I am not even a practicing Catholic. I haven't gone to church in a very long time. But, after delving into some topics that interest me, I came across the fundamentals of the Lutheran Reformation. And I must say, I find it to be extremely retarded. It's:>internally contradictory>deterministic>illogical>degenerate It makes mo fucking sense whatsoever. Sola fide is bullshit, not just because it goes against the teachings of Christ, but because faith is meaningless if it isn't a choice, which Luther vehemently defends. Lutheran theology creates a caste system of saved/damned, where nobody can do anything about it whatsoever. There is no covenant, there is no goodness, there is no morality, it's simply chosen-ness. How can ANYONE believe this utter bullshit? I find it an insult to the human race as a whole. It's Hegelian and Marxist, in that is strips people of all agency and value and simply deems them as completely reactive beings in the face of a system. It's deeply pagan in essence.It's disgusting. Fitting for a man who couldn't cope with his own evil, who confessed to hating God, and who ised such foul language. Moreover, all of his most relevant points in his 95 theses, were resolved by the Spanish at the Salamanca school. If you are a protestant. How? Why? Are you fucking retarded?
>>85723330What's retarded about wanting to worship the scripture and not the Church. What's retarded about believing the Pope is the Antichrist?
literally nothing written here is true whatsoever
>>85723342You don't know the history of your own fucking religion. Luther rejected free will and he admitted that this created a caste system. He admitted to confessing to hating God. His entire system is crafted to cope with his own evil and hatred for God. >>85723337>wantingYou don't get it. Luther himself says it's not you that WANTS it. The Slamanca already solved the issues of political authority. Protestants truly are fucking cattle.
The truth matters less than politics. The protestant reformation allowed the local nobles to suppress the Church and increase their power, and the plebs where just dragged along.
>>85723365Do you have any practical evidence of Protestants being retards or are you going to try and nitpick texts that a) nobody reads and b) are largely irrelevant to modern practices?I say that the Catholics are the retards because they don't worship Christ, they worship the institution, the Church. They don't practice scripture, they practice Idol worship, the Pope. That's far more retarded than anything Protestants do.
>>85723390Yes, protestant doctrine obfuscates the truth. Luther wanted certainty of his salvation, he wanted to be 100% sure that he would be saved. He didn't have a single bit of faith in his soul. He wanted to be sure. He deluded himself into creating a system that he used to reassure himself, all while plunging Europe into a horrible war, where millions died and unforgivable sins were committed by his followers. That's all he did.
>>85723401>Do you have any practical evidence of Protestants being retardsYou. >nitpick texts that a) nobody reads and b) are largely irrelevant to modern practices?If protestants don't read or know the very foundations of their faith and practices, they are retards. And you just proved me right.
Protestants make no sense to me for two reasons: 1. They say sola scriptura. Okay. Who made the Bible? Inb4 Divine inspiration, sure, but through what earthly means. The church. Okay. So suddenly the church is okay when then tell you what books to read and believe but not how to interpret or anything else? Seems sus.2. Anglicans allow gay female priests to take down the cross to make the space more welcoming to Muslims. Without some sort of authority, your interpretation is just as valid as theirs.Bonus 3, and this is an attack towards all secular Christians including Catholics: that people allow such degenerate ways such as casual sex, drug use, abortions, and other such things is absolutely disgusting.t. someone who did those things in the past when i was young and dumb. Living in the city is bad for the soul. I accept culpability but man it would have been nice to have someone around telling me not to be a fucking dumbass instead of encouraging such behavior.
>>85723416I read the Bible, that's it. I don't let other people determine how I practice my faith. That's what it means to be Protestant.
>>85723401Catholics don't worship the Pope; many of them have (or had) hefty criticisms of them. When they're speaking as biblical authority they're to be accepted but outside of those rare instances they're just as fallible as anyone else (and often more so). >>85723401Just take a look at any prosperity preacher.
>>85723451The first two are basic mainstream arguments against protestant doctrine. Which I do believe are still valid, and something the struggle to resolve. But the depths of Luther's system are abhorrent. It's despicable. Idc about the 3rd one, it simply sounds self-righteous.
>>85723462There are two groups of Protestants: those who read the Bible and go solo, and those who read Bible and attend a faux church. >excepting of course those who don't actually read the Bible which is most of themThe first group have more respect in my eyes than the latter. But that still means you're not getting any of the sacraments which you should be aware of: no Eucharist, etc.
>>85723465I don't really see how it's self righteous to attack casual sex when it's a basic tenant of Christianity to reserve sex for marriage? I can accept that statement for alcoholism and would concede that to a point.
>>85723462No, it isn't. >I read my bibleAccording to Luther himself and literally everyone with a brain, it is understood that your interpretation of the words in the Bible is determined by outside forces. I happen to believe that this isn't entirely the case, but you MUST rely on the inputs of historical figures to make sense of the Bible. They didn't spend so much time debating and writing because it was easy. So you either implicitly rely on their teachings or don't read the bible at all.
>>85723484The attacks aren't self-righteous, presenting them as an argument is. You aren't offering anything pf substance, just performing offended-ness and acting like it an argument. You condemn the protestant faith because is results in something you oppose, and that isn't relevant to the believers.
>>85723401no part of the Bible is completely irrelevant. modern practices and beliefs should be biblical if that's what they base their religion on. an insane amount of protestants believe jews are the chosen people despite that being completely debunked by the new testament and the old testament if you know how to read it. they often ignore historical contexts and assume that the Bible is going to be completely applicable to modern times and ignore anything in it they don't like. I don't agree with the catholics either but sola scriptura is unbelievably retarded. there's a million different interpretations of a million different things in the Bible and the protestant idea just lets anyone start a church and say their interpretation is the right one without question. a lot of it is just a reaction to catholics as well, they treat Mary like a background character, ignore any sort of symbolism, and act like images are a sin. i'm not saying all of them do these things but it is a concerning amount.
>>85723532I am not here to argue catholic doctrine. Replacement theology is also stupid. "Knowing how to read it" is mostly arbitrary bullshit. And not relevant to this thread. That anon was referring to Luther's writings, not the bible.
>>85723555>That anon was referring to Luther's writings, not the bible.my mistake. and it is an arbitrary way to say it but dispensationalism is insane desu. that's probably one of the most harmful parts of protestant theology. and it's slightly relavent to many protestants being retarded.
>>85723511I condemn the protestant faith because it results in (the spiritual equivalent of) people eating empty calories and dying of malnutrition. It has no substance.
>>85723555"Knowing how to read it" is very important. Jesus never actually said "love thy neighbor as yourself", because he didn't speak English (at the very least, those writings were in English).So to actually know what you're reading you need translation which also requires context, otherwise you get scoffield bible jew fellatio.NTA btw.
>>85723693"Knowing how to read it" is bullshit because it is based on several circular assumptions that do not exist in the text, on the particular agenda of the scribe, on the agenda of the authority, etc. There is no such thing as "knowing how to read it" in an objective manner, especially since we don't even have the original writtings. That phrase is often a slight of hand for a particular interpretation. Once again, this isn't relevant to this thread, because it's an entirely different topic. I am particularly focused on Luther's retarded system, and not addressing it in favor of a different argument makes it so the problems with Lutheran doctrine remain devoid of judgement.
>>85723330Luther was an Augustinian and Augustinians do in fact believe that one's salvation hinges on this chosen-ness. The pope is an Augustinian and literally spoke of this chosen-ness on his first inaugural mass. The big brain of Catholics Aquinas speaks of it too:>Thus, as men are ORDAINED to eternal life through the providence of God, it likewise is part of that providence to permit some to fall away from that end; this is called reprobation....Therefore, as predestination includes THE WILL TO CONFER grace and glory; so also reprobation includes the will to permit a person to fall into sin, and to impose the punishment of damnation on account of that sin>It's Hegelian and Marxist, in that is strips people of all agency and value and simply deems them as completely reactive beings in the face of a systemIf by reactive you mean being mere puppets then neither Marx nor Hegel believes this. Both believe that the people produced by a system also can actively shape the system they participate in. If you meant that people's actions are reactions to the conditions they are born in, then Christianity is reactive in this way too. Mankind's life on earth is totally "reactive" to the flesh, first in its pre-saved state in its inability to save itself as Augustin argues against Pelagius, and 2nd in an on going battle against the flesh even after being saved as Paul writes in Romans 7Catholics and Protestants believe in this predestined caste of save/damned, what they are different in is that *some* protestants are labeled as double predestinarians which Catholics misconstrue as God actively reprobating the damned; which isn't true btw, the so called double predestinarians believe in passive reprobation in which the damned are simply permitted, not actively chosen, of their fate similar to the greentexted aquinas quote above(wc means both parties actually believe in the same thing). Hopefully this points you to the right direction.
>>85723330>where nobody can do anything about it whatsoeveryou are talking about double predestination (i.e God decided before you were even born if you go to heaven or hell) while Lutheranism holds to simple predestination (at the end of the day it is God who decides if you go to heaven or hell, i.e you can't purchase your way into heaven or whatever catholics believe)
>>85723933Yes, this is a pagan idea. Condemnation of the flesh is not found in the old testament, it is entirely a consequence of platonism and helenistic influence. >ORDAINEDThis isn't a contradiction. I do not claim that the ultimate decision is in the hands of the individuals, it's in God's hands, only he has the authority. Luther rejects the notion that it is anyone who can be saved however. Catholic doctrine establishes the uncertainty of salvation, Luther attempts to eliminate it. For Luther, faith isn't how one gets saved, faith is a symptom of being saved. Despite what "sola fide" claims, humans do not have any agency in attaining faith, it is God who grants faith to those he chooses to save. Otherwise, Luther would necessarily have to include free will into his system, but he rejects it. To Luther, being chosen isn't something that happens at "the day of judgment". Those who are saved were always meant to be, those who are damned were always intended to be. Salvation precedes faith, but salvation is recognized through the manifestation of faith.>"reactive" Wrong, you can only argue total reactive character if there is no choice involved. If, faith is granted by divine whim, then the actions of one who claims to be chosen can only ever be classified as righteous. If, salvation is granted based on character and behavior, then there is an active component in choosing to obey or disobey. The notion of a lack of free will is incompatible with the knowledge of good and evil. Luther makes this clear with analogy of horses. The horse cannot choose its rider, the horse can neither tell who is riding him, therefore the can't tell if he is being ridden by God or satan. Delight is found both paths, and neither is followed willingly. It is Hegelian and Marxist in the sense that complete surrender of the individual to the system isn't a mere element, but the essence of the system upon which everything else stands on.
>>85723977No, I am not. Read >>85724073Luther thinks God chooses whether you have or not.
>>85723977Yeah exactly. The Catholc church at the time was so corrupt. >>85723330 I'm pretty sure Catholics believe in predestination anyway. Calvinists are the ones with the stupid view on it, and the vast majority of Christians aren't Calvinists.
>>85724092>The Catholc church at the time was so corrupt.This was addressed and solved by the Salamanca school. They were literally centuries ahead in social philosophy and governance. It took 300 years and a civil war in the US for protestants to reach the same conclusions.
>>85724135I think you're vastly over valuing A: the Salamanca's power in being able to override the Catholic church as a whole and B: their indepndence in causing reform in the Catholic church absent the Reformation. They were integral to the Counter Reformation and largely created by the Reformation and the theological questions posed by it. For instance the Salamanca's were integral to removing the indulgences for sins. If wasn't for the Reformation, and in fairness, the Hussites, those heavily entrenched corrupt practices would have continued, absent the Council of Trent.
Well, Catholics should be the representatives of Christ's church. They're the most long running sect of Christianity. So, protestants do lose automatically once we set all pretense and focus solely on recorded history. But, does that make Catholicism right? Idk. But protestants are in the wrong, so you are right OP on this front at least.
>>85724211I am not arguing for the actual potential that the Salamnca school held for inciting change in the church, I am arguing for the philosophical value of their ideas. One is purely a philosophical/theological argument about governance and ethics, the other is an analysis of history. The Salamanca school was condemned in many cases by the church, some were excommunicated. Their stances on slavery and governance were literally forced to be held in a private debate due to the damage they could cause to the system of encomiendas. On the other hand, the matters which they raised were relegated to secondary issues due to the immediate problem of the reformation, the peasant revolt and the wars in europe. From a historical POV, Spain lost a massive part of it's identity when the wrold embranced secularism or protestantism, it literally forgot that they had already developed answers for the problems that made the rest of the world choose either of these systems, and was left trying to imitate them. Not even Franco's empty callback to "tradition" was able to bring back their identity, as it lacked a rational framework that could withstand modern scrutiny and was simply a tool for governance.Some at the school held opposing views as well, it's not all cohesive. But Locke's philosophy was mostly based on an adaptation of their thought. And their thiught offered a robust answer to Luther's objections. I bring them up because I think it's a tragedy that they are so undervalued, and because the Lutherans hardly ever seem to consider a way to resolve their issues with catholicism if not through the schism ans violence that happened at the time.
>>85723330Sola Scriptura is a non-starter for me. Christ didn't deliver scripture, he delivered a tradition.
>>85724316That's all rather resonable, dude. Yeah it was a shame, it caused an awful lot of pain and death in many many countries. I'll give the Salamanca's a detailed look one day, they sound rather interesting then.
>>85724316Protestantism, in my opinion, brought about a political slight of hand, in which church and state pretend to be separate, and act as such in the creation of the laws of the state, however the axioms under which these laws are created are entirely religious, even though Europe and the US, at the time, pretends to be secular. They always call back to God, from swearing on the bible in their judicial systemsto religious motos, to the notion of equality under the law, the underlying framework is intrinsically tied. The law is predicated on religious axioms, which, acter the reformation, are no longer unified. Because Protestantism chose to break with unified authority, issues of morality were HIGHLY relativized. This is why a myriad of different denominations broke out. The only reason it withstood the test of time is it's reliance on PREVIOUS JUDGEMENTS OF A UNIFIED AUTHORITY. I am not even arguing for a reunification of church and state, but simply pointing out the resulting hypocrisy. It's a system that constantly rejects it's own basis. Identity crises are inevitable in such a scenario. I am proposing that Luther's system is corrupt and unnecessary, and at the very least, bearing a huge part of the fault for many of the issues of today.
>>85724378Very nice. Vitoria was cool. They addressed slavery, right to govern, civil laws, charging of interest, economics, inflation, etc. In all fairness, I do agree with Luther's opposition to corruption in the church. His objections were incredibly necessary.
>>85723330Christianity itself is retarded. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature can see that it's bullshit.
>>85724461Monotheism in the abrahamic sense is probably the single most important development in the history of human consciousness (philosophy, religion, or whatever you want to call it)
