The TRUE reformers in Germany in the 16th Century were men such as Hans Denk and Ludwig Hetzer, whose German Worms translation of the New Testament was preferred by the Mennonites over Luther’s translation for over 100 years. This Received Text translation was based on the earlier Waldensian translation of the 1400s. Michael  Sattler was martyred for publishing his confession of faith (the SCHLEITHEIM CONFESSION, 1527). Menno Simons consulted with the ancient authorities, as well as Luther, Bucer, and Bullinger and found that infant baptism had no ground in the scriptures. Menno Simons became a baptist unlike his modern-day namesakes who accept sprinkling and pouring as valid.

Luther, Calvin and the other “reformers” should have sat at the feet of these men and learned the word of God in truth!

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?m=t&s=23091744374

What is an “Anabaptist?” Listen closely to the answer of a 10 year old! A look at the Anabaptists of 16th Century Switzerland from the “Collegiate Baptist History Workbook” by James Beller and “A History of the Churches” by David Cloud.

The Zurich study group composed of Ulrich Zwingli, Felix Manz, Blaurock, Graebel and others came to the position that scriptural baptism is by immersion of adult believers. Zwingli soon reversed position and returned to the Protestant position of sprinkling infants due to the opposition that the study group received from Zurich’s leaders. “The fear of man bringeth a snare!”

The Zurich City Council called for a public debate between Zwingli and the other members of the study group. Immediately after the debate, the city council shut down all preaching and teaching which was contrary to the Protestant position. Manz and others drowned in 1527.

Balthasar Hubmaier tortured on the rack and in a moment of extreme duress recants, and is brought to the “church” to make a public recantation. After Zwingli preaches against the heresies of the Anabaptists, Hubmaier is called to make his statement. Greatly strengthened by the Lord, Hubmaier shouts that infant baptism is not of God and is hauled back to the dungeon! He is later released and over the next 3 years baptized 12,000 converts before he is finally martyred in 1528!

This is an informal study we do on Sunday evenings in our home as a part of our homeschooling curriculum. Another couple from our church joins us every Sunday night. We discuss things and you might even hear the younger children playing in the background! We hope you enjoy this study and encourage you to follow along!

“Why are they for going with their…naked shoulders, and paps hanging out like a cow’s bag? Why are they for painting their faces, for stretching out their neck, and for putting of themselves unto all the formalities which proud fancy leads them to? Is it because they would honor God? Because they would adorn the gospel? Because they would beautify religion, and make sinners to fall in love with their own salvation? No, no, it is rather to please their lusts…I believe also that Satan has drawn more into the sin of uncleanness by the spangling show of fine clothes, than he could possibly have drawn unto it without them. I wonder what it was that of old was called the attire of a harlot: certainly it could not be more bewitching and tempting than are the garments of many professors this day.”

John Bunyan, “The Life and Death of Mr. Badman,” in The Works of John Bunyan, George Offor, ed., Vol. III (London: Blackie & Sons, 1875; reprint ed., Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Publishing Group, 1977), 645. Quoted from Christian Modesty: The Public Undressing of America by Pastor Jeff Pollard

“Rock has always been the devil’s music, you can’t convince me that it isn’t. I honestly believe everything I’ve said—I believe rock
and roll is dangerous. … I feel that we’re only heralding something even darker than ourselves” (David Bowie, Rolling
Stone, February 12, 1976, p. 83). Quoted from “Rock Music vs. The God of the Bible” by David Cloud.

Rock musicians acknowledge what gullible Christians refuse to admit…

 

CCM is not just coming from people who have some doctrinal problems. CCM represents the spirit of end-time apostasy. The spirit of the one-world church. It is the music of the devil masquerading as an angel of light.

From “The Foreign Spirit of Contemporary Worship Music” by David Cloud. Available as a download from Way of Life Literature.

 

“We close with one suggestion to such women as may be inclined to this new claim. If they read history, they find that the condition of woman in Christendom, and especially in America, is most enviable as compared with her state in all other ages and nations. Let them ponder candidly how much they possess here, which their sisters have enjoyed in no other age. What bestowed those peculiar privileges on the Christian women of America? The Bible. Let them beware, then, how they do anything to undermine the reverence of mankind for the authority of the Bible. It is undermining their own bulwark. If they understand how universally in all but Bible lands the “weaker vessel” has been made the slave of man’s strength and selfishness, they will gladly “let well enough alone,” lest in grasping at some impossible prize beyond, they lose the privileges they now have, and fall back to the gulf of oppression from which these doctrines of Christ and Paul have lifted them.”

R.L. Dabney on the Public Preaching of Women, The Southern Presbyterian Review of October 1879.

“This common movement for “women’s rights,” and women’s preaching, must be regarded, then, as simply infidel. It cannot be candidly upheld without attacking the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures. We are convinced that there is only one safe attitude for Christians, presbyters, and church courts to assume towards it. This is utterly to discountenance it, as they do any other assault of infidelity on God’s truth and kingdom. The church officer who becomes an accomplice of this intrusion certainly renders himself obnoxious to discipline, just as he would by assisting to celebrate an idolatrous mass.

R.L. Dabney on the Public Preaching of Women, The Southern Presbyterian Review of October 1879.

“Both the parents owe duties to their children; but the appropriate duties of the mother, especially towards little children, are such that she could not leave them as the pastor must for his public tasks without criminal neglect and their probable ruin. It may be said that this argument has no application to unmarried women. The answers are, that God contemplates marriage as the proper condition of woman, while he does not make celibacy a crime, and that the sphere he assigns to the unmarried woman is also private and domestic… God has assigned to her a private sphere sufficiently important and honorable to justify the whole expenditure of angelic endowments- the formation of the character of children. This is the noblest and most momentous work done on earth.”

R.L. Dabney on the Public Preaching of Women, The Southern Presbyterian Review of October 1879.

“In this day innovations march with rapid strides. The fantastic suggestion of yesterday, entertained only by a few fanatics, and then only mentioned by the sober to be ridiculed, is to-day the audacious reform, and will be to-morrow the recognized usage…A few years ago the public preaching of women was universally condemned among all conservative denominations of Christians, and, indeed, within their bounds, was totally unknown. Now the innovation is brought face to face even with the Southern churches, and female preachers are knocking at our doors.”

R.L. Dabney on the Public Preaching of Women, The Southern Presbyterian Review of October 1879

Some brother preachers and I got the opportunity to do some street preaching at Chattanooga’s 2nd annual “pride” event. We got the usual flak from the sodomites (well, we really didn’t expect them to roll out the red carpet), and the usual dressing down from pseudo-“Christian” passers-by; nothing unusual. What I really wanted to address is this notion that a) Jesus Christ never said anything about “homosexuality;” and b) that the New Testament doesn’t condemn “homosexuality,” (have you ever been told, by a 6’3” drag queen that the New Testament doesn’t mention “homosexuality?” It’s not a pretty sight!)

So, did the Lord Jesus Christ address the issue of sodomite relations? The short answer is “no.” He did not directly address the issue, however the assertion that He never said anything pertaining to the subject belies a fundamental misunderstanding or an outright rejection of the authority of the scriptures. This “red-letter” sort of bible interpretation that puts more weight on the words that Jesus spoke while upon earth is invalid. All scripture is inspired by God (2 Timothy 3:16-17) and therefore carries more authority than a voice out of heaven (2 Peter 1:16-21). In other words “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination,” Leviticus 18:22 is as inspired by God as John 3:16. Furthermore, the Old Testament was written for our learning, admonition and ensample. While New Testament Christians are not under the Mosaic law, any law or command from the Old Testament that is repeated or upheld in principle in the New Testament is just as binding. So when you couple Old Testament passages such as the ones from Leviticus and Deuteronomy with a passage out of Romans or 1 Corinthians, what you have is a clear witness from God that this doctrine is binding upon all people for all time.

So while Jesus never said “Thou shalt not commit sodomy,” He did define marriage, as well as condemn lust (Matthew 5:27-28), adultery and fornication (Matthew 15:18-20).

Jesus Christ is God (1 Timothy 3:16, 1 John 5:7). When God defines something, that definition is absolute and authoritative. Even in the natural realm you can’t legitimately re-define something without destroying the original definition. For example: My big white van will never be a little red Corvette no matter who defines it as such.

When the Pharisees came to Jesus with a question on divorce Jesus upheld, not only the Genesis account of creation, but also the Genesis definition of marriage.

“The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” Matthew 19:3-6

So to say that Jesus had nothing to say about sodomy is to play fast and loose with the New Testament text! The bible definition is: marriage = one man + one woman + one time! Let God be true and every man a liar.(Romans 3:4)