Where did Martin Luther and John Calvin disagree?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jimmy_B
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
For Sola Scriptura

His view of double predestination held that some are predestined to salvation, while others are predestined to damnation.

Ouch - do YOU believe that?

:confused:
 
I would add that Calvin did not believe in the true and substantial body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist. If for no other reason, Luther was right, Calvin wrong. If for no other resaon, I would be Catholic or Orthodox long before I would be Calvinist.
Jon,
I agree with you all the way. And, given the expansion of the topic to include Zwingli, I would included the Zwinglians with the Calvinists.
 
JimmyB, I thought you might like this passage from Titus 3:10-11.

"After a first and second warning, break off contact with a heretic. Realizing that such a person is perverted and sinful and stands self-condemned."----St. Paul

Need I say more? 😉
I think someone here needs a hug.
 
Hi Sola!

Can you repeat that? I have difficulty understanding your sentence.

Thank you
:whacky:
:hmmm:
:tiphat:
Without going back to my original post – I’m sure what I meant to say is the faithful in all Christian denominations have a varying degree of scriptural knowledge. People who visit forums like this are in some cases not very knowledgeable (but hungry to learn) or they are very knowledgeable and eager to share and have a place for fellowship on more than just Sunday. In either case we can assume the vast majority of people who take advantage of resources like this one are committed Christians. I actually like this forum because the participation level is very high.

Blessings
 
For Sola Scriptura

His view of double predestination held that some are predestined to salvation, while others are predestined to damnation.

Ouch - do YOU believe that?

:confused:
I believe everything is predestined by God. It’s a complicated issue though – I’m sure most would be bored by its more technical aspects. However, to sum it up we disagree with what has become the majority view that God chooses people based on His foreknowledge of their future behavior or what their response to universally applied prevenient grace will be.
 
Jon,
I agree with you all the way. And, given the expansion of the topic to include Zwingli, I would included the Zwinglians with the Calvinists.
Calvin and Zwingli didn’t agree on the Eucharist exactly.
 
just those first two words of TULIP - total depravity - is enough to turn me off. i didn’t find any of the sermons on TULIP enlightening or beneficial nor did i feel like a better Christian after hearing them.
 
just those first two words of TULIP - total depravity - is enough to turn me off. i didn’t find any of the sermons on TULIP enlightening or beneficial nor did i feel like a better Christian after hearing them.
The Law proclaimed rightly generally has that effect on people. Christian and non-Christian alike. No one wants to be told that they are so sinful they cannot change it by themselves.
 
Without going back to my original post – I’m sure what I meant to say is the faithful in all Christian denominations have a varying degree of scriptural knowledge. People who visit forums like this are in some cases not very knowledgeable (but hungry to learn) or they are very knowledgeable and eager to share and have a place for fellowship on more than just Sunday. In either case we can assume the vast majority of people who take advantage of resources like this one are committed Christians. I actually like this forum because the participation level is very high.

Blessings
Yes I agree. For me it is very good to communicate with people in different continents. I speak French and Portuguese and understand certain cultures but the American culture is something I must say I never regarded with much respect. Hence I have never had the desire to travel to america. I may do so one day because now I have a great grandson in North Carolina! (I know, I shouldn’t be a GG yet but every child is a gift from God)

The movies do not project a very good image of the US and I have always considered americans as very childish and plastic. sorry about that. anyway since I have been watching EWTN I have discovered another side of Americans which is more positive.

You sound like a very nice person even though sometimes you are a pain!!:rotfl: :bounce: :rotfl: :bounce:
 
Re: the “tulip” picture.

I honestly don’t think anyone should be in the least offended by it. It was obvious (to me anyway) as being nothing other than a case of having some clean, lighthearted fun. But even supposing it was meant to offend, it would still be light-years from the kind of material the reformers, particularly Luther, could produce!

And when was the last time any of our Protestant friends said a peep about that!

But lest I be judged unfair, let me give an example of what I talking about (and no, I’m not trying to offend anyone; just presenting *historical *information).

The following is from the Theosophical Quarterly of 1918. Listen to what it has to say about the gross vulgarity to those two so-called “great reformers” - Luther and Melanchthon.
In this connection there becomes noticeable Luther’s innate coarseness and vulgarity, for his conversation concerning the most intimate details of life is such as could not be reproduced. His coarseness had already been painfully evident in many of his writings, - more especially those against the Papacy, but, as a matter of fact, those against practically anyone who opposed him and his views.
Perhaps the most startling illustrations of it are his poem “Emancipation,” ridiculing transubstantiation and penance, and his “Interpretation of Two Horrible Monsters, an *** Pope, and a Calf Monk.”
These were published with a number of drawings by his friend, Lucas Cranach, which have been pronounced the most vulgar in the history of caricature. The two pamphlets, wholly aside from partisan feeling as to Church or creed, must impress even the most religiously indifferent as not only gross vulgarity but as the most shocking sacrilege and desecration.
The theosophical quarterly, The Theosophical Society in America, 1918, Brooklyn, New York, vol. XVI, No. 3, p. 241, Harry Houdini Collection (Library of Congress),

books.google.com/books?id=PvxWbFBOzU8C&pg=PA241&dq=%22interpretation+of+two+horrible+monsters%22&lr=&as_brr=0

German title (following the older German spellings) of the “Interpretation of Two Horrible Monsters”:

Deuttung der Czwo grewlichen Figuren Bapstesels czu Rom vnd Munchkalbs czu … By Philipp Melanchthon, Martin Luther, Wittenberg 1523.

D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe, Published by Böhlau u.a, 1900, Weimar.

Werke, 11 Band (Works, volume 11), pp. 367ff (see images pp. 371 and 373).
books.google.com/books?id=wlQMAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA365&dq=%22two+wonderful+popish+monsters%22&lr=#PPA366,M1

books.google.com/books?id=dMWKGwAACAAJ&dq=%22Deuttung+der+czwo+grewlichen%22&lr=

An early English translation.

Of Two Wonderful Popish Monsters, to Wyt, of a Popish Asse which was Found at Rome in the Riuer of Tyber, and of a Moonkish Calfe, Calued at Friberge in Misne: Which are the Very Foreshewings and Tokens of Gods Wrath, Against Blinde; Obstinate, and Monstrous Papistes, By John Brooke, Jean Crespin, Philipp Melanchthon, Martin Luther

Published at London by Thomas East, dwelling by Paules Wharfe, 1579
36 pages

books.google.com/books?hl=en&as_q=&as_epq=popish+monsters&as_oq=&as_eq=&num=10&lr=&as_filetype=&ft=i&as_sitesearch=&as_qdr=all&as_rights=&as_occt=any&cr=&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&safe=images&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wp&q=%22popish%20monsters%22

Interpretation of Two Horrible Monsters, an ***-Pope and a Calf-Monk.
By Martin Luther, Philipp Melanchthon, Published by , 1823

books.google.com/books?as_q=&num=10&lr=&as_brr=0&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=%09+Interpretation+of+Two+Horrible+Monsters%2C+an&as_oq=&as_eq=&as_brr=0&lr=&as_vt=&as_auth=&as_pub=&as_sub=&as_drrb=c&as_miny=&as_maxy=&as_isbn=

Little wonder therefore, that Denifle could write the following about such slanderers:
Nevertheless those runaway monks and fallen priest, who had annihilated their own and other’s decency, modesty, and honor, had the effrontery to come forward as preachers of morality, even to call themselves the Evangelicals and, by their malevolent exaggeration of the evil condition of the Church, to cover their own infamy. Luther himself, some years earlier, had already said: “Heretics cannot themselves appear good unless they depict the Church as evil, false, and mendacious. They alone wish to be esteemed as the good, but the Church must be made to appear evil in every respect.” {44} “The close their eyes to the good,” said St. Augustine {45} in his day, “and exaggerate only the evil, real or imagined.”
Luther and Lutherdom, from original sources, 1917, by Heinrich Denifle; translated from the 2d revised edition of the German by Raymund Volz, pp. 14-15.

Notes:
  1. Martin Luther, Dictata in Psalterium or Dictata Super Psalterium (1513-1515). Weimar, III, p. 445.
    D. Martin Luthers Werke: kritische Gesamtausgabe, Band 3, Weimar, Herman Bohlau, 1883.
    books.google.com/books?id=9YkVtSs8WdUC&pg=PA350&lpg=PA350&dq=luther+%22dictata+%22&source=web&ots=kCO3YIoBAf&sig=T3oz2LtL_yvOeRFjC2e6–XTLQc&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=9&ct=result#PPA445,M1
  2. Augustine, Enarrationes (Ennarations) on Psalm 90, no.12.
 
I believe everything is predestined by God. It’s a complicated issue though – I’m sure most would be bored by its more technical aspects. However, to sum it up we disagree with what has become the majority view that God chooses people based on His foreknowledge of their future behavior or what their response to universally applied prevenient grace will be.
How does that leave free will? Predestination makes no sense to me I am afraid.

I believe we all have different gifts and vocations and as we yield to the Spirit we will be given other gifts and it all depends on our responses.

Predestination? That implies that we have no control? No Sola, that doesn’t sound like God. Uh-huh:nope: :nope: :nope: :tsktsk: :tsktsk: :tsktsk:
 
i don’t like the idea of predestination either. it has never appealed to me.

i could not be a follower of calvin or luther.
 
i don’t like the idea of predestination either. it has never appealed to me.

i could not be a follower of calvin or luther.
Then how do you deal with those passages of Scripture that teach it?
 
How does that leave free will? Predestination makes no sense to me I am afraid.

Where does Scripture teach the humanistic notion of free will?
Predestination? That implies that we have no control? No Sola, that doesn’t sound like God. Uh-huh:nope: :nope: :nope: :tsktsk: :tsktsk: :tsktsk:
If God is not sovereign over His creation, then the only being in the universe without a free will would be God. Do you believe God alone being the author of all things is a bad thing?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top