He may not have walked out of the Catholic Church, but he was excommunicated by it.
Yes, his negative talk about the Jews, late in life, was about the worse thing that he ever said.
Upvote
0
He may not have walked out of the Catholic Church, but he was excommunicated by it.I am not so sure Luther was the father of Protestantism. Yes, he presented the Catholic Church with his 95 theses but he never left the Catholic Church and he did not disown his leadership in it.
His main purpose was to challenge indulgences which were being used to make money and not always for the Catholic Church. Some used them to pocket the money for themselves.
He never challenged the hierarchy, transubstantiation, or the place of the priesthood in the church. From what I have read it was another priest in Germany who took up Luther's thoughts and started the breakaway from the Catholic Church.
Having done that he took a lot of the church with him as the Protestant Communion is nothing more than an expression of the Catholic Mass, the Pastor is nothing more than an expression of the Catholic Priest, church leaders dressing up to lead meetings is nothing more than the Catholic regalia to show the superiority of the chosen few and denominations are nothing more than various branches of the Catholic Church.
So what we really have is a variation on the Catholic Church but not a true protestant church except in a few circumstances, mainly churches that meet in the home as the New Testament Church did.
Yes, his negative talk about the Jews, late in life, was about the worse thing that he ever said.Believe me....Luther said a lot worse things than “sin boldly “ lol
He may not have walked out of the Catholic Church, but he was excommunicated by it.
Yes, his negative talk about the Jews, late in life, was about the worse thing that he ever said.
I always refer to myself as a “Jesus man”. A free man in Christ....I agree with EVERTHING Harry Ironside said....check out Or google ironside gospel and you will see everthing I hold dear in Christianity. God bless you,fine woman
Lutherans, by enlarge, reject double predestination, irresistible grace, limited atonement and perseverance of the saints (OSAS). The problem is, if you reject any of the five points, you would have to reject them all because they all are based on the same concept. Lutherans reject 3.5 of the five points of Calvinism.
Being excommunicated is quite different from walking away from it. I was excommunicated from a Protestant church this year because I asked the preacher a question. Apparently, you did not do this as it suggests the preacher is not infallible.
If I had not been excommunicated, I would still be part of it because I loved the people and got on really well with them.
Preach brother!We Wesleyans believe in sanctification, which takes the desire to sin boldly away.
I am sort of a Presbyterian. My church is a Non-Denom that adheres to the WCF.
Westminster Confession of Faith. It's the primary standard for conservative Presbyterians -- subordinate to Scripture, of course.What is WCF?
Interesting. I've not seen that quote. Lutheran theology does stress assurance and justification, but it also allows for the possibility of losing faith. That isn't talked about much, or at least that was my experience in being LCMS Lutheran.
They seem extremely similar to me, except that Lutherans seem to reject the idea of "irresistible grace." What other major differences are there
When you read widely in CF, you begin to appreciate what "sin boldly" means. Luther was not, of course, encouraging people to sin. However many Christians are so in fear of sinning that they get tied up in knots worrying about their shortcomings. Jesus was more concerned that we help people than that we be perfect.
I don’t believe that Luther is encouraging God’s people to sin. He would never do that IMO. Perhaps something is lost in translation.What are the views of your denomination, and what denomination is that. Thanks.
I don’t believe that Luther is encouraging God’s people to sin. He would never do that IMO. Perhaps something is lost in translation.
He is, however, preaching a strong message of eternal security and salvation by grace alone.
I believe what he is trying to convey is that in order for a person to have true justifying faith and throw all of their hope for salvation on Jesus requires that they fully identify with their sinful nature not only before conversion but after conversion as well.
Most of us have who believe in the eternal security of the believer have entered into threads here in the forum where certain people (more than a few) have so much emphasized the necessity for holy living (in order to stay saved as they see things) that they have lapsed over into a gospel of works rather than grace through faith. That is, of course, no gospel at all.
I’m not saying that anyone who doesn’t believe in eternal security is preaching another gospel. But there are many who do IMO.
Only God knows the heart of course and He’ll have to sort out who has “fallen from grace” in their gospel and who has not.
I think what Luther is trying to say in the quote is that we must truly see ourselves as great sinners or else it is impossible that we can truly see Jesus as our great Savior. After all, believing that you are “saved” requires that you believe there is something to be saved “from”.
As Luther would likely quote for us, “Therefore, I tell you, her many sins have been forgiven--as her great love has shown. But whoever has been forgiven little loves little." Luke 7:47
I don't belong to a particular denomination but most protestants who believe what Jesus told us about never again coming into condemnation would agree with Luther - assuming he really did mean what I think he did.
All Protestants who know church history knows that it was Martin Luther who is the father of Protestantism. Since then, many Protestant denominations have arisen with differing beliefs on grace and sin and salvation. They differ from the most liberal - sin so grace can abound, all the way to sinless perfection.
Here is a letter from Martin Luther on his view. "Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger.
Here is the letter in context. What are the views of your denomination, and what denomination is that. Thanks.
If you are a preacher of mercy, do not preach an imaginary but the true mercy. If the mercy is true, you must therefore bear the true, not an imaginary sin. God does not save those who are only imaginary sinners. Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world. We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides. We, however, says Peter (2. Peter 3:13) are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth where justice will reign. It suffices that through God’s glory we have recognized the Lamb who takes away the sin of the world. No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day. Do you think such an exalted Lamb paid merely a small price with a meager sacrifice for our sins? Pray hard, for you are quite a sinner.
I'm of the group that understands we are transformed from sinners to saints at our conversion. Following salvation it is normal to do what is right. It is abnormal to sin. If we sin, we repent and are forgiven. If the sin is habitual, we confront the sin by talking about it with others and figuring out a way to remove it from our lives. As saints, to do righteousness is normal. To sin means we need our mind to be renewed in some way. To sin is to do something that is completely contrary to our new nature. To sin grieves the Holy Spirit. The "struggle with the flesh" is non-existent because the flesh was circumcised and cut off (Romans 7 is talking from Saul's perspective, not Paul's), rather the aim is to have our minds renewed so that we live out who we are on the inside: and who are we on the inside? Our true nature is awesome, loving, caring etc. Adam and Eve sinned even though they didn't have a sinful nature. Our sins, after we are saved, are like Adam and Eve. We might sin via external temptation but this is rare. Jesus saves us and therefore our life is in Him. There's a lot more to say but hopefully I've given a basic idea of how we think about salvation and sin. I believe we can live sinless lives. I believe what we believe about sin affects how we act. If we believe we can't stop sinning because the flesh is always battling with Spirit, we'll keep sinning. But if we render the flesh dead, as it is, we live in the Spirit. Here's a link to a transcript of some preaching that is similar.
Read “On the Jews and Their Lies” and let us know if you still think he would never encourage Christians to sin.I don’t believe that Luther is encouraging God’s people to sin. He would never do that IMO. Perhaps something is lost in translation.
This part really made me grimace: "No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day." I don't know of anywhere in the Bible where it states that sin doesn't separate you from God. No where does any apostle advocate sinning.
Read “On the Jews and Their Lies” and let us know if you still think he would never encourage Christians to sin.
Sin can't separate us from God if we are in Christ, not unless we want to become Roman Catholic can we affirm this. Every Reformed and Lutheran Protestant believes that we are held firmly in Jesus grasp, and that all our sins are forgiven, past, present, and future. This is nothing new.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?