Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Good grief – here we go again . . .
I was just packing for a little vacation this weekend and thought I’d have one last look at the posts on this forum before I left – and I saw this putrid pile of anti-Catholic manure. You guys have GOT to stop reading those moronic Jack Chick tracts. This thread is so full of gaping holes, it’s difficult to know just where to begin . . .
#10 is a good one: "Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory."
Wait till you get down into the 20's and beyond. LOL#10 is a good one: "Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory."
I never challenged what is written in Luther’s document. I challenge the false allegations by many based on what he wrote.Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses
… to have discovered a recently written book concerning the development of Protestantism.
As long as you ignore the first three - right??Wait till you get down into the 20's and beyond. LOL
Indeed.believe it or not they are forgiven, which is going to be even worse for them
Good point.Is this not considered a valid and accurate historical document?
Martin Luther's 95 Theses
I figure if the Church wasn't doing it, Martin Luther wouldn't have complained about it..... No one would have even noticed his rant. But, as it seems it was...………… the Church officials were quite upset with him.Good point.
Luther never set out to subvert nor replace the church. What he was saying in those first things is "that since it is true that we say we believe and we teach these truths, WHY are we introducing all these other things that we (the Church) use to bilk money out of the believers?"I never challenged what is written in Luther’s document. I challenge the false allegations by many based on what he wrote.
Ummmmm, have you actually read through the entire document?
First of all – NOT all of his “95 theses”were protests against the Church. Some of them actually AGREED with Church teaching. Case in point – look at the first three that mirror what is taught in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC):
Thesis 1: When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, “Repent” (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.
Thesis 2: This word [i.e., Christ’s call to repent in Mark 4:17] cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.
- CCC 1431: Interior repentance is a radical reorientation of our whole life, a return, a conversion to God with all our heart, an end of sin, a turning away from evil, with repugnance toward the evil actions we have committed.
Thesis 3: Yet it [i.e., the call to repent in Mark 4:17] does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.
- CCC 1427: Jesus calls to conversion. This call is an essential part of the proclamation of the kingdom: “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent, and believe in the gospel” [Mark 4:17]. In the Church's preaching this call is addressed first to those who do not yet know Christ and his Gospel. Also, Baptism is the principal place for the first and) fundamental conversion.
What I challenge are the false allegations in the book you read about the CHURCH selling Indulgences and the false statements about Purgatory. that I PROVED wrong in my last post.
- CCC 1430: Jesus' call to conversion and penance, like that of the prophets before him, does not aim first at outward works, “sackcloth and ashes,” fasting and mortification, but at the conversion of the heart, interior conversion. Without this, such penances remain sterile and false; however, interior conversion urges expression in visible signs, gestures, and works of penance.
I figure if the Church wasn't doing it, Martin Luther wouldn't have complained about it..... No one would have even noticed his rant. But, as it seems it was...………… the Church officials were quite upset with him.
And, as I’ve already stated – the Church WASN’T doing this. It was an abuse by men like Tetzel. This was NEVER a Church-mandated practice – nor was it ever endorsed by the Church.Luther never set out to subvert nor replace the church. What he was saying in those first things is "that since it is true that we say we believe and we teach these truths, WHY are we introducing all these other things that we (the Church) use to bilk money out of the believers?"
I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.Read post #27 . . .
How many times must I remind you that this was an ABUSE, not a directive??I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.
And the Church leaders never heard a word about it? Where did they think all that money was coming from?How many times mist i remind you that this was an ABUSE, not a directive??
ONE MORE TIME . . .And the Church leaders never heard a word about it? Where did they think all that money was coming from?
I like that #. Read the same # (27) in the theses. Obviously the Church's own priests were doing this preaching.