The debate "Was Martin Luther bad and why" was started by
January 28, 2019, 6:30 pm.
By the way, lucky is disagreeing with this statement.
0 person is on the agree side of this discussion, while 37 people are on the disagree side.
That might be enough to see the common perception.
It looks like most people are against to this statement.
lucky posted 1 argument to the disagreers part.
lucky, JDAWG9693, historybuff, Debate_Wonder, Princess826, millennialmale, nativeRepublican, Debate_Master1011, seefus, finthechat, District9, district10, amir_alhakim07 and 24 visitors disagree.
In what way was he bad? He saw problems in society and in religion, most notably the idea that you could buy your way into heaven, so he pointed them out. The pope's response was to call him a heretic because he like selling indulgences. He was using the money to help build a cathedral.
i agree that the outcomes of this weren't exactly great. it caused centuries of conflict and death. but in my opinion the church was corrupt and he was trying to fight corruption. The church was bad, not martin luthor. If they had accepted that selling tickets to heaven was corruption, they could have avoided alot of pain and suffering.
that being said, i'm not exactly an expert on the subject so i am certainly willing to hear your case for why he was bad.
MLK, or the original protestant?