Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49
Like Tree53Likes

Bible Discussion Forum

Ask (or answer) Bible questions here. Join or start a Bible discussion now!

Thread: can some people give me their....

  1. #21
    Senior Member followjesus's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 1st, 2016
    Age
    40
    Posts
    4,401
    Rep Power
    72

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by 3putter View Post
    I have thought about Denominations often also. I did not think Protestant was a Denomination. I thought it was a Movement. The Evangelical one was the one that caused me to start thinking about these things when it became popular to use to define Christians several years ago. I still do not understand why there is a difference between Evangelicals and Christians though.

    I agree with the person who said they have no label other than Christian. I hope someone can explain the need for all of these different labels also.
    "I hope someone can explain the need for all of these different labels also."

    different interpretations of scripture id say, but thats just my own reasoning

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 12th, 2016
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,290
    Rep Power
    81

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    It seems many people are exceptionally foggy about the history of the Church.

    Quick potted summary:
    There was only one church grouping for several centuries. The Church then was administered by five Patriarchs located in Rome, Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople.
    About the 11th century growing division between the church in Rome and the church in the eastern parts of the Mediterranean, resulted in a split that had persisted to this day. Historians refer to this as the Great Schism and it is dated to 1054.
    The Orthodox Church grew out of the eastern component of the split (Greek Orthodox, Russian Orthodox etc) and the Roman Catholic Church from the church in Rome. The patriarch of Rome evolved into what we know as the Pope - the head of the Roman Catholic Church.
    Nothing much changed for several centuries until Martin Luther crystallised several brewing issues within the Roman Catholic Church, resulting in his posting of the Ninety-Five theses. Given that this document challenged the authority of the Roman Catholic Church on many levels conflict was inevitable. The splitting up of the Roman Catholic Church across northern Europe was a complex affair intermixed with a volatile political environment with lots of shifting political allegiances and wars.
    Although doctrinal positions were often touted as the prime movers in many of these conflicts in reality most of what happened was a convenient coalescing of political and religious goals and with political and religious figures of the day.
    This splitting up of the Roman Catholic Church and the adoption of very different doctrines is referred to as the Reformation. To the current day the result has been the creation of multitudes (several thousand) different denominations. Some are characterised by specific doctrinal approaches and some, especially historically, were created to cater for a particular ethnic group - nowadays this distinction is rather blurred.

    To call oneself a Protestant just means one belongs to a Church that came into being as result of the Reformation or whose roots can be traced to that time - nothing more. Churches within the Protestant fold are known to squabble amongst themselves as much, if not more, than with the Roman Catholic Church.

    Calvinism and Arminianism are two different doctrinal systems the conceptual roots of which go back as early as the first centuries of the existence of the Church.

    Pentecostal churches came into being around the end of the 19th century and early 20th century. The key distinguishing feature of a Pentecostal Church is their belief in the latter-day operation of the gifts of the Holy Spirit with speaking in tongues as a prominent feature. Pentecostal Churches are largely, but not exclusively Arminian in their doctrinal outlook.
    (It is interesting to note that many of the characteristics of what would be recognised as Pentecostalism today were variably present in some churches and at different times for several hundred years before the acknowledged emergence of Pentecostalism.)

    The appearance of the term Charismatic emerges in the years after the Second World War. Churches from many different denominations (mostly Protestant but never exclusively) began adopting Pentecostal practices. Changes to their accepted previously accepted doctrine of the Holy Spirit were necessary to incorporate their understanding.
    A Baptist church which went through this process might be informally referred to as a Charismatically-Reformed Baptist church.
    Generally a church such as this would retain the rest of their doctrines.
    Many staunchly Calvinist-orientated church groups will derisory label Charismatically-Reformed churches as Arminian with respect to their doctrine but this would be totally inaccurate as a generalisation.

    I have purposefully avoided giving much detail about the actual structural and doctrinal differences that characterise, and are responsible for the formation of the different church groups and movements, and the conflicts that often arose.
    However, there are enough buzzwords mentioned to make a Google search an easy affair, if desired. A couple of hours research in Wikipedia using the terms I have mentioned will unearth enough useful information to give one a practically useful working knowledge of Church History.

    There is nothing comprehensive about this very light review of Church History.
    I chose to highlight those aspects that were mentioned in previous posts with a view to providing only a skeletal framework of the history in question.

    Questions are welcome but don't bother trying to pick apart supposed inaccuracies in detail - the whole point is that very little detail is provided!

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    August 25th, 2016
    Age
    73
    Posts
    236
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    I would call myself a Christian. That is I am a believer in my savior Jesus Christ. I don't like the word denominations. To me it separates all of us. I look forward to the day when HE will put us all straight.
    graceNpeace and Rosemaryx like this.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 8th, 2011
    Age
    35
    Posts
    14,667
    Blog Entries
    58
    Rep Power
    217

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNameMcgee View Post
    definitions

    i dont know much about branches or denominations
    1
    whats protestant
    2. whats evangelical
    3. Whats charasmatic


    i just recently learned a bit about "calvinists"
    i understand catholics
    and baptists
    a bit about mormans
    and jehova witnesses

    but have no clue about the first 3 i listed

    if anyone proclaims any of these titles

    can you tell me why?

    or what they mean?
    1. Protestant: not Catholic...broke off because they didn't like how corrupt they believed the Catholic church had become. Often traces back to Martin Luther and His nailing the Confessions to the door of a church.

    2. Evangelical....churchs tend to focus on spreading the gospel to the whole world. Most churches believe in this to some small part, but if it's in the name...they normally send missionaries to foreign countries and stress the importance of converting the whole world to Christianity.

    3. Charismatic....churches believe that the spiritual gifts are still given to people today...the opposite is called cessationist.
    NoNameMcgee likes this.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 8th, 2011
    Age
    35
    Posts
    14,667
    Blog Entries
    58
    Rep Power
    217

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by Yahweh_is_gracious View Post
    So...with the seat warmers, would it be accurate to say there is a denomination called "Churchianity"?
    The title I have seen is "carnal" or "nominal" Christians

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 12th, 2017
    Age
    54
    Posts
    2,641
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    The Bible only uses the word Christian & Christians once.

    Acts 26.28-
    28 Agrippa replied to Paul, “In a short time you will persuade me to become a Christian

    Acts 11.26-
    26 and when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. And for an entire year they met with the church and taught considerable numbers; and the disciples were first called Christians in Antioch.

    Both times these terms are used they were used to demean and belittle. In other words, they were used as adjectives to describe how silly, crazy and false the followers of Jesus were and had become.

    Paul never used this term anywhere in his letters to the church, he used the term brothers, saints, sons of God, heirs and many other adjectives like conqueror, when describing those in the way or faith.

    I am not a Christian, nor do I desire to be one.

    I am sin forgiven son of God, who is a saint[set apart/holy one] a joint heir with Christ Jesus, and a brother of like-minded people.

    I see many people using and identifying themselves as a Christian that are not a son of God, saint or heir.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 8th, 2011
    Age
    35
    Posts
    14,667
    Blog Entries
    58
    Rep Power
    217

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    I identify with Christian because it shows that I have a larger connection with not only God they Jesus Christ but the earthly Church and the fellowship I share with my brothers and sisters.
    Iamlearning and NoNameMcgee like this.

  8. #28
    Senior Member Tinuviel's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 6th, 2015
    Age
    18
    Posts
    3,813
    Rep Power
    97

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNameMcgee View Post
    too long winded


    what do you call someone who believes every word in the Holy Bible and it is the preserved inspired Word of God
    Oh, that's Calvinist . Everyone is going to have a different name for that, because everyone believes that that is what they believe.
    “If sinners be damned, at least let them leap to Hell over our dead bodies. And if they perish, let them perish with our arms wrapped about their knees, imploring them to stay. If Hell must be filled, let it be filled in the teeth of our exertions, and let not one go unwarned and unprayed for.”
    ~Charles Spurgeon

  9. #29
    Senior Member ForthAngel's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31st, 2012
    Age
    34
    Posts
    2,168
    Rep Power
    52

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinuviel View Post
    Oh, that's Calvinist . Everyone is going to have a different name for that, because everyone believes that that is what they believe.
    Well.... Reformed is the better term, but sure Calvinists too.

    The unfortunate truth however is that not all brands of "Christianity" rely on sola scriptura. You will hear such things as "God is not limited by his word" and "God is above his word", and if anyone claims the bible is their authority and believe every word in it, yet deny it with their deeds (i.e. extrabiblical revelation and prophecy), then they are a walking contradiction.

    To go further with your statement about Calvinists, I would wager that reformed believers wish to understand the bible as it is meant to be understood honestly, even if the truths are difficult and painful at times, rather than twist it or impose presuppositions into the text that aren't there. Just my two cents.

    Also, I am sure there are some, but I have yet to meet anyone that started out as a reformed believer until after they picked up the bible and read it for themselves. Most start out as Arminians, which classifies most other denominations. There are very few variations in the reformed system of theology, whereas Arminians seem to have hundreds, if not thousands, of variations of interpretations.
    Tinuviel, notmyown and Laish like this.
    Look now to our adversaries (I mean the priesthood, at whose beck and pleasure others
    ply their enmity against us), and consider with me for a little by what zeal they are actuated.
    The true religion which is delivered in the Scriptures, and which all ought to hold, they
    readily permit both themselves and others to be ignorant of, to neglect and despise;

  10. #30
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 6th, 2017
    Age
    27
    Posts
    2,574
    Rep Power
    138

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    hey fourth
    always enjoy your input

    thanks for posting
    Laish likes this.

  11. #31
    Senior Member ForthAngel's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31st, 2012
    Age
    34
    Posts
    2,168
    Rep Power
    52

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNameMcgee View Post
    hey fourth
    always enjoy your input

    thanks for posting
    Hey man. I just read your testimony. Thanks for sharing that.

    Also, a good place to start in understanding the denominations you posted would be to do a study on church history. You've already been given some good definitions though.

    Protestant reformation was the breaking away from the Catholic church.

    Evangelicals are those who spread the Gospel, although evangelical is almost a derogatory term these days since a lot of the "gospels" being spread by mainline denoms is a false gospel and the undeveloped world is being polluted by it.

    Charismatic is the movement brought about by Pentecostalism that started in 1906. It used to be called neo-Pentecostalism and it is backed by the Catholic church in many cases. That gave rise to other things like Word of Faith, Dominionism, and things of that nature.
    Laish and NoNameMcgee like this.
    Look now to our adversaries (I mean the priesthood, at whose beck and pleasure others
    ply their enmity against us), and consider with me for a little by what zeal they are actuated.
    The true religion which is delivered in the Scriptures, and which all ought to hold, they
    readily permit both themselves and others to be ignorant of, to neglect and despise;

  12. #32
    Senior Member Tinuviel's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 6th, 2015
    Age
    18
    Posts
    3,813
    Rep Power
    97

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by ForthAngel View Post
    Well.... Reformed is the better term, but sure Calvinists too.

    The unfortunate truth however is that not all brands of "Christianity" rely on sola scriptura. You will hear such things as "God is not limited by his word" and "God is above his word", and if anyone claims the bible is their authority and believe every word in it, yet deny it with their deeds (i.e. extrabiblical revelation and prophecy), then they are a walking contradiction.

    To go further with your statement about Calvinists, I would wager that reformed believers wish to understand the bible as it is meant to be understood honestly, even if the truths are difficult and painful at times, rather than twist it or impose presuppositions into the text that aren't there. Just my two cents.

    Also, I am sure there are some, but I have yet to meet anyone that started out as a reformed believer until after they picked up the bible and read it for themselves. Most start out as Arminians, which classifies most other denominations. There are very few variations in the reformed system of theology, whereas Arminians seem to have hundreds, if not thousands, of variations of interpretations.
    I'll give you the Reformed thing, since "Calvinism" is a dumb term and sounds like Calvin made it up...but recently it has been popular to call yourself "reformed" even when you're not, so I usually call myself Calvinist just to differentiate from that.

    I was a reformed believer before reading a Bible for myself . God (surprise, surprise!) used his covenant family to bring me to Christ at an early age, and I didn't read the Bible through until I was about 11. But I agree, most people don't start out Christians with the reformed faith, and I had "growing pains" as I grew older and came to fuller understandings of things.
    ForthAngel and Laish like this.
    “If sinners be damned, at least let them leap to Hell over our dead bodies. And if they perish, let them perish with our arms wrapped about their knees, imploring them to stay. If Hell must be filled, let it be filled in the teeth of our exertions, and let not one go unwarned and unprayed for.”
    ~Charles Spurgeon

  13. #33
    Senior Member ForthAngel's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 31st, 2012
    Age
    34
    Posts
    2,168
    Rep Power
    52

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by Tinuviel View Post
    I'll give you the Reformed thing, since "Calvinism" is a dumb term and sounds like Calvin made it up...but recently it has been popular to call yourself "reformed" even when you're not, so I usually call myself Calvinist just to differentiate from that.
    Very true. Different kinds of "reformations" nowadays too like the New Apostolic Reformation. I was actually trying to help a friend of mine find a church recently and thought I found a good reformed one for them, but turns out it was a 7th Day Adventist church masquerading as a reformed church. My first time ever seeing that.

    I was a reformed believer before reading a Bible for myself . God (surprise, surprise!) used his covenant family to bring me to Christ at an early age, and I didn't read the Bible through until I was about 11. But I agree, most people don't start out Christians with the reformed faith, and I had "growing pains" as I grew older and came to fuller understandings of things.
    Glad you got taught right early on! And 11? Geez. It took me 30 years to finally pick it up for myself -_-

    I grew up Southern Baptist and my family was very superstitious (like pretty much all Southern Baptists). I would say I was closer to Word of Faith or Charismatic though. Then one day I decided to read the bible for myself and wow. Huge difference in what scripture says and what I had been taught. Like you though, plenty of growing pains to overcome and accept, and some really tough pills to swallow.
    Tinuviel likes this.
    Look now to our adversaries (I mean the priesthood, at whose beck and pleasure others
    ply their enmity against us), and consider with me for a little by what zeal they are actuated.
    The true religion which is delivered in the Scriptures, and which all ought to hold, they
    readily permit both themselves and others to be ignorant of, to neglect and despise;

  14. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 12th, 2016
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,290
    Rep Power
    81

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Sola Scriptura is the way to go!

    Nonetheless, a conviction that the Bible is the sole source of revelation of God is only a first step.
    Learning how to get out of Scripture what it is actually saying rather than reading into it what we may wish it to say is easier said than done.
    Learning how to become an exegete (someone who correctly interprets the Bible) rather than an eisegete (someone who deliberately or inadvertently reads their own understanding into the Bible) is a trial-and-error process.

    I am firmly convinced that no human being on earth, since the fall anyway, has had a perfect theological understanding. 1 Cor 13:11-12.

    Sadly, the church universal is a victim of this imperfect understanding and so, over the centuries groups have split away due to these differences in understanding.
    Some of these groups have withered away to become the subject of historical interest only and some are still around now.

    Interestingly, some of the biggest clashes amongst different groupings has been their understanding of ecclesiology (the doctrine of the church). These differences in understanding of what the church is, how it should be organised, and what authority the church has are responsible for hundreds of years of vicious war across Europe.
    We like to think that the Reformation was all about a new understanding of soteriology (the doctrine of salvation) as evidenced by Luther's firm conviction of justification by faith but the knock on effect that Luther's conviction had was a direct challenge to the authority of the Roman Catholic Church and the control that they exercised over the political structures and population of Europe i.e. to the RCC this was an ecclesiastical issue.

    I am not a fan of denominationalism but it is an historical reality and all of us who worship at a local church risk being labelled in some way - most likely by people that attend a church of a different hue.

    Another important aspect, to me anyway, when it comes to an individual's doctrinal position is this:
    What you actually do is the most important marker of your beliefs.
    In this respect the inward looking selfishness that characterises the life of so many church goers does make me question their beliefs irrespective of their supposed confession of faith.

  15. #35
    Senior Member Katy-follower's Avatar
    Join Date
    June 25th, 2011
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,347
    Blog Entries
    9
    Rep Power
    71

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Someone once asked me this question, in their attempt to credit the catholic church as being a solid church versus the hundreds of divided protestant denominations (not saying you're doing the same).

    To put it simply....

    In the christian world you have two groups.. either catholic or protestant. Think of the protestants as "protesting" the teachings of the catholic church.

    Within the protestant world there are many denominations, like baptist, etc. For the most part these denominations all teach the same gospel (so they agree on salvation), but they just differ on non salvational things. I heard one denomination doesn't agree with using instruments, for example.

    Charismatics are those who go to the lively churches that speak in tongues and roll around on the floor ... also embracing of healing and prophecies (mainly pentecostal churches). There are also charismatic catholics.

    Then there is the ecumenical movement, which seeks to unite protestant churches with the catholic church. Some of the protestant churches are ecumenical now, so I steer clear of those. Some of them have embraced catholic teachings and also promote this unity regardless of gospel. A family friend went to a picnic and was rebuked by the pastor for sharing the gospel with some of the catholics there. Shocking. He didn't want any "discord".

    Concerning the names of men.... believers associate themselves with different men, based on shared views of the scriptures, concerning end times or predestination, etc. The concern with these labels is that one is then seen by others as following all of that person's views, even if some are unbiblical (so it can be misleading). So it's safer to just call yourself a follower of Jesus.

    I'm reminded of this scripture that warns against division among BELIEVERS....

    1 Cor 1:10-17:
    Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say this, that each of you says, “I am of Paul,” or “I am of Apollos,” or “I am of Cephas,” or “I am of Christ.” Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect"


    The title of christian is overused by so many, whether they are true believers or not, that you end up asking what type of christian the person is. I don't call myself a christian for this reason. I don't want to be lumped together with those that teach a different gospel. I just say I'm a born again christian. Some will call themselves evangelical christians which identifies them as being focused on the gospel and spreading the good news of it, so no confusion there, although some have become ecumenical. I think catholics find it easier to refer to non catholic christians as evangelicals or even fundamentalists!

    JW's/Latter day saints & Mormon churches seem to be completely separate as they teach a different gospel to the protestant denominations. These two are similar in that they disagree with the teachings of the protestant churches. And just like the catholic church (RCC) they teach faith + works for salvation. Also like the RCC they claim you must belong to THEIR church in order to be saved. They have unbiblical doctrines. The + should say it all. They say "Jesus + x,y,z" when in reality it's Jesus alone and nothing added. I haven't researched the JW & mormon religions in depth, but this is what I understand to be true of them......

    JW gospel teaches: faith + obedience are needed for salvation (faith + works)

    Mormon gospel teaches: faith + works (since they say "endurance to the end" is needed to be saved, so they claim works are required to prove oneself worthy of the "reward" of eternal life). Also they have their own book of Mormon, just like the catholics have their catechism. The scriptures say not to add to or take away from the bible. Having an extra book would be considered adding to the bible.

    Just to point out that there are a mix of believers and non believers in all the churches. While most of the protestant denominations teach the true gospel, the congregation will consist of those who have the truth and those who are not yet saved (some of which may never get saved). The same can be said of the catholic church.... God still gets through and convicts people of their sins, but then He does call them out of these false systems. There are plenty of testimonies of ex priests and ex catholics who got saved and then left the catholic church once their eyes were opened to the truth. For some reason some have stayed (evident by the fact that God says to "Come out of her MY people")

    Religion is such a burden. It's so much easier for non religious people who haven't been indoctrinated by these manmade religions. Truly sad.
    "If we want to study the word of God, we need to have an open mind to allow the Holy Spirit to teach us. A closed mind lets in no light. If the Spirit illuminates a scripture, we need to be willing to display a teachable spirit. When we align ourselves with any particular camp we are no longer teachable. That is elementary"



    John 14:27: "Peace I leave with you, My peace I give to you; not as the world gives do I give to you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid"


  16. #36
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    March 22nd, 2015
    Age
    83
    Posts
    7,589
    Rep Power
    82

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by NoNameMcgee View Post
    definitions

    i dont know much about branches or denominations

    whats protestant
    whats evangelical
    whats charasmatic


    i just recently learned a bit about "calvinists"
    i understand catholics
    and baptists
    a bit about mormans
    and jehova witnesses

    but have no clue about the first 3 i listed

    if anyone proclaims any of these titles

    can you tell me why?

    or what they mean?
    Protestants is a general name given to non-Roman Catholic churches apart from the Orthodox churches and those in communion with Rome. They were so named for 'protesting' against the heresies in the Roman Catholic church.

    Evangelicals are called such because they basically accept 'the Gospel message'. They consider that there is a need for a personal relationship with Jesus Christ and that those who truly believe in Jesus Christ are saved from the terrors of judgment to come through the cross.

    Charismatics are those who believe that tongues and other spiritual gifts are available today, and use them in their worship.

    All three titles are applied to those in many denominations as appropriate..

  17. #37
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    June 24th, 2011
    Age
    47
    Posts
    7,222
    Rep Power
    157

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by graceNpeace View Post
    Sola Scriptura is the way to go!

    Nonetheless, a conviction that the Bible is the sole source of revelation of God is only a first step.
    I agree with your first sentence.

    But the bible itself refutes your second sentence. Maybe you didn't mean it exactly as you wrote it.


    If you read in the bible the Lord Jesus saying 'Come to Me and I will give you rest', do you think that means just keep reading the bible over and over to understand what He is saying?

    Or do you think He literally wants you to come to Him?


    I think all of the Revelation of Christ can be confirmed by the bible. But the bible itself doesn't give the revelation.

    I'm not sure if this is totally obvious and just a mis-worded sentence on your part...

  18. #38
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    August 12th, 2016
    Age
    52
    Posts
    1,290
    Rep Power
    81

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by Grandpa View Post
    I agree with your first sentence.

    But the bible itself refutes your second sentence. Maybe you didn't mean it exactly as you wrote it.


    If you read in the bible the Lord Jesus saying 'Come to Me and I will give you rest', do you think that means just keep reading the bible over and over to understand what He is saying?

    Or do you think He literally wants you to come to Him?


    I think all of the Revelation of Christ can be confirmed by the bible. But the bible itself doesn't give the revelation.

    I'm not sure if this is totally obvious and just a mis-worded sentence on your part...
    Yes, the Holy Spirit gives the revelation in the sense that it becomes alive and is comprehensible to the believer.

    Nothing that I said above should be interpreted as not including the work of the Holy Spirit.
    Nonetheless, with respect to your illustration it requires an understanding of exegetical principles to come up with an answer.

  19. #39
    Senior Member pottersclay's Avatar
    Join Date
    August 14th, 2015
    Age
    58
    Posts
    2,676
    Rep Power
    102

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    Quote Originally Posted by Magenta View Post
    The protest from Martin Luther originally took the form of 95 theses which concerned blatant abuses of the Roman Catholic church, such as the selling of indulgences.

    The 95 Theses http://www.luther.de/en/95thesen.html

    Out of love for the truth and from desire to elucidate it, the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and Sacred Theology, and ordinary lecturer therein at Wittenberg, intends to defend the following statements and to dispute on them in that place. Therefore he asks that those who cannot be present and dispute with him orally shall do so in their absence by letter. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, Amen.

    When our Lord and Master Jesus Christ said, ``Repent'' (Mt 4:17), he willed the entire life of believers to be one of repentance.

    This word cannot be understood as referring to the sacrament of penance, that is, confession and satisfaction, as administered by the clergy.

    Yet it does not mean solely inner repentance; such inner repentance is worthless unless it produces various outward mortification of the flesh.

    The penalty of sin remains as long as the hatred of self (that is, true inner repentance), namely till our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

    The pope neither desires nor is able to remit any penalties except those imposed by his own authority or that of the canons.

    The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring and showing that it has been remitted by God; or, to be sure, by remitting guilt in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in these cases were disregarded, the guilt would certainly remain unforgiven.

    God remits guilt to no one unless at the same time he humbles him in all things and makes him submissive to the vicar, the priest.

    The penitential canons are imposed only on the living, and, according to the canons themselves, nothing should be imposed on the dying.

    Therefore the Holy Spirit through the pope is kind to us insofar as the pope in his decrees always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

    Those priests act ignorantly and wickedly who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penalties for purgatory.

    Those tares of changing the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory were evidently sown while the bishops slept (Mt 13:25).

    In former times canonical penalties were imposed, not after, but before absolution, as tests of true contrition.

    The dying are freed by death from all penalties, are already dead as far as the canon laws are concerned, and have a right to be released from them.

    Imperfect piety or love on the part of the dying person necessarily brings with it great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater the fear.

    This fear or horror is sufficient in itself, to say nothing of other things, to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

    Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ the same as despair, fear, and assurance of salvation.

    It seems as though for the souls in purgatory fear should necessarily decrease and love increase.

    Furthermore, it does not seem proved, either by reason or by Scripture, that souls in purgatory are outside the state of merit, that is, unable to grow in love.

    Nor does it seem proved that souls in purgatory, at least not all of them, are certain and assured of their own salvation, even if we ourselves may be entirely certain of it.

    Therefore the pope, when he uses the words ``plenary remission of all penalties,'' does not actually mean ``all penalties,'' but only those imposed by himself.

    Thus those indulgence preachers are in error who say that a man is absolved from every penalty and saved by papal indulgences.

    As a matter of fact, the pope remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to canon law, they should have paid in this life.

    If remission of all penalties whatsoever could be granted to anyone at all, certainly it would be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to very few.

    For this reason most people are necessarily deceived by that indiscriminate and high-sounding promise of release from penalty.

    That power which the pope has in general over purgatory corresponds to the power which any bishop or curate has in a particular way in his own diocese and parish.

    The pope does very well when he grants remission to souls in purgatory, not by the power of the keys, which he does not have, but by way of intercession for them.

    They preach only human doctrines who say that as soon as the money clinks into the money chest, the soul flies out of purgatory.

    It is certain that when money clinks in the money chest, greed and avarice can be increased; but when the church intercedes, the result is in the hands of God alone.

    Who knows whether all souls in purgatory wish to be redeemed, since we have exceptions in St. Severinus and St. Paschal, as related in a legend.

    No one is sure of the integrity of his own contrition, much less of having received plenary remission.

    The man who actually buys indulgences is as rare as he who is really penitent; indeed, he is exceedingly rare.

    Those who believe that they can be certain of their salvation because they have indulgence letters will be eternally damned, together with their teachers.

    Men must especially be on guard against those who say that the pope's pardons are that inestimable gift of God by which man is reconciled to him.

    For the graces of indulgences are concerned only with the penalties of sacramental satisfaction established by man.

    They who teach that contrition is not necessary on the part of those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessional privileges preach unchristian doctrine.

    Any truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without indulgence letters.

    Any true Christian, whether living or dead, participates in all the blessings of Christ and the church; and this is granted him by God, even without indulgence letters.

    Nevertheless, papal remission and blessing are by no means to be disregarded, for they are, as I have said (Thesis 6), the proclamation of the divine remission.

    It is very difficult, even for the most learned theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the bounty of indulgences and the need of true contrition.

    A Christian who is truly contrite seeks and loves to pay penalties for his sins; the bounty of indulgences, however, relaxes penalties and causes men to hate them -- at least it furnishes occasion for hating them.

    Papal indulgences must be preached with caution, lest people erroneously think that they are preferable to other good works of love.

    Christians are to be taught that the pope does not intend that the buying of indulgences should in any way be compared with works of mercy.

    Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better deed than he who buys indulgences.

    Because love grows by works of love, man thereby becomes better. Man does not, however, become better by means of indulgences but is merely freed from penalties.

    Christians are to be taught that he who sees a needy man and passes him by, yet gives his money for indulgences, does not buy papal indulgences but God's wrath.

    Christians are to be taught that, unless they have more than they need, they must reserve enough for their family needs and by no means squander it on indulgences.

    Christians are to be taught that they buying of indulgences is a matter of free choice, not commanded.

    Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting indulgences, needs and thus desires their devout prayer more than their money.

    Christians are to be taught that papal indulgences are useful only if they do not put their trust in them, but very harmful if they lose their fear of God because of them.

    Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the indulgence preachers, he would rather that the basilica of St. Peter were burned to ashes than built up with the skin, flesh, and bones of his sheep.

    Christians are to be taught that the pope would and should wish to give of his own money, even though he had to sell the basilica of St. Peter, to many of those from whom certain hawkers of indulgences cajole money.

    It is vain to trust in salvation by indulgence letters, even though the indulgence commissary, or even the pope, were to offer his soul as security.

    They are the enemies of Christ and the pope who forbid altogether the preaching of the Word of God in some churches in order that indulgences may be preached in others.

    Injury is done to the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or larger amount of time is devoted to indulgences than to the Word.

    It is certainly the pope's sentiment that if indulgences, which are a very insignificant thing, are celebrated with one bell, one procession, and one ceremony, then the gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

    The true treasures of the church, out of which the pope distributes indulgences, are not sufficiently discussed or known among the people of Christ.

    That indulgences are not temporal treasures is certainly clear, for many indulgence sellers do not distribute them freely but only gather them.

    Nor are they the merits of Christ and the saints, for, even without the pope, the latter always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outer man.

    St. Lawrence said that the poor of the church were the treasures of the church, but he spoke according to the usage of the word in his own time.

    Without want of consideration we say that the keys of the church, given by the merits of Christ, are that treasure.

    For it is clear that the pope's power is of itself sufficient for the remission of penalties and cases reserved by himself.

    The true treasure of the church is the most holy gospel of the glory and grace of God.

    But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last (Mt. 20:16).

    On the other hand, the treasure of indulgences is naturally most acceptable, for it makes the last to be first.

    Therefore the treasures of the gospel are nets with which one formerly fished for men of wealth.

    The treasures of indulgences are nets with which one now fishes for the wealth of men.

    The indulgences which the demagogues acclaim as the greatest graces are actually understood to be such only insofar as they promote gain.

    They are nevertheless in truth the most insignificant graces when compared with the grace of God and the piety of the cross.

    Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of papal indulgences with all reverence.

    But they are much more bound to strain their eyes and ears lest these men preach their own dreams instead of what the pope has commissioned.

    Let him who speaks against the truth concerning papal indulgences be anathema and accursed.

    But let him who guards against the lust and license of the indulgence preachers be blessed.

    Just as the pope justly thunders against those who by any means whatever contrive harm to the sale of indulgences.

    Much more does he intend to thunder against those who use indulgences as a pretext to contrive harm to holy love and truth.

    To consider papal indulgences so great that they could absolve a man even if he had done the impossible and had violated the mother of God is madness.

    We say on the contrary that papal indulgences cannot remove the very least of venial sins as far as guilt is concerned.

    To say that even St. Peter if he were now pope, could not grant greater graces is blasphemy against St. Peter and the pope.

    We say on the contrary that even the present pope, or any pope whatsoever, has greater graces at his disposal, that is, the gospel, spiritual powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written. (1 Co 12[:28])

    To say that the cross emblazoned with the papal coat of arms, and set up by the indulgence preachers is equal in worth to the cross of Christ is blasphemy.

    The bishops, curates, and theologians who permit such talk to be spread among the people will have to answer for this.

    This unbridled preaching of indulgences makes it difficult even for learned men to rescue the reverence which is due the pope from slander or from the shrewd questions of the laity.

    Such as: ``Why does not the pope empty purgatory for the sake of holy love and the dire need of the souls that are there if he redeems an infinite number of souls for the sake of miserable money with which to build a church?'' The former reason would be most just; the latter is most trivial.

    Again, ``Why are funeral and anniversary masses for the dead continued and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded for them, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?''

    Again, ``What is this new piety of God and the pope that for a consideration of money they permit a man who is impious and their enemy to buy out of purgatory the pious soul of a friend of God and do not rather, beca use of the need of that pious and beloved soul, free it for pure love's sake?''

    Again, ``Why are the penitential canons, long since abrogated and dead in actual fact and through disuse, now satisfied by the granting of indulgences as though they were still alive and in force?''

    Again, ``Why does not the pope, whose wealth is today greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build this one basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?''

    Again, ``What does the pope remit or grant to those who by perfect contrition already have a right to full remission and blessings?''

    Again, ``What greater blessing could come to the church than if the pope were to bestow these remissions and blessings on every believer a hundred times a day, as he now does but once?''

    "Since the pope seeks the salvation of souls rather than money by his indulgences, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons previously granted when they have equal efficacy?''

    To repress these very sharp arguments of the laity by force alone, and not to resolve them by giving reasons, is to expose the church and the pope to the ridicule of their enemies and to make Christians unhappy.

    If, therefore, indulgences were preached according to the spirit and intention of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved. Indeed, they would not exist.

    Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, ``Peace, peace,'' and there is no peace! (Jer 6:14)

    Blessed be all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, ``Cross, cross,'' and there is no cross!

    Christians should be exhorted to be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, death and hell.

    And thus be confident of entering into heaven through many tribulations rather than through the false security of peace (Acts 14:22).
    Sorry sweetie could you repete that?
    NoNameMcgee likes this.

  20. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    December 3rd, 2016
    Age
    47
    Posts
    1,674
    Rep Power
    0

    Default Re: can some people give me their....

    i just recently learned a bit about "calvinists"
    Calvin doesn't even have his own book in the Bible... so no need to pay attention to Calvin or his followers.

    That'll just try to get tou all jacked up on some tulip flower power thingy bob what'chacallit




    A protestant protests the bogus authority Rome imposes...
    I love it... "bogus"

    If I ever met a catholik priest and they tell me I have to call him "father" I'm going to tell them "no, that's bogus man"!

    I'll tell them Magenta said so!

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Do not give up on people
    By PeterJens in forum Bible Discussion Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: November 20th, 2015, 11:04 PM
  2. Why did God give the enemy power to tempt us and possess people?
    By Danielle1234 in forum Bible Discussion Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: July 27th, 2014, 04:29 PM
  3. Is it a sin to give people what they want?
    By thefightinglamb in forum Bible Discussion Forum
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: October 10th, 2009, 06:40 PM