why were Luther s followers known  as Protestants?
480252
They were protesting the Catholic church's practices. Hence, Protestants.
519728
Just a note, both Protestants and Catholics actively persecuted one another.  It was not instigated by Catholicism, rather the process was a civil war and the Protestant Princes set the events in motion for both sets of persecutions.  Luther committed what amounted to genocide on the baptists, the baptists would kill entire towns if they didn't become baptists, Catholics would level whole cities that they considered in religious revolt.  Luther burned around 20,000 baptists at the stake.  Protestants persecuted each other and Catholics.  It unleashed existing hatreds in monstrous proportions.  One leading Protestant reformer, who was previously a member of the Inquisition wrote of his horror at the methods of the reformation.  Believe it or not, the Inquisition had rules of restraint on torture, which was culturally accepted as a positive thing at the time by everyone.  The Reformation, in rejecting canon law was free from the restraints.  Both sides acted hideously, as did Americans during our own Revolution, though we were not quite as bad because the populations here were not so dense and the war was between us and them, whereas the Reformation would be though of as closer to the Afgani Civil War.\n\nAs to the consequences, I think there were several both positive and negative.\n\nFirst, the saddest and the most obvious even on these boards is that when you start killing people it is very hard to get people to go back and forgive or say "sorry."  The anger from 500 years ago spills onto these boards, and the angriest rarely understand the real issues or have a real grasp on what is actually being fought over.  We have deep splits on what are really non-Christian issues, but we have Christianized the issues.\n\nMost Americans have not spent any real time in Europe.  That is a shame.  If you went to Germany and followed the geography of the split between the Reformation and Catholicism, you would notice something interesting.  It follows the old Roman line of advance.  Protestant areas are those areas that retained Northern European pagan theologies as Christianized theologies.  Catholic areas are those areas that retained Roman pagan theologies as Christianized theologies.  You even see it in the physical housing today of people.  For example, if you are in Northern German, it is visually very spartan, but has great oral and musical components.  If you are in Bayern (Bavaria), the houses and structures are visually very appealing, but there is less in the music and less emphasis on the spoken.\n\nIn Protestantism, you have an anti-visual symbolism emphasis.  It emphasizes the "word," and the bardic traditions of singing, witnessing and storytelling.  The visual is distrusted.  A good early Calvinist church wouldn't have even had cushions and nothing to see.\n\nIn the Catholic areas you have a distrust of individual witness, a distrust on non-scriptural hymns, and a distrust of using stories in teaching.  Instead you have a rich painted or statuary tradition.  It was believed that since Jesus was both God and Man, he had to be picturable.  As such, while it is wrong to paint a picture of God the Father, it is essential to paint images of God the son with halos to affirm his simultaneous divinity and humanity.\n\nThis division ultimately lead to a number of positive cultural components.  Art and literature improved dramatically as they were now in greater competition.  Religious toleration gradually became a new cultural concept.  It did not previously exist almost anywhere at any time.  There are what have been considered unusual examples in history but they were not the norm.\n\nAn anti-religioussness sprang forth and became the Enlightenment.  Without it, we would not have the United States.  As John Adams said, "in the best of all possible worlds, there would be no religion."  It permitted a growth in science independent and indeed completely separate from religion.  Science now exists
579579
http://www.anabaptists.org/history/ss8001.html\n\nMennonites are also known as "Anabaptists." They originally came from Europe, especially Switzerland and Germany. Many settled in the American state, Pennsylvania.
576739
It's just what form of Christianity you are talking about.  Protestants will say Peter (because they don't have Saints).  Catholics will call him Saint Peter (because they do have saints).
935492
The main areas of religious teaching he disputed were contained in his 95 Theses. They concerned themselves with the authority of the pope, the selling of forgivness (indulgences), and the nature of physical penance. He also married after becoming a priest, which was not common practice even then. \n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_95_Theses
890285
Hi, I am a Protestant and I say the rosary because it gives me comfort and I like the ritual.\n\nProtestants should be flexible in their worship customs.
861297
The Seventh Day Adventists are members of the sectarian movement.  It is a side effect of being sectarian of being especially anti-Catholic.  They hold a number of myths to be true that have no basis in historical fact.  They are anit-Catholic because they inherited the idea and are more extreme because they are more extreme than their predecessor belief group.\n\nIt is important to understand that they believe themselves to be the correct group of Christians.  All others are wrong and Catholics especially as they see Catholicism as the source of all other Protestant errors.
408517
Well, let's start with Christianity. Before Jesus died on the cross, he said to Peter, "On you I will build my church." So Peter essentially became the first Pope of the Catholic church, and from then on the "first church" continued to appoint popes. Then comes Martin Luther into the picture. He saw some real problems in the Catholic church that he wanted changed. He demanded change, but was excommunicated instead. Still, he had followers. They became the Lutheran church. And so they were the first to "protest" the Catholic church, thereby becoming "protestants." Then there were the Catholics in England. The king didn't like the fact that he could not divorce, so he broke away from the church too and made his own, the Anglican church. \n\nSo to keep it short and sweet. Different religions form when a group in one religion breaks away from the original and it's like a domino effect and they just evolved into what you see today: the Episcopalians, the Methodists, the Presbyterians, the Baptists, the Pentecostals, etc.
803910
I know that John Bunyan, the author of Pilgrim's Progress, and John Milton, the author of Paradise Lost were puritans. \n\nBy protestants I understand all Christians who are neither catholics nor Orthodox. So all the divisions you mention belong to protestants.\n\nSorry I couldn't help with all parts of your question.
1059018
If you protest the teaching of the catholic church and take another route while still believing in the same god you are a protestant, it started in the sixteen century with Martin Luther, who broke off of the catholic church and started a separated church following the teachings of the bible as he thougth was the right way. today there are many denomination and are call protestants: anglicans,bautists,pentecostalts etc...
957873
Protestants started with a monk Martin Luther who rebelled against the corruption of the RC church in his time (15th Century). Anglicans were started by Henry VIII who wanted a divorce. Protestant tends to cover Baptists and other groups that are quite 'back to basics' with regard to the Bible. Anglican covers a spectrum from Anglo-catholic (more like RC) to Evangelical (more like Pentecostal). The biggest difference though is in how they view Holy Communion. Anglicans would be closer to the Roman Catholic interpretation (Jesus spiritually and physically present), whereas Proteatants see it just as a memorial meal of the last supper.
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.
814903
Well they were all protestants of course but the denomination that most Connecticut residents were (the largest plularity) was prebysterians followed by Episcopalian (since the Anglicans in the new United States all left the Anglican Church).
587438
QUESTION: Why did the first Protestant, Martin Luther, take out from the bible Hebrews, James, Jude, and Revelation, plus 7 books from the Old Testament—and put them in an appendix without page numbers?\n\nANSWER: Luther deleted those 7 books because they did not suit his doctrines.  He called the book of James “an epistle of straw…”.  The argument that the Jews did not accept them as scripture is based on the fact that they were not written in Hebrew.  That was never the criteria for the 27 New Testament books set forth by the Catholic Church that Protestants accept. Apostolic Teaching was the primary measurement for proving inspiration, not some mans opinions 1100 later.  By accepting Jewish standards for what should be in the Bible, you are accepting an authority that rejected Christ and the message of the New Testament. \n\nQUESTION: Also, why do some Protestants accept some of the 7 sacraments while others only accept only 1 or 2 of them while still others will reject them all?\n\nANSWER: By doing so they diminish the importance of the Incarnation, and the sacramental principle of the Incarnation. When God became man, physical matter was elevated to new heights.  Matter is not evil, as the heretics have taught. Physical matter can be used to convey grace, as “things” were used in the New Testament for healing. Bread, wine, oil and water are found throughout the Old Testament as outward signs of God’s actions. These same elements are used by the Church in the administration of the Seven Sacraments. The Bible shows they were instituted by Christ. \n\nQUESTION: Why do some Protestants insist that the Sabbath be observed on Saturday while other Protestants insist that it is Sunday while still other Protestants will claim that people don't have to go to Church?\n\nANSWER: The “Saturday” Protestants are mostly cults who are anti-Protestant. Christians who say you don’t have to go to a church are socially dysfunctional, or the churches they have been in don't have Real Food, and Real Drink.
773759
I'm a Christian that does not subscribe to any denomination.\n\nWhy?\n\nI follow Christ Jesus.\n\nWho does Lutherans follow? Luther?\n\nA follower of Jesus is called a Christian, and YES, that IS in the Bible.\n\nIf you want to follow Jesus, then BE a Christian.
837788
they dont actully 'think' when they say that per se,\n\nit comes from protestant having to break off from catholic in a messy kind of way, with such justifications as 'they're idolatrous' 'un-christian' and others that really have no merit.\n\nwhen in reality, all it is is a reminder of the person that we're praying to.  in church the priest doesnt say 'statue have mercy' he says 'Christ have mercy'
364019
Having seen your previous question I beleive the Martin luther you are asking about is that of the Lutherian Form of Christianity.\n\nIt could be said that by starting his own faction of christianity that went against the grain of Catholic society he divided what was a united religion, thus seperated people on religous basis.\n\nHowever it can equally be argued that he brought people of similar minds together, he was a theologist as well as "protestant" - Protestor of Catholosicm, and brought to the people he conversed with alot of ideaologies and concept which are available from wesite like Wikipedia.\n\nHope this Helps\n\nWill