. That is dead on straight with the bible.. but is definitely not a practice of the RCC or for that matter many protestant denominations such as Anglicans and liberal Methodists. And these are the kind of people that have written the church history.
Click to expand...
My reply was actually sarcasm. If you have to latch onto every heretical group in history to complete your trail, you're doing it wrong.
 
NightTwister said:
My reply was actually sarcasm. If you have to latch onto every heretical group in history to complete your trail, you're doing it wrong.
Click to expand...

And take seriously those who would cut the bible into shreds? That is what happens when you try and baptise babies and sprinkle instead of baptism by immersion.

Anyway.. I'll reply to you no furthermore
 
rrcn said:
For many years main stream Christian churches were called Protestant as a distinction from Catholicism. Today these churches call themselves Evangelicals.

Is this change due to a realigning of values and subsequent blurring of the original doctrines of the early Reformers?
Click to expand...
As of 2016, there were an estimated 619 million evangelicals in the world, meaning that one in four Christians would be classified as evangelical. The United States has the largest proportion of evangelicals in the world. American evangelicals are a quarter of that nation's population and its single largest religious group. As a transdenominational coalition, evangelicals can be found in nearly every Protestant denomination and tradition, particularly within the Reformed (Continental Reformed, Presbyterian, Congregational), Plymouth Brethren, Baptist, Methodist (Wesleyan–Arminian), Lutheran, Moravian, Free Church, Mennonite, Quaker, Pentecostal/charismatic and non-denominational churches. (wiki.evangelical)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mission21
Inquisitor said:
As of 2016, there were an estimated 619 million evangelicals in the world, meaning that one in four Christians would be classified as evangelical.
Click to expand...
Statistics about spiritual matters must be taken with some reservation. And 2016 was a long time ago.
 
GRACE_ambassador said:
RC Brock states:

"A mighty revival would take place if Christians would get back to Pauline truth.":

7 Basic Bible Facts

Still praying - Amen.
Click to expand...
I agree. There are many professing Christians who aren't willing to accept the scriptures as being 100% correct. There are worldly Christians too, who have some sincerity in following God - but whose lives need to be purged completely from sin, through repenting, and turning away from their sins, prayerfully and to the best of their ability. God doesn't hear the prayers of people who haven't fully surrendered themselves to God yet. Hanging onto any sin, results in useless prayers, as God doesn't listen to such prayers, the Bible says.
 
NightTwister said:
Please tell me about "The Trail of Blood."
Click to expand...
The Trail of Blood is not accurate history at all, as baptists of today would consider the donatists and paulicians to be work salvationist heretics.

The fact is that the baptist churches are just not-historic at all, doesn't mean they arent right, but definitely nothing historic about em. No protestant denomination has any history behind it.

The catholic and orthodox do, but what kind of history? History of mixing in paganism to Christianity, history of infant baptism, veneration of saints and mary and other hocus pocus.

Whats my point? Who cares if there is a "direct line" of churches or something, lets just believe the Bible and stick with that
 
wattie said:
And take seriously those who would cut the bible into shreds? That is what happens when you try and baptise babies and sprinkle instead of baptism by immersion.

Anyway.. I'll reply to you no furthermore
Click to expand...
Nothing wrong with sprinkling, although I prefer pouring for the symbolism.
 
Komentaja said:
The Trail of Blood is not accurate history at all, as baptists of today would consider the donatists and paulicians to be work salvationist heretics.

The fact is that the baptist churches are just not-historic at all, doesn't mean they arent right, but definitely nothing historic about em. No protestant denomination has any history behind it.

The catholic and orthodox do, but what kind of history? History of mixing in paganism to Christianity, history of infant baptism, veneration of saints and mary and other hocus pocus.

Whats my point? Who cares if there is a "direct line" of churches or something, lets just believe the Bible and stick with that
Click to expand...
For whatever reason, it's important to some that there be a continuous church through history that did not include the Catholic church.
Paganism mixed is definitely a problem, but there's nothing wrong with infant baptism. Hebrews talks about heroes of the faith, but the Catholic church definitely took that too far.
 
Komentaja said:
The Trail of Blood is not accurate history at all, as baptists of today would consider the donatists and paulicians to be work salvationist heretics.

The fact is that the baptist churches are just not-historic at all, doesn't mean they arent right, but definitely nothing historic about em. No protestant denomination has any history behind it.

The catholic and orthodox do, but what kind of history? History of mixing in paganism to Christianity, history of infant baptism, veneration of saints and mary and other hocus pocus.

Whats my point? Who cares if there is a "direct line" of churches or something, lets just believe the Bible and stick with that
Click to expand...

There are other books that elaborate on the Trail of Blood booklet history far more in depth. By itself it is too short and misses alot.. with the other books you do see the real history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back