ISN’T MARTIN LUTHER THE SAME AS JOSEPH SMITH?

QUESTION: How is Martin Luther different from Joseph Smith or the JW’s?  Aren’t they all the same? They all broke from Rome, they all are Protestants, right?

ANSWER: Actually, there is a very big difference between Martin Luther and these non-orthodox sects.  Yes, they all are Protestant in that they do not recognize the unique authority of the Roman Catholic Church.  But in significant doctrines these sects break from core beliefs both the Church in Rome AND Protestants all agree to.  And in one way these sects are actually closer in spirit to the old Catholic church than they are to most Protestant churches today.

WHO ARE PROTESTANTS?

A little history will bear this out:  Martin Luther started the Protestant Reformation. His big idea was that church traditions had overtaken the Bible as the rule for Christians.  This idea was not held by him alone.  Before him, by about a century, the Waldensians had launched a movement in France with very similar leanings.  These preexisting rumblings were likely the reason why after Luther, this “back to the Bible” movement quickly spread to many different countries, and many different leaders.  For example, Calvin (France), Zwingli (Switzerland), the Baptists (the Dutch), the Anglican Church (England) and others.  They all agreed that we needed to appeal to the original community of Apostles and to Jesus himself for our highest authority, and that this guidance was was uniquely preserved in Scripture.

This Protestant Reformation had the effect of decentralizing authority in the Church.  It did this by putting the Bible in the hands of everyone.  And as a consequence, everyone could now read for themselves that the original Apostles taught that everyone in the church was a priest with access to God by faith in Jesus. (1 Peter 2:5-9)

THE FEARS OF CATHOLICS

The great fear of the Catholic Church was that, with every Christian appealing to the Bible directly, this would lead to great division and factionalism in the Church.  What would stop them from reading whatever they wanted into the Bible?  What errors might the Church get into without an approved Tradition and Authority to govern interpretation of the Bible? 

This fear was not without some merit.  The great spintering of the Protestant movement into many different denominations could be seen bearing out the Catholic concern.

EXTREME PROTESTANTS AREN'T PROTESTANT

This is where we get to the JW's and Mormons.  These denominations are "non-orthodox" because they deny core essentials held by the Church in most times and most places.  To name two, the deity of Christ and the doctrine of the Trinity are both rejected by JW's and Mormons.  So, one might say, this is where the Protestant Reformation ends, in gross errors of belief driven by people who look only to the Bible in isolation from Church tradition, causing them to leave behind core ideas central to the faith.

However, the JW's and Mormons are actually proof of the rightness of the original Protestants mantra which was, "sola scriptura" and "sola fide".  The reason the Witnesses and Mormons broke from orthodox Christian thinking is NOT because they took the Bible in a free wheeling manner.  The reason is that they denied the centrality of the Bible by adding to the Bible.  So their abberant teachings are not a product of taking the Bible in a vaccum in order to invent new doctrines out of whole cloth.  Their heresies are a result of adding authorities to the Bible from which they get their non-orthodox teachings.

IN SPIRIT, CATHOLIC

In this way, ironically, the Witnesses and the Mormons centralized authority again!  I say ironically, because they’re considered Protestant sects, but they both went in the opposite direction of the original Protestants. 

For example, with the JW’s, the Watchtower Society (getting its doctrinal inspiration from Charles Taze Russel) carried unique authority to authorize a special translation of the Bible with utterly unique readings (The New World Translation). This is effectively adding to the Bible.  This Society today also has the sole authority to interpret and create new doctrine for the church.  This is the opposite of the Protestant spirit which was not about finding new revelations, but rather recovering the old.

Likewise, Joseph Smith claimed very unique authority, because he actually gave us new scripture, the Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants and The Pearl of Great Price. This is utterly "unprotestant"!  By inventing new scripture, from which the Mormons get all of their non-orthodox beliefs, Smith arrogated to himself the same authority as a Pope.  In fact, he claimed a higher authority than a pope, for he gave new Holy Scripture to the Church, something no pope ever did.

Smith's unique authority carries on today with the council of 12 apostles that rule the Mormon Church. This committee also carries unique authority to interpret the Bible and establish new doctrine which it has many times, essentially adding to Scripture. 

As such, these 2 sects are not so much Protestant as they are a return to the Catholic model: where church tradition and a small group of people reserve the right to have an authority over the faith and practice of the Church on par with the Word of God itself.