I wouldn’t argue the point. There are instead various (sadly too many) traditions within the one True Church
I was raised in a United Presbyterian church. They adopted the Revised Standard Translation as their official Bible as soon as it was produced in 1948.
Steve, you’re taking this from Beggars All. James Swan was reacting to what Pacwa said; he cannot be the source of Pacwa’s claim.
The 1995 book Swan referenced on his site is pretty much the only source that has ever made such an accusation against Luther. That book, as Swan notes, was written by a maxillofacial surgeon. Not exactly a theologian or historian. Furthermore, the point of that surgeon’s book was to retroactively diagnose Luther with various afflictions. Pseudoscience, at best; anti-Luther propaganda, at worst. And his source for claiming Luther killed another man? One single sentence in the second-hand Table Talks, interpreted in a way no one else ever had.
That Pacwa would repeat such a spurious claim demonstrates either a pre-existing anti-Luther bias, or ignorance of historical evidence. In either case, he is not to be considered an expert on Martin Luther.
And sadly too many willing to defend ALL THOSE TRADITIONS outside the one True Church.
Sadly, you and me and all of us.
Swain was apparently pointing to the book that made the claim Luther was in a duel and killed his friend. The real question is, did Fr Pacwa really say what he is accused of saying?
As you know, I don’t defend the divisions that happened.
Which he was only made aware of after hearing Pacwa’s strange claim. Goodness, I hope James is around to comment on this soon. The book is dubious enough. The author’s credentials are lacking. It cannot be considered reliable in any sense. It is an outlier.
No, and this is evidence we’ve gone too far down this rabbit hole. The root point was not a question, but a simple truth: one cannot determine factual history from a single, contemporary source – much less a single, contemporary source who cites dubious works by unqualified researchers with an ax to grind!
I think we’re saying the same thing, just saying it differently
Then count me relieved to re-read your post in that light.
I hope others in this thread consider reading multiple reputable sources for historical fact, rather than simply accepting one person’s word because it fits their narrative.
Good grief, JonNC! All of the Protestant churches. Lutherans were the first Protestants. The father of Protestantism is Martin Luther.
As for their communion, I never took part in it. So I can’t answer that question.
And yet you have been told repeatedly that plenty of English-speaking Protestants use other translations.
Technically speaking, I’m not sure that Anglicans, Methodists, and Episcopalians are strictly Protestant. They didn’t grow out of the Reformation. They grew out of the split under Henry VIII.
I noticed that last night on the CNN miniseries on the Pope, in their “family tree” of the Catholic Church, they split the Anglicans and their descendants off from Protestantism as a whole and didn’t branch them under the Protestant Reformation.
Maybe someone with a lot more knowledge can clarify that for me. Is the strictest definition of “Protestant” one that specifies having been born of the Luther-driven Reformation, or just someone who disagrees with/split from Catholicism? I’ve always heard and understood it to be more the former. Because then technically the Easterns are essentially Protestant, are they not?
Serious question. It’s confused me for a while and if someone has flat out defined it, I missed that post.
Did I by chance, see a change in your profile after Sunday?
We just went through multiple posts in this thread proving that Lutherans do not use KJV worldwide and only used to temporarily in the US, the Anglicans use whatever, so do the Methodists and the Presbyterians. Several Protestants and ex-Protestants have reported this from their perspective.
That’s four fairly large mainline Protestant denominations not using the KJV at all or only in combination with other translations.
To still claim all Protestants use the KJV and that anything else is unthinkable makes it seem like we were all speaking to deaf ears.
You did indeed.
It was the first thing I did before finally getting to bed.
I’m enjoying the word “they” in relation to “everyone else”.
And as you know, neither do I.
Then your statement about Protestant churches using the KJV, posted again below, in incorrect.
Until I became continuing Anglican, I never, in over 60 years, saw a Lutheran Mass, Matins, or Vespers using the KJV.
I saw RSV, NIV, and ESV. The first bible I owned was RSV. I own an ESV with the DCs, a copy of Luther’s Die Bibel, an NKJV, a paraphrase from college days known as “The Way”, and a copy the KJV.
As for Luther being the “Father of Protestantism “, that is more a comment about chronology, not leadership. Most communions commonly known as Protestant have very little in common with Luther, particularly regarding the sacraments.
I recommend you read the book “Purgatory Illustrated by the Lives and Legends of the Saints”