Fun fact: The german dialect used in Luthers bible translation became the standard german we know today, because everybody had to learn it in order to read the Bible (and everybody had a bible at home).
@@micahistory i dont think its banned from reading it, its just not really accessible to the people since creating bible was somewhat expensive before printing press and the bible also in latin so no peasant able to understand much i mean charlemagne did mass produce bible with no harm back in the days
@@Ahmad-nf9ez it is bad, very bad, immoral to rape some1. thus, humans agreed to make rape a crime. can you define sin for me? because the concept of a crime is clear.
@@JamesAsp that's very non-biblical. I don't mind that at all. But the "missing the mark" part is very vague. A girl likes me, I don't realize it (because I am 14 in this story), then I realize it too late. Was this a sin then? It sure was a waste. More importantly, then homosexuality (usually considered a "sin") is not a sin. F.e. 2 men do NOT miss the mark, and then they love eachother exactly as they meant to love eachother.
I believe a very important detail was left out. Namely the local counts and princes in Germany were supposed to pay heavy dues to the Catholic Church (also because St. Peters was being built at the time) and they were very annoyed about this. Luther gave them the perfect excuse to stick it to the Pope, so when Luther kickstarted the Reform and defied the church, the local princes and counts gave him protection from the church with the very nice side effect of not having to pay the hefty dues anymore. Of course this led to war at some point so... I guess we all must live with our choices.
The marriages between powerful Spain and the heads of the Holy Roman Empire (Austria) worried a lot Northern European monarchs, too. These had great influence in Italy, at the time, with great access to the Pope. The balance of power in Europe cannot be overlooked.
Good one, Marius. But as spiritual as Martin Luther was he did very little for repairing the 1,200-year damage to Christianity created by the church and their mangling of scripture in their egoistic urge to find a "fixed" meaning. Ref: Trinity Treason
The reformation was beginning before Luther or Calvin came on the scene. Both the Waldensians (c. 1173) originating in Lyons and the Hussites in Bohemia (c. 1415) preceded them. The Hussites fought a war against Catholics and ended up winning that fight, and practiced their own faith in the Czech region for a couple of hundred years, until the Thirty Years War rolled through (now they are known as the Moravian church).
They did not reform the Catholic Church, they actually revolted against it. The result of this revolt is that the Catholics decided to reform their church. Something was lost in the translation.
True. The fact is, that some form of “reformation “ had been going on, in some place, paralleling the entire “Catholic “ church, But, there were also outright heretics as well.
Not to mention Jan Huss in the previous century and William of Ockham before him, both of whom opposed papal infallibility and held the scriptures in very high regard.
@@saadshoaib901 So? And the French were enemies of the Counter Reformation. They fought against Spain/Catholics during the Reformation LOL. All the while Martin Luther who was financed and made a fool by Jews/Turks the Ottoman Empire kept growing. All Martin Luther did was cause mass destruction on a global level. And divided Christendom forever.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Christendom was deemed to divide the bible wasn't accessible to the public literary rates we're deemed to go higher one time or another it was a time bomb think about it
My ancestors were crucified for their religious beliefs. They were Protestants from Bavaria, Germany. My family sailed to the east coast in the early 1600's of America and settled in Virginia
Crucified? in medieval Europe? are you sure, that form of death penalty ceased to exist in Christendom after Emperor Constantine banned it to honour Jesus.
An empire is by definition an entitity, that governs wast ammounts of lands inhabitet by various people, so the PLC is by definition an empire. It was big ( 1 milion km2 at its peak) and governed over many nations: Ruthenians, Germans in Prussia, Baltic people in Courland and Livonia, Moldavians for a short time, and heck - one Polish King was even the Tzar of Russia.
@@borisbrosowski6630 The definition says "States or territories", not specifically kingdoms. And Poland ruled over many of them, as I already mentioned - Lithuania, Livonia, parts of Estonia, Courland, the Red Rus', parts of the Kievan Rus', small chunks of Slovakia (Spisz) and Moldova in the middle ages and for a short period in the early 1600's. And this isn't even counting the personal union with Sweden in 1592 or the Russia-Troubles-Polish-Tzar thing. Going by your definition - what kingdoms comprised the ottoman empire? Kingdoms in the middle ages were established only with the supervision of the pope, and I don't remember the pope blessing any ottoman sultan. So the PLC, just like the Ottomans, and the HRE was an Empire. And as for Ukraine - it became independent only in 1945, and for a brief period in the 1920's before being swallowed up by the bolsheviks, So it wasn't an empire. The Russians yeah, but Ukraine not.
@@borisbrosowski6630 Yeah, but Poland can be concidered an empire on the same terms as the Ottomans or Russia: "an aggregate of many separate states or territories under a supreme ruler". Non of them was appointed by the pope as emperors, but by definition they just were empires.
@@Maximmuss_The pope was only responsible for the old west-roman empire (this includes poland) - the catholic half. Please show me a map or any document from 1400-1800 where it is written "Imperium Polonicum". The Ottomans as Kalifs (=Emperors) ruled over Sultans (=Kings) - of course, being ilsamic they could not have been appointed by the orhtodox Patriarch. The Russians declared themeselves "Tsar" (as did the Bulgarians) but became an Empire only after acquireing the Kingdom of Poland. (Funny story: the Grand-Duchy of Warzaw actually had to be promoted to a kingdom so that the Tsar could be an emperor...)
@@JimmyHandtrixxthe problem eith tradition tho is that it may have strayed far from the core of the message and instructions fromnthe Gospels and the New Testament. Which is why i respectfully disagree with you, but not entirely because there are some traditions that are great for everyone.
@@peestrem31 bro, *all jews* have followed tradition since the beggining of their believes as an organized religion, Jesus probably also followed the jewish oral tradition, because, well, He was a jew. That fact you mock the jews for having a tradition but accept the jewish version of the Old Testament and mocks about the Old Testament based in the Septuaginta (also used by the jews and also the apostles) is strange.
You may have mentioned Jan Hus of Bohemia and the Hussites who came a 100 years earlier and already protested the selling of indulgences, translating the Bible into Czech and the Bible as the authority. They formed armies and successfully fought the Catholic Crusaders called upon the land. Luther actually took many of his ideas from Jan Hus. It was a very important prerequisite to the Reformation already weakening the church by the time Luther nailed his thesis. Check it out.
People do ignore Hus for some reason. Remember that history is a story. Our brains like to hear a story. Historians know this. Hus forms an epilogue. This is awkward to a nice story.
@@kiennguyenanh8498 actually he did know about him and quoted him many times. For Central Europe he was well known. Do some deeper research you will be amazed.
What about Husittes? Why does everyone forget Husittes? They had several crussades sent against them. Even Joan of Arc wanted to lead one against them. Or John Wycliffe, who inspired them all?
I think its because the Hussites and the Lollards did not succeed like Luther did. The Lollards were suppressed easily after the Oldcastle Rebellion and although the Hussites were more successful being able to contend with Catholics and do things like the First Defenestration of Prague, the burning of Jan Hus at the Council of Constance doesn’t make it as successful as Luther’s reformation. Finally, I think Luther and his later fellows Calvin, Zwingli et al. had far more radical ideas which could lead to schism like sola fides, sola scriptura and the like.
@@laurenceraran4027 Husitte Wars resulted in Catholics tolerating protestants. After Battle of Lipany, Utraquists made peace with Catholics and after that, protestants could live normally in Bohemia. We even had protestant king shortly after the wars and almost a century before Luther was even born.
@@Volnas97 That’s true, I won’t deny the importance or the relative success of the Hussite Wars - they are by far the most important proto-Protestant group and had a great effect by showing that the religious hegemony of the Catholic Church is not impregnable. But what Luther did was form something not particularly contained within Bohemia or Germany as I would argue the Jan Hus’ ideas were due to his death at Constance. Where Hus faced death at the hands of Sigismund and the Council of Constance, Luther was invited to Trent where they had to form a council specifically to counter the Reformation (although he would die before then, so he may have suffered the same fate as Hus). Hus was able to preach to the people and intellectuals in Prague, Luther faced the Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain, Charles V, down and preached his ideas in a debate at the Diet of Worms before the nobles of Germany. I am judging success in Luther and Hus to be how widespread their impact was and it is clear that while the Church was shook by Hus, it would not face schism and full separation. Luther’s ability to survive and continue writing against the Church increased his ability to divide the Church, expose corruption and form a new theology - which I think makes him more reformist and more successful than Jan Hus and the Hussites.
Ezzo von Achalm I’m sure there were many saturnalians authoritarians that was saying , “ why aren’t they bowing and kissing our stone statue , paying off their sin and thinking Jesus is the the only mediator instead of including our guy with the pointy hat and kid friendly priests ?” And , who taught them to read so they could have freedom to feel , think, and act according to how God leads them , instead of how we dictate ?” Such heretics !
King Henry VIII of England was awarded the title "Defender of the Faith" by the Pope after he published a statement against Luther. The joke is that the Pope forgot to specify WHICH faith he was supposed to defend. The monarchs of England retain this title to this day.
Edward, everyone knew what "the Faith" meant. It means the Catholic Faith and always will. The Protestant hijaking of the term makes no difference. The Church of England is the counterfit organisation that stole Catholic churches and monasteries and murdered and persecuted the Catholic people. The C of E will never replace the Catholic Faith that has never dissapeared from England.
Spain was the wealthiest European kingdom. Henry’s wife was a Spanish princess. The Pope wasn’t going to grant Henry’s marriage dissolution. For fear of offending the King of Spain
In Western Europe From around the 6th Century unto the 16th Century, there was primarily only “one Church” and this Church was headed up in Rome, it was know as the Roman Catholic Church, Catholic meaning a/ universal & worldwide b/ Including everything positive & Christian c/ Past, the present and eternity. This Church was/is headed up by the Popes & Cardinals, in a Pyramid system of Governorship. They taught that there should be and must be only one church in & throughout the world and that this Church should be headed up in Rome, by the Pope. Therefore, during these Centuries the Church was managed and controlled by Rome Rome owned the church property & land, and controlled the clergy in all of England In England In the 16th Century, no small dispute arose, between the King of England, Henry the VIII, and the Popes of Rome. This dispute was mainly focussed on Henry’s Marriages. He wanted the Pope of Rome, to annul his marriage(s) but the Pope was not altogether willing. As a result mainly of this dispute, Henry Kicked out Roman Catholic rule and control of the church in England, He took control of the churches, land and Clergy. Henry made himself the Head of the Church of England. So, the churches in England, became known as “The church of England” ! it was no longer the church of Rome, but it became the church of England under King Henry VIII. This became what was later called the Reformation, so under Henry the church was reformed. It was reformed to become a national church, in contrast to a Catholic & Global church headed up in Rome. The boundary of the newly reformed church became the boundary of the Nation state, hence church “of England”. From then onwards, the church of England was owned and controlled by the King and His Ministers. This was the Nationalisation of the Church During this time, in England, the Bible was translated into English, it was printed and fully released in the English language, making it accessible to all English speaking readers During the following Century after Henry’s so-called Reformation As time proceeded, many Bible believing Christians and Christian church leaders in England. Began to increasingly see from reading the New Testament, that the Church should be Independent & Self Governing. They came to steadfastly realise that the church in/of England should not be something owned and controlled by the Monarch and the Monarch’s Government, rather the church should be Independent and self-Governing, and that the bible taught that there should be local assemblies/churches, that are Independent & Self-Governing. This type of Christian & Christian church leader, was sometimes called; a/ Separatist b/ Non-Conformist c/ Dissenters. One of the most distinct early non-conformists was a man called Robert Browne bn 1550s died 1633, he was the Master at the Great Hospital in Norwich and is famous for stating in His book entitled “without tarrying for any” that the church should appoint its own leaders. These non-conformist Christians tried many times to meet together, have their own-independent assembly church life, independent from Government control. They were often severely persecuted, and like Robert Browne, John Robinson and hundreds of others, they often fled England to live in todays Holland (later the American Colonies) where they could freely have their own church-life. After a long and varied struggle, Later with the Act of Toleration in 1688, a deal was struck and the English Monarchy William & Mary permitted, the building of “houses for worship” for non-conformists use
@@Idahoguy10157 Offending the Spanish king wasn't the problem, the problem was that he need the Spaniards to defend him from the French and the Turks, also Charles the V compromise himself to stop Martin Luther as he was the HRE's emperor.
The presentation missed completely that "reformation" against church excesses started long before Luther. It was Wykliffe in England and Jan Hus in Bohemia (burn at stakes n 1415) who preached against church practices. Hus' death was followed by wars between Hussite movement and Catholic powers and later continued with Czech Brothers (Jednota bratrska), who also printed a bible in Czech (bible Kralicka).
In Western Europe From around the 6th Century unto the 16th Century, there was primarily only “one Church” and this Church was headed up in Rome, it was know as the Roman Catholic Church, Catholic meaning a/ universal & worldwide b/ Including everything positive & Christian c/ Past, the present and eternity. This Church was/is headed up by the Popes & Cardinals, in a Pyramid system of Governorship. They taught that there should be and must be only one church in & throughout the world and that this Church should be headed up in Rome, by the Pope. Therefore, during these Centuries the Church was managed and controlled by Rome Rome owned the church property & land, and controlled the clergy in all of England In England In the 16th Century, no small dispute arose, between the King of England, Henry the VIII, and the Popes of Rome. This dispute was mainly focussed on Henry’s Marriages. He wanted the Pope of Rome, to annul his marriage(s) but the Pope was not altogether willing. As a result mainly of this dispute, Henry Kicked out Roman Catholic rule and control of the church in England, He took control of the churches, land and Clergy. Henry made himself the Head of the Church of England. So, the churches in England, became known as “The church of England” ! it was no longer the church of Rome, but it became the church of England under King Henry VIII. This became what was later called the Reformation, so under Henry the church was reformed. It was reformed to become a national church, in contrast to a Catholic & Global church headed up in Rome. The boundary of the newly reformed church became the boundary of the Nation state, hence church “of England”. From then onwards, the church of England was owned and controlled by the King and His Ministers. This was the Nationalisation of the Church During this time, in England, the Bible was translated into English, it was printed and fully released in the English language, making it accessible to all English speaking readers During the following Century after Henry’s so-called Reformation As time proceeded, many Bible believing Christians and Christian church leaders in England. Began to increasingly see from reading the New Testament, that the Church should be Independent & Self Governing. They came to steadfastly realise that the church in/of England should not be something owned and controlled by the Monarch and the Monarch’s Government, rather the church should be Independent and self-Governing, and that the bible taught that there should be local assemblies/churches, that are Independent & Self-Governing. This type of Christian & Christian church leader, was sometimes called; a/ Separatist b/ Non-Conformist c/ Dissenters. One of the most distinct early non-conformists was a man called Robert Browne bn 1550s died 1633, he was the Master at the Great Hospital in Norwich and is famous for stating in His book entitled “without tarrying for any” that the church should appoint its own leaders. These non-conformist Christians tried many times to meet together, have their own-independent assembly church life, independent from Government control. They were often severely persecuted, and like Robert Browne, John Robinson and hundreds of others, they often fled England to live in todays Holland (later the American Colonies) where they could freely have their own church-life. After a long and varied struggle, Later with the Act of Toleration in 1688, a deal was struck and the English Monarchy William & Mary permitted, the building of “houses for worship” for non-conformists use
THE HOUSITES ZISKA THE GREAT IM FROM GREECE BUT I KNOW HISTORY EVERYBODY SPEAK ABOYT GREAT ALEXANDER AND HE WAS GREAT BUT AS A GENERAL ZISKA WAS EQUAL AND MAYBE BETTER IN MILITARY ONLY SUBJECTS
Husits were actually the first. Jan Hus requested that laity should receive Holy Blood of Christ, not just priests. And he was sentenced to death. For me he was reformist, not Protestant.
Well done. Best 12-minute view. The study & debate has been going on for 1/2 a millennium. One of the most avoided topics is the cost in lives over "Christianity". Thanks.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr Thousands and Thousands of people were killed - Jews especially - to and from the Crusades and Bible Readers during the Inquisitions. All killed in the Name of God or Pope depending on what you "Obeyed".
Great ! I'm precisely reading a book about the thirty years war (and I just have to say that the estimates of this war, nowadays, are less heavy than what you said : only some region like the Rhenish Palatinate saw their population nearly disappear). And before that I read some stuff about the religious wars in France. I was surprised how fast and wide the reformation spread. And how fast it provoked war, in the Spanish Netherlands and in France.
@@HectorHernandez-ix9kp It's been a while now, but it could this book : _La Guerre de Trente Ans_ , Marie-Noëlle Faure, ed. Ellipses. It's a good introduction, although in french. I guess, if you're begining in this subject you could read in english _The Thirty Years' War_ , Geoffrey Parker.
You forgot to mention Jan Hus. The primary reason why the Catholic church eventually opposed Luther was his statement _"Ja, ich bin Hussite"_ ("Yes, I'm a Hussite") when put on trial. Many figures originally wanted to get Luther on board for a reformation _within_ Catholicism, which eventually happened anyway.
Good point, Cyrusol. The church's kidnapping and murder of William Tyndale was only one of countless crimes against Christ and humanity. But perhaps the most dispiccable was the early church's insistance on a "fixed" meaning for scripture, including betraying their flock with the *_only unforgivable sin._* Ref: *_Trinity Treason_*
@@RodMartinJr You're not the original Christian Church, and you have no authority to say what should be doctrine and what shouldn't. The Church and its Bishops, who are ordained by the Church, who trace their priestly line to Christ and the Apostles, have the authority to declare doctrine (an objective fact). Thus, you're just an idiot heretic who's just coping and seething extremely hard.
@@amanahmad1110 correct and you are one of the few that has mentioned it. The truth was that Corsica was a very troublesome island for Genoa and became economic drain by keeping troops stationed with with its ships. Apparently Napoleon was born Italian by a few hours or some days to become a French citizen, a fact denied by French historians but of course Italian historians historians are quite excited about this. Fun fact: Napoleon's family originated somewhere in Tuscany but I don't remember where....
The Protestant Reformation started because of the occurrence of the printing press, and some structural problem in the Catholic Church that already in the end of the 14th century and the start of the 15th century caused the Wycliff reformation movement as well as the Husite wars ... as well as the Waldensian schism already in the 13th century. Luther was a catalyst, and he impressed other reformation adherents that much that they dared to raise their flag at the same time.
luther sent a copy of his thesis' to constantinople (instanbul) asking the orthodox patriarch to give his input because luther believed that the orthodox had not lost their way as did the roman catholics. this document is still in the orthodox library in constantinople (instanbul) and you can read the notations that the patriarch made. the document never made it back to luther due to luther's death.
@@JoshAlicea1229 That the orthodox will stay as such and the Protestant will stay the same...I remind you that the closest to the Catholic church are the orthodox church
@@JoshAlicea1229 They would have deeply disagreed with protestantism and have disagreed since. Latin Catholicism may be different from Orthodox Catholicism but they certainly agree with one another regarding protestantism.
The Scottish Protestant Reformation was certainly one of the causes of the Jacobite uprisings. The Stuarts believed they were divinely chosen to be rightful monarchs of Great Britain, and the Hanoverian monarchy to be usurpers. However, the relationship between monarch and people in Scotland was always one of contract, with sovereignty resting with the people, and most Scots did not accept divine monarchy. That's why there were Scots, both Catholic and Protestant, who fought on both the Jacobite and Government sides. What is more accurate was that the parallel reformations in England and Scotland led to the Covenanting wars. While King Henry VIII established the English monarch to be head of the Church of England, which retained priests and bishops, the Calvinist Scottish Protestant Reformation, which grew with astonishing support, established the Church of Scotland whereby there were no intercessors between God and mankind; ministers were merely preachers and teachers. James VI, King of Scots from the abdication of his Catholic mother, Mary, in 1567, was brought up in this strict Presbyterian belief. In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I of England died, and James was the only person who could succeed her on the English throne. He decreed that his two kingdoms were one, which he called "Great Britain". In 1621 he ordered the Bible be translated into English (yes, that King James). While King James I of Great Britain, as he was now fashioned, was happy to leave his native Scotland alone, his Stuart successors were a different matter. King Charles I ordered that the Anglican Church become the state religion of Scotland, installed bishops, and outlawed all other forms of worship. Needless to say, the Scots Presbyterians were having none of it. In 1638 a band of Presbyterians in Greyfriar's Kirk, Edinburgh, signed the "Solemn League and Covenant", demanding freedom to worship in their own beliefs. Copies of the "Covenant" were signed all over Scotland. Presbyterians would hold services in secret, often with armed guards. Charles I sent forces to put down this dissent, and it was not long before the two sides met in open warfare. Charles I was of course deposed and executed for trying to impose his will upon the English parliament. But after the Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell, the monarchy was restored in 1660 under King Charles II. He too tried to impose Anglicanism upon Scotland, and civil war broke out again. When his son, King James II, ascended the throne, he tried again. The Covenanting wars against James II were the bloodiest of all, becoming known as "the Killing Time". One slogan of the Covenanters of the time was "No king but Christ". With James II leaning towards Roman Catholicism, the Scots were only too happy in joining the English and Irish to invite William of Orange to depose James II. But even then, before they would accept William as king, the Scots demanded he sign the Claim of Right in 1689, stating that neither he nor any future monarch would interfere in Scots ecclesiastical matters. Scottish Presbyterian belief remains one of the strictest forms of Protestantism in the world to this day.
Lots of good stuff here. I watched Bruce Fumey's youtube vid on topic. But- is there evidence that Scots were among those who "invited" Wm to sail with an Armada and take over? My understanding was it was English MPs
Protestantism is the counterfit movement that stole Catholic churches and monasteries and murdered and persecuted the Catholic people. It will never replace the Catholic Faith that has never dissapeared from Britain
And now scotts are getting replaced by muslims and hindus in their own homeland Insuppose it was worth it weakining europe and crippling christianism in europe forever. Its not like all protestant countries nowadays are majorithy atheist right ?
You need to add! The Reformation began before Luther was a twinkle in his mother's eye. John Wycliffe was 150 years before Luther and a few hundred Bibles were hand written by volunteer scribes, some of which survive to this day. Wycliffe taught at Oxford and had the patronage of John of Gaunt. He also taught some Bohemians the Word of God and they later became the Hussites. He had his own movement in England too. The Lollards. Wycliffe was called "The Morning Star of the Reformation"
Yes, I seem to remember Wycliffe being spoken about in my history lessons at school. The American commentators always seem to miss things out on English history. Maybe they ought to stick to their own.
@@Saxondog indeed so. It has struck me as odd that usually, to attain entry to university one needs to demonstrate that the applicant has the ability to study and seek out sources of information that will critique or confirm what they are being taught in lectures. If this is maintained, well and good. Otherwise universities and colleges are becoming sources of indoctrination. Bias against England may have its roots in two sources in the USA. Firstly the Revolutionary War (of Independence) and the War of 1812 (mainly naval) added to the culture of Irish immigrants carrying their bitterness from the ill treatment of Irish people by English and local landlords in the 19th Century during the Potato Blight. However, truth should never be a casualty of proper learning. This only occurs when the hearers have permitted themselves to search their own consciences in favour of a 'feel good' factor. A classic inclination of young people. Thought. Sophomore is derived from 2 words in Greek sophos and mores (check the spelling) meaning 'wise' and 'fool' Of course a conscientious faculty will not take advantage of this in pursuit of their own agenda. Students will then become aware of truthful information such as Reformation history and not find satisfaction in viewing it through political spectacles, be they nationalist or Marxist.
@@jerrymichaelgreen2675 he certainly did as did Tyndale but Roman Catholic power was immense. The Pope declared that any translation was an act of heresy punishable by burning. Something supported by Thomas Aquinas and even as 385 by Augustine of Hippo (torture rather than burning). Wycliffe handwrote many copies before he died in 1688.
Now we have smart phones and solar generators. Especially primitive societies. Everybody is online The remotest and most primitive. FYI. Have you seen the abundance of abnormal pheomemen documented online. Clergy and Phds debate reality. While archeology and the 74 different independent national space programs. Provide photos, Some mytheducated doubt the space program. The Bible what we know of it, written before Rome, doesn't support Vatican rules. A contrast of interest. It's understood Luther couldn't afford the indulgance tax. As a result we have liberty.
Matthew 10:34-36 MEV “Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s foes will be those of his own household.’
The Spanish Inquisition is not older than the Inquisition in Rome. The Papal Inquisition was founded in the 13th century, while the Spanish Inquisition (the Castilian Inquisition ti be precise) was founded at the end of the 15th century. Also it's impossible to explain the Reformation without mentioning the precedents: Cathars, Hussites and Erasmus of Rotterdam. These kind of mistakes are somehow common in this channel.
It is important to mention the attraction of the wealth of the Catolic Church which was greater than theological aspects. Princes in Germany and kings as the King of Swede took advantage to confiscate all land and other assets of the Catolic Church. Gustavus Adolphus, the King of Swede was almost bankrupt when he switched to Protestantism. So taking all the land and other assets of the Catolic church was a big deal and he had money to intervine in the religious war in Germany. The funny aspect was that of forcing all population within a country or kingdom to convert automatically to the faith of the king/prince or leave the land. In England the situation was more dramatic and funny due to the fact that the Church of England was invented in order Henry the 8th got a divorce. In all cases was an enormous destruction of monasteries, confiscation of valuable goods, old books burned, many people just killed end so on. Pretty much like Viking invasions. Not to mention that the tax paid by ordinary people to the church was not eliminated but redirected to the British Treasury. So, this aspect is less discussed but I think was a major push for Prices/Kings to embrace so suddenly the Protestant faith and to fight so hart for it.
Gustavus Adolphus was born a protestant. I think you mean Gustav Vasa. Besides, a spiritual institution should not horde wealth; they should worship God, not Mammon.
Nah, that bugged me too. Sure it's a noble gas, but Catherine of Argon and Catherine of Aragon are two entirely different things... Everyone knows Catherine of Argon had more to do with the Galvanist and Lithium movements.
Supposedly Luther tried to talk with the Greeks, as the New Testament was originally written in there language but with the fall of the Byzantine (Roman) empire Luther could no longer communicate with them. I believe without the fall of the Roman Empire the reformer would have been much smaller
My understanding is the Ottomans where extremely supportive of the Protestants. They where 100% in favour of a schism among the Christians - just loved the idea.
there was communication... the church didnt die... and the reality is that they both hated the catholic church, and they both agreed on many things against the catholic doctrine... but thats all there was to it... also due to the structure of the greek orthodox church(the emperor appointed the patriarch of constantinople and since the empire was dead, the patriarch was now an ottoman puppet, which is why even greece today has its own church away from the patriarch and the patriarch is nothing but a tittle any more, he has virtually no community, apart from some 10 thousand greeks that the turks didnt manage to butcher the last century!)
All one has to do is read the New Testament to understand the problems with Catholicism. There are genuine Christians within the RCC but the institution is rife with man made doctrines and traditions that are a mixture of pagan and Christianity. If you read the OT, God really hates this and calls it spiritual fornication and rebukes the Jews over it throughout the OT. Yes Catholics, I hear you, this does not make protestant perfect, far from it. But the basis of Christianity and sound doctrine is the Bible according to Jesus and the Apostles and the early church.
You need to name Jan Hus when speaking of Reformation. Jan Hus basically already pointed out everything that Luther later would say. And this was nearly 100 years before Luther! Please do not make the same mistake like so many teachers and historians and ignore Hus and the other early Reformers.
Augustine was the source of some of the bad theology and practices in the Roman Catholic Religion which needed to be Reformed. The practice of Baptizing Infants and the need to have Confirmation comes from around the time of Augustine. Some of Augustine's ideas were good, but not all
@@pastorart1974 I think you should realize that Luther and Calvin and John Wesley ALL continued the practice of infant baptism AND confirmation. The churches they started still have infant baptism AND confirmation. If infant baptism is as wrong as some say why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire these reformers to abolish it ?? God wants us to be committed to Him. This commitment can come during adult baptism OR confirmation.
@@davidwv7370 You have identified the major problem in those three denominations to this day. Most of the people in most of the infant sprinkling denominations today have neither been converted or born again. These are the denominations which support the LGBTQ movement today. These are the Denominations which support abortion today. Keep in mind that I was raised in what is today an ELCA Pro Abortion, Pro LGBTQ Lutheran Church. Very few of my Confirmation Classmates are serving Jesus today. The Wesley Foundation campus Pastors were the Chaplains of the Gay Peoples Alliance at Illinois State University 50 years ago (my Alma Mater). Note that the 1974 in my Screen Name is the year I became a Pastor not the year I was born I am a Vietnam Veteran. After coming home from Vietnam I had a long talk with my Lutheran Pastor who admitted not one baby was ever baptized in the Bible. In that same conversation he told me he didn't believe in Billy Graham's religion That was the day I decided to leave the Lutheran Church. Within ten years I would see Apostasy and Liberalism creep into my new Denomination.
Even if you’re not religious, the reformation is a really significant part of American/ western civilization because the reformation was a kinda a result of the renaissance where people were trained to really READ the Bible in their own and have personal and intellectual relationships with God, rather than just listen to the church. A lot of our culture and following revolutions/philosophy is based on this idea. 😊
@@Hannah-kk7wpRead by their own, and then created doctrine by their own. Chose what book is part of scripture by their own, or translate the scripture by their own. Some say Jesus is the Father, Some say Father is Jesus, some say Jesus is created, some say He's not divine, some say God predetermined evil, and so on... It's just "me, me, and me". Reformation is so beautiful... or should i say deformation?
In my textbooks its swapped way too many times, like "they discovered the telephone" etc. Nah telephone wasn't hidden in some cave for 13.8 billion years it was invented
Love this channel so much. U make it entertaining and easy to keep up. I've learned so much from this channel. Its explanation of historical events & people is outstanding.
The Church never intended this to happen it was because of widespread misinformation and other priests, bishops and even cardinals using indulgences to get bags full o' coins. This was later corrected by the Church but the damage has already been done, If it wasn't for that Dominican or any other priests who misinterpreted the indulgences as a way for salvation then none of this shit would've happen.
As a South African Protestant of French and Dutch decent , It was an immense delight to get to visit the Vatican as well as numerous Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches all over Poland and Lithuania. I just pray that I may someday get to visit Jerusalem as well. To walk where our Saviour walked.
08:10 in direct contradiction to the reformists ...well, it was the reformed view that was in direct contradiction to a dozen centuries of christian-catholic tradition.
As a Lutheranian I have at least two Bibles in my house, my grand parents (that I have inherit) and modern bible (new paper, more robust), and it is written in my language.
It's wonderful that you have a collection of Bibles, including one from your grandparents. Bibles can hold significant sentimental and spiritual value, especially when they have been passed down through generations. Having both a modern version and an older one can provide you with diverse perspectives on scripture, as translations may vary and the language can reflect different contexts and understandings of faith.
Yes I've already got back ground on this but thank you for pointing out King Henry's support methods ....which we are to believe in support of refermation... obviously God is fortress for everyone and I'm sure those women were praying for mercy of God to take there soul's
Yeah man I totally agree with you. Now that was a true Reformation. This Phony Reformation ended in disaster, with these so called "reformers" not agreeing among themselves
@@diegofuentes6639 Indeed, famously Luther's betrayal of the rebelling peasants as he sided with the german lords and princes in the Holy Roman Empire against his increasingly radical followers, he is a very twisted histioric character..
In my opinion, the protestant reformation was one of the worst events in christian history, far worse than the schism of 1054. Science, Laws, Philosophy, Art, Education, and many more things that made the western civilization greater than others (multiculturalists can cry now) came from the Holy Church. We catholics, instead of genociding natives, integrated them in society. Catholic priests protected natives against enslavers in the americas. The calvinists and lutherans took the land and killed or expeled them. Protestantism didnt ever produce human arts like the catholics did, look their simplistic architecture for example. Also this movements today, flat earth and antivax, come from the protestant sects, since a protestant priest can say whatever he wants without consequences.
@@Nimai_Aquino You are Spot on My Brother in Christ. The Cathlolic Church BUILT WESTERN CIVILIZATION. It was CATHOLICS who stood up for the faith in times of danger, such as the Battle of Tours, The Crusades, Lepanto and Vienna,not protestants. They were busy preaching their heresies and dividing the faithful. But there are some doctrines that these "reformers" kept, such as the belief in Infant baptism, the Belief in Mary's perpetual virginity as well as her role as the Mother of God, something that Luther, Zwingli and Calvin themselves believed even after they revolted against the Church. So just so you know, even what their founders tought they don't believe it.
This is big fat lie video, the catholic church never ever thought that for money and paper your sins will be forgiven , unfortunately Protestantism is based on lies .
I think that the fact that the catholic church did end up listening to the reformists complaints, and reforming the catholic church afterwards whilst still affirming and better clarifying its, at the time 1400-year-old doctrine of faith, is a fact that is too often overlooked.
why then is th protestant reformation looked down upon, since its demands were eventually co-opted in some way? If Roman Catholicism was infallible then it could have just continued as was, innit?
My ancestor, Wibald, a Catholic Priest from Wales, authored catechisms and biblical translations from Latin into Franconian for Charlemagne, then King of the Franks, prior to 800AD. A contemporary of Alquin of York.
Matthew 16:18-19 "And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven.”
@@Vic-oi5vr However, the early Church fathers highlighted the significance of this authority in promoting unity and nurturing faith among the believers. In addition to the leadership roles, the teachings in Romans 12-14 underscore the importance of showing love to one another, mirroring Christ's love for us. This principle should guide our interactions with others, regardless of their position of authority. The keys to Heaven are not exclusive to Church leaders; they are also accessible to all believers who demonstrate love and compassion, and by doing so, they can bring a taste of Heaven to earth through their actions. This special authority was bestowed upon St. Peter by Jesus, emphasizing his unique role in leading the Church.
I like it. I just wish I could hear this great info in my Arabic language. As a man of the middle east I never heard enough infomation of diffrent sources and as you know our orthodox and catholic churches in middle east the will never write objectively or impartial about such an important happing. Now I left all churches but I am alwayes hongry for such good content. Thank you for sharing it with us.
I've been to Trent once and even had a look in the church. Very beautiful city with some fresco painted buildings still around. I highly recommend it as a travel destination 🙂
As usually the topic is considered from the point of faith. It is wrong. Reformation is 80% about politics, 10% about faith and 10% about something else.
You are 100% correct. If someone studies the reformation only from a religious perspective they will never understand it. I think a good place to start is 100 years before Luther when French kings "Kidnapped" the papacy for 100 years.
And a thanks to the printning press that made it possible for every man to read the Bible in their own language. NOT being told by a Catholic priest what God's Word is about and being interpreted in the way the Pope and the Catholic clergymen, wished to control and terrorize ordinary people. I don't think God approved. 😊😮❤😎👍👌
@@kms_scharnhorst Oh, I didn't realize you were that untainted by the internet atheist community. "Free will" is next to "you can't understand god's plan" one the main arguments Christians like to use when confronted with problems that contradict their idea of an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent god. Why is there evil in the world - free will. Why are there illnesses - you can't understand god's will. Why is god creating sinners if in the end he is only gonna condem them to eternal suffering - free will and you can't understand god. It is quite a ridiculous argument but they keep on using it. The "check mate atheists" is a phrase used quite commonly by atheists to ridicule the overconfident Christians who use arguments, that have been debunked by every Atheist influencer out there, as if they were the ultimate undebunkable solution to all the questions an atheist could possibly have. It is partly born out of the frustration of hearing the same old arguments over and over again. Now to your question, why some religious folk hates us so much. You can't really pinpoint one reason and every hater has his own personal mix of them, but here is a small collection of some more prominent ones. There is the simple fear of stuff you don't understand. Plenty of people have grown up in a completely religious environment. Some of those might not be able to cope with the idea that others do not adhere to the same ideas they hold so dearly in their hearts and this can possibly turn to hate. Others did just simply have some not so pleasent encounters with atheists in the past and are now projecting their hate of their tormentors onto the ideas of atheism instead against the actual people hurting them. Still others might still be caught in the cold war propaganda if the USA. This mentality of good christian American against bad atheist Communist is still held by many especially in more conservative circles and leads to a deep mistrust of everything socialist and atheist. And lastly they might just be following the teachings of the bible. Non-believers are quite often described as haters of god, evil people who only want to sin and deniers of the truth. And if you believe this is the literal word of god, I can see how you could start hating a group of people you have never even engaged in a single serious conversation. I hope this was helpful and you understood that I didn't try to attack you in the slightest. Have a nice day.
The Catholic Church was never opposed to people reading the Bible. What it opposed was people reading interpretations the Bible apart from the teaching authority of the Church, which would lead to the kinds of problems we have today with 30,000 denominations interpreting Scripture differently. The Bible itself warns against this: "Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation" (2 Peter 1:20).
Yes, the interpretation of God word is led by the Holy Spirit. As a believer, the holy spirit dwells in you, it guides and teaches you of God's word. In John 14:26, Jesus told his disciples, “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you” 1 Corinthians 3:16- Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Oooooooof. So, the topic of 2 Peter 1:20 is PROPHECY, and people like you decided the topic was all Scripture. Catholics are whack, man. They don't even read the very text of the Bible.
@@kkiv1639 people can easily interpret the holy spirt with their feeling when people don’t have intellectual guidance their quick to jump to conclusion.
Maybe I have this wrong but I thought there was a time when the Roman Catholic Church made it like a criminal offence for people to own their own copy of the Bible??? Just asking. 💒
@wendylang2360 Yes. You are right. It was once illegal for people to own the Holy Bible. I think that was during the Middle Ages. You see, it's up to the Catholic priest to read you the scripture during mass. And only him. In Catholicism, the priest is seen as an authority figure. He tells us the good word. And we must believe him. There is only one interpretation. And all Catholic priests taught the same thing in the same way. This means you could attend mass in Ireland or Italy or France and expect to hear the same teachings wherever you go. It's the word of God. I think the reason why the Holy Bible was banned is due to the fact that people were not meant to make up their own interpretations of the scripture. Only the priest may have that authority. Everything comes from the Vatican in Rome. Ya know?
Please consider reading ‘Fatal Discord. Erasmus, Luther and the Struggle for the Western Mind”. One of the most influential books on my perception of history and oddly of humanity.
A pagan like gandhi cannot understand really. How can a man be like God himself? In paganism the man saves himself by a cicle of reincarnation (in tha case of hinduism) always striving to be born in a superior existence. In christianity we can only be saved by God. Completely different concepts.
@@Nimai_Aquino I think you never read bible,Jesus clearly said that only your faith can decide your afterlife he ie god punishes the wicked and rewards pious because of their faith and deeds if he rewards and punishes people only by his grace without watching their faith and deeds then he isn't God but a satan who commits Injustice
@@Nimai_Aquinoand first of all you should learn about hinduism it's not a single religion but bunch of various regional religious views. people in ancient India followed a religion which was surprisingly different from modern hinduism which is also called vedic religion Which is monotheistic and according to Vedic religion one stays in cycle of birth and death only because he/she never realised God in their past life but whoever realises God will directly go to abode of our ultimate creator and will never take birth in this physical universe
@@Nimai_Aquino God accepts those people in their abode who dedicate their whole life to the most powerful eternal infinite and omnipresent being Worshippers of different gods like sungod,wind God,fire god,earth God go to abodes of these different gods and these pagans ie polytheist never realise that these divine beings are un-eternal with limited power but he who realises that these gods were created by the most powerful and eternal which is called jeyovah in bible and paramatma in Vedas will go to abode of this infinite eternal and most powerful being And yes I agree with you that pagans are on wrong path
Quite a few oversimplification leading to wrong impressions on a number of things. There were forerunners to many of the reformation ideas over the previous 200 years such as Wycliffe and Huss. Also Luther was on the same side as the Catholics against the Calvinists about the literal body of Christ in the Eucharist.
its fun to learn history. never had it in high school ( unless you wanna count world geography ) so i watch channels like this, watch history memes, play games like ( assassins creed ), etc. it's a lot to take in, but history's worth learning
@@jerryklooster438 Only one year (and possibly only one semester) is allotted to the entirety of World History class. Not room for a whole lot of content to be covered. That happens in the teaching of American History as well but the greater problem is that schools in some states are being prohibited from teaching anything other than a literally "white washed" curriculum whereby America virtue progressively grows to lead the world. In Florida, those who believe in "American Exceptionalism" dominate the government and are using state degrees to dictate what is to be taught. There are no literal book burnings but most certainly a massive amount of book banning.
@@karenryder6317 Required curriculum varies from state to state. National learning standards would be an improvement over the mishmash we have now. The Common Core curriculum was a bipartisan effort from the nation's governors, but despite being endorsed by many leading conservative, the right wing nut jobs were able to convince their base that the Common Core infringed on a state's right to teach unscientific and religious dogma.
school basically teaches you to read after that your really on your own to decide which books you read to lift yourself up/school never touches on anything controversial/ Church only tells you what they want you to know never discovering the differences how ever subtle. see Dr. Myles Munroe for history on Bahamas if You think this is interesting/Bahamas was under England well let him tell you on UA-cam/
I am Catholic- however I remain quite progressive with my views/opinions regarding the origins and history; the parts that I believe and wish were different in regards to how the message of Christ is meant to be received. This was a great video- thank you for making it!
@@amazigh8776 The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution permits you to blaspheme Jesus Christ? But, I don't recommend it! Praise God. Jesus lives. As for your reply. Thanks.
[1 Corinthians 12:27] All of you together are Christ’s body, and each of you is a part of it. ----------------------------------- If parts of Christ body go astray (that will say, some believers in Christ, and at that moment it was the Catholic church) the other parts tried to correct its brother. It took a too long time for many, so meanwhile lot of denominations arose. But as long as any of those denominations follow Christ and his teaching, they are a part of what makes up the body of Christ. Catholics are not the fullness of Christs body (as any believer in Christ is part of His body), the Catholics are however part of that body, when they believe and follow Christ.
@@JamesAsp 1 Corinthians 12:27-29 Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles? All I have seen in Corinthians 12:27-29 is that all of Christ's followers are individually members of his Body. Then Paul goes onto state how each member of the Church has an individual role in the Church. No one is called to be all apostle, prophet, teacher, and miracle workers at once. Which it seems like in the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scripture, they claim to be. No, you need ONE Church, which miracles are worked through. Everyone is part of Christ's body. , the Catholic Church is where you find that body physically at work, promoting and glorifying God's name. Those denominations all have a misunderstanding or a twisted version of Christ as there can only be ONE Truth. There cannot be a thousand truths. There can only be God, one God, that Truth is found in the Catholic Church which was founded on and by Christ. The other denominations might have some percentage of truth, hell even Satanists acknowledge the Eucharist as the Body of Christ when they steal and try to destroy it. But, why be in 50% or 75% truth when you can be in Full Truth in the Catholic Church.
@@pokenaut7803 You wrote: "is that all of Christ's followers are individually members of his Body." Exactly, spot on. -------------------------------------------------- [Romans 16:16]All the churches of Christ send greetings Because, where did you take your quote you labeled as from Jesus? "Jesus Christ: I want a United Church on Earth as in Heaven."
@@JamesAsp Romans 16:16 is about all chruches, as in societies and cultures, coming together to welcome and worship Christ. An example of this is the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, who share their belief and faith in God, the only difference being the traditions they do, they are all subject to the Pope in Rome. They are under one Holy Apostolic Catholic Church. Why would Catholics interpret it this way? Well, for one "churches" is not capitalized, it doesn't mean an actual Faith background like the Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Churches. Two, it goes back to both Tradition and the Acts of the Apostles. In Gospels and the book of Acts, Jesus did three things that established the framework of His Church. First, He chose humans to carry out His work. He appointed Peter to be the visible head of the Church. Jesus said to Peter, "You are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church." (Matthew 16: 18) Jesus said "build," as in to create a structure. Jesus built His structure on specifically chosen human beings Peter and the apostles. Second, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles the power and authority to carry out His work. "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven."(Matthew 16:19; 18:18) "Receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained."(John 20:23) Third, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles commands as to what that work should be. At the last supper, He commanded, "Do this in memory of Me." (Luke 22:19) He commanded them to "Make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:19), and to "Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15) The early Church was structured in a hierarchical manner as it is today. We see in Acts, chapter 15 how the apostles and the elders came together under the leadership of St. Peter to decide the question of what was required of Gentiles. We also see how St. Peter was regarded as the head of the Church when St. Paul, "Went up to Jerusalem to confer with Kephas [Peter] and remained with him fifteen days." (Galatians 1:18) In this way, we see that the Catholic Church has her roots as planted and still remains there. Christ did establish one Church in which in Mattew he said to the Apostles " and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you. And look, I am with you always; yes, to the end of time." (Matthew 28:20) He promised the Apostles that He would be with them until the end of time. Meaning that the Chruch of Jesus Christ still exists today since the Chruch he established, is already seen operating in the book of Acts. If Apostle succession is to be believed, which it should be because the replaced Judas as a Bishop and added more Apostles later on like Paul, we only need to find who is Peter's successor as he was given authority over God's sheep. Anyways, my point is in the joke, all Christians believe there was an early Church established by Christ and His Apostles. So according to Matthew 28, that Church should still be around today, so why have 400,000 sects of Christianity when Christ only created one. Sorry if it was long, I wanted to get the full answer in.
Matthew Reyes -- I was brought up in the Church of Christ and for a long time i thought it was Protestant. But only long after my family left it did i learn it was founded as a "Restoration" church, the Disciples of Christ, whose purpose was to restore "Christ's true church", which to its founders was none of the other Christian churches. As for the Lutheran Church, the radio show "A Prairie Home Companion" taught me far more about it and its culture in the Upper Midwest than i'd ever learned before.
@J Kim I'm not a Luthern, but God bless Martin Luther, despite his faults, for: 1.Exposing The Vatican for what it really is as well as the vile popery. 2. Giving the German people a Bible they could read which eventually opened the Bible to everyone. 3. Exposed the selling of indulgences grift. 4. Gave us A Mighty Fortress Is Our God hymn. 5. And, most importantly, he taught the ultimate truth of the Word of God, the doctrine of justification by faith alone which is the central doctrine of the Christian life and that faith comes solely as a gift from God.
@J Kim Catholics kneel down and worship idols; pray to dead saints and Mary; are very superstitious, see apparations; believe in the silly brown scapular; believe their man-made traditions are equal to or superior to the Holy Spirit 's Word of God and tell their sins to gay and pedo priests.
@@johnbrowne3950 he was sincere, but he opened the floodgates to many Innovations in the religion and ultimately the washing down and secularisation of Christianity.
Because they didn't have enough faith in God's wisdom. Peter was chosen to be the Rock of the Church eventhough Jesus knew Peter would deny Him 3 times. If from the start God chose a flawed man to succeed Him, what do you think God was trying to tell us?
@@inurmomsbedroom123 then you don’t understand the Papacy then because the pope isn’t in “GOD’S Place”. He is the second in command that is pastoring the church until Jesus returns! This practice existed goes back all the way to the Davidic Kingdom. If the King had to go away, he would leave in charge his steward which is what Christ( the heir of the throne of David) did with St.Peter!
@@mx_moi1964 They tried to convince everyone that the pope's signature on a scrap of paper would resolve them of sin. The Catholic church is a fraud and an institution of Judas.
You talked about three schisms and that Martin Luther was the second part. At first I thought that the first was from King Gorge the 8th. But he was the third. What was the first schism for fracture?
Martin Luther believed that Mary should be held in highest reverence, advocating the use of the first half of the Hail Mary (that is, "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.") as a sign of reverence for and devotion to the Virgin
Yeah in the beginning of his faith. Then he realized that wasn't correct. Oh my please always research what you research. Don't just take one source and run with it
3 kinds of christianity evangelicals/ catholics/ and the rest that just celebrate the holy days and the rest of the time there tv is church/ difference Kingdom citizen are followers of Christ actually read what Christ came for... Read Acts for more
Here is something that doesn't make any sense to me. Henry VIII started the Church of England because he wanted a divorce. He was even divorced twice. However, since Henry VIII, the Church of England has taken a hard line against divorce. So we have a church started by a selfish king who wanted a divorce and doesn't want to allow divorce.
Exactly that's the reason he started the reformation it's called self gratification on his behalf,the reformation caused alot of collateral damage.the catholic church is the one true church that christ established on earth nearly 2000 years ago,all other religions are a cut off from the catholic church,check the dates out when all other religions came in to play,you don't have to be a mathematician to work it out.God bless
03:00 luther insists only the bible itself should be viewed as the only reliable source of information.. then proceeds to edit the bible and make a protestant version to suit his newly created religious dogmas.
All one has to do is read the New Testament to understand the problems with Catholicism. There are genuine Christians within the RCC but the institution is rife with man made doctrines and traditions that are a mixture of pagan and Christianity. If you read the OT, God really hates this and calls it spiritual fornication and rebukes the Jews over it throughout the OT. Yes Catholics, I hear you, this does not make protestant perfect, far from it. But the basis of Christianity and sound doctrine is the Bible according to Jesus and the Apostles and the early church.
We now have countless copies of the entire NT that are nearly 2000 years old in the original Greek. We KNOW for a fact the words have not been changed.
He even wanted to take out james, cause there's the famous verse in james that says and i'm paraphrasing badly here but that, having faith alone isn't enough but that you must also have good works in conjunction with the faith that your'e supposed to have. Edit: yea i'm a bad paraphraser, here's the original section from james mentioning it which shows, even the bible was against Luther and his teaching, so luther was in heresy, aka a heretic. *14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[a] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.*
Martin Luter in the letter to Philip Melanchthon writes: "Be a sinner and sin hard, but believe and admire even harder in Christ... He took on himself all the sins of this world, therefore don't afraid to sin. Even if we will fornicate and murder thousands times a day, it will be forgiven by His grace." (My translation) This statement I call - The Golden Rule of The Protestant Church. I would consider an insult if someone calls me a christian.
'Henry VIII triggered the reformation for both religious and political reasons' - I admire you for saying that with a straight face, I guess it sounds better than saying the started a national church because his genitals were severely damaged by syphilis and he was unable to father several male children.
Henry VIII did not lead a reformation. He made the church in England autonomous from Rome because the latter would not allow him an annulment. Unlike Luther and Calvin, he had no doctrinal differences with the Catholic Church. He even considered himself defender of the faith. That makes Anglicans some kind of third way between Catholics and Protestant.
@@AndrewCMC Nope. There is/was no divorce in the Anglican church -- Henry VIII never divorced anyone. He got annulments from the Anglican church -- just like those given by the Roman church.
Also probably because Luther's views on protestantism and the theology it influenced is the most widely held view today. Calvinism is around and has produced some great theologians. But is a more minority view.
@@elijahcademartori9854 Sure but reducing the Reformation to Luther is like reducing the Beatles to Paul McCartney. But I get it, no Protestant really wants to be associated with the fundamentalist bigotry of Knox, Calvin or Zwingli or their equally overzealous puritan successors like Cromwell...
In a nutshell Luther was sick of the Catholic Churches BS and posted something on the newsfeed of his day and people agreed then he started doing stuff about it
First and foremost Luther wanted to get married and still preach. He ended up having three wives. People should really learn more about the true nature of Luther before demonizing the Catholic church.
@@davidescobar5366 He also wanted to take out Psalms and Proverbs out of the Bible. Isn’t that crazy? The two most common books Protestants like to preach about at their sermons, hm.
Short summary Luther gave his life to God after he promised he would love for God if he survived a storm He did He then studied the bible and noticed that there were some things in the Catholic church that were unbiblical He wrote 95 co plants he had with the Catholic church and explained what they should teach instead. But the catholics hated this and martin luther hid
Martin Luther was the biggest heretic known to man lol. The blatant idea that sola scripture is true is quite literally the most false teaching ever 😂 Basically teaches that even though St Peter was a Pope he himself has no authority for the teachings of Jesus other than what is in the Bible
only because they all cease to take doctrine seriously, IOW they do not care what they do believe or should believe. but where there are enclaves of both cath and prot who do take doctrine seriously the enmity is as if the 30 years was never ended. I have seen these outfits - websites and churches
Its not better, its just that religion has been clearly disproven and most westerners have no interest in it, its just a shame we still have silly people that are sticking to their nonsense and bringing it to the west again for us to all deal with just as we were moving away from it
Not sure if everyone is aware in the early Catholic churches services, and "the bible" were in Latin, not one's native tongue of German, or Spanish etc. That might have been one little issue with the Catholic church Protestants had. At Sunday service they had no idea what the priests were talking about. That sounds like fun.
Yeah and most priests weren’t very fluent in Latin so services were mostly Latinish gibberish for a few hours every Sunday. Hard to believe people wanted something different
@@koppite9600 so Christian’s were to let their priests tell them to pay large amounts to get to heaven, having their priests not let them take full communion because they wanted the wine to themselves, meanwhile their priest was participating in immoral lifestyles? Man is corrupt but God’s word isn’t hence why the Catholic Church got more and more corrupt. They didn’t want people knowing what the Bible said because it would mean they could no longer control them. “See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” Colossians 2:8 “And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!” Mark 7: 6-9 We need God’s word as our only authority so it means we can discern when corruption comes into any Church and cut it off. The body of Christ is the believers not a literal building. “All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16
Why is Ireland a majority Catholic country called "England" in the visuals?PS : Tudors did not conquer Ireland until the 17th century completely! I described the early reformation on other history sites as a land grab by nobles and others where the poor suffered most after the destruction of the monostries Henry 8th remained doctrinally a Catholic most of England was Catholic in the early reformation but bludgeoned into protestantism simply because the rich /powerful succumbed to Henrys wiles in their own interests!
I agree. Even after the complete conquering of Ireland by the English, the name Ireland didn't go away. A subjugated nation I'll agree but the name Ireland wiped off the map, wtf. Same should apply to Wales as well.
@@teviottilehurst Wales has only ever existed as a unified kingdom separate to England for 45 years in the history of Britain as an island. It’s been a principality of England for centuries and England has had territory in what is now called Wales since before William the Conqueror won in 1066. It’s not comparable in the slightest to Ireland.
@@adventussaxonum448 Absolutely, in 1707 and 1801 when the Union flag was introduced and then the Irish Saltire added, retrospectively, Wales was just seen as a region in the Kingdom of England. Ireland was never thought of as such.
Very disappointed that political factors were ignored. Also, there were 12 German translations before Luther attempted his own. By the catholic church.
A big correction. No man invents anything! All ideas/knowledge comes from God as the Bible says no man can take glory for anything! When God thinks its the correct time to introduce new technology in the chronology of human existence, then He allows it Don't exhalt yourself or any other man
I read that Martin Luther slept in the same bed for 40 years. That is without the sheets or blankets being changed. I guess you could tell easily when he was nearby.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr You also totally ignored my previous comment about Luther's philosophical position. My comment about his personal habits was by the way. In effect it is you who is being ad hominen by being very selective in your comment. Henry Vlll was given the title Defender of the Faith by the Pope following his early defence of Catholic doctrine. You can still see this title on British coins to this day.
In Scotland, followers of Know throw the Eucharist on the ground and spit on it. He spat in the Face of Christ HIMSELF. I wonder if that dirt bad and a lot of others like in the rest of England that murder Catholic for over 100 years are really in Heaven or Hell. they rejected HIM on earth. did they do that when they died as well????
England had the Bible. And today English speaking people only acknowledge the King James version of the Bible...??? Why is that??? My Bible is not a King James Bible, but I can read The Bible and learn the same as they can. Or will God only save people with a King James Bible ?????🤔🤔🤔😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😊❤😎👍👌
As a Belgian I know that our country was a battlefield between the Spanish troops and the rebellious militia of the Netherlands 🇳🇱. After we separated from the Netherlands 🇳🇱 mainly because we were Christians and the Dutch were Calvinists. But I didn't know how these Protestants became seoarate from the Catholic Church. Thank you for the video.
Belgium is home to the meeting of the disgusting european union, how can they allow that to go on knowing the damage they have done to countries and push their globalist left wing agenda. Where are the Belgians outside protesting or asking for the removal of a government that seeks to pass laws on other countries and peoples and restrict them at will.
Fun fact: The german dialect used in Luthers bible translation became the standard german we know today, because everybody had to learn it in order to read the Bible (and everybody had a bible at home).
If the Northern German Dialects had always been included in this official German language, Dutch and German would have been even a lot more similar.
only protestants did, the catholics banned people from reading their own bible until very recently but yeah that is correct
About the same in Estonia and wouldn`t be surprised if Skandinavia as well.
@@micahistory i dont think its banned from reading it, its just not really accessible to the people since creating bible was somewhat expensive before printing press and the bible also in latin so no peasant able to understand much i mean charlemagne did mass produce bible with no harm back in the days
@@yonathanrakau1783 true
Blaise Pascal once wrote:
"There are only two kinds of men: the righteous who think they are sinners and the sinners who think they are righteous"
and that's wrong. Because sin does not exist. Sin is just a political concept used to judge people who commit(ted) no crime
@@istvansipos9940 so you don't believe in morality? No right and wrong? So it is not sin to kill? To rape?
@@Ahmad-nf9ez it is bad, very bad, immoral to rape some1. thus, humans agreed to make rape a crime. can you define sin for me? because the concept of a crime is clear.
@@istvansipos9940 Sin literally means "to miss the mark" and are a way of describing when something is not going fully as it was meant.
@@JamesAsp that's very non-biblical. I don't mind that at all. But the "missing the mark" part is very vague. A girl likes me, I don't realize it (because I am 14 in this story), then I realize it too late.
Was this a sin then? It sure was a waste.
More importantly, then homosexuality (usually considered a "sin") is not a sin. F.e. 2 men do NOT miss the mark, and then they love eachother exactly as they meant to love eachother.
I believe a very important detail was left out. Namely the local counts and princes in Germany were supposed to pay heavy dues to the Catholic Church (also because St. Peters was being built at the time) and they were very annoyed about this. Luther gave them the perfect excuse to stick it to the Pope, so when Luther kickstarted the Reform and defied the church, the local princes and counts gave him protection from the church with the very nice side effect of not having to pay the hefty dues anymore. Of course this led to war at some point so... I guess we all must live with our choices.
The leaders paid their dues because of the fear of being excommunicated, ie condemned to hell for eternity, after death of course.
The marriages between powerful Spain and the heads of the Holy Roman Empire (Austria) worried a lot Northern European monarchs, too. These had great influence in Italy, at the time, with great access to the Pope. The balance of power in Europe cannot be overlooked.
Good one, Marius. But as spiritual as Martin Luther was he did very little for repairing the 1,200-year damage to Christianity created by the church and their mangling of scripture in their egoistic urge to find a "fixed" meaning.
Ref: Trinity Treason
The Catholic church is the oldest and largest criminal organization on this planet...😊
@@RodMartinJr under rated comment right here
The reformation was beginning before Luther or Calvin came on the scene. Both the Waldensians (c. 1173) originating in Lyons and the Hussites in Bohemia (c. 1415) preceded them. The Hussites fought a war against Catholics and ended up winning that fight, and practiced their own faith in the Czech region for a couple of hundred years, until the Thirty Years War rolled through (now they are known as the Moravian church).
They did not reform the Catholic Church, they actually revolted against it. The result of this revolt is that the Catholics decided to reform their church. Something was lost in the translation.
Waldensians and Hussites
+ Cathars and Lollards + Others
True. The fact is, that some form of “reformation “ had been going on, in some place, paralleling the entire “Catholic “ church, But, there were also outright heretics as well.
Not to mention Jan Huss in the previous century and William of Ockham before him, both of whom opposed papal infallibility and held the scriptures in very high regard.
@@TheJoeschmoe777 I actually did mention Hus, since that's where the Hussites got their name. :)
Fun fact: Historically Pyongyang was called the Jerusalem of the East because it once had a big Christian presence, more specifically Protestant
But Protestants have nothing to do with Jerusalem.
Protestantism is a Jewish/Turk concoction.
I love you kimmy thank you for all you’ve given to me 🙇♂️
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 why u putting the turks here?
they we're allies of the French Catholics during this time dummy
@@saadshoaib901 So?
And the French were enemies of the Counter Reformation.
They fought against Spain/Catholics during the Reformation LOL.
All the while Martin Luther who was financed and made a fool by Jews/Turks the Ottoman Empire kept growing.
All Martin Luther did was cause mass destruction on a global level.
And divided Christendom forever.
@@phillip_iv_planetking6354 Christendom was deemed to divide
the bible wasn't accessible to the public
literary rates we're deemed to go higher
one time or another it was a time bomb
think about it
My ancestors were crucified for their religious beliefs. They were Protestants from Bavaria, Germany. My family sailed to the east coast in the early 1600's of America and settled in Virginia
Crucified? in medieval Europe? are you sure, that form of death penalty ceased to exist in Christendom after Emperor Constantine banned it to honour Jesus.
Check out Derek Prince
My family history is as yours they were known as Melungeons...mixed races before slavery.
My ancestors were French Calvinists, and they fled to America. They settled in Virginia too.
God Bless your ancestors !
"Polish-Lithuanian Empire"
So here is a like" from some Polish man.
Keep going
Come back to save europe PLC!
An empire is by definition an entitity, that governs wast ammounts of lands inhabitet by various people, so the PLC is by definition an empire. It was big ( 1 milion km2 at its peak) and governed over many nations: Ruthenians, Germans in Prussia, Baltic people in Courland and Livonia, Moldavians for a short time, and heck - one Polish King was even the Tzar of Russia.
@@borisbrosowski6630 The definition says "States or territories", not specifically kingdoms. And Poland ruled over many of them, as I already mentioned - Lithuania, Livonia, parts of Estonia, Courland, the Red Rus', parts of the Kievan Rus', small chunks of Slovakia (Spisz) and Moldova in the middle ages and for a short period in the early 1600's. And this isn't even counting the personal union with Sweden in 1592 or the Russia-Troubles-Polish-Tzar thing.
Going by your definition - what kingdoms comprised the ottoman empire? Kingdoms in the middle ages were established only with the supervision of the pope, and I don't remember the pope blessing any ottoman sultan. So the PLC, just like the Ottomans, and the HRE was an Empire.
And as for Ukraine - it became independent only in 1945, and for a brief period in the 1920's before being swallowed up by the bolsheviks, So it wasn't an empire. The Russians yeah, but Ukraine not.
@@borisbrosowski6630 Yeah, but Poland can be concidered an empire on the same terms as the Ottomans or Russia: "an aggregate of many separate states or territories under a supreme ruler".
Non of them was appointed by the pope as emperors, but by definition they just were empires.
@@Maximmuss_The pope was only responsible for the old west-roman empire (this includes poland) - the catholic half. Please show me a map or any document from 1400-1800 where it is written "Imperium Polonicum". The Ottomans as Kalifs (=Emperors) ruled over Sultans (=Kings) - of course, being ilsamic they could not have been appointed by the orhtodox Patriarch. The Russians declared themeselves "Tsar" (as did the Bulgarians) but became an Empire only after acquireing the Kingdom of Poland. (Funny story: the Grand-Duchy of Warzaw actually had to be promoted to a kingdom so that the Tsar could be an emperor...)
If you read the Gospels carefully and analytically, it is easy to see how far the churches have run off the rails.
have you heard of tradition? how about oral tradition? just because its not in the bible doesnt mean its not valid.
@@JimmyHandtrixxthe problem eith tradition tho is that it may have strayed far from the core of the message and instructions fromnthe Gospels and the New Testament. Which is why i respectfully disagree with you, but not entirely because there are some traditions that are great for everyone.
@@JimmyHandtrixx pharisees followed their tradition too, catholics are like modern day pharisees
@@peestrem31Even Jesus Himself and all the apostles held on to their traditions. What He condemned are the hypocrisy of the pharisees
@@peestrem31 bro, *all jews* have followed tradition since the beggining of their believes as an organized religion, Jesus probably also followed the jewish oral tradition, because, well, He was a jew. That fact you mock the jews for having a tradition but accept the jewish version of the Old Testament and mocks about the Old Testament based in the Septuaginta (also used by the jews and also the apostles) is strange.
You may have mentioned Jan Hus of Bohemia and the Hussites who came a 100 years earlier and already protested the selling of indulgences, translating the Bible into Czech and the Bible as the authority. They formed armies and successfully fought the Catholic Crusaders called upon the land. Luther actually took many of his ideas from Jan Hus. It was a very important prerequisite to the Reformation already weakening the church by the time Luther nailed his thesis. Check it out.
Thanks for this information. That's very interesting and I had never heard about that.
People do ignore Hus for some reason. Remember that history is a story. Our brains like to hear a story. Historians know this. Hus forms an epilogue. This is awkward to a nice story.
The church was never got weakened by Jan Hus and Luther did not know anything about him when the Reformation began
@@kiennguyenanh8498 actually he did know about him and quoted him many times. For Central Europe he was well known. Do some deeper research you will be amazed.
Yeah, they also ommited John Wyclif
What about Husittes? Why does everyone forget Husittes? They had several crussades sent against them. Even Joan of Arc wanted to lead one against them. Or John Wycliffe, who inspired them all?
I think its because the Hussites and the Lollards did not succeed like Luther did. The Lollards were suppressed easily after the Oldcastle Rebellion and although the Hussites were more successful being able to contend with Catholics and do things like the First Defenestration of Prague, the burning of Jan Hus at the Council of Constance doesn’t make it as successful as Luther’s reformation. Finally, I think Luther and his later fellows Calvin, Zwingli et al. had far more radical ideas which could lead to schism like sola fides, sola scriptura and the like.
@@laurenceraran4027 Husitte Wars resulted in Catholics tolerating protestants. After Battle of Lipany, Utraquists made peace with Catholics and after that, protestants could live normally in Bohemia. We even had protestant king shortly after the wars and almost a century before Luther was even born.
@@Volnas97 That’s true, I won’t deny the importance or the relative success of the Hussite Wars - they are by far the most important proto-Protestant group and had a great effect by showing that the religious hegemony of the Catholic Church is not impregnable. But what Luther did was form something not particularly contained within Bohemia or Germany as I would argue the Jan Hus’ ideas were due to his death at Constance. Where Hus faced death at the hands of Sigismund and the Council of Constance, Luther was invited to Trent where they had to form a council specifically to counter the Reformation (although he would die before then, so he may have suffered the same fate as Hus). Hus was able to preach to the people and intellectuals in Prague, Luther faced the Holy Roman Emperor and King of Spain, Charles V, down and preached his ideas in a debate at the Diet of Worms before the nobles of Germany. I am judging success in Luther and Hus to be how widespread their impact was and it is clear that while the Church was shook by Hus, it would not face schism and full separation. Luther’s ability to survive and continue writing against the Church increased his ability to divide the Church, expose corruption and form a new theology - which I think makes him more reformist and more successful than Jan Hus and the Hussites.
That's true. Joan was against the Hussites.
@@Volnas97 Protestantism started with Luther so how do you have “Protestant” king a century before him?
It’s always a pity that people forget the Hussite reformation. I feel like they’re entirely forgotten by content creators
Agreed,
Had Karl V let burn Martin Luder nobody would remember even his name ,as with Jan Hus and many other heretics !
Ezzo von Achalm
I’m sure there were many saturnalians authoritarians that was saying , “ why aren’t they bowing and kissing our stone statue , paying off their sin and thinking Jesus is the the only mediator instead of including our guy with the pointy hat and kid friendly priests ?” And , who taught them to read so they could have freedom to feel , think, and act according to how God leads them , instead of how we dictate ?”
Such heretics !
@@hussitewagoner6838.
Because it was a localized event and, the moderate branches won the internal conflicts and re-entered the Catholic Church.
King Henry VIII of England was awarded the title "Defender of the Faith" by the Pope after he published a statement against Luther. The joke is that the Pope forgot to specify WHICH faith he was supposed to defend. The monarchs of England retain this title to this day.
Edward, everyone knew what "the Faith" meant. It means the Catholic Faith and always will. The Protestant hijaking of the term makes no difference. The Church of England is the counterfit organisation that stole Catholic churches and monasteries and murdered and persecuted the Catholic people. The C of E will never replace the Catholic Faith that has never dissapeared from England.
Spain was the wealthiest European kingdom. Henry’s wife was a Spanish princess. The Pope wasn’t going to grant Henry’s marriage dissolution. For fear of offending the King of Spain
In Western Europe
From around the 6th Century unto the 16th Century, there was primarily only “one Church” and this Church was headed up in Rome, it was know as the Roman Catholic Church, Catholic meaning a/ universal & worldwide b/ Including everything positive & Christian c/ Past, the present and eternity. This Church was/is headed up by the Popes & Cardinals, in a Pyramid system of Governorship. They taught that there should be and must be only one church in & throughout the world and that this Church should be headed up in Rome, by the Pope. Therefore, during these Centuries the Church was managed and controlled by Rome
Rome owned the church property & land, and controlled the clergy in all of England
In England
In the 16th Century, no small dispute arose, between the King of England, Henry the VIII, and the Popes of Rome. This dispute was mainly focussed on Henry’s Marriages. He wanted the Pope of Rome, to annul his marriage(s) but the Pope was not altogether willing.
As a result mainly of this dispute, Henry Kicked out Roman Catholic rule and control of the church in England, He took control of the churches, land and Clergy. Henry made himself the Head of the Church of England. So, the churches in England, became known as “The church of England” ! it was no longer the church of Rome, but it became the church of England under King Henry VIII.
This became what was later called the Reformation, so under Henry the church was reformed. It was reformed to become a national church, in contrast to a Catholic & Global church headed up in Rome. The boundary of the newly reformed church became the boundary of the Nation state, hence church “of England”. From then onwards, the church of England was owned and controlled by the King and His Ministers. This was the Nationalisation of the Church
During this time, in England, the Bible was translated into English, it was printed and fully released in the English language, making it accessible to all English speaking readers
During the following Century after Henry’s so-called Reformation
As time proceeded, many Bible believing Christians and Christian church leaders in England. Began to increasingly see from reading the New Testament, that the Church should be Independent & Self Governing. They came to steadfastly realise that the church in/of England should not be something owned and controlled by the Monarch and the Monarch’s Government, rather the church should be Independent and self-Governing, and that the bible taught that there should be local assemblies/churches, that are Independent & Self-Governing.
This type of Christian & Christian church leader, was sometimes called; a/ Separatist b/ Non-Conformist c/ Dissenters. One of the most distinct early non-conformists was a man called Robert Browne bn 1550s died 1633, he was the Master at the Great Hospital in Norwich and is famous for stating in His book entitled “without tarrying for any” that the church should appoint its own leaders.
These non-conformist Christians tried many times to meet together, have their own-independent assembly church life, independent from Government control. They were often severely persecuted, and like Robert Browne, John Robinson and hundreds of others, they often fled England to live in todays Holland (later the American Colonies) where they could freely have their own church-life. After a long and varied struggle, Later with the Act of Toleration in 1688, a deal was struck and the English Monarchy William & Mary permitted, the building of “houses for worship” for non-conformists use
He received the title before his falling out. He was very devout.
@@Idahoguy10157 Offending the Spanish king wasn't the problem, the problem was that he need the Spaniards to defend him from the French and the Turks, also Charles the V compromise himself to stop Martin Luther as he was the HRE's emperor.
The presentation missed completely that "reformation" against church excesses started long before Luther. It was Wykliffe in England and Jan Hus in Bohemia (burn at stakes n 1415) who preached against church practices. Hus' death was followed by wars between Hussite movement and Catholic powers and later continued with Czech Brothers (Jednota bratrska), who also printed a bible in Czech (bible Kralicka).
You could say that it started even earlier with Augustine of Hippo.
In Western Europe
From around the 6th Century unto the 16th Century, there was primarily only “one Church” and this Church was headed up in Rome, it was know as the Roman Catholic Church, Catholic meaning a/ universal & worldwide b/ Including everything positive & Christian c/ Past, the present and eternity. This Church was/is headed up by the Popes & Cardinals, in a Pyramid system of Governorship. They taught that there should be and must be only one church in & throughout the world and that this Church should be headed up in Rome, by the Pope. Therefore, during these Centuries the Church was managed and controlled by Rome
Rome owned the church property & land, and controlled the clergy in all of England
In England
In the 16th Century, no small dispute arose, between the King of England, Henry the VIII, and the Popes of Rome. This dispute was mainly focussed on Henry’s Marriages. He wanted the Pope of Rome, to annul his marriage(s) but the Pope was not altogether willing.
As a result mainly of this dispute, Henry Kicked out Roman Catholic rule and control of the church in England, He took control of the churches, land and Clergy. Henry made himself the Head of the Church of England. So, the churches in England, became known as “The church of England” ! it was no longer the church of Rome, but it became the church of England under King Henry VIII.
This became what was later called the Reformation, so under Henry the church was reformed. It was reformed to become a national church, in contrast to a Catholic & Global church headed up in Rome. The boundary of the newly reformed church became the boundary of the Nation state, hence church “of England”. From then onwards, the church of England was owned and controlled by the King and His Ministers. This was the Nationalisation of the Church
During this time, in England, the Bible was translated into English, it was printed and fully released in the English language, making it accessible to all English speaking readers
During the following Century after Henry’s so-called Reformation
As time proceeded, many Bible believing Christians and Christian church leaders in England. Began to increasingly see from reading the New Testament, that the Church should be Independent & Self Governing. They came to steadfastly realise that the church in/of England should not be something owned and controlled by the Monarch and the Monarch’s Government, rather the church should be Independent and self-Governing, and that the bible taught that there should be local assemblies/churches, that are Independent & Self-Governing.
This type of Christian & Christian church leader, was sometimes called; a/ Separatist b/ Non-Conformist c/ Dissenters. One of the most distinct early non-conformists was a man called Robert Browne bn 1550s died 1633, he was the Master at the Great Hospital in Norwich and is famous for stating in His book entitled “without tarrying for any” that the church should appoint its own leaders.
These non-conformist Christians tried many times to meet together, have their own-independent assembly church life, independent from Government control. They were often severely persecuted, and like Robert Browne, John Robinson and hundreds of others, they often fled England to live in todays Holland (later the American Colonies) where they could freely have their own church-life. After a long and varied struggle, Later with the Act of Toleration in 1688, a deal was struck and the English Monarchy William & Mary permitted, the building of “houses for worship” for non-conformists use
There was also the Hussite movement in and around what is today Czechia.
THE HOUSITES ZISKA THE GREAT IM FROM GREECE BUT I KNOW HISTORY EVERYBODY SPEAK ABOYT GREAT ALEXANDER AND HE WAS GREAT BUT AS A GENERAL ZISKA WAS EQUAL AND MAYBE BETTER IN MILITARY ONLY SUBJECTS
@zalacainbilbao, I think that the Czech Hussites must be also be included in a discussion of the Protestant Reformation.
I think that was actually about 100 years beforehand i.e. in the early 1400s
Husits were actually the first. Jan Hus requested that laity should receive Holy Blood of Christ, not just priests. And he was sentenced to death. For me he was reformist, not Protestant.
@@tasosgkouzos2036 tard
Well done. Best 12-minute view. The study & debate has been going on for 1/2 a millennium. One of the most avoided topics is the cost in lives over "Christianity". Thanks.
Oh yeah, God's true religion killed tons of people, but this is only the beginning of what God has in store for humanity.
Yes. What we are experiencing could be the "End Times".@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr Thousands and Thousands of people were killed - Jews especially - to and from the Crusades and Bible Readers during the Inquisitions.
All killed in the Name of God or Pope depending on what you "Obeyed".
Great ! I'm precisely reading a book about the thirty years war (and I just have to say that the estimates of this war, nowadays, are less heavy than what you said : only some region like the Rhenish Palatinate saw their population nearly disappear).
And before that I read some stuff about the religious wars in France. I was surprised how fast and wide the reformation spread. And how fast it provoked war, in the Spanish Netherlands and in France.
Hugin....
...and not forget how rapidly protestantism vanished in the whole of France after the clean massacre of the St Bartholomy feast.
Though it may not affect all of Europe, but for Sweden the 30 years war was huge, as it solidified a more than 100 year dominance of. Or there Europe
What book was it?
@@HectorHernandez-ix9kp It's been a while now, but it could this book : _La Guerre de Trente Ans_ , Marie-Noëlle Faure, ed. Ellipses.
It's a good introduction, although in french.
I guess, if you're begining in this subject you could read in english _The Thirty Years' War_ , Geoffrey Parker.
@@Hvginn thank you for the response! I’ll check it out
You forgot to mention Jan Hus.
The primary reason why the Catholic church eventually opposed Luther was his statement _"Ja, ich bin Hussite"_ ("Yes, I'm a Hussite") when put on trial.
Many figures originally wanted to get Luther on board for a reformation _within_ Catholicism, which eventually happened anyway.
@Top Secret Are you yet another Turk with an overly inflated, undeserved sense of national pride and a complete lack of historical knowledge? Bye.
@Top Secret You have issues.
@@cyrusol He is desperate.
Good point, Cyrusol. The church's kidnapping and murder of William Tyndale was only one of countless crimes against Christ and humanity. But perhaps the most dispiccable was the early church's insistance on a "fixed" meaning for scripture, including betraying their flock with the *_only unforgivable sin._*
Ref: *_Trinity Treason_*
@@RodMartinJr You're not the original Christian Church, and you have no authority to say what should be doctrine and what shouldn't. The Church and its Bishops, who are ordained by the Church, who trace their priestly line to Christ and the Apostles, have the authority to declare doctrine (an objective fact). Thus, you're just an idiot heretic who's just coping and seething extremely hard.
I hope I won't sound like a smart aleck but Corsica was not a part of France until the 1700s.
wow so true the french bought it a year before napoleon was born I think in 1768 they (France) purchased it from republic of genoa
@@amanahmad1110 correct and you are one of the few that has mentioned it. The truth was that Corsica was a very troublesome island for Genoa and became economic drain by keeping troops stationed with with its ships. Apparently Napoleon was born Italian by a few hours or some days to become a French citizen, a fact denied by French historians but of course Italian historians historians are quite excited about this. Fun fact: Napoleon's family originated somewhere in Tuscany but I don't remember where....
The Protestant Reformation started because of the occurrence of the printing press, and some structural problem in the Catholic Church that already in the end of the 14th century and the start of the 15th century caused the Wycliff reformation movement as well as the Husite wars ... as well as the Waldensian schism already in the 13th century. Luther was a catalyst, and he impressed other reformation adherents that much that they dared to raise their flag at the same time.
luther sent a copy of his thesis' to constantinople (instanbul) asking the orthodox patriarch to give his input because luther believed that the orthodox had not lost their way as did the roman catholics. this document is still in the orthodox library in constantinople (instanbul) and you can read the notations that the patriarch made. the document never made it back to luther due to luther's death.
I wonder what would have happened if there was more dialogue between the Protestants and the Orthodox.
@@JoshAlicea1229 That the orthodox will stay as such and the Protestant will stay the same...I remind you that the closest to the Catholic church are the orthodox church
@@JoshAlicea1229 They would have deeply disagreed with protestantism and have disagreed since. Latin Catholicism may be different from Orthodox Catholicism but they certainly agree with one another regarding protestantism.
@@kuyachamp7618 what I meant was that maybe Luther would have gone east
@@kuyachamp7618 what I meant was that maybe Luther would have gone east.
The Scottish Protestant Reformation was certainly one of the causes of the Jacobite uprisings. The Stuarts believed they were divinely chosen to be rightful monarchs of Great Britain, and the Hanoverian monarchy to be usurpers. However, the relationship between monarch and people in Scotland was always one of contract, with sovereignty resting with the people, and most Scots did not accept divine monarchy. That's why there were Scots, both Catholic and Protestant, who fought on both the Jacobite and Government sides.
What is more accurate was that the parallel reformations in England and Scotland led to the Covenanting wars.
While King Henry VIII established the English monarch to be head of the Church of England, which retained priests and bishops, the Calvinist Scottish Protestant Reformation, which grew with astonishing support, established the Church of Scotland whereby there were no intercessors between God and mankind; ministers were merely preachers and teachers.
James VI, King of Scots from the abdication of his Catholic mother, Mary, in 1567, was brought up in this strict Presbyterian belief. In 1603, Queen Elizabeth I of England died, and James was the only person who could succeed her on the English throne. He decreed that his two kingdoms were one, which he called "Great Britain". In 1621 he ordered the Bible be translated into English (yes, that King James).
While King James I of Great Britain, as he was now fashioned, was happy to leave his native Scotland alone, his Stuart successors were a different matter. King Charles I ordered that the Anglican Church become the state religion of Scotland, installed bishops, and outlawed all other forms of worship. Needless to say, the Scots Presbyterians were having none of it. In 1638 a band of Presbyterians in Greyfriar's Kirk, Edinburgh, signed the "Solemn League and Covenant", demanding freedom to worship in their own beliefs. Copies of the "Covenant" were signed all over Scotland. Presbyterians would hold services in secret, often with armed guards. Charles I sent forces to put down this dissent, and it was not long before the two sides met in open warfare.
Charles I was of course deposed and executed for trying to impose his will upon the English parliament. But after the Commonwealth under Oliver Cromwell, the monarchy was restored in 1660 under King Charles II. He too tried to impose Anglicanism upon Scotland, and civil war broke out again. When his son, King James II, ascended the throne, he tried again. The Covenanting wars against James II were the bloodiest of all, becoming known as "the Killing Time". One slogan of the Covenanters of the time was "No king but Christ".
With James II leaning towards Roman Catholicism, the Scots were only too happy in joining the English and Irish to invite William of Orange to depose James II. But even then, before they would accept William as king, the Scots demanded he sign the Claim of Right in 1689, stating that neither he nor any future monarch would interfere in Scots ecclesiastical matters.
Scottish Presbyterian belief remains one of the strictest forms of Protestantism in the world to this day.
Lots of good stuff here. I watched Bruce Fumey's youtube vid on topic. But- is there evidence that Scots were among those who "invited" Wm to sail with an Armada and take over? My understanding was it was English MPs
Protestantism is the counterfit movement that stole Catholic churches and monasteries and murdered and persecuted the Catholic people. It will never replace the Catholic Faith that has never dissapeared from Britain
And now scotts are getting replaced by muslims and hindus in their own homeland
Insuppose it was worth it weakining europe and crippling christianism in europe forever.
Its not like all protestant countries nowadays are majorithy atheist right ?
don't think the Irish really had much say in the glorious revolution.
You need to add! The Reformation began before Luther was a twinkle in his mother's eye. John Wycliffe was 150 years before Luther and a few hundred Bibles were hand written by volunteer scribes, some of which survive to this day. Wycliffe taught at Oxford and had the patronage of John of Gaunt. He also taught some Bohemians the Word of God and they later became the Hussites. He had his own movement in England too. The Lollards. Wycliffe was called "The Morning Star of the Reformation"
Yes, I seem to remember Wycliffe being spoken about in my history lessons at school. The American commentators always seem to miss things out on English history.
Maybe they ought to stick to their own.
@@Saxondog indeed so. It has struck me as odd that usually, to attain entry to university one needs to demonstrate that the applicant has the ability to study and seek out sources of information that will critique or confirm what they are being taught in lectures. If this is maintained, well and good. Otherwise universities and colleges are becoming sources of indoctrination.
Bias against England may have its roots in two sources in the USA. Firstly the Revolutionary War (of Independence) and the War of 1812 (mainly naval) added to the culture of Irish immigrants carrying their bitterness from the ill treatment of Irish people by English and local landlords in the 19th Century during the Potato Blight. However, truth should never be a casualty of proper learning. This only occurs when the hearers have permitted themselves to search their own consciences in favour of a 'feel good' factor. A classic inclination of young people. Thought. Sophomore is derived from 2 words in Greek sophos and mores (check the spelling) meaning 'wise' and 'fool' Of course a conscientious faculty will not take advantage of this in pursuit of their own agenda.
Students will then become aware of truthful information such as Reformation history and not find satisfaction in viewing it through political spectacles, be they nationalist or Marxist.
Luther had the benefits of the printing press
@@jerrymichaelgreen2675 he certainly did as did Tyndale but Roman Catholic power was immense. The Pope declared that any translation was an act of heresy punishable by burning. Something supported by Thomas Aquinas and even as 385 by Augustine of Hippo (torture rather than burning). Wycliffe handwrote many copies before he died in 1688.
Now we have smart phones and solar generators.
Especially primitive societies.
Everybody is online
The remotest and most primitive.
FYI.
Have you seen the abundance of abnormal pheomemen documented online.
Clergy and Phds debate reality.
While archeology and the 74 different independent national space programs.
Provide photos,
Some mytheducated doubt the space program.
The Bible what we know of it, written before Rome, doesn't support Vatican rules.
A contrast of interest.
It's understood Luther couldn't afford the indulgance tax.
As a result we have liberty.
No matter where you stand on the reformation, it ripped the church apart and divided followers of Christ.
Matthew 10:34-36 MEV
“Do not think that I have come to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to turn ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; a man’s foes will be those of his own household.’
chosen - Agreed. At what point do you think people will begin to admit that belief in mystical gods is just a fantasy?
Call it whatever, the truth is it was not a reformation but rather a deformation. An action deviding christians cannot be considered good, period.
@@kevin8712 Yea but the person speaking was literally God. Luther and his politicians were not.
The Spanish Inquisition is not older than the Inquisition in Rome. The Papal Inquisition was founded in the 13th century, while the Spanish Inquisition (the Castilian Inquisition ti be precise) was founded at the end of the 15th century. Also it's impossible to explain the Reformation without mentioning the precedents: Cathars, Hussites and Erasmus of Rotterdam.
These kind of mistakes are somehow common in this channel.
and it is also worth mentioning the previous schisms of the church.
Those "mistakes' are 'intended", by design!!
Fruits of the spirit. Hospitality
When they are constantly feed anticatholic propaganda it's no wonder they are ignorant
Both inquisitions were inspired by Satan.
Borneo protestant from Sabah, Malaysia HERE!
It is important to mention the attraction of the wealth of the Catolic Church which was greater than theological aspects. Princes in Germany and kings as the King of Swede took advantage to confiscate all land and other assets of the Catolic Church. Gustavus Adolphus, the King of Swede was almost bankrupt when he switched to Protestantism. So taking all the land and other assets of the Catolic church was a big deal and he had money to intervine in the religious war in Germany. The funny aspect was that of forcing all population within a country or kingdom to convert automatically to the faith of the king/prince or leave the land. In England the situation was more dramatic and funny due to the fact that the Church of England was invented in order Henry the 8th got a divorce. In all cases was an enormous destruction of monasteries, confiscation of valuable goods, old books burned, many people just killed end so on. Pretty much like Viking invasions. Not to mention that the tax paid by ordinary people to the church was not eliminated but redirected to the British Treasury. So, this aspect is less discussed but I think was a major push for Prices/Kings to embrace so suddenly the Protestant faith and to fight so hart for it.
The Catholic Church ran the poverty programs.
Gustavus Adolphus was born a protestant. I think you mean Gustav Vasa. Besides, a spiritual institution should not horde wealth; they should worship God, not Mammon.
@@TeikonGom Gustavus Adolphus was born as a humble human being. His parents baptized him in a Protestant cult. Was not his choice.
@@TeikonGom Apparently their god is Mammon.
@@VSP4591 You literally said that he switched to Protestantism.
“As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:” Romans 3:10 ; "For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;" Romans 3:23
CRaul - please have the courage to think for yourself.
Enoch (disciplined) Abraham Samuel Isaiah Jeremiah etc all became friends of God. What's wrong with people,? The way you think is what you end up as?
Thank you for including the Restorationists. We are often overlooked when it comes to big picture issues like this.
I know, I know, I'm being "picky", but, It's Catherine of Aragon, not argon. Otherwise, loved the video. Thanks.
There are a lot of words this narrator needs to learn how to pronounce.
Also 'annulment' and 'subsequently'
@Robert Hunter yeah but those are pretty big ones
Also Iohan, should be pronounced Johann, not I-O-hann
Nah, that bugged me too. Sure it's a noble gas, but Catherine of Argon and Catherine of Aragon are two entirely different things... Everyone knows Catherine of Argon had more to do with the Galvanist and Lithium movements.
Supposedly Luther tried to talk with the Greeks, as the New Testament was originally written in there language but with the fall of the Byzantine (Roman) empire Luther could no longer communicate with them. I believe without the fall of the Roman Empire the reformer would have been much smaller
@Kokoro Shimamura they mean the eastern romans
My understanding is the Ottomans where extremely supportive of the Protestants. They where 100% in favour of a schism among the Christians - just loved the idea.
there was communication... the church didnt die... and the reality is that they both hated the catholic church, and they both agreed on many things against the catholic doctrine... but thats all there was to it... also due to the structure of the greek orthodox church(the emperor appointed the patriarch of constantinople and since the empire was dead, the patriarch was now an ottoman puppet, which is why even greece today has its own church away from the patriarch and the patriarch is nothing but a tittle any more, he has virtually no community, apart from some 10 thousand greeks that the turks didnt manage to butcher the last century!)
All one has to do is read the New Testament to understand the problems with Catholicism. There are genuine Christians within the RCC but the institution is rife with man made doctrines and traditions that are a mixture of pagan and Christianity. If you read the OT, God really hates this and calls it spiritual fornication and rebukes the Jews over it throughout the OT. Yes Catholics, I hear you, this does not make protestant perfect, far from it. But the basis of Christianity and sound doctrine is the Bible according to Jesus and the Apostles and the early church.
@@ExperienceEric other way around.. Christ said he would establish his church on earth
You need to name Jan Hus when speaking of Reformation. Jan Hus basically already pointed out everything that Luther later would say. And this was nearly 100 years before Luther! Please do not make the same mistake like so many teachers and historians and ignore Hus and the other early Reformers.
You are correct about Jon Hus who was burned at the stake in 1415.
Then you should go back further to the bishop of Hippo himself, Augustine.
Augustine was the source of some of the bad theology and practices in the Roman Catholic Religion which needed to be Reformed. The practice of Baptizing Infants and the need to have Confirmation comes from around the time of Augustine.
Some of Augustine's ideas were good, but not all
@@pastorart1974 I think you should realize that Luther and Calvin and John Wesley ALL continued the practice of infant baptism AND confirmation. The churches they started still have infant baptism AND confirmation. If infant baptism is as wrong as some say why didn't the Holy Spirit inspire these reformers to abolish it ?? God wants us to be committed to Him. This commitment can come during adult baptism OR confirmation.
@@davidwv7370 You have identified the major problem in those three denominations to this day. Most of the people in most of the infant sprinkling denominations today have neither been converted or born again. These are the denominations which support the LGBTQ movement today. These are the Denominations which support abortion today.
Keep in mind that I was raised in what is today an ELCA Pro Abortion, Pro LGBTQ Lutheran Church. Very few of my Confirmation Classmates are serving Jesus today.
The Wesley Foundation campus Pastors were the Chaplains of the Gay Peoples Alliance at Illinois State University 50 years ago (my Alma Mater).
Note that the 1974 in my Screen Name is the year I became a Pastor not the year I was born I am a Vietnam Veteran.
After coming home from Vietnam I had a long talk with my Lutheran Pastor who admitted not one baby was ever baptized in the Bible. In that same conversation he told me he didn't believe in Billy Graham's religion That was the day I decided to leave the Lutheran Church. Within ten years I would see Apostasy and Liberalism creep into my new Denomination.
I'm not particularly religious, but I found this quite interesting.
Even if you’re not religious, the reformation is a really significant part of American/ western civilization because the reformation was a kinda a result of the renaissance where people were trained to really READ the Bible in their own and have personal and intellectual relationships with God, rather than just listen to the church. A lot of our culture and following revolutions/philosophy is based on this idea. 😊
I learned that, which at times in grade school I might not have believed - the printing press is a huge step or advent, in hueman evolution.
It’s why Catholics and Protestants are different despite being both Christianity
@@Hannah-kk7wpRead by their own, and then created doctrine by their own. Chose what book is part of scripture by their own, or translate the scripture by their own.
Some say Jesus is the Father, Some say Father is Jesus, some say Jesus is created, some say He's not divine, some say God predetermined evil, and so on...
It's just "me, me, and me". Reformation is so beautiful... or should i say deformation?
You discover things like fire. You invent a printing press
Haha, I was thinking the exact same thing when he said that so awkwardly.
In my textbooks its swapped way too many times, like "they discovered the telephone" etc. Nah telephone wasn't hidden in some cave for 13.8 billion years it was invented
I thought of the same thing when I heard it
This what happened with communism really
Unless you're Plato.
Love this channel so much. U make it entertaining and easy to keep up. I've learned so much from this channel. Its explanation of historical events & people is outstanding.
1:38 you explained the indulgences correctly, but that text in the bubble is wrong. The didn't remove sins, only reduced the time in purgatory.
The Church never intended this to happen it was because of widespread misinformation and other priests, bishops and even cardinals using indulgences to get bags full o' coins. This was later corrected by the Church but the damage has already been done, If it wasn't for that Dominican or any other priests who misinterpreted the indulgences as a way for salvation then none of this shit would've happen.
As a South African Protestant of French and Dutch decent , It was an immense delight to get to visit the Vatican as well as numerous Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches all over Poland and Lithuania.
I just pray that I may someday get to visit Jerusalem as well. To walk where our Saviour walked.
How do you feel about the church of england ordaining a trans priest and referring to God as they/them?
@@jeanbethencourt1506 the protestant churches constantly changed the rules.
A man made religion.
@@Kitiwake all religions are msn made!
Were do you Make the maps? Or how
Try a map maker I've herd they make maps
08:10 in direct contradiction to the reformists ...well, it was the reformed view that was in direct contradiction to a dozen centuries of christian-catholic tradition.
Is it in the bible?
As a Lutheranian I have at least two Bibles in my house, my grand parents (that I have inherit) and modern bible (new paper, more robust), and it is written in my language.
It's wonderful that you have a collection of Bibles, including one from your grandparents. Bibles can hold significant sentimental and spiritual value, especially when they have been passed down through generations. Having both a modern version and an older one can provide you with diverse perspectives on scripture, as translations may vary and the language can reflect different contexts and understandings of faith.
Yes I've already got back ground on this but thank you for pointing out King Henry's support methods ....which we are to believe in support of refermation... obviously God is fortress for everyone and I'm sure those women were praying for mercy of God to take there soul's
No one asked you what you know
It was Catholics who were killingvwomen as witches 🤪
@@Errhhk Yet you replied
@@RandomVidsforthought don't remember asking you, nerd
A video on the Catholic Counter-reformation would be very interesting!
Yeah man I totally agree with you. Now that was a true Reformation. This Phony Reformation ended in disaster, with these so called "reformers" not agreeing among themselves
@@diegofuentes6639 Indeed, famously Luther's betrayal of the rebelling peasants as he sided with the german lords and princes in the Holy Roman Empire against his increasingly radical followers, he is a very twisted histioric character..
@@johannesmaximilian848 Thats true my friend. And you should also remember that Luther was deeply Anti-Semitic.
In my opinion, the protestant reformation was one of the worst events in christian history, far worse than the schism of 1054. Science, Laws, Philosophy, Art, Education, and many more things that made the western civilization greater than others (multiculturalists can cry now) came from the Holy Church. We catholics, instead of genociding natives, integrated them in society. Catholic priests protected natives against enslavers in the americas. The calvinists and lutherans took the land and killed or expeled them. Protestantism didnt ever produce human arts like the catholics did, look their simplistic architecture for example. Also this movements today, flat earth and antivax, come from the protestant sects, since a protestant priest can say whatever he wants without consequences.
@@Nimai_Aquino You are Spot on My Brother in Christ. The Cathlolic Church BUILT WESTERN CIVILIZATION. It was CATHOLICS who stood up for the faith in times of danger, such as the Battle of Tours, The Crusades, Lepanto and Vienna,not protestants. They were busy preaching their heresies and dividing the faithful. But there are some doctrines that these "reformers" kept, such as the belief in Infant baptism, the Belief in Mary's perpetual virginity as well as her role as the Mother of God, something that Luther, Zwingli and Calvin themselves believed even after they revolted against the Church. So just so you know, even what their founders tought they don't believe it.
Really outstanding video, thank you! I love filling in the gaps in my knowledge with videos like this.
This is big fat lie video, the catholic church never ever thought that for money and paper your sins will be forgiven , unfortunately Protestantism is based on lies .
Great job explaining the sequence of events. I found it very educational
I think that the fact that the catholic church did end up listening to the reformists complaints, and reforming the catholic church afterwards whilst still affirming and better clarifying its, at the time 1400-year-old doctrine of faith, is a fact that is too often overlooked.
agree, cool video but really overlooked the cultural and ecclesiastical achievements of the counter reformation.
And it only took the Church 400 years to reverse its excommunication of Galileo.
They use the word clarifying as if they're not just making up a ton of new stuff all the time.
@@philipliethen519 They were in the right originally. The bible is a flat earth book.
why then is th protestant reformation looked down upon, since its demands were eventually co-opted in some way? If Roman Catholicism was infallible then it could have just continued as was, innit?
My ancestor, Wibald, a Catholic Priest from Wales, authored catechisms and biblical translations from Latin into Franconian for Charlemagne, then King of the Franks, prior to 800AD. A contemporary of Alquin of York.
God Bless that man. Ave Christus Rex.
3:11 invented not discovered.
Matthew 16:18-19
"And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. I will give you the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in Heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in Heaven.”
are you not sure that roman catholics are putting too much emphasis on the physical rock and not Jesus who proclaimed that?
Keys to Kingdom - given to heads of church, early father's reflect it, Rom12-14 is what "we" do regardless of who "rules" over Man. Love one another.
@@pola5392 Are you sure you and putting enough enphasis on the physical rock which Jesus proclaimed?
@@Vic-oi5vr However, the early Church fathers highlighted the significance of this authority in promoting unity and nurturing faith among the believers.
In addition to the leadership roles, the teachings in Romans 12-14 underscore the importance of showing love to one another, mirroring Christ's love for us. This principle should guide our interactions with others, regardless of their position of authority.
The keys to Heaven are not exclusive to Church leaders; they are also accessible to all believers who demonstrate love and compassion, and by doing so, they can bring a taste of Heaven to earth through their actions. This special authority was bestowed upon St. Peter by Jesus, emphasizing his unique role in leading the Church.
@@pola5392 🙄
For everyone else in Europe it was about the Catholic church. For the English it was about Henry Tudor trying to get his end away with Anne Boleyn.
I like it. I just wish I could hear this great info in my Arabic language. As a man of the middle east I never heard enough infomation of diffrent sources and as you know our orthodox and catholic churches in middle east the will never write objectively or impartial about such an important happing. Now I left all churches but I am alwayes hongry for such good content. Thank you for sharing it with us.
The printing press wasn’t “discovered”, it was “invented”
You must be fun at parties
And it had been invented many hundreds of years before Gutenberg's time.
Gutenberg invented a mold for casting movable type.
Nothing is invented
@@iordanneDiogeneslucas
😖😖😖
@@EdinProfa At least he gets invited
I've been to Trent once and even had a look in the church. Very beautiful city with some fresco painted buildings still around. I highly recommend it as a travel destination 🙂
Is it the one which was bought by Muslims?
Your pronunciation of the German names is hilarious: "Marden Luser", "Elbört of Meins", "Dshon Kelvin", "Alric Suingli"... 🤣🤣🤣
As usually the topic is considered from the point of faith. It is wrong. Reformation is 80% about politics, 10% about faith and 10% about something else.
You are 100% correct. If someone studies the reformation only from a religious perspective they will never understand it. I think a good place to start is 100 years before Luther when French kings "Kidnapped" the papacy for 100 years.
Thanks to William Tyndale for his English Translation of the Bible!!!
A man who gave his life for the word of God!
So it was William Tyndale that changed the verse of, 'and Son of God.' Mark 1:1 verse line.
And a thanks to the printning press that made it possible for every man to read the Bible in their own language. NOT being told by a Catholic priest what God's Word is about and being interpreted in the way the Pope and the Catholic clergymen, wished to control and terrorize ordinary people. I don't think God approved. 😊😮❤😎👍👌
Printing press not printning ...sorry😊❤😂😂😎👍👌
did the Protestant reformation passively led to the invention of modern Atheism?
As a born PROTESTANT. YES definitely.
and Europe islamisation
@@kms_scharnhorst But ... but ... but ... but ......... but free will!
Check mate, Atheists!
@@kms_scharnhorst Oh, I didn't realize you were that untainted by the internet atheist community.
"Free will" is next to "you can't understand god's plan" one the main arguments Christians like to use when confronted with problems that contradict their idea of an omniscient, omnipotent and omnibenevolent god. Why is there evil in the world - free will. Why are there illnesses - you can't understand god's will. Why is god creating sinners if in the end he is only gonna condem them to eternal suffering - free will and you can't understand god. It is quite a ridiculous argument but they keep on using it.
The "check mate atheists" is a phrase used quite commonly by atheists to ridicule the overconfident Christians who use arguments, that have been debunked by every Atheist influencer out there, as if they were the ultimate undebunkable solution to all the questions an atheist could possibly have. It is partly born out of the frustration of hearing the same old arguments over and over again.
Now to your question, why some religious folk hates us so much. You can't really pinpoint one reason and every hater has his own personal mix of them, but here is a small collection of some more prominent ones.
There is the simple fear of stuff you don't understand. Plenty of people have grown up in a completely religious environment. Some of those might not be able to cope with the idea that others do not adhere to the same ideas they hold so dearly in their hearts and this can possibly turn to hate.
Others did just simply have some not so pleasent encounters with atheists in the past and are now projecting their hate of their tormentors onto the ideas of atheism instead against the actual people hurting them.
Still others might still be caught in the cold war propaganda if the USA. This mentality of good christian American against bad atheist Communist is still held by many especially in more conservative circles and leads to a deep mistrust of everything socialist and atheist.
And lastly they might just be following the teachings of the bible. Non-believers are quite often described as haters of god, evil people who only want to sin and deniers of the truth. And if you believe this is the literal word of god, I can see how you could start hating a group of people you have never even engaged in a single serious conversation.
I hope this was helpful and you understood that I didn't try to attack you in the slightest.
Have a nice day.
@@the4thindustrialrevolution225 Sprichst du Deutsch?
Awesome video
I personally say the Hussites were the first reformation that were generally somewhat succesfull
The Catholic Church was never opposed to people reading the Bible. What it opposed was people reading interpretations the Bible apart from the teaching authority of the Church, which would lead to the kinds of problems we have today with 30,000 denominations interpreting Scripture differently. The Bible itself warns against this:
"Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation" (2 Peter 1:20).
Yes, the interpretation of God word is led by the Holy Spirit. As a believer, the holy spirit dwells in you, it guides and teaches you of God's word.
In John 14:26, Jesus told his disciples, “the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you”
1 Corinthians 3:16- Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
Oooooooof. So, the topic of 2 Peter 1:20 is PROPHECY, and people like you decided the topic was all Scripture. Catholics are whack, man. They don't even read the very text of the Bible.
@@kkiv1639 people can easily interpret the holy spirt with their feeling when people don’t have intellectual guidance their quick to jump to conclusion.
Maybe I have this wrong but I thought there was a time when the Roman Catholic Church made it like a criminal offence for people to own their own copy of the Bible??? Just asking. 💒
@wendylang2360 Yes. You are right. It was once illegal for people to own the Holy Bible. I think that was during the Middle Ages. You see, it's up to the Catholic priest to read you the scripture during mass. And only him. In Catholicism, the priest is seen as an authority figure. He tells us the good word. And we must believe him. There is only one interpretation. And all Catholic priests taught the same thing in the same way. This means you could attend mass in Ireland or Italy or France and expect to hear the same teachings wherever you go. It's the word of God.
I think the reason why the Holy Bible was banned is due to the fact that people were not meant to make up their own interpretations of the scripture. Only the priest may have that authority. Everything comes from the Vatican in Rome. Ya know?
Please consider reading ‘Fatal Discord. Erasmus, Luther and the Struggle for the Western Mind”. One of the most influential books on my perception of history and oddly of humanity.
I loved "Fatal Discord." Why waste time on "Game of Thrones"?
Thank you for making this video. Much needed knowledge acquired!
"I like your Christ, but i don't like you christians. You christians are so unlike your Christ."
- Gandhi
Clearly never met a man like Billy graham.
A pagan like gandhi cannot understand really. How can a man be like God himself? In paganism the man saves himself by a cicle of reincarnation (in tha case of hinduism) always striving to be born in a superior existence. In christianity we can only be saved by God. Completely different concepts.
@@Nimai_Aquino I think you never read bible,Jesus clearly said that only your faith can decide your afterlife he ie god punishes the wicked and rewards pious because of their faith and deeds if he rewards and punishes people only by his grace without watching their faith and deeds then he isn't God but a satan who commits Injustice
@@Nimai_Aquinoand first of all you should learn about hinduism it's not a single religion but bunch of various regional religious views. people in ancient India followed a religion which was surprisingly different from modern hinduism which is also called vedic religion
Which is monotheistic and according to Vedic religion one stays in cycle of birth and death only because he/she never realised God in their past life but whoever realises God will directly go to abode of our ultimate creator and will never take birth in this physical universe
@@Nimai_Aquino God accepts those people in their abode who dedicate their whole life to the most powerful eternal infinite and omnipresent being
Worshippers of different gods like sungod,wind God,fire god,earth God go to abodes of these different gods and these pagans ie polytheist never realise that these divine beings are un-eternal with limited power but he who realises that these gods were created by the most powerful and eternal which is called jeyovah in bible and paramatma in Vedas will go to abode of this infinite eternal and most powerful being
And yes I agree with you that pagans are on wrong path
Quite a few oversimplification leading to wrong impressions on a number of things. There were forerunners to many of the reformation ideas over the previous 200 years such as Wycliffe and Huss. Also Luther was on the same side as the Catholics against the Calvinists about the literal body of Christ in the Eucharist.
Calvinists were extremists, even the video host admits it.
its fun to learn history. never had it in high school ( unless you wanna count world geography ) so i watch channels like this, watch history memes, play games like ( assassins creed ), etc. it's a lot to take in, but history's worth learning
Just curious...what state are you in that doesn't require that world and American history be taught in high school?
@@jerryklooster438 maybe he dropped out before he took those classes
@@jerryklooster438 Only one year (and possibly only one semester) is allotted to the entirety of World History class. Not room for a whole lot of content to be covered. That happens in the teaching of American History as well but the greater problem is that schools in some states are being prohibited from teaching anything other than a literally "white washed" curriculum whereby America virtue progressively grows to lead the world. In Florida, those who believe in "American Exceptionalism" dominate the government and are using state degrees to dictate what is to be taught. There are no literal book burnings but most certainly a massive amount of book banning.
@@karenryder6317 Required curriculum varies from state to state. National learning standards would be an improvement over the mishmash we have now. The Common Core curriculum was a bipartisan effort from the nation's governors, but despite being endorsed by many leading conservative, the right wing nut jobs were able to convince their base that the Common Core infringed on a state's right to teach unscientific and religious dogma.
school basically teaches you to read after that your really on your own to decide which books you read to lift yourself up/school never touches on anything controversial/ Church only tells you what they want you to know never discovering the differences how ever subtle. see Dr. Myles Munroe for history on Bahamas if You think this is interesting/Bahamas was under England well let him tell you on UA-cam/
I am Catholic- however I remain quite progressive with my views/opinions regarding the origins and history; the parts that I believe and wish were different in regards to how the message of Christ is meant to be received.
This was a great video- thank you for making it!
I find the story of Luther's rebellion against the Catholic Church to be very interesting history. I think Luther was the greatest of the reformers.
Whatever you do, don’t Google “Martin Luther 1543” - his last published book.
Imagine if some bohemian farmers revolted and defeated 5 crusades by vagons
Yeah, and eyeless general would lead them. Don't be crazy, Like that would ever happen.
@@Volnas97 yeah I know, but that is just theory
@@makrela1231 a film theory
Praise and glory to God. God Bless. Jesus Christ, is the name of God. He lives. Praise and Bless God's holy name.
Ah, you're one of these 'only Jesus!!!' fanatics, very funny.
Jesus is not god.
@@amazigh8776
The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution permits you to blaspheme Jesus Christ? But, I don't recommend it! Praise God. Jesus lives. As for your reply. Thanks.
@@sir.joshuarane.doebler3762 jesus is a prophet not a god
@@amazigh8776 jesus is jesus
But….Jesus gets them all! Catholics and everyone on that map! ❤
Jesus Christ: I want a United Church on Earth as in Heaven.
Protestants: So what your saying is 6K sects of Christianity?
Good one!
[1 Corinthians 12:27]
All of you together are Christ’s body, and each of you is a part of it.
-----------------------------------
If parts of Christ body go astray (that will say, some believers in Christ, and at that moment it was the Catholic church) the other parts tried to correct its brother. It took a too long time for many, so meanwhile lot of denominations arose. But as long as any of those denominations follow Christ and his teaching, they are a part of what makes up the body of Christ. Catholics are not the fullness of Christs body (as any believer in Christ is part of His body), the Catholics are however part of that body, when they believe and follow Christ.
@@JamesAsp 1 Corinthians 12:27-29
Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it. And God has appointed in the church first apostles, second prophets, third teachers, then workers of miracles, then healers, helpers, administrators, speakers in various kinds of tongues. Are all apostles? Are all prophets? Are all teachers? Do all work miracles?
All I have seen in Corinthians 12:27-29 is that all of Christ's followers are individually members of his Body. Then Paul goes onto state how each member of the Church has an individual role in the Church. No one is called to be all apostle, prophet, teacher, and miracle workers at once. Which it seems like in the Protestant Doctrine of Sola Scripture, they claim to be. No, you need ONE Church, which miracles are worked through.
Everyone is part of Christ's body. , the Catholic Church is where you find that body physically at work, promoting and glorifying God's name.
Those denominations all have a misunderstanding or a twisted version of Christ as there can only be ONE Truth. There cannot be a thousand truths. There can only be God, one God, that Truth is found in the Catholic Church which was founded on and by Christ. The other denominations might have some percentage of truth, hell even Satanists acknowledge the Eucharist as the Body of Christ when they steal and try to destroy it. But, why be in 50% or 75% truth when you can be in Full Truth in the Catholic Church.
@@pokenaut7803 You wrote: "is that all of Christ's followers are individually members of his Body."
Exactly, spot on.
--------------------------------------------------
[Romans 16:16]All the churches of Christ send greetings
Because, where did you take your quote you labeled as from Jesus? "Jesus Christ: I want a United Church on Earth as in Heaven."
@@JamesAsp Romans 16:16 is about all chruches, as in societies and cultures, coming together to welcome and worship Christ. An example of this is the Eastern Rites of the Catholic Church, who share their belief and faith in God, the only difference being the traditions they do, they are all subject to the Pope in Rome. They are under one Holy Apostolic Catholic Church.
Why would Catholics interpret it this way? Well, for one "churches" is not capitalized, it doesn't mean an actual Faith background like the Catholic or Eastern Orthodox Churches. Two, it goes back to both Tradition and the Acts of the Apostles.
In Gospels and the book of Acts, Jesus did three things that established the framework of His Church. First, He chose humans to carry out His work. He appointed Peter to be the visible head of the Church. Jesus said to Peter, "You are Rock and on this rock I will build my Church." (Matthew 16: 18) Jesus said "build," as in to create a structure. Jesus built His structure on specifically chosen human beings Peter and the apostles.
Second, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles the power and authority to carry out His work. "Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven."(Matthew 16:19; 18:18) "Receive the Holy Spirit, whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained."(John 20:23)
Third, Jesus gave Peter and the apostles commands as to what that work should be. At the last supper, He commanded, "Do this in memory of Me." (Luke 22:19) He commanded them to "Make disciples of all nations" (Matthew 28:19), and to "Go into the whole world and proclaim the Gospel to every creature." (Mark 16:15)
The early Church was structured in a hierarchical manner as it is today. We see in Acts, chapter 15 how the apostles and the elders came together under the leadership of St. Peter to decide the question of what was required of Gentiles. We also see how St. Peter was regarded as the head of the Church when St. Paul, "Went up to Jerusalem to confer with Kephas [Peter] and remained with him fifteen days." (Galatians 1:18)
In this way, we see that the Catholic Church has her roots as planted and still remains there.
Christ did establish one Church in which in Mattew he said to the Apostles " and teach them to observe all the commands I gave you. And look, I am with you always; yes, to the end of time." (Matthew 28:20) He promised the Apostles that He would be with them until the end of time. Meaning that the Chruch of Jesus Christ still exists today since the Chruch he established, is already seen operating in the book of Acts. If Apostle succession is to be believed, which it should be because the replaced Judas as a Bishop and added more Apostles later on like Paul, we only need to find who is Peter's successor as he was given authority over God's sheep.
Anyways, my point is in the joke, all Christians believe there was an early Church established by Christ and His Apostles. So according to Matthew 28, that Church should still be around today, so why have 400,000 sects of Christianity when Christ only created one.
Sorry if it was long, I wanted to get the full answer in.
Interesting as a Lutheran myself, my school never bothered to reach us about any of this
Matthew Reyes -- I was brought up in the Church of Christ and for a long time i thought it was Protestant. But only long after my family left it did i learn it was founded as a "Restoration" church, the Disciples of Christ, whose purpose was to restore "Christ's true church", which to its founders was none of the other Christian churches. As for the Lutheran Church, the radio show "A Prairie Home Companion" taught me far more about it and its culture in the Upper Midwest than i'd ever learned before.
And yet you still think you were taught 100% truth.
@@Salsuero No, i don't think that -- far from it.
@@atheodorasurname6936 I was talking to Matthew. I believe you.
@@Salsuero Okay 😇
Videoda ne anlatılıyor biri özetleyebilir mi?
Martin Luther’in protestanlık mezhebini nasıl yaydığıyla ilgili bilgi veriyor sanırım
Hiç bir şeymi anladın?
@@e.a9751 :(
About the three places of reformation, what is the health of protestant churches in those three three countries 2023 ?
Chaotic.
It's a great irony that although Martin Luther did all this purely out of religious zeal. He's a significant cog in the atheist movement
Acually, Luther is one of the few true Christians of his time, despite his flaws.
@J Kim I'm not a Luthern, but God bless Martin Luther, despite his faults, for:
1.Exposing The Vatican for what it really is as well as the vile popery.
2. Giving the German people a Bible they could read which eventually opened the Bible to everyone.
3. Exposed the selling of indulgences grift.
4. Gave us A Mighty Fortress Is Our God hymn.
5. And, most importantly, he taught the ultimate truth of the Word of God, the doctrine of justification by faith alone which is the central doctrine of the Christian life and that faith comes solely as a gift from God.
@J Kim Catholics kneel down and worship idols; pray to dead saints and Mary; are very superstitious, see apparations; believe in the silly brown scapular; believe their man-made traditions are equal to or superior to the Holy Spirit 's Word of God and tell their sins to gay and pedo priests.
@J Kim Prove it or admit I'm right.
@@johnbrowne3950 he was sincere, but he opened the floodgates to many Innovations in the religion and ultimately the washing down and secularisation of Christianity.
5:11
Pope: hey if you do that, I'll excommunicate you!
Henry viii: who cares man?
Pope: oh no! Apathy! My weakness!
Oversimplified reference?
@@kimmysalvadore3412 yes sir
@Artour Babiev and big harlots!!! Waiting in line to lose their heads to mr. Lecher!! Literally
@@davido3026 keep your legs shut ! Simple
Henry 8: Ok, I'll create religion for my people, but I'll remain Catholic and attend Mass!
Because they didn't have enough faith in God's wisdom. Peter was chosen to be the Rock of the Church eventhough Jesus knew Peter would deny Him 3 times. If from the start God chose a flawed man to succeed Him, what do you think God was trying to tell us?
Good question you should ask a local pastor.
The Catholics got what they deserved. They tried to place themselves in a role that only belongs to God.
@@inurmomsbedroom123 then you don’t understand the Papacy then because the pope isn’t in “GOD’S Place”. He is the second in command that is pastoring the church until Jesus returns! This practice existed goes back all the way to the Davidic Kingdom. If the King had to go away, he would leave in charge his steward which is what Christ( the heir of the throne of David) did with St.Peter!
@@mx_moi1964 They tried to convince everyone that the pope's signature on a scrap of paper would resolve them of sin.
The Catholic church is a fraud and an institution of Judas.
@@inurmomsbedroom123 wait what are you talking about? Give me more context plz! I would love to engage into a charitable discussion with you
You talked about three schisms and that Martin Luther was the second part.
At first I thought that the first was from King Gorge the 8th. But he was the third.
What was the first schism for fracture?
Martin Luther believed that Mary should be held in highest reverence, advocating the use of the first half of the Hail Mary (that is, "Hail Mary, full of grace, the Lord is with thee. Blessed art thou amongst women and blessed is the fruit of thy womb, Jesus.") as a sign of reverence for and devotion to the Virgin
Yeah in the beginning of his faith. Then he realized that wasn't correct. Oh my please always research what you research. Don't just take one source and run with it
I'm not a Christian but I find this very interesting
3 kinds of christianity evangelicals/ catholics/ and the rest that just celebrate the holy days and the rest of the time there tv is church/ difference Kingdom citizen are followers of Christ actually read what Christ came for... Read Acts for more
I hope Christ finds you.
"Polish-Lithuanian empire"
Alright, calm down Poland.
We never used that word, and to be honest it's the first time I see that political entity being called an 'empire'. It was a commonwealth.
why did you ignore the anabaptist and baptist which were an additional branching coming from that same time frame?
Here is something that doesn't make any sense to me. Henry VIII started the Church of England because he wanted a divorce. He was even divorced twice. However, since Henry VIII, the Church of England has taken a hard line against divorce. So we have a church started by a selfish king who wanted a divorce and doesn't want to allow divorce.
Exactly that's the reason he started the reformation it's called self gratification on his behalf,the reformation caused alot of collateral damage.the catholic church is the one true church that christ established on earth nearly 2000 years ago,all other religions are a cut off from the catholic church,check the dates out when all other religions came in to play,you don't have to be a mathematician to work it out.God bless
Very interesting 🧐 & I enjoy hearing a different view of the information. Thank You 😊
03:00 luther insists only the bible itself should be viewed as the only reliable source of information.. then proceeds to edit the bible and make a protestant version to suit his newly created religious dogmas.
A classic
All one has to do is read the New Testament to understand the problems with Catholicism. There are genuine Christians within the RCC but the institution is rife with man made doctrines and traditions that are a mixture of pagan and Christianity. If you read the OT, God really hates this and calls it spiritual fornication and rebukes the Jews over it throughout the OT. Yes Catholics, I hear you, this does not make protestant perfect, far from it. But the basis of Christianity and sound doctrine is the Bible according to Jesus and the Apostles and the early church.
We now have countless copies of the entire NT that are nearly 2000 years old in the original Greek. We KNOW for a fact the words have not been changed.
amen
He even wanted to take out james, cause there's the famous verse in james that says and i'm paraphrasing badly here but that, having faith alone isn't enough but that you must also have good works in conjunction with the faith that your'e supposed to have.
Edit: yea i'm a bad paraphraser, here's the original section from james mentioning it which shows, even the bible was against Luther and his teaching, so luther was in heresy, aka a heretic. *14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good[a] is that? 17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.*
Martin Luter in the letter to Philip Melanchthon writes: "Be a sinner and sin hard, but believe and admire even harder in Christ... He took on himself all the sins of this world, therefore don't afraid to sin. Even if we will fornicate and murder thousands times a day, it will be forgiven by His grace." (My translation)
This statement I call - The Golden Rule of The Protestant Church.
I would consider an insult if someone calls me a christian.
'Henry VIII triggered the reformation for both religious and political reasons' - I admire you for saying that with a straight face, I guess it sounds better than saying the started a national church because his genitals were severely damaged by syphilis and he was unable to father several male children.
Henry VIII did not lead a reformation. He made the church in England autonomous from Rome because the latter would not allow him an annulment. Unlike Luther and Calvin, he had no doctrinal differences with the Catholic Church. He even considered himself defender of the faith. That makes Anglicans some kind of third way between Catholics and Protestant.
@Murray David basically Catholics but with divorce
@@AndrewCMC Nope. There is/was no divorce in the Anglican church -- Henry VIII never divorced anyone. He got annulments from the Anglican church -- just like those given by the Roman church.
@@otsoko66 it’s an old joke
It's always fun how everyone tends to focus on Luther because Calvin and Zwingli were basically protestant taliban.
Yes, extremes of fundamentalism are present in every religion.
Absolutely right !
Also probably because Luther's views on protestantism and the theology it influenced is the most widely held view today. Calvinism is around and has produced some great theologians. But is a more minority view.
@@elijahcademartori9854 Sure but reducing the Reformation to Luther is like reducing the Beatles to Paul McCartney. But I get it, no Protestant really wants to be associated with the fundamentalist bigotry of Knox, Calvin or Zwingli or their equally overzealous puritan successors like Cromwell...
In a nutshell Luther was sick of the Catholic Churches BS and posted something on the newsfeed of his day and people agreed then he started doing stuff about it
"sick of the Catholic Churches BS"
Lol, this context was put in a nutshell? Counter argument?
Catholic Church ain’t the bad guys, Look up more on Martin Luther before being so one sided and demonizing the church.
First and foremost Luther wanted to get married and still preach.
He ended up having three wives.
People should really learn more about the true nature of Luther before demonizing the Catholic church.
@@davidescobar5366 He also wanted to take out Psalms and Proverbs out of the Bible. Isn’t that crazy? The two most common books Protestants like to preach about at their sermons, hm.
@@uriel6873 didn't know that but it is crazy.
Short summary
Luther gave his life to God after he promised he would love for God if he survived a storm
He did
He then studied the bible and noticed that there were some things in the Catholic church that were unbiblical
He wrote 95 co plants he had with the Catholic church and explained what they should teach instead.
But the catholics hated this and martin luther hid
Martin Luther was the biggest heretic known to man lol. The blatant idea that sola scripture is true is quite literally the most false teaching ever 😂 Basically teaches that even though St Peter was a Pope he himself has no authority for the teachings of Jesus other than what is in the Bible
Great video! Loved the understatement: "Today, though, the relationship between the Western churches is remarkably better than it once was."
only because they all cease to take doctrine seriously, IOW they do not care what they do believe or should believe.
but where there are enclaves of both cath and prot who do take doctrine seriously the enmity is as if the 30 years was never ended. I have seen these outfits - websites and churches
Belfast = "Hold My Beer"
Its not better, its just that religion has been clearly disproven and most westerners have no interest in it, its just a shame we still have silly people that are sticking to their nonsense and bringing it to the west again for us to all deal with just as we were moving away from it
Not sure if everyone is aware in the early Catholic churches services, and "the bible" were in Latin, not one's native tongue of German, or Spanish etc. That might have been one little issue with the Catholic church Protestants had. At Sunday service they had no idea what the priests were talking about. That sounds like fun.
Yeah and most priests weren’t very fluent in Latin so services were mostly Latinish gibberish for a few hours every Sunday. Hard to believe people wanted something different
How many were able to read by themself? People were illiterate.
@@koppite9600 the point is it could at the very least have been read in the language they spoke.
@@Becky-ly4kh
Any Christian is to do what the church says, not what seems good.
@@koppite9600 so Christian’s were to let their priests tell them to pay large amounts to get to heaven, having their priests not let them take full communion because they wanted the wine to themselves, meanwhile their priest was participating in immoral lifestyles? Man is corrupt but God’s word isn’t hence why the Catholic Church got more and more corrupt. They didn’t want people knowing what the Bible said because it would mean they could no longer control them.
“See to it that no one takes you captive by philosophy and empty deceit, according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.” Colossians 2:8
“And he said to them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, “‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me; in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men.” And he said to them, “You have a fine way of rejecting the commandment of God in order to establish your tradition!” Mark 7: 6-9
We need God’s word as our only authority so it means we can discern when corruption comes into any Church and cut it off. The body of Christ is the believers not a literal building.
“All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16
Why is Ireland a majority Catholic country called "England" in the visuals?PS : Tudors did not conquer Ireland until the 17th century completely! I described the early reformation on other history sites as a land grab by nobles and others where the poor suffered most after the destruction of the monostries Henry 8th remained doctrinally a Catholic most of England was Catholic in the early reformation but bludgeoned into protestantism simply because the rich /powerful succumbed to Henrys wiles in their own interests!
I agree. Even after the complete conquering of Ireland by the English, the name Ireland didn't go away. A subjugated nation I'll agree but the name Ireland wiped off the map, wtf. Same should apply to Wales as well.
@@teviottilehurst Wales has only ever existed as a unified kingdom separate to England for 45 years in the history of Britain as an island. It’s been a principality of England for centuries and England has had territory in what is now called Wales since before William the Conqueror won in 1066. It’s not comparable in the slightest to Ireland.
Ireland is a region of england
@@tomben6180
Which explains the lack of representation of Wales on the Union Flag. The Irish saltire is there.
@@adventussaxonum448 Absolutely, in 1707 and 1801 when the Union flag was introduced and then the Irish Saltire added, retrospectively, Wales was just seen as a region in the Kingdom of England. Ireland was never thought of as such.
Very Good Presentation
Very disappointed that political factors were ignored. Also, there were 12 German translations before Luther attempted his own. By the catholic church.
One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church .
Are you still calling catholic holy despite the millions of innocent people the system sent to graves?
@@stephen-S7nYou must ignore how many Protestants sent to graves
And thus the Habsburg's ambition to unite HRE went down the drain as more and more members convert and the imperial authority plummets down to zero
vassal swarm op
Even the early years of the HRE they were pretty decentralized
Thank your for the valuable content. A slight correction: The printed press was invented not discovered.
A big correction. No man invents anything!
All ideas/knowledge comes from God as the Bible says no man can take glory for anything!
When God thinks its the correct time to introduce new technology in the chronology of human existence, then He allows it
Don't exhalt yourself or any other man
I read that Martin Luther slept in the same bed for 40 years. That is without the sheets or blankets being changed. I guess you could tell easily when he was nearby.
That's called an ad hominem attack. It's particularly useful when you can't argue the actual facts.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr Maybe but true all the same.
@@Volleyball_Chess_and_Geoguessr You also totally ignored my previous comment about Luther's philosophical position. My comment about his personal habits was by the way. In effect it is you who is being ad hominen by being very selective in your comment. Henry Vlll was given the title Defender of the Faith by the Pope following his early defence of Catholic doctrine. You can still see this title on British coins to this day.
@@doubleplusgoodthinker9434 "I know you are but what am I?"
Germany had Luther, Switzerland had Zwingli and Calvin, Scotland had John Knox, England had the Bible, but Ireland benefited from all
Could you expand your thoughts?
In Scotland, followers of Know throw the Eucharist on the ground and spit on it. He spat in the Face of Christ HIMSELF. I wonder if that dirt bad and a lot of others like in the rest of England that murder Catholic for over 100 years are really in Heaven or Hell. they rejected HIM on earth. did they do that when they died as well????
England had the Bible. And today English speaking people only acknowledge the King James version of the Bible...??? Why is that??? My Bible is not a King James Bible, but I can read The Bible and learn the same as they can. Or will God only save people with a King James Bible ?????🤔🤔🤔😅😅😅😅😂😂😂😊❤😎👍👌
As a Belgian I know that our country was a battlefield between the Spanish troops and the rebellious militia of the Netherlands 🇳🇱.
After we separated from the Netherlands 🇳🇱 mainly because we were Christians and the Dutch were Calvinists.
But I didn't know how these Protestants became seoarate from the Catholic Church. Thank you for the video.
I think it was the story about a pregnant married virgin riding a donkey at christmas that was just too much
You were Roman Catholics some of the Dutch were Calvinist. All were Christians.
@@alsoascot02
It's true. I keep forgetting that the Church ruled our country for so many years.
Their propaganda is still in my system.
Belgium is home to the meeting of the disgusting european union, how can they allow that to go on knowing the damage they have done to countries and push their globalist left wing agenda. Where are the Belgians outside protesting or asking for the removal of a government that seeks to pass laws on other countries and peoples and restrict them at will.
Thanks for the channel.🐬🐬🐬