For clarification for some of the comments. Rev. Einertsons claim is both simple, and non controversial. Catholic means universal. Both Lutherans and Roman Catholics claim to be in doctrinal unity to the universal and historical church. Both sides of the argument understood that this was the claim of the reformers. Einertson is simply reminding both sides of the simple fact that the reformers weren't claiming anything new. The ongoing disagreement between Rome and the LCMS is whether or not that straightforward claim was/is accurate.
Jamaliel principle. The Lutheran church will be gone in only 1 or two generations. What is of God can never be destroyed. What is against God will never prevail. God bless all of you who of ignorance love God and seek God. But the Lutheran institution and the theology have to go because it was always a denial of Christ's teachings that are easily verifiable in Scripture for those who bother to look and are supported by all secondary documents including Clement I, Sub Tuum Presidium, and patristics. Come home brother, it's time to stop the rebellion against God's Church founded on the disciple he named Rock - take the real Eucharist that only apostolic lineage priests can give and retake the West. This is not a personal attack. The truths are all self evident and easily accessible and intuitive - we are in the online age. Everyone can read Scripture, Ludwig Otts Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, and Patristics. There is no more excuse for 100+ IQ grown adults who take their faith seriously and want to know the truth. Take it and thrive in it. This is the real deal 🇻🇦🍞🍷✝️📿 One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church 🤩🙏🏻
Justification is one of the two main issues that gave rise to Reformation. According to Luther Justification is by faith alone and through Justification an exchange took place between believers and Christ, known as double imputation. The believers got Christ’ righteousness imputed on them as if that righteousness were theirs while they remain sinners. Christ got believers’ entire sins (past, present, future) imputed on Him as if those sins were His while He remains sinless. There is no limit of either amount or type of believers' sins imputed on Him. Christ willingly offered Himself to take the punishment of those sins by dying on the cross or God punished Christ for the sins of believers, and He paid the penalty of those sins in full. Questions: 1. The phrase "justified by faith" appears four times in New Testament (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, Gal. 2:16, 3:24). New Testament was written in Greek and the one in Rom. 3:28 is in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense . Both tenses do not indicate once for all justification. If Scripture teaches faith-alone justification, then the Holy Spirit would inspire Paul to write the phrase "justified by faith" in Greek passive perfect tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action described by the verb (to be justified) was completed in the past with continuing effect to the present. 2. Scripture denies double imputation in Eze. 18:20 (ESV): “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.” 3. Scripture says that we lose righteousness by sinning or we cannot be righteous and sinner at the same time. Eze. 33:13 (ESV) says: “The righteous shall not be able to live by his righteousness when he sins. Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his righteousness and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he shall die." Death here refers to hell, not physical death. 4. By declaring believers as righteous who remain sinners and punishing Christ for the sins He did not commit on the cross, God did abomination according to what Scripture says in Pro. 17:15 (ESV): “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.”
Just another Catholic who doesn’t understand the law and the gospel. Read CFW Walthers book on this and Luther’s Galatians commentary. Maybe you will understand the scriptures.
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty LOL!!!😂 thats funny stuff! “Read my guy’s “opinion” and you will understand. NO! Read my guy and you will understand, No, no, read my guy and you will really understand the scriptures…” 🤦♂
@@srich7503 Little do you know, I’ve argued with this guy extensively… And all he does is either reposition his argument or contradict the Roman Catholic doctrine. So I’ve recommended these books to him… maybe he will see the light. Maybe you will too.
If only there was some sort of collection of writings from God that we could use to test to see who was telling the truth. Otherwise it's just everyone's word against everyone else.
I'm not trying to dunk on anyone, but wouldn't every schism or heresy say this? The church departed from the truth and we are just holding to the actual true teachings? Nestorians, Arians, etc? There would have to be some way to break the symmetry between two competing claims aside from just saying we are the true ones.
Technically Lutherans didn't do that...the term "Christian" was substituted for "catholic" in the German translation of the creed a century or so before the Reformation, and the Lutherans simply continued that tradition.
Yes, better to have personal interpretation with a magical hat and chair that makes it so no one can question you. That's a much better system, the exact same thing but with no accountability.
17th century textual critique, humanism, anda logical extreme reading of St. Augustine and telos has nothing to do with the 1st century church, patristics, or Bible (put together by the Catholic bishops at the council of Rome). Just be honest and straight with it - "we think we did it better". Then we can all go to Ludwig Ott's fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - fact check the Scriptural basis of beliefs, read Clement I and the Sub Tuum Praesidium, compare to the patristics. Won't be hard and no big human brain or movement will EVER erase the lines of the Bible that mention the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, Jesus founding the Church on the disciple he named rock - praying so that he would not fail, or the laying on of hands being expicitly stated in Acts to be the means of ordinating bishops and deacons. Nothing against folks, but those who do inquire will inevitably be given the truth and there is an either/or choice if we want to follow those logical implications or not with profound spiritual consequences if we of full will and mind reject what Christ is revealing to us. Come home brethren ✝️ eat the Eucharist and come re-evangelize the West. 📿
OK if Luther had issues with the church why not present questions to a church based council. This is what happened whenever heresy arose from the earliest days. NO you are NOT the Catholic church stop with your false statements.
Beware the bewitchment of language, as (Roman Catholic) Ludwig Wittgenstein said. 'Catholic' means 'universal', so they're not saying they're carrying on Roman traditions while Rome isn't, they say they continue to be the universal church the Roman Catholics have broken away from. Anglicans also claim to be Catholic: just not Roman Catholic.
I can claim to be a woman. I can even dress as a woman. I can get laws changed to say that I am a woman. I'm still a man. Lutherans can say what they want. It doesn't make it true. They have a 500 year old man-made-up tradition.
Rev. Einertsons claim isn’t that there are not differences between the Lutheran and Catholic Church, but that Lutheranism is the proper expression of the Catholic (meaning universal and historical church) rather than the Roman Catholic Church of today. So you are correct that your church, my church, and Rev. Einertsons church all teach the many differences between the LCMS and todays Roman Catholic Church :)
You are *not* the Catholic Church- but rather you’ve declared yourself as your own personal private Pope. You do not have the authority to make the declarations you’ve stated. You have no apostolic succession. There is a continual line of Popes from Peter to Francis- Luther was not even a Bishop.
lutherans maintain apostolic succession but do not view it as necessary. Presbyterial ordination was considered allowable in the early church and was present in the alexandrian churches until ~400AD. Modern roman catholic scholars admit that presbyterial ordination is not invalid.
@bobbobberson5627 Do they teach most faithfully according to God's Word? Likewise do they properly administer the sacraments according to His written commands? That's how you find a good church.
@@Battleaxe0246 is there really a problem with that? I’ve seen a lot of men pastors that are worthless. I’ve seen a lot of women pastors who were awesome.
I’m a Catholic in Union with pope in Rome, the first bishops were in union with the pope as well, then Judas did what he did…leaving a vacancy in the Jesus’ established church…a vacancy that was filled because that vacancy needed to be filled…to complete the Church…to complete the 12
For clarification for some of the comments. Rev. Einertsons claim is both simple, and non controversial. Catholic means universal. Both Lutherans and Roman Catholics claim to be in doctrinal unity to the universal and historical church. Both sides of the argument understood that this was the claim of the reformers.
Einertson is simply reminding both sides of the simple fact that the reformers weren't claiming anything new. The ongoing disagreement between Rome and the LCMS is whether or not that straightforward claim was/is accurate.
This is vital for all Lutherans to understand.
Jamaliel principle. The Lutheran church will be gone in only 1 or two generations. What is of God can never be destroyed. What is against God will never prevail.
God bless all of you who of ignorance love God and seek God. But the Lutheran institution and the theology have to go because it was always a denial of Christ's teachings that are easily verifiable in Scripture for those who bother to look and are supported by all secondary documents including Clement I, Sub Tuum Presidium, and patristics.
Come home brother, it's time to stop the rebellion against God's Church founded on the disciple he named Rock - take the real Eucharist that only apostolic lineage priests can give and retake the West.
This is not a personal attack. The truths are all self evident and easily accessible and intuitive - we are in the online age. Everyone can read Scripture, Ludwig Otts Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, and Patristics. There is no more excuse for 100+ IQ grown adults who take their faith seriously and want to know the truth. Take it and thrive in it. This is the real deal 🇻🇦🍞🍷✝️📿
One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church 🤩🙏🏻
It is vital for all Lutherans to believe in the True Presence of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist!
Yes indeed
Justification is one of the two main issues that gave rise to Reformation.
According to Luther Justification is by faith alone and through Justification an exchange took place between believers and Christ, known as double imputation. The believers got Christ’ righteousness imputed on them as if that righteousness were theirs while they remain sinners. Christ got believers’ entire sins (past, present, future) imputed on Him as if those sins were His while He remains sinless. There is no limit of either amount or type of believers' sins imputed on Him. Christ willingly offered Himself to take the punishment of those sins by dying on the cross or God punished Christ for the sins of believers, and He paid the penalty of those sins in full.
Questions:
1. The phrase "justified by faith" appears four times in New Testament (Rom. 3:28, 5:1, Gal. 2:16, 3:24). New Testament was written in Greek and the one in Rom. 3:28 is in Greek passive present tense while the rest are in Greek passive aorist tense . Both tenses do not indicate once for all justification. If Scripture teaches faith-alone justification, then the Holy Spirit would inspire Paul to write the phrase "justified by faith" in Greek passive perfect tense. Unlike that of English Greek perfect tense indicates the action described by the verb (to be justified) was completed in the past with continuing effect to the present.
2. Scripture denies double imputation in Eze. 18:20 (ESV): “The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.”
3. Scripture says that we lose righteousness by sinning or we cannot be righteous and sinner at the same time. Eze. 33:13 (ESV) says: “The righteous shall not be able to live by his righteousness when he sins. Though I say to the righteous that he shall surely live, yet if he trusts in his righteousness and does injustice, none of his righteous deeds shall be remembered, but in his injustice that he has done he shall die." Death here refers to hell, not physical death.
4. By declaring believers as righteous who remain sinners and punishing Christ for the sins He did not commit on the cross, God did abomination according to what Scripture says in Pro. 17:15 (ESV): “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD.”
Just another Catholic who doesn’t understand the law and the gospel.
Read CFW Walthers book on this and Luther’s Galatians commentary.
Maybe you will understand the scriptures.
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty LOL!!!😂 thats funny stuff! “Read my guy’s “opinion” and you will understand. NO! Read my guy and you will understand, No, no, read my guy and you will really understand the scriptures…” 🤦♂
@@srich7503 Little do you know, I’ve argued with this guy extensively… And all he does is either reposition his argument or contradict the Roman Catholic doctrine. So I’ve recommended these books to him… maybe he will see the light. Maybe you will too.
@@Thatoneguy-pu8ty and what all do you know the extent of what and who i or anyone else has argued with? Are you God? 😆
Yes snow on poop. 🤦
Every denomination believes they have the Christian truth, though
If only there was some sort of collection of writings from God that we could use to test to see who was telling the truth. Otherwise it's just everyone's word against everyone else.
@@ChristianCombatives They're all interpreting the same text you interpret, more or less
I'm not trying to dunk on anyone, but wouldn't every schism or heresy say this? The church departed from the truth and we are just holding to the actual true teachings? Nestorians, Arians, etc? There would have to be some way to break the symmetry between two competing claims aside from just saying we are the true ones.
Sure, although as it's in the 1500s there's a hugely better historical record to look at.
A lot of people in the comments completely missing the point here. Shouting "Nuh Uh!" before listening.
I can't take this sentiment seriously from a group that removed "catholic" from their version of the Nicene Creed.
Technically Lutherans didn't do that...the term "Christian" was substituted for "catholic" in the German translation of the creed a century or so before the Reformation, and the Lutherans simply continued that tradition.
Once again, based and true title!
The epitome of personal interpretation. Come back to Christ.
Yes, better to have personal interpretation with a magical hat and chair that makes it so no one can question you. That's a much better system, the exact same thing but with no accountability.
17th century textual critique, humanism, anda logical extreme reading of St. Augustine and telos has nothing to do with the 1st century church, patristics, or Bible (put together by the Catholic bishops at the council of Rome).
Just be honest and straight with it - "we think we did it better". Then we can all go to Ludwig Ott's fundamentals of Catholic Dogma - fact check the Scriptural basis of beliefs, read Clement I and the Sub Tuum Praesidium, compare to the patristics. Won't be hard and no big human brain or movement will EVER erase the lines of the Bible that mention the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, Jesus founding the Church on the disciple he named rock - praying so that he would not fail, or the laying on of hands being expicitly stated in Acts to be the means of ordinating bishops and deacons.
Nothing against folks, but those who do inquire will inevitably be given the truth and there is an either/or choice if we want to follow those logical implications or not with profound spiritual consequences if we of full will and mind reject what Christ is revealing to us. Come home brethren ✝️ eat the Eucharist and come re-evangelize the West. 📿
This guy is kidding himself and trying to rewrite history.
OK if Luther had issues with the church why not present questions to a church based council. This is what happened whenever heresy arose from the earliest days.
NO you are NOT the Catholic church stop with your false statements.
Muddying of the waters even further, while confusing those who lack, or don't want to recognize, 1500 years of tradition prior to the reformation!
Which Lutheran church? 😂😂😂😂😂😂
Yeah that’s an insane illogical comment. Luther carried on the tradition of Catholicism and it’s Rome who is schismatic 🤦 just not logically coherent
Beware the bewitchment of language, as (Roman Catholic) Ludwig Wittgenstein said. 'Catholic' means 'universal', so they're not saying they're carrying on Roman traditions while Rome isn't, they say they continue to be the universal church the Roman Catholics have broken away from. Anglicans also claim to be Catholic: just not Roman Catholic.
I can claim to be a woman. I can even dress as a woman. I can get laws changed to say that I am a woman. I'm still a man.
Lutherans can say what they want. It doesn't make it true. They have a 500 year old man-made-up tradition.
When Jeremiah and the entire rest of the priesthood fell out, which party was the schismatic one?
Nope, Im Lutheran, and in my church, we teach quite a few distinct differences between us and the Catholic Church.
Rev. Einertsons claim isn’t that there are not differences between the Lutheran and Catholic Church, but that Lutheranism is the proper expression of the Catholic (meaning universal and historical church) rather than the Roman Catholic Church of today. So you are correct that your church, my church, and Rev. Einertsons church all teach the many differences between the LCMS and todays Roman Catholic Church :)
@@otl_podcast_keep telling yourself that
@otl_podcast_ I am not LCMS, I am with the CLC, Church of the Lutheran Confession. We are more conservative than they are
@@otl_podcast_ Presumably it isn't actually teaching that it *is* the catholic church; otherwise there would be no Christians outside it, correct?
Luther wrote: “Before God became God, he was Satan”. What does it say about Lutheran church?
Could you provide a link or source to this statement so that I can look at it as well?
No, he didn't.
You are *not* the Catholic Church- but rather you’ve declared yourself as your own personal private Pope. You do not have the authority to make the declarations you’ve stated. You have no apostolic succession. There is a continual line of Popes from Peter to Francis- Luther was not even a Bishop.
lutherans maintain apostolic succession but do not view it as necessary.
Presbyterial ordination was considered allowable in the early church and was present in the alexandrian churches until ~400AD. Modern roman catholic scholars admit that presbyterial ordination is not invalid.
I converted to Holy Orthodoxy. Every traditional Lutheran should.
Why?
@ I would need more than a reply box to answer that.
@bobbobberson5627 Do they teach most faithfully according to God's Word? Likewise do they properly administer the sacraments according to His written commands?
That's how you find a good church.
Only LCMC is the true Catholic Church.
Women’s ordination?
Ordaining women..
@@Battleaxe0246 is there really a problem with that? I’ve seen a lot of men pastors that are worthless. I’ve seen a lot of women pastors who were awesome.
how? Obviously Elca is not but why not LCMS? WELS? AALC? Especially if you ordain women while the apostolic and traditional Protestant churches don’t?
@@tonyfisher9961women will go into that profession to change it rather than to become part of it
I’m a Catholic in Union with pope in Rome, the first bishops were in union with the pope as well, then Judas did what he did…leaving a vacancy in the Jesus’ established church…a vacancy that was filled because that vacancy needed to be filled…to complete the Church…to complete the 12
lol