Is the doctrine of Sola Scriptura really a reflection of Luther's egotism?
547536
I think in what i have read about luther sola scriptura seemed in his eyes to be the correct and just way to not only reach God, but to bring more people to him. It is not like Luther woke up one day and said Forget Catholism, in fact luther does not out and out give up on everything the Church believes in (Transubstantiation being evidence). I think Luther wanted to work within the Catholic Church, but much like many other people throughout history, he could not reconcile his beliefs with the beliefs of the system he was apart of. \n\nI agree there were risks, but i think he had mostly good intentions. He saw a church that he believed needed to change and he went about making the changes he thought were necesary. Of course he certainly wasnt the only one doing so and much like the others, he expeirences some mixed results. \n\nAbout Luthers hatred of Jews....it is easy to look now and say well the man is clearly out of his mind as evidence from the Jew-bashing. However to discredit the ideas simply because the man is flawed is perhaps overstepping ones bounds. Also i think its important to remember this is a societal opinion by much of the Catholic Church at this point in their history so it is not like he deviates incredibly far from the norm. \n\nLast rant i promise...the whole idea of discrediting of discrediting the church because of the indulgence thing....everyone gets the idea. Catholism has accepted for a while that it was a big no-no and i dont think we really need to judge the current Church on that fallacy.
562877
The "church" as an institution I think has really used spirituality to hype the political agenda of it's rulers (witness the Inquisition). But the confirmation of rules that really help a society work (don't steal, murder, cop another person's spouse or property) I think would be something that a "God" would be all in favor of.  I think that there are God ordained humans whose life's work is to remind those of a lesser spiritual bent that "to treat others as you would be treated" is the ideal.  These people SHOULD be "the church" but like you say there are those who for milllineums have used the claim that they have a "direct line to God" to control whole populations.  I figure if there IS a God, and He created me, why wouldn't He care what happens to me and if I am living a worthwhile life or not. I'm not sure about a heaven or hell type of judgement, but once again, if there IS a God/Creator then I figure he cares if I am a hurter or a helper and when I go back to Him He will care about an accounting that I have for my actions while I passed through his Creation.
825547
"The age of martyrs also produced a great number of writers who wrote about Christianity and what they believe in order to dispel some of the myths about Christians (some said they were cannibals because they ate the “body and blood”) These writers became known as “The Apologists” and they were able to help clarify Christian theology to the pagans, leaving us with some of the greatest explanations of the Christian faith."\n\n\nWhat you teacher tells you is true.  Christians were deemed to be cannibals because of the whole blood host thing with communion and they were martyred by mass murders.\n\nThis is an important lesson in not taking the time to really learn about something and just assuming that rumors are true - like what you hear on TV - \n\nBig spin off in the Catholic religion when King Henry VIII of England wanted to divorce his wife and the Pope said NO.  So, Henry got out of the Catholic religion, made himself the King of Religion in his country and tried to make all the Catholics in England convert to the Church of England - a lot of people were murdered for not changing over as it was deemed treacherous not to obey Henry.\n\nThe irony of the whole protestant England thing was that in Germany a monk name Martin Luther was trying to lead reforms in the Catholic Church too.\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther\n\nIt is a strange thing that ofter two or more people will arrive at the same idea in different ways by different methods but almost simultaneously\n\nNow we have Protestants because a man wanted a divorce - which would have been better because Henry usually cut off their heads after that and his first wife was, in a way lucky to have got away with her head.\n\nYou have a very good teacher
535985
Any theologian should be wary of a doctrine that:\n!. Denies the existance of God.\n2. advocates theft and murder.\n\nCommunism is merely a theory.  It promises a panacea in which everyone is equal yet has always produced a totalitarian state in which most individual rights are not recognized and the vast majority of the people live in abject poverty when the party leaders wallow in wealth.
779934
No.  The whole concept of "vicarious atonement" was invented purely to subjugate and control the masses. \n\n"All your righteousness is as filthy rags."  This is the sort of amoral callousness that passes for "morality" amongst the "pious."\n\nIt's quite a racket though - I'll give them that.  Concepts like "Original Sin" and the salvationist theology of christianity provide a nice system of threats and rewards with which the powers-that-be can exploit the ignorant peasants, and the peasants themselves feel vindicated by the idea that their oppression in this life is securing them a good seat in the Afterlife.
918941
In Protestant (liberal) theology there are several "middle grounds."  There is the notion that the Bible "contains God's word" and also that is can "become God's words."  These are of course nuanced meanings of how Scripture communicates God's message through a supposedly imperfect text.
461593
Yes.\n\nYes, or well, our soul does, not our ego :)\n\nFor Christian references, see:\n\nGospel of John, Chapter 9, 1-3.\n\n(IMO, the disciples ask a question related to the working out of karma and rebirth. It has nothing to do with oroginal sin (why ask the question, if that was the answer?) or with other teachings of the day (why ask Christ in such a specific way? It must relate to a conversation they had earlier with the Christ). We are told several times in the Bible, that the disciples are given teachings, that the common crowd is not yet ready for (their ears haven't yet "opened", their souls are asleep).)
603966
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/95_Theses\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther
401241
I found the presentation on NGC interesting. While the jury is out on the authenticity of the document, it does present a different perspective held by Christians of the time. Diversity in beliefs and expressions is nothing new to the Church, and we should be open to new ideas based upon new information coming to light.\n\nThe idea of Judas acting on behalf of Jesus is also nothing new, and has been present throughout Christian history.\n\nNew ideas do not threaten my beliefs or weaken my faith.
1007757
I AM NOT DEFENDING SOLA SCRIPTURA, BUT I HAD TO COMMENT ON THIS.\n\nJesus taught by saying (preaching) and doing. He did not write to the people (except what he wrote in the sand).\n\nSacred Scripture (the Bible) tells us that not everything that Jesus did (and said) is recorded in Sacred Scripture.\n\nJohn 21:25 \nThere are also many other things that Jesus did, but if these were to be described individually, I do not think the whole world would contain the books that would be written.\n\nSo SOME of what Jesus said and did was passed on to us in writing. This is the New Testament portion of Sacred Scripture.\n\nThe "other things that Jesus did" and said has also been preserved for us.  This is what the Catholic Church calls Sacred Tradition.\n\nWhen people claim Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone) they choose to ignore "the other things that Jesus did" and said.\n\nThrough Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition, the Catholic Church makes available EVERYTHING that Jesus revealed to us.\n\nAND THAT is why "Both Scripture and Tradition must be accepted and honored with equal sentiments of devotion and reverence"\n\nI pray that you allow the Holy Spirit to Guide you to the Fullness of Truth.
1057677
Ugggh, homework? It's summer soltice!  Give us a break!  \nI take issue with this article's assumptions, which are very general.  First the author makes the statement that Christianity's two prime articles of faith are "revelation and Crucifixion."  There are major divisions amongst Christianity itself on the person of Jesus Christ, the saving nature of his life, death, resurrection, teachings. And the question of whether or not he is the definitive and only saviour for all people of all times, is not universally agreed on by all Christians.  \nThe role of the Crucifixion is also not understood uniformly across the board by all Christians.  The question has long been asked and debated, "how is Jesus' death and crucifixion redemptive?" Is it? Redemption, atonement, sacrifice, are all traditional understandings, but theology has always had several understandings of and interpretations of soteriology, and Christology.\nInterestingly enough the earliest Christian art showed nothing of the crucifixion...\nBut I'm off the hook since your author inists that "no man" this and "no man" that...
1039113
From one professor to another :), That he "walks with God" and takes his cues directly from the almighty, assuming of course if one believes in him/her. This is the kind of Neanderthal thinking that, in my opinion, exemplifies why church and state should ALWAYS be separate. Is that illogical enough for you?
28621
I think that Pope Benedict is in support of this movement in general, though he, like others in the Catholic hierarchy, has some concerns about it. He seems to support the movement, but reminds members to stay connected to the whole Church.  The quotation below is from before he was elected Pope.\n\n\n\n\n \nFor his part, Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, has added his voice to the Pope's in acknowledging the good occurring in the Charismatic Renewal and providing some cautions. In a forward to a book by Cardinal Suenens, at that time the Pope's delegate to the Charismatic Renewal, the Prefect comments on the Post-Conciliar period stating,\n\n"At the heart of a world imbued with a rationalistic skepticism, a new experience of the Holy Spirit suddenly burst forth. And, since then, that experience has assumed a breadth of a worldwide Renewal movement. What the New Testament tells us about the charisms - which were seen as visible signs of the coming of the Spirit - is not just ancient history, over and done with, for it is once again becoming extremely topical."\n\nSpeaking of the book's subject, renewal and the powers of darkness, he says,\n\n"What is the relation between personal experience and the common faith of the Church? Both factors are important: a dogmatic faith unsupported by personal experience remains empty; mere personal experience unrelated to the faith of the Church remains blind."\n\nFinally, he urges those who read the book to pay special attention to the author's double plea,\n\n"... to those responsible for the ecclesiastical ministry - from parish priests to bishops - not to let the Renewal pass them by but to welcome it fully; and on the other (hand) ... to the members of the Renewal to cherish and maintain their link with the whole Church and with the charisms of their pastors. "[Renewal and the Powers of Darkness, Leo Cardinal Suenens (Ann Arbor: Servant Books, 1983)]
902449
No. I can't. \n\nI have to base my judgements on what I read in the bible and how I interpret it. \n\nI DO believe (for certain) one thing: \n\nGod loves us (ALL) therefore, once we accept that: \n\nWe have to love ourselves\n\nThen we have to love others as we love ourselves\n\nTHAT pretty much wraps it up.\n \nIf we treat others, regardless of whether we like them or not, how we want to be treated, if we love ourselves, odds are we'll do the right thing. \n\nThe rest is just semantics.
482
Oftentimes, we mean "An organized, militant Evangelical movement originating in the United States in the late 19th and early 20th century in opposition to Protestant Liberalism and secularism, insisting on the inerrancy of Scripture." \n\nBut the concept of fundamentalism can be extended to any ideology or theology whose tenents include a strict adherance to a code, especially one which demands the observance by persons who do not subscribe to that code.\n\nNaturally, this makes for a source of conflict. And an understandable one at that. For example, say you believe some act is wrong. Furthermore, you believe you have a duty to prevent wrongdoing altogether. Consequently, you have a moral obligation to prevent any person from doing that act - including people who do not think that act is wrong.\n\nAny critical examination of a dogmatic theology or ideology will reveal how necessary this is, yet any objective look at disparate cultures will reveal how subjective - and frightening - this can be.\n\nThe hope of the future is that fundamentalist evangelism will be enacted by appeal to reason rather than dictates of law. Ideally, people would choose to perform 'right' acts for their own sake, rather than out of fear of punishment.
367376
I agree with Maimonides, who basically also sees eye to eye with classical (i.e. pre-evangelical fundamentalist) Christian theology: the same views were essentially held by St. Ambrose and St. Augustine in the 4th century.
1123807
In a time when defense of the Gospel meant closing down any errant viewpoints, Luther was just another heretic.\n\nIt also wasn't a good year to rebel against authority. That Luther survived his rejection of the Catholic Church is a testament either to his strength or the church's restraint.