Why do you think God allowed Protestantism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter distracted
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
distracted said:
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…
Click to expand...
As a convert from Protestantism, I am reminded of two comments my first, wisest, most prophetic Protestant pastor made to me in the privacy of his office. It’s unfortunate he never had the courage to say so privately.
  1. “I sometimes wonder if Protestants get into heaven. The Reformation was easily the most violent episode in Church history. I don’t think God is as easy going about the division of His church as we are.”
  2. “I think the ‘false prophet’ has already been and gone. I think it was Martin Luther. Some of the things Luther said and did weren’t very Christian. That’s why I very rarely preach on Luther.”
Now that was coming from a very wise, spiritual, prophetic Protestant pastor. So then why would God allow Protestantism?

There are three main reasons I can think of - the first is Biblical criticism, which basically took root in Protestantism. Catholic scholarship caught up later.

The second was the development of Western democracy, which took place most rapidly in Protestant nations. Where Catholicism held sway there was a tendency for right wing dictatorships - France, Spain, even Poland lagged well behind in this particular development. Latin American countries were decades behind the Protestant US in terms of democratic development.

Eastern Europe, with the Orthodox Church dating back to the Emperor system of Constantinople never even had a Protestant revolution, and as a result lacked even further in democratic development, with Tsarist Russia for example a feudal society in the 20th century.

The third is that I think God wants men to think for themselves and not just parrot “The church teaches it” as the answer to all religious questions. He has after all given us a brain, and expects us to use the thing.

The same church now that is so against the death penalty and the use of torture, was for quite a long time quite prepared to employ both. What changed? Infallible Papal rulings? A thunderbolt from heaven? Or political and historical and social developments forcing the church to change its teachings and practices? (This is the reason I’m somewhat leery of the business of “Papal Infallibility” no matter how many learned theologians try to tell me otherwise. Even the circumstances of Vatican I seemed to indicate to me God did not want that doctrine formulated at that council.).

However if my old pastor was correct, and I found from experience he nearly always was, then even he is not in heaven, since he died in 1992. I think he might have to wait till the church reunifies, since I don’t think God cares much for the murderous division that took place with millions of violent deaths (eg. Shirer in “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” quoted that the population in Germany post Luther fell from 16 million to 6 million, and that the country fell into a horrible torpor for centuries, and he was a Protestant).

I think it’s time the churches stopped fighting each other. There’s a lot at stake. More than we think.
 
Ag_not said:
We all have free will. We are free to chose where we worship and what we worship and how we worship, and to change what we worship. When we have the truth revealed to us, we have to consent to adhere to that truth.

There is a difference between allowing and not stopping.
Click to expand...
Spot on there…why did God allow Adam to sin? Why did God allow Lucifer to fall? Why did God allow the holocaust?

Free will is both a gift and a curse (though I am in no way equating protestantism with Nazism!)

God didn’t want robots which followed his will because that was what they were programmed to do, so he gave us free will. Sometimes free will has resulted in things which have hurt other people or have resulted in division…or both.
 
Bob_Crowley said:
As a convert from Protestantism, I am reminded of two comments my first, wisest, most prophetic Protestant pastor made to me in the privacy of his office…

I think it’s time the churches stopped fighting each other. There’s a lot at stake. More than we think.
Click to expand...
That was a great post. Full of insight and information. If you had not been Protestant first you never would have known all that. One of the reasons God allowed Protestantism is for its educational value.
 
Yes, I agree, that was a great post by Mr. Crowley. And there is, I agree, more at stake then we think. And I think it goes far beyond the reunion of churches. It goes, in my opinion, to even re-examining the roots of christianism and all other religions. I have to wonder why there are hundreds of religions worshioing each one God. I sense that Crowley’s deliniation of reasons might have a broader application than mere Christendom.
Code: 
"where do you go to find out about Jesus? do you go to the muslims? or hindus? or mormons? or jehova's witnesses? or budhism? where do you go to find the true teachings of Jesus? if you are sick, do you go to a lawyer or an accountant, or do you go to a doctor?" ~~ 'seeker

The root of "doctor" is "teacher." As for "going" to Jesus, my credentials in that department are in post #826 in this thread. And why would I want to know *only* about Jesus, who it seems to me has much in common with other Teachers, which you would knoe had you looked. 

"Bon chance!"
 
Bob_Crowley said:
As a convert from Protestantism, I am reminded of two comments my first, wisest, most prophetic Protestant pastor made to me in the privacy of his office. It’s unfortunate he never had the courage to say so privately.
  1. “I sometimes wonder if Protestants get into heaven. The Reformation was easily the most violent episode in Church history. I don’t think God is as easy going about the division of His church as we are.”
  2. “I think the ‘false prophet’ has already been and gone. I think it was Martin Luther. Some of the things Luther said and did weren’t very Christian. That’s why I very rarely preach on Luther.”
.
Click to expand...
I loved this… 'cause sounds so right on…

I don’t know what RCIA class you wnet trhough but sometihng seems to have been lacking…

If the Church officially teaches Papal infallibility, then the matter is settled… Can’t say i know a lot about that particular teaching but i have no trouble believing it because of this:

God is capable of establishing a Church on Earth… You agree?

He is capable of ensuring that it never teaches error. Right?

God knows better than anyone (even satan) how weak we are and how much we need an infallible Chruch to guide us in all things having to do with faiht/morals.

so… if God did NOT establish a Church that would guide us infallibly… then what kind of God is He?? I worship a God of love… and this God of love desires to bring all his wayward, miserable children to Him… forever in Heaven… and so He gives us all He can to accomplish that goal…

Jesus told us … “On this rock (Peter) I will build my Church and the gates of Hell (error, confusion, etc.) will not prevail against it.”

We can trust the Church on everything or nothing … Take your pick but you can’t have it half and half…
 
RobbyS said:
. The best thing about the Reformation was that it put the average Christian closer to that text; the worst thing was that it provided him with a poorer understand of it.
Click to expand...
well, for one thing… its doubtful Luther really put the Bible closer to the people in any way… . If he put a false bible closer to them or taught them to interpret things for themsleves , which he did… then what good is that?

as said before, Luther unleashed the devil on the earth… whether intentionally or whatever…

There have been more wars, persecutions (i speak mostly of Catholics), more crimes against nature (abortion, etc.) since the time of Luther than the 500 yrs that preceded that time… probably 100 times as much evil… from what i know of history…

Luther taught that once you accept Christ, it doesn’t matter whether you stop sinning or not… he even once said to “sin boldly… but believe all the more boldly” or something to effect… He said you could commit adultery 20 times a day and you’d still be saved!!! Hmmm… gee, Where is THAT in the Bible??? :whacky:

I know from personal experience how that kind of belief can wreak havok in a person’s life… 😦

and it is so unbiblical as to be ridiuculous… Jesus said that to get to Heaven … keep the Commandments… give up everything and follow Him… He said:
Whatever you do to the least of His brethren, you do to Him… and if you do not feed, clothe, etc… his brethren (Him) you will not inherit eternal life…

i frankly think that Luther was possessed… I just hope he repented before meeting Jesus…
 
distracted said:
Luther taught that once you accept Christ, it doesn’t matter whether you stop sinning or not… he even once said to “sin boldly… but believe all the more boldly” or something to effect… He said you could commit adultery 20 times a day and you’d still be saved!!! Hmmm… gee, Where is THAT in the Bible??? :whacky:

I know from personal experience how that kind of belief can wreak havok in a person’s life… 😦

and it is so unbiblical as to be ridiuculous… Jesus said that to get to Heaven … keep the Commandments… give up everything and follow Him… He said:
Whatever you do to the least of His brethren, you do to Him… and if you do not feed, clothe, etc… his brethren (Him) you will not inherit eternal life…

i frankly think that Luther was possessed… I just hope he repented before meeting Jesus…
Click to expand...
I looked up Luther’s catechism. He didn’t encourage people to sin.

iclnet.org/pub/resources/text/wittenberg/luther/little.book/web/book-1.html
Luther’s Little Instruction Book
(The Small Catechism of Martin Luther)

**K. The Conclusion to the Commandments **
Q. What does God say to us about all these commandments?
A. This is what He says:
“I am the Lord Your God. I am a jealous God. I plague the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of those who hate me with their ancestor’s sin. But I make whole those who love me for a thousand generations.”
Q. What does it mean?
A. God threatens to punish everyone who breaks these commandments. We should be afraid of His anger because of this and not violate such commandments. But He promises grace and all good things to those who keep such commandments. Because of this, we, too, should love Him, trust Him, and willingly do what His commandments require.
 
distracted said:
as said before, Luther unleashed the devil on the earth… whether intentionally or whatever…

There have been more wars, persecutions (i speak mostly of Catholics), more crimes against nature (abortion, etc.) since the time of Luther than the 500 yrs that preceded that time… probably 100 times as much evil… from what i know of history…
Click to expand...
Look at history. The Church had some serious problems before Luther was born. You can’t blame everything on him.

encyclopedia.com/doc/1O48-GreatSchism.html
Great Schism Two breaches in the Christian Church. The Great or EAST-WEST SCHISM (1054) marked the separation of the Eastern (Orthodox) and Western Christian churches. The Great Schism of 1378–1417 resulted from the removal of the papacy from Italy to France in 1309. Feuds among the Italian cardinals and their allies among the Italian nobility led to Pope Clement V (1305–14) moving the papal residence from Rome to Avignon in southern France. French interests came to dominate papal policy and the popes, notorious for their luxurious way of life, commanded scant respect. An attempt to return the papacy to Rome was followed by schism as two rival popes were elected by the cardinals, Urban VI by the Roman faction and Clement VII by the French faction. The period of popes and rival ANTIPOPES lasted until the Council of CONSTANCE (1417) elected Pope Martin V of the Roman party and deposed his French rival. The division of the papacy discredited the Church and was criticized by those demanding reform, notably WYCLIF.
 
thunderballs75 said:
It seems to me that the reason Martin Luther did what he did was originally because of vast corruption. If it weren’t for the Reformation, the Counter-Reformation would never have been proposed, and the corrupt practices may have continued unabated.
Click to expand...
The counter-Reformation was already well under way, led by people like St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, and St. Ignatius of Loyola. Martin Luther had the opportunity to become a great Saint, by joining with them, but instead he sold out to politics.

But with half of Europe burning down due to the rampages of the Lutherans (as recorded by St. Teresa of Avila in The Way of Perfection) travel was made that much more difficult - the Council of Trent could have happened a couple of decades earlier (and had a much quicker impact), if the Lutherans had remained peaceful, and had worked together with the Carmelites and the Jesuits, instead of against the whole Church.
 
ron77nyc said:
That was a great post. Full of insight and information. If you had not been Protestant first you never would have known all that. One of the reasons God allowed Protestantism is for its educational value.
Click to expand...
Correct. However I think it’s a bit more personal than that. If I’d never met the old pastor, I’d never have known all that. At the time I became a Christian, I was coming out of the worst four years of my life. I was getting a distinct nudge to go to church, despite the fact no individual was putting any pressure on me. And the nearest Presbyterian Church at that time (I’d been baptised Presbyterian) “Happened” to have the old pastor and his family.

In other words I think God wanted me to meet him personally. I learnt a lot from him with the singular downside that he discouraged me rather badly, for which he apologised. And he was prophetic.
 
distracted said:
I loved this… 'cause sounds so right on…

I don’t know what RCIA class you wnet trhough but sometihng seems to have been lacking…

If the Church officially teaches Papal infallibility, then the matter is settled… Can’t say i know a lot about that particular teaching but i have no trouble believing it because of this:

God is capable of establishing a Church on Earth… You agree?

He is capable of ensuring that it never teaches error. Right?

God knows better than anyone (even satan) how weak we are and how much we need an infallible Chruch to guide us in all things having to do with faiht/morals.

so… if God did NOT establish a Church that would guide us infallibly… then what kind of God is He?? I worship a God of love… and this God of love desires to bring all his wayward, miserable children to Him… forever in Heaven… and so He gives us all He can to accomplish that goal…

Jesus told us … “On this rock (Peter) I will build my Church and the gates of Hell (error, confusion, etc.) will not prevail against it.”

We can trust the Church on everything or nothing … Take your pick but you can’t have it half and half…
Click to expand...
If the Popes are so “infallible” why did Peter, the very first Pope, demonstrate such fallibility - denying Christ three times, having to be rebuked as “Satan” at one stage, and blundering all over the place? And Christ’s disciples all ran away. That was the original magisterium in action. Couldn’t the Holy Spirit have kept them from doing so if He wanted to?

I think Peter’s fallibility is in the Scriptures for a reason, along with his Primacy, and that in part was so that later Popes, who inherited his mantle, would not get big ideas of “infallibility”.
 
Bob_Crowley said:
If the Popes are so “infallible” why did Peter, the very first Pope, demonstrate such fallibility - denying Christ three times, having to be rebuked as “Satan” at one stage, and blundering all over the place? And Christ’s disciples all ran away. That was the original magisterium in action. Couldn’t the Holy Spirit have kept them from doing so if He wanted to?

I think Peter’s fallibility is in the Scriptures for a reason, along with his Primacy, and that in part was so that later Popes, who inherited his mantle, would not get big ideas of “infallibility”.
Click to expand...
That’s not Peter’s fallibility we see, it’s his iniquity. Infallibility is God’s characteristic, not man’s. Infallibility is protection from error in promulgating truth, not protection from sinfulness. But I agree with you that the many blunders of the Apostles, as well as their righteousness, are all there for a specific, guiding reason.
 
POINT 1.I believe anything that leads someone away from evil and to Christ is valid and important. In there quest to acquire knowledge (if they have one) they will discover the many truths they can find in Catholism. If you have read my first post, I have been a member of the Baptist church for most of my Christian life.
POINT 2. In addition, every half century or so a Book, Movie (sometimes one generates the other) or other media endeavor causes all of the pew sitting, cross your fingers behind their back people who profess to believe, who have real doubts to get off the fence. Catholism is difficult for the mentally lazy person to understand. Truth be known, anyone who claims to be a believer must make a heart choice, yes, they believe or no, they do not, there is nothing in between.
POINT 3. The Lord probably did want an easier, softer way to lead people to Christ. The mystery and the majesty of the church will never be understood by any one of our simple human minds. As a final point, strange and different forms of violation of the sixth commandment are once again at an all time high, the absence of Christ in people’s lives generates this type of evil.
 
Detales said:
jpaul1953, there IS indeed, one Truth. And there are a zillion interpretations of it or we would not be having this conversation. Your reference to the President of Iran deliniates exactly why this is so. And clearly you have not looked into Catholic history other than through Catholic eyes.

Wow. Nancy. :hypno:
Click to expand...
HI! how are you? i dont need catholic eyes I know of the mistakes the church has made in the past and so have other churches no one has denied this, and no one has denied Christ either. Please pray for Iran the people need prayers right now. thank you Love of Christ Nancy
 
SteveGC said:
That’s not Peter’s fallibility we see, it’s his iniquity. Infallibility is God’s characteristic, not man’s. Infallibility is protection from error in promulgating truth, not protection from sinfulness. But I agree with you that the many blunders of the Apostles, as well as their righteousness, are all there for a specific, guiding reason.
Click to expand...
When Peter sided with Jewish opinion; circumcision was necessary for salvation, wasn’t he teaching error by his actions and perverting the gospel? When Pope Leo accepted the money from the sale of indulgences wasn’t he saying that you could purify for a price?
 
well, did god also allow suffering?

because he has given us freewill, we can do whatever we please, even to turn away from the church he had set up for us.

alot is due to the choice made by man. by granting us the freedom, he can only set an example via jesus christ, that we may follow his example and receive salvation. those who chose not to listen, they do have their choice in that matter too.
 
Bob_Crowley said:
As a convert from Protestantism, I am reminded of two comments my first, wisest, most prophetic Protestant pastor made to me in the privacy of his office. It’s unfortunate he never had the courage to say so privately.
  1. “I sometimes wonder if Protestants get into heaven. The Reformation was easily the most violent episode in Church history. I don’t think God is as easy going about the division of His church as we are.”
  2. “I think the ‘false prophet’ has already been and gone. I think it was Martin Luther. Some of the things Luther said and did weren’t very Christian. That’s why I very rarely preach on Luther.”
Now that was coming from a very wise, spiritual, prophetic Protestant pastor. So then why would God allow Protestantism?

There are three main reasons I can think of - the first is Biblical criticism, which basically took root in Protestantism. Catholic scholarship caught up later.

The second was the development of Western democracy, which took place most rapidly in Protestant nations. Where Catholicism held sway there was a tendency for right wing dictatorships - France, Spain, even Poland lagged well behind in this particular development. Latin American countries were decades behind the Protestant US in terms of democratic development.

Eastern Europe, with the Orthodox Church dating back to the Emperor system of Constantinople never even had a Protestant revolution, and as a result lacked even further in democratic development, with Tsarist Russia for example a feudal society in the 20th century.

The third is that I think God wants men to think for themselves and not just parrot “The church teaches it” as the answer to all religious questions. He has after all given us a brain, and expects us to use the thing.

The same church now that is so against the death penalty and the use of torture, was for quite a long time quite prepared to employ both. What changed? Infallible Papal rulings? A thunderbolt from heaven? Or political and historical and social developments forcing the church to change its teachings and practices? (This is the reason I’m somewhat leery of the business of “Papal Infallibility” no matter how many learned theologians try to tell me otherwise. Even the circumstances of Vatican I seemed to indicate to me God did not want that doctrine formulated at that council.).

However if my old pastor was correct, and I found from experience he nearly always was, then even he is not in heaven, since he died in 1992. I think he might have to wait till the church reunifies, since I don’t think God cares much for the murderous division that took place with millions of violent deaths (eg. Shirer in “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” quoted that the population in Germany post Luther fell from 16 million to 6 million, and that the country fell into a horrible torpor for centuries, and he was a Protestant).

I think it’s time the churches stopped fighting each other. There’s a lot at stake. More than we think.
Click to expand...
Bob Crowley, God Bless you and Welcome to CAF I never did a study on Luther but I think it would be of benifit to me. I was there once to but I did see it was to wild and open a religion for me. Protestant had no structure and i do need structure and I need to be with the real church of Christ and his people. I had fought it for a long time there are to many churches out there and none of them are playing with a full deck, so I came home and I am still adjusting and learning. I thank God for this forum and all the wonderful people here even the ones I don’t agree with over subjects other then the church teachings, and there is alot to learn, but I ask alot of questions. You are Loved Nancy
 
doughnut said:
well, did God also allow suffering?

because he has given us freewill, we can do whatever we please, even to turn away from the church he had set up for us.

alot is due to the choice made by man. by granting us the freedom, he can only set an example via Jesus Christ, that we may follow his example and receive salvation. those who chose not to listen, they do have their choice in that matter too.
Click to expand...
Hello doughnut, welcome to CAF, Yes we all have choice as to who we will serve, and we are our brothers keeper so we need to bring all those we can to and for the glory of God and Christ Jesus. you are Loved God Bless You Nancy:)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top