Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: D-fendr

Ah, you’re trying that trap. Heh. Luther made clear his view thereon, and I accept it as the best a human can understand & explain of that spiritual reality which is still beyond our full comprehension & articulation. And no, Luther did not accept “transubstantiation” as he wasn’t a cannibal.


11 posted on 11/01/2017 2:04:04 PM PDT by ctdonath2 (It's not "white privilege", it's "Puritan work ethic". Behavior begets consequences.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]


To: ctdonath2

I’m not sure if you’re agreeing with Luther the Real Presence or not? Or do you agree with Zwingli?


12 posted on 11/01/2017 2:06:31 PM PDT by D-fendr (Deus non alligatur sacramentis sed nos alligamur.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: ctdonath2
Luther did not accept “transubstantiation” as he wasn’t a cannibal.

He did at one time until Satan got a hold of him. Remember, he was once a good Catholic priest who consecrated the Body and Blood of Christ at his Masses.

Here's a couple more representative stamps commemorating Luther:


21 posted on 11/01/2017 2:33:42 PM PDT by ebb tide (We have a rogue curia in Rome.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

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