Protestant errors and inventions (3)

[MoreCoffee]

That was my first thought too. However, your "list" includes items that are taken from similar groups and I don't see any interest in keeping them from being peddaled as Protestant "errors and inventions."

Care to name the items and the groups that are "similar to [Christian Science]"?

If item #57 is on your mind then by all means mention it and explain why it ought to be excluded.

That's one of them. But I've called this to your attention already.

You pretended to do some housekeeping, yet a number of invalid items remain and you seem to be able to identify #57 without even being prompted. But it's still there on the list.

What would really be interesting is the compilation of a SERIOUS list, omitting items that are uncharacteristic of Protestants and held by only a small minority of Christians and identified with a particular denomination. This list is no more than a game and no more valid than if I were to compile a list of Catholic errors, listing acceptance of homosexual clergy, women priests, reincarnation, and universal salvation. All of those are held by some members of some Catholic churches.

Thanks for your reply. You didn't mention anything in it that was "similar to [Christian Science]". Perhaps you need some additional time to find an item like that? If not then you need not reply to this post. I am content that you failed because no such item exists in the list.

Here's the list once more - to help those who wish to search it for something that is similar to Christian Science.

1. A bible with only 66 books.
2. Saint Paul's letters are not inspired.
3. Sola Scriptura - In English "Scripture alone" is the theory (unsupported by sacred scripture) that "all things necessary for God's 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.
   [*]Prima Scriptura - A doctrine teaching that besides canonical scripture, there are other guides for what a believer should believe, and how he or she should live; the ways of knowing or understanding God and his will, that do not originate from canonized scripture, are in a second place, perhaps helpful in interpreting that scripture, but testable by the canon and correctable by it, if they seem to contradict the scriptures.
   [*]Personal interpretation of scripture as normative for individual faith content determination.
   [*]Arminianism.
   Arminianism is based on the theological ideas of the previously Dutch Reformed theologian Jacobus Arminius (1560–1609) and his historic supporters known as the Remonstrants. ... They asserted that:
   

   1. election (and condemnation on the day of judgment) was conditioned by the rational faith or nonfaith of man;
   2. the Atonement, while qualitatively adequate for all men, is efficacious only for the man of faith;
   3. unaided by the Holy Spirit, no person is able to respond to God’s will;
   4. grace is resistible; and
   5. believers are able to resist sin but are not beyond the possibility of falling from grace.

   ​
   [*]Faith alone - In Latin "sola fide" is the theory (unsupported by scripture fact) that salvation is obtained by faith alone.
   [*]Antinomianism.
   In Christianity, an antinomian is "one who holds that under the gospel dispensation of grace the moral law is of no use or obligation because faith alone is necessary to salvation". ... Antinomianism in modern times is commonly seen as the theological opposite to Legalism or Works righteousness, the notion that obedience to religious law earns salvation. This makes antinomianism an exaggeration of justification by faith alone. -- Wikipedia​
   [*]Total depravity - one of the five points of Calvinism (All human beings are affected by sin in every area of thought and conduct so that nothing that comes out of anyone apart from the regenerating grace of God can please God. As far as our relationships to God are concerned, we are all so ruined by sin that no one can properly understand either God or God's ways. Nor do we seek God, unless He is first at work within us to lead us to do so).
   [*]Unconditional election - second point of Calvinism (If sinners are as helpless in their depravity as the Bible says they are, unable to know and unwilling to seek God, then the only way they could possibly be saved is for God to take the initiative to change and save them. This is what election means. It is God choosing to save those who, apart from His sovereign choice and subsequent action, certainly would perish.).
   [*]Limited atonement - third point of Calvinism (Reformed theology stresses that Jesus actually atoned for the sins of those the Father had chosen. He actually propitiated the wrath of God toward His people by taking their judgment upon Himself, actually redeemed them, and actually reconciled those specific persons to God. A better name for "limited" atonement would be "particular" or "specific" redemption.).
   [*]Irresistible grace - fourth point of Calvinism (When God works in our hearts, regenerating us and creating a renewed will within, then what was undesirable before becomes highly desirable, and we run to Jesus just as previously we ran away from Him. Fallen sinners do resist God's grace, but His regenerating grace is effectual. It overcomes sin and accomplishes God's purpose).
   [*]Perseverance of the saints - the fifth point of Calvinism (You cannot lose your salvation. Because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure. They are eternally secure in Christ. Some of the verses for this position are John 10:27-28 where Jesus said His sheep will never perish; John 6:47 where salvation is described as everlasting life; Romans 8:1 where it is said we have passed out of judgment; 1 Corinthians 10:13 where God promises to never let us be tempted beyond what we can handle; and Phil. 1:6 where God is the one being faithful to perfect us until the day of Jesus’ return.)
   [*]Once saved always saved.
   1. Once saved always saved even when one denies the faith some time after being saved.
   2. Rededications even though once saved always saved.
   [*]Double predestination. [In the Reformed view God from all eternity decrees some to election and positively intervenes in their lives to work regeneration and faith by a monergistic work of grace. To the non-elect God withholds this monergistic work of grace, passing them by and leaving them to themselves. He does not monergistically work sin or unbelief in their lives. Even in the case of the "hardening" of the sinners' already recalcitrant hearts, God does not, as Luther stated, "work evil in us (for hardening is working evil) by creating fresh evil in us." -- R. C. Sproul]
   [*]Lapsarianism:The logical order of God's decrees in Calvinist theology is the study of the logical order (in God's mind, before Creation) of the decree to ordain or allow the fall of man and reprobation in relation to his decree to elect and save sinners. Several opposing positions have been proposed, all of which have names with the Latin root lapsus meaning fall.
   1. Supralapsaranism.
   2. Infralapsarianism/Sublapsarianism.
   [*]Penal substitutionary atonement - A widespread Reformed conception of the Atonement is that in Christ’s Passion and death, God the Father poured out all of His wrath for the sins of the elect, on Christ the Son. In Christ’s Passion and death, Christ bore the punishment of the Father’s wrath that the elect deserved for their sins.
   [*]Ordinances/Anti-sacramentalism.
   [*]Infant dedication (not baptism) in a worship-service. [This is a common practise in many groups but rarely has a formal doctrine accompanying it as an explanation of why it is done.]
   [*]It isn't baptism unless one is submerged.
   [*]Only people old enough to say the sinner's prayer can be baptised.
   [*]One is born again by saying & believing the sinner's prayer (or a near equivalent).
   [*]Believer's baptism as a public testimony to one's faith but not as the washing away of one's sins nor as the means by which God brings about the birth from above.
   [*]Covenant baptism as a sign and symbol of inclusion into the new covenant community but not as the means by which God gives sanctifying grace.
   [*]The Lord's supper as sign and symbol but not as the body and blood of the Lord.
   [*]Two greater and five lesser Sacraments
   [*]Dispensing with baptism and the Lord's supper altogether. [A few groups have dropped all sacraments.]
   [*]The rapture
   1. A pre tribulation rapture.
   2. A mid tribulation rapture.
   3. A post tribulation rapture.
   [*]A future seven year reign of anti-christ with three and a half years of Israelite temple worship.
   [*]Dispensationalism: scripture must be rightly divided by applying a scheme of dispensations to it; usually seven dispensations are taken as normative but other additional dispensations are sometimes included.
   [*]The sermon on the mount as "old testament teaching" that's not applicable under the new covenant.
   [*]Sermon centric worship - being an explanation of the meaning of the text of scripture or a lesson on morals or doctrine for the instruction of the congregation - is the central act of worship in the gathering of the Lord's people on the Lord's day.
   [*]The One True Church is not a visible institution.
   
   1. The One True Church is made up of all true believers scattered throughout all denominations.
   [*]Denominationalism.
   [*]Rejection of the threefold office in the church. Deacon, Presbyter, and Bishop are the offices identified in sacred scripture and present in the church from the beginning. Some protestant bodies reduce this to Deacon and Elder some to Deacon and Pastor and some teach Deacon, Elder, and Pastor with Pastor distinguished only by being the "teaching elder" in a congregation.
   [*]Rejection of clerical laity distinction in the church.
   [*]The pulpit ought to be the focus of a church building's architecture and the table for use on communion ought to be to the side or located in a different part of the church because there is no altar in the church and no sacrifice is made in a church service.
   [*]Equivocating "worship" and "worship service" - meaning that worship in a small group consisting of two or more is the same as the 'worship service' one would normally experience on a Sunday in a church [building]. [Not a formal doctrine but a widely held view of Christian worship among some of those in denominations and also some in non-denominational and other groups.]
   [*]Lone ranger Christianity - the belief that one need not be associated with any church or group. While this is not a denominational belief it is sufficiently widespread to make a kind of theology of its own.
   [*]Emerging church movement; Emerging churches are fluid, hard to define, and varied; they contrast themselves with what has gone before by using the term "inherited church." Key themes of the emerging church are couched in the language of reform, Praxis-oriented lifestyles, Post-evangelical thought, and incorporation or acknowledgement of political and Post-modern elements. ... -- from Wikipedia
   [*]Prosperity gospel: Prosperity theology (sometimes referred to as the prosperity gospel, the health and wealth gospel, or the gospel of success) is a Christian religious doctrine that financial blessing is the will of God for Christians, and that faith, positive speech, and donations to Christian ministries will always increase one's material wealth.
   [*]Congregations electing their ministers.
   [*]Seeker sensitive churches.
   [*]Accountability partners.
   [*]Altar calls.
   [*]Church discipline effectively nullified because of the difficulty of enforcement in a multi-denominational community.
   [*]Temperance movement. ... Alcohol is wicked, "a devil's brew".
   [*]Old covenant Dietary laws applied to new covenant Christians: Christians shall have no shellfish, crustaceans, pork, or any 'unclean meat' because they are forbidden in the Law of Moses.
   [*]The papacy is the antichrist.
   [*]A specific pope will be the antichrist.
   [*]Michael the Archangel and Jesus being the same person.
   [*]Heaven being in the Orion nebula.
   [*]Soul Sleep: Death is an unconscious, sleep-like state. When Jesus Christ comes again, He will resurrect the dead who believe in Him and will take them to heaven. The dead who are unbelievers will be resurrected 1000 years later.
   [*]For a period of a thousand years the earth will be utterly desolate and only Satan and his angels will be on earth. At the end of the thousand years the the Holy City in heaven will descend to earth. The unrighteous dead will be resurrected and with Satan and his angels, they will surround the Holy City to attack God and His people. God will destroy Satan and his followers, hence removing sin forever.
   [*]Trail of blood - also known as Baptist successionism. It is the theory (unsupported by fact) that Jesus Christ is the founder of the Baptist denomination (Which in fact started around 1605 AD in England).
   [*]The Jesuit oath - An absurd fake oath that among other things says "make and wage relentless war, secretly and openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Masons".
   [*]Oneness (denying the Trinity) - some might think this is a non-christian sect's doctrine while others are inclined to believe that Oneness Pentecostalism is within the confines of Christianity.
   

 

[bbbbbbb]

Very kind of you to offer the above suggestion. Alas, Christian Science is not normally considered a Christian denomination. So, sadly, your suggestion is contrary to the stated purpose of the list.

Pssst! Don't tell that to our scientific Christian friends.

Very well. Seeing that you have a Presbyterian background I think you might find the Confession of 1967 of interest. Here is a link to the current rendition of it - Confession of 1967

 

[bbbbbbb]

That was my first thought too. However, your "list" includes items that are taken from similar groups and I don't see any interest in keeping them from being peddaled as Protestant "errors and inventions."

Which is precisely why I suggested it.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Magic?Is that like the magical prayer that once said saves no matter what?

ELO-Strange Magic - YouTube

Yes, that is the gist of it. Say the magic words and abracadabra, wonderful and strange things happen - or not.

 

[Standing Up]

No sir, you are, despite it being explained many times, the one who is mistaken. There is not a single Church which has maintained the early Church's teaching regarding the efficacy of the Sacraments as a means of grace that uses it as an excuse to sin. -snip-

Actually, in order to be absolved of any sin, we really must be contrite, and resolute not to do them again. If we're not, then it really does not good to eat anything.

OTOH, if you're saved once forever, you really can do whatever you want. You're saved! YAY! Sorry, it doesn't work that way. And knowing how it works in those Churches where we believe we're working out our salvation, would help you along tremendously...

Folks, let me quote St Paul. My paraphrase got lost in translation.

Rom. 5:21, 6:1-2
That as sin hath reigned unto death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life by Jesus Christ our Lord.
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?
God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

No one who believes in OSAS also teaches go and do whatever you want (sin).

So, while you may disagree with OSAS, do so for some other reason than you're fearful of the straw man of permissiveness. Remember also, love casts out fear.

Chalk up another one P got right.

 

[Standing Up]

Prove that this is held by official teaching of the Catholic Church. Show, in the Catechism, where that is. Otherwise, stop it. You see, with the Catholic Church, it doesn't matter what some of the members think. It matters what the Church teaches, which is what Christ taught. With Protestants, if you disagree with a particular denomination, you take their creed, change what you want, and start your own. Doesn't work that way in Catholicism.

Of course it does. Tell that to the post Vat II and pre Vat II groups. Or to EO. Or to OO. Or to the very early church. That Rome does not follow what was handed down, anyone may know (Firmilian, 256ad).

 

[Standing Up]

We could probably do this until the cows come home.

Anything else going on?

 

[MoreCoffee]

Pssst! Don't tell that to our scientific Christian friends.

Very well. Seeing that you have a Presbyterian background I think you might find the Confession of 1967 of interest. Here is a link to the current rendition of it - Confession of 1967

I've heard of it before, the 1967 confession I mean, but never spent the time necessary to find & read it. Thanks for the URL.

I did read a book by Gordon Clarke called WHAT DO PRESBYTERIANS BELIEVE that offered a rather harsh critique of the preliminary discussions that led to the 1967 confession. He was a Bible Presbyterian I think.

 

[Thekla]

In humans there is space and time. Therefore we do not teleport back to the time when Christ layed His life down for His sheep. It was a one time for all time meaning it does not need to happen again and again. He shed His blood as it dropped on the ground for my sins. Good enough for me. His broken body was also for me.. Good enough for me. For what He did was Holy. What we are are sinners saved by the blood He shed.

God is "above/beyond" space and time. If we humans are only "in" space and time, then we do not have Christ in us, nor the Holy Spirit.

 

[Albion]

God is "above/beyond" space and time. If we humans are only "in" space and time, then we do not have Christ in us, nor the Holy Spirit.

But the celebration of the Eucharist is not above and beyond time and space, as MamaZ said. We are not assembled outside time and space. The actions of the priest and, indeed, the Crucifixion are not above and beyond time and space except in terms of consequences or value, etc.

 

[Thekla]

But the celebration of the Eucharist is not above and beyond time and space, as MamaZ said. We are not assembled outside time and space. The actions of the priest and, indeed, the Crucifixion are not above and beyond time and space except in terms of consequences or value, etc.

As much as we participate in God through His presence and indwelling, then there is an "intersection" between what we are doing and the timelessness of God. The actions that any of us do, including the priest, in this manner are beyond time.

Re: the Crucifixion, "the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev.); Christ was crucified in time but this has cosmic spiritual effect, as God is also beyond/above time.

In the Eucharist we receive Christ's resurrected body and blood - and Christ ascended (resurrected human "flesh" is in heaven). In time and beyond time.

 

[Albion]

As much as we participate in God through His presence and indwelling, then there is an "intersection" between what we are doing and the timelessness of God. The actions that any of us do, including the priest, in this manner are beyond time.

Re: the Crucifixion, "the lamb was slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev.); Christ was crucified in time but this has cosmic spiritual effect, as God is also beyond/above time.

In the Eucharist we receive Christ's resurrected body and blood - and Christ ascended (resurrected human "flesh" is in heaven). In time and beyond time.

I don't think any of that conflicts with what I wrote.

 

[tadoflamb]

No one is talking about doing the work of Christ. It's obvious that God uses the human agent to do this work. What God didn't do was make the foundation of His church a fallen man. That's not even logical. It's like you taking your child and entrusting their wellbeing with a drug addict. It is undeniable that the disciples helped to establish the church as a group. Peter however was not the foundation or leader of that church.

Obviously, Jesus Christ had more faith in St. Peter than you do. What we see in Matthew 16 is not a Church being built upon a fallen man, but the transfer of authority. Yes, Christ left His Church in the hands of a human being, just like you, just like me. An odd thing isn't it? That a God that has no need for us invites us to help build His Kingdom. I'm not sure if it's logical or not, but God's ways are not our ways. And, as a Catholic, it's truly fascinating to see the successor of St. Peter, in the Chair of St. Peter, in the Basilica of St. Peter which is built over the bones of St. Peter fulfilling Christ's commission to St. Peter of 'feed my sheep'. That's what we have in the Catholic faith; a faith that is real and tangible just like our Lord.

I have to confess I'm always a little stunned when protestants dismiss the apostles as 'dead' or 'fallen' men. I only pray that you show more respect to the founders of your denominations as well as to your own families. Because, this is we are talking about when we talk of the Saints who have come before us. We're talking about family.

 

[tadoflamb]

Tadoflamb has simply invented something he calls the "Protestant Church" in order to vilify Protestants.

What!?! I believe in the same Protestant Church as you do. The one that is invisible that no one knows what it teaches and who is ordered to it.

 

[Albion]

What!?! I believe in the same Protestant Church as you do.

Which one would that be, then? By name.

That ought to clear things up, don't you think?



.

 

[bbbbbbb]

I've heard of it before, the 1967 confession I mean, but never spent the time necessary to find & read it. Thanks for the URL.

I did read a book by Gordon Clarke called WHAT DO PRESBYTERIANS BELIEVE that offered a rather harsh critique of the preliminary discussions that led to the 1967 confession. He was a Bible Presbyterian I think.

Yes, he was.

 

[tadoflamb]

Which one would that be, then? By name.

That ought to clear things up, don't you think?

But you know as well as I do that those protestant denominations and sects which have broken from apostolic succession and thus don't have a valid Eucharist can't properly be called churches, but are more properly known as 'ecclesial assemblies'. Thus your query 'which Church' has no answer outside the protestant milieu.

No, the Protestant Church I refer to is the same Protestant Church protestants refer to, either directly or obliquely. Sometimes it's even capitalized as if it were a proper noun describing a person, place or thing. If the Protestant Church doesn't exist (even if it does so invisibly) then it follows that it's pet teachings also don't exist. Therefore, there is no such thing as sola scriptura, no salvation by faith alone and a bible with only 66 books isn't an authentic canon.

You can see the difficulty that arises when you have a Protestant Church that only exists invisibly or doesn't exist at all. It just makes you look like a loose conglomeration of man-made institutions which, in fact, you are.

Don't like it? Hold a council.

 

[bbbbbbb]

But you know as well as I do that those protestant denominations and sects which have broken from apostolic succession and thus don't have a valid Eucharist can't properly be called churches, but are more properly known as 'ecclesial assemblies'. Thus your query 'which Church' has no answer outside the protestant milieu.

No, the Protestant Church I refer to is the same Protestant Church protestants refer to, either directly or obliquely. Sometimes it's even capitalized as if it were a proper noun describing a person, place or thing. If the Protestant Church doesn't exist (even if it does so invisibly) then it follows that it's pet teachings also don't exist. Therefore, there is no such thing as sola scriptura, no salvation by faith alone and a bible with only 66 books isn't an authentic canon.

You can see the difficulty that arises when you have a Protestant Church that only exists invisibly or doesn't exist at all. It just makes you look like a loose conglomeration of man-made institutions which, in fact, you are.

Don't like it? Hold a council.

Your grammar is puzzling. You seem to be addressing the concept of a Protestant Church, but tear into it as if it doesn't exist and never did exist. Therefore, one can conclude, as you seem to, that there can be no such things as Protestant errors and inventions. However, you cap your tirade off with a statement expressing the fact that "you are" a loose conglomeration of man-made institutions.

It seems to me that the Catholic church also fits the same description, being a loose confederation of man-made institutions commonly known as Rites. This is also true of Freemasonry with its various Rites.

 

[Root of Jesse]

Problem with this is that it's not a fact. You're not even trying to think about this logically. What you're proposing is simply impossible.

Nothing is impossible with God. That you choose to limit Him is very telling.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Nothing is impossible with God. That you choose to limit Him is very telling.

I also find it very telling when people insist that the "fullness of salvation" can be only found in their particular denomination and that God does not recognize other denominations as being branches of the same vine, Jesus Christ.