The Pilgrims, also known as the Pilgrim Fathers, were the English settlers who traveled to America on the Mayflower and established the Plymouth Colony in Plymouth, Massachusetts, named after their final departure port of Plymouth, Devon.

Their leadership came from the religious congregations of Brownists, or Separatist Puritans, who had fled religious persecution in England for the tolerance of 17th-century Holland in the Netherlands.

The pilgrims of the Mayflower were a group of around 100 people seeking religious freedom from the Church of England.

However, pilgrims were not the only passengers on the Mayflower. Other Mayflower passengers included servants, contracted workers, and families seeking a new life in America.

Mayflower 400 years: How many people are related to the Mayflower pilgrims?

So, can the 35 million number really be true? Or might it be inflated by some wishful thinking?

The figure seems high, especially when you look at some of the numbers.

There were 102 passengers and around 30 crew that set sail on the Mayflower in September 1620 – some of them were fleeing religious persecution in England, but others were travelling to America to set up new commercial ventures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What’s more, Adams explained that the Pilgrims were the antithesis of cruel or racist conquers seeking to vanquish and plunder.

Instead, they “were illustrious by their intrepid valor no less than by their Christian graces … Their glory has not been wafted over oceans of blood to the remotest regions of the earth.

They have not erected to themselves colossal statues upon pedestals of human bones, to provoke and insult the tardy hand of heavenly retribution. But theirs was ‘the better fortitude of patience and heroic martyrdom.

Theirs was the gentle temper of Christian kindness; the rigorous observance of reciprocal justice; the unconquerable soul of conscious integrity.”

 

Our Founding Myth

Our knowledge of the Pilgrims comes from two primary sources. The earliest account is from Edward Winslow, whose report on the founding of the Plymouth settlement was published in London in 1622, just two years after the Pilgrims arrived in the New World.

The more detailed and authoritative account comes from the Pilgrims’ second governor, William Bradford, whose poignant and eloquent history Of Plymouth Plantation, written between 1630 and 1651, tells the story of the community from their formation in England to their exile in Holland and their eventual founding of the Plymouth Colony.

Any fair reading of the primary source documentation will give you all the evidence you need to understand why we chose the Pilgrims’ arrival at Plymouth as the date of “our true founding” and as the basis of our founding myth.

But before I examine that record, let me make clear what I mean by the term “founding myth.” To call an event a founding myth is not to denigrate it or to question its historical accuracy. The fact that Americans don’t understand this is an indictment of our education system, which no longer teaches the Classics (because learning Greek and Latin is apparently “racist” or something).

Our nation’s Founders understood the concept of a founding (or origin) myth in the same way the ancient Greeks and Romans did. A nation’s origin myth isn’t a falsification of history meant to deceive. Quite the contrary! It is a story rooted in history that reflects a nation’s most sacred values, rituals, and identity. To call something your founding myth is to state: This is who we were, this is who we are, and this is who we aspire to be.

An origin myth often describes the emergence of a new civilization out of the ashes of an older one.

Take, for example, the Aeneid, Virgil’s epic poem recounting the founding myth of ancient Rome. In one of the most memorable passages, Virgil provided us with a perfect reflection of the Roman concept of pietas, which means a religious and familial duty. Virgil described his hero, Aeneas, fleeing the burning city of Troy while holding the hand of his young son and carrying on his back his elderly father who is cradling in his arms their family’s household gods. In that beautiful tableau,

Aeneas reflects all the values the Romans held most sacred: He is protecting his family and honoring his gods, as he flees the fall of one civilization and courageously sets out to find another greater one in Rome.

 

There is a reason why we chose the Pilgrims and their establishment of the Plymouth Colony in 1620 as our origin myth, not the Virginians who settled in Jamestown over a decade before that date. Our reasoning had everything to do with the Pilgrims’ lack of racism. Americans have always aspired to be on the right side of history, and the Pilgrims were nothing if not righteous.

Their story embodies our most sacred American values. Like Aeneas fleeing the fall of Troy, the Pilgrims saw themselves as fleeing a cataclysmic conflagration about to engulf Europe. And like the Roman hero, they too hoped to forge a new civilization with a spark from the dying embers of the old one.

This is exactly how John Quincy Adams viewed the story of the Pilgrims.

In a speech in 1802 commemorating the landing at Plymouth, Adams described the Pilgrims as America’s origin myth; but unlike other nations, the heroes of our founding myth were clearly known to us by their historical record, and they were defined by their virtue, not by their conquest.

There’s also a class dimension to WASP culture that means the Pilgrim Fathers are hardly regarded as populist heroes, the poster boys of the present incumbent of the White House and his Make America Great Again supporters. WASP culture has traditionally been an upper class preserve, reinforced through marriage, inheritance, patronage, and elite schools and universities.

 

 

His Thanksgiving message became an annual tradition over the years. Limbaugh recounted the “True Story of Thanksgiving” in his book See, I Told You So. He also included the true story in his Rush Revere series.

“The point is, The True Story of Thanksgiving is spreading, and I couldn’t be happier about that. Bottom line: It is spreading. I’m just gonna cut to the chase here before getting into reading the text. The Real Story of Thanksgiving, going back to the very first early days of the Pilgrims arriving at Plymouth Rock, is that socialism failed,” Limbaugh said during his final Thanksgiving radio broadcast.

Then Limbaugh explains a part that few of us learned at school:

Now, here’s the part that has been omitted. The original contract the Pilgrims entered into in Holland — they had sponsors. They didn’t have the money to do this trip on their own. They had sponsors. There were merchant sponsors in London and in Holland. And these merchant sponsors demanded that everything that the Pilgrims produced in the New World would go into a common store, a single bank, if you will. And that each member of the Pilgrim community was entitled to one share.

So everybody had an equal share of whatever was in that bank. All of the land they cleared, all of the houses they built belonged to that bank, to the community as well. And they were going to distribute it equally, because they were gonna be fair. So all of the land that they cleared and all the houses they built belonged to everybody. Belonged to the community. Belonged to the bank, belonged to the common store. Nobody owned anything. They just had an equal share in it. It was a commune.

The Pilgrims established a commune, essentially. Forerunner of the communes we saw in the sixties and seventies out in California. They even had their own organic vegetables, by the way. Yep. The Pilgrims, forerunners of organic vegetables. Of course, what else could there be? No such thing as processed anything back then.

But William Bradford saw that it wasn’t working, and decided to take “bold action”:

Now, William Bradford, who had become the governor of the colony ’cause he was the leader, recognized that this wasn’t gonna work. This was costly and destructive, and it just wasn’t working. It was collectivism. It was socialism. It wasn’t working. That first winner had taken a lot of lives. The manpower was greatly reduced. So William Bradford decided to take bold action, which I will describe when we get back.

He assigned a plot of land to each family. Every family was given a plot of land. They could work it, manage it however they wanted to. If they just wanted to sit on it, get fat, dumb, happy, and lazy, they could. If they wanted to develop it, if they wanted to grow corn, whatever on it, they could. If they wanted to build on it, they could do that. If they wanted to turn it into a quasi-business, they could do whatever they wanted to do with it.

He turned loose the power of the capitalist marketplace. Long before Karl Marx was even born. Long before Karl Marx was a sperm cell in his father’s dreams, the Pilgrims had discovered and experimented with what could only be described as socialism, and they found that it didn’t work. Now, it wasn’t called that then. But that’s exactly what it was. Everybody was given an equal share. You know what happened? Nobody did anything. There was no incentive. Nothing worked. Nothing happened.

 

“The lesson is — The True Story of Thanksgiving is — that William Bradford and his Pilgrim community were thanking God for the blessings on their community after the first miserable winter of a documented failure brought on by their attempt at fairness and equality, which was socialism,” Limbaugh added.

“During that first winter — remember, they arrive in November — during that first winter, half of them, including William Bradford’s own wife, died of starvation, of sickness, exposure to the elements. Now we’re getting close to what you were taught in school. When spring finally came — and, by the way, writing that doesn’t do it justice.

Spring didn’t just finally come. It was a survival. It was an act of survival that you and I cannot possibly relate to or understand,” he said, explaining that this is where the story usually begins to take a turn in public schools.

“They did meet the Indians, the Native Americans who were there, who did help them in planting corn and fishing for cod. They showed ’em where the beavers were so the beavers could be skinned for coats, other things.

“But even at this, even with this degree of assistance from the Indians, the Native Americans, there wasn’t any prosperity yet. They had the Mayflower Compact. They had these laws they were living by, and there was no prosperity. And I wonder why,” he said.

“Now, this is important to understand here, folks, because this is where modern American history lessons end, with the Indians teaching the Pilgrims how to eat, how to fish, how to skin beavers, and all that,” he continued.   Never Forget: Rush Limbaugh’s Final ‘True Story of Thanksgiving’ (breitbart.com)

So Bradford introduced the basic tenets of capitalism, which completely changed the game for the Pilgrims in the New World.

“The success of that colony after they had abandoned socialism and tried what was essentially capitalism, the word spread throughout the Old World of this massive amount of prosperity that was there for the taking in the New World. And guess what happened? The New World was flooded with new arrivals,” he said.

 

 

WHO are they? 

In 381, Theodosius ordered the widespread persecution of pagans in Rome. He put an end on pagan rituals and traditions, destroyed a vast number of temples and considered magistrates as criminals each time they failed to put anti-pagan laws into practice in their areas. Later during the rule of Theodosius there were more laws that banned paganism. For instance, Pagan holidays were no longer observed, temple visits were not allowed, and witchcraft was banned, to name a few.  

Soon, Pagan priests were killed, and there was a desecration of holy sites and symbols. Death sentence and confiscation of property were the consequences faced by people who continued to practice paganism. These harsh edicts were also viewed as a means of declaring war against traditional religious practices, and Christianity was seen as the primary religion in the empire. 

Despite all of these sufferings, they remained true to their faiths. Some pagans defied the authority and the edicts that were passed, although this would mean risking their lives and their loved ones’. Yet, the anti-paganism laws became unbearable to the people, and many pagans were killed and tortured. 

Back in 300 AD, only a small percentage of people in Rome were made up of Christians. In fact, Christianity was considered as the empire’s minority religion where only 10 percent of the citizens practiced this religion. However, several decades later, it became Rome’s official religion, and most of the people converted from other faiths and adopted Christian practices. This became more evident during the persecution of pagans, which ended this traditional religion in the Roman Empire. 

 

In 381, Theodosius ordered the widespread persecution of pagans in Rome.

He put an end on pagan rituals and traditions, destroyed a vast number of temples and considered magistrates as criminals each time they failed to put anti-pagan laws into practice in their areas.

Later during the rule of Theodosius there were more laws that banned paganism. 

 

 

What did Separatists believe about the Church of England? 

The Mayflower Pilgrims were also known as Separatists because of their controversial religious views. Their key belief was that people should not be tied to their local parish church and should be free to gather with other like-minded Christians to form independent autonomous churches 

How did the Separatists feel about the Church of England How did the Puritans’ point of view about the Church of England differ from the Separatists? 

While the Separatists believed that the only way to live according to Biblical precepts was to leave the Church of England entirely, the Puritans thought they could reform the church from within. 

Did the Pilgrims disagree with the Church of England? 

The group of English colonists who settled in North America and later became known as the Pilgrim Fathers originated as a group of Puritans from Nottinghamshire and Lincolnshire. By 1605 this group had come to believe that their Christian faith was incompatible with the Church of England. 

What is the difference between Pilgrims and Puritans? 

Whereas 102 Pilgrims came over on the Mayflower, 1,000 Puritans came to Boston. Unlike the Pilgrims, the Puritans had an official charter from the King of England to establish a colony and had not separated from the Church of England. 

What did the Puritans have against the Church of England? 

The Puritans were English Protestants in the 16th and 17th centuries who sought to rid the Church of England of Roman Catholic practices, maintaining that the Church of England had not been fully reformed and should become more Protestant. 

Why didn’t the Puritans like Catholics? 

The Puritans left England because of Roman Catholicism. Either because of perceived threats by Catholics or Pseudo-Catholics or their detestation of the continued presence of Catholic influence in church, government, and society, Puritans believed there existed a better way of life outside the sway of Catholicism. 

What is the Puritan view of God? 

The Puritans were strict Calvinists, or followers of the reformer John Calvin. Calvin taught that God was all-powerful and completely sovereign. Human beings were depraved sinners. God had chosen a few people, “the elect,” for salvation. 

What are 5 values of Puritanism? 

Basic Tenets of Puritanism 

• Judgmental God (rewards good/punishes evil) 
• Predestination/Election (salvation or damnation was predetermined by God) 
• Original Sin (humans are innately sinful, tainted by the sins of Adam & Eve; good can be accomplished only through hard work & self-discipline) 
• Providence. 
• God’s Grace. 

 

Combined, both pillars led the pilgrims to conclude that the Church of England was naturally corrupt and incapable of reform. …

The origins behind the pilgrim’s ideological beliefs can be traced back to the county of Norfolk over seventy years prior to 1620.

Jewish refugees from Central and Eastern Europe 

At the beginning of the 1600s, a small number of Jews from Central Europe moves to Amsterdam. In addition, more and more Jews come from Eastern Europe, who faced persecution and a lack of rights from the first half of the seventeenth century.

Between 1646 and 1660, thousands of Jews in Poland and the west of the Russian Empire die at the hands of the Cossacks led by Bohdan Khmelnytsky.

Eventually, the Ashkenazi4 community in Amsterdam grows larger than that of the Portuguese. Up until this very day, these two groups determine the face of the Jewish orthodox community in Amsterdam. 

 

What do the Pilgrims see as the problem with the Church of England? 

What do the Pilgrims (Reformers) see as the problem with the Church of England? Answer: The Pilgrims thought the Church of England was becoming too powerful. The Pilgrims said that the Church was persecuting others who are trying to be “servants of God.” 

 

 

Why did the Founding Fathers leave England? 

Many colonists came to America from England to escape religious persecution during the reign of King James I. 

What religion were the founding fathers? 

Many of the founding fathers—Washington, Jefferson, Franklin, Madison and Monroe—practiced a faith called Deism. 

Are Quakers and Puritans the same? 

Although the Quakers may have resembled the Puritans in some religious beliefs and practices, they differed with them over the necessity of compelling religious uniformity in society. 

Why did Puritans dislike Quakers? 

Quakers had no need for ordained clergy of any kind in order to “talk to Jesus” directly. In the Society of Friends, everyone, including women, were equivalent to any minister or preacher. For Puritans in New England, this was not only blasphemous, but a threat to their highly structured way of life. 

Are Amish people Pilgrims? 

Like the Pilgrims and Puritans, the Amish migrated to America in search of religious freedom. But unlike other religious denominations, the Amish have retained the ways of their ancestors. 

What ethnicity were the Pilgrims? 

The Pilgrims, also known as the Pilgrim Fathers, were the English settlers who traveled to America on the Mayflower and established the Plymouth Colony in Plymouth, Massachusetts (John Smith had named this territory New Plymouth in 1620, sharing the name of the Pilgrims’ final departure port of Plymouth, Devon). 

When did Puritanism end? 

There is no consensus on when the Puritan era ended, though it is agreed that it was over by 1740. 

 

What religion did Pilgrim’s practice? 

And it begins with the pilgrims, who were Puritan Separatists, fleeing the Church of England, in search of a land where they could be religiously free. Had they not fled on religious conviction, perhaps the day of thanks would never come to be. About 100 Pilgrims sailed from England on the Mayflower in September 1620. 

 

 

“Bathing as you and I know it was very, very uncommon [among western Europeans] until the later part of the 18th century,” says W. Peter Ward, a professor emeritus of history at the University of British Columbia and author of the new book The Clean Body: A Modern History.

This went for people of all social classes. Louis XIV, a 17th-century king of France, is said to have only taken three baths in his entire life.

Both rich and poor might wash their faces and hands on a daily or weekly basis, but almost no one in western Europe washed their whole body with any regularity, says Ward.

The Separatist Pilgrims and the Puritans who followed them may have even thought that submerging their whole body in water was unhealthy, and that taking all of their clothes off to do so was immodest.

“The idea of being clean wasn’t closely associated with water in the 17th century anywhere in the western world,” Ward says.

Although bathhouses did exist in the colonies, they were not for bathing in the modern sense. Rather, bathhouses were thought of as a kind of medicinal cure, or else a place for wealthy people to relax. In the 1770s, the royal governor of the Colony of Virginia used his bathhouse to cool down on a particularly hot day. And the handful of baths Louis XIV took? Those were on the advice of a doctor, to treat his convulsions.

“Cleanliness, to the extent that people thought about it in the 17th century, had much more to do with what we now call underwear than anything else,” Ward says. Colonists kept themselves “clean” by changing the white linens under their clothes. The cleaner and whiter the linens, the cleaner the person—or so the thinking went.

“It was thought that the linen underwear was what really kept the body clean…because it was assumed that the underwear itself was the agent that cleaned the body; that it absorbed the body’s impurities and the dirt and the sweat and so on,” he says.

What are the two major differences between Puritans and Pilgrims? 

The most significant difference between the two groups is that while the Pilgrims desired a separation of church and state, the Puritans only wanted to purify the Church of England from within. The pilgrims did not want to belong to the Church of England, and they took to holding meetings in barns and homes. 

What was the first religion in America? 

Early Colonial era. Because the Spanish were the first Europeans to establish settlements on the mainland of North America, such as St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565, the earliest Christians in the territory which would eventually become the United States were Roman Catholics. 

 

WHO WERE THE PASSENGERS ON BOARD THE MAYFLOWER? 

The voyage of the Mayflower to the New World was a long, grueling and often painful one. Her passengers huddled within the leaking, cramped, storm-lashed ship, enduring seasickness and uncertainty for 10 long weeks before they landed at modern-day Massachusetts.  

But, while the reality of the journey may have been far from glamorous, the story of the passengers and the colony they founded has become one of the most fabled origin stories of the United States. So much so, many pride themselves on being descendants of the roughly 132 people who set sail from Plymouth, Devon. 

A good proportion of the passengers were radical Puritan separatists, who – disenchanted with the Protestant Reformation and the Church of England – wanted to establish a new community where they could live without fear of persecution.    

Renegade congregation in Nottinghamshire. Like Brewster, Bradford also lived in Holland for a time, before the pivotal voyage to America took place. Bradford was a key member of exploration parties who set off to explore possible locations for a settlement while others stayed behind on the anchored Mayflower. It was while he was away on one of these reconnaissance trips that his wife Dorothy fell overboard and drowned. 

 

The Ottoman Empire (Ottoman Turkish language: Devlet-i Aliye-i Osmaniye; Turkish language (Modern Turkish): Osmanlı İmparatorluğu) was an imperial power centered on the borders of the Mediterranean Sea that existed from 1281 (or 1299) to 1923 

 

The first Jewish refugees 

In 1492, life had become unbearable for Jews in Spain. The Roman Catholic Church banned all other religions. Jews, and Muslims too, fled the country. Many Jews also fled from Portugal. In Portugal, the Inquisition was also given free rein to persecute non-Catholics. Some become baptised to avoid persecution. Nevertheless, many of them were burnt at the stake.

The first Jews to move to Amsterdam, are Portuguese traders: Sephardim2, fleeing the Inquisition3. The city council is interested in the trade they bring with them from the Portuguese colonies in South America. They quickly switch from trade with Portuguese colonies to trade with Dutch colonies like in the Caribbean and Suriname.

During this era, Amsterdam grew into Europe’s most important port. The seventeenth century becomes the Dutch Golden Age. 

 

 

1517  Martin Luther published his arguments against the Catholic Church. This catalyst for the Reformation protested against the many clerical abuses such as nepotism, pluralism, and the selling of indulgences. 

Pluralism is a political philosophy that values diversity and equality in society. It suggests that people of different beliefs, backgrounds, and lifestyles can coexist in the same society and participate equally in the political process¹. Here are some key points about pluralism:

1. Definition: Pluralism recognizes that individuals with varying interests, beliefs, and lifestyles can peacefully coexist and engage in the governing process. It assumes that decision-makers will negotiate solutions that contribute to the overall “common good” of society.
2. Political Context: In government, pluralism anticipates that competing interest groups will share power. It is considered a fundamental element of democracy. For instance, in a pure democracy, each individual has the right to vote on all laws and court decisions.
3. Historical Roots: The argument for modern political pluralism traces back to early 20th-century England. Progressive writers objected to the isolation caused by unrestrained capitalism. They believed that pluralism, through economic and administrative decentralization, could counteract the negative aspects of industrialized society.
4. James Madison’s Influence: James Madison, often called the Father of the U.S. Constitution, advocated for pluralism. In the Federalist Papers No. 10, he argued that allowing many competing factions to participate equally in government would prevent factionalism from fracturing the young American republic.
5. Beyond Politics: Pluralism extends beyond politics. It also applies to culture and religion, emphasizing the value of diverse perspectives and coexistence.

Jan 28, 1521  Held in Worms, German, this formal assembly was held for deliberation to determine the fate of Martin Luther. He fled before a decision was made and disappeared for an undetermined amount of time. 

1525  The Anabaptist movement may have been an offset of Protestantism, or a movement of its own. While that is unknown, we know that the Amish, Apostolic Christain Church, Mennonites, and Hutterites are direct descendants of the Anabaptist movement. 

1530  As the primary confessional for the Lutheran movement, the document was never published because it was poorly written. It was, however, signed and accepted by John Calvin in 1540 and Martin Luther founded the first Luthern Church. 

1536 The Protestant Reformation caused the dissolution of many Monasteries after the rulers adopted other beliefs. Most chose to go with the Lutheran or Reformed beliefs and others failed to keep Catholism, with active resistance.  

1538  Christian 111 of Denmark was a strong believer in Martin Luther and his teachings, officially naming the Protestant religion and state religion of Norway and Denmark. 

The most notable reformer was German Theologian Martin Luther (1483-1546) 

Norfolk, Nebraska was initially explored by three scouts from a German Lutheran settlement in 1865

Freedom of conscience 

In 1572, the seven northern provinces of the Netherlands revolt to rid themselves of Spanish rule. They proclaim themselves the Republic of the Seven United Netherlands. A few years later in 1579, they sign the Union of Utrecht. One of the constitutional rights in this political agreement is that all residents enjoy personal freedom of conscience.

It is the first ever legal base for this human right in Europe.

In practice, it means that the Catholic Church is banned, but Catholics cannot be persecuted. It also means that Portuguese and Spanish refugees, who fled to the country in around the 1600s can feel safe. They decide to return to their original religion and culture, Judaism. 

 Start of the practice of the Jewish religion

The year 1602 marks the official beginning of the practice of the Jewish religion. Rabbi Uri Ha Levi, who is appointed to return the immigrants back to Judaism, is arrested on suspicion of selling banned goods.

He denies the charges, but admits “exercising his religion here in the Jewish way” – and is released. The first public synagogue is consecrated in 1639.

How the Protestant Reformation set the stage for the Scientific Revolution

Martin Luther:  The man who is celebrated for calling into question the authority of a corrupt Church, for initiating religious freedom in an age of spiritual feudalism, for initiating free universal education, for freeing the Scriptures from the bondage of a dead language, for… Well, you get the idea. 

But how much Luther has the average Protestant read? Or even the average Protestant clergyman? 

Little, if any, I submit. 

As you may judge for yourself below, Luther was a troubled, surly, intemperate — and occasionally even blasphemous — man. Hardly the picture of a Spirit-led leader of the faith. 

Does this sound outrageous to you? Inconceivable? I’m not surprised. In fact, I myself was surprised to discover Luther’s true nature. But once you read his own words, his nature is undeniable. 

In this document, you can review some of Luther’s more surprising utterances for yourself. And don’t think you can find them in any neighborhood bookstore, either. I had terrible trouble finding anything besides the great man’s ‘Small Catechism.’ Even the highly sanitized anthologies of his work are not easy to locate — if you can find them at all, it’s usually in secular bookstores. 

Why the scarcity of Luther’s writings in mainstream Protestant bookstores? I cannot speak from first-hand knowledge. But if you read the passages below, you may suspect — as I do — that Luther has been silenced because his true theology is an embarrassment to his followers. They would much rather propagate the image of the benevolent bombast, the passionate leader, the enlightened patriarch — because if people really know what Luther thought and taught, they would be appalled. 

Since his work extends to more than 50 volumes, we won’t even try to give an overview here. Instead, we’ll be selecting some of his more surprising — and, yes, inflammatory — ideas. For the strength of a chain is determined by its weakest links. 

Now, an objection by those who have not read Luther first-hand will be, “These passages are taken out of context, and therefore they cannot be trusted as accurate representations of Luther’s thought.” However I will give citations for each excerpt. Go to the source and see for yourself. You’ll find that not one of these passages means anything apart from what appears here; indeed, I challenge you to try to imagine any context that could possibly change the meaning of these words. 

Luther’s meanings are all too clear. 

A further objection is that other of Luther’s writings can be cited that contradict some of what you find here. We would reply that self-contradiction does not make an individual more reliable, but less. 

In any case, you be the judge…  as we allow Luther to speak for himself.
  

Luther Said:  ‘Be A Sinner’ 

“Be a sinner, and let your sins be strong, but let your trust in Christ be stronger, and rejoice in Christ who is the victor over sin, death, and the world.  We will commit sins while we are here, for this life is not a place where justice resides…  No sin can separate us from Him, even if we were to kill or commit adultery thousands of times each day.” (‘Let Your Sins Be Strong, from ‘The Wittenberg Project;’  ‘The Wartburg Segment’, translated by Erika Flores, from Dr. Martin Luther’s
Saemmtliche Schriften, Letter No. 99, 1 Aug. 1521). 

Luther is actually saying that our actions — even the most sinful actions imaginable — don’t matter! He is saying we can commit any sin we want — willfully, presumptuously, purposefully — and we will not offend God!   After all, we require nothing more than “faith” to be saved.   What we do is incidental.   Of course anyone familiar with Scripture will point out that this is not a Christian teaching.  For throughout the Bible we are told that sin separates us from God (Isaiah 59:1-2).  No believer has a license to sin.  Christians who willfully sin WILL be judged at the Judgment Seat of Christ (Romans 12:14; 1st Thessalonians 4:6).
  

Luther Said:  Doing Good Is More Dangerous Than Sinning 

“Those pious souls who do good to gain the Kingdom of Heaven not only will never succeed, but they must even be reckoned among the impious; and it is more important to guard them against good works than against sin.”  (Wittenberg, VI, 160, quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, p. 122.) 

You must be thinking, “What?  Could he possibly have written what I thought I just read? ‘It is more important to guard them against good works than against sin.'”  Well okay, read it again, just to make sure. We’ll wait. 

See?  You were right the first time.  Luther cautions us against good and upright actions.  He says, don’t worry about sin — Jesus will take care of it.  But doing good — that you’d better watch out for. Especially if you think being kind and generous and loving will affect your outcome at the final judgment. 

In his hubris, he ignores verse after verse of Scripture — New Testament and Old — where we are told that the way we live out our faith will be the criterion upon which we will be judged.  As Paul makes eminently clear in Rom. 2: 5-11, “…the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to his works.”  And again in 2 Cor. 5:10, “For we must all appear before the judgment seat… so that each one may receive recompense , according to what he did in the body, whether good or evil.”  Luther was utterly and monumentally wrong — wrong for the ages.
  

Luther Said:  There Is No Free Will 

“…with regard to God, and in all that bears on salvation or damnation, (man) has no ‘free-will’, but is a captive, prisoner and bondslave, either to the will of God, or to the will of  Satan.” (From the essay, ‘Bondage of the Will,’ ‘Martin Luther: Selections From His Writings, ed. by Dillenberger, Anchor Books, 1962 p. 190.) 

“…we do everything of necessity, and nothing by ‘free-will’; for the power of ‘free-will’ is nil…”  (Ibid., p. 188.) 

“Man is like a horse.  Does God leap into the saddle?  The horse is obedient and accommodates itself to every movement of the rider and goes whither he wills it.  Does God throw down the reins?  Then Satan leaps upon the back of the animal, which bends, goes and submits to the spurs and caprices of its new rider…  Therefore, necessity, not free will, is the controlling principle of our conduct.  God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good, and, as He bestows happiness on
those who merit it not, so also does He damn others who deserve not their fate.”  (‘De Servo Arbitrio’, 7, 113 seq., quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, pp. 266-267.) 

All these passages come from a tract Luther penned, titled, ‘De Servo Arbitrio ,’ or ‘Bondage of the Will,’ in which the great reformer works hard to present the case that free will does not exist. 

Scripture, of course, disagrees, in both word and spirit. In Sirach 15:11-20, we find:  “Say not:  ‘It was God’s doing that I fell away’: for what he hates he does not do. Say not: ‘It was he who set me astray’; For he has no need of wicked men… When God, in the beginning, created man, he made him subject to his own free choice. If you choose you can keep the commandments… There are set before you fire and water; to whichever you choose, stretch forth your hand.” 

So you see, the scripture is quite clear on the matter:  “When God, in the beginning, created man, he made him subject to his own free choice.” 

But, you object, Sirach is ‘apocryphal’ — Luther discarded it, questioning its canonicity.  And no wonder, we respond, considering how directly it confutes his teachings.  But we can also point to Deut. 30:19-20, in which God tells us: “I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse.  Choose life, then, that you and your descendants may live, by loving the Lord, your God, heeding his voice, and holding fast to him.”  So we see that man is more than simply free to choose; he is obliged to choose. 

And earlier yet, in Gen. 4:7, God speaks to Cain: “Why are you so resentful and crestfallen?  If you do well, you can hold up your head; but if not, sin is a demon lurking at the door: his urge is toward you, yet you can be his master.” 

And, finally, in John 15:15, our Lord pronounces his love for us, his followers:  “I no longer call you slaves, because a slave does not know what his master is doing.  I have called you friends…”  Hardly sounds like the words of a rider to his horse. 

As often happens, Paul has the final word:  “But if, in seeking to be justified in Christ, we ourselves are found to be sinners, is Christ then a minister of Sin?  Of course not!”  (Gal. 2:17.)  A more direct contradiction of Luther’s pronouncement, “God is the author of what is evil as well as of what is good,” is difficult to imagine. 

Luther’s position includes no accountability.  No responsibility.  No sense of learning or of being perfected through the course of our lives. No dignity even.  Just the bleakest, most oppressive coercion which robs human life of any meaning whatsoever.  What you do in your life — even the love you evidence toward your neighbors — means nothing, according to Luther.  Your struggles, your suffering, your perseverance — none of it amounts to anything.  Your will is not even in your own hands.
  

Luther Said:  The Individual Christian Is Subject To No Authority 

“…every Christian is by faith so exalted above all things that, by virtue of a spiritual power, he is lord of all things without exception, so that nothing can do him any harm.  As a matter of fact, all things are made subject to him and are compelled to serve him in obtaining salvation.”  (From the essay,’ Freedom of a Christian,’ ‘Martin Luther: Selections From His Writings, ed. by Dillenberger, Anchor Books, 1962 p. 63.) 

“Injustice is done those words ‘priest,’ ‘cleric,’ ‘spiritual,’ ‘ecclesiastic,’ when they are transferred from all Christians to those
few who are now by a mischievous usage called ‘ecclesiastics.'” (Ibid., p. 65.) 

Luther teaches that we don’t need anyone between us, the community of believers, and our Savior.  So he objects to ecclesiastical authority — and the hierarchy which exercises it.  God is with the entire congregation, he says, so why should we bother with a priest. 

Sounds great.  Until you realize that this position echoes that of Moses’ sister, the prophetess Miriam, who protests in Numbers Chapter 12, “Is it through Moses alone that the Lord speaks?  Does he not speak through us also?”  For her rebellion against the authority established by God, she contracts leprosy.  Thanks to Moses’ intercessory prayer, she is cleansed. 

And she is followed just a few chapters later by Korah, who incites the people against Moses and Aaron in the most disturbing words of all. They say, “Enough from you!  The whole community, all of them, are holy; the Lord is in their midst.  Why then should you set yourselves over the Lord’s congregation?”  Whereupon Korah and his followers were consumed by fire sent by the Lord.  (Numbers 16.)
  

Luther Said:  Peasants Deserve Their Harsh Treatment 

“Like the mules who will not move unless you perpetually whip them with rods, so the civil powers must drive the common people, whip, choke, hang, burn, behead and torture them, that they may learn to fear the powers that be.”  (El. ed. 15, 276, quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, p. 235.) 

“A peasant is a hog, for when a hog is slaughtered it is dead, and in the same way the peasant does not think about the next life, for otherwise he would behave very differently.” (‘Schlaginhaufen,’ ‘Aufzeichnungen,’ p. 118, quoted ibid., p. 241) 

Perhaps Luther’s darkest hour was his betrayal of the long-abused serfs during Münzer’s Peasants’ War of 1525.  First, he naively fomented their unrest by publishing tracts such as ‘On Authority,’ in which he castigated the princely classes with invective such as, “People cannot, people will not, put up with your tyranny and caprice for any length of time.” (Ibid., p. 223.)  And, “…the poor man, in excitement and grief on account of the damage he has suffered in his goods, his body and his
soul, has been tried too much and has been oppressed by them beyond all measure, in the most perfidious manner.  Henceforth he can and will no longer put up with such a state of things, and, moreover, he has ample reason to break forth with the flail and the club as Karsthans threatens to do.” (Ibid., p. 225.) 

Yet when the rebellion came, he turned coat, publishing the tract, ‘Against the Murderous and Rapacious Hordes of Peasants,’ which urged the ruling lords to “stab them secretly and openly, as they can, as one would kill a mad dog.” (Ibid., p. 235.) 

To underscore the coldness of the man, Luther was married on the heels of the tragic massacre that resulted.  Erasmus, a contemporary, estimated that a hundred thousand peasants lost their lives. (Ibid., p. 237.)
  

Luther Said:  Polygamy Is Permissible 

“I confess that I cannot forbid a person to marry several wives, for it does not contradict the Scripture.  If a man wishes to marry more than one wife he should be asked whether he is satisfied in his conscience that he may do so in accordance with the word of God.  In such a case the civil authority has nothing to do in the matter.” (De Wette II, 459, ibid., pp. 329-330.)
  

‘Sola scriptura’ has its consequences.
  

Luther Said:  The Bible Could Use Some Improvement 

“The history of Jonah is so monstrous that it is absolutely incredible.” (‘The Facts About Luther, O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 202.) 

“The book of Esther I toss into the Elbe.  I am such an enemy to the book of Esther that I wish it did not exist, for it Judaizes too much and has in it a great deal of heathenish foolishness.” (Ibid.) 

“Of very little worth is the Book of Baruch, whoever the worthy Baruch might be.” (Ibid.) 

“…the epistle of St. James is an epistle full of straw, because it contains nothing evangelical.”  (‘Preface to the New Testament,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 19.) 

“If nonsense is spoken anywhere, this is the very place.  I pass over the fact that many have maintained, with much probability, that this epistle was not written by the apostle James, and is not worthy of the spirit of the apostle.”  (‘Pagan Servitude of the Church,’ ed. Dillenberger, p. 352.) 

Reading these words of Luther, it’s hard to imagine that he is the same man who so often claimed that he looked upon the Bible “as if God Himself spoke therein.”  How could he have claimed to believe in the inspired Word of God as the ultimate authority on religious matters if he placed himself in judgment of Scripture?  In doing so, he quite clearly set himself up as judge over God himself. 

Believe it or not, in his hubris Luther even presumed to rank the gospels:  “John records but few of the works of Christ, but a great deal of his preaching, whereas the other three evangelists record many of His works, but few of His words.  It follows that the gospel of John is unique in loveliness, and of a truth the principal gospel, far, far superior to the other three, and St. Paul and St. Peter are far in advance of the three gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke.”  (‘Preface to Romans,’ ed. Dillenberger, pp. 18-19.) 

And he complained about the Book of Revelation: “to my mind it bears upon it no marks of an apostolic or prophetic character…  Everyone may form his own judgment of this book; as for myself, I feel an aversion to it, and to me this is sufficient reason for rejecting it.” (Sammtliche Werke,  63, pp. 169-170, ‘The Facts About Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books,
1987, p. 203.) 

And finally, he admitted adding the word ‘alone’ to Rom. 3:28 of his own volition:  “If your Papist annoys you with the word (‘alone’), tell him straightway, Dr. Martin Luther will have it so:  Papist and ass are one and the same thing.  Whoever will not have my translation, let him give it the go-by: the devil’s thanks to him who censures it without my will and knowledge.  Luther will have it so, and he is a doctor above all the doctors in Popedom.”  (Amic. Discussion, 1, 127,’The Facts About
Luther,’ O’Hare, TAN Books, 1987, p. 201.) 

Here he is condemned by his own mouth.  For John, in Rev. 22: 18-19, declares anathema anyone who presumes to change even a single word of Scripture:  “I warn everyone who hears the prophetic words of this book: if anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book, and if anyone takes away from the words in this prophetic book, God will take away his share in the tree of life and in the holy city described in this book.”  Luther, of course, didn’t add or take away mere words, but entire passages and books.
  

Luther Said:  Persecute The Jewish People 

“Jews are young devils damned to hell.”  (‘Luther’s Works,’ Pelikan, Vol. XX, pp. 2230.) 

The Truth About Martin Luther (jesus-is-savior.com)

From Lutheran to Deist (deism.com)

 

“Burn their synagogues.  Forbid them all that I have mentioned a “Jews are young devils damned to hell.”  (‘Luther’s Works,’ Pelikan, Vol. XX, pp. 2230.) 

“Burn their synagogues.  Forbid them all that I have mentioned above. Force them to work and treat them with every kind of severity, as Moses did in the desert and slew three thousand… If that is no use, we must drive them away like mad dogs, in order that we may not be partakers of their abominable blasphemy and of all their vices, and in order that we may not deserve the anger of God and be damned with them.  I have done my duty.  Let everyone see how he does his.  I am excused.”  (‘About the Jews and Their Lies,’ quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, p. 290.) 

It is very disturbing to contemplate the possible fruit born of the seeds of hatred sown by this man.  If he was guided by any spirit, clearly it was not holy. 
  

Conclusion 

How is it so many people have followed the author of these dark, bleak teachings?  There is only one explanation:  They don’t realize what Luther — the real Luther — actually taught.  If they did, they’d would see that many of the ideas of the Reformation father run counter to both Scripture and good sense. 

And I suspect that, from the seminary onward, Protestant ministers concentrate more on the perceived errors of Catholicism than they do examining the writings of their own founders.  Yes, Catholicism is straight out of the pits of Hell, but so is Lutheranism. 

If you doubt these passages, I urge you to go to the source.  Finding Luther’s writings is not easy, but with diligence it can be done. 

May God bless those whose search for truth and lead them to sift with impartiality:  “Examine yourselves to see whether you are living in faith.  Test yourselves.”  (2 Corinthians  13:5.)  And may the God who created us all in his image bring us closer to his heart, where all truth is found. 

 

• Martin Luther (One might find it surprising that Martin Luther should be included here, but he deserves his spot on this infamous list.  He said that salvation was by faith alone, but he did not mean what he said.  He added that salvation must be “through baptism!”  In his catechism he taught that baptism gives the forgiveness of sins, redeems one from death, and bestows eternal salvation.) 
• The Truth About Martin Luther      Baptismal Regeneration Exposed 
• Baptismal Regeneration and Bible Salvation     Baptismal Regeneration? 
• Martin Luther’s “Large Catechism” concerning Baptism (If you really want to get sleepy, read this garbage.  He says that no one can become a Christian apart from the two Sacraments of Baptism and the Holy Communion.  Of course, this is a lie!  I seriously doubt Martin Luther’s salvation.) 
• Martin Luther’s Devotion to Mary (Martin Luther said, “Our prayer should include the Mother of God…What the Hail Mary says is that all glory should be given to God.”  This is idolatry no matter what they say.  To pray to Mary is NOT taught anywhere in the Bible!  Danger!!!) 
• Martin Luther Taught the Confessional Sacrament (Martin Luther said, “a person receives absolution or forgiveness from the confessor, as if from God Himself.”) 
• Martin Luther Taught the Holy Communion Sacrament (Martin Luther said, “the forgiveness of sins, life and salvation are given to us through these words in the sacrament.“) 
• Martin Luther Taught Baptismal Regeneration (Martin Luther said, “In Baptism God forgives sin.”  Click HERE for a different version.  Note that this is from Luther’s “Small Catechism” writings.) 
• Lutheran Misconceptions of Baptism Refuted (baptism is NOT supposed to be a Sacrament, it’s just an ordinance–not a means of forgiveness!  Infant “baby” baptism is not found in the Bible, it’s ridiculous.)  

bove. Force them to work and treat them with every kind of severity, as Moses did in the desert and slew three thousand… If that is no use, we must drive them away like mad dogs, in order that we may not be partakers of their abominable blasphemy and of all their vices, and in order that we may not deserve the anger of God and be damned with them.  I have done my duty.  Let everyone see how he does his.  I am excused.”  (‘About the Jews and Their Lies,’ quoted by O’Hare, in ‘The Facts About Luther, TAN Books, 1987, p. 290.) 

It is very disturbing to contemplate the possible fruit born of the seeds of hatred sown by this man.  If he was guided by any spirit, clearly it was not holy.
  

Conclusion 

How is it so many people have followed the author of these dark, bleak teachings?  There is only one explanation:  They don’t realize what Luther — the real Luther — actually taught.  If they did, they’d would see that many of the ideas of the Reformation father run counter to both Scripture and good sense. 

And I suspect that, from the seminary onward, Protestant ministers concentrate more on the perceived errors of Catholicism than they do examining the writings of their own founders.  Yes, Catholicism is straight out of the pits of Hell, but so is Lutheranism. 

If you doubt these passages, I urge you to go to the source.  Finding Luther’s writings is not easy, but with diligence it can be done. 

May God bless those whose search for truth and lead them to sift with impartiality:  “Examine yourselves to see whether you are living in faith.  Test yourselves.”  (2 Corinthians  13:5.)  And may the God who created us all in his image bring us closer to his heart, where all truth is found. 

 

 

 

Lutheran Lies

by David J. Stewart | May 2005

       Sadly, the Lutheran religion is full of lying deceits of the Devil.  Just as the cult of Roman Catholicism, the Lutheran religion is based largely upon manmade TRADITIONS and NOT upon the Word of God.  The Word of God is the ONLY Authority upon which we should base our beliefs and faith.

One of the easiest ways to identify a FALSE religion is by finding out upon what authority their beliefs are based.  For example: The Seventh-Day Adventists are a false religion whose beliefs are largely based upon the godless writings of a woman named Ellen G. White.  Christian Scientists base their religious beliefs upon the heathen writings of Mary Eddy Baker.

The Jehovah’s Witness cult base their beliefs largely upon the heretical writings of Charles Taze Russell.  The cult of Scientology base their beliefs upon the hellish teachings of Ron Hubbard.  Do you see what I am saying?  EVERY false religion/cult can be traced back to some human AUTHORITY.

The Word of God, the Bible, should be our FINAL AUTHORITY in every matter.  The heresies of the Lutheran FALSE religion can be traced back to the heretic, Martin Luther.  I realize that Luther made a public profession of faith in Christ, but he also publicly ADDED the holy mass and baptism to his faith as well.

According to the Bible, Martin Luther is burning in hell today.  I know what I just said would flabbergast the average Protestant church member, but it is nonetheless true.  Martin Luther in his large and small catechisms blatantly declared that NO ONE could go to heaven without being baptized or partaking of the holy mass.

If you’ll read the Lutheran Augsburg Confessions, you’ll discover some awful heresies.  The Lutherans actually believe that God couldn’t come to the earth incarnate without MARY’S PERMISSION. That is ludicrous!  The Lutherans believe that Mary is very dear to the heart of God, more dear than any other godly woman.  This is heresy!

Though the Lutherans don’t falsely recognize Mary as a co-redeemer as the Catholics do, they do RECOGNIZE Mary.  It is a SIN to recognize Mary at all because the Bible NEVER tells us to recognize Mary.  I experienced a very creepy feeling as I was reading some of the Lutherans hymns which hail Mary.  Listen folks…if you hail Mary, you are hailing Satan.

A Lutheran article entitled, “Mary, Mother of the Church,” written by Darel E. Paul, makes the religious claim that Mary is the MOTHER complement of God the Father and Christ the Son.  This is heresy!  Following are some quotes (in green font) from Darel E. Paul’s Lutheran article and my rebuttal using the Bible.

It is common to hear Roman Catholics speak of “Mother Church.” You might even hear a Lutheran use the phrase, although unfortunately as often in sarcasm as in sincerity. All Lutherans, however, should gladly embrace the language of the Church as Mother. We can find testimony to this understanding in no less a source than the Large Catechism. In the section “Of the Creed”, Luther speaks of the Church as:

‘the mother that begets and bears every Christian through the Word of God.’

The Church is the mother who begets and bears the Christian because the Church is the site and the means by which the Holy Spirit works in the life of the Christian. The Church with the Holy Spirit begets the Christian, and the Church bears the Christian in his or her growth “to the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” (Eph. 4: 13) The Church is that tender mother who nurtures us, teaches us, guides us, admonishes us, protects us, and most of all, through the sacraments which are her mark, administers to us the forgiveness of sins. As the Large Catechism continues,

‘outside of this Christian Church, where the Gospel is not, there is no forgiveness, as also there can be no holiness [sanctification].’

She does none of these things on her own authority, of course, but only on the authority of God Himself. Jesus Christ has given to her the keys to the kingdom (Matt. 16: 19), and He has promised that the gates of hell shall not prevail against her (Matt. 16: 18). [emphasis added]

I do NOT intend to be unkind, but the preceding Lutheran doctrines are straight from Hell, not found in the Bible. There is NOTHING in the Bible which even hints that the church was ever supposed to be our “Mother.” The Lutherans are following the Roman Catholic monstrosity from afar off. It is Satanic to view the church as our “mother.” The Bible teaches that we are born again by the Word of God…

“Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.” —1st Peter 1:23

God’s children are NOT begotten by the church, but rather by the Word of God which is Jesus Christ (John 1:1,14; Revelation 19:13). When a person is “born again,” the Spirit of Christ is born in them (Romans 8:9). The church CANNOT do this! The church is composed of believers, it CANNOT create new believers. Mr. Paul says that “The Church with the Holy Spirit begets the Christian.” Lies! NOTHING in the Bible even suggests such demonic heresy!  It is the Word of God and the Holy Spirit that begets the Christian, the church has NOTHING to do with one’s salvation!

The ONLY responsibility of the church is soul winning, preaching the Gospel to the world. In Matthew 28:19-20, Jesus gave us The Great Commission to go into all the world with the Gospel. It is extremely DANGEROUS to teach that the church is our “Mother.” If it’s wrong for the Catholics to teach such evil doctrines, then it is EQUALLY wrong for the Lutherans to teach it.

The Lutheran’s reasoning is flawed. Just because the Bible speaks of “God the Father” and “God the Son” does NOT demand that there be a mother. We must be extremely careful not to read into the Bible what is NOT there. Here are some more Lutheran heresies concerning Mary by Darel E. Paul (with quotes from heretic Martin Luther)…

THE VIRGIN MOTHER

While the language of the Church as our Mother may sound vaguely acceptable to the Lutheran, the language of the Virgin Mary as our Mother is harder to swallow. And yet, what more easy conclusion can one draw then that, with Christ as our Brother and God our Father, our mother should therefore be the same mother which bore Christ and the same woman chosen by our Father to bear His Son? Martin Luther wrote that:

Mary is the Mother of Jesus and the Mother of all of us even though it was Christ alone who reposed on her knees . . . If he is ours, we ought to be in his situation; there where he is, we ought also to be and all that he has ought to be ours, and his mother is also our mother.

Yet what is the contemporary Lutheran’s reaction to this statement? To run in fear from ‘Romanizing ideas’, or to embrace it in joy? If we listen to Luther, we hear that we are not motherless Christians. Rather:

This is the great joy, of which the angel [of the Lord (Luke 2: 9-12)] speaks, this is the consolation and the superabundant goodness of God, that man (if he has this faith) may boast of such treasure as that Mary is his real mother, Christ his brother, and God his father. For these things are, all of them, true and they come to pass, provided we believe them.

Did you read that? Martin Luther said that Mary is “also our mother.” Do you see why I call Martin Luther an unsaved heretic! Mary is NOT my mother. Mary was the earthly mother of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the few children she conceived AFTER marrying Joseph latter on. Mary is NOT the Mother of any Christian today and it is DAMNABLE HERESY to tech that she is. If you are a Lutheran, you might as well walk down the street to your local Catholic religion and become a Catholic because you’re in the same boat already.
Mary Worship

Though not to the idolatrous extent that the Catholics idolize Mary, the Lutherans follow in the same adulterous steps of the Great Whore, Roman Catholicism. The photo at the left is one depiction of the Lutheran Mary.

Though the Halo around Mary’s head is missing, it is still disconcerting (and unbiblical) for anyone to recognize her at all. Mary is no more to be praised than any other godly mother. In a poem titled “Swept Up In Joy” by David Miller, a Lutheran Minister, he says the following:

I tried to pray through my distress as the choir sang of Mary: “Hail favored one, the Lord is with thee.” But my thoughts connected only with my anxiety.

“Hail favored one?” Excuse me, but where in the Bible are we ever commanded to recognize Mary at all? Jesus never even hinted for anyone to praise Mary. This is a MANMADE TRADITION, and it came out of the Great Whore of Catholicism. Just as Catholics deny that they worship Mary (which they obviously do), so do the Lutherans deny that they worship Mary to a lesser degree.

Barbara Owen, a member of Our Shepherd Lutheran Church, Annapolis, Md., is the editor of Daily Readings from Luther’s Writings, Augsburg Fortress. The following quotes are from her article “Luther On Mary”:

The Scriptures always point to Christ as the one who saves. Luther characteristically said: “Oh, how many kisses we bestowed on Mary! But she did not redeem and save me.”

But Luther also honored Mary and her “unique place in all of [humankind].” He insisted “the festivals of the Purification and Annunciation of Mary may be continued, and for the time being her Assumption and Nativity.” He could even imagine her as a heavenly intercessor.

The first couple of sentences are ok (and this is all that MOST people see when they look at Lutheranism), but take a look at the sentences which follow. This is shocking! Martin Luther said that he could even imagine Mary as a “heavenly intercessor.” Folks, that’s devilish doctrine! In one breath Martin Luther admits that Mary CANNOT redeem anyone, and in the next breath he speaks blasphemy against God.

“For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” -1st Timothy 2:5

Mary is NOT an intercessor and you had better get that straight because Martin Luther was a doctrinal mess. Here is a whole bunch of demon doctrine from Martin Luther (the source is from the same article above, Luther On Mary):

Luther noted Mary’s humility: “So the wondrous pure spirit of Mary is worthy of even greater praise, because having such overwhelming honors heaped upon her head, she does not let them tempt her [to pride]. … [In] truth she thrusts [pride and honor] from her and would have us honor God in her and come through her to a good confidence in His grace.”

Mary is a model for us and a comfort. Luther wrote: “O Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, what great comfort God has shown us in you, by so graciously regarding your unworthiness and low estate. This encourages us to believe that henceforth He will not despise us poor and lowly ones, but graciously regard us also, according to your example.”

Mary isn’t “a goddess who could grant gifts or render aid, as some suppose when they pray and flee to her rather than to God,” Luther wrote. “She does nothing, God does all. We ought to call upon her, that for her sake God may grant and do what we request.” Luther biographer, Martin Brecht, describes Luther’s thoughts: Mary is “the model for believers, and, above all, the example of God’s action. It is God’s grace that we are to admire in Mary, nothing else.”

Through faith, Luther wrote, a person “may boast of such treasure as that Mary is his real mother, Christ his brother, and God his father…. By this token you sit assuredly in the Virgin Mary’s lap and are her dear child.”

The Catholics teach that Mary is a “co-redeemer” with Christ. Of course, that is a lie of the devil. Jesus is the ONLY Redeemer. Though the Lutherans deny this heresy, they are woefully guilty of creating their own heresy by praying to Mary. Did you read what Luther said above? – “We ought to call upon her, that for her sake God may grant and do what we request.” Heresy! Show me that in the Word of God!

I triple-dog dare you to show me one verse in the Bible that says we should pray, admire, praise, or seek to contact Jesus’ mother in ANY way. You CANNOT! Show me where the Bible teaches that we should expect God to answer our prayers for Mary’s sake. The Lutheran church in NO church, but a bastard child of the Mother of harlots (Roman Catholicism). Luther prayed…”O Blessed Virgin, Mother of God, what great comfort God has shown us in you…”

Like I said, Catholicism never came out of Martin Luther.  Even more sickening is Luther’s comment above…”a person “may boast of such treasure as that Mary is his real mother, Christ his brother, and God his father.” Whoa! Martin Luther is guilty of the same thing that Roman Catholics are guilty of… ELEVATING MARY! Martin Luther speaks out of both sides of his mouth—He tells us that Mary does nothing, yet we should praise her greatly. But what does the Bible say…

“I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.” -Isaiah 42:8

If Martin Luther were alive today, he would be another ecumenical heretic like Billy Graham. Read the shocking heresy found at http://orthodoxlutheran.fws1.com/bvm/books.html…

In 1996, Pope John Paul II concluded that the title ‘Mother of God’ “proclaims the nobility of woman and her very high vocation. God, in effect, treats Mary as a free and responsible person and does not fulfill the Incarnation of his Son until after he has obtained her consent.” Lutherans fully agree with this understanding of Mary. [emphasis added]

Are you getting this? Lutherans believe that God could not come to the earth incarnate without Mary’s PERMISSION. If you’ll read the Bible, you’ll quickly learn that Mary was ALREADY pregnant before she or Joseph knew what was going on. God did NOT need or ask for Mary’s permission!

Lutherans are basically unofficial Catholics. They read out of the Apocrypha like the Catholics. They recognize Catholic saints, holidays and festivals. They idolize Mary. They baptize infants like the Catholics. And tragically, they teach Baptismal Regeneration, which is an accursed ANOTHER GOSPEL.
Awake to Righteousness!

For some strange reason, we Christians are slow to see what the devil is up to.  I am amazed at how few websites there are EXPOSING the heresies of the Lutheran false religion.  The Lutheran religion is even MORE dangerous than Roman Catholicism because it does claim salvation by grace through faith.  But what people FAIL to realize is that EVERY Lutheran also ADDS baptism and holy communion to that faith in Christ.  It is no longer faith.

There are an estimated sixty million Lutherans (60,000,000!).  Lutheranism is one of the biggest cults in the world next to Buddhism, Islam and Catholicism.  Why are the churches silent?  I am an Independent Fundamental Baptist.  I wish I could wake up more Christians to contend for the faith against these less obvious cults like the Lutheran religion.

It is a good indicator of the apostasy of our generation that so many believers actually think that Lutherans are Christians.  Are you a Christian?

“Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?” -2nd Corinthians 13:5

The Apostle Paul didn’t take any chances, he warned the people that churchianity doesn’t give us Christianity.  Sadly, I fear that most Lutherans have churchianity without Christianity.  I can confidently say that if you follow the teachings of the Lutheran church that you WILL end up in hell.

Why?  Because you are ADDING works to your faith.  Romans 11:6 warns that you cannot be saved by grace and works, it’s one or the other.  For Lutherans to claim that they are NOT trusting in works, while REQUIRING baptism and holy communion for salvation is a hypocritical contradiction.

On the surface Lutherans speak of faith alone in Christ, but delve deeper into their beliefs and you’ll find doctrines of devils, Satanic Catholicism, straight from the depths of hell.  Don’t be fooled.  Salvation can ONLY be obtained through childlike faith in the Saviour.

END OF ARTICLE  Lutheran Lies (jesus-is-savior.com)

 

INFANT BAPTISM EXPOSED! 

It’s History and Harm 

Copyright © 2003. Petersburg Gospel Center. All Rights Reserved.
(Much of the preceding was taken from a pamphlet by the Late Dr. William Pettingill on INFANT BAPTISM) 

 

 

 INFANT BAPTISM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR SENDING MORE PEOPLE TO HELL THAN ANY OTHER RELIGIOUS ERROR. 

From my point of view, it is a dreadful thing to baptize a baby and let him grow up believing that by that baptism he has been saved and is on his way to heaven. 

As we have said so many times, we believe all babies and children below the age of accountability are protected by the Lord respecting their eternal soul. I do not believe-that any child below the age of accountability has ever gone to hell. Of course, there is no differentiating between those who were baptized as infants and those who were not. 

Little children certainly can come to Christ when they are old enough to understand that Jesus died for them and shed his blood to pay for their sins.  If that child is old enough to realize that he cannot take his sin to heaven, and that he is lost and a sinner, than that child is old enough to be saved. What age is that?  I do not know.  It varies from child to child.  Billy Graham and James Dobson claimed they were saved at 4 years of age.  I was saved at age 6.  It depends upon the religious training environment a child is raised in too. 

 In fact, we adults must become like ‘little children’ and have child-like faith when we come to Him!  Jesus did say in Matthew 19:14, 

“But Jesus said, Suffer little children, and forbid them not, to come unto me: for of such is the kingdom of heaven.” 

This verse is not teaching, however, that little infants, just born, are come to Christ by being baptized by a priest!  As stated earlier, little children who die in infancy are covered by the Blood of Christ and will go to heaven.  They are thus ‘covered’ until they reach the age that they can understand the Gospel, and at that point they must trust Christ on their own, of their own volition. 

HISTORY OF INFANT BAPTISM

Infant baptism appeared in the Christian church history around the Second Century, coming from the pagan influences of Baal Worship, as we will show later, but It came about as a result of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration – the teaching that baptism is essential to salvation; or, if you want to turn it around, that water baptism saves the soul (or at least is a part of a person’s salvation). Consequently, as the teaching of baptismal regeneration started being propagated, it was natural for those holding to this doctrine to believe that everyone, should be baptized as soon as possible. Thus, baptism of infants still in the innocent state (and as yet unaccountable for their actions) came into vogue among many of the churches.

Once again I state: These two grievous errors baptismal regeneration and infant baptism – have probably caused more people to go to hell than any other doctrine. 

  

WHERE DID THIS INFANT BAPTISM COME FROM? 

Once has to go back to Genesis 10 and 11 where we read of Noah’s Great grandson, NIMROD, and his wife SEMIRAMUS, who started the great pagan BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION at the Tower of Babel.  This great pagan religion was later known as ‘BAAL WORSHIP’ in the Old Testament, simply another name for Nimrod.   The great book, TWO BABYLONS by Alexander Hislop gives us a little background on this Babylon Mystery Religion of ‘BAAL WORSHIP’ started by Nimrod and Semiramus. 

  

BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION 

In this mysterious Babylonian Religious System, Nimrod and Semiramis, along with their priests, were the only ones who understood ‘The great mysteries of God’ and since it was the only true religion… all others were false… therefore, only the Babylonian Priests could forgive and absolve sins…and administer salvation. Salvation could be achieved thru various Sacraments performed during the person’s life time. These SACRAMENTS were so-called ‘Channels of grace’ whereby salvation could be achieved. These Sacraments, necessary to salvation ..began at birth with Infant Baptism, other sacraments throughout life, ending with a final anointing with oil at death to prepare one for the hereafter. Now Since the Babylonian Priest was the only one who could administer these ‘sacraments’, the person was ‘bound’ to the Babylonian system helplessly for life! The first essential sacrament Semiramis taught was Baptism by water. The fact that such “Baptism” was practiced 2000 years before it was even mentioned and practiced in Christianity is an established fact, and it can be traced right back to Babylon and Semiramis herself! The ancient historian Bryant (vol.3 p2l,84) traces this pagan baptism back to the practice of commemorating Noah and his 3 sons deliverance thru the waters of the flood, emerging from the ark and entering a New life. To commemorate this event, the Priests of Nimrod would ‘baptize’ new-born infants the fathers chose to keep, and they would become ‘born-again’ and become members of the Babylonian Mystery Religion. (Hislop,Two Babylons, p134) The fact that the Devil practiced the ritual of Baptism over 2000 years before it was even used in Christianity has truly amazed historians! 

  

WHERE DID THIS BABY BAPTISM COME FROM? 

Armitage’s History (p73) explains the pagan civil law and social customs of that day. These pagans had no standard of morality as you and I have. Their marriage rites were not on the basis ours are. One man might be the husband of a hundred women, and he might be the father of several hundred children. The mother had no right at all to determine whether the child she bore was to live or not, that was le ft up to the FATHER. Just as the farmer would go down to the pigpen and pick out the pigs he wanted to keep and do away with the runts, so was the father the one who decided if the child was to be kept and allowed to live. The mother could not even name the child if it was kept, the pagan priest did that. If the child was decided to be kept, the daddy would take it down to the pagan priest and the ceremony would be arranged. The Priest first must ‘exorcise’ evil spirits from the infant by anointing the baby’s head with OIL. With the oil the priest puts the occult mark of Tammuz on the child’s head by marking a “T” with the oil. (later to become the ‘Sign of the Cross) The Priest then put SALT and SPITTLE on the baby’s tongue to preserve it from future influence of evil spirits. “HOLY WATER” is now sprinkled or poured over the baby’s head, and the baby is said to be cleansed from any original sin and is now “born-again” and a member of the Babylonian Religion. This process was known as INFANT CHRISTENING and was practiced hundreds of years before Christ, (Hislop,pl38) and is found NOWHERE in the Bible! There is not a single example of a baby being ‘baptized’ or ‘christened’ in the Bible! Knowing what you do now, WOULD YOU WANT YOUR BABY CHRISTENED? 

This was called ‘Baal Worship’ in the Old Testament, and God called it an abomination! 

  

MORE HISTORY ON BABY BAPTISM

The professed conversion of Emperor Constantine in A.D. 313 was looked upon by many as a great triumph for Christianity. However, it more than likely was the greatest tragedy in church history because it resulted in the union of church and state and the establishment of a hierarchy which ultimately developed into the Roman Catholic system. There is great question that Constantine was ever truly converted. At the time of his supposed vision of the sign of As we have said so many times, we believe all babies and children below the age of accountability am protected by the Lord respecting their eternal soul. I do not believe-that any child below the age of accountability has ever gone to hell. Of course, there is no differentiating between those who were baptized as infants and those who were not. 

  

INFANT BAPTISM COMES TO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH 

At around the 3rd Century, traces of the Babylon Mystery Religion, now known as Baal Worship, infiltrates the Christian Church.  Immediately, Bible Believing Christians reject the idea of baptizing babies and Baptismal regeneration – the teaching that baptism is essential to salvation; or, if you want to turn it around, that water baptism saves the soul (or at least is a part of a person’s salvation). These Bible Believing Christians were labeled slanderously as ‘ANABAPTISTS’ because they rejected this idea of baptizing babies as pagan and not Scriptural.  They would ‘RE-BAPTIZE these infants when they got older and trusted Christ as Savior!  Thus the term, ANABAPTISTS…which meant “RE-BAPTIZERS”!   It was later shortened to ‘Baptists’.  So you see, Baptists got the their name at this time, and the issue that started the name Baptists and separated them was this issue of ‘Baby Baptism’!!!!   These ‘ANABAPTISTS’ were persecuted greatly because of this issue!  

  

EVERY BABY MUST BE BAPTIZED 

 When Emperor Constantine made ‘Christianity’ the official ‘STATE RELIGION of Rome, one of the FIRST LAWS passed was the law decreeing infant baptism as the law of the land in 416 A.D. That simply meant that everybody within a certain age limit had to conform to it. When they passed that law in 416 that every baby in the Roman Empire had to be baptized at the hands of an authorized Roman priest… OR ELSE! Those who disagreed with teaching and rejected it were soon slanderously called “ANABAPTISTS”, and they were persecuted without mercy for not conforming. Historian J.M.Carroll declares, ” For 30 miles on the road leading out of Rome were stakes with gory heads of ANAPTISTS….” 

INFANT BAPTISM BECAME THE LAW OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE 

Occasionally someone will say, “Don’t you think infant baptism is beautiful to look at?” A.A.Davis replies, “If you knew the history of that doctrine, where it came from and the bloodshed that it brought into the world, you would never watch another such service in your lifetime.” (THE BAPTIST STORY, p67). He quotes historian J.M. Carroll from his TRAIL OF BLOOD “no other doctrine that ever found its way into Christendom has caused so much BLOODSHED in this world as the doctrine of INFANT BAPTISM.”

Armitage’s History (p7l-73) tells us that in the 6th century, Emperor Justin issued an edict commanding ALL UNBAPTIZED PARENTS to present themselves and their children for baptism at once. Leo III issued, another edict in-A.D. 723 demanding the forcible baptism of the Jews and Montanists (anabaptists). Toward the close of the 6th century the baptism of–.infants was turned to gain in the shape of FEES ($$$) paid for its administration; but, the charges soon became so enormous that the poor could not pay them. And yet lest their children should DIE unsaved, the frightened parents strained every nerve to  get them baptized.” (Armitage’s history, p7l)  He continues, “Suppose you owned a section of land with an oil well on it; you had a baby born into your home and you went to the priest to get the baby baptized. The priest would say I want the title to that section of land. When the thing was over, the priest would get the title to the land and the BABY would get a few drops of water on its head. He says this is how the Mother Church of Rome come to own Czechoslovakia, Mexico, etc.

One is reminded of Peter’s Scripture, 

“and through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of YOU..” (2 Peter 2:1-3) 

We could spend pages here looking at the history books showing how the ANABAPTISTS (those who rejected infant baptism) were persecuted in ways almost too horrible to describe. Many were put in a special iron casket called the IRON MAIDEN, which had dozens of sharp spikes inside … or the anabaptist preacher who, in the 4th century, was laid upon the ground and a horse was hooked to each of his arms and feet, and the signal given so the horses would pull the pastor into 4 quarters…..Why?

... because he believed it was wrong to baptize BABIES. (BAPTIST STORY, p109) 

The author continued to tell about those anabaptists who had HOT WAX poured into their EARS…or those who had their tongues
pulled out with hot pincers. The wives of the anabaptists had  their bodies mutilated in terrible ways, as parts of their bodies were cut off….Pregnant women had their stomachs ripped open and the offspring cast to wild hogs as husband was forced to watch. One anabaptist pastor was taken, his body CUT open, and ears of corn stuffed inside, and hungry dogs not fed for 4 days turned loose to devour the man’s entrails and corn inside. (BAPTIST STORY, p110) 

THE ‘HOLY INQUISITION’ RESULTED FROM THIS ISSUE OF BABY BAPTISM

No wonder the Book of Revelation declared in Revelation 17:6 that this great HARLOT false religion had become ‘DRUNK with the BLOOD of the Saints’…Historian and Bible commentator Sir Robert Anderson estimated that thru out the middle ages OVER 40 MILLION people were murdered and martyred over this one doctrine of INFANT BAPTISM! To illustrate this great number of those anabaptists slain, Anderson said if you lined 40 million people in a line, four abreast and four feet apart, and they marched by at normal marching pace, it would take 4 years and 4 months for this number of people to march by!!!

ROME LAID DOWN THE LAW.. ..INFANT BAPTISM ESSENTIAL!

 The General Council of Trent, Seventh Session (1547) Canons on the Sacraments in General:

(a) “If anyone, shall say that the sacraments of the New Law were not all instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, or that there are more or fewer than seven, namely baptism, confirmation, Eucharist, penance, extreme unction, orders, and matrimony, or that any one of these seven is not truly and intrinsically a sacrament – anathema sit.”

(b) “If anyone shall say that the sacraments of the New Law are not necessary for salvation but are superfluous, and that without them or without the desire of them men obtain from God through faith alone the grace of justification, though all are not necessary for every individual anathema sit.”

(c) “If anyone. shall say that by the sacraments of the New Law grace is not conferred ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the divine promise is sufficient to obtain grace – anathema sit.”

THE BABYLON MYSTERY RELIGION AT ROME TAUGHT THAT EVEN LITTLE BABIES COULD NOT BE SAVED AND GO TO HEAVEN UNLESS THEY WERE BAPTIZED…

The Priests of Rome taught-and still do-that it is NOT possible even for newly born infants to be saved so as to enjoy the delights of heaven unless they are baptized. The COUNCIL OF TRENT catechism states in black and white: 

 “Infants, unless regenerated unto God thru the grace of BAPTISM, whether their parents be Christian or infidel, are born to eternal misery and perdition.” 

But what a horrible doctrine that was!! And what a contrast with the doctrinal beliefs of the anabaptists who believed that all those dying in infancy, whether baptized or unbaptized, are saved! 

 Lorraine Boettner, in his ROMAN CATHOLICISM, p190, declared, 

“The Romish doctrine was so horrible and so unacceptable to the public that it was found necessary to invent a third realm, the Limbus Infantum… later shortened to ‘Limbo’…a place where unbaptized infants are sent, in which they are excluded from heaven but in which they suffer no positive PAIN. The Council of Trent and the Councils of Lyons and Florence declare positively that unbaptized infants are confined to this realm.” 

Boettner continues, 

“The primary purpose of the Church of Rome in excluding unbaptized infants from heaven is to force parents to commit their children to her as soon as possible … the pressure put on members of the Mother Church of Rome parents to see that their children are baptized EARLY is almost  UNBELIEVABLE… ..a commitment which once she receives she never relinquishes.” (P 191) 

  

BABY BAPTISM THROUGH THE DARK AGES 

Consequently, as the teaching of baptismal of the Dark Ages which endured for more than twelve centuries – until the Protestant Reformation.

During this time God had a remnant who remained faithful to Him; they never consented to the union of church and state, or to baptismal regeneration, or to infant baptism. These people were called by various names, but probably could better be summed up by their generic name, Anabaptists, meaning rebaptizers. These people ignored infant baptism and rebaptized those who had been saved through personal faith. 

 

 

NOW THIS IS STRANGE 

Protestant Churches of the Reformation Bring Baby Baptism with Them! 

 

The strange thing about these two diabolical doctrines of baptismal regeneration and infant baptism is that the great reformers (Martin Luther, for one) brought with them out of Rome these two dreaded errors – the union of church and state and infant baptism. Strangely enough, in those days not only did the Roman Catholic church persecute those who would not conform to its ways, but after the Lutheran church became the established church of Germany, it persecuted the nonconformists as well – of course, not as stringently so and not in such numbers as those before them.

John Calvin in France, as well as Oliver Cromwell in England and John Knox in Scotland, stuck to the union of church and state and infant baptism and used their power, when they had power, to seek to force others to conform to their own views. 

  

BABY BAPTISM COMES TO AMERICA

Unaware to a lot of people, this thing came to the Americas well in the early days of this republic. Before the Massachusetts Bay Colony was twenty years old, the following was decreed by statute:

“If any person or persons within this jurisdiction shall either openly condemn or oppose the baptizing of infants, or go about secretly to seduce others from the approbation or use thereof, or shall purposely depart from the congregation at the administration of the ordinance after due time and means of conviction, every such person or persons shall be subject to banishment..”

Religious persecution existed even in the early days of the United States of America. Roger Williams and others were banished – when banishment meant to go and live with the Indians – because they would not submit to the doctrine of baptismal regeneration or the baptizing of infants.

However, it was the constitution of the Rhode Island Colony – founded by Roger Williams, John Clark, and others – that established religious liberty by law for the first time in thirteen hundred years (over the world). 

Thus it was that Rhode Island, founded by a small group of believers, was the first spot on earth where religious liberty became the law of the land. The settlement was made in 1638, and the colony was legally established in 1663.

Virginia followed, to be the second, in 1786.

As you can see, the doctrine of infant baptism has a long and bloody history, and it has been one of Satan’s chief weapons to condemn untold millions to hell. 

 

I WILL ATTEMPT TO EXPLAIN IT FURTHER

Many, of course, will ask, “What does the above have to do with us today?”  A lot!

You see, the union of church and state continues today in most countries of the world. In these state churches, pastors and leaders christen babies – which means they “make them Christians” by baptizing them; thus the that has been christened as a baby believes he is on his way to heaven simply because he was christened (or baptized) in infancy. Having been taught all his life that this saved him, he naturally considers himself saved by the act of infant baptism. 

 The Roman Catholic Church still teaches baptismal regeneration and practices infant baptism. Its statement of doctrine says: 

“The sacrament of baptism is administered on adults by the pouring of water and the pronouncement of the proper words, and cleanses from original sin.” 

The Reformed Church says: 

 “Children are baptized as heirs of the Kingdom of God and of His covenant. “ 

The Lutheran Church teaches that baptism, whether of infants or adults, is a means of regeneration. 

Because of the following declaration, I believe the Episcopal Church teaches that salvation comes through infant baptism.  In his confirmation, the catechist answers a question about his baptism in infancy by saying this:

“In my baptism. I was made a member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of God.”

(This is printed in the prayer book and can be read by anyone interested enough to look for it.)

Most people who practice infant baptism believe the ceremony has something to do with the salvation of the child. These are traditions of men, and we can follow the commandments of God or follow after the traditions of men; it is up to us. 

riptural doctrine.  It is not found in the Bible. There is not one example in the Bible of one single baby being baptized.  We will show that baby baptism is of pagan origin. 

 

THE CLEAR BIBLE TEACHING OF SALVATION

I believe the Word of God is clear regarding the matter of salvation. Jesus said:

“He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God … He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him” (John 3:18, 36).

Basically this tells us that there are two groups of people in the world today – those who believe on the Son and those who do not. Those who believe are not condemned; they have everlasting life (whatever church they may belong to). Those who believe not on the Son are condemned already, and they shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on them.

I believe this is the clear, unmistakable teaching and language of the Bible.

If you will notice, the Word of God never says simply believe and be saved; rather, it seeks always to identify the object of faith, which is the Lord Jesus Christ Himself. 

John 3;16 says, “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” 

It is not enough just to believe; a person must believe “in Him.” 

The Philippian jailer asked, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”  The Apostle Paul answered, “Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”  (Acts 16:30,31) 

It was not enough simply to ‘believe’; that belief, that trust, that dependence had to be ‘in Him’….. 

If a person is trusting in baptism for salvation, he cannot be trusting “in Him”.  Christ is not ONE way of salvation;  He is the ONLY WAY salvation. 

There is no promise in the Word of God to those who believe partially in Christ.  In other words, we cannot trust in the Lord Jesus 90% and in baptism 10%.. 

We must trust Christ and what He did at Calvary 100% and nothing else. 

My friend, just because you were baptized as a baby does not save you! 

You must trust Christ alone. INFANT BAPTISM EXPOSED! (jesus-is-savior.com)

 

 

Damnable Lutheran Doctrines

by David J. Stewart | February 2006 | Updated November 2018

2nd Peter 3:9, “…which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

       The Lutheran religion is nothing less than diet Catholicism, i.e., you get the same poison of Catholicism, just less of it. The Lutheran religion is straight from Satan himself. Jesus never commanded us to follow any man’s teachings over the Word of God. I get sick and tired of woefully ignorant pastors and Bible teachers promoting Martin Luther as some great hero of the Christian faith. The shocking and sad truth is that Mr. Luther up until his death insisted that “holy baptism” and “holy communion” (neither term appears in the Word of God) are necessary to enter into the Kingdom of God.

The damnable heresies which were taught by Martin Luther are still followed by the Lutheran Church today, but to their own destruction. Nowhere in the Holy Bible are we taught to be water baptized to be saved. The Gospel of John is God’s Gospel track. John 20:31, “But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” In the Gospel of John we find the words “believe,” “believed” and “believing” mentioned 87 times, but we never find the word “repent” nor “baptism” associated with these words. Clearly, we are saved solely by BELIEVING the Gospel, and not by anything else.

The Damnable Heresy of Salvation Through the Holy Communion

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is found under the section, “THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY COMMUNION”; and then under the subheading, “THE BLESSINGS OF HOLY COMMUNION”:

Keep in mind what you learned in your Catechism instructions.

“What blessings do we receive through this eating and drinking?

That is shown us by these words: ‘Given’ and ‘poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins.’ Through these words we receive forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation in this sacrament. For where there is forgiveness of sins, there is also life and salvation.” [Luther’s Catechism. Holy Communion. Second.] [emphasis added]

“How can eating and drinking do such things?

It is certainly not the eating and drinking that does such things, but the words ‘Given’ and ‘poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins.’ These words are the main thing in this sacrament, along with the eating and drinking. And whoever believes these words has what they plainly say, the forgiveness of sins.” [Luther’s Catechism. Holy Communion. Third.] [emphasis added]

SOURCE: https://wels.net/faq/the-blessings-of-the-lords-supper

What blasphemy!!!  There is not one single Verse in the entire Word of God which teaches that salvation comes through “Holy Communion.”  You cannot be saved by repeating some stupid words. In fact, the phrase “Holy Communion” is NOT found in the Bible at all.  The Bible speaks of “communion” in 1st Corinthians 10:26, “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?”  The Greek word for “communion” is “koinonia,” which means, “partnership. i.e. (lit.) participation.” Thus, a person “participates” in the sin-cleansing blood of Jesus Christ through faith in Christ alone, and not by works or the Lord’s Supper.  Paul was simply teaching the believers at Corinth that they were saved by the blood of Jesus, and were being hypocritical to partake of the Lord’s supper while also eating meats offered to idols (partaking of idolatry).  Paul told them that it was impossible to eat at God’s table and the Devil’s, “Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.” 

Tragically, this is exactly what the Catholic and Lutheran religions are doing today when they RECOGNIZE Mary in ANY capacity.  Mary was a dirty-rotten sinner who died because of her sins (Romans 6:23).  Jesus called John the Baptist the greatest human being ever born amongst women (Matthew 11:11), so why recognize Mary?  Jesus said that the least person in Heaven will be greater than John the Baptist.  Mary is no more special than anyone else in Heaven.  It is unscriptural and sinful to recognize Mary in any way, shape, or form.

1st Corinthians 10:16 must NOT be interpreted by itself.  Basing a doctrine upon this Scripture alone could easily result in a damnable heresy, which is exactly what Mr. Luther has done.  1st Corinthians 11:25 clearly states, “After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in REMEMBRANCE of me.” 

Paul was quoting Christ when in Luke 22:19 Jesus said, “…This is my body which is given for you: this do in REMEMBRANCE of me.”  The Word of God plainly teaches that the Lord’s Supper is simply a means to REMEMBER what Christ did for us upon Calvary, no more.  To claim, as Lutheran’s do, that there is some special power to the Lord’s Supper is a Satanic lie. 

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is also found under the section, “THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY COMMUNION”; and then under the subheading, “THE POWER OF HOLY COMMUNION”:

“Third: How can eating and drinking do such great things?

It is certainly not the eating and drinking that does such things, but the words, “Given and poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins. “These words are the main thing in this sacrament, along with the eating and drinking. And whoever believes these words has what they plainly say, the forgiveness of sins.” (emphasis added)

What a lie of Satan!!!  No such nonsense is taught in the Bible.  This is ceremonialism, not faith in Christ.  You can’t be saved by the citing of some words.  Notice carefully how Satan has actually replaced faith in Jesus Christ, with faith in a statement.  The Bible NEVER leads us to place our faith in the words of some Lutheran minister. 

The Bible never leads us to place our faith in the Lord’s Supper.  If it were so, then Jesus and the Apostles would have continually told people to partake of the Lord’s supper to be saved.  In fact, only a handful of references are made in the entire Bible to the Lord’s Supper (communion).  The phrase “Given and poured out for you for the forgiveness of sins” doesn’t even appear in the Word of God, not even portions of it.  “Given and poured” does not exist.  “Poured out for you” does not exist.  These are the words of a religion; and NOT from the Bible. 

The word “holy” is NEVER used concerning Baptism or the Lord’s Supper.  Never!  The Lord’s Supper is ONLY symbolic of the flesh and blood of Christ, which was sacrificed to take away our sins.  Only through faith alone in Christ can anyone be saved (John 14:6).

The Damnable Heresy of Confessing Your Sins to a Lutheran Minister

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is also found under the section, “THE MINISTRY OF THE KEYS AND CONFESSION”; and then under the subheading, “THE KEYS”:

“First: What is the use of the Keys?

The use of the Keys is that special power and rightwhich Christ gave to his church on earth, to forgive the sins of penitent sinners but to refuse forgiveness to the impenitent as long as they do not repent.

Where is this written?

The holy Evangelist John writes in chapter 20, “Jesus breathed on his disciples and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive anyone his sins, they are forgiven; if you do not forgive them, they are not forgiven.”

How arrogant!, How blasphemous!, How damnable!, for any human being to claim the power to forgive sins.  Not one Verse in the entire Word of God records anyone forgiving sin apart from Jesus Christ alone.  If the Lord had given this power to the Apostles, then why isn’t it recorded?  No, Jesus never gave such power to the church. 

The Lutheran minister and the Catholic priest arrogantly and sinfully proclaim that they have the “special power and right” to forgive sins; but they certainly do NOT.  They also claim the “special power and right” to deny forgiveness of sins to the impenitent; but, again, they certainly do NOT.  This is clear from the words of Jesus in Matthew 6:15, “But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”  Ephesians 4:32 reads, “…forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake hath forgiven you.” 

Who would be so arrogant as to deny someone forgiveness in lieu of such clear teachings of Scripture?  If you’ll follow me carefully, and think this through, you’ll come to the ONLY conclusion that is possible–Forgiveness of sins can only come through faith in Jesus Christ.  In other words, even if a minister or priest wants to forgive someone, they CANNOT if that person has no faith in Christ as Saviour.  And likewise, no Lutheran minister or Catholic priest can deny forgiveness to someone who is trusting upon the blood of Jesus to forgive them.  I’m simply saying that forgiveness is out of the minister’s or priest’s hand.  Romans 1:16 tells us that the Gospel is the POWER unto salvation. 

Listen friend, you can confess sins to your Lutheran minister or Catholic priest ’til the cows come home if you want, but that won’t get you forgiven.  Romans 1:16 declares that forgiveness comes through the power of the GOSPEL, and nothing else.  The Gospel being Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. 

In so doing, Christ shed His precious blood for our sins.  If we simply believe upon Jesus Christ as our personal Saviour, trusting upon the finished work of Christ to take away our sins with His blood, our sins will be forgiven.  How dare any stiff-necked minister or priest teach differently.   You can’t be fooled if you’ll follow the Word of God my friend.

John 20:23 is used by the Lutheran minister and the Catholic priest to claim they have power to forgive your sins.  I want you to notice carefully here that the EXACT same Greek word “aphiemi,” which is used in John 20:23, is also used in Matthew 6:12, “And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.” 

The word literally means, “to send forth” (i.e., to “let go”).  When we forgive our debtors, we “let it go.”  Again, in Matthew 6:14 and 15 we read, “For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.”  These are from the EXACT same Greek word, “aphiemi,” found in John 20:23.  Hence, ministers and priests have no more ability to pardon other people’s sins than laymen do.  Clearly, we have been lied to by Lutheran ministers and Catholic Priests! 

Every believer is commanded by God to “forgive” (aphiemi) other’s sins (Ephesians 4:30-32).  Please understand that no human can cleanse another human’s sins away.  No minister or priest can make you right with God.  If you commit a sin against me, and then make restitution, asking for my forgiveness–I am commanded by God to forgive (aphiemi) you; but that doesn’t mean you’re now saved and on your way to Heaven. 

I cannot save you or make you right with God, you MUST go through Jesus Christ, Who is the ONLY Mediator between God and men, “For there is one God, and ONE MEDIATOR between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.”  Clearly, the forgiveness offered from one human to another CANNOT substitute one’s need for forgiveness from God.

The Word of God is clear that ONLY God can forgive sin, “…who can forgive sins but God only?” (Mark 2:7).  So what was Jesus saying to the Apostles in John 20:23?  Since Jesus spoke about people NOT being forgiven, there is only one thing He could have been talking about, the Gospel. The same is true of Matthew 16:19 concerning the word “key,” and again in Matthew 18:18 concerning the word “bind.” 

The ONLY “key” to Heaven is the Gospel of Christ Jesus; hence, the preaching of the Gospel distributes the keys which allow men to become saved and enter Heaven.  VINE’S EXPOSITORY DICTIONARY OF GREEK NEW TESTAMENT WORDS says concerning the word “key in Matthew 16:19…

” ‘a key,’ is used metaphorically (a) of “the keys of the kingdom of heaven,” which the Lord committed to Peter, Matt. 16:19, by which he would open the door of faith, as he did to the Jews at Pentecost, and to Gentiles in the person of Cornelius, acting as one commissioned by Christ, through the power of the Holy Spirit; he had precedence over his fellow disciples, not in authority, but in the matter of time, on the ground of his confession of Christ (v. 16); equal authority was committed to them (18:18); (b) of “the keys of knowledge,” Luke 11:52, i.e., knowledge of the revealed will of God, by which men entered into the life that pleases God; this the religious leaders of the Jews had presumptuously “taken away,” so that they neither entered in themselves, nor permitted their hearers to do so…”

Clearly, the “key” which Jesus spoke of is, the Gospel.  The POWER of the Gospel in Romans 1:16 is the key that frees us from the bondage of sin, the condemnation of the Law, the fires of Hell, and the lies of false religions which lay burdens “grievous to be borne” upon men’s shoulders (Matthew 23:4). 

But again, there is no reference to ministers or priests being given the “special power and right” to forgive sin.  To teach such nonsense is to neglect hundreds of Scriptures which do NOT agree.  We can forgive other’s their debts, foolishness, wrongs, trespasses, and evil’s against us; but only God alone can forgive SIN.  Come down off your pedestal Mr. Lutheran minister.   Only Jesus can forgive sin (1st Timothy 2:5).

The Bible commands us to forgive those who seek our forgiveness (Matthew 6:14 and 15), so Jesus couldn’t have been speaking about personal forgiveness in John 20:23.  Furthermore, it wasn’t the “special power and right” of the disciples to decide whether a man was forgiven or not, that POWER is clearly stated in Romans 1:16 to be THE GOSPEL. 

Listen to the frightening words of the Apostle Paul in 2nd Thessalonians 1:8,9 to all Christ-rejecters, “In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction…”  Clearly, the determination of whether a person is forgiven or not is based upon his or her acceptance or rejection of the Gospel of Jesus Christ; and not, upon the whims of some earthly pompous Lutheran minister or Catholic priest.  You had better obey the Gospel, and not the Lutheran religion. 

Martin Luther is burning in the fires of Hell right now for His damnable beliefs.  Mr. Luther made the woeful error of ADDING to God’s simple plan of salvation, which is faith alone in Jesus the Christ.

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is also found under the section, “THE MINISTRY OF THE KEYS AND CONFESSION”; and then under the subheading, “WHAT IS CONFESSION?”:

First: What is Confession?

Confession has two parts. The one is that we confess our sins; the other, thatwe receive absolution or forgiveness from the pastor* as from God himself, not doubting but firmly believing that our sins are thus forgiven before God in heaven.

Fourth: How will the pastor assure a penitent sinner of forgiveness?
He will say, “By the authority of Christ, I forgive you your sins in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.” (underline added)

*The German term is best translated as ‘confessor,” that is, the person who hears the confession.

I’ve included this last section of the Lutheran Catechism to show how arrogant their ministers are, to actually claim that they have the power to forgive sins.  How wicked!  Mr. Luther, you are an imposter!  You won’t fool me with your damnable teachings, no Sir!  I’m going to follow the Word of God, and not a man (Romans 3:4; Psalm 118:8).  EVERY Lutheran minister is required and expected by headquarters to TEACH that they (ministers) have the power to forgive sin.  To teach such a lie is a damnable heresy!!! 

Notice Luther’s Catechism above states, “we receive absolution or forgiveness from the pastor.”  You’ve got to be kidding me brother!  Only a child of the Devil would claim to have the power and right to forgive another person’s sin.  I have a few questions for you.  Who does the Lutheran minister go to, to get his sins forgiven?  Who does his wife and children go to, to get their sins forgiven?  Why can’t we go directly to God like the publican in Luke 18:13 who cried, “God be merciful to me a sinner.”  Are you so foolish to buy into Satan’s lie that another sinful man can forgive your sins? 

Do a little homework and I’m certain you’ll find that EVERY Lutheran minister and Catholic priest which lived 150 years ago are DEAD today.  Do you know why?  Because Romans 6:23 proclaims “for the wages of sin is death…”  They died because they were SINNERS, just like you and me.  Listen friend, I don’t know about you, but I feel a lot more secure trusting in the Perfect Lamb of God, Who died upon the cross for me; than in some sinful minister, who never did anything for me, nor could do anything for me. 

Are you going to place all your faith in the hopes that some Lutheran minister has the self-proclaimed power to forgive your sins?  Would you feel safer hearing a sinful minister say, “I forgive your sins”; or the words of Hebrews 4:16, “Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy…“

The Damnable Heresy of Salvation Through Holy Baptism

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is also found under the section, “THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY BAPTISM”; and then under the subheading, “THE BLESSING OF BAPTISM”:

Second: What does Baptism do for us?

Baptism works forgiveness of sin, delivers from death and the devil, and gives eternal salvation to all who believe this, as the words and promises of God declare. What are these words and promises of God? Christ our Lord says in the last chapter of Mark, “Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (underline added)

What a damnable lie of Satan!!!  Not one verse in the entire Bible teaches that “Baptism works forgiveness of sin.”

The following quote is from Luther’s Small Catechism, as promoted by the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod.  The quote is also found under the section, “THE SACRAMENT OF HOLY BAPTISM”; and then under the subheading, “THE POWER OF BAPTISM”:

“Third: How can water do such great things?

It is certainly not the water that does such things, but God’s Word which is in and with the water, and faith which trusts this Word used with the water. For without God’s Word the water is just plain water and not baptism. But with this Word it is baptism, that is,a gracious water of life and a washing of rebirth by the Holy Spirit.

Where is this written?

St. Paul says in Titus, chapter 3, “God saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit, whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that, having been justified by his grace, we might become heirs having the hope of eternal life. This is a trustworthy saying.” (emphasis added)

I don’t know what Martin Luther was smoking, but he’s way out in left field.  The Scriptures quoted above are being taken out of context.  A standard rule in interpreting the Word of God is that you NEVER base a doctrine upon one Scripture by itself.  You COMPARE it to all the other Scriptures in the Bible. 

Titus 3:5 clearly speaks of the “washing of regeneration,” not the washing by Baptism.  Revelation 1:5 declares, “And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.”  It is clear from this Scripture that “washing” is speaking about Jesus’ blood, and not baptism.  It may be convenient for Lutherans to “claim” that Titus 3:5 is speaking about baptism, but a simple comparison of Titus 3:5 with other Scriptures in the Bible denies their foolish claim. 

Again in Revelation 7:14 we read, “And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.”  Just as false prophets always do, Lutherans target Scriptures that, by themselves, can be easily taken out of context.  Well they can’t pervert Revelation 1:5 or 7:14 because they clearly speak of the Blood of Jesus which WASHES our sins away.

Notice in Luther’s Catechism above that he also tries to justify Baptismal Regeneration by quoting Mark 16:16, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.”  A simple comparison with Romans 10:9-13 refutes such an idea.  Romans 10:10 declares, “For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness…”  Salvation is of the heart; and not, through the ceremonial act of baptism. 

The necessary thing to be saved is BELIEF; and not, baptism.  Notice that Mark 16:16 does not say “he that is not baptized shall be damned.”  No, it says “he that believeth not shall be damned.”  The thief upon the cross who turned to Christ in faith was not baptized.  Romans 4:3 reads, “For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”  There is NO reference to baptism; but only, faith.  Jesus NEVER told anyone to be baptized to go to Heaven.  Jesus claimed that He is the Door, by which men can be saved if they’ll enter (John 10:9).  Jesus claimed that He is the Living Water, by which men can be saved if they’ll drink (John 4:10). 

Jesus claimed that He is the Bread of Life, by which men can be saved if they’ll eat (John 6:35).  Jesus claimed that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life (John 14:6).  Yet, Jesus never ADDED anything about being Baptized in all these Scriptures.  The “washing of Regeneration” in Titus 3:5 is nothing more than our sins being washed away by Jesus blood, and the Holy Spirit indwelling our body.  We are “regened” when we are BORN-AGAIN (John 3:3). 

Our spirit which was dead in trespasses and sins, is quickened (made alive) by the Holy Spirit of God (Ephesians 2:1).  The regeneration is the “new creature” (Christ) which comes to dwell within us (2nd Corinthians 5:17).  The regeneration is the Holy Spirit of God; thus, we become a new creature in Christ.

I once had a Church of Christ minister tell me that the Apostle Paul didn’t baptize because his disciples did.  He spoke this in an attempt to justify baptism, and discredit 1st Corinthians 1:17 where Paul clearly stated, “For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel…”  The Apostle Paul said in Romans 10:1, “Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved.” 

In the entire book of Romans, Paul only mentions “baptized” or “baptism” TWICE (Romans 6:3 and 4).  Yet, Paul mentions the word “faith” 34 times.  Clearly, baptism is NOT necessary for salvation or else the Apostle would have mentioned it much more.  In fact, Paul explains what baptism is in Romans 6:3,4…

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?  Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that LIKE as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.”

Carefully notice the word “like.”  Hence, baptism is only symbolic of the Gospel of Christ.  It is simply a way for us to identify ourselves with Christ in His crucifixion, for others to witness.  Just as Jesus died, was buried, and rose again–so do we identify with Him, showing forth our faith, through baptism. 

BUT, please notice, baptism ALWAYS come AFTER a person is already saved.  No one in the Word of God was ever baptized to get saved; but rather, were baptized because they were already saved.  Though there are several passages in the New testament which mention baptism with faith, there are umpteen more which only mention faith, and baptism is NOT mentioned at all.  The diligent Bible student must “rightly divide” the Word of Truth.  If baptism were as necessary for salvation as the cults all claim, than surely baptism would have been mentioned much more throughout the Word of God.  Baptism is not even mentioned in the Book of revelation, yet faith is mentioned 11 times. 

In 2nd Corinthians 13:5, the Apostle Paul declares, “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?”  Interestingly again, Paul does not mention baptism.  In fact, baptism is not even mentioned in 2nd Corinthians; but faith is mentioned 6 times.  The Book of Hebrews mentions faith 34 times; but baptism once ONCE. 

And let me also say that “baptism” in the Bible often refers to the baptism of the Holy Spirit (salvation) and NOT water baptism.  For example: 1st Corinthians 12:13 reads, “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body…”  The word “baptized” here is NOT referring to water baptism, but to the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs the moment we accept Christ as our Saviour. 

John the Baptist declared in Matthew 3:11, “I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire.”  It is clear from Scriptures like Mark 1:4 that John the Baptist didn’t teach baptismal Regeneration, “John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.”  It wasn’t water baptism that saved those people under John’s preaching; but rather, their repentance and faith in Christ. 

John preached the baptism of REPENTANCE, not salvation through water baptism.  Acts 19:4 reads, “Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”  Acts 10:47 plainly declares, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?”  Please notice, they had already received the Holy Ghost (salvation, Romans 8:9), but they had not yet been baptized.  How can any honest student of the Bible claim that baptism is required for salvation in lieu of such overwhelming evidence to the contrary?

In conclusion, these are but a few of the damnable doctrines of the Lutheran religion.  Martin Luther didn’t like the Book of Revelation because he couldn’t understand it.  He didn’t believe it belonged in the Bible.  He denied the Biblical teaching that Christ would one day reign from Jerusalem.  He denied the Millennium altogether, in spite of clear Biblical prophecy supporting it.  Luther denied the rapture.  Martin Luther was a heretic by all counts.  Sadly, even professed Independent Fundamental Baptists ignorantly praise Martin Luther as a man of faith. 

What many people fail to realize, as I once did, is that Luther’s faith was not SOLELY in Christ, but in his own perverted theology which ADDED “holy baptism” and “holy communion” to his faith.  Thus, there’s not a dime’s difference between Catholics are Lutherans.  The following quote if from The Lutheran World Federation, and states:

“The dialogue between the Lutheran World Federation (LWF) and the Roman Catholic Church began soon after the end of the Second Vatican Council in 1965.  The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification is so far the high point of the more than 30-year process.  The two dialogue partners confirm that they have reached ‘a consensus on basic truths of the doctrine of justification’ and ‘that the mutual condemnations of former times do not apply to the Catholic and Lutheran doctrines of justification as they are presented in the Joint Declaration.’ “

What a hoax!  The Catholics and Lutherans sat down together and drew up an agreement, stating that they BOTH believed that justification by faith in Christ was necessary for salvation.  They called this agreement, The Joint Declaration on the Doctrine of Justification.  But the problem is that they BOTH ADD the sacraments to that faith.  They BOTH require their congregations to seek forgiveness from the minister or priest, instead of from Jesus Christ as the Word of God teaches (1st John 1:9).  Who’s kidding who? 

There’s a fine line between faith and foolishness friend, and it’s the difference between Heaven or Hell when you die.  You’d better forsake your false religion, and turn to the Lord Jesus Christ instead.  Martin Luther was a heretic who taught Satanic lies.  Let every Christian who names the name of Jesus Christ, EXPOSE this worker of darkness.  As Psalm 118:8 solemnly warns, “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man.”  My friend, trust Jesus; Not Martin Luther or any other man.

“For such are false apostles, deceitful workers, transforming themselves into the apostles of Christ. And
no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” —2nd Corinthians 11:13-14

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1534 — King Henry VIII breaks away from the Roman Catholic Church and establishes the Church of England. People in England are required to attend and participate in services for the Church of England. The Puritan movement starts in the late 16th century and leads to the establishment of the Separatists. 

 

 

May 13, 1607, these first settlers selected the site of Jamestown Island as the place to build their fort. 

  

 

The Separatists Move to the Netherlands 

1607–1608 — After intense persecution and harassment from English officials, the Scrooby Separatists decide to leave England. Since it was illegal to leave the country without the permission of the King, they have to escape. Over the course of two years, they make their way to Amsterdam. 

1609 — In May, Robinson and his congregation decided to move to Leiden, which is southwest of Amsterdam. 

1617 — The Separatists decide to leave the Netherlands and move to Virginia. John Carver and Robert Cushman are sent to England to acquire permission to settle in Virginia and financial support. 

 

Preparations to Move to Virginia 

June 9, 1619 — The Virginia Company of London grants the Separatists a charter, which gives them permission to settle at the mouth of the Hudson River, at the site of present-day New York City. 

The term “Pilgrims” is used to describe the 102 English settlers who set out for the New World in 1620 on the Mayflower. Many of them were fleeing from religious persecution they faced at home.  

Upon their arrival, the Pilgrims established Plymouth Colony in present-day Massachusetts. It was the first permanent settlement of Europeans in New England. 

February 1620 — The Separatists join a joint-stock company to raise money to help pay for transportation and provisions. They work with a group of investors who called themselves the “Merchant Adventurers,” including Thomas Weston. In order to raise enough money, the Adventurers decided to send a group of their own settlers — also known as planters — on the voyage with the Separatists. 

July 22, 1620 — 125 Separatists from Robinson’s congregation set sail from Delfshaven, Holland on a ship called the Speedwell. The Speedwell sails to England and joins the Mayflower at Southampton. Robinson stays in Leiden because of his age, along with the majority of the congregation. 

The Mayflower Journey Begins 

August 15, 1620 — The Speedwell and Mayflower sail out of Southampton, on their way to the New World. The Separatists are on the Speedwell. Unfortunately, the Speedwell leaks and needs repairs. The ships stop in Dartmouth, England, and repairs are made to the Speedwell.  

August 17, 1620 — The repairs to the Speedwell are completed, but stormy weather keeps the ships from leaving. When the weather cleared, the ships set sail again. However, the Speedwell continues to leak and the ships are forced to stop at Plymouth, England.  

At Plymouth, it is decided that Speedwell will not be able to make the voyage, and everyone will need to go on the Mayflower. Around 20 of the Separatists decide to stay in England, including Robert Cushman. 

 

September 6, 1620 — The Mayflower departs from Plymouth with 102 passengers. 49 of the passengers are Separatists, but only two of them — William Brewster and William Bradford — are from the original church at Scrooby. It is estimated there are 20-30 crewmen on the ship. The Separatists are joined by 35 colonists recruited by the Merchant Adventurers. There are also 18 servants on the ship. Two babies are born before they settle in America. 

 

The Pilgrims Arrive in America 

November 9, 1620 — After 65 days, the Mayflower arrives off the East Coast at Cape Cod. The ship is much further north than expected but was forced to change course due to violent storms. Captain Jones tries to sail south, but the rough seas force the Mayflower to turn back. That night, the ship drifts off of Cape Code, near present-day Chatham, Massachusetts. 

The Pilgrims Write the Mayflower Compact 

November 10 — There is dissension between the Separatists and the other passengers. There are concerns they do not have the authority to settle anywhere but at the mouth of the Hudson. However, they cannot make the journey south due to the weather. According to William Bradford’s account, “several strangers made discontented and mutinous speeches.” A decision needs to be made before anyone leaves the ship. The leaders of both sides worked together on an agreement that will hold the Pilgrims together and form a government for the new colony — the “Mayflower Compact.” Separatist John Carver is chosen as the first Governor of what will become Plymouth Colony. 

November 11, 1620 — The Pilgrim’s First Landing. Early in the morning, most of the men on board — 41 total — either sign their name or make their mark on the Mayflower Compact. After 66 days at sea, the Mayflower anchors in present-day Provincetown Harbor. 16 men leave the Mayflower on a small boat and sail to the mainland.  

According to William Bradford, when they first set foot on land they “fell upon their knees…and blessed the God of Heaven…” Then they explored and gathered wood, which they burned that night on the Mayflower.  

The First Landing in New England is commemorated with a memorial at Pilgrim’s First Landing Park in Provincetown, Massachusetts, on Cape Cod. 

 

November 13, 1620 — The First Washing Day. The passengers go ashore for the first time. They wash their clothes properly for the first time since they left England.  

The Pilgrims Explore Cape Cod and Encounter Native American Indians 

November 15, 1620 — The First Expedition. Miles Standish leads a group of 16 men on an expedition to the mainland. The group includes William Bradford, Stephen Hopkins, and Edward Tilley. They are armed and wearing light armor.  

They encounter a small group of Indians on the beach. The Indians run away, down the shore. The Pilgrims chase after them but cannot catch up and spend the night on the beach. 

November 16, 1620 — First Water at Pilgrim Spring. Standish and his men continue the search for the Indians and follow tracks into the forest. They come across a spring, now called Pilgrim Spring, where they take their first drink of fresh, New England water. The site is marked by Pilgrim Spring Memorial Plaque. They spend the night on the mainland. 

November 17, 1620 — The Pilgrims Find Corn Hill. Standish and his men come across an old cornfield and Indian graves. They find some baskets of shelled and whole corn at a place called Corn Hill. The Pilgrims decided to take some of the corn with them because they are desperate. Afterward, they return to the harbor. 

November 20, 1620 — Susanna White gives birth to a boy, Peregrine White, on board the Mayflower. Susanna and her husband, William, are believed to have been “Strangers,” not Separatists. However, the name “Peregrine” is derived from the Latin word “peregrinus,” which means “pilgrim.” 

November 27, 1620 — The Second Expedition. Captain Jones leads an expedition of 34 men — 24 passengers and 10 crewmen — on an expedition to find a place for the settlement to be built. Their boat is blown to the east side of Provincetown Harbor and the strong wind will not allow them to return to the Mayflower. They camp for the night near what is called Pilgrim Lake. There is a heavy snowfall that night. 

November 28, 1620 — The next morning, they sail south, but it is too cold. Jones decides to stop and make camp again. Some of the men are sick. 

November 29, 1620 — Jones and his men return to Corn Hill where they find and take more corn. The corn and sick men are loaded onto the boat and sent to the Mayflower. Jones returns to the Mayflower and leaves Standish in charge of the remaining men. 

November 30, 1620 — Standish leads a search for the Indians. They come across a grave that is covered with boards. The grave contains the skull of a man — with yellow hair and skin still present — and a bag with the bones of a child. The boards appear to be from a ship. Later that day, they find abandoned Indian wigwams. The boat arrives and they return to the Mayflower. 

December 6, 1620 — The Third Expedition. An expedition sails in the small boat down along the coast of Cape Cod Bay. Near present-day Wellfleet, they see a group of Indians on the beach, butchering a dead, beached whale. When they see the Pilgrims coming, they run off. The Pilgrims camp on the shore that night. 

December 7, 1620 — The group splits up to look for a place to build the settlement. Neither group finds anything. They spend the night near Herring River, on Wellfleet Harbor. 

December 8, 1620 — The First Encounter. Early in the morning, the Pilgrims are ambushed by Indians The Indians hide in the woods and fire arrows at the camp. The Pilgrims fired a few shots into the darkness and then took defensive positions in their camp. It is estimated there were about 30 Indians on the attack. When the Pilgrims identified the leader of the attacking party, they fired on him and the Indians withdrew. The location of this brief fight is called First Encounter Point Beach. It is in present-day Eastham, Massachusetts. 

 

The Pilgrims Start Plymouth Colony 

December 8, 1620 — Arrival at Clark’s Island. The expedition sailed all the way around the south end of the Cape Cod Harbor and up the western shore to a place earlier explorers called “Thievish Harbor.” The wind is harsh and the water is rough. 

 The boat suffers damage and they are forced to row with oars. They spend the night on what is now Clark’s Island in Duxbury Bay. It was named for the pilot, John Clark, who was the first to set foot on it. 

December 11, 1620 — The Pilgrims explore the area of what is now Plymouth Bay. They find old fields, but no Indian settlements. They believe they have found the place to build their settlement. 

December 12, 1620 — The expedition returns to the Mayflower. 

December 15, 1620 — The Mayflower leaves Provincetown Harbor. Strong winds keep it from reaching Plymouth Harbor that day. The ship anchors at present-day Goose Point, near Duxbury, just north of Plymouth. 

December 16, 1620 — The Mayflower Arrives at Plymouth Bay. Over the course of the next three days, they explore the area more and discuss the exact location to build their settlement.

 

 

An old map, drawn by Samuel de Champlain, showed an Indian village on the banks of the harbor. However, by the time the Pilgrims arrived, nothing was left — except for the bones of the dead. Most of them likely died when an epidemic wiped out a significant portion of the Indians in New England from 1616 to 1619 in what is known as the “Great Dying.” 

 

The settlement of the Puritans — later to be known as “Pilgrims” — at Plymouth, Massachusetts, in 1620 looms large in the development of New England and the United States.

Unfortunately, virtually all the historic sites relating to the earliest settlement period have lost their original character and convey little impression of the colony. One exception is Cole’s Hill, which is still the dominant landmark of Plymouth Harbor. The view from the hill of land harbor and sea conveys a vivid impression of the scene that greeted the Mayflower’s weary passengers.

December 20, 1620 — Cole’s Hill is Chosen for Settlement. They decide to begin building on a hill, which is known today as Cole’s Hill. A small group stays on the mainland that night. They plan to begin work the next day, but bad weather keeps them from starting.

 

The Pilgrim Hall Museum, which tells the story of the Pilgrims, is located at 75 Court Street (Route 3A).

The building, constructed in 1824, houses the nation’s oldest continuously operating public museum and houses an unmatched collection of Pilgrim possessions. Among its irreplaceable treasures are William Bradford’s Bible, Myles Standish’s sword, the only portrait of Pilgrim Edward Winslow painted from life, the cradle of New England’s firstborn, Peregrine White, the great chair of William Brewster, and the earliest sampler made in America, embroidered by the teenage daughter of Myles Standish.

 

December 23, 1620 — Workers sail from the Mayflower to the mainland and start cutting down trees. 

 

December 25, 1620 — The First Christmas in New England. The Pilgrims do not celebrate most holidays, so they spend Christmas Day working. They build the frame for the first building in Plymouth Colony. 

December 31, 1620 — The Pilgrims name their new home New Plymouth, after the town they left from in England. 

Important Dates in Pilgrim History After the Founding of Plymouth 

March 16, 1621 — Samoset walks into Plymouth, and, according to legend, asks for bread and beer — in English. The Pilgrim leaders meet Massosiot and Squanto a few days later. 

April 1, 1621 — Plymouth and the Wampanoag agree to the Pilgrim-Wampanoag Treaty. 

Mid-Apil, 1621 — John Carver dies, and William Bradford is elected Governor. 

October 1621 — The First Thanksgiving. 

November 1621 — A ship called the Fortune arrives, carrying 35 new settlers. 

 

The Mayflower Compact is a written agreement composed by a consensus of the new Settlers arriving at New Plymouth in November of 1620. They had traveled across the ocean on the ship Mayflower which was anchored in what is now Provincetown Harbor near Cape Cod, Massachusetts.  

The Mayflower Compact was drawn up with fair and equal laws, for the general good of the settlement and with the will of the majority. 

November 1622 — Squanto dies from an illness. 

1623 — The shared system of living is abolished. Settlers are given one acre of land to plant their own crops. If they raise more than they need, they can trade the surplus. 

 

Summer 1623 — Two ships, the Anne and Little James bring around 100 new settlers. 

June 1630 — The Winthrop Fleet arrives in Massachusetts Bay. The Great Puritan Migration is accelerating. 

On April 23, 1635, the first public school in what would become the United States was established in Boston, Massachusetts. Known as the Boston Latin School, these boys-only public secondary school was led by schoolmaster Philemon Pormont, a Puritan settler. 

The first such college was Harvard University, founded in 1636 in Massachusetts. What was the first US college? Harvard University is the oldest college in the entire country — it dates to 1636 

May 1657 — William Bradford dies. 

June 1660 — Massasoit dies. He is succeeded by his son, Wamsutta, who the English call Alexander. 

1662 — Wamsutta dies after visiting Plymouth. He is succeeded by his brother, Metacomet, who the English call Philip. Philip blames the people of Plymouth for his brother’s death. 

June 1675 — Wampanoag warriors attack Swansea, a settlement in Plymouth Colony. King Philips’ War begins. 

December 1686 — Plymouth Colony becomes part of the Dominion of New England. 

 

October 1691 — William and Mary issue a new charter for Massachusetts. Under the new charter, Plymouth and Maine become part of Massachusetts Bay Colony. 

Famous Pilgrims and Founders of Plymouth Colony 

William Brewster 

William Brewster founded the Separatist church in Scrooby, England, and moved with the group to Amsterdam, then Leiden, and then Plymouth. In Plymouth, he served as the pastor of the congregation and an advisor to the Governor. He left Plymouth in 1632 and moved to Duxbury. Brewster signed the Mayflower Compact. 

 

John Carver 

John Carver went to London with Thomas Cushman to help organize transportation and funding for the trip. Carver signed the Mayflower Compact and was chosen as the first Governor of Plymouth Colony. He was a Separatist and had joined the congregation in Leiden. Carver died in the spring of 1621. 

 

William Bradford 

William Bradford signed the Mayflower Compact and went on to serve as the Governor of Plymouth Colony for nearly 30 years between 1621 and 1657. He wrote a history of the Pilgrim journey and early years of Plymouth Colony called “Of Plymouth Plantation.” He was a Separatist and an original member of the Scrooby Congregation. He succeeded Carver as Governor in 1621. 

 

John Alden stayed in Plymouth when the Mayflower left. He married fellow passenger, Priscilla Mullins. During his life, he played a prominent role in the government of the colony and was the last surviving signer of the Mayflower Compact. 

Myles Standish 

Myles Standish was an English soldier living in Leiden who accompanied the Separatists on their voyage to America. He signed the Mayflower Compact and participated in the Pilgrim expeditions to the mainland in search of a place to build their settlement. Standish was the military leader of Plymouth Colony. 

Significance of the Pilgrims 

The success of the Pilgrims had a significant impact on the course of not just the history of the United States, but of the entire world. Plymouth Colony helped shape the course of New England, led to the Great Puritan Migration, and ultimately the creation of the United States of America.  

 

Today, more than 30 million people (about the population of Texas) can trace their ancestry to the Pilgrims and there are various historic sites dedicated to them in the Netherlands, England, and the United States. 

 

 

WHO WERE THE PILGRIMS? 

The Pilgrims were a small group of English colonists that emigrated from England to the New World in 1620 on the ship Mayflower. Some of them were Puritan Separatists who wanted to separate from the Church of England.  

The other passengers were servants, workers, and families that were sympathetic to the Separatist cause or wanted their own fresh start in the New World. The Separatists called themselves “Saints” and referred to everyone else on the Mayflower as “Strangers.” 

WHY ARE THEY CALLED “PILGRIM FATHERS?” 

Over time, the entire group — Saints and Strangers — have come to be known as the Pilgrims. In 1820, Daniel Webster delivered a speech at the bicentennial celebration and referred to the entire group of colonists as the “Pilgrim Fathers.” 

HOW MANY PEOPLE WERE ON THE MAYFLOWER? 

There were about 102 passengers in total, along with 20-30 crewmembers. There were men, women, and children — entire families.  

There were unaccompanied children who were looked after by the other adults on the trip.  

Within the group were skilled tradesmen and men with military experience. A baby boy, Oceanus Hopkins, was born during the voyage. Another boy, Peregrine White, was born after the Mayflower reached Cape Cod. 

WHY DID THEY EMIGRATE TO AMERICA? 

In England, people were required to attend and participate in the services of the Church of England, however, the Separatists — who were part of the Puritan movement — wanted to separate from the Church of England.  

They first moved to the Netherlands but found they were losing their identity as Englishmen. They decided to emigrate to America, where they could have religious freedom and retain their English customs and way of life. The other passengers on the Mayflower were looking for a new life in the New World. 

WHAT DID THEY DO WHEN THEY ARRIVED IN THE NEW WORLD? 

They arrived at Cape Cod and established Plymouth Colony in 1620. It was the first successful English Colony in New England. 

Why did the Pilgrims dislike the Church of England? 

The Pilgrims strongly believed that the Church of England, and the Catholic Church, had strayed beyond Christ’s teachings, and established religious rituals, and church hierarchies, that went against the teachings of the Bible. 

 

How did the Pilgrims feel about the Anglican Church? 

The Pilgrims were religious nonconformists—Calvinist dissidents who disliked the hierarchical authority of the Anglican Church and sought a more democratic and direct religious experience. 

Why did the Puritans disagree with the Church of England? 

The Puritans were members of a religious reform movement known as Puritanism that arose within the Church of England in the late 16th century. They believed the Church of England was too similar to the Roman Catholic Church and should eliminate ceremonies and practices not rooted in the Bible. 

Did Pilgrims or Puritans want to purify the Church of England? 

Puritans were English Protestants who were committed to “purifying” the Church of England by eliminating all aspects of Catholicism from religious practices. English Puritans founded the colony of Plymouth to practice their own brand of Protestantism without interference. 

Why did the Separatists want to separate from the Church of England? 

The Separatists believed they should seek out other believers and gather as they saw fit. They believed the Church of England retained too much of the Catholic Church’s ceremonies and liturgy, and they should instead worship as they saw fit. 

 

What was the other name for the Virginia colony? 

After the English Civil War in the 1640s and 1650s, the Virginia colony was nicknamed “The Old Dominion” by King Charles II for its perceived loyalty to the English monarchy during the era of the Protectorate and Commonwealth of England. 

 

 

 

Mayflower was an English ship that transported a group of English families, known today as the Pilgrims, from England to the New World in 1620. After a grueling 10 weeks (about 2 and a half months) at sea, Mayflower, with 102 passengers and a crew of about 30, reached what is today the United States, dropping anchor near the tip of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, on November 21 [O.S. November 11], 1620. 

 

What did the Virginia Company name their settlement? 

In December 1606, the Virginia Company’s three ships, containing 144 men and boys, set sail.  

 

In 1607, 104 English men and boys arrived in North America to start a settlement.

On May 13 they picked Jamestown, Virginia for their settlement, which was named after their King, James I. 

 

Why is New Orleans so French? 

In 1682 the French laid claim to a huge chunk of North America and named it ‘La Louisaine’ in honor of the Duke of Orléans, who ruled France until the young Louis XV could ascend to power. Nearly two decades later, the French founded New Orleans for its prime position on the Mississippi River and the Gulf of Mexico.

 

 

Colonial Era (1700-1774) 

The Colonial Era in the United States spanned from 1700 to 1774, during which the thirteen British colonies in North America underwent significant developments in politics, society, and culture.  

This period was marked by the growth of colonial economies, the spread of religious diversity, and the emergence of a distinct American identity. In this essay, we will explore the major events and themes of the Colonial Era in the United States. 

Religion played a significant role in the development of colonial society. The colonies were established by different religious groups, including Puritans, Quakers, and Catholics, who sought to create communities based on their religious beliefs.  

These communities were often intolerant of religious diversity, leading to conflicts and persecution of religious minorities.  

However, over time, the colonies became more religiously diverse, as new religious groups, such as Baptists and Methodists, emerged and challenged the dominance of established churches the Colonial Era in the United States was a period of significant development and change.  

It was marked by the growth of colonial economies, the spread of religious diversity, the emergence of representative assemblies and local governments, and the events leading up to the American Revolution.  

Despite its challenges and conflicts, the Colonial Era laid the foundations for the United States as a nation and shaped its identity as a land of freedom and opportunity 

 

 

The history of the Hellfire Club dates back to the 1700s when it was originally a British secret society for high-standing individuals of a certain persuasion. The club provided a place for fun, like-minded, intelligent people who wanted a place to be themselves without judgment.

 

 

 

Child Molestation, Murder, Mystery and Mayhem in the Hell Fire Club in West Wycombe near London in the 1700s.

Keeping the facade of Christian worship in an above ground Church Sir Francis Dashwood and Benjamin Franklin below ground practice the worship of debauchery, rape, and murder.

The specter of Satanic practices and worship goes on to this day in Bohemian Grove and the Skull and Bones where Americas leaders are nourished and indoctrinated with the Luciferian Doctrine. . Though the Hell Fire Clubs members are long gone….

 

By everybody’s standards, Sir Francis was not a religious man and even the building of this church was dismissed by his contemporaries as for show rather than prayer. Indeed, why else build a church at the top of a hill, when the entire congregation lives at the bottom?

As the story goes, during his visits to Italy on his Grand Tours, Sir Francis had developed a profound antipathy for the Roman Catholic Church. This was later shown in a variety of ways, not least in having himself painted as a Franciscan monk in irreverent parodies of Renaissance art.

In one of those paintings, the deity ‘San Francisco di Wycombo’ worships is Venus, and the book he reverently peruses is not the Bible, but a copy of an erotic novel, while the profile of Dashwood’s friend and partner in mischief, Lord Sandwich, peers from the halo.

Sir Francis Dashwood and the Earl of Sandwich were members of the notorious club that began by meeting at the George and Dragon inn as the Order of the Knights of St Francis, then at Medmenham Abbey where they became the Friars of Medmenham, and lastly in the caves dug under the hill crowned by the Dashwood Mausoleum, known to this day as the Hellfire Caves.

The Hellfire Caves are a network of man-made caverns excavated by the local villagers who were employed to mine chalk and flint. The chalk was used to build the road between West Wycombe and High Wycombe, and also the church, the Mausoleum and some of the houses in the village.

The caves were used as a meeting place for Sir Francis Dashwood’s gathering of ‘friars’, by then renamed the Hellfire Club. Its members included various important XVIII century figures such as William Hogarth, John Wilkes, Thomas Potter and John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich. Though not believed to have been a member, Benjamin Franklin was a close friend of Dashwood’s who visited the caves on more than one occasion.

Two of those notable personages are immortalised in the names chosen for some of the chambers. The route through the caves progresses from the Entrance Hall to the Steward’s Chamber and Whitehead’s Cave, then passes through Lord Sandwich’s Circle, Franklin’s Cave , the Banqueting Hall, the Triangle, the Miner’s Cave and finally, across a subterranean river named the Styx, into the Inner Temple, where the meetings of the Hellfire Club were held.

According to Horace Walpole, the members’ practice was “rigorously pagan. Bacchus and Venus were the deities to whom they almost publicly sacrificed; and the nymphs and the hogsheads that were laid in against the festivals of this new church sufficiently informed the neighbourhood of the complexion of those hermits.”

Meetings occurred twice a month, with a gathering of all members for a fortnight or so in June or September, and rumours of black magic, satanic rituals and orgies circulated in the area and beyond. Nevertheless, it would appear that the majority of the participants were merely interested in drinking, singing bawdy songs and meeting in privacy with their mistresses, while a handful of others, which included Sir Francis himself, were genuinely interested in the revival of some ancient ‘pagan’ cults.

There is a very entertaining story about a practical joke played on Lord Sandwich at one of the meetings of the club. John Wilkes, the notorious radical, contrived to bring a baboon to the proceedings, dressed the animal in ‘phantastic garb’, kept him secreted away, and eventually released him at a chosen moment without being noticed, by means of an elaborate contraption. Finally freed from his place of confinement, the baboon leapt on Lord Sandwich’s shoulders.

Shocked by the sudden appearance of the shrieking creature, his lordship was gripped by the fear that it was the very Devil whom they had been invoking, come to carry him away. The harder he tried to shake the baboon off, the tighter it clung, while Sandwich cried: “Spare me gracious Devil! Spare a wretch who never was sincerely your servant. I sinned only from vanity of being in the fashion. Thou knowest I never have been half so wicked as I pretended, never have been able to commit the thousandth part of the vices which I have boasted of. Leave me therefore and go to those who are more truly devoted to your service. I am but half a sinner!”

Whether half- or full-measure sinners, and whatever the Hellfire Club had been up to in the bowels of the earth, by the late 1760s the party was over. The club was disbanded in 1766 and the caves, disused after Sir Francis Dashwood’s death in 1781, fell into disrepair. However, after the Second World War, they were renovated and turned into a visitors’ attraction by another Sir Francis Dashwood, a descendant of the notorious sybarite, and the profits used to refurbish the dilapidated family home.

 

The practices still carry on with Zionist New World Order Rites in The Bohemian Grove before the Owl of Moloch and in the tomb of Skull and Bones at Yale University.

 

 

“One of the most influential figures in the American Revolution was the writer, philosopher and scientist Benjamin Franklin. He was a Quaker but had become a Freemason in 1731 when he joined the Lodge of St. John in Philadelphia, which was the first recognized Masonic lodge in America. 

At the time he was inducted Franklin was working as a journalist and he wrote several pro-Masonic articles which were published in The Pennsylvania Gazette.  

In 1732 he helped draft the by-laws of his lodge and in 1734 he printed the Constitutions which was the first Masonic book ever issued in America. He eventually rose to Grand Master of the St. John’s lodge and in 1749 was elected Grand Master of the Province. 

While in France in the 1770s, as a diplomat for the American colonies, Franklin was made Grand Master of the Nine Sisters Lodge in Paris. Members of the Lodge included Danton, who was to play a crucial role in the French Revolution, the Marquis de Lafayette and Paul Jones, both of whom fought in the American War of Independence. While in Paris Franklin used his Masonic contacts to raise funds to buy arms for the American rebels.” 

 

Bellevue Hospital is the oldest public hospital in the US. It was established on March 31, 1736, and is still in operation to date.   

 

Russian-Circassian War 1763 – 21 May 1864 

 

 

Eastern State Hospital, founded in 1773 in Williamsburg, Virginia, has the unique distinction of being the first hospital built in America specifically for the confinement and treatment of the mentally ill. 

 

 

 

The Boston Tea Party was a political protest staged on December 16, 1773, at Griffin’s Wharf in Boston, Massachusetts. 

 

 

Revolutionary Era (1774-1780) 

The Revolutionary Era in the United States, which lasted from 1774 to 1780, was a critical period in the nation’s history. During this time, the colonies, united in their opposition to British rule, took bold steps toward independence and self-governance.  

The Revolutionary Era was marked by several key events, including the First and Second Continental Congresses, the Declaration of Independence, and the American victory at Saratoga. In this essay, we will explore these events and their significance to the Revolutionary Era. 

The Revolutionary Era began in 1774 with the convening of the First Continental Congress. Representatives from twelve of the thirteen colonies met in Philadelphia to discuss their grievances with British rule, including the lack of representation in the British Parliament and the imposition of taxes without their consent.  

The Congress issued a series of resolutions, including a boycott of British goods, and called for the establishment of colonial militias to defend against British aggression. 

The following year, in 1775, the Second Continental Congress was convened. This Congress was more radical than the first and included representatives from all thirteen colonies.  

Congress established the Continental Army and appointed George Washington as its commander-in-chief. The Congress also issued the Olive Branch Petition, a final attempt at reconciliation with Britain, which was rejected by King George III. 

 

A history lesson for Americans. You’re still British.

Extracts from: The Great American Adventure – Secrets of America

Political history of government and law by Judge Dale (retired)

The Colonization of America continued to expand while King George grew deeper in debt to the Rothschild Bank. It was Mayer Amschel Bauer (Rothschild), a Jew and the founder of the Rothschild Banking Empire, who suggested to King George that he tax the American colonies and demand his payment in gold. Since he was thoroughly in debt to the Rothschild Bank, King George subsequently decided to tax all commerce entering or exiting the Americas and he demanded his payment in gold. His first tax was on tea.

The colonists did not trade in gold but had developed a system of exchange based upon promissory notes called “Colonial Script,” which is similar to the “Federal Reserve Notes” of today. The difference between Colonial Script and Federal Reserve Notes is: “Consent.” The colonists consented to establish and honor the Colonial Script as a fair medium of exchange and which bore no interest charges; whereas, Federal Reserve Notes were thrust upon Americans without our consent, with interest and the intent of stealing the fruits of American labor, equity and assets.

The King’s demand for gold is what instigated the Boston Tea Party and not the historic claim of ‘Taxation without Representation.’ The Colonists were actually willing to pay King George’s tea tax, providing he would accept his payment in Colonial Script, which he could then trade back to them for tobacco and hemp products, and he refused. In response to the Boston Tea Party, King George sent his military in force to intimidate the colonists. This resulted in an armed confrontation and many skirmishes, which was later billed and classified as the Revolutionary War.

The fifty-one colonists who are counted as being the “Founding Fathers,” prepared and served a declaration upon King George, declaring America’s independence from England under the name of “The United States of America,” which did not set well with the King. In fact, it outraged him. The Colonists learned to fight guerrilla style warfare from fighting with and against the various Indian tribes and subsequently won many of these revolutionary skirmishes but they never had a prayer of winning a war and besides, King George never intended to kill off the colonists because: Who then would pay his tax? All he was attempting to do was regain control over his deposed slaves and any new slaves who had joined forces with the colonists.

 

 

In 1776, the colonies declared their independence from Britain with the adoption of the Declaration of Independence. This document, drafted by Thomas Jefferson, asserted that all men are created equal and have certain unalienable rights, including life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The Declaration of Independence marked a turning point in the Revolutionary Era, as the colonies moved from protesting British policies to asserting their right to self-governance. 

The Revolutionary Era also saw several key military victories for the colonies, including the Battle of Saratoga in 1777. This battle was a turning point in the Revolutionary War, as it convinced France to enter the war on the side of the colonies. The French provided crucial military and financial support to the colonies, which ultimately helped secure their victory over Britain. 

The Revolutionary Era in the United States was a critical period in the nation’s history. It was marked by the establishment of colonial militias, the declaration of independence, the formation of the Continental Army, and the American victory at Saratoga. These events, along with the social and cultural developments of the time, helped shape the identity and ideals of the United States as a nation founded on the principles of liberty, democracy, and self-governance. 

 

The American Revolutionary War (April 19, 1775 – September 3, 1783), also known as the Revolutionary War or American War of Independence, was a military conflict that was part of the broader American Revolution, where American Patriot forces organized as the Continental Army and commanded by George Washington defeated the British Army. 

 

The Declaration of Independence is a statement adopted by the Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, announcing that the thirteen American colonies then at war with Great Britain were no longer a part of the British Empire. Drafted by Thomas Jefferson and revised and approved by the Second Continental Congress on July 4, 1776, the Declaration is a formal explanation of why Congress had voted on July 2 to obtain independence. 

 

Confederation Era (1780-1787) 

The Confederation Era, which lasted from 1780 to 1787, was a challenging period for the newly independent United States. After winning their independence from Great Britain, the former colonies struggled to establish a functioning government that could effectively govern the nation.  

During this time, the United States operated under the Articles of Confederation, which created a weak central government and gave significant power to the individual states. In this essay, we will explore the key events and challenges of the Confederation Era. 

The Confederation Era began with the United States at war with Great Britain, and the Continental Army was in dire need of funding and supplies. In 1781, the Articles of Confederation were finally ratified by all thirteen states, creating the first formal system of government for the United States.  

However, the Articles created a weak central government with limited powers, unable to effectively address the needs of the nation. The central government was unable to levy taxes or regulate commerce, leading to economic instability and competition between the states. 

The Confederation Era was also marked by significant diplomatic challenges. The United States struggled to gain recognition from foreign nations, particularly Great Britain, which refused to acknowledge American independence. In addition, the United States was embroiled in conflicts with Native American nations, which were angered by American expansion into their territories. 

In 1786, a rebellion broke out in Massachusetts known as Shays’ Rebellion. The rebellion was led by farmers who were deeply in debt and facing economic hardship. The rebellion demonstrated the weaknesses of the central government under the Articles of Confederation and raised concerns about the ability of the government to maintain order and stability. 

The challenges of the Confederation Era ultimately led to the Constitutional Convention of 1787. Delegates from twelve of the thirteen states met in Philadelphia to revise the Articles of Confederation and create a more effective system of government. The result of the convention was the creation of the United States Constitution, which established a stronger central government with a system of checks and balances to prevent the abuse of power. 

In conclusion, the Confederation Era in the United States was a challenging period marked by a weak central government, economic instability, and diplomatic challenges. The inability of the central government to address the needs of the nation led to significant unrest, culminating in Shays’ Rebellion.  

However, the challenges of the Confederation Era ultimately led to the creation of the United States Constitution and the establishment of a more effective system of government, which continues to govern the nation to this day. 

In the Treaty of Paris, the British Crown formally recognized American independence and ceded most of its territory east of the Mississippi River to the United States, doubling the size of the new nation and paving the way for westward expansion. The Revolutionary War . In the fall of 1781, American and British troops fought the last major battle of the American. Revolutionary War in Yorktown, Virginia. 

Immediately the Union army moved into northern Virginia and captured Alexandria without a fight and controlled it for the remainder of the war. 

 

 

By the turn of the 19th century, four medical schools had been established in the United States, with Harvard Medical School opening in 1782, followed by Dartmouth Medical School in 1797. Dartmouth, founded by Nathan Smith, was the first medical school established outside of a major US city, and the first medical school founded in the independent United States after. 

 

 

 

 

The Treaty of Paris was signed on September 3, 1783, and it was ratified by congress on January 14, 1784. 

Washingtonian Federalist Era (1790-1800) 

The Washingtonian Federalist Era, spanning from 1790 to 1800, was a crucial period in the early history of the United States. It marked the presidency of George Washington, the formation of political parties, the implementation of economic policies, and the expansion of the federal government.  

This era witnessed the consolidation of the federal government’s power and set the stage for the development of the nation. In this essay, we will explore the key events and themes of the Washingtonian Federalist Era. 

The Washingtonian Federalist Era began with George Washington assuming the presidency in 1789, following his unanimous election by the Electoral College. Washington’s leadership and his commitment to a strong central government were instrumental in shaping the era.  

His administration laid the foundation for the federal government’s structure and policies, as well as establishing precedents that would guide future presidents. 

One of the significant accomplishments of the Washingtonian Federalist Era was the formation of political parties. The Federalist Party, led by Alexander Hamilton and John Adams, advocated for a strong central government, a national bank, and a pro-British foreign policy.  

On the other hand, the Democratic-Republican Party, led by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison, favored a limited central government, an agrarian economy, and closer ties with France. This political division marked the beginning of a two-party system in the United States and reflected the differing visions for the future of the country. 

Economic policies played a central role during the Washingtonian Federalist Era. Alexander Hamilton, as the first Secretary of the Treasury, implemented policies to strengthen the national economy and establish a solid financial foundation. Hamilton’s economic plan included the assumption of state debts, the establishment of a national bank, and the promotion of manufacturing and trade. These policies faced opposition from Democratic-Republicans, who feared the concentration of power and believed in an agrarian economy. 

Foreign relations were also a significant concern during this era. The Washingtonian Federalist Era witnessed the French Revolution and subsequent conflicts between France and Britain.  

Washington pursued a policy of neutrality, seeking to avoid entanglement in European conflicts. This policy was challenged by Democratic-Republicans who sympathized with France and criticized the government’s pro-British stance. 

Another important development of the Washingtonian Federalist Era was the expansion of the federal government’s power. The establishment of a federal court system, including the Supreme Court, with the Judiciary Act of 1789, ensured the interpretation and enforcement of federal laws.  

This expansion of federal authority helped solidify the central government’s influence and establish its role in shaping the nation’s legal framework. 

The Washingtonian Federalist Era culminated in the peaceful transition of power from President Washington to John Adams, who became the second President of the United States.  

Adams faced numerous challenges, including the Quasi-War with France and the passage of the Alien and Sedition Acts, which were highly controversial and met with significant opposition. 

In conclusion, the Washingtonian Federalist Era was a formative period in the early years of the United States. It witnessed the leadership of George Washington, the formation of political parties, the implementation of economic policies, and the expansion of federal power.  

This era laid the foundation for the development of the country and set the stage for the political, economic, and social transformations that would shape the United States in the years to come.  

The Washingtonian Federalist Era remains a critical chapter in American history, highlighting the challenges and accomplishments of the young nation as it navigated the complexities of governance and established its identity. 

 

 

The New York Post has been running since 1801. This makes it the oldest running publication to continuously issue daily newspapers. Another publication that claims to be the oldest is the Hartford Courant. It began as a weekly by the name of “Connecticut Courant” on October 29, 1764. 

 

 

1803: The Louisiana Purchase 

In 1803, the United States, under the presidency of Thomas Jefferson, made one of the most significant land acquisitions in its history known as the Louisiana Purchase. The United States acquired approximately 828,000 square miles of territory from France for $15 million. 

 

 

 

 

First U.S. vaccine mandate in 1810 launched 200 years of court battles 

At the turn of the 19th century, a Massachusetts doctor named Benjamin Waterhouse learned that an English physician had been injecting people with the cowpox virus and claiming it protected them from the deadlier smallpox. So, Waterhouse decided to test this novel treatment on his 5-year-old son and expose him to smallpox patients. 

 At the time, it wasn’t unusual for scientists and doctors to use their children as test subjects. When Waterhouse’s son didn’t become ill, he vaccinated other members of his family. Then he raised the stakes. 

 

He repeated the experiment — this time with 19 children. He injected them with cowpox and sent them to Noddle’s Island, a secluded smallpox hospital off the coast of Boston. Twenty days later, not even one was showing symptoms of smallpox. 

 

 

 

Waterhouse published his results within weeks of completing the experiment. He became a passionate vaccine advocate, lobbying every level of government, from the Boston Board of Heath all the way up to the White House, to demand an organized way to vaccinate the public. He even sent the vaccine to President Thomas Jefferson. 

 

Armed with the results of Waterhouse’s experiments, alongside several conducted by other local doctors, the Massachusetts legislature took swift action. In 1810, it passed a law giving local health boards the authority to require vaccination — the first vaccine mandate law in U.S. history. 

 

 

The biggest hurdle was not that people did not want the shot, but that many did not have access to it. The procedure often required paying a small fee, and some poorer Bostonians could not afford it. Boston began setting up free vaccinations for those who could not afford to pay as early as the first decade of the 19th century. 

The smallpox vaccine is the first vaccine to have been developed against a contagious disease. In 1796, British physician Edward Jenner demonstrated that an infection with the relatively mild cowpox virus conferred immunity against the deadly smallpox virus. Cowpox served as a natural vaccine until the modern smallpox vaccine emerged in the 20th century. From 1958 to 1977, the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted a global vaccination campaign that eradicated smallpox, making it the only human disease to be eradicated. Although routine smallpox vaccination is no longer performed on the general public, the vaccine is still being produced to guard against bioterrorism, biological warfare, and mpox.

 

Antebellum Period in American history is generally considered to be the period before the Civil War and after the War of 1812, although some historians expand it to all the years from the adoption of the Constitution in 1789 to the beginning of the Civil War.  

 

It was characterized by the rise of abolition and the gradual polarization of the country between abolitionists and supporters of slavery. 

 

 

War of 1812, (June 18, 1812–February 17, 1815), conflict fought between the United States and Great Britain over British violations of U.S. maritime rights. It ended with the exchange of ratifications of the Treaty of Ghent. The tensions that caused the War of 1812 arose from the French revolutionary (1792–99) and Napoleonic Wars (1799–1815). 

 

 

The Burning of Washington is the name given to the burning of Washington, D.C., by British forces in 1814, during the War of 1812. Strict discipline and the British commander’s orders to burn only public buildings are credited with preserving most residences, but as a result the facilities of the U.S. government, including the White House, were largely destroyed. 

 

 

1819: The Adams-Onís Treaty with Spain establishes the western boundary of the United States as the Sabine River and formalizes U.S. claims to Florida. 

 

 

The Monroe Doctrine was presented to Congress on December 2, 1823, by President James Monroe in his Annual Message to Congress. 

 

Monroe declared that the United States would not tolerate any further colonization or involvement in the Western Hemisphere by European powers 

 

The Doctrine had three main principles: separate spheres of influence for the Americas and Europe, non-colonization, and non-intervention 

Over time, the Monroe Doctrine was invoked and strengthened over time to justify U.S. intervention in Latin America and the Caribbean, including the Roosevelt Corollary 

 

1824: The Bureau of Indian Affairs is established to oversee Indian affairs and facilitate westward expansion. 

 

1826  The first photographs 

 

Starting in 1827, all Boston children were required to show proof of smallpox vaccination to attend school. Massachusetts enacted a statewide requirement in the 1850s, and other states followed suit.  

 

By the end of the 19th century, 13 states required vaccination for schoolchildren, and 11 states had adult vaccine mandates. 

 

 

In 1828, the first telegraph in the USA was invented by Harrison Dyar, who sent electrical sparks through a chemically treated paper tape to burn dots and dashes. 

1830: The Indian Removal Act is passed, leading to the forced removal of thousands of Native Americans from their ancestral lands in the Southeast to the Indian Territory (now Oklahoma). 

1836: Texas declares its independence from Mexico, eventually leading to the Texas Revolution 

1836 and 1839. The Trail of Tears was a forced movement of Native Americans in the United States. 

1838 Atlantic steamboats begin to cross the Atlantic 

1839-1846: The Oregon Trail becomes a major route for settlers moving to the Pacific Northwest. 

In 1845, the United States annexed the Republic of Texas, which had gained its independence from Mexico in 1836. This annexation led to tensions between the United States and Mexico, as Mexico had never recognized Texas’ independence. 

The annexation of Texas was a major step towards westward expansion and the eventual fulfillment of Manifest Destiny. 

1846: The Oregon Treaty with Britain establishes the 49th parallel as the U.S.-Canada border in the Pacific Northwest. 

1848: The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ends the Mexican-American War, ceding a significant portion of Mexican territory to the United States, including present-day California, Arizona, New Mexico, and more. 

Gold in California was discovered by a carpenter, James W. Marshall at Sutter’s mill in Coloma on January 24, 1848. The US President James K. Polk formally announced discovery of gold in California on December 5, 1848. 

California was admitted to the Union as the 31st state on September 9, 1850. 

 

1853: the United States made the Gadsden Purchase, acquiring a strip of land in present-day southern Arizona and southwestern New Mexico from Mexico for $10 million. The primary reason for this purchase was to secure a suitable route for the construction of a transcontinental railroad. 

The Gadsden Purchase allowed for the establishment of a southern route, which later became part of the Southern Pacific Railroad. This acquisition played a crucial role in connecting the eastern and western coasts of the United States and promoting economic growth through improved transportation. 

 

1854: The Kansas-Nebraska Act opens new territories to settlement and allows residents to decide whether to permit slavery, leading to violence in “Bleeding Kansas.” 

The Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 was a pivotal piece of legislation that allowed settlers in the Kansas and Nebraska territories to decide for themselves whether to allow slavery within their borders. This act effectively repealed the Missouri Compromise of 1820, which had prohibited slavery in territories north of a certain latitude line. 

The passage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act led to intense conflict in the Kansas Territory, as pro-slavery and anti-slavery settlers flooded in, each hoping to influence the territory’s status. 

This period of violent conflict became known as “Bleeding Kansas,” and it was a precursor to the broader sectional tensions that would eventually lead to the American Civil War. The Kansas-Nebraska Act highlighted the deep divide over slavery in the United States and the consequences of westward expansion on the issue. 

 

The orphan trains operated between 1854 and 1929 

 

 

 

 

 

The Civil War Timeline charts the major events and battles that claimed the lives of over 618,000 men. 

In 1866 the western half of Indian Territory was ceded to the United States, which opened part of it to white settlers in 1889. This portion became the Territory of Oklahoma in 1890 and eventually encompassed all the lands ceded in 1866. The two territories were United and admitted to the Union as the state of Oklahoma in 1907. 

1867: The United States purchases Alaska from Russia, further expanding its territory to the west. This acquisition added a vast expanse of land in the far northwestern part of North America to the United States 

 

 

Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution To the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868 

 

Gilded Age     Described as the period from about the 1870s to the late 1890 

 

 

Feb 21, 1871,  the 41 Congress passed the Act of 1871, which established the US corporation.  The United States Is Not a Democracy — It’s a Corporation! The Act of 1871 

 

It took about six years to build the Transcontinental Railroad and the golden spike was hammered into the ground on May 10, 1869. Then, in 1872, a bridge across the Missouri River gave the U.S. a single line of track running from coast to coast. By 1876, a train had run from NY to California in less than 90 hours. 

 

 

The first Indian boarding school in the United States was the Carlisle Indian Industrial School established in 1879. 

 

 

 

 

Partition of Africa (“Scramble for Africa”) was the occupation, division, and colonization of Africa by European powers during the era of New Imperialism between 1881 and 1914. 

 

 

From 1892 to 1954, over twelve million immigrants entered the United States through the portal of Ellis Island, a small island in New York Harbor. Ellis Island is in the upper bay just off the New Jersey coast, within the shadow of the Statue of Liberty. 

 

The World‘s Columbian Exposition (also known as the Chicago World‘s Fair) was a world‘s fair held in Chicago in 1893 to celebrate the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s arrival in the New World in 1492 

 

 

 

 

Hawaii Before Statehood. Hawaii was a territory that belonged to the United States since 1898. 

Technically Hawaii is not legally a state, a commonwealth or even a territory of the USA. History books won’t tell you that the U.S. stole royal ceded lands known as crown lands of Hawaii without a treaty, declared war, or any financial consideration, which is required for a deed of purchase. The history of US politics on the taking of Hawaii is discussed backed up with proof, so this is NOT just an opinion piece.

Even before it was an empire, the United States behaved like one. Decades before the Declaration of Independence in 1776, amid contests between the French, English, Spanish, Native Americans, the Plymouth Company, the London Company, and more, the very bedrock of the US became founded on contests over land. The original 13 colonies expanded and gobbled up earth, seizing tribal territories without remorse or compunction, as overviewed by Aeon. By the time the US engaged in the Mexican American War (1846-48) over the US’ annexation of Texas, as Britannica explains, the country was well on its way to fulfilling its original mandate of colonization.

Once the US abutted Canadian and Mexican borders, it simply turned its eyes overseas. Guam, The Marshall Islands, The Solomon Islands, Haiti, Puerto Rico, Cuba, The Northern Mariana Islands, American Samoa, The Virgin Islands, The Philippines: all of these islands have, at some point, been militarily occupied and/or annexed by the United States. Many of these were territorially relevant to the US, as they girded the country along its south side in the Caribbean, or expanded its influence into the Pacific Ocean (which eventually segued to the Korean War, Vietnam War, and other armed conflicts).

And then, of course, there’s American’s favorite tropical vacation site: Hawaii. Before Hawaii was annexed by the US, it was its own, sovereign kingdom.

 

THE “BANANA WARS” is a term coined for the conflicts involving the United States across Central America, Mexico and the Caribbean from 1898 to 1934 

 

 

 

World War I or the First World War (28 June 1914 – 11 November 1918), often abbreviated as WWI, was one of the deadliest global conflicts in history. It was fought between two coalitions, the Allies (primarily France, the United Kingdom, Russia, Italy, Japan and the United States) and the Central Powers (led by Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire). 

 

Allies vs Axis who is who in WW2. The main Allied powers were Great Britain, The United States, France, and the Soviet Union.

 

 

 

Unlike World War II and Vietnam, the Korean War did not get much media attention in the United States.

 

 

The Vietnam War which lasted from 1955 to 1975 was fought between North Vietnam (supported by the Soviet Union, China, and North Korea) and South Vietnam

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

did chiltons become clintons??? 

James Chilton Family Tree And Mayflower 

Published: Jun 15, 2022 · Modified: Oct 31, 2023 by Russell Yost · This post may contain affiliate links · 

James Chilton was the oldest passenger on the Mayflower and would never step foot on Plymouth Colony soil because he died after signing the Mayflower Compact. 

Around 1600, he moved to Sandwich, Kent. By 1615, he was in Leyden with some of his children. On April 28, 1619, James and his daughter, Isabel, was caught in an anti-Arminian riot, and James was hit in the head with a large stone and required the services of the town surgeon, Jacob Hey. 

On September 6, 1620, the Mayflower left Plymouth, England. On board were James, his wife, and their daughter Mary, 13. James Chilton signed the Mayflower Compact on November 11, 1620. Both James and his wife died on the ship before the winter was out. 

Mary is traditionally said to have been the first female to step ashore at Plymouth and is assumed to have joined the Myles Standish household. 

She later married John Winslow, who arrived on the “Fortune”. 

Religious Holidays: The Pilgrims observed the commandment to “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy, ” (Exodus 20:8, KJV) yet they did not observe Christmas and Easter since they believed those religious holidays were invented by modern people and were not celebrated as holy days in the Bible. 

The Pilgrims, or Separatists who established Plymouth Colony, did not celebrate Christmas because they could not find any literal references in the Bible that Jesus was born on December 25th (or any other specific date, for that matter 

I was stunned to discover that the first Pilgrims never celebrated Christmas. In fact, for a number of years it was a crime to celebrate Christmas in the northern colonies! In this they were going along with the Puritans back in England, where Oliver Cromwell, the Head Of State for England, had declared Christmas celebrations to be a criminal offense. 

 

 

HISTORY OF CHRISTMAS IN AMERICA: 1659 — 1681
 

Part of the reason was that the Puritans wanted to purify Christianity, and their idea of purifying it was to eliminate all religious activities that did not appear in the Bible. Since the people in the Bible did not celebrate Christmas, the Puritans felt they should not celebrate it. 

The other reason for abolishing Christmas celebrations was due to the offensive way in which the English celebrated their holiday. 

Traditionally on Christmas Day, gangs of young males from the poor areas of the city prowled the better neighborhoods. They sang Christmas songs and banged on the doors of homes. They also demanded servings of the seasonal drink, wassail, a strong wine flavored with spices. If the young men were not invited into the home, they smashed the doors or shattered the windows, then forced their way inside. After “visiting” five or six homes, their drunkenness and rowdy behavior became a serious problem. 

Cromwell was so insistent on squelching this behavior that every Christmas Day, he sent 30,000 troops into the streets to eliminate all trace of anything festive. If his soldiers so much as smelled goose cooking, they entered the home and confiscated all of the food. 

I am amazed and impressed by how far we Americans have come, from the days when Christmas celebrations were a crime to the wonderful celebrations we have today. What I learned at the library enhanced my appreciation of this celebration. Now, I wish to share it. I hope that this story will make Christmas more meaningful for you, also. 

In my interpretation of history, I suspect that a deep longing was caused by the Holy Spirit, who whispered, “Come on, folks, it’s time to bring Christmas out of the closet.” 

And so, it came to be. 

HISTORY OF CHRISTMAS IN AMERICA: 1822 

The history of Christmas in America evolved slowly over a 35-year period during the early 1800s. By then it was no longer a crime to observe Christmas. Still, nothing special was done. All through the 1700s and well into the 1800s, Christmas had been just another workday. But the members of discussion clubs, which were composed of clergymen and authors on both sides of the Atlantic, deeply longed for something wonderful to happen. 

The first significant part of our story begins with Rev. Clement Moore, one of those clergymen. Imagine the scene.  

It is Christmas Eve in New York in 1822. Rev. Moore is riding home in the backseat of a sleigh. Next to him on the seat is a large turkey, which he will serve to his family on Christmas day. A light snow falls… the kind with those great, big snowflakes.  

Moore snuggles under a blanket and closes his eyes. As he listens to the jingling sound of sleigh bells and the clip-clop of the horses’ hooves, he feels more and more dreamy. His thoughts drift to his children, and his desire to do something special for them. 

Since Clement Moore is a poet, a story begins to form in his imagination. The story appears as if it were a vision. He sees a chubby little man in a red suit… St. Nicholas. Like Clement, he too is riding in a sleigh, but instead of being drawn by horses, the sleigh is soaring across the heavens, led by reindeer. It lands on a rooftop. St. Nick leaps from the sleigh with a bag full of toys across his back, and quickly drops down the chimney. 

We all know the rest of the story. By the time Rev. Moore reached home, his poem was complete. 

After dinner, he called his children to the fireside and read the poem. This was the first time a father read “Twas The Night Before Christmas to his children on Christmas Eve. His little boys and girls were so enchanted that the next day they told their neighbors about the wonderful story Daddy had read to them. These folks asked for copies. Soon, it was printed in a newspaper. Before long it surged across the sea to England! From there Rev. Moore’s poem spread through the world. Today, fathers in almost every country read it to their own children on Christmas Eve. 

The instant popularity of this poem tells us that The Night Before Christmas was a powerful piece of literature. So powerful that it changed religious culture. In fact, it caused a revolution. How? Moore’s poem changed Christmas from an outdoor ruckus to an indoor celebration. Reading the story to children brought Christmas into the home. It domesticated Christmas, gave people a new vision of what a Christmas celebration could be like. From a rowdy English street festival, it became a child and family centered time of the year. A real warm fuzzy. And, it set the standard for our concept of Santa. 

Of course the church pastors were delighted to see renewed interest in this holy day. They responded by offering special services. Not only did this increase the indoor nature of Christmas, it also sparked a more spiritual approach to the day. 

 

 

HISTORY OF CHRISTMAS IN AMERICA: 1827 

The next event in the history of Christmas in America happened in Boston… Ground Zero for Puritanical traditions. It was early December in the year 1827, and a young music publisher, Lowell Mason, was in his office. 

Mason sat frowning at his desk. The church pastor had asked him to play the organ for the Christmas Day service. He’d done this last year, and been very disappointed in the music he was forced to play. The pastor had insisted that it be reverent. But his idea of “reverent” was music that was somber and monotonous. Until late into the night, deep in thought, the young man tried to figure out what he should do. 

 

Lowell felt that he could not play that kind of music again. The birth of Christ was one of the most exciting events in all of history, and the music should be exciting, too. “It would be so great,” he mused, “if I could start the service with a song that expressed the energy of the first scene in the Christmas story… the angel’s announcement to the shepherds!” 

Soon he remembered a melody he had written a few years earlier. It was a lively piece based on two songs in Handel’s Messiah. Mason knew it would make the perfect musical accompaniment. But he needed lyrics. 

At this moment, I believe the Holy Spirit gave young Lowell a nudge toward his bookshelves. There on the top shelf, his gaze fell on a small, grey book. It was a 130 year-old hymn book. So he leafed through it, then stopped at a hymn with lyrics based on Psalm 98. In this psalm, an ancient Hebrew composer assured his congregation that the promise of a Messiah was real. “The Lord will come. And when He does, the people should greet Him with joyful songs accompanied by trumpets, horns and harps.” The words soared, “He will rule the earth and all of nature shall rejoice. The rivers will clap their hands, and the mountains will sing His praises!” 

The lyrics fit his music seamlessly. On that night, Joy To The World was born. 

HISTORY OF CHRISTMAS IN AMERICA: 1843 

The last scene we will explore takes us back to England. It is 1843, and Charles Dickens has published a book called A Christmas Carol. Because of its powerful message, it quickly spreads to America, then around the world. The effect of this story draws the Christmas celebrations even further inside the human heart. How so? It dramatizes the spirituality of Christmas and the need for generosity. 

How did this tale come to be? What prompted Charles Dickens to write this scary, brutally honest story? Was the Holy Spirit busy again? 

In Dicken’s England, there were two classes of people: the very rich, and the very, very poor. What distressed him was that the rich ignored the poor. They felt no compassion because the poor were not real to them. Via this story, Dickens addressed the rich in the hope of awakening their sense of responsibility. 

 

In the tale, three ghosts visit a rich man, Ebeneezer Scrooge, in his dreams. The first ghost forces him to see himself as the nasty miser that he is. At first he protests, telling himself that he is a good man.  

There is nothing the matter with him. He works hard, pays his bills and does not break any laws. But, the ghosts cause him to realize that more is required of him. He has failed to perform any acts of kindness. He has failed to share any of his wealth. And, the fate of Marley, his deceased partner, condemned to walk earth forever dragging heavy chains, is a warning to him. On the day Scrooge faces Judgement, Christ will ask him, “How well did you spread the love I gave you?” 

The second ghost helps Scrooge feel the happiness of sharing Christ’s love. 

 

Another main character in the story is Scrooge’s nephew and employee, Bob Cratchit. He is the opposite of Scrooge. Not only is he poor, Bob is also a saintly man. As such, he is our role model. No matter how mean Scrooge is to him, Bob Cratchit never complains or criticizes. And every year, he invites Scrooge to dinner on Christmas day. Of course Scrooge always refuses… until his encounter with the third ghost, who gives him a vision of his barren future should he continue his mean spirited ways. 

In the end, Scrooge awakens a changed man. Eagerly, he joins his nephew’s family for Christmas. There we meet Tiny Tim, and the child / family centered theme is reinforced. Scrooge is kind to the Cratchits. He is moved to provide for Tiny Tim, so the ending of this story is a happy one. 

Everyone who read A Christmas Carol was drawn to the scenes of grinding poverty. For this reason, Dickens felt that his story was a success. It created the awareness that charitable giving was an indispensable part of the Christmas celebration. 

This journey through the history of Christmas in America led me to recall one of Mother Teresa’s wise instructions… Each day do something beautiful for God. Indeed, each of the men in our story–Clement Moore, Lowell Mason, and Charles Dickens–did just that. 

 

 

 

 

All U.S. Presidents Except One In an incredible family tree, it was revealed that all U.S. presidents except for Martin Van Buren are great-grandsons of King John of England   

 

 

So, while there were some familial connections among the Founding Fathers and later presidents, most of the Founding Fathers were not directly related to each other.

Yes, some of the Founding Fathers did have famous cousins. Here are a few examples: 

Carroll Family   Charles Carroll, the only Catholic signer of the Declaration of Independence, had two famous cousins. One was Daniel Carroll, and the other was John Carroll, who became America’s first Catholic bishop 

 

 

 

 

Samuel Adams2: Samuel Adams, one of the Founding Fathers, had a second cousin named John Adams, who was also a Founding Father and the second President of the United States2. 

 

 

 

 

James Madison3: James Madison, the fourth President of the United States, was a second cousin of President Zachary Taylor 

These familial connections among the Founding Fathers highlight the close-knit nature of the early American political community.  

 

Yes, there are several instances of U.S. Presidents being related to past Presidents. Here are a few examples: 

 

 

 

 

George W. Bush (the 43rd president) is the son of George H.W. Bush (the 41st president)1. 

 

 

 

 

John Quincy Adams (the 6th president) was the son of John Adams (the 2nd president)1. 

 

 

 

 

Benjamin Harrison (the 23rd president) was the grandson of William Henry Harrison (the 9th president). 

 

 

 

 

James Madison (the 4th president) and Zachary Taylor (the 12th president) were second cousins 

 

 

 

 

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (the 32nd president) was a fifth cousin of Theodore Roosevelt (the 26th president). Genealogists have determined that FDR was distantly related to a total of 11 U.S. presidents, 5 by blood and 6 by marriage 

There are indeed several interesting familial connections among U.S. Presidents. Here are some examples: 

 

 

 

 

Franklin D. Roosevelt  The 32nd president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, was related to at least 11 presidents overall, including John Adams and Ulysses S. Grant.   

His most obvious presidential relation was Theodore Roosevelt, who was in office a few decades prior. Despite the shared surname, the men were actually fairly distant relations. 

 

 

 

 

Barack Obama   Barack Obama, the 44th president, is a very distant cousin of his immediate predecessor, George W. Bush1. Their shared ancestors were Samuel Hinckley and Sarah Soole, a Kent couple who migrated to the New World in the 17th Century1. Genealogical research has also shown Obama to be the distant cousin of other presidents, including Lyndon Johnson and Harry Truman1. 

 

Presidential Descendants of King Edward I3: Many U.S. presidents are descendants of English King Edward I. This includes George

Washington, John Adams, Franklin Roosevelt, and Theodore Roosevelt3. 

 

 

These familial connections among U.S. Presidents highlight the interconnectedness of American political history.  

There are indeed several actors who have familial connections to politicians. Here are a few examples: 

 

 

 

 

Ben Affleck and Joaquin Castro1: Actor Ben Affleck and Congressman Joaquin Castro are tenth cousins, once removed1. 

 

 

 

 

Kyra Sedgwick and Endicott Peabody1: Actress Kyra Sedgwick is a descendant of Endicott Peabody, the 62nd Governor of Massachusetts1. 

 

 

 

 

Tom Hanks and Abraham Lincoln1: Actor Tom Hanks is a third cousin, four times removed, of President Abraham Lincoln1. 

George Clooney and Abraham Lincoln1: Actor George Clooney is a half-first cousin five times removed of President Abraham Lincoln1. 

 

 

 

 

Brad Pitt and Barack Obama1: Actor Brad Pitt and former President Barack Obama are ninth cousins1. 

These connections highlight the surprising ways in which the worlds of Hollywood and politics often intersect. 

 

Yes, there are several notable relationships between actors and politicians. Here are a few examples: 

Rosario Dawson and Sen. Cory Booker1: Actress Rosario Dawson confirmed in March 2019 that she was dating New Jersey Senator Cory Booker. 

 

 

 

 

Sandra Lee and Gov. Andrew Cuomo1: Sandra Lee, a Food Network star, and New York Governor Andrew Cuomo were together for 14 years before confirming their separation in September 2019. 

 

 

 

 

Jane Fonda and Sen. Tom Hayden1: Oscar-winning actress Jane Fonda was married for nearly 20 years to political activist and former California Senator Tom Hayden. 

 

 

 

 

Arnold Schwarzenegger and Maria Shriver.: Actor and former California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger was married to Maria Shriver, a journalist and member of the Kennedy family.

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, comes from a family of finance and banking professionals. He has an older brother, Peter, and a fraternal twin brother, Ted. 

Both his father and grandfather were stockbrokers at Shearson However, there is no widely known information indicating that Jamie Dimon has any relatives who are actors or politicians. It’s worth noting that familial connections can be complex and not all are well-documented or widely known.  

Panos Papademetriou, Jamie Dimon’s paternal grandfather, had an inspiring journey from a busboy to a stockbroker 

Born in Greece, Papademetriou emigrated to the United States in the 20th Century.  Upon his arrival in New York in 1921, he found work as a busboy. However, he soon realized that many employers were reluctant to hire Greeks. This experience reportedly led him to change his last name to Dimon. 

Despite these early challenges, Papademetriou was determined to succeed. He eventually landed a job at the Atlantic Bank of New York, which was a subsidiary of the National Bank of Greece. Starting from the bottom, he worked his way up to become a vice president at the bank. 

Later, Papademetriou left the Atlantic Bank to become a stockbroker at Shearson, Hammill & Co. His success in the finance industry laid the foundation for the future generations of the Dimon family, including his grandson Jamie Dimon, the current CEO of JPMorgan Chase. 

Papademetriou’s story is a testament to his resilience and determination. His legacy continues to inspire his family and others who learn about his remarkable journey. 

Dimon’s efforts to rescue the bank, meanwhile, stand to cement Dimon as the most powerful figure on Wall Street and the industry’s leader in Washington DC.   

“JPMorgan is the biggest bank in America, more than $4 trillion in assets,” Dick Bove, a bank analyst at Odeon Capital, said. “They are the backstop of the banking industry. Jamie Dimon is the true chairman of the Federal Reserve.” 

How to Mirror sites online. Here is how it works: