C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
Luther decided that he was the authority, not the bible.
It was up to Luther to determine the truth by determining which books didn’t meet with his approval.
I find it very amusing.
- Status
It was up to Luther to determine the truth by determining which books didn’t meet with his approval.
I find it very amusing.
H
hmgs1
Guest
Very true, and not what the Great Reformer intended, but that does not in my opinion invalidate Luther’s concept of SS only how how it was practiced to the point of abuse. Mathison rails against this very point. It also shows how mankind, Pope or peasant, can dork up anything no matter how well conceived.
Y
YADA
Guest
Peter’s instruction is important … much is made [by some] that James spaeks last as the Bishop of Jerusalem … that it is not Peter that is the Bishop of Jerusalem … Peter is the one singled out by Jesus to be a Shephard to His [Jesus’] sheep and lambs … and not just the Jewish ones but the gentile ones as well … Peter’s role was to Shephard [in jewish parallelism the shephard equates with kingship or being a ruler to the people ]
In John 21 … Jesus singles out Peter from the others present and gives him a singular commission to feed and tend the sheep … as a Shephard or earthly authority … all of the people not just the jews, not just the gentiles or the citizens of Jerusalem. Similar but not exact authorities are given to the others ‘binding and loosing sins’ … but not the ‘keys’] …
And just to be clear many references in scripture identify Jesus as the SHephard and King of Kings, Lord of Lords … the foundation of the Chruch and Poessessor of the “Keys” … So Jesus is the Ultimate Shephard and owner of the flock … he gives Peter a special authority … and the use of the term Shephard is not accidental but a giving of a power that is not just of honor but jurisdiction …
Thus the early Christians [Pentacost through 400 AD] not only did not have a “Bible” to turn to as the sole infallable source they had the Church … comprised of the followers of Jesus, a church that was headed up by individual apostles and their successors an led by the earthly Shephard … Peter and his successors. When questions of faith arose, they turned to the Bishops …
As illustrated by the issue of circucision and other laws regarding food, concensus was not found amoung the Apostles … yet they deferred to the testimony of Peter … who did not turn to a book but to divine revelation …
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Not to mention the Council of Trent’s reaction of having to declare yet again which books were canonical. Luther’s disrespect for various books was met with a LOT of opposition.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
It makes the doctrine of sola scriptura all the more difficult to swallow.
This is the truth, no wait, now THIS is the truth.
You find it amusing, but did you find a source to verify that this was what Luther thought, as you claim. If so, I’d like to see it.
Jon
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
No problem!
Luther added the word “alone” to Romans 3:28, then had this to say to those who opposed him:
“If your Papist annoys you with the word (alone), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so: Papist and *** are one and the same thing. Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge. Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.”
Amic. Discussion, 1, 127.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
One more:
He also wrote against the Book of Revelation:
“…to my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character… Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.”
Sammtliche Werke, 63, pp. 169-170
B
Bill_Pick
Guest
LUTHER ALSO SAID ; Luther), near the end of his life, was afraid that “any milkmaid who could read” would found a new Christian denomination based on his or her “interpretation” of the Bible. Luther opened a “Pandora’s Box” when he insisted that the Bible could be interpreted by individuals and that It is the sole authority of Christianity. Why do we have over 20,000 different non-Catholic Christian denominations? The reason is individuals’ “different” interpretations
Sounds like an angry response. It was. But is was not as you have portrayed it. His translation was being lifted by others and claimed for their own.
I think I’d be angry, too.
Why did he insert the word solum?
If you quote the Open Letter on Translating, please quote in context.
Be that as it may, even this, taken out of the context of the letter, does not support your charge that he thought he was the authoirty, not the Bible.
As for “It was up to Luther to determine the truth by determining which books didn’t meet with his approval.” Luther was a theologian. He was far from alone in discussing the canonicity of any of the books he questioned. It is what theologians do. They discuss and question things. If your charge fits Luther, it fits a host of other theologians of his time, before, and since, Catholic, Orthodox and protestant.
If you disagree with Luther’s POV on canonicity, or his understanding of the German language of his time regarding Romans 3:28, that’s fine. Personally, I can’t say one way or another since I don’t know German. Perhaps you are a German scholar and can. And btw, “alone” isn’t in any English translation I know of.
I take umbrage at what appears to be an attack on his faith and character, and what was in his heart.
Maybe you are right, but you can’t know that anymore than I can know your heart or Leo’s. Only God can know that, and we do best by not questioning the hearts of others.
beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2006/02/luther-added-word-alone-to-romans-328.html
Jon
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
His words are clear.
Luther thought that HIS opinion was more important than the words of scripture.
He was explicit in his declaration.
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
You are in denial.
P
Prodigal_Son1
Guest
…and denial is not a river in Eygpt.
Your position is as well-founded as that of protestants who, after well-explained Catholic thought, continue to insist that Catholics worship Mary and the saints.
I provided a link regarding Luther’s open letter and Lutheran explanations regarding it. Read it if you choose, or not. Personally, I try to follow a rule where I don’t tell others what they believe or what their Church teaches. To me, it is simple respect, as I expect others to know more about their faith traditions thanI do. You, also, can follow that rule, or not.
Jon
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
I provided explicit statements from Luther where he claimed that his judgment was superior to scripture as written.
Nothing you posted changed the meaning of his statements.
Did you read the link?
If you did, and you still came away with that view, then we must agree to disagree, hopefully agreeably.
If you didn’t, well then I accept your view as yours.
In the meantime, should you express to me in the future your understanding of Catholic teachings and the writings of Catholics, I will attempt to understand your explanation. Hopefully, in the future, you’ll offer the same courtesy.
Jon
C
CHESTERTONRULES
Guest
- Status