Calvin or Luther or someone else?

[BrianGular]

It would be pretty unreasonble to believe that the Church Jesus found would fall into apostasy…

I don’t know, wisdom seeker. The history of Israel demonstrates that God does allow his people to slip into apostasy while preserving a remnant of the faithful. You would probably disagree, but the orthodox Protestant position would be that those who agitated against the abuses of the church were the remnant.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I don’t know, wisdom seeker. The history of Israel demonstrates that God does allow his people to slip into apostasy while preserving a remnant of the faithful. You would probably disagree, but the orthodox Protestant position would be that those who agitated against the abuses of the church were the remnant.

Although Israel slipped many times, God never pulled away from israel. He adomineshed and punished them until they repented. God built a nation and Jesus built a Church to teach all men. God made a Covenant with His Church and He cannot break the Covenant. Besides just because there are some bad apples, it does not mean that Jesus would abandoned the Church. The remnant is in the Church, they dont leave. it is the holy ones in teh Church taht will continue on. there is only one Church and not many.

The bad apples in teh Church, it is not us who judge them but it is God alone. how God deals with them it is His right and only Him knows what to do with them. luther was a rebellious man who lead a revolt against the holy of Church of God. God dealt with him in the end and with the others.

 

[jlhargus]

I don’t know, wisdom seeker. The history of Israel demonstrates that God does allow his people to slip into apostasy while preserving a remnant of the faithful. You would probably disagree, but the orthodox Protestant position would be that those who agitated against the abuses of the church were the remnant.

JL: Which of the thousands of Protestant faith groups would you define as orthodox? Those who do not hold OSAS or those who do? Those who hold faith alone or those who don’t? Those who hold bible alone or those who don’t? Those who baptize infants or those who don’t? Those who hold baptism is necessary or those who don’t? Those who hold the real presents or those who don’t? Those who hold the Trinity or those who don’t? Those who hold Tradition or those who don’t? Those who don’t hold a secret rapture or those who do? Those who hold dispensationalism or those who don’t? etc., etc., etc…

 

[BrianGular]

JL: Which of the thousands of Protestant faith groups would you define as orthodox? Those who do not hold OSAS or those who do? Those who hold faith alone or those who don’t? Those who hold bible alone or those who don’t? Those who baptize infants or those who don’t? Those who hold baptism is necessary or those who don’t? Those who hold the real presents or those who don’t? Those who hold the Trinity or those who don’t? Those who hold Tradition or those who don’t? Those who don’t hold a secret rapture or those who do? Those who hold dispensationalism or those who don’t? etc., etc., etc…

Hello, JL. I hope you are well.

I can understand how, looking in from the outside, the existence of an orthodox Protestantism seems impossible. J. I. Packer and Thomas Oden conducted an analysis of this issue in their book, “One Faith.” The authors acknowledge the problems caused by multiple Protestant denominations, but their summary argues compellingly for evangelical consensus in the following areas:

• The Good News: the heart of the Gospel
• The Bible: the authority of Holy Scripture
• The One True God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit
• Human life under God: creation fallen into sin
• Jesus Christ: his person and work
• Christ’s reconciling work on the cross: his penal substitution for our sins
• The exalted Lord: his resurrection, ascension, and session
• Justification by grace through faith: the acquittal
• The meaning of salvation: God saves sinners
• The sending of the Holy Spirit: uniting the faithful to Christ
• The holy life: sanctifying grace
• Unity and truth of the Gospel: the unity of all believers
• The church: the people of God
• Religious pluralism and the uniqueness of Christ: salvation in Christ alone
• Christian social responsibility: the integration of words and deeds
• The future: the last things

Packer and Oden do not claim that this list represents orthodoxy. Their focus is unity of conviction among Protestants. To portray Protestantism as “division” is simply neither accurate nor complete because there is a large body of consensus.

That there is disagreement among Protestants does not nullify the orthodoxy of a common faith. If it were so then American Roman Catholics are in trouble, too. A recent poll conducted by Catholic University sociologist William D’Antonio suggests disagreement among the faithful. Some highlights:

• 86% of Catholics say it’s possible to disagree with official church teaching on key issues and still be a loyal member of the faith
• 78% say you an be a good Catholic without going to Mass every week (Only 31% do attend weekly)
• 40% say you can be a good Catholic without believing in transubstantiation
• Only 30% support the teaching authority claimed by the Vatican (suggests 70% don’t)
• 88% say how you live is more important than whether you are Catholic

You can read the results for yourself here:

usatoday.com/news/religion/story/2011-10-24/catholic-religious-identity-survey/50891152/1

It would seem Roman Catholics and Protestants share some common characteristics.

 

[Telestia]

I see that I have forgotten this topic, and there are many replies I was not around to answer. I hope to return to it soon, and respond to those who replied to me.

I think at this time and since that I am posting here, that I should share with posters on this forum my limitations.

In September, 2005, I had a stroke that left me mentally disabled. I’m good in the here and now can carry on a good conversation, though I may have trouble recalling some specifics at any given moment. I can not multitask mentally, the more issues I’m dealing with at any given moment - the more likely my mind will shut down. I get sleepy at random parts of the day, my mind simply turns off.

For this reason I am unemployable. The few jobs I was able to get since the stroke, I could not keep them. More recently, I have gone through bankruptcy, and my home is heading toward foreclosure. Don’t cry for me, my heart is filled joy, for my redeemer lives, and in God I truly trust. I have a real and good relationship with God, Father-Son-Holy Spirit.

However, when I write on forums these days, I am good in the here and now, but I quickly forget what I wrote, who I wrote to, what thread title I wrote in, and specifically what I did write.

So I am glad that this forum puts a little sign on threads that I wrote on, and that is how today, I found my posts on this thread and the unanswered responses made to what I had posted. I plan to reply to them, but not today, Thanksgiving Day.

Happy Thanksgiving Day to all.

 

[jlhargus]

Hello, JL. I hope you are well.

I can understand how, looking in from the outside, the existence of an orthodox Protestantism seems impossible. J. I. Packer and Thomas Oden conducted an analysis of this issue in their book, “One Faith.” The authors acknowledge the problems caused by multiple Protestant denominations, but their summary argues compellingly for evangelical consensus in the following areas:

First I came from a Protestant background I was there looking from the inside. Knowing scripture and my Protestant faith.

• The Good News: the heart of the Gospel

JL: I agree the Good News is the heart of the Gospel. Also both as a Protestant and now Catholic I believed one could lose salvation and OSAS is a false Gospel. So is that ONE common orthodox FAITH?

• The Bible: the authority of Holy Scripture

JL: I agree Scripture is authoritative and as some Protestants I believe scripture ALONE is not the ONLY authority is that one common orthodox faith?

• The One True God: Father, Son and Holy Spirit

JL: I agree yet some Protestants believe the Trinity is a false Gospel.

• Human life under God: creation fallen into sin

JL:   I agree human life is under God and creation is fallen.

• Jesus Christ: his person and work

JL: I agree in the personhood of Jesus Christ and His work What does this really mean? Answer; whatever anyone wants it to mean.

• Christ’s reconciling work on the cross: his penal substitution for our sins

JL: I agree in Christ reconcling work on the cross suffering the cruse for our sins.

• The exalted Lord: his resurrection, ascension, and session

JL: So those who believe Christ resurrected, but NOT BODILY are just as othodox as those who believe in BODILY ressuection

• Justification by grace through faith: the acquittal

JL:  I agree justification by grace through faith when are sins are remitted at baptism.

• The meaning of salvation: God saves sinners

 JL:  I agree God saves sinners but along with the majority of Protestants I believe one can lose salvation.  So do those Protestants who believe in OSAS hold the same orthodox common faith as those who don't?

• The sending of the Holy Spirit: uniting the faithful to Christ

JL: I agree in ONE VISIBLE body of Christ.

• The holy life: sanctifying grace

JL: I agree.

• Unity and truth of the Gospel: the unity of all believers

JL: So the Gospel that one can lose salvation is in unity of the Gospel with the contradicting Gospel of OSAS?

• The church: the people of God

JL:  I agree and that Church subsists in the Catholic Church.   Which can be seen, heard, name leaders, and found in history.  As opposed to that elusive phantom that can’t be seen, heard, name leaders of or found in history.

[Mk 9:38 And JOHN answered him, SAYING, MASTER, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and HE FOLLOWETH NOT **US: and WE FORBAD HIM, because HE FOLLOWETH NOT US. 39 But JESUS SAID, FORBID HIM NOT: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40 For he that is not against US is on OUR PART.] Christ established, and SENT one fellowship to TEACH the whole world till the end, promising to be WITH THEM ALWAYS. The Holy Spirit works thru those separated denominations not in visible union with the Apostles Fellowship. Uniting them to the ONE fellowship in a spiritual way. All Christ’s children are spiritually, although not visibly nor holding the apostles doctrine fully, united to the Catholic Church or body of Christ. [1Tm3:15 But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself IN THE HOUSE OF GOD, which is THE CHURCH of the living God, THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF TRUTH.] There can’t be thousands of pillars and grounds of TRUTH. Teaching contradicting doctrine. There is only ONE HOUSEHOLD OF GOD, that is the pillar and ground of truth. The ONE SENT by Christ the APOSTOLIC FELLOWSHIP and their successors, in union with St Rock (Peter).

• Religious pluralism and the uniqueness of Christ: salvation in Christ alone

JL:  I doubt that even all Protestant would agree with disorgainized religion.  Many other groups will not accept they have a religion.

• Christian social responsibility: the integration of words and deeds

JL:  Again I doubt all Protestant groups would accept this statement.  My formeer non-denomination would not accept it as is for sure.

• The future: the last things

JL: Well most everone believes in a future and last things, but many Protestants would disagree on the last things.

 

[jlhargus]

Packer and Oden do not claim that this list represents orthodoxy. Their focus is unity of conviction among Protestants. To portray Protestantism as “division” is simply neither accurate nor complete because there is a large body of consensus.

JL: You even admit Packer and Oden DO NOT CLAIM that this list represents ORTHODOXY. They are certainly right on that point. It’s unorthodox and ridiculous to say contradicting gospels are ALL orthodox. So one person’s truth, 2+2=3 is as true as another person’s truth that 2+2=4?. Even though they contradict. Ok, No Protestants I know would go alone with it. This list is so general as to be interpreted anyway one wanted. Maybe that’s your kind of orthodoxy. So why don’t all those contentious contradicting orthodox denominations UNITE under Packer and Oden? What’s the problem?

That there is disagreement among Protestants does not nullify the orthodoxy of a common faith.

JL: Thousands of contradicting Gospels and that’s a common orthodox faith? How can thousands of contradicting teachings such as the following be a common orthodox faith. Which following teachings are orthodox?

Those who do not hold OSAS or those who do? Those who hold faith alone or those who don’t? Those who hold bible alone or those who don’t? Those who baptize infants or those who don’t? Those who hold baptism is necessary or those who don’t? Those who hold the real presents or those who don’t? Those who hold the Trinity or those who don’t? Those who hold Tradition or those who don’t? Those who don’t hold a secret rapture or those who do? Those who hold dispensationalism or those who don’t? etc., etc., etc… Please tell me what does nullify orthodoxy?

If it were so then American Roman Catholics are in trouble, too. A recent poll conducted by Catholic University sociologist William D’Antonio suggests disagreement among the faithful. Some highlights:

• 86% of Catholics say it’s possible to disagree with official church teaching on key issues and still be a loyal member of the faith
• 78% say you an be a good Catholic without going to Mass every week (Only 31% do attend weekly)
• 40% say you can be a good Catholic without believing in transubstantiation
• Only 30% support the teaching authority claimed by the Vatican (suggests 70% don’t)
• 88% say how you live is more important than whether you are Catholic
  It would seem Roman Catholics and Protestants share some common characteristics.

JL: There are many common characteristics but NOT IN UNITY. There is a great difference between ONE official teaching and THOUSANDS of official teachings. Yes there are problems in the Church, but not with her teachings. Thru bad catecheses in the seventies and eighties most of two generations have been poorly or incorrectly taught. Short answer those who disagree with official teaching are simply mistaken.

There are many reasons why some disagree with a teaching. Not being properly taught, misunderstanding the teaching, not paying attention. Being taught by those in sheep’s clothing (false teachers) who want to change the teaching of the Church, God chastizing his people , etc. Or it simply could be a sign of the times. [2thes2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come A FALLING AWAY first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;]

 

[jlhargus]

I don’t know, wisdom seeker. The history of Israel demonstrates that God does allow his people to slip into apostasy while preserving a remnant of the faithful. You would probably disagree, but the orthodox Protestant position would be that those who agitated against the abuses of the church were the remnant.

JL: Yet God didn’t form another nation or people The remnant was still Israel the ONE people of God. I would argue the so called reformers are like the ten lost tribles who broke away. Scattered to the wind by every doctrine man can invent.