A Few Controversial Scriptures Examined

Was the Reformation about Religious Liberty?

“Historically nothing is more incorrect than the assertion that the Reformation was a movement in favor of intellectual freedom. The exact contrary is the truth. For themselves, it is true, Lutherans and Calvinists claimed liberty of conscience . . . but to grant it to others never occurred to them so long as they were the stronger side. The complete extirpation of the Catholic Church, and in fact of everything that stood in their way, was regarded by the reformers as something entirely natural.” ( Johann von Dollinger, Grisar, VI, 268-269; Dollinger: Kirche und Kirchen, 1861, 68)

“Save for a few splendid sayings of Luther, confined to the early years when he was powerless, there is hardly anything to be found among the leading reformers in favor of freedom of conscience. As soon as they had the power to persecute they did.”(Secular scholar Preserved Smith, The Social Background of the Reformation 177)

“...Luther’s nature was essentially despotic. He insisted that his will in theological and ecclesiastical matters must be supreme. Everyone who differed from him in regard to dogmas he pronounced a heretic, if not worse, and this in words which frequently were far too low and vulgar to be reproduced. Among the mildest of his utterances is:-- ‘Whoever teaches otherwise than I teach, condemns God, and must remain a child of hell’. After such words he hardly needed to say, ‘I can hear and endure nothing which is against my teachings.’” ( John L. Stoddard, Rebuilding a Lost Faith by an American Agnostic, p.97

 

The Kings Used the Reformation For Money

“Right from the beginning, Luther's spiritual revolt had let loose material greed. The German rulers, the Scandinavian monarchs and Henry VIII of England had all taken advantage of the break from papal tutelage to appropriate both the wealth and the control of their respective Churches.” (Henri Daniel-Rops, 309-310)

“The cities found Protestantism profitable. . . . The Lutheran princes suppressed all monasteries in their territory except a few whose inmates had embraced the Protestant faith.” (Will Durant, 438-439)

Melanchthon, the right hand man of Luther, lamented about the outcome of the Reformation: “They do not care in the least about religion; they are only anxious to get dominion into their hands, to be free from the control of bishops . . . Under cover of the Gospel, the princes were only intent on the plunder of the Churches.”(Durant, 438, 440)

One of the worst of the plunders of Catholic property was under British King Henry VII who, after tearing the papal crown off the Rome’s bishop and placing it on his own head he made land grabs and seized Catholic property on his island as well as Ireland.

Luther’s friend Erasmus wrote, “This certainly is a fine turn of affairs, if property is wickedly taken away from priests so that soldiers may make use of it in worse fashion; and the latter squander their own wealth, and sometimes that of others, so that no one benefits.” (Erasmus, 157)

Luther was content with the expulsion of the Catholics. Melanchthon was in favor of proceeding against them with corporal penalties . . . Zwingli held that, in case of need, the massacre of bishops and priests was a work commanded by God. (Janssen, V, 290)

Now we start looking at the actual persecution.

 

Chronology of Anti-Catholicism


Luther Advocates Violence Towards the Catholics

1522-3
Protestant peasants went to the same church Luther had nailed his 95 thesis on and destroyed its altars, statues and threw out the priests. Many reformers thought it their duty to silence the Pope and popery by force. (Grisar, 298)

Luther, not too kindly nor with religious tolerance wrote: "The Pope and the Cardinals . . . since they are blasphemers, their tongues ought to be torn out through the back of their necks, and nailed to the gallows!" (Against the Papacy of Rome, Founded by the Devil)

More Luther:
"It were better that every bishop were murdered . . . And we would smile did it happen. All who contribute body, goods . . . that the rule of the bishops may be destroyed are God's dear children and true Christians." (Werke, Weimar, v.28, pp.142-201 Against the Falsely Called Spiritual Order of the Pope and the Bishops)
"...these Cardinals, these Popes, and that whole abomination of the Romish Sodom . . . why do we not wash our hands in their blood?" (Werke, Erl., v.2, p.107 On the Pope as an Infallible Teacher).

1524
See also: Martin Luther's Violent, Inflammatory Rhetoric and its Relationship to the German Peasants' Revolt (1524-1525)

1525
Zwingli's Zurich was definitely not a haven of Christian freedom:
The presence at sermons . . . was enjoined under pain of punishment; all teaching and church worship that deviated from the prescribed regulations was punishable. Even outside the district of Zurich the clergy were not allowed to read Mass or the laity to attend. (Janssen, V, 134-135)

The Mass was abolished in Zurich. (Dickens, 117).

In Zurich the reformers demolished churches and burned monsteries. Bishops of Constance, Basle, Lausanne and Geneva were forced to abandon their sees. (Daniel-Rops, 81-82)

Young Bible students he once mentored were now advocating more radical reform . . . refusing to have their babies baptized, citing his own earlier ideas . . . In January, 1525, Zwingli agreed that they deserved capital punishment . . . for tearing the fabric of a seamless Christian society. (John L Ruth., "America's Anabaptists: Who They Are," Christianity Today, October 22, 1990)

The penalties enjoined by the Town Council of Zurich [for Anabaptists] were 'drowning, burning, or beheading,' according as it seemed advisable . . . 'It is our will,' the Council proclaimed, 'that wherever they be found, whether singly or in companies, they shall be drowned to death, and that none of them shall be spared. (Janssen, V, 153-157)

1527
Luther's home territory of Saxony had instituted banishment for Catholics. (Grisar, VI, 241-242).
Inquisitor General: Martin Luther. Heretics? Catholics. “It is the duty of the authorities to resist and punish such public blasphemy.” (Grisar, VI, 240)

1528
At Constance, on March 10, the Catholic faith was banned. “There are no rights whatever beyond those laid down in the Gospel as it is now understood” So then they went about following what they interpreted the Bible to command by smashing altars, organs, and everything inside the Catholic churches were considered idolatrous. (Janssen, V, 146)

Zwingli declared the massacre of the bishops for the sake of the gospel. (Janssen, V, 180; Zwingli's Works, VII, 174-184) Zwingli’s treatment of Anabaptists hadn’t improved for his town council ordered 170 heretics burnt through the cheeks with hot irons; many were beheaded; some had their tongues cut out. (Janssen, V, 160)

Protestant theologian Meyfart (on tortures of Catholics he personally witnessed): “Rome it is not customary to subject a murderer . . . an incestuous person, or an adulterer to torture for the space of more than an hour; but in Germany . . .the torture is kept up for a whole day, for a day and a night, for two days . . . even also for four days . . . after which it begins again . . . There are stories extant so horrible and revolting that no true man can hear of them without a shudder.” (Janssen, XVI, 516-518, 521)

1529
Back in Luthersville and Calvinsville: the Council of Strassburg ordered the total destruction of several Catholic churches and convents. (Janssen, V, 143-144). AND in Frankfurt-am-Main (Durant, 424). AND in Basle, Switzerland. (Stoddard, 94)

1530
Luther advocates death by hanging for heretics and traitors.

1531
Luther’s bosom reformer, Melanchthon, insisted on capital punishment for the rejection of the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist (after putting some to death for this he changed his mind later on in life and himself rejected the real presence), the denial of infant baptism (Smith, 177), and the belief that some heathen might be saved (Janssen, IV, 140-141). He demanded the suppression of all books that opposed or hindered Lutheran teaching (Janssen, XIV, 503).

The Protestant states suppressed or forbade Catholic worship, and seized Catholic properties (Janssen, VI, 46-63, 181, 190, 208-214, 348-349). Censorship of the press was adopted (Janssen, IV, 232 ff.), along with excommunication (e.g., in the Augsburg Confession of 1530).

(note: I’m pretty sure these last two paragraphs were copied and pasted directly from Dave Armstrong’s website.)

Inquisitor General: Melanchthon Heretics: Anabaptists

After scores being sentence to death or life imprisonment, Melanchthon responded: “Why should we pity such men more than God does?” (Durant, 423) When Luther read of what his old friend was doing he replied that it please him and about all the cruelty his response was, “it is even more cruel of them . . . not to teach any certain doctrine -- to persecute the true doctrine . . .(Grisar, VI, 251)


In Strasburg not only the Catholic heretics were put to death, their entire families were executed with them. (Bax, 352).

1533
Luther began what he called “frightening” citizens to attend Lutheran preaching under excommunication and threats of civil punishment. (Grisar, VI, 365; letter to Leonard Beyer,)

1534
Anglican England began slaughtering the Irish monks, almost 800 a year.

1535
Catholic mass abolished in Geneva. All Catholic churches, monasteries and convents seized and closed. (Harkness, 8)
Several Lutheran towns voted to hang or banish Anabaptists, Catholics or Zwinglians. (Janssen, V, 481).

King Henry burned or beheaded or disemboweled Anabaptists, monks and bishops. (Hughes, 181-182) Let’s hear some more gruesome details by one who saw it. These heretics were, “hanged until partially conscious. Then their bellies were cut open, their intestines wrenched out and tossed on a fire, and their hearts ripped out by hand. The bodies were beheaded and quartered, and the pieces were posted at various locations throughout England. As the executioner slit open his belly, John Houghton, prior of the London Carthusian monastery, said, "O most holy Jesus, have mercy upon me in this hour." This was the punishment for treason in sixteenth-century England. Their crime? Refusal to recognize "the king, our sovereign, to be the supreme head of the Church of England afore the Apostles of Christ's Church." Oh about 318 of them.... During England’s “Pilgrimage of Grace” the King suppressed those darned Catholic revolts, killing as many as 4000.

1536
Luther: “That seditious articles of doctrine [Catholics and Anabaptist’s] should be punished by the sword ...when it is a case of only upholding some spiritual tenet, such as infant baptism, original sin, and unnecessary separation, then . . . the stubborn sectaries must be put to death.” (Janssen, X, 222-223; pamphlet of 1536)
"Zwingli complained of Luther's intolerance when he was the victim . . . but he and his followers threw the poor Anabaptists into the Lake of Zurich, enclosed in sacks." (Patrick O’Hare, 50:293)

1530-40 Northern Europe
[There came a change . . .] The temptation to loot Church property and the habit of doing so had appeared and was growing; and this rapidly created a vested interest in promoting the change of religion. Those who attacked Catholic doctrine, as, for instance, in the matters of celibacy in the monastic orders . . . opened the door for the seizure of the enormous clerical endowments . . . by the Princes . . . The property of convents and monasteries passed wholesale to the looters over great areas of Christendom: Scandinavia, the British Isles, the Northern Netherlands, much of the Germanies and many of the Swiss Cantons. The endowments of hospitals, colleges, schools, guilds, were largely though not wholly seized . . . Such an economic change in so short a time our civilization had never seen . . . The new adventurers and the older gentry who had so suddenly enriched themselves, saw, in the return of Catholicism, peril to their immense new fortunes. (Hilaire Belloc, 9-l0)
[This is getting too long so I am going to skip some dates... just more of the same.... and I don’t want to be too redundant.]

1538
Henry made sure the Bible was made available to the English people.

1539
Henry regrets giving Bible to people because of theological riots in home, churches and taverns and forbids anyone but licensed theologians from preaching from scripture.

Catholic friar, John Forest, roasted alive over a fire made of a wooden statue of a saint.

 

1545 Switzerland
John Calvin wrote, “If he [Michael Servetus] comes to Geneva, I will never allow him to depart alive.” A few years later: Michael came. He did not conquer, and Michael burned.

Calvin recalls his martyrdom: “showed the dumb stupidity of a beast . . . He went on bellowing . . . in the Spanish fashion: "Misericordias!" . . .(Daniel-Rops, 190-191)

1554 Switzerland
Reformer Theodore of Beza wrote: “What crime can be greater or more heinous than heresy... Christian magistrates [Geneva], do your duty to God, who has put the sword into your hands for the honor of His majesty; strike valiantly these monsters in the guise of men.” Later he characterized those who demanded freedom of conscience “worse than the tyranny of the pope. It is better to have a tyrant, no matter how cruel he may be, than to let everyone do as he pleases.”

1558
When in England’s Protestant Queen Elizabeth I gained the throne, Ireland “ran red with the blood of innocent victims.” This icy butcheress starved to death or slaughtered around 1.5 million Catholics and seized their land. ( J. M., The Way of the Aggressor, p. 20.)

For just a break in the horror I thought I would pause here and tell you that:

• Zwingli called Luther “the devil” among other things many times.
• Lesser known Reformer, Oecolampadius believed Luther to be seduced by Satan and arrogant.
• Luther called other reformers “miscreants” who have “in-deviled, through-deviled, over-deviled, corrupt hearts and lying mouths.” He considered them damned.
• Calvin called Luther ignorant and wrote that “people ought not to let themselves be duped by following his steps.” He also wrote, “I am carefully on the watch that Lutheranism gain no ground, nor be introduced into France. The best means . . . for checking the evil would be that the confession written by me.” And he couldn’t stand Zwingli either.

1615
A Jesuit Disemboweled
Jesuits mutilated in England and Scotland.
Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress

1652
British Parliament signs act that every Irish Catholic priest be hanged, beheaded, quartered, his bowels drawn out and burned, his head thrust upon public poles. Dissenters fingers were twisted off, they were seared with hot iron, whipped or beaten till bones were broken. The edict added, “If any one shall know where a priest remains concealed, in caves, woods, or caverns, or if by any chance he should meet a priest on the highway, and not immediately take him into custody and present him before the next magistrate, such person is to be considered a traitor and an enemy of the Republic... any correspondence or friendship with a priest, he is to suffer death.”

British Protestant historian, Professor Lecky recorded in his History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, “the slaughter of the Catholic Irishmen was looked upon as literally the slaughter of wild beasts. Not only men, but even women and children who fell into the hands of the English, were deliberately and systematically butchered. Bands of soldiers traversed great tracts of country, slaying every living thing they met.”
Scottish Protestant Dr. Smiles agrees, “Men, women and children wherever found were put indiscriminately to death. The soldiery was mad for blood. Priests were murdered at the altar, children at their mother’s breast. The beauty of woman, the venerableness of age, the innocence of youth was no protection against these sanguinary demons in human form.”

1586
British citizen, Protestant Margaret Clitherow, converted to Catholicism and was arrested for harboring a Catholic priest. Her sentence? The same as all who converted, she was to be crushed to death beneath a half tone of weights. She is recorded as stating, “I am fully resolved in all things touching my faith, which I ground upon Jesus Christ, and by him I steadfastly believe to be saved, which faith I acknowledge to be the same that he left to his apostles, and they to their successors from time to time, and is taught in the Catholic Church through all Christendom, and promised to remain with her unto the world's end, and hell-gates shall not prevail against the same faith; for if an angel come from heaven, and preach any other doctrine than we have received, the Apostle biddeth us not believe him.” As her ribs cracked, Margaret whimpered, "Jesus! Jesus! Jesus! Have mercy on me." Her body was left under the door and weights from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m., then stuffed secretly in a rubbish heap. Queen Elizabeth who ordered this execution, was responsible for murdering more Catholic in one year that the Inquisition did in all its over three hundred years. Anglican bishops were accomplices if not directly but for their silence.

1649
Oliver Cromwell sent to their deaths over 5500 Irish specifically as punishment for their Catholic faith. Including the entire population of the town of Drogheda. When reporting to the House of Commons, Cromwell announced, “It has pleased God to bless our endeavor at Drogheda. . . we put to the sword the whole number. . . . I wish that all honest hearts may give the glory of this to God alone, to whom indeed the praise of this mercy belongs." (Seumas MacManus,The Story of the Irish Race, 1920)

The infamous “Cromwellian Settlements” followed his conquest of Ireland. Millions of acres of land were allocated to English Protestant settlers. The landowners of Irish birth were either killed, banished or forced out to Connaught in the west of Ireland, where it was hoped “they would starve to death.” (J. M., The Way of the Aggressor, p. 20.)

From 1649 to 1652, one-third of Catholic Ireland, about 660,000 people were killed. Twenty thousand Irish boys and girls also were sold into slavery to the West Indies. (F. H., Cromwell, p. 149.) It was a deliberate Protestant attempt at Catholic genocide. Many scholars today call it an attempt at ethnic cleansing.

In Sweden, Catholic land and churches were seized by the crown. In many countries Catholic Bibles were taken and burned. Huguenots butchered Catholics by tearing out their bowels, burning them, hacking up children, priests’ genitals were cut off, grilled and fed to them.

 

Persecution of Catholics by Huguenots

Frightful Outrages perpetrated by the Huguenots in France
Engraving from Richard Verstegen, Théâtre des Cruautez des
Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C. (3)


Rousseau says truly:
"The Reformation was intolerant from its cradle, and its authors were universal persecutors . . ."

Auguste Comte also writes:

"The intolerance of Protestantism was certainly not less tyrannical than that with which Catholicism is so much reproached." (Philosophie Positive, IV, 51)

1789 French Revolution
One of the aims of the revolution was the destruction of the Catholic Church. The persecution and death was vicious. Some French historians call it French Catholic genocide.

Austria and America had strong anti-Catholic laws and sentiments but no persecution.

1845
Irish Catholic Holocaust --- 5-8 Million died because of anti-catholic bigotry. Starved to death by Anglican England.

I will stop here.... Catholic martyrdom continued in the millions, but not at the hands of Protestants.

Conclusion:

The story of the Reformation has been one-sided. Big bad Catholic Church meets godly punishment for her theological crimes and martyrdom of people who dared to disagree with her. Reformation sets people free. Yet author of a huge 16 volume history of Germany, Johannes Janssen, records that the Protestants weren’t near as religiously-oriented as claimed. Among the reformers, “Cursing and blaspheming were as frequent as praying was rare.” Many scholars realize that the Reformation was really a manipulation of Christians by the government.

“Those who think the Protestant Reformation threw off the yoke of tyrannical church leaders and restored a New Testament church must realize that not Scripture but a sacralized king was in charge of the English Reformation from start to finish.”

“The principle which the Reformation had upheld in the youth of its rebellion - the right of private judgment - was as completely rejected by the Protestant leaders as by the Catholics . . . Toleration was now definitely less after the Reformation than before it.” (Will Durant)

[On the Reformers] “It required no great sagacity to perceive the inconsistency and dishonesty of men who, dissenting from almost all Christendom, would suffer none to dissent from themselves, who demanded freedom of conscience, yet refused to grant it.” (Protestant scholar Thomas Macaulay, Babington, Essays)

Luther’s right-hand man, Melanchthon, once penned, “All the waters of the Elbe would not yield me tears sufficient to weep for the miseries caused by the Reformation.” (Melanchthon, Philip, Epistles, Book 4, Ep. 100.)


Enough? Okay... enough.
We forgive you, Protestants.

Isn’t that silly? Today’s Protestants have nothing to be forgiven. They didn’t torture or murder anyone, nor would they. Neither would the Catholics. Please forgive us, for we too can’t believe what early Catholicism did. Why do Christians hurt Christians? I just don’t understand.

Now can we just heal from all these horrors and start to love each other? Trust each other? Respect each other? Even if we disagree?

 

ADD TO THAT , the TRUTH .......that you do not possess because you did not preserve one Dogma. I would say you are just like your Mother in harlotry, but nothing like the Christians preserved in the Catholic assembly who clung to Mother Mary and maintained a Christ like heart, mind and soul. I am getting out the popcorn, you all deserve each other. Lord I can not wait for your assembly's TWO WITNESSES. I am just a prelude.

 

ONEFOR ISRAEL: Martin Luther:

Martin Luther, Israel, and the Jewish People

Luther is famous for propelling the Protestant Reformation into action, and also, less illustriously, for penning such scathing anti-Semitic writings that they inspired Hitler. So, was he a champion of faith? Or a vile anti-Semite?

Five hundred years ago today, Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the door of the church in Wittenberg, no longer able to endure what had become a very twisted church doctrine. His “95 Theses” put forward two central beliefs—that the Bible should be the primary religious authority and that salvation can be obtained by faith alone, not by deeds. He railed against the wicked practice of “indulgences” which essentially sold forgiveness for money. He also criticised the greed rampant in the Catholic church at the time:

“Why does not the pope” asked Luther, “whose wealth today is greater than the wealth of the richest Crassus, build the basilica of St. Peter with his own money rather than with the money of poor believers?”[1]

Good question, Luther. So far, so good.

Inspiring Christians to study the Bible
The Reformation in 1517 brought a revolution to the body of Messiah around the world in a very positive way. One of the blessings that arose was that (also thanks in part to the invention of the printing press and Bible translation which occurred around the same time) people started reading their Bibles for themselves. They could see in the pages of their own Bibles, in their own language, that there were many promises that Israel would be regathered to the land once more before Yeshua’s return. This led to a great awakening in eschatological interest and study of Biblical prophecy, particularly in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries. As a result, many Christians and churches adopted a renewed interest in Israel, and in sharing the gospel with Jewish people both in Israel and abroad.

The Restorationist Movement (that eventually helped bring about the restoration of Israel) may not have developed or gained traction the way it did had it not been for Luther’s radical actions, which led many to study the Bible for themselves. By bucking slavish adherence to church tradition and doctrine he showed that, rather than being de facto dangerous, studying the Bible with a willingness to question assumptions was a good and right thing to do.

Initially, Luther encouraged Christians to honor the Jewish people
Luther felt certain that the reason Jewish people hadn’t been accepting Yeshua as Messiah was due to the failure of the church to present the truth adequately. In 1523 he wrote the book, “That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew”[2], encouraging Christians to adopt a kinder attitude towards their Jewish brethren:

“They have dealt with the Jews as if they were dogs rather than human beings; they have done little else than deride them and seize their property…. I hope that if one deals in a kindly way with the Jews and instructs them carefully from Holy Scripture, many of them will become genuine Christians and turn again to the faith of their fathers, the prophets and patriarchs. They will only be frightened further away from it if their Judaism is so utterly rejected that nothing is allowed to remain, and they are treated only with arrogance and scorn.”

“If the apostles, who also were Jews, had dealt with us Gentiles as we Gentiles deal with the Jews, there would never have been a Christian among the Gentiles. Since they dealt with us Gentiles in such brotherly fashion, we in our turn ought to treat the Jews in a brotherly manner in order that we might convert some of them. For even we ourselves are not yet all very far along, not to speak of having arrived.”

Martin Luther, “That Jesus Christ was Born a Jew”, 1523

 

Luther at this point displays a great respect for the Jewish people, and encourages fellow Christians to follow suit. He notes the place of honour given to the Jewish people in the Bible:

“When we are inclined to boast of our position we should remember that we are but Gentiles, while the Jews are of the lineage of Christ. We are aliens and in-laws; they are blood relatives, cousins, and brothers of our Lord. Therefore, if one is to boast of flesh and blood, the Jews are actually nearer to Christ than we are, as St. Paul says in Romans 9[:5]. God has also demonstrated this by his acts, for to no nation among the Gentiles has he granted so high an honor as he has to the Jews. For from among the Gentiles there have been raised up no patriarchs, no apostles, no prophets, indeed, very few genuine Christians either. And although the gospel has been proclaimed to all the world, yet He committed the Holy Scriptures, that is, the law and the prophets, to no nation except the Jews, as Paul says in Romans 3[:2] and Psalm 147[:19-20], “He declares his word to Jacob, his statutes and ordinances to Israel. He has not dealt thus with any other nation; nor revealed his ordinances to them.”…

“Therefore, I would request and advise that one deal gently with them and instruct them from Scripture; then some of them may come along. Instead of this we are trying only to drive them by force, slandering them, accusing them of having Christian blood if they don’t stink, and I know not what other foolishness. So long as we thus treat them like dogs, how can we expect to work any good among them?”

He was eager to start a new chapter of church history in which Christians would respect Jewish people as their “older brother”, saying that if he had been Jewish, seeing the way the church had been treating the Jews, he’d rather become a pig than a Christian. So, basically good, right?
From hater of corruption to a corrupted hater
But as the decades passed and it became clear to Luther that the spiritual blindness of the Jewish people[3] was not merely due to abuse at the hands of the church, his attitude changed. As many have noted, Luther was a passionate and tempestuous man, prone to moods and depressions, and his state of mind towards the latter end of his life was not good. In his frustration, Luther wrote “Concerning the Jews and their Lies” in 1543[4], in which he advised the German princes to destroy synagogues, to burn their books and raze their houses. He wanted to forbid Jewish practice and teaching, and considered Jewish people to be “just devils and nothing more”. He wrote,

“Verily, a hopeless, wicked, venomous and devilish thing is the existence of these Jews who for fourteen hundred years have been, and still are, our torment and misfortune… Know, Christian, that next to the devil, thou has no enemy more cruel, more venomous and violent than a true Jew”.

Martin Luther, “The Jews and their Lies”, 1543

 

This contemptible book is eye-wateringly anti-Semitic, to the degree that even at the time many rejected it. Many Lutherans ignored it, choosing the approach of his earlier book over the scalding hatred of his latter work, and even his Latin translator modified it, but Adolf Hitler landed upon it and considered Luther a genius.

As we follow the evil progress of the Nazis and the steps against the Jewish people, burning synagogues and destroying homes, it is hard to ignore the fact that Hitler was following the advice Luther had given the German princes all those years ago to a tee. Hitler used Luther’s words to justify his actions as “Christian”, and declared Luther the greatest warner of the German people against the Jews.

What is Luther’s legacy?
The Holocaust memorial museum in Jerusalem, Yad Vashem, catalogues the descent into hell from propaganda to extermination camps. It creates a journey through the horrific realities of history and leads out to a panoramic view of modern Jerusalem. Luther sadly had a part to play in the Holocaust, but he also also encouraged Christians to read their Bible afresh and think for themselves, which led to many realising that God had in no way finished with Israel. The numerous prophecies about God’s intention to restore the people to the land became evident to many influential Christians, without whose help Israel may not have been reestablished.

Perhaps instead of trying to assign Luther either to the good books or the trashcan, we should soberly note the human capacity – even among believers – for both good and evil.

It is God who will have to sort through all this at the end of time, not you or I. It is hard to say that Luther was “not a real Christian”. He was. Yet he was deeply flawed. We all are. From the story of Luther, we can see the profound effect one life can make, for good or for bad. We can see how our words carry power and influence that may go way beyond what we could ever imagine. I wonder what Luther himself would make of the outworkings of history, if he could trace the impact his words had had on the church, on the people of Israel, and on the world.

 

Again , I show NO partiality, I esteem what should be esteemed and admonish what is to be admonished. If "Protestant" wants to be a true representative for Christ , he better get to getting to all truth, not partial truth. 'Half a truth is the greatest lie of all because it is meant to deceive. "

 

Christians should not hate each other nor treat even our enemies as they treat us. Clearly there will be those who call themselves Christian, who act like anything but. And for sure Christ did not commission any man to act like many have done in the history of men who have done evil to one another using Christ's name.

It is a pursuit of truth. Clearly, I have not spoken outside of the written Word. Not one thing I post is without support of the scriptures and Holy Spirit. Not one lie do I speak. The moral of the story, do the bad things men do define our faith or does the truth?
John 18:37
Jesus Before Pilate
…37“Then You are a king!” Pilate said. “You say that I am a king,” Jesus answered. “For this reason I was born and have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who belongs to the truth listens to My voice.”
TRUTH:
It is not as One sees it,or just as One believes it to be, but has to be supported by the Creator and greater than that all truth is from Him . He reveals it to be. It is as Christ spoke it, and it means LOVE. Those who are for truth ALONE, show no bias or partiality. Truth is in between the lines which divide assemblies. Divisions from doctrines that men contrive should not be the foundation of your life, those who can see the TRUTH show themselves to be approved by God. If Christians simply follow Christ's words and pay attention to the changes and nuances of the time of men, they will not be carried away by the drowning waters . Whatever the RCC does, the Protestants, or Orthodox, it is the written word the holy scriptures that will protect the believer from being deceived. If one is a believer he can not ,with knowing Christ's teachings be deceived . A True believer can not be convinced to reject Christ or hate. "I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except by Me".

Can not receive the Mark of the Beast through the baptismal waters. It is not through water that the mark of the beast will be applied upon man's, head or hand. It is an application developed through fallen angel science. The equation of that biology is revealed through God's good science. He gave the information about man's carbon number before man even knew what it was.

If a person believes what the "Protestant" is saying with his OP then you will be duped and receive the Mark. It is an extra DNA Marker added to man's DNA .It is already here, the right event must make men receptive to it. It will be DURING THE TIME OF TRIBULATION. The worst time known to man ever, since man's existence. Did everyone miss that? You better be in the Love of God revealed in His Son. And that is not by hating your brothers. The CONFESSING of the INCARNATION will unite us. That includes Mother Mary, the only thing evil spirits can not say and will not do. (The Mystery of the Incarnation) is the Confessing 1 John 4 ,which includes Both Christ and His Mother and Gabriel and Elisabeth revealed its Confessing. Peace!

 

So, in that case, there's still no Scriptural authority for a pope. And Mary didn't die a virgin. She had at least 6 more children after Jesus, conceived by the usual method.

 

The papacy is not the antichrist. He will be ONE MAN. And he will have a miracle-working false prophet sidekick who MIGHT be a high RCC official.

He will enter the new temple the Jews will build in Jerusalem, & there set up a statue of himself & proclaim himself God. The FP will supernaturally cause the statue to speak. (It'll be supernatural, as people wouldn't marvel at a statue speaking electronically.) And while there, the FP will initiate the marka the beast at his boss' behest.

This mark will be some sorta microchip that'll hold all the bearer's financial dealings. He will be paid in it, & will make purchases with it, being scanned as he makes a purchase. The chip will replace all cash & MAC cards.

And Scripture says ALL who receive it are condemned !

The rapture will occur before any of this, so there'll be little opposition to the mark.

 

You don't know Mary had children after she gave birth to Jesus. The 'brethren of the Lord' could have easily been children that Joseph fathered from a previous wife who died. You weren't there and the scripture doesn't say either way. Calvin, Luther, and other protestants believed in the perpetual virginity of Mary. The primacy of Peter is easy to prove.

 

There is scriptural authority which upholds the WORD RABBI= (teacher, father, pastor-(English for the Greek word pater which means father) After all, what does “pope” actually mean? ... The Pope is the Bishop of Rome, and thereby the (world) leader of the Catholic Church. The word comes from the Latin papa, which means “father.” He is also the head of the Vatican, the tiny, sovereign, city-state within Rome.

Joseph was not married before and it is easy to know that. The argument for Mary's (perpetual physical virginity after giving birth) is not biblical . Catholic "fathers" came up with that from an apocrypha book called the Infant Gospel according to St. James which is dated around AD 145 as to when it was written. It gives an account which states that Joseph did not even take Mary as his wife. And that he was accompanied by his son's from.a previous marriage.
It also states that Abigail who directed both Mary and Joseph to the cave which was for the farm animals , that she may give birth, was a mid wife who examined Mary right after she gave birth and found her virginity was still in tact . That is rubbish! It contradicts the gospels and even a mid wife of that time knew ,you do not do any such thing to a woman for fear of infection. God actually gave Israel many health practice , that even for modern medicine were found beneficial and were implemented .

It is funny, the book is not even considered deuterocanonical it is apocrypha :writings or reports not considered genuine.

Plus it was written in AD 145.

That is what I mean about the RCC's harlotry. There is a Mystery concerning Perpetual Virginity but, it makes doctrines not supported by the scriptures and then creates division and confusion. God is not the author of confusion.

This too with the Orthodox, they have done one worse. They have taken one verse out of the OT concerning a gate of the temple in an Ezekiel account and suggest it was Mary's virginal gate, in which only Christ can pass through.

Ezekiel 44:1-3
The East Gate Assigned to the Prince
1The man then brought me back to the outer gate of the sanctuary that faced east, but it was shut. 2And the LORD said to me, “This gate is to remain shut. It shall not be opened, and no man shall enter through it, because the LORD, the God of Israel, has entered through it. Therefore it will remain shut. 3Only the prince himself may sit inside the gateway to eat in the presence of the LORD. He must enter by way of the portico of the gateway and go out the same way.”…

This has nothing to do with Mary's virginity but just as all the prophecy is speaking of, a physical temple that would be built. This Ezekiel prophecy was written after the destruction of the first temple and and before the construction of the second. The Lord was in the second temple and did eat in there and did enter through the East gate. The East gate is the Portico of Solomon it is there that Christ revealed He is God the Son to the Jews in the (city of David )in Jerusalem. It is there that they wanted to stone Him.
John 10:
22At that time the Feast of Dedication took place in Jerusalem. It was winter, 23and Jesus was walking in the temple courts in Solomon’s Colonnade. 24So the Jews gathered around Him and demanded, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.”

25“I already told you,” Jesus replied, “but you did not believe. The works I do in My Father’s name testify on My behalf. 26But because you are not My sheep, you refuse to believe. 27My sheep listen to My voice; I know them, and they follow Me. 28I give them eternal life, and they will never perish. No one can snatch them out of My hand. 29My Father who has given them to Me is greater than all. No one can snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30I and the Father are one.”

31At this, the Jews again picked up stones to stone Him. 32But Jesus responded, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone Me?”

33“We are not stoning You for any good work,” said the Jews, “but for blasphemy, because You, who are a man, declare Yourself to be God.”

34Jesus replied, “Is it not written in your Law: ‘I have said you are gods’b ? 35If he called them gods to whom the word of God came—and the Scripture cannot be broken— 36then what about the One whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world? How then can you accuse Me of blasphemy for stating that I am the Son of God?

37If I am not doing the works of My Father, then do not believe Me. 38But if I am doing them, even though you do not believe Me, believe the works themselves, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I am in the Father.”

39At this, they tried again to seize Him, but He escaped their grasp.

During the Feast of the Dedication (Hanukkah) bread is offered and eaten by the celebrants . Christ would have participated in this dedication. It upholds the events of Maccabees and Christ is Yahweh . It is then He reveals Himself as such. The East gate is the women's portion of the temple.. It is NOT Mary's birth canal.

I had a major debate about this and wrote a paper on it. Let's just say it is making waves. Orthodox have nothing to say in reply other than "It is our Tradition in belief" I say what about belief in what the faith actually teaches.

It is as the gospels say:

Matthew 1:25
And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS.

To know , knew.......just as the bible says it means. Catholics have no problem with understanding its meaning in the OT, but when it comes to the NT and Mary suddenly they dance all around the issue giving new meaning to what is plainly spoken by the writers of scripture. The preoccupation by men in religious orders on her Virginity is bizarre . She was given into marriage because MARRIAGE IS HOLY and founded by God. This would not take away her devotion to God. Her perpetual Virginity is FIRST spiritual and then at her assumption at Christ's ascension she would be transformed in a moment in the twinkling of an eye. For we are taught by Paul that this flesh and blood can not enter the kingdom, the perishable must put on that which does not perish. The mortal must put on immortality . We know Christ said " we are like the angels in the kingdom of heaven , not marrying or being given in marriage."

Mary was given her resurrected body in a twinkling of an eye. Like the End time Bride will. She the TYPE and symbol for the Elect Bride , was transformed in a moment and her assumption is one with the ascension and it is supported by scripture alone.

That is another thread , for truth seekers.

 

Christ prophesied the destruction of the very temple he entered by the east gate. "
Matthew 24:1-3
Temple Destruction Foretold
1As Jesus left the temple and was walking away, His disciples came up to Him to point out its buildings. 2“Do you see all these things?” He replied. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be toppled.” 3While Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to Him privately. “Tell us,” they said, “when will these things happen, and what will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?”…

GATE CLOSED ,because the Messiah came . To the Jews still looking for the Messiah, your man can not fulfill that Ezekiel prophecy. Christ entered the Temple (by the east gate) just as Ezekiel foretold. Gate closed, and case closed! Prophecy fulfilled and Christ is the BOMB! I love prophecy.

 

Some more concerning the Mark (IN) the flesh- MARK OF THE BEAST , get it?

The how in application. You see I know a bit about biological engineering .
There are already nano chips which carry genetically engineered information . They are technology , mixed with organic matter and cells. Those cells can carry DNA information , that can attach to the carbon in any species. it has already been done with animals . Genetic engineering is proudly esteemed.


Is what I am saying far fetched ?The offspring of the fallen watchers began defiling themselves with animals. The book of Jasher says:

4:18 And their judges and rulers went to the daughters of men and took their wives by force from their husbands according to their choice and the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the earth the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air and taught the mixture of animals of one species with the other in order therewith to provoke the Lord; and God saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals.

The same thing will happen today and is happening now;



.
Matthew 24:37-39
37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,

39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
Notice Christ refers to Himself as THE SON OF MAN. This because what went on during Noah's time produced offspring not fully man. They mixed species as Jasher says. Today men are doing the same thing and this is an abomination before God.

The Book of Enoch also supports this record, saying that after the fallen angels merged their DNA with women, they, "began to sin against birds, and beasts, and reptiles, and fish" (7:5,6)

The Old Testament contains associated reference to genetic mutations, which developed among humans following this activity, including unusual size, physical strength, six fingers, six toes, animal appetite for blood and even lion-like features among men (2 Sam 21:20; 23:20).

The same method used in animals is pretty much the same application to human genes. But they have developed a a chip of sorts, they are working on even less invasive methods like a tattooing which penetrates through the skin. In any case both application will transfer genetic material which will bond to the Carbon 12,the number of a man 666.Carbon-12; one of 5 elements in the human DNA is composed of 6 protons, 6 electrons and 6 neutrons, ...

As I have said many times before ,
You can't make this stuff up!

Preceding Generations Forgotten Ecclesiastes 1:8-10

…8All things are wearisome; Man is not able to tell it. The eye is not satisfied with seeing, Nor is the ear filled with hearing. 9That which has been is that which will be, And that which has been done is that which will be done. So there is nothing new under the sun. 10Is there anything of which one might say, "See this, it is new "? Already it has existed for ages Which were before us.…

Through science's fallen angel knowledge they have developed an application which can be placed in the flesh through the hand or forehead.


Genome editing in primary cells and in vivo using viral-derived Nanoblades.

Man already has the technology to affect the genome of humans. I guess it is just a matter of , with what?

 

Over the years, I've seen many goofy excuses from RCs trying to justify having a pope, but THIS whopper's a CLASSIC ! This shows real desperation to come up with something THIS silly !

There's nothing anywhere saying Joseph had another wife. And James, etc. were called the BROTHERS of Jesus.

YOU weren't there, either, but we have SCRIPTURE. And Scripture says Joseph had no "relations" with Mary til after Jesus was born. It does NOT say he NEVER had "relations" with her!

And we know Calvin, Luther, etc. had several other incorrect beliefs as well.

 

The Book of Jasher aint SCRIPTURE.

 

A lot of things AINT scripture according to the shearing locust. Makes no difference to the fact that Jasher's account clearly rings true for today. A TRUTH that has transcended time and fits dead center with what Christ said would be the case for these days. Both Enoch and Jasher written thousands and thousands of years ago, and relevant today? I'll go with those prophets, acceptable or not to you or what any man deems as Canon. Considering you pretty much line up with this half backed thread of the "Protestant's" it is clear not only is grammar not your forte, nor is commonsense, or obvious truth.

It is in my Canon of choice . And since those two prophets spoke something waaaaaay before your hokey pokey crew and is proven true , simply based on the instant replay of jacked men of this world, I 'll take my chances and go with them.
Ethiopia and their gifts:
A Message to Cush
…6They will all be left to the mountain birds of prey, and to the beasts of the land. The birds will feed on them in summer, and all the wild animals in winter. 7At that time gifts will be brought to the LORD of Hosts— from a people tall and smooth-skinned, from a people widely feared, from a powerful nation of strange speech, whose land is divided by rivers— to Mount Zion, the place of the Name of the LORD of Hosts.

This has not happened yet. Verse 6 are the events immediately following the 6th seal which will leave many, many people dead and the birds will have to clean up their carcasses . But notice , the faithful of Ethiopia make it. WHY? because they too hold the Dogma of the faith and too venerate mother Mary. They shall bring gifts to Israel, to Mount Zion were Christ will dwell within and over His Elect . This is the Marriage Feast of the Lamb. It will be a spiritual renewal, in which the Elect gathered from the four wins will be part of. They will bring their gifts to the Holy Anointed of Zion who have the interior "Marker" of Christ with in, and have the Father's name written on their minds. Some , like myself already have study in what Ethiopia possesses .