Mfw Veeky Forums genuinely thinks Luther was the bad guy

Frenchies actually believe translating the Bible into a language the common people could understand was bad for Christianity. They genuinely believe allowing people to have direct communion with God, as opposed to filtering it through Patricians and priests was bad. They genuinely believe it didn't reenergize a flagging, static system of belief and transform it into a galvanizing, rhapsodic chorus that all members of society could participate in.

Other urls found in this thread:

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark 1
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

yes, the papists are the bad guys

Yes I also like seeing 10,000 churches in America with each one being more retarded than the last.

The Catholic circlejerk on this board is insane. I was actually surprised when I got here, because before I figured most of Veeky Forums was either non-religious or secular to the point that they never felt like talking about it.

>average pleb
>able to differentiate the divine from an overflowing latrine on their own

Enjoy your exponential increase in heresy.

what? Veeky Forums loves luther. only the jewish vocal minority on here hates him

>Protestant countries, industrious, libertarian and prosperous
>Catholic countries, poverty stricken, lurching left with ruinous results, perpetually stagnant

and you people would have burnt Darwin and Newton at the stake.

Because you fear the overman

I am the person who has been shitposting about Lu-lu on here.

But I mean defence, you *have* to be autistic not to see intercession and worship as two seperate concepts. Faith without good works is dead, and the church needs a final authority who regulates all of it. Otherwise you'll get any drunk German fag who will read the bible and say stuff that it wasn't intended too.

>translating the Bible into a language the common people could understand was bad for Christianity
Translating the Bible was bad, period. You want to retain the original meaning 100% and it's just impossible with a translation. If you're too stupid or lazy to learn Koine or Hebrew then you aren't very serious about salvation to start with.

well to be fair, it does kind of go back to the roots of early christianity before it had the backing of the Empire. Back when it was just a lot of weird gnostics out in the desert writing their own gospels with each one being more retarded than the last.

You do realise that protestants were heavy into witch hunting and all that jazz as well, someone even exceeding the harschness of catholics?

Which ones are the most left-leaning and disruptive of their own people and culture :^)

>protestant countries
>libertarian
You mean ANGLO countries and I'm honestly getting tired of people who equate Protestantism with Anglos, if anything the Anglo strains are a complete bastardization of Protestantism.
Germany and Scandinavia are the polar opposite of libertarian societies.

Lets be honest here, Paulian Christianity is heresy and proper Christians should be circumstanced and follow the food & clothing regulations laid out by the God back during his honey moon with Jews.

He was right to call out the corruption of the church, and desire for vernacular translations of the bible. And I can understand his desire to cut away traditional practices that have no basis in the gospels, but his extreme anti-semitism is quite troubling to read.

Z A R D O Z
A
R
D
O
Z

>Back when it was just a lot of weird gnostics out in the desert writing their own gospels with each one being more retarded than the last.
You do realise that Jesus himself said that even his apostles weren't sanctioned to spread faith until they had proven themselves to be truly worthy and faithfull? How does this translate to some dickhead spouting bullshit when it's not even in accordance to his teachings? This is exactly the reason why the church was so strict. Inb4 muh councils

You don't have to hate News as a people to mistrust their collective role in our societies.

>proper Christians should be circumstanced and follow the food & clothing regulations laid out by the God back during his honey moon with Jews.
You do realise that Jesus himself has relieved man of following the old testament laws? Have you even read the new testament?

Too bad that the modern Christianity is based on the teachings of some guy who never even met the guy while he was alive and spent his career as a preacher by making it more appealing for Romans, Greeks, and other Mediterranean goatfuckers.

>you'll get any drunk German fag who will read the bible and say stuff that it wasn't intended too.

This is my big issue with Protestantism in general. Too many Protestants have a predetermined set of morals and attempt to find justification in them through the bible. This inevitably leads to hundreds upon hundreds of sects, infighting within the sects, more schisms, and eventual irreligiosity.

Limiting the codified dogma of beliefs to a council or other authority that dedicates their life to the study and understanding of scripture and tradition so that it might be passed down to laymen and future generations is a far superior way to handle theological understanding. Anyone who wants to research scripture has the ability to do so, provided the necessary steps are taken to arrive at that point, and those with only a passing or incomplete look on scripture are turned away. This keeps things unified and at a higher level of discourse than a man alone attempting to understand all the bible and the history surrounding it with the same efficacy as an entire mass of ordained.

to what are you referring

>your religion is distanced from the source
>this makes my religion which is even further from the source more credible

Excuse me, Jews. Not News.

yes I know, to what are you referring when you say to mistrust the jews' "collective role in our societies"

Oiiii Whats wiv all the french h8 on this board lately ?

>be French
>create an absurdly radical strain of protestantism that completely shits on tradition and everything Rome stands for
>nobody takes notice and all Catholics blame that one fat German guy whose theology is basically Catholicism lite
Hehehe everything according to plan!

Christianity is properly defined by certain doctrines that are revealed in the Bible,Roman Catholicism violates the essentials of the Christian faith. It goes beyond what is written in God's word (1 Cor. 4:6). It denies the sole and true sovereignty of the living God by promoting prayer to and the worship of Mary and saints. Also, it denies justification by faith alone in Christ alone.

It is not a Christian church

/thread

Calvin did nothing wrong
TULIP is biblical

>You can go to heaven even if your not a good person. Just believe in Jesus.

What did he mean by this Veeky Forums?

>They genuinely believe allowing people to have direct communion with God, as opposed to filtering it through Patricians and priests was bad.
Uh yeah it was. Because then every single moron thought they could interpret scripture correctly and you get thousands of different denominations with theological differences based on the idea they're reading a translation of a translation of a translation the right way and it means only they have the right doctrine. The Church is supposed to be united, and theological issues handled by the clergy who have the insight to be able to discuss those issues properly. Not idiots looking at random verses and thinking "Holy moly, the Catholic Church has it all wrong! Jesus was actually an alien from Mars!"

he was an asshole but I did like how aggressively he poked holes into catholic dogma

>Christianity is properly defined by certain doctrines
Doctrines that were passed down by Jesus Christ. The Bible is just a book. It has zero authority. The only authority is Jesus Christ and his teachings were passed down orally, not written. For the first 500 years the Bible wasn't even codified so I have no idea how some people think it's the only source that matters.

>The Bible is just a book
Are you saying the bible is not inspired?

It's inspired but what matters about it is that it contains the teachings of Jesus, and I can't help but notice nowhere did he ever say "Write down what I tell you and that will be the sole source of authority". Christianity was an oral tradition, Jesus taught others, who went off and taught others. A lot of those teachings are NOT in the Bible. So where are they? In the Church.

All of which could've been done through reforms, which is exactly as It happened anyway.

The protestant reforms were more about muh papal taxes than their interpretation of god

Because it is inspired by god Scripture is perfectly and fully sufficient for everything in the Christian life.

>All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.
-2 Timothy 3:16-17

>Christianity was an oral tradition

You might be retarded.

Point me to the writings of Jesus Christ. Or where it is said he wrote. How did he teach? Did he write to people?

Christianity is founded on written documents. You might be confusing it with Catholicism, which is based on pagan mythology.

what protestant countries?
They are either the ones that secularize the worst, or their churches turn into the most cucked things in existence.
Speaking of atheists, just so you dont think it's just the west being retarded, Ukraine was known as the Bible Belt of the USSR, because of the number of neo-protestants there.
And they didnt get persecuted much.
Nowadays it's one of the most irreligious post-commie countries and the only guys still there are eastern christians, either orthodox or uniate.
So you can keep your cancer.

...

He had good intentions(he honestly wanted to REFORM the Church, not break away from it) and he did lead to the Counter-Reformation, but it turned into a fiasco.
just ignore him.
He does that every time, despite us, even not catholic, directly showing how retarded he is.

They're written down in the gospels, in Acts, and in the Revelation.

It's as though you've never heard of the bible before.....Catholic?

>I know who every user poster is.
>mfw that's not me. But you think it is.

>Christianity is founded on written documents
Christianity is founded on the the lessons of Jesus Christ which he never wrote down. In fact none of the apostles who traveled with him during life bothered to write anything down either. Not looking good for writings being the ultimate authority of Christianity considering the founded himself, Jesus Christ didn't write anything, and neither did his closest followers the apostles. Uh oh, how did they spread out and preach the word if they didn't have access to the modern day Bible, the ultimate authority for Christian faith? Were the apostles not Christian?

biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew 1
biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark 1
Enjoy my friend

No, it is not.

Christianity is the confession that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, who died for the sins of the world and rose again on the third day.

All of which is written down in the NT.

All of which is alluded to in the OT.

Your garbage traditions of men, your garbage oral traditions, have nothing to do with God at all.

>Your garbage traditions of men, your garbage oral traditions, have nothing to do with God at all.
So you think the apostles weren't Christian then

I think the Roman Catholic church started 2000 years before Jesus was born, yes.

Here's why.

Like many of the beliefs and rites of Romanism, transubstantiation was first practiced by pagan religions. The noted historian Durant said that belief in transubstantiation as practiced by the priests of the Roman Catholic system is "one of the oldest ceremonies of primitive religion." The Story Of Civilization, p. 741. The syncretism and mysticism of the Middle East were great factors in influencing the West, particularly Italy. Roman Society From Nero To Marcus Aurelius, Dill. In Egypt priests would consecrate mest cakes which were supposed to be come the flesh of Osiris. Encyclopedia Of Religions, Vol. 2, p. 76. The idea of transubstantiation was also characteristic of the religion of Mithra whose sacraments of cakes and Haoma drink closely parallel the Catholic Eucharistic rite. Ibid. The idea of eating the flesh of deity was most popular among the people of Mexico and Central America long before they ever heard of Christ; and when Spanish missionaries first landed in those countries "their surprise was heightened, when they witnessed a religious rite which reminded them of communion...an image made of flour...and after consecration by priests, was distributed among the people who ate it...declaring it was the flesh of deity..." Prescott's Mexico, Vol. 3.

The Christian Church for the first three hundred years remained somewhat pure and faithful to the Word of God, but after the pseudo-conversion of Constantine, who for political expedience declared Christianity the state religion, thousands of pagans were admitted to the church by baptism alone with out true conversion. They brought with them pagan rites which they boldly introduced into the church with Christian terminology, thus corrupting the primitive faith. Even the noted Catholic prelate and theologian, Cardinal Newman, tells us that Constantine introduced many things of pagan origin: "We are told in various ways by Eusebius, that Constantine, in order to recommend the new religion to the heathen, transferred into it the outward ornaments to which they had been accustomed in their own...The use of temples, and these dedicated to particular saints, and ornamented on occasions with branches of trees; incense, lamps, and candles; votive offerings on recovery from illness; holy water; asylums; holydays and seasons, use of calendars, processions, blessings on fields, sacerdotal vestments, the tonsure, the ring in marriage, turning to the East, images at a later date, perhaps the ecclesiastical chant, and the Kyrie Eleison, are all of pagan origin, and sanctified by their adoption into the Church." An Essay On The Development Of Christian Doctrine, pp. 359, 360. This unholy alliance also allowed the continuance of the pagan custom of eating and drinking the literal flesh and literal blood of their god. This is actually how transubstantiation entered the professing church.

nigga, you kinda start to realise the posts that say "catholics aren't christian" "muh Babylon" "muh Word of God" might be by the same guy, just how there is also some guy that is really autistic about free markets, and also another guy who thinks saying "lel thats a spook" makes him smart.
As for me, im just some e. orthodox that comes around here from time to time.

>Iberians, CisAlpine Celts, Galatian Celts, Ionian Hellenes, Illyrians, Sicilians, and Balkans are "goatfuckers"
>never met the guy
>implying Paul didn't meet Christ on the road to Damascus
>inb4 "I presuppose these things impossible therefore they could not happen even in theory"
If you concede the theoretical you concede the argument.

I know. I'm that guy.

Which is why I'm laughing at someone calling someone else me.

It's as though more than one person can have the same opinion.

>catholics aren't christian
This is an objective fact

I don't know how you reconcile the idea that you're somehow a Christian and the Apostles weren't

>I know. I'm that guy.
No you're not, i'm the one who keeps saying Catholics aren't Christian

The apostles weren't Catholic

Some of the apostles wrote books of the bible. Shocking, I know. Let's see. Matthew, Peter, John, Paul, James and Jude. All wrote books.

Where is anything they said?

Why, the wind took it immediately, and it's gone.

I'm saying Catholics aren't Christians twice as hard as you are. They're pagans!

This
Even the Catholics admit every word we have from Jesus or the apostles is recorded in scripture

Yeah they were.

Nope. Not members of the Roman Catholic church, which was not created until 300 years later.

Impossible.

They slime into "but certain other teachings were received from the disciples of the apostles", and then blaspheme their way right into making their own traditions as important as the Word of God.

Peter was the founder of the Catholic Church, doofus

Wrong

This board is full of jews, what do you expect?

>actually believing in the christian god

That is the claim of the Roman Catholic Church.

The claim is false.

Jesus is here?

>anti-semite
>doesnt even take the logical position that protestantism divided the west
>therefore le jew kill whitey man would support it
/pol/ is so fucking retarded

Actually it's true. Peter founded the Catholic Church and was the first Pope

Babylonian false religion is what divided the west

>entire west was christian
>divided
ooooooookay
if it werent for monotheism, the entire moral fabric of the west would be left to the caprice of the individual and regional communities under paganism. that's as divided as you can get

Catholics aren't Christian

do you have any idea what the word catholic means?

I was referring to Roman Catholics, not those of the church catholic, who are the true Christians.

>be part of a reform movement within the church
>basically say "fuck doing it right" and get excommunicated
>tramp around the HRE, preaching to princelings to follow your movement
>trigger one of the most devastating wars in history
>the good guy

If you know anything about history and the fallout of events and the consequent firestorm that often ensues, you tend to dislike people like Luther. It's actually very simple.

>>trigger one of the most devastating wars in history
It was foretold in Revelation 18:6

who do i believe

>The Eastern Orthodox Church,[1] also known as the Orthodox Church,[2] or officially as the Orthodox Catholic Church,[3] is the second largest Christian church[4] and one of the oldest current religious institutions in the world.[5]
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Orthodox_Church

>who do I believe
A neutral third party examining history without religious bias in either direction.

also he meets Christ in the desert for 1v1 training.

Which would mean the guy who said it's false
The only people who believe Peter was pope are Catholics

Probably, but are they saying it because they have an understanding of how the position of pope actually emerged out of some of the early Christian churches, or because they're Protestant and therefore have an ingrained ideological opposition to popes and the validity of the claim?

The only way to know for sure is to avoid the Catholic/Protestant argument entirely and look at what history says.

I believe in Christianity because there are more christians than muslims, and then I believe in catholicism because they're more catholics than other christians.

it's probably stupid reasoning, but it just makes sense to me that god's true denomination on earth would be the largest one.

>are they saying it because they have an understanding of how the position of pope actually emerged out of some of the early Christian churches, or because they're Protestant and therefore have an ingrained ideological opposition to popes and the validity of the claim?
Why not both?

>Frenchies actually believe translating the Bible into a language the common people could understand was bad for Christianity.
There were a lot of people translating the Bible into other languages before Luther.

The only reason translations took off was because of printing.

>There were a lot of people translating the Bible into other languages before Luther
They were all Reformation precursors and their translations were staunchly opposed by the church on principle

they weren't

>reenergize a flagging, static system of belief and transform it into a galvanizing, rhapsodic chorus that all members of society could participate in

That's the worst part though. Christianity could have died out naturally and been replaced by something more relevant to the times, but then this German faggot came along, reinvigorated everything, and indirectly started a bloody world-spanning rivalry that lasted for centuries.

Interesting

Yes they were. It's an indisputable fact of history

none of which were written by anyone who personally saw jesus

>translating a book full of parable, allegory, and metaphor that's supposed to be a guide to life and afterlife
>translating from Latin which was translated from greek which was translated from Hebrew
>letting people uneducated in rhetoric or the interpretative nature of the bible read it

Translating the bible was a total shit show. Even the Latin version had some mistranslations that propagated a huge shit show. For example "let not a poisoner live" was translated to "let not a witch live" and was the theological basis for the witch hunts in Germany.

>Another "catholic logic and science stuff" post

The bible is the inspired word of god who reaches out to us over time and space. Do you possibly think he can make sure its translated properly?

>implying reason and rationality wasn't God's greatest gift to man and what differentiates us from beasts
>implying he doesn't expect us to use it to the best of our abilities to understand faith

Calvinists go and stay go.

>translating bible into common language
Oh yes then say because they used nothingness and not a word which can mean desert that everything is flawed
>everyone hears god
And how do you seperate out those who heard Satan and who heard the Hily Spirit and Mother Mary
>all members could compete in
>unironically wanting direct democracy and communism but with faith for some reason

Has there ever been a demographics poll for Veeky Forums?