Question for all protestants

[Novocastrian]

You know I LOVE you Jon. and yes I have to explain what I said and I will.

Luther said that Heretics being burned goes against the teaching of the Holy Spirit. Lets stop right there. Do you agree that this is an accurate statememt. The Church states that this is not an accurate statement. Period.

The word of God states that it will happen when the ends comes, thats simple enough.

Now Luther took his version of what the RCC teaches, twisted it into his own version of what he tried to make it say and ran with it.

Because the Church cannot and will not deny a truth, he tried to make the Church say something they never said.

The Church said this in plain english, Luther you are wrong, that is not what scripture teaches,

Now lets go into this world today, because of him saying that the Church was wrong, people actually believe that in the end there is not eternal fire of hell, hell does not exist.

Now because the Church showed he is not correct on that teaching, he choose to find another way to make the Church look bad.

So he interpretated that to say that the Church agrees that burning heretics at the stakes is something they agree with and believe God wants this to be done.

Then he knew that the Church played a role not in making roman Law but had to abide by Roman Law and the only thing the Church could do is give heretics a inquisition and only the Church had the ability to understand Church Law and at least give an honest trial we can say.

If the Church said someone was indeed a Heretic, which they did, it was the Church saying they agreed with burning of people at the stake, because they did not (our favorite word here) and could not lie and tell the truth. The person either was a heretic or they were not. If they were they could at least have the power to give them absolution for that sin, and have them turn back to the truth and be released.

Cont…

Laws concerning the trial, punishment and (occasionally) burning of heretics were made and governed by the Popes. Luther was not disputing the reality of the fires of Hell, so how can Exsurge Domine be refuting that dispute? No, it is quite clear that Exsurge Domine defends the burning of heretics by the civil authority under the direction, and with the blessing, of the Roman Church.

 

[pocohombre]

One can only conclude that God is one of confusion. How does one the know it is God that is whispering and not the evil one?

Still does not disprove the method of God’s revelations to individuals. That is like saying seeing with the eye is wrong because after all, seeing can be deceiving ( eg does the sun go around the earth or do we go around the sun, and “the hand is quicker than the eye”).

 

[pocohombre]

If you accept the teachimgs of Jesus then the RCC prevailing is because of God. And if you believe and of course I believe you do that Jesus is indeed God.

You are Peter and upon this rock I will build MY Church and the gates of Hades will not prevail!

The latter quote is one all Christian communities understand it to be as part of their heritage and foundation.

 

[rinnie]

Now as I said Heresy was not a religious crime but a crime against the state.

The inquisitions were more humane then those of Secular authorities.

Scholars have found prisoners in secular criminal court actually would actually commit blasphemy to get to the Inquisitions court. That had more of a fair chance.

Were mistakes made by the Church leaders, sure, just like they are today in this world.

Vatican records prove that in Catholic Countries inquisitions Courts prevented many witches from being burned at the stakes.

Not in Protestant countries, which is ironic that Luther sure didn’t practice what he preaches. In Protestant countries they did not even get a fair trial.

In 450 years in medieval Europe around 5000 who were tried in a Inquisition court received the death penalty. Much less the people like to make you believe. 5000 too many Yes of course. But how many at least go off by the Church. It was the best shot you had back then,

Again this is in Vatican records check it out.

Ironically in the 40 years or so since Roe vs Wade app. 50 million people received the death penalty who got no trial.

If you choose to blame the RCC that is your right. But how can the RCC be any more responsible in medieval times then today.

You yourself accused the Church of being part of the reason these people of receiving the death sentence because they were indeed heretics, and I don’t deny that did do that.

But if you accuse then for not changing the law, how is there any less blood on our hands today for letting inocent people like a Baby be put to death.

And that is where I believe in my heart you are not giving the Church a fair trial.

We did our best I believe or as said, I choose to believe, and I have that right, and history proves they did indeed save many who by secular law only would have got the death sentence.

The same that years from now the RCC will be charged again for letting abortion happen. And I also choose to believe we are doing whatever we can possibly do today and once again failing again.

Is every RC Priest or Bishop doing his part. No. Many are and can be corrupt as in the time of Luther. But many our. And now we have a Good Pope.

But back to my point the RCC even through can and will make mistakes by men, will not make mistakes in teaching us our faith as taught by Christ.

There is One truth.

As I have stated hundreds of times in the past, If you are going to put the sins of RCC Priests etc at the foot of the RCC. Then you better put the sins of Judas at the foot of Christ. Because you are doing the same thing in my eyes.

 

[rinnie]

The latter quote is one all Christian communities understand it to be as part of their heritage and foundation.

Then why do they protest the teachings of their heritage foundation. The RCC was started by Peter do you deny this?

 

[rinnie]

Still does not disprove the method of God’s revelations to individuals. That is like saying seeing with the eye is wrong because after all, seeing can be deceiving ( eg does the sun go around the earth or do we go around the sun, and “the hand is quicker than the eye”).

Actually it does and :extrahappy::extrahappy: with a STRETCH pertains to my thread.

If someone makes a claim that they have a revelation from God, and yes they absolutely can and don’t even have to be RC it has to go through the RCC first to prove it is indeed a valid truth.

The RCC has the Authority given to them from God to do this. And the knowledge of the true word of God from knowing how to interpret his word to prove it wrong.

Kinda like the whole Luther thing, They showed him to be wrong.

 

[dronald]

Laws concerning the trial, punishment and (occasionally) burning of heretics were made and governed by the Popes. Luther was not disputing the reality of the fires of Hell, so how can Exsurge Domine be refuting that dispute? No, it is quite clear that Exsurge Domine defends the burning of heretics by the civil authority under the direction, and with the blessing, of the Roman Church.

This honestly needs to be addressed. I feel like this has been overlooked the entire thread.

That dead horse is back.

 

[rinnie]

Since we refuse to answer my question. lets also address Luthers teaching on the Person Of Christ.

 

[rinnie]

This honestly needs to be addressed. I feel like this has been overlooked the entire thread.

That dead horse is back.

CCC 2298 now can we move on.

 

[rinnie]

Laws concerning the trial, punishment and (occasionally) burning of heretics were made and governed by the Popes. Luther was not disputing the reality of the fires of Hell, so how can Exsurge Domine be refuting that dispute? No, it is quite clear that Exsurge Domine defends the burning of heretics by the civil authority under the direction, and with the blessing, of the Roman Church.

Please show me proof that the Church was responsible for the practices instead of legitimate goverments.

As stated in the CCC The Church forbid clerics to shed blood. My source is the CCC. Now please provide your source that states the CCC is false. If not can we please get off of this which has NOTHING at all to do with my question.

Is it so hard to keep On Track. Instead of making false accuations against the RCC show me where your Church has proof its teaching are truly and completely from the Holy Spirit and cannot be false. Thats all I am asking.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

CCC 2298 now can we move on.

Aren’t you glad dronald is not a Priest. He would be throwing your sins in your face every single time you saw him…

He is not going to drop it. It seems his whole justification to discredit the Church throughout all Her years hangs on this one issue.

You know how it goes thou - if you don’t forgive others - your Father in heaven will not forgive you.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

You mean you made your assertion that I don’t respond to questions before you researched it ?

No, after reading them - they don’t really address the issues at hand. They are just reposts of going around them.

Although, to your credit you did address some of it on post #850

I withdraw my assertion of Salem and Zwingli in previous post to be similar ,for i do not care to look it up. This is enough for now, and as you rightly say, say only what you back up ( or have time to back up). Thank you

Even if you went off the tangent again… your case would be dismissed in court as you present it. It should be no different here.

 

[rinnie]

What is the direct relationship between human beings burning other human beings at the stake, and God exercising His judgement to condemn the devil and his angels into eternal fires?

Rinnie, you know I won’t let this pass by. We recently talked about “lies”. A lie includes a component of intent to deceive.

When you wrote recently that the Lutheran understanding of the real presence was consubstantiation. I could have accused you of spreading a lie about Lutheranism, but I saw no intent to deceive. Therefore you were not telling a lie.
Unless you have specific evidence that Dr. Luther intended to deceive people, you cannot say he lied, without it becoming an issue of the Eighth Commandment.

Jon

Well Jon all I can say is the direct line is God on some occasions used capital punnishment for certain offenses.

ex. 22:18-20
Det 13:5 8-10 15 18-20

Now not only does the bible tell us the one who reject God will burn into an eternal fire. Which is how we cannot accept the teaching that heretics being thrown into the eternal fire go against the will of the Spirit. But also this.

The death penalty in those times was unfortunately exercised by burning of heretics. So while the bull defends that the death penalty for heretics does not go against the will of the Spirit which was at that time burning, it had to contradict Luthers teaching that said it did,

Now the bulls states just because the Church condemned the Position that it is contrary to the will of the Spirit to put heretics to death, by NO means states it is the WiLL of the Spirit to do so.

Now lets also read what the Papal Bull reads which I apologize If I would have investigated it clearer and knew what my Church teaches better (but I’m learning everday and trying)
Does state.

The Papal Bull States God Does NOT wish the death of a sinner but rather he be converted and live.

By the way this is the part that BLOWS my mind. Especially to those who consistently defended Luther here for what he said, He HIMSELF REPUDIATED what he said!

Yep:sad_yes::yup::clapping:

 

[rinnie]

Aren’t you glad dronald is not a Priest. He would be throwing your sins in your face every single time you saw him…

He is not going to drop it. It seems his whole justification to discredit the Church throughout all Her years hangs on this one issue.

You know how it goes thou - if you don’t forgive others - your Father in heaven will not forgive you.

Truely nope, not at all. I actually ADMIRE the dude. I am not being sarcastic either. And if I were him and believed something I would do my best to not let it go either. Just ask around I am always accused of it, and many times rightly so.

And thanks to him I learned another truth my Church indeed taught, and ironically defended my Church to be the Pilar of Truth once again:extrahappy: but all by the grace and truth given to me by God, and thank him for his ability for patience with me to help me truly understand it.

Unfortunately and yet fortunately this source may be the only place he can at least investigate the truth and find what he needs to know. While I am not going to make a RC out of him. he can at least hopefully see it is the truth, and at least defend us if he has to.

 

[dronald]

Truely nope, not at all. I actually ADMIRE the dude. I am not being sarcastic either. And if I were him and believed something I would do my best to not let it go either. Just ask around I am always accused of it, and many times rightly so.

And thanks to him I learned another truth my Church indeed taught, and ironically defended my Church to be the Pilar of Truth once again:extrahappy: but all by the grace and truth given to me by God, and thank him for his ability for patience with me to help me truly understand it.

Unfortunately and yet fortunately this source may be the only place he can at least investigate the truth and find what he needs to know. While I am not going to make a RC out of him. he can at least hopefully see it is the truth, and at least defend us if he has to.

Dawahhh, thanks

And you’re correct, this is the only place where I can investigate the truth; sometimes when I read Catholic articles on the Internet defending a position I’ll pick out holes like crazy. Here I can have an actual discussion and like you, it truly helps me learn.

As much as you may think we’ve taken this thread off topic though, in truth we have not. I was the culprit who (multiple times) kept bringing up the burning of heretics and that it was condoned by the head honcho of the CC, Leo X during the sixteenth century.

The reason I press this issue had nothing to do with a lack of forgiveness for the CC, as I love the CC as it is now and all the members within. Pope Francis is a wonderful Pope of a magnificent Church that is working for the greater good.

However, there was a time when someone could not do what Luther (and those before him) did without fear of a physical death. The reason this is relevant is the discussion is about “who to go to.” In the 1500’s I would agree with Luther when it comes to burning heretics being against the will of the Spirit. We need someone who can challenge the leaders of the CC to keep them in line. If the CC made a pronouncement that other Churches are committing heresy by saying burning heretics is against the will of the Spirit, we now have multiple Churches that would condemn such a proclamation.

Like you, I want unity again but sometimes division is necessary as it keeps everyone in line. When a Sunni Muslim (90% of all Muslims) blows up a Church, wouldn’t it be better if Islam had a denomination that could condemn that denomination for such a practice? Unfortunately there’s confusion in Sunni Islam amongst different Muslims in different regions on a ton of issues. A peaceful sect needs to break off as their own denomination in order to defend against the radical sects imo.

Look how peaceful all of Christianity is now.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Dawahhh, thanks

And you’re correct, this is the only place where I can investigate the truth; sometimes when I read Catholic articles on the Internet defending a position I’ll pick out holes like crazy. Here I can have an actual discussion and like you, it truly helps me learn.

As much as you may think we’ve taken this thread off topic though, in truth we have not. I was the culprit who (multiple times) kept bringing up the burning of heretics and that it was condoned by the head honcho of the CC, Leo X during the sixteenth century.

The reason I press this issue had nothing to do with a lack of forgiveness for the CC, as I love the CC as it is now and all the members within. Pope Francis is a wonderful Pope of a magnificent Church that is working for the greater good.

However, there was a time when someone could not do what Luther (and those before him) did without fear of a physical death. The reason this is relevant is the discussion is about “who to go to.” In the 1500’s I would agree with Luther when it comes to burning heretics being against the will of the Spirit. We need someone who can challenge the leaders of the CC to keep them in line. If the CC made a pronouncement that other Churches are committing heresy by saying burning heretics is against the will of the Spirit, we now have multiple Churches that would condemn such a proclamation.

Like you, I want unity again but sometimes division is necessary as it keeps everyone in line. When a Sunni Muslim (90% of all Muslims) blows up a Church, wouldn’t it be better if Islam had a denomination that could condemn that denomination for such a practice? Unfortunately there’s confusion in Sunni Islam amongst different Muslims in different regions on a ton of issues. A peaceful sect needs to break off as their own denomination in order to defend against the radical sects imo.

Look how peaceful all of Christianity is now.

So, our lack of unity is a good thing?

What do the scriptures say?

Church Unity

John 10:16
I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

Jesus is the Good Shepherd, and He left Peter with instructions to feed and tend the flock (Jn 21:15-19). What does that tell you about the Pope?

John 17:20-23
20 “My prayer is not for them alone. I pray also for those who will believe in me through their message, 21 that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that the world may believe that you have sent me. 22 I have given them the glory that you gave me, that they may be one as we are one— 23 I in them and you in me—so that they may be brought to complete unity. Then the world will know that you sent me and have loved them even as you have loved me.

Unity was supposed to be a sign to unbelievers. How strong is our testimony now, brother?

1 Corinthians 1:10
I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought.”

Mind and thought? Doctrine?

Romans 15:5-6
May the God who gives endurance and encouragement give you a spirit of unity among yourselves as you follow Christ Jesus, so that with one heart and mouth you may glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Romans 15:17-20
17 I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. 18 For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.

 

[RichWh1]

I asked this on another site and its got me thinking!:newidea: Oh NO!

Okay here it is. What makes one Protestant Preachers version of the Truth correct or incorrect over another Protestant Preachers version.

Lets say I go to one Protestant Church and the Preacher teaches me that this is what the word of God is saying, and then the next says this, and so on and I go to 10 different Protestant Preachers and get ten meanings. Who do you feel is right?

And how do you know which one is right?

There ARE no “versions” of truth; there is truth and there is error.

 

[rinnie]

Dawahhh, thanks

And you’re correct, this is the only place where I can investigate the truth; sometimes when I read Catholic articles on the Internet defending a position I’ll pick out holes like crazy. Here I can have an actual discussion and like you, it truly helps me learn.

As much as you may think we’ve taken this thread off topic though, in truth we have not. I was the culprit who (multiple times) kept bringing up the burning of heretics and that it was condoned by the head honcho of the CC, Leo X during the sixteenth century.

The reason I press this issue had nothing to do with a lack of forgiveness for the CC, as I love the CC as it is now and all the members within. Pope Francis is a wonderful Pope of a magnificent Church that is working for the greater good.

However, there was a time when someone could not do what Luther (and those before him) did without fear of a physical death. The reason this is relevant is the discussion is about “who to go to.” In the 1500’s I would agree with Luther when it comes to burning heretics being against the will of the Spirit. We need someone who can challenge the leaders of the CC to keep them in line. If the CC made a pronouncement that other Churches are committing heresy by saying burning heretics is against the will of the Spirit, we now have multiple Churches that would condemn such a proclamation.

Like you, I want unity again but sometimes division is necessary as it keeps everyone in line. When a Sunni Muslim (90% of all Muslims) blows up a Church, wouldn’t it be better if Islam had a denomination that could condemn that denomination for such a practice? Unfortunately there’s confusion in Sunni Islam amongst different Muslims in different regions on a ton of issues. A peaceful sect needs to break off as their own denomination in order to defend against the radical sects imo.

Look how peaceful all of Christianity is now.

No offense dronald but things really haven’t changed. While society teach you that you can reject the RCC, and Protestant faiths tell you that. Jesus said it is better to have death of the body then death of the soul.

Protestant faiths teach you do not have to confess your sin to a Priest, Which another teaching that blows my mind.

So when Jesus gave the Apostles and Peter the right to retain or loose sin, how did the Priest know what to loose or bind if he never had them confess the sin to them. Were they supposed to have the power to read minds, Another protestant stumper for me.

Now I am at a little loss here, You said you would have agreed with what Luther said and reject the Church teaching, even though Luther admitted the Church was correct and he was wrong??

Because I believe I was crystal clear on why the Church corrected him, and when Luther saw it, he agreed.

 

[rinnie]

There ARE no “versions” of truth; there is truth and there is error.

Then who in your opinion has the power to reveal the ONE TRUE VERSION? ANd does it without error?

 

[jmcrae]

Salem. Calvin.Zwingli I think

Not one of those three were Catholics.