This blog had an open unmoderated comment policy for quite a while, then spammers and some nefarious people became a nuisance, so moderation was turned on.
I've gotten a number of comments recently all basically saying the same thing: Luther was an awful person, with some comments going further, by extension inferring, James Swan is also an awful person.
Frankly, I don't have time to interact with comments like that. If you don't like Martin Luther or John Calvin, or the Reformation period of history, that's fine. You are entitled to your opinion. There are things about Luther, Calvin, and the Reformation that I don't like either.
So, here's what I propose: I'm not going to allow the "Luther was an awful person" stuff on my previous entries. Generally, I've noticed those types of comments don't actually engage the material I'm putting forth.
However: this entry will be moderated but left open for the "Luther was an awful person" comments. Feel free to post away and express yourself about how terrible you think Luther was. I'll publish them all, unless they are crude or trouble my tender heart in some way.
Posts
10 comments:
This made me smile.
BTW, we are all, to the last man, terrible persons.
A smile is good!
Here's a recent comment left under another entry:
By refusing to publish my posts exposing unrepentant Luder's many idolatrous errors, you are in fact failing to *DENY* self, therefore violating one of Jesus' commands, to *DENY* self. Worldly, cancel-culture, cult behavior. This is antichrist. Your actions indicate you are a hearer of His word but not a doer of His word. James 1:22 pronounces you as deceived (another way of failing to DENY self). Why wouldn't the antichrist, deceived person cling to idolatry? No doubt you worship a "jesus" who is unable to discern your continual walk of darkness, which is idolatry. You are supposed to flee idolatry, but you actually run into its arms. All to stubbornly protect Luder's supposed non-idolatrous reputation Pathetic, right? The deceived, idolatrous, antichrist soul doesn't even realuze he is on a waterdlide to eternal torment. Those deceived by Luder's idolatry are unaware of being deceived. If you would not like censurship applied to your person, but willingly do it unto others, you are violating another of Jesus' commands in Matt 7:12, the Golden Rule. More antichrist disobedience (and failure to DENY self) on your part which further deceives your soul! Is that what you want to build for yourself?? Better consider the cost -- anothers of Jesus' commands you are breaking. Faith in idols saves nobody. Faith in your self-assertive, Christ-disobeying, deceived actions will only get you eternally destroyed. You'll be all suprised and rebellious, but you were warned during this life. Seems like the spiritual fruits of Luderanism are pretty rotten; that is true of all false religious movements, Catholics and Orthodox included. I know of no non-idolatrous denomination. If you find yourself unable to repent of your deceived, sin-saturated deeds, just remember there is a very good reason for it: "without Me you can do nothing" -- John 15:5 or even 2 Thess 2:10-12 My repentance and apologies if you have recently died, been incarcerated, or hospitalized -- preventing your positive, self-denying, Christ-obedient actions.
Holy wow! Lol. I've been curious about whether or not you still get these kinds of messages after all these years. I can't remember exactly how long it's been since a certain person was posting here that gave you plenty of reasons to moderate posts here. Let's call him GF. Does he still try to post on your blog or did he stop a while ago?
I've been curious about whether or not you still get these kinds of messages after all these years.
Yes! I have a backlog of them, I think I may simply cut-and-paste them here.
Let's call him GF. Does he still try to post on your blog or did he stop a while ago?,
I'm not entirely sure... however... on a Catholic / Protestant FB group I visited earlier this year, I'm almost positive I interacted with him, about.... Siamese cats. He was pleasant, and I was cordial, and that was the extent of it.
Here's another recent gem, left under another post here:
"Don't you know that he used to offer to help little old ladies cross the street only to trip them half way across, and then run them over with his own horse?" Andrew 1:13 AM, AUGUST 25, 2009
Never heard that one, but maybe it was Martin's sincere following his own advice: "Would God I could commit some real brave sin [EDIT: how about betrayal of trust and horse-trampling little old ladies in the name of Holy Spirit?] to ridicule the devil." That'll show Jesus how much he hates the devil! Martin trampling Jesus Golden Rule command at Matt 7:12 shows he would be a self-deceived son of the devil. He will rue for eternity his life of pretending to be Jesus' disciple, taking His name in vain. Luke 6:46-49 and James 1:22 strike again, and to Martin's detriment, whose spiritual father came to steal, kill, and destroy. "If you've done it to the least of these, you have done it unto Me" -- Jesus. "He also hated puppies." Really? My hounds are loyal lovers of their daddy, me. Ditto my kitty. Even my feeder-quality goldfish pets (17 cents / Walmart) seem to like me! To the impure, everything is impure. Sign of reprobates. Titus 1:15,16, look it up. Martin needed a sharp rebuke. Not that it would have done any good. "Many are called, few are chosen." "Without Me, little foolish martin can do nothing good." His idolatry, trampling old ladies, and desiring to bravely sin in God's name does not count as good works. Martin's faith without good works was dead. No wonder he despised book of James -- it literally crushed him continually over being a hearer of Jesus' word, but not a doer, thereby deceiving himself (antichrist), which is still disobeying Jesus' command to not be deceived!! -- James 1:22 explodes little martin's claims again. So true -- "without Me martin can do nothing good nor avoid idols". On the fifth day of creation, God made puppies and saw that it was good and blessed them, Gen 1:21-23. Apparently Martin hated what God saw as good and blessed. Muslims also hate dogs, and they are also spiritual reprobates. Woe to those who put bad for good and put dark for light. Around this issue God-mocking Luther has more in common with evil Muslims than with God. Just another nail in his own coffin. He should never have been a teacher. Yep, another violation of book of James! I can see why he detested that book now! It continually crushed and "stabbed him with a heavy pike used to hunt boars". Like Haiman, he is hung on his own gallows. Pretty clever by half, Marty. Good thing I never asked Marty to come into my heart (TIC) or set about to defend his many antichrist teachings.
Boa resposta.
Nossa, eu fiquei impressionado com o comentário desse Andrew! Como é que alguém consegue acreditar numa asneira dessas (risos)? Acho que os papistas aprenderam certinho com o Papado como se deve proceder: com mentiras. Eles refletem bem o que é a seita romanista: um amontoado de idolatria, baixaria e mentiras descaradas. Mas isso é de se esperar de pessoas que acreditam mais no Papa do que nos próprios sentidos ao aceitarem a heresia da transubstanciação.
Blogs that allow anonymous comments are not a good idea. I wish people with talent would move on to different forums, and allow people to comment who show their face, voice, and identify themselves. Things like Blogger, Youtube, Twitter, and Discord are bad platforms. I know opening a Blogger profile is easy, but it encourages personal attacks & angry comments.
I am a Traditional Roman Catholic (though not in communion with Francis or any of the Vatican II believers), and I strongly denounce much of what the Roman Church did for centuries. I think many people are ignorant about the deeds of Alexander VI, Clement VII, and Leo X (among many others). They've not read the history, instead blindly repeating statements about the primacy of Rome and personal attacks on Luther. My faith is that of St. Antony, St. Leo, St. Gregory, St. Romuald, and St. Benedict. In this way, the Roman Church has departed, but so have the Reformers. The personal life of Luther doesn't change my view. I do support the primacy of Rome, but not when a heretic is elected. Ideally the church will be united and we can again appeal to Rome for orthodoxy.
I've read some books on the Renaissance papacy & The Sack of Rome, and that really opened my eyes to the truth about these men. I've also read about St. Romuald who wrote about the horrific state of the clergy in the 11th century. The papacy really went downhill around the 10th century, and it just got worse by the time of the Renaissance. There have been better popes, but many didn't really want to clean up the church. I tend to criticize all of them from the 16th century onward, even Pius V and Pius X.
Hi James Newlin:
Thanks for stopping by. Agree about anonymous comments... I do though understand that some people want (and should!) protect their identities online. There are though a number of anonymous drive-by nasty comments by people too afraid to identify themselves. Since the advent of Facebook, Twitter, etc., Blogger does not get the same amount of traffic. I maintain this blog primarily because I don't have the time or patience right now to move.
In regard to your other comments, I don't have anything significant to add, other than agreeing in essence that church history is complicated, particularly when trying to navigate through Roman Catholicism. I suspect you'd get a lot of debate over your comments with those who defend Rome at all costs.
Post a Comment