T
TrevorL
Guest
Greetings again Arial,
I was interested in the comments in the book "Here I Stand - A Life of Martin Luther" By Roland Bainton page 202:
"Thomas Muntzer was readily able to find support for his view of the Spirit in the Scripture itself, where it is said that "the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" 2 Corinthians 3:6. Luther replied that of course the letter without the spirit is dead, but the two are no more to be divorced than the soul from the body. The real menace of Muntzer in Luther's eyes was that he destroyed the uniqueness of Christian revelation in the past by his elevation of revelation in the present. Luther for himself had had absolutely no experience of any contemporary revelation, and in times of despondency the advice to rely upon the spirit was for him a counsel of despair, since within he could only find utter blackness. In such moments he must have assurance in tangible form in a written record of the stupendous act of God in Christ. Luther freely avowed his weakness and his need of historic revelation. Therefore he would not listen to Muntzer. At this point lies much of the difference not only between Muntzer and Luther, but between modern liberal Protestantism and the religion of the founders."
Kind regards
Trevor
I believe that faith comes from hearing the Word of God Romans 10:17, not by some form of the Holy Spirit interpreting or enhancing the Word.The Holy Spirit does indeed give gifts to men but He also indwells them for the continuous work of illuminating their understanding of the scriptures and for progressive sanctification. 1 Cor 3:16; 1 Cor 6:19; 2 Tim 1:14; Rom 8:11. The Bible often says the Holy Spirit indwells the believer.
I was interested in the comments in the book "Here I Stand - A Life of Martin Luther" By Roland Bainton page 202:
"Thomas Muntzer was readily able to find support for his view of the Spirit in the Scripture itself, where it is said that "the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" 2 Corinthians 3:6. Luther replied that of course the letter without the spirit is dead, but the two are no more to be divorced than the soul from the body. The real menace of Muntzer in Luther's eyes was that he destroyed the uniqueness of Christian revelation in the past by his elevation of revelation in the present. Luther for himself had had absolutely no experience of any contemporary revelation, and in times of despondency the advice to rely upon the spirit was for him a counsel of despair, since within he could only find utter blackness. In such moments he must have assurance in tangible form in a written record of the stupendous act of God in Christ. Luther freely avowed his weakness and his need of historic revelation. Therefore he would not listen to Muntzer. At this point lies much of the difference not only between Muntzer and Luther, but between modern liberal Protestantism and the religion of the founders."
There is no justice in punishing the innocent and letting the guilty go free.was Jesus actually accomplishing something when He died in our place? I say yes. I say He in actuality met justice against the sins of His people (those God would give Him) so that God could extend eternal (not temporary) mercy on them without His justice being compromised.
One key is that Jesus was rightly related to death because he was a descendant of Adam and inherited his fallen nature.How is this, not this below?
Kind regards
Trevor