the lumberjack Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I'm neither of those gentlemen (I think they're guys????)... I'm a Protestant Monster...or at least thats what I've been called around these parts...
the lumberjack Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 cmom...I agree with mulls. and to answer your question, what would Luther have said when asked that same question? I think he would've said,"I'd LIKE to talk, but there's just TOO much wrong." and now...I think he'd just run in horror of whats happened. eg Fatima.
ironmonk Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 [quote name='the lumberjack' date='Nov 3 2004, 04:27 PM'] cmom...I agree with mulls. and to answer your question, what would Luther have said when asked that same question? I think he would've said,"I'd LIKE to talk, but there's just TOO much wrong." and now...I think he'd just run in horror of whats happened. eg Fatima. [/quote] Lumber, You just prove that you don't know anything about Fatima. It's a shame you must base your "faith" on bashing ours. Why do you think that is? Especially seeing that every prot faith is an offshot of ours... hmmm.... Acts 20:29-30. [b] Timoty 3:14 [/b] But you, [b][u]remain faithful [/u][/b]to what you have learned and believed, [u][b]because you know from whom you learned it[/b][/u], Ok... Who did I learn (1) if from? Who did they learn (2) it from? Who did they learn (3) it from? And who did they learn (4) it from? and so on.... until I get to the first century. That is who I should listen to. "We are compelled to concede to the Papists that they have the Word of God, that we received it from them, and that without them we should have no knowledge of it at all." ~ Martin Luther, Commentary on St. John Hmmm... Where did Luther learn about Christ? Hmmm... Luther was a Catholic Priest.... what does that mean since we are to remain faithful to what we have learned because from whom we learned it? Was Luther faithful to what he learned? Hmmm... Calvin... Where did Calvin learn of Christ? Hmmm... His father worked as a lay administrator in the service of the local bishop, sent him to the University of Paris in 1523 to be educated for the priesthood but later decided that he should be a lawyer.... hmmm.... So Calvin also learned about Christ from the Catholic Church, but became a lawyer? Then started a religion? Sounds like a money making scam to me. "From whom did he learn it?" Was Calvin Faithful to what he learned? [b]1 Corin 11:2[/b] I praise you because you remember me in everything and hold fast to the traditions, just as I handed them on to you. What traditions have been handed on? Gotta go back to 33 AD and start there to know. [b]St. Matt 16:18[/b] "And so I say to you, you are Peter (Kephas), and upon this rock (Kephas) I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevail against it." [b]19 [/b]I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." [b]John 21:15 [/b] When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord, you know that I love you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." Christ said that the Church was built on Peter and would never be overcome. This makes our job a little easier because we can cross off all churches that don't claim that they were built on Peter. Where does that leave us? Learn to study and think. God Bless, ironmonk
thessalonian Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 e.g. Fatima, Yes, the horror of it all. The mother of our lord asking people to pray, reflecting on her son's life, fast, repent, and do penance for the sins of the world. Horror of horrors what tangled webs we weave. We certainly wouldn't want to reflect on her son's life and all now would we. Is sarcasm allowed on this board? I got booted off another one for that. Blessings
Justified Saint Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 [quote]and now...I think he'd just run in horror of whats happened.[/quote] You're telling me. He would be entirely disgusted at how far Protestantism has departed from orthodoxy. But this is inevitable as long as private judgement is the rule of thumb which was a force that Luther quite ignorantly unleashed. If here today, Luther would only find the comfort of the gospel in the very same Catholic Church he helped to reform.
Balthazor Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 I think that if Luther were alive today he would have remained or returned to the Catholic Church. Why you ask? Because he would have found the internet and eventually find Phatmass and then Ironmonk and the rest of the people on this forum would show him the light. What a happy thought.
mulls Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 [quote]He would be entirely disgusted at how far Protestantism has departed from orthodoxy.[/quote] I agree with that. [quote]If here today, Luther would only find the comfort of the gospel in the very same Catholic Church he helped to reform.[/quote] I disagree with that.
the lumberjack Posted November 3, 2004 Posted November 3, 2004 [quote name='Justified Saint' date='Nov 3 2004, 02:50 PM'] You're telling me. He would be entirely disgusted at how far Protestantism has departed from orthodoxy. But this is inevitable as long as private judgement is the rule of thumb which was a force that Luther quite ignorantly unleashed. If here today, Luther would only find the comfort of the gospel in the very same Catholic Church he helped to reform. [/quote] the church he helped reform? is this why Luther spent the rest of his life in anguish? ------------ and cmom, I can think very well, and am taught by strong Brothers in Christ. I do not base my faith off bashing anyone else's. if you follow Christ, good. in following Christ, I praise only the Triune God, no one or thing else...in prayer, adoration, supplication, whatever.... Christ had a relationship with the Father, which I do as well, thru Him. the apostles? they ONLY PRAYED to Christ...so shall I. I need not the intercession of anyone else that MIGHT or MIGHT NOT be in Heaven...
Guest JeffCR07 Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 [quote]I think he'd just run in horror of whats happened.[/quote] It is interesting for me to consider the difference between Martin Luther and St. Francis of Assisi. Both lived in times of abuse and corruption. In fact, many scholars of Church history would argue that the Church of Francis' time was even more full of abuses than that of Luthers. The reason I bring this up is because it seems to me that the fundamental difference between the two is that St. Francis refused to run from the Church
ICTHUS Posted November 4, 2004 Author Posted November 4, 2004 [quote name='thessalonian' date='Oct 29 2004, 08:14 AM'] As for your point about the Gospel they preach, I will grant you a half a point against the preachers themselves. Many today preach a watered down Gospel. Sin is rarely mentioned in many of the parishes. Some even embrace homosexuality. We are told in the scriptures that there will be false teachers among us and that men will be decieved by them. Peter's letters I believe as well as the book of Acts. It is difficult enough for men to come to a true knowledge of Christ when the Gospel is preached well for we are told that even then some of the seed will fall on rocky ground and not even begin to grow while some will produce shallow Christians who sprout up and die. Then the false teachers will take some, being those seeds which sprouted but were chocked out by the weeds. So even if the Gospel is preached well, which it is in many parishes and by many priests in the Catholic Church these things will happen. So I will grant you a point for saying the Gospel must be preached with fidelity to the truth, saying the hard things, but I cannot grant you a point for saying that because people are led astray by the false teachers that this is some sort of reflection or apologetic arguement against the Catholic Church. Biblically it just doesn't hold. There were plenty of problems in the early Church with the very converts that Paul and the rest of the Apostles preached to. Read 1 Cor 5,6 and Galatians, and Revelations 2 & 3. It seems likely that the people spoken of here were holding on to false ideologies and sinful behavior of their past as well. Now was there something wrong with the Gospel that the Apostles preached because of the sinful behavior and the scandal. No. It was just the seeds falling on various types of soil and withering in the heat of daily life and temptation and the fallen nature of man. For those false teachers or the ones that water down the faith and avoid saying the hard things, Jerimiah 3 and 33 tell us that those teachers will recieve their due. Ezekiel 3:17-19 "Son of man, I have appointed you a watchman to the house of Israel; whenever you hear a word from My mouth, warn them from Me. "When I say to the wicked, 'You will surely die,' and you do not warn him or speak out to warn the wicked from his wicked way that he may live, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand. "Yet if you have warned the wicked and he does not turn from his wickedness or from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but you have delivered yourself. Blessings [/quote] I still don't agree. But this takes us to the matter of soteriology - whose gospel is correct? I would hold that the reason why there are so many who do not believe is that Rome actually deems the true gospel to be heresy and preaches a 'gospel' which is really not the Gospel at all, for it is devoid of the sovereign, foreknowing, predestining, calling by grace alone, justifying by the imputation of Christ's righteousness by faith alone, and glorifying, so that the saints may reflect the glory of God alone, mercy of God. Very truly, I agree with you that Rome as a whole waters down the Gospel and preaches falsehoods, which is why Mexico and other such places are dens of satanic idolatry. It is not just some preachers - it is [i]all[/i] preachers who preach the Church of Rome's doctrine of salvation by works with any consistency. The only way a Roman Catholic may be saved is if they hold the doctrines of the Roman Church inconsistently. If they hold them consistently, they believe in salvation by works - another gospel.
ICTHUS Posted November 4, 2004 Author Posted November 4, 2004 [quote name='Justified Saint' date='Nov 1 2004, 05:13 PM'] Those are your words, not ours - we have called it Protestantism. Given the fractious nature of Protestantism, I guess there would be no difficulty in classifying it as other religions and cults. It turns out that ICTHUS has more or less relented on this point. He has been forced to defend classical, reformed, conservative Protestantism, whatever that is, against the thousands of other kinds of Protestantism. Talk about mixing truth, eh? [/quote] Saint, you made the charge that Luther anathematized reason. I clarified the one statement you were no doubt referring to about 'beaver dam whore reason'. That was the statement I was asking you to respond to. Ought not reason - even the reason of the mind of a regenerate man- to be held captive by the Word of God?
Justified Saint Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 [quote]the church he helped reform? is this why Luther spent the rest of his life in anguish?[/quote] Anguish from his destructiveness and his rebellion against the Catholic Church.
Justified Saint Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 [quote]Ought not reason - even the reason of the mind of a regenerate man- to be held captive by the Word of God?[/quote] You would have to tell me what you mean by "held captive by the Word of God", but I suspect you are uttering absurdities. You said before that people are vain and foolish when they try to reason the non-existence of God, but what is the case when they reason His existence?
Justified Saint Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 [quote]The only way a Roman Catholic may be saved is if they hold the doctrines of the Roman Church inconsistently. If they hold them consistently, they believe in salvation by works - another gospel. [/quote] This is a continued mischaracterization that you persist in despite our repeated corrections of your errors. I suspect their is no harm done since nobody would be fooled by your strawmen.
the lumberjack Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 whats funny to me is that when you can't seem able to cope with something that is posted, the VERY easy out is to run around like a loon yelling, [font="Impact"][color=green]"STRAWMAN STRAWMAN!!!! WOOOOOOWOOOOOOOOWOOOOOOOWOOWOOOOOOO!!!![/color][/font] and thus, the point is dimissed, simply because you say we know nothing. and thus, it stands, the Catholic Church's word versus God's word. and thus, I stand with God. In Christ, the dumb one
Justified Saint Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Well, I stand corrected. [b]Most[/b] everyone would not be fooled.
God Conquers Posted November 4, 2004 Posted November 4, 2004 Well... truthfully the statement was not a straw man. It was a falsity.
yiannii Posted November 5, 2004 Posted November 5, 2004 LOL as soon as I read the title of this post I knew that it was going to be started by a schismatic.....LOL It is sooooo predictable!
Recommended Posts