Posted on 02/07/2015 9:54:25 AM PST by RnMomof7
Second ‘source’ The requested URL /bstanley/luther.htm was not found on this server.
Not located on the server, but located here:
EWTN Re History of Protestants.
Oh yeah, EWTN for all the unbiased news about Protestants.
The sourcing and composition of the post requires that the poster be Hereby DENIED an Indulgence normally given for the posting of RCC propaganda. Reason: Even dumb protestants could figure out the links. ByDir Cardinal Vaselli Chief Propagandist Vatican.
Thanks. They just toss stuff out there, hoping people will not look it up and just take their word for fact. They should know better by now.
John 20:7 And the napkin, that was about his head, not lying with the linen clothes, but wrapped together in a place by itself. Yet Catholics go apoplectic if someone changes "by itself" to "alone". Petty anyone?
Why bother? It’s the Protestant along with the Muslim-in-chief who sit on their high horses condemning the Catholic Church for so called atrocities that have been committed against the poor Muslims in the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.
“I will not serve! Came out of the depravity of Luther. He could have been a great Saint in reforming the Catholic Church as did St. Francis of Assisi, But no, he rebelled and said “I will not serve and changed Bible verses to justify and serve his own purposes. (Judas).
Henry the VIII, I will not serve! Which introduced divorce and later Birth Control.
So tell me, who destroyed the FAMILY?
“I will not serve!”
It’s the Catholic who will have to explain to their fallen away brothers that there will be no Rapture. It will be the Catholic who will have to explain to their fallen away brothers that it’s not the end of the world.
It will be in Humility and Love that the Catholic will embrace with Love and Mercy their lost brothers and sisters who were deceived by the Ant-Christ because of their disobedience. “I Will Not Serve.”
St. Michael, “Who Is Like Unto God?”
I’m sorry, but you justify unto hate. For you are the rebellions ones.
You prefer not to look back to the Fathers of the Church but prefer the easy way out which is wide and met with no resistance.
I pity you.
Wait...what? Are you saying that Catholics would chastise us or using a site biased against Catholics then hypocritically use a site biased against Protestants? How can this be? Surely they would have petitioned to have such a biased site banned from being used.
I am very familiar with Romans. ALL of it.
*Proof texting*???
Now THAT'S funny coming from a Catholic. If you object to proof texting, then there's a whole bunch of random Scripture verses that Catholicism that it hangs its hat on that I'd like to discuss.
The whole purpose of Romans was to contradict the idea that Christians were still bound to the Mosaic law.
Yes.
To try to apply what he is saying to a discussion of the relationship between faith and obedience to the moral law is to take Paul completely out of context.
And you know that how? Is that your interpretation of the passage?
For even in Romans Paul states that his mission is to bring about the obedience of faith (Romans 1:5).
OK.
Salvation is more than just an intellectual assent to the saving work of Jesus Christ.
True, but it happens before works. One is saved first, then produces the works to demonstrate it.
But the righteousness we have is the righteousness of Christ that has been credited to our account by faith in Him.
Rnmom states it very well here.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3254531/posts?page=336#336
"I can say with confidence I am saved now ... I am working out that salvation as God wills.. and on the day of my death I will stand Before Christ clothed in His righteousness .. not my own ... "
and here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3254976/posts?page=15#15
" But I know with certainty that as I breath my last breath I will be in His presence wearing His robe of righteousness.. "
We enter heaven clothed in HIS righteousness, not our own. Our righteous deeds, done as the out flowing of our faith are for the praise and glory of God and we will be rewarded for faithful obedience but they do NOT contribute to our salvation because OUR righteous deeds are as filthy rags in God's sight.
Well, now that that’s been thoroughly discussed (after some 45 posts), how about discussing the Five Remonstances of Arminius and the Five Points of Calvinism as set forth in reply by the Synod of Dordt?
That should keep us off the streets for a while!
It’s the Protestant along with the Muslim-in-chief who sit on their high horses condemning the Catholic Church for so called atrocities that have been committed against the poor Muslims in the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.
What prots have ever condemned the Catholic church for so-called atrocities against the muslims?
And as far as calling them *so-called* atrocities, do you not consider burning someone at the stake with pages from the Bible as fuel an atrocity?
Do Catholics not think that that would qualify?
“I will not serve! Came out of the depravity of Luther. He could have been a great Saint in reforming the Catholic Church as did St. Francis of Assisi, But no, he rebelled and said “I will not serve and changed Bible verses to justify and serve his own purposes. (Judas).
The Catholic church ex-communicated him.
And did he ever say *I will not serve*? Can you point to the quote?
We look to Jesus. No need to look to man.
But I will provide the link: Luther Added The Word "Alone" to Romans 3:28?
What out FRoman Catholic FRiend Salvation didn't provide, for whatever reason is the rest of the article, which actually refutes the above FRoman Catholic Polemic. Here is what you will find regarding Luther and adding the word "alone:" The Roman Catholic writer Joseph A. Fitzmyer points out that Luther was not the only one to translate Romans 3:28 with the word “alone:”
At 3:28 Luther introduced the adv. “only” into his translation of Romans (1522), “alleyn durch den Glauben” (WAusg 7.38); cf. Aus der Bibel 1546, “alleine durch den Glauben” (WAusg, DB 7.39); also 7.3-27 (Pref. to the Epistle). See further his Sendbrief vom Dolmetschen, of 8 Sept. 1530 (WAusg 30.2 [1909], 627-49; “On Translating: An Open Letter” [LuthW 35.175-202]). Although “alleyn/alleine” finds no corresponding adverb in the Greek text, two of the points that Luther made in his defense of the added adverb were that it was demanded by the context and that sola was used in the theological tradition before him.What? All of those early "Catholics" held to faith alone?!?Robert Bellarmine listed eight earlier authors who used sola (Disputatio de controversiis: De justificatione 1.25 [Naples: G. Giuliano, 1856], 4.501-3):
Origen, Commentarius in Ep. ad Romanos, cap. 3 (PG 14.952).
Hilary, Commentarius in Matthaeum 8:6 (PL 9.961).
Basil, Hom. de humilitate 20.3 (PG 31.529C).
Ambrosiaster, In Ep. ad Romanos 3.24 (CSEL 81.1.119): “sola fide justificati sunt dono Dei,” through faith alone they have been justified by a gift of God; 4.5 (CSEL 81.1.130).
John Chrysostom, Hom. in Ep. ad Titum 3.3 (PG 62.679 [not in Greek text]).
Cyril of Alexandria, In Joannis Evangelium 10.15.7 (PG 74.368 [but alludes to Jas 2:19]).
Bernard, In Canticum serm. 22.8 (PL 183.881): “solam justificatur per fidem,” is justified by faith alone.
Theophylact, Expositio in ep. ad Galatas 3.12-13 (PG 124.988).
To these eight Lyonnet added two others (Quaestiones, 114-18):
Theodoret, Affectionum curatio 7 (PG 93.100; ed. J. Raeder [Teubner], 189.20-24).
Thomas Aquinas, Expositio in Ep. I ad Timotheum cap. 1, lect. 3 (Parma ed., 13.588): “Non est ergo in eis [moralibus et caeremonialibus legis] spes iustificationis, sed in sola fide, Rom. 3:28: Arbitramur justificari hominem per fidem, sine operibus legis” (Therefore the hope of justification is not found in them [the moral and ceremonial requirements of the law], but in faith alone, Rom 3:28: We consider a human being to be justified by faith, without the works of the law). Cf. In ep. ad Romanos 4.1 (Parma ed., 13.42a): “reputabitur fides eius, scilicet sola sine operibus exterioribus, ad iustitiam”; In ep. ad Galatas 2.4 (Parma ed., 13.397b): “solum ex fide Christi” [Opera 20.437, b41]).
See further:
Theodore of Mopsuestia, In ep. ad Galatas (ed. H. B. Swete), 1.31.15.
Marius Victorinus (ep. Pauli ad Galatas (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15-16: “Ipsa enim fides sola iustificationem dat-et sanctificationem” (For faith itself alone gives justification and sanctification); In ep. Pauli Ephesios (ed. A. Locher), ad 2.15: “Sed sola fides in Christum nobis salus est” (But only faith in Christ is salvation for us).
Augustine, De fide et operibus, 22.40 (CSEL 41.84-85): “licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intellegatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur” (Although it can be said that God’s commandments pertain to faith alone, if it is not dead [faith], but rather understood as that live faith, which works through love”). Migne Latin Text: Venire quippe debet etiam illud in mentem, quod scriptum est, In hoc cognoscimus eum, si mandata ejus servemus. Qui dicit, Quia cognovi eum, et mandata ejus non servat, mendax est, et in hoc veritas non est (I Joan. II, 3, 4). Et ne quisquam existimet mandata ejus ad solam fidem pertinere: quanquam dicere hoc nullus est ausus, praesertim quia mandata dixit, quae ne multitudine cogitationem spargerent [Note: [Col. 0223] Sic Mss. Editi vero, cogitationes parerent.], In illis duobus tota Lex pendet et Prophetae (Matth. XXII, 40): licet recte dici possit ad solam fidem pertinere Dei mandata, si non mortua, sed viva illa intelligatur fides, quae per dilectionem operatur; tamen postea Joannes ipse aperuit quid diceret, cum ait: Hoc est mandatum ejus, ut credamus nomini Filii ejus Jesu Christi, et diligamns invicem (I Joan. III, 23) See De fide et operibus, Cap. XXII, §40, PL 40:223.
Out of curiosity Salvation, why did you not post the entity of this article, but just the part about where the author is laying out the Catholic Polemic and not the response?
I know, I'm at a loss to explain it as well. Perhaps a Papal mis-translation on the laity level. You never know about these tolerant Catholics.
Another great Catholic historian in the making. LOL.
Many people are not aware that we are aware that Luther was neither alone in adding "alone," nor in his exclusion of certain books re the canon.
Actually, he proclaimed himself to be the beginning and the end of Scripture proves he believed himself to be the authority of at least hundreds of years of the Catholic Church. Disregarding the Fathers and Doctors of the Church. “HE knew better, don’tcha know?
The very fact that this man in his disobedience and changing the scripture to suit his prideful beliefs, cries out to the world his acclamation of “I will not serve.”
Amen!
And where's the source for that claim, too?
You can provide the link along with the one from the other quote you claimed he made.
The very fact that this man in his disobedience and changing the scripture to suit his prideful beliefs, cries out to the world his acclamation of “I will not serve.”
Where are those words found?
And he would not serve whom? Or what?
His disobedience to whom or what?
And his objection to the abuse of indulgences? Is that without merit?
Between the potty mouth and these fanciful proclamations it might be better for you to stick to the Caucus'ed threads.
Actually, he proclaimed himself to be the beginning and the end of Scripture
Seriously, these threads require proofs, not polemics. You seem over-wrought.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.