How did anyone ever take Protestantism seriously?

>buy indulgence
>money goes to feed, clothe, educate and heal the poor

Where's the problem?

There were abuses but this is really all the Prots have to complain about 500 years later asshows

Protestant theological arguments have Biblical roots and the fact of the matter is that the Kingdom of Heaven has a political impact. The Vatican worked to suppress this impact because they did not want to give up their Roman traditions so they perpetuated false teachings about the Kingdom to deceive the people into tolerating their extravagances. The Reformation ensured that the style of church portrayed in the Book of Acts would be the standard bearer for genuine Christianity.

You're either an obtuse divinity school student or possibly on the Vatican payroll here and elsewhere on this site recruiting lost boys. An imbecile or a lie. The sheer volume of complete utter hypocrisy and, quite frankly, disgusting, immoral, and unconscionable things the catholic church has done to its followers and it's non followers in the name of God and that has been discussed and aggrieved for millenia is worthless to go over yet again. Yet you'll play, like you all always do, like we're ignorant of a single verse of James, as if that verse, even if it were the true wish of Christ, would somehow justify and sanction both your personal behavior as well as your Vatican rulers behavior.

So no, I will not play your silly little satanic game for yet another millenia. I will simply call you a faggot for that is what you are.

Run along little cocksucker.

>Abrahamic religions
I know you idiots are just brainwashed, so I can't be that angry. But, I'll admit. You mother fuckers really do piss me off with your idiocy.

>The Bible actually says the exact opposite in the 2nd chapter of James.
Where?

>utterly obsessed with cocks and a gigantic conspiracy

See this sounds like bait, but it's close enough to possibly be real...

James 2:14
In the Authorized version of the Bible "Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Yeah, that fake story of some butt Pirate and his beast fetish is what really attests to the truth of god.

CATHOLIC CHURCH = PHARISEES

FACT!!!!

It's important to remember that there are conflicting verses in the Bible so it's difficult to ascertain precedence over another.
However from Romans 1:17
>For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”
It is quite appalling however how some get torn up on this matter of 'Protestant VS Catholic'. It's dissapointing to see Catholics and Protestants at each other's necks here hurling profanities most foul. We must remember that we are Christians first and foremost and petty doctrinal disputes distract us from faith in the Lord and to the teachings of the gospels.
Remember John 13:34
>A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.

>there are conflicting verses in the Bible
Nope. You're wrong. God's word is absolute and the Bible was presented as the basis of Christianity. That was of course until people started learning the Bible was full of children's stories and bull shit. Then the church got worried, they realized we could prove passages in the Bible were false. So what did they do? Well they revised their religious book of course!
They said:"Woah Woah Woah, you guys got it all wrong. The Bible (yes THE BIBLE the one and only, the book of god and his prophets) is actually WRONG! So we've revamped this mother fucker FOR REAL this time. It's called 'The New Testament' forget that old testament, that wasn't REALLY the word of god like we said it was for hundreds of years haha!"
And all of the idiots believed them, and continue to give money to the church to this day.

>God's word is absolute and the Bible was presented as the basis of Christianity.
It never was that way, you brainlet

Also
ITT: Prots throw insults and lame muh sola scriptura muh indulgences tired arguments, while ignoring that their founder literally wanted to remove inspired books from the Bible, thought that he fought poo-throwing contests with the devil and last but not least the fact, that no Church Father and not even heresiarchs and heretics EVER professed a sola fide doctrine, it's virtually non-existent in early Church history

Oh, and Luther got Sola Scriptura (which like Sola Fide was never attested in early Church history) was probably inspired by Quran and its position in Islamic faith

Protestants are all one giant Sign of Contradiction

Yes it was. It was literally presented as the word of God. Fuck you trying to pull here?

Bible was always accompanied by Holy Tradition. The Word of God title means the Scripture is inspired, but it does not mean is inerrant in matters outside of Faith or Theology. Otherwise Origen wouldn't warn against literalist interpretation of Genesis.

Basis of Christianity is sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ and Scriptures are relevant to this as prophetic confirmations of his status as Messiah. Without Christ though they would be just letters without Spirit.

IIRC the only words in OT that are undeniably straight from God and not paraphrases are Ten Commandments.

t. non-expert, so thread cautiously

Nah nigga. You're wrong. Thessalonians 2:13 "We also constantly give thanks to god for this, that when you received the word of god that you heard from us, you accepted it not as a human word but as what it really is, god's word, which is also at work in you believers."

He literally says "yeah, you heard it from us. But it's the word of God!" Just so we're clear, that is from the New Testament.

First, stop talking like a whigger.
Second, word of God in this context doesn't mean Bible itself, but Gospel, Good News, preaching about Jesus Christ.
Likewise Catholic profesion of Faith mentions that Holy Spirit speaks through mouth of Prophets - as such Apostles and Prophets preaching the Truth indeed speak word of God.

Bible is very important and sacred and thank God for all its riches, but let's not fall into Bibliolatry.

>protestant "christian"s literal only argument is to shout conspiracy theories that were created to justify their particularly american style of racism against irish and italians
Also hate is not christian at all user

Veeky Forums American protestants are all like that, AFAIK only one Orthodox user on Veeky Forums had THAT level of vitriol and even he gave sources for his claims beyond antipapist insults. American protestants aren't Christian.

Nah nigga, I speak how I want. Yes they are speaking about the gospel. Which comes from the Bible. Peter 1:25 "But the word of the Lord Endureth for ever. And this is the word by WHICH the gospel is preached unto you."
Again, literally saying "We are preaching the Gospel, WHICH we're doing from this book." The gospel is the word of god, Jesus and Co were preaching the Gospel from the Bible. Ergo, they were preaching the word of god from the Bible. This is 100% logical proof, unless:
The gospel is not the word of god
Jesus and Co weren't preaching the gospel
Or
Jesus and Co weren't preaching from the Bible.

Ironic that now it's the Nu-Protestant's that do this shit with their purchasing planes and building fuck huge concert halls with donations, it's all come full circle

>being a whigger
>2018

Your argument is non-sensical. You do realize that Gospels as scriptures were written decades after Jesus, right?
You do realize that while Jesus quoted what we know as OT profusely he ALSO openly disobeyed interpretation of both Saducees and Pharisees of his time.

In fact, when Jesus wrote on a sand (Gospel of John 7:53-8:11) while Pharisees tried to force him to judge adultress he broke the Law.
In other place, he mentions that Poligamy was in the Law only because of hardness of Israelites' hearts.

If Jesus treated the Scripture the way protestant treat Bible today none of those episodes would happen.

>Jesus and Co weren't preaching from the Bible.
>implying Word Himself, a Part of Trinity, should be equal in authority with Bible

>the early Chuch, which Christ and the Apostles established, and from which the Bible came, gave us the Councils, the Church Fathers and organised authority
>say fuck that, nitpick from the Holy Tradition and take only the Bible for real, ignore everything else, even though it all came from the same source
>fall apart into 300 denominations by tomorrow
>now Jesus was an alien, gay female bishops are ok, science is evil and native Americans are a lost Jewish tribe
That's Proddie logic for you.

But if they came from God, also a part of the Trinity then they should be equal to the bible.

...

>while Pharisees tried to force him to judge adultress he broke the Law
How does that work, isn't Jesus sinless?

>Proddie responds by insulting Christ-like behaviour and appealing to his pride, the worst sin
How unexpected.

Indeed it was inspired by God, still it was written by people. Look into history of OT books. Bible is not one book, it's an anthology of texts from across centuries which Tradition holds - and I believe - are divinely inspired.
Again, it's not like Quran, which IS one book, written in one time period, supposedly existed since eternity and is literal, undeniable word of God, which creates so many theological, societal, political etc. problems for Islamic world it's uncanny.

Authors of biblical Scriptures were human - and thanks to Providence and Holy Spirit those books contain Truth, which aides us and spiritually feeds us in our quest for Salvation. Every Christian should read the Bible, should ponder about meaning of its verses and how they relate to his Life - but Bible is not God or Jesus Christ.
I honestly think that if Christians read more Wisdom of Sirach (which might be not part of protestant canon - look into it, the book is awesome) they would live better or if they read more Song of Songs they wouldn't thought all sex is impure. But Bible is a tool - given to us by God of course - which won't help us much without faith or Holy Spirit.

I'm no expert, but the basic gist is this - Pharisees came to Him in Sabbath and asked him what to do with adultress to trap Him: if He does sentence her to death He will break the Law, since there's prohibition of judicial judgement on Sabbath, if He doesn't He will break the Law since she is to be stoned for her transgression.
Jesus recognized it so He "broke" the Law himself - by writing, which is also prohibited during Sabbath. This is also why when He spoke about Sinless casting the first stone Pharisees went away - they TOO transgressed the Law by demaning judgement on Sabbath.

Like I said I'm no expert, google it. AFAIK sin isn't perfectly aligned with the Law, and spirit of the Law is more important than letter. In risk of heresy I'll write - Jesus broke the Letter, but kept the Spirit.

*wouldn't think

Ok, thank you for explaining

Nobody gives a shit, it was just a way to get the pope off everyone's back and out of european politics.

This is beautifully wholesome. I get the impression most people that debate Christianity here are atheists who claim to be 'cultural christians'

>this seems to be all the Prots have.
It's a really big deal.

>money goes to feed, clothe, educate and heal the poor

No it didn't go to that, thats the problem. The money went to fund the Basilica and the lavish lifestyles of the Pope.

Paul was a Pharisee

he did't break the Mosaic law.
The whole letter vs spirit thing is a Paulinian invention so far as this layman can tell

>This is what I believe but don't care enough to confirm
this must be bait or you are surprisingly ignorant about the basic tenants of the Christian religion, even for atheist standards.

Only baptists and calvinists do this, lutherans and episcopalians are generally more moderate about the bible than the old churches

>it's another "heretics asking heretics why they do heresy" episode

I am an actual seminarian in a reformed tradition. AMA, I'll be here a little while.

My theology is pretty middle-way. Romanism, Protestantism and Orthodox are all important and I think the true faith is found if you study all three. The main problem with modern day Christianity and denominational division is due to poor education. In the age of the early church and the old fathers (take Clement for example) your average Christian did the equivalent of 1-2 years of div school education just to get confirmed. Not the case anymore.

If more people studied the faith I think they would see that some fundamentals of each dogma are wanting.

example:

Prots: The biblical canon was not established for nearly 150 years, the gospels were essentially preserved by oral tradition until things were written down and agreed to be accepted. We can't simply state that there is the bible and absolutely nothing else--you must have some type of sacred tradition.

Romans: Often fall into Gnostic level heresy due to their absolute hatred of the flesh, love of absolute hierarchies, secret wisdom/knowledge and condemnation of material sin over that of the spirit. Plus celibate priests--which is just ridiculous.

Jesus Christ is the truth, he wants us to start thinking about the faith. Dogma is important, but people get way too bogged down in defending their little sliver of interpretation of Gods good news.

A single shitpost nailed to a Kike's "church" door generated this much anger from moneychanging shitskin footkissers. Let that sink in.

Amen.

Protestantism was OK until they came up with dispensationalism and started kissing Israel's ass.

>How did anyone ever take Protestantism seriously?

Lord: "i am a stronk empowered nobleman who dont need no church and kaiser"
*converts to protestantism*
*converts lands to protestantism*
*confiscates all church property for himself*

This entire thread is "Nuh-uh, my headcanon is the real one."