Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How The Reformation Changed The Church
frontline.org ^ | Dr. Peter Hammond

Posted on 02/05/2011 11:07:42 AM PST by Gamecock

In the book of Judges we read about another generation which arose, which knew neither the Lord nor what He had done (Judges 2:10). Today, it appears that a generation has arisen, which like Israel under the Judges, knows little of either the Lord nor of what He did during the time of the Protestant exodus and the struggles in the wilderness, which followed in the 16th and 17th century. Sometimes this is from a cowardly dislike of controversy and confrontation. But few people seem to understand either the evils from which the Reformation delivered us or the blessings which the Reformation won for us.

The Reformation delivered the Church from gross ignorance and spiritual darkness The church, before the Reformation, was a church without the Bible. And a church without a Bible is as useless as a lighthouse without light, a candlestick without a candle, or a motor vehicle without an engine. The priests and people knew scarcely anything about God’s Word or the way of salvation in Christ.

Bishop J.C. Ryle described the situation: “The immense majority of the clergy did little more than say masses and offer up pretended sacrifices, repeat Latin prayers and chant Latin hymns (which of course most of the people could not understand), hear confessions, grant absolutions, give extreme unction, and take money to get dead people out of purgatory.”

Bishop Latimer observed: “When the devil gets influence in a church, up go candles and down goes preaching.”

Quarterly sermons (that is, once every three months) were prescribed to the clergy, but not insisted upon. Latimer noted that while the mass was never left unsaid for a single Sunday, sermons might be omitted for 20 Sundays in succession. Indeed, to preach much was to incur the suspicion of being a heretic.

Bishop Hooper, who along with Bishop Latimer was burned alive at the stake under Queen Mary, did a survey in 1551 and found that out of 311 clergy in his Diocese, 168 were unable to repeat the Ten Commandments, 31 of those 168 could not even say in which part of the Scripture the Ten Commandments were to be found, 40 could not tell where the Lord’s Prayer was written, and 31 of the 40 did not even know who the author of the Lord’s Prayer was!

Bishop Ryle summarized the situation: “Before the Reformation was a religion without knowledge, without faith and without lively hope – a religion without justification, regeneration and sanctification – a religion without any clear views of Christ and the Holy Ghost. Except in rare instances, it was little better than an organized system of Mary worship, saint worship, image worship, relic worship, pilgrimages, alms giving, formalism, ceremonialism, processions, penances, absolutions, masses and blind obedience to the priests. It was a huge higgledy-piggledy of ignorance and idolatry, and serving an unknown God by deputy. The only practical result was that the priests took the people’s money and undertook to secure their salvation. And the people flattered themselves that the more they gave to the priests, the more sure they were to go to Heaven!”

The Reformation delivered the church from childish superstitions The Roman Catholic church, before the Reformation, taught its members to seek spiritual benefit from so-called relics of dead saints and to treat them with divine honor. Calvin’s “Inventory of Relics” and Hobart Seymour’s “Pilgrimage to Rome” catalog some of the ludicrous swindles which were perpetrated by the church of Rome. This included pieces of wood “of the true cross” enough to load a large ship, thorns professing to be part of the Saviour’s crown of thorns, enough to make a huge faggot, at least 14 nails said to have been used at the Crucifixion, four spearheads – each purporting to be the one which pierced our Lord’s side, at least three seamless coats of Christ, for which the soldiers cast lots, Saint James’s hand, bones of Mary Magdalene, toenails from Saint Edmund, some bread, purported to have been used by Christ at the Last Supper, a girdle of the Virgin Mary and milk from the Virgin Mary! The Royal Commissioners of Henry VIII examined a vial at the Abbey in Gloucestershire, which was said to contain the blood of Christ! The Commissioners found that it contained the blood of a duck.

There were literally thousands of profane and vile inventions, fabrications and deceptions, which Roman priests imposed on the people before the Reformation. They must have known that they were deceiving the people, yet they persisted in presenting these lies and requiring that the ignorant laity believe them. Sometimes the priests induced dying sinners to give vast tracts of lands to abbeys and monasteries, in order to atone for their bad lives. In one way or another, they were continually separating sinners from their money and accumulating property and wealth in the hands of the Roman church.

The power of the priests was practically despotic and was used for every purpose except the advancement of the Christian faith. It seemed that their primary object was power. To them confession had to be made. Without their absolution and extreme unction no professing Christian could be saved. Without their masses no soul could be redeemed from purgatory. In short, they were, to all intents and purposes, the mediators between Christ and man. To please and honor the Roman church was a devout Christian’s first duty. To injure them was the greatest of sins. One of the indulgences issued in 1498, with the authority of the Pope, claimed: “To absolve people from usury, theft, manslaughter, fornication and all crime whatsoever, except smiting the clergy and conspiring against the Pope!”

A starving man in a famine may be reduced to eating rats and rubbish, rather than die of hunger. Similarly, a conscience-stricken soul, deprived of God’s Word, should not be judged too harshly by us, if they struggled to find comfort in the most debasing superstition. However, we must never forget that it was from such superstitions which the Reformation delivered us.

The Reformation delivered the church from blatant immorality Before the Reformation, the lives of the clergy were simply scandalous. There were brothels in the Vatican. The Popes, Cardinals and Bishops openly consorted with prostitutes and engaged in the most debauched orgies. The local priests became notorious for gluttony, drunkenness and gambling. As Bishop Ryle pointed out: “To expect the huge roots of ignorance and superstition, which filled our land, to bear any but corrupt fruit, would be unreasonable and absurd.”

Contemporary art depicted friars as foxes preaching with the neck of a stolen goose peeping out of the hood behind; as wolves giving absolution, with the sheep partly concealed under their cloaks; or as apes sitting on a sick man’s bed with a crucifix in one hand and with the other hand in the suffering person’s pocket! Such public contempt in art reflects the scorn with which the clergy were held at the time.

Bishop Ryle pointed out: “But the blackest spot on the character of our pre-Reformation clergy in England is one of which it is painful to speak … their horrible contempt of the 7th Commandment … the consequences of shutting up herds of men and women in the prime of life, in monasteries and nunneries, were such that I will not defile my paper by dwelling upon them … if ever there was a plausible theory weighed in the balance and found utterly wanting, it is the favorite theory that celibacy and monasticism promote holiness … monasteries and nunneries were frequently sinks of iniquity.”

The report of the Royal Commissioners, under Henry VIII, declared: “That manifest sin, vicious, carnal and abominable living, is daily used and committed in abbeys, priories, and other religious houses of monks, cannons and nuns, and that albeit many continual visitations have been had, by the space of 200 years or more, for an honest and charitable reformation of such unthrifty, carnal and abominable living, yet that nevertheless, little or none amendment was hitherto had, but that their vicious living shamefully increased and augmented.”

It was observed that: “There is no surer recipe for promoting immorality than fullness of bread and abundance of idleness.” (Ezekiel 16:49) It is from such superstition, corruption, immorality, ignorance and idolatry that the Reformation freed the church.

The Reformation gave the church back the Bible In 1519, six men and a woman were burned at Coventry for teaching their children the Ten Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer and the Apostle’s Creed in English. Nothing seems to have alarmed and enraged the Roman priesthood as much as the spread of Bibles in the local language. It was for the crime of translating the Bible into English that the Reformer, William Tyndale, was burned at the stake. Of all the aspects which combined to make up the Reformation, no other aspect received such bitter opposition as the translation and circulation of the Scriptures. The translation of the Bible struck a blow at the root of the whole Roman Catholic system. The Bible, as the only rule of faith and conduct, freely available in the local languages, was a threat to all the superstitions and abuses of the medieval Roman popery. With the Bible in every parish church, every thoughtful man soon saw that the religion of the priests had no basis in Holy Scripture.

The Reformation opened the road to the throne of Grace The way of salvation had become blocked up and made impassible by heaps of superstitious rubble. “He who desired to obtain forgiveness had to seek it through a jungle of priests, saints, Mary worship, masses, penances, confession, absolution and the like, so that there might as well have been no throne of Grace at all.” J.C. Ryle

The Reformers hacked their way through this huge jungle of papal obstruction and cleared the way for every heavy-laden sinner to go straight to the Lord Jesus Christ for remission of sins.

The Reformation restored Biblical simplicity to worship Before the Reformation, the laity were only present at church services as passive, ignorant spectators. The elaborate, theatrical presentations of the sacraments were a solemn farce because the ceremonies and prayers were in Latin. The laity could bring their bodies to the services, but their minds, understanding, reason and spirit could take no part at all. For this reason, the 24th Article of the Church of England declared: “It is a thing totally repugnant to the Word of God and the custom of the primitive church to have public prayer in the church or to minister the sacraments in a tongue not understood of the people.”

The Reformation gave a Biblical understanding of the office of a minister Before the Reformation, the concept of the Christian ministry was sacerdotal. That is – it was understood that every clergyman was a sacrificing priest. The clergy were understood to hold the keys of Heaven and to be practically the mediators between God and man.

The Reformers brought the office of the clergy down to its Scriptural level. They stripped it entirely of any sacerdotal character. They cast out the words “sacrifice” and “altar”. They taught that the clergy were pastors, ambassadors, messengers, witnesses, evangelists, teachers and ministers of the Word and sacraments. The Reformers taught that the chief business of every Christian minister is to preach the Word and to be diligent in prayer and the reading of the Scriptures. The Reformers taught the immense superiority of the pulpit to the confessional. For this reason, where the altar used to be, the Lord’s table was placed with an open Bible, or a pulpit, showing the centrality of God’s Word in the worship of Protestant churches.

The Reformation restored a Biblical understanding of holiness Before the Reformation, it was believed that a monastic life and vows of celibacy were the only ways to escape sin and to attain sanctification. Multitudes of men and women poured into the monasteries and convents under the vain idea that this would please God and ensure their eternal salvation.

The Reformers struck at the root of this fallacy by establishing the great Scriptural principle that true religion was not to be found in retiring into convents and monasteries and fleeing from the difficulties of daily life, but in manfully facing up to our difficulties and doing our duty diligently - in every position to which God calls us. It is not by running away from the world, that we fulfill God’s call, but by courageously resisting the devil, the flesh and the world and overcoming them in daily life. That is how true holiness is to be exhibited. For this reason, the Reformers dissolved the monasteries and convents in their areas and freed the inmates to be reintegrated into normal life.

The Reformers also ordered that the Ten Commandments be set up in every parish church and taught to every child, and that our duty towards God and our neighbor be set forth in the Catechism. They insisted that you cannot become saints by shirking your duties in society.

A Heritage of Faith and Freedom We must continually thank God for the Reformation. It lit the flames of knowledge and freedom which we must ensure are never allowed to be extinguished or to grow dim. We need to continually remember that the Reformation was won for us by the blood of many tens of thousands of martyrs. It was not only by their preaching and praying, and writing and legislation, but by their sacrifices that our religious liberty, freedom of conscience and Christian heritage was won.

The Reformation found church members steeped in ignorance and left them in possession of knowledge. It found them without Bibles and left them with the Bible in every parish. It found them in darkness and left them in light. It found them bound in fear and left them enjoying the liberty and peace which only Christ can give. It found them strangers to the blood of Christ’s atonement, to faith, grace and holiness and left them with the key of all those blessings in their hands. It found them blind and left them with spiritual eyes to see. It found them slaves to superstition and set them free to serve Christ.

As Bishop Ryle declared: “Are we to return to a church which boasts that she is infallible and never changes – to a church which has never repented her pre-Reformation superstitions and abominations – to a church which has never confessed and abjured her countless corruptions? Are we to go back to gross ignorance of true religion? Shame on us, I say, if we entertain the idea for a moment! Let the Israelite return to Egypt, if he will. Let the prodigal go back to his husks among the swine. Let the dog return to his vomit. But let no Englishman with brains in his head, ever listen to the idea of exchanging Protestantism for Popery, or returning to the bondage of the church of Rome. No, indeed! … God forbid! The man who counsels such base apostasy and suicidal folly, must be judicially blind. The iron collar has been broken; let us not put it on again. The prison has been thrown open; let us not resume the yoke and return to our chains … Let us not go back to ignorance, superstition, priestcraft and immorality.”

If you have a Bible in your own language, and enjoy to read and study God’s Word, never forget that you owe that Bible to the Reformation. Brave men and women died that you could have the freedom to delight in God’s Word.

If you know the joy of sins forgiven and new life in Christ, if you are walking by faith and enjoying peace with God, never forget that you owe this priceless privilege to the Reformation.

If you enjoy Church services, Scripture choruses, Hymns, prayers and sermons in your own language, remember that for this you are also indebted to the Reformation.

If you appreciate the Biblical and practical sermons of your pastor, and his counsel, never forget that for this you are indebted to the Reformation. The Reformation is the source of many blessings. We need to ask if we are on the side of the Reformers, or of those who burned them and the Bible. “… Contend earnestly for the Faith which was once for all delivered to the saints.” Jude 3


TOPICS: General Discusssion; History; Mainline Protestant
KEYWORDS: catholicbashing; reformation; revisionisthistory
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,421-1,4401,441-1,4601,461-1,480 ... 2,701-2,713 next last
To: aruanan; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; RnMomof7; Dr. Eckleburg
Followers of Calvin believe this?


1,441 posted on 02/09/2011 1:49:03 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1348 | View Replies]

To: Cronos
Correct.

Good night, Cronos! Careful now... Agreement between you and I just might cause a pole shift or something! ; )

[roamer_1:] predestination is inclusive rather than exclusive - Christ is seen blotting names out, not writing them in. It seems to be a small exception, but it has major ramifications.

Yes, that is the problem with the Calvinist philosophy.

Whatever might be wrong with Calvin is better than Rome by several orders of magnitude... There. Back to our accustomed stance. Ain't that better, now?

1,442 posted on 02/09/2011 1:49:46 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just Socialism in a business suit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1179 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; Quix
Actually, you do reject the words of Christ -- the words of Christ that clearly state in John 6 on the inauguration of the Eucharist. You do reject the scripture which clearly speaks of the efficacy of baptism.

We will relentlessly repeat these errors of yours

We hope to ensure that you and others learn to trust Christ in His very OWN words, which is why we relentlessly hammer you with the truth until maybe, prayerfully, eventually, it soaks in and with the help and grace of the Holy Spirit, you wake up to the truth of Christ. Now, if you don't want to listen to Christ's very own words, that's your free will, given by God to choose or reject Him
1,443 posted on 02/09/2011 1:52:49 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1361 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Note, the Church Fathers are also developers of your own doctrine. Augustine for one and even Tertullian and others whose inspired thinking led to the understanding of the Trinity as we now understand it.


1,444 posted on 02/09/2011 1:54:07 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1366 | View Replies]

To: CynicalBear; wmfights; blue-duncan; Dr. Eckleburg; roamer_1; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD
I am not adding to scripture, you are taking away from scripture. The promise is: “and to your house”. If that house contains children they are included. You would say they are not thereby saying that the statement “and your house” is not inclusive of all that are included in the house.

This is frightfully close to the belief the Hebrews had... That they were saved by their parentage... their patronage through Abraham and the fathers...

I dare say we all know that was wrong, and this concept is only incrementally different.

1,445 posted on 02/09/2011 1:56:35 AM PST by roamer_1 (Globalism is just Socialism in a business suit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1229 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; kosta50

Secondly, the “tossing the theological ball back and forth” is what we all do — we in orthodoxy will routinely ask ourselves the basics of our faith. The advantage we have is that we can read about this “back and forth” and don’t have to re-invent the wheel as we can see all sides of the arguments before we argue in our heads.


1,446 posted on 02/09/2011 2:03:31 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1366 | View Replies]

To: boatbums
Thirdly, even after the "tossing the theological ball back and forth" there has never been doctrine on l. It's etymological meaning is edge and it's basically been speculation for centuries. That is why we state "the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God,"

This is what the Church has always taught, hence you made a false statement in 1110 that it was doctrine. What a person interprets is quite different from doctrine -- hence why we reject sola scriptura.
1,447 posted on 02/09/2011 2:08:08 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1366 | View Replies]

To: caww; GCC Catholic; kosta50; Kolokotronis
That picture looks like a cartoon....sorry if it offends but that is just what it looks like

There is a reason why icons are drawn in that way -- I think Kosta can answer it better, it's got something to do with ensuring that it shows the person, yet is not quite a depiction of a human being -- I'm probably describing it incorrectly, so will let the experts, K, G or K answer.
1,448 posted on 02/09/2011 2:09:50 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1368 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; one Lord one faith one baptism
crept into the church early

So are yo uone of those who believe in the Great Apostasy just after the Apostolic age?
1,449 posted on 02/09/2011 2:12:38 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1378 | View Replies]

To: boatbums; metmom; Judith Anne
To say "no women teaching" cannot obviously mean no woman can teach other women or children does it?

---> now you're putting your own interpretation on scripture, against sola scriptura.

Furthermore, you are putting your own pieces together when you say "mothers should teach their children about the Lord." --> where does it, if you go by sola scriptura, say "mothers should"?

Also, it omits the context of leadership within the church that contained men and women which WAS the intent --> so are you saying there should be no women as administrators etc. if they are to "assume authority over a man?

What they think the guys knew everything just because they were male?

I dunno -- perhaps you should ask Paul, but as a 'sola scriptura' person, you have to take it as-is, right?

I wonder how many women have been bosses over men? Does this mean that no Christian man can ever work for a woman??! --> In the sola scriptura world, both are not possible

misunderstanding or misinterpreting a verse in order to lord it over women. --> In the sola scriptura way, there is no misunderstanding or misinterpretation because everything is as-is, right?

Most days now, it is the woman having to explain Scriptural meanings to their husbands. --> so then, in your sola scriptura way, would you say Paul was wrong in Tim to say "no woman to teach"? Or are these folks just not following sola scriptura?

What does "learn in quietness" mean and shouldn't we all be "still and know that I am God"? --> More questions for Paul, yet since you folks are sola scriptura, you have to follow what he said exactly, right?
1,450 posted on 02/09/2011 2:20:17 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1381 | View Replies]

To: boatbums

Finally — bb, I told you before, stop jumping to false conclusions and pretending to read minds — I never stated anything, I just asked and keep asking “if you believe in sola scriptura, then what about these verses” — you cannot hold to both.


1,451 posted on 02/09/2011 2:21:32 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1381 | View Replies]

To: metmom; boatbums
Because very simply, I asked YOU first, if your group follows each of those tenets -- does it?

you answer and I will then tell you about what The Church does.
1,452 posted on 02/09/2011 2:22:46 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1386 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Ruy Dias de Bivar; caww; RnMomof7; metmom
Who would those groups be --> the sola scriptura types like the OPC, PCA, the various christian non-Church groups, even the non-Christian ones, even Metmom's.

Simple question -- does your group follow all of these statements of Paul in his epistle to timothy and others? If not, how do you hold that with sola scriptura?
1,453 posted on 02/09/2011 2:25:25 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1403 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; roamer_1
I would bet it was a Roman Catholic who brought up this

Paranoid much? It was roamer_1 who brought it up in the 400s :-P
1,454 posted on 02/09/2011 2:26:38 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1146 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg; Quix; Alex Murphy
So, can she become a pastor? The woman can't become a deacon or a ruling elder, so I guess that Quix' woman don't stand much chance in the OPC.

For that matter, do the women do the readings in the OPC meetings? Do they run bible study classrooms?
1,455 posted on 02/09/2011 2:28:34 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1428 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1; CynicalBear; Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD
The Bereans Acts 17:11 "... received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.[1]", and many of them believed. --> these "scriptures" were the Septuagint only and maybe the Gospel of Mark and Matthew. The Gospel of John wouldn't be written for some more decades, and Acts hadn't been written yet, and neither any of the epistles.

So, in short, these folks were OT+Mark+Matthew alone -- and nothing else. Is that only what's in your bible?

Furthermore, context, context, context, read the preceeding and following lines
10 As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.
11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.
So, they did rely on a man's word initially -- two men, Paul and Silas who spread the Good News amongs them. Then they checked the OT to see if the references to the Christ were correct. And also, the Berean Church included GREEKS -- who wouldn't have read the scriptures as they were not of Jewish origin, they took the Gospel for what Paul and Silas preached, tradition alone, not scripture.

Furthermore, note what happened before -- in Thessalonia. There, "For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the Scriptures" --> THESE THESALLONIANS were sola scriptura folks who disagreed with Paul and Silas' interpretation of scriptures (the OT) on the Christ.

Remember, both the Thesalonians in the passages before this and the Bereans were Jews who studied the OT for the references of Jesus being the Christ. Why did they study this? because of the ORAL TRADITION that Paul and Silas brought, claiming Jesus Christ was the Son of God.

The Thesalonians rejected this as "it weren't in scripture, sola scriptura", while the Bereans accepted Holy Tradition, i.e. ORAL teaching by Paul and Silas.

if anything, the tale of the Bereans shows the era of SOLA scriptura.
1,456 posted on 02/09/2011 2:31:01 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1409 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1; CynicalBear; Dr. Eckleburg; wmfights; Gamecock; Alex Murphy; HarleyD
The Bereans Acts 17:11 "... received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.[1]", and many of them believed. --> these "scriptures" were the Septuagint only and maybe the Gospel of Mark and Matthew. The Gospel of John wouldn't be written for some more decades, and Acts hadn't been written yet, and neither any of the epistles.

So, in short, these folks were OT+Mark+Matthew alone -- and nothing else. Is that only what's in your bible?

Furthermore, context, context, context, read the preceeding and following lines
10 As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue.
11 Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.
12 As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.
So, they did rely on a man's word initially -- two men, Paul and Silas who spread the Good News amongs them. Then they checked the OT to see if the references to the Christ were correct. And also, the Berean Church included GREEKS -- who wouldn't have read the scriptures as they were not of Jewish origin, they took the Gospel for what Paul and Silas preached, tradition alone, not scripture.

Furthermore, note what happened before -- in Thessalonia. There, "For three weeks he [Paul] reasoned with them from the Scriptures" --> THESE THESALLONIANS were sola scriptura folks who disagreed with Paul and Silas' interpretation of scriptures (the OT) on the Christ.

Remember, both the Thesalonians in the passages before this and the Bereans were Jews who studied the OT for the references of Jesus being the Christ. Why did they study this? because of the ORAL TRADITION that Paul and Silas brought, claiming Jesus Christ was the Son of God.

The Thesalonians rejected this as "it weren't in scripture, sola scriptura", while the Bereans accepted Holy Tradition, i.e. ORAL teaching by Paul and Silas.

if anything, the tale of the Bereans shows the error of SOLA scriptura.
1,457 posted on 02/09/2011 2:31:25 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1409 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Eckleburg
Paul never said women couldn’t be Sunday school teachers.

Yet 1 Tim 2:12 if one holds to sola scriptura says no teaching -- how do you reconcile the two?

In Church i.e. during the mass/service, I agree with you -- but 1 Tim 2:12 does not seem to, if one follows sola scriptura, be limited to place or time. so, how do you reconcile these two?
1,458 posted on 02/09/2011 2:38:06 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1439 | View Replies]

To: roamer_1
Hardly -- even if someone does try to build a Chrysler 300 by first re-inventing the wheel, one can have some basics right as you do when you have correctly pointed out that The Father would that all of Adam's sons be saved. Every one. and predestination is inclusive rather than exclusive - Christ is seen blotting names out, not writing them in. It seems to be a small exception, but it has major ramifications.

predestination is a step to brahminism
1,459 posted on 02/09/2011 2:40:27 AM PST by Cronos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1442 | View Replies]

To: Cronos; metmom; Quix; RnMomof7

“Paul is clearly talking about false groups like yours that deny Christ’s words and warning us to be aware and not to be deceived by the loftiness of words that your group and others like it preach. We stick fast to the faith of Christ as taught through the ages from the Apostles.”

Oh, please; you can do better than that! I feel like I’m arguing with a parrot.

“These verses condemn the wrong human traditions like practised by those who reject Christ’s words in the Eucharist, reject the efficacy of baptism, etc.”

This would absolutely laughable were it not truly so sad. ‘Human traditions’ of Protestants, eh? You must mean stuff like genuflection, ‘vererating’ (worshipping) saints, praying to Mary, ‘purgatory’, indulgences, penance, inquisitions, and... uh, wait. Protestants don’t believe or do those things—Roman Catholics do!!! The rejection and twisting of scripture has been the balliwick of Roman Cathloicism for centuries.

“WE hold fast to the apostolic traditions, rejecting your group’s man-made traditions.”

And those are...? And the proof and sourcing of each is...? The traditions you espouse MUST be provable, right? I’ve sen this referred to constantly, but I have yet to see this sourced and proven to the actual apostle’s lips or writing. Care to do that?

Weak. Try again. And do try to be original in your attempt; you’re becoming boringly predictable.

Hoss


1,460 posted on 02/09/2011 3:36:21 AM PST by HossB86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1408 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,421-1,4401,441-1,4601,461-1,480 ... 2,701-2,713 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson