JESUS MEANT WHAT HE SAID

Catholic Answers Magazine ^ | October 2022 | KARLO BROUSSARD

[boatbums]

Gosh, if you are so busy and limited in time you could have saved a lot of effort had you understood the point of the article linked regarding Luther's use of the word "alone" in his GERMAN translation of Romans 3:23! Did you miss the whole point why he cited others before him who also translated it that way? It wasn't because he claimed they agreed with him on theology. I'll post in again:

Luther continues to give multiple examples of the implied sense of meaning in translating words into German. He then offers an interpretive context of Romans:
“So much for translating and the nature of language. However, I was not depending upon or following the nature of the languages alone when I inserted the word solum in Romans 3. The text itself, and Saint Paul's meaning, urgently require and demand it. For in that passage he is dealing with the main point of Christian doctrine, namely, that we are justified by faith in Christ without any works of the Law. Paul excludes all works so completely as to say that the works of the Law, though it is God's law and word, do not aid us in justification. Using Abraham as an example, he argues that Abraham was so justified without works that even the highest work, which had been commanded by God, over and above all others, namely circumcision, did not aid him in justification. Rather, Abraham was justified without circumcision and without any works, but by faith, as he says in Chapter 4: "If Abraham were justified by works, he may boast, but not before God." So, when all works are so completely rejected — which must mean faith alone justifies — whoever would speak plainly and clearly about this rejection of works will have to say "Faith alone justifies and not works." The matter itself and the nature of language requires it.”

4. Previous translations of the word “alone” in Romans 3:28. Luther offers another line of reasoning in his “Open Letter on Translating” that many of the current Cyber-Roman Catholics ignore (and most Protestants are not aware of):

“Furthermore, I am not the only one, nor the first, to say that faith alone makes one righteous. There was Ambrose, Augustine and many others who said it before me.”

Casting aspersions on the authority and sufficiency of Holy Scripture by using - yet again - a red herring, only shows your own aversion to God's word. The term "sola Scriptura", as has been explained more times than I can count, means it is the FINAL authority on matters of the Christian faith. You think you have found a gotcha contradiction in condemning Luther for "adding to Scripture" but he was TRANSLATING from Greek/Aramaic into a German dialect for the benefit of the GERMAN people. Like he stated, the clear meaning of that passage as well as other like passages demands that it be affirmed we are not saved by our works but by faith alone because of the grace of God alone.

You are stuck on the false and accursed gospel of faith AND works to save you. What you and others fail constantly to remember is that GRACE is what saves us THROUGH faith and not our works. No matter how you shake it out, you ARE relying upon your own efforts and deeds to merit eternal life and that, my friend, is the essence of an accursed gospel and is why you have no assurance of your salvation. Proceed at your own risk.

[MurphsLaw]

Gosh, if you are so busy and limited in time you could have
saved a lot of effort had you understood the point of the article linked regarding
Luther's use of the word "alone" in his GERMAN translation of Romans 3:23!

My time constraint was in wishing getting back to you sooner, not in understanding.
To that end- I think you are projecting here just a wee bit.
I wanted to, and did so, spend enough amount of time on my reply to you
so that you could see your misguided situation.
We may be writing past each other, but I don’t understand how you are lost on the simple logic I offer you.
I understood the ridiculous, and irrelevant, idea of the author of your post that
Luther’s need for German language translation
was one Rome would not be able to justice with.
And that Luther, as a German who read scripture, was that guy for the job.
So what? In what way- or by what authority is Luther given artistic license to change Church doctrine as he wishes? -
REGARDLESS of WHAT LANGUAGE it is written in- French, German or English etc.?
When it comes to ancient scripture, changing it to suit a presupposed, anachronistic meaning, for a specific language is unbiblically heretical.
We point that out with our Mormon friends as well.

Luther’s position is irrelevant that he needed to add “Alone” to his translation for his German readers.
What does that do to the inerrancy of scripture
if translations are made to suit the reader- based on the current language? Where does that process end?
Soory- the word “Alone” IS NOT in the Greek text to translate in Romans -
Thankfully, I believe, most shorter 66 book English Bibles DO NOT add the word “alone” to their translations either. So there is that.

Did you miss the whole point why he cited others before him who also translated it that way?
It wasn't because he claimed they agreed with him on theology…

No I did not miss the point of citation, and if you reread I answered it quite specifically.
As I showed you with St. Augustine- Luther incorrectly falsely uses St. Augie at one point-
only then to later disregard the Saint as Holy- but with poor or little faith.
I cited you those specific quotes. Further, none of those ECF’s cited were using in the terms the Luther invented 1000 years later.
Its easy to see that in other writings of those same ECFs who saw justification quite differently than what Luther was proposing.
He was basically hijacking obscure texts back in his day and twist them for his own purpose.
When called out on it- as I cited – he was belligerent, ego-maniacal- and it was his judgement “alone” that mattered.
And that is why other “reformers” of that day disagreed with him as well.
Let the games begin.

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/when-faith-alone-meets-scripture-alone

Luther’s extra-Biblical appeal to Church Fathers- over 1000 years before him
was also hypocritical and contradictory to his other invented “scripture alone” theology.
Now I know “scripture alone” has many meanings and can mean very different things for people-
but at its core.. it CANNOT mean that something considered the highest authority, needs clarification from a lower authority.
Luther’s appeal to Church fathers to validate his theology, outside of scripture,
refutes his own idea. And it IS the Catholic way to appeal to the Early Church for understanding- one that we are told is not acceptable as well.
Because its ”not in the Bible”. “Heads”, you win… “tails”, I lose…

Even still, citing this as you did, confirms Luther must make this appeal because his “fide” invention is not a theme found within scripture-
except for a few verses he can twist out a meaning favorable to his personal desire.
If that weren’t bad enough- he has to ignore – or flat out disavow-
some of that sacred scripture, James 2 or St. Pauls understanding in Love, being much more than Faith.
Its easy to see, Luther’s own application of “scripture alone” in his time was not able to be adhered to.
Sounds good and all- The Word of God is the final authority and all… and the Word was made Flesh, in Christ.
God is the Final Authority. Period.

Also, Luther’s theology of Justification WAS NOT a part of the early Church theology- and it is a simple case of
Luther reading back into history his own ideals on the subject.
And even if some the Church fathers looked like they had similar ideas matching the modern technical imputed righteousness of Luther-
which they don’t – why are you assuming they are correct on this?
In being consistent after all- (and getting back to the thread theme)-
Would you like to, now, agree with these Church Fathers on the Real Presences of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist?
I didn’t think so… so you are selectively choosing your argument,
and not following your own standard- or allowing others that same standard.

Casting aspersions on the authority and sufficiency of Holy Scripture by using - yet again - a red herring, only shows your own aversion to God's word.

I cast aspersions on false Gospel that is predicated on a MAN’S manipulation
of scripture
that leads many into error- and continues a cycle of division.

The term "sola Scriptura", as has been explained more times than I can count, means it is the FINAL authority on matters of the Christian faith.

Can you show me where that is in the Bible?
Seriously- I would liek to now where it states scripture as "Final".
That's an invention of man. In scripture Jesus words tell us to take
errant sinners to the Church as a “final” authority.
Can you show me where the Bible it declares the Bible
SPECIFICALLY is the FINAL authority?

You think you have found a gotcha contradiction in condemning Luther for "adding to Scripture" but he was TRANSLATING from Greek/Aramaic into a German dialect for the benefit of the GERMAN people.

How did that work out for the German people?
Have they benefitted from that?
Don't they now tithe their government for the freedom to express their Christian Faith these days?

Like he stated, the clear meaning of that passage as well as other like passages demands that it be affirmed we are not saved by our works but by faith alone because of the grace of God alone.

We are saved by Grace. Period.
Christians are not saved BY FAITH…
and not by faith alone either.
The Church IS VERY CLEAR that Works do NOT MERIT GRACE.
It's false and anti-Christian for non-Catholics to keep pushing this divisive red-herring...
even as they are continued to be told they are wrong time and time again.
Through God’s Mercy we are all saved by Grace- its ALL Grace.
Nothing else is needed. Nothing else we can do to merit that Grace.
And that alone means it is NOT BY Faith.
You contradict your birthday gift analogy by saying
we need Faith to merit that saving Grace.
Faith and Works cooperate with that Grace, yes- but they do not save what God has initiated.
And having Faith IS SOMETHING WE DO.
It is a work- just as confession and prayer is.
St. Paul writes it very clearly there in scripture- that you fail to abide by according to your own standard of final authority.

2 And if I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries
and all knowledge, and if I have all faith,
so as to remove mountains,
but have not love, I am nothing.

Even aside from James "re-interpretation", Faith ALONE- is anti-biblical.
How can you not see this?

You are stuck on the false and accursed gospel of faith AND works to save you. What you and others fail constantly to remember is that GRACE is what saves us THROUGH faith and not our works.

Again- another error in your faith where you must deny scripture-
and pretend it doesn’t exist. I beginning to think that the tighter you wrap yourself in scripture-
the less functional and more errant it becomes for you.
For God’s clearly scriptural word tells us:

6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: (KJV)

….. thou treasurest up to thyself wrath, against the day of wrath,
and revelation of the just judgment of God.
6 Who will render to every man according to his works. (DRA)

God has revealed a truth you wish to ignore.
Faith and Works may be a wrong tandem in your eyes,
and while it does NOT save initially justify, but it is Biblical and for Salvation.
And this is what The Catholic Church teaches.

[Cronos]

Simon “The Rock” wasn’t the founder of the Catholic Church — the founder of the Catholic Church was Jesus.

Simon was renamed Rock by Jesus and told that Jesus would build His community on that Rock.

This wasn’t because Simon was brave or super intelligent or strong - he failed in all of these. What He was, was ready to follow Christ to death.

The fact that we record Simon Peter’s failings and Jesus calling him deceiver.

Jesus here is referring to Peter as Satan in a metaphorical way, as an “adversary” (the literal meaning of “satan”) who, because he is thinking as a man does (we never believe suffering is God’s plan), temporarily becomes an obstacle to Jesus. Jesus was talking of His crucifixion.

NOTE also that Jesus says in Luke 22:31-32 “Simon, Simon, behold, Satan demanded to have you [plural], that he might sift you [plural] like wheat, but I have prayed for you [singular] that your faith may not fail; and when you have turned again, strengthen your brethren”

Since in English we don’t have words to distinguish the second-person singular from the second-person plural, we miss an important switch. Jesus is saying that Satan has demanded to have all twelve of them, to sift them all like wheat. And Jesus’ response to this isn’t to pray for all twelve of them but to pray for one of them, Peter, that his faith might not fail, and then to entrust him with the task of strengthening his brethren.