Sola Scriptura: A Tradition of Men 5


Peter & the KeysCharles Allen: All things must be tested to God’s word which is truth then we must ask if these oral teachings were tested to God’s word. So does the catechism of the CC church test these oral traditions to scripture ? If they were not tested by scripture then how are we to be sure of their validity ie that they were not merely man’s invention.
Sola scripture just means that things must be tested to scripture as the only reliable source of truth – it was not an invention of Luther’s but always existed.

BFHU:  Where has Sola Scriptura always existed? It did not exist until Martin Luther invented it. Did you know that because of his adherence to Sola Scriptura Luther had the audacity  to delete 7 books from the NT that conflicted with his doctrines.

For instance, he taught that we are saved by faith alone. Sola Fide. But, in James we find these words;

James 2:24 You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Well, Martin Luther did not like that so he just took it out of his translation of the Bible into German along with other books of canonized Scripture. I think it was 7 OT and 7 NT. He took them out b/c his doctrine of sola scriptura conflicted with his doctrine of  sola fide.

He also added the word alone to Eph 2:8 in an outrageous attempt to bolster his doctrine of Sola Fide.

“saved through faith alone.” Here is what it actually says:

Ephesians 2:8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God—

Yes, Charles, nothing the Catholic Church teaches contradicts or conflicts with Scripture. Catholic teachings do, however, conflict with Protestant interpretations of Scripture.

Because Protestants tend to think, as you do, that they can infallibly interpret scripture*, (see note below) then, when the Catholic Church teaches something they don’t agree with because they have a different interpretation, they assert that Catholic teachings conflict with Scripture. But that is not correct. Catholic teachings merely conflict with various INTERPRETATIONS of Scripture. That is not the same thing as actually conflicting with Scripture. And, not only that, Catholic interpretations are 2000 years old. Protestant interpretations only go back 500 years.

But where in Scripture does it say anything close to”

“all things must be tested to God’s word which is truth”?

Scripture does say:

I Thess. 5:20 do not despise prophesying, 21 but test everything;hold fast what is good, 22 abstain from every form of evil.

St. Paul clearly says not to despise prophesying, that would certainly be ORAL not written. But to test it. He NOWHERE SAYS TO TEST IT BY GOD’S WORD, SCRIPTURE OR ANYTHING OF THE SORT.

The Catholic Church does test everything by both the oral and the written Teachings of the Apostles.

Once again, Charles, you are adding to Scripture what just is not there. Therefore, you are now making up traditions of men.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

*NOTE:  By the way, I am not making a false accusation agains Charles. In a comment on another post:

Let us take note that in answer to my question:

Do you think you can infallibly interpret scripture?

Charles said,

“Yes”

About these ads

66 Responses

  1. You know my answer was not an unqualified ‘yes’ – why not post my full answer.

  2. How would you test a prophecy other than by scripture. The only other way is if the prophecy has come true. There are many false prophets so we need to test any prophecy to scripture.

  3. Dear Charles,

    How was your “yes” qualified? I gave a link to your full answer which did not change the fact that you believe you can interpret Scripture infallibly. I appreciate your honesty b/c in fact Protestant all must think they are infallible interpreters of Scripture or else they would at least consider other legitimate interpretations. But, many think any Catholic interpretation or different interpretation is demonic heresy. This is exactly why there are thousands of Protestant denominations.

    I would certainly test any prophecy with Scripture but not with Scripture alone with my private interpretation alone….

    II Peter 1:20 First of all you must understand this, that no prophecy of scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation…..

    • BFHU – you admitted previously that you were twisting Peter 1.20 and that it does not mean what you and many catholics believe – you leave out the whole reading which goes onto say that Peter is telling us that the word of God does not come from man’s thoughts(interpretations) but from the Holy Spirit and can therefore be trusted as truth – it means the opposite of what you are trying to say. Why are you changing back to your previous error

      I believe that a christian if he humbles himself and reads scripture with an honest mind , prays to God about it CAN infallibly interpret scripture – if this was not the case then no one would be able to read and interpret scripture.

      “I write this to you about those who would deceive you; but the anointing which you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that any one should teach you; as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie, just as it has taught you, abide in him.” (1 John 2:26-27 RSV)

      The points of salvation are not hard to understand and Jesus said even a child can understand the message of salvation.

      Catholics have so many different cults but under one umbrella – they disagree on many things that can only be corrected by scripture since this is the only God given truth.

      • That’s actually 2 Pet 1:20 about the warning against private interpretation. As is usually in the case of Charles, he fails to distinguish between the commendable private devotional bible reading and the stance dancing of an agnostic who publicly disdains established Christian doctrines and habitually substitutes his private judgment over that of the Church’s. There is even a growing disenchantment with the practice of private interpretation among Protestants as they are beginning to recognize the folly of it and the fear of being “secret heretics” because of it (See example, http://christianthought.hbu.edu/2013/09/23/should-we-give-up-on-private-bible-reading/).

        Many people commonly misread 2 Pet 1:20 contextually by limiting the warning therein to biblical prophecies only (Of course, Mat 16:18 is also an prophecy about the establishment of the Church and her authority on earth). The demarcation of chapters and verses in the bible was a fairly late invention. The warning in 2 Pet 1:20 is explained immediately following it in chapter 2. We read:

        “But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction. And many will follow their licentiousness, and because of them the way of truth will be reviled” (2 Pet 2:1-2).

        When we begin to see the assertion of the “infallibility” of individual Christians to interpret scripture contrary to a Church established by Christ to govern and teach ALONE in His name, it is a clear sign that they are the forewarned false prophets, false teachers secretly bringing destructive heresies. Being forewarned is also being forearmed against these heretics who are busy doing the work of the Devil here. Their deeds are willful and malicious. God spares your soul.

  4. Peter says that scripture comes from the Holy Spirit and can be relied upon – nothing to do with not reading scripture.

    About heresies peter is saying that men will bring in their own heresies by twisting scripture – this is a separate topic which you are trying to use against reading the bible.

    Heresies are multiplying because christians are NOT reading the bible
    ie they are straying from the truth and not checking the preachers like the Bereans did.
    The Bible is the plumb line by which all doctrine should be tested.

  5. The problem with you, Charles, is that you have consistently failed to understand anything no matter how simple it’s being explained to you. No one is talking about not being able to read the bible privately, it’s the PRIVATE INTERPRETATION of it which is damned. A heresy is the result of someone who privately misinterpreted the bible contrary to orthodoxy, nothing to do with bible reading itself. Since you like to quote the Protestant cliche “the bible is the plumb line”, then maybe you should put it into practice just for once in your life. The Bereans were more “noble” because they were teachable, unlike those from Thessalonica who were consumed with similar preconceived ideas like your anti-intellectual, anti-Catholic biases and prejudices as a former Protestant and now less than a half-baked Catholic. Do you even consider studying Catholicism taught by Catholic authors first? The difference between you and me is that I insure that I studied and understood Catholicism very firmly entering this world of great confusion and ungodliness. You seem to devoid of any BASIC catechesis of your faith. You need to discard your baggage as a former Protestant and start to study bible with the eyes of faith as a believing Catholic with the guidance of Mother Church. Or maybe you should really consider just re-joining the former happy company of Protestants instead of staying in the Church as a cafeteria Catholic with so little self-respect, honor and integrity.

    You are indeed straying from truths, and that makes you an agnostic and a heretic. If you really can honestly call it God’s work by the the myriad of divisive and opposing core doctrines as a direct result of Sola Scriptura and Private Interpretation, then you should be a professed Protestant and be a proud one for it. If you are such a miserable Catholic, you should move on to a Protestant blog where you will find more congeniality and sympathy to your views.

    • Your main problem seems to be that you think that the Holy Spirit has been promised to EVERY SINGLE INDIVIDUAL BELIEVER with the ability to know and arrive at the truth. No such promise was ever given. When Christ promised that the Holy Spirit “will teach you all things, and bring to remembrance all that I have said to you (Jn 14:26) and “will guide you into all the truth” (Jn 16:13), He was speaking to the Apostles only. Read it for yourself in context. Only the Devil and those who are oppressed and possessed by the Evil One will twist and turn God’s words in this way.

      • We all receive the Holy Spirit at Baptism as promised by Peter and your Catholic Church or as with children at their confirmation – you dont seem to know what your church teaches.
        No Jesus was speaking to all genuine Christians – all Christians must walk in the spirit – how can we do this without receiving the spirit.

        Private Interpretaion – you keep going on about this – you are misquoting Peter – he is NOT saying you cannot interpret the Bible – he is saying that the bible does not come from man’s thoughts (interpretations) but from the Holy Spirit – so it can be trusted . You cant get your head round the meaning of one sentence.

      • Actually, the Holy Spirit and atoning blood of Christ have been promised to everyone as a Covenant, regardless of whether they believe or not; which is why the Catholic and Lutheran catechisms proclaim universal atonement (catholic atonement). Additionally, we both proclaim vicarious atonement in our catechisms as well. Check your Baltimore Catechism for instance or other compatible version.

        This however doesn’t mean that all will accept these means of grace offered by God through baptism and the Eucharist. Those of Hindi, Buddha, Muhammad, and etc… have chosen generational separation for themselves and the next generation; from the truth of their Hebrew-Israeli-Jewish faith under the Law through the Old Testament. They no longer have bondage to the Old Testament and are completely estranged from God until reclaimed by God’s saving Grace, through his Word, and sacrament under Faith, in the Holy Trinity “alone”.

        Apart from God there’s no salvation. The true “Protestants” are the Hindi, Buddha, Muhammad, and etc…

        Trinitarian Judeo-Christianity may have congregational divisions, doctrinal disputes, and varying bylaws; though sufficient Word and sacrament are generally present and adequately available towards salvation. The Roman-Catholic Counter-Reformation and subsequent Inquisitions are still dividing the Catholic Church today as too much distrust hasn’t yet been overcome to make Christians feel comfortable returning to Rome for their spirituality. It’s extremely crude and cruel for the papacy to proclaim those at war with Christianity are saved by ignorance; while those faithful to God outside of Rome will go to Hell for not being “Roman” enough.

        Just when society was beginning to heal and return to Rome for religious comfort, following the Middle-Ages; the 20th century Catholic League and papacy promoted Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini on their rise to power. Just because they were the candidates who claimed to be adherents of the Roman-Catholic faith. As we well know, these politicians helped to rid Catholicism of its Lutheran and Jew problems and began genocide on those outside the “Roman” Church. Lutheran Reverend Dietrich Bonhoeffer of the Lutheran Confessing Church made a failed attempt at the assassination of Adolf Hitler to save the lives of fellow Lutheran congregants taken into concentration camps. The LCMS and WELS congregations throughout the US were a refuge to Confessional Lutherans who fled and escaped the NAZI regime. Most of the NAZI survivors in the US Lutheran congregations have passed on from old age, but as a youth, they used to tell their accounts of what happened in Germany before being liberated by Allied Forces.

        Unfortunately the papacy ended-up taking a reactive stance against the Axis Powers after it was too late, and their candidates of choice had wreaked carnage across the globe. This simply isn’t the infallibility and or quality of decision making expected of the papacy who claims an authority to a Chair of Saint Peter, or any other Apostle.

    • Your usual mess of pottage and abuse without any facts. Catholics in the main barely read the Bible and in the past it was forbidden to read.
      Even many priests admitted not reading the Bible – it gathered dust.

      When the last two Popes said that all faiths lead to God does he get this from scripture ??? Previous Popes have said no communion with any other pagan belief systems – so which Popes are infallible ?????

      When he allowed medicine men to bless him was this heretical ??

      Do catholics love Hinduism Buddhism Islam more than protestants – I get the impression that you do .

      • I was talking about Christ’s promise of being able to know and arrive at truth and you are muttering unintelligibly about the reception of the Spirit at Baptism. Are the two events synonymous to you?

        Again, St. Peter was talking about the pitfalls of private interpretation: destructive heresies. Did you ever learn reading comprehension in school at all?

        Yes, it’s very likely that a righteous pagan will get save instead of a hardened sinner who worship Charles-ianity indeed. Just be sure that you can’t claim to be invincibly ignorant of what all good Christians have been trying to tell you all along.

        Oh yes, of course the ultimate nonsensical escape clause: “(speaking to) genuine Christians” just like what a stepchild of another great heretic, John Calvin, will say.

        You be happy with misery as your company. I have better time to do.

        • The private interpretation Peter is talking about in 2.1 is that the words of scripture come from the Holy Spirit not from man’s thoughts.

          In the next chapter Peter is talking about misinterpreting scripture – you are trying to confuse the two verses .

          It is you that has no comprehension.

          You said that only the apostles receive the Holy Spirit ????

          So the heretics will be saved in Buddism Hinduism Islam but the protestant Christians will be damned according to surkikoism .

          Yes there are tares and wheat within the church – genuine christians and tares – it is not calvinism but straight from scripture.

          • “The private interpretation Peter is talking about in 2.1 is that the words of scripture come from the Holy Spirit not from man’s thoughts.
            In the next chapter Peter is talking about misinterpreting scripture – you are trying to confuse the two verses.”

            Misinterpretation as a result of the private interpretation of scripture. That’s the context, context, context. It is a continuing theme. You may be confused with the demarcation of chapters and verses which can be quite arbitrary and do not form as a part of the inspired scripture.

            • God wants us to read the bible – Jesus wants us to read the bible – Peter wants us to read the bible. You are confusing these two verses-
              trying to make out that Peter is saying if you dont read the bible you will be safe from error. I stand by my interpretation as even a child would know what Peter is saying. Your agenda seems to be – dont read the bible – or dont read it too much and you will still be saved.

              1 Peter says that scripture comes from the Holy Spirit not from man’s thoughts – so can be trusted.

              2 Peter warns about men who will (deliberately) misinterpret scripture.

              No where in the Bible does it tell an individual not to read scripture – indeed Paul commended the Berean’s for doing this.

              If you think that anyone can read something without interpreting the passage then you have a problem .

              You dont have to worry about catholics since most never read scripture outside of the 5 minutes of the Sunday service – meaning that they probably live out their lives without reading the WHOLE counsel of scripture.

              “Man cannot live by bread alone but by EVERY WORD of GOD – (THE WHOLE BIBLE)

              You think that anyone reading the Bible must have a priest sitting beside him ?????

              • You can’t simply make up your own rules and definitions. Sadly … no one, and even an average Protestant will run scarce from you. Be patient and first learn what’s properly meant by “private interpretation” in the common theological usage or risk being incoherent and irrelevant. Is it really so difficult for you to distinguish between private devotional bible reading and private interpretation of it contrary to the dogmatic teachings of the Church? We are only talking about the latter here. The only sure way of guaranteeing orthodoxy is by reading the bible with the mind of the Church … or risk heresies (contra-orthodoxy). To read about “private interpretation” in context, one really needs to start at 2 Pet 1:19 where one is remanded to “do well to pay attention to this” and which then go all the way through to the end of the letter. For someone who insisted to know better than the Teaching Church, such a person is “accursed” for “reviling in matters of which they are ignorant,” and having escaped the “defilements of the world .., (can) again be entangled in them and overpowered, the last state has become worse for them than the first”, so liken to a “dog turns back to his own vomit, and the sow is washed only to wallow in the mire.” If you claim to be such a wonderful bible student, maybe you want to really believe in the bible for once.

    • I’m pretty sure the ad hominems aren’t going to convince him surkiko, nor do they help those of us who are honestly seeking truth.

  6. I just got my new book about the 50 priests who were converted from Catholism.I haven’t had time to do more that to take a quick scan. The author, RichardBennett is priest # 50 in the book.It will take a long time to read the whole book. It has 345 1/2 pages!!!  

    • I have heard about him and he is on you tube . He highlight the lack of bible study in the church. I believe though that the 7 sacraments can be justified by scripture but for infant baptism – maybe a full immersion baptism would solve any misunderstanding – I am still studying this in the early church – but infant baptism appears to have been carried out pre 300ad

      • Even the Old Testament distinguished between a circumcision of flesh by mankind vs. circumcision of the heart by the Holy Spirit. Circumcision was required by the 8th day of birth and the Old Testament clearly indicates that the Holy Spirit is present. The Holy Spirit is synonymous with faith and faith is synonymous with the Holy
        Spirit, as the two are inseparable. Both, Dr. Martin Luther and John Calvin continued the practice of infant baptism, as it had been carried out in Catholicism.

        It wasn’t until the Ana-Baptist influence swept the Reformation after the deaths of Luther and Calvin that we see infant baptism thoroughly challenged.

        So long as the Old Testament indicates that infants can receive imputed faith (i.e. the Holy Spirit) then there’s little to argue with regarding God’s covenant promise in baptism or the Eucharist. Predestination definitely plays a role, but congregations of various backgrounds will argue over the role and extent of predestination with election.

        Both, Dr. Martin Luther and Roman-Catholics refer to universal atonement and vicarious atonement in the catechisms. It’s of the general opinion of Lutherans that universal atonement (catholic atonement) under baptism is where Catholicity’s name originated within the Hellenistic Orthodox Jews who converted to Christianity, or Catholic Orthodoxy if you prefer, prior to the Great Schism of 1054.

        For Lutherans, all are predestined to Heaven, but are allowed the free-will and capacity to fall from grace. God’s predestination lays forth a path where we can be reclaimed from our many falls from grace; particularly through the Eucharist. Lutherans for instance don’t separate the sacraments into seven parts, but rather see different aspects co-existing within two well defined sacraments. The Lutherans’ application of their two sacrament understanding would incorporate at least six of the Orthodox and Roman sacraments. Lutherans wouldn’t accept marriage as a sacrament, beyond or outside of, Christ Jesus as the bridegroom.

        Through Martin Luther’s two year lecture he received his Doctorate in the Sentences by Peter Lombard at the Roman-Catholic Monastery in Wittenberg, Germany. Peter Lombard was almost excommunicated for elevating five rites of the Church to sacraments; but found acceptance from Pope Alexander III. The Holy See of Rome entrusted Martin Luther as a Doctor of Catholic theology, who actively ordained monks at Wittenberg seminary until his excommunication in 1521.

        Dr. Martin Luther’s 97 Theses were accepted as Catholic doctrine (which included saved by faith rather than works); but Dr. Martin Luther’s 95 Theses were rejected for diluting the tithes needed to construct St. Peter’s Basilica. Anti-Pope Leo X had removed the requirement to validate indulgences through the Church and allowed a free-for-all approach to any and all indulgences that generated revenue towards St. Peter’s Basilica.

  7. Discretion is the better part of valor: http://http://daddysloft.com/christian%20cartoons%20(immersion).gif

  8. Try this again:

    • Surkiko your wasting time with the leads to other websites – I have not looked at one. I just want to hear from yourself – the oracle.

  9. Pam, I don’t comment often but I am a frequent reader to your blog. I just wanted to salute you. You have the indomitable spirit of my personal patron saint, St. Catherine of Siena. God bless you.

  10. Thank you Manny. Hey Charles and Surkiko. This is getting much more contentious than charitable. Let’s just agree to disagree…..Please.

  11. I agree. Mea culpa …

  12. Lutheran Study Bible with Dr. Martin Luther Commentary

    Ephesians 2
    English Standard Version (ESV)
    By Grace Through Faith

    2 And you were dead in the trespasses and sins 2 in which you once walked, following the course of this world, following the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that is now at work in the sons of disobedience— 3 among whom we all once lived in the passions of our flesh, carrying out the desires of the body[a] and the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, like the rest of mankind.[b] 4 But[c] God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, 5 even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— 6 and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, 9 not a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them.

    James 2
    English Standard Version (ESV)
    Faith Without Works Is Dead

    14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[b] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

    18 But someone will say, “You have faith and I have works.” Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder! 20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless? 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works; 23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”—and he was called a friend of God. 24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone. 25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? 26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.

    No case is made against Dr. Martin Luther when this is approached in context, rather than a hatchet job. If you read Dr. Luther through to completion, rather than incomplete snippets, it doesn’t take long to discover that these versus don’t contradict one another. A person imputed with faith of the Holy Spirit will always produce good fruit (works of the Holy Spirit). The only distinction that Dr. Luther defines is that these works are instituted by the Holy Spirit, through the Holy Spirit’s imputed faith.

    The disagreement is between Dr. Luther’s Catholic-Orthodoxy view of St. Augustine’s approach to predestination vs. the Roman-Catholic synergism (semi-Pelagianism) of free-will choosing works on God’s behalf to merit God’s faith. According to Scripture, only the “Word” can invigorate the repentance through the law and salvation through the Gospel necessary to stir the Holy Spirit within us. Once the Holy Spirit stirs within us, we’re then lead to imputed faith through baptism or renewal of our baptism in the Eucharist. This imputed faith allows us to fully blossom in our gifts of the Holy Spirit which are then utilized by God in producing his good works through us as his vessels. The Roman-Catholics of the 1500’s placed themselves first in choosing good works towards merit (like Cain in Genesis); rather than accepting that God predestined good works in advance of any decision we think we’ve made for ourselves. We can only choose not to participate in those good works God laid out before us in our lives; apart from faith we have no spiritual capacity to choose good works that are God pleasing under our total depravity.

  13. Daniel S: That’s quite a bit of self-patronization for Lutheranism. You simply crossed several boundaries without borders with impunity. It will be better served if you can try to narrow your focus on one topic at a time to allow for discussion. I’ve expected better from LCMS but as it is, your “dissertation” is just a typical anti-Catholic forest of polemic rhetoric. I’m quite capable of writing a “dirty” history of Lutheranism too but that won’t serve well assuredly.

    • surkiko: “I’m quite capable of writing a “dirty” history of Lutheranism too but that won’t serve well assuredly.”

      Yes, but it wasn’t necessary, since Charles Allen beat you to a “dirty history of Lutheranism…that won’t serve well assuredly”. Calling the kettle black and double-standards achieve little as well.

      Lutherans have every right to live out and practice their Catholic faith in peace; just as much as any Roman. Prior to the 1850’s Lutheranism was on the verge of extinction in terms of Confessional Lutheran Orthodoxy.

      Eve invented individual interpretation when Satan asked her if God really commanded her not to eat from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and this has deprived all of humanity into and under original sin by involving Adam into her sin. Dr. Martin Luther didn’t even come close to being an inventor of individual interpretation. Individual interpretation was an issue during the Arian Controversy, Pelagian Controversy, Waldenses Controversy, Hussite Controversy, and etc…

      I also quoted out of the Lutheran Study Bible with Luther’s Commentary and didn’t see this alteration of text adding validation for sola fide as was indicated. I also presented the 1885 AD date for when the 66-book canon was invented, yet here we are now on article#5 repeating the lies already confirmed to be false. Dr. Martin Luther’s completed translation before his death was around 73-books in the Die Bible of 1545: http://lutherbibel.net/

      Again, as a lifelong Lutheran, I have never read anywhere in our theology that individual interpretation is even remotely allowed. This is just an anti-Lutheran stereotype invented by Rome to prevent Christians from taking any interest in the issues that divided the Catholic Church into 30k denominations. Now Dr. Martin Luther and John Calvin are used as escape goats as Rome implicitly designs artificial theologies and then applies them liberally to Luther, Calvin and others out of convenience to erode away any perception of what Lutheran theology really believes.

      1st point of Roman failure to understand: Lutherans believe in total depravity and regard every word from anyone’s mouth as potentially being of the Devil, which means all comments must be presented where rebuke is available from a body of believers.

      2nd point of Roman failure to understand: interpretation in Lutheranism belongs to the body of the Church in Christ Jesus, which means among those actively Baptized and in regular regeneration through the Eucharist. Again, where rebuke can correct missguide personal interpretations, which is actually the Catholic canon law of conciliarism under the Haec Sancta Synodus and Sacrosancta, which Lutherans reclaimed for the Church Catholic after it was abolished by Anti-Pope Leo X in 1517; when he replaced clergy with politicians.

      3rd point of Roman failure to understand: the doctrine of Two Kingdoms was designed to keep businessmen, politicians, monarchies, emperors, kings, and the secular Left-Hand Realm in general out of theological interpretation; holding fast and reaffirming the Office of the Keys back to the Right-Hand Realm which directly serves God. The priesthood of all believers are those who witness outside the Church in the secular “Left-Hand Realm”; while called ordained servants of the LORD instituted through the laying on with hands to serve God’s congregations within his Church.

      4th point of Roman failure to understand: doctrine of Law and Gospel prevents perverting what God does for us with what we think we do for God. This helps to weed out the two extremes of mankind’s free-will over that of God’s while also avoiding the extreme legalism of constantly adding new traditions, rules, laws, ceremonies, and procedures aimed at earning the merit Cain sought. This keeps us aware and mindful by better preparing ourselves against individual interpretation.

      5th point of Roman failure to understand: Sola means “alone” and only appears once, not three times.

      The “Alone” or “Sola” means Holy Trinity.
      The “Grace” means that it’s by the Father’s will that we even exist.
      The “Word” means Christ Jesus the Word made flesh.
      The “Faith” means the presence of the Holy Spirit working in us.

      The “Grace”, “Word” and “Faith” circumvent around the Trinity or the cross of Christ Jesus revealing the fullness of God. The “Alone” appears once inside of “Grace”, “Word”, and “Faith”.

      It’s a three-legged-stool where the Trinity doesn’t exist apart from its members under the Godhead. If you attack God’s Grace, Word, or Faith then it’s blasphemy against God himself. Apostolic Word and Scriptural Word are seen as one in the same in Lutheranism, but what’s written must correspond to what’s orally taught as well, and both must be equally available for rebuke to be tested by the Spirit who dwells within all believers as his temple. I doubt many Romans have their Magisterium sitting next to their Bible on their nightstand.

      John 1
      English Standard Version (ESV)
      The Word Became Flesh

      1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. 4 In him was life,[a] and the life was the light of men. 5 The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

      6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. 7 He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. 8 He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light.

      9 The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world. 10 He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. 11 He came to his own,[b] and his own people[c] did not receive him. 12 But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, 13 who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

      14 And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory, glory as of the only Son from the Father, full of grace and truth. 15 (John bore witness about him, and cried out, “This was he of whom I said, ‘He who comes after me ranks before me, because he was before me.’”) 16 For from his fullness we have all received, grace upon grace.[d] 17 For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. 18 No one has ever seen God; the only God,[e] who is at the Father’s side,[f] he has made him known.

  14. Daniel S: I appreciate the perspective and information you posted. It’s much more manageable now so let us discuss:

    “I also quoted out of the Lutheran Study Bible with Luther’s Commentary and didn’t see this alteration of text adding validation for sola fide as was indicated … in the Die Bible of 1545: http://lutherbibel.net/

    Sorry, I think that you forgot that original version from 1534:
    “So halten wir nun dafur, da_ der Mensch gerecht wird ohne des Gesetzes Werke, allein durch den Glauben.” Martin Luther physically added the word “allein” (alone) in Rom 3:28 to justify his new doctrine of Sola Fide.

    “Again, as a lifelong Lutheran, I have never read anywhere in our theology that individual interpretation is even remotely allowed. This is just an anti-Lutheran stereotype invented by Rome …”

    Let’s survey the landscape of Protestantism and I don’t see anyone quite happy or ready to jump ship on this rallying cry of being able to interpret bible privately as individuals yet. It may be arguable that Martin Luther never intended to “(Here I) stand” on it, but he did presume to interpret scripture contrary to interpretations rendered both by all “popes and Church Councils … unless (he is) convinced by Sacred Scripture.” By this, the principle of private interpretation was born and baptized with fire. It’s great if you’re prepared to concede the doctrine of Private Interpretation, but whatever it is … just don’t call it a Romish invention.

    “1st point of Roman failure to understand: Lutherans believe in total depravity … all comments must be presented where rebuke is available from a body of believers.”

    Kindly explain Total Depravity in your understanding with scripture of course. So if everyone is totally depraved, who’s to say that “a body of believers” cannot be be similarly pervaded?

    “2nd point of Roman failure to understand: interpretation in Lutheranism belongs to the body of the Church in Christ Jesus, which means among those actively Baptized and in regular regeneration through the Eucharist.”

    Really? Where is that in scripture? Is that the “actively baptized and in regular regeneration” of the LCMS or ELCA or WSLC or from the other dozens of different denominations and divisions of Lutheranism?

    “Catholic canon law of conciliarism under the Haec Sancta Synodus and Sacrosancta, which Lutherans reclaimed for the Church Catholic after it was abolished by Anti-Pope Leo X in 1517; when he replaced clergy with politicians.”

    Really? Please authenticate this outside the traditions of Lutheranism.

    “3rd point of Roman failure to understand: the doctrine of Two Kingdoms was designed to keep businessmen, politicians, monarchies, emperors, kings, and the secular Left-Hand Realm in general out of theological interpretation; holding fast and reaffirming the Office of the Keys back to the Right-Hand Realm which directly serves God.”

    What two kingdoms? What Office of the Keys?

    “4th point of Roman failure to understand: doctrine of Law and Gospel prevents perverting what God does for us with what we think we do for God … keeps us aware and mindful by better preparing ourselves against individual interpretation.”

    So what’s your safeguard against unbridled private interpretation and churchianity in Lutheranism? Comparing scriptures?

    “5th point of Roman failure to understand: Sola means “alone” and only appears once, not three times … the “Alone” appears once inside of “Grace”, “Word”, and “Faith.”

    There are a lot more “alone’s” than that in scripture but where are the sola’s for Faith Alone and Scripture Alone?

    “what’s written must correspond to what’s orally taught as well, and both must be equally available for rebuke to be tested by the Spirit who dwells within all believers as his temple. I doubt many Romans have their Magisterium sitting next to their Bible on their nightstand.”

    Actually, we have the three-legged stool as Scripture, Sacred Traditions and the Teaching Church (Magisterium). What’s your objection?

  15. surkiko: “Sorry, I think that you forgot that original version from 1534:
    “So halten wir nun dafur, da_ der Mensch gerecht wird ohne des Gesetzes Werke, allein durch den Glauben.” Martin Luther physically added the word “allein” (alone) in Rom 3:28 to justify his new doctrine of Sola Fide.”

    The LCMS and WELS have documented many of Luther’s writings as inappropriate for their theology, I don’t know if this is one of those items or not, so no Luther himself didn’t get a clean slate nor easy pass within the whole of Lutheran theology itself. “The LCMS, however, does not seek to “excuse” these statements of Luther, but denounces them (without denouncing Luther’s theology).” Lutheran theologian Martin Chemnitz for instance was highly critical of Dr. Martin Luther.

    Dr. Martin Luther continued to update his Biblical translations alongside the Order of Saint Augustine at Wittenberg Monastery, contrary to popular belief, Dr. Luther didn’t finalize his translations unilaterally, as the whole monastery had Catholic theologians helping him. The simple fact that these updated translations were produced is an indication that they, with Luther, weren’t confident that the best possible translation had been put forth. Technically, Confessional Lutherans only accept the original Codex directly penned by the Apostles’ scribes to be truly and fully inerrant. Subsequent vernacular translations and copies are generally deemed an honest attempt at retaining the context and intent of Scripture. The LCMS has no official Biblical endorsement, but does restrict Bible usage within its Church to the NIV-1984, NKJV, RSV, NASB, and ESV. The most recent Lutheran Study Bible is being produced in the ESV for now.

  16. “surkiko: Kindly explain Total Depravity in your understanding with scripture of course. So if everyone is totally depraved, who’s to say that “a body of believers” cannot be be similarly pervaded? Really? Where is that in scripture? Is that the “actively baptized and in regular regeneration” of the LCMS or ELCA or WSLC or from the other dozens of different denominations and divisions of Lutheranism?”
    file:///C:/Users/Daniel/Downloads/Other%20Denominations.pdf

    TULIP vs. SCURF vs. TUURF

    http://cos-lutheran.org/resrcs/TULIPSCURFTUURF.pdf

  17. surkiko: “What Office of the Keys?”

    Part III, Article VII. Of the Keys.

    1] The keys are an office and power given by Christ to the Church for binding and loosing sin, not only the gross and well-known sins, but also the subtle, hidden, which are known only to God, as it is written in Ps. 19:13: Who can understand his errors? And in Rom. 7:25 St. Paul himself complains that with the flesh he serves the law of sin. 2] For it is not in our power, but belongs to God alone, to judge which, how great, and how many the sins are, as it is written in Ps. 143:2: Enter not into judgment with Thy servant; for in Thy sight shall no man living be justified. 3] And Paul says, 1 Cor. 4:4: For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified.

    From the Office of the Keys and Confession

    1 What is the Office of the Keys?

    The Office of the Keys is the special power of attorney, has given by Christ to his Church on earth, the repentant sinners to forgive sin, unrepentant but to keep the sin as long as they do not repent.

    Where is it written?

    Our Lord Jesus Christ to Peter, “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, All that thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. ” (Mt 16 , 19). Likewise, saith the Lord to all the disciples: “Receive the Holy Spirit, Whom will forgive the sins, they are forgiven, and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained!.” (Jn 20 , 22f).

    What do you think of these words?

    I think: What the appointed ministers of Christ act out his divine command with us – even if they exclude the public and unrepentant sinners from the Christian community and those who want to repent of their sin and make amends, again absolve, which is as strong and certainly in heaven, as negotiated our dear Lord Christ Himself to us.

    2 What is confession?

    The Confession consists of two pieces: the first, that one confess his sins, and the second, that the absolution or forgiveness from the confessor to receive as from God Himself, and do not doubt, but firmly believe that sins are forgiven by prior God in heaven.

    What sins should we confess?

    Before God intended you to give all sins guilty, even we do not know as we do in the Lord’s Prayer, but before the confessor we should confess only those sins which we know and feel in our hearts.

    What are they?

    Just look your stand on according to the Ten Commandments, whether you are the father, mother, son, daughter, standing in what profession and service you, whether you have been disobedient, unfaithful or lazy, angry, disorderly or quarrelsome; whether you done to someone suffering you with words or works, whether you stole something, missed or done damage have.

    But if someone is not burdened with such or greater sinners that should not worry, and looking for more sins, and make confession a torture, but tell one or two sins that he knows.

    How do you confess your sins to the confessor?

    So you can speak to the confessor: “I ask you to hear my confession and forgiveness to award me for God’s sake.” Then confess you before God guilty of all sins, and say from before the confessor, which as a special sin and guilt is on you. you can close your confession: That’s all sorry I beg your mercy I want to improve myself..

    What happens absolution?

    The confessor says, ‘God be merciful to you and strengthen your faith. Do you also believe that the forgiveness that I ascribe to you, God’s forgiveness is “Answer:” Yes, I think so “Then he saith.” How do you think so unto thee. And I, at the command of our Lord Jesus Christ, forgive you your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. Go in peace! ”

    But which are very adversely affected within the conscience or saddened and challenged, which is well know to comfort a confessor with more words of Scripture and irritate the faith. This is just a way of confession.

    How do you confess your sins together with the community? (General Confession)

    “Almighty God, merciful Father! I, poor, wretched, sinful man, you confess all my sins and iniquities with which I have you ever temporal and eternal well-deserved offended and your punishment. But you are to me all very sorry and repent me much, and I beg you by your causeless mercy and by the innocent, bitter sufferings and death of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, that thou wilt give me, a poor, sinful people gracious and merciful, all my forgive sin and give me my improvement of your Holy Spirit power. Amen. ”

    1. The Office of the Keys (Mt 16:19; 18:15–20; Jn 20:22–23; Rv 1:18) is a peculiar, special, unique, spiritual power given by Christ to the ch.

    2. Christ is Master (Mt 23:8–10), Head of the ch. (Eph 1:22; 4:15; 5:23; Cl 1:13, 18); His Word is authoritative (Jn 12:48–50; 1 Ti 6:3–5). The ch. should not go beyond His Word or allow other authority to est. its doctrine and creeds (Gl 1:8–9; Cl 2:8).

    3. The Office of the Keys is spiritual (Mt. 20:25–26; Jn 18:36; 2 Co 10:4; Eph 6:10–17); it includes all spiritual rights, duties, and privileges necessary for the welfare of the ch. on earth, e.g., the conveying of grace to mankind through preaching, administering Baptism and Lord’s Supper, and through mutual conversation and consolation. In particular, the Office of the Keys gives power to forgive and retain sins (loosing and binding), i. e., not merely to announce and to declare to men the remission or retention of sins, but actually to give forgiveness to penitent sinners and to deny forgiveness to impenitent sinners (Jn 20:23; 2 Co 2:10). See also Justification, 6.

    4. The whole Gospel of Christ is an absolution.* Absolution does not exist outside the Gospel, but is a special form of administering the Gospel in which a minister or other Christian forgives the sins of others. It is not a better or more powerful forgiveness, but a special application which conveys reassurance (Lk 7:47–48).

    5. Only God can forgive sins (Is 43:25; Mk 2:7). Christ gave the Office of the Keys to the ch. on earth; the ch. delegates and transfers the pub. exercise of the Office of the Keys to called servants of the Word (Acts 20:28; 1 Co 4:1; 2 Co 2:10; Eph 4:10–12). See also Ministerial Office, 5.

    6. When the Office of the Keys is properly administered, the act is as valid and effective in the sight of God as though Christ Himself had performed it (Jn 20:23). The validity does not depend on faith, repentance, worthiness, good works, satisfaction of the one who pronounces absolution. Unbelief does not annul validity of forgiveness (Ro 3:3), but forgiveness is received through faith (Acts 10:43).

    7. Possession of the Office of the Keys obligates Christians to observe all corresponding duties, e.g., to proclaim the Word publicly (Mt 28:18–20) and privately (Cl 3:16), to maintain purity of the Word (Jn 8:31–47; 1 Ti 6:20), to express faith (Ro 10:9), to forgive sins (Mt 18:21–35; Eph 4:32), to practice discipline (Mt 18:17; 1 Co 5:2–5; 1 Ti 1:20; Tts 3:10–11), to judge doctrine (Mt 7:15; 1 Jn 4:l; Acts 17:10–11).

    8. RC interpretation refers the Office of the Keys to supremacy of spiritual jurisdiction vested in the pope and including unqualified executive power, universal legislative power, supreme judicial power, infallibility,* primacy (see Vatican Councils, 1 b). RCm holds that this supremacy originally belonged to Peter (but see, e.g., Mt 18:1–4; Lk 22:24–26; Acts 15:6–31; Gl 2:7–11; Eph 2:20; 1 Ptr 5:1; 2 Ptr 1:19) and that the popes are Peter’s successors. CCS

    9. Ban, or excommunication, is the process whereby impenitent sinners are excluded from Communion and other fellowship of the ch. In the Middle Ages a distinction was made bet. lesser ban, which excluded from the Sacraments, and greater ban, or interdict, which included civil penalties and excluded from all blessings and graces of the ch. The Luth. Confessions recognize only lesser ban as truly Christian and of concern to ministers (SA-III IX; cf. AC XXVIII 2; Ap VII–VIII 3; XI 4; XXVIII 12; Tractatus 60, 74). The RC Ch. distinguishes bet. tolerati (tolerated) and vitandi (to be avoided) excommunicates. The faithful need not shun the tolerati either in profane or religious matters. The vitandi are to be avoided as much as possible. The vitandi are excommunicated by being named in a pub. decree of the papal see. In 1971 a papal-appointed commission recommended dropping the vitandi category. See also Priesthood.

    C. C. Stephan, “The Office of the Keys,” The Abiding Word, I, ed. T. Laetsch (St. Louis, 1946), 342–365; W. H. Bouman, “The Practical Application of Matthew 18:15–18,” CTM, XVIII (March 1947), 178–204; O. Cullmann, Peter: Disciple-Apostle-Martyr, tr. F. V. Filson, 2d ed. (Philadelphia, 1962); H. Frhr. v. Campenhausen, Kirchliches Amt und geistliche Vollmacht in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten, 2d ed. (Tübingen, 1963), tr. J. A. Baker, Ecclesiastical Authority and Spiritual Power in the Church of the First Three Centuries (Stanford, California, 1969); G. Ebeling, Kirchenzucht (Stuttgart, 1947); R. Bohren, Das Problem der Kirchenzucht im Neuen Testament (Zurich, 1952).

  18. surkiko: “What two kingdoms?”

    City of God by Augustine of Hippo, Doctor of Catholicism

    The Christian a Citizen of Two Kingdoms

    http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=649

    The Two Realms in the Lutheran Confessions

    http://www.lcms.org/Document.fdoc?src=lcm&id=666

    The Intersection of Church and State and Lutheran Hour Ministries
    video: http://intersectionofchurchandstate.com/

    John Calvin also conformed to an Augustinian doctrine of separation between Church and State, similar to that of Luther. This doctrine is the founding principle for the separation of Church and State in the US among theologians. This also helps to maintain neutrality among conflicting theocratic governments like the King’s Church (Anglican), Papists (Roman Church), and Caliphate (Islam).

    This was further expanded by US President James Monroe’s (Monroe Doctrine of 1823) and the Roosevelt Corollary of 1904; which restricts theocratic governments like the Caliphate, Roman-Catholicism, and the “King’s/Queen’s Church(es)” from taking on direct political influence in US domestic affairs in the Western Hemisphere.

  19. surkiko: “So what’s your safeguard against unbridled private interpretation and churchianity in Lutheranism? Comparing scriptures?”

    1 Corinthians 11:17-34
    English Standard Version (ESV)
    The Lord’s Supper

    17 But in the following instructions I do not commend you, because when you come together it is not for the better but for the worse. 18 For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you. And I believe it in part,[a] 19 for there must be factions among you in order that those who are genuine among you may be recognized. 20 When you come together, it is not the Lord’s supper that you eat. 21 For in eating, each one goes ahead with his own meal. One goes hungry, another gets drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and humiliate those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I commend you in this? No, I will not.

    23 For I received from the Lord what I also delivered to you, that the Lord Jesus on the night when he was betrayed took bread, 24 and when he had given thanks, he broke it, and said, “This is my body which is for[b] you. Do this in remembrance of me.”[c] 25 In the same way also he took the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes.

    27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty concerning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a person examine himself, then, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment on himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died.[d] 31 But if we judged[e] ourselves truly, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are disciplined[f] so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

    33 So then, my brothers,[g] when you come together to eat, wait for[h] one another— 34 if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home—so that when you come together it will not be for judgment. About the other things I will give directions when I come.

    Verses 27-32 in particular link the stability of a healthy Church to those who participate in the Lord’s Supper in a worthy manor. Those Churches and congregations that partake of the Lord’s Supper in an unworthy manor weaken and some may even die, due to their drinking and eating judgement onto themselves. At the Altar of Holy Communion we see that God cleanses away not only our sins, but also the sinners among us. There’s no better safeguard than that of God himself. This is why Confessional Lutherans practice a close communion among congregational members where the reverend is aware of members active in their confession of sin through active participation. Under close communion some LCMS or WELS won’t even allow visiting congregational members to commune without first proclaiming their confession of faith.

  20. surkiko: “So what’s your safeguard against unbridled private interpretation and churchianity in Lutheranism? Comparing scriptures?”

    1 Corinthians 5
    English Standard Version (ESV)
    Sexual Immorality Defiles the Church

    5 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father’s wife. 2 And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.

    3 For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing. 4 When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus, 5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.[a]

    6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump? 7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. 11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. 12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church[b] whom you are to judge? 13 God judges[c] those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.”

    Though this Scripture focuses on the literal sexually immoral, it’s also important to take into consideration how God used Hosea to reveal how his chosen Church was whoring itself out to false teachings. God judges those outside of his instituted Church while his fellowship of believers are to judge those from within the Church.

    In short answer, vigilant congregational members are very vocal in Bible studies and our reverends are quick to pull the ill informed off to the side for further instruction. Some break through, others harden their hearts against God and leave rather than fight a room full of dedicated believers, and while in more extreme instances even excommunication isn’t off the table as an option. Lutheran congregations are all about rebuke and cordially testing one anothers’ spirit against Scripture. As for the pastors themselves, we pray to God to properly guide them, and our pastors must complete a minimum of a masters of divinity before being allowed to answer a call to congregations. The masters of divinity incorporates Hebrew and Koine as second languages to lessen English or German vernacular inaccuracies or fluctuations in translations. Some pastors take the additional Aramaic courses too, though this is more rare, unless their pursuing a doctorate of divinity. Sharing of the Spirit among clergy through the laying on with hands is also significant in carrying on in the faith.

  21. “The simple fact that these updated translations were produced is an indication that they, with Luther, weren’t confident that the best possible translation had been put forth.”

    Unfortunately, the floodgate was already opened and the heresies of Private Interpretation, Sola Fide and Sola Scriptura spread very quickly.

    I will abstain from commenting on the internal discipline and politics of LCMS since they are very culturally specific obviously. Only the below …

    “RC interpretation refers the Office of the Keys to supremacy of spiritual jurisdiction … originally belonged to Peter … and that the popes are Peter’s successors.”

    The promise of the “keys” was directed to Peter alone. The “binding and loosing” was directed to Peter and the Apostles alone. How did you transfer that to Lutheranism? Is it all scripturally sound?

    “John Calvin also conformed to an Augustinian doctrine of separation between Church and State, similar to that of Luther”

    Hardly how history wrote itself. The Reformation was a highly charged event being fueled by much political ambitions. The beginning of Protestantism was protected by political princes and made national churches of several countries in Europe. Catholicism is not a theocracy. You need to command some respectability by stopping the use of common anti-Catholic jargons like “Papists.” So what does it mean when Lutheranism set itself up as a direct affront to a Church by rejecting the established order and re-inventing itself with a different Creed and Confessional in the Book of Concord? Where is the scriptural license for that? With due respect, how different is that to all the heretics and schismatics who privately interpreted the bible to foster their personal agendas?

    To make it easier to read, please try to articulate your answers instead of quoting extensively from some Lutheran texts which not everyone here subscribe to. Thanks.

    • Back to the Bible – for 300 years there were seven churches in Asia alone , ruled by different Bishops which had various different problems .
      This is why Jesus sent a different letter to each church pointing out their different faults and commending some more than others. The Church of Philadelphia was complemented without any blemishes.

      So if there was only the Roman church ruling them all why were 7 letters needed ?

      • charlesallan, this doesn’t even include the Pauline Epistle congregations that also used bishops. Though these were predominantly Gentiles converted to Christianity, which would obviously include Rome.

        I believe the significance of John’s Revelation and Gospel is that of Jewish converts to Christianity indicating a more profound continuance of lineage and a more literal Hebrew heritage. These would basically be the Hellenistic Judeo-Christian congregations able to convert both Jews and Gentiles alike.

    • Technically, Lutheranism retained the establishment of Catholicism as it was known circa 1050 before the Great Schism with the East, and refused to conform to Anti-Catholic movements within the Holy See of Rome.

      Dr. Martin Luther was ordained through the laying on with hands and held a Doctorate degree in the Sentences by Peter Lombard. The Holy See of Rome allowed Dr. Martin Luther to ordain their clergy until his excommunication in 1521.

      There’s no known heresy associated with “faith” where the Bible is very clear that “faith” is the private property of the Holy Spirit and is his to give and withhold as he pleases. Believing that you can coerce the Holy Spirit into giving you his “faith” according to a merit system of human initiated works is a well documented heresy.

      Lutheranism only has three creeds which are known as the Three Eucemenical Creeds: Apostles, Nicene, and Athenasian which appear redundantly in our liturgy and memorized by catechumenate. These are the only three “creeds” that appear in the Book of Concord in 1580, which is the only version.

      The Roman-Catholic Church is a theocracy according to the Vatican Councils and the Council of Trent, unless you feel they’re lying to us? Johann Maier von Eck presented the Lutheran delegation in the 1500’s with a document known as the Primacy of the Pope, clearly stating that all politicians are to be appointed by the Pope or his trusted advisors, and Pope Leo X clearly appointed Charles V as Emperor over the Holy Roman Empire. Under international law and the United Nations, the Pope is acknowledged as the Head of State for Vatican to this day. Our Lutheran delegation, which included the LCMS for which I’m a member, were invited by Pope Benedict XVI to Vatican City for ecumenical discussions. At each eucumenical meeting the Lutheran deligations have requested the Papacy to denounce its dogma over the control of subjects or citizens in a political and military nature; and they have refused to back off their position as the World’s theocracy on each occurrence. Rome still feels that all politicians are to be appointed by the Papacy or those serving in an authoritative capacity to the Papacy.

      I’m well aware of the political expediency exerted by those wanting separation from Rome and utilizing religion as a convenient tool to do so. Aside from the Evangelical Church of Germany being able to exercise its faith in peace apart from the Inquisition; Luther’s Two Kingdom/Two Realm theology didn’t support and wouldn’t validate any politically instituted religion. The Evangelical Church of Germany was overtaken by political opportunist, who after Luther’s death, merged Luther’s followers with Crypto-Calvinist by the late 1540’s into the 1550’s. This resulted in the Schmalkaldic War with “Luther’s Followers” against another and new theocratic state. The Holy Roman Empire ceased this opportunity to successfully conquer the Electors of Saxony.

      “Luther’s Followers” chartered the 1st “Lutheran” congregations in 1580 at the Formula of Concord, (almost 40-years after Luther’s death) apart from any state ran instituted Church like that of the EKD in Germany, Rome, or England. Prussia took over control of all Churches in the late 1700’s to include the Reformed, EKD, and Lutheran: forcing them into the Prussian Union Church. Confessional Lutherans fled outside the control of the Prussian government. Various different immigration routes were taken by different ethnic Germanic/Scandinavian groups to the United States and several other nations. Depending on the dialect, language, and immigration route: LCMS, WELS, NALC, and etc… developed as culturally distinct congregations that are solidified in the same confession of faith under the articles presented within the Book of Concord.

      The Prussian Union Church continues its ecumenical effort to merge all faiths together (a one World Church) and institutionalized the German Evangelical Synod of North America to compete against resisting Confessional Lutheran and Reformed Calvinist congregations in the United States. The German Evangelical Synod of North America has since changed its name to the United Church of Christ or the (UCC) as it’s more commonly known today. Of all the various “Evangelical” congregations, the UCC is closest to achieving acceptance by the Vatican as a rite to Catholicism, like the Byzantine Rite for example. The UCC is especially anxious now that a Jesuit Pope is in power, because the Jesuits are extremely focused on free-will theology, and very sympathetic to Arminian leaning Semi-Pelagianism.

      In the US, followers of Calvinist theologian Jacobus Arminius (Arminianism or Remonstrance) best known for his Semi-Pelagianism free-will theology has influenced the creation of many new congregations: John Smyth’s (Free-Will Baptist, General Baptist, and Second Baptist) and John & Charles Wesley’s (United Methodist [Episcopal-Methodist & Breverned], Wesleyan Church, Pentecostal, Assemblies of God, Vineyard, Bridge Church, and Charismatic Church). The ELCA is currently in open communion with most of these groups and has pretty well left “Lutheranism” on the shelf to collect dust, but may merge soon with the UCC where they probably belong.

      Congregations that are loyalist to Vatican I despise what they perceive as Jacobus Arminius’s Charismatic-Arminianism and Semi-Pelagianism associated with Vatican II doctrinal revisions. Roman-Catholic Charismatics are pushing hard for pro-choice agendas and women clergy. Charismatic Roman-Catholics are keeping John Boehner, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and many other Leftist/Progressive politicians in power. In the 2008 and 2012 election cycles 51% of overwhelmingly Roman-Catholic voting districts in the US voted in favor of pro-abortion and LGBT promoting candidates, to include Obama’s retention of his office. The WELS and LCMS congregations averaged 67-75% against pro-choice and LGBT promoting candidates. Statistically, in-house apologetics are in far greater need than many Roman-Catholics care to admit.

      The Old Testament tells of two betrayals, one by a snitch against God’s Son and the other by a believer in God’s Son, Jesus as the Christ. When you compare Isaiah for instance to that of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew 16, Mark 8, Luke 9) we see that Saint Peter/Cephas is being set apart to witness Jesus as the Christ to fulfill the foreknowledge of prophesy to come where Jesus is denied three times. Privat translation on the part of the Romans has “puffed up” outside of what Scripture reveals to artificially make Saint Peter the “Sola” Christian where know one else may be apart from him as the Vicar of God rather than Christ Jesus. Sorry, but this Roman invention and Chair of the Vicar, simple aren’t supported when Scripture is read in context to what it is truly revealing.

      A redundant New Testament theme is that Christ Jesus alone is the “cornerstone” by which all congregations are adjoined together. When Simon makes his “confession of faith in Jesus as the Christ”, this is the “rock” or “foundation” mentioned throughout the New Testament. It’s the “confession” not the person, which is the focus of Christ Jesus’s teachings. Christ Jesus has honored Simon with Peter/Cephas as a name for witnessing this truth, which was a “faith” attributed to God revealing it to Simon and not Simon coming to this knowledge on his own; imputed faith in other words. Besides, Christ Jesus had already sent out the 72-Apostles to begin witnessing the “Word” of God apart from Peter and the other 11-Apostles accompanying Christ Jesus. Besides, Saint John was the last surviving Apostle to have witnessed the transfiguration of Jesus as the Christ and would have been the highest ranking Apostolic authority on the earth to conclude the Apostolic Era. Saint Peter’s anxiousness is consistently portrayed as his vice and one of his primary sins, as he was often too quick to lead where he still needed to listen, which is further reinforced where Christ Jesus says to him, “get behind me Satin”. All 12-Apostles are co-equals in every aspect where leadership was concerned. Christ Jesus prohibited any one of them from unilaterally leading and instead instructed them to only witness in pairs, so if lead by Satin, another was available for rebuke. Saint Paul will make use of this rebuke, as instructed by God, against Peter/Cephas later in his Pauline Epistles. Saint Paul also preaches against following any one Apostle over any other as they all share in the same witness to the same good news.

  22. I would like a snail mail address to send you some stuff that is too difficult to sit & write.

  23. Joan B: Not sure who you are addressing, but I did order the book by ex-priest Bennett. I even went ahead and ordered another book about ex-nuns. Let me know if you still want the mailing address. Blessings,

    • I wouldn’t mind having it. I would like a copy of the email that I just sent to you in my inbox. I’d like to send a copy to my daughter who turned Catholic to please her husband.
      You know that I am tenchickens@inbox.com
      It is not likely that either of us will convert the other but I do appreciate that we can have civil discussion.
      I believe the Lord is pleased with us both concerning this.

  24. Daniel S:

    “Technically, Lutheranism retained the establishment of Catholicism as it was known circa 1050 before the Great Schism with the East, and refused to conform to Anti-Catholic movements within the Holy See of Rome.”

    How did you draw this artificial and arbitrary demarcation line? Lutheranism was not even “born” yet. The last time that I check, Lutheranism hasn’t relinquished and joined Eastern Orthodoxy in obedience either.

    “Dr. Martin Luther … held a Doctorate degree in the Sentences by Peter Lombard … The Holy See of Rome allowed Dr. Martin Luther to ordain their clergy until his excommunication in 1521.”

    I think that you’re badly informed about the “Holy See” approving her rogue priest M. Luther to ordain clergy. Can you cite an official teaching of the Church as authority which permitted a mere priest to ordain another priest in Catholicism cir AD 1050? I will even allow you to digress and cite from the whole history of Christianity till present day 2014. But even let’s just grant it for the sake of discussion, Lutheranism’s Orders would, in time, become illicit and invalid anyway when they deliberately eliminated all sacrificial language with prejudice to the apostolic liturgy of ordination, just like in the case against the Anglican Orders by decreed of Pope Leo XIII in 1896 to be “absolutely null and utterly void” (Apostolicae Curae).

    ” … the Bible is very clear that “faith” is the private property of the Holy Spirit and is his to give and withhold as he pleases.”

    Please give scriptural support for this novel teaching.

    “The Roman-Catholic Church is a theocracy according to the Vatican Councils and the Council of Trent, unless you feel they’re lying to us?”

    You’re badly confused with Vatican City State being a theocracy instead of a ecclesiocracy.It is even a canon law (285) which disallows Catholic clergy to run for political office (An affirmation of a State/Church separation but for an entirely different set of reasons). You may have a point when talking about the coming theocratic kingdom on earth according to the Jehovah’s Witnesses but Catholics are no premillennialists.

    “Congregations that are loyalist to Vatican I despise what they perceive as Jacobus Arminius’s Charismatic-Arminianism and Semi-Pelagianism associated with Vatican II doctrinal revisions. Roman-Catholic Charismatics are pushing hard for pro-choice agendas and women clergy. Charismatic Roman-Catholics are keeping John Boehner, Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and many other Leftist/Progressive politicians in power.”

    I didn’t know that you claim such an authority on Catholicism being an outsider. This can be an interesting topic of discussion of itself but we should not be distracted …

    “When Simon makes his “confession of faith in Jesus as the Christ”, this is the “rock” or “foundation” … It’s the “confession” not the person, which is the focus of Christ Jesus’s teachings … Christ Jesus has honored Simon with Peter/Cephas as a name for witnessing this truth”

    Really? So Christ personally changing Simon’s name to Kepha (Cephas) was for redundancy? How does Lutheranism twist Matt 16:18 to mean a mere confession of faith only (“Thou are Kepha [Rock] and upon this kepha [rock] I will build my Church”)? And what about the giving of the “keys of the kingdom of heaven” to Peter alone (v 19)?

    “All 12-Apostles are co-equals in every aspect where leadership was concerned.”

    So why did Christ only confer upon Peter the unique role of shepherd (Jn 21: 15-17; Jn 10:16) and teacher (Lk 22:32)? Why did even Paul have to go up and see Cephas “lest somehow I should be running, or had run in vain” (Gal 1:18; 2:1-2)? I see Lutheranism running amok.

    “Saint Paul also preaches against following any one Apostle over any other as they all share in the same witness to the same good news.”

    Catholics don’t claim to be Cephites so why Lutheranism is resting its foundation on one rogue priest, Martin Luther?

    • Daniel and Surkiko

      It is hard to believe in the infallibility of the Pope after reading
      “Chiesa viva YEAR XL – N° 430 Sept. 2010.”

      Much if not most of what John Paul said is so far from scripture and what previous popes have said. Every catholic and protestant should read this which was written by a traditional catholic. It is the One World Church whose architects are the masons – syncretism planned by the NWO and predicted by the Bible and some Church doctors and mystics.
      John Paul preached theological mumbo jumbo rather than the “simplicity of the gospel”
      On the same site “novus ordo watch” we see a couple doing a tango in front of the alter before mass with the current pope in attendance ??

      • Wherever the Church is, Satan lingers nearby, so the Lutheran viewpoint is that all congregations are under constant attack at all times from Satanist outside and inside of congregations.

        The LCMS (Prussian congregations) and WELS (West-German congregations) were in open communion in the US, but the larger LCMS was under attack from Progressive transfer students claiming to switch denominations and Semi-Pelagian Hippies from our post-modern secular society wanted to design Church in their image apart from God. Thankfully, by the mercies of God, the LCMS wouldn’t have any of it a drove out the Liberal faction from our midst. WELS rightfully so, withdrew pulpit and communion activities with the LCMS, while they cleaned-out their house and the altercation split the LCMS in half with the schism claiming the name ELCA for themselves.

        The LCMS has regained its congregational strength, since the 1970’s seminary-walkout (Seminex), while the ELCA has merged with the Methodist, UCC, and Episcopalians to remain legitimate under Evangelical Eucumenicalism. The ELCA proudly promotes their split from Conservative Christianity to a more Liberal christianity in the debate here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OJ0vIG8IvY

      • Pope Leo X via Johann Eck in 1530’s presented this to the Lutheran congregations:

        1. The Roman Pontiff claims for himself [in the first place] that by divine right he is [supreme] above all bishops and pastors [in all Christendom].

        2. Secondly, he adds also that by divine right he has both swords, i.e., the authority also of bestowing kingdoms [enthroning and deposing kings, regulating secular dominions etc.].

        3. And thirdly, he says that to believe this is necessary for salvation. And for these reasons the Roman bishop calls himself [and boasts that he is] the vicar of Christ on earth.

        Obviously, Surkiko’s catechismal reference is invalid as it’s applied here, since the papacy supersedes the position of clergy as it’s understood in Rome. Lutherans have challenged every Pope to date on these three areas of contention, but these positions remain upheld by Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II. Only the papacy and Roman Church have any authority to theocratically select, appoint, or institute representatives (politicians, kings, electors) over society; notice clergy aren’t serving as politicians (in-keeping with their catechism), but rather rein over them as a higher authority. According to Pope Leo X, to believe this is necessary for salvation within the Roman-Catholic Church.

        An authentic Roman-Catholic believes as part of their salvation that it’s necessary to believe that only the papacy should have any authority to appoint the Three Branches to the United States for instance; as the Church Catholic from their viewpoint alone should hold such authority rather than some Representative-Democracy for instance. Pope Leo X was at war against his own Papal States over just this issue of “primacy” of the electorate vs. the papacy. Pope Leo X was so distracted by his local power grab that he insufficiently dealt with Islamic threats in the Far East that overthrew much of Eastern-Christianity and established the Ottoman Empire as an Islamic Caliphate. To date, 75% of all European religious converts are to Islam, rather than Christianity. The daughter of Muhammad, Fatima, even has a Roman-Catholic omen attributed to a city named after her in Portugal. No where in the Bible’s Old or New Testament have we seen any omens attributed by name to someone well outside the faith of Judeo-Christianity. Our Lady of Fatima (Martyrdom Of Lady Fatima,daughter Of The Prophet Muhammad) is often viewed as patronizing to Muslims, where the Roman-Catholics attempt to appear less inclusive to make Muslims feel more comfortable with the Roman-Catholic faith, having symbolism with Muhammad’s daughter.

        The Lutheran counter-response “A Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, Treatise Compiled by the Theologians Assembled at Smalcald – 1537″ is here: http://bookofconcord.org/treatise.php

  25. Sorry, simply just another radical traditionalist (“Rads Trad”) faction’s obsession with conspiracy theories. I won’t lose sleep over the late Fr. Villa and his dirty magazine, Chiesa Viva.

    • The pictures dont lie – neither do the words – pope John Paul worshipped with false religions as even the simple can see. Father Villa was not the only witness – keep your head in the sand.

  26. Is ignorance really bliss?

    • You will know – ignoring the doctors , watchmen and watchwoman of your own church. The Pharisees thought that because they held the badge of Moses and Abraham that they were saved and everyone else was lost.

  27. Actually, it’s being gullible to believe everything you see, hear or read about yourself from your enemies at face value. You simply lack the faculty to discern truth from heresy, apostasy and the Big Lie. I spent a good many hours studying Fr. Luigi Villa and his works. If only you would use the same care before babbling your “mouth free rein for evil and your tongue frames deceit.” To your displeasure, I will celebrate the canonization of JP-II and J-XXIII and sainthood cause of P-VI. BTW, why ain’t you spending your hobby time trading favorite verses with your Protestant friends instead of wasting your talent here? Don’t bother to reply ‘cos I won’t.

  28. Dear Surkiko: I told you about the book Far From Rome Near to God.It is written by 50 Roman Catholic Priests telling why they left the Roman Catholic Church.
    I have read at least 13 of them & there are some things that they all agree on: The Catholic Church teaches a lot of things that not only are not found in the Bible but directly contradicts the Bible. Each one of them uses the Bible as his standard. One of them went, with another one to India to spend 6 months doing missionary work. While there, the 2 studied some official church documents & found actual tampering with the 10 commandments. When I quote that one I will include what those two priests found in the documents.
    If these priests are right, & I believe that they are, You are fighting God
    when you twist His divinely inspired Word.
    Your argument that some obit said that a woman didn’t have a baby until after she died sounds like something that someone made up to try to discourage belief in the scriptures that say that Mary were not intimate (as one translation put it) until she died.
    I am 82 years old & I have never seen a remark in an obit that announces that the dead one was childless. I have never even seen them announce that they were step children.
    Almost all of them were born Catholic & wanted to be a priest.
    Anyway I will tell you a bit from most of those that I have read already.
    I can’t copy the whole book. In most cases I just take a little of the most important. You can but the book & learn how each one slowly woke up & turned against the church & how they hungered to know God & how the Catholic Church left them feeling that something was missing & how free they felt when they became friends with Jesus Christ.
    In most, probably all, of these I’ll leave out how (almost every one of them) they grew up in a Catholic family & looked forward to becoming a priest & just give the doctrine that they disagreed with.

    #1 Bob Bush & Victor Affonso, who was also a Jesuit, went to India to do missionary work. They spent a month with a group researching Catholic dogma in the light of the scriptures. We were determined to follow what the Bible said. If Catholic doctrines contradicted that, we would reject them.
    We are told to pray to our Father in Jesus Name, never to a saint or to Mary. Jesus said, “Where 2 or 3 are gathered together in my name, I am there in the midst of them. Matt 18:20. They prayed to the Father; they had the guidance of the Holy Spirit & obeyed the commandments of God.
    In India we discovered that the Catholic catechism had changed the 10 commandments from the way they were in the Bible. In the Roman catechism they kept the 1st commandment as it is in the Bible.
    They removed the 2nd commandment & replaced it with the 3r. All the other commandments were move up 1. They got the 9th commandment by splitting the 10th commandment into 2 commandments.
    The commandment that they eliminated reads: “You shall not make any graven image, or likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth. You shall not bow down to them, nor serve them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, Visiting the iniquity of the father’s upon their children unto the 3rd & 4th generation of them that hate me; & showing mercy to the thousands of them that love me, & keep my commandments Ex. 20:4-6.
    God forbids us to bow down before these or to serve them. yet there are pictures of the pope bowing down & kissing statues.
    We investigated the doctrine of the Immaculate conception. This is the doctrine that Mary was conceived without sin. This contradicts Rom 3:23 which says: ‘For all have sinned & come short of the glory of God.
    Here we have a doctrine, a tradition that is passed down & solemnly defined as infallibly true, & it contradicts the Bible. One of our biggest areas of conflict has to do with the sacrifice of the Mass/ The official Catholic position on the sacrifice of the Mass is that it is a continuation of the sacrifice of Calvary.

    The council of Trent actually defined it this way”. “& since in this divine sacrifice, which is celebrated in the Mass, that same Christ is contained & immolated in an unbloody manner, who on the altar of the cross once offered Himself in a bloody manner (Heb 9:27 the Holy Synod teaches that this is truly propitiatory. Fir it is one & the same victim, the same one now offering by the ministry of the priests as He then offered Himself on the cross, the manner of offering alone being different.
    Cardinal Ratzinger (now pope Benedict xvI) then head of the congregation for Doctrine of the Faith which the (Old Holy Office) in a book called Ratzinger Report said, “t is likewise impossible to decide in favor of Trent & Vatican I but against Vatican II. Whoever denies Vat II denies the authority that upholds the other councils & there detaches them from their foundations.
    The new Baltimore Catechism says the Mass is the same sacrifice, as the sacrifice of the Cross because in the Mass the victim is the same & the principle Priest is the same Jesus Christ. Yet Hebrews 10:18 says “Now where remission of these is there is no more offering for sin. So scripture makes it very clear. In fact 8 times in 4 chapters, beginning with chapt. 7 of this letter to the Hebrews, it says “Once & for all there was one offering for sin: once & for all.”

    Dominic Stockford #2
    We know that we have passed from death to life because we love the brethern. He that loves not his brother abides in death.” John 3:14
    When we studied the Catholic teaching of the Eucharist & their unbiblical theory of transubstantiation, we used philosophy to learn about it, not the Scriptures.I understood most of what was being taught during the year, but the majority of the class failed to comprehend. There was no realization by the faculty, or the students, that philosophy is the way of man & not of God. There was not contact, or connection, with the Word of God. We would perform practice of confessions on willing human guinea pigs, & yet in 5 years at the seminary, I never gave one practice on a real sermon.
    We just misused John 20:23 & practiced being being walls between God & man. They left out Paul’s letter to the Romans; “For that He died unto sin once: but in that He lives. He lives unto God. Likewise reckon yourselves dead to sin but alive to God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Romans 6:10,11.
    Also who (Jesus) needs not daily, as those high priests, to offer us sacrifice, 1st for His own sins & then for the people;s, for this He died once, when He offered up Himself.” The words of Scripture were ignored; the words of laws of the Catholic were all that mattered. I nearly saw the Catholic Church for what it was, a secular organization with secular aims & hidden under religious trapping. I praise God, I began to question transubstantiation. (He is talking about a student who noticed things were not quite right about transubstantiation & started asking questions & got kicked out & woke himself up) He, the student, sought out relevant scriptures & found that the Bible does not say what he was told bu the Catholic Church, nor does the Bible support what Catholic professors told him.He was thrown out of the seminary within 2 days. These events & this man’s dignity,nearly broke through – revealing the way of life the Catholic denomination & the hold it had over me. As I writ this, I do so with anguish, for I still did not see the truth. The words of Isaiah quoted by Jesus, were as true of me as of all those there. “The people draw near to me with their mouth, & honor me with their lips; but in their hearts is far from me. But in vain, they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. Matt 15:8,9. To be quite clear this is not a condemnation of he individuals led astray, but a condemnation of the Roman Catholic denomination that promulgates errant & unbiblical teachings in full knowledge of the errors contained therein. And every priest stands daily ministering the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; but this man (Jesus) after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God; from here on expecting till His enemies be made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever them that are sanctified. Heb 10:11-14
    I can remember fully understanding for the 2sst time the idolatry of Benediction, the Rosary, & the Marion theology, in a way so clear as not to be denied. I was now free of Rome in a way that I had not been before, & free from dependence upon the unbiblical &ungodly demands of the church of Rome. I understood that my sins were forgiven through His death on the Cross. I understood that during all those years I had been told by the Church of Rome that I had to earn such forgiveness thru works & acts of my own & thru the so called sacraments of the Roman Church, I had been living in delusion, knowing that a man is not justified by works of the law, but by faith in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of (in) Christ, & not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified Gal:2:16. for weeks after this, I found myself in the same position – weeping my way thru much of the service, not tears of pain, loss or anger, but tears of relief & joy that finally, I saw & understood the words of Jesus when He says to us; “I am the way, the truth, & the life; no man comes to the Father, but by me.” John 14:16
    I am a minister of the gospel in a small Reformed, lithurgical, & most importantly, a faithful-to-the Bible’s congregation. I preach & teach the gospel as the sole source of faith & practice for Christians. I endeavor to help others understand that only by God’s grace we are
    cleansed by the blood of the Lamb; Jesus Christ. The Lord has blessed me; I know Jesus Christ is my Savior.I repented of my sins & not rest in His mercy.
    I may send more later but this is a good sample.
    Almost all of them were born Catholic & wanted to be priests. They had a hunger for God that led them to the priesthood. Once there they spent a lot of years & never had that feeling of something missing fulfilled until something led them to the Bible & the Protestants.
    All of those whose bios I have read so far have become Protestant ministers & they all report how that missing peace has been found.
    I have read about 13 & I can hardly wait to read about all the others.
    So far all have agreed that the Bible is their standard & they that not only a large part of what the church teaches is not to be found in the Bible but contradicts the Bible.
    Read Rev 17. There are 2 Babylons mentioned in the Book of Revelations. The Spiritual & the political.
    I read an article that said that when a pope is elected the go to a room & dress him in a new set of clothes. It said that the clothes had gold, precious stones, pearls, (I think that I forgot one). In Rev. a list of those very things are mentioned. If my memory is correct there is a vest that is covered with pearls. The description sounds exactly like the Vatican. There are scriptures that tell of a great tribulation coming. We are looking for Jesus to come & take His church (People of every church that try to follow Him, is my belief), The signs of that time are screaming at us. We look for Him to come anytime;may be a few years but it looks close.
    You don’t want to be left here to live under the antichrist. If you do don’t take that mark in your hand or forehead or you’ll be forever condemned by God.
    If you keep working to lead people to live this occult religion I fear for your eternal soul.

  29. To Joan B:

    “I am 82 years old …”

    God has blessed you with longevity, Joan. I dare say that it’s okay if doctrinal purity and precision may not be as pressing now in that we are both beyond the yonder days of our youth full of vitality (but then which itself also possesses a zeal plus an impetuosity which can very lacking in discerning prudence and charity for our fellow Christians at times). We both have had tried to serve the Lord to our best ability in our own ways. But if you still must continue to seek out truth, please forgive me if somehow that I may have managed to unsettle the restful contentment of your ripen faith life …

    I can only address your first objection now. Just let me know if you have another topic which is burning you for an explanation ;)) :

    “( #1 Bob Bush & Victor Affonso) … discovered that the Catholic catechism had changed the 10 commandments from the way they were in the Bible … removed the 2nd commandment & replaced it with the 3rd … got the 9th commandment by splitting the 10th commandment into 2 commandments.”

    For Catholics, they are simply following the TRADITIONAL list of the Christian Church. The First Commandment is a positive imperative to worship God and only Him alone. It is inclusive for the prohibition of idolatry of “having no other gods” and “the making of graven images (to bow down to them and worship them).” It is only the johnny-come-lately Protestantism which has very unwisely separated “graven images” into a different commandment as a general prohibition. This runs contrary to scripture where we see God commanding and praising the making of images and statues in Ex 25:18; Num 21:8-9, and; I Kg 6:23-28, 9:3; and, 1 Chr 28:18.

    Well, the Protestants have indeed dug themselves into a deep hole which they were then forced to compensate by combining the last two Commandments into one “covetness” so as to conform to the system of the “Ten Word.” By doing so, they unwittingly equated a wife with the chattels. Not too many modern women (which will include yourself with ‘recent’ memory of women’s suffrage and unequal treatments) will be too happy to be considered a part of one neighbor’s donkeys and other property. I can also imagine God’s disdain and disapproval for equating the great sin of lust/adultery with that of thieving from one’s neighbor!

    The proper understanding of revelation in Judeo-Christianity is the gradual process of it culminating in Christ at the fullness of time. As Heb 1:1-2 will say: “In polumeros (Gk.) God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets.” This polumeros (“many and various ways in many portions”) prepared an ancient people when and as they were able to receive it in the gradual unfolding of revelation. The equal dignity of man and woman was already revealed in Genesis (“In the image of God he created him; male and female he created them”) but the ancients took some time to grasp and develop an understanding of it. We can see this in the development of the Decalogue from Exodus to Deuteronomy. From the earlier and more primitive form of it in Ex 20 to the later version of it in Deut 5, we see a clear change and the sharp distinction being drawn by the separation of “wife” from the neighbor’s chattels. While previously in Exodus, the verb “chamat” was used for both wife and chattels, the inspired author of Deuteronomy began using two different Hebrew words: (1) “Chamat” for “covet” (with regard to the wife), and (2) “Avah” for “desire” (with regard to a neighbor’s property, thus leaving little doubt of the two separate and different Commandments. It actually did not stop there. The Catholic Church also decrees for all Christians to worship on the Lord’s Day (Sunday) in the observance of the Fifth Commandment as the final and full revelation in Christ.

    [We can also see another good example of this development of revelation in the question of divorce and adultery. While divorce was permitted in Deut 24:1-4, God had expressed his "hatred" for it in Malachi 2:16. So when Christ came, he cancelled divorce and remarriage absolutely by elevating Christian marriage to a Sacrament. Christ explained that Moses had allowed divorce because of the "hardness of the heart" but it was never intended that way from the beginning (Mt 19:5-6)].

    Another interesting tidbit is the advantage of the Catholic (Augustinian) numbering by allowing the first three Commandments to match the “Greatest and First Commandment” of love of God, while the following seven Commandments correspond to love of neighbor in biblical numerology of the significance of “3” and “7.”

    Well Joan, I hope that you can prayfully think of what I have taken some time to compose with meditation. God bless your good heart!

  30. A Sacrament is something that’s always available and accessible to 100% of the body of Christianity as a means of grace towards salvation. Marriage isn’t necessary for salvation, therefore won’t ever be “Sacramental” regardless of how the Romans portray this notion. A Sacrament is an absolute guarantee from God, but not all who are married procreate, since procreation is a core function of marriage as seen with the nations of Abraham, tribes of Israel, rod/stem of Jesse, and lineage of David. Elevating marriage from a rite of Catholicism to a Sacrament under the Sentences by Peter Lombard has corrupted the Biblical intent of God’s gift to his people, so that “man” won’t be alone via “woman”. Roman clergy denouncing marriage for instance, means they can only participate in six Sacraments, if really and truly a Sacrament, such would deny them access to heaven by willfully rejecting God’s means of grace bestowed upon them.

    Paul’s letter to the Ephesians and Galatians appropriately explains the role of marriage within the Church. If mankind has a gifted will from the Holy Spirit to resist desires of the flesh, then it’s appropriate to unilaterally serve God. If mankind sucumbs to the will of the flesh, yet respectfully carries out his/her desires’ through holy matrimony instituted by the Church, then he/she can serve God through their gifts in God as a couple. Saint Peter and other Apostles carried out their obligations to Christ Jesus with their families among them. Unlike Buddhist, Christianity doesn’t require any separation between a spouse and children with their father, when he pursues ordination. To believe or proclaim otherwise in heresy, under Satan’s Church of unrealistic legalism.

    Obviously, Lutherans don’t place a specified number on the Sacraments (two to three are most commonly attributed), but rather view “Sacramental Union” with the literal (true/real) presence of God in the water, wine, and bread as a means of grace in Baptism and Eucharist. The nature of the Holy Trinity in these means of grace is such that we confess and receive: atonement, remission, absolution, penance, anointing, renewal, and etc… Participation in the Eucharist is forbidden until Catechumen complete their Catechesis explaining God’s judgement on us at Holy Communion when and where our Confession of faith is lacking.

    Calvinist and other Reformed congregations made a huge issue of shortening the Ten Commandments, but the content of these commandments are the issue; the description of each commandment remains in place for catechismal studies. Both the Lutherans and Romans are heavily criticized for the use of imagery in their congregations; especially our use of the crucifix being walked down the aisle of the sanctuary as the Divine Worship begins. Lutherans for instance regard images as Sacred Marks of the Christian Church, which helps Christians to identify a legitimate place of worship against watered down theology. The use of an eight-sided-font is also customary to Lutheran Baptismal practice in accordance with claiming infants into their Church by the eighth-day, as seen in circumcision.

  31. Daniel S:

    “Elevating marriage from a rite of Catholicism to a Sacrament under the Sentences by Peter Lombard has corrupted the Biblical intent of God’s gift to his people … Roman clergy denouncing marriage for instance, means they can only participate in six ”

    You must be a very conflicted person ‘cos you would seem to be so puffed up on how Martin Luther was tutored under the “Sentences” of Peter Lombard at one time and now is so quickly to disavow it as vehemently. But thanks be God for your sanity’s sake, the Sacramento of Marriage doesn’t trace its origin to Lombard.

    “Saint Peter and other Apostles carried out their obligations to Christ Jesus with their families among them … ”

    You need to substantiate this spurious claim of “Peter and other Apostles” which I don’t think that you can. I think that you meant to say “renouncing (marriage)” for the Latin rite clergy. Sacraments are only the ordinary means of channeling graces but I wouldn’t go as far as saying that each one of them is “an absolute guarantee … (to) access to heaven” if I have understood you correctly. Well, the Latin clergy gives up Holy Matrimony and the rest of us also give up Holy Orders, but everything is well in the kingdom of God with all of us realizing our own vocation just as God has made it. And I also don’t want you to think that I have somehow misplaced celibacy which is only a discipline only in the Church …

    “Lutherans don’t place a specified number on the Sacraments (two to three are most commonly attributed) … ”

    Since when did it become okay for Lutherans to privately interpret the bible against the dogmatic teachings of apostolic faith like the total sum of Seven Sacraments, something which is witnessed jointly by both the East and West “lungs” of Church? I’m looking for consistency in what you had said and is saying now. Do you or do you not believe in “private interpretation”?

    Blessings,

  32. Daniel S:

    “… these positions remain upheld by Trent, Vatican I, and Vatican II. Only the papacy and Roman Church have any authority to theocratically select … rein over them as a higher authority.”

    It’s not really that hard to understand that since Christ is the Way, Truth and Life, he can thus properly say: “All authority has been given to me in heaven and on EARTH” (Mt 28:18). By delegation, Christ can also give this authority of “the keys of kingdom of heaven” to Peter (Mt 16:18). Yes, no good Christian will disagree that the spiritual will always be a “higher authority” than the temporal one … but what we have is an ecclesiocracy, not a theocracy (which you save for the discussion with JWs instead).

    “… the papacy should have any authority to appoint the Three Branches to the United States for instance; as the Church Catholic from their viewpoint alone should hold such authority …”

    I didn’t know that you are still so still uptight about RFK and the Vatican conspiracy theory of taking over this country?

    “To date, 75% of all European religious converts are to Islam, rather than Christianity. The daughter of Muhammad, Fatima, even has a Roman-Catholic omen attributed to a city named after her in Portugal.”

    Again, I didn’t know that you feel so insecure or threaten by the proponents of various conspiracy theories. I doubt that there’s anyone here who share this kind of paranoia so I will just leave “Fatima” alone as simply another unproven conspiracy for now .,.

  33. Surkiko – which parts of the Bible have I misinterpreted – this seems to be an obsession but you never go into detail. We are commanded to read the Bible – it is impossible for a diligent Bible student to avoid interpreting what he is reading.

    2 Timothy 2:15

    “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.”

  34. Charles:

    “We are commanded to read the Bible – it is impossible for a diligent Bible student to avoid interpreting what he is reading.”

    I will only agree to stay if we can discuss calmly. You have asked a valid and reasonable question so I can attempt to explain. It is correct that deciphering anything we read will involve some type of interpretation of it. The bible is no exception. We already know that it’s a practical impossibility for every believer to lay claim to be all inspired by the one Spirit of Truth when a multiplicity of diametrically opposing views can arise which divides Christianity. And who’s to say that a JW, LDS, SDA or another new quasi-Christian cult, again all claiming to be inspired by the Holy Spirit, is wrong just because it does not fit nicely into our own slant of beliefs? But if we can at least agree that our God is not a God of chaos, then surely the omniscient-omnipotently God must have had already figured all this out in eternity, right?. Do you think that just maybe … that God has a better plan for us?

    • By studying what heretic cults proclaim and comparing it to scripture we can identify heresy. The scripture is the plumb line that we use.
      This is how the Berean’s tested what Paul said.

  35. Charles A:

    The question remains who’s to decide what’s and what’s not heresy. One may be compelled to be a “trinitarian” while another is equally convinced of an unitarian “oneness” God. An Anglican will adore Christ as God but a JW will be just as adamant that Christ is only a “first-born” creature. All have relied on scripture as their sole authority and have claimed to be divinely inspired by the Holy Spirit. And why do we even presumed that the Bereans had gotten it “right” when the Thessalonians were equally testing scripture too? On closer examination, the Thessalonians were even most rigorously orthodox since the new “sect” of the Nazarenes were “turning the world upside down” (Acts 17:6) by teaching damnable “heresies” that God’s eternal Abrahamic covenant of circumcision is now abrogated, koshe laws are no more, and worship will hence be on a new “Lord’s Day” instead of Sabbath. Yes, so we are told that the Bereans were “more noble” or variously described as being open-minded, better disposed and fair-minded. How is a modern-day Christian’s going to Insure that the “plumb line” is indeed a straight line? As we have already seen, individual Christians comparing bible verses and calling out each other to be heretical are not solving any real problems. God must be gravely mistaken to not foresee such chaotic results … or did God, in fact, have conceived a better “original” plan before it was supplanted by man? Can you explain for me, Charles?

    • The trinity is quite clear in the Bible as is the fact of Jesus and His Father being one. Only wilful misreading of scripture can misinterpret to this extent. Paul said the Bereans attitude was correct – test everything to scripture. All the damnable heresies came from misreading scripture -twisting things which are quite clear to a single minded Christian.
      Cults are easily identified by making scripture a daily part of your life – since His sheep will not listen to a strangers voice .

      The plumb line of the Word is dead straight.

      God knew that satan would corrupt believers by convincing them that
      God’s word is not perfect and needs add ons just like he did in the garden – so satan must prevent Christians reading the Bible and piercing him with the sword of the spirit. He makes the christian think that bible study is not necessary only church attendance.

      It is a test by God. God allows satan to test us – some fail and refuse to follow ALL the commandments in the OT and NT.

      It is clear from 1958 that the CC had been infiltrated by communists and masons – they themselves told us – so from this dates heresy was preached contradicting previous church councils.

      If an electrical boss gives his men a safety manual and some dont read it and some do wilfully MISread it – this does not mean the safety manual is dangerous to read . Most will read it and follow its commands and be safe.
      You think that by denying God’s word to the laity you are keeping them safe but it has the opposite effect since there is no guiding light in their lives.
      The mormons , witnesses and 7th day were masonic infiltrations to the true church – which now has happened to the CC.
      So now we are starting in the Apostasy as predicted by the NT – our safety is in God’s word – not man’s word.

  36. Charles A:

    Sorry, even I won’t go so far to say that the “heretics” are/were wilfully misreading the bible. Quite the contrary, it’s quite common knowledge that all the past popular heretics were proto- or strict sola-scripturists who also made “scripture a daily part of (their) life.” Just examine Arius, Donatus Magnus, Montanus, Pelagius, Peter Weldo, Jansenius, Martin Luther, John Calvin, with the list goes on and on. I have no doubt that these were sincere Christians with every good intention to be faithful to scripture … but as the wise will say: The path to hell is paved with good intentions. What really happened is that they all had made themselves an Authority by pitting their own understanding of scripture (aka “Private Interpretation”) against that of the Church’s.

    It’s not my job to be an apologist for sects like JW or Mormonism. But I also won’t go so far to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is “so clear” from scripture. You can say so only because of the advantage of hindsight and having been brought up in a trinitarian faith.

    Did something happen in 1958 which caused you to say that some heretics have been preaching something “contracting previous church councils”? I have little doubt that there has always been a constant flow of heretics, schimatics and apostates since the beginning of the Church. Can you give an example or two of how Church doctrines had changed since 1958?

    As I said earlier, the Bereans were “noble” not because they searched the scripture but because they were more conducive to accepting the fresh revelation as explained by St. Paul. The modern predicament is still the same: How to be “open-minded, better disposed and fair-minded” while remaining faithful to scripture?

    I don’t see how you have successfully presented a workable solution for the problem of the continuing fragmentation and anarchy of faith and morals for the Christian Church. To point to the old tried and tired twin proposition of “Sola Scriptura” and “Private Interpretation” is just a vicious unending wheel of futility and purposelessness. Can you assure me how and why I should trust you as an Authority to interpret the bible more faithfully than another “bible Christian” who disagree with you? Please work with me on this.

    • The Heretics you mention were challenged by bible believing christians who used scripture as their weopon .
      The Bereans were noble BECAUSE they searched the scriptures if you correctly read what paul was saying .

      “For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you. 20 Therefore when you meet together, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper,…

      So factions can be healthy for true doctrine to emerge .

      Those who fought heresy and did not fall into it – where did they get their wisdom from but from God’s word.

      In 1958 Pope John was chosen and he was a mason according to many religious and non religious – the masons also said this.
      Vatican 2 was then convened by him. You would be better to read the anti vatican 2 websites which identify the heresies departing from the magisterium.
      If I interpret a bible verse incorrectly then you should study the verses
      to see if my interpretation is correct.

      I know what Jesus said about divorce – it is forbidden to remarry even if the divorce was allowed under adultery. But most churches including the CC do not follow this teaching – this is one example. Can you dispute this. No church can change the commands of Jesus.

      • We’re probably going to talk the “Bereans” to death without either one of us conceding the point to the other. It’s becoming unproductive so let’s just leave it here.

        So I see that you’re joined with the “red tad” in opposing the updated Vat II Church. I’m yet to hear from you as to why and how she has gone into apostasy. So spare me the agony.

        It’s unclear if you are saying that allowing “divorce and remarriage” is one of the new heresies of the Vat II Church? Well, that will be news to me ‘cos divorce and remarriage was and is still not permitted in the Catholic Church. If you can, do you mind citing from an official church teaching or document to prove your case? BTW, this “exception clause” in Matthew’s gospel is very misleading. Although many Protestant bible translations use the word “adultery” (“moicheia”), Christ actually said “porneia” which means illicit or invalid. The Jewish audience of Matthew knew exactly what Christ meant by recalling Lev 18:6-306 which lists marriages between certain degrees of consanguinity between Jews, homosexuality (gay marriages), beastility (human-animal marriages), and interfaith marriages with a Gentile, to be invalid. A Catholic annulment is not a divorce but a declaration of nullity of an invalid marriage.

        Again, I want to stay on topic by reiterating what I asked: I don’t see how you have successfully presented a workable solution for the problem of the continuing fragmentation and anarchy of faith and morals for the Christian Church. To point to the old tried and tired twin proposition of “Sola Scriptura” and “Private Interpretation” is just a vicious unending wheel of futility and purposelessness. Can you assure me how and why I should trust you as an Authority to interpret the bible more faithfully than another “bible Christian” who disagree with you?

        Why is it always the “other guy” who is the “heretic” for you?

    • “For there must be also heresies: that they also, who are approved, may be made manifest among you. “

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 307 other followers

%d bloggers like this: