Did the reformation hurt Christendom?
Before the reformation, most of the known world was Catholic(Universal Christian), Greek Orthodox or Roman Catholic. The reformation resulted millions of deaths on both sides. The Bible was re-assembled giving way to confusion and needless doubts and debates about our Faith. The reformation started a Christian civil war. The U.S hates Catholics and most of Western Europe hates Protestants, especially in N. Ireland. Instead of ONE Church of Christ, built on the rock of Peter's Faith 2,000 years ago, there are now 40,000 different Protestant Churches in the U.S alone. With no hierarchy Protestant Churches can do and teach whatever they please which led to fake tongue speakers, snake charmers, mega churches, televangelists seeking money for prayers, and worst of all the misinterpretation of the Scriptures... I know there are always good and bad aspects to everything, but wouldn't it be nice to be under one flag again? I've witnessed first hand Protestant children being taught that Catholics are evil. I don't think that's what Christ would have wanted.
How did the Catholic Church respond to the Protestant Reformation?
Well, initially, they said "This is awful. Can we just let these heretics teach what they want? No. Can we just let people leave the Catholic Church if that's what they want to do? No!" So it (the Church) took a variety of steps to force people out of Protestantism, which partly included laws against practicing it.Essentially though, the goal of the Catholic response was to install Catholic rulers in every important position who would ensure that Protestantism is illegal and that people who attempt to spread Protestant teaching are expelled or killed or silenced. Something along those lines.After much fighting though, Catholic and Protestant rulers worked out the Peace of Westphalia, which ensured that Lutheranism and Calvinism would be recognized as legitimate expressions of Christianity and that local rulers could determine the religion of their realm. It also laid the groundwork for the modern nation-state, we now all basically live in nation-states that relate with each other under an expectation of Westphalian sovereignty. Zelo Domus Dei was the name of the papal bull that condemned Westphalia and forbade Catholic rulers from recognizing it- that particular pope really wanted to keep fighting until the coercive power of the Church was once again absolute. But the bull was ignored by everyone and treated as if it didn't exist. That was a good day.
Christians in Rwandan Genocide - what happened?
Is it true that Pope Jp II actually helped priests who murdered people leave the country, and he didn't want charges against them? What role did Christians play in the genocide?
Why do Jehovah's Witnesses, find tithing at a church a bad thing?
Every time I talk with a Jehovah's Witness they always bring up the subject of tithing. They will say " well at least we do not pass a plate or tithing basket". Why is this such a subject with JW's. Don't they know that tithing is in the bible? A JW lady once said to me " You are forced to tithe and also people look at you and judge you, by how much you put in". I laughed, because I never have been forced to tithe and never have I felt that someone was counting how much I put in. Plus I never have even heard that from fellow church attendees. I mean the basket comes by , I either put in a check or I don't and the basket go on it's little mary way. The moment it passes I forget about it and I am back to listening the praise music. I don't turn around a bug my eye out to see who is putting in what.. That is ridiculous...NOBODY CARES how much you put in. I tithe because I want to, not because I have too. Tithing doesn't save anyone or grant you any membership into Heaven, but if I want to do it I can or if I don't , It really makes no difference. I just don't see how and act of worship such as tithing in church is chalked up as a bad thing by Jehovah's Witnesses. I don't understand the point the JW is trying to get across when using that example as a reason why they are the only true church? Care to explain?
Christians and Jehovah's Witnesses is smoking a disfellowshipping offense? If so can you provide proof?
You said it when you state that the WT practice of disfellowshiping for this "non-Biblically-addressed" offense, is Harsh, and legalistic. If a man or woman chooses to defile their physical body with an "immoderate" use of ANY substance, it is at the discretion of this human to decide what amount he or she will use, not because of the edicts of any old crotchety old men, dictating their own limits of sin amongst the members of any church. I abhor cigarettes, cigars, and pipes as well, because they can all be damaging, and dirty to deal with. However, the use of "Alcohol" is seemingly left out of the sin-room here....it is as damaging to the liver, heart and mind of the user as cigarettes are, when NOT USED IN MODERATION. I personally knew a LARGE number of Jehovah's Witnesses who were heavy drinkers, and users of depression meds. When a habit like cigarettes is attacked by the "organization", it is because it is a "Visible" sin, one that others can judge the WTBTS's, clean, "outside of the cup" presentation of their members . The other "unseen"sins, like being a drunkard, or dependent on drugs, and pedophilia, are very conveniently "dealt with" (Hidden), at the congregation level...sometimes. Growing a beard, (not allowed in jehovah's witnesses),which is based on Joseph Rutherford's hatred of Charles Taze Russell and his beard, is also outlawed as a "sin" by the legalistic JW's. Jehovah's Witnesses, as well as many other churches of Christendom, are guilty of washing the outside of the cup, while the inside is full of disgusting things. Hypocrites. I have more love for a Christian that smokes a pipe, and declares that Jesus is come in the flesh, than in 10,000 JW's with their Michael the Archangel fantasy-land doctrines. YES, THIS SHOULD BE A MATTER OF CONSCIENCE ALONE!
Jehovah's Witnesses: Why did you used to teach that black people would turn white?
Watchtower 1904 February 15 pp.52-53 “Can the Ethiopian change his skin?” “What the Ethiopian cannot do for himself God could readily do for him. The difference between the races of men and the differences between their languages have long been arguments against the solidarity of the human family. The doctrine of restitution has also raised the question. How could all men be brought to perfection and which color of skin was the original? The answer is now provided. God can change the Ethiopian’s skin in his own due time. Prof. H. A. Edwards, Supt. of Schools in Slater, Mo., has written for the public press an elaborate description of how Julius Jackson, of New Frankfurt, Mo., a ***** boy of nine years, began to grow white in September, 1901, and is now fully nine-tenths white. He assures us that this is no whitish skin disease; but that the new white skin is as healthy as that of any white boy, and that the changed boy has never been sick and never has taken medicines" I was appalled when I first read this. Why would God select a religion that was teaching this nonsense? How can you justify this?