Top Ten Remarkable “Catholic” Beliefs of Martin Luther

[Richard_White]

Yes.

Remarking so disrespectfully about the Pope is one of the worst things I have ever heard you say on this forum, and I have heard you say a lot of unsubstantiated, heretical things.

May God bless you and bring you to the Light of His Holy Catholic Church!

 

[SalusaSecondus]

Remarking so disrespectfully about the Pope is one of the worst things I have ever heard you say on this forum, and I have heard you say a lot of unsubstantiated, heretical things.

Thank you for your honesty. I would much rather be called a full blown heretic than a “separated brethren”.

 

[Michael68]

Absolutely yes.

Not at all. I don’t think it ever existed in the first place.

Yes.

So you think its ok that Luther just made stuff up?

 

[Michael68]

I keep going to the thief on the cross…he didn’t have time to do any works, he just had faith that Jesus would remember him when He entered His Kingdom.

The thief did do good works! He rebuked the other thief for disbelief and demostrated faith, and confession. How can you say he had no works?

 

[SalusaSecondus]

So you think its ok that Luther just made stuff up?

What did he make up?

 

[truetofaith]

The thief did do good works! He rebuked the other thief for disbelief and demostrated faith, and confession. How can you say he had no works?

You are really stretching to call these words of the thief, “works.” If it makes you happy…enjoy.

 

[Duane1966]

You are really stretching to call these words of the thief, “works.” If it makes you happy…enjoy.

Not a stretch at all. I am surprised that you don’t realize that confessing with your lips, that Jesus is Lord in the face of ridicule (like standing up for what is right when the crowd is against you), is clearly a work. It is an assent of the will to do something that you know to be right. (The actual doing of the something is the work).

The thief clearly did all that he could possibly do in that situation. If the thief believed Jesus was Lord, but had not rebuked the other thief, and not confessed with his lips (the Church has always held Confession to be a work), that what they had done was wrong, but remained silent, would he have been saved? Before the thief asks Jesus to remember him he must have come to faith,** BUT** Jesus never says a word to him until he ** ACTS ** on that faith.

 

[Kliska]

Thinking, believing, loving, talking, etc… are actions not works in the Biblical sense. Remember, no work was to be done on the Sabbath, but they could talk, breath, pray, think, love, etc…

 

[pablope]

Quote:
Originally Posted by pablope View Post
And do you think this is a postive developement?
Absolutely yes.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

There are only six Churches in the Evangelical Catholic branch ( not ecclesial communities)

1. Lutherans
   2.Reformed
   3.Anglicans
   4.Weslyans
   5Anabaptists
   6.Adventists.

Second Lutherans view purgatory as unscriptural

Third is it animosity to call out false teachers don’t think so .

Fourth the reformation was not a sin , persecution of true believers on the part of Rome was a sin however.

 

[pablope]

There are only six Churches in the Evangelical Catholic branch ( not ecclesial communities)

1. Lutherans
   2.Reformed
   3.Anglicans
   4.Weslyans
   5Anabaptists
   6.Adventists.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

The Fathers established 4 marks of the Church. Apostolic being one of them…none on your list can claim to be of apostolic origin.

 

[pablope]

1. No , I said the Reformation was not a sin ,

Why do you think so? The Reformation split Christianity, do you think this is not a sin?

Prior to your hero reformers, there were reformers in the Church also…and they did not cause a split of Christianity. Examples are Catherine of Siena, Francis of Assis, Cardinal Contarini.

So, which kind of reform would you prefer…a reform that causes a split or a reform that does not cause a split of the Church?

of course the reformers weren’t perfect people, but they restored the truths of scripture so why should we apologize for that ,

Truths of Scripture according to whom? Are the Reformers the one to decide the truths of Scripture? Did they have a monopoly of the truth of Scripture?

or do you somehow think that compromise is ok?

The Church never compromises on the truth.

1. The Roman church slaughtered other believers in the Reformation, it was wrong to do so , but I did NOT say it is always at fault .

So did the Reformers slaughter the baptists, and Catholics alike. Would you now also say the Reformers where wrong on this part too?

3.A church is apostolic based on apostolic teaching.

You are redefining “Apostolic” now, in order to claim apostolicity for yourself. Early Christianity did not define “Apostolic” as merely apostolic teaching.

Many could claim to have apostolic teaching…how would you decide what is apostolic and what is not apostolic?

4.Lutherans do not believe in purgatory because of our view of certain passages.

Are you correct in this disbelief in purgatory or purgation, that is my question.

Are your views correct and without error, is my question.

5.a pope can be in error yes

In what sense? And would you admit, you could be in error too? (in your interpretation of scripture passages?)

 

[KathleenGee]

Ecclesial communities do not have bishops.

Bishops are supposed to keep the flock together and free from heresy and division, and promote communion among the faithful.