Not the least of which was the Romanist claim that the church has an “unwritten apostolic tradition.” This is a complete fiction without warrant either in Scripture or in the earliest Christian writers, who said nothing about any such thing.
When they did mention was the “apostolic tradition,” which was merely a way of speaking about the Epistles. See e.g., Ad Diog., c. AD 150). Basil was the 1st to speak of an unwritten apostolic tradition and he was just making up things to refute the Eunomians.
Over against the Romanist marginalizing of Scripture the Protestants recovered the Scriptures as the unique, final, sufficient, perspicuous authority for the Christian faith and the Christian life. It freed millions of Christians from the tyranny of human opinion.
Under sola Scriptura, the Reformed, in particular, were able to clear out centuries of man-made tradition, without root or precedent in apostolic or early post-apostolic history in worship and in the Christian life. Christian liberty is something to celebrate.
Sola scriptura freed us from the tyranny of a deeply corrupt and often malevolent Roman magisterium and papacy, which, by the 16th century, had become a bloody, petty, Italian duchy. It freed us from stupid, unhistorical, unbiblical, manipulative myths like “purgatory.”
It freed us from a series of dreadful ecclesiastical decisions in the 13th, 14th, and 16th centuries to add five false, man-made sacraments. As late as the 9th century NO ONE knew anything about those five false sacraments. They weren’t even ratified by a council until 1274.
They were nothing but elaborations on the dominical sacraments and they were without warrant in holy Scripture a fact that honest Romanist scholars freely admit (with the exception of extreme unction).
Recovering our Lord’s two instituted sacraments and recovering the cup for the laity (which we did at considerable cost to ourselves) is worth celebrating.
Then there is the matter of what had become the dominant medieval doctrine of progressive justification by grace and cooperation with grace. This is still the Roman doctrine BTW. See the Catechism of the Catholic Church (1994) sect. 1987.
This doctrine was not that of Scripture nor that of the earliest post-apostolic church (see e.g., 1 Clement or Ad Diog. ch. 5 for 2 early examples). The Reformation recovered the biblical definition of grace as unconditional divine favor toward sinners (sola gratia).
The Reformation recovered the biblical definition of faith as resting, receiving, trusting in Christ and HIS obedience FOR ME (not the Spirit’s work in me and my cooperation with it). This is sola fide.
In Romanism Christ is an enabler but the cooperating believer is really the savior—which is blasphemy. Rome makes Jesus but half a Savior. The Reformation restored, as it were, salvation to Christ. This is worth celebrating.
The Reformation recovered the biblical doctrine of assurance. Rome made it so that one had to have direct, special revelation to know if one is really justified. Whereas Paul says plainly (as Raymond Brown acknowledges) that we are NOW justified.
There are not two stages of justification. Baptism doesn’t justify initially (contra Rome and the Federal Vision) and there is no final justification at the judgment. Believers are justified now—“having therefore been justified” says Paul.
BTW, shame on those evangelicals and prots who have em braced the two-stage view of justification. You’re only degrees away from Rome.
The medieval church and Rome and Trent (and since) corrupted the gospel (see Galatians 2) and with it the assurance and peace of millions of Christians. The Reformation restored the gospel and assurance. That’s worth celebrating.
The church is not fractured. The church has been freed from its Babylonian Captivity and is now calling the Roman sect to repent of her sins and errors and to embrace Jesus the only Savior by grace alone, through faith alone.
One more thing. Show me in the NT or in ANYONE in the 2nd century where the early Church spoke, as Rome does now, of the Blessed virgin as “Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix” (CCC, 969). Mediatrix?
Holy Scripture: “For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 2:5).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
🧵We need to distinguish between a principled, Christian opposition to homosexuality as a behavior, orientation, & lifestyle and homophobia. The Apostle Paul was not afraid of homosexuals or homosexuality. He feared God and his wrath. He also loved homosexual sinners
enough to incur their disapproval to tell them the truth that a homosexual orientation and behavior is contrary to natural and specially revealed law. It is destructive of the image. Indeed, he taught that sexual sin is not like all other sins inasmuch as
all other sins are outside one's body but sexual sin is more intimate and defiles the imagery intended by the union of a man & a woman, i.e., the union between Christ & his church. What is the image of homosexual union? It's not Christ & his church.
They aren’t busking, which is providing a service. They can’t play. That’s part of the scam.
Most (85%) of the “homeless” are drug addicts. You’re inly funding their habit. You’re not helping. They KNOW you feel guilty. Addicts are manipulators any way.
An addict ONLY wants one thing: another hit. It’s hard to accept the fact that apparently needy people will look right you and lie but they do. What they need is Jesus and to get clean. They need to detox and then some treatment.
The drugs/booze didn’t just magically enter their system. Addicts/drunks are self-medicating a problem. Your $20 just postpones that help and allows them to continue using/drinking til they die.
The winnowing continues. This really is sad. A lot of good people are being ejected from the service of their country. We're going to look back on this episode and shake our heads at how panicked and rash we were.
This is also about the exercise of control. The vax is good for 6 months at most. It's not as if there are no risks or nor ethical questions connected with the vaccine but never mind those.
It *appears* that most will be given an "other than honorable" discharge. This will negatively affect their access to VA benefits. All their service is marred bec of their conscience?
Uh no. If Baptists want to become Reformed, great! Adding predestination to a Baptist reading of redemptive history, Baptist polity, theology, piety, & practice does not make one Reformed. How dare I say such a thing? 1. Words mean things. 1/x
2/x 2. The word Reformed meant something before American Baptists (of whatever sort) discovered it. It signified a way of reading redemptive history (e.g., one cov of grace, multiple administrations and the theology, piety, & practice confessed by the Reformed churches).
3. The Reformed have been confessing this reading of redemptive history, theology, piety, & practice since the early 1520s. We’re still confessing it.
4. If you haven’t read and seriously considered the theology, piety, & practice of the Heidelberg Catechism (1563),
Thread. Saw a video re an officer-involved-shooting. Commenter(s) asked: “why didn’t the officer shoot him the leg?” This is why: shooting a firearm well is a lot like swinging a golf club. It involves a lot of fine motor movements, except, unlike hitting a golf ball there is an
explosion in front of one’s face. It’s unnatural. Those things make shooting difficult even when she’s just on the range. Squeeze the grip just a little too hard and the shot goes down and to the left. Flinch in anticipation of the shot/bang and the shot goes wide.
Now, when an officer arrives at a scene she often has a sketchy report (e.g.,man with a knife). She sees the threat, which is not usually stationary, as she pulls to a stop. She’s moving as she gets out of the car (she has to get out of her seatbelt just like you but
It simply doesn’t follow and there is no evidence that the apostles or early post-apostolic church intended to say Ekklesia, in Christsn use, meant what it meant in secular usage.
Ekklesia is used in the LXX (The Greek translation of the Old Testament) in place of the Hebrew word for “covenant assembly.“ This is how it is used in the New Testament.