Luther! Read Read!

[Steven_Merten]

TertiumQuid:

Hi Steven,

"Now this is the work of the First Commandment, which commands: “Thou shalt have no other gods,” which means: “Since I alone am God, thou shalt place all thy confidence, trust and faith on Me alone, and on no one else.” For that is not to have a god, if you call him God only with your lips, or worship him with the knees or bodily gestures; but if you trust Him with the heart, and look to Him for all good, grace and favor, whether in works or sufferings, in life or death, in joy or sorrow; as the Lord Christ says to the heathen woman, John iv: “I say unto thee, they that worship God must worship Him in spirit and in truth.” And this faith, faithfulness, confidence deep in the heart, is the true fulfilling of the First Commandment; without this there is no other work that is able to satisfy this Commandment. And as this Commandment is the very first, highest and best, from which all the others proceed, in which they exist, and by which they are directed and measured, so also its work, that is, the faith or confidence in God’s favor at all times, is the very first, highest and best, from which all others must proceed, exist, remain, be directed and measured. Compared with this, other works are just as if the other Commandments were without the First, and there were no God, Therefore St. Augustine well says that the works of the First Commandment are faith, hope and love. As I said above, such faith and confidence bring love and hope with them. Nay, if we see it aright, love is the first, or comes at the same instant with faith. For I could not trust God, if I did not think that He wished to be favorable and to love me, which leads me, in turn, to love Him and to trust Him heartily and to look to Him for all good things.

James Swan

Hello James,

Are you denying Jesus and the Father’s teaching that the greatest commandment is to love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind, with all your strength and with all your soul? Do you deny Jesus and the Father’s teaching that obedience to God is love for God?

NIV 1JO 5:3

This is love for God: to obey his commands. And his commands are not burdensome.NIV JOH 14:15

"If you love me, you will obey what I command."
NAB MAR 12 The Great Commandment.(Jesus quotes from Moses.)****

“Which is the first of all the commandments?” Jesus replied, "This is the first:

**'Hear O Israel! The Lord our God is Lord alone!**Therefore you shall love the Lord your God
with all your heart,
with all your soul,
with all your mind,
and with all your strength.'
"This is the second,
’You shall love your neighbor as yourself.'
There is no other commandment greater than these."

NAB DEU 6:1

"These then are the commandments, the statutes and decrees which the LORD, your God, has ordered that you be taught to observe in the land into which you are crossing for conquest, so that you and your son and your grandson may fear the LORD, your God, and keep, throughout the days of your lives, all his statutes and commandments which I enjoin on you, and thus have long life. Hear then, Israel, and be careful to observe them, that you may grow and prosper the more in keeping with the promise of the LORD, the God of your fathers, to give you a land flowing with milk and honey." The great commandment. Hear, O Israel! The LORD is our God, the LORD alone! Therefore, you shall love the LORD, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your strength. Take to heart these words which I enjoin on you today. Drill them into your children. Speak of them at home and abroad, whether you are busy or at rest. Bind them at your wrist as a sign and let them be as a pendant on your forehead. Write them on the doorposts of your houses and on your gates.continued:

 

[Steven_Merten]

continued:

NAB JOH 15:9

“As the Father has loved me, so I have loved you. Live on in my love. You will live in my love if you keep my commandments, even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and live in his love. All this I tell you that my joy may be yours and your joy may be complete. This is my commandment: love one another as I have loved you. There is no greater love than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends. You are my friends if you do what I command you.”

**NAB JOH 15:22 ** “If I had not come to them and spoken to them, they would not be guilty of sin; now, however, their sin cannot be excused. To hate me is to hate my Father. Had I not performed such works among them as no one has ever done before, they would not be guilty of sin; but as it is, they have seen, and they go on hating me and my Father.”

So James, can you see how both Jesus and the Father’s great commandment to love God and Jesus and the Father’s call for people to believe are both defined by scripture as obedience to God? Even you state that one must obey God’s first commandment “Thou shalt have no other gods,”.

NAB JOH 12:44

Jesus proclaimed aloud: “Whoever puts faith in me believes not so much in me as in him who sent me; and whoever looks on me is seeing him who sent me. I have come to the world as its light, to keep anyone who **believes **in me from remaining in the dark. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I am not the one to condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words already has his judge, namely, the word I have spoken it is that which will condemn him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own; no, the Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to speak. Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me.”

NAB JOH 3:36****Whoever believes in the Son has life eternal. Whoever disobeys the Son will not see life, but must endure the wrath of God.

NIV PSA 78:32

In spite of all this, they kept on sinning; in spite of his wonders, they did not believe.

 

[Steven_Merten]

TertiumQuid:

Hi Steven,

No need for review. I must say I stand amazed at your ability to put everything I say into “Steven-speak”. That is, you interpret my words to say things I never said, and then rewrite my words to say what you want them to. This **greatly decreases **my desire to want to interact with you, or spend time looking at anything you have to say. It seems to also to be a strong reason why Edwin bailed out on your comments. I am similarly tempted to shake the dust from my feet and leave.

Hello James,

Edwin studied Luther for twelve years. Yet Edwin admits he does not agree with Luther. I think it was Edwin growing weary of trying to defend Luther’s beliefs, which he himself did not believe, is reason why we have not seen Edwin lately.

Post 247

Contarini]

My post said nothing about what Luther taught on the subject. Why do you assume that I agree with Luther? Is the concept of historical fairness and accuracy totally alien to you?

BTW, in response to your earlier question, to which you now allude, I can’t find Luther teaching that believers are judged on the basis of their works.* As far as I can tell, he believed that believers are covered with Christ’s righteousness at the judgment.*

And like you, I think this is flatly contrary to the plain sense of Scripture. So please spare me your endlessly repeated proof-texts!

Edwin

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Assurance-
(concerning post553)

So you don’t think anger and lust (Matthew 7) need forgiveness and that they are only evil if they come out? I thought the point is that the evil things come from within, and then they come out. Catholic Dude, I think you should think long and hard about this. I quoted many verses to you about how wicked we are, and you did quite well in explaining them from your perspective. I disagree of course – and primarily because Jesus Himself calls his disciples “evil” – a passage I note you did not deal with. I myself find this and the above text to be quite important texts – ones that I would ignore to the peril of my salvation.

I never said anger and lust didnt need forgiveness, when a bad thought comes to mind and you dwell or act on it then its a sin.
About terms like “wicked” and “evil” and such they dont always mean the same, eg in Matt16 while Jesus was talking to Peter Jesus calls him “Satan”, does that mean Peter is Satan or that Peter is hell bound? Concerning the Matt7 “evil disciples” stuff:
9 Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent?11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him! 12 So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets. 13 "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. 15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. 18 A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will know them by their fruits.
Notice how in that same verse it says they “know how to give good gifts” indicating some sort of good inside them, the term “evil” here is talking about they all being sinners by our fallen nature. He goes on to teach the Golden Rule, if only evil comes out of men why does the Golden Rule mean anything to these people? And finally it ends with “by their fruit you will know them”. A BAD tree bears EVIL fruit. If we are evil in the sense you claim we are unable to bear good fruit. How can we be “evil” in the sense you calim and bear good fruit?, its cant be done. The bearing of fruit is our actions, we determine if our actions will be good or evil, hence the punishment for not bearing good fruit and obeying this Sermon. As the chapter continues it says:
21 "Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’ 24 "Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock … 26 And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand.
Again in v23 we see that there is a distinction between the “evil disciples” and the “evildoers” that bear evil fruit and will be punished. At the very start of this sermon Jesus says:
8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
If the heart is evil the way protestants believe then its impossible to have a pure heart and bear good fruit.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hello Catholic Dude,

I want to thank you again for an awesome thread. I can see that you have put much time, devotion and contemplation into your thread. After so many pages of posts, I was wondering if you could go over, in priority order, some of the major points, obsticals, observations, developements, understandings, discoveries etc., that you have encountered and developed in this long, yet interesting, thread?

I certianly hope your thread continues on. Yet, I thought you might take a moment to reflect on your journey through this thread up to this point.

Thanks!

Steven

 

[Montie_Claunch]

Wow. 254-19. For some reason I don’t think that the people at this forum agree all that much with Luther. Would any of ya’ll happen to be Catholic? lol.

 

[Catholic_Dude]

Montie Claunch:

Wow. 254-19. For some reason I don’t think that the people at this forum agree all that much with Luther. Would any of ya’ll happen to be Catholic? lol.

The question is who were those 19?

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude,

FYI, I was not among the 19. I have finally read the “Treatise on Good Works” and so now can comment more intelligently.

Catholic Dude from post 526
Now I understand he usese terms like “memorial” to talk about the Mass, but I dont believe he meant it in the modern day Protestant sense, I believe at this point in time Luther still believed in the Eucharist as Christians always have. There surely was a change in what he believed and preached about later in life.

Catholic Dude, I don’t think there was a change in what he believed and preached about later in life. This is what I and the Lutheran pastors I know believe – we are so very far from the “Protestant sense” of the Lord’s Supper – we have much more in common with RC’s and the EO on this point.

Im also out to see if Lutherans maintain what Luther believed about the Mass.

I believe what you read in there is what Lutherans believe.

525:

How can I disagree with this? All I can conclude is that his rabid FA talk had to have come later, and that this was early in his protestant career (when he sound very Catholic). He doesnt trumpet FA, instead stuff like “wants us to work with Him”, those unwilling to work will be condemned, the Commandments were given to be followed, people should test themself, etc. This doesnt sound like his later works. (Also not only has he cited from the book of Wisdom in this work a few times, in this chapter he also cites Baruch a few times)

But I don’t disagree with any of it either, and don’t see how it contradicts FA talk! For example, where does Luther in this work say that faith in the completed work of Christ in and of itself (though faith is never alone – where there is fire there is smoke) does not save a person?

After all, Luther closes the first section of his treatise (see end of “Starts discussion on the love of God with the whole heart …” at iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/wittenberg-luthworks.html) by saying:

Lo! thus must thou form Christ within thyself and see how
in Him God holds before thee and offers thee His mercy
without any previous merits of thine own, and from such a
view of His grace must thou draw faith and confidence of
the forgiveness of all thy sins. Faith, therefore, does
not begin with works, neither do they create it, but it
must spring up and flow from the blood, wounds and death
of Christ. If thou see in these that God is so kindly
affectioned toward thee that He gives even His Son for
thee, then thy heart also must in its turn grow sweet and
kindly affectioned toward God, and so thy confidence must
grow out of pure good-will and love – God’s love toward
thee and thine toward God. We never read that the Holy
Spirit was given to any one when he did works, but always
when men have heard the Gospel of Christ and the mercy of
God. From this same Word and from no other source must
faith still come, even in our day and always. For Christ
is the rock out of which men suck oil and honey, as Moses
says, Deuteronomy xxxii.

Catholic Dude, now after reading the Treatise you have surely, seen that Luther vigorously supports good works and believes Christians must do them, and yet of course later on in life he said that one cannot say that “good works are necessary for salvation” in the sense that they effect ones salvation before God. It is true that in your quote from him in post 526 he says “Thus it is true, as men say, that parents, although they had nothing else to do, could attain salvation by training their own children; if they rightly train them to God’s service, they will indeed have both hands full of good works to do.”, but I think that it is obvious that the real thrust behind this statement in this Treatise is that the works God gives us to do – and not all the human traditions – are those that we should exercise ourselves in. The thrust is not that these works effect one’s salvation before God – which Luther clearly believes that the Christian already possesses. Luther means good works are necessary FROM salvation (proceeding from the full salvation in Christ obtained by faith), and that be exercising one’s self in those works through faith, “Christ…works within the Christian through His Spirit to cause him to joyously strive to fulfill the Law, but not for the purpose of salvation. The purpose is to conform the Christian to Himself and thus ever keep the Christian away from the danger of sin overcoming the Christian to such an extent that his faith is destroyed” (from my pastor)

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude, post 529:
Luther clearly changed his views as time went on, I wouldnt be surprised to read what Assuance posted that Luther wanted all his early works burned.

Well, I think Luther would probably be more careful about how he put things here, but after reading through it, I agree with TertiumQuid and think that it is still very representative of his thought throughout his life, and I have read a lot of Luther.

Then in post 545 you (Catholic Dude) say:

I didnt realize those two works were so close, at the same time as I have seen that Sin Boldly letter not as authoritative as the Good Works or Galatians commentary.
As I said above, he doesnt use the term FA in that whole work that I noticed. He even says things that would indicate that failure to do good works, eg:
Luther: parents cannot earn eternal punishment in any way more easily than by neglecting their own children in their own home

Luther could have easily talked about our lack of faith (and corresponding lack of works) “earning” damnation even later in his life, in the sense that such sin would drive out true faith in Christ. Of course, he would say that only Christ could earn eternal life and salvation for us – only Christ could fulfill the law perfectly.

CD, 547:
What Abraham did was not mere evidence for us, there was no one around to see it. There is nothing to prove before men that is separated from the saving process. James 2 doesnt support this, and as for v18 the context (v14-26) doesnt support that either. One example that comes to mind is Matt6:
2 "Thus, when you give alms, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do… 3 But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your alms may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
It goes on in that chapter of a few more cases of justification by works not before men, but before God. Not to say that we shouldnt do certain works before men, just that there is no such thing as outward works simply to prove to others that we were already justified.

Catholic Dude, keep in mind Matthew 5 though, right before this, where Jesus talks about letting your light shine before men so that they glorify the Lord. And here, God wants us to give alms in secret while we live on earth among men (in contrast to the Pharisees, who intentionally did good works to reveal and prove their own righteousness [not God’s in Christ] before men), even though in the last day it will be revealed to them as evidence that we were His children. Further, the reward God speaks of is certainly not the relationship that they already possess with Him in Christ (when we are with Christ, eternal life and heaven are there also), but rather things like mansions, cities, etc.

548:
Good works by Christians have to be meritorious, Jesus uses the term “reward” all the time for doing as He commands

Sure. God crowns and rewards those good works He does in us through Christ. Again, however, see above.

CD:
Rm3:20, that is explicitly dealing with “works of the law” which as I have come to conclude from Luther’s Galatians writing that he did not (for whatever reason) distinguish between the works of the law and the good works as per Christs teachings.
-Gal3:10, same situation as above, it explicitly is dealing with the works of the law.
Im surprised that that quote came from where it did because thats a fundamental error is mistaking works of the law with the commands Christ spoke.

I would be interested in knowing why you believe the “works of the law”, which must include the 10 commandments and the two greatest (see Romans 3 before verse 3:20), cannot be equated with the good works Christ commands us to do in any sense. How would you define “works of the law”? It can’t just be ceremonial and civil stuff – look at Romans 4 in particular where it says Abraham’s works were nothing before God (and there was no ceremonial and civil law at that point). Further in Romans 7:22? Paul talks about how he delights in the law of God according to his inner man. In Romans 8, Paul talks about how the law is fulfilled by the believer in Christ. Are these not the very same works that are described in the law, or “works of law”?

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude, I’ll get back to you a couple posts, down. For now, I want to address Hurst, who had some thought-provoking comments and questions.

Hurst:
Luther says:

Ask God to work faith in you, or you will remain forever without
faith, no matter what you wish, say or can do.
iclnet.org/pub/resources…uther-faith.txt

Hurst: What do you call this “Ask God” part? Is it a “good work”? Is it “faith”?

It is faith and not a good work. This statement which you referenced is from Luther’s famous introductory comments to the book of Romans. He is clearly speaking this to believers who already have faith, so he is essentially saying “You trust God – ask Him to give you more trust”. Note what it says in Luther’s small catechism regarding the third article of the Apostle’s Creed:

I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true.(italics mine)

Moreover, technically, this is not a work, since it is all taking and no giving – pure receptivity. Finally, even before the person speaks, there is faith in the heart which prompts the speaking.

Hurst: Is it not the single point from which his system of “faith bearing good works” must start - a system which is trying to deny the merit of man’s free will?

No, the single point from which his system must start is Romans 10:17: “Faith comes by hearing the Word of God”. The Gospel (forgiveness of sins for Christ’s sake) – the Word – is what creates faith in those who hear it.

It reminds me of the “single point” from which the Big Bang Theory’s universe must start - a theory that denies the merit of God’s free Will, so to speak. But where did the point come from? Scientists try to ignore that question.

Please don’t ignore this question. It is the man behind the curtain.

I hope you are satisfied with the answer above. The Answer is the Word of God.

Hurst: Where did the “Ask God” part come from? I ask this rhetorically, because I think it is clear that it cannot be the “faith” Luther speaks of, since that is what is being asked for. It cannot be a “good work”, because that can only flow from the “faith” which you don’t have yet. He is admitting that prayer is needed after all, even before “faith”. It plainly shows that man must cooperate with God for his salvation.

Again, I think all of this is answered above. Man does not cooperate with God for his salvation – God alone creates faith. Once he has been saved, he is able to cooperate with God – only in the sense that he is able to reject that life which he has been given. What prompts one to reject and disown that life (unbelief, dis-trust) is sin which chokes and kills faith (false doctrine is in here too).

Hurst: Thus, even before “justification”, man’s free will is capable of desiring and choosing good, though it isn’t in his power to give that chosen good to himself. And if it is active beforehand, it is active afterwards.

No, man’s free will is not capable of desiring and choosing good – at least you can’t discern that from this statement of Luther, written to Christians (on the contrary, look at Luther’s “Bondage of the Will”). Man does indeed have a free will afterwards, however.

Hurst: For even people with “faith” are able to still say no to all those works they should be doing from that “faith” that Luther describes, though he says “Faith cannot help doing good works constantly.”

But that is another issue.

Yes, I agree here – it is an issue worth taking up sometime. Sin, if allowed to enter in, can come in and choke and destroy the faith which produces good works.

 

[Assurance]

Hurst:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assurance
…
According to official RC teaching, one can not know that one has attained the end. One can not know that one already possesses the end. Catholics cannot have absolute assurance that they are in a state of grace and have obtained even present salvation – they CANNOT know that their faith is without error, according to the Council of Trent.

Hurst: Not quite. We can be certain we are in the state of grace, but we can’t be certain we will stay in it. We can’t be certain we will persevere and actually attain our salvation (Canon 16).
ewtn.com/library/councils/trent6.htm

Being in the state of grace is not the same as being “saved”. But we are closer than when we first believed (Rom 13:11), and he that shall persevere unto the end, he shall be saved (Matt 10:22,24:13).

Hurst, I think you are mistaken here. Please see posts 87 and 88 here (forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=73096&page=1&pp=100) which deal at length with these staggering words from Trent:

But, although it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted, nor ever were remitted save gratuitously by the mercy of God for Christ’s sake; yet is it not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins, and rests on that alone; seeing that it may exist, yea does in our day exist, amongst heretics and schismatics; and with great vehemence is this vain confidence, and one alien from all godliness, preached up in opposition to the Catholic Church. But neither is this to be asserted,-that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubting whatever, settle within themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified, but he that believes for certain that he is absolved and justified; and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone: as though whoso has not this belief, doubts of the promises of God, and of the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ. For even as no pious person ought to doubt of the mercy of God, of the merit of Christ, and of the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, even so each one, when he regards himself, and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension touching his own grace; seeing that no one can know with a certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God. (bold mine)

If you want to discuss this issue of assurance more, go to that link above and get caught up with that discussion. I’d love to get your views.

Hurst:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Assurance
…
You had nothing to do with your being born the first time. You have nothing to do with being born again. You can only take life and not create it. In salvation, God gets all the glory for eternal life. If we inherit eternal death instead, we get all the blame.

Hurst: The underlined part is contrary to the Catholic notion of the requirement to cooperate with God’s grace. (note to Hurst: sorry that your underlines are gone now)

A popular saying is:

God created us without us, but He will not save us without us.

I can’t agree with this – I think God adopts us wholesale and brings us into the Kingdom and we have nothing to do with it. Once we are in though, we can succumb to our Old Adam, and lose faith if we are not constantly nurtured by the life-giving Word of God.

Hurst: Also, while all glory goes to God, yet He bestows glory on His saints. To ignore that is to deny God’s wish that they be glorified in some measure.

Well no, I don’t think so – once we are saved and in a living relationship with God, we have a new nature and can begin to cooperate with God. And he will richly crown those works He Himself does in us through Christ (Augustine).

Hurst:

Matt 6:1 Take heed that you do not your justice before men, to be seen by them: otherwise you shall not have a reward of your Father who is in heaven.

1 Cor 3:14 If any man’s work abide, which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 15 If any man’s work burn, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire.

Or do you make that reward out to be something else?

I don’t believe the reward He is speaking here is heaven, as especially 1 Cor 3:14 presumes that a person already has a relationship with God – I think this is talking about mansions, cities, whatever those rewards might be…

 

[Assurance]

Back to Catholic Dude’s thoughts!

Catholic Dude (in the 540s I think):

By this my Father is glorified, that you bear much fruit, and so prove to be my disciples. 9 As the Father has loved me, so have I loved you; abide in my love. 10 If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love, just as I have kept my Father’s commandments and abide in his love.

This is a beautiful summary of the Gospel and what Christ expects us to do to be saved. The Catholic Church has always believed this. Catholics believe that apart from Christ we cant do anything, but in Him not only can we bear good fruit we are required to. Protestants in general dont like Catholic teachings because they dont understand passages like this. Protestants have the idea that we are buying our way into Heaven apart from the merits of Christ, Catholics are not buying our way into Heaven, rather we are doing what is required of us through the merits and help of Christ.

Catholic Dude – I understand what you are saying about some Protestants not understanding your position. Regarding this passage from John however, God has already told the disciples in John that they ARE disciples (and in 15:3 says they ARE pure, as His Word has made them pure). If they are to continue, they must ABIDE IN HIS LOVE by keeping His commandments. The commandment Jesus has in mind here is for his disciples is to “love one another as I have loved you”, and regarding this “Law commandment” (which requires us to not just take, but to give something) Lutherans would say something like the following (which I know you just read above):

Christ…works within the Christian through His Spirit to cause him to joyously strive to fulfill the Law, but not for the purpose of salvation. The purpose is to conform the Christian to Himself and thus ever keep the Christian away from the danger of sin overcoming the Christian to such an extent that his faith is destroyed) (quote from my pastor)

Of course, the foremost commandment of Christ for His disciples throughout the book of John is to believe (see comments on I John 3:22,23 below where I talk to Steve Merten) – which is all taking and no giving - as true belief and trust (confidence) must, of course, precede true love (this was prominent in Luther’s Treatise on Good Works, as I’m sure you noticed).

Again, regarding this issue of proving that they are his disciples - of course Jesus knows what they believe and are committed to and what those beliefs will naturally translate into in their lives – He doesn’t need to see their fruit – rather He is looking to be glorified among men (He isn’t glorified for the purposes of being glorified to himself is he?) when they bear much fruit and prove to be His disciples before the eyes of men! (so unlike some of the Jews the Name of God will not be blasphemed among the Gentiles, but glorified when these lights and cities on a hill do what they’ve been called to do!).

Again, to emphasize - we Lutherans too say that we are required to bear good fruit, but that it does not constitute our acceptance before God in any way.

 

[Assurance]

Steve Merten (551):

Hello James,

I am still waiting to here your response to the fact that Protestants just made up their own definition to Jesus’ biblical word “believe”. The Protestants have created on their own a false definition, anti and opposing to Christ’s true meaning and use of the biblical term “believe”.

Steve, I note that you have also said to James: “I have given scriptures which point us in the direction that Jesus word “believe” means to do what God tells you to do”, and I am happy to say that besides the post directly above (which I hope you find helpful) I dealt with the questions you have regarding “believe” and “obey” here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1069477&postcount=132 or post 132 here: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=73096&page=2&pp=100.

Catholic Dude, please check out this post as well. Steve, also note this following passage from I John, which I think is also important to consider when you talk about the passage you quoted above, namely “If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love,”:

I John 3:22,23:
And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ, and love one another, as he gave us commandment.

Like Luther, I think before you start talking about the commandments of God which require something of us (giving), we must always first focus on those commandments of God which requires nothing of us – which are about all taking (free gift!) and no giving. Truly, “it is more blessed to give than to receive”, but unless we receive fully from His bountiful feast of spiritual food (forgiveness, life, and salvation), we have nothing of spiritual significance to give to anyone.

We think to have faith or to believe is primarily about simple trust in the Word of God – the Word of God that by virtue of the finished work of Christ, I John 1:9 holds true: “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” To have this is to have life and salvation.

Steve: You implicated that you, possibly many Protestants, don’t believe that Jesus taught very much at all on what we must do to go to heaven. This is supprising to me. What on earth do you and other Protestants think Jesus was teaching about? Gardening? Cooking? Fishing? What?

Steve, I think Jesus was talking about bringing the Kingdom of God, which is the about the Messiah who has come to reign. It is about Him bringing the future restoration of the world (New Eden) into space – time NOW through the message that He has come to free us from our sin, death, and the devil. Jesus is the front-line of Heaven’s War to take back creation and to restore it to its original fullness and more. It is about His Passion (thank you Mel Gibson) where He accomplished everything, where the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world, pronounced absolution on the whole world, and ushered in the end times: I forgive you (though many reject this Word and do not believe). This is the primary Word that is spread in the parable of the sower.

Again, I know you’ve heard this before, but when we ask: “what must we do to work the works of God?”, Jesus says: This is the work of God – that you BELIEVE (TRUST) on the One whom He has sent. Again – you asked for me to explain believe, and I have done that in the post I linked you to. Here is another link that deals with this topic that you may have already read: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=1007130&postcount=85 or go here and to post 85: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=73096&page=1&pp=100

 

[Assurance]

Quote:
In the Preface to the Complete Edition of Luther’s Latin Works (1545). Luther says,

“…I wanted all my books to be buried in perpetual oblivion, that thus there might be room for better books.”

“Consequently you will find that, in my earlier writings, I most humbly conceded many important things to the pope, things which I later detested and now detest as being the greatest blasphemy and abomination. Therefore, dear reader, kindly ascribe this error or, as my calumniators call it, this contradiction to the time and to my inexperience. At first I was alone and surely much too inept and unlearned to be dealing with such matters. For, as God is my witness, it was by accident and not by my own will or desire that I got involved in all this turmoil.”
The entire document is found here: iclnet.org/pub/resources…preflat-eng.txt

Catholic Dude: I hope Luther didnt really say this, this is terrible. He is admitting to ignorance and inexperience in dealing with the various issues and yet he started the war anyway? It looks clear to me that he changed his views over time, from first being semi Catholic to doing everything to eliminate anything that even reminded him of Catholics.

Catholic Dude, I call this humility and honesty, something I know many do not believe Luther had. The whole key is that there was one thing that Luther was certain about: that through Jesus Christ His Lord he had the assurance of salvation. Also, keep in mind he was one of the most educated and brilliant minds of his time - and you have seen his deep faith come out in the “Treatise on Good Works” that you read. Of course, I think Luther remained truly Catholic.

Quote:
"Writing to Capito on July 9th, 1537, with reference to a suggested complete edition of his works, {Luther} roundly affirmed that none of them deserved preservation save the little children’s Catechism and The Bondage of the Will; for only they, in their dapartments, were ‘right’ "

Source: The Bonage of The Will (Packer & Johnston translation)- introductory comments page 40.

Catholic Dude: So what works did Luther finally end with claiming that they were worth saving? I would be interested to know that list, I dont even see the Small or Large Cat in the above quote.

Small catechism = little children’s catechism.

Quote:
“Ratzinger invited those present to read those writings again, as they express the great battle that Luther had with himself to live and accept the teachings of the just and good God,” he added. “‘Dear Protestant friends, rediscover the Luther of those years,’” recommended Cardinal Ratzinger at the time. "

Catholic Dude: From the little amout I have read I have made a similar conclusion, that FA was not the problem at hand, rather it was the solution to a problem Luther found himself in.

I think it’s the only solution to the problem all of us should find ourselves in, for our God is a consuming fire, and the deeper His Law penetrates into us, we see we have nothing to offer Him.

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude: Concerning the first link, the main quote came from a non-Catholic pro lutheran source so its conclusions are going to give credence to the protestant position, in this case by making the Catholic position appear “bad”.
eg, it says:
Still, one could never be certain that one’s contrition was sufficient…
Is there an official source of the Catholic Church teaching this? If there isnt a source, then those words were merely the authors opinion rather than actual Catholic teachings.
When I say “desperate”, I talking about comments that sound like: “Catholics can never be sure about ____”, is there an official Church source that says Catholics are never sure about their state of salvation? .

….

Again I offer this from Trent:

But, although it is necessary to believe that sins neither are remitted, nor ever were remitted save gratuitously by the mercy of God for Christ’s sake; yet is it not to be said, that sins are forgiven, or have been forgiven, to any one who boasts of his confidence and certainty of the remission of his sins, and rests on that alone; seeing that it may exist, yea does in our day exist, amongst heretics and schismatics; and with great vehemence is this vain confidence, and one alien from all godliness, preached up in opposition to the Catholic Church. But neither is this to be asserted,-that they who are truly justified must needs, without any doubting whatever, settle within themselves that they are justified, and that no one is absolved from sins and justified, but he that believes for certain that he is absolved and justified; and that absolution and justification are effected by this faith alone: as though whoso has not this belief, doubts of the promises of God, and of the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ. For even as no pious person ought to doubt of the mercy of God, of the merit of Christ, and of the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, even so each one, when he regards himself, and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension touching his own grace; seeing that no one can know with a certainty of faith, which cannot be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God. (bold mine)

Catholic Dude: from what I understand the EO do believe it is the actual Body and Blood AND that the elements are NO longer bread and wine, BUT they dont explain HOW it happens. The issue here is you seem to believe that the bread and wine ARE STILL bread and wine. I dont see how thats possible while maintaining that you dont believe in consub.

I don’t think the EO teach that – I think they leave it a mystery. Rome says they can’t still be bread and wine in any sense, while the Apostle Paul says, “this BREAD that we break – is it not the body of Christ?” Consub specifically states that the bread and body for instance are commingled thoughout – like different colored grains of sand. Lutherans would say that when we talk about this issue, a better way to compare it would be the two natures of Christ – Christ is fully God and fully man and cannot be separated in any sense.

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude, post 525:

Luther: And Proverbs xxiv: “For a just man falleth seven times, and riseth up again.” Yes, this confidence and faith must be so high and strong that the man knows that all his life and works are nothing but damnable sins before God’s judgment, as it is written, Psalm cxliii: “In thy sight shall no man living be justified”; and he must entirely despair of his works, believing that they cannot be good except through this faith, which looks for no judgment, but only for pure grace, favor, kindness and mercy, like David, Psalm xxvi: “Thy loving kindness is ever before mine eyes, and I have trusted in Thy truth”; Psalm iv: “The light of Thy countenance is lift up upon us (that is, the knowledge of<> Thy grace through faith), and thereby hast Thou put gladness in my heart”; for as faith trusts, so it receives.

Catholic Dude: Finishing up Chapter 1, besides the underlined parts which I only conclude as questionable but not enough to be called unCatholic, other than that for this chapter nothing major that I disagree with. This is really as “bad” as its gets in terms of my disagreeing with what he has said.

Catholic Dude, I think the parts that you say are only questionable end up growing into doctrines that you would call unCatholic. I think it is the absolute crux of the matter and that all of Luther’s good insights in this work (as well as insights from other works that you would not think are so good) are really derived from these key views and his real-life experience of believing and living these views, namely those things that you have underlined above. Again, I think that one’s view of sin and man’s capabilities towards God are a major issue, and so that these portions you underlined are far more important than perhaps you realize.

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude, post 558:
Matthew 7:9 Or what man of you, if his son asks him for bread, will give him a stone? 10 Or if he asks for a fish, will give him a serpent?11 If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him! 12 So whatever you wish that men would do to you, do so to them; for this is the law and the prophets. 13 "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few. 15 "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. 16 You will know them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles? 17 So, every sound tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears evil fruit. 18 A sound tree cannot bear evil fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus you will know them by their fruits.
Notice how in that same verse it says they “know how to give good gifts” indicating some sort of good inside them, the term “evil” here is talking about they all being sinners by our fallen nature. He goes on to teach the Golden Rule, if only evil comes out of men why does the Golden Rule mean anything to these people? And finally it ends with “by their fruit you will know them”. A BAD tree bears EVIL fruit. If we are evil in the sense you claim we are unable to bear good fruit. How can we be “evil” in the sense you calim and bear good fruit?, its cant be done. The bearing of fruit is our actions, we determine if our actions will be good or evil, hence the punishment for not bearing good fruit and obeying this Sermon. As the chapter continues it says:
21 "Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many mighty works in your name?’ 23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers.’ 24 "Every one then who hears these words of mine and does them will be like a wise man who built his house upon the rock … 26 And every one who hears these words of mine and does not do them will be like a foolish man who built his house upon the sand.

Catholic Dude: Again in v23 we see that there is a distinction between the “evil disciples” and the “evildoers” that bear evil fruit and will be punished. At the very start of this sermon Jesus says:
8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.
If the heart is evil the way protestants believe then its impossible to have a pure heart and bear good fruit.

Catholic Dude – I think you put forth a marvelous effort here – but I can’t get on board with you here, if for no other reason than in Luke 11 there is a parallel passage where Jesus calls his disciples “wicked”/”evil” and no corresponding “fruit” passages nearby. In any case, you seem to be saying that even though a person naturally might have evil desires (which you concede ought to be called sins – at least, sometimes), if they outwardly do good in spite of those desires they will somehow get a pure heart or at least will be said they have a pure heart. Now, I tend to think that Jesus is saying that though are nature is very sinful and twisted and selfish and awry, we still, paradoxically, might manage to treat our children in a good way (namely by giving them good gifts when they ask us and not bad things! – this is a big accomplishment?) – at the very least, externally. The immediate context is really the key here I think – the main point is that since God’s desires are pure and holy (and ours are not!) how much more will God give good (better!) gifts to His children!

In one sense, you are right when you say “If the heart is evil the way Protestants believe then its impossible to have a pure heart and bear good fruit.” Strictly speaking, there is nothing good in me (my flesh), for according to Jesus, there is only One who is Good – and we know what the fruits of His goodness are. The whole point is that though we are evil sinners, when we see our wretched sins and come to Christ whose burden is light, we can stand before the Father, for Christ is our Sin-Magnet, and takes all of our wickedness upon Himself while freely offering up to the Father on our behalf His perfect life (and innocent death which is the result of His being the Sin-Magnet). Because of this great love for us in which we stand before God with the truly Fruitful One (One is holy! One is Lord! Jesus Christ… to the glory of God the Father…) in perfect acceptance, we are made into New Creatures who work with Christ for good in faith.

 

[Assurance]

Catholic Dude, Phillip Melanchton, Luther’s friend, once made a poignant confession, one that I, still bearing a sinful heart, must confess as my own as well:

“I often blaze with unjust indignation and desire for revenge. I pile up curses which rise out of the desire to inflict harm. I am moved by jealousy. I regret the power of another person or that his authority increases, and I desire to put him down. I am proud. I look down on my peers and I want for myself superiority over them. I am suspicious, and sometimes develop unjust hatreds because of false suspicions. I sow and strengthen discord. I often spread rumors and words which hurt people and arouse hatred. I have my share of spite and malevolence. I delight in disparaging people. Sometimes in a critical manner I misconstrue the words and actions of others. I am not at all anxious to remove offenses and reconcile opposing wills. I allow hatred to increase by my private spite or for some other private reason. I curse those who are absent. And sometimes I pour insults on those who are present. I hinder my own prayers and stir up hatred and dissent among others.”

Can you confess it with me? If you cannot, I hope that you will still consider that perhaps we are in fact sinning constantly – and yet, Christ is still for us, the failing Christian!

I make the Psalmist’s (40:11-13) confession my own:

Withhold not thou thy tender mercies from me, O LORD:
let thy loving-kindness and thy truth continually preserve me.

For innumerable evils have compassed me about:
mine iniquities have taken hold upon me, so that I am not able to look up;
they are more than the hairs of mine head:
therefore my heart faileth me.

Be pleased, O LORD, to deliver me:
O LORD, make haste to help me.

In short, I believe I am sinning all the time because I am a sinner (not that I am a sinner because I am sinning all the time). I praise my Lord Christ that He is so generous in pouring His mercy upon me, giving me assurance that by virtue of His perfect life and innocent death on my behalf I may stand before my Father with absolute confidence and boldness.

And with that, I bid all of you farewell once again (probably for at least a month). I’ll check in at that time.

I leave you with Luther again:

Lo! thus must thou form Christ within thyself and see how
in Him God holds before thee and offers thee His mercy
without any previous merits of thine own, and from such a
view of His grace must thou draw faith and confidence of
the forgiveness of all thy sins. Faith, therefore, does
not begin with works, neither do they create it, but it
must spring up and flow from the blood, wounds and death
of Christ. If thou see in these that God is so kindly
affectioned toward thee that He gives even His Son for
thee, then thy heart also must in its turn grow sweet and
kindly affectioned toward God, and so thy confidence must
grow out of pure good-will and love – God’s love toward
thee and thine toward God. We never read that the Holy
Spirit was given to any one when he did works, but always
when men have heard the Gospel of Christ and the mercy of
God. From this same Word and from no other source must
faith still come, even in our day and always. For Christ
is the rock out of which men suck oil and honey, as Moses
says, Deuteronomy xxxii.

 

[Mickey]

Assurance:

In short, I believe I am sinning all the time because I am a sinner (not that I am a sinner because I am sinning all the time). I praise my Lord Christ that He is so generous in pouring His mercy upon me,

LORD JESUS CHRIST, SON OF GOD, HAVE MERCY ON ME, A SINNER.
img25.imageshack.us/img25/3156/3barcross1mb.gif

 

[Mickey]

Assurance:

I don’t think the EO teach that – I think they leave it a mystery. Rome says they can’t still be bread and wine in any sense, while the Apostle Paul says, “this BREAD that we break – is it not the body of Christ?” Consub specifically states that the bread and body for instance are commingled thoughout – like different colored grains of sand. Lutherans would say that when we talk about this issue, a better way to compare it would be the two natures of Christ – Christ is fully God and fully man and cannot be separated in any sense.

The EO and Rome teach that it is a Mystery (Sacrament). The difference is that Rome defined it further. However, the EO do not adhere to consubstantiation.

**Christ said indicating (the bread and wine): ‘This is My Body,’ and “This is My Blood,” in order that you might not judge what you see to be a mere figure. The offerings, by the hidden power of God Almighty, are changed into Christ’s Body and Blood, and by receiving these we come to share in the life-giving and sanctifying efficacy of Christ. **
St. Cyril of Alexandria, Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew 26,27, 428 A.D.