MS wrote: SteveR wrote: The reformers supported....blah,blah. Martin Luther, blah, blah, blah.... --------- "Thus saith the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD. Jeremiah 17:5. AV
More on Luther and the peasant Anabaptist uprisings
"When he(Luther) was in later years reproached for such violent language(as aforementioned), and for inciting territorial lords to merciless slaughter (they killed over 100,000 peasants), he answered defiantly: â€˜It was I, Martin Luther, who slew all the peasants in the insurrection, for I commanded them to be slaughtered. All their blood is upon my shoulders. But I cast it on our Lord God who commanded me to speak in this way.â€™[Martin Luther, Werke, Erlangen edition, vol. 59, p. 284] (William McGrath, Anabaptists: Neither Catholic nor Protestant, http://www.pbministries.org/History/William%20R.%20McGrath/the_anabaptists_part1.htm).
Fraud detector wrote: Yes, we can see why the murder of believers by religious unbelievers would cause you to laugh out loud, being a religious unbeliever yourself of the reformed catholic persuasion.
My laughter was directed at the ETWN poster and those foolish enough to believe the WCF almost supported the Anabaptist position, losing by just one vote. Mind you. this poster pretends to understand theology, but was completely ignorant of the fact that anabaptists were still being executed for their rebellions during the Assembly.
The list of Reformers that supported executions of rebellious anabaptists is a long one, and I wouldnt call them 'unbelievers.'
For example, lets take Martin Luther who at first supported anabaptists. However, their wickedness led him to say
" On the obstinate, hardened, blinded peasants, let no one have mercy, but let everyone, as he is able, hew, stab, slay, lay about him as though among mad dogs, . . . . so that peace and safety may be maintained... etc.â€™ [Martin Luther, Werke, Erlangen edition, vol. 24, p. 294; vol.15, p. 276; passim.]
Before this thread goes any further off topic. This exchange began when Observer made up an absurd lie that a WCF committee was one vote away from scrapping infant Baptism. Then to add shame to his lie, he requested a history of the Reformed standard of this doctrine.
Rome and the Lutherans too....I think the harsh punishments stem from their desire to use Christianity as a cloke for their wicked hearts. A spirit anabaptist forefathers have given some of their children here
Rodney K. wrote: Yeah. I couldn't find a "tongue-in-cheek" emoticon.
You certainly perfected the nose in cheeks without emoticon idolatry
btw: even when they fled, other nations executed them
"Henry VIII (1509-1547) was known for his persecution of foreign Anabaptists. Between 1535-1546 large numbers of foreign "Anabaptists" were executed or burned at the stake for heresy. In 1535, some 25 Dutch Anabaptists who had fled the Amsterdam Uprisings were quickly rounded up. They were arrested, condemned for heresy and burned at the stake within the month."
ladybug wrote: I could care less what Reformers embraced and why; there's NO scriptural support for it, regardless of what happened in the past. Ignorance is believing and exalting history over holy Writ, .
I suggest you google the vile deeds done at the Anabaptist Kingdom of Munster, and you will see you are following in your fathers footsteps and why your children are left behind.
Hosea 4:6 My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children.
ladybug wrote: SteveR., - "As for a person who stirs up division, after warning him once and then twice, have nothing more to do with him." Titus 3:10
Live in ignorance if you wish
However, its important that Christians understand why the Reformers took the path they did. Christians should know why Reformers embraced infant Baptism as a doctrinal standard. Unfortunately for you, it was Anabaptists that were stirring up violent divison. Early Anabaptists behaved more like ISIS in Iraq than Christians, using baptism as a tool for social rebellion, mayhem, lust and envy. Their acts were so vile & wicked, local governments throughout Europe hunted them down like dogs by the thousands. When these heretics were finally able to control themselves, they were included in various Acts of Toleration that allowed their sects to continue.
Observer wrote: I asked you to prove it not re-iterate it Brains! Duh! Since no one has asked me to prove my point, I'm real surprised that you would ask for it. Oh wait, you're illiterate and struggle with comprehension, or is it that you really are an inmate in a lunatic asylum. Hmmm - keep taking the meds. Wait again... Since you've not made good any other lie you've ever posted up and you are a recognised internet Troll, I'm gonna take my own advice and stop feeding you. Bye Bye Chimera!
I underestimated your ignorance of the Reformation. The oldest of the Reformed Confessions, the Begic Confession in 1567, confirmed infant Baptism as a doctrinal standard. That is three generations before the Westminster Assembly.
Whatever study guides you are using should be thrown away
ladybug wrote: Today's Christianity loves to adhere to denominations, creeds, covenants and documents written by men. We need to get back to the old paths
I travel quite a bit, and find your statement in error. Churches today do not like to follow creeds, confessions and catechisms. Further, its becoming more a more difficult for me to find Confessional Churches to worship at when traveling. Too many Churches say they only follow the Bible, yet beguile their followers with anti Biblical doctrine. I found that to be the case at too many 'independent Baptist' churches. Granted, Confessions can be a crutch for the lazy, and even misused by the wicked, but those like the WCF have been very helpful for Gods Elect, especially when they expose false teachings(like those of the RCC).
Obstinate Infant Baptism was long accepted in the Reformed Churches before the WCF. The only vote I know that was close was whether to allow 'private' infant baptisms. All see you cant authenticate the one vote win you falsely claimed
works dont work wrote: History records the importance and the grace blessed endeavour of true Christians in the use and application of the WCF and the Catechism. Those therefore who attack the WCF/Catechism and dismiss or deride it are attacking one of the tools which God uses to build His Church and Doctrines. We need to help them perceive the truth and sound doctrines.
edit: I noticed one of those attacking the WCF claimed infant baptism was in question. Infant Baptism was well established in the Reformed Churches prior to the WCF, the only disagreements were in the mechanics and if private baptisms were acceptable. It seems the enemies of the WCF only have lies and deception as their tools
Lurker wrote: OK, John. I'll think on it today and share some thoughts tonight. While I'm doing that I'll pray for your headache. I woke up this morning with one too.... although I doubt as bad as what you get. Bummer.
Lurker I wasnt going to respond to this interaction, but I think I backed myself into it with a post so I will offer this. John has asked you about marriage and Christians being dead to the law. When you give your answer, please consider that marriage came BEFORE the LAW. Marriage is part of creation
Molsten D wrote: That is not necessarily true. You wouldn't be lying to us would you Steve, just to support your favourite heretics? Remember Steve the lost souls of the Roman Catholic idolatry and blasphemy conspiracy need help - NOT support in their fallacies. "IF" you know the truth God will expect you to tell them about it.
Oh, I agree we are called on to help our brethren seek a more pure faith. Im just saying that all Catholics arent lost and are Christian, just as all current PCUSA members arent lost. I do strive to encourage Christians of all stripes to seek a worship that is worthy of their calling.
William S. Sutherland wrote: Thug acts like a thug and dies like a thug. Where was his new-found faith when he was roughing up the store clerk and stealing property? Where was his repentance unto life when he was beating the police officer in the face, fracturing the bone around his eye, and trying to steal his weapon? A profession is not the same as possession. Jesus said there will be many who profess to know Him and He will say unto them, "I never knew you."
I would go even further and say the man was looking for trouble, and received his due
Romans 13:1 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Romans 13:2 Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
Elsdent wrote: PCUSA:- Ordains women to eldership 1930 Ordains women to pulpit 1956 Became pro-abortion with United Methodist church and others 1973. (Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice) Pro Homosexual 1998 I think this "ECO" crowd left it too late to adhere to Scripture.
I would draw BACK FURTHER, to when they no longer required head coverings for women. It was an invitation to the dishonour that followed
1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven.
John Yurich USA wrote: The one and only Anti-Christ is living now? Where is the one and only Anti-Christ at? The one and only Anti-Christ will not come on the scene until near the Second Coming of Christ. And thus the Pope and no Pope has ever been the Anti-Christ.
The beguiled love to bask in their spiritual ignorance