Why follow Luther, Calvin , and Wesley, and not Jesus Christ?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Righteousone
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Righteousone said:
C.S. Lewis used the term “a great cataract of nonsense”. When it came to the sinners prayer.
In 1977, billy Graham published a now famous book entitled “How to be born again”. For all the Scripture he used, he never once used the hallmark rebirth event in the second chapter of the Book of Acts. The cataract (blind spot) kept him away from the most powerful conversion event in all Scripture. It’s emphasis on baptism and repentance for the forgiveness of sins was incompatible with his approach.

Evangelicals are skewing church auditoriums all over the world from a clear pictue of conversion with a nonsensical practice.
Click to expand...

**So why not tell us why he thought it “nonsense” ? **​

**The theology of BG (& CSL) was not Calvinist - outside Calvinism, the theology of the Puritans may well be “nonsense” - so is the Eucharistic theology of the CC, if detached from its setting in the CC; it would be “nonsense” in a Calvinist setting. Calvinist theology is a whole, of which its theology of salvation is an organic part - of course a detached part of it will be a “great cataract of nonsense”. So would a toe grafted onto a cheek. **

**Does it follow that because a practice can be cut loose from its Christian moorings, it has no prop****er place in Christian practice ? If indulgences are not illegitimate though they have been grievously abused, why is the same not true of the SP ? **

**Protestant Evangelicals do at least attend to something of capital importance: they emphasise the importance of a living faith in Christ as Saviour - of what the Puritans called “experimental (= experiential) religion”. An “historic faith” (= belief that there was once a Jesus who “went around doing good”) is not enough - & far too often, Catholic apologetic is based on an “historic faith”. Details about the Popes are all very well - but so is a guided around Jerusalem: neither has any saving power. A Jesus Who is confined to the past is no Saviour, but a corpse 😦 **

This emphasis is not purely Protestant: Mgr. R.A. Knox stressed the great importance of what is or was called “a spirit of interior religion” for the life of the Catholic Christian, & pointed out that if we lack this, we are sooner or later going to lose the faith we have. Is it surprising Catholics so often blossom as Protestants ? If they find a more humanly adequate faith in Protestantism, this points to inadequacies in the CC.

**Being Catholic consists in being Christian - not in avoiding all things found in Protestantism. If it did, we would have to reject Christ :eek: So it does not follow that because Protestant Evangelicals emphasise the importance of personal faith, we should have a faith which is **
  • purely historical - &
  • impersonal
    Jesus Christ is not a dead guy rotting in a grave - & neither is His Love impersonal. A corporate faith (such as Catholicism) can all too easily give the impression that He is in the past & only in the past, & that He cannot be known today. Luther emphasised Paul’s words that
  • Gal 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.
    This is far from impersonal - was the Apostle wrong ? **Luther was familiar with such authors as Tauler & Ruysbroeck, whose piety is very personal - they were Catholics, & much of what Catholics criticise today in Protestantism is Catholic. **
 
O.S.Luke said:
I don’t think you’re arrogant or uncharitable. But I am not sure what you’re saying in light of the prayer I posted. And what am I in denial about? :confused:

O+
Click to expand...
You say that you don’t follow Wesley, when obviously you do. If not, you would not be Methodist, now would you? You are following a man’s opinion on Christ and what His Church should be. The real thing is there, my brother.

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew
 
Harpazo said:
You say that you don’t follow Wesley, when obviously you do. If not, you would not be Methodist, now would you? You are following a man’s opinion on Christ and what His Church should be. The real thing is there, my brother.
Click to expand...
You don’t know your history, obviously. Wesley did not intend to start a church, but a movement within the Church - bascially, an Ecclesiola in Ecclesia. Wesley died a priest in good standing within the Anglican Church. If you want to point toward a founder(s) of the Methodist Church, you should probably point toward Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke.

Those who are baptized are not baptized into the Methodist Church, but the Church Catholic. Their membership vows reside in (1) the denomination, and (2) the local church. None of the membership vows, nor any ordination vows, mention the names John Wesley, Charles Wesley, Francis Asbury, Thomas Coke, Phillip Otterbein, or Martin Boehm. They do mention the repentance of sin, the confession of Christ as Savior and to serve Him as Lord in union with the Church which Christ opened, to remain a faithful member of Christ’s holy Church, to serve as Christ’s representative and disciple in the world, and answering the Apostles’ Creed in interrogative form.

To say that Methodists follow Wesley would be like saying Catholics follow Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Hippolytus, or for that matter any other Early Church Father.

The distinguishing marks of a Methodist - again, a movement in the Anglican Church (which Wesley wrote in 1767, long before there was a Methodist denomination), were these:
We believe Christ to be the eternal, supreme God; and herein we are distinguished from the Socinians and Arians.

A Methodist is one who has “the love of God shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost given unto him;” one who "loves the Lord his God with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his mind, and with all his strength. God is the joy of his heart, and the desire of his soul; which is constantly crying out, “Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee! My God and my all! Thou art the strength of my heart, and my portion for ever!”

[H]e “prays without ceasing.”… his heart is ever lifted up to God, at all times and in all places. In this he is never hindered, much less interrupted, by any person or thing. In retirement or company, in leisure, business, or conversation, his heart is ever with the Lord. Whether he lie down or rise up, God is in all his thoughts; he walks with God continually, having the loving eye of his mind still fixed upon him, and everywhere “seeing Him that is invisible.”

As he has time, he “does good unto all men;” unto neighbours and strangers, friends and enemies: And that in every possible kind; not only to their bodies, by “feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting those that are sick or in prison;” but much more does he labour to do good to their souls, as of the ability which God giveth; to awaken those that sleep in death; to bring those who are awakened to the atoning blood, that, “being justified by faith, they may have peace with God;” and to provoke those who have peace with God to abound more in love and in good works.

And… most importantly:
By these marks, by these fruits of a living faith, do we labour to distinguish ourselves from the unbelieving world from all those whose minds or lives are not according to the Gospel of Christ. But from real Christians, of whatsoever denomination they be, we earnestly desire not to be distinguished at all, not from any who sincerely follow after what they know they have not yet attained. No: “Whosoever doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.” And I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, that we be in no wise divided among ourselves. Is thy heart right, as my heart is with thine? I ask no farther question. If it be, give me thy hand. For opinions, or terms, let us not destroy the work of God. Dost thou love and serve God? It is enough. I give thee the right hand of fellowship. If there be any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies; let us strive together for the faith of the Gospel; walking worthy of the vocation wherewith we are called; with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love, endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; remembering, there is one body, and one Spirit, even as we are called with one hope of our calling; “one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

We follow and serve Christ - and only Christ, Andrew.

O+
 
NDfan said:
How can you say they don’t share the divine nature when Jesus flat out tells us “I and the Father are one in the same”, and the Holy Spirit is said to be of GOD as in Matthew 3.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Jesus is one-third God?

Read this from another Protestant:
In chapter 10, verse 38, Jesus explains the close relationship between the Son and the Father that is necessary for Him to do these works. Jesus says, “the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” Here we have a profound doctrine that the theologians call emperichoresis or circumincisio. This is the teaching that although the Father and the Son are distinct divine Persons, yet they are never separated. They always co-exist. Because the Father, Son and Holy Spirit each fully possess the Divine Nature, wherever One of them is, all of God is there. As Jesus said, “the Father is in Me, and I in Him.”
grovergunn.net/andrew/joh1022s.htm
Click to expand...
That’s the problem with Protestantism. They accept some teachings from the Catholic Church and reject others. Protestants are their own interpreters. And they think the CC is wrong. If she is wrong, Protestantism is even more so. Will the real Protestant please stand up.
Jesus flat out tells us “I and the Father are one in the same”
Click to expand...
Firstly, you have added your own words to the scriptures, to suit your own needs.

This is what the NIV says:
John 10:30
I and the Father are one."

Now, how do you now He was talking about His nature here? Have a look at John 17:22:

I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one: 23 I in them and you in me. May they be brought to complete unity to let the world know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

He prayed that the apostles may be one as He and the Father were one.
 
I just think it’s funny when O.S. Luke claims Catholics don’t know their history…yet we are the only ones who have any dating back to Christ…:rolleyes:
 
O.S.Luke said:
You don’t know your history, obviously. Wesley did not intend to start a church, but a movement within the Church - bascially, an Ecclesiola in Ecclesia. Wesley died a priest in good standing within the Anglican Church. If you want to point toward a founder(s) of the Methodist Church, you should probably point toward Francis Asbury and Thomas Coke.

Those who are baptized are not baptized into the Methodist Church, but the Church Catholic. Their membership vows reside in (1) the denomination, and (2) the local church. None of the membership vows, nor any ordination vows, mention the names John Wesley, Charles Wesley, Francis Asbury, Thomas Coke, Phillip Otterbein, or Martin Boehm. They do mention the repentance of sin, the confession of Christ as Savior and to serve Him as Lord in union with the Church which Christ opened, to remain a faithful member of Christ’s holy Church, to serve as Christ’s representative and disciple in the world, and answering the Apostles’ Creed in interrogative form.

To say that Methodists follow Wesley would be like saying Catholics follow Thomas Aquinas, Augustine, Hippolytus, or for that matter any other Early Church Father.

The distinguishing marks of a Methodist - again, a movement in the Anglican Church (which Wesley wrote in 1767, long before there was a Methodist denomination), were these:
We believe Christ to be the eternal, supreme God; and herein we are distinguished from the Socinians and Arians.

A Methodist is one who has “the love of God shed abroad in his heart by the Holy Ghost given unto him;” one who "loves the Lord his God with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his mind, and with all his strength. God is the joy of his heart, and the desire of his soul; which is constantly crying out, “Whom have I in heaven but thee? and there is none upon earth that I desire beside thee! My God and my all! Thou art the strength of my heart, and my portion for ever!”

[H]e “prays without ceasing.”… his heart is ever lifted up to God, at all times and in all places. In this he is never hindered, much less interrupted, by any person or thing. In retirement or company, in leisure, business, or conversation, his heart is ever with the Lord. Whether he lie down or rise up, God is in all his thoughts; he walks with God continually, having the loving eye of his mind still fixed upon him, and everywhere “seeing Him that is invisible.”

As he has time, he “does good unto all men;” unto neighbours and strangers, friends and enemies: And that in every possible kind; not only to their bodies, by “feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, visiting those that are sick or in prison;” but much more does he labour to do good to their souls, as of the ability which God giveth; to awaken those that sleep in death; to bring those who are awakened to the atoning blood, that, “being justified by faith, they may have peace with God;” and to provoke those who have peace with God to abound more in love and in good works.

And… most importantly:
By these marks, by these fruits of a living faith, do we labour to distinguish ourselves from the unbelieving world from all those whose minds or lives are not according to the Gospel of Christ. But from real Christians, of whatsoever denomination they be, we earnestly desire not to be distinguished at all, not from any who sincerely follow after what they know they have not yet attained. No: “Whosoever doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.” And I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, that we be in no wise divided among ourselves. Is thy heart right, as my heart is with thine? I ask no farther question. If it be, give me thy hand. For opinions, or terms, let us not destroy the work of God. Dost thou love and serve God? It is enough. I give thee the right hand of fellowship. If there be any consolation in Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of the Spirit, if any bowels and mercies; let us strive together for the faith of the Gospel; walking worthy of the vocation wherewith we are called; with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love, endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace; remembering, there is one body, and one Spirit, even as we are called with one hope of our calling; “one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.”

We follow and serve Christ - and only Christ, Andrew.

O+
Click to expand...
If you don’t follow Wesley or his theology, as you claim, why are you Methodist? Clearly your sect, faction, denomination, whatever you want to call it of the Protestant movement, was founded by John Wesley. Surely you cannot deny this.

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew
 
Righteousone said:
I was wondering why non-Catholic Christians don’t follow what Jesus gave to St. Peter, the church, the holy Catholic church. Since everything was Catholic back then (Early Church Fathers, etc…).
If Protestants KNOW this, yet they follow someone who instead married a nun (Luther married a Catholic nun, and he himself was a Catholic), why would you remain Protestant? Don’t you realize that if everything WAS Catholic BEFORE Luther, why not feel that Jesus made it that way?
And Calvin and Wesley started THEIR OWN churches, the Presbyterian and Methodist churches.
Why not become Catholic as it was in the days BEFORE these gentlemen decided to go off on their own?
Click to expand...
Non Catholic christians do follow Jesus hence the word christian. Luther was a catholic priest as you know and he saw some abuse by the leaders at the time some of his reforms were adopted after he was excomunicated from the church. Take some time and read both sides of history. Look at both sides of the story . Sometimes History is what we want it to be or what we are willing to tell others or want others to know. Do not believe everything everbody tells you find out for yourself and contect the dots.
 
Righteousone said:
I just think it’s funny when O.S. Luke claims Catholics don’t know their history…yet we are the only ones who have any dating back to Christ…:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
History as you were told it was . As they want you to believe it to be. righeousone.
 
catholiconce said:
Non Catholic christians do follow Jesus hence the word christian. Luther was a catholic priest as you know and he saw some abuse by the leaders at the time some of his reforms were adopted after he was excomunicated from the church. Take some time and read both sides of history. Look at both sides of the story . Sometimes History is what we want it to be or what we are willing to tell others or want others to know. Do not believe everything everbody tells you find out for yourself and contect the dots.
Click to expand...
I studied Luther, I read his biography, what’s better than that. Luther was a Catholic monk, married an ex-Catholic nun. You can’t do that. Then he rewrote the bible, wouldn’t let 7 books in because he disagreed with these books. Who the heck did he think he was anyway? Before Luther, EVERYTHING WAS CATHOLIC. Don’t you get it? Even if error was in the church, it doesn’t matter. Christ started the Catholic church because that’s all that was around.
 
O.S.Luke said:
Don’t call me Shirley.

You’re just being argumentative now. The Lord be with you, Andrew.

O+
Click to expand...
I like the Airplane reference. 😉 But that still does not answer my original question, or challenge to you rather. I posed an honest question using reasoning and logic that could lead to one obvious outcome. Are you denying it? Please be honest with me and don’t brush it off.

Shlomo dMshiho khoulkhoun,
Andrew
 
Harpazo said:
I like the Airplane reference. 😉 But that still does not answer my original question, or challenge to you rather. I posed an honest question using reasoning and logic that could lead to one obvious outcome. Are you denying it? Please be honest with me and don’t brush it off.

Shlomo dMshiho khoulkhoun,
Andrew
Click to expand...
I’ve been extremely honest with you and answered every question and challenge you’ve posed. You set up a strawman for the answer you want, rather than hear any honest answer I gave to you - and I’ve been polite. Arguing for argument’s sake is pointless, and no answer I will give you will satisfy you. This is, in my opinion, dishonest apologetics.

I don’t worship or follow John Wesley, Augustine, or any other saint or divine. If I followed John Wesley and emulated everything about him, I would wake up at 4 in the morning, work 18 hours a day, and ignore my wife so much that I wouldn’t even bother to show for her funeral. If I followed Augustine, I would still feel guilty about stealing pears from my neighbor’s yard when I was a boy. I am imperfect, but I do not emulate any of these behaviors, good men that Wesley and Augustine were.

I worship the risen Christ and follow Him and Him only.

Pax vobiscum,

O+
 
O.S.Luke said:
I’ve been extremely honest with you and answered every question and challenge you’ve posed. You set up a strawman for the answer you want, rather than hear any honest answer I gave to you - and I’ve been polite. Arguing for argument’s sake is pointless, and no answer I will give you will satisfy you. This is, in my opinion, dishonest apologetics.

I don’t worship or follow John Wesley, Augustine, or any other saint or divine. If I followed John Wesley and emulated everything about him, I would wake up at 4 in the morning, work 18 hours a day, and ignore my wife so much that I wouldn’t even bother to show for her funeral. If I followed Augustine, I would still feel guilty about stealing pears from my neighbor’s yard when I was a boy. I am imperfect, but I do not emulate any of these behaviors, good men that Wesley and Augustine were.

I worship the risen Christ and follow Him and Him only.

Pax vobiscum,

O+
Click to expand...
Let me get this correctly, you give no credence to what Wesley says and follow none of his teachings in regards to Christ, the two Sacraments you celebrate, moral living, etc.? If not, then why are you Methodist?

Al-Masih Qam!
Andrew
 
Righteousone said:
I studied Luther, I read his biography, what’s better than that. Luther was a Catholic monk, married an ex-Catholic nun. You can’t do that. Then he rewrote the bible, wouldn’t let 7 books in because he disagreed with these books. Who the heck did he think he was anyway? Before Luther, EVERYTHING WAS CATHOLIC. Don’t you get it? Even if error was in the church, it doesn’t matter. Christ started the Catholic church because that’s all that was around.
Click to expand...
Oh calm down Why all the threats. Jesus Founded the Catholic Church. Catholic means universal. universal Christian church Not the Roman Catholic church as it is today or as it was back before and during the reformation period. They ex comunicated Luther because he spoke up and chalenged them and After they kicked him out they adopted several of his ideas. You can Thank Martin Luther each Sunday when you par take in the Eucharist. Thanks to him The layity was able to again recieve The Eucharist.
Also After he got the boot he married the former nun. If your not a priest any longer you can marry if you want.
 
Righteousone said:
I studied Luther, I read his biography, what’s better than that. Luther was a Catholic monk, married an ex-Catholic nun. You can’t do that. Then he rewrote the bible, wouldn’t let 7 books in because he disagreed with these books. Who the heck did he think he was anyway? Before Luther, EVERYTHING WAS CATHOLIC. Don’t you get it? Even if error was in the church, it doesn’t matter. Christ started the Catholic church because that’s all that was around.
Click to expand...
Oh I get it the question should be do you get it ? Who did Martin Luther think he was you ask ? A catholic monk then a priest. That is the problem the Church was in error and it did and it does matter. Selling indulgences that were not even worth the paper they were writen on to people who could not afford it in the first palce so they can get out of purgatory sooner!?!?!?! “OH but we are the Roman Catholic Church and we are infaliable” We can do no wrong. “It is the way we say it is” oh give me a break where in scripture does all of that come from. It does not that is just how it is interpeted. "
 
Harpazo said:
Let me get this correctly, you give no credence to what Wesley says and follow none of his teachings in regards to Christ, the two Sacraments you celebrate, moral living, etc.? If not, then why are you Methodist?
Click to expand...
Andrew… your logic is a bit hard to follow. My apologies, but it seems a lot like this:
Premise: God is love.
Premise: Love is blind.
Premise: Stevie Wonder is blind.
Conclusion: Therefore, Stevie Wonder is God. 😃

I’ve read Wesley’s sermons, letters, and journals - invaluable reading for any Christian. I’ve read the readings of the Early Church Fathers and gleaned much. I’ve read Aquinas’ Summa and am the better for it. I studied the writings of Martin Luther - some of it priceless and some of it anti-Catholic rhetoric. According to your logic, that would make me a MethoCathoLutheran.

The official teachings of the sacraments in Methodism didn’t come from Wesley… they came from the Church of England which had its birthing from Catholicism. Methodists certainly have no monopoly on the sacraments or on admonitions toward moral living; historically, most of what Wesley taught the early Methodist societies regarding moral teachings were excerpts from the ECF’s.

Once again, I worship the risen Christ and follow Him and Him only.

You are erecting more Strawmen, Andrew. Again, this is not honest apologetics. However, I will be happy to continue your questioning offline, via PM.

O+
 
O.S.Luke said:
I’ve read Wesley’s sermons, letters, and journals - invaluable reading for any Christian. I’ve read the readings of the Early Church Fathers and gleaned much. I’ve read Aquinas’ Summa and am the better for it. I studied the writings of Martin Luther - some of it priceless and some of it anti-Catholic rhetoric. According to your logic, that would make me a MethoCathoLutheran.

The official teachings of the sacraments in Methodism didn’t come from Wesley… they came from the Church of England which had its birthing from Catholicism. Methodists certainly have no monopoly on the sacraments or on admonitions toward moral living; historically, most of what Wesley taught the early Methodist societies regarding moral teachings were excerpts from the ECF’s.
Thank You O.S. Luke
Once again, I worship the risen Christ and follow Him and Him only.

You are erecting more Strawmen, Andrew. Again, this is not honest apologetics. However, I will be happy to continue your questioning offline, via PM.

O+
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top