Ask a protestant a question thread.

[Publisher]

I have another one. Are there any aspects to the Catholic (or Orthodox) faith that you would love to have incorporated into your denomination, like Lent or Advent? Are there any things that you yourself have added on your own?

I have been to “taize” services at the Episcopal cathedral…moving experience…I love the chanting.

In my private devotions I have incorporated a “chokti” from Orthodox practice…I have even taken it with me to Meeting…one First Day I looked up across the room and another Friend had a “mala” he was using…our eyes met and we smiled at one another.

Sometimes when I’m reading scripture I’ll set out an icon an acquaintence gave me and light a votive. I’ll put on some Gregorian chants and settle down for study…at times doing this “speaks to my condition”. I do keep note as to which “season” we are in, I have used the Book of Common Prayer Psalter at times.

I really wouldn’t want to see any “outward forms” incorporated into the meeting for worship, as I find the Gatherd Meeting to hold a beauty and power all it’s own.

 

[Publisher]

If you submit to the authority of the bible, then why dont you submit to the authority that gave us the holy bible?

From “Quaker Beliefs” It is said better than I could say it anyway.

"Friends consider that true religion cannot be learned from books or set prayers, words or rituals, which George Fox called ‘empty forms’. When Quakerism began in England, the Bible had only just come into common circulation in English translation and was widely read and quoted. Most Protestant groups attributed a great finality and infallibility to it. The common desire for an external authoritative standard was very strong. In religious controversies, each group tried to find support somewhere in the wording of scripture.

At times, Friends fell into the same habit. But they also believed in the contemporary revelation of God’s will, parallel to what was described in the Bible. George Fox once said: “You will say Christ saith this, and the apostles say this, but what canst thou say? Art thou a child of Light and hast thou walked in the Light, and what thou speakest is it inwardly from the God?”

Friends refuse to make the Bible the final test of right conduct and true doctrine. Divine revelation is not confined to the past. The same Holy Spirit which has inspired the scriptures in the past can inspire living believers centuries later. Indeed, for the right understanding of the past, the present insight from the same Spirit is essential. Friends believe that, by the Inner Light, God provides everyone with access to spiritual truth for today."

 

[SolaFide]

From which authority does Sola Scriptura come from?

P.S. I just noticed your profile; Can I assume you’re a Protestant? And happy birthday too.

Ok, I’ll bite on a few of these.

On this one…primarily from this verse although there are others.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness,
2Ti 3:17 so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.

Tell me what good work is Scripture NOT able to train the Christian for? Teaching doctrine? Nope, that’s covered. Rebuking false doctrine or actions? Nope, that’s covered too. Correcting errors in the church or our lives? Nope, it says Scripture can do that too. Training to serve God or live a righteous life? Nope, Scripture has that nailed as well.

Oh golly then I guess Scripture can thorougly equip me for EVERY good work. What do I need tradition for? Absolutely nothin’ …say it again!

 

[SolaFide]

What happens to babies who die before they are baptised?

Since nowhere in Scripture (don’t even go to tradition, it has NO authority with me whatsoever. If you need to prove a point, find it in the Word of God not the word of men.) does it even mention that baptism is necessary for salvation, babies go to be with God.

2Sa 12:21 His servants asked him, “Why are you acting this way? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept, but now that the child is dead, you get up and eat!”
2Sa 12:22 He answered, “While the child was still alive, I fasted and wept. I thought, ‘Who knows? The LORD may be gracious to me and let the child live.’
2Sa 12:23 **But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” **

 

[SolaFide]

Can a peaceful and loving muslim make it to heaven?

No.

Rom 3:9 What shall we conclude then? Are we any better? Not at all! We have already made the charge that Jews and Gentiles alike are all under sin.

Act 17:26 From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live.
Act 17:27 God did this so that men would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from each one of us.
Act 17:28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’ As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’
Act 17:29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone–an image made by man’s design and skill.
Act 17:30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, **but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.**Act 17:31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to all men by raising him from the dead.”

Act 20:21 I have declared to both Jews and Greeks that they **must turn to God in repentance and have faith in our Lord Jesus. **

Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, all need to come to Jesus Christ in repentance. No exceptions, no get out of Hell free card.

 

[SolaFide]

I now see that my question wasn’t very clear. So I’ll try again.

Concerning moral teaching, what does Protestantism bring to the table that is superior to Catholic moral teaching?

Prostestantism divested itself of much of the trappings of paganism that were absorbed by Romanism (candles, icons, robes, mitres, etc.). Sadly, some churches (Anglican and Lutheran for example) have maintained some of these trappings. Also the return to justification by faith alone and not works and elimination of unbiblical teachings such as purgatory, indulgences, veneration of saints or icons.

There is a wonderful, godly move of the Holy Spirit in many protestant churches to return to the Hebraic roots of our faith wherein the true worship of YHVH is found. Of which I am thrilled to pieces!!!

 

[Catholic_Dude]

No, this is not what I am saying, you asked about their genuineness. Being Genuine is different than saying true things. Someone can read my words here and agree with them or disagree with them, but that does not attest to weather I genuinely believe all I say AND live it out each and every day.

If you want to know what church fathers I agree with the teachings (though not 100%) they have published, that is a very different question. and I agreed with bengal-fan’s list as I said.

I never meant to ask about the condition of an individual’s soul, what I was asking about was their doctrine, was that person preaching a Gospel which you believe is free from significant error?

catholic dude, the OP said this was not a thread for debate but an opportunity to ask a question and get an answer. if you want to debate you should start another thread, but i will address this (and only this) post.

I dont see where I was “debating”. I was trying to get a straight and consistent answer.

so, by your own logic, you don’t judge, you trust your church to judge. that’s fine, that’s just not how protestants (most) operate. i cannot judge the “Christianness” of some one else. i can look at their actions and see if they are compatible with what the bible teaches, but i am not the one who judges. even the catholic church says it cannot say who is in hell. they will say who is definitely in heaven, but they would not say some one is in hell.

I shouldnt have used the term “genuine”, I never meant that. I was talking specifically about doctrine and which Church Fathers you consider to be preaching a Gospel that is free of significant error.

they are heretics according to your and your church’s understanding, but they did not think they were heretics. in fact, they believed they were teaching the truth. many times, the winner of the argument was the one with the most power (political, military, votes, etc.) behind them.

Then you are saying there is no such thing as a heretic and/or it isnt a big deal for people like Arius to pop up. What the Catholic Church decides is what matters, otherwise the Truth becomes relative to what each individual wants it to be. Church doctrine is the measuring stick for orthodoxy.

again, this is not a thread for disagreements, but i said i would respond this one time in here. one church judges it as heretical, one church says it isn’t. the arian controversy is a great example of this. at some points, arius was considered a heretic. at others, athanasius was. athanasius’ point of view eventually won out, but in the nicene creed, there was a bit of a compromise with the arians in including the term “begotten”. i don’t have to consider anybody anything, let alone not a “genuine Christian”. i can disagree with some one and still worship with them. all protestant denominations have a set of “essentials” (trinity, death and resurrection of Christ, etc.) which is what makes them a Christian religion. after that though, i can disagree with anyone on anything and still worship with them. i might think they are wrong, but i must always be humble enough to know that i might be wrong.

No offense, but what you described is a state of confusion. If Truth is up to each individual, then the Truth is relative, you have no right to say the denial of the Trinity is heretical, in fact you must be open to the idea that your Trinitarian views “might be wrong”.

because i hold to prima scriptura number one. and because it is not a necessary doctrine for salvation. it is a doctrine of practice. it does not separate Christians from non-Christians. the catholic church even teaches this by accepting that protestants are Christians.

hope this helps, and again this will be the last debate by me in this thread. if you want to question or debate any of the protestant answers, start a new thread.

I was talking about Sola Fide…are you saying SF is not a necessary doctrine for salvation for Protestants?

 

[bengal_fan]

I have another one. Are there any aspects to the Catholic (or Orthodox) faith that you would love to have incorporated into your denomination, like Lent or Advent? Are there any things that you yourself have added on your own?

confession. not because i believe that we must go to confession and be forgiven by a priest (i know, God is the one who forgives but the priest gives absolution and we can do it without a priest in extreme circumstances) but because i think it is psychologically healing and it creates accountability to each other.

communion every week (heck, i’d even go for everyday).

pretty buildings

art

 

[bengal_fan]

Since nowhere in Scripture…doesn’t even mention that baptism is necessary for salvation

it’s not a debate thread BUT (there is always a but…lol)

there are places in scripture that say baptism is necessary for salvation. when asked what must they do to be saved, peter said repent and be baptized. there are other places as well. just fyi. i understand you are saying that in the context of the whole bible, one can make the argument that it doesn’t teach we have to be baptized to be saved (although i might think differently), but to say it doesn’t even mention it in scripture is false.

 

[bengal_fan]

No offense, but what you described is a state of confusion. If Truth is up to each individual, then the Truth is relative, you have no right to say the denial of the Trinity is heretical, in fact you must be open to the idea that your Trinitarian views “might be wrong”.

i am very open to that. i am also open to universal salvation. i am open to many things. i know what i think and it is not anti-trinitarian or universal salvation, but i have to be willing to admit i might be wrong.

I was talking about Sola Fide…are you saying SF is not a necessary doctrine for salvation for Protestants?

that is what i’m saying. sola fide is not necessary for salvation. i am a calvinist in many ways though so i would say nothing is necessary for salvation since it is God who does the saving, not us.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

What do Protestants make of the following verse:

1 John 4:16 - God is love, and whoever lives in love lives in union with God and God lives in union with him.

Could this imply that a peaceful and loving non-christian (eg: muslims) can make it to heaven?

I realise the Protestant argument is based on Jesus; But considering Jesus is God, and God is Love, then that would imply that Jesus is Love and Love is Jesus. Therefore, whoever lives in love lives in Jesus. Right?

 

[khutcheson]

I was talking about Sola Fide…are you saying SF is not a necessary doctrine for salvation for Protestants?

Of course it’s not.

 

[khutcheson]

confession. not because i believe that we must go to confession and be forgiven by a priest (i know, God is the one who forgives but the priest gives absolution and we can do it without a priest in extreme circumstances) but because i think it is psychologically healing and it creates accountability to each other.

Agreed. Well said.

We were commanded to confess our sins to one another. That is missing in most Protestant churches.

 

[khutcheson]

What do Protestants make of the following verse:

1 John 4:16 - God is love, and whoever lives in love lives in union with God and God lives in union with him.

Could this imply that a peaceful and loving non-christian (eg: muslims) can make it to heaven?

I realise the Protestant argument is based on Jesus; But considering Jesus is God, and God is Love, then that would imply that Jesus is Love and Love is Jesus. Therefore, whoever lives in love lives in Jesus. Right?

In John 14:6 Jesus said, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

I don’t understand how a non-Christian can make it to heaven, and I don’t think it’s possible without Jesus, but I the limits of my comprehension don’t limit His power.

It’s a mystery.

 

[Publisher]

In John 14:6 Jesus said, “I am the Way and the Truth and the Life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.”

I don’t understand how a non-Christian can make it to heaven, and I don’t think it’s possible without Jesus, but I the limits of my comprehension don’t limit His power.

It’s a mystery.

Maybe His grace is much broader and deeper than we can possibly imagine…perhaps if ANY make it, He is the sole reason anyway…

 

[SolaFide]

it’s not a debate thread BUT (there is always a but…lol)

there are places in scripture that say baptism is necessary for salvation. when asked what must they do to be saved, peter said repent and be baptized. there are other places as well. just fyi. i understand you are saying that in the context of the whole bible, one can make the argument that it doesn’t teach we have to be baptized to be saved (although i might think differently), but to say it doesn’t even mention it in scripture is false.

What is the FIRST thing Peter said to do? Repent! How many babies do you know who can do that??? Not one! Salvation is dependent upon repentance of sins. First you must be aware that you are a sinner and be able to repent of those sins. Something of which an infant incapable of doing. Please just read the text, it’s right there in black and white. Sheesh!

 

[SolaFide]

What do Protestants make of the following verse:

1 John 4:16 - God is love, and whoever lives in love lives in union with God and God lives in union with him.

Could this imply that a peaceful and loving non-christian (eg: muslims) can make it to heaven?

I realise the Protestant argument is based on Jesus; But considering Jesus is God, and God is Love, then that would imply that Jesus is Love and Love is Jesus. Therefore, whoever lives in love lives in Jesus. Right?

First of all, there is so much more to God’s character than just love. He is holy, unable to tolerate sin in His presence. He is righteous. He is just, demanding punishment for sin. The Bible clearly says that God’s wrath abides on those who do NOT accept the offer of salvation. Everybody loves to quote John 3:16 but they stop there and don’t read the verse in context. Shall we be true to the text and read it…oh let’s:

Joh 3:16 For this is the way God loved the world: he gave his one and only Son that everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
Joh 3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him.
Joh 3:18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.

Notice that condemned already part. There are other places in the Bible which back this up.

Joh 3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects the Son will not see life, **but God’s wrath remains on him. **

Notice God’s wrath REMAINS on him, not comes on him. This means that God’s wrath is already on the one who does not believe in the Son.

Rom 5:8 But God demonstrates his own love for us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
Rom 5:9 Much more then, because we have now been declared righteous by his blood, **we will be saved through him from God’s wrath. **
Rom 5:10 For if while **we were enemies **we were reconciled to God through the death of his son, how much more, since we have been reconciled, will we be saved by his life?

Notice those who are not born again are God’s enemies and will experience His wrath.

Jesus came to reconcile two parties at enmity with one another God and man. Jesus as God in the flesh is the only one who could offer a holy and perfect sacrifice to satisfy God’s standards. What do you think the word “propitiation” means?

2435
ἱλαστήριον
hilastērion
Thayer Definition:

1. relating to an appeasing or expiating, having placating or expiating force, expiatory; a means of appeasing or expiating, a propitiation
   1a) used of the cover of the ark of the covenant in the Holy of Holies, which was sprinkled with the blood of the expiatory victim on the annual day of atonement (this rite signifying that the life of the people, the loss of which they had merited by their sins, was offered to God in the blood as the life of the victim, and that God by this ceremony was appeased and their sins expiated); hence the lid of expiation, the propitiatory
   1b) an expiatory sacrifice
   1c) a expiatory victim
   Part of Speech: noun neuter
   A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: from a derivative of G2433
   Citing in TDNT: 3:318, 362

Rom 3:21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets,
Rom 3:22 even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference;
Rom 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Rom 3:24 being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus,
Rom 3:25 whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed,
Rom 3:26 to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.

Jesus’ sacrifice appeased the just wrath of a holy and righteous God. To say that someone can just waltz into heaven by being a “good person” is to spit in the eye of God and blaspheme the very sacrifice of Christ. When Jesus sweat blood in the Garden of Gethsemane he was basically pleading with the Father if there were any other way that men might be saved then let’s go with that plan.

Since Jesus went to the cross, then there was no “Plan B.” All people everyone of every religious and ethnic persuasion must all come to God the same way…through Jesus Christ.

Joh 14:6 Jesus replied, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. **No one **comes to the Father except through me.

 

[Charlie_Zeaiter]

There are some people who can not learn about Jesus Christ; They live in oppression, or have been brainwashed, or can not learn about Jesus because they are just separated from the people of Israel (eg, indigenous people of other countries).

I’ve often wandered if their souls have been saved or wasted.

Can people get a second chance - after death - to learn and have faith in Jesus Christ?

 

[mark_a]

Surprisingly (I was surprised when I discovered it) nothing that I can tell.

I sense that your post was intended to start a conflict, but you won’t get one from me on this issue.

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

 

[mark_a]

As

most

How can this be?