Posted on 06/01/2007 2:28:41 PM PDT by Gamecock
People ignore the fact that as Luther got older, he did get increasingly frustrated with people’s unbelief. Initially after his break from Rome, he did make outreaches to the Jews in his area. I am sure the Jews, after such wonderful treatment by Christians, were skeptical of Luther (probably any Christian at that time) and his results with them (in terms of them accepting the Gospel/Christianity) was very poor. His initial writings exhorted fellow Christians to bring the Gospel to the Jews.
After 20+ years of very little success, with them, and other groups he wrote some very depressing, bitter, un-Luther-like things about them. My own belief is that he took this personally and was lashing out at others because he couldn’t convince them of the truth. Here we see the human being that is Luther, and his failings. We don’t disguise the fact Luther was human and prone to error. We acknowledge the error and simply say, this is something we as Lutherans do not stand by or agree with.
And from what I have read about Luther’s rants against Jews, his fellow Germans, etc, it appears he reserved the worst and harshest of his criticisms to his fellow Germans.
Apparently, you have to “evangelize” by posting Catholic bashing sites.
I guess using your own reformed theology is a loser. I notice that no one bothers to read the threads regarding Calvin et al. You get a few hits from your own, but rarely from others. The views are much fewer too.
From the site:
“Many of us used to be Roman Catholics and just about all of us likely spend more time researching and reading ‘official’ RCC documents and church history than the vast majority of the Catholic faithful. When we expose the foolishness of what they have been taught, many Catholics are shocked and go into denial because they had no idea of the sad truth behind the false dogma and doctrines of the Roman church.
On this page are links to letters written by people who used to be Roman Catholics. Read in their own words what led them to renounce paganism and take Christ’s offered hand.”
Poor people. Satan got into their thoughts. Can happen to the best of us if we aren’t careful.
Regarding Mary. She was the mother of Jesus, the Word made flesh, the second person of the Trinity. Jesus was either God or not, I believe He was. Mary was the mother of the second person of the Trinity.
Keep up your journey and you will end up home.
Wrong...there are many truth claims, but only with one truth. Truth is “that which corresponds with reality.” There is only one truth because there is only one reality!
John Knox advocated killing Catholics. I had only vaguely heard of him referred to before today so I went and read some of his writings, he was an angry man.
Among the important things I've learned from reading FR: "Reformed theology" is 99% angry, vehement repudiation of all things Catholic, and only about 1% love of Jesus Christ.
Some of them are even proud of that.
Gamecock and others: don't bother telling me I'm wrong unless you're going to change your behavior to prove it. Words are cheap.
Perhaps in his heart of hearts he knew what he had sacrificed and felt robbed.
Don’t let the door hit you in the you-know-what on the way out ... byebye!
No, he/she needs a different thread for each question if it isn’t exactly on point. Effectively, they are all about Catholic-faith bashing and so meld into one and any and all anti-Catholic topics should be game for any thread because as they are all essentially just a continuation.
“Some of them are even proud of that.”
I guess we have to pray for them. Actually I do ask the Sacred Heart for the conversion of the world, but I guess I have to be more specific!
I agree, why else would they be so determined to bring down the Catholic Church?
That was not my point. My point is that there are may truth claims, but only one truth. The Law of the Excluded Middle says a truth claim cannot be both true and false...or somewhere in the middle. The truth claims of one group don’t automatically disqualify the claims of another...because the truth claims of both groups could be wrong. On the other hand, if the truth claims are both false, there is another set of truth claims somewhere that are true. But only the truth claims that correspond to reality (those which are really real) are the true ones.
Whereas me, I tend to view Gamecock as a "glass full" kind of person.
Pyro, you just invoked Irving's Law. ears_to_hear wins the round by default.
Irving's Law: once a comparison is made between [Pharisees/anti-Semitism/Jack Chick tracts] and someone's theology, the discussion is immediately finished - and whoever makes the comparison automatically "loses" whatever debate was in progress, forfeiting all points previously scored.
When I first saw your post I thought “good for you, but shouldn’t it be a private matter?”. After reading your excellent letter I am thankful you shared it - exposing the un-scriptural basis for these practices is a good thing. I know you’re taking shots, hang in there and God bless.
Sounds like a law contrived by someone who wants Chick-like hate of Catholicism to be shielded from counterattack.
In other words, it’s BS.
If you're claiming he's full of it, well, who am I to argue?
It will forever be true that there is no scriptural basis for rcc mariology: immaculate conception, assumption, co-redemptrix.
It simply cannot be demonstrated biblically.
You are also, of course, entitled to your own personal interpretation of scripture.
You wrote:
“If Henry VIII was a Reformer Benny Hinn is the next pope.”
Then get ready for Benny Hinn’s papal election. Henry VIII indeed was a “Reformer”.
1) Through Cranmer he introduced the Exhortation and Litany, which was the first English only service manual ever. It’s Protestant character was unmistakeable. It weakened the place of the communion of saints, for instance. It was published in 1544 and relied heavily upon Martin Luther’s own service books and, if I am not mistaken, Miles Coverdale’s Bible translation.
In addition to changing the rituals of the Church and making them increasingly Protestant, Henry VIII robbed and closed over 2,000 chapels, monasteries, convents, hospitals, colleges, chantries, and orphanages.
So, he changed the Catholic rituals, attacked doctrine thereby, robbed the Church, murdered those monks and clerics who opposed him, etc. Yep, he was a “Reformer”.
“BTW, how how many Popes had children?”
A bunch.
“I assume John The Baptist would wink at that?”
No. But John the Baptist also never said Judaism was false just because the Pharisees were hypocrites either. He would extend the same reasoning to Christianity at the very least don’t you think?
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.