Why I could never follow Luther.

[dogknox]

From the Augsburg Confession

*Article IX: Of Baptism.

1] Of Baptism they teach that it is necessary 2] to salvation, and that through Baptism is offered the grace of God, and that children are to be baptized who, being offered to God through Baptism are received into God’s grace.

3] They condemn the Anabaptists, who reject the baptism of children, and say that children are saved without Baptism.*

You see, my Christian friend, this is what I mean when I say you do not have a reasonable knowledge of Luther or Lutheranism.
Now, maybe I am misunderstanding you, and you are of the opinion that Lutherans are not Protestant. If so, carry on.

Jon

I reply… So I have it in black and white… “You reject salvation by; Faith ALONE”!!
Now you post…Of Baptism they teach that it is* necessary** 2] to salvation, and that through Baptism *

**You NEED… You MUST be Baptized!!! **
YES then you are admitting salvation comes from; “Faith in the saving works of Baptism”!
Faith PLUS Baptism… Not Faith >>ALONE<<!

**JonNC **you see you can’t have it both ways…
All protestants have roots back to Martin Luther… all reject the teachings of; God’s one and only one, Holy Catholic Church, headed by the Pope.!
Protestant= One who protests, the authority of the Pope!
Lutherans are Protestant!

Dogknox

 

[rinnie]

Hello** rinnie**… thank you for your reply… You said…

I reply: Scripture tells you…
If you reject the words of Jesus then you are rejecting Jesus.
If you reject the words of Jesus then you are rejecting the scriptures!

** rinnie** Let me point this out to you…
Jesus gave his warning… In John 12 “He who does NOT accept my words REJECTS ME, (the scriptures) MY WORDS will Condemn him!”… THEN…
Then he said this next… John 13…“This IS my body” (as he held up bread)
Then we read this…
**John 13:27 **As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.

rinnie Judas REJECTED Jesus… Because he did NOT accept the words of Jesus!
Satan claimed what was his… “All who reject Jesus are the Children of Satan!”
All who do NOT accept the words of Jesus are rejecting Jesus!
All who do NOT accept the scriptures are rejecting Jesus!
All who reject the “WARNING” (the words of Jesus) are rejecting Jesus!

Question… How can you say Martin Luther did NOT reject Jesus?
Jesus said… “A person is JUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE DOES… Not by Faith Alone”!
Luther was going to remove the whole epistle from the bible because it said…
“A person is JUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE DOES… Not by Faith Alone”!

rinnie It is a HISTORICAL FACT: Martin Luther was willing to remove the book from the bible!
If this is NOT rejecting the words of Jesus (Rejecting Jesus) then what is!!?

Dogknox

Okay dogknox lets start with Judas, when did Judas reject the words of Jesus? Where is that written in the bible. I was always taught that Judas betrayed Jesus but never rejected his teachings? Could you show me in either Tradition or Written Scripture where Judas rejected any teaching of Jesus. Thanks

 

[rinnie]

Hello** rinnie**… thank you for your reply… You said…

I reply: Scripture tells you…
If you reject the words of Jesus then you are rejecting Jesus.
If you reject the words of Jesus then you are rejecting the scriptures!

** rinnie** Let me point this out to you…
Jesus gave his warning… In John 12 “He who does NOT accept my words REJECTS ME, (the scriptures) MY WORDS will Condemn him!”… THEN…
Then he said this next… John 13…“This IS my body” (as he held up bread)
Then we read this…
**John 13:27 **As soon as Judas took the bread, Satan entered into him.

rinnie Judas REJECTED Jesus… Because he did NOT accept the words of Jesus!
Satan claimed what was his… “All who reject Jesus are the Children of Satan!”
All who do NOT accept the words of Jesus are rejecting Jesus!
All who do NOT accept the scriptures are rejecting Jesus!
All who reject the “WARNING” (the words of Jesus) are rejecting Jesus!

Question… How can you say Martin Luther did NOT reject Jesus?
Jesus said… “A person is JUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE DOES… Not by Faith Alone”!
Luther was going to remove the whole epistle from the bible because it said…
“A person is JUSTIFIED BY WHAT HE DOES… Not by Faith Alone”!

rinnie It is a HISTORICAL FACT: Martin Luther was willing to remove the book from the bible!
If this is NOT rejecting the words of Jesus (Rejecting Jesus) then what is!!?

Dogknox

Also what words did Luther reject? I agree that he did not understand them in the context of scripture, but what words did he reject?

While I agree he said that we are saved by faith alone is misunderstanding the word, do you feel that we are not saved by our Faith? I was taught that of course we can be saved by our faith, but its faith, and grace and works etc. If Luther just said we are saved by our faith and not used the word alone the Church would have probally agreed with him.

But Luther said it was faith ALONE without works, grace, etc. That is where he misinterpreted scripture. But to misunderstand and outright reject are 2 very different things would you not agree?

What Luther should have said is faith without Grace and works is fruitless. But while I agree that faith alone is not the truth, we are saved by our faith, that is part of our salvation, just not all of it. Or are you saying we can be saved by our works without faith, and without grace? Do you see what I am saying, it is a package deal.

But the bible does say we are not saved by our works alone either. Luther just did not teach it right is all. But he did not reject the scripture, he just did not have the power of the Holy Spirit to interpret it correctly.

 

[JonNC]

=dogknox;7225866]I reply… So I have it in black and white… "You reject salvation by; Faith ALONE"!!
Now you post…Of Baptism they teach that it is* necessary*** 2] to salvation, and that through Baptism

No, I reject your misunderstanding of faith alone. We are jsutified by grace alone, through faith in Christ alone.
Faith alone refers to the way we come to justification, not by works, lest anyone can boast, but by the efforts and merit of Christ. Faith is the way we access Grace. While this is true, faith is not cannot be alone. Certainly justification is followed by sanctification, and a true, living, saving faith works through love, as Galatians states.
We must grow in Grace as well, and that is why we have the means of Grace - Baptism, the Eucharist, confession/Holy Absolution, the hearing of the word, and other means from which grace is bestowed upon us.

**You NEED… You MUST be Baptized!!! **
YES then you are admitting salvation comes from; “Faith in the saving works of Baptism”!
Faith PLUS Baptism… Not Faith >>ALONE<<!

Of course I admit that Grace comes to us through the means of Grace, of which Baptism is one. That does not contridict sola fide.

you see you can’t have it both ways…
All protestants have roots back to Martin Luther… all reject the teachings of; God’s one and only one, Holy Catholic Church, headed by the Pope.!

I certainly reject those abuses, commtitted by sinful men in the name of the Church (what ML was speaking of in the Satan remark you throw around without context) that brought about the Reformation in the first place. I certainly reject *as doctrine * those doctrines which bind the conscience of the believer without scriptural support, or support of an early council, not that I necessarily reject all of them personally.

Protestant= One who protests, the authority of the Pope!

You are aware, of course, that the term Protestant came about, not because of a protest of the Bishop of Rome? Right?

Lutherans are Protestant!

Ok, then you admit your error in telling rinnie that I don’t believe in the necessity of Baptism. Good!

And by the way, I am not laughing at rinnie. I have great respect and admiration for her faith, and her strident yet charitable dedication to her Church.

Jon

 

[Mikeoffaith]

And this is something that we as Catholic’s must admit. Luther did see corruption in our Church. There were very bad examples from People who should have been doing better.

But what Luther did was not right either. He took the sins of Man, and turned around and tried to bring down the Church of Christ, IMHO.

Now what he should have done was continue to bring forth the wrong doing by men, but he should have never left the True Church. He should have stayed and fought for HIS CHURCH and HIS GOD. Because what people need to remember the RCC is not the Popes Church, or the Bishop or Priests Church. IT is OUR CHURCH. IT is OUR GOD.

When we walk in there we worship GOD not the Pope etc. But we do have respect Love for our Pope and respect his authority to teach Gods word. ANd we know that no matter how he can sin in his own personal life, he cannot teach us ONE WRONG WORD when he teaches us the word of God. Because simply Jesus told his Apostles I WILL GIVE YOU THE WORDS.

No matter how he lives his personal life (which may I add, I believe that John Paul 11 and the present Pope are great example for us today) it cannot take away that power from the Holy Spriit to teach in God’s name. That Promise came from the Boss. Our dear Lord and Savior himself!!

Luther gave the impression that if a Man is a Pope or Bishop (more or less Apostle of Jesus) he is to be without sin. That is not possible. Our original Apostles had sin.

So Luther in turn started HIS own Church and what example did he show? Something to think about.

Hi Rinnie-

Some nice points. How do you see that Luther left the True Church? What is that makes you think that Luther left on his own account?

I don’t think Luther was looking at bishops and popes and saying that they need to be without sin. Tell me if I am off base with this assumption Jon, but I believe that Luther would say that there is no possible way for any man, pope, bishop, patriarch, etc, to be without sin. I think what Luther was saying especially in regards to the Papacy and especially in regards to the papacy and episcopate of his time, was that the politics and corruption had infiltrated to such a point that the papacy was the root of the problem. I don’t think that you can look at the papacy of today and compare it with the papacy of 1500. I think the system has changed considerably so to prevent the abuses of circa 1500.

 

[JonNC]

Hi Rinnie-

Some nice points. How do you see that Luther left the True Church? What is that makes you think that Luther left on his own account?

I don’t think Luther was looking at bishops and popes and saying that they need to be without sin. Tell me if I am off base with this assumption Jon, but I believe that Luther would say that there is no possible way for any man, pope, bishop, patriarch, etc, to be without sin. I think what Luther was saying especially in regards to the Papacy and especially in regards to the papacy and episcopate of his time, was that the politics and corruption had infiltrated to such a point that the papacy was the root of the problem. I don’t think that you can look at the papacy of today and compare it with the papacy of 1500. I think the system has changed considerably so to prevent the abuses of circa 1500.

I agree on all counts, Mike. And what you say at the last about the papacy is why I consider the confessions charge of the papacy as anti-Christ as being no longer valid. No of the string of popes in my lifetime at least are anything but valiant men of faith. I consider JPII to be the greatest Christian of my lifetime.

Jon

 

[Frost]

I was thinking of this all day and wonder how others feel about it.

Luther came AFTER the Church. Now scriptures said the Church is One, Holy, Catholic,and Apostolic.

Now on a common sense level Luther separated himself from the ONE Church. Now we come into the battle who has the ONE Church. It has to be the Church that was started by Peter.

Now here is where the problem with Luther comes in my mind. Luther was at one time a part of the Church started by Peter. Simply because, he walked away from the Church that History proves was connected to Peter. Here is where common sense comes to play, Peter and the CC were here long before Luther, Luther was not here long before the CC.

It hasn’t occurred to you that the Church could have continued with Luther, and that what you call the CC truly wasn’t the Church any more?

I don’t really think this, I am just trying to show how your line of reasoning isn’t all thought through. If the Church was split in two with Luther, there is no telling which one was the true Church: was it Luther’s church or the CC?

Or maybe it is both?

 

[rinnie]

Hi Rinnie-

Some nice points. How do you see that Luther left the True Church? What is that makes you think that Luther left on his own account?

I don’t think Luther was looking at bishops and popes and saying that they need to be without sin. Tell me if I am off base with this assumption Jon, but I believe that Luther would say that there is no possible way for any man, pope, bishop, patriarch, etc, to be without sin. I think what Luther was saying especially in regards to the Papacy and especially in regards to the papacy and episcopate of his time, was that the politics and corruption had infiltrated to such a point that the papacy was the root of the problem. I don’t think that you can look at the papacy of today and compare it with the papacy of 1500. I think the system has changed considerably so to prevent the abuses of circa 1500.

Possibly, I hope so, But what he did was take Church teaching that has been passed down from the Apostles from the beginning of time and tried to prove it untrue.

He used the Sins of the Priests to try to prove the teaching’s of the Church untrue. Indulgences for one thing. They are permitted today as they were in the beginning of time. But because he felt they were being abused he tried to make them out to be wrong, They are not wrong and are still permitted.

Now Jon just showed you what Luther taught, and exactly what the big problem with your Church and ours.

Jon said that justification is from faith alone, that is indeed a Luther teaching, and something we completely deny as Catholics. and Jon said that faith alone comes from the merit of Christ, and faith is the way we access grace. That is exactly what Luther taught and the CC disagrees with it 100%.

The CC teaches that justification is treated TOGETHER with grace, since grace itself is in itself a manifestation of the grace of the Holy Spirit.

That GRACE has the power to justify us, that is to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus from our Baptism.

We are taught that all justification takes place IN and THROUGH Christ, by bringing his Son into the world to take on our human failure.

It is Through GRACE and the OUTPOURING of the HS that elevates us to the level at which we can become Children of God.

It is through this GRACE not faith that God gives to us that makes us FREELY want to do what is right. (Ezekiel 36:26) which is baptism our new heart.

Yes we are justified by Faith in Christ but faith alone before Grace is impossible.

It was finally agreed between 1999 where we became a closer understanding between the Lutherans and Catholics about this issure.

But as you can see faith without works cannot save you. Read James 2:14-18

It is by Grace that we acquire Faith, and by that faith that we can use free will from God to do good works for the right reason. But the more good works we do comes from GRACE not Faith. The more GRACE we are given the stronger our FAITH can become and the more good works we can achieve. So again as much as I love and respect Jon he is still running with Luthers thinking here, which separtes us.

The joing declaration confirms GOOD WORKS made possible by GRACE and the working of the Holy Spirit contribute to growth in grace so that righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion is deepened ith Christ.

All of our actions works flow from our redemption in Christ and manifest the presence of the Holy Spirit within us. Our faith in Christ, our actions,all come from the Grace that is given to us from the Holy Spriit in our Baptism.

 

[rinnie]

It hasn’t occurred to you that the Church could have continued with Luther, and that what you call the CC truly wasn’t the Church any more?

I don’t really think this, I am just trying to show how your line of reasoning isn’t all thought through. If the Church was split in two with Luther, there is no telling which one was the true Church: was it Luther’s church or the CC?

Or maybe it is both?

Actually it couldn’t have. Because the Way that the Church is Sanctifed is through the Sacraments. The Pope is the current Vicar of Christ the Bishop of Rome is at the same time Peter.

If you read the N.T. we read in a number of the Gospels that Peter is always at the head of the group of the 12 Apostles.

In Matthew it is written that Jesus appointed Peter to be the Rock on which he would build his Church. It was Peter who God had given authority over his Church. It was Peter he elected as shepherd of his flock.

The Pope is who was chosen to walk in the footsteps of Peter. In his election as Bishop of Rome he assumes the responsibility as the Universal Pastor for the Church and takes on the awesome authority of the Vicar of Chrst to preside over the whole Church to oversee its activities and to build up the Church in faith and Love.

If the Church was NOT split in 2 then we would still all follow the Universal Teacher like we did when Luther was a Catholic Monk.

The Pope has never left the CC, Luther left the CC. If Luther would have stayed then there would be ONE CHURCH. But as you can see you are not called the Catholic Church led by the Vicar of Christ we are.

 

[rinnie]

Also Mike I agree that Luther did not leave on his own he was kicked out. But as you can see the many reasons why. He did not agree with all of the teaching’s that was passed down to us from the Apostles. He had some ideas of his own, and believed that he had the power of the HS to teach, and as you can see, his teaching was in direct conflict with the Apostles which proved he was not led by the HS in his teachings.

If the Holy Spirit teaches something it can never change.

 

[Magdalena09]

I would also add that Luther separated himself from the Church before he was ever excommunicated. It was not all that different from the different “Catholic” movements that reject various teachings for whatever reason. Just claiming to be a Catholic does not mean that you actually practice the faith. So in the same way that someone who has no qualms about abortion or euthanasia may call themselves a Catholic, they are actually not being obedient to the teachings of the Church and should not claim to represent the Church–especially not the OHC&A Church, nor should they lead others astray so that they may live disobediently, but have company doing so.

 

[rinnie]

I would also add that Luther separated himself from the Church before he was ever excommunicated. It was not all that different from the different “Catholic” movements that reject various teachings for whatever reason. Just claiming to be a Catholic does not mean that you actually practice the faith. So in the same way that someone who has no qualms about abortion or euthanasia may call themselves a Catholic, they are actually not being obedient to the teachings of the Church and should not claim to represent the Church–especially not the OHC&A Church, nor should they lead others astray so that they may live disobediently, but have company doing so.

You are right, kind of like having faith without works, would you not agree.

In order for us to follow our faith we must follow ALL of the teaching’s of the Apostles, not just what we like and don’t like. Now we can say we do not like a teaching of the Church, or feel a teaching of the Church is hard to live by, but we know that it does indeed come from God and it is his will for us to follow it, But it is our free will to obey or disobey.

Now it is also not a sin to not understand a teaching of the Church, but then again it is also our own personal duty to learn what the Apostles did teach, and to obey that teaching. And it is from the Grace given to us at our Baptism from God that is poured down on us that helps us to gain that knowledge. It is Grace and prayer that faith can become strong. Anyone can have faith, but few can LIVE that faith! I for one can say that I have alot of Grace from God, much more then I deserve, but I still have a hard time living it myself, not because God did not give me enough, but because he gave me the free will to choose him or sin, and unfortunately in this world sin can seem to win at times.

That is why I thank him daily for the RCC that I can go and receive that same grace from the Holy Spirit that cleansed me at birth, to cleanse me once more by the Power of the Holy Spirit given to Christ’s Living Apostles here on earth, to make me new once more.

 

[Mikeoffaith]

I agree on all counts, Mike. And what you say at the last about the papacy is why I consider the confessions charge of the papacy as anti-Christ as being no longer valid. No of the string of popes in my lifetime at least are anything but valiant men of faith. I consider JPII to be the greatest Christian of my lifetime.

Jon

I agree completely Jon, but I think even though I only caught the tail end of John23, I think he was exactly the type of man the church needed especially when it came to ecumenism. I think the thoughtful papacy of Paul6 was stellar as well.

 

[dogknox]

It hasn’t occurred to you that the Church could have continued with Luther, and that what you call the CC truly wasn’t the Church any more?

I don’t really think this, I am just trying to show how your line of reasoning isn’t all thought through. If the Church was split in two with Luther, there is no telling which one was the true Church: was it Luther’s church or the CC?
Or maybe it is both?

Hello Frost It is good to meet you…
You ask a question… Scriptures have the answer, all you are asked to do is believe the scriptures.

This is scripture PROPHESY!
2 Peter 2:1 **
But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves.
2 Many will follow their depraved conduct and will bring the way of truth** into disrepute.

Frost Do you see it?
Martin Luther was “AMONG the Catholic Church”! This PROPHESY cannot work in the other direction!!
The Catholic Church was NOT > Among Martin Luther< !

Frost The Prophesy PROVES… Martin Luther is a “False Teacher”!
The PROPHESY PROVES… The Catholic Church is “The Way Of Truth”!
This PROPHESY PROVES… All protestant churches cannot be…The Way Of Truth! All Protestant churches have roots back to, Martin Luther a “False Teacher”, a person who WAS AMONG the Church!

Frost One more proof.
Martin Luther said word for word…“Satan is the head of the Catholic Church”!
He must have believe that somehow, “Satan overpowered God, that Satan TOOK the Body of Jesus away from Jesus”!
Frost Do you understand… Martin Luther refused to believe the words of Jesus!!!
Fact is…“If you reject the words of Jesus, then you are rejecting Jesus.”

The words of Jesus: “I am with you ALWAYS to the very end of the Age”!
Luther was forced to believe the scriptures lie… that Jesus lied!
Luther believed: Jesus is NOT, was NOT, that he could NOT, be with his Catholic Church to the very end of the age!

Frost NO; You are wrong to think the Church is the Lutheran one… to believe this, you are also forced to reject the Prophesy and the scriptures as a lie!

Dogknox

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Possibly, I hope so, But what he did was take Church teaching that has been passed down from the Apostles from the beginning of time and tried to prove it untrue.

He used the Sins of the Priests to try to prove the teaching’s of the Church untrue. Indulgences for one thing. They are permitted today as they were in the beginning of time. But because he felt they were being abused he tried to make them out to be wrong, They are not wrong and are still permitted.

Now Jon just showed you what Luther taught, and exactly what the big problem with your Church and ours.

Jon said that justification is from faith alone, that is indeed a Luther teaching, and something we completely deny as Catholics. and Jon said that faith alone comes from the merit of Christ, and faith is the way we access grace. That is exactly what Luther taught and the CC disagrees with it 100%.

The CC teaches that justification is treated TOGETHER with grace, since grace itself is in itself a manifestation of the grace of the Holy Spirit.

That GRACE has the power to justify us, that is to cleanse us from our sins and to communicate to us the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus from our Baptism.

We are taught that all justification takes place IN and THROUGH Christ, by bringing his Son into the world to take on our human failure.

It is Through GRACE and the OUTPOURING of the HS that elevates us to the level at which we can become Children of God.

It is through this GRACE not faith that God gives to us that makes us FREELY want to do what is right. (Ezekiel 36:26) which is baptism our new heart.

Yes we are justified by Faith in Christ but faith alone before Grace is impossible.

It was finally agreed between 1999 where we became a closer understanding between the Lutherans and Catholics about this issure.

But as you can see faith without works cannot save you. Read James 2:14-18

It is by Grace that we acquire Faith, and by that faith that we can use free will from God to do good works for the right reason. But the more good works we do comes from GRACE not Faith. The more GRACE we are given the stronger our FAITH can become and the more good works we can achieve. So again as much as I love and respect Jon he is still running with Luthers thinking here, which separtes us.

The joing declaration confirms GOOD WORKS made possible by GRACE and the working of the Holy Spirit contribute to growth in grace so that righteousness that comes from God is preserved and communion is deepened ith Christ.

All of our actions works flow from our redemption in Christ and manifest the presence of the Holy Spirit within us. Our faith in Christ, our actions,all come from the Grace that is given to us from the Holy Spriit in our Baptism.

I’m sorry Rinnie, but I think you have an incorrect vision of Lutheran teaching when it comes to the role of faith in works in our justification. And in my reading of the JDDJ, it does not come to the conclusion that what Luther taught was incorrect or that what the Magisterium teaches as being wholly correct, but that both are completely compatible and should not be a road block to our unity with one another.

If you read Luther, and sorry but I am going to ask Jon to be the arbiter again, Luther sole teaching about faith alone was not that fact that works aren’t important or that the church was completely in err. The church of Luther’s time had changed works into an Old Testament understanding. That these works were necessary for salvation. Luther said that we are saved by Grace which is a free gift given to us by our most merciful Father. And that no amount of works that we could possibly ever do, no matter how large, or how great or how good, could ever earn us salvation. If any of our human works could save us, then Christ would be unnecessary and we could simply live under the Law. What Luther says about faith is exactly what James goes on to say. It’s not the works that save you, it’s the faith. A real faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ brings about works as a natural extension of the grace given to you. If your faith produces no works, it’s no real faith at all.

So let’s talk about indulgences. At this point, I think we need to have a better understanding of what you understand to be indulgences and what they were at the time of Luther. So if you can provide an explanation of your understanding of indulgences I think it would be helpful. And then in order to relate that to the time of Luther maybe you can let us know exactly what the going rate for an indulgence is. How much do the merits of Christ’s suffering on the cross go for in today’s market? And if indulgences are such an integral part of the Gospel and of the Early Apostolic church why is it that this practice is non-existent in the Orthodox church?

And what of Luther’s other articles? How do they deviate from what the Early Church and Early Church Father’s taught?

I’m a little confused exactly what you wanted Luther to do exactly. So you wanted him to stand up and say, “I see these abuses by a corrupt hierarchy that has veered away from the Gospel and the Apostles.” But when that same corrupt Curia says “No way you’re a heretic, recant or die.” What did you want him to do?

 

[Mikeoffaith]

Actually it couldn’t have. Because the Way that the Church is Sanctifed is through the Sacraments. The Pope is the current Vicar of Christ the Bishop of Rome is at the same time Peter.

If you read the N.T. we read in a number of the Gospels that Peter is always at the head of the group of the 12 Apostles.

In Matthew it is written that Jesus appointed Peter to be the Rock on which he would build his Church. It was Peter who God had given authority over his Church. It was Peter he elected as shepherd of his flock.

The Pope is who was chosen to walk in the footsteps of Peter. In his election as Bishop of Rome he assumes the responsibility as the Universal Pastor for the Church and takes on the awesome authority of the Vicar of Chrst to preside over the whole Church to oversee its activities and to build up the Church in faith and Love.

If the Church was NOT split in 2 then we would still all follow the Universal Teacher like we did when Luther was a Catholic Monk.

Ok so at this point you have now alienated all your Orthodox brethren and sisters as being part of the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic church, which is contrary to Roman Catholic teaching. And the church had already been split in two earlier in 1054. Oh and I don’t know why people keep saying this, Luther was NOT a Catholic MONK. The man was an Augustinian. They are not MONKS.

The Pope has never left the CC, Luther left the CC. If Luther would have stayed then there would be ONE CHURCH. But as you can see you are not called the Catholic Church led by the Vicar of Christ we are.

Again, if you are excommunicated you aren’t leaving, you are being thrown out. And how exactly did you expect Luther to stay with in the church? Should he have stayed in like poor Galileo?

 

[dogknox]

**Also what words did Luther reject? ** I agree that he did not understand them in the context of scripture, but what words did he reject?

While I agree he said that we are saved by faith alone is misunderstanding the word, do you feel that we are not saved by our Faith? I was taught that of course we can be saved by our faith, but its faith, and grace and works etc. If Luther just said we are saved by our faith and not used the word alone the Church would have probally agreed with him.

But Luther said it was faith ALONE without works, grace, etc. That is where he misinterpreted scripture. But to misunderstand and outright reject are 2 very different things would you not agree?

What Luther should have said is faith without Grace and works is fruitless. But while I agree that faith alone is not the truth, we are saved by our faith, that is part of our salvation, just not all of it. Or are you saying we can be saved by our works without faith, and without grace? Do you see what I am saying, it is a package deal.

But the bible does say we are not saved by our works alone either. Luther just did not teach it right is all. But he did not reject the scripture, he just did not have the power of the Holy Spirit to interpret it correctly.

Hello rinnie Thank you for your reply. You asked “What words did Judas reject?”
Jesus held up bread and said “This IS my body”! I point you to the word “IS”!
Also Judas rejected the TEACHING of God as a LIE! To be a believer you MUST believe the “WORDS” of Jesus >>AND<< you must believe Jesus is in fact “GOD”! The Jews do NOT believe Jesus is “GOD” they call Jesus** a MAN!** (below)
Here is the teaching…below!
John 6:45
It is written in the Prophets: ‘They will all be taught by God.’ Everyone who has heard the Father and learned from him comes to me.
46 No one has seen the Father except the one who is from God; only he has seen the Father.
47 Very truly I tell you, the one who believes has eternal life.
48 I am the bread of life.
49 Your ancestors ate the manna in the wilderness, yet they died.
50 But here is the bread that comes down from heaven, which anyone may eat and not die.
51 I am the living bread that came down from heaven. Whoever eats this bread will live forever. This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.”

52 Then the Jews began to argue sharply among themselves, “How can **this man **give us his flesh to eat?”

53 Jesus said to them, “Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.
55 For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink.
56 Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in them.
57 Just as the living Father sent me and I live because of the Father, so the one who feeds on me will live because of me.
58 This is the bread that came down from heaven. Your ancestors ate manna and died, but whoever feeds on this bread will live forever.”
59 He said this** while teaching **in the synagogue in Capernaum.

rinnie The Jews don’t believe Jesus is God and these disciples (below) don’t believe his ** WORDS**!
60 On hearing it, many of his disciples said, “This is a hard teaching. Who can accept it?”

LOOK there are people that believe the words & they believe Jesus is GOD!
68 Simon Peter answered him, “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.
69 We have come to believe and to know that you are the Holy One of God.”
LOOK what Jesus replies to Peter the first Catholic’s… The very next verse…
70 Then Jesus replied, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is a devil!”
71 (He meant Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, who, though one of the Twelve, was later to betray him.)

Judas REJECTED Jesus he does NOT believe Jesus is God or his TEACHINGS!
Satan took Judas as his Child because Judas rejected Jesus… He did NOT believe the bread is the Body of Jesus!

rinnie Look again at verse #47 (above) Judas does NOT have eternal life… he rejected the TEACHING of GOD as a LIE!!

 

[rinnie]

I’m sorry Rinnie, but I think you have an incorrect vision of Lutheran teaching when it comes to the role of faith in works in our justification. And in my reading of the JDDJ, it does not come to the conclusion that what Luther taught was incorrect or that what the Magisterium teaches as being wholly correct, but that both are completely compatible and should not be a road block to our unity with one another.

If you read Luther, and sorry but I am going to ask Jon to be the arbiter again, Luther sole teaching about faith alone was not that fact that works aren’t important or that the church was completely in err. The church of Luther’s time had changed works into an Old Testament understanding. That these works were necessary for salvation. Luther said that we are saved by Grace which is a free gift given to us by our most merciful Father. And that no amount of works that we could possibly ever do, no matter how large, or how great or how good, could ever earn us salvation. If any of our human works could save us, then Christ would be unnecessary and we could simply live under the Law. What Luther says about faith is exactly what James goes on to say. It’s not the works that save you, it’s the faith. A real faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ brings about works as a natural extension of the grace given to you. If your faith produces no works, it’s no real faith at all.

So let’s talk about indulgences. At this point, I think we need to have a better understanding of what you understand to be indulgences and what they were at the time of Luther. So if you can provide an explanation of your understanding of indulgences I think it would be helpful. And then in order to relate that to the time of Luther maybe you can let us know exactly what the going rate for an indulgence is. How much do the merits of Christ’s suffering on the cross go for in today’s market? And if indulgences are such an integral part of the Gospel and of the Early Apostolic church why is it that this practice is non-existent in the Orthodox church?

And what of Luther’s other articles? How do they deviate from what the Early Church and Early Church Father’s taught?

I’m a little confused exactly what you wanted Luther to do exactly. So you wanted him to stand up and say, “I see these abuses by a corrupt hierarchy that has veered away from the Gospel and the Apostles.” But when that same corrupt Curia says “No way you’re a heretic, recant or die.” What did you want him to do?

Okay Mike, I will try to get to you about indulgences, but If not tonight tommorow I promise. I have a meeting it is my last for the Church Council and I can’t miss. But I want to expain them in as simple terms as I can.

Now back to Luther and Faith ALONE, IT does not work. You and Jon continue to say, as Luther FAITH ALONE. Faith ALONE is not possible in any way form or shape,

The only way the word ALONE could be used with a word would be GRACE ALONE or JESUS CHRIST ALONE because the Grace is from Jesus. Faith is something that is given to us from the Free gift of Grace that we did not deserve. But without grace as I said faith is not possible. So faith alone does not exist, It is where Luther contradicted himself quite often.

I understand he said other things also, but he said FAITH ALONE, he was wrong. We cannot ever be saved by faith alone.

 

[rinnie]

To make it short, and I will explain this later, this is one form of an Indulgence.

Say I go now to Church and I pray alone in the Church for One hour. Now I can offer this up as an indulgence to my Dad who I believe is in heaven, and My Brother who I believe is in heaven but there can always be a chance they can be in Purgatory. We will get to that later also.

But my point is If I continue to pray for them and offer this up to them from me God will accept my prayers and that good that would have came to me, I can ask for God to give that extra grace to them. Its like the good of one can exchange this Good to another because it proves that the holiness of one, and honest good works, can profit others simply because the Good that someone can do, can out do the harm that sin of one could cause.

Like for example I am being asked to do something right now in my Church that is very demanding and will take alot of my time. I of course had to have been called to do this by the Powrer of the Holy Spirit.

But will I answer that call? I do not know yet. Only God knows the answer to that. But if I can get enough Grace from God to feel in my heart to figure out what he is truly asking of me, and I answer God, this can be extra Grace that is given to me in exchange. Not for the work I will do or accomplish, but because of the Grace that God has given me, and my free will to us that free gift. In turn I can ask God to offer up some of the good works that I do in his name for him, and my Brother and my Dad can kind of reap the reward.

Mind you God knows WHY I am doing this, because he is asking me too, But my free will is to do it because his grace is leading me there, But by taking this time, and accomplishing what he is asking of me, I am rewarded with extra grace, And when you take time out for God because you know you should even though its difficult at times, you can become more righteous in his eyes. And when you are in that state he will accept your prayers and answer them for you.

So while I am not doing this simply for an indulgence, I can obtain one.

So when I confess my sins, I am forgiven but you still need to come to peace with those sins. It is through works of devotion, penance, and charity that this happens. Although I am already forgven there is still temporal punishment due for the sins that have been remitted. That is a way of using an indulgece for myself. I can actually rid myself of the sin also from good works provided by Gods grace. (Or in my words, God keeps you so busy being Good, and doing good, it keeps you out of trouble, and can actually rid you of one of your sins while doing his work. Maybe a habit that was hard to break was actually broken at this time that you did not have to do the habit, or sin, etc.)

 

[JonNC]

Okay Mike, I will try to get to you about indulgences, but If not tonight tommorow I promise. I have a meeting it is my last for the Church Council and I can’t miss. But I want to expain them in as simple terms as I can.

Now back to Luther and Faith ALONE, IT does not work. You and Jon continue to say, as Luther FAITH ALONE. Faith ALONE is not possible in any way form or shape,

The only way the word ALONE could be used with a word would be GRACE ALONE or JESUS CHRIST ALONE because the Grace is from Jesus. Faith is something that is given to us from the Free gift of Grace that we did not deserve. But without grace as I said faith is not possible. So faith alone does not exist, It is where Luther contradicted himself quite often.

I understand he said other things also, but he said FAITH ALONE, he was wrong. We cannot ever be saved by faith alone.

Faith alone, rinnie, is never an exclusion of Grace, but is in fact a recognition of Grace. Faith alone refers to the fact that we come to justification only by Grace through faith in Christ. We don’t come to Grace by our actions or works, as they are like filthy rags.
Sola fide was simply a way of rejecting the abuses of the time, that seemed to teach, and I would contend against historic apostolic teaching, that through certain actions we could win for ourselves salvation.
Does that exclude works? No!! Works are what Christ commands us to do for our neighbors, in response to grace. Our neighbors need our works, not God. Our works don’t save us, but grace through faith in Christ does. And a living saving faith must obey Christ’s commands.
Failure to do the works Christ sets for us to do is sin, and repeated, unrepented sin separates us from grace - that is why we have confessions/Holy Absolution. Faith without works is dead, and a dead faith cannot save.

Mike mentioned the JDDJ, which says:

14.The Lutheran churches and the Roman Catholic Church have together listened to the good news proclaimed in Holy Scripture. This common listening, together with the theological conversations of recent years, has led to a shared understanding of justification. This encompasses a consensus in the basic truths; the differing explications in particular statements are compatible with it.

15.In faith we together hold the conviction that justification is the work of the triune God. The Father sent his Son into the world to save sinners. The foundation and presupposition of justification is the incarnation, death, and resurrection of Christ. Justification thus means that Christ himself is our righteousness, in which we share through the Holy Spirit in accord with the will of the Father. Together we confess: By grace alone, in faith in Christ’s saving work and not because of any merit on our part, we are accepted by God and receive the Holy Spirit, who renews our hearts while equipping and calling us to good works.[11]

16.All people are called by God to salvation in Christ. Through Christ alone are we justified, when we receive this salvation in faith. Faith is itself God’s gift through the Holy Spirit who works through word and sacrament in the community of believers and who, at the same time, leads believers into that renewal of life which God will bring to completion in eternal life.

17.We also share the conviction that the message of justification directs us in a special way towards the heart of the New Testament witness to God’s saving action in Christ: it tells us that as sinners our new life is solely due to the forgiving and renewing mercy that God imparts as a gift and we receive in faith, and never can merit in any way.

Three messages are clear:

1. that between Catholics and Lutherans, there is a basic consensus on the doctrine of justification
2. That it is by grace through faith in Christ that our justification is possbile, and it is grace that saves, not our own merit.
3. that we are called to obey His commands to do the good works He has prepared before us.

Jon