Can we drop "alone" from faith and grace?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JRKH
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Isaiah45_9 said:
I think a good analysis can also be:

Is saying “alone” with faith and grace contrary to Scriptures? Faith alone is only found in the negative (James 2) and Grace alone is never found.

Also, what is the driving force for saying alone? Why the need to separate and divide things that necessarily work together? This was my biggest obstacle during my Protestant years. What is the motive for it?
Click to expand...
Because Dr. Martin said so. I am paraphrasing him
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
what is the driving force for saying alone? Why the need to separate and divide things that necessarily work together? This was my biggest obstacle during my Protestant years. What is the motive for it?
Click to expand...
The need was, and remains, to show that no amount of works will save; justification occurs by God’s Grace, through Faith. If the distinction is not made and Faith’s importance is downplayed, sometimes people start buying and selling indulgences. 😉

Side note: I’m diggin’ the Banhammer. 😃
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
Oh yes he did remove books, I looked on Bible Gateway and looked over Luther’s
1545 Canon and though translating the names would be helpful, the very number
of books says it all:

  1. *]1 Mose
    *] 2 Mose
    *] 3 Mose
    *] 4 Mose
    *] 5 Mose
    *] Josua
    *] Richter
    *] Rut
    *] 1 Samuel
    *] 2 Samuel
    *] 1 Koenige
    *] 2 Koenige
    *] 1 Chronik
    *] 2 Chronik
    *] Esra
    *] Nehemia
    *] Ester
    *] Hiob
    *] Psalm
    *] Sprueche
    *] Prediger
    *] Hohelied
    *] Jesaja
    *] Jeremia
    *] Klagelieder
    *] Hesekiel
    *] Daniel
    *] Hosea
    *] Joel
    *] Amos
    *] Obadja
    *] Jona
    *] Mica
    *] Nahum
    *] Habakuk
    *] Zephanja
    *] Haggai
    *] Sacharja
    *] Maleachi
    *] Matthaeus
    *] Markus
    *] Lukas
    *] Johannes
    *] Apostelgeschichte
    *] Roemer
    *] 1 Korinther
    *] 2 Korinther
    *] Galater
    *] Epheser
    *] Philipper
    *] Kolosser
    *] 1 Thessalonicher
    *] 2 Thessalonicher
    *] 1 Timotheus
    *] 2 Timotheus
    *] Titus
    *] Philemon
    *] Hebraeer
    *] Jakobus
    *] 1 Petrus
    *] 2 Petrus
    *] 1 Johannes
    *] 2 Johannes
    *] 3 Johannes
    *] Judas
    *] Offenbarung

    Protestant Bible has 66 books while the Catholic Bible steadfastly maintains
    the 73 books. The other 7 books Luther rejected, and he even insisted, but
    was unable to do so, that other books such as Revelations be removed.
Click to expand...

  1. I didn’t look on Gateway. I looked in my copy of Luther’s Die Bibel. It has 74 books. 👍

    Jon
 
JonNC said:
Hope, ISTM, plays an important role in faith. As Paul says, faith justifies.

Jon
Click to expand...
Yes, and you know what James says too.

Solve this problem authoritatively and infallibly once and for all if you please.
 
JonNC said:
I didn’t look on Gateway. I looked in my copy of Luther’s Die Bibel. It has 74 books. 👍

Jon
Click to expand...
I don’t know if your copy contains this, but Luther did comment how “These books are not
held equal to the Scriptures but are useful and good to read.” “Not held equal to the
Scriptures” pretty much means they were there, but they weren’t canonical.

I admit though to knowing nothing about the Prayer of Manassah.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
Oh yes he did remove books, I looked on Bible Gateway and looked over Luther’s
1545 Canon and though translating the names would be helpful, the very number
of books says it all:
…
Protestant Bible has 66 books while the Catholic Bible steadfastly maintains
the 73 books. The other 7 books Luther rejected, and he even insisted, but
was unable to do so, that other books such as Revelations be removed.
Click to expand...
Oh, no he did not (Bible Gateway and Wikipedia aren’t exactly authoritative sources). Sadly, this anti-Lutheran tidbit is still being floated about. The 66 books of the “Protestant Bible” has nothing to do with Luther, and all to do with printing costs for American and English printers… There are plenty of threads discussing this on CAF, but read this: latifhakigaba.blogspot.com/2010/02/did-luther-throw-out-books-of-bible.html

Also, pet peeve of mine: It’s the “Book of (the) Revelation (of St. John),” not “Revelations.”

Now back to the topic…
 
steido01 said:
Oh, no he did not (Bible Gateway and Wikipedia aren’t exactly authoritative sources). Sadly, this anti-Lutheran tidbit is still being floated about. The 66 books of the “Protestant Bible” has nothing to do with Luther, and all to do with printing costs for American and English printers… There are plenty of threads discussing this on CAF, but read this: latifhakigaba.blogspot.com/2010/02/did-luther-throw-out-books-of-bible.html

Also, pet peeve of mine: It’s the “Book of (the) Revelation (of St. John),” not “Revelations.”

Now back to the topic…
Click to expand...
Actually, Dr. Martin preferred the Hebrew canon of the O.T. as opposed to the Alexandrian canon. The Alexandrian canon didn’t quite mesh with the good Dr.'s fallible doctrines.
 
Tomster said:
Excellent! We are making progress Jon. So we agree, faith without works is dead.
Click to expand...
Lutherans have always believed that. This isn’t new. While it is faith that justifies, faith isn’t a simple intellectual assent. We could say that belief could be referred to that way ( think of the demons who believe), but not faith. Faith is far more than that. It includes hope, as Pastor Weedon speaks of. And, as Luther says, faith that lacks charity/love has no value, is a dead faith. An idle faith is a dead faith, and a dead faith is not a saving faith.

Jon
 
JonNC said:
Lutherans have always believed that. This isn’t new. While it is faith that justifies, faith isn’t a simple intellectual assent. We could say that belief could be referred to that way ( think of the demons who believe), but not faith. Faith is far more than that. It includes hope, as Pastor Weedon speaks of. And, as Luther says, faith that lacks charity/love has no value, is a dead faith. An idle faith is a dead faith, and a dead faith is not a saving faith.

Jon
Click to expand...
Would you say that faith is a theological virtue infused in the soul, along with the other theological virtues of hope and charity, when one is properly baptized?
 
Tomster said:
Are you agreeing that we are making progress or that the continuing Catholic Church believes that faith without works id dead?
Click to expand...
The latter. I’m allergic to most things that claim the word “progress.” 😃

Jon nailed it:
40.png
JonNC:
Lutherans have always believed that. This isn’t new. While it is faith that justifies, faith isn’t a simple intellectual assent. We could say that belief could be referred to that way ( think of the demons who believe), but not faith. Faith is far more than that. It includes hope, as Pastor Weedon speaks of. And, as Luther says, faith that lacks charity/love has no value, is a dead faith. An idle faith is a dead faith, and a dead faith is not a saving faith.
Click to expand...
 
steido01 said:
Oh, no he did not (Bible Gateway and Wikipedia aren’t exactly authoritative sources). Sadly, this anti-Lutheran tidbit is still being floated about. The 66 books of the “Protestant Bible” has nothing to do with Luther, and all to do with printing costs for American and English printers… There are plenty of threads discussing this on CAF, but read this: latifhakigaba.blogspot.com/2010/02/did-luther-throw-out-books-of-bible.html
Click to expand...
Nope, like I told JonNC:
…Luther did comment how “These books are not held equal to the Scriptures but are
useful and good to read.” “Not held equal to the Scriptures” pretty much means they
were there, but they weren’t canonical.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top