Daily reminder Protestantism is blatant heresy

Following the teachings of Luther.

Following what Luther teaches instead of what the Romans taught.

No one disputes the term ROMAN Catholicism.

Luther did.

He disputed Roman Catholicism was Roman?

>bipolar
Changing your beliefd to better suit the whims of people who are keeping the inquisition away from your ass isn't bipolar user, it's perfectly rational.
Cowardly maybe, but certainly not bipolar.

He disputed against the Roman church.

He disputed the doctrines, not the name.

So what is the big deal?

And why do people still follow his proven false teachings?

Convenience.

How were they proven false?

It's a meme thread, I don't know if any of the people who post on here are actually Christian

the reformation was a mistake, protestants are pathetic losers who are bitter because other churches actually succeeded in their life

Is there a source for this?

Adding to scripture to suit your ideology for one.

Everyone adds to scripture. Every sect of any religion can be accused of "adding" and "subtracting" from scripture.

>i can't build any [spoiler]actually beautiful[/spoiler] churches so i'm just gonna prohibit it.
>i'm so fucking poor but at least i am pure!
truth is that the catholic and the orthodox are laughing at protestants, protestants are literally the most pathetic church to ever exist

Catholics and Orthodox decided what was canon and had subsequent grand councils to interoperate doctrine. Far different from Luther arbitrarily adding "alone" after faith to compensate for his lack of Biblical justification of Sola Fide.

Everything martin luther rejected were impurities added to make christianity more appealing to pagans. Protestantism is the most pure and undiluted form of christianity.

>Catholic
>Protestant
>Orthodox

>Christian

These are just different ideas about the same things, different interpretation. What really matters is how we read it for ourselves, as opposed to letting a specific sect choose for you how to interpret it.

>What really matters is how we read it for ourselves, as opposed to letting a specific sect choose for you how to interpret it.

So you think any random joe can interpret the Bible with the same validity of an ancient continuous Church who's documented the tradition and elaborated upon Christian theology for over 2000 years?

Yes.

At that point, it's like, you find a Bible in 2016, you might as well trust in God to help guide you where you should go.

There is a Catholic church across the street from an Orthodox church, both very expensive buildings, right across the street from each other, very close in walking distance talking like 2 and a half minutes.

If these people who "decided how to Bible should be read" according to their "councils" way later than the original times of Christianity, why are they not joined together? Because clearly, they have different ideas.

It isn't about denomination. There is no one to better interpret the Bible for you than yourself, and help comes when God shows us the way Wisdom isn't exclusive to a specific religion or a specific sect of religion, we literally can learn from anybody

Lacking a tradition to back up the word gives you idiocy like Biblical literalism. Made even worse when Protestantism's founder unabashedly altered scripture.

Disagreed.

Reminder that....
The papal states based its secular power on a lie ((Donation of Constantine))

Started wars out of greed for secular power

Destroyed the authority of the Holy Roman Emperor when it out of Greed contested their authority over Italy and ruined their system of administrating Bishops.

Used excommunication, a spiritual measure, to get secular power

Betrayed its allies in war ((Remember War of the League of Cambrai? The Papal states was the first ones to switch side))

Let the corruption in its church grow so vast that a violent reformation soon became inevitable

Had a cardinal, one of the very people responsible for electing a new pope, funding both Muslim Ottomans and Protestant Swedes to kill his fellow Catholics ((Cardinal Richelieu))

Used it's own Monks to perfect different methods of torture. May sound like a minor thing, but don't quite sound like the ideal things for men supposed to live like Jesus to spend their time on.

Why do you disagree?

The first disciples were never associated with any particular denomination, and they were left to contemplate the deeper meanings of what is taught to them.

And they left us with such deeply meaningful principals like Sola fide and predestination right? How exactly is this better than the Christianity of St. Augustus, St. Aquinas, St. Bernard and Dante?

Every sola is just a quality being pointed out. All five are equally important, and each one is emphasized for various reasons. These five Solas are inventions to help us interpret scripture but not specifically mentioned in scripture.

Same with predestination. It is a concept, which has the opposite extreme, free will. Both of these are not as contradictory as they seem.

These ideas though are outside of the scriptures themselves. The scriptures themselves would be the best thing to reference when asking these questions.