Luther was right

[Contarini]

Sola’s Sola’s Sola’s
%between%

The Sola’s are not truths. They’re crude slogans adopted by unimaginative followers of the Reformers.

However, you do seem to have a more classically Reformational theology than I gave you credit for. Perhaps I should have asked you what you believe about the Real Presence instead, since Luther thought that was an important part of the Gospel as well!

Edwin

 

[Tanner9188]

Tells us what the false doctrines are and why are they false in relation to the very Word of God. We wait with eager anticipation of you carefully thought out reply.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Bill; something that was always in Scripture, but was not “formulated” (lack of better term) until Luther came to the revelation, is not “developed over time”. Maryology would be an example of something developed over time because it was never in Scripture. Sola Sriptura was taught by the apostles through the OT writings, the epistles and oral teaching during the lives of the apostles. They did not use the term just as the word catholic or universal was never a term, but the church was and is universal in the sense that it covers the entire globe of God’s elect.

Tanner I hate to tell you but you are WRONG Sola Scriptura, the doctrine of SS is NOT taught anywhere in the Bible,The doctrine of Af SS had its souurce in Luther own emotional problems, sorry but you lose this one

 

[Sword_Brethren]

Tells us what the false doctrines are and why are they false in relation to the very Word of God. We wait with eager anticipation of you carefully thought out reply.

Justification by faith, sacramental union, the priesthood is universal, there is no visible Church,and sola scripture are all false doctrines.

 

[adrift]

**If you will reread carefully; you will see the citation; GivingUSA.org is one of a few organization that track philanthropic giving within the US. **

Yes you quoted them but gave no source only in its report. I have searched their site and cannot find it. Nor could I find your other source. There are many questions that need to be answered before you can conclude your statement.

The definition of church is common to anyone who has access to a Greek lexicon.

:bowdown:
No matter how common you think a source might be you should cite it.

 

[Bill_Pick]

Justification by faith, sacramental union, sola scripture are all false doctrines.

Sola Scriptura Bible alone, The first Christian did not have A complete bible, the idea of the scriptures authority of the teaching church is utteley foreign to the early church,none of the original biblical manuscripts is extants

 

[rinnie]

Luther was wrong. Christ established The Church to be the foundation of Christianity, not the bible. Scripture was to be “usefull for teaching” but not the final authority.
.

Amen to that. If Luther was right then the word of God was wrong. SS teaches the opposite of what the bible teaches. If someone thinks they can teach the word of God then they are claiming that they have the Power of the HS. Not everyone has the power of the HS to teach scripture. Again its in the bible.

Jesus said to the Apostles go out and choose your followers wisely. He did not say give everyone the power of the HS to choose for themself.

Funny its all in the bible. Just ignored for some reason.

 

[rinnie]

Bill; something that was always in Scripture, but was not “formulated” (lack of better term) until Luther came to the revelation, is not “developed over time”. Maryology would be an example of something developed over time because it was never in Scripture. Sola Sriptura was taught by the apostles through the OT writings, the epistles and oral teaching during the lives of the apostles. They did not use the term just as the word catholic or universal was never a term, but the church was and is universal in the sense that it covers the entire globe of God’s elect.

Sorry tanner how could that be. SS is when you take the word of God and say what it means to you, not what God meant it to be. The teachings of the Mother of CHrist were always assumed since the days of the Apostles. Oral teachings were passed down oraly. Thats why they are called oral teachings.

Maryology was not developed over time, it was just never questioned until later in time. Thats all. So when things are called into question is when its commented on.

The reason it was never in scripture alot is because everyone knew back then, and it did not need to be written. Everyone knew the truth so never questioned it.

 

[Sword_Brethren]

Luthers courage saved hundreds of millions from false doctrines.

and destoryed Christendom and gave birth to the modern age. With a Europe that is dead to Christ and an America that allows abortion and pornography. Luthers’ pride brought forth the end of Chiritian unity. Luther was nothing more than a false prophet.

Matthew 7:1
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

 

[rinnie]

and destoryed Christendom and gave birth to the modern age. With a Europe that is dead to Christ and an America that allows abortion and pornography. Luthers’ pride brought forth the end of Chiritian unity. Luther was nothing more than a false prophet.

Matthew 7:1
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

Very well said!

 

[JonNC]

and destoryed Christendom and gave birth to the modern age. With a Europe that is dead to Christ and an America that allows abortion and pornography. Luthers’ pride brought forth the end of Chiritian unity. Luther was nothing more than a false prophet.

And destroyed Christendom? Since when did the gates of hell prevail?
Luther’s pride? Luther’s pride was matched by the pride and arrogance of a pope who allowed abuses, because of his desire for duckets.
Europe dead to Christ? If Europe, home to the current pope, is dead to Christ, I don’t see how anyone can blame Luther or Leo, dead these 500 years.
Luther…end of Chiritian unity? 1054 was the first break in Christian unity. Tough to lay that one on Luther.

Lack of Christian unity cannot be blamed on the past. That’s a cheap easy way out. Schism and division is our fault - right now, today - ours and our leaders (Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, Anglican, Reformed, all of us). No one gets off the hook. We are all guilty of the sin of disunity, and should be asking forgiveness, from God, and from each other, not blaming dead people.

**Luther was nothing more than a false prophet. ** Luther was not a prophet at all, false or otherwise.

Jon

 

[Hisalone]

and destoryed Christendom and gave birth to the modern age. With a Europe that is dead to Christ and an America that allows abortion and pornography. Luthers’ pride brought forth the end of Chiritian unity. Luther was nothing more than a false prophet.

Matthew 7:1
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in the clothing of sheep, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.”

It was more important that there be a schism in Chritianity than for false doctrines to go forth.Catholics want to point to Luthers shortcomings when addressing the split but never ever ever take responsiblity for their own shortcomings.

 

[Hisalone]

His crime treason against Jesus Christ.

His “crime” was to desire a debate on the Treasury of Merit.
How dare he question Rome.

 

[JonNC]

It was more important that there be a schism in Chritianity than for false doctrines to go forth.Catholics want to point to Luthers shortcomings when addressing the split but never ever ever take responsiblity for their own shortcomings.

And the way you started this thread was to point out their shortcomings, without taking responsibility for your own.

You claim Luther? Then claim the real presence, salvific infant baptism, confession and Absolution, free will of the regenerate, the ability to lose one’s justification, the basic marion doctrines. If you can’t, then stop invoking him to start baiting threads.

Jon

 

[rinnie]

His “crime” was to desire a debate on the Treasury of Merit.
How dare he question Rome.

Sorry hisalone its not his wanting to question rome. He wanted to change the word of God, he wanted to change scripture to fit his plan not Gods. And the RCC would not allow it. Could no allow it.

That is why he moved the books in the bible and placed them into Appendix to try to take away their authority.

He did a good job too, may I add, because then in about 1826 that were RE-moved all together.

Now you tell me, Where did anyone ever get that right?

 

[Tanner9188]

Tanner I hate to tell you but you are WRONG Sola Scriptura, the doctrine of SS is NOT taught anywhere in the Bible,The doctrine of Af SS had its souurce in Luther own emotional problems, sorry but you lose this one

Just because you say it is not there; millions of people disagree with you. It is easily identified from Scripture; not only that, but the rest of the sola’s are easily identifiable, but you must be able to understand the whole of Scripture to see the truth. Therefore, we stop here for that reason.

 

[Tanner9188]

Yes you quoted them but gave no source only in its report. I have searched their site and cannot find it. Nor could I find your other source. There are many questions that need to be answered before you can conclude your statement.

:bowdown:
No matter how common you think a source might be you should cite it.

Good answer!

 

[Tanner9188]

Sorry tanner how could that be. SS is when you take the word of God and say what it means to you, not what God meant it to be. The teachings of the Mother of CHrist were always assumed since the days of the Apostles. Oral teachings were passed down oraly. Thats why they are called oral teachings.

Maryology was not developed over time, it was just never questioned until later in time. Thats all. So when things are called into question is when its commented on.

The reason it was never in scripture alot is because everyone knew back then, and it did not need to be written. Everyone knew the truth so never questioned it.

LOL

 

[rinnie]

And destroyed Christendom? Since when did the gates of hell prevail?
Luther’s pride? Luther’s pride was matched by the pride and arrogance of a pope who allowed abuses, because of his desire for duckets.
Europe dead to Christ? If Europe, home to the current pope, is dead to Christ, I don’t see how anyone can blame Luther or Leo, dead these 500 years.
Luther…end of Chiritian unity? 1054 was the first break in Christian unity. Tough to lay that one on Luther.

Lack of Christian unity cannot be blamed on the past. That’s a cheap easy way out. Schism and division is our fault - right now, today - ours and our leaders (Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, Anglican, Reformed, all of us). No one gets off the hook. We are all guilty of the sin of disunity, and should be asking forgiveness, from God, and from each other, not blaming dead people.

**Luther was nothing more than a false prophet. ** Luther was not a prophet at all, false or otherwise.

Jon

Hi Jon, Hope all is well, love to read your responses they are always interesting and intelligent.

But I will say I do blame Luther to a degree and let me explain why. Luther was a Catholic Monk, he knew better. I agree that the Pope was not perfect, no one is. But he was a prophet to alot of People because he did know the word of God. And misled them with that.

Kinda that saying just enough brains to be dangerous.

But the reason I could say he was a false prophet is because he did sway alot of people from the Church and there would be no other way to do that then to convince them you were doing the work of God. And a prophet is sent from God.

But unfortunately a true prophet would not teach the word of God and go against Apostlolic teachings. Which is what I feel luther did.

While I agree we both must accept blame for sin, The Pope has never claimed to be perfect. God said the only way the Pope is perfect is in his teachings of the faith. Yes a Pope should be a good example a all times, but unfortunately like all of us fail at times. Its called be human.

But I am sure the Pope is forgiven like all men as long as he will confess his sin and continue to pray for grace.

I also believe that we were very blessed these last 2 times with Popes who are great examples. And hope you like myself will continue to pray for them to receive Gods grace to do well at bringing all the sheep into one flock someday. God Bless you Jon.

 

[JonNC]

Hi Jon, Hope all is well, love to read your responses they are always interesting and intelligent.
God Bless you Jon.

His blessings on you, as well, rinnie. All is well, as I hope you are, too. Thanks for the kind words. Let me first respond by commenting that, as my posts to Sword and Hisalone may have revealed, I truly dislike threads that seem to be intended for rancor.

But I will say I do blame Luther to a degree and let me explain why. Luther was a Catholic Monk, he knew better. I agree that the Pope was not perfect, no one is. But he was a prophet to alot of People because he did know the word of God. And misled them with that.

I will not account Luther as blameless in the Reformation. He, too was human. Of course, you will not be upset if I say that there were some “misleadings” that came from Rome, as well, at that time. And looking back, we have the advantage of 20-20 vision to see what they all could have done differently. Could Luther have been more obedient, and still gotten his point across? Could the leaders of the Church been more open to hear Luther’s concerns? A resounding yes to both.

But the reason I could say he was a false prophet is because he did sway alot of people from the Church and there would be no other way to do that then to convince them you were doing the work of God. And a prophet is sent from God.

But unfortunately a true prophet would not teach the word of God and go against Apostlolic teachings. Which is what I feel luther did.

If one sees Luther as a prophet from a Catholic POV, yes, I can understand why you would say he was a false prophet. Do you feel the same about John Tetzel? Did he lead people away from true teachings of the Church ? WHat about Pope Leo X?

While I agree we both must accept blame for sin, The Pope has never claimed to be perfect. God said the only way the Pope is perfect is in his teachings of the faith. Yes a Pope should be a good example a all times, but unfortunately like all of us fail at times. Its called be human.

But I am sure the Pope is forgiven like all men as long as he will confess his sin and continue to pray for grace.

And Lutherans have never claimed perfection for Luther. Believe me, we are well aware of his warts. I believe he, and Pope Leo X are both forgiven, and praying together for unity.
This pope, and his recent predecessors are undoubtedly good Christian men. they have done a great service of opening up the door of dialogue.

I also believe that we were very blessed these last 2 times with Popes who are great examples. And hope you like myself will continue to pray for them to receive Gods grace to do well at bringing all the sheep into one flock someday

I agree, and indeed I do.

Jon