WHY I COULD NEVER CHOOSE TO BE A PROTESTANT. (one stupid thread title is as good as another)

[Truth7t7]

Re-posting the same fictional nonsense.
I see you haven't learned you lesson here.

History is MUCH more than a couple of out-of-context remarks.
It takes some actual research . . .

The Martyr's identified are fact, is it hard to accept what Roman Catholicism really is.

Wikipedia: William Tyndale (/ˈtɪndəl/;[1] sometimes spelled Tynsdale, Tindall, Tindill, Tyndall; c. 1494 – c. 6 October 1536) was an English scholar who became a leading figure in the Protestant Reformation in the years leading up to his execution. He is well known for his translation of the Bible into English. He was influenced by the work of Desiderius Erasmus, who made the Greek New Testament available in Europe, and by Martin Luther.[2] A number of partial translations had been made from the seventh century onward, but the spread of Wycliffe's Bible in the late 14th century led to the death penalty for anyone found in unlicensed possession of Scripture in English

Wikipedia: Council of Constance is the 15th-century ecumenical council recognized by the Catholic Church, held from 1414 to 1418 in the Bishopric of Constance.
The council also condemned Jan Hus as a heretic and facilitated his execution by the civil authority.

A second goal of the council was to continue the reforms begun at the Council of Pisa (1409). These reforms were largely directed against John Wycliffe, mentioned in the opening session and condemned in the eighth on 4 May 1415, and Jan Hus, along with their followers. Jan Hus, summoned to Constance under a letter of safe conduct, was found guilty of heresy by the council and turned over to the secular court. "This holy synod of Constance, seeing that God's church has nothing more that it can do, relinquishes Jan Hus to the judgment of the secular authority and decrees that he is to be relinquished to the secular court." (Council of Constance-Session 15 – 6 July 1415). The secular court sentenced him to the stake.

Jerome of Prague, a supporter of Jan Hus, came to Constance to offer assistance. But he was similarly arrested, judged, found guilty of heresy and turned over to the same secular court, with the same outcome as Hus. Poggio Bracciolini attended the council and related the unfairness of the process against Jerome.[6]

Paweł Włodkowic and all the Polish representation to the Council of Constance publicly defended Jan Hus.

HuffPost

Proclamations at the Ecumenical Council of Constance in 1415 C.E.: Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 C.E.) to translate the New Testament into English to “...helpeth Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ’s sentence.” For this “heresy” Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council’s decree “Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River.”

Fate of William Tyndale in 1536 C.E.: William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance.

 

[Truth7t7]

Hi Truth,

Your statements are false based on omission. Since you leave out KEY FACTS your lie looks pretty good. How about some Truth instead of lies by omission?

The Council of Toulouse was a LOCAL council that met to deal with the Albergencian Heresy and it had no problem with the mere translations of the Bible since vernacular versions had been appearing for centuries. The Albergensians were twisting the Bible to support an immoral moral system. The bishops at Toulouse restricted the use of the Bible until the Heresy was ended and their action was a LOCAL one. When the Albigensian problem dissappeared so did the force of their order which never affected more than southern France.

If you take the time to learn what they taught you will see why The Church put an end to the Albergencian Heresy. I am thankful that The Church was protecting the word of God from being twisted by twisted men. I suspect you are also???

You can continue the Tyndale lie if you want but do you know why King Henry VIII declared that "the translation of the Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale should be utterly expelled, rejected, and put away out of the hands of the people."??? Read some history books instead of anti-Catholic propaganda and you will find out.

Are you interested in Christian history or just interested in lying about The Church???

Mary

You will closely note you give "No Citation" to your claims, smiles!

From the catholic encyclopedia, eh!

 

[BreadOfLife]

The Martyr's identified are fact, is it hard to accept what Roman Catholicism really is.

Wikipedia: William Tyndale (/ˈtɪndəl/;[1] sometimes spelled Tynsdale, Tindall, Tindill, Tyndall; c. 1494 – c. 6 October 1536) was an English scholar who became a leading figure in the Protestant Reformation in the years leading up to his execution. He is well known for his translation of the Bible into English. He was influenced by the work of Desiderius Erasmus, who made the Greek New Testament available in Europe, and by Martin Luther.[2] A number of partial translations had been made from the seventh century onward, but the spread of Wycliffe's Bible in the late 14th century led to the death penalty for anyone found in unlicensed possession of Scripture in English

Wikipedia: Council of Constance is the 15th-century ecumenical council recognized by the Catholic Church, held from 1414 to 1418 in the Bishopric of Constance.
The council also condemned Jan Hus as a heretic and facilitated his execution by the civil authority.

A second goal of the council was to continue the reforms begun at the Council of Pisa (1409). These reforms were largely directed against John Wycliffe, mentioned in the opening session and condemned in the eighth on 4 May 1415, and Jan Hus, along with their followers. Jan Hus, summoned to Constance under a letter of safe conduct, was found guilty of heresy by the council and turned over to the secular court. "This holy synod of Constance, seeing that God's church has nothing more that it can do, relinquishes Jan Hus to the judgment of the secular authority and decrees that he is to be relinquished to the secular court." (Council of Constance-Session 15 – 6 July 1415). The secular court sentenced him to the stake.

Jerome of Prague, a supporter of Jan Hus, came to Constance to offer assistance. But he was similarly arrested, judged, found guilty of heresy and turned over to the same secular court, with the same outcome as Hus. Poggio Bracciolini attended the council and related the unfairness of the process against Jerome.[6]

Paweł Włodkowic and all the Polish representation to the Council of Constance publicly defended Jan Hus.

HuffPost

Proclamations at the Ecumenical Council of Constance in 1415 C.E.: Oxford professor, and theologian John Wycliffe, was the first (1380 C.E.) to translate the New Testament into English to “...helpeth Christian men to study the Gospel in that tongue in which they know best Christ’s sentence.” For this “heresy” Wycliffe was posthumously condemned by Arundel, the archbishop of Canterbury. By the Council’s decree “Wycliffe’s bones were exhumed and publicly burned and the ashes were thrown into the Swift River.”

Fate of William Tyndale in 1536 C.E.: William Tyndale was burned at the stake for translating the Bible into English. According to Tyndale, the Church forbid owning or reading the Bible to control and restrict the teachings and to enhance their own power and importance.

And your "facts" are quite skewed - if not mostly fictional.
A little advice: Don't get your "facts" from opinion sites like the Huffington Post . . .


A little information about William Tyndale . . .
He wasn't condemned merely for translating the Bible. He was condemned for MISTRANSLATING it which produced heresy. The Catholic martyr, Sir Thomas More charged him with replacing the words for 'priest' and 'Church' with the English words 'elder' and 'congregation'. So, instead of the orthodox Scriptural Catholic hierarchy with priests who were set aside from and relegated as leaders over the people (1 Thess. 5:12, 1 Tim. 5:17), Tyndale's version of Scripture now said that any group of Christians could get together as a "congregation", elect ant member of their group as their leader, making him, in fact another Pope.

AGAIN - simply "reading" and "owning" a Bible was not the case - no matter how much YOU try to skew the facts . . .

 

[brakelite]

And your "facts" are quite skewed - if not mostly fictional.
A little advice: Don't get your "facts" from opinion sites like the Huffington Post . . .


A little information about William Tyndale . . .
He wasn't condemned merely for translating the Bible. He was condemned for MISTRANSLATING it which produced heresy. The Catholic martyr, Sir Thomas More charged him with replacing the words for 'priest' and 'Church' with the English words 'elder' and 'congregation'. So, instead of the orthodox Scriptural Catholic hierarchy with priests who were set aside from and relegated as leaders over the people (1 Thess. 5:12, 1 Tim. 5:17), Tyndale's version of Scripture now said that any group of Christians could get together as a "congregation", elect ant member of their group as their leader, making him, in fact another Pope.

AGAIN - simply "reading" and "owning" a Bible was not the case - no matter how much YOU try to skew the facts . . .

And you are so blind that you cannot see how that through your quote above you condemn your own church. So Tyndale was executed for holding the Bible above the tradition of the church. Praise God for that!
Tyndale was executed for believing the word of God which declares all believers as potential elders instead of priests offering sacrifice, which of course is repugnant to those who love to pretend to execute Christ Himself continually, every day, for 1800 years, in the mass. Praise God for that! Catholic priests make the Jews of Christ's time look positively annointed.
Tyndale was executed for correctly translating the Greek word 'ecclesia" as being congregation/group of believers thus removing the authority and determination of one's own destiny form a group of self appointed self absorbed corrupt sinners to oneself. Praise God for that!
Tyndale was executed for believing contrary to Rome. He will be in glory ahead of any of his murderers...and so long as you continue to support, justify, and claim its validation as a righteous act of your church, then you are as guilty as they.

 

[BreadOfLife]

And you are so blind that you cannot see how that through your quote above you condemn your own church. So Tyndale was executed for holding the Bible above the tradition of the church. Praise God for that!
Tyndale was executed for believing the word of God which declares all believers as potential elders instead of priests offering sacrifice, which of course is repugnant to those who love to pretend to execute Christ Himself continually, every day, for 1800 years, in the mass. Praise God for that! Catholic priests make the Jews of Christ's time look positively annointed.
Tyndale was executed for correctly translating the Greek word 'ecclesia" as being congregation/group of believers thus removing the authority and determination of one's own destiny form a group of self appointed self absorbed corrupt sinners to oneself. Praise God for that!
Tyndale was executed for believing contrary to Rome. He will be in glory ahead of any of his murderers...and so long as you continue to support, justify, and claim its validation as a righteous act of your church, then you are as guilty as they.

And apparently, YOU don't see the complete contradiction of your statements.

You applaud Tyndale for holding Scripture "above" Sacred Traditions - yet Scripture itself puts Sacred Tradition ON PAR with Scripture. In other words, Einstein - you just contradicted the very Scripture YOU hold to be our final Authority . . .
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, WHETHER BY an ORAL STATEMENT - OR BY a LETTER from us."

And there you have it - Scripture proving you wrong again.

By disobeying and rejecting Christ's Church - Tyndale was disobeying and rejecting Christ Himself . . .
Luke 10:16
Whoever listens to YOU listens to ME. Whoever rejects YOU rejects ME. And whoever rejects ME rejects the ONE who sent ME."

His punishment by any earthly authority PALES in comparison to the punishment he may receive after death . . .

 

[epostle1]

Tyndale:
"...Finding no support for his translation from his bishop, he left England and came to Worms, where he fell under the influence of Martin Luther. There in 1525 he produced a translation of the New Testament that was swarming with textual corruption. He willfully mistranslated entire passages of Sacred Scripture in order to condemn orthodox Catholic doctrine and support the new Lutheran ideas. The Bishop of London claimed that he could count over 2,000 errors in the volume (and this was just the New Testament).

And we must remember that this was not merely a translation of Scripture. His text included a prologue and notes that were so full of contempt for the Catholic Church and the clergy that no one could mistake his obvious agenda and prejudice. Did the Catholic Church condemn this version of the Bible? Of course it did.

The secular authorities condemned it as well. Anglicans are among the many today who laud Tyndale as the "father of the English Bible." But it was their own founder, King Henry VIII, who in 1531 declared that "the translation of the Scripture corrupted by William Tyndale should be utterly expelled, rejected, and put away out of the hands of the people." (King Henry VIII, not the pope)

So troublesome did Tyndale’s Bible prove to be that in 1543—after his break with Rome—Henry again decreed that "all manner of books of the Old and New Testament in English, being of the crafty, false, and untrue translation of Tyndale . . . shall be clearly and utterly abolished, extinguished, and forbidden to be kept or used in this realm."

Ultimately, it was the secular authorities that proved to be the end for Tyndale. He was arrested and tried (and sentenced to die) in the court of the Holy Roman Emperor in 1536. (Emperor Charles V, not the Pope) His translation of the Bible was heretical because it contained heretical ideas—not because the act of translation was heretical in and of itself. In fact, the Catholic Church would produce a translation of the Bible into English a few years later (The Douay-Reims version, whose New Testament was released in 1582 and whose Old Testament was released in 1609).

When discussing the history of Biblical translations, it is very common for people to toss around names like Tyndale and Wycliff. But the full story is seldom given. This present case of a gender-inclusive edition of the Bible is a wonderful opportunity for Fundamentalists to reflect and realize that the reason they don’t approve of this new translation is the same reason that the Catholic Church did not approve of Tyndale’s or Wycliff’s. These are corrupt translations, made with an agenda, and not accurate renderings of sacred Scripture.

And here at least Fundamentalists and Catholics are in ready agreement: Don’t mess with the Word of God.
Tyndale's Heresy | Catholic Answers
lies6t6 , the Catholic encyclopedia is far more objective than your "infallible" wikipedia.

 

[epostle1]

I. The Challenge: Find an Early Church Protestant Bible.

Did the Protestant Bible Exist Before the Reformation? – Shameless Popery

 

[brakelite]

You applaud Tyndale for holding Scripture "above" Sacred Traditions - yet Scripture itself puts Sacred Tradition ON PAR with Scripture. In other words, Einstein - you just contradicted the very Scripture YOU hold to be our final Authority . . .
2 Thess 2:15
"Stand firm and hold fast to the Traditions you were taught, WHETHER BY an ORAL STATEMENT - OR BY a LETTER from us."

Actually it is your church that has acted contrary to the above. By demanding obedience to traditions that were not orally handed down, or written, the Catholic church has violated scripture.
And, by not keeping traditions that were written down, your church has violated scripture. Want an example?

 

[epostle1]

You will closely note you give "No Citation" to your claims, smiles!

From the catholic encyclopedia, eh!

Your primary source is from Huffpost, a cheap tabloid. The author is a psychologist, Bernard Starr, who is not a historian or a theologian.
You NEVER provide a link to your sources.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Versions of the Bible
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Authorized Version

Exodus 20:16 "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

Exodus 23:1 "Do not spread false reports. Do not help a guilty person by being a malicious witness.

Proverbs 6:19 a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

 

[Truth7t7]

Your primary source is from Huffpost, a cheap tabloid. The author is a psychologist, Bernard Starr, who is not a historian or a theologian.
You NEVER provide a link to your sources.
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Versions of the Bible
CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: The Authorized Version

Exodus 20:16 "You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.

Exodus 23:1 "Do not spread false reports. Do not help a guilty person by being a malicious witness.

Proverbs 6:19 a false witness who pours out lies and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.

Gotta Love That Good Ole King James, Written In Blood!

 

[epostle1]

Gotta Love That Good Ole King James, Written In Blood!

What's this? More psychotic lies? Your Constantine myths have been demolished, so you changed the subject to Tyndale, and now the KJV which has nothing to so with anything.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Actually it is your church that has acted contrary to the above. By demanding obedience to traditions that were not orally handed down, or written, the Catholic church has violated scripture.
And, by not keeping traditions that were written down, your church has violated scripture. Want an example?

Then, why do YOU hold to the Tradition of the Canon of Scripture??
This is a CATHOLIC Tradition. The Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit declared the Canon of Scripture.

Can you explain this??

 

[brakelite]

Then, why do YOU hold to the Tradition of the Canon of Scripture??
This is a CATHOLIC Tradition. The Catholic Church, guided by the Holy Spirit declared the Canon of Scripture.

Can you explain this??

LOL...good try.

 

[BreadOfLife]

LOL...good try.

In other words - you can't explain why you hold to a Canon of Scripture that was declared by the Catholic Church.
Is that it - or do you deny that it was the Catholic Church who declared the Canon of Scripture?

A little less "LOL-ing" and a little more 'splainin' would help . . .

 

[Truth7t7]

In other words - you can't explain why you hold to a Canon of Scripture that was declared by the Catholic Church.
Is that it - or do you deny that it was the Catholic Church who declared the Canon of Scripture?

A little less "LOL-ing" and a little more 'splainin' would help . . .

No the cannon as identified by Roman Catholicism is not historically accepted by the english speaking churches, as Catholicism recognizes the Apocrypha as cannon

 

[BreadOfLife]

No the cannon as identified by Roman Catholicism is not historically accepted by the english speaking churches, as Catholicism recognizes the Apocrypha as cannon

The fact that Protestants rejected 7 Books and threw them out of their Bibles is not the issue.
The issue here is that ALL of the Books in YOUR Bible were compiled and declared canonical by the Catholic Church.

If the Catholic Church is such an "evil" entity - WHY would you accept its choices of Books??
Pretty hypocritical if you ask me . . .

 

[epostle1]

No the cannon as identified by Roman Catholicism is not historically accepted by the english speaking churches, as Catholicism recognizes the Apocrypha as cannon

There is no "Roman Catholicism" as a blanket term for all Catholics. Did the other 22 non-Roman rites disappear?
Catholicism does not recognize all Apocrypha books as canonical. The correct term for the 7 books Luther threw out is "Deuterocanonical". The extra books which were eventually received as Scripture in the Greek Orthodox church and those received in the Catholic church do not correspond exactly to the list of books commonly called "Apocrypha" by Protestants.
The Book of Barnabas, the Gospel of Thomas etc. are not in the Catholic Bible, and they are "Apocrypha" books. You have a straw man fallacy.

The Canon of Scripture itself is an example of developing doctrine. The New Testament never informs us which books comprise itself, and its Canon (final list of books) took about 360 years to reach its final form (at the Council of Carthage in 397). For instance, the books of Hebrews, James, 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and Revelation were not widely accepted by the Church until 350 A.D.!

And books such as Barnabas and 1 and 2 Clement were considered Scripture by many at the same time (for example, the manuscripts Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Alexandrinus). Of the 27 New Testament books, 14 were not mentioned at all until around 200 A.D., including Acts, 2 Corinthians, Galatians and Colossians.

On what grounds, then, can we receive the Canon today except on the authority of the Church in the 5th century? These facts cause insuperable problems for Protestantism and its guiding principle of “Scripture Alone,” but are not a difficulty in the least for Catholics, who believe in Tradition, Church Authority, and development – all crucial elements in the very human process of selection of the biblical Canon.

The canon went unchanged for 1500 years; the assertion that "not historically accepted by the english speaking churches," is false. For one, English did not exist as a language in the first few centuries.

The only thing lies6t6 can do is dream up Bible origin fantasies, and write a history of his own.

straw man fallacy

 

[Marymog]

You will closely note you give "No Citation" to your claims, smiles!

From the catholic encyclopedia, eh!

The Huff post and Wikipedia are reliable citations....Hmmmmm....

You will closely note you FAILED to refute my statement or give any facts....Just your opinions. I did refute your statement, with facts.

Notice (which you didn't) I stated that your statements are false based on omission. If you would like me to explain that to you I will. :)

A conversation based on FACTS eludes you....Just like the truth does.

Mary

 

[epostle1]

iF truth7t7 likes Tyndale and Hus's Bible so much, then there is no reason why he would reject a gender neutral Bible. The Church rejected their Bibles for the same reason truth7t7 would reject a gender neutral bible. A few years after the English government executed Tyndale, English translations were approved by the Church.

 

[OzSpen]

Dave Armstrong simply copied Loraine Boettner’s work, Roman Catholicism, a book published in 1962 by Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company of Philadelphia.

And got rich off it.

From where did you gain the information that Boettner got rich from publishing his book?