False Prophets

[epostle1]

Luther was anything but normal. He was insane.

Luther's god was an overbearing and abusive father who acted capriciously and violently in response to any minor infraction. Luther actually hated that god if you read his autobiographical material. This deity could only be placated by total submission and trust in his might and "goodness." Spiritual passivity was essential because any effort by Luther to be good himself would be a futile attempt to detract from the "goodness" of his deity. If Martin Luther did not suffer from severe bipolar manic-depressant illness with frank psychosis during his periods of mania, he would never have invented a purely formal definition of 'righteousness' that was evacuated of all moral content and inspired millions of others to settle for a sub-Christian notion of discipleship…

Luther lived with his paramour for 1 1/2 years before marrying her. He was complicit in the bigamy of Philip of Hess. He encouraged gangs of thugs to invade convents and rape the nuns therein.

Lutherans are for the most part, good Christians. I am not going to post reams of documents supporting the belief of Luther's insanity. It just leads to Lutheran bashing and that is not my intention. That gets nowhere. But the record needs to be set straight about Luther. I have no desire to offend my Lutheran brothers and sisters.

 

[Axehead]

Luther was anything but normal. He was insane.

Luther's god was an overbearing and abusive father who acted capriciously and violently in response to any minor infraction. Luther actually hated that god if you read his autobiographical material. This deity could only be placated by total submission and trust in his might and "goodness." Spiritual passivity was essential because any effort by Luther to be good himself would be a futile attempt to detract from the "goodness" of his deity. If Martin Luther did not suffer from severe bipolar manic-depressant illness with frank psychosis during his periods of mania, he would never have invented a purely formal definition of 'righteousness' that was evacuated of all moral content and inspired millions of others to settle for a sub-Christian notion of discipleship…

Luther lived with his paramour for 1 1/2 years before marrying her. He was complicit in the bigamy of Philip of Hess. He encouraged gangs of thugs to invade convents and rape the nuns therein.

Lutherans are for the most part, good Christians. I am not going to post reams of documents supporting the belief of Luther's insanity. It just leads to Lutheran bashing and that is not my intention. That gets nowhere. But the record needs to be set straight about Luther. I have no desire to offend my Lutheran brothers and sisters.

It does not matter if you think the vessel was insane. God used him to expose the lie of indulgences and reveal the truth of Justification by faith and other things. And the Reformation was not about one man, but many brave souls that were willing to stand up to the iron fist of the Vatican. We don't deify man, God is still our God and Jesus Christ is still the One Mediator.

A good friend of mine told me this and I think it encapsulates the thoughts of many:

We have to respect Luther's stand for the light which God gave him, and, that in rebelling against the mother Church, he was willing to risk his life for the sake of conscience.

Axehead

 

[epostle1]

Luther's life was never at risk. He played it up as one of his delusions, and anti-Catholic myth makers have been running with it ever since. He was invited to the Vatican to state his case, and refused to go.

As far as Martin himself is concerned, O good God, what have we overlooked or not done? What fatherly charity have we omitted that we might call him back from such errors? For after we had cited him, wishing to deal more kindly with him, we urged him through various conferences with our legate and through our personal letters to abandon these errors. We have even offered him safe conduct and the money necessary for the journey urging him to come without fear or any misgivings, which perfect charity should cast out, and to talk not secretly but openly and face to face after the example of our Savior and the Apostle Paul. If he had done this, we are certain he would have changed in heart, and he would have recognized his errors. He would not have found all these errors in the Roman Curia which he attacks so viciously, ascribing to it more than he should because of the empty rumors of wicked men. We would have shown him clearer than the light of day that the Roman pontiffs, our predecessors, whom he injuriously attacks beyond all decency, never erred in their canons or constitutions which he tries to assail. For, according to the prophet, neither is healing oil nor the doctor lacking in Galaad.​

But he always refused to listen and, despising the previous citation and each and every one of the above overtures, disdained to come. To the present day he has been contumacious. With a hardened spirit he has continued under censure over a year. What is worse, adding evil to evil, and on learning of the citation, he broke forth in a rash appeal to a future council. This to be sure was contrary to the constitution of Pius II and Julius II our predecessors that all appealing in this way are to be punished with the penalties of heretics. In vain does he implore the help of a council, since he openly admits that he does not believe in a council.​

more at Bull of Pope Leo X issued June 15, 1520​

 

[maccauk11]

I believe the APostacy started evne before Jesus left the earth.

Why do we keep looking for a physical representation of the Kingdom. It is already within us
Luke 17: 20-21. This is the Truth that many of us find hard to accept. This is the freedom that the Lord gave those who love him.
The True church cannot be seen or touched it is "no part of the world" . Paul also spoke about the true church as one being not built by human hands and we can enter into with boldness and go right into the presence of Almighty God. This is spiritual and not physical.

The True church cannot be seen or touched it is "no part of the world" . Paul also spoke about the true church as one being not built by human hands and we can enter into with boldness and go right into the presence of Almighty God because there we have our High Priest who when on earth opened up the the way for us to enter the holy of holies. Again this is spiritual and not physical.

Every church on earth is counterfeit a deception and an illusion in opposition to the real thing. Jesus put an end to religious ways at the cross and opened up the way for us. Listen to him and him only and you will never be deceived. God himself will teach you the truth and lead you in the way you should go through the Holy Spirit. The church Paul spoke about in Hebrews is clean undefiled and has a leader that will never be corrupted.

It's when a believer realizes this that he can be set free. The freedom Jesus spoke about. The cry from him in revelation for those who love him, is him warning us to "get out of her my people". Just like when he says if anyone says "here is Christ" or "he is here" do not believe them Matthew 24: 23-26. Millions of our brothers and sisters have not heeded his words.

The judgement is upon the churches.. Therefore any earthly representation is counterfeit and an illusion or delusion to the reality of the real thing . Brothers and Sisters, when are you going to wake up and stop following men who lead you away form True Worship. The true worshippers worship in Spirit and Truth, they have no need for anyone to teach them anything.

All things have been accomplished. We walk through this life serving him, living a life of justice and mercy towards others. Our heavenly father does not need anything form us, he does not require sacrifices or works. We enter into his rest by letting ourselves be free from man. We rid ourselves of the weight of sin that the churches keep us enslaved in. We live non judgmental lives. Love God and love our neighbour.

 

[epostle1]

I believe the APostacy started evne before Jesus left the earth.

Some doubted. Matthew 28:17 That's all that scripture says on the matter. Doubt is not apostasy. He didn't leave us, He promised to be with us until the end of the age. Apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; technically you have to be a Christian before you can be an apostate. Apostasy is not something that can be declared by any individual believer.It must be ruled by an entity that determines what the Christian faith is to begin with.Otherwise, we would have apostasy thrown around all over the place.

Why do we keep looking for a physical representation of the Kingdom. It is already within us
Luke 17: 20-21. This is the Truth that many of us find hard to accept. This is the freedom that the Lord gave those who love him.
The True church cannot be seen or touched it is "no part of the world" . Paul also spoke about the true church as one being not built by human hands and we can enter into with boldness and go right into the presence of Almighty God. This is spiritual and not physical.

The True church cannot be seen or touched it is "no part of the world" . Paul also spoke about the true church as one being not built by human hands and we can enter into with boldness and go right into the presence of Almighty God because there we have our High Priest who when on earth opened up the the way for us to enter the holy of holies. Again this is spiritual and not physical.

Jesus said that the unity of Christians would be objective evidence to the world that He had been sent by God (John 17:20-23). How can the world see an invisible "unity" that exists only in the hearts of believers?

God himself will teach you the truth and lead you in the way you should go through the Holy Spirit.

Chapter and verse, please. Nowhere in scripture does it say God will teach each individual directly without the Church.

The church Paul spoke about in Hebrews is clean undefiled and has a leader that will never be corrupted.

True.
Exodus 28:1 and 19:6 shows the three offices of the Old Testament priesthood
(1). high priest Aaron (Ex. 28:1);
(2). Ministerial priests Aaron's sons (Ex. 19:6; 28:1); and
(3). Universal priests Israel (Ex. 19:6).

The New Testament priesthood also has three offices:
(1) High Priest Jesus Christ (Heb. 3:1);
(2) Ministerial priests: the ordained bishops and priests (Rom. 15:16; 1 Tim. 3:1, 1 Tim. 3:8; 1 Tim 5:17; Titus 1:7); and
(3) Universal priests - all the baptized (1 Pet. 2:5,9; Rev. 1:6).

It's when a believer realizes this that he can be set free. The freedom Jesus spoke about. The cry from him in revelation for those who love him, is him warning us to "get out of her my people". Just like when he says if anyone says "here is Christ" or "he is here" do not believe them Matthew 24: 23-26. Millions of our brothers and sisters have not heeded his words.

"get out of her my people" does not mean get out of the Catholic Church, or any church for that matter. That is bible twisting and pretzel theology at its worst, proclaimed by self-righteous bigots and apostates who interpret the Bible for themselves to their own destruction. (2 Peter 3:16) They are a malignant tumor in the body of Christ, with a proliferation of opinions and new denominations being formed on a daily basis. IT IS A SCANDAL!!! God is calling all true believers to work together for the common good of humanity!. To transformation of hearts, healing, forgiveness of the past, and overcoming the obstacle of prejudice. What you mean, Newbie, is that millions of people are not heading YOUR words!

God's voice is a still, small voice, not the screaming of pompous amoral hypocrites running around telling everybody how wrong they are. Run fast from false teachers like Matt Slick, Dave Hunt, L. Boettner, "Dr." Pickering, Alexander Hyslop, Jackkk Chickkk, and legions like them. They flood the earth with their gospel of hate, seeking to devour the innocent Child within you. (Rev. 12:17) OPEN YOUR EYES! They will tell you there is no priesthood. They will tell you the twelve thrones Matthew 19:23–30 are only in heaven and not on earth. They are in/on BOTH! Pray about which web sites are of God and which ones are of Satan. Watch out for the ones that babble on about Babylon. Don't be fooled by these liars with their self -proclaimed authority; their noisy gongs and clanging symbols, who care not a whit about the downtrodden, the poor, the hungry, the lonely. They appeal to the ignorant and fear-based just so they can make money with their hate propaganda.

Times are changing. God is doing a great work in the churches. I believe a Fourth Great Awakening is at hand, a New Evangelization has already begun, and the scandal of division will diminish within the next 20-30 years.
We need each other, we need to pray, we need to listen to that still, small Voice.

These are true prophesies that every Christians should read. It was presented in 1975, well before 9/11

 

[ccfromsc]

Y'all are a scary lot! h34r: Why so? Why so negative? Have you not been redeemed by the blood of Christ? Then rejoice! Tell others to rejoice! Cause the Kingdom of God is at hand!

When you look at a glass of water half full what do you see?
A glass of water half full?
A glass of water half empty? :huh:

After reading some of your posts here I would believe that we are all damned and there is no hope. No faith in God. Why are you all like that?

 

[epostle1]

I'm not. These are true prophesies that every Christians should read. It is full of hope.

 

[Axehead]

Luther's life was never at risk. He played it up as one of his delusions, and anti-Catholic myth makers have been running with it ever since. He was invited to the Vatican to state his case, and refused to go.

Well, we don't want to be "anti-Catholic myth makers" so I think its time for some more Roman Catholic Church quotes. The Roman Catholic Church states that she never makes mistakes and therefore never needs to change her decisions and declarations. Let's take a look.

Was Luther Right about His Opposition to the Roman Catholic Church? (Let's see what Father Schroeder says)

"There were not wanting bishops who expressed regret at the early dissolution of the Council (Fifth Lateran, 1512-1517): yet it is difficult to see what would have been the advantage of its continuance. Only a few months later (October 31, 1517) Luther affixed to the castle church door his ninety-five theses. No council, certainly no council with Leo X at its head and surrounded by an array of corrupt Cardinals and self interested bishops, could have stemmed the storm of revolt. The evil was too widespread and its roots lay too deep to be destroyed over night. Many salutary reform decrees had been enacted by this Council of the Lateran, but unfortunately they were not enforced. In the highest ecclesiastical circles there does not appear to have been any real desire for reform. Leo X did not hesitate to ignore repeatedly the decrees in the making of which he played a principle role. His curia remained as worldly as ever. Many bishops instead of recognizing the urgent need of reform in themselves and in the secular clergy, thought of it only in reference to the religious orders, whose privileges were an obstacle to their increasing the source of revenue. The custom of bestowing ecclesiastical dignities on children continued and lastly the curse of pluralism and commendatory benefices remained. It might be added that one of the most flagrant and crying abuses of the time, the traffic in indulgences, did not receive a word of condemnation from the Council" (Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, Father H.J. Schroeder, 486).

Looks like Luther was right.

Odious Greed for Money Gives Impetus for the Reformation
"The immediate cause was bound up with the odious greed for money, displayed by the Roman Curia, and shows how far short all efforts at reform had hitherto fallen" (Cath. Ency., IX, 166).

"The Pope (Leo X) was either unwilling or not in a postion to regulate the unworthy and immoral conduct of many of the Roman courtiers" (Cath. Ency., IX, 165)

"John Tetzel began to preach in Germany the indulgences proclaimed by Leo X" (Cath. Ency., IX, 163)

Pope Leo issued 2 Papal Bulls against Luther. The first Bull, Exsurge Domine (Arise, O Lord) decreed that Martin Luther's writings should be publicly burned.

In response, Martin Luther publicly burned the first Papal Bull (Exsurge Domine) against him.

On 29 November 1520, Luther published a second response to the bull entitled Assertion of All the Articles Wrongly Condemned in the Roman Bull. Luther's commentary on proposition #18 provides a representative example of its general tone: "I was wrong, I admit it, when I said that indulgences were 'the pious defrauding of the faithful.' I recant and say, 'Indulgences are the most pious frauds and imposters of the most rascally pontiffs, by which they deceive the souls and destroy the goods of the faithful.'" Luther also published his On the Freedom of a Christian that same month. Although this work was not penned as a direct response to the bull, it nevertheless reaffirmed Luther's commitment to certain themes censured therein, including the primacy of ecumenical councils over papal decrees. (Source: http://en.wikipedia..../Exsurge_Domine)

On 10 December 1520, Luther burned the Papal Bull
"Since they have burned my books, I burn theirs. The canon law was included because it makes the pope a god on earth. So far I have merely fooled with this business of the pope. All my articles condemned by Antichrist are Christian. Seldom has the pope overcome anyone with Scripture and with reason."

The text of the first Papal Bull against Martin Luther: Exsurge Domine

The breach between Luther and the papacy was finalized on 3 January 1521, when on account of Luther's failure to comply, the Pope issued the bull Decet Romanum Pontificem to declare that he had been formally excommunicated.

The text of the second Bull, Decet Romanum Pontificem

A sentence from the 2nd Bull.
"On all these we decree the sentences of excommunication, of anathema, of our perpetual condemnation and interdict; of privation of dignities, honours and property on them and their descendants, and of declared unfitness for such possessions; of the confiscation of their goods and of the crime of treason; and these and the other sentences, censures and punishments which are inflicted by canon law on heretics and are set out in our aforesaid missive, we decree to have fallen on all these men to their damnation."

So, Luther is decreed a heretic. So, let's take a look at a few Catholic quotes about "heretics" (there are many more).

What to do with Heretics? Kill them!
(382 A.D.) - 4th Century
"Heresy was first called a capital crime by Theodosius (Cath. Ency., VII, 260).

Heretics burned at the stake after the 11th century
"The burning of heretics was first decreed in the eleventh century" (Cath. Ency., VII 260)

What does the Pope Claim?
"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" (Great Encyclical Letters, 304)

Middle Age Cruelty and Burning at the Stake are Defendes
"The charge of cruelty is also easy to meet. All repressive measures cause suffering or inconvenience of some sort; it is their nature. But they are not therefore cruel. The father who chastises his guilty son is just and may be tender-hearted. Cruelty only comes in where the punishment exceeds the requirements of the case. Opponents say: Precisely; the rigors of the Inquisition violated all humane feelings. We answer: they offend the feelings of later ages in which there is less regard for purity of faith; but they did not antagonize the feelings of their own time, when heresy was looked on as more malignant than treason...Toleration came in only when faith went out; lenient measures were resorted to only where the power to apply more severe measures was wanting" (Cath. Ency., VII, 262).

For being "obstinate", death by fire or life imprisonment was "Due Punishment"
"In February, 1231, the Pope (Gregory IX) enacted a law for Rome that heretics condemned by he ecclesiastical court should be delivered to the secular power to receive their "due punishment". This "due punishment" was death by fire for the obstinate and imprisonment for life for the penitent. (Cath. Ency., VI 797)


Axehead

 

[us2are1]

The true way to know whether a prophet or anyone claiming to belong to the Lord God Almighty is real is by the Power of the Spirit being displayed by them. God bears witness of His own. The babelon mouth and cleverly devised words of deceivers are all over the globe. So in the mean time ask God for His Spirit and start practicing faith that moves mountains.. Because you will need it for yourself and all of your loved ones through the great tribulation. Which is about to strike everyone on earth.

Rev 11
10 -------- because these two prophets tormented those who dwell on earth.








.

 

[epostle1]

Well, we don't want to be "anti-Catholic myth makers" so I think its time for some more Roman Catholic Church quotes. The Roman Catholic Church states that she never makes mistakes and therefore never needs to change her decisions and declarations. Let's take a look.

Was Luther Right about His Opposition to the Roman Catholic Church? (Let's see what Father Schroeder says)

"There were not wanting bishops who expressed regret at the early dissolution of the Council (Fifth Lateran, 1512-1517): yet it is difficult to see what would have been the advantage of its continuance. Only a few months later (October 31, 1517) Luther affixed to the castle church door his ninety-five theses. No council, certainly no council with Leo X at its head and surrounded by an array of corrupt Cardinals and self interested bishops, could have stemmed the storm of revolt. The evil was too widespread and its roots lay too deep to be destroyed over night. Many salutary reform decrees had been enacted by this Council of the Lateran, but unfortunately they were not enforced. In the highest ecclesiastical circles there does not appear to have been any real desire for reform. Leo X did not hesitate to ignore repeatedly the decrees in the making of which he played a principle role. His curia remained as worldly as ever. Many bishops instead of recognizing the urgent need of reform in themselves and in the secular clergy, thought of it only in reference to the religious orders, whose privileges were an obstacle to their increasing the source of revenue. The custom of bestowing ecclesiastical dignities on children continued and lastly the curse of pluralism and commendatory benefices remained. It might be added that one of the most flagrant and crying abuses of the time, the traffic in indulgences, did not receive a word of condemnation from the Council" (Disciplinary Decrees of the General Councils, Father H.J. Schroeder, 486).

Looks like Luther was right.

Odious Greed for Money Gives Impetus for the Reformation
"The immediate cause was bound up with the odious greed for money, displayed by the Roman Curia, and shows how far short all efforts at reform had hitherto fallen" (Cath. Ency., IX, 166).

"The Pope (Leo X) was either unwilling or not in a postion to regulate the unworthy and immoral conduct of many of the Roman courtiers" (Cath. Ency., IX, 165)

"John Tetzel began to preach in Germany the indulgences proclaimed by Leo X" (Cath. Ency., IX, 163)

Pope Leo issued 2 Papal Bulls against Luther. The first Bull, Exsurge Domine (Arise, O Lord) decreed that Martin Luther's writings should be publicly burned.

In response, Martin Luther publicly burned the first Papal Bull (Exsurge Domine) against him.

On 29 November 1520, Luther published a second response to the bull entitled Assertion of All the Articles Wrongly Condemned in the Roman Bull. Luther's commentary on proposition #18 provides a representative example of its general tone: "I was wrong, I admit it, when I said that indulgences were 'the pious defrauding of the faithful.' I recant and say, 'Indulgences are the most pious frauds and imposters of the most rascally pontiffs, by which they deceive the souls and destroy the goods of the faithful.'" Luther also published his On the Freedom of a Christian that same month. Although this work was not penned as a direct response to the bull, it nevertheless reaffirmed Luther's commitment to certain themes censured therein, including the primacy of ecumenical councils over papal decrees. (Source: http://en.wikipedia..../Exsurge_Domine)

On 10 December 1520, Luther burned the Papal Bull
"Since they have burned my books, I burn theirs. The canon law was included because it makes the pope a god on earth. So far I have merely fooled with this business of the pope. All my articles condemned by Antichrist are Christian. Seldom has the pope overcome anyone with Scripture and with reason."

The text of the first Papal Bull against Martin Luther: Exsurge Domine

The breach between Luther and the papacy was finalized on 3 January 1521, when on account of Luther's failure to comply, the Pope issued the bull Decet Romanum Pontificem to declare that he had been formally excommunicated.

The text of the second Bull, Decet Romanum Pontificem

A sentence from the 2nd Bull.
"On all these we decree the sentences of excommunication, of anathema, of our perpetual condemnation and interdict; of privation of dignities, honours and property on them and their descendants, and of declared unfitness for such possessions; of the confiscation of their goods and of the crime of treason; and these and the other sentences, censures and punishments which are inflicted by canon law on heretics and are set out in our aforesaid missive, we decree to have fallen on all these men to their damnation."

So, Luther is decreed a heretic. So, let's take a look at a few Catholic quotes about "heretics" (there are many more).

What to do with Heretics? Kill them!
(382 A.D.) - 4th Century
"Heresy was first called a capital crime by Theodosius (Cath. Ency., VII, 260).

Heretics burned at the stake after the 11th century
"The burning of heretics was first decreed in the eleventh century" (Cath. Ency., VII 260)

What does the Pope Claim?
"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" (Great Encyclical Letters, 304)

Middle Age Cruelty and Burning at the Stake are Defendes
"The charge of cruelty is also easy to meet. All repressive measures cause suffering or inconvenience of some sort; it is their nature. But they are not therefore cruel. The father who chastises his guilty son is just and may be tender-hearted. Cruelty only comes in where the punishment exceeds the requirements of the case. Opponents say: Precisely; the rigors of the Inquisition violated all humane feelings. We answer: they offend the feelings of later ages in which there is less regard for purity of faith; but they did not antagonize the feelings of their own time, when heresy was looked on as more malignant than treason...Toleration came in only when faith went out; lenient measures were resorted to only where the power to apply more severe measures was wanting" (Cath. Ency., VII, 262).

For being "obstinate", death by fire or life imprisonment was "Due Punishment"
"In February, 1231, the Pope (Gregory IX) enacted a law for Rome that heretics condemned by he ecclesiastical court should be delivered to the secular power to receive their "due punishment". This "due punishment" was death by fire for the obstinate and imprisonment for life for the penitent. (Cath. Ency., VI 797)


Axehead

Your accusation that "the church never makes mistakes" is based on typical funnymentalist ignorance, confusing infallibility with impeccability. I'm not going to bother counting the phoney quotes, lies, and twisted histories you pasted from A LIST OF FORGERIES. Your quote from Exsurge Domine does not exist in that document, I just read it. Your statements are half truths, misrepresentations, and outright lies. Grow up. When will you learn that not everything you find on web sites is authorive or true??? Seek a mature church instead of some fundie cult that can't give you the inner healing you need. You take pleasure in being scolded and you take pleasure in persecuting people who stand up against your immaturity. THAT IS WHY YOU KEEP HOUNDING ME. In the name of Jesus, I beg you, stop the persecution, and stop hounding me.

 

[Strat]

The new religion is emotionalism,emotionalism says that truth must be pleasant,likeable,it must make one feel good about themselves,it must stroke the ego,it must be popular since association with it will make one popular...which of course feels good.....emotionalism cannot accept truth from any source that it finds unappealing in any way...emotionalism is obsessed with things like "tone" and demeaner and cultural relevance since emotionalism believes that culture defines right and wrong,not God....indeed Jesus said many things the modern post christian emotionalist would never say.

The emotionalist will of course reject all of this because it exposes the childish foolishness of the religion...which of course does not make them feel good...they will whine about the tone and how impolite it is,ect,ect,ect....remember the emotionalist creed...it feels good to feel good about feeling good.

 

[epostle1]

False prophets of today are the ones who have made a business out of prophecy. They write books for sale at christian book stores. They tour and gather crowds of people and take up collections of money, while they are there. They speak soothing and faltering words to the listener, in Gods name, for the purpose of their business.

This time, I agree with you. And these liars are all over the Internet as well. Axehead is a sheep attracted to these snakes, regurgitating their venom thinking he is doing God a favor.

http://www.phatmass.com/directory/index.php/cat/30

http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=3604

Jack Chick's Lies: The Real Alberto Rivera (with a letter from an Alberto supporter and counter-reply)

 

[us2are1]

Son of Man,

2 Timothy 2:24

24 The Lord’s bond-servant must not be quarrelsome, but be kind to all, able to teach, patient when wronged, ​

25 with gentleness correcting those who are in opposition, if perhaps God may grant them repentance leading to the knowledge of the truth, ​

26 and they may come to their senses and escape from the snare of the devil, having been held captive by him to do his will.​

Scripture disagrees with your position.​

1 Cor 13

1 If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal. ​

2 If I have the gift of prophecy, and know all mysteries and all knowledge; and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing. ​

3 And if I give all my possessions to feed the poor, and if I surrender my body to be burned, but do not have love, it profits me nothing. ​

4 Love is patient, love is kind and is not jealous; love does not brag and is not arrogant, ​

5 does not act unbecomingly; it does not seek its own, is not provoked, does not take into account a wrong suffered,​

6 does not rejoice in unrighteousness, but rejoices with the truth; ​

7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.​

Now lets look closely at a quote from Jesus​

Matthew 12:34​

34 “You brood of vipers, how can you, being evil, speak what is good? For the mouth speaks out of that which fills the heart. ​

35 “The good man brings out of his good treasure what is good; and the evil man brings out of his evil treasure what is evil. ​

36 “But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. ​

37 “For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.” ​

Take notice of the 37th verse. True there is a time for sharp rebuke, just as is taught in Titus, but it is never taught to remove kindness. Now if it is Jesus uses a harsh tone with His speaking against men during this time, is it for us to judge Him weather or not He is using kindness?

Wow!! So what happened here? 5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner.

Wow!! So what happened here? 5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner.

Do you suppose that it means verbal as well as Physical. Harm can come in many forms. What measure of judgement for this do you think the Lord has instructed them to use?

 

[epostle1]

The new religion is emotionalism,emotionalism says that truth must be pleasant,likeable,it must make one feel good about themselves,it must stroke the ego,it must be popular since association with it will make one popular...which of course feels good.....emotionalism cannot accept truth from any source that it finds unappealing in any way...emotionalism is obsessed with things like "tone" and demeaner and cultural relevance since emotionalism believes that culture defines right and wrong,not God....indeed Jesus said many things the modern post christian emotionalist would never say.

The emotionalist will of course reject all of this because it exposes the childish foolishness of the religion...which of course does not make them feel good...they will whine about the tone and how impolite it is,ect,ect,ect....remember the emotionalist creed...it feels good to feel good about feeling good.

Perhaps you read my thread starter: TRUTH.

Jumping up and down in church has it's place.
Yelling in tongues has the right ordered time and place.
Devotional prayer alone with Jesus every day is essential.
Daily reading of the Bible is important.
Spiritual formation and doctrinal development is the responsibility of all Christians.
Submission to authority (priest, pastor, mentor) is essential.
Being your own authority in a church of one is a deception.

Saying all the right things (praise the Lord, halleluiah) and having all the right behaviors (waving arms, competing with others in quoting bible verses) does not mean you are a disciplined Christian. Church hopping to the best entertainment is not forming a community. It is infantile. Too many Christians are still on the breast milk of entertainment and emotionalism. When the hype wears off and God calls them to advance from breast milk to pablum or mashed bananas, they stop going to church. This is one reason of many why I left Protestantism and returned to my Catholic heritage. I like 7 course meals.

 

[justaname]

Wow!! So what happened here? 5 And if anyone wants to harm them, fire proceeds from their mouth and devours their enemies. And if anyone wants to harm them, he must be killed in this manner.



Do you suppose that it means verbal as well as Physical. Harm can come in many forms. What measure of judgement for this do you think the Lord has instructed them to use?

[sup]3 [/sup]And I will grant authority to my two witnesses, and they will prophesy for 1,260 days, clothed in sackcloth.”
[sup]4 [/sup]These are the two olive trees and the two lampstands that stand before the Lord of the earth. [sup]5 [/sup]And if anyone would harm them, fire pours from their mouth and consumes their foes. If anyone would harm them, this is how he is doomed to be killed. [sup]6 [/sup]They have the power to shut the sky, that no rain may fall during the days of their prophesying, and they have power over the waters to turn them into blood and to strike the earth with every kind of plague, as often as they desire. [sup]7 [/sup]And when they have finished their testimony, the beast that rises from the bottomless pit will make war on them and conquer them and kill them,

Have you or anyone you know been granted this authority by God? Are you one of the two witnesses?
Why would you attempt to justify unkindness with a text that speaks of a time when God's wrath is being poured out on mankind? Do you really believe this text gives you license to be demeaning to others?