To the Catholics visiting the Baptist forum.

[Adonia]

If you mean present in a statue or an icon...

Don't be ridiculous. No present in the Holy Eucharist, the teaching that was passed down from the beginning. We have it and you don't. Sad for you, a joy to us!

 

[Adonia]

Sola Scriptura is quite a firm melief in MY church. We rely SOLELY ON THE BIBLE for ALL our intel about God, & Scripture is the final authority in all our matters of faith/worship. We follow NO man-made "traditions" or doctrines of faith/worship.

A false gospel if there ever was one. Brought to you by mere men some 1600 years down the line.

 

[Adonia]

First, Peter was never a bishop. Nowhere in the Bible does he ever mention being the bishop of Rome.

The Bishop's known as the Early Church Fathers disagree with you, so I will go with them on this one.

 

[Walpole]

First, Peter was never a bishop. Nowhere in the Bible does he ever mention being the bishop of Rome. In fact, Paul had a bigger influence in Rome than Peter had.
The Church at Rome is famous for its revision of history. It had the power, it could control the narrative.
My question is why you would support such an obviously corrupt organization. It's the equivalent of being a Nazi sympathizer.

Please answer my questions. You made assertions. Please support them.

 

[Walpole]

As we say, if it aint in Scripture, it aint so !

You need to rewrite your statement as follows:

"If it ain't in Scripture, it ain't so...except for this statement."

 

[MartyF]

That's a pretty big statement that I think you would have a hard time supporting. He did want people to come to Christ.

Augsburg Confession of 1530

“We condemn Anabaptists who forbid Christians to hold office,” and “We condemn Anabaptists who reject the baptizing of children, and say that children are saved without baptism.”

Condemn in this case and time means a death sentence.

However, there are many of Luther's writings at ARE profitable and you can't just automatically reject them all because some have truths to them.

A broken watch is right twice a day. That doesn't mean that it is wise to use one regardless of the situation.

 

[David Kent]

The Bishop's known as the Early Church Fathers disagree with you, so I will go with them on this one.

Eusebius said Linus was the first bishop of Rome. Ordained by Peter and Paul.

 

[MartyF]

I didn't say it was biblical. I just challenged your false narrative that Luther was an anti-semite.

I was just using the everyday definition.

Definition of ANTI-SEMITE

 

[Walpole]

Sola Scriptura is quite a firm melief in MY church. We rely SOLELY ON THE BIBLE for ALL our intel about God, & Scripture is the final authority in all our matters of faith/worship. We follow NO man-made "traditions" or doctrines of faith/worship.

"We follow NO man-made traditions or doctrines of faith/worship EXCEPT for our tradition / doctrine that we rely SOLEY ON THE BIBLE for ALL our intel about God & Scripture is the final authority in all our matters of faith/worship."

 

[Reformed1689]

Obviously you haven't bothered to actually read the work.

Actually I have. I even told you what it actually says. Not what Luther's detractors try to make it say.

If you actually decide to read that work and it doesn't convince you of his anti-semitism,

I have read it, and the work is not anti-semitic. Pieces of the work taken out of context can look anti-semitic, but not if you read the entirety of the works and, also, his previous works. I have also read Vom Schem Hamphoras and it is just an extension of the Lies piece. It is not anti-semitic. It is against the religion of the Jews, not the race of the Jews. Big difference.

 

[Reformed1689]

I was just using the everyday definition.

Definition of ANTI-SEMITE

That definition is Jews as a race, not Jews as religion.

 

[Reformed1689]

"We follow NO man-made traditions or doctrines of faith/worship EXCEPT for our tradition / doctrine that we rely SOLEY ON THE BIBLE for ALL our intel about God & Scripture is the final authority in all our matters of faith/worship."

You are repeating a flat out lie.

 

[MartyF]

You need to rewrite your statement as follows:

"If it ain't in Scripture, it ain't so...except for this statement."

2 Timothy 3:14-17 NLT
But you must remain faithful to the things you have been taught. You know they are true, for you know you can trust those who taught you. [15] You have been taught the holy Scriptures from childhood, and they have given you the wisdom to receive the salvation that comes by trusting in Christ Jesus. [16] All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful to teach us what is true and to make us realize what is wrong in our lives. It corrects us when we are wrong and teaches us to do what is right. [17] God uses it to prepare and equip his people to do every good work.

 

[Reformed1689]

First, Peter was never a bishop. Nowhere in the Bible does he ever mention being the bishop of Rome. In fact, Paul had a bigger influence in Rome than Peter had.
The Church at Rome is famous for its revision of history. It had the power, it could control the narrative.
My question is why you would support such an obviously corrupt organization. It's the equivalent of being a Nazi sympathizer.

It's actually likely Peter never even made it to Rome.

 

[MartyF]

That definition is Jews as a race, not Jews as religion.

ok. I'll completely withdraw the anti-semite comment.

 

[Reformed1689]

Augsburg Confession of 1530

“We condemn Anabaptists who forbid Christians to hold office,” and “We condemn Anabaptists who reject the baptizing of children, and say that children are saved without baptism.”

Condemn in this case and time means a death sentence.

None of which shows your assertion that he did not want people to come to Christ.

A broken watch is right twice a day. That doesn't mean that it is wise to use one regardless of the situation.

And I guess we shouldn't read any of Paul's letters then considering the things he did.

 

[Adonia]

Eusebius said Linus was the first bishop of Rome. Ordained by Peter and Paul.

And the only way Linus could be ordained was by - another Bishop. Sounds to me like Peter and Paul could also be considered Bishop's.

 

[MartyF]

It's actually likely Peter never even made it to Rome.

It matter how you interpret Babylon in 1 Peter 5:13.

He was in a major city, whether that be Rome, Jerusalem, or actually Babylon is possible.

I think Peter stayed in Jerusalem since that is what Paul says and Paul never mentions the Peter in Rome.

 

[MartyF]

None of which shows your assertion that he did not want people to come to Christ.

Sorry, but if you're murdering people for coming to Christ and obeying him by being Baptized, then you don't want people to come to Christ.

And I guess we shouldn't read any of Paul's letters then considering the things he did.

I can name most of the books Luther got wrong.

Name one of the Letters Paul got wrong after his conversion.

 

[Walpole]

Actually I have. I even told you what it actually says. Not what Luther's detractors try to make it say.

I have read it, and the work is not anti-semitic. Pieces of the work taken out of context can look anti-semitic, but not if you read the entirety of the works and, also, his previous works. I have also read Vom Schem Hamphoras and it is just an extension of the Lies piece. It is not anti-semitic. It is against the religion of the Jews, not the race of the Jews. Big difference.

Sure you've read them...wink, wink.