-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
how do Protestants explain history?
- Thread starter Adamski
- Start date
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
I suspect you might not quite understand what the Reformation was about.
How do people explain history have never studies history,
Study the reformation you seem to have a blankspot in your history. Btw are you Catholic because that's a pretty common approach to the reformation by some Catholics. I would also say that human thought evolves along inter connected like biology so you have an intelligent design gap in the whole question.
...
I'm not a Protestant, or even a Christian, and I can see just, every fault in this logic. Do you really need this explained to you? How old are you? Because this is the reasoning of a 10yr old.
Skwim
Veteran Member
How do you know he didn't? Does the catholic church have such a mandate? And keep in mind that just because someone or something claims to have a mandate doesn't necessarily mean they do.
.
I learned about the Catholic Church history through Abeka. I learned about Lollards, selling of Indulgences, multiple popes and all kinds of Historical snafus attributed to the Roman Church specifically, schisms etc. You can bet that Protestants believe the Roman Catholics lost their way long ago. I remember as a kid reading how the mean old Roman Catholic church wouldn't let common people read the Bible for themselves but finally gave in to popular demand. This is basic Protestant stuff filling many, many books. Then later on I took Western Civ. in community college which was quite depressing and went into unwanted detail about Crusades and Popes and church hierarchies and rebellions and wars. Beyond that I encountered books like The Bad Popes, The Borgias, and Foxes Book of Martyrs. When I was a kid we did a play patterned after John Bunyans book The Pilgrims Progress -- John Bunyan was a man burned at the stake, then dug up and burned again by the Roman church. Who burns a man twice? How does it even make sense, but they did it. I mean there are tons of materials that Protestants have, lots of dirt on things the Roman church did and then also denied doing later. I'm not a Historian, but I highly doubt Protestants feel that the Roman church is some kind of pure gold refined by fire. They do not feel that they are in need of it.
Last edited:
Luther had the Bible. He also had the ability to recognize internal contradictions in Catholic doctrine.
Edit: have you read his 95 theses?
Luther didn't write the bible, he just translated it into common language so that everybody could read it. Which really made the Catholic church leaders angry since they had become so used to preaching their own "gospel" uncontested by the common folk. Such as paying money to have your sins forgiven, also known as "indulgences". So when people read the bible the began to Protest the corruption of the Catholic church they came to be called Protestants.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Is truth based on history or god?
Who confines god to history?
(That is the protestant point of view)
-We- Catholics see differently AND that is okay. The Church says if one is baptized in the father, son, and holy spirit they are cool. A lot of protestants are. All protestants have the sacraments. The Church has no right for political claims of another persons faith.
A catholic is a christian who should be in communion wih ALL christians.
This OP says the opposite. Why is that?
Last edited:
Scott C.
Just one guy
I'm not sure if you're a Catholic arguing that Luther had no line of authority to empower him. Catholics see Christ ordaining Peter as the first Pope with a line of authoritative succession until today. Luther would not be part of that line of authority. But a Protestant would say that line of authority is not needed. Luther read the Bible, observed problems in the church and took it upon himself to remedy the situation. Most Protestants would say he had all of the official calling from God that he needed. As a Mormon, I have my beliefs on apostolic succession and authority which I won't go into here. I don't know if I hit at all on what you are asking.
The term "Protestant" covers too much territory for your question. Can you be more specific?
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
As usual, you are too kind.
Adamski
Member
Luther never claimed to have that authority he said the bible did a book compiled 300 years after Jesus, jeuss never said to read his book he said to follow the church he started
Adamski
Member
Pick one of the 38,000+ competing groups that call them self Protestants and tell me
Adamski
Member
It is clearly needed look at he Protestant chaos 38,000+ competing denominations all with different beliefs
Adamski
Member
God directed Peter and the apostles directly not Luther those apostles appointed others who appointed others and so on
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Luther never intended to leave the CC permanently.
BTW, I grew up in a fundamentalist Lutheran church, and I heard regular anti-Catholic rants both there and from my parents. In two months, I will have been married to a Catholic woman for 50 years.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Actually it does, and it shows up in Acts and in some of the epistles.
Here are my questions back to you: After Jesus and the apostles were dead, was there a church authority of some type or not, and if not, then what guided the church and how was that supposedly mandated?
And vice-versa. Have you ever studied the history of Protestantism? Yes, there were problems, including many very serious problems, throughout the history of the CC, and many of those were made by their own doing. But let me remind you that not only did much the same happen within Protestantism, but also even the apostles were hardly stellar at times-- Peter's denial, Thomas' doubting, Judas' betrayal, arguments between them, ...
Religious institutions were not built for perfect people because perfect people wouldn't need such facilities-- they were built for us flawed people.
Such as?