Martin Luther's doctrinal heresy.

[Scotth1960]

Martin Luther's doctrinal heresy.

1. That man has no free will.

2. Therefore, that God works evil in man.

"COMMENTS ON ERASMUS' TREATMENT OF PASSAGES DENYING FREE WILL


"Evil in Man
"...Perhaps it will be asked how God can be said to work evil in us, in the same way He is said to harden us, to give us up to our desires, to cause us to err, etc.?
"We should indeed be content with the words of God and simply believe what they say, for the works of God are utterly indescribable. However, to humor Reason, i.e., human folly, I will just act the fool and the stupid fellow for once, and try by a little babbling, if I can make any impression upon it ...
"Now then, Satan and man, being fallen and abandoned by God, cannot will good things, i.e. things which please God or which God wills, but are ever turned in the direction of their own desires, so that they cannot but seek out their own ... So that which we call the remnant of nature in Satan and wicked man, as being the creatures and work of God, is not less subject to divine omnipotence and action than all the rest of the creatures and works of God. Since God moves and works all in all, He necessarily moves and works even in Satan and wicked man. But he works according to what they are and what He finds them to be, i.e,, since they are perverted and evil, being carried along by that motion of Divine Omnipotence, they cannot but do what is perverse and evil. Just as it is with a ma riding a horse lame on one foot or on two feet. His riding corresponds to what the horse is. That is, the horse moves badly. But what can the man do? He is riding this horse together with sound horses. This one goes badly, though the rest go well. But it cannot be otherwise, unless the horse be made sound.
"Here you see then that when God works in and by evil man, evil deeds result. Yet God cannot do evil Himself, for he is good. He uses evil instruments, which cannot escape the swat and motion of His Omnipotence. The fault which accounts for evil being done when God moves to action lies in these instruments which God does not allow to lie idle ... Hence it is that the wicked man cannot but always err and sin, because under the impulse of divine power he is not permitted to remain motionless, but must will, desire and act according to his nature ... We are subject to God's working by mere passive necessity ... God is incessantly active in all His creatures, allowing none of them to keep holiday ... He cannot but do evil by our evil instrumentality, although He makes good use of this evil for His own glory and for our salvation. ... God is God, for whose will no cause or reason may be laid down as its rule and measure. For nothing is on a level with it, not to speak higher. It is itself the measure of all things. If any rule or measure, or cause or reason existed for it, it could no longer be the will of God. What God wills is not right because He ought to or was bound to so will. On the contrary, what takes place must be right, because He so wills it." (pages 128-130: Winter, Ernst F., translator and editor. (1961). Erasmus - Luther- Discourse On Free Will. New York: Frederick Ungar Publishing Company, Inc.).

Here is Martin Luther's evil heresy: Luther says, wrongly, that God "cannot but do evil by our evil instrumentality ..." (page 130).

God cannot but do evil? No. Scripture says, "God is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all."
God does not and can not sin, or do evil, or cause evil, or will evil, or cause men or Satan or Satan's demons to do evil.

God save us all from the wickedness of Lutheranism.
"Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to sin, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!" (Matthew 18:6-7 NKJV).

Men by whom offenses come

Augustine of Hippo (endorses Filioque and original sin (guilt)

Pope Benedict VIII (first pope to endorse Filioque)

Martin Luther (denies free will and teaches God causes evil. and endorses justification by

faith alone and believes in false theory of scripture alone, and believes in Filioque)


God save us all in Christ Jesus. Christ says, "Repent, for the Kingdom of God is at hand." Amen.

In Erie PA USA August 2011 AD Scott R. Harrington

PS Yes, you can tell I am offended by false doctrines.

 

[trust_in_the_name]

Martin Luther's doctrinal heresy.

1. That man has no free will.

Show me free will in the Bible.

(Hint: It's not in there.)

 

[Laodicea]

endorses justification by

faith alone and believes in false theory of scripture alone, and believes in Filioque)

The reason he taught that is because the Papacy taught salvation by works, people had to pay to be saved and do works to be saved which is a Babylonian teaching it was taught at the tower of Babel salvation by works.

 

[Scotth1960]

[quote=trust_in_the_name;513080]Show me free will in the Bible.

(Hint: It's not in there.)[/quote]Dear trustinthename:

Free will in the Bible. Truth: It's in there. Revelation 22:17:
"And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires (whosoever will, KJV), let him take the water of life freely" (NKJV). To deny free will is to deny this and the other Scriptures that teach free will.
God bless you. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington

 

[Scotth1960]

The reason he taught that is because the Papacy taught salvation by works, people had to pay to be saved and do works to be saved which is a Babylonian teaching it was taught at the tower of Babel salvation by works.

So Luther didn't teach this something out of faith in what the Scripture says; he was just being emotional and reacting to what the papacy was doing. But Luther was right to teach against indulgences (paying for forgiveness of sins with money) in his 95 theses.

 

[Laodicea]

So Luther didn't teach this something out of faith in what the Scripture says; he was just being emotional and reacting to what the papacy was doing. But Luther was right to teach against indulgences (paying for forgiveness of sins with money) in his 95 theses.

Yes that is what I was referring to.

Romans 4:4-6
(4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
(5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(6) Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

 

[rodogg]

Show me free will in the Bible.

(Hint: It's not in there.)

Does something so obvious need to be in the Bible to exist?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Does something so obvious need to be in the Bible to exist?

Its in there. some people just can not see it.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Yes that is what I was referring to.

Romans 4:4-6
(4) Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
(5) But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
(6) Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

yeah its like alot of people. they get some things right, and mess up in other areas. I think you would be hard pressed to find any church which has everything right. at least I have not found one yet. and I have been to many many churches.

 

[Scotth1960]

yeah its like alot of people. they get some things right, and mess up in other areas. I think you would be hard pressed to find any church which has everything right. at least I have not found one yet. and I have been to many many churches.

God imputeth righteousness without the "works of the law" (Jewish circumcision, Jewish ceremonial laws, Jewish dietary laws, Jewish animal sacrifices, Jewish sabbath keeping, Jewish OT covenant sanctions), not without any works; for you see that "by works" a man "is justified" (James 2:24). No church on earth is (yet) perfect.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

God imputeth righteousness without the "works of the law" (Jewish circumcision, Jewish ceremonial laws, Jewish dietary laws, Jewish animal sacrifices, Jewish sabbath keeping, Jewish OT covenant sanctions), not without any works; for you see that "by works" a man "is justified" (James 2:24). No church on earth is (yet) perfect.

No scott. Paul said Not by works of righteousness which we have done (meaning ANY WORK WHATEVER, not just works of the law) But by faith we were saved.

Saying works only means works of the law, but not other works is not right. God did not remove works of the law and add other works, in fact hebrews said works of the law never saved anyone. It is by faith they were saved, just like it is by faith we are saved.

Faith produces salvation and the result is works.

no faith will not produce salvation. and will be proven by the fact there are no works.

James said faith without works is dead. no faith = no salvation. James is not saying we need to work to earn our salvation. this is not correct.

and your right. no church is perfect. Including the EO.

 

[Scotth1960]

Martin Luther's doctrinal heresy.

1. That man has no free will.

2. Therefore, that God works evil in man.

Dear friends,

For more on the heretical problem of theological determinism, see:

"Problems with Universal, Divine, Causal Determinism" by William Lane Craig
Craig is a Protestant and a Molinist, and not Orthodox, but truth is truth regardless of who speaks (it), and according to the following website, Craig's remarks are spot on, notwithstanding his Protestant and Molinist views.

Problems with Universal, Divine, Causal Determinism – Orthodox Christian Faith

God save us. Amen. In Erie PA Scott R. Harrington August 2011 AD

 

[Scotth1960]

No scott. Paul said Not by works of righteousness which we have done (meaning ANY WORK WHATEVER, not just works of the law) But by faith we were saved.

Saying works only means works of the law, but not other works is not right. God did not remove works of the law and add other works, in fact hebrews said works of the law never saved anyone. It is by faith they were saved, just like it is by faith we are saved.

Faith produces salvation and the result is works.

no faith will not produce salvation. and will be proven by the fact there are no works.

James said faith without works is dead. no faith = no salvation. James is not saying we need to work to earn our salvation. this is not correct.

and your right. no church is perfect. Including the EO.

What did James mean when he said a man is justified by works and not by faith alone? If all it takes for a man to be "saved" is faith, that is, faith "alone", what do we do with this, throw it out of the Bible because it contradicts Luther's interpretation of Saint Paul. It is Luther's interpretation of Saint Paul that is questionable. Saint Paul himself is not question. Saint Paul says we are saved by faith with worketh through love (Galatians 5:6). So Saint Paul says we are saved by faith and works, not by faith alone. Luther disagreed and tried to remove James from the New Testament. Go figure. It's the works of the law that do not save. But faith and works (James 2:24, Gal. 5:6) with repentance (Acts 3, etc.), baptism (Mark 16:16, Matt. 28:19), and the the mercy of Jesus Christ (Titus 3:5) save us in Christ Jesus.

 

[Grandpa]

What did James mean when he said a man is justified by works and not by faith alone? If all it takes for a man to be "saved" is faith, that is, faith "alone", what do we do with this, throw it out of the Bible because it contradicts Luther's interpretation of Saint Paul. It is Luther's interpretation of Saint Paul that is questionable. Saint Paul himself is not question. Saint Paul says we are saved by faith with worketh through love (Galatians 5:6). So Saint Paul says we are saved by faith and works, not by faith alone. Luther disagreed and tried to remove James from the New Testament. Go figure. It's the works of the law that do not save. But faith and works (James 2:24, Gal. 5:6) with repentance (Acts 3, etc.), baptism (Mark 16:16, Matt. 28:19), and the the mercy of Jesus Christ (Titus 3:5) save us in Christ Jesus.

James said Justified. He did not say saved. By faith are we saved. We are justified by works because this is the fruit of our salvation. This is how we can tell we have been saved. This is the test, the justification.

And that is what he was saying. Faith without works is dead because faith leads to action. Faith doesn't lie around doing nothing.

I hope you see the distinction

God Bless You

 

[trust_in_the_name]

Free will in the Bible. Truth: It's in there. Revelation 22:17:
"And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires (whosoever will, KJV), let him take the water of life freely" (NKJV). To deny free will is to deny this and the other Scriptures that teach free will.

17 And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. (Revelation 22:17)

I never said that will isn't in the Bible; I just pointed out that it's not free. We do of course have a will, but free will is never found in scripture.

16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. (Romans 9:16)

The Bible does speak of "him who wills," but only in the context of refuting free will: "it is not of him who wills ... but of God who shows mercy."

13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:13)

We do indeed have a will, and the Bible speaks about this will, but again in doing so it actually refutes the idea of free will. Believers are spiritually "born" "not ... of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

 

[trust_in_the_name]

Does something so obvious need to be in the Bible to exist?

Yes, since the Bible actually teaches that it doesn't exist (see above post). Of course, the fact that you find something obvious isn't by any means a good argument for its existence, since we are to trust in God, whose thoughts are not our thoughts, and not in our own understanding.

5 Trust in the Lord with all your heart, And lean not on your own understanding; (Proverbs 3:5)

8 "For My thoughts are not your thoughts, Nor are your ways My ways," says the Lord. 9 "For as the heavens are higher than the earth, So are My ways higher than your ways, And My thoughts than your thoughts. (Isaiah 55:8-9)

33 Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and His ways past finding out! (Romans 11:33)

For many, free will is obvious. For most, it's obvious that the message of the cross is foolishness.

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. (1 Corinthians 1:18)

 

[trust_in_the_name]

Its in there. some people just can not see it.

Good argument, but you've made too many good points and provided too much good biblical evidence. I don't think I'll be able to address such a comprehensive refutation.

 

[Scotth1960]

17 And the Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely. (Revelation 22:17)

I never said that will isn't in the Bible; I just pointed out that it's not free. We do of course have a will, but free will is never found in scripture.

16 So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. (Romans 9:16)

The Bible does speak of "him who wills," but only in the context of refuting free will: "it is not of him who wills ... but of God who shows mercy."

13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:13)

We do indeed have a will, and the Bible speaks about this will, but again in doing so it actually refutes the idea of free will. Believers are spiritually "born" "not ... of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."

If we have a will, we have a free will. There is no difference. If we do not have free will, we cannot be blamed for our sin, for God makes us sin. That is Calvinism.
You are taking Romans 9:16 out of context. It doesn't deny free will. Revelation 22:17 teaches free will.
The Church Fathers all teach free will. All true Christians teach free will. Whoever denies free will is either a Lutheran-Calvinist heretic or some other kind of heretic.
Whoever denies the Church Fathers' teaching denies there is a visible Church of Christ that can be identified in history. Augustine of Hippo changed his mind on this. For a while, he denied free will, but later in life he came to his senses, and affirmed the existence of free will.
See: Geisler, Norman L. Chosen But Free. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers.

 

[Grandpa]

If we have a will, we have a free will. There is no difference. If we do not have free will, we cannot be blamed for our sin, for God makes us sin. That is Calvinism.
You are taking Romans 9:16 out of context. It doesn't deny free will. Revelation 22:17 teaches free will.
The Church Fathers all teach free will. All true Christians teach free will. Whoever denies free will is either a Lutheran-Calvinist heretic or some other kind of heretic.
Whoever denies the Church Fathers' teaching denies there is a visible Church of Christ that can be identified in history. Augustine of Hippo changed his mind on this. For a while, he denied free will, but later in life he came to his senses, and affirmed the existence of free will.
See: Geisler, Norman L. Chosen But Free. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers.

I don't think you can prove one way or another that free will exists or does not exist. Only God knows. However there are verses in the bible that seem to allude to choices we make. Since there are choices we make then we probably have free will to make those choices. But still, only God knows.

I bet there's a lot of things like that where only God knows. I wonder if He laughs when people try to reason through these things??

God Bless You

 

[trust_in_the_name]

If we have a will, we have a free will. There is no difference.

Since our will is in accord with the will of God, it's not truly free.

36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things, to whom be glory forever. Amen. (Romans 11:36)

If we do not have free will, we cannot be blamed for our sin,

That's exactly the argument Paul set out to refute in Romans 9.

18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. 19 You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?" (Romans 9:18-19)

You're saying that if God is responsible, "we cannot be blamed for our sin." In other words, "Why does He still find fault?" And this is how he refutes it.

20 But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, "Why have you made me like this?" 21 Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor? (Romans 9:20-21)

But indeed, O Scotth1960, who are you to reply against God? We can indeed be blamed for our sin.

for God makes us sin. That is Calvinism.

Actually it's just the teaching of scripture.

17 O Lord, why have You made us stray from Your ways, And hardened our heart from Your fear? Return for Your servants' sake, The tribes of Your inheritance. (Isaiah 63:17)

You are taking Romans 9:16 out of context. It doesn't deny free will.

Actually I'm taking it in context, since it says "whom He wills He hardens." Who hardens? God does.

18 Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens. (Romans 9:18)

So if it's God that hardens, that hardly constitutes free will.

Revelation 22:17 teaches free will.

You've yet to demonstrate any such thing.

The Church Fathers all teach free will.

The "church fathers" were Catholic so it's no surprise that they taught against the scriptures.

"They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they confess not the Eucharist to be the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, which suffered for our sins, and which the Father, of His goodness, raised up again. Those, therefore, who speak against this gift of God, incur death in the midst of their disputes. But it were better for them to treat it with respect, that they also might rise again." -Ignatius

"And this food is called among us Euvcaristia [the Eucharist], of which no one is allowed to partake but the man who believes that the things which we teach are true, and who has been washed with the washing that is for the remission of sins, and unto regeneration, and who is so living as Christ has enjoined. For not as common bread and common drink do we receive these; but like manner as Jesus Christ our Saviour, having been made flesh by the Word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation, so likewise have we been taught that the food which is blessed by the prayer of His word, and from which our blood and flesh by transmutation are nourished, is the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh." -Justin Martyr

"When, therefore, the mingled cup and the manufactured bread receives the Word of God, and the Eucharist of the blood and the body of Christ is made, from which things the substance of our flesh is increased and supported, how can they affirm that the flesh is incapable of receiving the gift of God, which is life eternal, which [flesh] is nourished from the body and blood of the Lord, and is a member of Him?" -Irenaeus

All true Christians teach free will. Whoever denies free will is either a Lutheran-Calvinist heretic or some other kind of heretic.

That's interesting since I still haven't seen a single verse that supports the idea of the will being free.

Whoever denies the Church Fathers' teaching denies there is a visible Church of Christ that can be identified in history.

8 I tell you that He will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless, when the Son of Man comes, will He really find faith on the earth?" (Luke 18:8)

Augustine of Hippo changed his mind on this. For a while, he denied free will, but later in life he came to his senses, and affirmed the existence of free will.
See: Geisler, Norman L. Chosen But Free. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers.