Posted on 02/05/2015 9:29:51 AM PST by RnMomof7
What caused the Reformation?
Many people might answer that question by pointing to Martin Luther and his 95 Theses.
But if you were to ask Luther himself, he would not point to himself or his own writings. Instead, he would give all the credit to God and His Word.
Near the end of his life, Luther declared: “All I have done is put forth, preach and write the Word of God, and apart from this I have done nothing. . . . It is the Word that has done great things. . . . I have done nothing; the Word has done and achieved everything.”
Elsewhere, he exclaimed: “By the Word the earth has been subdued; by the Word the Church has been saved; and by the Word also it shall be reestablished.”
Noting Scripture’s foundational place in his own heart, Luther wrote: “No matter what happens, you should say: There is God’s Word. This is my rock and anchor. On it I rely, and it remains. Where it remains, I, too, remain; where it goes, I, too, go.”
Luther understood what caused the Reformation. He recognized that it was the Word of God empowered by the Spirit of God preached by men of God in a language that the common people of Europe could understand and when their ears were exposed to the truth of God’s Word it pierced their hearts and they were radically changed.
It was that very power that had transformed Luther’s own heart, a power that is summarized in the familiar words of Hebrews 4:12: “The Word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword.”
During the late middle ages, the Roman Catholic Church had imprisoned God’s Word in the Latin language, a language the common people of Europe did not speak. The Reformers unlocked the Scriptures by translating them. And once the people had the Word of God, the Reformation became inevitable.
We see this commitment to the Scriptures even in the centuries prior to Martin Luther, beginning with the Forerunners to the Reformation:
In the 12th century, the Waldensians translated the New Testament from the Latin Vulgate into their regional French dialects. According to tradition, they were so committed to the Scriptures that different Waldensian families would memorize large sections of the Bible. That way, if Roman Catholic authorities found them and confiscated their printed copies of Scripture, they would later be able to reproduce the entire Bible from memory.
In the 14th century, John Wycliffe and his associates at Oxford translated the Bible from Latin into English. Wycliffe’s followers, known as the Lollards, went throughout the countryside preaching and singing passages of Scripture in English.
In the 15th century, Jan Huss preached in the language of the people, and not in Latin, making him the most popular preacher in Prague at the time. Yet, because Huss insisted that Christ alone was the head of the church, not the pope, the Catholic Council of Constance condemned him for heresy and burned him at the stake (in 1415).
In the 16th century, as the study of Greek and Hebrew were recovered, Martin Luther translated the Bible into German, with the New Testament being completed in 1522.
In 1526, William Tyndale completed a translation of the Greek New Testament into English. A few years later he also translated the Pentateuch from Hebrew. Shortly thereafter he was arrested and executed as a heretic—being strangled and then burned at the stake. According to Fox’s Book of Martyrs, Tyndale’s last words were “Lord, Open the King of England’s Eyes.” And it was just a couple years after his death that King Henry VIII authorized the Great Bible in England—a Bible that was largely based on Tyndale’s translation work. The Great Bible laid the foundation for the later King James version (which was completed in 1611).
The common thread, from Reformer to Reformer, was an undying commitment to the authority and sufficiency of Scripture, such that they were willing to sacrifice everything, including their own lives, to get the Word of God into the hands of the people.
They did this because they understood that the power for spiritual reformation and revival was not in them, but in the gospel (cf. Rom. 1:16–17). And they used the Latin phrase Sola Scriptura (“Scripture alone”) to emphasize the truth that God’s Word was the true power and ultimate authority behind all they said and did.
It was ignorance of Scripture that made the Reformation necessary. It was the recovery of the Scripture that made the Reformation possible. And it was the power of the Scripture that gave the Reformation its enduring impact, as the Holy Spirit brought the truth of His Word to bear on the hearts and minds of individual sinners, transforming them, regenerating them, and giving them eternal life.
I do not believe Jesus came to leave us a book, He came to leave us a Church and establish His Kingdom. He said as much. If He came to leave us a book He would have told His followers to write everything down as it happened. Jesus did no such thing. For a few hundred years there was no written word, Christians relied on instruction and traditions passed on to them by the Apostles.
Regarding the two options you give, yes, Christ is the head of the Church. I believe that Church to be the Catholic Church. Jesus did give a leader, Peter, the Keys to his Church until He returns.
The same thing happened in the Old Testament, did it not? Pharaoh gave Joseph a ring, clothing and a gold necklace, giving him absolute power over the Kingdom while Pharaoh was away. So Christ did with Peter.
In the Old Testament Moses led the people and was the intermediary. Kings led the people. One of them build a temple. Some of those Kings were less than stellar.
The Old Testament foreshadowing of the Catholic Church is everywhere.
Another misconception about the Catholic Church is that Catholics do not read scripture. You mention that we catholics can find Mary everywhere but not Jesus? That strikes me as funny because Protestants gloss over everything Christ said that they do not like, such as John 6. Or Christ giving Peter the Keys. Or Confession, or the Priesthood.
Sometime between the Council of Orange and Trent. The difference between the Canons is startling.
I don't act that way, any priest abuser is too many. The fact the 'Church' appears to be hindering prosecutions doesn't help. Tough to believe the OTC has salvation doctrine when it won't follow the Law. Were there a big enough outcry in the pews this would have been long done.
>>>>I do not believe Jesus came to leave us a book, He came to leave us a Church and establish His Kingdom. He said as much. If He came to leave us a book He would have told His followers to write everything down as it happened. Jesus did no such thing. For a few hundred years there was no written word, Christians relied on instruction and traditions passed on to them by the Apostles.<<<<
Jesus is the Living Word who came to reveal God to man. The written Word is the bridge to God. Its not “just a book” except to the religious. Scripture has been around since at least Moses. Note the number of times NT writers quote OT Scripture. Notice how Jesus stops the satanic deception - “It is written.” Observe that the only offensive weapon that Paul mentions for spiritual warfare is the sword of the Spirit - the Word of God. Jesus reply to the religious folks of his time is still relevant today - “Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.”
>>>>Regarding the two options you give, yes, Christ is the head of the Church. I believe that Church to be the Catholic Church. Jesus did give a leader, Peter, the Keys to his Church until He returns.<<<<
There is ONLY ONE HEAD. Nobody else on the planet is qualified to be the HEAD of the Body other than Jesus. And only bad things happen when someone assumes this power. Besides, a careful reading of Scripture will reveal Matthew 16 HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BODY OF CHRIST. It was a Mystery, hidden in God until revealed by revelation to Paul. Jesus was teaching the Kingdom of Heaven to the Jews while on Earth, which is an earthly kingdom centered on Israel. One more thing religion has mucked up over the years, probably because of antisemitism. Everything promised to Israel will come in its proper time. In the Church NOW - there is neither Jew or Gentile, male or female, but one body of people placed according to God’s pleasure.
Jesus did not set aside a very well developed religion, with its ceremonies and priesthood to create yet another bureaucratic religious system. He came as the Last Adam, so that the spiritually dead could be reborn into God’s family as His children. Believers are no longer servants or even friends. They are God’s kids. And as a child of God, I don’t need to visit Uncle Charlie, or Pastor Bob, or get permission from some man in a fancy costume to see my Daddy. I have an open invitation to enter His presence at any time. There are no middlemen needed. And its GLORIOUS being in the presence of LOVE HIMSELF.
>>>>The same thing happened in the Old Testament, did it not? Pharaoh gave Joseph a ring, clothing and a gold necklace, giving him absolute power over the Kingdom while Pharaoh was away. So Christ did with Peter.
In the Old Testament Moses led the people and was the intermediary. Kings led the people. One of them build a temple. Some of those Kings were less than stellar.
The Old Testament foreshadowing of the Catholic Church is everywhere.<<<<
Only in the creative imaginations of Rome. Joseph was a type of Jesus - its appalling that people can’t see something so obvious. Betrayed by his brothers, cast into jail and accused wrongly. And then restored to be over Israel and the known world.
Absolutely, God used prophets and kings in the OT as he worked His plan of redemption. But we are no longer in the OT. We are in the age of Grace. We are back to where Adam and Eve were before the Fall if you choose to believe God’s Word. We are NEW CREATIONS, made alive in Christ and seated in Heavenly Places. Does anyone in Rome ever read the books written SPECIFICALLY TO THE BODY OF CHRIST?
>>>>Another misconception about the Catholic Church is that Catholics do not read scripture. You mention that we catholics can find Mary everywhere but not Jesus? That strikes me as funny because Protestants gloss over everything Christ said that they do not like, such as John 6. Or Christ giving Peter the Keys. Or Confession, or the Priesthood.<<<<
I know some do - I have them in my extended family. When it comes to spiritual matters, they are lost. They know all the sacraments, rituals, and how to perform at Mass, but have little understanding of the Body of Christ. If Born Again, they remain babes in Christ. BTW - I have similar criticism for protestant churches. The denomination I grew up in, born out of revival and known for preaching the Word with signs following, is a shell of its former self. Rome turned to ceremonies and doctrines of men, while they have turned to reasoning and a social gospel, both neglecting Paul’s plea to, “Preach the WORD!”
All those things you mentioned - Mary, priesthood, Peter’s “keys”, priestly confession - have NO PLACE IN THE BODY OF CHRIST. Jesus is the ONLY WAY. We are complete IN HIM. There is no place for Mary. Priesthood - there is now only one High Priest in Heaven. He has placed his blood on the Eternal Mercy Seat and sat down. Believers are made alive in Christ and filled with the Holy Spirit - THEY are the Temple of God. Please tell me what some vicar in a tutu could do for me that Jesus has NOT ALREADY DONE?
The Keys were to the KINGDOM OF HEAVEN - I covered this above. This is an EARTHLY kingdom based on Israel. Believers are a Spiritual Body made up of NEITHER Jews or Gentiles. This really is Christianity 101 kind of stuff here.
John 6 - Oh my has Rome made a mess of that chapter. Just a casual review of the scope of the passage reveals this has nothing to do with eating or drinking anything.
John 6:64-68 (AMP)
64 But [still] some of you fail to believe and trust and have faith. For Jesus knew from the first who did not believe and had no faith and who would betray Him and be false to Him.
65 And He said, This is why I told you that no one can come to Me unless it is granted him [unless he is enabled to do so] by the Father.
66 After this, many of His disciples drew back (returned to their old associations) and no longer accompanied Him.
Note - religious folks abandoned him AFTER Jesus once again mentioned the Father’s role in drawing people to Jesus, and their lack of faith. It wasn’t because of the “hard saying” about eating flesh or drinking blood - which everyone understood figuratively, since this type of language was common in Israel. Heck, just look at Jesus use of metaphors in the NT.
67 Jesus said to the Twelve, Will you also go away? [And do you too desire to leave Me?]
68 Simon Peter answered, Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words (the message) of eternal life.
Jesus is talking about people who did not believe. What did they not believe? What Jesus said several times in John 6 - he who believes in ME has eternal life.
Now look at Peter’s response, he doesn’t even mention eating flesh or drinking blood. When responding to the question if they would depart, Peter says, “You have the words of eternal life.” Not flesh and blood, but -— THE WORD -— faith is in God’s Word! Its so obvious it takes religion, or a theologian to screw it up.
There is contrast here between physical food (manna) and spiritual food (faith in Jesus - the Word made flesh - John 1). Eating bread and wine does nothing for your spirit or mind - the ones that ate the manna all died. Jesus obeyed God’s Word. He only spoke God’s Word. His very life was based precisely on doing God’s Will, which is His Word. For Believers, the Word saves and builds faith (Romans 10:17, Galatians 3:5, 1 Thessalonians 2:13), the Word renews your mind (Romans 12:2, Ephesians 5:25-27, Colossians 3:10, 2 Timothy 3:15-18). What enters the mouth goes to the stomach, not the heart (spirit), and then ends up in the sewer (Matthew 15:17, Mark 7:19). Spiritual food, God’s Word, feeds the spirit and produces life - Eternal Life.
My mother always said two wrongs don’t make a right, so maybe you could apply that here. I don’t think the current Lutheran doctrine is even close to what Luther meant it to be, but it really doesn’t matter. Your denomination was selling indulgences for money and kicking Jews out of Spain and that forced people to read the Bible. Once they read the Bible they realized just how wrong by your own Bible that your denomination was and is. Your denomination chooses to follow the catechism instead of your Bible and thus you think all the rest of us are wrong. The only problem is that while the the Word of God doesn’t change your catechism has changed according to the times and that will unfortunately lead to damnation.
**Since there was only 1 Church for 1,000 years who held the deposit of faith up to that point?**
Oh, and by the way, that is not exactly accurate, now is it?
The very reason why God referred to Nebuchadnezzar as, "My servant, Nebuchadnezzar".
See post 144. You would not call this individual a Protestant? They simply fall into the category of “third thing?” Are people who believe those things (being born again, etc.) outside Protestantism?
Therein lies the problem with the revolt as Luther pointed to in his Letter to the ‘Christians’ of Antwerp and my point.
Luther and his followers opened the door for this mess. Every man believing he can interpret the Bible for himself.
If so, your ‘Church’ has the same problem that the Catholic Church had/has, combating heresy. For if they are outside the approved five Sola’s you mention, what else would you call it? Aren’t those ‘Sola’s’ your dogmas and deposit of the faith that you hold? If so, again, your religion has the same problem the Catholic Church has, yours has set itself up as the proper way to worship God. The difference, as I see it, your religion simply cut out the priesthood and the Ecclesia and have what? No teaching authority.
So how then can it be said that these folks are this ‘third thing’ you speak of? All of them spring from the same reformation ideas, attributed to the reformation.
I would wager if that ‘third’ group was asked they would indicate that they are all part of reformation theology.
Catholics just can’t get past the following man thing, can they?
We do not think in the same box that you all do. It seems like it’s virtually impossible for a Catholic to see something from a different vantage point, no matter how many times it’s explained.
And rarer still is any Catholics who seems to even be interested in seeing the other point of view.
ping to post 135
I’ll tell you what.
When I was a teen and Catholic at the time, and I first started hearing about Jesus and having a personal relationship with Him, I didn’t think it was possible because all my life I had been taught that He was unapproachable except through the clergy and church. They were the only ones who were holy enough and qualified enough to connect me with God, that God would not listen to me.
Worse yet, I didn’t think that God would even want to. Who was I? Just some no name little sinner who God was sitting up there watching so He could zap me next time I made a mistake.
No way I thought He’d be approachable and be interested in me as an individual, thanks to Catholic church upbringing.
The whole concept of going directly to God through only Jesus was foreign to me. He had better things to do and He was no interested in my petty little problems.
How wrong I was and how I thank God that He did reveal Himself to me and save me from that mess.
Then why didn't they follow the Scriptural commands in how to deal with immorality in the church.
They claim to have written Scripture in the first place and claim to be the only infallible interpreters of it and yet can't even follow the clear simple straightforward instructions on how to deal with immorality in the church?
Qualifications for elder and deacon.
1 Corinthians 5:1-13 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife. And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.
For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”
That precludes taking communion with someone like that.
2 John 1:4-11 I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father. And now I ask you, dear lady—not as though I were writing you a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning—that we love one another. And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it. For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not confess the coming of Jesus Christ in the flesh. Such a one is the deceiver and the antichrist. Watch yourselves, so that you may not lose what we have worked for, but may win a full reward. Everyone who goes on ahead and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God. Whoever abides in the teaching has both the Father and the Son. If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.
Titus 1:5-16 This is why I left you in Crete, so that you might put what remained into order, and appoint elders in every town as I directed you— if anyone is above reproach, the husband of one wife, and his children are believers and not open to the charge of debauchery or insubordination. For an overseer, as God's steward, must be above reproach. He must not be arrogant or quick-tempered or a drunkard or violent or greedy for gain, but hospitable, a lover of good, self-controlled, upright, holy, and disciplined. He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.
For there are many who are insubordinate, empty talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision party. They must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for shameful gain what they ought not to teach. One of the Cretans, a prophet of their own, said, “Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, lazy gluttons.” This testimony is true. Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth. To the pure, all things are pure, but to the defiled and unbelieving, nothing is pure; but both their minds and their consciences are defiled. They profess to know God, but they deny him by their works. They are detestable, disobedient, unfit for any good work.
1 Timothy 3:1-13 The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be above reproach, the husband of one wife, sober-minded, self-controlled, respectable, hospitable, able to teach, not a drunkard, not violent but gentle, not quarrelsome, not a lover of money. He must manage his own household well, with all dignity keeping his children submissive, for if someone does not know how to manage his own household, how will he care for God's church? He must not be a recent convert, or he may become puffed up with conceit and fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover, he must be well thought of by outsiders, so that he may not fall into disgrace, into a snare of the devil.
Deacons likewise must be dignified, not double-tongued, not addicted to much wine, not greedy for dishonest gain. They must hold the mystery of the faith with a clear conscience. And let them also be tested first; then let them serve as deacons if they prove themselves blameless. Their wives likewise must be dignified, not slanderers, but sober-minded, faithful in all things. Let deacons each be the husband of one wife, managing their children and their own households well. For those who serve well as deacons gain a good standing for themselves and also great confidence in the faith that is in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 5:19-24 Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy, drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.
So tell us WHY they haven't dealt with the issue of pedophiles and those who would seek to destroy the church....
And then give us one good reason why anyone should follow an organization that can't keep it's own leaders in line.
Matthew 23: 8-10 But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ.
You don't need the institution of the church......You don't need the intercession of the Priests’....and you don't need the papal ceremonies or rituals...nor the traditions of men.......which none of these just mentioned bring salvation or the assurance of.
It's never been about the individual and the church...
It's about the individual and God.
As Christians we have personal and institutional freedom ... There's no such thing as “achieving” salvation....and no earthly institution can stand before you and God nor on your behalf.
Why should they?
The CATHOLIC one is the CORRECT one!
Jesus has a human nature as well as a divine nature, so in a sense, you're right.
But why do Protestants follow Luther and the doctrine that he invented 1400 years after Christ, his doctrine of Sola Scriptura?
The doctrine doesn't appear in the Bible, which one would expect. There isn't even a hint of it. In fact, there's no mention of the Bible ALONE as being the SOLE or ULTIMATE rule of faith, anywhere in Christian history, prior to Luther.
+++
"To be deep in history is to cease to be a Protestant." --Cardinal Newman
+++
But the papacy is mentioned by the early Church Fathers, the succession of popes can be traced back to Peter, and the Bible indicates that Peter held the office of the vice-regent of the eternal, redeemed House of David, i.e., Peter held the office of the representative of the King of the eternal, redeemed House of David, Jesus.
The Bible tells us that Jesus is the King of the eternal House of David:
"He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David." (Luke 1:32)In the ancient Davidic kingdom, the authority of the palace majordomo, or vice-regent, was represented by an over-sized key that the vice-regent would wear around his neck. The vice-regent held plenary authority in the king's absence.
"I will clothe him with your robe and fasten your sash around him and hand your authority over to him. He will be a father to those who live in Jerusalem and to the people of Judah. I will place on his shoulder the key to the house of David; what he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open." (Isaiah 22:22)As King of the eternal, redeemed Davidic Kingdom, Jesus holds the "key of David," which he may bestow on His representative or vice-regent.
These are the words of him who is holy and true, who holds the key of David. What he opens no one can shut, and what he shuts no one can open. (Rev. 3:7)Was Peter's office transferred? History tells us that it was, and so does the Bible, as Isaiah 22 shows the succession in office of vice-regents of the Davidic kingdom.I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:19)
Unfortunately, Protestants generally ignore this plain biblical evidence for the papacy, reading the Bible through the human traditions of Luther and his disciples.
As a former romanist myself, who has no desire whatsoever, to swim the Tiber, I can identify with that. You are correctamundo, as usual. 😄😇😃
19 There was a certain rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen; and feasted sumptuously every day.
20 And there was a certain beggar, named Lazarus, who lay at his gate, full of sores,
21 Desiring to be filled with the crumbs that fell from the rich man's table, and no one did give him; moreover the dogs came, and licked his sores.
22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. And the rich man also died: and he was buried in hell.
23 And lifting up his eyes when he was in torments, he saw Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom:
24 And he cried, and said: Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, to cool my tongue: for I am tormented in this flame.
25 And Abraham said to him: Son, remember that thou didst receive good things in thy lifetime, and likewise Lazareth evil things, but now he is comforted; and thou art tormented.
26 And besides all this, between us and you, there is fixed a great chaos: so that they who would pass from hence to you, cannot, nor from thence come hither.
27 And he said: Then, father, I beseech thee, that thou wouldst send him to my father's house, for I have five brethren,
28 That he may testify unto them, lest they also come into this place of torments.
29 And Abraham said to him: They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.
30 But he said: No, father Abraham: but if one went to them from the dead, they will do penance.
31 And he said to him: If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they believe, if one rise again from the dead.
What's so unfortunate about rejecting the Calvinosaurus of Catholicism?
Doctrine that was concocted from a bit here, a snippet there, an inference over yonder...
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.