Question for all protestants

[pocohombre]

Of course, that would be God’s determination at judgement, and we have no place to make that determination
You can say humans burning “heretics” goes against the will of the Spirit. Judgement is His, not ours

Good point. The sin of Korah’s rebellion(Numbers 16) is sometimes equated to Protestants. Moses controlled his anger and trusted God to judge quickly. We know Moses could be impulsive, and suffered for it ( had to leave Egypt when he murdered an Egyptian and couldn’t enter promised land for striking rock). God’s way is best .God found them guilty and executed judgment on the schismatics. The true Israelites were only asked by God to separate themselves. The choice for dealing with heretics has always been the same. Either separate yourself and let God judge and deal with it, or take things into your own hands and suffer the negative consequences. As a side note, many colonialists who were loyal to the crown (Tories) joined the revolution only after seeing or being harshly treated by the British soldiers, with the burning of farms, confiscating property etc.

 

[GKC]

I most certainly want to do this. I am going to get as many books as I can and get real busy the next couple of weeks and see what I can find.

Then I want to come back and open a debate on this subject.’

But could we PLEASE now everyone get back to my question.’’

This thread is about over.

I PROMISE I will open this debate soon.

I do suggest multiple books. It’s why my library runs to 35,000 volumes, give or take. Bought 4 today.

But if you debate anyone, it won’t be me. I relate history. I don’t argue.

GKC

 

[pocohombre]

The statement you made that I asked for verification is Constantine ordered Eusebius to make 50 bibles around 325 AD.

I have no idea what you are answering with 27 books. I imagine it gets hard to keep everything straight.

It is your claim and you shouldn’t expect me to prove it. However, I have looked. Not only did I do a Google search without luck, I read what you posted as your proof and also read a history book with no luck.

So where did this information come from?

There are twenty seven books in Nt , right ? The order for the books is discussed by Eusebius in his* Life of Constantine,* I believe. I also found it discussed in* Halleys Bible Handbook*.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fifty_Bibles_of_Constantine

 

[RichWh1]

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

There IS no ONE correct version! Original language manuscripts need to be studied and compared and then a translation from there would give one a proper translation.
There are a FEW that have been taken from the original language, incl the NAB (Catholic Bible) and the NASB

These two versions probably agree more than any other.

Let me add that NO ONE had the power or authority to reveal (or determine) ONE TRUE VERSION without error! That is a misnomer.

 

[Randy_Carson]

I do suggest multiple books. It’s why my library runs to 35,000 volumes, give or take. Bought 4 today.

But if you debate anyone, it won’t be me. I relate history. I don’t argue.

GKC

If you’ve read them all cover to cover, that would be impressive.

 

[Novocastrian]

No. Popes have Theology and Divinity degrees; not law degrees.

“Obey the civil authorities.” Isn’t that from St. Paul?

Right. I don’t really know where to begin with this.

I’ll start by pointing out that for centuries the Popes were the secular princes of the Papal States - a swathe of central Italy, including major cities such as Rome and Bologna. Are you willing to see that there wasn’t necessarily the same distinction between Church and state that you clearly believe existed?

We can move on from there, and I’ll explain the rest.

 

[Novocastrian]

There is also the issue of disobedient lay people … (hmmm, I wonder where they got the example to follow, of being disobedient to the Bishops … ?)

Quite often, lay people who thought that the Bishops were being too lenient would go ahead and burn heretics anyway, against the orders of the Bishops.

John Wyclif was burned to death by a group of little old ladies who were fed up with him and worried that he was leading their grandchildren astray; not by any of the Bishops.

I completely agree. All humans are capable of sin! But the fact that some non-bishops committed atrocities doesn’t automatically exculpate those who did…

 

[Novocastrian]

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.

Just to be clear, I’m not imputing any kind of sin to the modern Roman Church. Benedict and Francis both seem like very holy, Christian men. What I am saying is that the defence of the moral and theological rightness of burning heretics at the stake should be seen as a big problem for a Church which claims infallibility. You’re right to say that the truth is one - Christians can’t be relativists. Either it was wrong to burn heretics in the 16th century, or it is right to do so now.

 

[RyanBlack]

There is also the issue of disobedient lay people … (hmmm, I wonder where they got the example to follow, of being disobedient to the Bishops … ?)

Quite often, lay people who thought that the Bishops were being too lenient would go ahead and burn heretics anyway, against the orders of the Bishops.

John Wyclif was burned to death by a group of little old ladies who were fed up with him and worried that he was leading their grandchildren astray; not by any of the Bishops.

John Wycliffe was not burned to death. He died of a stroke. His body was exhumed and burned more than forty years after his death.

 

[Picky_Picky]

John Wycliffe was not burned to death. He died of a stroke. His body was exhumed and burned more than forty years after his death.

Tyndale, on the other hand, was burned at the stake. But he was strangled first, which may well have been less unpleasant. Of the other founders of English language liturgy we could remember Archbishop Cranmer. He was burned to death.

 

[GKC]

If you’ve read them all cover to cover, that would be impressive.

I find the sheer number impressive. Also daunting, and challenging to stack.

I’ll get to reading the small blue one, on the top shelf, eventually.

GKC

 

[PRmerger]

Just to be clear, I’m not imputing any kind of sin to the modern Roman Church. Benedict and Francis both seem like very holy, Christian men. What I am saying is that the defence of the moral and theological rightness of burning heretics at the stake should be seen as a big problem for a Church which claims infallibility.

You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that the Church made any sort of infallibility claim with its 11 word phrase in Ex Surge.

If, however, you are not claiming that this is an infallible statement, then one has to wonder what your point is in referencing the teaching on infallibility?

 

[PRmerger]

Of course you know God is not the author of confusion. It is our hearing that is the problem, isn’t it ?

'zactly, poco. Egg-zactly.

So that’s why you need someone to infallibly declare for you when your hearing is in error.

You cannot know when your hearing is defective or when it is not, unless you have an Absolute Truth, and an infallible interpreter, to use as your guide.

 

[PRmerger]

As in they (OT Jews) relied on the tradition of Holy Writ, even Christ during His earthly ministry ? Scripture is not scripture till it is cannonized ?

No, david. YOU (and I) can’t know what is Scripture until it is canonized.

That’s why you need the Church. And Sacred Tradition.

 

[GKC]

You seem to be operating under the misapprehension that the Church made any sort of infallibility claim with its 11 word phrase in Ex Surge.

If, however, you are not claiming that this is an infallible statement, then one has to wonder what your point is in referencing the teaching on infallibility?

Around 4 years ago, 30 pages of posts went round and round on this, as you will recall.

GKC

 

[jmcrae]

I’m not arguing whether the CC was right or wrong. I am simply saying that Luther never denied the existence of Hell. I don’t know the involvement of Church leaders in the incidences of burning “heretics” at the stake. I will let you argue with others on that.
Jon

I think I finally get what Rinnie is saying.

If it is against the will of the Holy Spirit to burn heretics with fire (as Luther claimed) then it would be impossible for the Holy Spirit to send heretics to Hell and burn them with fire.

But we know that heretics go to Hell and are burned with fire at the rate of thousands every day (cf. the vision of Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco at Fatima, June 13, 1917); therefore, the Holy Spirit is not opposed to burning heretics with fire.

This is the reason the Church cannot agree with Luther that the Holy Spirit does not approve of burning with fire - not because the Church approves of the death penalty, or thinks that heretics ought to be burned at the stake.

 

[GKC]

I think I finally get what Rinnie is saying.

If it is against the will of the Holy Spirit to burn heretics with fire (as Luther claimed) then it would be impossible for the Holy Spirit to send heretics to Hell and burn them with fire.

But we know that heretics go to Hell and are burned with fire at the rate of thousands every day (cf. the vision of Lucia, Jacinta and Francisco at Fatima, June 13, 1917); therefore, the Holy Spirit is not opposed to burning heretics with fire.

This is the reason the Church cannot agree with Luther that the Holy Spirit does not approve of burning with fire - not because the Church approves of the death penalty, or thinks that heretics ought to be burned at the stake.

I think you interpret Rinnie correctly.

But I think JonNC’s point is whether man burning heretics is the same thing as the final judgement of God.

GKC

 

[PRmerger]

Around 4 years ago, 30 pages of posts went round and round on this, as you will recall.

GKC

Yes. I do remember. I think I referenced that thread a few pages back here.

 

[GKC]

Yes. I do remember. I think I referenced that thread a few pages back here.

Me too.

GKC

 

[PRmerger]

I think you interpret Rinnie correctly.

But I think JonNC’s point is whether man burning heretics is the same thing as the final judgement of God.

GKC

It is a reference to “it is against the will of God that heretics be burned”.

Clearly, it is not, if heretics go to hell.

Good job, rinne! I had never considered that before.