PROTESTANTS! Answer me this....

[ALLFORHIM]

Hello, All For Him! I’ve read quite a few of your posts, and I must say it is obvous you have a fervent love for our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

I have a question about what you wrote.

My question is about this hypothetical situation:

I have a friend who is teaching false doctrine about Baptism to my children. As a good mother and (hopefully!) a good Christian, I want my children to have the truth. In order to follow Jesus (as you said above–and I agree), I should do what He said to do about this situation. He said:

“If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have won over your brother. If he does not listen, take one or two others along with you, so that every fact may be established on the testimony of two or three witnesses. If he refuses to listen to them, tell the church. If he refuses to listen even to the church, then treat him as you would a Gentile or a tax collector.” Matt. 18:15-17

So, as Jesus said, I go to him alone, but he will not listen. I then take along a couple of friends and go to him again. He still will not listen. So, as Jesus said, I am to take it to the church.

Here is my question: Which church do I take it to? Some teach Baptism is for everyone; some say it is not for infants. Some teach that Baptism is regenerative; others say it is merely symbolic. Some teach Baptism is not necessary at all. They all claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit.

Please do not tell me to take my problem to the Bible and ask the Holy Spirit to guide me. That’s not what Jesus said to do. He didn’t say, “Go to the Bible to find out what it says about your problem” and He didn’t say, “Go to the Bible to find out which church is the right one.”

If I am going to follow Him, I need to do what He said. He said, “Take it to the church.”

Which church?

Hi,
You take it to the church you belong to. I’m assuming the person you are having the issue with is in your church. If not then your probably not going to get anywhere with them. That Scripture is for people who are in the same church and meant for believers. Because as we know unbelievers wouldnt listen and probably wouldnt be in church anyway I take that back I actually think there are alot of people who sit in pews and only have an intellectual knowledge of Christ. I was one of those people until I was about 30.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

Do you see what you are saying… another example of the believers assuming the authority to judge… not given to them. All power was given to Christ… He in turn designated who would have power from Him

Yes and He still gives people the power today. Im sorry I think Im missing your point but I am tired and stressed.:whacky:

 

[ALLFORHIM]

I was just confused by AFH post 125. I mean, I guess the ECF’s could be in agreement with a lot of things non Catholic christians do, but is it cherry picking things they said here and there or using all their writings? I mean, what does this really mean? The Early Church Fathers did not support multiple Churches. They were all Catholic. I dont get it. If someone can find things that the fathers wrote about what about everything they wrote in context? Why would it be a shock that the Fathers are used to support Christian beliefs when they were Christians!
I was a tad offended by AFM’s shock. If I did not know any better (or do I?) It sounded like she was not seeing the connection to using the ECF’s for back up.

I hope I am wrong, but that’s offensive if I am not.

Hi,
Im sorry that I offended you. What I meant by being shocked is that the catholics here keep saying that protestants dont care what the ECF’s have to say. So I figured well maybe their right I dont really know. So when my minister quoted something from an ECF I was like OH I guess we do(meaning protestants) read and study (the ministers anyway)the ECF’s.

I did not mean any disrespect at all. Please forgive me

 

[ALLFORHIM]

But SDAs, JWs, Mormons, etc. are not members of your specific congregation. How do they find out that they are not really Christians?

In other words, where does the “Invisible Church of All Believers” get its authority to say who is really a Christian, and who is not - and how does it make that information known?

Hi,
It is not for us to judge I suppose. We need to read and know Scripture so we can discern what other people are telling us. All we can do to help these people is when given the chance preach the Gospel message to them.

 

[ALLFORHIM]

But none of them is being fed like the Catholics. It was St Peter whom the Lord instructed to Feed My sheep, Tend My flock, Feed My sheep.

Any faith community outside the Catholic Church has none of the Apostolic Authority that make the Catholic Church the only “church” All others are only faith communities who choose to include the word church in their description.

Do they bear good fruit… some do some of the time. But the bad fruit… keeping their “flock” from Jesus’ Church far outweighs it all in the long run .

.

Hi,

But with all due respect you are judging all of the other churches because you dont know what is in each individual’s heart. Salvation is the most important doctrine their is. Im sure you agree. The CC even acknowledges that people can be saved outside the CC. So if those faith communities who call themselves churches are leading people to Christ(and the CC is ok with it)then isnt that great!!!

 

[DARichards]

St. Eric…Pax tecum…

One of my favorite subjects…The downfall of the Protestants…because you are asking to define something that is not defined in Scripture…but here is some of your answers.

1. Please reveal to me “the” ( the definition that speaks for all of the non Catholic denoms) definitive definition of “sola scriptura”

From the Westminster Confession Chapter I Sections VI-VII:
VI. The whole counsel of God concerning all things necessary for his own glory, man’s salvation, faith and life, is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture: unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of Men. Nevertheless, we acknowledge the inward illuminaiton of the Spirit of God to be necessary for the saving understanding of such things as are revealed in the Word: and that there are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and the government of the church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature, and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed.
VII. All things in Scripture are not aloike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation, are so clearly propunded, and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, by attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.

 

[DARichards]

1. Please reveal to me “the” definition of “sola fide”

The Westminster Confession Chapter XI Section I-III (pay close attention to II)

I. Those whom God effeectually calleth, he also freely justifieth: not by infusing righteousness unto them, but by pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting thier persons as righteous; not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; nor by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness; but by imputing the obedience and satisfaction of Christ unto them, they receiving and resting on him and his righteousness, by faith; which faith they have not of themselves, it is the gift of God.
II. *** Faith, thus recieving and resting on Christ and his righteous ness, is the alone instrument of justification; yet is it not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, but worketh by love.***

III. Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the deby of all those that are thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to his Father’s justice on their behalf. Yet, inasmuch as he was given byt he Father for them; and his obedience and satisfaction accepted in their stead; and both, freely, not for anything in them; thier justification is only of free gread; that both the exact jsutice and rich grace of God might be glorified in the justification of sinners.

Thus, according to the Protestant traditions, we are justified “soley” by our faith in the saving Sacrifice of Christ. Hence, “Sola Fide.”

 

[DARichards]

1. Please show me where the bible explicitly teaches both of thes doctrines.

Interesingly enough, as you are aware, the Bible doesn’t even define which books are to be included in the Canon, much less that these collection of books are to be used as the sole source of faith and salvation as previously stated in the Westminster Catechism.

 

[santaro75]

Hi,
I dont call anyone heretics. I just think they are sadly mistaken. I do think they teach in error.

Great job keeping up with the bombardment!

the natural next question is how do they come to such conclusions with the same conviction that you come to your conclusions with? they believe the same holy spirit guided them to all truth with the same scriptures as you but have different beliefs. the holy spirit can not speak out of both sides of its mouth.

jesus said to peter: “feed my sheep” and “tend my flock”

We are the sheep. sheep are not shepards. Peter and the apostles were the shepards and they feed us. We are sheep. it was so in the beginning and it is so now.

 

[Damascus]

Its Okay All for Him.

I just dont understand that is all. I am hoping you have a very Merry Christmas.

 

[St.Eric]

Interesingly enough, as you are aware, the Bible doesn’t even define which books are to be included in the Canon, much less that these collection of books are to be used as the sole source of faith and salvation as previously stated in the Westminster Catechism.

Thanks for chiming in DAR! I always appreciate your (name removed by moderator)ut brother! The thing I am after though, is “THE” protestant definition for these questions posed in the OP. I suppose that I could assume that the Westminster confession speaks for all of protestantism, but I would be wrong. I know there are those who disagree with it, like the president of “mission to Catholics” “dr.” Joe Mizzi, for instance…I guess that’s why I ended up in the Catholic church. As a protestant, I was seeking the one truth, and could not find it despite all of my church hopping in the early days. A kernel of truth here, a kernel of truth there, but nothing that would fill the entire void…I would always hear, from a pastor, none the less…“just go to a bible believing church…that’s all that matters…” What a pitiful piece of advice! For the love of PETE! Even the devils believe in God and Christ and the Bible! Does that make them the guardians of the truth? NO!..By the grace of God, the one truth has been revealed to me! Amen.

 

[St.Eric]

1. Please reveal to me “the” ( the definition that speaks for all of the non Catholic denoms) definitive definition of “sola scriptura”
2. Please reveal to me “the” definition of “sola fide”
3. Please show me where the bible explicitly teaches both of thes doctrines.
4. Please show me where the bible teaches that each person is able to interpert the bible and that interpretation is valid.
5. Thank you so much for your guidance!

Well…out of 100+ posts, no one has answered the OP questions, kinda disapoints me. Knight$God gave a fairly good attempt but fell short. Then the Knight couldn’t respond to my responses. Thanks everyone…thanks for bolstering my faith in the RCC teachings. I appreciate it. God has one truth and not a whole bunch of partial truths, confusing his people.

Merry Christmas everyone (Christmas being a truncation of “Christ’s Mass” if you were unaware.)

One other random thought. Sunday worship is an “invention” of the Catholic church, so is the observance of Christmas on 12/25, and so is Easter on the day we celebrate it, and on and on. Just wanted to point out that alot of protestants follow the traditions of the Roman Catholic Church.

Pax Vobiscum

 

[Kay_Cee]

Hi,
You take it to the church you belong to. I’m assuming the person you are having the issue with is in your church. If not then your probably not going to get anywhere with them. That Scripture is for people who are in the same church and meant for believers. Because as we know unbelievers wouldnt listen and probably wouldnt be in church anyway I take that back I actually think there are alot of people who sit in pews and only have an intellectual knowledge of Christ. I was one of those people until I was about 30.

Thank you for your quick response.

But I’m afraid this doesn’t help at all. How do I know the church I’m attending will give me the right answer about Baptism? As I pointed out, some teach Baptism is for everyone; some say it is not for infants. Some teach that Baptism is regenerative; others say it is merely symbolic. Some teach Baptism is not necessary at all. They all claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit.

Because I want my children to have the truth, it’s absolutely essential they be taught the correct doctrine about Baptism. But all these churches have different doctrines! All these churches go by the Bible and claim to be guided by the Holy Spirit, but they can’t all be right because they teach opposing doctrines!

What if I’m saying Baptism is regenerative and is for infants, but my friend says it isn’t regenerative and infants should not be baptized? (And that’s what he’s teaching my kids!) How do I trust whatever church I happen to be attending to give me the right answer? That church might say my friend is right, and I am wrong. However, if I happen to attend a different church, it might say I’m right and he’s wrong!

Now, when Jesus said “take it to the church,” surely He didn’t mean for me to take it to a church that’s going to give me a wrong answer. Surely Jesus wants us to have the truth. As I’ve pointed out, simply *taking it to the church I happen to attend *is no guarantee that church will teach me the correct doctrine.

So I have to ask again: Which church do I take it to?

Or, to put it another way: Is there a church I can trust to teach me the correct doctrine? Because if there isn’t, why would Jesus tell me to “take it to the church”?

 

[mrs_abbott]

1. Please reveal to me “the” ( the definition that speaks for all of the non Catholic denoms) definitive definition of “sola scriptura”
2. Please reveal to me “the” definition of “sola fide”
3. Please show me where the bible explicitly teaches both of thes doctrines.
4. Please show me where the bible teaches that each person is able to interpert the bible and that interpretation is valid.
5. Thank you so much for your guidance!

I’m not a Protestant but I can try and answer your questions.
1.) Sola Scriptura = The Bible is the only inspired and authoritative Word of God. The Bible does not stand by itself but is an instrument of God by which He comes to man.
2.) Sola Fide = Justification (being declared guiltless by God) is received by faith only, not good works. Faith yields justification and good works.
3.) Sola Fide = Ephesians 2:8-9; Ephesians 3:12; Hebrews 10:22
Sola Scriptura = Romans 15:4; Luke 24:27; John 2:22
4.) 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.”
5.) Again, I’m not Protestant but I hope this answers your OP.

 

[DARichards]

I’m not a Protestant but I can try and answer your questions.
1.) Sola Scriptura = The Bible is the only inspired and authoritative Word of God. The Bible does not stand by itself but is an instrument of God by which He comes to man.
2.) Sola Fide = Justification (being declared guiltless by God) is received by faith only, not good works. Faith yields justification and good works.
3.) Sola Fide = Ephesians 2:8-9; Ephesians 3:12; Hebrews 10:22
Sola Scriptura = Romans 15:4; Luke 24:27; John 2:22
4.) 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.”
5.) Again, I’m not Protestant but I hope this answers your OP.

Mrs. Abbott,

This is the exact point that St.Eric was making. As a fellow Catholic, I know where you are coming from. The point is this: There is no definitive comprehensive explanation of Sola Scriptura that can be adopted by the entirety of the Protestants. Even your point 4:

4.) 2 Timothy 3:16 “All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness.”

What the Protestants fail to understand is that by their very definition of Sola Scriptura, (as previously defined in the Westminster Catechism) Scripture must define what Scripture is. In other words, I am right because I say I am right. God has always declared Himself right and also provided witnesses to prove the truth of Him being right. That is the way He works. So for 2Tim 3:16 to be backing Sola Scriptura, then there would have to be given in Scripture a definition which would define Scripture as the 66 books contained between Genesis and Revelation. This obviously doesn’t exist. In addition, This verse in no way implies that these books are to be the sole deposit of faith. It says what they are profitable for and how they can be used, but no where does it say that there are 66 books to be relied on for the totality of our faith.

In addition, as followers of Christ, we never read about Christ commanding His apostles to write said books and that they are to be bound by them. Therefore, the very idea of Sola Scriptura is not even taught by Christ.

 

[julebenn]

I have full confidence in the Holy Scriptures because they are “given by inspiration” or “God-breathed”

when I read the word of God he is speaking to me, and the Scriptures are the infallible rule of faith since God can neither lie nor err.

*Sola Scriptura *is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge.

John 21:25 says that not all that Jesus did is recorded in the book, but the bible does not have to be complete o function as the sole rule of faith for the church. but remember neither is tradition- I challenge you to give us one statement that Jesus said that comes to us by tradition and not from the Holy Scripture.

 

[Damascus]

I have full confidence in the Holy Scriptures because they are “given by inspiration” or “God-breathed”

when I read the word of God he is speaking to me, and the Scriptures are the infallible rule of faith since God can neither lie nor err.

*Sola Scriptura *is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge.

John 21:25 says that not all that Jesus did is recorded in the book, but the bible does not have to be complete o function as the sole rule of faith for the church. but remember neither is tradition- I challenge you to give us one statement that Jesus said that comes to us by tradition and not from the Holy Scripture.

You wont see a Catholic say there is a single thing wrong with the Bible itself.
I will put it this way:
Its not the bible that has a problem, its imperfect people outside of Jesus Christs Church led by the Holy Spirit that is the problem.

Anyway- do what you wish. I cant post on this thread anymore. I dont have the stamina to repeat myslef over and over.

 

[mrs_abbott]

Mrs. Abbott,

This is the exact point that St.Eric was making. As a fellow Catholic, I know where you are coming from. The point is this: There is no definitive comprehensive explanation of Sola Scriptura that can be adopted by the entirety of the Protestants.

I can see how and why Protestants believe sola scriptura but it’s not defined in the Bible clearly to obey scripture and scripture alone.

 

[jmcrae]

Hi,
It is not for us to judge I suppose. We need to read and know Scripture so we can discern what other people are telling us. All we can do to help these people is when given the chance preach the Gospel message to them.

That’s a cop-out. If it’s not for us to judge, then who are we to say that they aren’t really Christians?

If their interpretation of the Bible is just as valid as any other, then who are we to say, “Hey, kids, avoid those cults!” Since we have absolutely no basis for saying that they are cults - they just disagree with us at every point of interpretation of Scripture.

The Bible doesn’t explain itself, and if they cherry-pick different verses than you do for their “essentials of Christian theology” then who is to say that they are wrong?

The only way we know about the Trinity is because of the Catholic Church. The members of the Seventh Day Adventist churches can’t find that doctrine in Scripture, and if you ask them, they will prove to you beyond the shadow of a doubt that the verses you think support this doctrine can easily be interpreted to mean something completely different.

The only support we have on our side is the oral tradition that comes down to us through the Apostolic Succession in the Catholic Church, which tells us that when those verses were being written, they were referring to the Trinity, and not to something else.

The only reason we interpret the Scriptures correctly on this and other issues is because we follow the Holy Tradition (whether we acknowledge it or not) while they don’t - having rejected all of Holy Tradition, and not just some of it, as most “main stream” Protestant organizations have rejected some but not all of Holy Tradition, the SDA and other cults are left with literally the Bible alone, and they make of it what they will, without any (name removed by moderator)ut from the oral record of the Apostles, nor any of the long-standing customs of the Church.

 

[MrS]

I have full confidence in the Holy Scriptures because they are “given by inspiration” or “God-breathed”

when I read the word of God he is speaking to me, and the Scriptures are the infallible rule of faith since God can neither lie nor err.

*Sola Scriptura *is not a claim that the Bible contains all knowledge.

John 21:25 says that not all that Jesus did is recorded in the book, but the bible does not have to be complete o function as the sole rule of faith for the church. but remember neither is tradition- I challenge you to give us one statement that Jesus said that comes to us by tradition and not from the Holy Scripture.

And what is the Holy Spirt saying to you when you read His inspired word given only to the Catholic Church… where He warns you of your self-interpretation.??