a discussion i had with a baptist friend.


#1

i recently had a discussion that lead to a debate with a baptist friend of mine. she has churched hopped from Catholic, to lutheran, to baptists to assembly of God. she said she was a baptist. i asked why and she said because some friends lived good lives and invited her to say a sinners prayer. i told her that the church Christ founded was the Catholic church and founded the church on Peter. she didn’t agree. i asked if she took communion as a metaphor. she said yes. i quickly pointed out that John chapter 6 was literal. she didn’t agree. so i asked if she could lose her salvation. she said no, of course. i said she must agree with Luther and that she could go go on a mass murder spree, commit suicide, and still go to Heaven. she said, “well, David was a murderer, adulterer, etc.” and i was kinda stumped. does anyone know how i should have responded? that kinda got me. what is a good way to share catholic views with Protestants who just don’t want to listen and who believes i am taking “scriptures out of context to fit my own religion”? even though we gave them the bible!


#2

Did Luther actually say this? Can you provide a source? Doesn’t such an idea lead to serious issues re Romans chapter 6?

I might also add that just because one person sinned and was forgiven does not give you license to do likewise. This is an appalling attitude and does not jive with anything I have ever heard in any Protestant church. :frowning:

Zirconia


#3

xmydreamsfadex i recently had a discussion that lead to a debate with a baptist friend of mine. she has churched hopped from Catholic, to lutheran, to baptists to assembly of God. she said she was a baptist. i asked why and she said because some friends lived good lives and invited her to say a sinners prayer. i told her that the church Christ founded was the Catholic church and founded the church on Peter. she didn’t agree. i asked if she took communion as a metaphor. she said yes. i quickly pointed out that John chapter 6 was literal. she didn’t agree. so i asked if she could lose her salvation. she said no, of course. i said she must agree with Luther and that she could go go on a mass murder spree, commit suicide, and still go to Heaven. she said, “well, David was a murderer, adulterer, etc.” and i was kinda stumped. does anyone know how i should have responded? that kinda got me. what is a good way to share catholic views with Protestants who just don’t want to listen and who believes i am taking “scriptures out of context to fit my own religion”? even though we gave them the bible!

You are unclear on the beliefs of Baptists as well as Luther… What you have ascribed to Luther is actually antinominism which is not a Baptist belief. To do better in these sorts of discussions, study up a bit on the beliefs of the person you are talking with in advance. One good way to do that is to ask the protestants here on CAF. :smiley:


#4

The difference is that David repented by wearing sac cloth and pouring ashes over his head and begging for mercy. God forgave him, but in the case of his adultery with Bathsheba and his murder of her husband Uriah, God punished David by taking the life of his newborn child. You see, David repented, but he still faced the consequences of his actions. I can’t imagine what his punishment would be if he did not repent

As for your statement about sharing Catholic views, there are plenty of resources on the web, aswell as threads that deal with issues on this site. In some cases, it is difficult to prove that your interpretation is the correct one and not theirs’. Pray for them:) ! Ask God to help them see the Truth for themselves. It seems that your friend is swayed to be Baptist because of the “good people,” but I know many “good people” myself, but that does not mean they follow the teachings of Christ…

BTW, Luther taught that one may lose their salvation, but Baptists teach that one cannot…

Hope this helps!!!

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius:cool:


#5

Couldn’t agree more! :slight_smile:

I attend a Southern Baptist church, and can confirm that I have never, ever heard anything approaching such a heresy from this quarter.

Also, I would like to point out that not even Protestants in general hold to such an outrage; as a kid growing up and attending a United Brethren church (another Protestant denomination) was where I first learned about what antinomianism was, and (if I remember my heresies correctly) how unbelievable and terrible it was, this idea that a person could have Jesus as Savior but not as Lord (ie, not obey anything He taught and still be saved).

And if Luther actually did hold to such a belief, then it seems to me that even by Protestant standards that would mean he held to a heresy (!) :eek: That is why I asked for a source in my previous post. Anything to this effect that has been directly stated in his (translated) writings would be most helpful.

I apologize if the above came across as uncharitable or offensive; it was not at all intended to be such.

Zirconia


#6

Quotes from Luther as requested:

Be a sinner and sin strongly, but more strongly have faith and rejoice in Christ.
Martin Luther

“God does not work salvation for fictitious sinners. Be a sinner and sin vigorously… Do not for a moment imagine that this life is the abiding place of justice; sin must be committed.”
“Sin cannot tear you away from him [Christ], even though you commit adultery a hundred times a day and commit as many murders.”


#7

I hope these are from a credible source as they are very condemning indeed. I don’t doubt he said these things, though…:frowning:

Either he was disobeying Christ when Christ told many to “sin no more,” or he overdid his doctrines of sin and redemption (or both)…:confused: :mad: :frowning:

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius:cool:


#8

those are the quotes i have read. what more can you expect from luther since he was a drunk? thanks, guys.


#9

Why?

Either he was disobeying Christ when Christ told many to “sin no more,” or he overdid his doctrines of sin and redemption (or both)…:confused: :mad: :frowning:

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius:cool:

Thanks for the quotes, everyone :tiphat:

I must say this is quite disturbing. As for the credibility, I Googled Luther’s writings and found the source; the quote comes from Letter no. 99, 1 August 1521, “A Letter from Luther to Melanchthon.”

So unless someone can offer clear and convincing evidence that this letter was forged, I would say the source appears very credible indeed…:frowning: That said, why is it not better known? Seems to me both sides should be hammering away at it.

BTW, I can scarcely see how the assertion that Luther was “a drunk” (post number 8) is relevant to this discussion. Not only that, but it is also not at all conducive to fruitful discussions with Protestants (even if it is true) :banghead:

Zirconia


#10

see this link iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/letsinsbe.txt


#11

I have a protestant friend who deny’s all of the catholic teachings but can not or will not state why. she also will not state why what she believes is true.

frustrating


#12

Even if Luther said such things, it’s still not a Baptist belief. If you approach a Baptist and accuse them of antinominism, you are highly unlikely to get them to listen to anything you say.

You can’t hold your own in a debate by throwing out such randomness. You need to be clear on what the person you are talking to actually believes. Also if you want to convert someone, remember it’s not about winning the debate, but about winning the person!


#13

By the way, not all Baptists are strict 5 point Calvinists. Here’s an article on found on the Southern Baptist Convention’s website: sbclife.org/articles/2006/04/sla8.asp


#14

So unless someone can offer clear and convincing evidence that this letter was forged, I would say the source appears very credible indeed… That said, why is it not better known? Seems to me both sides should be hammering away at it.

The point is that Baptists are a breakaway from a breakaway…which broke away from Luther whom broke away from the RCC…

Sometimes it’s better to not acknowledge any false teaching that Luther held from a Baptist standpoint. If you acknowledge publicly that Luther was wrong on a few things, then if you follow the logical conclusion…what if Luther was wrong on everything?..then you have to question your own doctrines because after all you are a result of Luther’s schisming domino effect.

We Catholic Apologists do hammer away with it, It’s just that the preconcieved Protestant mind refuses to listen.


#15

The above opinion is a generalization and is not condusive to postive dialoge between Protestants and those of other faiths. I would like to ask the poster, what of the Greek Christians? Where do they stand in your opinion as far as schisms etc?

Peace,
Jokerz


#16

True, they are not, I think there is even a group of Baptists who are Arminian! Even so, they still aren’t antinominists.


#17

You are correct. No Christians are antinominists actually because that is a heresy long ago condemned.


#18

Do you mean that “there are no TRUE Christian antinominists?” I’m sure that some “Christians” still believe and teach this even though it was condemned…

BTW: Do you know when and/or where it was condemned? If you don’t, then don’t worry about it…:wink:

Prayers and petitions,
Alexius:cool:


#19

See this link: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinomianism


#20

Are you referring to to Luther accusing Agricola of antinomianism*?*


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.