Do Protestants really follow the Bible alone?

[JonNC]

Nothing creates ecumenism quicker than a common foe.

Like the HHS mandate.

Jon

 

[joe370]

Lutherans follow the Bible along with the writings of Luther (Large Catechism, Small Catechism, etc). Reformed and Presbyterians follow the Bible along with the writings of John Calvin. Etc.

Good question. If they really do follow the bible alone, as opposed to allegiance to some sort of church teaching office, then that makes each scripture alone advocate the final teacher, in terms of discerning doctrinal truth. The only question remains is: are their interpretations fallible (wrong) or infallible (right)? Must be fallible given the fact that almost all protestants are united on one thing: the catholic church cannot teach infallibly, via the guidance of God.

 

[joe370]

Sure. Quote away. You know the problem, Joe, because it is true in the CC, too: poor catechesis. If she doesn’t want to come here, send me an email and I’ll email you back.

Jon

Good point…and will do brother…

 

[benjohnson]

Like the HHS mandate.

Jon

Isn’t that the truth. When it comes to this mandate, teach me to pray the rosery, give me a brown scapular, and call me a Catholic in sympathy.

Thanks to PR and JustaServent for the kind words, and for the continued hospitality!

 

[JustaServant]

Hey, don’t mention it Ben.
Once again, like in the other thread, dberrie disappears and leaves questions unanswered and hanging.
He reminds me of Topper and Smedley, the two lisping French aristocrats in Blackadder:

Topper: …I’ve just remembered: my father’s just died! I’ve got to be at his funeral in ten minutes! Goodbye, Your Highness.
Smedley: Oh,… I’m the best man

Blackadder the Third, Nob and Nobility.
(slightly cleaned up for CAF)

 

[Porknpie]

Lutherans are a cross between Catholic and Protestant.

What…where…what…where do come up with this?

This is just not factually correct. Lutherans are protestant although some are very liturgical in their service and have more in common with the Catholic Church than some other Protestant denominations. Well at least this is particularly true with the LCMS…

 

[JonNC]

Good question. If they really do follow the bible alone, as opposed to allegiance to some sort of church teaching office, then that makes each scripture alone advocate the final teacher, in terms of discerning doctrinal truth. The only question remains is: are their interpretations fallible (wrong) or infallible (right)? Must be fallible given the fact that almost all protestants are united on one thing: the catholic church cannot teach infallibly, via the guidance of God.

And of course the answer to this that sola scriptura means that Luther himself is accountable to scripture. Lutherans know this. They know this about all the Lutheran reformers, about Calvin, about the ECF’s also.

Since sola scriptura does not mean the exclusion of Tradition, or teachers or teachings, doctrines or dogma, but only means that said are held accountable to scripture as the final norm, then it is not inconsistent with sola scriptura for Lutherans to cite Luther, the ECF’s, Chemnitz, etc., when what they teach is consistent with scripture.

Lutherans believe without question (well confessional Lutherans) that the Book of Concord in general, and more specifically Augsburg, its Apology and the Small Catechism rightly reflect the truth of the faith. I don’t know if that qualifies as infallibility.

So, what about the early Church? The creeds and councils. Infallible? I don’t know, but they certainly are authoritative.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

What…where…what…where do come up with this?

This is just not factually correct. Lutherans are protestant although some are very liturgical in their service and have more in common with the Catholic Church than some other Protestant denominations. Well at least this is particularly true with the LCMS…

Come on, Pork. What’s not to love?

Jon

 

[joe370]

And of course the answer to this that sola scriptura means that Luther himself is accountable to scripture. Lutherans know this. They know this about all the Lutheran reformers, about Calvin, about the ECF’s also.

Since sola scriptura does not mean the exclusion of Tradition, or teachers or teachings, doctrines or dogma, but only means that said are held accountable to scripture as the final norm, then it is not inconsistent with sola scriptura for Lutherans to cite Luther, the ECF’s, Chemnitz, etc., when what they teach is consistent with scripture.

Lutherans believe without question (well confessional Lutherans) that the Book of Concord in general, and more specifically Augsburg, its Apology and the Small Catechism rightly reflect the truth of the faith. I don’t know if that qualifies as infallibility.

So, what about the early Church? The creeds and councils. Infallible? I don’t know, but they certainly are authoritative.

Jon

Hey Jon, I understand that within the Lutheran church, everything is held accountable to scripture as the final norm, and that the Book of Concord in general, and more specifically Augsburg, its Apology and the Small Catechism, rightly reflect the truth of the Lutheran faith.

Is there in fact a teaching office (which of course is held accountable to scripture as the final norm, and the Book of Concord etc, which are used by the teaching office to properly reflect the truth) in the Lutheran church to properly discern truth when truth is challenged, God forbid or when disputes arise?

 

[JonNC]

Hey Jon, I understand that within the Lutheran church, everything is held accountable to scripture as the final norm, and that the Book of Concord in general, and more specifically Augsburg, its Apology and the Small Catechism, rightly reflect the truth of the Lutheran faith.

Is there in fact a teaching office (which of course is held accountable to scripture as the final norm, and the Book of Concord etc, which are used by the teaching office to properly reflect the truth) in the Lutheran church to properly discern truth when truth is challenged, God forbid or when disputes arise?

In the LCMS, the leaders of our synod.

Jon

 

[joe370]

In the LCMS, the leaders of our synod.

Jon

OK. Thanks…There is no synod where my Lutheran family members go…

 

[Porknpie]

Isn’t that the truth. When it comes to this mandate, teach me to pray the rosery, give me a brown scapular, and call me a Catholic in sympathy.

Thanks to PR and JustaServent for the kind words, and for the continued hospitality!

Ben,

I believe Luther was positive on these words:

“Hail Mary full of grace,
The Lord is with thee,
Bless art thou amongst women,
and bless is the fruit of they womb Jesus”

All from scripture…and attests to scripture in “all generations shall call me blessed”. Sadly, some “protestants” ignore Mary or worse. Luther did not.

You can certainly meet us half-way and honor Mary and Jesus by doing so.

 

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 ]—I agree–and it is a different meaning that what most mainline Protestants confess. They are faith that is alone for salvation–no acts of obedience necessary for salvation.

I agree–which translates into most of the Protestants not believeing that any acts of obedience is necessary for salvation. Lutherans and the Church of Christ being an exception.

Please–no misunderstanding. I do not misunderstand what you are saying–only that most Protestants do not believe that there are any acts of obedience necessary for salvation. The sola fide of the Lutherans and the sola fide of most of the Protestants take on two entirely different meanings.

No, I really don’t think you know what you are talking about. You are not describing “Faith alone”, you describing is Calvinism.

Most Calvinist are probably included as faith alone adherents, and I am describing the faith alone of most Protestant denominations.That means no acts of obedience to Jesus Christ necessary for salvation.

That verses some Protestant denominational beliefs—such as might include Luther himself–which believe that there are works that must be done in order to gain salvation.

Those two faith alone theologies are two different belief systems–with two different sola fide definitions.

Faith alone for most Protestant denominations means just that–faith that is alone for salvation.

In what other way do you believe Protestants do not follow the Bible at all?

The Trinity. Church organization and authority. Continueing revelation. The Atonement. Almost every doctrine of the NT church. They do believe in Jesus Christ as the Savior and Redeemer of the World–which is one of the few salvational truths left in Protestantism, when speaking of the faith that is alone for salvation.

 

[batman1973]

Ben,

I believe Luther was positive on these words:

“Hail Mary full of grace,
The Lord is with thee,
Bless art thou amongst women,
and bless is the fruit of they womb Jesus”

All from scripture…and attests to scripture in “all generations shall call me blessed”. Sadly, some “protestants” ignore Mary or worse. Luther did not.

You can certainly meet us half-way and honor Mary and Jesus by doing so.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lutheran_Marian_theology This is an interesting read. Being that it’s wikipedia, I cant verify accuracy

 

[dberrie2000]

Originally Posted by dberrie2000 Lutherans are a cross between Catholic and Protestant.

What…where…what…where do come up with this?

This is just not factually correct.

I’m not sure what you mean by “factually”–but Lutherans are a cross between the Protestant Reformation and Catholicism.

The faith alone of most Protestant denominations are faith that is alone for salvation. The Lutherans add works into the salvational equasion. That is a mix somewhere between Catholicism and Protestantism. The sola fide of the Lutherans and that of most Protestant denominations are very different. Adding works into the mix is an anathema to most Protestant denominations, when referring to salvation. It’s a deal breaker. For Martin Luther–works were essential for salvation.

Lutherans are protestant although some are very liturgical in their service and have more in common with the Catholic Church than some other Protestant denominations. Well at least this is particularly true with the LCMS…

Yes–I relate with the Lutherans and the Catholics. Anyone who teaches that there are no acts of obedience necessary for His grace unto life is not what I call Biblical.

 

[dberrie2000]

Now I’ve been to my share of different denominations and I am very interested in Theology and I’ll be the first one to admit that I am not an expert or a Doctor in such matters.

However, you sound a bit on the arrogant side in the way you seem to appoint yourself to speak for most (mainline) Protestant denominations. Perhaps you can share your credentials to back such authority?

So that we can have a more educated exchange: Are you a 5 point Calvinist, 4 point, 3 point, Not Calvinist, other? It will help understand where you stand, and we can then know exactly what it is you mean when posting your rebuttals. It would benefit us all if you can also define the terms you use in your posts. It minimizes the risk of misunderstanding what you are trying to say.

Thanks.

Isaiah–I agree with your scriptures. You misunderstand me. I am LDS–and do not believe in the faith that is alone for salvation theology. I believe that works(obedience to Jesus Christ)–including baptism–is essential for salvation.

But most sola fide denominations do not. They are faith that is alone for salvation. No acts of obedience to Jesus Christ necessary for salvation.

 

[joe370]

The faith alone of most Protestant denominations are faith that is alone for salvation. The Lutherans add works into the salvational equasion. That is a mix somewhere between Catholicism and Protestantism. The sola fide of the Lutherans and that of most Protestant denominations are very different. Adding works into the mix is an anathema to most Protestant denominations, when referring to salvation. It’s a deal breaker. For Martin Luther–works were essential for salvation.

Yes–I relate with the Lutherans and the Catholics. Anyone who teaches that there are no acts of obedience necessary for His grace unto life is not what I call Biblical.

 

[fordhamstudent]

Most contemporary Protestant scholars today assert that the solas of the Reformation are oversimplifications of complex theological and biblical issues regarding soteriology. Sola Scriptura is indefensible today since it rejects the source of the Scriptures, namely the Catholic Church who compiled and canonized the texts, and it is not supportable by modern Protestant biblical scholarship who has clearly shown that the text of the New Testament with all of its variants and scribal and redactor errors, cannot be the foundation of Protestantism. Sola Christe is unsupportable since it rejects the Church Christ founded as the vehicle for salvation and is a denial of the promise of Christ that the gates of hades will not prevail against the Church. Sola fide and gratia are indefensible since they deny that the believer can become “perfect as the Father is perfect” as the Scriptures attest. Fundamentally, private judgment–a Protestant notion–has only created division instead of unity and confusion instead of clarity of truth.

Luther’s primary problem is he universalized Augustinian theology as being the primary theological paradigm of the Catholic Church, when he neglected to realize and differentiate between the Germanic and Augustinian Catholicism he experienced and the various expressions of Catholic faith in the other religious orders, other national expressions, and did not even consider that one could hold to Eastern Christian views in the Church united to Rome. The Reformers had tunnel vision and collapsed within their limited perspective on the Catholic Church and only judged the Church based on their experience of a localized and national Catholic expression. We however, are called to be in dialogue with the children of the Reformers since the Council and we should hold them with esteem, love, and respect. The children of error should not be punished because of their parents.

 

[Porknpie]

Come on, Pork. What’s not to love?

Jon

:hug1:

 

[Porknpie]

I’m not sure what you mean by “factually”–but Lutherans are a cross between the **Protestant Reformation **and Catholicism.

Ok, wiki I know

Facts below…

The Protestant Reformation was the 16th-century schism within Western Christianity initiated by Martin Luther, John Calvin and other early Protestants.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reformation