This is a gross error. Luther accepted the faith of Nicaea, and he emphasized the two natures in one person, confirmed at Chalcedon.
Luther had a great admiration and love for the Blessed Virgin Mary.
Maybe these verses will offer some meditation:
I disagree. Nothing in Catholic belief is conflicted with or by the Word of God. However, if there were not direct, literal proofs in Scripture he would not accept such a doctrine. What you call an Anabaptist conception was Luther’s.
II Timothy 3:16
Luther accepted the doctrines found in the Nicean creed cause they were provable to him from SS, not because they were from the teaching Magisterium of the Church.
Yes, SS can instruct us to salvation, but we use a duality of Scripture and Tradition.
No credal presentation of sola scriptura (Westminster Confession, Belgic Confession, Second Helvetic Confession, etc.) makes the claim that Scripture would be an exhaustive collection of all revelation.
I mentioned “Luther did not believe” to indicate a subjective view (i.e. “according to Luther”) rather than present the material as objective fact.
I would venture to say true on this one.
I do have problems with his views on James. He does seem to regard it as counterfeit and not truly a God-inspired work.
This was not made de fide until 1950, long after Luther’s time. The Eastern Churches, while not condemning the Assumption of Mary, do not accept it as necessary to salvation. Do the Eastern Christians then not love the BVM?
Why do you say this?
Because of Luther’s highly nuanced preface to the Epistle of St. James. He claims that he thinks highly of the epistle, and that he sees it as valuable; but then he goes on to mention that he denies it apostolic authorship, and that he considers the work as counter to the rest of the Bible, which he holds as teaching justification by faith instead of works. He focuses on how James (in Luther’s view) over-emphasizes the goodness of the Law. He himself declares that James is not on his list of canonical books.
I can’t link to it but if you go to beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com and check out the Luther Myth’s category you will see this one addressed pretty well.
Thanks for the link. Concerning the preface to the Epistle of James: It is a certain fact that Luther wrote this preface to his first NT edition. Even if Luther were to have removed this preface, I am not aware of any new prefaces by Luther which raised the book of James (in Luther’s eyes) to divine authorship. If you know of any links to later editions of Luther’s preface to James, I’d love to read them. I don’t remember ever having come across Luther’s retraction.
Thanks Calvinator,
What do they profess then?
In a nutshell, they profess that scripture alone is the only certain, infallible norm by which all theolgy, creeds, practices, and beliefs of the Christian Church are to be guided by. I know that is a little rough, but I think it’s clear enough.
What do Presbyterians believe ? by Gordon H. Clark gives the correct understanding of Sola Scriptura from a Reformed perspective. He after all has championed the idea Sola Scriptura. (something I used to also believe but have found that it is a trifle narrow.)
Pophead, you’re such a kidder!
… It’s not my fault.