A Bit of History.

 Today, a short history lesson. 

Are you a Christian- one who follows the Lord Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God?

Are you a Protestant Christian?  As I was growing up I knew that Protestants were not Catholics, and that was that.  When I was growing up we hadn't really heard of Islam, or Buddhism, or the many other religions out there. In my little world there were three religions really- Protestants, Catholics, and Jews. 

What makes a Protestant, a Protestant? This is where the short history lesson comes in. 

Encarta Dictionary states-

1. Member of church rejecting papal authority-

A member or adherent of any denomination of the Western Christian church that rejects papal authority and some fundamental Roman Catholic doctrines, and believes in justification by faith. The formulation of Protestants' beliefs began with the Reformation in the 16th century.

Rejecting papal authority.  Protestants were against Catholics. I didn't say they hated them, I'm saying they were against them- against their beliefs, against papal authority.

I am a Protestant, I am against papal authority, and a lot of the fundamental Roman Catholic beliefs. As such, I'm not alone. Every single Protestant that takes that stance in being Protestant, is against papal authority. 

Now, we say that it's not the same any longer, it's not like it used to be in the days of the Reformation when Papal Rome was horrific- killing those they deemed heretics (those who were against the Catholic church beliefs). Times change, the Catholics have changed and so on and so forth. It's true, times changed, at one point a pope of the Catholic church was dethroned and imprisoned. It wasn't until 1929 that the Catholic church regained a bit more power- but nothing like the tremendous power it had before. 

'Upon ratification of the Lateran Treaty, the papacy recognized the state of Italy, with Rome as its capital. Italy in return recognized papal sovereignty over the Vatican City, a minute territory of 44 hectares (109 acres), and secured full independence for the pope.'

From <https://www.google.com/search?q=lateran+treaty+significance&rlz=1C1AVFC_enUS845US845&oq=latean+treaty&aqs=chrome.5.69i57j0i13l8j0i22i30.14986j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8> 

This does not negate the history of the Catholic church, it just doesn't. Nothing erases history, it is factual. You say time can alter views of history and that's true, but it still can't change it. We live in a world filled with information of the past- in books, letters and so on, all transferred to the digital age. The history that led many to revolt against the Catholic church- Protesting, seeking reform is a very real thing and the reasons were real, valid reasons. Many men and women and even children died for those reasons. There are a lot of historians and Bible scholars- intellectually great men- that separate from each other, came to the conclusion that Papal Rome was evil.

How dare I say that? IT'S HISTORY! I didn't make it up! I'm no Biblical scholar. I'm not well versed in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic etc. I'm not an historian! But many, and I mean MANY, who have been all arrived at this conclusion, and in my studies of their works and my personal study of the Bible, I can see most decidedly how they came to their conclusions.

I DO NOT HATE ANYONE, by the grace of God!

But I will not bow down to a society that tells me I must ACCEPT beliefs that are contrary to God's word! I can love ALL, without accepting their beliefs!  Jesus loved all, but He did not love the beliefs of all! He called His own people vipers. I do NOT have to ACCEPT any belief that I personally believe is contrary to the word of our Lord and Savior. I DO NOT ACCEPT the beliefs of the society I live in, but my Lord tells me to love all, and by Him, through Him, I will. My being loving towards someone, does not mean I accept their beliefs. If asked to take a stand for the beliefs I don't believe in, by the people I love- in order for them to love me- I can't, I won't by the grace of God. Their asking me to accept their beliefs by denying my own beliefs is an act not of love- if it's a forced acceptance they're making in order for them to love me. They can decide not to love me because of my non-acceptance, that is their choice and we all have to make choices. 

Because of the excerpts we are studying right now, I just felt compelled to have this little history bit. I did not create Protestantism, I am a Christ follower who is of the Protestant persuasion. I have no particular name for the way I believe- it leans towards Seventh-day Adventism, but the corporate church of Seventh-day Adventists has apostatized from their original beliefs so I no longer am a member of that religious organization. 

I am a Christ follower, a truth follower, a follower of The Way of Christ and the truth He has allowed me see.

All through His amazing love! All by His mercy and grace! Now and forever, Amen!

*******

THE GREAT TRIBULATION

VERSE 21: "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not, since the beginning of the world to this tune, no, nor ever shall be." 

It is contended that the greatest tribulation that ever befell the Jews was in the siege and destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans. Against this we interpose two objections:–

I. It is by no means clear that the overthrow of Jerusalem by the Romans was the greatest tribulation the Jews ever suffered. All the scenes of horror described by historians, as occurring at that time, are by the inspired records ascribed also to the conquest of the Babylonians. See the Lamentations of Jeremiah, especially chap. 4:10: "The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children; they were their meat in the destruction of the daughter of my people." Also, Daniel 9:11-13: "The curse is poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law of Moses the servant of God, because we have sinned against him. And he hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and against our judges that judged us; by bringing upon us a great evil; for under the whole heaven hath not been done as hath been done upon Jerusalem. As it is written in the law of Moses, all this evil is come upon us."

2. At the coming of Christ, as noted in Matthew 24, the elect of God, the saints of Christ, will be gathered "from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." Verse 31. This cannot be referred to the destruction of Jerusalem. Nothing occurred at that time to which it will possibly apply. Paul, speaking of the coming of Christ, mentions the same fact, as follows: "Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him." 2 Thess. 2:1. How did the Lord come to Jerusalem at the time of its  overthrow? We are answered, "It was a figurative coming." If it was not literal and actual, what was the nature of the figure used? It is said that he visited the Jews in judgment; that Titus, or the Roman army, really executed the judgment upon the doomed city. Then the coming of Titus, or of the Roman army, is represented as the coming of Christ? Was it a fact, then, that the saints of God, the followers of Christ, from the four winds, were gathered together unto Titus, in that day? This must have been so if the coming of Titus represented the coming of Christ, or if Christ came figuratively in the person of Titus. It is as sure as the Scriptures are true that the saints will be gathered unto Christ in the day of his coming; which

did not occur, even in a figure, at the time of the destruction of Jerusalem; for the saints, instead of being gathered unto Christ, or to any person or thing which came to Jerusalem as his representative; were scattered from the city, fleeing from the presence of that which represented Christ! So absurd is that theory.  The fact of Christ's coming, and the gathering of the saints at that time, being stated alike in Matthew 24 and 2 Thessalonians 2, proves that these chapters refer to the same time and event. We therefore in this connection notice a circumstance mentioned by Paul, as one to take place before the Lord comes. And to this point we call the special attention of all who deny the literal advent of our Lord. Paul cautions his brethren not to look for the coming of Christ until the man of sin is revealed. Who, or what, is that man of sin? Paul wrote this about eighteen years before Jerusalem was overthrown. What arose within these eighteen years which filled the outline of this prophecy?–Nothing at all. The, old and well-accepted view of the reformers Protestants–that this man of sin is the "supreme pontiff" of Rome, is every way reasonable, and to produce a harmony of the prophetic scriptures, is unavoidable. Notice these point:–

(I.) Paul wrote only eighteen years before the overthrow of Jerusalem, but he looked forward to the future for the revealing of the man of sin. The elements were then already operating, but hindering causes had to be removed. Consequently, as he said, the coming of the Lord was not "impending" in his day. 

(2) It was not merely a sinful man to be revealed, there were many such then; "that man of sin"–who legalizes and enforces sin, not merely one who breaks law, but one who overrides and breaks down law–such has been the character of the Roman pontiff. Many readers will remember his indictment on this point by Alexander Campbell, in his debate with Bishop Purcell.

(3) Exalting himself above God. This he has done, not, merely by assuming the prerogatives of but by legislating on the law of God, which can be done only by a superior, in fact or assumed. 

(4) Claiming to be God. See the titles which have been given to, and assumed by, the pope; and most recently, the assumption of infallibility. 

These, and other specifications of prophecy, have been fulfilled by the popes of Rome, and by no other. And we shall find that the proofs grow even stronger and clearer as we proceed. The "great tribulation" mentioned in verse 21 is that of the church of Christ, and not the tribulation of the Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem. We offer the following reasons:–

I. It is a fact that the tribulation of the Christian Church, especially under the reign of the Papacy, was greater than God's people had suffered before "since the beginning of the world." The tribulation of the Christian church has been greater than it will ever be again. True, a time of trouble "such as never was," spoken of in Dan. 12:1, is coming upon the wicked; but we find in the same verse this blessed promise, "And at that time thy people shall be delivered." The tribulation of the Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem was not greater than the world will ever witness. The vials of Jehovah's unmingled wrath are yet to be poured out, not upon the people of one nation only, but upon the guilty inhabitants of all nations. "The slain of the Lord shall be at that day from one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth; they shall

not be lamented, neither gathered, nor buried." Jer. 25:33.

2. If this tribulation be applied to the Jews, or to any other class of unbelieving men, it cannot be harmonized with Dan. 12:1, which speaks of the time of trouble such as never was, when Michael shall stand up. Certainly there cannot be two times of trouble at different periods, greater than ever was or ever would be. Therefore the "tribulation" spoken of in Matt. 24:21, 29, applies to the church of Christ, extending down through the 1260 years of papal persecution; and the "trouble" mentioned in Dan. 12:1, to the unbelieving world, to be experienced by them in the future. 

3. The period of tribulation was shortened for the elect's sake. This cannot refer to the Jews, for their house had been pronounced desolate. They were left of God in their hardness of heart and blindness of mind: Says Paul, "Lo, we turn to the Gentiles." The elect were the followers of our Lord Jesus Christ. And where were they when tribulation was upon the Jews?–They had fled to the mountains. It is absurd, then, to say that the days of tribulation of the Jews in the city of Jerusalem, were shortened for the sake of the elect, who had fled from the place of tribulation.

4. The connection between verses 20 and 21 shows that the tribulation was to commence with those Christians who were to flee out of the city. "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the Sabbath-day; for then shall be great tribulation." Our Lord here speaks of the tribulation which his people would suffer from the time of their flight onward. We follow them in their flight to the mountains, and then pass along down through the noted persecutions of the church of God under Pagan Rome, and we see, indeed, tribulation. And when we come to the period of papal persecution, we see them suffering the most cruel tortures and dying the most dreadful deaths that men could inflict. This last period is especially noted in prophecy.

5. The prophet Daniel saw the Papacy, its blasphemy, its arrogance, its work of death on the saints, and its duration as a persecuting power, under the symbol of the little horn. "And he shall speak great words against the Most High, and shall wear out the saints of the Most High, and think to change times and laws; and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time." Chap. 7:25. It is generally admitted that "a time and times and the dividing of time'" is 1260 years. Commencing A. D. 538, the 1260 years reached to A. D. 1798, when Berthier, a French general, entered Rome in triumph. The pope was taken prisoner, and died in exile. 

Note that time the Papacy has had no power to wear out the saints of the Most High. Here ended the days of the tribulation spoken of by our Lord. (End Excerpt)

*******