Christianity ruins families.

[Nikolai]

The speaking in tongues you've witnessed, were they speaking actual languages they didn't know or just stringing together nonsense?

Neither they nor me understood it. It sounds different from person to person, and I don't know that many languages, but some have sounded asian, and some african. Impossible to say for sure though. People who speak in tongues don't understand it themselves, but for it to be biblical, someone has to get the "translation" from God(ie somehow understand the message God wants us to hear) if it is publicly given. Paul has some on that, but I don't remember right now in which letter.

EDIT: I have heard of a missionary in China that had a person in his flock who spoke in Norwegian, but that is secondhand at best.

[Kidlicious]

It is definitely a minority viewpoint though. It's become more acceptable since the rise of the Charismatic movement, but plenty of Christians view it with suspicion and horror.

Methodists view it as a misinterpretation of the scriptures. It's something that only happened to the disciples at Pentecost. To be baptised by the Holy Spirit means to spread the Gospel.

[Nikolai]

Why, then, did Paul give recommandations on its use? He was converted much later than pentecost.

EDIT: Baptism by the Holy Ghost is not in the Bible btw.

[Ben Kenobi]

as a Christian re-interpretation as moving away from tradition of salvation through the Church, as Catholics still believe.

Catholics have always taught that salvation is not limited to the Church. As Christ said, many who are outside will be inside, and many who are inside will be outside. What they do teach is that the Catholic church was established by Christ, and that Christians are supposed to be united both in body, and in spirit.

[Ben Kenobi]

I mean there was an actual reason Luther was excommunicated. It wasn't because there was an insubstantial difference.

True, but only 41 of the theses were named as grounds for excommunication. I'll see if I can find the document.

http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo10/l10exdom.htm

1. It is a heretical opinion, but a common one, that the sacraments of the New Law give pardoning grace to those who do not set up an obstacle.

2. To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

3. The inflammable sources of sin, even if there be no actual sin, delay a soul departing from the body from entrance into heaven.

4. To one on the point of death imperfect charity necessarily brings with it great fear, which in itself alone is enough to produce the punishment of purgatory, and impedes entrance into the kingdom.

5. That there are three parts to penance: contrition, confession, and satisfaction, has no foundation in Sacred Scripture nor in the ancient sacred Christian doctors.

6. Contrition, which is acquired through discussion, collection, and detestation of sins, by which one reflects upon his years in the bitterness of his soul, by pondering over the gravity of sins, their number, their baseness, the loss of eternal beatitude, and the acquisition of eternal damnation, this contrition makes him a hypocrite, indeed more a sinner.

7. It is a most truthful proverb and the doctrine concerning the contritions given thus far is the more remarkable: "Not to do so in the future is the highest penance; the best penance, a new life."

8. By no means may you presume to confess venial sins, nor even all mortal sins, because it is impossible that you know all mortal sins. Hence in the primitive Church only manifest mortal sins were confessed.

9. As long as we wish to confess all sins without exception, we are doing nothing else than to wish to leave nothing to God's mercy for pardon.

10. Sins are not forgiven to anyone, unless when the priest forgives them he believes they are forgiven; on the contrary the sin would remain unless he believed it was forgiven; for indeed the remission of sin and the granting of grace does not suffice, but it is necessary also to believe that there has been forgiveness.

11. By no means can you have reassurance of being absolved because of your contrition, but because of the word of Christ: "Whatsoever you shall loose, etc." Hence, I say, trust confidently, if you have obtained the absolution of the priest, and firmly believe yourself to have been absolved, and you will truly be absolved, whatever there may be of contrition.

12. If through an impossibility he who confessed was not contrite, or the priest did not absolve seriously, but in a jocose manner, if nevertheless he believes that he has been absolved, he is most truly absolved.

13. In the sacrament of penance and the remission of sin the pope or the bishop does no more than the lowest priest; indeed, where there is no priest, any Christian, even if a woman or child, may equally do as much.

14. No one ought to answer a priest that he is contrite, nor should the priest inquire.

15. Great is the error of those who approach the sacrament of the Eucharist relying on this, that they have confessed, that they are not conscious of any mortal sin, that they have sent their prayers on ahead and made preparations; all these eat and drink judgment to themselves. But if they believe and trust that they will attain grace, then this faith alone makes them pure and worthy.

16. It seems to have been decided that the Church in common Council established that the laity should communicate under both species; the Bohemians who communicate under both species are not heretics, but schismatics.

17. The treasures of the Church, from which the pope grants indulgences, are not the merits of Christ and of the saints.

18. Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful, and remissions of good works; and they are among the number of those things which are allowed, and not of the number of those which are advantageous.

19. Indulgences are of no avail to those who truly gain them, for the remission of the penalty due to actual sin in the sight of divine justice.

20. They are seduced who believe that indulgences are salutary and useful for the fruit of the spirit.

21. Indulgences are necessary only for public crimes, and are properly conceded only to the harsh and impatient.

22. For six kinds of men indulgences are neither necessary nor useful; namely, for the dead and those about to die, the infirm, those legitimately hindered, and those who have not committed crimes, and those who have committed crimes, but not public ones, and those who devote themselves to better things.

23. Excommunications are only external penalties and they do not deprive man of the common spiritual prayers of the Church.

24. Christians must be taught to cherish excommunications rather than to fear them.

25. The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter.

26. The word of Christ to Peter: "Whatsoever you shall loose on earth," etc., is extended merely to those things bound by Peter himself.

27. It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or the pope to decide upon the articles of faith, and much less concerning the laws for morals or for good works.

28. If the pope with a great part of the Church thought so and so, he would not err; still it is not a sin or heresy to think the contrary, especially in a matter not necessary for salvation, until one alternative is condemned and another approved by a general Council.

29. A way has been made for us for weakening the authority of councils, and for freely contradicting their actions, and judging their decrees, and boldly confessing whatever seems true, whether it has been approved or disapproved by any council whatsoever.

30. Some articles of John Hus, condemned in the Council of Constance, are most Christian, wholly true and evangelical; these the universal Church could not condemn.

31. In every good work the just man sins.

32. A good work done very well is a venial sin.

33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.

34. To go to war against the Turks is to resist God who punishes our iniquities through them.

35. No one is certain that he is not always sinning mortally, because of the most hidden vice of pride.

36. Free will after sin is a matter of title only; and as long as one does what is in him, one sins mortally.

37. Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.

38. The souls in purgatory are not sure of their salvation, at least not all; nor is it proved by any arguments or by the Scriptures that they are beyond the state of meriting or of increasing in charity.

39. The souls in purgatory sin without intermission, as long as they seek rest and abhor punishment.

40. The souls freed from purgatory by the suffrages of the living are less happy than if they had made satisfactions by themselves.

41. Ecclesiastical prelates and secular princes would not act badly if they destroyed all of the money bags of beggary.

[Ben Kenobi]

1. It is a heretical opinion, but a common one, that the sacraments of the New Law give pardoning grace to those who do not set up an obstacle.

Luther is arguing here, that the sacraments do not confer grace. ie, that Baptism will not in and of itself save.

2. To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

Catholics believe that baptism cleanses one of original sin.

3. The inflammable sources of sin, even if there be no actual sin, delay a soul departing from the body from entrance into heaven.

This again is wrong. Purgatory only cleanses sins committed, but not confessed.

4. To one on the point of death imperfect charity necessarily brings with it great fear, which in itself alone is enough to produce the punishment of purgatory, and impedes entrance into the kingdom.

Luther is arguing that if you do right, but reluctantly, that this is sinful. Catholics understand that a right action even if performed imperfectly still counts.

5. That there are three parts to penance: contrition, confession, and satisfaction, has no foundation in Sacred Scripture nor in the ancient sacred Christian doctors.

Luther's arguing against confession here. This is a bit of a technical point. Contrition, is the act of being sorry for one's action. Confession is the act of telling the priest the action you have committed, and satisfaction, is the blessing received from Christ for the forgiveness of sins.

6. Contrition, which is acquired through discussion, collection, and detestation of sins, by which one reflects upon his years in the bitterness of his soul, by pondering over the gravity of sins, their number, their baseness, the loss of eternal beatitude, and the acquisition of eternal damnation, this contrition makes him a hypocrite, indeed more a sinner.

Again, Luther is arguing against confession, that it is hyprocritical to confess your sins to the priest.

7. It is a most truthful proverb and the doctrine concerning the contritions given thus far is the more remarkable: "Not to do so in the future is the highest penance; the best penance, a new life."

It's not sufficient to stop doing bad things, you have to do restitution to those you have harmed. Luther's arguing that it's sufficient to simply cease doing them.

8. By no means may you presume to confess venial sins, nor even all mortal sins, because it is impossible that you know all mortal sins. Hence in the primitive Church only manifest mortal sins were confessed.

Again, Luther's off on confession. All sins, venial or mortal that are known are to be confessed.

9. As long as we wish to confess all sins without exception, we are doing nothing else than to wish to leave nothing to God's mercy for pardon.

Luther's arguing here that the desire to confess is sufficient. Catholics argue that you have to go and confess, and that absolution cannot be made unless a true confession is made.

10. Sins are not forgiven to anyone, unless when the priest forgives them he believes they are forgiven; on the contrary the sin would remain unless he believed it was forgiven; for indeed the remission of sin and the granting of grace does not suffice, but it is necessary also to believe that there has been forgiveness.

Luther's arguing that absolution cannot be performed by the priest, unless he believes it, ie a priest who doesn't believe in absolution cannot absolve. Absolution is not dependent on the state of the priest, the act performed by the priest in and of itself is sufficient.

[Ben Kenobi]

11. By no means can you have reassurance of being absolved because of your contrition, but because of the word of Christ: "Whatsoever you shall loose, etc." Hence, I say, trust confidently, if you have obtained the absolution of the priest, and firmly believe yourself to have been absolved, and you will truly be absolved, whatever there may be of contrition.

Again, Luther is arguing that if you firmly believe that you are absolved, then contrition is unnecessary.

12. If through an impossibility he who confessed was not contrite, or the priest did not absolve seriously, but in a jocose manner, if nevertheless he believes that he has been absolved, he is most truly absolved.

Again, Luther believes that contrition is not necessary for absolution.

13. In the sacrament of penance and the remission of sin the pope or the bishop does no more than the lowest priest; indeed, where there is no priest, any Christian, even if a woman or child, may equally do as much.

Catholics believe that priests are necessary to absolve. While it is true that the pope is equal to the bishop or priest in this regard, only ordination confers upon the ability to hear confessions.

14. No one ought to answer a priest that he is contrite, nor should the priest inquire.

For about the 4th time, contrition is necessary for confession. Seems to be a reoccuring theme for Luther.

15. Great is the error of those who approach the sacrament of the Eucharist relying on this, that they have confessed, that they are not conscious of any mortal sin, that they have sent their prayers on ahead and made preparations; all these eat and drink judgment to themselves. But if they believe and trust that they will attain grace, then this faith alone makes them pure and worthy.

Luther is still on confession here. Confession before partaking of the eucharist is how it was always done. It would be nice if they restored that in the Catholic church today.

16. It seems to have been decided that the Church in common Council established that the laity should communicate under both species; the Bohemians who communicate under both species are not heretics, but schismatics.

The Eucharist is permitted to be taken under one species or both. There is no requirment to either.

17. The treasures of the Church, from which the pope grants indulgences, are not the merits of Christ and of the saints.

This one is pretty obvious. The Treasures of the church, refer to Christ and the saints. Luther is saying that indulgences have nothing to do with either.

18. Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful, and remissions of good works; and they are among the number of those things which are allowed, and not of the number of those which are advantageous.

Again, on indulgences. They do not remit sins. One is not saved for taking them, and one is not barred from salvation in their absence.

19. Indulgences are of no avail to those who truly gain them, for the remission of the penalty due to actual sin in the sight of divine justice.

Indulgences do remit suffering in purgatory of those who have already been saved.

20. They are seduced who believe that indulgences are salutary and useful for the fruit of the spirit.

Again, Luther is on indulgences. They are useful.

[Ben Kenobi]

21. Indulgences are necessary only for public crimes, and are properly conceded only to the harsh and impatient.

Indulgences are never necessary for salvation.

22. For six kinds of men indulgences are neither necessary nor useful; namely, for the dead and those about to die, the infirm, those legitimately hindered, and those who have not committed crimes, and those who have committed crimes, but not public ones, and those who devote themselves to better things.

Again, indulgences are only useful for those who have died in the Lord, to remit them of suffering in purgatory.

23. Excommunications are only external penalties and they do not deprive man of the common spiritual prayers of the Church.

This one is pretty obvious. Excommunication is an external penalty for internal separation from the Church.

24. Christians must be taught to cherish excommunications rather than to fear them.

Yeah, good luck with that one Luther.

25. The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter.

This is probably the biggest one, and alone would be sufficient for excommunication

26. The word of Christ to Peter: "Whatsoever you shall loose on earth," etc., is extended merely to those things bound by Peter himself.

Catholics believe in the entire passage, whatsoever you bind on earth, will be bound in heaven. Christ binds those whom Peter binds.

27. It is certain that it is not in the power of the Church or the pope to decide upon the articles of faith, and much less concerning the laws for morals or for good works.

Again, this is Luther arguing against the authority of the pope. The pope does have the authority to decide upon the articles of the faith.

28. If the pope with a great part of the Church thought so and so, he would not err; still it is not a sin or heresy to think the contrary, especially in a matter not necessary for salvation, until one alternative is condemned and another approved by a general Council.

Again, this is Luther arguing that you are only in error if you disagree with a council but not the pope. Quite wrong.

29. A way has been made for us for weakening the authority of councils, and for freely contradicting their actions, and judging their decrees, and boldly confessing whatever seems true, whether it has been approved or disapproved by any council whatsoever.

And unsurprisingly, every man can be a council in and of itself. This by itself would be sufficient for excommunioncation. This is the second crucial point.

[Ben Kenobi]

This last part is Luther's commentary on Hus.

[quote]
30. Some articles of John Hus, condemned in the Council of Constance, are most Christian, wholly true and evangelical; these the universal Church could not condemn.

31. In every good work the just man sins.

Wow. Ok. No.

32. A good work done very well is a venial sin.

Nope, fastidiousness is not sinful.

33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.

This is probably the only one which has changed.

34. To go to war against the Turks is to resist God who punishes our iniquities through them.

This is an argument against the crusades. The Church teaches that while pacifism is not sinful, neither were the crusades.

35. No one is certain that he is not always sinning mortally, because of the most hidden vice of pride.

If this were venial sins, yes. But mortal sins, no.

36. Free will after sin is a matter of title only; and as long as one does what is in him, one sins mortally.

This is an interesting one. Hus argues that we have no free will to resist sin.

37. Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.

One of the largest ones. Again, this alone would be sufficient for excommunication.

38. The souls in purgatory are not sure of their salvation, at least not all; nor is it proved by any arguments or by the Scriptures that they are beyond the state of meriting or of increasing in charity.

The Church teaches that purgatory is only for those who have been saved.

39. The souls in purgatory sin without intermission, as long as they seek rest and abhor punishment.

Wow, ok. Hus is saying here that it's possible to sin after death.

40. The souls freed from purgatory by the suffrages of the living are less happy than if they had made satisfactions by themselves.

Follows from the above. Purgatory seems to be understood by Hus as a waystation, where you decide whether you will or will not be saved.

41. Ecclesiastical prelates and secular princes would not act badly if they destroyed all of the money bags of beggary.

Ie, money is the root of all evil,

[Nikolai]

Can you prove purgatory from the scriptures, Ben?

[Ben Kenobi]

Imran:

These are the seven main reasons why he was excommunicated. I believe these are the core disagreements.


The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter.

Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.

Excommunications are only external penalties and they do not deprive man of the common spiritual prayers of the Church.

In the sacrament of penance and the remission of sin the pope or the bishop does no more than the lowest priest; indeed, where there is no priest, any Christian, even if a woman or child, may equally do as much.

Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful, and remissions of good works; and they are among the number of those things which are allowed, and not of the number of those which are advantageous.

To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

It is a heretical opinion, but a common one, that the sacraments of the New Law give pardoning grace to those who do not set up an obstacle.

[Ben Kenobi]

Can you prove purgatory from the scriptures, Ben?

There are two passages in the NT that refer to purgatory.

Matthew 12:32

Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Distinguishes between mortal and venial sins. Some of these that are forgiven in the age to come are those which are forgiven through purgatory.

1 Corinthians 3:11-14

For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man's work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames.

[Nikolai]

Imran:

These are the seven main reasons why he was excommunicated. I believe these are the core disagreements.


The Roman Pontiff, the successor of Peter, is not the vicar of Christ over all the churches of the entire world, instituted by Christ Himself in blessed Peter.

There is no scriptural evidence for the bishop of Rome to have any primacy over any other bishop as far I can see, the promise to Peter was clearly to him and not a random dude who claims to succeed him.

Purgatory cannot be proved from Sacred Scripture which is in the canon.

It can't, as far as I can see.

Excommunications are only external penalties and they do not deprive man of the common spiritual prayers of the Church.

I'm not sure I understand the language here. But I see excommunications as practiced by the Catholic church, as not covered in the Bible. It's a useful tool for dicipline, yes. But it doesn't exclude anyone from Jesus, if the person should repent or wasn't wrong and the church doesn't follow up because of human faultyness.

In the sacrament of penance and the remission of sin the pope or the bishop does no more than the lowest priest; indeed, where there is no priest, any Christian, even if a woman or child, may equally do as much.

A priest is a man. Any faithful Christian can perform priestly duties before Christ, but of course a priest has got education on the fields in question.

Indulgences are pious frauds of the faithful, and remissions of good works; and they are among the number of those things which are allowed, and not of the number of those which are advantageous.

You can't buy forgiveness. Period. See Simon Magus for more info from the apostles.

To deny that in a child after baptism sin remains is to treat with contempt both Paul and Christ.

All children are born with sin. Biblical. Baptism doesn't remove it. Admitting Christ into your heart; to believe in Him and proclaim it, that saves. Romans 10.9.

It is a heretical opinion, but a common one, that the sacraments of the New Law give pardoning grace to those who do not set up an obstacle.

What does this mean?

[Nikolai]

There are two passages in the NT that refer to purgatory.

Matthew 12:32



Distinguishes between mortal and venial sins. Some of these that are forgiven in the age to come are those which are forgiven through purgatory.

1 Corinthians 3:11-14

Matthew doesn't speak of purgatory. I see no trace of it. 1st Corinthians speaks of Judgement Day, not purgatory.

[Ben Kenobi]

There is no scriptural evidence for the bishop of Rome to have any primacy over any other bishop as far I can see, the promise to Peter was clearly to him and not a random dude who claims to succeed him.

This argument for apostolic succession comes from the Keys to the Kingdom of heaven. This is actually an allusion to a similar key given by the priest of melchizedek to the House of David. The Keys are understood to be an inherited title which can be passed on from one to another.

The allusion is here:

Isaiah 22:19-20

I will thrust you from your office and you will be cast down from your station and on that day I will call my servant Eliakim, the son of Hilkiah, and I will clothe him with your robe and will bind your girdle on him and will commit your authority to his hand, and he shall be a father to the inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the House of Judah; and I will place on his shoulder the key of the House of David."

When Christ gives Peter the keys to the kingdom of heaven, he is establishing a dynasty of Christ here on earth, his Church. The keys are to be passed down through the church, the same way as the key of the House of David was passed down through the heirs.

I'm not sure I understand the language here.

Luther is saying that an excommunication has only external consequences and not spiritual consequences.

But I see excommunications as practiced by the Catholic church, as not covered in the Bible.

The rationale for excommunication comes from 1 Cor 5:11

1 Corinthians 5:11

But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.

It's a useful tool for dicipline, yes. But it doesn't exclude anyone from Jesus, if the person should repent or wasn't wrong and the church doesn't follow up because of human faultyness.

Excommunications can be lifted with repentence. No one is ever cut off from God, but there are serious spiritual consequences for excommunication. It is meant to be a wake up call.

A priest is a man. Any faithful Christian can perform priestly duties before Christ, but of course a priest has got education on the fields in question.

And that is all the Church is arguing. The sacrament of confession can only be performed by the priest. One can certainly confess your sins to other Christians, but they cannot perform the sacrament.

You can't buy forgiveness. Period. See Simon Magus for more info from the apostles.

They aren't buying forgiveness. If they are in purgatory, they are already saved.

All children are born with sin. Biblical. Baptism doesn't remove it. Admitting Christ into your heart; to believe in Him and proclaim it, that saves. Romans 10.9.

Then why do you baptise? Christ says that you must be born again of water and the spirit.

What does this mean?

That a child baptised will be saved.