The Protestant Reformation

[Fidei Defensor]

On 5/2/2022 at 10:30 AM, Anne2 said:

I wonder why Luther and other reformers  just didn't embrace orthodoxy.

“The Greeks [Orthodox] . . .  are not heretics or schismatics but the most Christian people and the best followers of the Gospel on earth.”

“Yet he [the Pope] lifts his shameless, blasphemous mouth to heaven and slanders the Greek [Orthodox] church, claiming that it is schismatic and apostate. It is he himself who is the chief cause and sole author of all schisms and divisions. This is plain as day and all historical records show it.”

“Second, they revile, slander, and anathematize the Greeks [Orthodox], and all others who do not submit to the pope, as though these were not Christians.”

A quote from Luther

 

Because The Eastern Orthodox-Greek Orthodox do not believe salvation is by grace and faith as Romans 10:9-10, Ephesians 2:3-18, Acts 15:11, John 3:16, John 6:40, Philippians 3:9, and other verses of Holy Scripture affirm. The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Churches believe salvation is a processes (regeneration being integral), they do not believe salvation is certain, when salvation is absolutely certain upon confession and belief (Romans 10:9-10). Luther thus having read Romans which “opened the gates to heaven,” wasn’t going to exchange Roman slavery for Eastern-Greek Orthodox slavery. 
 

Sources: 

Bishop Kallistos Ware’s The Orthodox Church

Orthodox Church, Simple Guides, Katherine Clark

The Reformation, Diamand McCulloch

The 95 Thesis and Other Works, Martin Luther, Penguin Publishers

[Anne2]

On 7/3/2022 at 1:37 PM, Fidei Defensor said:

Because The Eastern Orthodox-Greek Orthodox do not believe salvation is by grace and faith as Romans 10:9-10, Ephesians 2:3-18, Acts 15:11, John 3:16, John 6:40, Philippians 3:9, and other verses of Holy Scripture affirm. The Eastern-Greek Orthodox Churches believe salvation is a processes (regeneration being integral), they do not believe salvation is certain, when salvation is absolutely certain upon confession and belief (Romans 10:9-10). Luther thus having read Romans which “opened the gates to heaven,” wasn’t going to exchange Roman slavery for Eastern-Greek Orthodox slavery. 
 

Sources: 

Bishop Kallistos Ware’s The Orthodox Church

Orthodox Church, Simple Guides, Katherine Clark

The Reformation, Diamand McCulloch

The 95 Thesis and Other Works, Martin Luther, Penguin Publishers

Yeah, Luther ignoring scripture discerning between a dead faith and a living one. Called James letter an epistle of straw. So, faith has no works (fruit).

[Fidei Defensor]

1 hour ago, Anne2 said:

Yeah, Luther ignoring scripture discerning between a dead faith and a living one. Called James letter an epistle of straw. So, faith has no works (fruit).

Luther had a bad translation of James. James means “faith without works is dead,” in that is speaking of witness (our faith being seen by the world), that your witness is dead because no one can tell you are saved because your works (actions) are not there.
 

RCC and EO use the Book of James to defend works-based-merit-salvation. But James is focused on fruit bearing, he is criticizing that the Grace crowd isn’t bothering to live like Christians, James is not advocating we can save ourselves with works, he is focused on fruit bearing. So his epistle should not be used in Soteriology. 
 

Here is an analogy. There is Charitas Love and Agape Love. Charitas is where we get charity, which doesn’t mean money, but yo show love through action. Agape love in contrast is only known by the person and who is loved alone. James is focused on Charitas:

“James 2:15-17

[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 is that? [17] So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.”

[Anne2]

17 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

RCC and EO use the Book of James to defend works-based-merit-salvation. But James is focused on fruit bearing, he is criticizing that the Grace crowd isn’t bothering to live like Christians, James is not advocating we can save ourselves with works, he is focused on fruit bearing. So his epistle should not be used in Soteriology. 

Yet James asks

Jas 2:14  What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

There are plenty of Catholic charities out there. Catholicism has been the source of education of children as well as hospitals.

[Fidei Defensor]

4 hours ago, Anne2 said:

Yet James asks

Jas 2:14  What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?

There are plenty of Catholic charities out there. Catholicism has been the source of education of children as well as hospitals.

Ah but save (salvo) can mean eternal salvation or save your life from death, misery, and consequences; as in “he saved me from that trouble.” 
 

I believe James means Salvo in that tense. 
 

I am not debating the good The Roman Church has done in terms of hospitals, and etc; we are discussing the Reformation, which is theological, soterological, doxological, and spiritual, 

[Anne2]

3 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

Ah but save (salvo) can mean eternal salvation or save your life from death, misery, and consequences; as in “he saved me from that trouble.” 
 

I believe James means Salvo in that tense. 
 

I am not debating the good The Roman Church has done in terms of hospitals, and etc; we are discussing the Reformation, which is theological, soterological, doxological, and spiritual, 

You mentioned fruit such being charity. Catholicism is charitable and has historically been so. 

Edited July 7, 2022 by Anne2

[Fidei Defensor]

2 hours ago, Anne2 said:

You mentioned fruit such being charity. Catholicism is charitable and has historically been so. 

Right, but my point is James is not talking about eternal salvation, his focus is good works that testify you are saved, not that save you. 
 

My point was Luther like many misinterpret James to be preaching a penance/works based gospel. He is not. The Greek makes it clear he is frustrated with Christians who arn’t any different than the world, who’s love fot others “has gone cold.” 

[Anne2]

You are saved Because of the nature of your faith. So it is a salvational issue. Just not in the context you accept with Catholicism. I think the difference is liturgical worship in assembly really. The Catholic Church has a priesthood which partakes communally of the Eucharist. Which they take in a worthy fashion because they see it differently than protestants. But the fruit is there. IMO it is more a sanctification issue.

[Fidei Defensor]

1 hour ago, Anne2 said:

You are saved Because of the nature of your faith. So it is a salvational issue. Just not in the context you accept with Catholicism. I think the difference is liturgical worship in assembly really. The Catholic Church has a priesthood which partakes communally of the Eucharist. Which they take in a worthy fashion because they see it differently than protestants. But the fruit is there. IMO it is more a sanctification issue.

The Priests of RCC are Sacros Priests, the Eucharist is treated as Jesus sacrificing himself over and over at the mass, which this violates Scripture: 

“And he did not enter heaven to offer himself again and again, like the high priest here on earth who enters the Most Holy Place year after year with the blood of an animal. If that had been necessary, Christ would have had to die again and again, ever since the world began. But now, once for all time, he has appeared at the end of the age to remove sin by his own death as a sacrifice. 
And just as each person is destined to die once and after that comes judgment, so also Christ was offered once for all time as a sacrifice to take away the sins of many people. He will come again, not to deal with our sins, but to bring salvation to all who are eagerly waiting for him.” (Hebrews 9:25-28)

[Anne2]

21 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

The Priests of RCC are Sacros Priests, the Eucharist is treated as Jesus sacrificing himself over and over at the mass, which this violates Scripture: 

Sacros priests? It seems to me it is simply a priesthood, as the bible speaks of priests. It is not a sacrifice for a memorial for sin. I think there may be a distinction there.

 

21 hours ago, Fidei Defensor said:

“And he did not enter heaven to offer himself again and again, like the high priest here on earth who enters the Most Holy Place year after year with the blood of an animal. If that had been necessary, Christ would have had to die again and again, ever since the world began. But now, once for all time, he has appeared at the end of the age to remove sin by his own death as a sacrifice. 

Clearly this is speaking of the yom kippur sacrifice once in the year. 

Heb 10:3  But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year. 
The eucharist however is for a memorial of Christ blood of the new covenant, not the old.

The first and second here is speaking to the covenants.

The first, offerings by the law

8  Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;

Taken away to establish the second, new covenant made in his blood

9  Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.

By which is sanctification...

10  By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

Christ was a sacrifce which all the sacrifices of the law were only shadows. 

The yom kippur sacrifice of which Hebrews speaks is Collective in nature.

It was a sacrifice for the sins of the entire nation and it's sin which the high priest served as representative agant of that collective. It was not focused upon indidvidual sin.

Christ as a sacrifice for a collective body, is the Passover establishing a new covenant body. 

Edited July 9, 2022 by Anne2