tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post8530434205449678327..comments2024-03-22T16:09:48.895-04:00Comments on Beggars All: Reformation And Apologetics: More Proof For Rome's Version of MaryJames Swanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comBlogger125125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-29127527916696848572015-01-01T08:02:45.866-05:002015-01-01T08:02:45.866-05:00And this 'Guy' wonders why nobody thinks h...And this 'Guy' wonders why nobody thinks he's arguing in good faith. <br /> It's like trying to make nice with a Social Justice Warrior, offer an olive branch and they jamb it in your eye.<br /> Maybe he's just ESL and has a difficult time interpreting English or understanding how grating his style of writing is.<br /> No, no, I shouldn't be like that, it is after all my own fault for feeding the troll(s).<br />JimBrooks1776https://www.blogger.com/profile/16819052416471646419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-21565645997503567262014-12-31T23:25:12.218-05:002014-12-31T23:25:12.218-05:00Well Fawker, the only question I asked was if it w...Well Fawker, the only question I asked was if it was only Calvinists who'd accused you (Catholics) of believing in works based salvation.JimBrooks1776https://www.blogger.com/profile/16819052416471646419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-23456567574834724912014-12-31T10:36:13.566-05:002014-12-31T10:36:13.566-05:00Lloyd Cadle said...When I stated that Luther parte...<i>Lloyd Cadle said...When I stated that Luther parted with Calvin on limited atonement and the Sacraments, I should have stated that Lutherans and the Reformed strongly disagree on those points. Lutherans teach that God elected some to salvation but that the atonement is for all. They let the tension stand on its own without trying to explain it. </i><br /><br />OK, good. That's all you needed to say. <br /><br /><i>Lloyd Cadle said... I also read a number of Luther's commentaries, and one of them was Luther's Lectures on Genesis, in L.W. 5:43-50, you will read a strong stance against double predestination by Luther. An no, he didn't mention Calvin by name.</i><br /><br />I'm familiar with what you're referring to (LW 5). My major investigation of Luther's view as compared to Calvinism can be found here:<br /><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20140712122228/http://tquid.sharpens.org/Martin%20Luther%20and%20TULIP.htm" rel="nofollow">Is Luther's doctrine of Predestination Reformed?</a><br /><br />You'll notice that I do take the comments from LW 5 into consideration. See my discussion in this link under:<br /><br /><b>VI. Avoiding Speculation on Predestination</b><br /> <br /><br />James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-32943521170522200082014-12-31T06:59:41.389-05:002014-12-31T06:59:41.389-05:00Fawksie, did you honestly read what I wrote and th...Fawksie, did you honestly read what I wrote and think I was asking for an explanation for your hyperdulia? Answering unasked questions and ignoring asked questions are the reasons some people might think you're trolling.<br /> Anyway, I for one am not accusing you, or any catholic of being a pagan. In regards to your analogy, AFAIK priestly raiments, incense, and chanting are not ever spoken of in the Bible the way statues, idols, and graven images are. To rephrase, I'm not saying you are "worshipping" such things, that's between you and God, but you should be able to understand how it looks to others.<br />JimBrooks1776https://www.blogger.com/profile/16819052416471646419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-24234473248311546692014-12-31T02:06:34.885-05:002014-12-31T02:06:34.885-05:00James - I, as mentioned on an earlier post, put th...James - I, as mentioned on an earlier post, put the PROTOEVANGELIUM of James in as an early document on the subject of Mary. Of Course it is not an ECF, it is a historical document, as I mentioned previously.<br /><br />Moving on, in the Book of Concord, Formula Epitome, XI. God's Eternal Foreknowledge, under Antitheses or Negative Statements, False Teachings about this Article, numbers 17, 18, 19, 20 and 21. Please read this, as it addresses the heretical doctrine of double predestination. It is right out of the Lutheran Confessions, Book of Concord.<br /><br />Please refer to my above quotations on the Christian Visitation Articles 1592, on the Lutheran understanding of the false teachings of the Calvinists. Go to the website Bookofconcord.org and see why the Christian Visitation Articles 1592 are part of the Confessions for all Lutherans. It is all in there.<br /><br />When I stated that Luther parted with Calvin on limited atonement and the Sacraments, I should have stated that Lutherans and the Reformed strongly disagree on those points. Lutherans teach that God elected some to salvation but that the atonement is for all. They let the tension stand on its own without trying to explain it. <br /><br />I also read a number of Luther's commentaries, and one of them was Luther's Lectures on Genesis, in L.W. 5:43-50, you will read a strong stance against double predestination by Luther. An no, he didn't mention Calvin by name.<br /><br />This should answer your questions. You mentioned the video on adoption. Grace just turned 5. She is still on a feeding tube but she eats a small amount of food. We take her to all of the best restaurants in Phoenix. She is doing great in pre-school. I love her more than anything in the world. She wants to be a nurse Nun. She says that Mary is her mother. She likes to wear her hair like Mary! Better to have Mary as a role model than a Lady GaGa. Grace just went to her first Confession. She is such a good girl. She told Jesus that she was sorry that she did not shut off her Nabe Jr. right when my wife asked her to. Grace was born one pound and three ounces. There has never been a girl like my sweet baby Grace!<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-89559074234543411462014-12-30T20:43:13.417-05:002014-12-30T20:43:13.417-05:00Guy said:
"Slanderous misinformation? Hardly...Guy said:<br /><br />"Slanderous misinformation? Hardly. Until the end of his days, he held that James did not deserve the status of the other books of the Bible. Somewhere on this blog is my post from weeks ago stating the fact."<br /><br />It is indeed misinformation, and it is also slanderous. It's misinformation because Luther translated the Bible and he kept the books in question. It's true that he had his doubts, but that leads to why you and Lloyd have made this slanderous claim.<br /><br />It's a slanderous claim because you two are implying that it was only Luther who was acting like a mad man and carelessly questioned books in the Bible. However, do you explain how his points of view were similar to other theologians of his time? Why don't you explain why there were high ranking Roman Catholics who had similar points of view as Luther did in regards to questioning some books in the Bible?<br /><br />"Whitewashing is just as dishonest as spreading lies. Whether he got his way or not is not the point and you know it."<br /><br />The only whitewashing going on here is by guy and Lloyd who make it seem like Luther was the only one who questioned what books belonged in the Bible.<br /><br />And yes, I do find Roman Catholicism repulsive (to repel or not attract). That is not a personal attack. It is only a way for me to illustrate Rome's method of declaring dogmas/doctrines evenif the evidence used is fraudulent. This is why I'm attracted to Jesus only. He is the pure one.<br /><br />James,<br /><br />Your observations on Lloyd are true. As soon as the heat turns up on him, he ignores you or says he won't respond because you aren't using your real name. He's not convincing by doing that.zipper778https://www.blogger.com/profile/03461482876486910840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-12941914439505904822014-12-30T14:07:20.944-05:002014-12-30T14:07:20.944-05:00Lloyd Cadle said...
James - CONCORDIA The Lutheran...<i>Lloyd Cadle said...<br />James - CONCORDIA The Lutheran Confessions; A Reader's Edition of the Book of Concord. They note in the preface; "With fervent prayer we offer this edition of The Lutheran Confessions, as contained in the Book of Concord of 1580." Concordia Publishing House.<br /></i><br /><br />Mr. Cadle, one thing I've noticed about your methods and interactions is your choice to not respond directly to anything that hits you directly. You simply ignored the fact that Luther never wrote about Calvin on either the atonement or predestination, and you ignore the fact that I pointed out you didn't actually cite a confessional statement to me but rather an editor's comment. These were your facts. I challenged them, and you simply ignore them. Recall earlier how you stated the Protoevangelium of James was the writing of an Early Church Father.<br /><br />I understand that you have pride in your previous denominational affiliations and consider yourself qualified to make statements of authority on such matters. However, you've repeatedly demonstrated that you won't even admit simple errors- perhaps just simple errors of memory. Why? You're credibility in regard to having useful knowledge of your past denominational affiliations actually suffers when you don't have direct and honest interactions on the facts you bring to the table when you're challenged.<br /><br />This doesn't mean I don't think you're a nice guy. In fact, I think I watched an old news video of you this morning on adoption. <br /><br />I make mistakes, everyone does. Why not end this year with saying you might not remember all your facts correctly about Luther, Calvin, Lutheranism and Calvinism? Why not simply stop saying how well-versed you are in these things until you actually are able to prove it? If you really know you're stuff, you won't need to tell anybody. We'll know by what you post. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-23407192397803019392014-12-30T13:47:51.711-05:002014-12-30T13:47:51.711-05:00James -
I tell folks all of the time that if you...James - <br /><br />I tell folks all of the time that if you want to know what the Reformed, Lutherans and Catholics, etc. teach, you have to take the time to read and study their confessions and catechism's. <br /><br />You can supplement your reading with Luther, Calvin etc., but to really accurately define their teachings, a person has to study all of their confessions. As an example, any Lutheran theologian will tell you that Luther tended to be a bad example in some of his statements on doctrine and racism.<br /><br />By the way, I have given away so many books, I do work off memory much of the time. I am buying a bunch of new books and have to make room for them.<br /><br />When I talk about Lutherans, the Reformed and Baptists etc. I would assume that folks in those camps know what I am talking about. They should have those sources on hand. I should not have to do homework for lazy folks.Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-80968143720141343042014-12-30T13:07:15.012-05:002014-12-30T13:07:15.012-05:00James - CONCORDIA The Lutheran Confessions; A Read...James - CONCORDIA The Lutheran Confessions; A Reader's Edition of the Book of Concord. They note in the preface; "With fervent prayer we offer this edition of The Lutheran Confessions, as contained in the Book of Concord of 1580." Concordia Publishing House.<br /><br />If you want, I can mail it to you with my notes, if you promise to mail it back to me. I used this edition for the purpose of teaching catechism students in the WELS and LCMS.<br /><br />Confessional Lutherans are bound by the Book of Concord, not the teachings of Luther. Even Dr. Rod Rosenbladt of the White Horse Inn will tell you that. Lutheran theologians like Martin Chemnitz and Philip Melanchthon contributed to the BOC.<br /><br />Confessional eccelisial Christian communities like the LCMS and the WELS and ELS will tell you that not everything Luther taught was correct Lutheran doctrine, hence their need for the BOC.<br />Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-1017114102197595852014-12-30T12:23:45.405-05:002014-12-30T12:23:45.405-05:00Gars Falks, so you think that because James Swan a...Gars Falks, so you think that because James Swan asks a particular person to be a little more careful before incorrectly assigning authorship of something to Martin Luther, James should then stop an undefined group of people from saying incorrect things about what Catholics believe? How does that equate? To your first "point", I'm pretty sure nobody here said that you or Catholics have a messed up view of sex because of your view of Mary's perpetual virginity, rather that some of the ECF's had messed up views of sex that made them more likely to posit Mary's perpetual virginity. To your second point, is that something you've noticed is said by all Protestants or is it primarily Calvinists? To your third point, I understand that you say you're not committing Mariolatry, but your hyperdulia has so many outward indicators in common with idolatry, you should be able to understand how others might misinterpret it.<br />JimBrooks1776https://www.blogger.com/profile/16819052416471646419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-23404555803028123242014-12-30T12:04:15.016-05:002014-12-30T12:04:15.016-05:00Well stop bowing down to statues of Mary then.Well stop bowing down to statues of Mary then.JimBrooks1776https://www.blogger.com/profile/16819052416471646419noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-26432580431212604632014-12-30T11:36:16.651-05:002014-12-30T11:36:16.651-05:00the most offensive slap of all, that we practice &...<i> the most offensive slap of all, that we practice "MARYOLOTRY".</i><br /><br />That's "Mariolatry" (merēˈälətrē), not Maryolotry. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-410720914716124922014-12-30T09:34:50.340-05:002014-12-30T09:34:50.340-05:00Lloyd Cadle said... Most of the stuff folks post, ...<i>Lloyd Cadle said... Most of the stuff folks post, I know if it is true or not because, for the most part, as a student, I took the time to study it.</i><br /><br />Well, if you ever come across where Luther actually wrote specifically against John Calvin on the atonement and predestination, I would be interested in those references. <br /><br />Here's a tip, take it or leave it. I try to verify what I post because sometimes my memory isn't always accurate. Recently, I searched for a half hour for something I thought I remembered, only to realize that I didn't remember it quite correctly.<br /><br />I think your memory got the best of you on this one. You probably remembered that the Lutheran Confessions had areas against Calvinism, and you turned that into Luther writing against John Calvin. <br /><br />Also, you seem to not have any knowledge of the controversy on Calvin's view of the atonement. <br /><br />If you post tidbits on the Reformers on my blog, it would be best to check your facts first to avoid situations like this. I may not be fluent in church history, but I know the Reformation era better than most. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-81758057545671835352014-12-30T09:14:24.380-05:002014-12-30T09:14:24.380-05:00Lloyd Cadle said...Book of Concord, Formula, Epito...<i> Lloyd Cadle said...Book of Concord, Formula, Epitome, Article XI: God's Eternal Foreknowledge and Election says this, "John Calvin and his followers had developed a teaching commonly known as "double predestination." This crass and horrible teaching states that God has foreordained and predestined some people to go to hell, no matter what, while others He has foreordained and predestined to go to heaven. Article XI clearly dismantles this dreadful and nonbiblical teaching and exposes it as a great error."</i><br /><br />What's odd about this statement is that it's not in my copy of the Book of Concord. I did find it online in a word document entitled "ABC Adult Curriculum" from the St James Lutheran Church. <br /><br />Which version of the Book of Concord are you using Lloyd? Why is this statement not my Tappert / Fortress Press edition (1959)?<br /><br />Is the statement later commentary added in, or is it actually part of the Epitome, Article XI? I have this section open now, and it doesn't have this statement you cite. James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-49903633940650759442014-12-30T08:54:19.824-05:002014-12-30T08:54:19.824-05:00Mr. Cadle:
Did Luther write the sections of the B...Mr. Cadle:<br /><br />Did Luther write the sections of the Book of Concord that you cited?<br /><br />Recall what you wrote:<br /><br /><i>Lloyd Cadle said...His erroneous teachings on limited atonement and God predestining some to hell are in defiance of using the whole Bible as a hermanuetic and an example of creating a God in his own image. Even <b>Luther</b> opposed him on this. </i>James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-65699966871409950182014-12-30T02:41:24.583-05:002014-12-30T02:41:24.583-05:00James - I have moved on to my Catholic faith. I ...James - I have moved on to my Catholic faith. I don't cut and paste. So, it takes time to pull out old books (I get migraine headaches from the dust), and type stuff out of books. <br /><br />I can make quick comments, but to keep pulling out church father quotes, etc. and doing homework for folks, I just don't have the time. I certainly don't expect others to research information for me. I wouldn't trust it anyway, as I have to check it out for myself.<br /><br />Most of the stuff folks post, I know if it is true or not because, for the most part, as a student, I took the time to study it. Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-91817504569179641452014-12-30T02:10:54.694-05:002014-12-30T02:10:54.694-05:00James -
Book of Concord, Formula, Epitome, Articl...James -<br /><br />Book of Concord, Formula, Epitome, Article XI: God's Eternal Foreknowledge and Election says this, "John Calvin and his followers had developed a teaching commonly known as "double predestination." This crass and horrible teaching states that God has foreordained and predestined some people to go to hell, no matter what, while others He has foreordained and predestined to go to heaven. Article XI clearly dismantles this dreadful and nonbiblical teaching and exposes it as a great error."<br /><br />In the Book of Concord, Christian Visitation Articles; False and Erroneous Doctrine of the Calvinists, Concerning the Predestination and the Providence of God it says thus:<br /><br />1. Christ died, not for all people, but only the elect. 2. God created most people for eternal condemnation and is unwilling that they be converted and saved. 3. The elect and regenerate cannot lose faith and the Holy Spirit and be condemned, even though they commit great sins and crimes of every kind. 4. Those who are not elect must be condemned, and cannot attain salvation, even though they are baptized a thousand times, daily go to the Lord's Supper, and also live as holy and blameless as possible.<br /><br />The Book of Concord also just as strongly condemnes the errors of the Calvinists regarding the Holy Supper, Person of Christ (regarding their false views of Christ's human and divine nature), and concerning Baptism.<br /><br />I have read, studied and marked every single page in the Book of Concord and taught it to Jr. High catechism students. <br /><br />Would you believe that I have known folks that have been Lutherans for over 50 years that didn't even know that there was a Book of Concord? Talk about ignorance and punching a time clock to spend time with Jesus for one hour a week......They would rather watch Love Boat reruns on T.V. than take their faith seriously.<br /><br />It should be noted that Lutheran pastors and theologians hold the Book of Concord as a higher standard of what Lutheran theology teaches than Luther himself.<br /><br />Again, it takes time to study this stuff. There are no shortcuts.Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-90269836881890426842014-12-29T23:33:20.252-05:002014-12-29T23:33:20.252-05:00Lloyd Cadle said...His erroneous teachings on limi...<i>Lloyd Cadle said...His erroneous teachings on limited atonement and God predestining some to hell are in defiance of using the whole Bible as a hermanuetic and an example of creating a God in his own image. Even Luther opposed him on this. </i><br /><br />Mr. Cadle, you keep pointing out how fluent you are in all these different theologies and theologians, but then you post stuff like this, and my typical first response while reading your words is, "huh?"<br /><br />To my knowledge, I know of no writings that Luther ever wrote to or about Calvin. <br /><br />Calvin's sparse comments on the extent of the atonement has lead a number of historical theologians to question whether or not Calvin actually held to limited atonement. Luther, likewise, doesn't have much to say on the extent of the atonement debate. He certainly never wrote about either Calvin or Geneva in opposition to limited atonement. If he did, show me where. <br /><br />In regard to predestination, once again, Luther never wrote against the Reformed on this. There is certainly a different emphasis in the two writers, and Calvin wrote more on the topic. Luther's view was not to speculate on the hidden purposes of God in which the reprobate are predestined to be doomed.<br /><br />If possible Lloyd, maybe you should pull out some of your old books and look over your notes before you make your comments here.<br /><br /> James Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16136781934797867593noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-33468607839268696972014-12-29T19:03:59.666-05:002014-12-29T19:03:59.666-05:00Is your point that Roman Catholics have to interpr...Is your point that Roman Catholics have to interpret which church is Roman Catholic and which is not?zipper778https://www.blogger.com/profile/03461482876486910840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-35943885347889746072014-12-29T18:46:16.347-05:002014-12-29T18:46:16.347-05:00By the way,
During our RCIA classes, we occasiona...By the way,<br /><br />During our RCIA classes, we occasionally have folks that are transferring in from what they perceive are Roman Catholic churches. They attempt to use documents from those churches. It turns out, like our Priest warned folks in his homily that these are not Roman Catholic Churches at all. They are not legitimate.<br /><br />They claim to be Catholic, but they are not. They are not even listed as Catholic Churches in the listing of Catholic Churches in the Diocese of Phoenix.<br /><br />They are fake Catholic Churches. Just because I put on a Yankee uniform doesn't make me a MLB player.Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-65402815880732703892014-12-29T18:17:57.051-05:002014-12-29T18:17:57.051-05:00Lloyd, I'd like to cover some things with you:...Lloyd, I'd like to cover some things with you:<br /><br />1) It's obvious that because you are talking to guy fawkes and myself now that you're over your non interaction with people who go by internet handles thing. Welcome back.<br /><br />2) Lloyd, you said this:<br /><br />"Way, way back on April 16, 2001, Newsweek Magazine reported that there were 33,820 christian denominations. Their source was World Christian Encyclopedia, by David Barrett, page 10, volume 1."<br /><br />It's good to see that you are trying to look for the source of your denominations claim, so I'll give you that, but you need to look harder. My argument still stands because in that same book, Barrett claims that from the number of denominations claimed, over 200 denominations belong to Roman Catholicism. So obviously your claim of 40,000 denominations all adhering to sola scriptura is false and voids your argument.<br /><br />3) Lloyd, you next state: "<br /><br />In my neighborhood alone, they are popping up all over the place. Some, claiming that they are "led by the Spirit" become pastors by completing on-line courses. All are sola scriptura. Each is his own reformer. Each has a new leader. Each has a different understanding of what the Bible teaches."<br /><br />Disagreements with church leaders are not always theological, there are a number of other reasons to start a new church, such as trying to spread the Gospel. Unless you can document that all of the new churches springing up in your area are due to doctrinal differences, then your argument is exagerated.<br /><br />4) Lloyd finishes with:<br /><br />"Do the math."<br /><br />Like the over 200 Roman Catholic denominations included in your number that you carelessly included in your 40,000 number? Do you want me to break down your number more and show you in greater detail why your number is even more misleading?<br /><br />Also, just because you see a number of churches rising in your area, doesn't mean that the total number of churches and/or denominations in the USA or the world are increasing as well. In general, religious attendence is on the decline, so for you to give a higher number then even Newsweek is giving you demonstrates how dishonest you are being. <br /><br />Silly me though, I love math ;)zipper778https://www.blogger.com/profile/03461482876486910840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-89687209448271578492014-12-29T16:59:34.341-05:002014-12-29T16:59:34.341-05:00"Man, with that kind of misinformation, it..."Man, with that kind of misinformation, it's no wonder why I find Roman Catholicism repulsive. As long as an argument supports the Roman Catholic Church, just go ahead and use it; even if it's a false argument."<br /><br />Pigs wallow, ducks quack, and unrepentant sinners sin impenitently. Since all do according to their nature why would we expect anything other than fallacious arguments from a false church?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04249673269230269465noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-37117031921419970432014-12-29T16:30:47.136-05:002014-12-29T16:30:47.136-05:00Way, way back on April 16, 2001, Newsweek Magazine...Way, way back on April 16, 2001, Newsweek Magazine reported that there were 33,820 christian denominations. Their source was World Christian Encyclopedia, by David Barrett, page 10, volume 1.<br /><br />In my neighborhood alone, they are popping up all over the place. Some, claiming that they are "led by the Spirit" become pastors by completing on-line courses. All are sola scriptura. Each is his own reformer. Each has a new leader. Each has a different understanding of what the Bible teaches. <br /><br />Some have started their own ecclesial Christian communities after a disagreement with the elder or pastor of their old church. They all have equal authority, led by a man. It is not a reformation, but a fragmentation.<br /><br />Do the math.Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-23534049242025560352014-12-29T15:27:45.204-05:002014-12-29T15:27:45.204-05:00Lloyd said:
"which has led to mass confusion...Lloyd said:<br /><br />"which has led to mass confusion and perhaps 40,000 ecclesial Christian communities, all under sola scriptura, which have variant teachings."<br /><br />This is what convinced you to go to Roman Catholicism? A false Roman Catholic argument that got a number from a book that defines the word denomination differently then most people do and then falsely stating that all of those denominations follow sola scriptura. Man, with that kind of misinformation, it's no wonder why I find Roman Catholicism repulsive. As long as an argument supports the Roman Catholic Church, just go ahead and use it; even if it's a false argument.<br /><br />"Their leader (Luther), also sought to remove numerous books of the Bible to fit his new theology."<br /><br />And yet he didn't remove any books from the Bible. Besides, this is another slanderous talking point that many Roman Catholics use that James has addressed a number of times on this blog.zipper778https://www.blogger.com/profile/03461482876486910840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19795707.post-65961546804605228242014-12-29T14:53:57.132-05:002014-12-29T14:53:57.132-05:00Guy -
I am not in agreement with the theology of ...Guy -<br /><br />I am not in agreement with the theology of Steadfast Lutherans. They falsely accuse Catholics of trying earn heaven through good works.<br /><br />Their leader (Luther), rather than submitting to Apostolic Authority (ordained by God), chose rebellion under his own authority, that has led others to do likewise--which has led to mass confusion and perhaps 40,000 ecclesial Christian communities, all under sola scriptura, which have variant teachings.<br /><br />His teachings have antinomian tendencies and a very small emphasis on the key Gospel message which includes repentance, where repenting too much is a work.<br /><br />Their leader (Luther), also sought to remove numerous books of the Bible to fit his new theology.Lloyd Cadlehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05678346232648824055noreply@blogger.com