Most Protestants believe in SOLA FIDE but what about........???

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Yes - one must be born of water and the spirit. This is the teaching of the Catholic Church. Again, however, the idea that those who are not reborn somehow “…have a dead demonic faith” is not borne out by your scriptural references. It is this to which I take exception.

Jesus calls some of his hearers children of the devil (John 8); even though they boasted of Abraham as their father. If the devil is their father, their faith can be no better; which makes it both dead and demonic. Those who are not Christ’s, are the devil’s; - it is that simple, and that New Testamental.​

 

[AwGusTeen]

If you are a bag which you are told is full of sweets, which do you choose: bag or sweets ? Bag, of course: because by receiving the bag, you also get everything in it too.

Faith is like the bag: by having saving faith, one gains access to everything contained in faith, just as a valid conclusion of a syllogism in logic is contained in its premises. The bag is the only way to get the sweets - to have them, we must be given the bag alone; then we do have them.

And faith is “alone”, because works are not co-ordinated with it: faith, and not faith joined with works, is what leads to justification. Only after justification - which as St. Paul says is by faith & not by works - & not before justification, nor without it, do our works have any value before God. So the question of the works of a Christian belongs to a later stage; it is irrelevant to the beginnings of the life of grace.

Faith is alone, or it is not faith at all.

Just as a body without a spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead. Thus, to be alive there must coexist both body AND spirit, just as to have a live faith there must simultaneously be faith AND works. James uses this very analogy to drive home the point. You must deal with this.

 

[benedictus2]

That’s why you’re a Catholic and I’m a Reformed catholic.

You mean rebellious Catholic?

We see things differently. The Catholic view of infant baptismal regeneration drives your understanding of James 2. In my world, regeneration comes before faith in light of John 3.

I believe that is what Catholic understanding is too. That is why we baptize babies who really cannot profess any faith, but they are regenerated nontheless once they have been baptized.

 

[AwGusTeen]

Jesus calls some of his hearers children of the devil (John 8); even though they boasted of Abraham as their father. If the devil is their father, their faith can be no better; which makes it both dead and demonic. Those who are not Christ’s, are the devil’s; - it is that simple, and that New Testamental.​

Since it’s so cut and dried simple, then there shouldn’t be any exceptions. Thus, the poor soul who was born, lived, and died without ever knowing Christ or hearing the good news is both dead and demonic. And what of the infant who dies shortly after being born? By your interpretation that soul is also both dead and demonic. That’s the logical outcome of your interpretation.

 

[benedictus2]

Actually, we may be the only Christ some people ever see. We may be the only Bible some people ever read. Our mission is to carry Christ forward into the hearts and minds of those around us - and to be, as St. Francis says, “…an instrument of Thy peace…”

God bless

Excellent point !!

But we must also remember that what we need to proclaiim is Christ. So when we do good works, it is important to somehow let peope be aware that these good works are happening because of Christ.

I think far too often we become too involved in charity that we tend to forgt to evangelize.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Adam:

I think you forget that, for over 1,000 years, all there was was the Catholic Church, East and West. and, If you ask an Orthodox, they’ll claim they’re the Catholic Church today, and that the Catholics united with the Pope are the ones in schism. You forget that, for the first 300 years of the Church, you wouldn’t be able to question whether most Catholics were “Reborn from Above” (Actual Greek in John 3), because they were giving their lives for the Faith, from the youngest (a young kid who refused to release the Eucharist to a gang of thugs who beat him to death) to the oldest (a 100+ year-old man was burned at the stake for refusing to renounce Christ and offer a few grains in sacrifice to the emperor). and, In many Countries they still offer the ultimate sacrifice today - From the Martyrs (both Anglican and Catholic) in Uganda to the Underground Church in China to the many Catholics who risk their lives in Islamic Countries (the TAC lost a Bishop in Pakistan in 2003, and both the TAC and Catholic Church lost priests and other volunteers in Nigeria during the past decade).

These people knew they needed Christ - They knew they needed his love and grace.

We’re lucky to live in a country where we have Religious Freedom. Because of that, most people don’t have to risk much or sacrifice much for their faith. Because of that, we have a lot of people who are “Cultural Catholics”, “Weenie Roast Baptists” and “Rock n Roll Christians”. Thanks to that, the Church may have lost its salt - We’ve had Abortion on Demand for 36 years, surveys now say that most college age kids would accept Gay Marriage, even some Pro-Lifers are willing to accept Embryonic Stem-Cell Research, and some states have Medically Assisted Suicide (Euthanasia).

I don’t need to be reminded that, “Judgment begins with the Household of God,” or that the Day is near.

Much of what you referred to was the fruit of bad or no catechesis - No teaching on the things that mattered - Which went on from the Mid-1960’s to the Early 1990’s. Catholics went from a strict regime of instruction (The Baltimore Catechism - I even used it myself once in desperation) to NO Regime of Instruction (The Books I saw in 1983 HAD NO Doctrine - NOTHING - They were worse than “fluff”).

“Baptismal Regeneration” means God puts His brand or mark on us (You’ll see that in Revelation) and plants a seed of new life (Parable of the Sower). But has St. Paul said, someone has to water the seed, someone has to provide instruction & discipleship, and the parents (If the person was baptized as a baby) have to take the child to Mass, participate in the life of the parish/community, pray with the child & teach the child to pray.

I assume you know that, from any Alter Call, fewer than 20% actually make it past a year. Most don’t even find themselves a church community to go to. This was brought to light in a thread here called “Hell’s Best Kept Secret” The original link is dead and can be found using the Wayback Machine - Living Waters.com. It’s a POWERFUL thread, because of the link. Listen to it - It wasn’t preached in many Catholic Churches from 1970-1995 either, and we’re seeing the fruits.

Obviously, people who know they why they need God’s love and mercy will produce “fruits worthy of repentance”, walk in the Spirit producing, not fruits of the flesh, but fruits of the Spirit.

Your Brother & Servant in Christ, Michael

The First Great Awakening in America was based on sound doctrine and the work of the Spirit. The Second Great Awakening appears to be the invention of altar calls, sinner’s prayers and the man made doctrine of decision regeneration. Therefore, Protestants and Catholics alike have many in the church who profess Christ and are not converted. They posses a James chapter 2 faith with mental assent without a conversion by the Spirit.

 

[2nd_Adam]

God has prepared good works for his obedient children to walk in; works are to be done by them for many reasons - increase in merit is not at all the only reason possible; important as this for Catholics. Love of God & man, & obedience, & doing as Christ did on earth, are more than sufficient reasons for for Protestants to be zealous for good works: they are trying to glorify Him, not themselves. Why is that so hard to understand ? It’s in the NT, all of it.​

STM we should leave the reading of other men’s hearts to God - we cannot even read our own perfectly.​

Ephesians 2:8-10

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

I think this verse is very significant in regards to the role of good works for the Christian. If good works is necessary for a forensic justification, then man has something to boast about. If good works is produces because God is in us, then even our good works done in Christ is done by His power to His glory. The debate is never about the requirement of good works for saving faith. It is where you place the good works, and the purpose of good works in the life of a Christian. You have to admit or at least understand why many Protestant Christians believe that Catholic Christians have a gospel of good works and personal merit for salvation within the bibilcal doctrine of justification. IMO… I believe Pope Benedict understands this within his teaching on justification according to Paul. Protestants and Catholics both have to reconcile Paul and James. Catholics appear to reduce or eliminate what Paul teaches in regards to justification through James chapter 2. Historic Protestant theology reconciles Paul and James much better than Catholic theology.

 

[2nd_Adam]

We see things differently. The Catholic view of infant baptismal regeneration drives your understanding of James 2. In my world, regeneration comes before faith in light of John 3.

You mean rebellious Catholic?

I believe that is what Catholic understanding is too. That is why we baptize babies who really cannot profess any faith, but they are regenerated nontheless once they have been baptized.

I think there is significant difference in regards to regeneration comes before fiath between what we are sharing. I would imagine that Catholic theology teaches that through the sacrament of baptism, the Priest has the power to convert or regenerate infants. In Reformed theology, it is the Spirit (John 3) who does the work of regeneration in the heart of man, so he can freely respond with God given faith. It’s interesting that Catholic theology does consider infant baptism as the new birth, but IMO, it does not fit in John chapter 3. As a Reformed Christian, I do believe in infant baptism. I do not believe in infant baptismal regeneration.

John 3

You Must Be Born Again

3:1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews. 2 This man came to Jesus [1] by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.” 3 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again [2] he cannot see the kingdom of God.” 4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother’s womb and be born?” 5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.”

Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?” Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? 11 Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things? 13 No one has ascended into heaven except he who descended from heaven, the Son of Man. [7] 14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up, 15 that whoever believes in him may have eternal life.

 

[2nd_Adam]

Excellent point !!

But we must also remember that what we need to proclaiim is Christ. So when we do good works, it is important to somehow let peope be aware that these good works are happening because of Christ.

I think far too often we become too involved in charity that we tend to forgt to evangelize.

This is the best post that I’ve read so far. It is through the proclamation of the gospel that God saves sinners. Those who are born of the Spirit will do good works of charity to the glory of God, because God seed is in those who are born from above.

 

[RickHolland]

My husband and I decided to do an Alpha Course because we cannot know enough about our Christian Faith and it is good to reflect and exchange our thoughts with others and learn through them as we do on these forums.

We attend different groups. Last night we were given a blank cheque from Jesus Christ and we were told to fill our names in the blank. This morning as we awoke my husband (ex atheist) said. We owe a HUGE debt to Jesus. We owe Him so much - everything in fact - how can people say that he has paid for our sins and all we need for our salvation is to believe that Jesus is our Lord and Saviour. We need to show Jesus our gratitude through our obediance and that includes our LOVE for Him and for our neighbour. Our whole lives must be dedicated to “repaying” this debt through our behaviour, through good works. If our Faith is true we need to use the Grace we are given through the Sacraments to follow the precepts of our Lord.

I knew a Protestant who used to talk about his Faith all the time and he was fornicating and committing adultary openly! Jesus paid for his sins in advance so he had nothing to worry about!

Surely an intelligent person cannot embrace SOLA FIDE!!!

Cinette

Maybe not an intelligent person, but a regenerate person can and does.
Luke 10 - but rejoice that your names are recorded in heaven." 21 At that very time He rejoiced greatly in the Holy Spirit, and said, "I praise You, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that ***You have hidden these things from {the} wise and intelligent ***and have revealed them to infants. Yes, Father, for this way was well-pleasing in Your sight.

Sole Fide defined:
The doctrine of sola fide or “by faith alone” asserts God’s pardon for guilty sinners is granted to and received through faith or belief alone in Jesus/God alone, to the exclusion of all human efforts or works.

Eph 2 - For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.

Rom 3 - being justified as a gift by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus; 25 whom God displayed publicly as a propitiation in His blood through faith.

**Rom 3 **- He would be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus

Rom. 4 - But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, 6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

It goes on and on and on; justification is a gift and it is on the sole basis of faith in God. What you miss and apparently the person you described is that the evidence of that true faith results in the fruits of the spirit and living by the word, which is also a gift of God.

This person shows evidence of a profession and intellectual knowledge, but not the heart felt believe that God requires.

 

[RickHolland]

Actually, to me, it does make sense; I just choose not to believe in it. By sense, here I am not speaking to the validity of it, but I mean sense in a systematic way. In other words, I can understand, at least in a limited way, why many Protestants believe as they do, even though I don’t believe what they do.

Not to defend Sole Fide, which I believe to be false, but I don’t think it’s as simple as saying all you need is faith and good works are irrelevant. Most of the Protestants I speak with would make a distinction here to say good works are irrelevant for salvation, but they are not irrelevant in terms of living a Christian life on the model given us, even commanded of us, by Jesus. .

You have chosen by your own admission what the Word of God clearly and explicitly in a multitude of crystal clear passages in Scripture. Jesus is the living Word of God; so your denial is the equivilent, in God’s sight, of rejecting His the Word. Santification is the process where we are transformed into the image of Christ; it is not what justifies a person, it is the result of the justification and the new nature. Your denial of this, is the denial of the gospel, which is what to a soul?

You can argue with me or anyone else about it, but it is God that you must argue with because He is the justifier and He has set the standard and given us the living Word.

God bless you!

rick

 

[2nd_Adam]

1 Corinthians 1:30

And because of him you are in Christ Jesus, who became to us wisdom from God, righteousness and sanctification and redemption,

Let’s all give the glory to God for what He has done for us in Christ!

 

[RickHolland]

Not to mention good fruits coming from pagan, atheist, budhist, muslim trees?

This fact disproves their claim that we are saved by faith alone but that once we are saved then we are able to do good works.

Just goes to show that the theology of salvation is a bit more involved than this simplistic formulation.

You are seeing this from a fallen human perspective. God sees the intent of the heart concerning works; which is why they will be tested by fire to reveal to all which were the works prepared by God beforehand and which ones were done in the name of God but from a heart of self-righteousness.

You cannot disprove God’s Truth as revealed by His word; you can deny His truth, which you are and have based on what you wrote above. Sola Fide is not an invention like the office of papacy; it is a qualified truth that always existed, just not defined. One adds to God’s word, the other has always been part of His word.

You do not need to convine me or anyone that this is not so; you must refute God, He is the one who wrote it. Good luck on that one. R.I.P.

Blessings
rick

 

[RickHolland]

Dear Contarini -

In response to your first question I await first your response to Benedictus.

Insofar as transsubstatiation is concerned I refer you to John 6. It is as Jesus said. Do we understand it? Not really. It is a mystery and we acknowledge that we need Faith through our belief and trust in Jesus Christ. It is recommended that you read John 6 slowly and prayerfully.

I notice you say you are episcopalian. I know a number of Anglicans who also believe in transsubstantiation. But then there are different levels of Anglicanism are there not?

Blessings
Cinette

We would suggest you read John 6:63 seventy times seven times and drill it into your brain and write it on the tablets of your heart. Don’t you find it odd that the people that walked away in unbelief are the very people that believed in the literal feasting on Christ as opposed to the spiritual feasting of Christ?

Who does a priest think he is that has power to bring Jesus down from heaven and has more power than the cheribum, which Satan, Michael and Gabriel are and that Christ willingly bows in submission; you are out of your minds to believe that because you won’t find that in the smallest since in Scripture.

Jesus last words on the cross; It is FINISHED, which means it is complete, no more sacrafices or resacrifes or any other kind of sacrifice. No one on the NT practiced the literal eating of any flesh. Read the Acts of the apostles if you don’t believe me.

All of the solas have always been in Scripture, not just sola fide. But you must understand what they mean or don’t mean.

I pray God gives you spiritual eyes to see Him,
Blessings
rick

 

[RickHolland]

Hi, Roman_Catholic,

He certainly does!

Actually, we may be the only Christ some people ever see. We may be the only Bible some people ever read. Our mission is to carry Christ forward into the hearts and minds of those around us - and to be, as St. Francis says, “…an instrument of Thy peace…”

God bless

Let’s pray not; you don’t even know the gospel, so how would anyone be able to come to Christ without the gospel of grace?

If you think I am wrong, then tell us the gospel.

 

[Nominefili]

We would suggest you read John 6:63 seventy times seven times and drill it into your brain and write it on the tablets of your heart. Don’t you find it odd that the people that walked away in unbelief are the very people that believed in the literal feasting on Christ as opposed to the spiritual feasting of Christ?

Who does a priest think he is that has power to bring Jesus down from heaven and has more power than the cheribum, which Satan, Michael and Gabriel are and that Christ willingly bows in submission; you are out of your minds to believe that because you won’t find that in the smallest since in Scripture.

Jesus last words on the cross; It is FINISHED, which means it is complete, no more sacrafices or resacrifes or any other kind of sacrifice. No one on the NT practiced the literal eating of any flesh. Read the Acts of the apostles if you don’t believe me.

All of the solas have always been in Scripture, not just sola fide. But you must understand what they mean or don’t mean.

I pray God gives you spiritual eyes to see Him,
Blessings
rick

Yeah gonna have to disagree with you here. I do believe that the sacrifice of the Mass is the improper way to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, but there’s no indication in scripture that the Eucharist is anything other than the true Body and Blood of Christ.

 

[RickHolland]

Yeah gonna have to disagree with you here. I do believe that the sacrifice of the Mass is the improper way to celebrate the Lord’s Supper, but there’s no indication in scripture that the Eucharist is anything other than the true Body and Blood of Christ.

There is plenty of evidence; first coming from the lips of the Lord in Do this in REMEMBRANCE of me. Do a word search on that word and it is used exactly as it sounds and means in English. John 6:63 is the explanation of the Bread of Life sermon. Jesus broke bread and drank wine; not literal flesh and blood. In acts it is always refered to as “breaking bread”; not eating of flesh. Jesus does not institute something without providing the example, which He did at the Lord’s Supper; therefore to say there is no indication in Scripture is to ignore Scripture. There is plenty in Scripture that should leave the spiritual alive able to clearly see. Also, it is implicit in Scripture not to eat raw flesh and definitely not drink blood; He would be in direct violation of His own word. Impossible.

 

[AwGusTeen]

There is plenty of evidence; first coming from the lips of the Lord in Do this in REMEMBRANCE of me. Do a word search on that word and it is used exactly as it sounds and means in English. John 6:63 is the explanation of the Bread of Life sermon. Jesus broke bread and drank wine; not literal flesh and blood. In acts it is always refered to as “breaking bread”; not eating of flesh. Jesus does not institute something without providing the example, which He did at the Lord’s Supper; therefore to say there is no indication in Scripture is to ignore Scripture. There is plenty in Scripture that should leave the spiritual alive able to clearly see. Also, it is implicit in Scripture not to eat raw flesh and definitely not drink blood; He would be in direct violation of His own word. Impossible.

Do some research into the Jewish culture of Christ’s day and today. Rememberance does NOT mean simple recollection - it means to make it real and live it. Check out the passover ceremony.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Rick,

I think you may have jumped on the wrong end. The idea that DOShea was trying to stress is that if by SF one means the profess Christ as their Savior and never lift another finger to either strengthen their belief in Christ or to aid their neighbor. In effect, "If saying, ‘Lord! Lord’ is all that is necessary, then I can handle that.

From my understanding of Protestantism today, few have this meaning. Such a meaning has never been a Catholic belief. Maybe we are really on the same page…

If you don’t mind, I have two questions of you… Thanks in advance.

(1.) I am not familiar with a Religion called “His”. Would you mind telling me about it?

(2.) I would appreciate it if you would clarify the statement that I emboldened below, specific to John 6’s treatment of the Eucharist.

Thanks.

**You have chosen by your own admission what the Word of God clearly and explicitly in a multitude of crystal clear passages in Scripture. Jesus is the living Word of God; so your denial is the equivilent, in God’s sight, of rejecting His the Word. ** Santification is the process where we are transformed into the image of Christ; it is not what justifies a person, it is the result of the justification and the new nature. Your denial of this, is the denial of the gospel, which is what to a soul?

You can argue with me or anyone else about it, but it is God that you must argue with because He is the justifier and He has set the standard and given us the living Word.

God bless you!

rick

God bless

 

[RickHolland]

Do some research into the Jewish culture of Christ’s day and today. Rememberance does NOT mean simple recollection - it means to make it real and live it. Check out the passover ceremony.

That is not how you appraoch Sripture. Let me help you a little. Start buy looking the text in question.

Luke 22:19
And when He had taken some bread and given thanks, He broke it and gave it to them, saying, “This is My body which is given for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”

What was about to happen; Christ was getting ready to what? Be put to death in the flesh for what? Redemption through? His body On what? The cross! In what way was Christ going give His body up? On the Cross? therefore, once this has taken place, the everytime you brak this bread, remember the bodily sacrafice on the cross for your salvation. Get it, do this in “remembrance”
“remembrance”=anamnēsis: (defined) a remembering, recollection

Used in the following versus in the NT:
1Co 11:25
In the same way He took the cup also after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood; do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me

1 Corinthians 11:24
and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “This is My body, which is for you; do this in remembrance of Me.”

10:3 But in those {sacrifices} there is a reminder of sins year by year.

There are different Greek words used for “remembrance”, but this is the use that has a single defintion of to remember. Also, notice the time it is used a the word “reminder”; to remember something done for you and that was what? I gave my body as a sacrafice for your behlf on the cross. The flesh and blood are symbolic, just as Jesus made clear on the Bread of Life sermon in John 6, the folks that took it as litereal eating and drinking of flesh and blood; walked away in unbelief or to say, they remained veiled. In verse 6:63, Jesus make sit crystal clear to the manner He was speaking, which was spiritual, not literal.

I think God is saying something by using the phrase and the same term in relation to sacrafice for sins in Hebrews 10 above.

i encouage you to look at the context of Hebrews 10:1-6; hopefully you will get the pictur.

JB