Unscriptural Protestant Beliefs

[George_2007]

So they don’t believe in good works of faith and hope expressed through charity?

What does this question mean? How can anyone not believe in good works?

Protestants have no problem with good works. They believe that good works are what you do in response to being saved and you do good works because God tells us to.

 

[JonNC]

I’ve perused this forum and the information is very fragmented at best. I’m curious to know -if any - what are some protestant beliefs that aren’t found in scripture (besides Sola Scriptura and Sola fide of course…even though sola fide is just a misunderstanding of semantics).

And please can we avoid this not turning into a flame war?

Yours in Christ

When you say Protestant beliefs, it leads to the misunderstanding that there is/was a singular Protestant Church. There isn’t, and never has been. So, it is difficult to generalize about group that really isn’t a group. For example, Lutherans and Baptists are not from the same Reformation movement.

So, from a Lutheran perspective (I can’t/won’t speak for other communions, such as Calvinists and Baptists), let me start by correcting a misconception about sola scriptura.
It is not a doctrine, but a practice. It is the practice of holding scripture as the final norm, to which all teachers and teachings, all Tradition are held accountable. It does not eliminate Tradition, or councils or creeds.

On sola fide, I have come to the belief that you are, in many ways correct, testified to by the Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.
vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/chrstuni/documents/rc_pc_chrstuni_doc_31101999_cath-luth-joint-declaration_en.html
This does not mean that there are not differences between us - there are! But the level of convergence between us has grown, thanks to the Holy Spirit.

It is also important to understand that Lutherans do not eliminate the value of good works, the Formula of Concord even uses the terms “necessary”, and “bound”. This is, in Lutheran teaching a necessary part of our sanctification. So, for Lutherans, faith is not just an intellectual assent to the belief in the existence of God. While we believe justification to be monergistic (God’s work alone), we certainly believe Sanctification to be, in many ways, synergistic, requiring our involvement and cooperation.
Failure to do good works may not condemn someone, but instead are evidence of a dead faith, which does not save.

You can find more about what Lutherans believe here:
www.bookofconcord.org
Sorry, it may not be helpful in learning what Protestants believe.

Jon

 

[grace_singh]

What does this question mean? How can anyone not believe in good works?

Protestants have no problem with good works. They believe that good works are what you do in response to being saved and you do good works because God tells us to.

well, not all of them. there are some who take the sola-fide arguement so far as to say that no works are neccesary as a Christrian, and that works have no bearing on one’s salvation or relationship with God. in other words one can drink heavily, even murder, and not need to confess this as sin or repent. just “go back to the grace” and understand that as Jesus’ blood covers us, we’re ok no matter what we do- faith and not works.

 

[kepha1]

Here’s my list of unscriptural Protestant beliefs:

altar calls
rapture
premillenialism
total immersion
eternal security
King James Version
sola scriptura (with foot notes)
total depravity
faith alone
substitutional atonement
Bible’s table of contents
itinerary of a service
board of directors or unordained elders hiring the pastor
abolishment of the sacrificial priesthood with the Sacrifice

the list goes on…

 

[mike52ad]

Three Protestant Beliefs that can be dangerous to the soul
**Belief Number One – Accept the Lord Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior **

The average Protestant will have had a moment in his life where he accepted Jesus as his personal lord and savior and will consider himself saved. Is this really enough? Actually, it is a wonderful and necessary first step. We need to have Jesus in our life and we need to carry Him close to our hearts. But the Gospel itself tells us that more is required to become part of the Household of God. The Bible tells us this in no uncertain terms. We read in Matthew 28: 18-19;
18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
We can clearly see here that Baptism is a requirement to be a member of the Household of God. This requirement was not made up by the Catholic Church, it was a commandment issued by Jesus Christ the Son of God Himself!

**Dangerous beliefs Number Two and Three – Once Saved, Always Saved, and We Are Saved By Faith Alone. **
We enter rocky shoals when we sail here!
To say we are saved by faith alone and that once we are saved we are always saved are two very potent lies. Both of these lies sound comforting but believe me, they are very dangerous lies indeed because they imperil your very soul. We are saved by Faith and Works. We CAN lose our inheritance. First of all the Gospel is very clear that our faith has to be backed up by actions. The familiar quote of James 2: 14-18 applies;
What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead. 18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.
But let’s face it. Martin Luther in his finite wisdom hated the Book of James because it proved him wrong about faith and works. Okay, so be it. The Book of James is banished, we have no knowledge of it anymore, and it is gone. Now, we can truly believe that we are saved by faith alone, right? Well, we would still have a bit of editing to do in the Bible, namely we would need to expunge Matthew 25: 31-46 - the story of the sheep and goats where the sheep who tended their brothers were led to heaven and the goats who only believed without placing it into practice were sent to hell.
Does Jesus sound like He is saying; “Believe and everything will be okay?” Do the math here. Both sets of people believed in Jesus, they accepted Him as Lord and Savior. Group one, the sheep were allowed into heaven because they ministered to their brothers and sisters and took care of their needs. They demonstrated their faith by works. The other group also was believers; we know this because they called Jesus “Lord.” They recognized Jesus as the Son of God, there is no doubt about that. They were sent away into eternal punishment because they failed to minister to their brothers and sisters. So, through the mouth of Jesus we hear that you CAN lose your salvation and that you need to put your faith into practice in order to attain heaven.

 

[skinny_pumpkin]

The list would be very long. Plus there is distortions of doctrine that have their roots in Catholicism. Substitutionary Atonement being a prime example, and Anselm being its original proponent, imo (some say Augustine, I do not). Calvinism, reformed theology is something I have problems with. The TULIP is where to begin, as many protestant’s theology starts here. The exceptions are Methodists, Anglicans, and fundamentalist Anabaptists and some of the 19th century protestants that emerged, such as the church of Christ (Campbell).

T otal depravity
U nconditional election
L imited atonement
I rresistible grace
P erseverance of the saints

I think most Catholics would have a problem with all of these.

Many Protestants have become “free will” protestants, but the vestiges of the TULIP, are still there. “Once saved, always saved” is an example.

 

[windlessuser]

T otal depravity
U nconditional election
L imited atonement
I rresistible grace
P erseverance of the saints

Ah, So that’s what TULIP stands for lol, (was too lazy to google it all this time). But, don’t fear the list being long, This thread is intended to be a compilation of some sorts.

 

[RedBert]

We’re on a roll guys, lets Keep this List going! What about the elect I keep hearing about? I think its from the Calvinists.

DO YOU EVEN KNOW WHAT IS IN THE BIBLE? or are just parroting some anit-protestant nonsense…

It is one thing to say something is unscriptural ;it is another to say we interpret that scripture differently.

Election is in the Bible; you may disagree on how it works, but ELECTION is scriptural…

Word of advise: check your “facts” out for yourself.
You’ll be a better Christian/Catholic for doing so.​

Matthew 24:22
If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened.

Matthew 24:24
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible.

Matthew 24:31
And he will send his angels with a loud trumpet call, and they will gather his elect from the four winds, from one end of the heavens to the other.

Mark 13:20
If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them.

Mark 13:22
For false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and miracles to deceive the elect—if that were possible.

Mark 13:27
And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens.

Romans 9:11
Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand:

Romans 11:7
What then? What Israel sought so earnestly it did not obtain, but the elect did. The others were hardened,

Romans 11:28
As far as the gospel is concerned, they are enemies on your account; but as far as election is concerned, they are loved on account of the patriarchs,

1 Timothy 5:21
I charge you, in the sight of God and Christ Jesus and the elect angels, to keep these instructions without partiality, and to do nothing out of favoritism.

2 Timothy 2:10
Therefore I endure everything for the sake of the elect, that they too may obtain the salvation that is in Christ Jesus, with eternal glory.

Titus 1:1
Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God’s elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness—

1 Peter 1:1
Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia,

2 Peter 1:3
Making One’s Calling and Election Sure ] His divine power has given us everything we need for life and godliness through our knowledge of him who called us by his own glory and goodness.

2 Peter 1:10
Therefore, my brothers, be all the more eager to make your calling and election sure. For if you do these things, you will never fall,

 

[NHInsider]

One thing I learned growing up evangelical and often hear repeated is, I think, part of “total depravity” - the notion that, because of original sin we are utterly sinful and so incapable of good works (our good works are tainted - the “filthy rags” thing) - and that even after receiving grace, we continue to be utterly sinful - that redemption doesn’t restore us to grace, it only “hides” our sins from God who “can’t see them” because they are “covered by the blood of Jesus.”

One caution - the thread asks about “unscriptural” beliefs but most deficient theologies and heresies are not “unscriptural” but based on divergent interpretations of Scripture -that’s why we need an authoritative Church. The gnostics and arians defended their positions from Scripture, just as non-Catholic Christians do today. (I am not trying to deflect this into an “All Protestants are heretics” thread - anyone who has read my posts in other threads knows I don’t hold that position.)

 

[Fair_Lady]

The exceptions are Methodists, Anglicans, and fundamentalist Anabaptists and some of the 19th century protestants that emerged, such as the church of Christ (Campbell).

T otal depravity
U nconditional election
L imited atonement
I rresistible grace
P erseverance of the saints

I think most Catholics would have a problem with all of these.

Many Protestants have become “free will” protestants, but the vestiges of the TULIP, are still there. “Once saved, always saved” is an example.

Thank you for not painting us all with the same brush. Calvinism, in my mind, is a huge scourge in the protestant circle today. It’s not scriptural and is leading many down the wrong path, to their demise - blissfully unaware of the dangers.

 

[JonNC]

=mike52ad;6588462]Three Protestant Beliefs that can be dangerous to the soul

Some Protestants. OSAS is a dangerous belief. Sola fide, if understood the way you portray it below, can be.

Belief Number One – Accept the Lord Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior

The average Protestant will have had a moment in his life where he accepted Jesus as his personal lord and savior and will consider himself saved. Is this really enough? Actually, it is a wonderful and necessary first step. We need to have Jesus in our life and we need to carry Him close to our hearts. But the Gospel itself tells us that more is required to become part of the Household of God. The Bible tells us this in no uncertain terms. We read in Matthew 28: 18-19;
18 Then Jesus approached and said to them, “All power in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age.”
We can clearly see here that Baptism is a requirement to be a member of the Household of God. This requirement was not made up by the Catholic Church, it was a commandment issued by Jesus Christ the Son of God Himself!
You’ll have to to define what an “average Protestant” is. I have no idea.
As a Lutheran, I agree with the rest of this. I am uncomfortable with the term “accept”. I received the Holy Spirit at the sacrament of Baptism, and continue to receive Christ as my savior through word and sacrament.

**Dangerous beliefs Number Two and Three – Once Saved, Always Saved, and We Are Saved By Faith Alone. **

I assume you know this, but just to clarify, Perseverence of saints is a separate belief from sola fide. Perseverence of saints is condemned as unscriptural, as free will certainly allows that the regenerate can lose saving faith.

We enter rocky shoals when we sail here!
To say we are saved by faith alone and that once we are saved we are always saved are two very potent lies. Both of these lies sound comforting but believe me, they are very dangerous lies indeed because they imperil your very soul. We are saved by Faith and Works. We CAN lose our inheritance. First of all the Gospel is very clear that our faith has to be backed up by actions. The familiar quote of James 2: 14-18 applies;
Sola fide only has to do with how we are justified. It is, in fact, Christ’s actions that save. Sola fide does not exclude the importance of works, or our participation in our sanctification. Faith must be backed up by actions, but it is not our actions that save us, it is Christ’s. A living, saving faith must respond by producing good fruits.

…18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I by my works will show you my faith.

No Lutheran worth his salt would deny any of this. This is in perfect keeping with Lutheran belief.

continued

 

[JonNC]

But let’s face it. Martin Luther in his finite wisdom hated the Book of James because it proved him wrong about faith and works. Okay, so be it. The Book of James is banished, we have no knowledge of it anymore, and it is gone. Now, we can truly believe that we are saved by faith alone, right? Well, we would still have a bit of editing to do in the Bible, namely we would need to expunge Matthew 25: 31-46 - the story of the sheep and goats where the sheep who tended their brothers were led to heaven and the goats who only believed without placing it into practice were sent to hell.

James does not contradict sola fide, unless you believe that works are not required of the regenerate. Luther never taught that.

Does Jesus sound like He is saying; “Believe and everything will be okay?” Do the math here. Both sets of people believed in Jesus, they accepted Him as Lord and Savior. Group one, the sheep were allowed into heaven because they ministered to their brothers and sisters and took care of their needs. They demonstrated their faith by works. The other group also was believers; we know this because they called Jesus “Lord.” They recognized Jesus as the Son of God, there is no doubt about that. They were sent away into eternal punishment because they failed to minister to their brothers and sisters. So, through the mouth of Jesus we hear that you CAN lose your salvation and that you need to put your faith into practice in order to attain heaven.

“They demonstrated their faith by works.” Exactly!! Those good works don’t save us - Christ does that. But good works demonstrate our faith, which we receive by Grace. Sola fide does not contend that we just “Believe and everything will be okay”. Obedience requires good works, but those good works have nothing to do with how we are justified.

Jon

 

[Loboto-Me]

I think that due to the sheer number of protestant sects (would that be the term?) it’s so very hard to select the non-biblical beliefs that “they” have and paint each sect with them.

That’s a huge problem with me because what the Mormons believe is not what the Sacramental Anglican believes, is not what the Born Again Christian believes. See what I mean?

Then for the sake of sanity, we have no choice but to paint them all with the same brush until we start dissecting them one from the other.

Nowadays, it almost seems that we need to introduce a new term to separate yet the protestants from each other again and again… those that still have some apostolic traditons and those who have split off so much as to have only their own made up traditions (traditions of man?).

This is reminding me of the bunch of old necklace chains sitting in my jewelry box that looks like a big lump of gold. I really need to detangle that lump… I know there are a few among the broken chains are not broken and with a bit of tender care, I could wear again.

 

[rovimax]

That’s very unscriptural indeed:

[BIBLEDRB]1 Corinthians 13:13
And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.[/BIBLEDRB]

Is there anything else that they profess that’s not in the bible?

Most of them believed that the Church is invisible.

 

[JonNC]

=Loboto-Me;6589196]I think that due to the sheer number of protestant sects (would that be the term?) it’s so very hard to select the non-biblical beliefs that “they” have and paint each sect with them.

The CCC calls us “ecclesial communities”.

That’s a huge problem with me because what the Mormons believe is not what the Sacramental Anglican believes, is not what the Born Again Christian believes. See what I mean?

With all due respect to Mormons, they are not Christians in the historic Trinitarian sense, so they cannot even be included in the generality Protestant, which btw, is a historical term that referrs to folks who protested against government oppression of certain religious
practices.

Then for the sake of sanity, we have no choice but to paint them all with the same brush until we start dissecting them one from the other.

You have no choice? This is like the current government practice of grouping all Spanish speakers into one group, labeling them with a linguistic term (Hispanic), and claiming it is an “ethnic group”.
You have no choice? Instead of “painting” your brothers and sisters in Christ with generalities, misconceptions, and misunderstandings, why not ask us what we believe, teach and confess?

Nowadays, it almost seems that we need to introduce a new term to separate yet the protestants from each other again and again… those that still have some apostolic traditons and those who have split off so much as to have only their own made up traditions (traditions of man?).

Polemics.

This is reminding me of the bunch of old necklace chains sitting in my jewelry box that looks like a big lump of gold. I really need to detangle that lump… I know there are a few among the broken chains are not broken and with a bit of tender care, I could wear again.

At least a better approach - but asking us first is still preferable.

 

[Matthew_P_Muehl]

Here’s my list of unscriptural Protestant beliefs:

altar calls
rapture
premillenialism
total immersion
eternal security
King James Version
sola scriptura (with foot notes)
total depravity
faith alone
substitutional atonement
Bible’s table of contents
itinerary of a service
board of directors or unordained elders hiring the pastor
abolishment of the sacrificial priesthood with the Sacrifice

the list goes on…

NO infant baptism
O.S.A.S.
The bible is the only authority.
Anyone can interpret scripture…

Matthew

 

[rr1213]

I’ve perused this forum and the information is very fragmented at best. I’m curious to know -if any - what are some protestant beliefs that aren’t found in scripture (besides Sola Scriptura and Sola fide of course…even though sola fide is just a misunderstanding of semantics).

And please can we avoid this not turning into a flame war?

Yours in Christ

I may be wrong, but one thing that I don’t believe has been addressed so far in this thread is the Protestant rejection and/or modification of the concept of authority. (This is linked to sola scriptura but is not exactly the same thing in my opinion).

For most Protestants, the ultimate doctrinal authority is their own personal understanding of the Scriptures. Sure, they may be open to learning from their pastors or other teachers whom they respect, but ultimately these Protestants are reading the Scriptures themselves and if their interpretation does not match that of their pastors or their denomination, they’ll usually go with their own read on the subject. In other words, as it is sometimes expressed, each Protestant is his own Pope. Now, this same thing happens with Catholics also, but the orthodox Catholic mindset is to subject our personal and individual understandings of Scripture and other doctrinal issues to the authority of the Church. That dynamic of submission to ecclessiastical authority is usually missing in modern Proestantism.

 

[Loboto-Me]

The CCC calls us “ecclesial communities”.

With all due respect to Mormons, they are not Christians in the historic Trinitarian sense, so they cannot even be included in the generality Protestant, which btw, is a historical term that referrs to folks who protested against government oppression of certain religious
practices.

You have no choice? This is like the current government practice of grouping all Spanish speakers into one group, labeling them with a linguistic term (Hispanic), and claiming it is an “ethnic group”.
You have no choice? Instead of “painting” your brothers and sisters in Christ with generalities, misconceptions, and misunderstandings, why not ask us what we believe, teach and confess?

Polemics.

At least a better approach - but asking us first is still preferable.

So OK, should I paint you with the same brush since you are all Non-Catholics? There are just too many of you to make the distinction of who believes in infant baptism and who doesn’t … which of you believes in OSAS and who doesn’t. I do not have a choice because there are just too many to distinguish from the other. What are we supposed to do?

I put the Mormons in there because I don’t know much about them, I just thought they’re just another group that broke off from the others. I think of JW’s as protestants too, are they? dunno.

 

[windlessuser]

Firstly, the JW, don’t believe that God is a Trinity which disqualifies them from being called Christians (the Nicene Creed).

For simplicity, This is Just a list, of Protestant(The large banner: Those who reject the Authority of the Church while subjecting themselves to the “Authority” of the bible). Which protestant denomination a particular belief is tied to is irrelevant. This is just a compilation of unscriptural protestant beliefs.

Shall we continue; this has gotten rather interesting. A short summary of what a particular belief entails would be most welcome as well.

 

[grace_singh]

I put the Mormons in there because I don’t know much about them, I just thought they’re just another group that broke off from the others. I think of JW’s as protestants too, are they? dunno.

mmmm, not quite. the Mormons see themselves as “Restorationists”, the true heirs to the original, Apostolic Christian faith. they don’t see themsleves as Protestant, Catholic, or Orthodox. they hold a number of beliefs not shared with any other Christian denomination or movement, such as tri-theism.

the JW’s make a distinction between themselves, and all other Christians. like the Arians, they believe that Christ is a created being, and they also deny the Trinity, as well as keep a number of OT Laws. some Orthodox Churches also keep some OT Laws (like the Ethiopian Orthodox Church), but the JWs are very recent historically, and see themselves as distinct and uniquely correct.