L
LutheranScholar
Guest
Eeeeehhhhhhrrrrmmmm… no. Though we might be close to it.Wow, thanks johnnyc176, you saved my day. PETER J almost had me convinced Protestants had a monopoly on judgementalism. :harp:
Eeeeehhhhhhrrrrmmmm… no. Though we might be close to it.Wow, thanks johnnyc176, you saved my day. PETER J almost had me convinced Protestants had a monopoly on judgementalism. :harp:
Nice verse from Ephesians, I’ll post more of it.Eeeeehhhhhhrrrrmmmm… no. Though we might be close to it.Original Sin’s a pesky bugger sometimes, isn’t it? All about Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Wrath, Sloth, Greed, Lust… all about turning on one’s brothers and sisters because the Self is just a little bit better than them. It could be one’s Christian affiliation, one’s career, income, anything else that sets the individual apart. God knows I’m guilty of it ( in spades), but thanks be to God for His wonderful gift of salvation through Christ Jesus. By faith we are saved, not by works, so that no man should boast. Thanks be to God that He chooses those who are His and we humans don’t dictate to Him who may or may not approach Him.
Exactly. The twentieth article of the Augsburg Confession also goes into this and this is a brief excerpt from that article:Nice verse from Ephesians, I’ll post more of it.
For by grace you have been saved through faith, and this is not from you; it is the gift of God it is not from works, so no one may boast.
For we are his handiwork, created in Christ Jesus for the good works that God has prepared in advance, that we should live in them. (NAB)
Wow, thanks johnnyc176, you saved my day. PETER J almost had me convinced Protestants had a monopoly on judgementalism. :harp:
Heh. But in all seriousity, I think that claims, direct or indirect, that the-other-side is acting in bad faith are par for the course in some dialogues. That’s one reason, actually, that I’m always trying to spend a little less time on web discussion forums and a little more time reading this or that on the Vatican’s website.Eeeeehhhhhhrrrrmmmm… no.
…yet, Luther did not remove but actually set apart these books:" Final Authority is always given to Christ and to Him alone" were my exact words. Christ always has the last say, He is undisputed Lord of His Church. That authority is delegated on earth to those who preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments, His " under shepherds," if you like. Everything is subordinate to the Scriptures, even tradition, in our church. God’s Holy Spirit inspired men to transcribe the Gospels and certain Ecumenical Councils ( guided by said Holy Spirit) determined the content of those Scriptures and when Luther transcribed the Bible into German, he left out the Apocrypha beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-luther-removed-2-maccabees-from.html.
" If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction." That reply produced a physical reaction. Unfortunately, I was drinking my tea at the time and spewed it all over this monitor after reading that reply. I’m perfectly willing to admit I misunderstood RC Witness and I fervently hope I did, but what my brain processed was this: " If Jesus Christ really were Lord of His own Church, you would have the gift of infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction.“There may be two working and dissimilar understandings of the word " church,” as well. I use it to mean the entire global Christian Community, every branch that accepts the Nicene Creed and the rulings of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. He might have meant the Roman Catholic Church and interpreted my words as being applicable only to the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod in my mind. If I were in any way unclear, I offer my apologies ( again) and hope this clears it up.
What misguided folks do not seem to accept is that the removal of these books (as those which Luther did want to remove from the New Testament) is a clear demonstration that if one man (Luther) can interpret on his own than any man can determine and interpret also on his/their own what the Word of God not only contains but also what it “really” means–just drop the clause “led/guided/inspired” by the Holy Spirit and it is so!Finally, in 1534 a complete version of the Bible, with Apocrypha, was released. They referred to the Apocrypha as “books not equal to the Holy Scriptures, yet good and useful to read.” Even the Roman Catholic Church had not yet canonized the Apocrypha—that happened at the Council of Trent in 1546—so this was not a controversial position. (christian-history.org/martin-luther-bible.html)
…don’t know who in France decided that wearing a Crucifix or cross in public was unlawful–less it is claimed as a jewelry piece; it could take a while, but someone in the near/far future may stake the claim of “inspired by the Holy Spirit” to support this determination by what is obviously an anti-Christian agenda by lost nationals.King James himself said, “As to the Apocriphe bookes, I omit them because I am no Papist” (Book I:13, Basilicon Doron). (kjvtoday.com/home/editions)
…interestingly, though, the King made a clear distinction on who was on His Right-hand-side and who would be completely rejected:Eeeeehhhhhhrrrrmmmm… no. Though we might be close to it.Original Sin’s a pesky bugger sometimes, isn’t it? All about Pride, Envy, Gluttony, Wrath, Sloth, Greed, Lust… all about turning on one’s brothers and sisters because the Self is just a little bit better than them. It could be one’s Christian affiliation, one’s career, income, anything else that sets the individual apart. God knows I’m guilty of it ( in spades), but thanks be to God for His wonderful gift of salvation through Christ Jesus. By faith we are saved, not by works, so that no man should boast. Thanks be to God that He chooses those who are His and we humans don’t dictate to Him who may or may not approach Him.
…you are so correct! …these poor fellows relied upon what they thought they knew about the Lord as they met Him empty handed, with little but “knowledge” in their hearts!41 “Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’ 44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ 45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’ 46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” (St. Matthew 25:41-46)
I hear you, man. For my part, I’m reading some of the material on the Wittenberg Trail website. Diplomacy is probably a great help to dialogue and some of these ministers are very diplomatic in their writings.Heh. But in all seriousity, I think that claims, direct or indirect, that the-other-side is acting in bad faith are par for the course in some dialogues. That’s one reason, actually, that I’m always trying to spend a little less time on web discussion forums and a little more time reading this or that on the Vatican’s website.
FWIW, I’m a lifelong Catholic and I cannot figure out what rcwitness meant by “If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction” … but that does not necessarily mean that it was anything offensive.
Sorry guys, just getting back to this…" Final Authority is always given to Christ and to Him alone" were my exact words. Christ always has the last say, He is undisputed Lord of His Church. That authority is delegated on earth to those who preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments, His " under shepherds," if you like. Everything is subordinate to the Scriptures, even tradition, in our church. God’s Holy Spirit inspired men to transcribe the Gospels and certain Ecumenical Councils ( guided by said Holy Spirit) determined the content of those Scriptures and when Luther transcribed the Bible into German, he left out the Apocrypha beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2011/06/why-luther-removed-2-maccabees-from.html.
" If this were true, you would have the gift of Infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction." That reply produced a physical reaction. Unfortunately, I was drinking my tea at the time and spewed it all over this monitor after reading that reply. I’m perfectly willing to admit I misunderstood RC Witness and I fervently hope I did, but what my brain processed was this: " If Jesus Christ really were Lord of His own Church, you would have the gift of infallibility with Universal Jurisdiction.“There may be two working and dissimilar understandings of the word " church,” as well. I use it to mean the entire global Christian Community, every branch that accepts the Nicene Creed and the rulings of the Seven Ecumenical Councils. He might have meant the Roman Catholic Church and interpreted my words as being applicable only to the Lutheran Church- Missouri Synod in my mind. If I were in any way unclear, I offer my apologies ( again) and hope this clears it up.
If an individual, or their Communion community actually accomplished this claim, then Jesus would be able to uninhibitedly work and Teach through these persons. Therefore, they would be Infallible, because Christ is the only Infallible one. I don’t think anyone truly gives Christ, and Him alone, final authority. We do in part and in degrees, and some more than others but no one gives Him alone all authority. And He knows this. That is why He established an office, which He built on, to Teach through. This office has the gift of Infallibility.Final authority is always given to Christ and Him alone.
Can you back that up, if not , then this a straw manLuther like all protestants was all about ‘my will’ instead of Thy Will. He would fall right in line with liberals whose pride gets in the way of their following the Truth of Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church.
For me it’s a constant question of what, out of so many things posted on the Internet, do you choose to respond to? (I don’t mean that as a criticism of your choice to respond to that particular post, but I don’t believe it is any worse than tons of other stuff that can be found on the net.)Can you back that up, if not , then this a straw man
Good point, that…Okay, this is so ridiculous, the idea that if Luther came alive today that the Protestant/Catholic split that currently exists would be a huge issue of his…
Luther would have more important concerns, okay?
Like desperately trying to claw his way out of his coffin before he runs out of air? Like, even if he cracks the coffin, trying to move the sealed stone casing over his above ground tomb? Like even if he breaks out, coming to grips with the fact that everyone he ever loved IS DEAD! Gosh, it is like none of you have thought this through…Jeez!
Seriously - think before you write.
I’ll go out on a limb and say that he already knows that.A Straw man? Umm…are you frigging kidding StarWarsFan?
Maybe you’ve never met anyone in real life, but outside of the Wizard of Oz, Straw Men aren’t alive.
Hi, Clay!Okay, this is so ridiculous, the idea that if Luther came alive today that the Protestant/Catholic split that currently exists would be a huge issue of his…
Luther would have more important concerns, okay?
Like desperately trying to claw his way out of his coffin before he runs out of air? Like, even if he cracks the coffin, trying to move the sealed stone casing over his above ground tomb? Like even if he breaks out, coming to grips with the fact that everyone he ever loved IS DEAD! Gosh, it is like none of you have thought this through…Jeez!
Seriously - think before you write.
I think it is a tremendous mistake to say that the Reformation was solely Luther’s doing. In fact, the Catholic Catechism admits there were errors on both sides. You seem to be perpetuating the myth that Luther Alone caused the Reformation.…though you are right, in a way, since if Luther had not existed in the 16th century perhaps all of the schism following his revolt would not have taken place–and his “reasons” for challenging the Church’s Authority, Scriptures, and Doctrine would not be the same.
Maran atha!
Angel
…no perpetuating here… there were two distinct issues happening: the Church errors and Luther’s revolt.I think it is a tremendous mistake to say that the Reformation was solely Luther’s doing. In fact, the Catholic Catechism admits there were errors on both sides. You seem to be perpetuating the myth that Luther Alone caused the Reformation.
Luther Alone. I like the sound of that.
But there were many reformers, and the Catholic Church was seeking reform at the time. It was a complex intersection of political, economic, religious and philosophical differences. If Luther had not done what he did, perhaps it would have been different, but I think there still would have been schism. The German nobles, for one thing, were long tired of Rome taking them to the cleaners financially. And since the state derived its power from the church in those days, so that politics and religion were fused, the only way a ruler could possibly secede was a revolt from the church.
*“Clawing at the lid of his coffin” is my standard answer to the question of What would so-and-so be doing were he alive today? Be at peace.So, I made two entries on this thread, in both of which I told what I thought were some really obviously very silly jokes, and apparently, they were taken seriously.
I understood the thread, and I did not think that Luther trying to escape from his coffin were he still alive was a real issue.
You were obviously being funny, man. It’s not you.So, I made two entries on this thread, in both of which I told what I thought were some really obviously very silly jokes, and apparently, they were taken seriously.
I understood the thread, and I did not think that Luther trying to escape from his coffin were he still alive was a real issue.
I know what a straw man is and I did not think anyone was accusing Luther of secretly being an animated scarecrow.
The above things were jokes that I told. I do not actually believe them, and when I acted like I knew better than those who disagreed, it was because I thought the character I was doing would be funnier if arrogant.
At the time I thought I was being obviously silly and very funny. I hope no one was upset by them. I regret them if they caused scandal or sadness.