Defending Protestant Theology.

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I’m glad you brought this up because during the canonization process certain books that aren’t in Protestant Bible some people in the church felt they were inspired. So at the end of the day it really comes down to what you take as inspired and what you don’t take as inspired.

Do you mean the Apocrypha? The Apocrypha had many holes in it and I think that's why it was removed from scripture. True, Peter and Paul said that all Scripture was God breathed so you can make the valid argument that the Apocrypha was included in that. I believe Luther did believe in the Apocrypha as scriptural. I believe it wasn't until King James came into the picture that Protestants really started questioning the validity of Apocrypha. But, also even the Catholic church doesn't accept all of the Apocrypha as scriptural so it's like, if you're going to accept some of it why not accept all of it?

But saying the Apocrypha should remain in the Bible is like saying we should obey Trump because God told us to. While It's probably true that we should be following and obeying our leaders why should we have to follow the anti Godly ones that probably were not put on there by God? But anyway, that can be a whole other topic.
 
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I’d like to also add that Peter has indirect quotes from the book of Enoch and I know a lot of Protestant don’t see that as inspired.

EDIT: What I mean is Peter and even Jude has parallels to pseudepigrapha like Enoch and Jubilees. That doesn't mean that they thought they were inspired however, it does at least suggest that they read those material and or were familiar with them.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
Fair enough. However, when they spoke of scripture they were referring to the Septuagint. Note I am a believer in Sola Scriptura, I just think that line of thinking of why it makes sense has some holes.
Perhaps the main reason it makes sense, and made sense to the Protestant Reformers, is that there is absolutely nothing which supports the claim made by the Church of Rome that what she substituted for Scripture is valid. Take it away, and you have Scripture remaining.
 
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Help me out - what specifically in St Clements quote supports Sola Scriptura or Sola Fide?

me out

Oh I'm sorry! I didn't see your post until just now! I'll quote it again and bold the relevant parts.

"And we [Christians], too, being called by His will in Christ Jesus, are not justified by ourselves, nor by our own wisdom, or understanding, or godliness, or works which we have wrought in holiness of heart; but by that faith through which, from the beginning, Almighty God has justified all men; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”
"Let us cleave, then, to those to whom grace has been given by God. Let us clothe ourselves with concord and humility, ever exercising self-control, standing far off from all whispering and evil-speaking, being justified by our works, and not our words... Let our praise be in God, and not of ourselves; for God hates those that commend themselves. Let testimony to our good deeds be borne by others, as it was in the case of our righteous forefathers."
"The good servant receives the bread of his labour with confidence; the lazy and slothful cannot look his employer in the face. It is requisite, therefore, that we be prompt in the practice of well-doing; for of Him are all things. And thus He forewarns us: Behold, the Lord [comes], and His reward is before His face, to render to every man according to his work. He exhorts us, therefore, with our whole heart to attend to this, that we be not lazy or slothful in any good work. Let our boasting and our confidence be in Him."

Like I said in the OP, this teaches what Luther taught. That we are saved by our Faith and not by any other works. But the faith that saves, is never alone. He never said the words "faith alone" but what he said and taught is exactly the same things that Luther taught when he taught Sola Fide. That our faith that saves, is never alone. It will ALWAYS have works and obedience.

But then again one could argue that those who don't "obey" are still saved because Paul said that they were in numerous places. But the majority of what Luther believed and taught was that we were saved by a faith that is never alone. This is further backed up by James in the book of James. Chapter 2 I believe? Not sure. We had this conversation though before though that Luther misunderstood James's statement and therefore wanted to remove the book of James from the Bible. It thankfully, didn't prevail and Protestants have since learned the true meaning of James's words were exactly in line with what Luther and the Early church taught.

This was also taught by Christ in Matthew 25:31-46.
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
I’d like to also add that Peter has indirect quotes from the book of Enoch and I know a lot of Protestant don’t see that as inspired.

EDIT: What I mean is Peter and even Jude has parallels to pseudepigrapha like Enoch and Jubilees. That doesn't mean that they thought they were inspired however, it does at least suggest that they read those material and or were familiar with them.
But Enoch was a real person.

So I don’t see it so much as “referencing the Book of Enoch” as talking about the individual, Enoch, who existed.
 
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But Enoch was a real person.

So I don’t see it so much as “referencing the Book of Enoch” as talking about the individual, Enoch, who existed.

I am sorry, I am referring to the book of Enoch (Book of Enoch - Wikipedia). It wasn't written by Enoch that's why it's considered to the pseudepigraphal.
 
Upvote 0

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
9,576
7,775
63
Martinez
✟893,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So tell me, if we have the Holy Spirit for forever, and we are sealed by the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation for forever, just how is it that we can lose our salvation again?
If you walk away from God you are no longer in His Body. For instance, Bart Ehrman is a very good example of a Christian "walking away". He became a born-again fundamentalist Christian in his youth and then turned away from God. He became an Agnostic/Atheist fighting against God with teachings on why one should reject the inerrancy of the Gospel . After reading his bio, do you think he is still saved?
Bart D. Ehrman - Wikipedia
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
But Enoch was a real person.

So I don’t see it so much as “referencing the Book of Enoch” as talking about the individual, Enoch, who existed.

But there's no evidence that the book of Enoch was also in fact, written by Enoch. It could have been written by somebody posing as him like some of the books that were supposedly written by Mary Magdalene and c.o. That apparently said that Christ said that hell didn't exist and all we had to do was say we're sorry to God ...etc. These writings were rejected by the early church as in-scriptural and probably fraudulent. So who's to say that the book of Enoch was actually written by Enoch?
 
Upvote 0

ToBeLoved

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jan 3, 2014
18,705
5,790
✟322,365.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
But there's no evidence that the book of Enoch was also in fact, written by Enoch. It could have been written by somebody posing as him like some of the books that were supposedly written by Mary Magdalene and c.o. That apparently said that Christ said that hell didn't exist and all we had to do was say we're sorry to God ...etc. These writings were rejected by the early church as in-scriptural and probably fraudulent. So who's to say that the book of Enoch was actually written by Enoch?
I don’t support extra-Biblical revelation.

And that was my point.

I think a lot of people ASSUME that because Enoch was a real person, the Book of Enoch is Biblical.
 
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
If you walk away from God you are no longer in His Body. For instance, Bart Ehrman is a very good example of a Christian "walking away". He became a born-again fundamentalist Christian in his youth and then turned away from God to become an Agnostic/Atheist fighting against God with his clear teachings on rejecting the Gospel. After reading his bio, do you think he is still saved?
Bart D. Ehrman - Wikipedia

But a Protestant (and I) would argue that that man was never saved to begin with and never had the Holy Spirit. Because, the Holy Spirit resides in a believer for forever and seals him. We argue that one of the signs and jobs of the Holy Spirit is to keep a person in the faith for forever to make any of Christ's (and God's) promises even possible because Christ did promise to save his sheep for forever (See John 6:37-40 & John 10:27-29). David said it as well in Psalm 37:18 so it isn't a foreign concept.

There are "believers" who leave the faith, yes. But they were never saved to begin with.
 
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So who's to say that the book of Enoch was actually written by Enoch?

Because we can estimate the dating of such material. Plus, 1 Enoch wasn't in the Tanakh and the Septuagint. However, there are some churches today that include it in their cannon namely, the Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church.
 
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Do you mean the Apocrypha?

Yeah I was mainly referring to the Apocrypha. However, you do have some pseudepigraphal text in some collections of the "Bible". My point is that at least some people in the early church history viewed them as inspired. That doesn't mean we should today though.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Maria Billingsley

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Oct 7, 2018
9,576
7,775
63
Martinez
✟893,955.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
But a Protestant (and I) would argue that that man was never saved to begin with and never had the Holy Spirit. Because, the Holy Spirit resides in a believer for forever and seals him. We argue that one of the signs and jobs of the Holy Spirit is to keep a person in the faith for forever to make any of Christ's (and God's) promises even possible because Christ did promise to save his sheep for forever (See John 6:37-40 & John 10:27-29). David said it as well in Psalm 37:18 so it isn't a foreign concept.

There are "believers" who leave the faith, yes. But they were never saved to begin with.
Yes, and that is always the argument,"they were never saved to begin with", therefore "once saved always saved" is a misnomer IMO. This is misleading at best and a deception at worst. This OSAS should be renamed as it has caused much confusion in The Body of Christ. Maybe FTTE "faithful till the end".
Blessings
 
  • Useful
Reactions: Te're'sa
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
But a Protestant (and I) would argue that that man was never saved to begin with and never had the Holy Spirit. Because, the Holy Spirit resides in a believer for forever and seals him. We argue that one of the signs and jobs of the Holy Spirit is to keep a person in the faith for forever to make any of Christ's (and God's) promises even possible because Christ did promise to save his sheep for forever (See John 6:37-40 & John 10:27-29). David said it as well in Psalm 37:18 so it isn't a foreign concept.

There are "believers" who leave the faith, yes. But they were never saved to begin with.

I find fault with this view. To say someone that works away from the faith was never saved to begin with I believe to be a dangerous view. If you read the book of Hebrews the author is very concerned that people should keep the faith. Continual belief in the finished work of Christ is how we are saved. However, we can work away from that belief and later come back to the faith.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Te're'sa
Upvote 0

Neostarwcc

We are saved purely by the work and grace of God.
Supporter
Dec 13, 2015
5,229
4,189
37
US
✟909,984.00
Country
United States
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I don’t support extra-Biblical revelation.

And that was my point.

I think a lot of people ASSUME that because Enoch was a real person, the Book of Enoch is Biblical.

But, there are many problems with the book of Enoch. It denies the Diety of Christ (Enoch 48:1-3), basically says that our salvation comes from an Angel named Phanuel (Enoch 40:1-10), says that our wisdom came from a demon named Penemue (Enoch 69:8-12) just.. it goes on and on. I can see why it was removed from the Bible because it isn't scriptural at all.
 
Upvote 0

Christ is Lord

Well-Known Member
Aug 27, 2019
578
410
Top Secret
✟27,506.00
Country
Virgin Islands, British
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yes, and that is always the argument,"they were never saved to begin with", therefore "once saved always saved" is a misnomer IMO. This is misleading at best and a deception at worst. This OSAS should be renamed as it has caused much confusion in The Body of Christ. Maybe FTTE "faithful till the end".
Blessings

Exactly. In the OT and NT people were saved by faith however, that doesn't mean that they can go and worship other gods (which would be rejecting God and not showing loyalty to him).
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

renniks

Well-Known Member
Jun 2, 2008
10,682
3,445
✟149,430.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Okay so my wife and I were discussing last night about how the basic theologies of Protestantism were found in scripture and that we should make a topic defending it so, here it goes.

I don't need to defend Eternal security because there are already a bazillion threads on the issue at the moment and this thread would easily get to 100+ pages in a week but I would like to defend Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura.

First Sola Fide. The fact of the matter is Sola Fide wasn't just believed/taught by Luther and Protestants throughout history it was in fact, believed by the Early Church and the Apostles as well. Yes, even the Catholic Church. The very first pope, Pope Clement I believed in Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura. The only difference is though, the Early church did not believe that we couldn't lose our salvation by a lack of faith and Luther defended and started the argument that we CANNOT lose our salvation for ANY reason. This particular belief did not start in the church until Luther (And it is argued that the apostles taught it but that it died with the church after they all died) but it is scriptural. Mainly because of these verses in scripture (John 6:37-40, John 10:28-29, John 5:24, Revelation 3:5, Revelation 21:7, Hebrews 10:10, 1 John 5:10-13, 1 Peter 1:4-5 & more.) Yes, even in Hebrews and John's letters where the so called "offending" verses were contained there were verses stating when you receive the Holy Spirit you receive it FOREVER and you HAVE eternal life FOREVER and were sanctified ONCE FOR ALL TIME even Christ himself said it (John 14:16). Peter said it, Paul said it (Ephesians 1:13-14, & Romans 8:9) John said it, The writer of Hebrews said it, the list just goes on and on.

So tell me, if we have the Holy Spirit for forever, and we are sealed by the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation for forever, just how is it that we can lose our salvation again? Was the Early church and the church today who believes that you can lose your salvation by lack of faith trying to claim that the Holy Spirit will be living inside of us when we go to Hades, or the Lake of Fire? Because if they are, that sounds preposterous! How could this have been taught by the Early church?

So far there has not been a single viable argument that Christians who do believe that you can lose your salvation by a lack of faith or that Sola Fide is a false doctrine can come up with that has satisfied Protestants or really anybody else capable of reading and applying the Bible as a whole (and we've been fighting about these topics for over 500 years now). However, Protestants can explain each and every offending verse in scripture because otherwise the Reformation would have died years and years ago since we believe in Sola Scriptura as well which, I'll get to in a moment. So, after saying all of this why is it that Protestants and Luther aren't right about scripture again? Especially when literally ALL of our basic teachings are taught THROUGHOUT the Bible? Just because our church is divided by people who are pro abortion, pro gay rights, pro women pastors, pro feminism, and other minor issues does NOT mean that we don't agree with each other on these basic points and it does NOT mean that Protestantism is a false church or w/e other Christians who disagree with the Reformation claim it to be. It also doesn't mean that those of us Protestants that do believe in Sola Scriptura should NOT defend the Bible say that those particular beliefs are WRONG and against God because the Bible teaches that they are from Genesis to Revelation.


Now that we've covered the part of Sola Fide that says that you cannot lose your salvation let's take a look at what the Bible says salvation even is. The Bible says that salvation is by grace through faith (Romans 4:1-25, Romans 3:28, Ephesians 2:8-10, Acts 16:31, John 3:16, 1 John 5:10-13, Philippians 3:9, John 5:24, to name a few)

While it's true that the words faith alone are never stated anywhere in the Bible it is implied throughout scripture. Nowhere in scripture does it say that we are saved by our faith + works, or by our faith + baptism or by our faith + anything. The Bible just says faith. When Paul was asked by the Jailer "Sir, what must I do to be saved?" notice Paul didn't say "You have to be baptized or you have to do good works...etc" he said "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household."

In Romans 10:13 Paul states that EVERYONE who calls upon the name of the Lord WILL be saved and this matches up with what Christ says in John 6:37 where Christ promises not to cast a SINGLE person out.

When the thief on the cross was saved by Christ, he was saved by his faith. He didn't have a chance to do any works or baptism because he was condemned to death along with Jesus. Yet, he is with Christ right now from the moment he died over 2,000 years ago to this very moment. And he will be with Christ, FOR FOREVER.

The words "Holy Trinity" are also not contained in the Bible but yet that has been a mainstream belief among Christians for a REALLY long time now. That doesn't necessarily mean that the doctrine of the Trinity is wrong. There is plenty of evidence supporting the Holy Trinity. Just like there is plenty of evidence supporting Sola Fide.

We ARE saved by our faith alone but the faith that saves, is never alone. It will ALWAYS have works and obedience. When we were saved we dedicated our lives to Christ and God's will for our lives not our own.

Second Sola Scriptura. The main argument that Luther had against the Catholic church was that how can we claim to follow God yet, not follow God's word but the words of a Pope who can be corrupted? The word of God on the other hand, cannot be corrupted because every person who has written scripture was carried along by the Holy Spirit and it is in fact, inerrant. Both Paul and Peter said it in 2 Timothy 3:16-17 & 2 Peter 1:21. So why is it that we should obey the doctrine of man and the "changing times" when scripture should be the #1 source of our theology. It's true, each Christian denomination has a separate interpretation of scripture but the fact of the matter is, that ALL Christians should go to the word of God FIRST and ONLY before they obey the doctrines of men. Even Paul (and Christ) warned us not to be conformed to this world (Romans 12:2 & John 17:16). The world has been evil from the beginning and many evil and Godless things are being "allowed" into this world ever since the beginning of time. So why take your theology from the world when the word of God cannot become corrupted?

Oh I realize that there are now Bibles that have been corrupted to say that homosexual marriage is "okay" and abortion is "okay" and divorce ...etc is "okay" but when you translate/look at the Bible as a whole and use 99.9% of the English translations of the Bible they ALL state that they are in fact, not okay.
Well I'm a Protestant I believe you can forfeit your salvation, by longer believing, and I'm not so sure about solo scriptoria as some people define it. The Spirit won't tell us anything that contradicts the Bible but that is not the same as saying the Bible is the only source of Truth.
 
Upvote 0