Why do you think God allowed Protestantism?

[look3467]

Name one or two reasons you think God allowed Protestantism.

1. A god is within it’s own right because it has a choice.
   The choices may be influenced by the environment, by other people and the times.
   We are gods, as Jesus pointed out and as Genesis details our misfortune.
2. Because we had no choice in being born asgods: about when, where and or to whom, we are limited to those conditions.
   For example, you might have been born a caveman or cave women, a Roman soldier, an African tribesman, an American Indian, catholic, or a protestant.

What had the caveman in common with a Catholic or a protestant?

But, get this, if God wanted to save all of His human creation, how would He do it?

Wouldn’t He lump them all together, and of one make a new creation?

Did He not of one make the peoples of the world?

And again, did He not make of one a new creation of the peoples of the world?

Where than is the distinction to God?

The distinction lies with the minds of mankind who separates, divides for it’s own gain the beliefs and standards of their own makings.

If love is what Jesus came to justify then love must be the standard for all the mentioned peoples above .

Love needs no religion for love is God!

All who practice love are from God.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[Good_Fella]

Name one or two reasons you think God allowed Protestantism.

I think one reason might be that Catholicism is so… difficult, that maybe God wanted there to be an “easier, softer” way that would lead people to Christ (and He knew that many would then be led to the RC Church)?? Just a thought.

Also, i think that Protestants generally focus on different things than Catholics do, different “aspects” of God, things that are nonetheless very important… like, well… i just think that sometimes they are more… friendly… & i feel they may trust in God’s mercy more than a lot of Catholics…

One may as well ask why God allowed the fall of Adam and Eve. His ways are not our ways, his thoughts unlike our thoughts. But since we have been created in God’s image, we are not only entitled but expected to ask the question that you’ve raised. In hindsight it would appear that the Reformation served to open the eyes of the Church to the malignant corruption that dwelt within. All the same, God did not desire that the Reformation take place just as much he did not want Adam and Eve to disobey him.

PAX :harp:

 

[look3467]

A story book explanation and one by which only our limited minds can understand is the fall of Adam and Eve.

God could not make robots human without giving the robots the ability to think and reason.

Human then were mad in the image of God and not robots.

The granting of intelligences gave the human the ability to distinguish the difference between good and evil.

There was no tree as such and an apple as such, but knowledge being the symbol of a tree and eating of knowledge is the symbol of the apple if you will.

Our downfall, then was the lowering, the casting out, the separation from God because of knowledge.

Is every baby born without knowledge? And does the baby begin (eating) of the tree of knowledge to the point where the child becomes its own god?

At that point, the child becomes dead to God an alive to its own kingdom on earth.

If the word allowed is useful for understanding, than the word designed is used to give god the glory of His creation.

It was His designed works to create us in like manner as He, in His likeness and the fall as a designed plan.

Because He knew the problem of our separation, He also provided us with reconciliation via His Son Jesus Christ.

He also knew of all the human pitfalls while in a separated state (Earthlings)that only He (God) could remedie the situation by giving us Jesus as the vehicle to accomplish it.

Does that sound like He allowed it to happen?

He designed it that way.

What is left for us to do then if God did the works of salvation for us?

For us to gain spiritual knowledge (the good side of the tree) and live and act upon that knowledge for His glory, and for our benefit.

God saved us from eternal separation, now it is up to us to save ourselves from the evil that is present in our beings, to become victorious over it in our daily living.

Catholics, Protestants and all others are divided because of the basic misunderstanding of what love of God is.

God’s love knows no religion, but sees only what is in the heart of the individual and only there can He effect a change of Heart which when it does, it changes the face of the individuals life.
A life changing experience.

If we are to address anything, should we not address the lack of understanding of Gods love?

If we can reach the lost (Those who have no understanding) concerning the love of God for their lives, they too would have a life changing experience.

Or should we argue to see ho is right?

 

[guanophore]

You’re right the true members of the Church would not do this but these things did occur by men who were sinners and were leaders Catholic.

They may have had positions of leadership in the Catholic Church but their actions and faith were not Catholic. Some people who were baptized Catholic left the faith, or never learned their faith, but continued to call themselves Catholic.

They are held to their errors. I’m just saying these things occured not sugar coating history or blowing it off. I think it is important for faults to be recognized and spoken of honestly anything else is deception. Things things occured.

Yes, I understand. Indeed they were in error. I am just saying it is important not to lay the faults of people at the feet of Jesus.

Does that mean the Chruch is less true? No. But it should be an object lessen for the body to be wary of such leadership. Consider Dante. Catholic as he was he still noted, in his Divine Comedy, that there were priest in hell for “selling salvation”. Now it is an observation that these things happen and we must not be blind to such things and hold each other to a higher standard.

Yes, you are right of course. I have heard that Hitler was baptized Catholic also, and some have tried to hold him up as an example of Catholicity.

I believe that Protestantism has in part done this.  Now protestants should never have left the Church like St. Francis, though humiliated by the Pope himself, did not.  But God has used it to benefit Catholics as well.

God can make the greatest good come out of the worst evil. One need only look at the crucifixion to see this.

 

[jmcrae]

A good summary of why many of the reformers separated themselves. It brings out the distinction between the visible and the invisible church as well.

And yet, they did not become perfect, by leaving the Church - their sins and their tendencies to sin went with them.

They might as well have stayed.

 

[Truthstalker]

And yet, they did not become perfect, by leaving the Church - their sins and their tendencies to sin went with them.

They might as well have stayed.

Not all had a choice, as we discussed before.

This, though, pertains to those who did have a choice. Calvin felt that Christ was lost “in a forest of saints” and the Gospel buried and hidden. They were not seeking personal perfection. They were seeking God and did not believe they could follow Him any longer within the Catholic Church. The Church was corrupt, as Pope Hadrian IV attested (link provided in a previous post on this thread). Priests were ignorant (one of Trent’s reforms was the requirement that they be educated) and bishoprics were treated as a source of wealth and power. Superstition was rampant. Politically, Luther tapped into and voiced something that the Germans had long felt, and that was that Rome was ripping them off. I suspect that had he not lived, the explosion in Germany would have been much worse. And I am aware of the Peasant’s War, the Thirty Years War, and the One Hundred Years War.

There were reformers who went a ways with the Reformers and either did not leave the CC or chose to return to it. Erasmus never left; both Luther and Calvin had acquaintences who returned to the Catholic Church. Calvin kept up his friendship with one who did so for the rest of his life, BTW, which may be a surprise to some.

As you have pointed out, some broke with Rome to justify their own sin. Others did so because they could no longer conscience allegience to Rome. You had a laity developing that was reading and thinking, rediscovering the classics, and they saw profound discrepencies between what they read in the Bible and what was happening in the Church. Able Catholic apologists, such as Francis de Sales, were few and far between. The church hierarchy was at best inattentive.

 

[jmcrae]

It is not much different from now - many priests come from foreign countries and barely speak the language; many priests today are not educated in their faith, even if they do speak the local language.

Much of the laity is superstitious, badly catechized, indifferent, distracted by worldly considerations, and some of them are just plain crazy.

We have both lay members and members of clergy who have done terrible things, and gotten away with them, even today. We have, today, nuns and religious sisters getting into paganism and witchcraft.

Yet, I find no reason in any of that to leave the Church, myself, because I find that in spite of all of these very real problems, only the Church is the Church. When I try to think of where else I would go, I have to echo St. Peter - “To whom, Lord, would we go? Thou alone hast the words of eternal life.”

I doubt that the men of the 16th century were actually dealing with a worse situation than what we have today.

 

[catharina]

It is not much different from now - many priests come from foreign countries and barely speak the language; many priests today are not educated in their faith, even if they do speak the local language.

Much of the laity is superstitious, badly catechized, indifferent, distracted by worldly considerations, and some of them are just plain crazy.

We have both lay members and members of clergy who have done terrible things, and gotten away with them, even today. We have, today, nuns and religious sisters getting into paganism and witchcraft.

Yet, I find no reason in any of that to leave the Church, myself, because I find that in spite of all of these very real problems, only the Church is the Church. When I try to think of where else I would go, I have to echo St. Peter - “To whom, Lord, would we go? Thou alone hast the words of eternal life.”

I doubt that the men of the 16th century were actually dealing with a worse situation than what we have today.

Amen, brother.
Well said!

Our Lord gave His Church to Peter.
We, through the grace of God, live in that Church today.

 

[Truthstalker]

It is not much different from now…
I doubt that the men of the 16th century were actually dealing with a worse situation than what we have today.

I think today’s Catholic Church is much stronger than the church was then. Trent cut out much of the bad stuff that was going on in the hierarchy. The CC is no longer playing the political games it was then. Back when I was role-playing Mr. Catholic Apologist I had a list as to Why the Church Today is Better. Stuff happens, but it is no longer systemic. I don’t think you’ll have another Medici pope. Catholic theology is much more defined, articulated and defended.

Of course, that doesn’t mean it has stopped looking like it is going to crash and burn at any second. I suspect it has always looked like that. Gnosticism, false prophets and persecution were the early church’s big problems. If it ever looks like it will NOT fall apart then you are not looking at it.

Amen, brother.
Well said!

Our Lord gave His Church to Peter.
We, through the grace of God, live in that Church today.

jmcrae is Judith Mcrae.

IF He did, then his successors have a lot of explaining to do. A lot. A whole lot. But that is the subject of other threads.

 

[athair_siochain]

I am surprised no one has brought this up. Without the Protestant Reformation, there would have been no Catholic Reformation.

There would have been no Council of Trent, no religious orders such as the Capuchins, Ursulines, Theatines, Discalced Carmelites, the Barnabites, and the Jesuits no saints such as Ignatius of Loyola, Teresa of Avila, John of the Cross, Francis de Sales and Filippo Neri.

There would have been no Puritans to sail to the New World to found the United States as we know it now. There would have been no Vatican II or an large ecumenism effort.

Also, priests would probably still be selling indulgences.

It’s only been about 500 years since the split. Maybe its part of a larger plan God has when the Protestants eventually come back home.

Why do we have to link God with everything we humans do, God would have known the reformation would lead millions of his creations to their deaths,

God did not take part, most of the changes were instigated by people from the top end of town, the suffering by the people and all the death and starvation, should make people think, who is this God worshiped by murderers and thieves, is the God man made ,or has a antichrist taken over, disguised as God, we all know what a anti/christ is capable of, just look at the world on the brink of extinction, we cant say a anti/christ has taken over. because the good books say he has not arrived yet. then maybe the antichrist is here. and saying he is not, is false information, everyday many are killed by religious fanatics, while peoples minds are filled with hate there will be no peace in this world,

 

[sambos671]

It is not much different from now - many priests come from foreign countries and barely speak the language; many priests today are not educated in their faith, even if they do speak the local language.

Much of the laity is superstitious, badly catechized, indifferent, distracted by worldly considerations, and some of them are just plain crazy.

We have both lay members and members of clergy who have done terrible things, and gotten away with them, even today. We have, today, nuns and religious sisters getting into paganism and witchcraft.

Yet, I find no reason in any of that to leave the Church, myself, because I find that in spite of all of these very real problems, only the Church is the Church. When I try to think of where else I would go, I have to echo St. Peter - “To whom, Lord, would we go? Thou alone hast the words of eternal life.”

I doubt that the men of the 16th century were actually dealing with a worse situation than what we have today.

Thats just ignoring history. There is very little comparison with today.

 

[jmcrae]

Thats just ignoring history. There is very little comparison with today.

Why, because Christian nations were at war with the Islamic countries back then? (That’s different from today, how?)

Because little heretical sects were popping up everywhere? (That’s different from today, how?)

Because people were proclaiming themselves to be Pope? (Pope Michael and his various imitators, anybody?)

 

[sambos671]

Why, because Christian nations were at war with the Islamic countries back then? (That’s different from today, how?)

Because little heretical sects were popping up everywhere? (That’s different from today, how?)

Because people were proclaiming themselves to be Pope? (Pope Michael and his various imitators, anybody?)

The Catholic church was a political power the Major power in Europe. Most of the Priesthood were poorly educated. Up until then only the Clergy and the wealthy could afford bibles and look into things themselves. The differences could go on and on and on. Much like the energizer bunny. Look I’ll quote a line from Jack Nicholson “you can’t handle the truth!” You like to blow off things that happened. I’m sure in a hundred years from now certain Catholics, not unlike yourself, will say protestants made up the fact that certain preist in Boston and elsewhere in the states were having sexual problems with boys in their diocese and the only thing the Bishop did was move the preist from one Parish to the other. The truth remains that these things happened. Be as ademant as you want. Truth is truth. Now I won’t go the extreme that some people have usedthe history of it but did priest sell salvation? Dante, a person of that time, thinks so and relates to it in his Divine Comedy. The Spanish inquisition happened. I won’t use the numbers that are popular and I’m sure the atrocities that happened were probably 1% of total population if that. But it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. If you don’t want to believe in it despite the evidence for it fine. I will say the Church teaches the truth despite the things that occured. If you need the church to be impeccible to solidify your faith, then I suggest you go ahead an keep believe that Popes never misused their position (Believe the Borga family didn’t exist). Believe that every priest was faithful and never lead people astray. Believe that certain priest never molested children in Boston. In short, don’t be honest with yourself. And definately don’t study history.

 

[jmcrae]

The Catholic church was a political power the Major power in Europe. Most of the Priesthood were poorly educated. Up until then only the Clergy and the wealthy could afford bibles and look into things themselves.

Anybody could go into their local parish Church and read the Bible that was chained to the ambo. The reason it was chained to the ambo was so that nobody would walk away with it, and it would remain available to anyone who wanted to read it. For those who couldn’t read, there were icons, paintings, and stain glass windows, pageants being performed on a wide variety of Biblical subjects, the Scriptures were (as they still are today) read out loud at Mass and in other liturgies, as well, along with public, oral prayer that quoted extensively from the Bible (such as the Rosary), as well.

The differences could go on and on and on. Much like the energizer bunny. Look I’ll quote a line from Jack Nicholson “you can’t handle the truth!”

Speak for yourself.

You like to blow off things that happened. I’m sure in a hundred years from now certain Catholics, not unlike yourself, will say protestants made up the fact that certain preist in Boston and elsewhere in the states were having sexual problems with boys in their diocese and the only thing the Bishop did was move the preist from one Parish to the other. The truth remains that these things happened.

Yes, they did. They remain not a good enough reason to throw away one’s faith - one’s eternal life. You should not throw away your eternal life based on someone else’s behaviour.

Be as ademant as you want. Truth is truth. Now I won’t go the extreme that some people have usedthe history of it but did priest sell salvation?

Did they try to, yes. They were the Benny Hinns of their generation. Should people lose their faith in Jesus Christ because Benny Hinn tries to sell salvation on television?

Dante, a person of that time, thinks so and relates to it in his Divine Comedy. The Spanish inquisition happened. I won’t use the numbers that are popular and I’m sure the atrocities that happened were probably 1% of total population if that. But it doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.

Again, you should not throw away your salvation because of someone else’s behaviour.

If you don’t want to believe in it despite the evidence for it fine. I will say the Church teaches the truth despite the things that occured. If you need the church to be impeccible to solidify your faith, then I suggest you go ahead an keep believe that Popes never misused their position (Believe the Borga family didn’t exist). Believe that every priest was faithful and never lead people astray. Believe that certain priest never molested children in Boston. In short, don’t be honest with yourself. And definately don’t study history.

And again, it’s not different than now. Yes, there are corrupt priests, priests who are selfish and greedy, priests who are not very nice people. Again, not a good reason to throw away your salvation.

Salvation is to belong to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ established on the Rock of Peter. By no other name can we be saved. This is the ark of salvation, and, like the original Noah’s Ark, it gets a bit stinky at times. Not a good reason to jump overboard and drown, though.

 

[look3467]

Salvation is to belong to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church that Christ established on the Rock of Peter. By no other name can we be saved. This is the ark of salvation, and, like the original Noah’s Ark, it gets a bit stinky at times. Not a good reason to jump overboard and drown, though.>>>jmcrae

By that statement, the rest of the world is hopeless?

Salvation belongs to God don’t you think?

I mean what part did mankind take to affect salvation for it’s self?

I will give the Catholic Church full recognition for being the vessel in the hands of God in compiling the book, books which is now called the holy Bible.

And also for giving millions of souls the where with to find God in the midst of a dark world.

Apart from that, God is being reached via His bible.

Consider the nation of Israel concerning the temple and the place to worship.

Was asked of Jesus: Joh 4:20 Our fathers worshipped in this mountain; and ye say, that in Jerusalem is the place where men ought to worship.

Jesus responded:Joh 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

Joh 4:23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.

Invite all to share your love for Christ via your love actions, and then let them decide to join you or not in your form of worship.

I have nothing but love for all religious beliefs, frankly because Jesus died for all of them.

I leave the judgment of the soul to Him!

Peace>>>AJ

 

[jmcrae]

I have nothing but love for all religious beliefs, frankly because Jesus died for all of them.

Jesus died for all human beings, but not for their religious beliefs. Jesus established one Church and wants everyone to be a member of it. (See John 17.)

I leave the judgment of the soul to Him!

So do I, but it’s not a complete mystery, who is going to be saved or not. He plainly left us a Church and wants us to belong to it, and it seems like, if we want to gain His favour, we should do the things that He wants us to do. You should give yourself the best possible chance for salvation, since after all, this is Eternity we are talking about.

 

[sambos671]

Jesus died for all human beings, but not for their religious beliefs. Jesus established one Church and wants everyone to be a member of it. (See John 17.)

So do I, but it’s not a complete mystery, who is going to be saved or not. He plainly left us a Church and wants us to belong to it, and it seems like, if we want to gain His favour, we should do the things that He wants us to do. You should give yourself the best possible chance for salvation, since after all, this is Eternity we are talking about.

I’m curious jmcrae, there is this Benedictine order in Oklahoma that’s raising funds for its monestary there. These people’s goal is to obtain Sainthood. Yet they keep themselves isolated from their community and I wonder how can they acheive sainthood and not do anything for anyone else? Also How did St. Anthony become a Saint? What did he do other then hide out in some rock hole somewhere in Egypt meditate and and have strange visions of satan? what did he do for anyone else. How can you demonstrate charity without interaction? It relates to this thread because at least protestants teach their members to interact with their communities and give something of value to it.

 

[look3467]

Jesus died for all human beings, but not for their religious beliefs. Jesus established one Church and wants everyone to be a member of it. (See John 17.)

So do I, but it’s not a complete mystery, who is going to be saved or not. He plainly left us a Church and wants us to belong to it, and it seems like, if we want to gain His favour, we should do the things that He wants us to do. You should give yourself the best possible chance for salvation, since after all, this is Eternity we are talking about.

When Jesus died on the cross, did He discriminate between Jew or Gentile?

History tells that God created man that became flawed.
Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter:…
This man Adam was the marred vessel.

…so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.

And again He made another vessel of the same lump of clay, Jesus.

Now tell me if you will, this second vessel of clay, (Second Adam)was it to recreate a new generation of believers (spiritual) or was it to recreate a new body? (physical)

If you agree to the former, then the church is a spiritual church of which all believers (Active present) are members of.

Now, what was God to do with all the souls who lived and died before Jesus ever made His entrance into the world?

Where they all condemned because they didn’t know to whom or what to belong to in order to be saved?

I would say, according to mankind’s understanding, they would all be in hell; but according to God’s understanding,they would all be saved in Christ.

Now there a thought for you to much on.

Truly, to deny God unconditional mercy is to not understand His works or His love.

You are a Catholic right? What if you were born (for lack of choice) in Africa to a primitive tribe who has never heard or even understood who or what God is, would you be eligible for God’s mercy?

Is God limited to our own thoughts of reaching out?

These are the questions one must ask in order to understand the love of God.

Peace>>>AJ

 

[jmcrae]

When Jesus died on the cross, did He discriminate between Jew or Gentile? [/qutoe]

No, but His purpose for dying on the Cross was not to leave them in Judaism and Paganism - His purpose in doing so was to free them from their false religious beliefs, and graft them into His Church. If Jesus had wanted those false religions to remain, and didn’t care if anyone joined His Church or not, He would not have bothered to die on the Cross - there would have been no point.

History tells that God created man that became flawed.
Jer 18:4 And the vessel that he made of clay was marred

 

[look3467]

No, but His purpose for dying on the Cross was not to leave them in Judaism and Paganism - His purpose in doing so was to free them from their false religious beliefs, and graft them into His Church. If Jesus had wanted those false religions to remain, and didn’t care if anyone joined His Church or not, He would not have bothered to die on the Cross - there would have been no point. >>>jmcrae

The original sin is upon all mankind as separation from the spirit of God?

How suppose God was to remedy it?

And if He did remedied it, who all were included? Excluded?

Surely, you believe God had/has not the power to redeem His own lost creation?

The physical creation is here to stay, the spiritual creation is what is harvested and of which has no ending.

You do realize that the Catholic Church is a spiritual body that is physically visible through its institutions, right? >>>jmcrae

If you say it this way, Universal church body of Christ is the body of believers, if the word catholic means universal.

Yes. This Church is the Catholic Church. All who follow Jesus in humility and truth are at least partially connected to the Catholic Church.>>>jmcrae

I will not deny that, for God is worshiped in spirit and not be partially connected to any thing except to a direct relationship with God.

They went to the natural afterlife - Hades, aka Sheol, aka Hell. Some of them were released into Heaven when Jesus rose from the dead. (I Peter 3:18-20)>>>jmcrae

Some of them? Psa 107:16 For he hath broken the gates of brass, and cut the bars of iron in sunder.

Please do a little research on the gates of Brass and Iron and its reference to.

Isa 45:2 I will go before thee, and make the crooked places straight: I will break in pieces the gates of brass, and cut in sunder the bars of iron:

The gates of heaven and the gates of hell opened to let and to receive, to where before, were held prisoners.

Peace>>>AJ