- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Interesting how "Evangelicals" are separating themselves from "Protestants".
Posted on 10/6/25 at 10:51 pm to Champagne
Posted on 10/6/25 at 10:51 pm to Champagne
quote:Any works done without the cleansing of Christ’s mediatorial blood by faith are filthy rags and do not merit anything but further condemnation. Works done by faith are pleasing to God, even if imperfect, because Christ intercedes for us as our high priest to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
I would like Foo and Something Different to answer this question:
There's missionary work being done in Africa - work for the poor. One missionary is from Something Different's church ( we don't know what church that is because he has bravely and with great courage kept that info from us) and the other missionary worker is Catholic.
Which works done by these two men are considered by Almighty God to be filthy menstrual rags? Why?
“whatever does not proceed from faith is sin“ -Rom 14:23
“But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags” -Isa 64:6
“And without faith it is impossible to please [God]” -Heb 11:6
“For the mind that is set on the flesh is hostile to God, for it does not submit to God's law; indeed, it cannot. Those who are in the flesh cannot please God.” -Rom 8:7-8
2
Posted on 10/6/25 at 10:59 pm to FooManChoo
quote:
“But we are all like an unclean thing, And all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags” -Isa 64:6
It does not say that all acts of righteousness are as filthy rags to God, but that those being rendered to him in Isaiah‘s day were.
This pertains to a particular historical situation, not to a general condition. The passage appeals to a time when Israelites once had a right relationship with God, when God helped them against their enemies because they waited on him, gladly did right, and remembered his ways.
When they sin against him and did not repent and return to their former state, he abandoned them to the will of their enemies, so that even Jerusalem and its Temple were destroyed. (Isaiah speaks of this prophetically, before it happened.)
It was during that period of continued sin, leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 B.C., that they had “become like one who is unclean”–they hadn’t always been like that. In this state, even the nation’s acts of righteousness appeared like filthy rags to God, so he wouldn’t help them: “When you spread out your hands in prayer, I will hide my eyes from you; even if you offer many prayers, I will not listen. Your hands are full of blood; wash and make yourselves clean. Take your evil deeds out of my sight! Stop doing wrong, learn to do right!” (Is 1:15-17).
Protestants are often confused about the role Catholics believe good works play in salvation, so you should clear this up for the Fundamentalist you know. You should explain to him that we do not perform good works in order to enter a state of justification. The Council of Trent stated that “nothing which precedes justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification” (Decree on Justification 8).
In fact, it is impossible for an unjustified person to do supernaturally good works, since these are based on the virtue of charity (supernatural love), which an unjustified person does not have. Good works therefore flow from our reception of justification; they do not cause us to enter a state of justification. Good works increase the righteousness we are given at justification and please God, who promises to give us supernatural rewards on the last day, including the gift of eternal life (Rom 2:6-7, Gal 6:6-10).
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:04 pm to Champagne
quote:Faith is a trusting and resting in Christ. Since such a thing is a gift of God by His grace, He can impart that to whomever He wishes, including an infant of Christian parents that has no mental capacity to know or understand Christ and His work on its behalf. Faith, itself, is an act of God's grace, not a work or something we produce in ourselves.
Foo, you say that we are saved by Faith Alone. If that is true, then how can a severely mentally disabled infant who is in a coma manage to make it to Heaven by being saved by Faith Alone?
quote:If a person is elect of God, then God will not let him believe a lie that denies the gospel of faith alone in Christ alone for justification.
And let me ask you another question. What if a person believes that Faith in Jesus Christ Alone leads to Salvation but has been tricked or somehow persuaded that in addition to Faith Alone, the person must always wear unmatched socks. Are you saying that person is going to Hell because he has believed that wearing unmatched socks is also required for Salvation? What if the person is not quite intelligent enough to realize that he's been tricked in to believing this nonsense about always wearing non-matching socks?
This non-matching socks guy is the best church-goer, believer and missionary that you've ever seen. Is he going to Hell because he mistakenly added something to his firm belief and acceptance of Jesus Christ as his personal Lord and Savior?
I believe you have been tricked, in a sense, to believe that your good works contribute something in addition to what Christ has done, and I hope you turn away from that belief and trust in Jesus Christ alone for your salvation. An atheist who does a lot of good deeds is still rejecting Christ's work on the cross, and a Catholic who trusts in his own good works or those of others other than Christ is still denying Jesus' work on the cross as sufficient for his salvation.
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:20 pm to gaetti15
quote:It is consistent with the rest of the testimony of Scripture. I included a few other verses that get to the same concept, that good works absent faith are nothing and merit nothing, but are actually sinful, because they are not done for God's glory by faith.
It does not say that all acts of righteousness are as filthy rags to God, but that those being rendered to him in Isaiah‘s day were.
quote:From Trent:
Protestants are often confused about the role Catholics believe good works play in salvation, so you should clear this up for the Fundamentalist you know. You should explain to him that we do not perform good works in order to enter a state of justification. The Council of Trent stated that “nothing which precedes justification, whether faith or works, merits the grace of justification” (Decree on Justification 8).
In fact, it is impossible for an unjustified person to do supernaturally good works, since these are based on the virtue of charity (supernatural love), which an unjustified person does not have. Good works therefore flow from our reception of justification; they do not cause us to enter a state of justification. Good works increase the righteousness we are given at justification and please God, who promises to give us supernatural rewards on the last day, including the gift of eternal life (Rom 2:6-7, Gal 6:6-10).
CANON XXIV.-If any one saith, that the justice received is not preserved and also increased before God through good works; but that the said works are merely the fruits and signs of Justification obtained, but not a cause of the increase thereof; let him be anathema.
Since our justification by Christ's works is perfect and complete, nothing can be added to it, by good works or otherwise. Christ's sacrifice was sufficient to cover all of our sins and merit our justification in total, so that there is nothing for us to do to preserve justification or to add to it.
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:25 pm to somethingdifferent
quote:
I've know some people who consider themselves "calvinist" but they certainly aren't like that. While I do not fully agree with the modern, reformed view of calvinism, I can acknowledge that they geniunely love the Lord and serve/minister to others.
I shouldn't have said or implied that anyone whose congregation is led by Calvinist pastor is some kind of insincere weirdo. Most Calvinists kind of take that part of their belief system and treat it as a footnote. I've never met one who took the attitude of, "well, everything is preordained anyway, so I can just do whatever the hell I want and it doesn't matter." The rules of salvation by faith are the same either way.
Where Calvinism does come out is in the attitude the "saved" congregations has towards outsiders. The notion that Christ died only for "the elect" and that God made people just to be damned is something that profoundly affects the way a pastor runs his church, IMO.
I suppose I'd categorize Calvinism as one of a larger family of heresies all stemming from confusion between having absolute power and actually using it in a given situation. I do believe that God could know whether or not I will ultimately be saved. I do not think He has ever had reason to, though, so He does not "know" in the full sense.
Just as God is omnipotent but under no obligation to act, He is omniscient but under no obligation to know.
Posted on 10/6/25 at 11:51 pm to Porpus
quote:I don’t know how God can be omniscient and yet not actually know all things. That seems to fly in the face of what the word means, as well as being an attack on God’s sovereignty. In an attempt to protect man’s freedom, you remove God’s freedom to act as He will.
I suppose I'd categorize Calvinism as one of a larger family of heresies all stemming from confusion between having absolute power and actually using it in a given situation. I do believe that God could know whether or not I will ultimately be saved. I do not think He has ever had reason to, though, so He does not "know" in the full sense.
Just as God is omnipotent but under no obligation to act, He is omniscient but under no obligation to know
Calvinism is merely an understanding of the Bible that teaches God’s sovereignty over all His creation for His own glory, particularly in regards to salvation of mankind.
“Heresy” is also a strong word to use here.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 12:14 am to Gaspergou202
quote:
I thought this was a reference to the common Protestant belief that the Christian Church ceased to exist sometime between 150AD and Constantine and was reborn under Father Martin Luther.
What denominations believe this? I'm Missouri Synod Lutheran and have never heard this one before.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 3:45 am to FooManChoo
quote:
In the same passage (ch 2), James contrasts a saving faith that produces good works with a mere intellectual faith about God that even the demons have. Clearly James isn’t talking about a saving faith in Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins, as demons can’t and don’t have that.
A person can have an intellectual belief that God exists and even that Jesus existed without a saving and changing faith
I want to delve more into the definition of faith. To restate your point, mere intellectual belief can exist, but does not necessarily include "a saving and changing faith." What is the demarcation between merely intellectual and "saving and changing?"
Posted on 10/7/25 at 5:46 am to somethingdifferent
. So you're ok saying that "Tradition" (in a highly institutional sense) is equal to scripture itself? It's a completely farcical notion and ends up being straight up heretical in praxis
Long before the New Testament came along there was the tradition of the church . Even when the New Testament Bible was assembled together, there was no kinko’s or way to replicate thousands of copies to the masses. Tradition was the only way to keep the knowledge of the teaching of Christ and the church intact. The New Testament was not officially assimilated until 382 AD at the council of Rome , followers had only fragments of letters at that time. I would say Tradition and the early fathers of the church was extremely important.
Long before the New Testament came along there was the tradition of the church . Even when the New Testament Bible was assembled together, there was no kinko’s or way to replicate thousands of copies to the masses. Tradition was the only way to keep the knowledge of the teaching of Christ and the church intact. The New Testament was not officially assimilated until 382 AD at the council of Rome , followers had only fragments of letters at that time. I would say Tradition and the early fathers of the church was extremely important.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 6:09 am to GumboPot
Evangelicals are Protestants. As Christians, we are instructed to spread the Gospel, or Good News of Jesus Christ, to the world so that people would repent (change their mind) of their unbelief or previously held notions of what would grant them entry to Heaven and believe upon Jesus alone instead, thus placing the full weight on Him for what He did rather than their own righteousness or efforts to be better. That’s all evangelicalism is really… The Great Commission.
Sola Scriptura is the fundamental basis for all Protestants, even those who also adhere to doctrines and traditions of men as well. That being said, spreading the gospel is pretty fundamental.
I personally don’t consider myself protesting or reforming anything. The King James Authorized English Bible and the words therin are all I believe upon.
Sola Scriptura is the fundamental basis for all Protestants, even those who also adhere to doctrines and traditions of men as well. That being said, spreading the gospel is pretty fundamental.
I personally don’t consider myself protesting or reforming anything. The King James Authorized English Bible and the words therin are all I believe upon.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 6:30 am to Mike da Tigah
quote:Some Catholics identify as Evangelicals. There is nothing wrong with the term it is just a different way of practicing your faith. I don't do enough of it but am comfortable with my position in the Global Methodist Church.
Evangelicals are Protestants.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 7:55 am to GumboPot
Don't let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ
.
Colossians 2:8
Never seen this more applicable.
.
Colossians 2:8
Never seen this more applicable.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 8:40 am to LockDown
quote:Traditionally, there have been three aspects to faith: knowledge, assent, and trust.
I want to delve more into the definition of faith. To restate your point, mere intellectual belief can exist, but does not necessarily include "a saving and changing faith." What is the demarcation between merely intellectual and "saving and changing?"
Saving faith typically requires knowledge of the facts of the gospel, an agreement that those facts are true and happened in time and space, and trust that those facts apply to you, personally.
I’ve heard it illustrated this way: you can see a parachute on a table in an airplane hanger and know what its purpose is for (knowledge). You can even see others strap them on and not worry about them jumping out of planes because you agree that the parachutes do what they are supposed to do (assent). But, you have to be able to rest in that knowledge in order to strap one on and be willing to jump out of a plane, yourself (trust).
Most know what parachutes are and what their purpose is, and many will agree that they work. Fewer will trust a parachute enough with their life to be willing to jump out of a plane thousands of feet in the air.
An intellectual knowledge knows facts about God and what Jesus did on the cross, and even agrees that God exists and Jesus did what is claimed that He did on the cross for sinners. A saving faith rests on Christ personally and fully for their own salvation, entrusting their very souls to Him.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:04 am to FooManChoo
quote:
Saving faith typically requires knowledge of the facts of the gospel, an agreement that those facts are true and happened in time and space, and trust that those facts apply to you, personally.
I’ve heard it illustrated this way: you can see a parachute on a table in an airplane hanger and know what its purpose is for (knowledge). You can even see others strap them on and not worry about them jumping out of planes because you agree that the parachutes do what they are supposed to do (assent). But, you have to be able to rest in that knowledge in order to strap one on and be willing to jump out of a plane, yourself (trust).
This usually comes at the end of our trying, and as a result of our inability to live the law, understanding our righteousness is hot garbage to God, and yet the only way in which we are saved is by being perfect as God is also perfect, or trusting solely in the only one who is perfect and sacrificed Himself on our behalf to pay our sin punishment on OUR cross he bore, God Himself, the same who created us and also died on our behalf. Rejecting that gift offered mankind and choosing to face God on our own rather than in Christ alone is a decision most will foolishly and consciously make for themselves.
The law was to show man his need for the savior. It is of course God’s nature, and yet our nature is rebellion, and God knows that, but also loves us with the kind of love we don’t comprehend, and only that kind of love could cause God to come to us as a man, experience life as a man, and then pay our death penalty on our behalf, and ask that we believe upon Him alone to receive that gift of salvation.
I think that when we no longer look through a glass darkly, and see Him face to face, and understand it with true clarity, it will floor us all.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:05 am to Swampcat
quote:Sola scriptura speaks to ultimate authority for the Church. Once Scripture was established as an authority, it became the standard for judging truth. Jesus did this. The Bereans did this. Paul told Timothy to do this.
Long before the New Testament came along there was the tradition of the church . Even when the New Testament Bible was assembled together, there was no kinko’s or way to replicate thousands of copies to the masses. Tradition was the only way to keep the knowledge of the teaching of Christ and the church intact. The New Testament was not officially assimilated until 382 AD at the council of Rome , followers had only fragments of letters at that time. I would say Tradition and the early fathers of the church was extremely important.
That doesn’t mean oral traditions weren’t authoritative. Jesus told the people to listen to the words of the religious leaders of Israel, but He, Himself, judged their words by the Scriptures.
The Bible provides surety that oral tradition cannot provide. If you say something once, it may be forgotten or misremembered. Once the spoken words are written down, you have a hard standard that continues on with confidence and as a point of unchanging comparison.
If we believe that all of Scripture is God-breathed, and God preserves His word for us, then we can be confident that what has been preserved for us is what God intends for us to know and believe.
There were many oral traditions from Moses that were passed down and were considered authoritative to the Jews during the time of Jesus’ ministry, but Jesus didn’t consider them authoritative to the same degree as the written word of the OT Bible, which Jesus appealed to frequently. That is what Protestants believe regarding apostolic tradition: they are not on the same level as Scripture.
We are also told that Jesus did (and said, I’m sure) many things that weren’t recorded. Those things were numerous, and yet even the RCC doesn’t claim to have all of them as part of oral tradition passed down to the Church. That means that there were some authoritative teachings that didn’t make it past His disciples. The Church has preserved what is necessary for us to believe in the Scriptures, and those Scriptures form the ultimate authority that all other teachings are to be compared against.
I would also say that the early practice of the Church was to copy the writings and pass them along to other churches. They knew what was Scripture early on, with little debate except for a couple of NT writings. They weren’t as dependent on apostolic oral tradition as you make it out, after the first few decades after Christ’s resurrection.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:07 am to FooManChoo
You answer moves a bit away from "Faith Alone" and returns to your belief in Double Predestination. You mention that "God's Elect" will have Faith Alone injected into them by God, even if they can never be "Faith Alone" in the conventional adult manner. You say that Double Predestination Saves those who cannot assent and intellectually accept the Doctrine of Faith Alone.
Have we found an exception to the Rule of Faith Alone here? A blind, deaf and dumb boy named Tommy has never heard of Jesus, or religion. He doesn't know what day it is or what Praying is. How can he be Saved by Faith Alone? Are you saying that God will Save him anyway? God will simply inject the required "Faith Alone" medicine and Save Tommy. That is your answer. But Tommy's Faith Alone journey is nothing like Foo's Faith Alone journey. In order to Save Tommy under Faith Alone, we have to invent a real "twist" in the logic of how Faith Alone works.
I will now argue the point that Tommy has found an exception to the Doctrine of Faith Alone. I will additionally make the point that Foo himself has declared that the Predestination Doctrine must be tacked on to the Doctrine of Faith Alone in order to Save Tommy and others like him.
Faith Alone + Predestination = Salvation is the Foo Equation.
I thought it was "Faith Alone".
Have we found an exception to the Rule of Faith Alone here? A blind, deaf and dumb boy named Tommy has never heard of Jesus, or religion. He doesn't know what day it is or what Praying is. How can he be Saved by Faith Alone? Are you saying that God will Save him anyway? God will simply inject the required "Faith Alone" medicine and Save Tommy. That is your answer. But Tommy's Faith Alone journey is nothing like Foo's Faith Alone journey. In order to Save Tommy under Faith Alone, we have to invent a real "twist" in the logic of how Faith Alone works.
I will now argue the point that Tommy has found an exception to the Doctrine of Faith Alone. I will additionally make the point that Foo himself has declared that the Predestination Doctrine must be tacked on to the Doctrine of Faith Alone in order to Save Tommy and others like him.
Faith Alone + Predestination = Salvation is the Foo Equation.
I thought it was "Faith Alone".
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:14 am to FooManChoo
quote:
If a person is elect of God, then God will not let him believe a lie that denies the gospel of faith alone in Christ alone for justification.
This is why Calvinism is the laziest form of Christianity. Do whatever you want because God will stop you if you were meant to go to heaven.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:14 am to FooManChoo
quote:
I believe you have been tricked, in a sense, to believe that your good works contribute something in addition to what Christ has done,
Have I been tricked? Let's examine further by amplifying our hypothetical scenario.
You and I are on the same mission doing missionary work in Africa. We are doing The Lord's Work. We both believe that Jesus is our Lord and Savior.
You say to me that "If you believe that your good works here in Africa contribute something to your Salvation in addition to what Christ has done, you have been tricked."
My answer: "Have I been tricked, Foo? I do this work of the Lord not because I expect something from the Lord in return. I do the Lord's Work ONLY to demonstrate my love for the Lord. I do the Lord's Work, not expecting anything in return, but only to imitate the Lord Himself. I do this work because I love my neighbor as myself."
Foo, have I been tricked, then, because I no longer believe in Faith Alone?
This post was edited on 10/7/25 at 9:16 am
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:17 am to redneck hippie
You probably think of it as political movement because of the money and ick involved. Grifters gonna grift, either in politics or evangelical churches.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:18 am to FooManChoo
quote:
They weren’t as dependent on apostolic oral tradition as you make it out, after the first few decades after Christ’s resurrection.
Are you speculating here? Where in the Bible does it say that?
Page 12 of 33
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News