Why there is satan throne in the Vatican

keeth · Feb 23, 2015

The Virtual Jewish History Tour

Rome

By Rebecca Weiner

During the Reformation, in 1555, Pope Paul IV decreed that all Jews must be segregated into their own quarters (ghettos), and they were forbidden to leave their home during the night, were banned from all but the most strenuous occupations and had to wear a distinctive badge — a yellow hat. More than 4,700 Jews lived in the seven-acre Roman Jewish ghetto that was built in the Travestere section of the city (which still remains a Jewish neighborhood to this day) If any Jews wanted to rent houses or businesses outside the ghetto boundaries, permission was needed from the Cardinal Vicar. Jews could not own any property outside the ghetto. They were not allowed to study in higher education institutions or become lawyers, pharmacists, painters, politicians, notaries or architects. Jewish doctors were only allowed to treat Jewish patients. Jews were forced to pay an annual stipend to pay the salaries of the Catholic officials who supervised the Ghetto Finance Administration and the Jewish Community Organization; a stipend to pay for Christian missionaries who proselytized to the Jews and a yearly sum to the Cloister of the Converted. In return, the state helped with welfare work, but gave no money toward education or caring for the sick. These anti-Jewish laws were similar to those imposed by Nazi Germany on the Jews during World War II. During the Reformation, talmudic literature as a whole was banned in Rome. On Rosh Hashana 1553, the Talmud and other Hebrew books were burned. Raids of the ghetto were common, and were conducted to insure that Jews did not own any "forbidden" books (any other literature besides the Bible and liturgy). It was forbidden to sing psalms or dirges when escorting the dead to their burial place. Every Saturday, a number of Jews were forced to leave the ghetto and listen to sermons delivered in local churches. Also, whenever a new Pope was ordained, the Jews presented him with a Torah scroll. Jews continued to live in the ghetto for almost 300 years.

JewishEncyclopedia.com Persecution under Pope Paul IV.
Under Paul IV. (1555-59) the Jews were subjected to further oppression. By his direction they were deprived of valuable franchises, enclosed within the ghetto, subjected to further taxation, limited in their commerce to old clothing, prohibited from practising any art other than medicine, and this not among the Christians, and forbidden the use of their calendar. As a means of satisfying his feeling of hatred against the Spaniards, Paul IV. practised cruelty toward the Portuguese Jews; he sent an inhuman commissioner, a certain Cesare Galuaba, to Ancona with orders to incarcerate all who did not accept baptism and to condemn them to the stake. Thus terrorized, sixty-three renounced their faith. Twenty-three men and one woman, whose names have been handed down in chronicles, preferred death to apostasy, and these were all hanged together and afterward burnt on the Piazza della Mostra ("Shalshelet ha-?abbalah" of Gedaliah ibn Ya?ya, and local records). (Compare D. Kaufmann, "Les Vingt-quatres Martyrs d'Ancona," in "Rev. Ét. Juives," xxxi. 222-230.) Thoroughly alarmed, many of the Jews fled. Prayers for the dead are still said, and the elegy composed by Jacob de Zano is still recited annually in the synagogues for these martyrs.

Jackson123 · Feb 23, 2015

keeth said:

The Virtual Jewish History Tour

Rome

By Rebecca Weiner

During the Reformation, in 1555, Pope Paul IV decreed that all Jews must be segregated into their own quarters (ghettos), and they were forbidden to leave their home during the night, were banned from all but the most strenuous occupations and had to wear a distinctive badge — a yellow hat. More than 4,700 Jews lived in the seven-acre Roman Jewish ghetto that was built in the Travestere section of the city (which still remains a Jewish neighborhood to this day) If any Jews wanted to rent houses or businesses outside the ghetto boundaries, permission was needed from the Cardinal Vicar. Jews could not own any property outside the ghetto. They were not allowed to study in higher education institutions or become lawyers, pharmacists, painters, politicians, notaries or architects. Jewish doctors were only allowed to treat Jewish patients. Jews were forced to pay an annual stipend to pay the salaries of the Catholic officials who supervised the Ghetto Finance Administration and the Jewish Community Organization; a stipend to pay for Christian missionaries who proselytized to the Jews and a yearly sum to the Cloister of the Converted. In return, the state helped with welfare work, but gave no money toward education or caring for the sick. These anti-Jewish laws were similar to those imposed by Nazi Germany on the Jews during World War II. During the Reformation, talmudic literature as a whole was banned in Rome. On Rosh Hashana 1553, the Talmud and other Hebrew books were burned. Raids of the ghetto were common, and were conducted to insure that Jews did not own any "forbidden" books (any other literature besides the Bible and liturgy). It was forbidden to sing psalms or dirges when escorting the dead to their burial place. Every Saturday, a number of Jews were forced to leave the ghetto and listen to sermons delivered in local churches. Also, whenever a new Pope was ordained, the Jews presented him with a Torah scroll. Jews continued to live in the ghetto for almost 300 years.

JewishEncyclopedia.com Persecution under Pope Paul IV.
Under Paul IV. (1555-59) the Jews were subjected to further oppression. By his direction they were deprived of valuable franchises, enclosed within the ghetto, subjected to further taxation, limited in their commerce to old clothing, prohibited from practising any art other than medicine, and this not among the Christians, and forbidden the use of their calendar. As a means of satisfying his feeling of hatred against the Spaniards, Paul IV. practised cruelty toward the Portuguese Jews; he sent an inhuman commissioner, a certain Cesare Galuaba, to Ancona with orders to incarcerate all who did not accept baptism and to condemn them to the stake. Thus terrorized, sixty-three renounced their faith. Twenty-three men and one woman, whose names have been handed down in chronicles, preferred death to apostasy, and these were all hanged together and afterward burnt on the Piazza della Mostra ("Shalshelet ha-?abbalah" of Gedaliah ibn Ya?ya, and local records). (Compare D. Kaufmann, "Les Vingt-quatres Martyrs d'Ancona," in "Rev. Ét. Juives," xxxi. 222-230.) Thoroughly alarmed, many of the Jews fled. Prayers for the dead are still said, and the elegy composed by Jacob de Zano is still recited annually in the synagogues for these martyrs.

If I were Catholic, I will question myself, Why vatican hated Jew so much?

The bible teach not to hate any body, not racist.

Vatican claim to be Christian, why so racist?

ThomistColin · Feb 23, 2015

Jackson123 said:

Ask the same of Luther, Wycliffe, Calvin, and Zwingli.

Jackson123 · Feb 24, 2015

ThomistColin said:

Are they hate Jew? If so, I will follow Jesus, not them, they are not my savior. Jesus is.

Is there such law in protestant country? Jew must life in specific area, wear yellow thingy ?

Sophia · Feb 24, 2015

ThomistColin said:

The difference is that those men did not claim to speak as the Vicar of Christ on earth.

If a man says "you don't have to follow anyone but Christ and His Word" and you believe him... does that make you a follower of that man? Or just one who recognises the Truth in the statement.

Those who agree with the reformers are not bound to them, but freed from following any but Christ.
That is why the sins of the papacy are not equatable with the sins of the reformers.
Because of the grandiose claims of the papacy and the entire government of Catholicism,
their sins shame the name of Jesus as much as their own names,
and anyone who willfully follows them is guilty of the same.

tribesman · Feb 24, 2015

Jackson123 said:

All this upheaval for this ugly artwork? The errors of Rome aside, this is not "the throne of satan". Don't mind all the stuff of these alarmist gossip blogs. Not spiritually healthy to buy in to what they say.

prodigal · Feb 24, 2015

..................

didymos · Feb 24, 2015

ThomistColin said:

Buncha priests saying: 'we hate Hitler THIIIIIIS much.'

mikeuk · Feb 24, 2015

It always amuses me that protestants and evangelicals are united on only one thing. Generally unreasoned criticism of RCC

Yet if you look at this forum you see several different protestant theologies of justification, many theologies of the eucharist, more of baptism, with punchups on every single one, and many matters besides, not to mention priesthood, role of women , homosexuality so on. So taking a random mix and match of those views, and hundreds of people holding more or less every and any combination of those and a dozen other issues, 99.9% at least of you are false teachers.There are tens of thousands of denominations, and beyond that, the non denomination

The only question is whether there is any protestant teaching the truth here at all! Which statistically is unlikely , and certainly only a few if any....

So the only thing you agree on is anti RCC, but then Protestantism was founded on a negative: most ignoring the historical fact that Luther Held RCC in high esteem, as he did Mary, never wanted a schism only to tidy the place up a bit, a broom to sweep it cleaner.

Since the truth does not change, neither should doctrine over millenia and the only denomination that can claim it is essentially unchanged is the object of all of your hatred! RCC

My suggestion therefore is we start thinking what is it in common that makes us christians? and if you read the Nicene Creed and catechism, you will see we are indeed christians!

Or you can focus on your differences, and since you all disagree with each other enough to fracture with monotonous regularity, so you do not need RCC for a good punchup, on average you all have a different theology from the poster who posted last, so why not leave RCC alone with all the differences protestants have?. And perhaps it is that lack of agreement, driving you to common hatred - as the ONLY thing you unite on.!

For those that care about truth in the original picture....moses seat was the symbol of authority of teaching, the cathedra of the episcopate, the continuation of that to present day. Plus ca change. The real church "pillar and foundation of truth" does not change much, it has authority to keep it that way.

Sophia · Feb 24, 2015

mikeuk said:

It always amuses me that protestants and evangelicals are united on only one thing. Generally unreasoned criticism of RCC

Yet if you look at this forum you see several different protestant theologies of justification, many theologies of the eucharist, more of baptism, with punchups on every single one, and many matters besides, not to mention priesthood, role of women , homosexuality so on. So taking a random mix and match of those views, and hundreds of people holding more or less every and any combination of those and a dozen other issues, 99.9% at least of you are false teachers.There are tens of thousands of denominations, and beyond that, the non denomination

The only question is whether there is any protestant teaching the truth here at all! Which statistically is unlikely , and certainly only a few if any....

So the only thing you agree on is anti RCC, but then Protestantism was founded on a negative: most ignoring the historical fact that Luther Held RCC in high esteem, as he did Mary, never wanted a schism only to tidy the place up a bit, a broom to sweep it cleaner.

Since the truth does not change, neither should doctrine over millenia and the only denomination that can claim it is essentially unchanged is the object of all of your hatred! RCC

My suggestion therefore is we start thinking what is it in common that makes us christians? and if you read the Nicene Creed and catechism, you will see we are indeed christians!

Or you can focus on your differences, and since you all disagree with each other enough to fracture with monotonous regularity, so you do not need RCC for a good punchup, on average you all have a different theology from the poster who posted last. And perhaps it is that lack of agreement, driving you to common hatred!

For those that care about truth in the original picture....moses seat was the symbol of authority of teaching, the cathedra of the episcopate, the continuation of that to present day. Plus ca change.

But we all agree that we are parts of the Body, and that we have differing roles and focus, and that we have Only One Head, who is Christ.
And we all agree that the Pope is not that Head.

mikeuk · Feb 24, 2015

Sophia said:

So do we.
Next ....

prodigal · Feb 24, 2015

quote..
The only question is whether there is any protestant teaching the truth here at all! Which statistically is unlikely , and certainly only a few if any.... mmm

Pope Stephen VI: had his predecessor exhumed, tried, de-fingered, and thrown to the river

Pope Benedict IX: the Pope who sold the papacy

Pope Sergius III: ordered the murder of another pope and started the "pornocracy"

Pope John XII: raped female pilgrims and invoked pagan gods

Pope Leo X: sold indulgences, killed cardinals

Pope Alexander VI: nepotism, orgies and the rise of the Borgia family

Pope Innocent IV: introduced torture on the Inquisition

Pope Urban VI: complained he did not hear enough screaming when his Cardinals were tortured

[h=2]Pope John XV: split the church's finances among his relatives[/h]
[h=2]Pope Clement VII: his power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked[/h]
true teaching thru the centuries. mmmm

mikeuk · Feb 24, 2015

prodigal said:

Bad people do bad things. In whatever denomination you are too! Power Corrupts.
Since RCC is so big, we have and have had more than most.

St Paul did very bad things as well,sent christians to death in his time, indeed reproaches himself for lack of resistance to sins of the flesh. But we all still consider his gospels part of the divinely inspired canon! (or most of us do...I even saw a thread, where some people didnt like Paul ,so decided he does not apply either!)

BUT Contrary to popular opinion "infallibility" is not a mark of a man. Popes are sinners, some more than others.
"infallibility" is a mark of an action, only regarding statement on doctrine, made ex cathedra, and in the history of the church it has only been done a handful of times. And anyway - all of you believe in "infallibility" in the context RCC has it. It is simply a description of when the holy spirit acts in a man to do something divinely inspired - eg writers of the gospels. So the only question is - who does it apply to and when. And as you know our opinion comes from Matthew 16:18 etc. I am not asking others to agree on that. In other regards the pope is just a sinner like the rest of us.

The substance of what I said is true. Most protestants have fundamental disagreements with all others, and when they dislike a view enough, they tend to start a new denomination. So why point only at differences within RCC?

The only thing I see united here, is a united dislike of RCC. But for all the bad popes, our doctrine has remained essentially unchanged.

I hope however we do all agree on the Nicene Creed...

Sophia · Feb 24, 2015

mikeuk said:

Bad people do bad things. In whatever denomination you are too! Power Corrupts.
Since RCC is so big, we have and have had more than most.

St Paul did very bad things as well,sent christians to death in his time, indeed reproaches himself for lack of resistance to sins of the flesh. But we all still consider his gospels part of the divinely inspired canon! (or most of us do...I even saw a thread, where some people didnt like Paul ,so decided he does not apply either!)

BUT Contrary to popular opinion "infallibility" is not a mark of a man. Popes are sinners, some more than others.
"infallibility" is a mark of an action, only regarding statement on doctrine, made ex cathedra, and in the history of the church it has only been done a handful of times. And anyway - all of you believe in "infallibility" in the context RCC has it. It is simply a description of when the holy spirit acts in a man to do something divinely inspired - eg writers of the gospels. So the only question is - who does it apply to and when. And as you know our opinion comes from Matthew 16:18 etc. I am not asking others to agree on that. In other regards the pope is just a sinner like the rest of us.

The substance of what I said is true. Most protestants have fundamental disagreements with all others, and when they dislike a view enough, they tend to start a new denomination. So why point only at differences within RCC?

The only thing I see united here, is a united dislike of RCC

I hope however we do all agree on the Nicene Creed...

But the authority of ex cathedra was used to sell indulgences, form and execute the Inquisitions, sack Constantinople, and form the lenten tradition of fish fridays.
Catholics see the Pope as the head of the Church, and the abuse of such powerful claims brings shame.

You claim an unbroken lineage of authority going back to Peter, yet yourself called many in that lineage "evil".
The lineage was and is broken, and given elsewhere.

keeth · Feb 24, 2015

Yea, freedom from oppression, abuse, and mind control are nothing to be protesting. Those stupid Reformers actually complained about and wanted freedom from such. What got into their inferior little heads? Just because Rome wanted to and did burn many of them and anyone else who dared to differ from them, this is no reason to protest. They should have, and we should all submit to Rome once again. What is our problem?

Medieval Sourcebook:
Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, 1302

THE BULL UNAM SANCTAM , 1302
The Bull 'Unam Sanctam', in which Pope Boniface VIII asserted his rights against King Phillip the Fair of France, is a landmark in the history of the doctrine of Papal Primacy.

The following English translation of 'Unam' is taken from a doctoral dissertation written in the Dept. of Philosophy at the Catholic University of America, and published by CUA Press in 1927.

UNAM SANCTAM (Promulgated November 18, 1302)
Urged by faith, we are obliged to believe and to maintain that the Church is one, holy, catholic, and also apostolic. We believe in her firmly and we confess with simplicity that outside of her there is neither salvation nor the remission of sins, as the Spouse in the Canticles [Sgs 6:8] proclaims: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. She is the only one, the chosen of her who bore her,' and she represents one sole mystical body whose Head is Christ and the head of Christ is God [1 Cor 11:3]. In her then is one Lord, one faith, one baptism [Eph 4:5]. There had been at the time of the deluge only one ark of Noah, prefiguring the one Church, which ark, having been finished to a single cubit, had only one pilot and guide, i.e., Noah, and we read that, outside of this ark, all that subsisted on the earth was destroyed.

We venerate this Church as one, the Lord having said by the mouth of the prophet: 'Deliver, O God, my soul from the sword and my only one from the hand of the dog.' [Ps 21:20] He has prayed for his soul, that is for himself, heart and body; and this body, that is to say, the Church, He has called one because of the unity of the Spouse, of the faith, of the sacraments, and of the charity of the Church. This is the tunic of the Lord, the seamless tunic, which was not rent but which was cast by lot [Jn 19:23-24]. Therefore, of the one and only Church there is one body and one head, not two heads like a monster; that is, Christ and the Vicar of Christ, Peter and the successor of Peter, since the Lord speaking to Peter Himself said: 'Feed my sheep' [Jn 21:17], meaning, my sheep in general, not these, nor those in particular, whence we understand that He entrusted all to him [Peter]. Therefore, if the Greeks or others should say that they are not confided to Peter and to his successors, they must confess not being the sheep of Christ, since Our Lord says in John 'there is one sheepfold and one shepherd.' We are informed by the texts of the gospels that in this Church and in its power are two swords; namely, the spiritual and the temporal. For when the Apostles say: 'Behold, here are two swords' [Lk 22:38] that is to say, in the Church, since the Apostles were speaking, the Lord did not reply that there were too many, but sufficient. Certainly the one who denies that the temporal sword is in the power of Peter has not listened well to the word of the Lord commanding: 'Put up thy sword into thy scabbard' [Mt 26:52]. Both, therefore, are in the power of the Church, that is to say, the spiritual and the material sword, but the former is to be administered _for_ the Church but the latter by the Church; the former in the hands of the priest; the latter by the hands of kings and soldiers, but at the will and sufferance of the priest.

However, one sword ought to be subordinated to the other and temporal authority, subjected to spiritual power. For since the Apostle said: 'There is no power except from God and the things that are, are ordained of God' [Rom 13:1-2], but they would not be ordained if one sword were not subordinated to the other and if the inferior one, as it were, were not led upwards by the other.

For, according to the Blessed Dionysius, it is a law of the divinity that the lowest things reach the highest place by intermediaries. Then, according to the order of the universe, all things are not led back to order equally and immediately, but the lowest by the intermediary, and the inferior by the superior. Hence we must recognize the more clearly that spiritual power surpasses in dignity and in nobility any temporal power whatever, as spiritual things surpass the temporal. This we see very clearly also by the payment, benediction, and consecration of the tithes, but the acceptance of power itself and by the government even of things. For with truth as our witness, it belongs to spiritual power to establish the terrestrial power and to pass judgement if it has not been good. Thus is accomplished the prophecy of Jeremias concerning the Church and the ecclesiastical power: 'Behold to-day I have placed you over nations, and over kingdoms' and the rest. Therefore, if the terrestrial power err, it will be judged by the spiritual power; but if a minor spiritual power err, it will be judged by a superior spiritual power; but if the highest power of all err, it can be judged only by God, and not by man, according to the testimony of the Apostle: 'The spiritual man judgeth of all things and he himself is judged by no man' [1 Cor 2:15]. This authority, however, (though it has been given to man and is exercised by man), is not human but rather divine, granted to Peter by a divine word and reaffirmed to him (Peter) and his successors by the One Whom Peter confessed, the Lord saying to Peter himself, 'Whatsoever you shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in Heaven' etc., [Mt 16:19]. Therefore whoever resists this power thus ordained by God, resists the ordinance of God [Rom 13:2], unless he invent like Manicheus two beginnings, which is false and judged by us heretical, since according to the testimony of Moses, it is not in the beginnings but in the beginning that God created heaven and earth [Gen 1:1]. Furthermore, we declare, we proclaim, we define that it is absolutely necessary for salvation that every human creature be subject to the Roman Pontiff.

Jeff_56 · Feb 24, 2015

the substance of everything you posted is false. (poster of post 73) . (as other ekklesia(true believers) have pointed out repeatedly; and from Scripture, and by Yahweh's Inspiration and by Yahshua's grace).

protestants may make errors, but they still are separate from the rcc heresy- rcc is satanic heresy=false gospel = totally evil.

yes "your doctrine" has remained essentially unchanged, or not. doesn't matter. "your doctrine" is heresy.

no, no ekklesia agrees with the roman catholic anything - the rcc uses anything and everything including marketing souls
as hasatan does ; hasatan is ruler of pope and of rcc--- the light of ekklesia in Yahshua(the Savior) has nothing to do with the total darkness of the rcc.

mikeuk · Feb 24, 2015

keeth said:

Actually Luther did not. He wanted some practices cleaned up, he stated that he held RCC in high regard, never wanted schism and so on.

It is only such as Calvin, who reading his rants on some verses in his commentaries clearly wanted to be pope himself, and usurp the very authority - that is interpretation of scripture - that the magisterium held.

As Luther pointed out, it opened pandoras box, to every Tom Dick and Harry making their own version of christianity up, since which have been 10000 schisms, since none of them believe the same things, how can any be the true church?.

As regards the final point...yes - I am obliged to follow the teaching of the pope and magisterium. If I did not believe the catechism so produced , I would not be a catholic. We do not get to mix and match, or create a denomination in our own image as protestants do.

Back to my essential point. The only thing I see protestants united on is dislike of RCC - A negative. And I think it is lack of unity on anything else, that makes it a rallying cry. It is a pity protestants do not unite around a proper creed. Even the ones that have such (like westminster confession) have optouts. There is not even unity in Presbyterian thinking even on that.

I think we would all do better to focus on what we do agree on. Hopefully the infallible scripture, and the basic expression of faith in the nicence creed.

mailmandan · Feb 24, 2015

This picture always gave me the creeps!

didymos · Feb 24, 2015

mikeuk said:

It's understandable that you left out Sally, but I wonder why you failed to mention Mary.

(Apparently she was of major importance for the foundation of a certain 'church.')

keeth · Feb 24, 2015

Yes, we can all pick and choose from the words of those whose writings are very proliferate, and make them say as we wish. Luther's real sentiments towards Rome developed over time and experience until he finally came to the following and correct conclusion -

[FONT=&quot]“[/FONT][FONT=&quot]I will send you these compositions of mine, that you may judge whether I am right in my divination when I assert, that the true Antichrist mentioned by St. Paul reigns in the court of Rome and is, as I think I can prove, a greater pest than the Turks.” (Dr. Martin Luthers Sammtliche Schriften edited by Johann Georg Walch, vol. 15, col. 2430; translated in Waddington, History of the Reformation, vol. 1, p. 201. Hereafter Luther’s Schriften, without other specification, will mean this Walch edition.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “I am sifting the pontifical decrials with a view to my disputation [at Leipsig]; and, to whisper to you the truth, I am not determined whether the Pope be Antichrist himself or only his apostle, so cruelly is Christ (which is the truth) corrupted and crucified by him in his decrials. I am in perfect torture when I consider that the people of Christ are thus mocked, under the pretence of the laws and name of Christ.” (Luther, Schriften, vol. 21a, col. 156; translated in Waddington, History of the Reformation, vol. 1, p. 201.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “I am practically concerned, and can hardly doubt any more, that the Pope is really the Antichrist, whom the world expects according to a general belief, because everything so exactly corresponds to the way of his life, action, words, and commandments.” (Translated from Luther, Schriften, vol. 21a, col. 234. In all translation a faithful, literal rendering, rather than a free, literary translation, is followed.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “ We here are of the conviction that the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist, against whose deceit and vileness all is permitted for the salvation of souls. Personally I declare that I owe the Pope no other obedience than that to Antichrist.” (Luther, Schriften, vol. 15, col. 1693.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “ I cry aloud on behalf of liberty and conscience, and I proclaim with confidence that no kind of law can with any justice be imposed on Christians, whether by men or angels, except so far as they themselves will; for we are free from all. If such laws are imposed on us, we ought so to endure them as still to preserve the consciousness of our liberty. We ought to know and steadfastly to protest that a wrong is being done to that liberty, though we may bear and even glory in that wrong; taking care neither to justify the tyrant nor to murmur against the tyranny. ‘Who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? (1 Pet. 3:13.) All things work together for good to the elect of God. Since, however, there are but few who understand the glory of baptism and the happiness of Christian liberty, or who can understand them for the tyranny of the Pope- I for my part will set free my own mind and deliver my conscience, by declaring aloud to the Pope and all papists, that, unless they shall throw aside all their laws and traditions, and restore liberty to the churches of Christ, and cause that liberty to be taught, they are guilty of the death of all the souls which are perishing in this wretched bondage, and that the papacy is in truth nothing else than the kingdom of Babylon and of very Antichrist. For who is the man of sin and the son of perdition, but he who by his teaching and his ordinances increases the sin and perdition of souls in the Church; while he yet sits in the Church as if he were God? All these conditions have now for many ages been fulfilled by the papal tyranny. It has extinguished faith, darkened the sacraments, crushed the gospel; while it has enjoined and multiplied without end its own laws, which are not only wicked and sacrilegious, but also most unlearned and barbarous.” (Luther, First Principles, pp. 196, 197 (Schriften, vol. 19. Cols. 70, 71).[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “ Neither is that which Matthew hath foretold, in ch. 24, touching that Horrible Abomination (to wit) Antichrist, a less certain Signs to me then [than] the former, namely that under his Kingdome, there should be and prevail, extream blindness, the most pernicious Errors, and the highest wickednesses. All which things do most wretchedly flourish in the kingdom of the Pope, and that in the greatest impudency and tyranny that can be.” (The signs of Christ’s coming and of the Last Day, the substance of a sermon of Martin Luther, p. 6.)[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot] “ Oh, Christ, my Lord, look down upon us and bring upon us thy day of judgment, and destroy the brood of Satan in Rome. There sits the Man, of whom the Apostle Paul wrote (2 Thess. 2:3,4) that he will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God,- that Man of Sin, that Son of perdition. What else is papal power but sin and corruption? It leads souls to destruction under thine own name, O Lord! …. I hope the day of judgment is soon to dawn. Things can and will not become worse than they are at this time. The papal see is practicing iniquity to its heights. He suppresses the Law of God and exalts his commandments above the commandments of God.” (Dr. Martin Luthers sammtliche Werke (Erlangen edition), vol. 21, p.339.) [/FONT]

Why there is satan throne in the Vatican

keeth

Guest

Jackson123

Senior Member

ThomistColin

Banned

Jackson123

Senior Member

Sophia

Guest

tribesman

Senior Member

prodigal

Guest

didymos

Guest

mikeuk

Guest

Sophia

Guest

mikeuk

Guest

prodigal

Guest

mikeuk

Guest

Sophia

Guest

keeth

Guest

Jeff_56

Banned

mikeuk

Guest

mailmandan

Senior Member

didymos

Guest

keeth

Guest