Is simple better?

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoyToTheWhirled
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
He also says keep the commandments

For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

1…GRACE

2… FAITH

3… WORKS
Of course. We Lutherans have been preaching Law and Gospel since the dawn of the Reformation. Who says that we’re Antinomians? We simply refuse to mix Law and Gospel and properly keep them separate.

*V. Law and Gospel

STATUS CONTROVERSIAE.
The Principal Question In This Controversy.

1] Whether the preaching of the Holy Gospel is properly not only a preaching of grace, which announces the forgiveness of sins, but also a preaching of repentance and reproof, rebuking unbelief, which, they say, is rebuked not in the Law, but alone through the Gospel.

Affirmative Theses.
Pure Doctrine of God’s Word.

2] 1. We believe, teach, and confess that the distinction between the Law and the Gospel is to be maintained in the Church with great diligence as an especially brilliant light, by which, according to the admonition of St. Paul, the Word of God is rightly divided.

3] 2. We believe, teach, and confess that the Law is properly a divine doctrine, which teaches what is right and pleasing to God, and reproves everything that is sin and contrary to God’s will.

4] 3. For this reason, then, everything that reproves sin is, and belongs to, the preaching of the Law.

5] 4. But the Gospel is properly such a doctrine as teaches what man who has not observed the Law, and therefore is condemned by it, is to believe, namely, that Christ has expiated and made satisfaction for all sins, and has obtained and acquired for him, without any merit of his [no merit of the sinner intervening], forgiveness of sins, righteousness that avails before God, and eternal life.

6] 5. But since the term Gospel is not used in one and the same sense in the Holy Scriptures, on account of which this dissension originally arose, we believe, teach, and confess that if by the term Gospel is understood the entire doctrine of Christ which He proposed in His ministry, as also did His apostles (in which sense it is employed, Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21), it is correctly said and written that the Gospel is a preaching of repentance and of the forgiveness of sins.

7] 6. But if the Law and the Gospel, likewise also Moses himself [as] a teacher of the Law and Christ as a preacher of the Gospel are contrasted with one another, we believe, teach, and confess that the Gospel is not a preaching of repentance or reproof, but properly nothing else than a preaching of consolation, and a joyful message which does not reprove or terrify, but comforts consciences against the terrors of the Law, points alone to the merit of Christ, and raises them up again by the lovely preaching of the grace and favor of God, obtained through Christ’s merit.

8] 7. As to the revelation of sin, because the veil of Moses hangs before the eyes of all men as long as they hear the bare preaching of the Law, and nothing concerning Christ, and therefore do not learn from the Law to perceive their sins aright, but either become presumptuous hypocrites [who swell with the opinion of their own righteousness] as the Pharisees, or despair like Judas, Christ takes the Law into His hands, and explains it spiritually, Matt. 5:21ff ; Rom. 7:14. And thus the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all sinners Rom. 1:18 ], how great it is; by this means they are directed [sent back] to the Law, and then first learn from it to know aright their sins-a knowledge which Moses never could have forced out of them.

9] Accordingly, although the preaching of the suffering and death of Christ, the Son of God, is an earnest and terrible proclamation and declaration of God’s wrath, whereby men are first led into the Law aright, after the veil of Moses has been removed from them, so that they first know aright how great things God in His Law requires of us, none of which we can observe, and therefore are to seek all our righteousness in Christ:

10] 8. Yet as long as all this (namely, Christ’s suffering and death) proclaims God’s wrath and terrifies man, it is still not properly the preaching of the Gospel, but the preaching of Moses and the Law, and therefore a foreign work of Christ, by which He arrives at His proper office, that is, to preach grace, console, and quicken, which is properly the preaching of the Gospel.* [bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#V Law and Gospel](http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#V Law and Gospel).
 
You lost me, have no idea what you are trying to say.

Let’s try something else… Book of James (I know…epistle of straw) … talks about 2 kinds of faith … one of those faiths is dead … what is the difference between the two faiths James speaks of?

Incidentally, James 2 is the only place in the NT you will find the phrase “faith alone”

Now please understand, just as justification is not by faith alone, it certainly is not by works alone (lest anyone can boast) either.
 
Of course. We Lutherans have been preaching Law and Gospel since the dawn of the Reformation. Who says that we’re Antinomians? We simply refuse to mix Law and Gospel and properly keep them separate.

*V. Law and Gospel

STATUS CONTROVERSIAE.
The Principal Question In This Controversy.

1] Whether the preaching of the Holy Gospel is properly not only a preaching of grace, which announces the forgiveness of sins, but also a preaching of repentance and reproof, rebuking unbelief, which, they say, is rebuked not in the Law, but alone through the Gospel.

Affirmative Theses.
Pure Doctrine of God’s Word.

2] 1. We believe, teach, and confess that the distinction between the Law and the Gospel is to be maintained in the Church with great diligence as an especially brilliant light, by which, according to the admonition of St. Paul, the Word of God is rightly divided.

3] 2. We believe, teach, and confess that the Law is properly a divine doctrine, which teaches what is right and pleasing to God, and reproves everything that is sin and contrary to God’s will.

4] 3. For this reason, then, everything that reproves sin is, and belongs to, the preaching of the Law.

5] 4. But the Gospel is properly such a doctrine as teaches what man who has not observed the Law, and therefore is condemned by it, is to believe, namely, that Christ has expiated and made satisfaction for all sins, and has obtained and acquired for him, without any merit of his [no merit of the sinner intervening], forgiveness of sins, righteousness that avails before God, and eternal life.

6] 5. But since the term Gospel is not used in one and the same sense in the Holy Scriptures, on account of which this dissension originally arose, we believe, teach, and confess that if by the term Gospel is understood the entire doctrine of Christ which He proposed in His ministry, as also did His apostles (in which sense it is employed, Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21), it is correctly said and written that the Gospel is a preaching of repentance and of the forgiveness of sins.

7] 6. But if the Law and the Gospel, likewise also Moses himself [as] a teacher of the Law and Christ as a preacher of the Gospel are contrasted with one another, we believe, teach, and confess that the Gospel is not a preaching of repentance or reproof, but properly nothing else than a preaching of consolation, and a joyful message which does not reprove or terrify, but comforts consciences against the terrors of the Law, points alone to the merit of Christ, and raises them up again by the lovely preaching of the grace and favor of God, obtained through Christ’s merit.

8] 7. As to the revelation of sin, because the veil of Moses hangs before the eyes of all men as long as they hear the bare preaching of the Law, and nothing concerning Christ, and therefore do not learn from the Law to perceive their sins aright, but either become presumptuous hypocrites [who swell with the opinion of their own righteousness] as the Pharisees, or despair like Judas, Christ takes the Law into His hands, and explains it spiritually, Matt. 5:21ff ; Rom. 7:14. And thus the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all sinners Rom. 1:18 ], how great it is; by this means they are directed [sent back] to the Law, and then first learn from it to know aright their sins-a knowledge which Moses never could have forced out of them.

9] Accordingly, although the preaching of the suffering and death of Christ, the Son of God, is an earnest and terrible proclamation and declaration of God’s wrath, whereby men are first led into the Law aright, after the veil of Moses has been removed from them, so that they first know aright how great things God in His Law requires of us, none of which we can observe, and therefore are to seek all our righteousness in Christ:

10] 8. Yet as long as all this (namely, Christ’s suffering and death) proclaims God’s wrath and terrifies man, it is still not properly the preaching of the Gospel, but the preaching of Moses and the Law, and therefore a foreign work of Christ, by which He arrives at His proper office, that is, to preach grace, console, and quicken, which is properly the preaching of the Gospel.* [bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#V Law and Gospel](http://bookofconcord.org/fc-ep.php#V Law and Gospel).
HEY JoyToTheWhirled … Was this post simple enough for You? Lol
 
You lost me, have no idea what you are trying to say.

Let’s try something else… Book of James (I know…epistle of straw) … talks about 2 kinds of faith … one of those faiths is dead … what is the difference between the two faiths James speaks of?

Incidentally, James 2 is the only place in the NT you will find the phrase “faith alone”

Now please understand, just as justification is not by faith alone, it certainly is not by works alone (lest anyone can boast) either.
Then let me help you. We don’t believe that all you have to do is say some sinner’s prayer and that’s it, once saved always saved. Of course in our eyes one is justified by grace through faith and that is God’s doing, not man’s. One of the most common fallacies I have seen is when sanctification gets mixed up with justification. The Holy Spirit sanctifies us. The Holy Spirit enables us to do the works of the Law and receive the promises of the Gospel. We are justified by grace through faith. We have faith as the root, love is naturally sprung from that root as trunk and branch, while works are manifested as the fruit. The process is a lifelong one, where we utilize the means of grace, returning to our Holy Baptism, hearing the Word proclaimed, receiving Absolution and partaking of the Sacrament of the Altar. Every tree needs nourishment if it is to thrive. Jesus nourishes us with His Body and Blood at Holy Communion and the Holy Spirit nourishes us with faith. You may well find Catholics and Lutherans in full agreement on more things than we disagree with.
 
HEY JoyToTheWhirled … Was this post simple enough for You? Lol
The effort was my honor to make. 🙂 You seem to have the idea that all Protestants need to do is make a confession of faith and that’s it. I was just pointing out that that’s not so. I provided a Lutheran context. I am sure the Anglicans and Presbyterians can provide examples from their own Confessions how just saying something without anything to back it up with is not consistent with their theologies.
 
Romans 10:9.

And before all Catholic attack me, I am sure I have heard it before.

But this is not merely a belief and it is cool and yea all is good. This should be a belief without a single whatsoever doubt and so on. I hope all know what I mean. This is a belief that can move mountains as stated in scripture, and I have not moved a mountain yet. It is 1 essential belief yes, and I feel it is a lot more worth worrying about then just following “simple” guidelines. I don’t believe it is that simple.
Did you know the mountains are spiritual? I have moved several
 
Did you know the mountains are spiritual? I have moved several
Does the Catholic Church have a determined list of which sayings of Christ are literal versus figurative or spiritual? It would be interesting to see it if there is.
 
The effort was my honor to make. 🙂 You seem to have the idea that all Protestants need to do is make a confession of faith and that’s it. I was just pointing out that that’s not so.
Are you saying that no protestant groups believe this ?
 
Does the Catholic Church have a determined list of which sayings of Christ are literal versus figurative or spiritual? It would be interesting to see it if there is.
Yes - its not a list but its called “the Catechism of the Catholic Church” and you can pick it up at any bookstore. What is the Protestant version of this? It would come in handy for comparison.
 
One of the most common fallacies I have seen is when sanctification gets mixed up with justification.
Yes ! We can certainly deal with Luther’s misunderstandings related to justification :), but FIRST, I’m not going to let you leave Luke 18:18 until you expound on Jesus telling the man to sell everything and give it to the poor. Would this not be a work?
 
Yes - its not a list but its called “the Catechism of the Catholic Church” and you can pick it up at any bookstore. What is the Protestant version of this? It would come in handy for comparison.
So help me then, where in the catechism does it explain that the mountain being moved is not literal but spiritual?
 
Yes ! We can certainly deal with Luther’s misunderstandings related to justification :), but FIRST, I’m not going to let you leave Luke 18:18 until you expound on Jesus telling the man to sell everything and give it to the poor. Would this not be a work?
It was a work impossible for the rich man to do at that point. Again, if the faith is there, so will the love be and when the faith is strong enough, people will leave their lives behind to follow Jesus. The Apostles are cases in point. Peter wanted to know in so many words " what was in it for them," because they did leave everything behind. Did Jesus rebuke Peter for his lack of faith ( again)? No, he answered the man’s question. Faith leads to love which leads to work. *Of course *works are going to follow faith. How can they not? Luther wasn’t condemning good works at all and as a matter of faith, he says that they are natural products of faith, " fruits of the spirit," if you will bookofconcord.org/defense_19_goodworks.php . Sure, the rich man would have been doing a mighty work if he had it in him to do what Jesus suggested so he could be perfect. He couldn’t, he didn’t and Jesus went on to speak of how difficult it would be for a rich person to enter the Kingdom of God, but by the power of the Holy Spirit and the grace of God, it could be done. The rich man just missed out, that was all… as would have almost any other rich person used to creature comforts and having others " do" for them. It wound up being a promise on those who maintained their faith.
 
Yes - its not a list but its called “the Catechism of the Catholic Church” and you can pick it up at any bookstore. What is the Protestant version of this? It would come in handy for comparison.
The Protestant version of the Catechism of the Catholic Church would be the Divinely inspired Holy Bible. You can pick it up at any bookstore. Comparing them would be a good idea.:o
 
Yes - its not a list but its called “the Catechism of the Catholic Church” and you can pick it up at any bookstore. What is the Protestant version of this? It would come in handy for comparison.
The Book of Concord, The Westminster Confession, the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, I mean, there’s not one single broadly- embracing " Protestant Catechism." I’ve been making extensive use of the Book of Concord’s contents here when I attempt to express a point from a Confessional Lutheran point of view.
 
The Book of Concord, The Westminster Confession, the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, I mean, there’s not one single broadly- embracing " Protestant Catechism." I’ve been making extensive use of the Book of Concord’s contents here when I attempt to express a point from a Confessional Lutheran point of view.
I think this thread shows for many Protestant denominations theology is not simple at all. The Concord Book for Lutherans is quite large and huge , LOL!~ Makes one wonder where Sola Scriptura fits into the picture when you have Luther’s small and large Catechisms, and the Concord book.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top