Question on Virgin Mary

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
K

Kool_uday85

Guest
One wonders then, why did Martin Luther remove books from the Bible?

dscherck: Keep wondering..... :)

Whats in the bible is very straight and clear and the verses are very clear ... You never even answered questions I posed in my previous posts to you.. and now you started wondering about Luther, How interestingly you go about with the conversation and thought process.... I see its so evident Mister dscherck
 
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
Charis,

You're mistaken. I didn't write any of that. :p
Sorry. Similarity of images. I give you permission to stick your tongue out at me six more times.....
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
Shyness please dont go. I'm sorry if my post contributed to this as this was definitely not my intent. Bless your heart.
 
K

Kool_uday85

Guest
o_O

So, because Our Lord sent Paul to the gentiles He's not allowed to have Peter lead His Church? Is that what you're implying? It seems to me that Our Lord told Peter to "feed my sheep" and "strengthen your brothers". Are you saying that Peter was incapable of preaching to the Jews and leading Christ's Church? Are you implying that Paul was the only apostle authorized to preach to the Gentiles? I'munsure of whatyour point is my dear brother.
Examine your own statements, Mister dscherck...
because...... Not allowed to do .... ? Is that what you are Implying?
.. seems... "feed my sheep" and "strengthen your brothers". Are you saying.....incapable......?
Are you implying.........paul was the only apostle authorised... Gentiles?
Unsure what your point is?


and then finally that after that I became a dear brother to you..

Listen, See my previous post about what i spoke... I gave a post in reply to your petra/petro link of the catholic view point link you sent me.... and whatever is there regarding peters teachings and the beliefs in the bible is also talked about... So if the very basis of the teachings in the bible arent in accordance with the Catholic church's beliefs.... what more? I even showed you verses which are very pinpointed to what it says... no beating around ...

see you said :

It seems to me that Our Lord told Peter to "feed my sheep" and "strengthen your brothers". Are you saying that Peter was ]incapable of preaching to the Jews and leading Christ's Church?


SEEMS!!!! What seems? Read the chapter and see what is talks about.... It didnt Imply anything thing that Peter did because of that parable.... SEEMS??? It just didn't say what Peter did in action to that parable.. Infact, that parable conveyed a meaning.. read the chapters that follow.. Book of Acts.. Please dont go by implications you speculate.... Nothing is open to interpretation as one wants.. read the chapters that follow in the book of acts and see what what the effect of that vision.. its even talked about....

What sort of reasoning you come up with????? Be honest, use scripture and talk... I don't care for words like seems, etc.. they are very iffy or things one could put in to make it fit with one wants...

Please read my reply to your link....
 
S

Shwagga

Guest
Do you call no one "teacher" or "master" either? What do your children call you?
So are you taking the authenticity away from Matthew 23 because people break those commands?
 
Aug 17, 2007
496
4
18
I have prayed about it and I decided to give this site another chance. I have been through many trying times especially in my faith. I just now got back in my house after two years of being displaced since the flood from Hurricane Ike. I have lost a whole lot due to five feet of storm surge in my house caused by the Hurricane. Also I had other street preachers before who told me that "God hates me" and that "I am on my way to hell" just only because I am a member of the Catholic church.
I just now started reading the bible and to tell you the truth, if you go by the bible, you never go wrong because God never fails and God is perfect. Believe me, I'm not perfect and yes I have sinned many of times and I used to hold grudges in the past but God has changed my heart and my mind and as I was reading the bible, God told me that if a person wrongs me, it is best to turn the other cheek. I'm so thankful and glad God has given me a new life. One thing I do believe in is learning is a life long process.

For God has not given us a spirit of fear but a heart of righteousness
 
Last edited:
C

charisenexcelcis

Guest
I have prayed about it and I decided to give this site another chance. I have been through many trying times especially in my faith. I just now got back in my house after two years of being displaced since the flood from Hurricane Ike. I have lost a whole lot due to five feet of storm surge in my house caused by the Hurricane. Also I had other street preachers before who told me that "God hates me" and that "I am on my way to hell" just only because I am a member of the Catholic church.
I just now started reading the bible and to tell you the truth, if you go by the bible, you never go wrong because God never fails and God is perfect. Believe me, I'm not perfect and yes I have sinned many of times and I used to hold grudges in the past but God has changed my heart and my mind and as I was reading the bible, God told me that if a person wrongs me, it is best to turn the other cheek. I'm so thankful and glad God has given me a new life. One thing I do believe in is learning is a life long process.

For God has not given us a spirit of fear but a heart of righteousness
Rough going, buddy. I am glad you have decided to stay.
 
Feb 27, 2007
3,179
19
0
Happy to hear that shyness. Sad to hear the street preachers say those words... not one regardless of the err of their chosen congregation... not one except our Lord alone can judge the salvation of another. My husband knew religion in that church but not the Lord... this makes my perspective different... I must say I have an old friend who attends Catholic church & I in no way question her salvation & joy our discussions about the Lord. She loves the Catholic churches traditions cause they make her feel connected to her ancestors who were all catholic. My ancestors were mennonite... we probably would never agree on most doctrine but we do agree on Jesus.

I've found when I reacted the strongest to any given thread or topic it was something that I needed to review what I held as truth, thats an important thing to do as a believer who seeks a closer relationship with the Lord. You are as precious to the Lord as any who are above you in the Church... just so you know. Bless your heart. Note that some of my tightest relationships came from those in Christian chat who challenged me in my belief. Dont be surprised if some of those who make you so upset and angry now end up being your very best friends.
 

dscherck

Banned [Reason: persistent, ongoing Catholic heres
Aug 3, 2009
1,272
3
0
So are you taking the authenticity away from Matthew 23 because people break those commands?
Well, if we insist that we can call NO man father, then we kind of do away with the significance of calling God Our Father. And we'd also have to worry about quite a few people in the Scriptures too. Just to point out a few examples:

"So it was not you who sent me here, but God; and he has made me a father to Pharaoh, and lord of all his house and ruler over all the land of Egypt" (Gen. 45:8).

"I was a father to the poor, and I searched out the cause of him whom I did not know" (Job 29:16).

"In that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah . . . and I will clothe him with [a] robe, and will bind [a] girdle on him, and will commit . . . authority to his hand; and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house of Judah" (Is. 22:20–21). <--Isn't that the Lord Himself calling Eliakim a father? Does this mean that the Lord changed His mind later?

And what about Elisha? Note how he refers to Elijah as "My father, my father!" when Elijah is taken into heaven. And later on Elisha is called a father by the kings of Israel in 2 Kings 6:21.

And that's just a few from the Old Testament. But we can see many examples of people being called "father" in the New Testament as well. Take for example Stephen, the protomartyr for Christ who referred to "Our Father Abraham" (Acts 7:2) and the Apostle Paul who references "our father Isaac" (Romans 9:10)

So we can see from the Scriptures that we can refer to our ancestors as "father", we can refer to men who give wise council as fathers (Joseph), or who help us out when we're in need as fathers (Job), and even those who are wise and who help us in need (Eliakim). And again, if we're not allowed to call our own male parent as "father" then it really makes using the term "father" apply to God not really that great a comparison.

So if there's all these examples of being able to refer to men as "father" are fine and dandy in the Scriptures, what could Our Lord mean when He said, "Call no man father"? In order to do that obviously we should take a close look at the Scriptures.

The full passage in question is from Matthew 23. Specifically verses 8-10

"But you are not to be called ‘rabbi,’ for you have one teacher, and you are all brethren. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called ‘masters,’ for you have one master, the Christ"
If we take this verse literally, we can not refer to people as teacher or master either. But we do this all the time. Are we to tell our children you can't call your teacher by that title? Anyone would obviously think this to be ridiculous! But we know then that Our Lord wouldn't do something like that. So perhaps we should delve further into the Scripture. What is the context of Our Lord's words? For that, let's jump two verses back.

"They love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues, and salutations in the market places, and being called ‘rabbi’ by men" (Matt. 23:6–7)
So we see that Our Lord is discussing the Pharisees, who at the time were sinful and proud. A careful look at the context reveals Our Lord is using one of His favoured methods of teaching a point, hyperbole. IE, exaggeration to make His point. By pointing to the sins of the Pharisees in their desire to be honoured without actually being deserving of such honour, He makes a strong point. They desired to be called "rabbi/teacher" but instead of teaching justice, mercy, and peace, they simply taught how to be hypocrites and as such, were undeserving of the title. After all, all good things come from God, including titles of honour.

So, back to the original implication. We are to call no man father. Let us look at the examples of the Apostles themselves from Scripture and see how we should interpret Our Lord's words from Matthew 23.

The Apostle Paul frequently referred to Timothy as his child or his son, laying claim to the title of father to them in accordance with the examples of Joseph, Job, and Eliakim.

"Therefore I sent to you Timothy, my beloved and faithful child in the Lord, to remind you of my ways in Christ" (1 Cor. 4:17).

"To Timothy, my true child in the faith: grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord" (1 Tim. 1:2).

"To Timothy, my beloved child: Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Lord" (2 Tim. 1:2).

"This charge I commit to you, Timothy, my son, in accordance with the prophetic utterances which pointed to you, that inspired by them you may wage the good warfare" (1 Tim 1:18).

"You then, my son, be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 2:1).

"But Timothy’s worth you know, how as a son with a father he has served with me in the gospel" (Phil. 2:22).


And beyond Timothy we see Paul talk about his other converts in similar terms:

"To Titus, my true child in a common faith: grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior" (Titus 1:4).

"I appeal to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become in my imprisonment" (Philem. 10).

Indeed, Paul writes explicitly in his letter to the Corinthians, " "I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel" (1 Cor. 4:14–15).

And it wasn't just Paul who used the terminology of fatherhood in regards to their converts, we see that Peter referred to Mark as his child in his first letter. The gospel writer John writes lovingly to his flocks saying, ""My little children, I am writing this to you so that you may not sin; but if any one does sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous" (1 John 2:1).
"No greater joy can I have than this, to hear that my children follow the truth" (3 John 4).

We can even see John calling the men of his flock by the title of father in 1 John 2:13–14!

Going by the example of Scriptures we can see that Our Lord in no way prohibits the title of "father" to those who truly are fathers to us in the spiritual sense, but He does warn against those who claim it and that we should be careful of those who are not true fathers in the spiritual sense.

As Catholics (and our beloved Orthodox brothers and sisters) know, the brave men who have answered Our Lord's call to serve as priests become a spiritual father to us, much like the Apostles themselves were fathers to their churches. As such, they are (in general) well deserving of the title of "father" because they became our fathers through the grace of Our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ!

Glory to Jesus Christ!
 
C

Consumed

Guest
two disciples come to Jesus saying there is a man down the road casting out demons in His name and that they had rebuked him and told him to stop, lol, Jesus rebuked them and gave them a lesson on "thou shalt not judge". Its not like God woke up one morning and said whats this???Jesus longest prayer in the bible is one of unity, we set a poor example at times, get caught up in things that dont edify and glorify Jesus, just doctrines of man. Paul made it clear as day, law is dead to those who walk in His light,we are saved by grace, justified by faith, accounted to us as righteousness thru Jesus fulfilling the requirements of the law. Praise be to King Jesus, Lord and Saviour who come not to condemn the world, but save.

ps, shyness-i love you, dont run from anyone, stand on your faith in Jesus
 
J

juspekatzus

Guest
I saw most of the picture of Virgin Mary is wearing Vail. why many christian not wearing it even in the church.

as u know most Muslim Women wear Vail. it seems that we are following Jesus than u guys do.


1 Corinthians 11:5-10: "But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but tthe woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels."

1 Corinthians 11:13: "Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God (with her head) uncovered?"
Jesus, the living word of our father God, is the only mediator between man, women, children and everyone who everlived[or are living. Our father does not take pleasure in what we wear, how we pray. Has long as we come to him by excepting his son Jesus and all he did from coming into this world including all he did for us thoughout, leading up to his last breath upon the cross. Including going down to hell[ I think for 3 days] to set free the souls held in captivity there. Our father knows and loves the heart of man. Its up to us what we wear or how we look. For in Christ Jesus we have obtained freedom, forever! OH Yes, A womans hair is her glory when praying!!!
 
K

Kool_uday85

Guest
I thought I'd share some of the history

From the book, “What People Ask About The Church,” by Dale A. Robbins

— 40 —
What is the difference between a Protestant
church and a Catholic church?


Although both Protestants and Roman Catholics share the common ground of being founded upon faith in Jesus Christ, there are significant differences between the two groups. From general observation, one can see contrasts in everything from the way that their clergymen dress, to the way their services are conducted. Unlike most Protestant churches, Catholic masses are conducted in a liturgical fashion, with much emphasis upon symbols, rituals and ceremony.

In Addition, the Catholic church has traditionally regulated the type of Bible translation used in the church. For centuries, the only version authorized for use was the Latin Vulgate, a translation from the original languages by Jerome, in around 400 A.D. This Bible reads very similar to Protestant translations, however with a major exception. The Catholic version contains the Apocrypha, a collection of seven complete books and a few additions to others. These are considered non-inspired writings written between the period of the Old and New Testaments. Only one is actually dated. Two books, Judith and Tobit tell of the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions. Two more, 1st and 2nd Maccabees record the Jewish war of independence of around 165 B.C. Two more, Ecclesiasticus and Wisdom of Solomon, are considered books of wisdom. Another is an addendum to Jeremiah, and there are short additions to Esther and Daniel. The Protestants do not include them because they have never met the criteria for divine inspiration. Further, the writings of Jewish historian Josephus (in 90 A.D.) indicated that the Jews did not accept the books of the Apocrypha as a part of their scriptures, and although Jesus and the Apostles quoted frequently and accurately from almost every other Old Testament book, never once did they quote from the Apocrypha. Even if accepted, it would not alter the message of the New Testament, and it doesn't appear that much, if any, of the doctrines of the Catholic church had any foundation from the Apocrypha

As we have said, there are many differences worth noting between Protestants and Catholics. However, the main distinction that sets them apart is the authority to which they look for their core beliefs. To help you understand this, let's first explain some of the detail about their origin in church history.

Catholic comes from the Greek, KATHOLIKOS, which means "throughout the whole, or universal," and was used as a general reference to the entire Christian church until the reformation period. However, as early as the fourth century, the Catholic church began adopting traditions and beliefs which were never a part of original Christianity as seen in the New Testament. It appears that many of these new ideas first emerged from the era of the Roman Emperor, Constantine who ruled from 313 to 337 A.D.

In contrast to his predecessor, Diocletian, who had vowed to destroy Christianity in 303, Constantine claimed a conversion to Christianity and virtually instituted it as the empire's religion by his Edict of Milan in 313 A.D. This proclamation of religious freedom brought about many positive changes for the church, and was certainly a much welcomed turnabout from the years of brutal persecution. But instead of converting completely from the old practices of paganism, this and the new Christian religion were somewhat mingled together. Since an Emperor was viewed as a god by pagan standards, and he already held the lifelong position of "Pontifex Maximus," chief priest of the pagan state religion, Constantine felt it only proper that he should also claim a high position of leadership in the church — he also authorized many of his secular officials as church leaders. This merger of a pagan, Christian and political hierarchy, produced a diluted spiritual leadership for the church, and its beliefs and doctrines thereafter became increasingly infected with a strange combination of traditions and pagan beliefs.

The Christian creed adopted at the Council of Nicaea in 325 (called for and presided over by Constantine) was theologically encouraging, but it was also in this era that the church first accepted such unscriptural ideas as praying for the dead, the veneration of angels and dead saints, the use of images, and the celebration of daily mass. This regression from scripture continued through the Council of Ephesus in 431 A.D., where the worship of Mary became an official doctrine of the church, referring to her as the "Mother of God." And only nine years later in 440, Leo, bishop of Rome was the first to declare himself the successor of St. Peter and laid claim to the role of Universal Bishop, a forerunner of papal authority. While this was widely disputed, Leo commanded that all should obey him on the false notion that he held the primacy of St. Peter.

Later, Leo's successor, Gregory I, was given the title of universal "Pope" (Latin "papas" or father) by the wicked emperor Phocas in 604. He refused the title, however his successor, Boniface III, did accept it and became the first in a long line of successors to be recognized as Pope. Under the new papal authority in the seventh century, many more new beliefs were added to the church, such as the unbiblical doctrine of purgatory (593), the required use of Latin in prayer and worship (600), and prayers said to Mary, dead saints and angels (600).

One reason many of these strange ideas gained accepted credibility was because the Bible was not readily available to the common people, either in print or in translation. They had no idea what the Bible really taught. It was restricted only to priests trained to interpret it as it pleased the church hierarchy. Further, the popes claimed the authority to speak under the unique utterance of "Ex Cathedria," which in effect meant divine inspiration. Their proclamations and decrees carried supreme authority to interpret or overrule Holy Scripture, and to invent whatever doctrines or practices they wished.

The next four hundred years saw many more new beliefs added to the church: The ritual kissing of the Pope's foot (709), temporal (political) power granted to the Pope (750), worship of the crucifix, images and relics (786), holy water mixed with a pinch of salt and blessed by a priest (850), the worship of St. Joseph (890), the establishment of the college of Cardinals to elect the popes (927), the baptism of bells (965), the canonization of dead saints (995), and prescribed fastings on Fridays and during lent (998).

A break in the church occurred in 1054 over a relatively trivial issue, when the eastern church condemned the western church for the use of unleavened bread in the Eucharist. The dispute resulted in Rome's attempt to excommunicate Michael Cerulararious, the Patriarch of Constantinople, who in turn, sought to excommunicate Pope Leo IX of Rome. From that time, the western (Roman Catholic) church and the eastern (Greek Orthodox) churches developed separately — each with their distinct traditions. A classic example of a church split.

As the Roman Catholic Church continued with new independence, it added even more remarkable doctrines that were not taken from the Bible. In 1079, Pope Gregory VII declared the shocking decree of celibacy for the priesthood. Peter the Hermit invented the technique of praying with rosary beads in 1090. A few of the other beliefs and practices authorized by the church were: The inquisition of alleged heretics (1184), the sale of indulgences (1190), the doctrine of transubstantiation (1215), auricular confession of sins to a priest instead of to God (1215), adoration of the wafer (1220), the forbidding of Bible reading by laity (1229), the scapular (1251), the forbidding of sharing the communion cup with laity (1414), the establishment of purgatory as an irrefutable dogma (1439), and the composition of the "Ave Maria" (1508).

Up to this point, the somewhat similar Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches were the two main institutions representing Christianity. But in the sixteenth century, events occurred which would bring a worldshaking reformation of Christian thought. A Catholic monk and professor of theology named Martin Luther, became convinced that the Bible was the only true authority in matters of spiritual instruction, and sought to reform the church with this new insight and to expose its errant doctrines.

Born in Eisleben in 1483, Luther first pursued studies in law at Erfurt, but in 1505 he chose instead to join the Augustinian Hermits in Erfurt where he studied theology. After his ordination in 1507, he was sent by his order to the university of Wittenburg to teach moral theology, and in 1512 he became the professor of biblical studies.

Luther's ambitions of reformation emerged from his lifelong search for spiritual conclusions in his personal life. After many years of studying the scriptures, he came to reject all theology based only on tradition and embraced the idea of a personal relationship with Jesus Christ through faith. He believed that all our actions stem from God and that He chose to forgive the sinner by His sovereign grace — that we are justified not by our deeds, but by faith alone. In 1520, Luther wrote a treatise to Pope Leo X, called "The Freedom of A Christian," which outlined the conclusions of his study of scripture. In it, he made this famous statement: "The word of God cannot be received and cherished by any works whatever, but only by faith. Therefore it is clear that as the soul needs only the Word of God for its life and righteousness, so it is justified by faith alone and not by works; for if it could be justified by anything else, it would not need the Word and consequently, it would not need faith."

The move toward reformation began to emerge on the eve of All Saints Day, October 31, 1517, when Martin Luther announced a disputation regarding the indulgences of the church. He stated his argument in 95 theses which he posted on the north door of the Castle Church in Wittenburg — an act not especially unusual as the church doors were often used as a notice board.

The 95 Theses were not originally intended to promote a reformation movement. They were simply the proposal of an earnest university professor to discuss the theology of indulgences in light of the errors and abuses that had grown over the centuries. Although heavily academic in tone, news of them spread rapidly in Europe. All were amazed how one obscure monk from a new and unknown university could stir the whole of Europe.

The sale of indulgences, which Luther opposed, was based upon a common fear of purgatory, supposedly a painful place of temporal "purging" of the soul after death to make the soul pure for entrance into Heaven. The people would pay for the special indulgences of a priest to shorten their term in purgatory. Luther saw that this trade in indulgences was completely unfounded by scripture, reason or tradition. It was, in effect, directing attention away from God and His forgiveness and looking to man for the absolving of sins.

In December of 1517, the archbishop of Mainz complained to Rome about Luther. Confronted with opposition, Luther's stand became even more determined. He refused to recant his position, and fled town when summoned to Rome. In July 1519, during a disputation at Leipzig with John Eck, his fiercest opponent, Luther denied the supremacy of the Pope and the infallibility of general councils. He burned the papal bull which threatened his excommunication, but nevertheless, the decree came from the Pope in 1520, and he was subsequently outlawed by the Emperor Charles V at Worms in 1521. For his safety, Luther was seized and taken to Wartburg Castle under the protection of Frederick of Saxony. While there, he spent his time translating the New Testament into German so that everyone might have access to the Bible.

Eight months later in 1522, he returned to Wittenburg to begin the reform of worship away from the rigid forms of Rome. Over the next 25 years, Luther published many books in German, written to the common people so that they could judge for themselves, his doctrines and disputes with Rome. As a result, his followers continued to multiply.

In 1529, at the Diet of Speyer, the Emperor Charles V attempted to smother Luther's movement by force, but some of the German state princes stood up in protest. Thus, because of their protest, the movement began to be known as the "Protestants." What had originally been intended to bring reform to Catholicism from within, was now an ousted reformation, forced to split from the original body.

In 1530, Luther presented beliefs of the new movement at the Diet of Augsburg, in a peace-seeking, non controversial attempt to explain their views. But as a result, the division between the Catholic and Protestants remained and became more distinct. New churches began to emerge referred to as "Evangelical" or "Protestant." And from this came three other branches: The Lutherans (in Germany and Scandinavia), the Zwinglian and Calvinists (in Switzerland, France, Holland and Scotland), and the Church of England.

Significant social, political and economic changes followed the reformation, and in some ways helped to shape it further before Luther's death in 1546. But besides exposing the errant beliefs of Catholicism, the reformation which produced the Protestant church was primarily a rediscovery of the authority of God's Word and the salvation which is by faith in the savior, our Lord Jesus Christ.

This is a brief explanation of the historical origin of Catholics and Protestants, and as you can see, the disparities are many. But in the simplest of terms, the basic difference between them is the authority they look to for their beliefs. The Protestant Church generally embraces the Bible as its sole source of authority and faith, while the Catholic Church views the post-biblical traditions of the church and its Popes to have more than equal authority with scripture.


Ref: What is the difference between a Protestant church and a Catholic church?
 
Last edited:
K

Kool_uday85

Guest
Disputation of Doctor Martin Luther
on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences
by Dr. Martin Luther (1517)
Published in:
Works of Martin Luther:
Adolph Spaeth, L.D. Reed, Henry Eyster Jacobs, et Al., Trans. & Eds.
(Philadelphia: A. J. Holman Company, 1915), Vol.1, pp. 29-38
_______________

[10] [20] [30] [40] [50] [60] [70] [80] [90]
Out of love for the truth and the desire to bring it to light, the following propositions will be discussed at Wittenberg, under the presidency of the Reverend Father Martin Luther, Master of Arts and of Sacred Theology, and Lecturer in Ordinary on the same at that place. Wherefore he requests that those who are unable to be present and debate orally with us, may do so by letter.

In the Name our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

1. Our Lord and Master Jesus Christ, when He said Poenitentiam agite, willed that the whole life of believers should be repentance.

2. This word cannot be understood to mean sacramental penance, i.e., confession and satisfaction, which is administered by the priests.

3. Yet it means not inward repentance only; nay, there is no inward repentance which does not outwardly work divers mortifications of the flesh.

4. The penalty [of sin], therefore, continues so long as hatred of self continues; for this is the true inward repentance, and continues until our entrance into the kingdom of heaven.

5. The pope does not intend to remit, and cannot remit any penalties other than those which he has imposed either by his own authority or by that of the Canons.

6. The pope cannot remit any guilt, except by declaring that it has been remitted by God and by assenting to God's remission; though, to be sure, he may grant remission in cases reserved to his judgment. If his right to grant remission in such cases were despised, the guilt would remain entirely unforgiven.

7. God remits guilt to no one whom He does not, at the same time, humble in all things and bring into subjection to His vicar, the priest.

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

9. Therefore the Holy Spirit in the pope is kind to us, because in his decrees he always makes exception of the article of death and of necessity.

10. Ignorant and wicked are the doings of those priests who, in the case of the dying, reserve canonical penances for purgatory.

11. This changing of the canonical penalty to the penalty of purgatory is quite evidently one of the tares that were sown while the bishops slept.

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

13. The dying are freed by death from all penalties; they are already dead to canonical rules, and have a right to be released from them.

14. The imperfect health [of soul], that is to say, the imperfect love, of the dying brings with it, of necessity, great fear; and the smaller the love, the greater is the fear.

15. This fear and horror is sufficient of itself alone (to say nothing of other things) to constitute the penalty of purgatory, since it is very near to the horror of despair.

16. Hell, purgatory, and heaven seem to differ as do despair, almost-despair, and the assurance of safety.

17. With souls in purgatory it seems necessary that horror should grow less and love increase.

18. It seems unproved, either by reason or Scripture, that they are outside the state of merit, that is to say, of increasing love.

19. Again, it seems unproved that they, or at least that all of them, are certain or assured of their own blessedness, though we may be quite certain of it.

20. Therefore by "full remission of all penalties" the pope means not actually "of all," but only of those imposed by himself.

21. Therefore those preachers of indulgences are in error, who say that by the pope's indulgences a man is freed from every penalty, and saved;

22. Whereas he remits to souls in purgatory no penalty which, according to the canons, they would have had to pay in this life.

23. If it is at all possible to grant to any one the remission of all penalties whatsoever, it is certain that this remission can be granted only to the most perfect, that is, to the very fewest.

24. It must needs be, therefore, that the greater part of the people are deceived by that indiscriminate and highsounding promise of release from penalty.

25. The power which the pope has, in a general way, over purgatory, is just like the power which any bishop or curate has, in a special way, within his own diocese or parish.

26. The pope does well when he grants remission to souls [in purgatory], not by the power of the keys (which he does not possess), but by way of intercession.

27. They preach man who say that so soon as the penny jingles into the money-box, the soul flies out [of purgatory].

28. It is certain that when the penny jingles into the money-box, gain and avarice can be increased, but the result of the intercession of the Church is in the power of God alone.

29. Who knows whether all the souls in purgatory wish to be bought out of it, as in the legend of Sts. Severinus and Paschal.

30. No one is sure that his own contrition is sincere; much less that he has attained full remission.

31. Rare as is the man that is truly penitent, so rare is also the man who truly buys indulgences, i.e., such men are most rare.

32. They will be condemned eternally, together with their teachers, who believe themselves sure of their salvation because they have letters of pardon.

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

34. For these "graces of pardon" concern only the penalties of sacramental satisfaction, and these are appointed by man.

35. They preach no Christian doctrine who teach that contrition is not necessary in those who intend to buy souls out of purgatory or to buy confessionalia.

36. Every truly repentant Christian has a right to full remission of penalty and guilt, even without letters of pardon.

37. Every true Christian, whether living or dead, has part in all the blessings of Christ and the Church; and this is granted him by God, even without letters of pardon.

38. Nevertheless, the remission and participation [in the blessings of the Church] which are granted by the pope are in no way to be despised, for they are, as I have said, the declaration of divine remission.

39. It is most difficult, even for the very keenest theologians, at one and the same time to commend to the people the abundance of pardons and [the need of] true contrition.

40. True contrition seeks and loves penalties, but liberal pardons only relax penalties and cause them to be hated, or at least, furnish an occasion [for hating them].

41. Apostolic pardons are to be preached with caution, lest the people may falsely think them preferable to other good works of love.

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

43. Christians are to be taught that he who gives to the poor or lends to the needy does a better work than buying pardons;

44. Because love grows by works of love, and man becomes better; but by pardons man does not grow better, only more free from penalty.

45. 45. Christians are to be taught that he who sees a man in need, and passes him by, and gives [his money] for pardons, purchases not the indulgences of the pope, but the indignation of God.

46. Christians are to be taught that unless they have more than they need, they are bound to keep back what is necessary for their own families, and by no means to squander it on pardons.

47. Christians are to be taught that the buying of pardons is a matter of free will, and not of commandment.

48. Christians are to be taught that the pope, in granting pardons, needs, and therefore desires, their devout prayer for him more than the money they bring.

49. Christians are to be taught that the pope's pardons are useful, if they do not put their trust in them; but altogether harmful, if through them they lose their fear of God.

50. Christians are to be taught that if the pope knew the exactions of the pardon-preachers, he would rather that St. Peter's church should go to ashes, than that it should be built up with the skin, flesh and bones of his sheep.

51. Christians are to be taught that it would be the pope's wish, as it is his duty, to give of his own money to very many of those from whom certain hawkers of pardons cajole money, even though the church of St. Peter might have to be sold.

52. The assurance of salvation by letters of pardon is vain, even though the commissary, nay, even though the pope himself, were to stake his soul upon it.

53. They are enemies of Christ and of the pope, who bid the Word of God be altogether silent in some Churches, in order that pardons may be preached in others.

54. Injury is done the Word of God when, in the same sermon, an equal or a longer time is spent on pardons than on this Word.

55. It must be the intention of the pope that if pardons, which are a very small thing, are celebrated with one bell, with single processions and ceremonies, then the Gospel, which is the very greatest thing, should be preached with a hundred bells, a hundred processions, a hundred ceremonies.

56. The "treasures of the Church," out of which the pope. grants indulgences, are not sufficiently named or known among the people of Christ.

57. That they are not temporal treasures is certainly evident, for many of the vendors do not pour out such treasures so easily, but only gather them.

58. Nor are they the merits of Christ and the Saints, for even without the pope, these always work grace for the inner man, and the cross, death, and hell for the outward man.

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

60. Without rashness we say that the keys of the Church, given by Christ's merit, are that treasure;

61. For it is clear that for the remission of penalties and of reserved cases, the power of the pope is of itself sufficient.

62. The true treasure of the Church is the Most Holy Gospel of the glory and the grace of God.

63. But this treasure is naturally most odious, for it makes the first to be last.

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

65. Therefore the treasures of the Gospel are nets with which they formerly were wont to fish for men of riches.

66. The treasures of the indulgences are nets with which they now fish for the riches of men.

67. The indulgences which the preachers cry as the "greatest graces" are known to be truly such, in so far as they promote gain.

68. Yet they are in truth the very smallest graces compared with the grace of God and the piety of the Cross.

69. Bishops and curates are bound to admit the commissaries of apostolic pardons, with all reverence.

70. But still more are they bound to strain all their eyes and attend with all their ears, lest these men preach their own dreams instead of the commission of the pope.

71. He who speaks against the truth of apostolic pardons, let him be anathema and accursed!

72. But he who guards against the lust and license of the pardon-preachers, let him be blessed!

73. The pope justly thunders against those who, by any art, contrive the injury of the traffic in pardons.

74. But much more does he intend to thunder against those who use the pretext of pardons to contrive the injury of holy love and truth.

75. To think the papal pardons so great that they could absolve a man even if he had committed an impossible sin and violated the Mother of God -- this is madness.

76. We say, on the contrary, that the papal pardons are not able to remove the very least of venial sins, so far as its guilt is concerned.

77. It is said that even St. Peter, if he were now Pope, could not bestow greater graces; this is blasphemy against St. Peter and against the pope.

78. We say, on the contrary, that even the present pope, and any pope at all, has greater graces at his disposal; to wit, the Gospel, powers, gifts of healing, etc., as it is written in I. Corinthians xii.

79. To say that the cross, emblazoned with the papal arms, which is set up [by the preachers of indulgences], is of equal worth with the Cross of Christ, is blasphemy.

80. The bishops, curates and theologians who allow such talk to be spread among the people, will have an account to render.

81. This unbridled preaching of pardons makes it no easy matter, even for learned men, to rescue the reverence due to the pope from slander, or even from the shrewd questionings of the laity.

82. To wit: -- "Why does not the pope empty purgatory, for the sake of holy love and of 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 reasons would be most just; the latter is most trivial."

83. Again: -- "Why are mortuary and anniversary masses for the dead continued, and why does he not return or permit the withdrawal of the endowments founded on their behalf, since it is wrong to pray for the redeemed?"

84. Again: -- "What is this new piety of God and the pope, that for money they allow 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, because of that pious and beloved soul's own need, free it for pure love's sake?"

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

86. Again: -- "Why does not the pope, whose wealth is to-day greater than the riches of the richest, build just this one church of St. Peter with his own money, rather than with the money of poor believers?"

87. Again: -- "What is it that the pope remits, and what participation does he grant to those who, by perfect contrition, have a right to full remission and participation?"

88. Again: -- "What greater blessing could come to the Church than if the pope were to do a hundred times a day what he now does once, and bestow on every believer these remissions and participations?"

89. "Since the pope, by his pardons, seeks the salvation of souls rather than money, why does he suspend the indulgences and pardons granted heretofore, since these have equal efficacy?"

90. To repress these arguments and scruples 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.

91. If, therefore, pardons were preached according to the spirit and mind of the pope, all these doubts would be readily resolved; nay, they would not exist.

92. Away, then, with all those prophets who say to the people of Christ, "Peace, peace," and there is no peace!

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

94. Christians are to be exhorted that they be diligent in following Christ, their Head, through penalties, deaths, and hell;

95. And thus be confident of entering into heaven rather through many tribulations, than through the assurance of peace.
 
R

Ricke

Guest
R

Ricke

Guest
I'm sorry to say but the picture of Mary is not a Roman Catholic thing. Western Christianity mainly utilizes statues. The Orthodox Church uses icons, which are pictures.

In XC
Exodus 20 v 4+5 "Thou shalt not make any GRAVEN IMAGE, or ANY LIKENESS OF ANYTHING that is Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them: for I, The Lord am a Jealous God,..........."

Isaiah _42 v 8 " I am The Lord that is my Name, and my Glory WILL NOT GIVE TO ANOTHER, nor my Praise TO GRAVEN IMAGES".
 
S

SantoSubito

Guest
Exodus 20 v 4+5 "Thou shalt not make any GRAVEN IMAGE, or ANY LIKENESS OF ANYTHING that is Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them: for I, The Lord am a Jealous God,..........."
So do you possess any image of any kind? If you do by your definition you have broken the 1st commandment. Additionally God ordered the Israelites to put images in the Temple and on the Ark of the Covenant (Cherubim). The 1st commandment speaks out against Idols of FALSE gods

Isaiah _42 v 8 " I am The Lord that is my Name, and my Glory WILL NOT GIVE TO ANOTHER, nor my Praise TO GRAVEN IMAGES".
Once again this is speaking of the Israelites worship of pagan gods which are generally represented by idols. You can't tie this verse in with with the Catholic and Orthodox practice of honoring the Saints.
 
R

Ricke

Guest
I have prayed about it and I decided to give this site another chance. I have been through many trying times especially in my faith. I just now got back in my house after two years of being displaced since the flood from Hurricane Ike. I have lost a whole lot due to five feet of storm surge in my house caused by the Hurricane. Also I had other street preachers before who told me that "God hates me" and that "I am on my way to hell" just only because I am a member of the Catholic church.
I just now started reading the bible and to tell you the truth, if you go by the bible, you never go wrong because God never fails and God is perfect. Believe me, I'm not perfect and yes I have sinned many of times and I used to hold grudges in the past but God has changed my heart and my mind and as I was reading the bible, God told me that if a person wrongs me, it is best to turn the other cheek. I'm so thankful and glad God has given me a new life. One thing I do believe in is learning is a life long process.

For God has not given us a spirit of fear but a heart of righteousness
Sorry, The street Preachers were so unkind to you. We have some like that here, who go downtown every Saturday Night screaming Bible verses at Young People going in and out of The nightclubs. That is no way to get someone's attention to witness unto them.

You seem to be heading in the right direction, so let me encourage you to keep looking ahead....God Bless
 
K

Kool_uday85

Guest
Sorry, The street Preachers were so unkind to you. We have some like that here, who go downtown every Saturday Night screaming Bible verses at Young People going in and out of The nightclubs. That is no way to get someone's attention to witness unto them.

You seem to be heading in the right direction, so let me encourage you to keep looking ahead....God Bless
http://christianchat.com/testimonies/16658-way-knew-jesus.htm

Shyness came to know the truth.. Please read the testimony in the link above..
 
Last edited:

Cleante

Senior Member
May 7, 2010
280
0
16
Exodus 20 v 4+5 "Thou shalt not make any GRAVEN IMAGE, or ANY LIKENESS OF ANYTHING that is Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them: for I, The Lord am a Jealous God,..........."

Isaiah _42 v 8 " I am The Lord that is my Name, and my Glory WILL NOT GIVE TO ANOTHER, nor my Praise TO GRAVEN IMAGES".
Read that carefully again Ricke and I have placed emphasis on the part on which I would like you to reflect on.

"Thou shalt not make any GRAVEN IMAGE, or ANY LIKENESS OF ANYTHING that is Heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them: for I, The Lord am a Jealous God,..........."
The Logos incarnate ceased to be a mysterious being in heaven and humbled himself to become one of us. Born of a Virgin, fully man and fully God, Jesus is a living icon of the invisible God the Father.

Eastern Orthodox find the first instance of an image or icon in the Bible when God made man in His own image (Septuagint Greek eikona), in Genesis 1:26-27. In Exodus, God commanded that the Israelites not make any graven image; but soon afterwards, he commanded that they make graven images of cherubim and other like things, both as statues and woven on tapestries. Later, Solomon included still more such imagery when he built the first temple. Eastern Orthodox believe these qualify as icons, in that they were visible images depicting heavenly beings and, in the case of the cherubim, used to indirectly indicate God's presence above the Ark.


In the Book of Numbers it is written that God told Moses to make a bronze serpent, Nehushtan, and hold it up, so that anyone looking at the snake would be healed of their snakebites. In John 3, Jesus refers to the same serpent, saying that he must be lifted up in the same way that the serpent was. John of Damascus also regarded the brazen serpent as an icon. Further, Jesus Christ himself is called the "image of the invisible God" in Colossians 1:15, and is therefore in one sense an icon. As people are also made in God's images, people are also considered to be living icons, and are therefore "censed" along with painted icons during Orthodox prayer services.

According to John of Damascus, anyone who tries to destroy icons "is the enemy of Christ, the Holy Mother of God and the saints, and is the defender of the Devil and his demons." This is because the theology behind icons is closely tied to the Incarnational theology of the humanity and divinity of Jesus, so that attacks on icons typically have the effect of undermining or attacking the Incarnation of Jesus himself as elucidated in the Ecumenical Councils.


The Eastern Orthodox teaching regarding veneration of icons is that the praise and veneration shown to the icon passes over to the archetype (Basil of Caesarea,On the Holy Spirit 18:45: "The honor paid to the image passes to the prototype"). Thus to kiss an icon of Christ, in the Eastern Orthodox view, is to show love towards Christ Jesus himself, not mere wood and paint making up the physical substance of the icon. Worship of the icon as somehow entirely separate from its prototype is expressly forbidden by the Seventh Ecumenical Council; standard teaching in the Eastern Orthodox and Roman Catholic churches alike conforms to this principle. The Catholic Church accepts the same Councils and the canons therein which codified the teaching of icon veneration.