The Renaissance started in the 1300s.
The reformation started in the 1500s.
The reformation did not cause the renaissance.
Protestants ruined Christianity.
Protestants are literally retarded and gay.
Most of today's problems can be traced back to the reformation.
God had to call Joseph Smith to stop the damage that the protestants were causing.
You can't refute this because you know it is true.
SOLA SCRIPTURE, SOLA FIDE, and all the other SOLA's are complete and utter lies. Ask any Catholic, they've been trying to tell you protestants this for centuries now. Maybe you should pay a little attention to what they have to say hummm?
Perhaps I should clarify. It was with the advent of the printing press that the completed Bible was distributed far beyond the Churches themselves, and made it much more open to "interpretation" by people who had no business doing so.
>Rome being in apostasy now ≠ Rome being in apostasy then. I have nothing but respect for the early church fathers.
The entity founded by those very same Church fathers is still in operation today, in some places of the country. Even the occasional mainline Catholic church still practices the old ways, but there are some valiant splinter groups such as the SSPX still carrying on the true Faith. But rest assured, this is not the end. The true Faith will be restored for all someday. Our modern woes are only temporary.
>The fact that they consider certain objects, locations, and people to have in them more of the presence of God than others
Well that's just the truth. Relics, holy sites, and the saints or the Holy Ones of God by *default* have to have at least some stronger degree of the presence of God in them.
>When the ‘nation’ in question was burning them at the stake for exposing that corruption…
I do think that the early protestant reformers had the best of intentions at heart. But their main problem was the sheer amount of division and disunity they created, which brought about unimaginable consequences that are blatantly visible in the world around us today. Lack of trust in Christian authority, lack of trust in the Christian system, lack of trust in the Christian scriptures. Remove the mortar holding the brick wall together and it will invariably crumble. While I would prefer not to see it at all, I would have still rather seen good people burned at the stake than the complete inversion and destruction of Christendom. One of the main causes for the complete abandonment of God and the ongoing destruction in the modern "christian" system is as a result of this. It is no coincidence that the judeo-bolsheviks *self-testified* that the united methodists were the easiest organization to subvert and lead astray while the Knights of Columbus were the hardest.
While this is correct, it’s a personal failing on the part of church leaders to have allowed these interpretations to be practiced as doctrine—not a failing on the part of society or individuals in reading the Bible directly. Given that the papacy forbade personal Bible ownership, and the Bible says that one’s relationship with God is personal…
> The entity founded by those very same Church fathers is still in operation today, in some places of the country.
Even with that conditional, I’m not sure I can let that statement slide. Vatican II has to be abandoned completely, but the rot set in long before that.
>there are some valiant splinter groups such as the SSPX still carrying on the true Faith.
I’ve heard decent things about them.
> But rest assured, this is not the end. The true Faith will be restored for all someday. Our modern woes are only temporary.
“Temporary is too damned long.” ~ some 1960s pop singer, probably
> Relics, holy sites, and the saints or the Holy Ones of God by default have to have at least some stronger degree of the presence of God in them.
Why? That spits in the face of doctrine. To say that God is somewhere *more* than somewhere else is to say that God is somewhere *less* than somewhere else. God has abandoned none of His creation. He is the only egalitarian who ever will be. Relics and holy sites are a matter of *human* historicity. They’re more important in that respect, in the same way that the Mona Lisa is more important than anything done by ✡[El Lissitzky](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/NY_Moma_lissitsky_19D.JPG)✡. I have no less respect for a holy site or relic than another site or object. Indeed, I have more, because they’re important from a historic perspective. They’re just not more important form a doctrinal perspective. That becomes idol worship.
> Lack of trust in Christian authority, lack of trust in the Christian system, lack of trust in the Christian scriptures.
I would argue that the ✡translations✡ of the last century did more in that respect than in the 1500s.
>I would have still rather seen good people burned at the stake than the complete inversion and destruction of Christendom.
Fucking thank you. Breath of fresh air. I was reading a Reddit thread a little while ago where all of them supported keeping child rapists alive for life—paid for by innocent taxpayers—rather than kill them under any circumstances.
Lot of people we have to kill these days. We’re not ready for it.
I mean, the stake burnings were apart of that, they just generally weren't well received by the people being torched...
>Vatican II has to be abandoned completely, but the rot set in long before that
I completely agree. And it *will* be a mortal blow to the Catholic Church if left unresolved (which is exactly how I know it *will* be resolved, eventually). But when you say 'long', I get the feeling you don't mean 30 years or so, which is when the judeo-bolshevik organized infiltration and subversion of the Church can be traced to. In my mind, that is the very start, in the '20s and '30s.
>I’ve heard decent things about them.
I'm telling you man, look into it. I've been to the SSPX's new flagship Cathedral and it is a night and day difference from anything else. Even surpassing the best of the mainline New World Order Catholic parishes or the still-existing TLM parishes (although they can be pretty close in some regards)
>“Temporary is too damned long.”
I get it man, I really do. It is not easy to persevere for 5, 10, 20, 50, or even 100 years or more to get what you want. But we're White people; it's what we do. Jesus never said that everything would be easy.
>To say that God is somewhere more than somewhere else is to say that God is somewhere less than somewhere else.
God is not a zero-sum game, leftism and the lies of leftism is. God is far beyond that.
>They’re just not more important form a doctrinal perspective. That becomes idol worship.
I'm not saying you have to make an annual pilgrimage to mecca or whatever, I'm merely saying that the *actual* places that Jesus lived and breathed and worked miracles are still around today. The *actual* place where He rose from the dead is here, on earth with us, and you could go there if you wanted. They're just infested with kikes currently and are in dire need of liberation. But putting that aside, holding such places in higher regard than places elsewhere is merely a sign of respect worthy of a person of such high stature.
>I would argue that the ✡translations✡ of the last century did more in that respect than in the 1500s.
Well sure, they didn't help. But protestantism naturally devolved into non-denominationalism (which is *considerably* worse than mainline protestantism theologically speaking as I'm sure you'd agree) in less than 500 years while it took Catholicism approximately 1,932 years to fall. Which track record is better, would you say?
>Lot of people we have to kill these days. We’re not ready for it.
Speak for yourself buddy. You've had all the time in the world to prepare.
Right! So to say that God is somewhere more than He is somewhere else feels “limiting” to me. We hear about an omnipotent being and we intrinsically want to put limits on what it can do because we’re incapable of truly comprehending the scope of anything infinite. It’s an insult to God to say He’s not somewhere “as much” as He is somewhere else. He is everywhere in equal (infinite) measure.
>Which track record is better, would you say?
I care more about the absolute dead silence with respect to the jews coming out of any branch of Christianity (or “christianity”) in any form. What if we’re looking at all this the wrong way? What if mending the Great Schism isn’t about enforcing one or the other interpretation of *filioque* onto the rest of Christendom. What if mending the Great Schism starts with naming the jew and killing them all, bringing other Christians into the fold–no matter their background–along the way?
>Speak for yourself buddy.
I’ll speak collectively. Whites are too empathic for our own good. It’s a genetic defect. When faced with a group of cowering children of the other species of humanity, having already killed the adults, what percentage of random whites *actually* has the will to say, *“Nits make lice.”* and start up his flamethrower again? Not enough of us. I’ll tell you that right now. Our ground state of being is seemingly “leaving the exact same problems for our grandchildren.” And that’s just *all* whites collectively. What percentage of Christians has the will to look at a group of cowering *jews* (of any age) on their knees saying, *"אני מאמין בכל לבי שישוע המשיח הוא בן האלוהים!”* and reply, *“Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius.”*
In the face of our own racial cowardice, how can I not feel the way I feel?