Name one thing Martin Luther was wrong about

Apostolic Succession

Marrying a nun

Sola scriptura

>thinking you can get out of work that easily

gibs me dat salvayshun massa!

>that spoiler text
You're not serious

Salvation does come only from the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, but faith without works is completely meaningless and trivializes the very sacrifice itself. Jesus Christ gave us the ability to be saved, but we still have to earn it ourselves.

>Salvation does come only from the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross, but faith without works is completely meaningless and trivializes the very sacrifice itself.
Quite the opposite. The sacrifice is so important because we ourselves are never without sin no matter how hard we try. We are all sinners.

>Jesus Christ gave us the ability to be saved, but we still have to earn it ourselves.
The very idea of salvation being able to be earned is an affront to Christ's sacrifice and a trivialisation of God's mercy and forgiveness.

Wasn't hardcore enough.

Forgot image.

Incorrect, man is naturally inclined to sin and born in original sin, but is capable of not sinning. The grace of God can be given to those to cleanse them of their sins on Earth through the sacraments that Christ gave to his Apostles that continue on today through the priesthood.

While I don't disagree that God has the capacity to forgive our sins, I do not see how claiming that man must at least try to do good is trivializing that same mercy. I personally struggle to believe that if hell is truly like what is described in say Dante, there could be any sinner who deserved that for eternity. So either hell is empty or it is different than how it is popularly viewed, i.e. is more of a state of being totally disconnected from God rather than physical torture, but I digress.

Tell me, then, of your dogma, what happens to those without faith who live good lives. Do they suffer hell for all eternity despite the fact they followed the message of Jesus Christ in actions rather than thoughts?

god existing

>I do not see how claiming that man must at least try to do good is trivializing that same mercy.
Man must try to do good of course, but not because it will earn him salvation points. If anything, good deeds having influence on one's salvation would make doing those good deeds less moral because of an element of self-interest.

>Tell me, then, of your dogma, what happens to those without faith who live good lives. Do they suffer hell for all eternity despite the fact they followed the message of Jesus Christ in actions rather than thoughts?
I don't believe people are capable of good lives.

>people actually think they don't have to take up their own cross to follow Jesus

god didn't restore his senses after being stuck by lightning.

Well, this must be the fundamental divergence in our belief system. God would not create man if man did not have the capacity to be good. In fact, one of God's greatest gifts to man was our free will so that we could choose to be good.

God created man before the fall, not in the state of sin.

True, but the stain of Original Sin can be cleansed through the sacrament of Baptism. Any other sins can be forgiven through sincere understanding and regret, the sacrament of Confession and the completion of penance.

Therefore, though man may be born into sin, he can exist outside of the state of sin.

“’Silence, you heretic! What comes out of our mouth must be kept!’ I hear it—which mouth do you mean? The one from which the farts come? (You can keep that yourself!) Or the one into which the good Corsican wine flows? (Let a clog shit into that!)” (Martin Luther, Luther’s Works, Vol. 41: 281)

Black people are defined by the blackness more now than anytime since slavery by both the right and left. It's a shame he's been disowned by the SJWs, they could learn a lot from him

Actually just finished Luther: Man between god and the devil
Has anyone else read this

Martin Luther also opposed the peasants rioting and demanding fairness in their shitty lives

This

Anabaptists were the best thing to come out of the protty revolution.

books of Hebrews, Jude, Revelations not being canon

Commie detected

he earnestly believed that nailing his want list to the church door would change things for the better.

but it did.......

Wrong about Apostolic Succession

Wrong about the Sacraments

Wrong about nearly everything

this right here

cant side with caesar when shit hits the fan

wow!

>hates the Church telling him what to do
>tells the peasants what to do when they start to take his ideas and apply them more broadly

wew

What do you guys mean by works? Prayer?

Veeky Forums is a Catholic board REEEEEEEE

Seriously though.
>be Protestant
>"I don't suppose one schism will harm the faith of literally an entire continent"
>many schisms
>oh fug
>Protestants abandon traditions of Mother Church
>literally making up shit as they go along
>anyone can start a church
>everyone does
>civil wars
>state churches just as if not more corrupt than central Roman church
>powerful men buddy up to top clergy
>everything is going great for everyone but Kierkegaard
>muh Protestant work ethic
>things are great, what could possibly go wrong
>societal elites become detached and corrupt
>Mainline Protestant churches, which exist to serve the whims of the powerful, adapt themselves to said whims
>married lesbian bishops blessing abortion clinics
>oh fug
>by 21st century the only conservative Protestant services are held in storefronts in the ghetto
>"Tyrone Darjeelius's Zion Trinity Church of Judah"
>mfw

Generally speaking, "works" simply means a transformative faith that leads to action. In other words, it's not enough to say "I believe in Jesus Christ." You must truly believe in him, and as a direct result of that belief your behavior will change. That's what works are in the Catholic context.

Luther did not understand this when he was first reading James, because Luther was a bit of a moron. That's why he misunderstands Aquinas, for example.

>Tyrone Darjeelius's Zion Trinity Church of Judah
dont hurt me like this

Tell me more about Luthor. Why was he a moron?

I mean on one hand from what I know is Luthor got more people into actually learning to read no?

daily reminder Christianity's schisms began at Nicaea

daily reminder that millions of literate artisan class protestants got genocided by dumb poor illiterate angry papist peasants for not gibs mone fo fundin dem programs and Europe's intellectual and manufacturing potential didn't recover until the genocides stopped

daily reminder Protestant guild unions and secret societies got their revenge by wrecking Europe with the French Revolution

daily reminder that American Protestantism is the only reason Christianity remains relevant and Catholicism is basically a wing of the New World Order

Daily reminder that history is not black and white, good vs bad.

American Protestantism is a lockstep tool of global capitalism and the atheism it generates.

Luthor tried to get Batman to fight Superman but failed. This thread is about LuthEr

Well, unless you're a Christian. Christ is definitely a "good guy" in history. Perhaps the only one there ever was.

>muh Lucretius
>muh Spinoza
>muh Deleuze
>"nothing means anything, just melt your atoms into the atoms of the world brah"
>good luck with that f a m.

this desu

He was right about catholics being shit tier but wrong about the pagan religion of christianity being redeemable tier.

>this triggers the protestant

>the image of the mother of christ, 2.99 wallet size, $4.99 small, $19.99 framed, every gift shop ever

Fuck Martin Luther, he was possessed by the devil.

I unironically agree with this, Germans caused pretty much every bad thing to ever happen in history back to the Fall of the Roman Empire

>When Joseph awoke from sleep, he did as the angel of the Lord commanded him; he took her as his wife,but had no marital relations with her until she had borne a son; and he named him Jesus.
>until

LOL @ sola scriptura fag over here.

"Enough of those superstitious Catholics, now let's take these 1,500-year-old texts (aggressively vetted and canonized by the Actual Church btw, but that doesn't pertain particularly to this argument) and parse them autistically for their literal meaning, assuming that they were not the divinely inspired work of men but the actual word of God like that brought down to the intellectual and humanitarian prophet Mahomet (the first Protestant tbqh).

>arguing semantics in a book that has been translated through 30,000 languages to get here
>protestants

uhh... there being a god

>assuming that they were not the divinely inspired work of men but the actual word of God

Actually, I think don't think either, I just think the "perpetual virginity" was a legend that developed later on.

>what happens to those without faith who live good lives. Do they suffer hell for all eternity despite the fact they followed the message of Jesus Christ in actions rather than thoughts?

Curious on this. I'm a relatively neutral agnostic and I was raised Christian. I've been told I live and act Christian. Back when I was on social media I would post Christian motivation stuff not because I identify as a Christian but because I liked the moral teachings of Jesus. I veiw Jesus as being the most perfect human to exist. But the idea of a personal deity doesn't appeal or seem realistic to me. The idea of an all powerful creator caring about me realing doesn't get to me. I've worked with churches before for volunteer work and most of the people I work with often think I'm Christian based on my actions. I normally just say it's how I was raised and how I've applied Christian moral principles to an agnostic lifestyle.

I've started resding Inferno and I found myself identify with the virtuous pagans. While not fully claiming belief in god they lived good lives relatively or almost free of sin. I felt a connection with them. Their status in the afterlife doesn't seem bad especially considering the power of god and what he could do to them.

If their is a loving personal god I trust that it will grant me a nice afterlife. It doesn't have to be heaven. Even if it is simply nothingness and a state of nonexistance I would find peace in lnowing my creator gave me a merciful afterlife.

Any Christian thoughts on this?

Ok that's nice that you think that, but you're literally arguing with the people who knew Mary personally.

>literally arguing with the people who knew Mary personally.

And who would that be? There's no evidence that the gospels were eyewitness accounts, and Paul never even met Jesus, save for his "vision".

I find it interesting that Paul seems to have more of an influence on Catholicism than Jesus. Jesus says divorce is OK in cases of adultery, but Paul says it's never OK. Guess who the Church listens to?

In Catholicism, it is typically taught that if you die in the state of a mortal sin (i.e. outside the grace of God) you cannot enter heaven, and unfortunately Original Sin counts as well.

However, we also have the teaching of Baptism of Desire. This is the official dogma that states that men who lived their lives outside the faith but lived in the footsteps of Christ are basically baptized as they die and are able to enter heaven.

We also believe that God is merciful. Even if you mess up, commit a mortal sin, and never go to confession, God will credit you if you truly regret it and make an effort not to sin again. Catholics never (or at least are supposed to never) claim anyone is in Hell. We have a system for proving that people are in heaven (the order of saints), but we don't claim to know who God damns to hell. Also, Hell is very likely much different than what you read in Dante (not that Inferno isn't great), it's, in my mind, much more akin to The Great Divorce by C.S. Lewis.

Anyway, sorry for being longwinded, but I fully believe that even if you don't make it back to the faith, and I hope you do, but I understand if you don't, that you will be able to enter heaven just like the rest of us. In fact, even though I don't know you, from what I've gathered, I'll wager you're gonna make it.

>This is the official dogma that states that men who lived their lives outside the faith but lived in the footsteps of Christ are basically baptized as they die and are able to enter heaven.
What about aborted/miscarried babies that never got a chance to follow those footsteps? Do they just get a free pass? Or are they fucked? Either way doesn't seem very fair.

>muh Paul argument

And now I know you've never actually studied Catholicism

A lot of people make the mistake of thinking that if something is not in the gospels that the belief is rooted in Paul. However, this is simply not the case, and is caused by the protestant dogma of sola scriptura. In Catholic teaching, we have two pillars: sacred scripture and sacred tradition. The gospel writers could not have written every single thing that Jesus did in their books; the man was very prolific if you haven't noticed. However, because Catholicism can trace it's lineage back to Jesus and the Apostles, we have Sacred Tradition.

Just because something is not in the Gospels does not mean that Paul made it up on the spot. Even if Paul later wrote about it. Paul did not invent Catholicism, he simply taught it.

Please educate yourself.

Unbaptized babies is another unfortunate piece of luggage from Dante.

Yes, they are given a Baptism of Desire. Limbo is not a real Church teaching.

Thank you very much user.

Another point of interest for me are the criminals christ was crucified alongside. One mocked him while the other requested mercy from Jesus. Given the population size of Christians at the time I doubt the man who requested mercy was a Christian but yet Jesus told me he will see him in heaven.

Would that be considered a non believer receiving salvation?

If the babies had no chance to sin against man or god then why would a loving god condemn them from heaven? Same with mentally ill and children. They are not cognitively able to comprehend purposely sinning against their fellow man and their creator. I doubt a loving god would condemn them.

...

>"nothing means anything, just melt your atoms into the atoms of the world brah"

this is perhaps what a christian believes, but most definitely what an diot believes

>change things
It did
>for the better
A lot of dead protestant Germans would disagree

>And now I know you've never actually studied Catholicism
I'm a confirmed Catholic and had a pretty good Sunday school teacher in high school.

I know about "sacred tradition" (which doesn't convince me of much, since there's at best spotty records of the early church(es)). But this is a case where church and Pauline teaching directly contradicts something Jesus said.

>If the babies had no chance to sin against man or god then why would a loving god condemn them from heaven? Same with mentally ill and children.
I agree that would be terrible if they were damned, but that basically means they get a "free pass". Through no effort of their own, they are guaranteed salvation, whereas us mentally stable adults actually need to do something.

You are exactly right. This is actually the first instance of that happening. Although I think it is taught that Jesus also led all the deserving souls of the world who had already died to heaven as well (people like Moses, maybe the Greeks, probably billions of chinese peasants), but Church teaching is a bit more vague on this, and it's been a while since I last really went in deep on church teachings.

>Although I think it is taught that Jesus also led all the deserving souls of the world who had already died to heaven as well (people like Moses, maybe the Greeks, probably billions of chinese peasants), but Church teaching is a bit more vague on this
I think that would need to happen *after* he died.

Again you are literally arguing semantics at this point. The adultery exception occurs in one Gospel: Matthew. You are probably misinterpreting what was originally written down by way of the Telephone game for two thousand years. If the church teaches something, it is because Christ himself taught it and on the subject of Sacred Tradition, you are missing the whole point of Sacred Tradition and that is that it is the so-called "spotty record" The Catechism of the Catholic Church is the survival of Christ's teaching through the heresies and upheaval of the early church. If that not convincing, that's fine. It's called faith for a reason.

You're right, but you need to remember that Christ died before the two criminals.

I understand your veiwpoint but the baby didn't get a choice in the matter either. Whatevwr happenes to the baby is beyond it's control. It didn't have the chance to grow spiritually so it shouldn't be punished for sin it didn't even have the chance to commit.

I remember a quote from some philosopher whose name I forgot. It went something like "the ideal life is to die as a child so you could never suffer in life" or something like that.

>probably billions of chinese peasants

I always forget that while the western world grew under Rome and Greece the Chinese states had been active for thousands of years. Now the idea of all the chinese people who have never even heard of Israel being given salvation for their good lives is in my mind.

>misinterpreting what was originally written down by way of the Telephone game for two thousand years
So written record from less than a century after Jesus's death is more prone to the "telephone game" than unwritten "tradition"?

Yes, I am glad you finally get it. The phrasing of a sentence in a book is much more prone to misinterpretation than the rules that were made from the lesson itself that have been followed for centuries.

>the rules that were made from the lesson itself that have been followed for centuries.
Except that the rules weren't solidified until centuries later.

Except the rules were solidified by the apostles

According to tradition.

Yes

So you admit it's circular reasoning?

Tradition is important because it carries on the teachings of Christ as taught to the Apostles, which we know is true because tradition tells us it is.

It's not circular reasoning; the piece of the puzzle you are missing is faith.

How specifically do you repent for past sins and go to heaven?

I'm a born Christian but my family stopped going to church when I was really young and besides believing in jesus and praying I don't know much about my own religion.

I think I have really bad karma from pendulum dousing which I just recently learned that some consider divination (even though I said a prayer first)

Idk but either way if god is mad at me or I've attracted demons I gotta fix this shit.

Not even joking lol. My luck has been shit and it's showing no signs of recovery in recent years.

hard to argue against that

at least they admit it

I was just going to say I can't argue with that.

The problem is I don't know how to ignore evidence which seems to show that there was a plurality of early beliefs and one triumphed for largely political reasons.

Aye, there's the rub

It's hard, I know it is. I like Catholicism because a lot of it can be argued from logic, but again you always need faith at the foundation.

I had fun talking shop with you guys. It's been a while since I've been able to have a real discussion about my faith and this really helped.

I need to go to sleep so I can't stick around for much longer, but I hope you guys have a good night.

I actually like Catholicism too, it's easily one of the more interesting Christianities, along with Eastern Orthodoxy. The main thing that turns me off is the dogmatism and the papacy (also all the "miracles", but that's another thing entirely).

Like, just imagine Jesus wearing papal robes and preaching in lavish cathedrals. It just doesn't fit. I think monastic orders are closer to Jesus than priestly ones.

If you're a fully initiated Catholic (as you should be, given that Veeky Forums is a Catholic board imho) all you have to do is see a priest for confession. If not, then the answer gets much longer.

Serious question for protestants: what do you do to absolve yourselves of sins? Make more money? Build an addition to your house? Take two cups of grape juice at your "services"?Desecrate images of the Blessed Virgin Mary? Hold hands with a female priest? LMAO

>like
>catholicism

Idk what sub-branch I am. Can I convert? Confession seems cool.

Pray for forgiveness? Be sorry for your sins? Do the same thing as Catholics but without the middle man?

i don't get it.

Confession is terrifying but important, and always rewarding.

Yes, anyone can convert if they want to. You have to take classes for about a year (maybe a little more), but I always enjoyed attending them. Just call the local parish and they should be happy to hook you up.

>"I cheated on my wife, Lord. Is that okay?"
>Sure, man. Just don't do it again.
>"Cool, God."

Seems sort of lacking tbqh. One might even argue that it was this abandonment of the priestly practice of intercession and mediation that cheapened the Protestant notion of the Trinity. Thus they tend to forget that Jesus Christ intercedes between man and God with the assistance of the Holy Spirit and religion gets dumbed down to Jesus Christ is my friend/Jesus Christ will make me rich.

>"I cheated on my wife, Father. Is that okay?"
>Sure, man. Just say 10 hail marys.
>"Cool, Father."

>also all the "miracles", but that's another thing entirely

user, you can't have Christianity without the supernatural.