"Faith Alone" dying among Protestants?

  • Thread starter Thread starter DeFide
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
What exactly are the 5 solas?
Click to expand...
Sola Fide
Sola Scriptura
Sola Gratia - salvation by grace alone
Solo Christo - salvation by Christ alone
Soli Deo Gloria - glory to God alone
 
40.png
Philthy:
How’d I do David?
Click to expand...
Well…

My fault. Used “Baptist” when I should not have. Wanted to relate to the topic of the thread.

Catholics introduced me to “sola scriptura” on the internet.

How could I be a Prot and have missed that? My background is Unitarian. Not UU. Classical Unitarianism. Of the Adams, Jefferson, Channing sort. T.S. Eliot’s heritage.

Oddly enough, we Federalist swamp Yankees found Catholics easier to take than Fundamentalists. Catholics were accepted. Probably because of the tradition of the faith.
 
40.png
David_Paul:
Well, I tried.

Sheesh.

It is not a them vs us mentality.

You want to talk about the Catholics who aided and adetted communists in the Soviet Union?

I got the data. Personal stuff.
Click to expand...
Jesus only promised that His Church would prevail…not the people in it. There are “bad” Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics etc. just as there are “good” Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Catholics etc. Being good or bad has no effect on the Church’s continuation or it’s moral stance etc.

God Bless,
Donna :love:
 
It never was predominent. I think only about 40% of the Protestant denominations ever really espoused Sola Fide.
 
My step brother is a Baptist Youth Minister, and from talking with him, he does not teach sola fide. In fact, I come across this teaching less and less among protestant denominations… One small baby step closer, perhaps, maybe, sort of, to actually agreeing with each other…
 
40.png
phish:
i do not see a change…
Click to expand...
Perhaps it has to do with the part of the country one lives in. But I live in Ca, where logic doesn’t exactly abound in massive quantities, so the sola fide should be alive and well here. 🙂

In Christ,
DJ
 
40.png
livingtashlikh:
I don’t see that much of a widespread change. Although, when I bring it up, many Protestants confess at least a little doubt in “faith alone”.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Luter himself had a problem with that. He had a private problem with what he taught officially, as well. I’ve read a Baptist minister writing about judgement from works. Just about everyone realises that God’s grace is crucial to salvation.

As for faith: If faith believes that X is proper and Y is wrong and you still do Y, then what is that faith worth? How much can it take before corrupting? Next, having faith is already a gracious gift from God. So it looks like the argument is about semantics. When it comes to theology, we’re mostly bickering over semantics. Problems start when we’re talking morals. Desires have a huge power of affecting theology. This isn’t true just of Luter or Calvin or Henry VIII or whomever. It’s a fact. What they believed and taught publicly, many Catholics believe. That or other ideas.
 
In thinking about the sola scriptura issue, I

posted the following in another thread:

"It seems to me that when Protestants speak of faith,
they mean a lively faith that embraces what Jesus
taught, which includes what St.James called “works.”

It is how works are* viewed* that constitutes the
real divide: works as an expression of gratitude
and obedience, or works as salvific?

Just my take,
reen12
 
I think the answer to your question is a qualified yes. Coming from a Protestant background myself, I have found that is typically the newer and less hierarchical denominations that tend to hold more stringently to sola fide. Such movements like fundamentalism and non-denominational evangelicalism emphasize the necessity of internal radical conversion of the self; many of their members are “converts” from non-religiousity or another faith tradition. As these churches/denominations age, and accordingly raise their children up in the church, the younger generation is taught that the sine qua non of faith is conversion, but many are “converted” at such a young age that said “conversion” is not really seen as a conversion at all. To them, all they know is the church. As such, the emphasis for the younger generation shifts towards “living out their faith” rather than “coming to faith”. As Protestant denominations and/or churches age, the membership comes recognizes works and the life of faith in addition to the conversion ethic. As such, the balance of emphasis tips away from sola fide to “how should we now live?”.
 
I voted No simply because if a person rejects justification by faith alone (sola fide) he/she really isn’t a protestant anymore anyway. That is one of the doctrines that makes a protestant a protestant. It’s like asking is papal infallability dying among Catholics. The answer would have to be no because if a person rejects papal infallability they really aren’t genuine Catholics. Acceptance of those doctrines goes with the territory.
 
40.png
Uranage:
I voted No simply because if a person rejects justification by faith alone (sola fide) he/she really isn’t a protestant anymore anyway. That is one of the doctrines that makes a protestant a protestant. It’s like asking is papal infallability dying among Catholics. The answer would have to be no because if a person rejects papal infallability they really aren’t genuine Catholics. Acceptance of those doctrines goes with the territory.
Click to expand...
I’m not so sure about the sola fide being a requirement to be a protestant (at least not in today’s world) as I do see quite a few churches that teach faith and works, at least around my area. After all, aren’t Anglicans protestant? Or is it only those belief systems that came out of the Reformation? Or do they believe in faith alone also? I don’t think so, but I am pretty sure they don’t. I guess this would be a good time for me to study up on the subject. :o

In Christ,
DJ
 
40.png
Uranage:
I voted No simply because if a person rejects justification by faith alone (sola fide) he/she really isn’t a protestant anymore anyway. That is one of the doctrines that makes a protestant a protestant. It’s like asking is papal infallability dying among Catholics. The answer would have to be no because if a person rejects papal infallability they really aren’t genuine Catholics. Acceptance of those doctrines goes with the territory.
Click to expand...
Not all Protestants are sola fide, and sola fide is not a “doctrine” of Protestants.

Even is sola fide is declining among Protestant denominations, it is unlikely (as others have noted) that more Protestants will gravtate to the Catholic church. To do so would mean accepting the teaching authority of the magisterium as defined by the Church. One can reject traditional Protestant sola fide (and also sola scriptura) but also reject the authority of the Magisterium.

This is what many are already doing in any practical sense, because it still allows the individual to ignore difficult or unpopular church teachings while avoiding at the same time the problematic or difficult theological ramifications of the the “solas.”

What I think we will see, as the theological differences between Catholics and liturgical Protestants narrow, is the emergence of denominational differences based more on traditions. That is, different groups will claim the authority of different traditions, or they will interpret Christian history and tradition in different ways, and so yield understanding of Christianity. In the end, there will still be denominations that justify gay marriage or deny the infallibility and authority of the pope or allow birth control, etc. They will simply use a different logical/theological train to get there.
 
Among conservative Protestants it is. But that is an inevitability. Many know that homosexuality is a sin, and they aren’t going to sit there and say that every homosexual who’s ever said the Jesus prayer is on the path to heaven, that would make it pretty pointless to be against things like gay marriage.

I am not sure where my church goes with it, but what I’ve been taught in Bible studies is that you have the Holy Spirit with you, and that leads you away from sin and helps you become more Christ-like, and if you are truly dwelling in Christ you have the spirit, and will be saved. If you are just rejecting him and going your own way, then not.

But they never had clear answers about people who “accepted” Christ but still continued to love sin and wallow in it on purpose. Apparently being “saved” wasn’t enough to make them want to stop, and yet they were still considered “saved” because they believed.

And to that I say, Huh?? How can people who teach Bible study ignore SO much of the Bible?

I really think you are saved by FOLLOWING Christ, not just by believing. And I guess I’m still a protestant.
 
My observations are very experiential.

I just recently finished a small group study with a bunch of non-denominational protestants. The study centered on a product written by one of the “Willow Creek” poeple (Chicago suburban HUGE evangelical church) entitled something like “Don’t all Religions Lead to God?”. The last of 5 chapters talked about what happens to people who have never heard of Jesus.

Anyhow, since the topic was basically about salvation, the discussion was mostly on the merits of sola fide and how a person avails themselves to the Grace that pours out from the cross. It turned out that of all the people in the group (about 10 or so), there was really only one of them that stuck to the typical Protestant notion of faith alone in Jesus. Nearly every other member’s discussion contributions gave de facto agreement to the idea that works matter; that “faith alone” isn’t enough, and more suprisingly, to the idea that salvation is possible for the “invincably ignorant”.

It was a very interesting discussion, simply because it took very little probing from me (the only Catholic) for the other members to draw openly different conlcusions than what the protestant study guide was obiously trying to impress. Some even took it too far, moving into the realm of the Pelagian heresy!

The one staunch protestant continues to hold that good works are the product of a saving faith, not a necessary component of it. He basically holds the standard belief that one who is saved will not commit grave sin, and if they do, then they were never saved to begin with. He also clearly believes in OSAS.

So it seems that the average protestant does not intrinsically believe in faith alone, but those who have been indoctrinated with that teaching hold to it.

Peace,
javelin
 
40.png
javelin:
The one staunch protestant continues to hold that good works are the product of a saving faith, not a necessary component of it. He basically holds the standard belief that one who is saved will not commit grave sin, and if they do, then they were never saved to begin with. He also clearly believes in OSAS.

Peace,
javelin
Click to expand...
My father-in-law sounds like that… His belief is that since he is “saved” he is unable to sin at all and dosen’t do “bad things 'cause Jesus wouldn’t do them.” Even if he did do “bad things” he’s already been totally forgiven anyway. As wacked out as that sounds He really does believe that, honest.
 
i don’t see that at all operating among the protestants…i see the exact opposite…i see more operating in faith as a belief for their salvation than putting their hope for salvation in their works…i believe its a doctrinal line that has to be drawn…salvation is by faith alone by grace…otherwise if salvation is obtained also by works…then christs death is in vain…we can’t do any work that will gain us access to salvation…but only through believing on christ…we do good works as it corresponds with the nature, the love of god that is shed abroad in our hearts…we are not justified by our works but by faith…

Ceasar
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top