Anyone here observe Lent, etc?

Nobody is saying listen to Judas. We're saying Paul's direct students contradict just about everything the reformation claims is true.

 

God used Martin Luther mightily as He also used Samson, who was a man of dubious morals but still is praised as a hero of faith (Hebrews 11:32). If God only used perfect people, he would never use anyone at all.

 

I'll stack Samson against Martin Luther any day.

 

This answer is why Christianity is so messed up now.

 

You should complain to God in that case.

 

I don't think the dead in Christ need to pray at least not in the manner that we do.
They have "sight" while we still here in our mortal flesh must live (and pray) by faith.

 

It would be more believable had PBS supplied us with excerpts from Luther's writings in back up of their claims.
which do not attain to scholarly documentation as they are not supported by Luther's direct quotations.

So while it is better than nothing it is still not very credible.
In fact even a documented blurb from Wikipedia would be more believable.

When folks make a claim here on the DEBATE Forums then at least an attempt at some kind of believable documentation is expected.

Thanks.

 

Studying the Patristic age is what convinced me that the Early Church looked NOTHING like the modern day Baptist church I attended. Orthodoxy of the highest degree can be found in the ECF works although they themselves are not infalliable and can contain error but their works on whole are a lot more orthodox than other Christian writers who left the church like Tertullians or those who died not being saints (probably because of the doctrinal controversy they espoused) so the work of Clement of Alexandria and Origien are to be taken on a lower level of acceptance than the works of Saint Augustine whose works were universally accepted in the western church and remain influential to this day. Some things Origen said were grossly heretical and known as Origenism and condemned by the Universal church.
It is interesting to me that when some evangelicals, like Martin Marprelate, debate fine points of disagreement they point to the early christian writers not known as church fathers such as Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen etc heck even we would admit their catholicism wouldn’t match ours today.

 

And which part of Lent is not found as proper within Scripture? Because remember that was your litmus test with the Regulative Principle. If you use the Catholic argument we shouldn't observe half of the things we do including Lord's Supper and Baptism. It's not a valid argument. By that argument, we also shouldn't pray or even go to church.

 

This is much better documentation as it includes Luther's writings.

I know full well that Luther was a scoundrel from past research but if you are going to bring accusation against a man for his sins then documentation is required lest you break the commandment "Thou shalt not bear False Witness".

For a time I researched the theologies of the Church of England and Lutheranism after I left the Catholic Church but felt they both were defective in their theologies of sacramentalism, a sacerdotal priesthood and infant baptism to name a few.

 

I can show you positive commands in scripture for the Lord's Supper (1 Corinthians 11:23-34), baptism (Matthew 28:19), church discipline (Matthew 18:15-18), good works (Ephesians 2:10), prayer (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18), and attending corporate worship (Hebrews 10:25). You cannot do the same for Lent. Once again (because you seem to need the instruction), the RPW concerns itself with those things in worship that we are commanded to do by scripture. It does not address private practices. So, if you want to take a period of time for self-examination and repentance, have at it. If you believe Lent should be part of the church calendar, then go swim the Tiber and be part of a church that believes as you do. I am making the case for why Lent is not practiced by most Reformed churches.

 

If you are happy with the ECF's being your primary source, fine. I will let your rejection of Sola Scriptura speak for itself.

 

Christ died on the cross for the salvation of His elect. The Holy Spirit convicts His elect of their sin resulting in them repenting of their sin and accepting Jesus Christ as their Savior through a re-birth - being born-again.

Catholic doctrine teaches that salvation is results from grace bestowed upon the one being baptized, including infants. And, under certain circumstances, while the child is still in the womb of the mother.

Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?
"Therefore, sacramental baptism is the only means given by our Lord that assures salvation. The Church must never neglect the duty to proclaim the Gospel, and by the grace of God, call people in faith to baptism.

The Catechism, however, adds a caution: "God has bound salvation to the Sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments" (No.1257). Besides the normal ritual baptism of water and invocation of the Holy Trinity, the Church has also accepted two other forms of baptism a baptism of blood and a baptism of desire. While these two forms are not the Sacrament of Baptism per se, they do render the same graces and effects (Catechism, No.1258)."

The stated RCC doctrine is false teaching. Do you agree?

 

So where is the biblical command against Lent? What in heaven's name is the problem with the faithful emulating Jesus's 40 days in the desert where He fasted and prayed by doing the same for a 40 day period before observing His great sacrifice as a special occasion? Anything that the Christian can do to praise His holy name is completely acceptable and well within biblical norms. Good grief!

 

You are asking the wrong question. The question is where is the biblical warrant for Lent? Where is the biblical warrant for Easter or Christmas? You are a Roman Catholic, so I do not expect you to agree with me. Roman Catholicism revolves around sacraments and holy days. Most of my fellow Baptists disagree with me and that is fine. My challenge is really for them, not you. Most Baptists consider themselves to be people of the book. They would agree that the bible is the sole authority for all matters of faith and practice. That is why I challenge them to consider what dictates their worship. When it comes to worship, do Baptists look at how scripture alone dictates the worship of God? Again, this question is not for you.

 

And pray tell bother, just how are we to re-enact the Last Supper? Do we follow the Scriptures verbatim as to what elements are used, or do we make up our own way and therefore have a false Last Supper?

 

So you don't think that God in His wisdom set out through the religious leaders of the day to co-opt those pagan holidays in favor of the truth of Jesus Christ, so that all the world would someday come to know Him? Those things that Easter and Christmas represent are real, Jesus was indeed born and He was crucified and rose from the dead and those truths my friend is where the biblical warrant comes from.