Where did Martin Luther and John Calvin disagree?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Mickey said:
I have never pitted Galileo against infallibility. That is sola_scriptura’s ball game. 😃
Click to expand...
I know you didn’t.

Just thought I would help you out with some facts. Everyone seems to forget that the Church was right. Galileo’s version of heliocentrism was wrong.
 
PerryJ said:
Interesting thought. I know that you do not prescribe to all of Luthers thought’s; however, in his earlier years he was framed by the humanistic approach. To a certain degree he refuted this in later years; however, in his early years it impacted his thoughts and theology.
Click to expand...
I agree. And where it can be harmonized with Greek philosophy I don’t think it is a problem. The problem I have with it is when it imposes itself on the text of Scripture. You see dispensationalists do this all the time. The issue is, is that our modern secular concepts of free will are completely foreign to biblical revelation. It doesn’t work in those categories. As Tertullian said “What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?”
 
Mickey said:
No. They were not. The deepest wells have the clearest water. With all due respect, I will adhere to the interpretations of the earliest Church Fathers of the Apostolic Church (many of which learned from the apostles or disciples of the apostles) over the interpretations of the worldy traditions of reformers who came along 1500 years later carrying new interpretations. 🤷

These men caused the real confusion.
Click to expand...
The problem is that the church fathers you are relying on for your view of free will were not disciples of the apostles. They were former Platonists and Aristotelians.
 
TriuneUnity said:
The problem is that the church fathers you are relying on for your view of free will were not disciples of the apostles. They were former Platonists and Aristotelians.
Click to expand...
There is no problem. Apostolic Christianity relies on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Your tradition lost much when it re-invented itself through odd interpretations.

This is what you were born into–it is not your fault.
 
TriuneUnity said:
The problem is that the church fathers you are relying on for your view of free will were not disciples of the apostles. They were former Platonists and Aristotelians.
Click to expand...
I am unclear are you refuting free will or the statement Mickey is using concerning free will.

I do agree with your posts that man is "depraved’ to some degree and that God has to make the first move. After that I believe in free will. I believe most other theories revert to free will. They just start them at a different point in the process.
 
“I am writing to all the churches and am insisting to everyone that I die for God of my own free will - unless you hinder me.
I implore you: do not be unseasonably kind to me.
Let me be food for the wild beasts, through whom I can reach God. I am God’s wheat, and I am being ground by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I might prove to be pure bread.”
**Letter of Ignatius of **Antioch to the Romans 4
 
TriuneUnity said:
I didn’t say he preached the gospel without the cross. I stated he preached the Law. A lot of it was also spent performing healing and miracles as signs of who he was and his mission.
Click to expand...
But Christ did, in fact, preach his gospel without explicit reference to the Cross. True?

And this gospel that Christ preached, this would certainly qualify as the “pure” gospel, would it not?
“So then, let the Church of Christ say, let our mother the Catholic Church say, let the body of that head which ascended into heaven say, a holy body, a manifold body, a body spread throughout the world, let that crop say that was produced by the grain which fell into the ground- for as you know, that grain said, as he drew near to his passion, Unless the grain, he said, falls into the ground, it remains alone."

St. Augustine, Sermon 111:2:1,

Sermons 94a-150 (Works of Saint Augustine), Edmund Hill (Translator), ISBN 1565480007, p. 141

amazon.com/Sermons-94a-150-Works-Saint-Augustine/dp/1565480007
 
PerryJ said:
I do agree with your posts that man is "depraved’ to some degree and that God has to make the first move.
Click to expand...
And the more I watch the news, the more I think we may indeed be totally depraved and totally deranged. 😦
 
PerryJ said:
I am unclear are you refuting free will or the statement Mickey is using concerning free will.

I do agree with your posts that man is "depraved’ to some degree and that God has to make the first move. After that I believe in free will. I believe most other theories revert to free will. They just start them at a different point in the process.
Click to expand...
True, Perry…but I am not disputing that Christians are an entirely different case than the unregenerate. Christians are no longer bound by the depravity of their sinful nature and have the will to do that which is pleasing to God as Christ works in them.

The unregenerate, however, are in slavery to sin and can do nothing to free themselves and have lost the moral capacity to love God and respond to Him unless God calls them through the Holy Spirit in the gospel.
 
raumzeitmc2 said:
But Christ did, in fact, preach his gospel without explicit reference to the Cross. True?

And this gospel that Christ preached, this would certainly qualify as the “pure” gospel, would it not?
Click to expand...
The gospel without the cross is no longer the gospel. The Law that was preached by Christ condemns us as sinners before God’s holy standard.
 
Mickey said:
“I am writing to all the churches and am insisting to everyone that I die for God of my own free will - unless you hinder me.
I implore you: do not be unseasonably kind to me.
Let me be food for the wild beasts, through whom I can reach God. I am God’s wheat, and I am being ground by the teeth of the wild beasts, that I might prove to be pure bread.”
**Letter of Ignatius of **Antioch to the Romans 4
Click to expand...
What has this to do with unbelievers?
 
Mickey said:
There is no problem. Apostolic Christianity relies on Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Your tradition lost much when it re-invented itself through odd interpretations.

This is what you were born into–it is not your fault.
Click to expand...
The apostles did not teach philosophical humanism as part of their “tradition.”
 
Mickey said:
Would you say that good acts of an unregenerate person are evil?
Click to expand...
From God’s perspective, yes. They are good on a civil level of human perception and we cannot discount that. However, for an act to be good in the eyes of God it must be done in perfect holiness.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top