who were the post lutheran reformers?
87870
I think that you mean post Luther reformers, not post Lutheran.  The Lutheran religion was not really ever "established" until many years after Luther's death.  Philip Melancthon was instrumental in the establishment of the "Lutheran" religion.  Martin Luther himself was rolling over in his grave at the notion of a religion named after himself.\nJust about all of the reformers either worked with Luther or incorporated some of Luther's orginal thoughts into their own separation from the Catholic Church.  Luther himself never wanted seperation, he wanted to "reform" the church... hence Protestant "Reformation."  \nAnyway, Andreas Carlstadt was instrumental in the Ana-baptist movement (Presbyterianism), John Calvin, John Wesley (Methodism), Henry III (Anglicanism/Episcopalean), Ulrich Zwingli (Swiss-Anabaptist), Johann Tetzel (credited for Luther's Inspiration), John Knox (Presbyterianism), and Thomas Muentzer (Peasant's War).\nHere is a pretty thorough article on your topic:\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation\nI hope that this helps.\n-Super
692379
Though I would disagree with the statement as written, what it means is as follows:\n\nDuring a period of church history known as The Protestant Reformation, the Lutheran Church as we know it broke away from The Roman Catholic Church.  A fellow by the name of Martin Luther (not to be confused with the more recent activist Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King, Jr.) had famously nailed 95 theses to the door of the church.  These theses were intellectual challenges of certain church practices and dogma.  While this may sound like a bold move, in truth there was little all that flamboyant about it.  Church doors in that place and time were also used as community bulletin boards and many people nailed notices and documents to them the way we post bills in urban areas today.  The 95 theses were little more than 95 topics of discussion for debate he'd hoped to bring attention to.  Martin Luther never had the notion of beginning a new form of the Christian religion.\n\nPerhaps the most noteworthy of the questions dealt with the then Roman Catholic Church practice of selling indulgences.  This was a transitive notion that depending on where one was either got enforced as an abuse to a large degree or got used as a quick little means of acceptance.  That's to say that people who paid the church money got absolution for sins from clergy right away, something Roman Catholics believe is necessary to enter the kingdom of heaven.  It was a practice that dated back hundreds of years in different forms and that segregated those who could pay from those who could not as if sin was a matter of barter.  Martin Luther wished to debate the practice, perhaps even eliminate it.\n\nWell, having gone so strictly against church policy, the simple questions turned into a grandiose argument that sent ripples through the Christian world without end.  The church was just too powerful to fight.  Martin Luther received the brunt of the fallout.  However, it wasn't until an almost unrelated incident, years later, when a reigning Pope excommunicated the entire nation of Germany from the church, that the people there rose up and basically said, "Hey, we don't need your church, we can follow the teachings of this guy over here, Martin Luther."  All of a sudden Luther's questions and assertions had followers.  They built their own churches, patterned after what they knew from Roman Catholicism.  They acquired their own clergy and a few practices that differed slightly from RC but ultimately fell in line with what Martin Luther had pointed out.  Though not the Protestant religion, Lutherans had much to do with the protestant movement (Protestant Reformation), a second schism away from the church after the Great Schism had divided the RC church into Eastern and Western centuries earlier..\n\nAttending a Lutheran church ceremony differs little from a Roman Catholic ceremony in the same season.  There are usually fewer images of Christ and saints, prefering a simple cross and a greater focus on the WORD.  Roman Catholics recognize seven practices as sacraments while Lutherans recognize only five.  Many of the songs are exactly the same, but sung to different tunes.  The Lutheran hierarchy goes up to bishops or so while the Roman Catholic hierarchy extends all the way to the Pope.  Lutheran churches tend to be a little smaller.  Roman Catholics traditionally go to Confession in a dark and quiet private booth called a Confessional while Lutherans tend to simply confess all their sins in a single, common sentence during part of the ceremony.  Both believe in pretty much the same versions of Christ's story and both have similar formats of services.  There’s an academic question over transubstantiation, but one of little note to a person practicing neither religion.\n\nIn recent years, post Vatican II, the similarities between the two have gotten even closer to the naked eye.  That's to say that the Roman Catholic Church has extended c
469015
I was raised as a Christian, because my Dad is a Lutheran pastor.  I follow the Bible explicitly, but I do study other religions in order to better debate with people.
375117
(From your hint, I take it the answer you want is #3 below, but I'll fill in the details nonetheless.)\n\nIt all depends on which "English" you are referring to\n\n1) OLD English -- there are several who translated at least parts of the Bible into Old English from the 7th to 9th centuries, beginning with the Venerable Bede.\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_English_Bible_translations\n\n2) MIDDLE English -- this one, already mentioned, was a translation from the Latin Vulgate by John Wycliff in the 1380s.  (Also note the important role Wycliff's persecuted followers, the "Lollards" played in setting the stage for the Reformation in England\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_English_Bible_translations\n\n3) MODERN English -- the great century of early Modern English translations begins with William Tyndale's work, first made public with the publication of his New Testament translated from Greek (with some help/influence from Luther's slightly earlier German translation).  As you hint, by the time his Old Testament (from the Hebrew) came out, he was burned at the stake (1536).  Of course, in the following decades a number of English versions came out, culminating in the half new translation, half revision 'King James Version' in 1611 -- but ALL of them owe a great deal to Tyndale's work \n\nAs a matter of factd, many of the expressions that the KJV is credited with bringing into the English language actually go back to Tyndale, which makes him, together with Shakespeare, one of the two great shapers of modern English (analogous to Luther's influence on Modern German through his Bible translation.\nhttp://www.hertford.ox.ac.uk/alumni/tyndale.htm\n\nBut, speaking of Shakespeare, the story about his name being hidden in the Psalms [Psalm 46, actually] as a clue that he either helped translate or that the translators wished to honor him -- whichever version of the story you've heard-- is, sad to say, pure bunkum.  There are a number of things that tell against it (see links below for more), but probably the strongest points are"\n(a) the count doesn't even work unless you arbitrarily leave out the word "Selah" which in the KJV is treated as a regular part of the text\n(b) the Hebrew words for "shake" and "spear" were there in the Psalm all along, and translated this way in pre-King James translations back to Tyndale (many before Shakespeare was even born!)\nhttp://av1611.com/kjbp/ridiculous-kjv-bible-corrections/psalm-46-Shakespeare-in-KJV.html\nhttp://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1828
215670
Martin Luther started the reformation because he didn't agree with some of the things the hierarchy of the catholic religion were doing. So he formed the Lutherans with a new priority list of things that are more important for salvation. One example is the Catholics believe that Mary was created without original sin so she could be the vessel to carry our Lord and the Lutherans feel that the only person born w/out original sin was Christ himself.
1134490
NO there are many many-- they are organized but not that well. I know of two who like in Gullipulli who have as little as possible to do with the others. They are now TRUE Christians.\n\nThey do other things now!!!! See below for all info.
458237
Martin Luther, the founder of the Lutheran religion, was German.  Martin Luther King, Jr., the civil rights advocate, was American.  Sheesh!
690316
Martin Luther posted 95 Theses on the church door in 1517.\n\nJoan of Arc lived from 1412 to 1431 about 100 years before Protestants got started therefore she was a Catholic.\n\nWith love in Christ.
842796
Well, there was David Friedrich Strauss, but as far as I can find he only claimed that Jesus was not divine. I'll keep searching and see if there was another who went further.
220336
Historically speaking that would be the Anglican church. When Henry viii wanted to divorce Catherine to marry Anne, he left the church. Their daughter Elizabeth was forced to fully convene the Anglican church so that she could continue having the  backing of religon so as to appease her people and prevent civil war. \n\nMartin Luther did not want to break away from the Catholic church. He only wanted the people who were the leaders to reform from practices such as papal indulgences etc.
961276
Yes, and so will the Lutherans and Christians in many other churches, as well.  \n\nLong long ago, before our churches split apart, some scholars put together a three-year liturgical cycle.  Readings from the gospels are matched up with readings on a similar theme from the old testament and from the epistles and acts of the apostles.   \n\nIt's a pretty good system, so many of the churches decided to keep it even after they split apart from the Catholic Church.  \n\nThis Advent we will begin Year C.
654757
there have been a number of reform movements in history.  the most likely ones you might be talking about are The Protestant Reformation or the social reform movement of the 19th century that followed on the heels of the industrial revolution.
199396
I've been slowly studying it for a long period of time, picking up pieces here and there.  I can't give you a complete account, but I can give you a rundown:\n\nThe vessel that God used to initiate this "movement" was John Wesley.  His brother and helper was Charles Wesley, the famous hymn writer.  \n\nEngland at this time had come past the Reformation...not very changed, because of all the politics involved (such as King Henry VIII dabbling into making his own "Anglican" church).  With a few exceptions (such as John Knox) the Reformation in England had man's handprints all over it...\n\nThus, God's spirit was hindered from moving and the moral atmosphere was poor both inside and outside the Church.  \n\nGod used John Wesley to preach "holiness" to his listeners and had a "method" for seeking God.  This was not a Martin Luther "We are justified by faith" movement (which I also believe God initiated), but a "We need to clean up our act" movement.  \n\nIronically, while Wesley was intensely protestant, some saw him as a traitor trying to bring back the law, tradition and rituality of the catholic church.  Wesley did not bring in dead ritual and men's traditions; He sought God's will with a fury on moral issues and preached his findings to his adherents.  Also note that on certain issues he was incredibly liberal compared to his times:  when pastors wouldn't let him preach in their buildings, he simply preached in fields!  This was NOT conventional.\n\nMany in England were violently opposed to these new religious fanatics called "Methodists" because things changed wherever they went...  If you hired a Methodist housemaid, you'd risk loosing members of your family and others to their energetic proselyting and you would feel convicted for your actions!  God forbid...\n\nThus is a very rough and superficial layout.  Hope it helped!  Any questions, just e-mail me.\n\nKeep in mind that when these movements took place, they had God pushing them forward and were not the dry lifeless denominations you see today; e.g. Lutheran, Methodist, etc.  Perhaps we (the Christian church as a whole) should seek God for what His "movement" would be in *this* hour instead of becoming stale by having our worship revolve around past movements...  :)
493391
To pink_maltese8, Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were not all apostles. Matthew and John were, but Luke was not and Mark was a disciple of peter and wrote down the teachings of Peter but never actually sat under Christs teachings. I am not trying to be mean but you obviously attend church because that is where you find the most people that know very little about the Bible yet think they have it down pat.\n\nRegarding the question: I would think that you are referring to the Catholics and JW's but I may not know your thinking. My personal opinion is that if they have a religious denominational name then they probably aren't Christians at all. There are very few Christians involved in any type of religion, the true believers won't tolerate the lies spewed from the pulpits. "come out of her my people".\n\nJoin the Revolution\nReject Religion\nTurn to Christ
1075515
d. Luther\nHis 95 thesus was on of the key stating points for the reformation.  Calvin also had a nice role in it.  However many historians beleive Luther laid the egg that would lead to the reformation.
719956
Reconstructionist is the most liberal.\nReform, and even Conservative (despite its name) are more liberal than most religious movements in the US.
476350
The Scandinavian countries have been Lutheran since the time of the Reformation. It is still the state (official) church, much as the Church of England (Anglican.) This doesn't mean everyone is Lutheran, though. For example, the Muslim population in Denmark.