Zwingli and luther stated the reformation

[lori milne]

Why did so many reformed prodistin Christians get killed But CALV was a hero??

Zwingli and Luther started the reformation
Correction on title

 

[drstevej]

Not sure I get your point.

 

[Norah63]

Bumped. May we hear more.

 

[lori milne]

Well they are the first to start the reformation and Their theology has nothing to do with Calvin's.

So why do so many fallow the CALV theology
And just to go their OSAS and the hyper grace is a steam off the Calvinist theology being that one can't loose ones salvation vs free will like Luther and Zwinglys theology

 

[faroukfarouk]

I think the issue is the Bible, rather than he said/she said. Romans 8.38-39 is a great promise.

 

[lori milne]

I think the issue is the Bible, rather than he said/she said. Romans 8.38-39 is a great promise.

Well unfortunately with this theology " it causes a major contradiction with what the bible says is the consequences for sin vs an election of people who are promised eternal life and now ware the consequences for sinning now for some reason don't apply

 

[drstevej]

Well they are the first to start the reformation and Their theology has nothing to do with Calvin's.

So why do so many fallow the CALV theology
And just to go their OSAS and the hyper grace is a steam off the Calvinist theology being that one can't loose ones salvation vs free will like Luther and Zwinglys theology

Luther taught Free Will?


"Let all the 'free-will' in the world do all it can with all its strength; it will never give rise to a single instance of ability to avoid being hardened if God does not give the Spirit, or of meriting mercy if it is left to its own strength." Bondage of the Will, p. 202

 

[lori milne]

Luther taught Free Will? "Let all the 'free-will' in the world do all it can with all its strength; it will never give rise to a single instance of ability to avoid being hardened if God does not give the Spirit, or of meriting mercy if it is left to its own strength." Bondage of the Will, p. 202

Yes Luther did teach free will
Being in bondage of free will is in fact what he meant

 

[lori milne]

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/fi...-predestination-isnt-calvinist-predestination
This was an essay done on the study of Luthers stance on predestination.

Luthers Lectures on Genesis , given in the last decade of his life, Luther speaks at length on the subject of predestination once more (I will quote only bits of it in what follows, but you can read the whole thing in LW 5:43-50): “I hear that here and there among the nobles and persons of importance vicious statements are being spread abroad concerning predestination or God’s foreknowledge. For this is what they say: ‘If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works.’ . . . If the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help

 

[Architeuthus]

Well they are the first to start the reformation and Their theology has nothing to do with Calvin's.

That's not true, actually.

Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on free will.

Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on predestination too.

Here is some of what Wikipedia says about Luther:

Luther in response maintained that sin incapacitates human beings from working out their own salvation, and that they are completely incapable of bringing themselves to God. As such, there is no free will for humanity because any will they might have is overwhelmed by the influence of sin. Central to his analysis, both of the doctrines under discussion and of Erasmus's specific arguments, are Luther's beliefs concerning the power and complete sovereignty of God.

Luther concluded that unredeemed human beings are dominated by Satan; Satan, as the prince of the mortal world, never lets go of what he considers his own unless he is overpowered by a stronger power, i.e. God. When God redeems a person, he redeems the entire person, including the will, which then is liberated to serve God. No-one can achieve salvation or redemption through their own choices—people do not choose between good or evil, because they are naturally dominated by evil, and salvation is simply the product of God unilaterally changing a person's heart and turning them to good ends. Were it not so, Luther contended, God would not be omnipotent and would lack total sovereignty over creation, and Luther held that arguing otherwise was insulting to the glory of God. As such, Luther concluded that Erasmus was not actually a Christian.

 

[lori milne]

That's not true, actually. Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on free will. Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on predestination too. Here is some of what Wikipedia says about Luther: Luther in response maintained that sin incapacitates human beings from working out their own salvation, and that they are completely incapable of bringing themselves to God. As such, there is no free will for humanity because any will they might have is overwhelmed by the influence of sin. Central to his analysis, both of the doctrines under discussion and of Erasmus's specific arguments, are Luther's beliefs concerning the power and complete sovereignty of God. Luther concluded that unredeemed human beings are dominated by Satan; Satan, as the prince of the mortal world, never lets go of what he considers his own unless he is overpowered by a stronger power, i.e. God. When God redeems a person, he redeems the entire person, including the will, which then is liberated to serve God. No-one can achieve salvation or redemption through their own choices—people do not choose between good or evil, because they are naturally dominated by evil, and salvation is simply the product of God unilaterally changing a person's heart and turning them to good ends. Were it not so, Luther contended, God would not be omnipotent and would lack total sovereignty over creation, and Luther held that arguing otherwise was insulting to the glory of God. As such, Luther concluded that Erasmus was not actually a Christian.

Wikipedia ?
Go get one of Luthers books he doesn't agree with the elect AT ALL and his agreement to free will is a verbal twist around " is the only way I can say it because with out predestination their is only free will it would be impossible other wise

 

[lori milne]

That's not true, actually. Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on free will. Luther and Zwingli both agreed with Calvin on predestination too. Here is some of what Wikipedia says about Luther: Luther in response maintained that sin incapacitates human beings from working out their own salvation, and that they are completely incapable of bringing themselves to God. As such, there is no free will for humanity because any will they might have is overwhelmed by the influence of sin. Central to his analysis, both of the doctrines under discussion and of Erasmus's specific arguments, are Luther's beliefs concerning the power and complete sovereignty of God. Luther concluded that unredeemed human beings are dominated by Satan; Satan, as the prince of the mortal world, never lets go of what he considers his own unless he is overpowered by a stronger power, i.e. God. When God redeems a person, he redeems the entire person, including the will, which then is liberated to serve God. No-one can achieve salvation or redemption through their own choices—people do not choose between good or evil, because they are naturally dominated by evil, and salvation is simply the product of God unilaterally changing a person's heart and turning them to good ends. Were it not so, Luther contended, God would not be omnipotent and would lack total sovereignty over creation, and Luther held that arguing otherwise was insulting to the glory of God. As such, Luther concluded that Erasmus was not actually a Christian.

That quote you used was only for the question of free will and he answered it the best way he could with out being killed or wares against ?
It was a threat to the church "free will "
And 1000 were killed

Look up what Calvinism vs Luther Protestant
??
Luther was a Protestant and Calvin was not a Protestant but is called the name? He was hired by Catholic Church and considers the Christian pope ??

Luther Protestants vs Calvinism


Luthers predestination is for all men but not all men choice CHRIST.

Calvin's is for an elect that are called and come regardless. And only a few are called.

Luther said what would the bible be needed for of Calvin is correct or the prophets jesus died on the cross for no reason it. would all be useless.

" ‘If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works.’ . . . If the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help"

 

[Norah63]

As late as 2011 the Protestant church in Geneva, I believe it was, refused a Servetus recognition.
Free thinking has always been bought with a dear price.
The errors of trinity still cause much controversy.

 

[Architeuthus]

Luther believed in predestination, not in "free will." In his own words:

"free-will is a nonentity, a thing consisting of name alone"

"The will of man without the grace of God is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil since it cannot turn itself to good."

"If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright."

"Free will without God's grace is not free will at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil, since it cannot turn itself to good."

"God foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, 'Free-will' is thrown prostrate, and utterly dashed to pieces."

"He that will maintain that man's free will is able to do or work anything in spiritual cases, be they never so small, denies Christ."

Luther is actually saying that those who preach "free will" deny Christ!

 

[Albion]

Luther believed in predestination, not in "free will." In his own words:

"free-will is a nonentity, a thing consisting of name alone"

Denied Free Will, but was not a believer in Predestination as we usually understand that term, or as Calvin did.

 

[Architeuthus]

Denied Free Will, but was not a believer in Predestination as we usually understand that term, or as Calvin did.

Believing there is no free will (and following Augustine), Luther certainly accepted predestination as we understand the term, and argued strongly for it in On the Bondage of the Will.

There are probably differences from Calvin's viewpoint (although that is debated), but they are subtle.

 

[lori milne]

Luther believed in predestination, not in "free will." In his own words:

"free-will is a nonentity, a thing consisting of name alone"

"The will of man without the grace of God is not free at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil since it cannot turn itself to good."

"If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright."

"Free will without God's grace is not free will at all, but is the permanent prisoner and bondslave of evil, since it cannot turn itself to good."

"God foreknows nothing by contingency, but that He foresees, purposes, and does all things according to His immutable, eternal, and infallible will. By this thunderbolt, 'Free-will' is thrown prostrate, and utterly dashed to pieces."

"He that will maintain that man's free will is able to do or work anything in spiritual cases, be they never so small, denies Christ."

Luther is actually saying that those who preach "free will" deny Christ!

first the definitoin of Luthers idea of free will and predestination arent being presented clearly.
second its absolutely impossible to not believe in both free will and predestination they go hand and hand and cant any other way.

if your predestined then you have no will to do anything about it?
if you have no free will to turn away or err then your predestined?
Luthers version of election was that ALL men were called and predestined but not all come'
and was Gods will becuase he is for-knowing

he made 2 points about free will
1. we have no free will in that God is for knowing and imputes his permissible will on all we've done then taking away are free will.
2. we have two choices evil or good, if then being corrupted we are not able to with out GOD able to be righteous then taking away are will to choose.
once receiving God he imputes his righteousness on us which if we have the TRUE Faith and with in his imputed righteousness we then again have no free will to choose evil.
is this the same as calvins free will and predestination theology NO
the calvin theology believe in an elect group that cant choose to leave the election and those who were not the elect cant choose to be elected.

Pdf link to the book
https://www.lutheransonline.com/lo/671/FSLO-1344356671-111671.pdf

 

[lori milne]

Believing there is no free will (and following Augustine), Luther certainly accepted predestination as we understand the term, and argued strongly for it in On the Bondage of the Will.

There are probably differences from Calvin's viewpoint (although that is debated), but they are subtle.

yes totally Luther and Calvin had way different definitions of predestination and free will

 

[Architeuthus]

first the definitoin of Luthers idea of free will and predestination arent being presented clearly.

The sentences in blue were what Luther actually said.

second its absolutely impossible to not believe in both free will and predestination they go hand and hand and cant any other way.

I agree with you. Luther believed both in "no to free will" and in "yes to predestination."

Luthers version of election was that ALL men were called and predestined but not all come

This is just not true.

In his Preface to the Epistle to the Romans, for example, Luther says "all things whatever arise from and depend upon the Divine appointment, whereby it was preordained who should receive the word of life and who should disbelieve it, who should be delivered from their sins and who should be hardened in them, who should be justified and who condemned."

Luther believed the same thing as Calvin!

Modern Lutherans do not believe what Luther believed, however.

 

[lori milne]

To

Architeuthus

Calvin's definitions and Luther definition of predestination and free will were were not the same in any way
Ill use your quot to explain,
"all things whatever arise from and depend upon the Divine appointment, whereby it was preordained who should receive the word of life and who should disbelieve it, who should be delivered from their sins and who should be hardened in them, who should be justified and who condemned."
now the words " depend upon is clear but divine appointment is clearer, but he goes further to explain just in your qoute alone that their are clearly brethern who err from the faith and again with ""those that are delivered from sin" i will explain why they are relevent and absolutly against john Calvins theology.
He agrees with no free will and yes to predestination because God is for-knowing and hence, it is Gods permissible will that it happens, so their for their is no will of are own and we are in fact predestined, NOW according to Luther it is for ALL men and we are self's don't know the out come of are own "choices" but since God does then he Agrees with predestination and no free will.
NOW is that the same as Calvinism NO.
does he say we have no free will out side of GODS for knowledge NO (in fact i quoted him saying ";If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works? If the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help' this is not a contradiction BTW it is in fact clearly a disagreement with a different definition of an election/predestination.


Calvin theology which then was the roman catholic churches stance as well is their is an elect "PREDESTINATION" group that are chosen to go to heaven and no one else can go even if they wanted to "NO FREE WILL" and any one who wanted to leave the faith /fall away couldn't if they tried, NOW read the qoute again knowing the difference and youll see the difference in definitions being used.

;If I am predestined, I shall be saved, whether I do good or evil. If I am not predestined, I shall be condemned regardless of my works? If the statements are true, as they, of course, think, then the incarnation of the Son of God, His suffering and resurrection, and all that He did for the salvation of the world are done away with completely. What will the prophets and all Holy Scripture help? What will the sacraments help'

"all things whatever arise from and depend upon the Divine appointment, whereby it was preordained who should receive the word of life and who should disbelieve it, who should be delivered from their sins and who should be hardened in them, who should be justified and who condemned."


Luther tipped toed around it I think' just to avoid the attacks it brought and any one who claimed free will were attacked by the church as many lives were taken and wars were waged! bellow is a quote of luther in his Book bondage of the will explaining to Erasmus that his disgruntled view of free will is so bad that if it were not against Luther him self the church would attack him for his assumptions on free will being true. NOW before you go trying to use this as a point its not a good one;just to give you heads up. you'll have to read the entire book plus Erasmus original letter to Luther. Erasmus believed that God waited for us to choice to then know and he was going on about how the bible had contradictions and was
unclear. Luther was upset one because he was teaching this and it wasn't even a solid belief, it was mostly questions then answers . this is Luther's Quote:
And yet the papists pardon and put up with these enormities of yours simply because you are writing against Luther; otherwise, if Luther were out of the way and you wrote such things, they would get their teeth into you and tear you to shreds."


Now you can say Calvin and Luther shared a believe of free will and predestination but when you find out what each others definitions are of the words you'll see they are actually not in agreement at all.\

Zwingli's theology was aligned with Luthers and he was warred against and Killed by the church as was 1000 of his followers.
why want Luther Killed? their are many answers to that in History and exciting story's either way.