Apologetics may be simply defined as the defense of the Christian faith. The word "apologetics" derives from the Greek word apologia, which was originally used as a speech of defense.

Why do protestants have a beef with Mary?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    Originally posted by William View Post
    Reopening the thread, the problem "child" has been removed from Christforums.



    This is what actually sent me over the top. Nobody calls me Bill or Billy, but Mama. Seriously, I only have encountered Catholics calling me another name in order to demean while in debate.

    I'd rather continue in discussion by keeping threads open rather than closing them due to one antagonist.

    God bless,
    William
    Right on, William. How've you been, man? We Confessional Lutherans have a high regard for the blessed Virgin Mary, but we certainly do not pray to her, nor do we acknowledge the invocation of those the Romanists regard as " saints" ( those who have been redeemed in Christ are all saints and sinners at once and the life of a Christian rightly ought to be one of repentance). Here's a link to the history of Mariology 502 Bad Gateway and its modification by the time of the Reformation.
    Comment>

    • #92
      Originally posted by ConfessionalLutheran View Post
      Right on, William. How've you been, man?
      Been good, glad to see you are still around. You have been missed!

      God bless,
      William
      Comment>

      • #93
        Originally posted by William View Post

        Been good, glad to see you are still around. You have been missed!

        God bless,
        William
        Thanks, William! Sorry about that. I got wrapped up in more recent months with debating Romanists on diverse forums ( aahh, Facebook!) and working on odd projects here and there, but it's definitely a joy to be back! God has been very good to me, all told. I'm glad that things over here are still running smoothly!

        Peace be with you.
        Andrew
        Last edited by ConfessionalLutheran; 08-11-2017, 11:49 AM.
        Comment>

        • #94
          Just curious, why is it Ok to use the term Romanist, if it is considered derogatory, or disparaging by the Catholic church. Why use it then?
          Comment>

          • #95
            Originally posted by Guppy View Post
            Just curious, why is it Ok to use the term Romanist, if it is considered derogatory, or disparaging by the Catholic church. Why use it then?
            One reason is that there are other groups who consider themselves quite as Catholic as the people who follow the decrees of the Vatican, except we don't offer our allegiance to the Bishop of Rome ( hence the term " Romanist"). Also, respect has to go both ways. We ( Confessional Lutherans) take exception to being called " heretics," although that is a term that a lot of RCs like to throw around in dialogue. Many of my compatriots use the term " papists," which doesn't sound overly civil, so I generally won't use the term.
            Comment>

            • #96
              Originally posted by ConfessionalLutheran View Post
              One reason is that there are other groups who consider themselves quite as Catholic as the people who follow the decrees of the Vatican, except we don't offer our allegiance to the Bishop of Rome ( hence the term " Romanist"). Also, respect has to go both ways. We ( Confessional Lutherans) take exception to being called " heretics," although that is a term that a lot of RCs like to throw around in dialogue. Many of my compatriots use the term " papists," which doesn't sound overly civil, so I generally won't use the term.
              We all know, what someone's beliefs are when they say they are Catholic and when someone says they are Lutheran. I hear the term Romanist quite often on forums and it is always meant to be derogatory. When was the last time you were called an heretic from a Catholic.
              What ever we call ourselves, we are Christians first. Why are you throwing stones?
              Comment>

              • #97
                Originally posted by Guppy View Post

                We all know, what someone's beliefs are when they say they are Catholic and when someone says they are Lutheran. I hear the term Romanist quite often on forums and it is always meant to be derogatory. When was the last time you were called an heretic from a Catholic.
                What ever we call ourselves, we are Christians first. Why are you throwing stones?
                Christian, Romanist, Lutheran, and Calvinist were all meant to be derogatory terms. Generally, when I think of Romanist I think of a separate Catholic body other than the 20+ rites that exists. More or less I'm thinking of a state run religion.

                God bless,
                William
                Comment>

                • #98
                  But if Catholics are offended are we right to use it?
                  Comment>

                  • #99
                    Originally posted by Guppy View Post
                    But if Catholics are offended are we right to use it?
                    G'day Guppy,

                    I suggest they turn the other cheek or proceed to a designated safe space. In all seriousness, I'm not one into political correctness. Lutherans called us Calvinist because we followed the doctrines of Calvin when evangelizing. In context they said, "those blasted Calvinist". I initially took offense when someone referred to me as following Calvin. Though it is not something I take personally anymore, and actually, I have learned to take it as something other than what people convey. I do not follow Calvin, but I believe his way of presenting the essentials of the doctrine are the best way to convey the Gospel. My point is, many today use it as something derogatory.

                    Christian was meant to be derogatory too, but how they responded in action to such a derogatory term set the example for our use today. I do not know any believer that is offended by the name Christian today.

                    If they do not like Romanist, they certainly are not going to like what the early Reformers referred to the popes as.

                    Just my opinion.

                    God bless,
                    William
                    Comment>

                    • Originally posted by ConfessionalLutheran View Post

                      One reason is that there are other groups who consider themselves quite as Catholic as the people who follow the decrees of the Vatican, except we don't offer our allegiance to the Bishop of Rome ( hence the term " Romanist"). Also, respect has to go both ways. We ( Confessional Lutherans) take exception to being called " heretics," although that is a term that a lot of RCs like to throw around in dialogue. Many of my compatriots use the term " papists," which doesn't sound overly civil, so I generally won't use the term.
                      Learn something every day.

                      Just curious, Luther called the office of pope anti-Christ. Where do the Lutherans stand today?

                      Westminster Confession of Faith

                      Chapter XXV
                      I. The catholic or universal Church, which is invisible, consists of the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness of Him that fills all in all.
                      II. The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the Gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion; and of their children: and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.
                      III. Unto this catholic visible Church Christ has given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the saints, in this life, to the end of the world: and does, by His own presence and Spirit, according to His promise, make them effectual thereunto.
                      IV. This catholic Church has been sometimes more, sometimes less visible. And particular Churches, which are members thereof, are more or less pure, according as the doctrine of the Gospel is taught and embraced, ordinances administered, and public worship performed more or less purely in them.
                      V. The purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error; and some have so degenerated, as to become no Churches of Christ, but synagogues of Satan. Nevertheless, there shall be always a Church on earth to worship God according to His will.
                      VI. There is no other head of the Church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Nor can the Pope of Rome, in any sense, be head thereof; but is that Antichrist, that man of sin, and son of perdition, that exalts himself, in the Church, against Christ and all that is called God.

                      God bless,
                      William
                      Comment>

                      • The office of the papacy is still regarded as Anti- Christ. Because the Confessions are based on Scriptures, we still hold them very seriously.Part II, Article IV: Of the Papacy.

                        That the Pope is not, according to divine law or according to the Word of God the head of all Christendom (for this [name] belongs to One only, whose name is Jesus Christ), but is only the bishop and pastor of the Church at Rome, and of those who voluntarily or through a human creature (that is, a political magistrate) have attached themselves to him, to be Christians, not under him as a lord, but with him as brethren [colleagues] and comrades, as the ancient councils and the age of St. Cyprian show.

                        But to-day none of the bishops dare to address the Pope as brother as was done at that time [in the age of Cyprian]; but they must call him most gracious lord, even though they be kings or emperors. This [Such arrogance] we will not, cannot, must not take upon our conscience [with a good conscience approve]. Let him, however, who will do it, do so without us [at his own risk].

                        Hence it follows that all things which the Pope, from a power so false, mischievous, blasphemous, and arrogant, has done and undertaken. have been and still are purely diabolical affairs and transactions (with the exception of such things as pertain to the secular government, where God often permits much good to be effected for a people, even through a tyrant and [faithless] scoundrel) for the ruin of the entire holy [catholic or] Christian Church (so far as it is in his power) and for the destruction of the first and chief article concerning the redemption made through Jesus Christ.

                        For all his bulls and books are extant, in which he roars like a lion (as the angel in Rev. 12 depicts him, [crying out] that no Christian can be saved unless he obeys him and is subject to him in all things that he wishes, that he says, and that he does. All of which amounts to nothing less than saying: Although you believe in Christ, and have in Him [alone] everything that is necessary to salvation, yet it is nothing and all in vain unless you regard [have and worship] me as your god, and be subject and obedient to me. And yet it is manifest that the holy Church has been without the Pope for at least more than five hundred years, and that even to the present day the churches of the Greeks and of many other languages neither have been nor are yet under the Pope. Besides, as often remarked, it is a human figment which is not commanded, and is unnecessary and useless; for the holy Christian [or catholic] Church can exist very well without such a head, and it would certainly have remained better [purer, and its career would have been more prosperous] if such a head had not been raised up by the devil. And the Papacy is also of no use in the Church, because it exercises no Christian office; and therefore it is necessary for the Church to continue and to exist without the Pope.

                        And supposing that the Pope would yield this point, so as not to be supreme by divine right or from God's command, but that we must have [there must be elected] a [certain] head, to whom all the rest adhere [as their support] in order that the [concord and] unity of Christians may be preserved against sects and heretics, and that such a head were chosen by men, and that it were placed within the choice and power of men to change or remove this head, just as the Council of Constance adopted nearly this course with reference to the Popes, deposing three and electing a fourth; supposing, I say, that the Pope and See at Rome would yield and accept this (which, nevertheless, is impossible; for thus he would have to suffer his entire realm and estate to be overthrown and destroyed, with all his rights and books, a thing which, to speak in few words, he cannot do), nevertheless, even in this way Christianity would not be helped, but many more sects would arise than before.

                        For since men would have to be subject to this head, not from God's command, but from their personal good pleasure, it would easily and in a short time be despised, and at last retain no member; neither would it have to be forever confined to Rome or any other place, but it might be wherever and in whatever church God would grant a man fit for the [taking upon him such a great] office. Oh, the complicated and confused state of affairs [perplexity] that would result!

                        Therefore the Church can never be better governed and preserved than if we all live under one head, Christ, and all the bishops equal in office (although they be unequal in gifts), be diligently joined in unity of doctrine, faith, Sacraments, prayer, and works of love, etc., as St. Jerome writes that the priests at Alexandria together and in common governed the churches, as did also the apostles, and afterwards all bishops throughout all Christendom, until the Pope raised his head above all.

                        This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. This is, properly speaking to exalt himself above all that is called God as Paul says, 2 Thess. 2:4. Even the Turks or the Tartars, great enemies of Christians as they are, do not do this, but they allow whoever wishes to believe in Christ, and take bodily tribute and obedience from Christians.

                        The Pope, however, prohibits this faith, saying that to be saved a person must obey him. This we are unwilling to do, even though on this account we must die in God s name. This all proceeds from the fact that the Pope has wished to be called the supreme head of the Christian Church by divine right. Accordingly he had to make himself equal and superior to Christ, and had to cause himself to be proclaimed the head and then the lord of the Church, and finally of the whole world, and simply God on earth, until he has dared to issue commands even to the angels in heaven. And when we distinguish the Pope's teaching from, or measure and hold it against, Holy Scripture, it is found [it appears plainly] that the Pope's teaching, where it is best, has been taken from the imperial and heathen law, and treats of political matters and decisions or rights, as the Decretals show; furthermore, it teaches of ceremonies concerning churches, garments, food, persons and [similar] puerile, theatrical and comical things without measure, but in all these things nothing at all of Christ, faith, and the commandments of God. Lastly, it is nothing else than the devil himself, because above and against God he urges [and disseminates] his [papal] falsehoods concerning masses, purgatory, the monastic life, one's own works and [fictitious] divine worship (for this is the very Papacy [upon each of which the Papacy is altogether founded and is standing]), and condemns, murders and tortures all Christians who do not exalt and honor these abominations [of the Pope] above all things. Therefore, just as little as we can worship the devil himself as Lord and God, we can endure his apostle, the Pope, or Antichrist, in his rule as head or lord. For to lie and to kill, and to destroy body and soul eternally, that is wherein his papal government really consists, as I have very clearly shown in many books.

                        In these four articles they will have enough to condemn in the Council. For they cannot and will not concede us even the least point in one of these articles. Of this we should be certain, and animate ourselves with [be forewarned and made firm in] the hope that Christ, our Lord, has attacked His adversary, and he will press the attack home [pursue and destroy him] both by His Spirit and coming. Amen.

                        For in the Council we will stand not before the Emperor or the political magistrate, as at Augsburg (where the Emperor published a most gracious edict, and caused matters to be heard kindly [and dispassionately]), but [we will appear] before the Pope and devil himself, who intends to listen to nothing, but merely [when the case has been publicly announced] to condemn, to murder and to force us to idolatry. Therefore we ought not here to kiss his feet, or to say: "Thou art my gracious lord", but as the angel in said to Satan: The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan.- Smalcald Articles - Book of Concord
                        Comment>

                        • Reading it now. Because the content was copied from a source which has lots of links as you can see, the spam guard was set off. That's why the post needed approval. In the future use the advanced editor by clicking A right above the input text field. Then click the T icon for Text Editor. Post your content in there and it will strip the links.

                          I'm going to clean up your post. Don't worry about it

                          God bless,
                          William
                          Comment>

                          • Originally posted by Guppy View Post

                            We all know, what someone's beliefs are when they say they are Catholic and when someone says they are Lutheran. I hear the term Romanist quite often on forums and it is always meant to be derogatory. When was the last time you were called an heretic from a Catholic.
                            What ever we call ourselves, we are Christians first. Why are you throwing stones?
                            A very angry Catholic called me a heretic before banning me from his site last month. I tried to approach him in a spirit of fellowship and comradery.. to emphasize all that the RCC and the LCMS had in common theologically and liturgically. Then he went into the whole " join Mother Church or thou shalt be damned" mode, I tried to offer things from a Protestant POV and got banned. That is ONE instance. It is what it all seems to boil down to with them.. either convert and join our club or fry in Hell.
                            Comment>

                            • Originally posted by William View Post
                              Reading it now. Because the content was copied from a source which has lots of links as you can see, the spam guard was set off. That's why the post needed approval. In the future use the advanced editor by clicking A right above the input text field. Then click the T icon for Text Editor. Post your content in there and it will strip the links.

                              I'm going to clean up your post. Don't worry about it

                              God bless,
                              William
                              Thanks, William. Sorry about that. I have some pretty strong feelings about this topic.. I think that a lot of what Dr. Luther wrote is still relevant today.
                              Comment>

                              • Originally posted by ConfessionalLutheran View Post
                                The office of the papacy is still regarded as Anti- Christ. Because the Confessions are based on Scriptures, we still hold them very seriously.Part II, Article IV: Of the Papacy.

                                That the Pope is not, according to divine law or according to the Word of God the head of all Christendom (for this [name] belongs to One only, whose name is Jesus Christ), but is only the bishop and pastor of the Church at Rome, and of those who voluntarily or through a human creature (that is, a political magistrate) have attached themselves to him, to be Christians, not under him as a lord, but with him as brethren [colleagues] and comrades, as the ancient councils and the age of St. Cyprian show.

                                But to-day none of the bishops dare to address the Pope as brother as was done at that time [in the age of Cyprian]; but they must call him most gracious lord, even though they be kings or emperors. This [Such arrogance] we will not, cannot, must not take upon our conscience [with a good conscience approve]. Let him, however, who will do it, do so without us [at his own risk].

                                Hence it follows that all things which the Pope, from a power so false, mischievous, blasphemous, and arrogant, has done and undertaken. have been and still are purely diabolical affairs and transactions (with the exception of such things as pertain to the secular government, where God often permits much good to be effected for a people, even through a tyrant and [faithless] scoundrel) for the ruin of the entire holy [catholic or] Christian Church (so far as it is in his power) and for the destruction of the first and chief article concerning the redemption made through Jesus Christ.

                                For all his bulls and books are extant, in which he roars like a lion (as the angel in Rev. 12 depicts him, [crying out] that no Christian can be saved unless he obeys him and is subject to him in all things that he wishes, that he says, and that he does. All of which amounts to nothing less than saying: Although you believe in Christ, and have in Him [alone] everything that is necessary to salvation, yet it is nothing and all in vain unless you regard [have and worship] me as your god, and be subject and obedient to me. And yet it is manifest that the holy Church has been without the Pope for at least more than five hundred years, and that even to the present day the churches of the Greeks and of many other languages neither have been nor are yet under the Pope. Besides, as often remarked, it is a human figment which is not commanded, and is unnecessary and useless; for the holy Christian [or catholic] Church can exist very well without such a head, and it would certainly have remained better [purer, and its career would have been more prosperous] if such a head had not been raised up by the devil. And the Papacy is also of no use in the Church, because it exercises no Christian office; and therefore it is necessary for the Church to continue and to exist without the Pope.

                                And supposing that the Pope would yield this point, so as not to be supreme by divine right or from God's command, but that we must have [there must be elected] a [certain] head, to whom all the rest adhere [as their support] in order that the [concord and] unity of Christians may be preserved against sects and heretics, and that such a head were chosen by men, and that it were placed within the choice and power of men to change or remove this head, just as the Council of Constance adopted nearly this course with reference to the Popes, deposing three and electing a fourth; supposing, I say, that the Pope and See at Rome would yield and accept this (which, nevertheless, is impossible; for thus he would have to suffer his entire realm and estate to be overthrown and destroyed, with all his rights and books, a thing which, to speak in few words, he cannot do), nevertheless, even in this way Christianity would not be helped, but many more sects would arise than before.

                                For since men would have to be subject to this head, not from God's command, but from their personal good pleasure, it would easily and in a short time be despised, and at last retain no member; neither would it have to be forever confined to Rome or any other place, but it might be wherever and in whatever church God would grant a man fit for the [taking upon him such a great] office. Oh, the complicated and confused state of affairs [perplexity] that would result!

                                Therefore the Church can never be better governed and preserved than if we all live under one head, Christ, and all the bishops equal in office (although they be unequal in gifts), be diligently joined in unity of doctrine, faith, Sacraments, prayer, and works of love, etc., as St. Jerome writes that the priests at Alexandria together and in common governed the churches, as did also the apostles, and afterwards all bishops throughout all Christendom, until the Pope raised his head above all.

                                This teaching shows forcefully that the Pope is the very Antichrist, who has exalted himself above, and opposed himself against Christ because he will not permit Christians to be saved without his power, which, nevertheless, is nothing, and is neither ordained nor commanded by God. This is, properly speaking to exalt himself above all that is called God as Paul says, 2 Thess. 2:4. Even the Turks or the Tartars, great enemies of Christians as they are, do not do this, but they allow whoever wishes to believe in Christ, and take bodily tribute and obedience from Christians.

                                The Pope, however, prohibits this faith, saying that to be saved a person must obey him. This we are unwilling to do, even though on this account we must die in God s name. This all proceeds from the fact that the Pope has wished to be called the supreme head of the Christian Church by divine right. Accordingly he had to make himself equal and superior to Christ, and had to cause himself to be proclaimed the head and then the lord of the Church, and finally of the whole world, and simply God on earth, until he has dared to issue commands even to the angels in heaven. And when we distinguish the Pope's teaching from, or measure and hold it against, Holy Scripture, it is found [it appears plainly] that the Pope's teaching, where it is best, has been taken from the imperial and heathen law, and treats of political matters and decisions or rights, as the Decretals show; furthermore, it teaches of ceremonies concerning churches, garments, food, persons and [similar] puerile, theatrical and comical things without measure, but in all these things nothing at all of Christ, faith, and the commandments of God. Lastly, it is nothing else than the devil himself, because above and against God he urges [and disseminates] his [papal] falsehoods concerning masses, purgatory, the monastic life, one's own works and [fictitious] divine worship (for this is the very Papacy [upon each of which the Papacy is altogether founded and is standing]), and condemns, murders and tortures all Christians who do not exalt and honor these abominations [of the Pope] above all things. Therefore, just as little as we can worship the devil himself as Lord and God, we can endure his apostle, the Pope, or Antichrist, in his rule as head or lord. For to lie and to kill, and to destroy body and soul eternally, that is wherein his papal government really consists, as I have very clearly shown in many books.

                                In these four articles they will have enough to condemn in the Council. For they cannot and will not concede us even the least point in one of these articles. Of this we should be certain, and animate ourselves with [be forewarned and made firm in] the hope that Christ, our Lord, has attacked His adversary, and he will press the attack home [pursue and destroy him] both by His Spirit and coming. Amen.

                                For in the Council we will stand not before the Emperor or the political magistrate, as at Augsburg (where the Emperor published a most gracious edict, and caused matters to be heard kindly [and dispassionately]), but [we will appear] before the Pope and devil himself, who intends to listen to nothing, but merely [when the case has been publicly announced] to condemn, to murder and to force us to idolatry. Therefore we ought not here to kiss his feet, or to say: "Thou art my gracious lord", but as the angel in said to Satan: The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan.- Smalcald Articles - Book of Concord
                                I betcha that would make lots of Catholics red faced!

                                God bless,
                                William
                                Comment>
                                Working...
                                X
                                Articles - News - SiteMap