What is the difference between protenstantism and reformed christianity?

This is the doctrine that the Holy Spirit regenerates God’s elect from spiritual deadness, providing them a new heart whereby they may freely believe in our Lord Jesus Christ. This is contrary to the idea of man that the Holy Spirit does all He can to regenerate a person, but until they make a conscious effort to believe, they have no life.

Pertinent Passages: John 6: 37, John 6: 44, John 10: 16, Rom 8:28-30, Rom 8: 32, 1 Cor 6: 11, 1 Cor 12: 3, 2 Cor 3: 6, 2 Cor 3: 17-18, Eph 1: 3-4, Eph 1: 7, Eph 1: 13-14, 1 Pet 1: 2, John 1: 12-13, Rom 9: 16, John 3: 3-8, 1 Pet 1: 3, 1 Pet 1: 23, 1 John 5: 4, Titus 3: 5, Deut 30: 6, Ezek 36: 26-27, 2 Cor 5: 17-18, Gal 6: 15, Eph 2: 10, John 5: 21, John 11: 14-15, John 11: 25, John 11: 38-44, Eph 2: 1, Eph 2: 5, Col 2: 13, John 17: 2, 1 Cor 4: 7, Eph 2: 8-9, Acts 5: 31, Acts 11: 18, Acts 13: 48, Acts 16: 14, Acts 18: 27, Eph 2: 8-9, Phil 1: 29, 2 Tim 2: 25-26

This is the doctrine that those elect who are regenerated by the saving grace of God Almighty will persevere in faith to the very end of their life, kept in that same faith by the power of God. This is contrary to the idea that a true Christian can lose his or her salvation, asserted by many. The erroneous idea known as “Easy Believism”, which says that salvation can be secured by a mere profession of faith, regardless of whether it’s kept or not, is also contrary to this doctrine.

Pertinent Passages: John 3: 16, John 3: 36, John 5: 24, John 6: 47, John 6: 51, John 11: 25, 1 John 5: 13, 1 Pet 1: 23, John 6: 35-40, John 10: 27-30, John 17: 11-12, John 17: 15, Rom 8: 29-30, Rom 8: 35-39, 1 Cor 1: 8, Eph 1: 5, Eph 1: 13-14, Eph 4: 30, Phil 1: 6, 1 Pet 1: 3-5, John 14: 21, John 15: 1-11, Eph 2: 10, 1 Peter 5: 10, 2 Peter 1: 10, Phil 2: 12-13, Phil 3: 12-15, 1 John 3: 9, 1 John 5: 18, Heb 5: 11-12, 1 John 2: 19, 1 John 2: 25

Just wrote some stuff on the differences between Catholics and protestants in beliefs regarding 3 of the solas, figured i'll just post em here. There's a catholic bias of course but it shouldn't be too bad.


1: Sola Scriptura
Protestants believe that only the scriptures, as in, the bible alone is authoritatively binding for what Christians should believe. This is in distinction to Catholics, that hold that the bible, the traditions of the church, and decrees from the councils (as in, ex cathedra statements from the Pope) are authoritatively binding. To expand further, Catholics believe all Catholic beliefs that have always been held universally by all Catholics everywhere - as in what is tradition - is infallible, for "the gates of hell shall not prevail", and under their logic for even one doctrine to be in error would mean hell has prevailed. The nature of the differences is obvious, protestants reject Catholicism, and therefor necessarily must reject the idea that God appointed a Pope, so obviously they can't rely on their councils or traditions. In the other case, Catholics who see the Pope as legitimate successors to the office given to saint Peter will have no problem accepting their authority in governing and direct the church, whether they like the current Pope or not.

Personally, I would sum up this as a question of "do you accept the human authority that God appointed to rule the church, or do you not believe that God appointed a man to rule the church, and therefor believe that the catholic church has no authority." It's pretty essential to not believe in the papacy as a protestant, because the pope, and in fact the whole Catholic church has long since declared Protestantism a heresy, which would mean you're heretic pretenders, destined for damnation if you do not recant… if they are right!

2: Grace alone
The biggest difference between protestants and Catholics is found most directly in the solas of grace alone, not the concept of faith alone - yet everyone spends so much time focusing on faith alone, which is confusing. In Protestantism, the concept of grace alone is the idea that you are saved not because you yourself are actually without sin, but because Christ died as the sacrificial scapegoat that pays the price that you deserved to pay. In other words, you are saved because of God's grace, not of anything you did - nothing about you made you earn your salvation to any degree. You're all sinner without any of the debt.
In Catholicism, Grace is absolutely essential for salvation, but it is not by grace alone. It is essential because we're all children of Adam born with original sin - this would damn everyone to hell no matter what they did; in fact it is orthodox belief that even the old testament saints were not able to go to heaven until Christ died (look it up). This is because for Catholics, baptism cleanses you of all your sins, including original sin, as though you were a completely new person or "born again" - this is what Christ's sacrifice did, as in it's not a legal payment to your account while you yourself are left a sinner; you are actually without any sin after baptism, but you can still sin and lose your salvation! You can and do still sin after baptism even though you are cleansed because of what they call 'concupiscence', which is your learned tenancy to sin that was never removed.

But this leads me to the most important point of all; for a catholic to be eligible for heaven, they must actually be without severe sin before they die, as in Catholics do believe it is possible to live without sin or "failure", "crookedness", and "iniquity". So it is by grace we get to heaven, as no one by their own bootstraps can lift themselves out of original sin, because in practice God is the one who must reveal himself to you, and because of many other practically essential graces such as the sacrament of confession (which is method of getting sins removed after baptism, however unlike baptism you do have to pay for these sins by purgation Isaiah 6:6-7), but that doesn't mean sit back and do nothing. we absolutely must work to be holy, without sin before we die, for that after that we cannot do anything to fix our state, and we must pay penance for our crimes and if you're feeling charitable, the crimes of others, be it this world or the next.

On a side note If you do not believe in free will, you'll probably like grace alone, because having a free will is not necessary for grace alone to work - it is a fact of history that Luther himself didn't believe in free will.

3: Faith alone
Faith alone for protestants is often all the beliefs covered by grace alone, just applied to faith. So you aren't saved by giving to charity, being a good person, because of your baptism, no you're saved because of your faith (as in belief of the true faith) and nothing else, as that is how you receive the benefits of Christ's sacrifice that pays for all your sins, not through baptism but through belief (though of course Protestantism is quite varied, some do believe in baptism being essential). And like grace alone above, Catholics deny faith alone as they believe that things like baptism, confession, either earthly or non-earthly penance, and doing God's will (as in not being with severe sin) is very much necessary to be saved, so while obviously you need faith, you need more than faith; you need faith and integrity, which is faith and works.

More or less. Baptists try to pull the same shit. It's just a lame attempt at trying to give their denomination an air of legitimacy it otherwise doesn't have.

If you aren't Catholic you aren't correct.

Oh shit we've got a live one

OP here.
I talked to my neighbour again.
He told me that reformed christians are distinctly not protestant, but I am totally confused now.
I didn't want to offend him so I just backed away from the question entirely.

He's delusional, pay him no mind

He's just mistaken
The very word reformed hearkens to the protestant reformation