How much did the Reformation reform?

[Marooncat79]

If we use your argument, then Trinitarianism is unbiblical since it is not specifically named anywhere in scripture. So are other theological constructs

 

[utilyan]

If we use your argument, then Trinitarianism is unbiblical since it is not specifically named anywhere in scripture. So are other theological constructs

We can find trinity just fine. Jesus is God in scripture. Father is God in scripture. Holy Spirit is God in scripture.

The word trinity merely organizes what is already stated.


Faith ALONE is in scripture ---> 24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.


We don't have to add words, scripture teaches plainly.


Satan says add fake things to scripture. LIES like Sola Scriptura and Faith Alone, that never existed in 1500 years.


God would have to be an idiot to support faith alone and have a verse in the bible to teach against it.


Jesus Could have plainly taught Faith ALONE. Look how easily we can teach it in one breathe.

But being God, Jesus was did no teach faith alone, which is not only dumb, but so dumb it doesn't mean faith alone half the time.

Invention of the dumbest catholic.

 

[Marooncat79]

James is saying that true saving faith results in good works. James is talking about being able to observe someones lifestyle and that the works on display demonstrate a person who has been born again.

Your timetable of 1500 yrs would be incorrect. There have always been churches that proclaim Justification by faith alone.

Agree about Trinitarianism. That wad my point. I was refuting the other poster.

How many works are required to be juatified before God?

What is the quality of works that need to be performed for justification?

How can you determine if you have enough works?

It is either by grace through faith, or it is not. Scripture says it is, and hatmonizes quite well

 

[utilyan]

Growing up in Eastern Orthodoxy, where I lived, we were in the minority. We were surrounded by Roman Catholicism. There were not that many Protestant churches around. So I came to know a lot about the Roman Catholic Church and how it differed from us. But I did not know a lot about Protestantism until I engaged in an in-depth study of it. I recognized how the Reformation changed Protestant beliefs in contrast to the RCC which it came out of. In that sense, Protestantism was indeed a rebellion from and reformation from Roman Catholicism, but not from Eastern Orthodoxy since the Protestant reformers did not come out of Orthodoxy.

Now what I'm about to say may shock many of you and find you in disbelief or denial of it, but this is what I found. Protestantism, while seeking to return to more Biblical/ancient doctrines and practices, still held and holds to basic premises that Roman Catholicism holds. Protestantism, just like Roman Catholicism, holds to an Augustinian soteriology, unlike Orthodoxy. Further, Protestant atonement theories are just expansions of Roman Catholic atonement theory, which are neither ancient nor Biblical, and neither is Augustinian soteriology.

So, in basic ideas of salvation, both Roman Catholic and Protestant (including Baptist) views are akin. These are different from Orthodoxy. Another specific difference is in the doctrine of justification. I will include a link to an article which is good at highlighting these differing views: Justification (theology) - Wikipedia

One big problem I am having in converting to Protestantism, and Baptists, is in this area of soteriology. In all my studies, I did find something astonishing, and I found it almost by accident. In reading about the Reformation, I stumbled on the Radical Reformation, and in those radicals I found a soteriology very close in some important aspects to Orthodox soteriology. And yet the Radical Reformers in other aspects were seemingly almost totally opposite to Orthodoxy. This has led me to study of the offspring of the Radical Refomers such as the Mennonites, Brethren, and Quakers (Friends).

All of this is fascinating and intriguing to me. I'll be glad to see comments from all who care to respond to my thread. I hope we can have a good discussion of this. I am glad to have found this forum. Your comments and responses are really making me think.

"One big problem I am having in converting to Protestantism, and Baptists, is in this area of soteriology."

You are joking right? You literally can tell yourself what you want to hear and slap a baptist label. I can prob start a baptist church today.

 

[Van]

Growing up in Eastern Orthodoxy, where I lived, we were in the minority. We were surrounded by Roman Catholicism. There were not that many Protestant churches around. So I came to know a lot about the Roman Catholic Church and how it differed from us. But I did not know a lot about Protestantism until I engaged in an in-depth study of it. I recognized how the Reformation changed Protestant beliefs in contrast to the RCC which it came out of. In that sense, Protestantism was indeed a rebellion from and reformation from Roman Catholicism, but not from Eastern Orthodoxy since the Protestant reformers did not come out of Orthodoxy.

Now what I'm about to say may shock many of you and find you in disbelief or denial of it, but this is what I found. Protestantism, while seeking to return to more Biblical/ancient doctrines and practices, still held and holds to basic premises that Roman Catholicism holds. Protestantism, just like Roman Catholicism, holds to an Augustinian soteriology, unlike Orthodoxy. Further, Protestant atonement theories are just expansions of Roman Catholic atonement theory, which are neither ancient nor Biblical, and neither is Augustinian soteriology.

So, in basic ideas of salvation, both Roman Catholic and Protestant (including Baptist) views are akin. These are different from Orthodoxy. Another specific difference is in the doctrine of justification. I will include a link to an article which is good at highlighting these differing views: Justification (theology) - Wikipedia

One big problem I am having in converting to Protestantism, and Baptists, is in this area of soteriology. In all my studies, I did find something astonishing, and I found it almost by accident. In reading about the Reformation, I stumbled on the Radical Reformation, and in those radicals I found a soteriology very close in some important aspects to Orthodox soteriology. And yet the Radical Reformers in other aspects were seemingly almost totally opposite to Orthodoxy. This has led me to study of the offspring of the Radical Refomers such as the Mennonites, Brethren, and Quakers (Friends).

All of this is fascinating and intriguing to me. I'll be glad to see comments from all who care to respond to my thread. I hope we can have a good discussion of this. I am glad to have found this forum. Your comments and responses are really making me think.

Hello NTChristian,

I know less than little about "Orthodox Eastern Catholic" views.

But I have been a conservative Baptist for decades.

Let me address some of the points you made in the above opening post.

1. "Protestantism, just like Roman Catholicism, holds to an Augustinian soteriology, unlike Orthodoxy."
Not all protestants hold to Augustinian soteriology, and certainly not all baptists. I do not know how you or your belief system defines "Augustinian Soteriology." Some Calvinist leaning baptists believe God compels salvation via irresistible grace, but the non-Calvinist baptists (or some of them) believe God offers salvation but does not compel or instill belief. Everyone believing into Christ shall not perish.

2. Not sure what you believe "atonement theory" is held. But any time I see "atonement" I think the view is unsound. Christ died on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, becoming the propitiation or means of salvation for all mankind. But only when God puts an individual spiritually into Christ do they receive the benefit of Christ's sacrifice, because once in Christ they are justified, forgiven and saved.

 

[utilyan]

James is saying that true saving faith results in good works. James is talking about being able to observe someones lifestyle and that the works on display demonstrate a person who has been born again.

Your timetable of 1500 yrs would be incorrect. There have always been churches that proclaim Justification by faith alone.

Agree about Trinitarianism. That wad my point. I was refuting the other poster.

How many works are required to be juatified before God?

What is the quality of works that need to be performed for justification?

How can you determine if you have enough works?

It is either by grace through faith, or it is not. Scripture says it is, and hatmonizes quite well

"James is saying that true saving faith results in good works"

Quote where he says this.

I get the impression you are told to read it all backwards.

I can quote the opposite.

22You see that faith was working with his works, and as a result of the works, faith was perfected;

According to James Works makes a IMPERFECT, FLAWED, BROKE faith into perfect faith.

Source-wise GOOD WORK of LOVE is the atom of Christianity. It is the building block. GOD is LOVE.



Can a imperfect faith save you?

"How many works are required to be juatified before God?"
TWO WORKS. LOVE GOD and LOVE NEIGHBOR

Very easy to prove wrong. Show example one saved who hates God and Neighbor..


"What is the quality of works that need to be performed for justification?"
Good works opposed to EVIL WORKS.

All Good works have God as their source else call it the EVIL for what it is.

Who thinks EVIL works get you to heaven?

"How can you determine if you have enough works?"
Enough for what?

You can be omnipotent in quantity and willpower. What you do or the sum of it doesn't justify.

1 Corinthians 13
3And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing.

When you think you have enough, You don't.

If you are obsessing over SALVATION and your own selfish interest of immortality and bliss, That is not our way.

God gave a command, We do it. FOR FREE or even pay our lives to do it.

This is the way.

Just witnessing acts of loving God and neighbor is a sincere Joy. You think to yourself I'm going to use that one day.


Faith that is devoid of LOVE of God is useless.

I can quote scripture

1 Corinthians 13

2If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.


If you went to the pope and challenged him its faith alone, he'll probably agree with you, He's going to assume someone where in the tiny writting LOVE of GOD/Neighbor is included inside packed away in some secret hiding place inside "faith alone"

Once you devoid it of the good work LOVE GOD and LOVE NEIGHBOR. Its EVIL FAITH.

If God told the Devil it was going to rain, the DEVIL will absolutely TRUST and have Faith in God that it will indeed rain. He will manage to have prefect FAITH and HATRED to God. He knows who God is, He believes Jesus Christ is Lord so much so he has already been bossed around here and there. He TRUSTS Jesus. Faith does not mean allegiance.

 

[Marooncat79]

Ephesians 2:8-10

 

[atpollard]

Faith ALONE is in scripture ---> 24You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

We don't have to add words, scripture teaches plainly

[begin sarcasm] Too bad James only wrote ONE VERSE, so we have no broader context to read to understand what he was communicating. [end sarcasm]

However, Paul writes paragraphs to more fully explain to us the important concepts, like this one ...

[Romans 4:1-8 NASB]

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."​

 

[Walpole]

[begin sarcasm] Too bad James only wrote ONE VERSE, so we have no broader context to read to understand what he was communicating. [end sarcasm]

However, Paul writes paragraphs to more fully explain to us the important concepts, like this one ...

[Romans 4:1-8 NASB]

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."​

Can you find the words “faith alone” in any of St. Paul’s explanatory paragraphs?

Of the three theological virtues of faith, hope and charity, which does St. Paul say is the greatest?

 

[atpollard]

Can you find the words “faith alone” in any of St. Paul’s explanatory paragraphs?

Of the three theological virtues of faith, hope and charity, which does St. Paul say is the greatest?

I can find the words “NOT OF WORKS” repeated over and over in Scripture (but they seem to not appear in the Catholic Bible, thus your placing the cart before the horse).

 

[ntchristian]

"One big problem I am having in converting to Protestantism, and Baptists, is in this area of soteriology."

You are joking right? You literally can tell yourself what you want to hear and slap a baptist label. I can prob start a baptist church today.

You see that as a bad thing. I do not, now.

 

[ntchristian]

Hello NTChristian,

I know less than little about "Orthodox Eastern Catholic" views.

But I have been a conservative Baptist for decades.

Let me address some of the points you made in the above opening post.

1. "Protestantism, just like Roman Catholicism, holds to an Augustinian soteriology, unlike Orthodoxy."
Not all protestants hold to Augustinian soteriology, and certainly not all baptists. I do not know how you or your belief system defines "Augustinian Soteriology." Some Calvinist leaning baptists believe God compels salvation via irresistible grace, but the non-Calvinist baptists (or some of them) believe God offers salvation but does not compel or instill belief. Everyone believing into Christ shall not perish.

2. Not sure what you believe "atonement theory" is held. But any time I see "atonement" I think the view is unsound. Christ died on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, becoming the propitiation or means of salvation for all mankind. But only when God puts an individual spiritually into Christ do they receive the benefit of Christ's sacrifice, because once in Christ they are justified, forgiven and saved.

Thank you for your informative post, especially point 1.

 

[ntchristian]

[begin sarcasm] Too bad James only wrote ONE VERSE, so we have no broader context to read to understand what he was communicating. [end sarcasm]

However, Paul writes paragraphs to more fully explain to us the important concepts, like this one ...

[Romans 4:1-8 NASB]

What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED. BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."​

Yeah, why takes James literally when you can explain away what he said?

 

[ntchristian]

To clarify: I am not taking sides in this, as I am not completely sure about what I believe yet regarding it. But I will interpret James literally as I believe it is meant literally, and I do know that there is disagreement in the Bible, which does not worry me.

 

[atpollard]

Yeah, why takes James literally when you can explain away what he said?

I do take James literally. I just take the thought expressed by the whole paragraph and the whole chapter and the whole book of James seriously, rather than read what I want to read into a single verse plucked out of context. James teaches the same thing that Ephesians 2:1-10 teaches. Men who have faith, will walk in the works that God has prepared in advance for them to walk in ... JUST LIKE ABRAHAM DID!

 

[Particular]

To clarify: I am not taking sides in this, as I am not completely sure about what I believe yet regarding it. But I will interpret James literally as I believe it is meant literally, and I do know that there is disagreement in the Bible, which does not worry me.

We interpret using the golden rule:
"When the plain sense makes common sense, seek no other sense."

We also use this rule:
"Scripture interprets scripture."

Both rules are used when understanding faith.

The question to ask yourself is this:
Will I interpret sentences in a vacuum, or will all of scripture guide my interpretation of a sentence?

What is your answer to that question, ntchristian?

 

[Van]

To clarify: I am not taking sides in this, as I am not completely sure about what I believe yet regarding it. But I will interpret James literally as I believe it is meant literally, and I do know that there is disagreement in the Bible, which does not worry me.

When we know there is disagreement, we know that as we understand its meaning, there is disagreement.

But some of the problems stem not from scripture, but our understanding of scripture. If we misunderstand one verse, then see another verse that says something different, the problem could be our understanding of the first verse.

Lets take "faith" is all that is required by God in order for God to save us by putting us spiritually into Christ. But James says it takes something more than "faith alone."

When we see "faith" as used to meet God's requirement to credit that faith as righteousness, what kind of faith is that? Lip-service faith, faith with no root, superficial faith? Nope. When we see "faith" in scripture think of it as "faithful faith" or "faith from which faithfulness flows" or "alive rather than dead faith." Such a "faith" exists within the person, even if they never get a chance to actually be faithful by serving Christ. (Such was the faith of the thief on the cross.) With such a view there is no disagreement between the teachings of Paul and James.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Yeah, why takes James literally when you can explain away what he said?....

....To clarify: I am not taking sides in this, as I am not completely sure about what I believe yet regarding it.

These two statements cannot square with each other.

 

[Walpole]

I can find the words “NOT OF WORKS” repeated over and over in Scripture (but they seem to not appear in the Catholic Bible, thus your placing the cart before the horse).

I didn't ask if you could find the words "NOT OF WORKS". I asked if you find the words "FAITH ALONE" in any of St. Paul’s explanatory paragraphs. Are you able to do that?

The words "FAITH ALONE" appear in the Catholic Bible, as a condemnation.

---> James 2:24

 

[Wesley Briggman]

For those that believe works is required to attain salvation, is there a scale to determine when you have done enough to pass the threshold for becoming a child of God? Once attained, is it good for your lifetime or can you fall below the threshold, losing your salvation? How do you know? If you can lose you salvation due to lack or your effort to keep it, can you regain it through additional effort?

Eph 4:30 KJV - And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.

Does this verse apply to you or are you somehow exempted?

Praise God I am sealed by the Holy Spirit and my spiritual standing with God is not determined by my feelings. It is grounded in fact not emotions.