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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Protestantism did not exist for all those centuries, but Christianity did. As the centuries passed, the pagan and secular aspects of Roman Catholic beliefs, policies, and traditions became unendurable to people like Martin Luther.
You're clearly not actually interested in "history". It's not hard to educate yourself. There's also much more to history than the petty divisions of the Hvítakristr's faith.
The church always considered itself as being "one body", to use Paul's words, and Acts plus some of the epistles indicate a process of the handing down of authority that eventually was called "apostolic succession". Even Luther recognized this historical fact. The Copts, Orthodox, and Anglicans recognize this as well and are considered as being part of that process that was disrupted and eventually fragmented due to political disputes.
Luther had more than his fair share of problems, with one of them being acute problems with constipation (true). Yes, he did correctly cite many of the problems found within the leadership and demands of the leadership, no doubt, but even with his 95 Thesis he merely asked that some of the theological stuff be discussed openly. When that was done, he actually didn't fare that well. At the end of his life, he died a fairly depressed man as he felt he had created some insurmountable problems.
Well, that depends. The title of "catholic" (note lower case) was at first used as a descriptor ("universal") in the mid-2nd century along with another descriptor "orthodox" ("truth"), but by the end of that century "Catholic" became a synonymous title with "Christian", the latter actually believed to have been an insulting term for the church when first used (shows up in Acts).
If I was you, I'd be careful saying things like that.
And there wasn't "corruption" within the apostolic church from the get go?
Truth. I did not mean to represent protestants as angelic, and I have not deeply studied its History on my own. I have read parts of various books. The protestants certainly did inherit a lot of anger and distress, and they stung themselves like scorpions trying to find out what went wrong in their original church. In my opinion protestants are representative of Roman Catholics, very much the same, although Roman Catholics often have (but do not always have) a more catholic understanding. What I point out is that things got so bad in the official organization that people were desperate. Some stayed to try and change things, and some left convinced that they could not. Protestants were desperate and felt they were driven out by a hierarchy that would not listen or confess.
As usual , Lmao!As usual, you are too kind.
To your knowledge he never claimed he had any mandate from god for his "belief system," but maybe he did. It is a possibility isn't it? And what is the mandate you evidently feel the Catholic Church is following?
"His" book"? The New Testament wasn't constructed until long after Jesus was dead.So I fail to see how he could have said it.
Just where does Jesus say to follow the "church he started"?
I Googled "Catholic Church mandate" and variations, but came up dry. Just what are the passages you're thinking of?
