Will Protestants be surprised when Jesus judges them according to their deeds?

[ltwin]

The use of the phrase “good Catholic” bothers me. What? there are three kinds of catholics, or more? good, bad, lukewarm, self-deluding, etc." I think 'good catholic" is redundant. Are there “good” Jews and others? Protestants? Muslims? Hindus? etc.?

Was it not Jesus (when talking to members of the early church [who I presume you believe were Catholic]) who said "I know your deeds; you are neither cold nor hot. How I wish you were one or the other. So because you are lukewarm — neither hot nor cold — I am about to spit you out of My mouth! " (Revelation 3:16)

So, yes, I think we can speak of “good Catholics” and “lukewarm Catholics” and “good Protestants” and “lukewarm Protestants.” Not everyone who is baptized will experience a conversion of the heart and not everyone who says “Lord, Lord” will enter the kingdom.

 

[ltwin]

Hence, belief in Jesus and obedience to his commands are necessarily MUTUALLY INCLUSIVE. The Protestants Christian A.W. Tozer elucidates: "“In the New Testament there is no contradiction between faith and obedience. Between faith and law-works, yes; between law and grace, yes; but between faith and obedience, not at all. The Bible recognizes no faith that does not lead to obedience, nor does it recognize any obedience that does not spring from faith.”

Since Tozer is a Protestant who is explaining a very Protestant view of faith and obedience and since you obviously know that Tozer is a Protestant, why do you write the following:

Protestants will undoubtedly twist this unequivocal statement by Jesus to conform to their convenient preconceived notions about no effort being required on their part to enter Jesus’ Kingdom.

You already know that Protestants do not hold such a “lazy” view of the Christian life, and yet you still base your thread on this caricature.

 

[spiritualsoldier]

Sorry, I should have said “most” Protestants.

And you know as well as I do that a central and ubiquitous belief of Protestants is the belief of “once saved always saved.” Many Protestants admit that it is preferable to obey Jesus commands, but at the same time think that obeying Jesus’ commands is not required for salvation. This view refutes Jesus’ preaching directly, and therefore is false doctrine and convenient heresy.

 

[ltwin]

And you know as well as I do that a central and ubiquitous belief of Protestants is the belief of “once saved always saved.”

I know of no such thing. Sola fide and sola Scriptura would be “central and ubiquitous” but “once saved always saved” is not. While some Protestant traditions do believe in eternal security (notably the Reformed), there are other Protestant traditions who teach conditional security (Arminianism, Lutheranism).

Many Protestants admit that it is preferable to obey Jesus commands, but at the same time think that obeying Jesus’ commands is not required for salvation.

This isn’t Protestantism. It’s Antinomianism. The Westminster Confession of Faith, the gold standard of Calvinist theology, states in Chapter 19 Of the Law of God:

V. The moral law does forever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof;[8] and that, not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it.[9] Neither does Christ, in the Gospel, any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.[10]

VI. Although true believers be not under the law, as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified, or condemned;[11] yet is it of great use to them, as well as to others; in that, as a rule of life informing them of the will of God, and their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly;[12] . . .

VII. Neither are the forementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it;[21] the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely, and cheerfully, which the will of God, revealed in the law, requires to be done.[22]

 

[JonNC]

I also agree. However, the issue at hand is Protestant distortion of Jesus’ Gospel. I cannot tolerate the distortion of Jesus’ Gospel into a convenient, no-effort-required “sola fide” solution

Can you provide a link to a particular nonCatholic denomination that teaches this? I would like to read it, and if it indeed says this, join you in condemning that type of theology.

 

[JonNC]

I don’t think it is even “most”.

 

[JonNC]

If someone claims to have faith but does no good works, or does a lot of bad works, then from the sola fide view they probably don’t have faith.

Or they had faith and rejected it.

 

[De_Maria]

The Jews have determined that there are 613 laws in the Torah. Although, there are many expansions and new applications. I wonder if it would be beneficial to attempt to enumerate the laws of the New Testament?

They boil down to two Laws:

Matthew 22:36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. 38 This is the first and great commandment. 39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

Everything else is just an elaboration on these two.

…Would you be able to identify these six constant and immediate commands of the Bible?

We are not people of the Book. We obey the Catholic Church. Whatever the Catholic Church says the Bible Teaches. She it is who wrote the New Testament. She it is who selected the books of the Old Testament. And She it is who put them together in the Bible.

 

[De_Maria]

I don’t think it is even “most”.

I do. I’ve been talking to Protestants for 20 years and I can count on one hand the ones that say that you can lose your salvation.

Even those who claim to oppose OSAS will turn around and say that once you say you believe in Christ, you will not be judged. Even if you should fall away, they say, God will make it so that you will be saved on the Last Day.

Prove me wrong.

 

[Autumn-Smoke]

All the years I spent in Evangelical Protestantism, and I was taught that we will be judged on our works, but this judgment will be for rewards in heaven only, not for a judgment with salvation as the outcome, because salvation was assured through acceptance of Christ.

The example sited was usually I Corinthians 3:12-14 “For no one can lay a foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If anyone builds on this foundation using gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, or straw, his workmanship will be evident, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will prove the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive a reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss. He himself will be saved, but only as one being snatched from the fire.…”

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

I don’t think it is even “most”.

I do. I’ve been talking to Protestants for 20 years and I can count on one hand the ones that say that you can lose your salvation.

Even those who claim to oppose OSAS will turn around and say that once you say you believe in Christ, you will not be judged. Even if you should fall away, they say, God will make it so that you will be saved on the Last Day.

Prove me wrong.

Well, I can’t, except to say that perseverance of the saints is a significant divide between the Calvinist / Reformed traditions and the Lutheran and Anglican traditions. And as far as I know, neither do Methodists confess OSAS

 

[De_Maria]

Well, I can’t, except to say that perseverance of the saints is a significant divide between the Calvinist / Reformed traditions and the Lutheran and Anglican traditions. And as far as I know, neither do Methodists confess OSAS

Every single one of those teaches that a Christian can’t lose his salvation. Now, they may see a difference between OSAS and their doctrine, which I believe they call “eternal” security. But I see none.

 

[jcm2017]

I’m Catholic, and I hope I’m surprised at the judgment.
If I’m not surprised by God’s beatitude, then I’ll be in hell, because our own expectations are nothing like God’s.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Well, I can’t, except to say that perseverance of the saints is a significant divide between the Calvinist / Reformed traditions and the Lutheran and Anglican traditions. And as far as I know, neither do Methodists confess OSAS

Every single one of those teaches that a Christian can’t lose his salvation. Now, they may see a difference between OSAS and their doctrine, which I believe they call “eternal” security. But I see none.

No, they don’t. I was raised Lutheran. Lutherans do not teach OSAS.
From the Augsburg Confession.
**Article XII: Of Repentance.

1] Of Repentance they teach that for those who have fallen after Baptism there is remission of sins whenever they are converted 2] and that the Church ought to impart absolution to those thus returning to repentance. Now, repentance consists properly of these 3] two parts: One is contrition, that is, 4] terrors smiting the conscience through the knowledge of sin; the other is faith, which is born of 5] the Gospel, or of absolution, and believes that for Christ’s sake, sins are forgiven, comforts 6] the conscience, and delivers it from terrors. Then good works are bound to follow, which are the fruits of repentance.

7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.**

 

[De_Maria]

No, they don’t. I was raised Lutheran. Lutherans do not teach OSAS.
From the Augsburg Confession.
Article XII: Of Repentance…
7] They condemn the Anabaptists, who deny that those once justified can lose the Holy Ghost. Also those who contend that some may attain to such 8] perfection in this life that they cannot sin.

You’re right. But how many Lutherans actually know this? I’m pretty sure that I’ve spoken to very many who defended eternal security. And the teaching is self contradicting. Let me show you:

Q: One of your FAQ answers states that it is possible for one to lose his salvation. However, in your Theses on Justification (1983) on this website it says plainly that believers have eternal assurance (paragraph 58). Which is it?
A: Lutherans believe both are true and Scriptural: It is possible for a believer to fall from faith and lose salvation, and it is possible for a believer to have complete assurance of eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. If this seems paradoxical to human reason, then (Lutherans say) this is only because the teaching of Scripture itself on this issue (as on many other issues) appears paradoxical to human reason.
For Lutherans, this is essentially a matter of properly distinguishing between Law and Gospel: Warnings against falling from faith are the strongest form of God’s Law, intended to warn against “carnal security” based on “good works” or against the attitude that “since I’m saved, I can do anything I want to do.” Assurances of God’s constant and eternal love in Christ are the sweetest and purest form of Gospel, intended to comfort those who are plagued by their sins and by their failures to keep God’s Law perfectly.
Usage: We urge you to contact an LCMS pastor in your area for more in-depth discussion. Published by: LCMS Church Information Center
©The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod
1333 S. Kirkwood Road, St. Louis, MO 63122-7295 888-843-5267 • infocenter@lcms.org • www.lcms.org/faqs

Lutherans believe both are true and Scriptural: It is possible for a believer to fall from faith and lose salvation, and it is possible for a believer to have complete assurance of eternal salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

Some Lutherans defend the former and not the latter. Some don’t believe the latter at all.

 

[JonNC]

Then they are not following their confession. Some Catholics don’t be in the real presence.
Poor catechesis isn’t the issue. Doctrine is.

 

[De_Maria]

Then they are not following their confession. Some Catholics don’t be in the real presence.
Poor catechesis isn’t the issue. Doctrine is.

There’s a difference. Catholics believe in the authority of the Church to Teach the Doctrines of the Lord. Lutherans espouse the idea of private interpretation of Scripture.

Lutherans who believe in eternal assurance are exercising their right of private interpretation.

Admit it. Could you, as a Lutheran, in good conscience, tell another Lutheran that he was wrong for believing in eternal assurance of salvation? I can.

 

[billsannie]

I don’t think most Evangelical Fundamentalists would have a problem with it. They would just cite Matthew 7:16 (By their fruits ye shall know them) and say that the lost weren’t really saved to begin with.

 

[JonNC]

JonNC:

Then they are not following their confession. Some Catholics don’t be in the real presence.
Poor catechesis isn’t the issue. Doctrine is.

There’s a difference. Catholics believe in the authority of the Church to Teach the Doctrines of the Lord. Lutherans espouse the idea of private interpretation of Scripture.

Lutherans who believe in eternal assurance are exercising their right of private interpretation.

Admit it. Could you, as a Lutheran, in good conscience, tell another Lutheran that he was wrong for believing in eternal assurance of salvation? I can.

Lutherans believe in the authority of the confessions as a right reflection of scripture. Doctrine.

I absolutely could, if he meant perseverance of the saints, or OSAS.

 

[De_Maria]

I absolutely could, if he meant perseverance I’d saints, or OSAS.

Yeah, but he doesn’t have to listen to you. Because the Lutheran code believes in Sola Scriptura:

But the Scripture is not only the sole source and norm of theology, but it is also — and for that very reason — the only sure and perfect rule of faith and life,” as we confess in our Explanation to Luther’s Small Catechism.

That the Bible is perfect we see from its own testimony. In the 19th Psalm, verse 7, we read: “The law of the Lord” (the word law here is used in its wider sense, including both Law and Gospel) “is perfect, converting the soul.” Our Savior Himself testifies to the perfection of Scripture when He says: “The scripture cannot be broken.” John 10:35. It is as a perfect ring.