Sola Fide in the Gospels

[JonNC]

Jon,
Thanks for the answer. I asked you about the timeframe of the Spirit-leaving without any intention of arguing the point, and your answer of “eventually” satisfies my curiosity.

Thanks for the link as well. It had been a while since I had read the Augsburg Confession. I remember it from back in my Baptist Bible College days when we talked about how we traced our roots as Baptists not from the Reformers, but from the Anabaptists, who were condemned even by the Reformers.

Thanks for your response, and for the information you posted. Indeed, it is often a misconception that all traditions and communions that fall under the umbrella of Protestant were once all one communion, or that all of them broke away from Luther and Lutheranism. As you point out, Anabaptist was/is a completely different group, never even closely rtelated to Luther.
Condemnations aside, we still hold a Chrstian love for ya. :hug1:
Jon

 

[estesbob]

Thanks for your response, and for the information you posted. Indeed, it is often a misconception that all traditions and communions that fall under the umbrella of Protestant were once all one communion, or that all of them broke away from Luther and Lutheranism. As you point out, Anabaptist was/is a completely different group, never even closely rtelated to Luther.
Condemnations aside, we still hold a Chrstian love for ya. :hug1:
Jon

It appears to be a distinction without a difference-like Luther they did not spring up unitl 1,500 years after Christ had founded the Church. Like Luther they rejected all who had went before them an believed that God had revealed to them the errors of the theology of the last 1,500 years.

I can not buy into the theseis that somehow they have more credibility becuase the other so called “reformers” disagreed with them. It was not long after Luther that Protestant theology had run off in thoursands of different directions. The fact that the Anabaptists ran off the rails a little ealier than others is preety much irlelevant.

 

[JonNC]

It appears to be a distinction without a difference-like Luther they did not spring up unitl 1,500 years after Christ had founded the Church. Like Luther they rejected all who had went before them an believed that God had revealed to them the errors of the theology of the last 1,500 years.

I would respectfully disagree with your assessment, here. And I’m sure neither of us will change the other’s mind in this regard.

Jon

 

[estesbob]

I would respectfully disagree with your assessment, here. And I’m sure neither of us will change the other’s mind in this regard.

Jon

It should be preety easy to resolve. Can you point us to anyone prior to the 15th century who espoused doctrines even remotely similar to those of Anabaptists and the “Reformers”?

 

[JonNC]

It should be preety easy to resolve. Can you point us to anyone prior to the 15th century who espoused doctrines even remotely similar to those of Anabaptists and the “Reformers”?

As you know, the Lutheran reformers (I won’t speak for any other groups from that era or since), claimed to remain true to the ECFs, and regularly pointed to them as evidence of their teachings.

Only those things have been recounted whereof we thought that it was necessary to speak, in order that it might be understood that in doctrine and ceremonies nothing has been received on our part against Scripture or the Church Catholic. For it is manifest that we have taken most diligent care that no new and ungodly doctrine should creep into our churches.

Augsburg Confession

Now, as I said above, we won’t resolve our disagreement because you will say that they did not hold true to the ECF’s. We will be at an impass that we can’t resolve, in this kind of a broad discussion.
To be sure, the Lutheran reformers did not condemn 1500 years of Church history. Their intent was to point out recent abuses.

Jon

 

[estesbob]

As you know, the Lutheran reformers (I won’t speak for any other groups from that era or since), claimed to remain true to the ECFs, and regularly pointed to them as evidence of their teachings.

Augsburg Confession

Now, as I said above, we won’t resolve our disagreement because you will say that they did not hold true to the ECF’s. We will be at an impass that we can’t resolve, in this kind of a broad discussion.
To be sure, the Lutheran reformers did not condemn 1500 years of Church history. Their intent was to point out recent abuses.

Jon

Yet we can find no one espousing Soal Scriptura or Sola Fideles prior to the so called reformation. Whether the “reformers” claimed to have remained true to the ECF’s is irelevant because we know they were not.

 

[Stouts989]

You might if you look at it with an open heart… things like Romans 11…

"provided you remain in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off. And they also, if they do not remain in unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. "

Our inheritance is being grafted into the tree. We must remain in his kindness… so there must be a way to fall from his kindness… our sins and unfaithfullness can cause us to be cut off from the tree. But through God’s grace we can also be grafted back in.

Also you’ll remember God as the vine from John 15…

“Anyone who does not remain in me will be thrown out like a branch and wither; people will gather them and throw them into a fire and they will be burned.”

There must be a way for us not to remain in Him… I would imagine any of the things we do that would cause us to not remain in Him would be considered sins of some kind in the eyes of God.

SD

But the first part of my question was dealing with 1 John 2:19 and 1 Peter 1. There is also John 6:39 and Ephesians 1.

Roman 11:22-23 come up before when I tried to have a similar conversation with someone else. Is this the only verse that deal with “being cut off” or something with falling away from God’s grace?

It says IF you continue in his kindness. Given the verses I listened above…continuing in His kindness seems like a promise protected by the power of God for the elect.

 

[SD_Catholic]

But the first part of my question was dealing with 1 John 2:19 and 1 Peter 1. There is also John 6:39 and Ephesians 1.

Roman 11:22-23 come up before when I tried to have a similar conversation with someone else. Is this the only verse that deal with “being cut off” or something with falling away from God’s grace?

It says IF you continue in his kindness. Given the verses I listened above…continuing in His kindness seems like a promise protected by the power of God for the elect.

When taken in the context which surround them, the verses you gave only strengthen what I’m trying to show you…

In 1John 2 you should have noticed this later on in verse 24, “Let what you heard from the beginning remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, then you will remain in the Son and in the Father.” The truth must remain in you, for you to remain in the Son and Father.

In 1 Peter 1… It talks about the undefiled inheritance being kept for us in heaven… Not that we once we join God’s family that we will never lose that inheritance… later on in the chapter it talks of all the things one needs to do to remain in that inheritance.

I don’t get your point on John 6… This is Jesus explaining His and the Father’s will.

All of these verse must be read in the context of how they were written, and to whom they were written.

I also showed you John 15, but even if Romans 11 was the only one it might be enough to prove that you must remain faithful even after you’ve joined the family of God or you can be cast out.

SD

 

[PJM]

.

I was wondering if Protestants know of any place where Jesus supposedly taught Sola Fide? (Salvation by Faith Alone.)

When I’ve seen proof-texts for the doctrine, they usually come only from the Letter of Paul. Are there any proof texts from the mouth of Jesus in the Gospels?

Thanks and God bless,

---

:shrug:Friend what the heck is a “proff text”? *

I have asked this question numerious times with never a single responce.

I know it “must be in the bible” because so many “bible churches teach, preach and beleif it” but try as I might; and I HAVE TRIED, I can’t finf it

Love and prayers,**

 

[Stouts989]

When taken in the context which surround them, the verses you gave only strengthen what I’m trying to show you…

In 1John 2 you should have noticed this later on in verse 24, “Let what you heard from the beginning remain in you. If what you heard from the beginning remains in you, then you will remain in the Son and in the Father.” The truth must remain in you, for you to remain in the Son and Father.

and if we don’t remain or leave than we were never of…just like verse 19 says.

I’ll re-read 1 Peter 1…

I don’t get your point on John 6… This is Jesus explaining His and the Father’s will.

Jesus says in John 6:39-40

“This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I myself will raise him up on the last day.”

Later in verse 65 Jesus says “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

So we are brought to Christ because of God the Father allowing us to…or granting us the ability to believe in Christ and all that are brought to Christ, Christ will keep and not loose and raise them up on the last day. Seems pretty simple to me.

All of these verse must be read in the context of how they were written, and to whom they were written.

So what’s the context I’m missing then?

I also showed you John 15, but even if Romans 11 was the only one it might be enough to prove that you must remain faithful even after you’ve joined the family of God or you can be cast out.

I think verse 16 sums up the context of John 15 dealing with the vine and the branches.

“You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give you.”

We are chosen…not choosing. And God is giving us the ability to bear good fruit so that we will remain. Us remaining in Christ is not the work of our doing…but the work of the power of God keeping and protecting us and giving us the ability to remain and not fall away.

That’s what I see anyway when I read John 15. Another promise to protect those He has chosen.

 

[PRmerger]

and if we don’t remain or leave than we were never of…just like verse 19 says.

How do you know if you ever really are “of” Christ? Aren’t there people who* think *they’re saved but really aren’t, in your theological system?

 

[SD_Catholic]

and if we don’t remain or leave than we were never of…just like verse 19 says.

I’ll re-read 1 Peter 1…

Jesus says in John 6:39-40

“This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I myself will raise him up on the last day.”

Later in verse 65 Jesus says “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to Me unless it has been granted him from the Father.”

So we are brought to Christ because of God the Father allowing us to…or granting us the ability to believe in Christ and all that are brought to Christ, Christ will keep and not loose and raise them up on the last day. Seems pretty simple to me.

So what’s the context I’m missing then?

I think verse 16 sums up the context of John 15 dealing with the vine and the branches.

“You did not choose Me, but I chose you, and appointed you that you would go and bear fruit, and that your fruit would remain, so that whatever you ask of the Father in My name He may give you.”

We are chosen…not choosing. And God is giving us the ability to bear good fruit so that we will remain. Us remaining in Christ is not the work of our doing…but the work of the power of God keeping and protecting us and giving us the ability to remain and not fall away.

That’s what I see anyway when I read John 15. Another promise to protect those He has chosen.

“This is the will of Him who sent Me, that of all that He has given Me I lose nothing, but raise it up on the last day. For this is the will of my Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I myself will raise him up on the last day.”

I think the misunderstanding comes from determining what it means to “Believe in Him”… To me “Believing in Him” means believing in all of Him and all that He has revealed to us… and if we fail to adhere to all He has taught us then how can we say we have truly believed in Him.

I understand you’re only “seeing” the parts that fit into your Biblical study grid (we all have a grid)… Perhaps certain words have different meaning to us. So answer me this to help me understand your point of view… What does it mean to you to be grafted into God’s tree? Then if you would explain to me what it means to be cut off from that tree(Certainly you can’t be “cut off” of something you were never part of)? I think your explaination of these 2 questions will help me understand your thinking better.

Also one more thing… Do you believe the ones bound for heaven are chosen from the beginning and that nothing anyone does will change that plan?

SD