Why Luther rejected James- it refuted his faith alone doctrine

Nic said:
Could be, but in the meantime your position will be regarded as error until you defend it with satisfaction.
In history, there's this book called the Book of Harmony or Concord. No less than 20 articles of faith were put forth in this collection to demonstrate the historical precedence in light of church history. In other words, Luther like-minded churchmen didn't create new beliefs outside of the faith already accepted as the faith once given to the saints. I defy you to demonstrate otherwise.
Click to expand...
That would be like me telling you to read the CCC. ? :cautious:
 
Arch Stanton said:
That would be like me telling you to read the CCC. ? :cautious:
Click to expand...
No, not at all. The twenty articles were historically documented to demonstrate their validity. Your catechism has novel teaching in it. Again this refers back to the Roman Catholic innovation of being wounded in sin versus being dead in sin. Just more of the same.
 
Arch Stanton said:
It is man-made.... you were warned about this [Gal 1:8, Acts 20:29, Mt 7:15, Eph 4:14]
Click to expand...
Now, THIS is THIS:

the-pot-calling-the-kettle-black.png
 
Arch Stanton said:
It is man-made.... you were warned about this [Gal 1:8, Acts 20:29, Mt 7:15, Eph 4:14]
Click to expand...
You're simply wrong on what I offered. Unless you like to assert I follow my Lutheran pastor all the way back to the Book of Concord as we follow those who had gone before in following Christ.
On your end however, you give yourself a pass on what you falsely accuse others of doing.
Let me assist you in arriving at the articles I referenced for your convenience.

Chief Articles of Faith

Nic
 
Arch Stanton said:
Totally agree!!! I thank The Lord for His promises --

Signed,
Pillar of Truth
Wisdom of God made known through the Church.
Whatever you bind....
The gates of the netherworld shall not prevail
Whoever listens to you, listens to ME
The Spirit of truth will guide you to all truth
I am with you always
Click to expand...
You do know that Rome was at best a mission congregation begun by unknown Christians when these things were said and that none of them were said to it, right?

Those at Rome were learning from Moses and the prophets and the occasional evangelist, in other words, they were learning from the church. Those at Rome had and have nothing substantive and true to add to the faith once delivered to the saints.
 
Arch Stanton said:
not at all, I saw it -- but I am on the LUTHERAN board ;) why not start with authority that can be trusted?
Click to expand...
It is because you are on the Lutheran board that you are receiving replies based on what Scripture says rather than the outright story telling of the Roman church.

The authority that can be trusted is the same one that those at Rome had to trust, that is, the church, Moses, et al.
 
Arch Stanton said:
The warning still stands! You follow man from the 16th century... Oh My!!! :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I follow Jesus Christ, oh, my! So did that 16th century fellow you so despise! He followed Jesus Christ, instead of your lying, power-hungry, false doctrine-teaching pope and cardinals!

Oh, my!
 
BJ Bear said:
It is because you are on the Lutheran board that you are receiving replies based on what Scripture says rather than the outright story telling of the Roman church.

The authority that can be trusted is the same one that those at Rome had to trust, that is, the church, Moses, et al.
Click to expand...
The same thing happens on the Catholic board. We non-Catholics refute what they write using Scripture. But the Catholics cannot back up their false teachings using Scripture, but must resort to quoting the ECFs, or their CCC.

Some also tell lies about Luther, since the truth makes them look bad. They claim he left their church to start his own church, which is totally false. He was excommunicated for refusing to reject the truth he found in the Bible, and refusing to blindly follow the pope and his minions in their error, and kowtow to their authority. That took great courage, to face the most powerful man on earth at that time, but he did, and lived to tell about it, unlike Hus.
 
Bonnie said:
Some also tell lies about Luther, since the truth makes them look bad. They claim he left their church to start his own church, which is totally false. He was excommunicated for refusing to reject the truth he found in the Bible, and refusing to blindly follow the pope and his minions in their error, and kowtow to their authority. That took great courage, to face the most powerful man on earth at that time, but he did, and lived to tell about it, unlike Hus.
Click to expand...
Warren H. Carroll - The Cleaving of Christendom, 1517-1661: A History of Christendom [vol 4]
 
BJ Bear said:
It is because you are on the Lutheran board that you are receiving replies based on what Scripture says rather than the outright story telling of the Roman church.
Click to expand...
Come on BJ, you are better than that! [Including your :ROFLMAO: on post 206] -- Why laugh at the obvious. It would be like someone rejecting the fact that Ted Williams was a Red Sox.
BJ Bear said:
The authority that can be trusted is the same one that those at Rome had to trust, that is, the church, Moses, et al.
Click to expand...
THE CHURCH is correct... Nazarene, The Way, Christian, Catholic [ONE Church, ONE faith]
 
Arch Stanton said:
Come on BJ, you are better than that! [Including your :ROFLMAO: on post 206] -- Why laugh at the obvious. It would be like someone rejecting the fact that Ted Williams was a Red Sox.
Click to expand...
I should have provided more detail.It was a laugh at the incompetence and error of Augustine with regard to the topic of the thread and the willingness of others to blindly follow him in those errors.

The cat out of the bag is the necessarily three sided disagreement on justification between the Evangelicals, the Catholics, and the Reformed.

As a newbie some older friends+ who were Catholic were excited to hear that I was visiting churches and investigating Christianity. They congratulated me until they heard I was thinking about hanging out with the Lutherans.

They would bicker among themselves about Jesuits vs another order (I don't remember the terms they used.), but they could agree on anything is better than Lutheran. The one who was a Jesuit shared a history text that characterized Calvin and Wesley as great evangelists with other positive characteristics, but Luther was a demon eyed heretic, drunkard, etc.

This surprised me since I knew almost nothing about what they would call church history. What I did know is that the Lutherans were the only ones that weren't telling me stories. They were the only ones who when they recognized my scriptural, cultural, and historical ignorance told me to read the Bible and come back and tell them what it says.

They were also the only ones who told me you can't know what Scripture means until you know what Scripture actually says.
Arch Stanton said:
THE CHURCH is correct... Nazarene, The Way, Christian, Catholic [ONE Church, ONE faith]
Click to expand...
If that is not an equivocation on terms like one church, one faith, etc., then the claim of the Roman Catholic church, and that of the other pretenders, of being the one church, one faith, etc., which Christ founded is categorically false. Otherwise, their so-called one faith of the one church of the one God would would not deviate from what Scripture says and means from Genesis through Revelation about the person and work of Christ for all men.
 
Arch Stanton said:
I wouldn't call Peter and Paul unknown.
Click to expand...
Peter and Paul did not establish or found the one church of the one God at Rome. That occurred more than a century before the LORD was incarnate when a delegation from Israel brought the one faith of the one Lord God to Rome. It was supplemented by anonymous Christians (A change in language doesn't signal a change in faith.) traveling to and from Rome during the passion of the Christ.

Paul later wrote of the common faith to an established assembly of the saints at Rome with no reference or allusion to Peter.
 
BJ Bear said:
I should have provided more detail.It was a laugh at the incompetence and error of Augustine with regard to the topic of the thread and the willingness of others to blindly follow him in those errors.

The cat out of the bag is the necessarily three sided disagreement on justification between the Evangelicals, the Catholics, and the Reformed.

As a newbie some older friends+ who were Catholic were excited to hear that I was visiting churches and investigating Christianity. They congratulated me until they heard I was thinking about hanging out with the Lutherans.

They would bicker among themselves about Jesuits vs another order (I don't remember the terms they used.), but they could agree on anything is better than Lutheran. The one who was a Jesuit shared a history text that characterized Calvin and Wesley as great evangelists with other positive characteristics, but Luther was a demon eyed heretic, drunkard, etc.

This surprised me since I knew almost nothing about what they would call church history. What I did know is that the Lutherans were the only ones that weren't telling me stories. They were the only ones who when they recognized my scriptural, cultural, and historical ignorance told me to read the Bible and come back and tell them what it says.

They were also the only ones who told me you can't know what Scripture means until you know what Scripture actually says.

If that is not an equivocation on terms like one church, one faith, etc., then the claim of the Roman Catholic church, and that of the other pretenders, of being the one church, one faith, etc., which Christ founded is categorically false. Otherwise, their so-called one faith of the one church of the one God would would not deviate from what Scripture says and means from Genesis through Revelation about the person and work of Christ for all men.
Click to expand...
I am not surprised the Lutherans sent you to the Bible, since we emphasize it so much. This Lutheran has suggested to
others on other boards just to tead the Bible as if they were reading it for the first time. To use your words: "As if it had something to say to you." I don't tell anyone to read Luther's Large Catechism, or the Book of Concord--just the Bible.

That is what I have seen on the RCC board, as well--Luther is caricaturized by most Catholics on that board as practically the devil Incarnate, a rebellious hetetic--yet the Catholic hymnal has not one, but TWO of Luther's hymns in it, including the one that has been called the "Battle Hymn of the Reformation"--"A Mighty Fortress"!--and "From Heaven Above."

Imagine! The RCC"s hymnal having a rebellious heretic's hymns in it....horrors!?

Oh, the irony!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top