WHO IS GOD'S TRUE CHURCH ACCORDING TO GOD'S WORD?

[Uber Genius]

Nope! Those who continue in a life of KNOWN UNREPENTANT SIN are not in a saved state with God as they do not know him.

This is called a strawman. It is not good. It is a fallacy.


I didn't claim that Paul was continuing in known unrepentant sin, the passage I quoted says that Paul is struggling with sin. And Rom. 8:1 says that the reason he has the strength to continue his walk is that


IT IS NOT BASED ON GOOD WORKS.


PAUL HAS BEEN ADOPTED AS A SON AND IS NO LONGER A SLAVE.


HE HAS BEEN AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE SAVED BY GRACE, NOT AS A RESULT OF WORKS THAT NO ONE SHOULD BOAST.


AGAIN WE ARE BACK WHERE WE STARTED.


GAL. 3 CALLS THIS SAVED BY GRACE, MAINTAINED BY KEEPING COMMANDMENTS is FOOLISHNESS! He describes those who hold such a view as "Bewitched," now you may have to look that word up, but I guarantee you won't like the definition.

My claim is that YOU ARE CHERRY-PICKING THE DATA OF SCRIPTURE. IF YOU STOP DOING THAT YOU WILL SEE YOUR GRACE/WORKS INFERENCE DOESN'T EXPLAIN A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE NT TEXTS.

 

[Johnny4ChristJesus]

I am not telling people out in the world that I am a saint.

You seem to have the idea that making Jesus attractive is some sort of sellout. That we should be offensive on purpose. Is that what you are saying?

So, let me understand what YOU are saying:

(1) Telling Truth that people don't want to hear is offensive
(2) Being offensive is to be avoided at all costs.
(3) Therefore, sharing Truth that might offend people should be avoided.

Now let me tell you why I WHOLEHEARTEDLY DISAGREE with that logic:

(1) Jesus didn't do that. Jesus offended people more than once. He knew what He was doing and He certainly knew it would offend them. In fact, sometimes He even acknowledged it, like when He said:
"Does this offend you?" right before many of His disciples left. But, I already shared the John 6 passage. You aren't choosing to accept that Scripture.

(2) None of the apostles did that.
(3) Stephen definitely didn't do that.
(4) Here is a study that someone else made me aware of. While I don't necessarily agree with the fullness of reformed theology, many of these statements should be accepted without doubt for true believers. You should read some of the sad survey results for "evangelical Christians", then answer this: At what point does withholding offensive Truth stop?

http://lifewayresearch.com/wp-conte...te-of-American-Theology-2016-Final-Report.pdf

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I thought this might be the case as well. Similarly to how one looks at the Grand Canyon and says "Wow," and is in awe of it without ascribing design.

The genetic code however is so striking because it appears to all to be an information product and everyone across the spectrum of beliefs seems to agree that it has the appearance of design (even Richard Dawkins), I thought maybe she was being a little sloppy. In the way a philosophical naturalist talks about how objectively wrong the Nazi holocaust was, without realizing that he or she is stealing the theist's worldview. But I am undecided on which of the current inferences best describes the data. And if you have other works from her that suggests I read too much into her comments then I will trust your judgement on the matter.

Actually, what she's doing is residing within the same working paradigm of Methodological Naturalism that atheist and science educator, Eugenie Scott, as well as Christian geneticist, Francis Collins, work within, as opposed to the other paradigm of Philosophical Naturalism that is utilized by those like Richard Dawkins.

 

[Uber Genius]

Quoted in the wrong forum...moved.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Because the poster in question has an agenda in which only the Decalogue are to be regarded as God's commandments, for the purpose of arguing that their particular sect--the Seventh Day Adventists--are God's true Church; as only those who observe the Decalogue, especially the keeping of the Sabbath, are truly abiding in the truth of God. I'm simply pointing out that they are inserting their own sectarian doctrine into the text.

Yes, the Decalogue is part of the Torah, but it's not the only part of God's Torah. And not only that, the Torah isn't the only Law God has.

Christ commands "Do not resist an evil person, if someone strikes you on the one cheek, turn and offer the other as well." That's not in the 10 Commandments, it's not in the Torah at all. But it is a commandment, it is God's Law.

For Lutherans the idea of Law means simply this: All which God has commanded is Law. So when we read that no one is justified under the Law, yes it means that no one is justified by observing the 613 mitzvot of the Torah--but it is also part of Paul's repeated refrain throughout his writings that no one is righteous by works, by effort, there is no earning a place with God by trying to be holy enough, righteous enough, good enough since all have fallen short, all sin, and thus our justification, our holiness, our place with God comes from outside of ourselves, as pure gift--as grace--by what God Himself has done for us in Jesus Christ, freely justifying us, and appropriating to us all the things of Christ as pure, unmerited gift.

The Law brings knowledge of sin because the Law condemns sin; so that when I hear the commandment my conscience is pricked as I find myself a sinner under the Law. And so the Law brings death. And no one can be justified by the Law, no one can be holy under the Law; because before the Law all stand condemned as sinners, dead in their trespasses. Both the Jew and the Gentile.

-CryptoLutheran

Believe me, I know what he believes. However, the verses he used are the 10C, but we are not under the 10C but under the commandments of Jesus, which covers those commandments but much more. The only one he misused was Revelation 12:17, but the others directly related to the 10C.

Just because apostles reference the 10C doesn't mean they are the subject of the teaching. The 10C everyone knows, so why not compare them to the commandments of Jesus, the Law of Liberty? Take, for instance, James 2. It was talking about partiality. There is no commandment in the 10C that deals with partiality, but does in the Law of Liberty as partiality is not showing love to the one being held in contempt.

The Law of Liberty is freedom from sin, not freedom to sin. That is the greatest misconception in the Church that Reformationists taught unfortunately ("Sin boldly"). The Law of Liberty is based on John 8:34-36. Therefore, those who want to keep the 10c rather than break them, God will honor. Romans 14. Those who want to break them and believe they are saved doing so, will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

 

[1stcenturylady]

Actually, what she's doing is residing within the same working paradigm of Methodological Naturalism that atheist and science educator, Eugenie Scott, as well as Christian geneticist, Francis Collins, work within, as opposed to the other paradigm of Philosophical Naturalism that is utilized by those like Richard Dawkins.

ROFL!

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I thought this might be the case as well. Similarly to how one looks at the Grand Canyon and says "Wow," and is in awe of it without ascribing design.

The genetic code however is so striking because it appears to all to be an information product and everyone across the spectrum of beliefs seems to agree that it has the appearance of design (even Richard Dawkins), I thought maybe she was being a little sloppy. In the way a philosophical naturalist talks about how objectively wrong the Nazi holocaust was, without realizing that he or she is stealing the theist's worldview. But I am undecided on which of the current inferences best describes the data. And if you have other works from her that suggests I read too much into her comments then I will trust your judgement on the matter.

But, yes, I think your analogy of "Grand Canyon Appreciation" is germane here. Much like that scene in the movie, Gravity, where the gal is adrift in space for a few short moments and faces....the entire enormity of our Milky Way galaxy. Kind of like that..............the impact of that experience will depend on the coherence of rational 'connections' that a person has in his/her brain, as well as, and especially through what 'hidden' orchestrations are made my God's Spirit to move us to that level of "appreciation." So, it's not that those like April will just flat out say, "Nope, that's no proof of a connection." Rather she'll just say there may be connections, but they're few and far between.

 

[Uber Genius]

moved to proper forum.

 

[Uber Genius]

Believe me, I know what he believes. However, the verses he used are the 10C, but we are not under the 10C but under the commandments of Jesus, which covers those commandments but much more. The only one he misused was Revelation 12:17, but the others directly related to the 10C.

Just because apostles reference the 10C doesn't mean they are the subject of the teaching. The 10C everyone knows, so why not compare them to the commandments of Jesus, the Law of Liberty? Take, for instance, James 2. It was talking about partiality. There is no commandment in the 10C that deals with partiality, but does in the Law of Liberty as partiality is not showing love to the one being held in contempt.

The Law of Liberty is freedom from sin, not freedom to sin. That is the greatest misconception in the Church that Reformationists taught unfortunately ("Sin boldly"). The Law of Liberty is based on John 8:34-36. Therefore, those who want to keep the 10c rather than break them, God will honor. Romans 14. Those who want to break them and believe they are saved doing so, will not inherit the Kingdom of God.

By why are we calling this view SDA?

It has no resemblance whatsoever to SDA? Ellen White taught grace alone.

I have only recently been involved in SDA and was stunned to find it perfectly in line with Evangelicalism and the five solas. It is heterodox in that it is sabbatarian but it is not heretical as the OPs views are.

 

[Albion]

The Law of Liberty is freedom from sin, not freedom to sin. That is the greatest misconception in the Church that Reformationists taught unfortunately ("Sin boldly").

It might be more accurate to say that this ^ is the greatest misconception about the Reformation and reformed churches that is held by members of the churches that teach works righteousness instead.

 

[Uber Genius]

WHO IS GOD'S TRUE CHURCH ACCORDING TO GOD'S WORD?

Been studying Ellen White for about 14 months now and your statements don't represent any SDA doctrine I have encountered. I have also been to two SDA churches and am finishing up a 12-month daily SDA study program with a friend who is SDA. Your comments again bear no resemblance to any of the teachings I have encountered. Please document where you are getting these heretical ideas from. Quotes in context would be appreciated.

Here is an article from the official SDA site.

How to Know You’re Saved

"Being good

"But surely," you might say, "God wants us to be good people. He's not going to save people who cheerfully do evil things." First, a caution: I've lived long enough to realize that we can't judge the sinfulness of others with any accuracy, because every human heart, including yours and mine, is "deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked" (Jeremiah 17:9). Nor do we have the right to say for sure whom God will save. Given the kinds of people Jesus brushed shoulders with (thieves, the demon-posessed and prostitutes), it's a safe bet that there will be people in heaven that you and I wouldn't have selected to go there.

Nevertheless, you would have a point. God does want us to be good. Determinedly wicked people aren't trusting in Jesus, or they wouldn't do the things they do. Why should they be in heaven? "Do you not know," writes Paul, "that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?" (1 Corinthians 6:9). Doesn't that mean that you have to be good to be saved?

In fact, it's rather the opposite. Striving to be good is one of the effects of knowing that you're saved. God's Spirit coming into a person's life inevitably produces the fruit of a good character. We may never become quite perfect (for temptation is always there), but our lives will trend in the direction of "love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control" (Galatians 5:22,23). Those who are defiant of God, who neither know nor trust Him, have little interest in doing His will. But God s plan for those who do love Him is pretty clear: "We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them" (Ephesians 2:10)."

And how do we get this "Good?" Life by the Spirit not life by the flesh.

Notice that phrase, "Trends in the direction."

Far from "Keeping all of God's Commandments," as suggested in the OP, we are told that are lives will "Never become quite perfect."

This is standard to Evangelical teaching.

We are saved by grace and perfected by the HS working on transforming our character. We are not again put under the law.

I challenge you to find one Ellen White quote that says otherwise (in context).

Now I'm not SDA. And am only interested in it as a way to help disciple someone who is. But my disciple didn't need any work on the knowledge that they were saved by grace and their salvation is maintained by grace NOT, "BY KEEPING ALL OF GOD's COMMANDMENTS."

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Some comments for your consideration below...

Been studying Ellen White for about 14 months now and your statements don't represent any SDA doctrine I have encountered. I have also been to two SDA churches and am finishing up a 12-month daily SDA study program with a friend who is SDA. Your comments again bear no resemblance to any of the teachings I have encountered. Please document where you are getting these heretical ideas from. Quotes in context would be appreciated. Here is an article from the official SDA site. How to Know You’re Saved

Firstly mate, I provide God's WORD for just about every scripture statement that I make here on the forum. Read the OP. What is it in the OP that you are claiming is not true? Is it that God has people in EVERY CHURCH? Please stop making claims you cannot prove with God's WORD.

We are saved by grace and perfected by the HS working on transforming our character. We are not again put under the law. I challenge you to find one Ellen White quote that says otherwise (in context).Now I'm not SDA. And am only interested in it as a way to help disciple someone who is. But my disciple didn't need any work on the knowledge that they were saved by grace and their salvation is maintained by grace NOT, "BY KEEPING ALL OF GOD's COMMANDMENTS."

My friend, where have I posted anything differently? Where have I ever posted that our salvation is in keeping God's LAW? Please post the link. Trying to say things that I have never said is simply being dishonest.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

By why are we calling this view SDA? It has no resemblance whatsoever to SDA? Ellen White taught grace alone.

I have only recently been involved in SDA and was stunned to find it perfectly in line with Evangelicalism and the five solas. It is heterodox in that it is sabbatarian but it is not heretical as the OPs views are.

You keep claiming that I have posted things here that are not true yet you cannot post what it is you believe I have posted here or elsewhere that is not true. Are you simply spreading misinformation because you have no scripture to share? Please state and post the link to what you believe I have posted that is not true and let's examine your claims. If you cannot than why make claims you cannot disprove with scripture?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

This is called a strawman. It is not good. It is a fallacy.

My friend, what is a strawman? I asked you a question earlier only as a help to the conversation. It had nothing to do with Paul. The question was; is anyone who is professsing to be a christian who is living a life of KNOWN UNREPENTANT SIN in a saved state before God or an unsaved state before God? How can a question be a strawman argument when it is a question? Anyhow, the answer to this question if your interested is here *HEBREWS 10:26-27; 1 JOHN 2:3-4; HEBREWS 6:4-8; REVELATIONS 12:17; 14:12; 22:14

I didn't claim that Paul was continuing in known unrepentant sin, the passage I quoted says that Paul is struggling with sin. And Rom. 8:1 says that the reason he has the strength to continue his walk is that
IT IS NOT BASED ON GOOD WORKS. PAUL HAS BEEN ADOPTED AS A SON AND IS NO LONGER A SLAVE. HE HAS BEEN AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE SAVED BY GRACE, NOT AS A RESULT OF WORKS THAT NO ONE SHOULD BOAST.

Maybe you misunderstood why I asked the question. I did not ask the question because of what you said about Paul.

AGAIN WE ARE BACK WHERE WE STARTED. GAL. 3 CALLS THIS SAVED BY GRACE, MAINTAINED BY KEEPING COMMANDMENTS is FOOLISHNESS! He describes those who hold such a view as "Bewitched," now you may have to look that word up, but I guarantee you won't like the definition. My claim is that YOU ARE CHERRY-PICKING THE DATA OF SCRIPTURE. IF YOU STOP DOING THAT YOU WILL SEE YOUR GRACE/WORKS INFERENCE DOESN'T EXPLAIN A LARGE MAJORITY OF THE NT TEXTS.

Now your making things up that I have never said my friend. Who is telling you that your salvation is maintained by keeping God's Commandments? Please post the link. There is a difference between someone who has saving faith and someone else that has the faith of devils. *JAMES 2:18-20; 26. If your faith does not have the FRUIT of OBEDIENCE then you are still in your sins and your sins if not repented of will keep you out of God's KINGDOM. The gospel is God's power to save a sinner from sin. It is not a liscense to continue to sin. *HEBREWS 10:26-27; 1 JOHN 2:3-4; JOHN 8:31-36; If you are still in your sins you need to be born again. *1 JOHN 3:3-10.

Hope this helps.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Amen! In regards to Romans 1:5, although Paul can speak of people’s initial response of choosing to believe the gospel as an act of obedience, in which he describes it as "obeying the gospel" (Romans 10:16; 1:16), the purpose of Paul’s apostleship was not merely to bring people to conversion but also to bring about transformed lives that were obedient to God.

*Notice that Paul said they HAVE (already) received grace and apostleship FOR/UNTO obedience to the faith. Just as in Ephesians 2:10, Paul said that we are created in Christ Jesus FOR/UNTO good works. We are clearly saved FOR good works, NOT BY good works (Ephesians 2:8-10). Paul did not say that they did not receive grace and apostleship until they produced obedience afterwards.

*We have access by faith into grace.. Romans 5:2 not faith "and obedience/works." We are saved through faith in Christ first, then "unto" obedience/good works.

No one is saying anything differently. Trying to make out that I am saying anything differently is only being dishonest. Funny that when you bring up scriptures showing obedience, people try and label it as works. Yet OBEDIENCE is the very fruit of true faith and without it your faith is dead *JAMES 2:18-20;26

 

[LoveGodsWord]

This is very true, all are under the curse of the letter of the law, and need saving from it... But, I highly doubt that is what "you meant"... Cause this is never, ever you, right...?

2 Corinthians 3:6- "who also made us sufficient as ministers of the new covenant, not of the letter but of the Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life."

Romans 3:23- "for all have sinned and fall short of the glory (perfect obedience) (the high mark of keeping the law fully) (also perfection) of God" (Christ Jesus).

God Bless!

Do you wish to be clear here? What do you mean by saying "But, I highly doubt that is what "you meant"... Cause this is never, ever you, right...?" None have God's Spirit while breaking his commandments neither do they know God *ACTS 2:38; 3:19; GALATIANS 5:16; 1 JOHN 2:3-4

 

[LoveGodsWord]

It's noteworthy that you insert "God's 10 commandments" into texts which simply refer to the Law.

-CryptoLutheran

Why not? The 10 commandments are a part of God's LAW are they not?

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Because the poster in question has an agenda in which only the Decalogue are to be regarded as God's commandments, for the purpose of arguing that their particular sect--the Seventh Day Adventists--are God's true Church; as only those who observe the Decalogue, especially the keeping of the Sabbath, are truly abiding in the truth of God. I'm simply pointing out that they are inserting their own sectarian doctrine into the text.

Yes, the Decalogue is part of the Torah, but it's not the only part of God's Torah. And not only that, the Torah isn't the only Law God has.

Christ commands "Do not resist an evil person, if someone strikes you on the one cheek, turn and offer the other as well." That's not in the 10 Commandments, it's not in the Torah at all. But it is a commandment, it is God's Law.

For Lutherans the idea of Law means simply this: All which God has commanded is Law. So when we read that no one is justified under the Law, yes it means that no one is justified by observing the 613 mitzvot of the Torah--but it is also part of Paul's repeated refrain throughout his writings that no one is righteous by works, by effort, there is no earning a place with God by trying to be holy enough, righteous enough, good enough since all have fallen short, all sin, and thus our justification, our holiness, our place with God comes from outside of ourselves, as pure gift--as grace--by what God Himself has done for us in Jesus Christ, freely justifying us, and appropriating to us all the things of Christ as pure, unmerited gift.

The Law brings knowledge of sin because the Law condemns sin; so that when I hear the commandment my conscience is pricked as I find myself a sinner under the Law. And so the Law brings death. And no one can be justified by the Law, no one can be holy under the Law; because before the Law all stand condemned as sinners, dead in their trespasses. Both the Jew and the Gentile.

-CryptoLutheran

My friend why make up things no one is saying to you? Where have I ever posted and said that anyone is justified or made righteous by the LAW? Please post the link. If you cannot are you only spreading misinformation. I will leave that between you and God.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

Loving your neighbor covers those AND MORE. The "and more" is why the 10C are obsolete and don't quite "cut it" anymore. In the old covenant you couldn't murder, but you could still hate and no one knew. In the New you can't hate which never gets to murder. Even the Pharisees kept the 10C, but Jesus said our righteousness must exceed that of the Pharisees.

The 10C are the bottom line commandments, of which there was no sacrifice in the Old Testament.

I think you miss the point of LOVE and how you cannot separate LOVE from OBEDIENCE to God's LAW because God's 10 Commandments are the very expression of what LOVE is.

* If you LOVE your neighbore will you steal from them?
* If you LOVE your neighbore will you lie to them?
* If you LOVE your neighbore will you kill them?

etc etc...

*If you LOVE God will you have other God's?
*If you LOVE God will you make other God's and bow down to them?
*If you LOVE God will you use his name in vain?

We can go through all the 10 Commandments which are our duty of LOVE to GOD and our fellow man.

Let's look at the scriptures...

What does Jesus say when he talk about the commandments. Jesus is quoting from Old testament scriptures of Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:18.

MATTHEW 22:36-40
[36], Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
[37], Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
[38], This is the first and great commandment.
[39], And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself.
[40], ON THESE TWO COMMANDMENTS HANG ALL THE LAW AND THE PROPHETS.

Let's get clearer...

MATTHEW 19:16-21
[16], And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
[17], And he said unto him, Why call thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: BUT IF YOU WILL ENTER INTO LIFE KEEP THE COMMANDMENTS.
[18], He saith unto him, WHICH? JESUS SAID, THOU SHALT NOT MURDER, THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, THOU SHALT NOT STEAL, THOU SHALT NOT LIE, HONOR YOU MOTHER AND FATHER AND THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF
[20], The young man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?
[21], Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. <Jesus showed him that he may have fulfilled His duty of love to his neighbor but not to God breaking commandment 1 and 2 loving riches more than God>

Well Jesus makes it very clear that what he is talking about it is the 10 commandments of God's Law.

What about James...

JAMES 2:8-12
[8], If ye fulfill the royal law according to the scripture, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF, ye do well:
[9], But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors.
[10], FOR WHOSOEVER SHALL KEEP THE WHOLE LAW AND YET OFFEND IN ONE POINT, HE SHALL BE GUILTY OF ALL.
[11], FOR HE THAT SAID, DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY SAID ALSO DO NOT KILL. NOW IF YOU DO NOT COMMIT ADULTERY AND YOU KILL, YOU HAVE BECOME A TRANSGRESSOR OF GOD'S LAW.
[12], So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty.

Well James makes it very clear what he is talking about when he talks about the Royal Law of love. He is talking about the 10 commandments. So Jesus and James both agree that they are talking about God's 10 commandments which also include the 4th commandment which is one of the ten.

What about Paul? He wrote a lot of books in God's Word...........................

ROMANS 13:8-10
[8], Owe no man anything, but to LOVE ONE ANOTHER: for HE THAT LOVES ANOTHER HAS FULFILLED THE LAW.
[9], For this, THOU SHALT NOT COMMIT ADULTERY, THOU SHALT NOT KILL, THOU SHALT NOT STEAL, THOU SHALT NOT LIE, THOU SHALT NOT COVET; and IF THERE SHALL BE ANY OTHER COMMANDMENT, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, THOU SHALT LOVE THY NEIGHBOR AS THYSELF.
[10], Love works no ill to his neighbor: therefore LOVE IS THE FULFILLING OF THE LAW.

Paul makes it very clear what he is talking about as well when he is talking about God's Law. It seems like Jesus, James and Paul all agree together what it is they are referring to when talking about God's Law. They are all referring to God's 10 commandments which includes the 4th commandment which is one of the ten (Exodus 20:1-17)

So now that God's Word shows us what it is referring to. No need to guess, what we are talking about, God’s Law of Love is God's 10 commandments. It is only through Faith that works by love that anyone can walk in the Spirit which produces the fruit of obedience because love is the fulfilling of God’s Law in those that walk by faith and not by sight.

Hope this helps.

 

[LoveGodsWord]

we sure have the word of God according to you and Luther...

the Sadducees also rejected books of Scripture, maybe they were right after all?

Jesus and the apostles quoted from the LXX,

sola scriptura would be "the LXX alone"

Luther = sola scriptura acceptablus

only those scriptures acceptable, to Luther et al

Luther preferred Paul, he didn't like Saint Peter's Rome, he didn't like the epistle of James, and he didn't much like the revelation of John either

Galatians 2:9

thus, Luther resembles Marcion, who similarly tossed out books he didn't like

in fact, Luther not only subtracted from scripture, but also added to it, according to Wikipedia:

he was criticised for inserting the word "alone" after "faith" in Romans 3:28

as of this moment, the logical truth is as obvious as it will ever have been in human history, from here on out everyone will just forget more and more history

Luther took God's word into his own hands...

and "revised and updated" it
claiming the result as God's

Matthew 12:32 ?

Everything is as it should be. God's WORD has gone to the WORLD just as God wanted it to. We no longer are held in the dark ages not having access to God's WORD and all mankind now has acess to God's written WORD. We are no longer enslaved to indulgences and other unscriptural teachings promoted by the RCC. Only God's WORD is true and we should believe and follow it.