How is it that the Catholic Church is evil?

[bèlla]

You are fortunate that your family came around to accepting your achievements.

We were raised to think for ourselves and not follow the crowd. If I don’t think the advice is sound I won’t accept it and the first place I look is the person delivering it. I examine their choices and the results that follow and look for patterns in their decisions. That’s the greatest metric we demonstrate regarding wisdom. You don’t sway people with words you move them with outcomes.

I have a few family members that are Catholic. They are good to us, but they have made it clear that our non-Roman Catholic faith is unacceptable.

While I don’t support catholicism I wouldn’t wreck my family over it. And it‘s a nonissue for us because we’re aligned on the subject. My daughter would never date a catholic or accept the same in her children. We have a different philosophy for our family much like others do for their home. A person who‘s guided by an institution is the wrong fit for us and unlikely to uphold our ethos if it contradicts those teachings.

That’s why a lot of families have eroded because they weren’t vigilant about the fold and allowed people in who were contrary to its betterment. Much like there‘s a body in the church your family is the same and each part has a purpose within the whole and the world. When you want to do great things for God you think differently and protect the flock. That’s what parents are. They’re shepherds.

~bella

 

[Valletta]

I think verses like John 20:23 have been misused. I should also mention that Christ died once for our sins, and the sacrifice does not have to be repeated.

Mt 9:6 But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he then said to the paralytic—“Rise, take up your bed and go home.” RSVCE
Jesus emphasized how important the forgiveness of sins on earth is, even more meaningful than having a paralyzed man healed. What a gift.
It is Catholic teaching that the one sacrifice of Jesus cannot be repeated.

 

[Jerry N.]

We were raised to think for ourselves and not follow the crowd. If I don’t think the advice is sound I won’t accept it and the first place I look is the person delivering it. I examine their choices and the results that follow and look for patterns in their decisions. That’s the greatest metric we demonstrate regarding wisdom. You don’t sway people with words you move them with outcomes.



While I don’t support catholicism I wouldn’t wreck my family over it. And it‘s a nonissue for us because we’re aligned on the subject. My daughter would never date a catholic or accept the same in her children. We have a different philosophy for our family much like others do for their home. A person who‘s guided by an institution is the wrong fit for us and unlikely to uphold our ethos if it contradicts those teachings.

That’s why a lot of families have eroded because they weren’t vigilant about the fold and allowed people in who were contrary to its betterment. Much like there‘s a body in the church your family is the same and each part has a purpose within the whole and the world. When you want to do great things for God you think differently and protect the flock. That’s what parents are. They’re shepherds.

~bella

It looks like your good family structure and upbringing will carry on for several generations. It is a great blessing. It might seem proper in this discussion to share my own journey in this regard, but I don’t think it would be right for me to write about my family and its dynamics more than I already have. God has blessed me in many ways, but family has been difficult, even if those difficulties have led me to be a better Christian.

 

[Jerry N.]

Mt 9:6 But that you may know that the Son of man has authority on earth to forgive sins”—he then said to the paralytic—“Rise, take up your bed and go home.” RSVCE
Jesus emphasized how important the forgiveness of sins on earth is, even more meaningful than having a paralyzed man healed. What a gift.
It is Catholic teaching that the one sacrifice of Jesus cannot be repeated.

Isn't the Mass a repeat of Christ's suffering and death and resurrection?

 

[rockytopva]

From Rocket Scientist to Christian... "One day in Fort Bliss, a neighbor called and asked if I would like to go to church with him. I accepted, because I wanted to see if the American church was just a country club as I'd been led to expect. Instead, I found a small, white frame building...in the hot Texas sun on a browned-grass lot...Together, these people make a live, vibrant community. This was the first time I really understood that religion was not a cathedral inherited from the past, or a quick prayer at the last minute. To be effective, a religion has to be backed up by discipline and effort." — Wernher von Braun (noticing he did not mention a denomination)

As long as the discipline and effort are there any church within the Christian Forums here can do well. Take away the discipline and effort and the one (fill in whatever denominational name) is just as bad as the other (fill in whatever denominational name).

 

[Valletta]

Isn't the Mass a repeat of Christ's suffering and death and resurrection?

There is just one sacrifice--the sacrifice of Christ and the sacrifice of the Eucharist are the same sacrifice.

 

[boughtwithaprice]

The pope/church hierarchy attempts to usurp Christ's place over the Bride. How can the teachings seem good and still be opposed to God?

Because not all the teachings are good. Truth mixed with falsehood...

Doesn't mean I have anything against people who call themselves Roman Catholics. I'm sure like any other belief system there's fine people who practice it. I have a deal of respect for a few Catholics I have run into.

I'm just sticking with Christianity myself, of the more orthodox Protestant variety.

Protestantism was not practiced until the 16th century, so I am not sure how it can be construed as orthodox. Its teachings were unheard of in the Church prior to that time. With Jesus being the same yesterday today and forever, you are going to have to study history to resolve your position.

If you won’t do that, then it just comes down to the musings of men being purported to be orthodox scripture. Why is there higher place given to new teachings started by men over centuries of Christian thought?

Should we not look for consistency of teaching ?

 

[Kathleen30]

Protestantism was not practiced until the 16th century, so I am not sure how it can be construed as orthodox. Its teachings were unheard of in the Church prior to that time. With Jesus being the same yesterday today and forever, you are going to have to study history to resolve your position.

If you won’t do that, then it just comes down to the musings of men being purported to be orthodox scripture. Why is there higher place given to new teachings started by men over centuries of Christian thought?

Should we not look for consistency of teaching ?

Broughtwithaprice iIn some regards that be true. But you must remember the Roman Catholic Church had become so corrupted with money making activities of indulgences and other unscriptural activities. Luthier never left the Roman Catholic Church he was kicked out and with the invention of the printing press around the same time many prople were able to finally read the word of God fuly for themselves. As to many of the Protestants doctrines being unheard of. Yes some were in latter centuries but many were not, such as many of the teachings of St Augustine on the Sovereignty of God which had been covered over by Chuch tradition concerning that. It was the Roman Catholic Church itself that lit the fire of the Reformation by persecuting and even burning at the stake many of their fellow Roman Catholics Tyndale does come to mind in that regard . Yours Kathleen

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Broughtwithaprice iIn some regards that be true. But you must remember the Roman Catholic Church had become so corrupted with money making activities of indulgences and other unscriptural activities. Luthier never left the Roman Catholic Church he was kicked out and with the invention of the printing press around the same time many prople were able to finally read the word of God fuly for themselves. As to many of the Protestants doctrines being unheard of. Yes some were in latter centuries but many were not, such as many of the teachings of St Augustine on the Sovereignty of God which had been covered over by Chuch tradition concerning that. It was the Roman Catholic Church itself that lit the fire of the Reformation by persecuting and even burning at the stake many of their fellow Roman Catholics Tyndale does come to mind in that regard . Yours Kathleen

Have you read the actual story of Tyndale and Luther? If you investigate the actual events, you may find that they are not what you believe them to be. Ever wonder why the Reformation coincides with a secular event called the enlightenment? Who is the angel of light that is capable of deception?

How do you know that you are not deceived? More investigation and examination of evidence is needed instead of just believing what we are told. We can learn to think instead of being trained to act emotionally or to make judgements without evidence.
The most fearful and powerful statement Jesus ever made is the same measure which you use to judge another will be used to judge you. We need to be more circumspect on history instead of believing propaganda
The greatest deception used by Satan is to say God didn’t really mean that. Don’t worry about judging with very little facts, just believe in Jesus, you don’t have to do what He says. Don’t be silly, works can’t save you

The direct statement from Jesus is the same measure we use will be used on us. Believe it or not. As for me, I want a full examination of the facts, as I want Jesus to use a full examination of facts before He passes judgement on me

 

[Kathleen30]

Have you read the actual story of Tyndale and Luther? If you investigate the actual events, you may find that they are not what you believe them to be. Ever wonder why the Reformation coincides with a secular event called the enlightenment? Who is the angel of light that is capable of deception?

How do you know that you are not deceived? More investigation and examination of evidence is needed instead of just believing what we are told. We can learn to think instead of being trained to act emotionally or to make judgements without evidence.
The most fearful and powerful statement Jesus ever made is the same measure which you use to judge another will be used to judge you. We need to be more circumspect on history instead of believing propaganda
The greatest deception used by Satan is to say God didn’t really mean that. Don’t worry about judging with very little facts, just believe in Jesus, you don’t have to do what He says. Don’t be silly, works can’t save you

The direct statement from Jesus is the same measure we use will be used on us. Believe it or not. As for me, I want a full examination of the facts, as I want Jesus to use a full examination of facts before He passes judgement on me

Broughtatgreatprice I’ve done some on both. I’ve never come across any damaging evidence about Tyndale.. but on Martin Luther. Well what can I say. In one of his biographies whilst riding upon a horse one day I was beseeched by a brood of demons chasing me. And of course Martin had this habitual habit of reminding his readers whilist siting upon the stool contemplating his thought's about doctrinal matters. If I were a drinking lady one might think upon Swollowing the entire contents of the liquor upon such thoughts. But that still doesn’t take away that all he wanted to do was reform the church with his 95 thesis’s. Instead they excommunicated him.

You than speak of the enlightenment era and how it coincides with the reformation. You’re saying that it infiltrated the reformation. In some ways it did. Even more in so in the 1800’s with the likes of Nelson Darby and Cyrus Schofield the Jehovah witnesses and Mormons to name a few . But what of the infiltration of the Roman Catholic that had begun much further down . At least according to all these Roman Catholic authors. perhaps they and I are not as unenlightened as you think. They remained Catholic but they in no way paint their church red pink rosy as you do.

Father Chiniquy was a little different he left Rome

Broughtatgreatprice when seeking enlightenment Mystery Babylon Does not discriminate where she makes her home be it the left or the right . Enquire within. Enlightened ones welcome. But not for all. Yours Kathleen

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Broughtatgreatprice I’ve done some on both. I’ve never come across any damaging evidence about Tyndale.. but on Martin Luther. Well what can I say. In one of his biographies whilst riding upon a horse one day I was beseeched by a brood of demons chasing me. And of course Martin had this habitual habit of reminding his readers whilist siting upon the stool contemplating his thought's about doctrinal matters. If I were a drinking lady one might think upon Swollowing the entire contents of the liquor upon such thoughts. But that still doesn’t take away that all he wanted to do was reform the church with his 95 thesis’s. Instead they excommunicated him. View attachment 366205 You than speak of the enlightenment era and how it coincides with the reformation. You’re saying that it infiltrated the reformation. In some ways it did. Even more in so in the 1800’s with the likes of Nelson Darby and Cyrus Schofield the Jehovah witnesses and Mormons to name a few . But what of the infiltration of the Roman Catholic that had begun much further down . At least according to all these Roman Catholic authors. perhaps they and I are not as unenlightened as you think. They remained Catholic but they in no way paint their church red pink rosy as you do. View attachment 366206View attachment 366207View attachment 366208 Father Chiniquy was a little different he left Rome View attachment 366209 Broughtatgreatprice when seeking enlightenment Mystery Babylon Does not discriminate where she makes her home be it the left or the right . Enquire within. Enlightened ones welcome. But not for all. Yours Kathleen

You make a false statement about me. I do not paint the Church’s history as rosy and pink. That can easily be explained by infiltration, which Our Lord said would happen in the parable of the wheat and the tares. That does not delegitimize the Church’s existence.

If Luther only wanted to reform the Church, then why did he find it necessary to change the Bible to fit his theology? He used the printing press more as a gossip column than reasoned debate or dissent.
Tyndale wrote a faulty translation. If he didn’t, then why is his translation not used today. It was a very poor scholarly work in line with the JW new world translation

Have you read Exurge Donine? The Pope’s rebuttal to Luther’s claims? Have you read the 95 theses? Do you know what either of these documents say and why you agree or disagree with them? If not, then you need to suspend your judgement until you do, else you are defying Jesus’ teaching and judging on gossip. Is that what you want to be used to judge you, gossip? Really?
To judge the Church, we must judge her teaching, not the claims of disgruntled members
I would not want to be judged by the gossip against me, why would you insist on being judged by yours? You must be confident that your reputation will spare you, I need a little more mercy than that.

Tyndale did not just want to translate the Bible into English, he changed words to fit his personal theology instead of accurately translating the Bible. Luther added words to the Bible where they not. In order to fit his personal theology also
Translating scripture is one thing, changing the meaning for personal reasons is another
It wasn’t the Catholic Church that executed Tyndale either. Henry VIII who had broken with the Church declared Tyndale’s translation illegal, and Tyndale was executed by secular authorities
The law against English translations came from Wycliffe translation that was so full of errors that it was banned
English translations were not illegal, they just had to be accurate translations, not altered translations written to deceive and sway public opinion

 

[Kathleen30]

You make a false statement about me. I do not paint the Church’s history as rosy and pink. That can easily be explained by infiltration, which Our Lord said would happen in the parable of the wheat and the tares. That does not delegitimize the Church’s existence.

If Luther only wanted to reform the Church, then why did he find it necessary to change the Bible to fit his theology? He used the printing press more as a gossip column than reasoned debate or dissent.
Tyndale wrote a faulty translation. If he didn’t, then why is his translation not used today. It was a very poor scholarly work in line with the JW new world translation

Have you read Exurge Donine? The Pope’s rebuttal to Luther’s claims? Have you read the 95 theses? Do you know what either of these documents say and why you agree or disagree with them? If not, then you need to suspend your judgement until you do, else you are defying Jesus’ teaching and judging on gossip. Is that what you want to be used to judge you, gossip? Really?
To judge the Church, we must judge her teaching, not the claims of disgruntled members
I would not want to be judged by the gossip against me, why would you insist on being judged by yours? You must be confident that your reputation will spare you, I need a little more mercy than that.

Tyndale did not just want to translate the Bible into English, he changed words to fit his personal theology instead of accurately translating the Bible. Luther added words to the Bible where they not. In order to fit his personal theology also
Translating scripture is one thing, changing the meaning for personal reasons is another
It wasn’t the Catholic Church that executed Tyndale either. Henry VIII who had broken with the Church declared Tyndale’s translation illegal, and Tyndale was executed by secular authorities
The law against English translations came from Wycliffe translation that was so full of errors that it was banned
English translations were not illegal, they just had to be accurate translations, not altered translations written to deceive and sway public opinion

Broughtwithaprice you claim I make a false statement about you . Did I ? I merely said there has been much infiltration within both Catholic and Protestant religions alike. At the same time I also said there be many man made traditions contrary to the word of God also made by Rome herself. As to having read Martin Luther’s 95 theses. Yes I have read. like at the age of around 13 : ) but you did start your Christian commitment much later. Perhaps you were not aware that it’s basic reformation history and for that matter basic Christian history.

Have I read the Exurgic Donine I’ve read some from our publication's and studies but not all. But one thing is certain the pope does not address all of Luther’s 95 theses only the ones that he chooses and some of the replies are rather vague . But he is very direct about Martin recanting all that he wrote on his 95 Theseus and that all would be forgiven if he did. And if not then to be excommunicated and classed as a heretic. But one thing is certain The German people chose with their feet of which rebuttal they believed. And it certainly wasn’t the popes rebuttal because they left the Roman Catholic Church in their droves.

As to reasons why I disagree well I’m not about go through the entire 95 theses. There be the matter of excessive powers bestowed upon the authority of the pope and the wealth of the church, also there be the matter of Gods grace by faith alone and not our works and of course the indulgences which was fleecing Gods people out of their money with the promise of a free ticket to heaven to name just a few.

.you ask if Luther wanted to reform the Church why did he write a new Bible. Well Broughtatgreatprice Martin had already been excommunicated from the Catholic Church so how could he do any reforming there. He wrote the Bible for a more up to date language more free flowing for the German people of that day. There certainly were mistakes like names and some grammar. But that fixed in later editions He did even question the book of Revelations for a time but accepted it as holy scripture after closer scrutiny and no doubt with a bit of Divine intervention: ) As to wanting it to suit his own theology. Well that’s a rather Big statement many would disagree with you but yes there is always the possibility of bias. You then move on to the Wycliffe translation saying it was so full of errors and was banned. Well I not know if there was a ban on not But one thing is certain that it must have became unbanned considering that you find 83 percent of it in the king James New Testament alone I’m not sure about the Old Testament . But seems it must been a pretty good version for the King James Version to enter so much of it into their holy script.

Broughtatgreatprice you than go on to claim that it wasn’t the Catholic Church that killed tyndale because king Henry viii wasn’t a Catholic. Well yes you right in that regard king Henry was too busy with his many wives and concubines. Tyndale did get himself in a pickle writing about his disapproval of the matter. So much so that he had to flee the Uk. King Henry never had Tyndale executed nor by any officials in the Uk . You are mistaken in that regard. It was certainly was a Catholic King that had Tyndale executed in what is now known as the Neverlands . And executed by strangulation and than burnt at the stake on orders of Catholic King Charles the fifth. We all make mistakes I not hold you to the same standard as you demand of me ❤️ but it does concern me that you pass of all those Catholic writers I mentioned as merely more disgruntled Catholics. Some funny. I guess there must be lot of disgruntled Catholics around : ) God bless for today. Yours Kathleen

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Broughtwithaprice you claim I make a false statement about you . Did I ? I merely said there has been much infiltration within both Catholic and Protestant religions alike. At the same time I also said there be many man made traditions contrary to the word of God also made by Rome herself. As to having read Martin Luther’s 95 theses. Yes I have read. like at the age of around 13 : ) but you did start your Christian commitment much later. Perhaps you were not aware that it’s basic reformation history and for that matter basic Christian history. View attachment 366236 Have I read the Exurgic Donine I’ve read some from our publication's and studies but not all. But one thing is certain the pope does not address all of Luther’s 95 theses only the ones that he chooses and some of the replies are rather vague . But he is very direct about Martin recanting all that he wrote on his 95 Theseus and that all would be forgiven if he did. And if not then to be excommunicated and classed as a heretic. But one thing is certain The German people chose with their feet of which rebuttal they believed. And it certainly wasn’t the popes rebuttal because they left the Roman Catholic Church in their droves. View attachment 366236As to reasons why I disagree well I’m not about go through the entire 95 theses. There be the matter of excessive powers bestowed upon the authority of the pope and the wealth of the church, also there be the matter of Gods grace by faith alone and not our works and of course the indulgences which was fleecing Gods people out of their money with the promise of a free ticket to heaven to name just a few. View attachment 366238.you ask if Luther wanted to reform the Church why did he write a new Bible. Well Broughtatgreatprice Martin had already been excommunicated from the Catholic Church so how could he do any reforming there. He wrote the Bible for a more up to date language more free flowing for the German people of that day. There certainly were mistakes like names and some grammar. But that fixed in later editions He did even question the book of Revelations for a time but accepted it as holy scripture after closer scrutiny and no doubt with a bit of Divine intervention: ) As to wanting it to suit his own theology. Well that’s a rather Big statement many would disagree with you but yes there is always the possibility of bias. You then move on to the Wycliffe translation saying it was so full of errors and was banned. Well I not know if there was a ban on not But one thing is certain that it must have became unbanned considering that you find 83 percent of it in the king James New Testament alone I’m not sure about the Old Testament . But seems it must been a pretty good version for the King James Version to enter so much of it into their holy script. View attachment 366241Broughtatgreatprice you than go on to claim that it wasn’t the Catholic Church that killed tyndale because king Henry viii wasn’t a Catholic. Well yes you right in that regard king Henry was too busy with his many wives and concubines. Tyndale did get himself in a pickle writing about his disapproval of the matter. So much so that he had to flee the Uk. King Henry never had Tyndale executed nor by any officials in the Uk . You are mistaken in that regard. It was certainly was a Catholic King that had Tyndale executed in what is now known as the Neverlands . And executed by strangulation and than burnt at the stake on orders of Catholic King Charles the fifth. We all make mistakes I not hold you to the same standard as you demand of me ❤️ but it does concern me that you pass of all those Catholic writers I mentioned as merely more disgruntled Catholics. Some funny. I guess there must be lot of disgruntled Catholics around : ) God bless for today. Yours Kathleen

Kathleen, I believe that you are trying to love Jesus and I get it. You just can’t see what you are doing
The false statement that you made of me was that I try to paint Catholic Church history as rosy and nice implying that I ignore evil done in her name. I don’t think you did it maliciously but it is what you said.
You give examples of Luther and Tyndale, but do not present them in full context. You imply that you do not have time to read the primary sources but prefer to read the opinions of people that agree with you. It would be a waste of my time and an endless rabbit hole to dig through gossip and the opinions of men
You say that you read these books and you value the opinions of these men and/or women.
Since you have read them, do any of them use primary sources for their arguments? Do they give you a sense of an honest review of the history or do they start their premise as the Catholic Church is bad, read what I have to say?
What about their words convinced you that they are right and the Church is wrong?

False premises lead to false conclusions. What have you done to verify the truth?

 

[JSRG]

Broughtwithaprice you claim I make a false statement about you . Did I ? I merely said there has been much infiltration within both Catholic and Protestant religions alike. At the same time I also said there be many man made traditions contrary to the word of God also made by Rome herself. As to having read Martin Luther’s 95 theses. Yes I have read. like at the age of around 13 : ) but you did start your Christian commitment much later. Perhaps you were not aware that it’s basic reformation history and for that matter basic Christian history. View attachment 366236 Have I read the Exurgic Donine I’ve read some from our publication's and studies but not all. But one thing is certain the pope does not address all of Luther’s 95 theses only the ones that he chooses and some of the replies are rather vague . But he is very direct about Martin recanting all that he wrote on his 95 Theseus and that all would be forgiven if he did. And if not then to be excommunicated and classed as a heretic.

Where was it demanded he recant all that he wrote in the 95 Theses? You appeal to Exsurge Domine, but it says nothing explicitly about the 95 Theses, and instead lists 31 condemned propositions, some of them taken from the 95 Theses, and says he needs to recant those propositions, but nothing of having to take back all of the Theses. Which would make sense, because while--from a Catholic standpoint--there was some to object to in the Theses, much of what he wrote in the Theses does not seem problematic at all. There is an interesting analysis of them from a Catholic perspective here which reaches that conclusion ("Luther corrects most of the theological errors underlying the abuses, and creates a few of his own in the process.")

Also: Why do your posts repeatedly have these big pink rectangles?

 

[Kathleen30]

Where was it demanded he recant all that he wrote in the 95 Theses? You appeal to Exsurge Domine, but it says nothing explicitly about the 95 Theses, and instead lists 31 condemned propositions, some of them taken from the 95 Theses, and says he needs to recant those propositions, but nothing of having to take back all of the Theses. Which would make sense, because while--from a Catholic standpoint--there was some to object to in the Theses, much of what he wrote in the Theses does not seem problematic at all. There is an interesting analysis of them from a Catholic perspective here which reaches that conclusion ("Luther corrects most of the theological errors underlying the abuses, and creates a few of his own in the process.")

Also: Why do your posts repeatedly have these big pink rectangles?

where does it say that they said for Luther to recant his 95 theses. It doesn’t. As I said they chose the ones they saw fit to reply to. As to the pink rectangles a topic or paragraph break up. I guess I like pink

 

[boughtwithaprice]

Where was it demanded he recant all that he wrote in the 95 Theses? You appeal to Exsurge Domine, but it says nothing explicitly about the 95 Theses, and instead lists 31 condemned propositions, some of them taken from the 95 Theses, and says he needs to recant those propositions, but nothing of having to take back all of the Theses. Which would make sense, because while--from a Catholic standpoint--there was some to object to in the Theses, much of what he wrote in the Theses does not seem problematic at all. There is an interesting analysis of them from a Catholic perspective here which reaches that conclusion ("Luther corrects most of the theological errors underlying the abuses, and creates a few of his own in the process.")

Also: Why do your posts repeatedly have these big pink rectangles?

I don’t know why there are rectangles It’s not my doing and I don’t see them

I have not appealed to anything. I inquired if the poster had read the points contained in them or is repeating what others have said
There is no fault in reading what others have said, but we need to refer to original sources to be lovers of truth and not gossips
You mention that Luther corrected theological errors but do not mention what any of them are or were. It’s a psychological trick to make a disparaging remark and blame the listener for not believing you because they do not have the time to read sources that may be in error. Is my time not valuable? A claim is made, it is the responsibility of the accuser to present the evidence, not have the listener rely on hearsay

This conversation requires us to examine the 95 thesis and Exurge Domini as they are primary sources

 

[Kathleen30]

Kathleen, I believe that you are trying to love Jesus and I get it. You just can’t see what you are doing
The false statement that you made of me was that I try to paint Catholic Church history as rosy and nice implying that I ignore evil done in her name. I don’t think you did it maliciously but it is what you said.
You give examples of Luther and Tyndale, but do not present them in full context. You imply that you do not have time to read the primary sources but prefer to read the opinions of people that agree with you. It would be a waste of my time and an endless rabbit hole to dig through gossip and the opinions of men
You say that you read these books and you value the opinions of these men and/or women.
Since you have read them, do any of them use primary sources for their arguments? Do they give you a sense of an honest review of the history or do they start their premise as the Catholic Church is bad, read what I have to say?
What about their words convinced you that they are right and the Church is wrong?

False premises lead to false conclusions. What have you done to verify the truth?

Broughtwithaprice you say . I think you are trying love to Jesus ??? I say to that It was he that first loved us and not us that first loved him. How could any Christian being saved by his power and love not love Christ. It not be a matter of trying to love Jesus it’s an automatic reaction once your saved

You than say I give examples of Luther and Tyndale but do not present them in full context. I give the context required in whati need to get a point across. What do you enquire of ? the entirety of Luther’s and Tyndales writings ? What I did say is that I’ve read the 95 theses of Luther and parts of Exurge Domine letter of which I have read fully now in the last few days. Not that that there was too much to add from what I’ve read in what the other publications had evaluated.

You than ask about the books I showed you. Do they present source material. Yes depending on which book sometimes political source material sometimes religious source material sometimes both together. You ask what about their words that convinced me that they are right and the church is wrong. They all be Roman Catholic writers they believe in their Church they only point out all the infiltration and corruption within the church that has taken place. All except for Father Chiniquy he left the Church of Rome. Their assessments be fair ones. Broughtwithaprice Perhaps read for yourself for your own evaluation. Yours Kathleen

 

[Valletta]

where does it say that they said for Luther to recant his 95 theses. It doesn’t. As I said they chose the ones they saw fit to reply to. As to the pink rectangles a topic or paragraph break up. I guess I like pink

Luther made all kinds of attacks and accusations, way beyond reform. After Luther's refusal to meet and discuss his accusations he was finally excommunicated. There was no reason to respond to every accusation from Luther.

 

[Freth]

Regarding the OP question, Paul wrote that apostasy would happen, and that it was already at work in his day.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-7 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.​

​

The reader should come to their own conclusion(s), based on historical events and fulfilled prophecy.

 

[Valletta]

Regarding the OP question, Paul wrote that apostasy would happen, and that it was already at work in his day.

2 Thessalonians 2:3-7 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things? And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.​

​

The reader should come to their own conclusion(s), based on historical events and fulfilled prophecy.

Yes, the reformation caused split after split and among Christians with I don't know how many denominations today.