Question for all protestants

[rinnie]

Okay I am not going to argue with you but now you have the moral obligation to myself and others to prove what you have said.

Show me the Infallible Doctrine or Dogma declaring that it is morrally correct to burn heretic’s to death.

I cannot continue to argue or admit a wrong you accuse the RCC of if you have no proof.

If its a dogma or church doctrine show me.

Number 575 is where I asked you. 576 was your answer.

 

[dronald]

Right here.

Number 575 is where I asked you. 576 was your answer.

Okay, you asked me for the document that says burning heretics is just fine, and what you’ve managed to do is defend that Papal Bull. I disagree that it can be defended, it was wrong and it should have never existed.

 

[rinnie]

Okay, you asked me for the document that says burning heretics is just fine, and what you’ve managed to do is defend that Papal Bull. I disagree that it can be defended, it was wrong and it should have never existed.

No I didn’t. I asked you for Infallible Church Dogma or Doctrine. You claim the Church has taught us something that is not the true word of God. As I said you have not done that.

Now you are speaking your opinion on what the Papa Bull stated, and you agree with Luther. So what. The Church teaches that Luther is wrong.

Luther is in conflict with the word of God. Among many other ways.

But here we are back to the beginning and you have failed to show me where the gates of hades have prevailed over the RCC and we were ever taught a false doctrine.

Also you failed to show authority over the RCC from anyone. You did manage to claim you disagee with the RCC but in order to override the teaching you must show me your authority to overthrow the RCC.

As stated in the beginning the RCC has always claimed authority either the Pope alone or with his Bishops.

 

[dronald]

No I didn’t. I asked you for Infallible Church Dogma or Doctrine. You claim the Church has taught us something that is not the true word of God. As I said you have not done that.

Now you are speaking your opinion on what the Papa Bull stated, and you agree with Luther. So what. The Church teaches that Luther is wrong.

Luther is in conflict with the word of God. Among many other ways.

But here we are back to the beginning and you have failed to show me where the gates of hades have prevailed over the RCC and we were ever taught a false doctrine.

Also you failed to show authority over the RCC from anyone. You did manage to claim you disagee with the RCC but in order to override the teaching you must show me your authority to overthrow the RCC.

As stated in the beginning the RCC has always claimed authority either the Pope alone or with his Bishops.

The entirety of this discussion is based on the question you posed, “who do we know who to go to?” As you have stated and I agree, Luther had a different opinion on the issue of burning heretics. In this instance I would go to Luther because I’m not justifying burning anyone alive.

Now in the issue of whether “God hates homosexuals” or not, I’m going to have to go with the CC, and my Church but not the WBC. Sometimes Churches have leaders who do not always do and say the right thing, if that’s the case one must go to whoever is taking the moral high ground while staying in line with Scripture. Many family members have left the Westboro Church because it’s obvious they are going against the word of God. Likewise, burning alive human beings for heresy is against God’s word.

You disagree, and no matter how agitated you get by my reply that the Pope was wrong for his Papal Bull against Luther my belief stands. Don’t burn heretics for heresy, it’s not Christ like.

 

[rinnie]

The entirety of this discussion is based on the question you posed, “who do we know who to go to?” As you have stated and I agree, Luther had a different opinion on the issue of burning heretics. In this instance I would go to Luther because I’m not justifying burning anyone alive.

Now in the issue of whether “God hates homosexuals” or not, I’m going to have to go with the CC, and my Church but not the WBC. Sometimes Churches have leaders who do not always do and say the right thing, if that’s the case one must go to whoever is taking the moral high ground while staying in line with Scripture. Many family members have left the Westboro Church because it’s obvious they are going against the word of God. Likewise, burning alive human beings for heresy is against God’s word.

You disagree, and no matter how agitated you get by my reply that the Pope was wrong for his Papal Bull against Luther my belief stands. Don’t burn heretics for heresy, it’s not Christ like.

I am not agitated with you I am just not letting you get away with stating something that is wrong against the RCC.

And again I am in total disagreement with you. If I left the RCC everytime I disagreed with the moral or human opinion of a Leader or Priest of the RCC I would be searching all of my life and never finding peace.

The Pope was not wrong against his defending the word of God. The burning of heretics in the eternal fire is what is going to happen when they go to hell, or to the heretics that deny Christ when they die. If they separate themself from Christ and choose the eternal fire it is their Choice and not the choice of Christ. It is a teaching of Christ and will be forever no matter how you refuse to accept it. A teaching of Christ is not against the teaching of the Holy Spirit, I am sorry we disagree.

Anymore then it is the choice of the RCC. Which by the way is one with Christ and his teaching.

Just curious since you are in total disagreement with the word of God and the teachings of the RCC where do you feel the devil will go? And all of his workers here and before our time? Heaven? Since you stand firm on your belief that let me Quote: Don’t burn heretics for heresy its not Christlike unquote.

 

[rinnie]

Matt 25:31 When the son of man comes in his glory and all his angels with him he will sit upon his throne and all nations before him…

He will separate the sheep from the goats. Sheep on right, goats on left…

To the ones on his right, come you who are blessed by my Father inherit the kingdom preparted for you from the foundation of the world.

To the ones on the left. Depart from me you accursed into the ETERNAL FIRE prepared for the devil and his angles.

Jesus told us on the last day he will reunite our bodies with our souls and raise the dead from the tombs.

The good are the sheep, bad the wolves.

The bad will be thrown into the eternal fires body and soul. This teaching does not go against the teaching of Christ, and the Church cannot defend Luther when he is teaching a falsehood.

Unless you can find a way to ignore the scripture according to Matt.

 

[SteveVH]

The entirety of this discussion is based on the question you posed, “who do we know who to go to?” As you have stated and I agree, Luther had a different opinion on the issue of burning heretics. In this instance I would go to Luther because I’m not justifying burning anyone alive.

Are you in favor of burning women accused of witchcraft? Luther didn’t seem to have a problem with that. He called them “the Devil’s whores”. Over 100,000 women were burned in Germany alone.

 

[Scitor]

You are correct it does. And the Pope is who claims that authority. In MHO it should be a huge issue for everyone.

This is probably the fundamental issue at heart. A Protestant would ask, “why is the Pope the ultimate authority?” Can not God speak through Billy Graham, Charles Stanley, Adrian Rogers, etc.

 

[steido01]

Are you in favor of burning women accused of witchcraft? Luther didn’t seem to have a problem with that. He called them “the Devil’s whores”. Over 100,000 women were burned in Germany alone.

…over what length of time, and by whom? What percentage by Roman Catholics? Are you seriously implying that Luther was responsible for the deaths of 100,000 women? :hypno:

Please, you can battle dronald’s arguments without Luther-bashing. It’s simply unnecessary.

 

[SteveVH]

…over what length of time, and by whom? What percentage by Roman Catholics? Are you seriously implying that Luther was responsible for the deaths of 100,000 women? :hypno:

No, I am saying that he didn’t have a problem with it. And it was carried out by Lutherans in Germany during early post-reformation period. Also in England where there were 30,000 burned at the stake. Roman Catholics were not involved at all in the burning of “witches” as most Catholics did not even believe in witches.

Please, you can battle dronald’s arguments without Luther-bashing. It’s simply unnecessary.

This was in response to Dronald’s statement that he would choose Luther over the Catholic Church because Luther was not in favor of burning anyone to death. I am only pointing out the error in that statement. Who am I suppose to refer to, Calvin? And sorry, but this is not Luther-bashing. It’s just the other side of the story to put things into perspective in that the severity of the punishments handed down in those days had nothing to do with Luther or Catholicism, but rather the character of the times.

 

[steido01]

No, I am saying that he didn’t have a problem with it. And it was carried out by Lutherans in Germany during early post-reformation period. Also in England where there were 30,000 burned at the stake. Roman Catholics were not involved at all in the burning of “witches” as most Catholics did not even believe in witches.

Witches were a-blazin’ on both sides of the Tiber. Don’t kid yourself, or your defense is no different than dronald’s in this discussion. Take a learning (from a Roman Catholic source, no less):

The Spanish Road stretching from Italy to the Netherlands was also a “witch-road.” The Catholic-ruled Spanish Netherlands (today’s Belgium) saw far worse persecutions than the Protestant-ruled United Provinces of the Netherlands, which had stopped burning convicted witches by 1600…

The claim of some Catholic apologists that Elizabeth I executed 800 witches a year is gross slander. In Southwest Germany alone, 3,229 people were executed for witchcraft between 1562 and 1684, more than were executed for any reason by the Spanish, Portugese, and Roman Inquisitions between 1500 and 1800. (All three of these Inquisitions burned fewer than a dozen witches in total.)

The most-dreaded lay witch-hunter was Nicholas Rémy, attorney general of Lorraine, who boasted of sending 900 persons to the stake in a single decade (1581-1591). But the all-time grand champion exterminator of witches was Ferdinand von Wittelsbach, Catholic prince-archbishop of Cologne, Germany, who burned 2,000 members of his flock during the 1630s.

Let no one argue that witch-hunting was a predominantly Protestant activity. Both Catholic and Protestant lands saw light and heavy hunts. Demonologists and critics alike came from both religious camps…

But although Catholics have been fed comforting errors by overeager apologists about the Church’s part in persecuting witches, we must face our own tragic past. Fellow Catholics, to whom we are forever bound in the communion of saints, did sin grievously against people accused of witchcraft. If our historical memory can be truly purified, then the smoke from the Burning Times can finally disperse.

catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0056.html

This was in response to Dronald’s statement that he would choose Luther over the Catholic Church because Luther was not in favor of burning anyone to death. I am only pointing out the error in that statement. Who am I suppose to refer to, Calvin? And sorry, but this is not Luther-bashing. It’s just the other side of the story to put things into perspective in that the severity of the punishments handed down in those days had nothing to do with Luther or Catholicism, but rather the character of the times.

Fair enough to point out the speck of sawdust in brother Martin’s eye (but you’ll need to provide a source for this - England certainly wasn’t Lutheran), but we mustn’t ignore the plank in our own. If you’re going to point out an error, don’t refute it with additional error.

I do agree with you that the punishments were, largely, a reflection of the times. The same can be said of the rhetoric used by the men of that age.

 

[rinnie]

This is probably the fundamental issue at heart. A Protestant would ask, “why is the Pope the ultimate authority?” Can not God speak through Billy Graham, Charles Stanley, Adrian Rogers, etc.

I don’t think the Church has ever denied that he can. But what the Church does deny is a truth they have feel have been given to them that goes out of bounds with the truth given to the RCC by the power of the Holy Spirit.

The Church actually admires all truths in all faith and sees it as a starting place for us to come together in Christ.

To make it short it is not the truth in other Churchs that has ever been denied. Its the fullness of the Truth given to us by the Power of the Holy Spirit that is proclaimed.

And the reason why is because Jesus gave him the keys to the kingdom. It is scripture based by the way.

 

[rinnie]

…over what length of time, and by whom? What percentage by Roman Catholics? Are you seriously implying that Luther was responsible for the deaths of 100,000 women? :hypno:

Please, you can battle dronald’s arguments without Luther-bashing. It’s simply unnecessary.

The truth is we are not in the position to bash anyone. It is not our reason for being here. But truths are truths.

The truth is the RCC never taught that they were in favor or Roman Law, They just obeyed it. And did their best to bring as many sheep back to the flock as they could.

If people want to accuse them of not doing enough to stop the horrible law they are free to do so.

But to say the the RCC teaches that Roman Law is the teachings of the RCC is incorrect.

Luther tired to blame the RCC for the Roman Law and failed in doing so.

 

[batman1973]

The truth is we are not in the position to bash anyone. It is not our reason for being here. But truths are truths.

The truth is the RCC never taught that they were in favor or Roman Law, They just obeyed it. And did their best to bring as many sheep back to the flock as they could.

If people want to accuse them of not doing enough to stop the horrible law they are free to do so.

But to say the the RCC teaches that Roman Law is the teachings of the RCC is incorrect.

Luther tired to blame the RCC for the Roman Law and failed in doing so.

I assume you can back up your claims?

 

[PRmerger]

This is probably the fundamental issue at heart. A Protestant would ask, “why is the Pope the ultimate authority?”

Because without an ultimate authority, you have the chaos confusion of each and every man thinking that he is how own pope.

Can not God speak through Billy Graham, Charles Stanley, Adrian Rogers, etc.

God can speak through those men. But when they profess different interpretations, and esp. when they profess contrary things, whom is speaking correctly?

 

[dronald]

I am not agitated with you I am just not letting you get away with stating something that is wrong against the RCC.

And again I am in total disagreement with you. If I left the RCC everytime I disagreed with the moral or human opinion of a Leader or Priest of the RCC I would be searching all of my life and never finding peace.

The Pope was not wrong against his defending the word of God. The burning of heretics in the eternal fire is what is going to happen when they go to hell, or to the heretics that deny Christ when they die. If they separate themself from Christ and choose the eternal fire it is their Choice and not the choice of Christ. It is a teaching of Christ and will be forever no matter how you refuse to accept it. A teaching of Christ is not against the teaching of the Holy Spirit, I am sorry we disagree.

Anymore then it is the choice of the RCC. Which by the way is one with Christ and his teaching.

Just curious since you are in total disagreement with the word of God and the teachings of the RCC where do you feel the devil will go? And all of his workers here and before our time? Heaven? Since you stand firm on your belief that let me Quote: Don’t burn heretics for heresy its not Christlike unquote.

The context has nothing to do with Jesus’s final judgement, and we have no right to carry out (or promote) a physical judgement.

Are you in favor of burning women accused of witchcraft? Luther didn’t seem to have a problem with that. He called them “the Devil’s whores”. Over 100,000 women were burned in Germany alone.

But that was a different time and place with witches, don’t you know that witches will not inherit the kingdom of God? They were simply doing what Jesus was going to do anyways by burning them, look:

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

 

[PRmerger]

If you mean that burning heretics was a false doctrine and a Pope agreed that it should be done, then yes; he was teaching false doctrine.

No, the Pope never taught that burning heretics was something that “should be done”.

Ex Surge Domine was a papal bull which rejected 42 of Luther’s propositions.

One of the propositions that Luther made was “That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit.”

The Church condemned this statement.

But that ought not be interpreted as the Pope saying, “It is therefore the will of God that heretics be burned”.

 

[rinnie]

The context has nothing to do with Jesus’s final judgement, and we have no right to carry out (or promote) a physical judgement.

But that was a different time and place with witches, don’t you know that witches will not inherit the kingdom of God? They were simply doing what Jesus was going to do anyways by burning them, look:

Matthew 25:41 Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

You just told me that this had nothing to do with the context and no one has the right for final judgement.

But anyone I am not going to argue with you because you just contradicted yourself.

You said that burning was what Jesus was going to do to witches anyone did you not? Not that I agree with what you are saying, because no one can judge what Jesus will or will not do in the final judgment.

But with that said are witches heretics? If not why were they burned? And if they were not. How were they not? And if so you have no case. And are also totally in disagreement with Luther also.

 

[steido01]

And are also totally in disagreement with Luther also.

Source. You and SteveVH have yet to name a source. Same for dronald, for that matter. None of you three are even Lutheran. Please, follow the example of Charles V and leave the poor dead man be.

If you want to use Luther to prove a historical point, that’s one thing. But you’ll need to name a source, and you have to present factual information - no more pretending that the Roman Catholic Church didn’t hunt witches. You also should bear in mind that Luther represents, at most, Lutheranism only (not general protestantism) and, at some points, speaks only for himself and not Lutheranism at all. If you don’t present information fairly, you’re engaging in Luther-bashing. I ask all three of you to kindly leave Luther out of your discussion.

Much appreciated. :tiphat:

 

[dronald]

You just told me that this had nothing to do with the context and no one has the right for final judgement.

But anyone I am not going to argue with you because you just contradicted yourself.

You said that burning was what Jesus was going to do to witches anyone did you not? Not that I agree with what you are saying, because no one can judge what Jesus will or will not do in the final judgment.

But with that said are witches heretics? If not why were they burned? And if they were not. How were they not? And if so you have no case. And are also totally in disagreement with Luther also.

Haha, I was being ironic my friend. My point is that no one, ever in history can burn people alive. It wasn’t okay for the witches as it wasn’t okay for heretics. No one can carry out that kind of judgment but God.