Martin Luther: The Idea that Changed the World (PBS Sept.2017)

Martin Luther: The Idea that Changed the World 1h 53m 41s
"The year 2017 marks the 500th anniversary of one on the most important events in Western civilization: the birth of an idea that continues to shape the life of every American today.
In 1517, power was in the hands of the few, thought was controlled by the chosen, and common people lived lives without hope. On October 31 of that year, a penniless monk named Martin Luther sparked the revolution that would change everything.
He had no army. In fact, he preached nonviolence so powerfully that — 400 years later — Michael King would change his name to Martin Luther King to show solidarity with the original movement.

image from - http://www.pbs.org/program/martin-luther-idea-changed-world/#gallery

This movement, the Protestant Reformation, changed Western culture at its core, sparking the drive toward individualism, freedom of religion, women's rights, separation of church and state, and even free public education. Without the Reformation, there would have been no pilgrims, no Puritans, and no America in the way we know it. 
The film follows the dramatic story of Martin Luther's life: the massive lightning storm that nearly killed him, the bleak self-punishment of his time in the monastery, the corruption that unleashed his anger, his trial before the most powerful man in Europe, and the staged kidnapping that helped him escape the death penalty. 

This is a highly-visual documentary with elaborate full-scale dramatizations that were filmed in the castles, monasteries and cobblestone streets of eastern Europe. Dozens of historians from Europe and the Americas were interviewed, with a careful eye to ensure all sides of the story are represented. The film is narrated by Hugh Bonneville ("Downton Abbey") and stars Padraic Delany ("The Tudors," "The Man Who Knew Infinity")." - http://www.pbs.org/program/martin-luther-idea-changed-world/#gallery

"Martin Luther: The Idea that Changed the World"

was produced by Boettcher+Trinklein Inc.

MORE- https://concordiatheology.org/2017/02/martin-luther-the-idea-that-changed-the-world-additional-resources/

ADOLF - The Vatican Puppet.

Did the Catholic Church help German Nazism? A look at the record.
The Vatican’s definitive statement, “We Remember: Reflections on the Holocaust,”  claims that Nazism was the antithesis of the Catholic church:

[Excerpt from “We Remember” starts here]

At the level of theological reflection we cannot ignore the fact that not a few in the Nazi Party not only showed aversion to the idea of divine Providence at work in human affairs, but gave proof of a definite hatred directed at God himself. Logically, such an attitude also led to a rejection of Christianity and a desire to see the Church destroyed or at least subjected to the interests of the Nazi state.

It was this extreme ideology which became the basis of the measures taken first to drive the Jews from their homes and then to exterminate them. The Shoah was the work of a thoroughly modern neo-pagan regime. Its anti-semitism had its roots outside of Christianity and, in pursuing its aims, it did not hesitate to oppose the Church and persecute her members also.
[My emphasis – J.I.]

– Published online at http://tinyurl.com/bxszb

[Excerpt from “We Remember” ends here]

Just as, according to “We Remember,” the extermination of European Jews was an extreme manifestation of anti-Catholicism (!), so, according to the Vatican statement, leading German clerics fought Nazi antisemitism. Case in point: Bavarian Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber. (The Vatican statement’s praise for von Faulhaber is quoted and refuted later in this article.)
Not only does “We Remember” claim that the church fought Nazi antisemitism, but it quotes Pope John Paul II apparently absolving the Catholic hierarchy from responsibility for the belief (one of the foundations of Christianity) in Jewish culpability for the death of Jesus:

“In the Christian world – I do not say on the part of the Church as such – erroneous and unjust interpretations of the New Testament regarding the Jewish people and their alleged culpability have circulated for too long, engendering feelings of hostility towards this people.” 
– Pope John Paul II, quoted in “We Remember: Reflections on the Holocaust” http://tinyurl.com/bxszb  

Reading this remarkable statement, one is compelled to ask: if Christians did not get their belief in Jewish culpability from the Christian church, pray tell where did they get it?
Many people, including some Jewish leaders, have praised Pope John Paul II and “We Remember” for facing up to ‘errors’ made during the Holocaust.
But if the Church never aided, and indeed opposed, the Nazis, and never accepted even non-racial, religion-based hatred of Jews, then to what errors would the Vatican need to face up?
Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, answered this question when he was a top advisor to John Paul II:

“‘Even if the most recent, loathsome experience of the Shoah (Holocaust) was perpetrated in the name of an anti-Christian ideology, which tried to strike the Christian faith at its Abrahamic roots in the people of Israel, it cannot be denied that a certain insufficient resistance to this atrocity on the part of Christians can be explained by an inherited anti-Judaism present in the hearts of not a few Christians.’”
[My emphasis – J.I.]
– Joseph Ratzinger as quoted by Abe Foxman in an Anti-Defamation League (ADL) press release welcoming Ratzinger’s election as Pope.
http://www.adl.org/PresRele/VaticanJewish_96/44698_96.htm
Also quoted on boston.com http://tinyurl.com/hfpob

So Joseph Ratzinger claims that: a) Nazism was “anti-Christian”; b) Christianity erred only by “a certain insufficient resistance” (notice the modifier, “a certain,” which limits the insufficiency - i.e., it wasn’t so very insufficient!) to Nazism, not by complicity or active support; c) even this error resulted from individual Christian’s religious hostility to Judaism – “an inherited anti-Judaismpresent in the hearts of not a few Christians” –  which rather avoids the question: from whom did they inherit it, if not the church?

The evidence shows that:

 

A) The Catholic church hierarchy, acting under Vatican orders, played the decisive role in making Hitler the dictator of Germany.

 

B) Subsequently, the Catholic hierarchy was active in Nazi movements outside Germany, for example in the Balkans, where the church was the institutional base of the Nazi puppet State of Croatia.

 

C) Although at Yad Vashem, in the year 2000, Pope John Paul II described the Nazis as having “a Godless ideology,” in 1933, when it mattered, the Vatican ordered German Catholics to love, honor, obey and protect the Nazis.

 

During the 1920s, the church-controlled Centre party (Zentrum) did clash with the Nazis. As Hitler wrote (see quote below) their quarrel was over politics, not Catholic religious teachings. The Nazis themselves claimed they were fighting against atheism, specifically Bolshevist atheism, which they depicted as a Jewish-created movement.  In attacking the Jews, the Nazis routinely employed Christian symbolism and traditional Christian antisemitic arguments, with which Europeans were already indoctrinated, making it an easy sale.  

 

On March 23, 1933, the Nazi government put forward the Enabling act, giving Hitler the authority to create new laws without parliamentary approval, thus making him the dictator of Germany.  This was after the Nazi-staged Reichstag fire; after the banning of the huge Communist party and subsequent arrest and murder of thousands of communists and other anti-Nazis; and amidst a campaign of violent antisemitism. To become law, the Enabling act needed a 2/3 parliamentary vote. Before the vote, Hitler addressed the Reichstag (parliament) saying the Nazis were fighting for Christianity:

“While the Government is determined to carry through the political and moral purging of our public life, it is creating and insuring prerequisites for a truly religious life. The Government sees in both [Catholic and Protestant] Christian confessions the most important factors for the maintenance of our folkdom. It will respect agreements concluded between them and the States. However, it expects that its work will meet with a similar appreciation. The Government will treat all other denominations with equal objective justice. It can never condone, though, that belonging to a certain denomination or to a certain race might be regarded as a license to commit or tolerate crimes. The Government will devote its care to the sincere living together of Church and State.” 
[My emphasis - Jared Israel]
–- http://tinyurl.com/g8gh3

To their credit, the Social Democrats for once took a strong stand, opposing the Enabling act. Hitler needed a 2/3 majority, so the balance lay with Zentrum, the Catholic Centre party. If Zentrum voted no or even abstained, Hitler would have been defeated.

 

Zentrum leader Monsignor Ludwig Kaas, a close friend and advisor to Eugenio Pacelli, the future Pope Pius XII, addressed the Reichstag. Far from attacking the Enabling act and disputing Hitler’s claim that Nazi measures were “prerequisites for a truly religious life,” Kaas endorsed the Enabling act. Zentrum and smaller allied parties voted ‘yes,’ and the act became law.

 

According to National Catholic Reporter correspondent John Allen, a liberal Catholic and student of Vatican history (he wrote a biography of Joseph Ratzinger), on March 28, 1933, four days after Zentrum voted to make Hitler the dictator of Germany:

[Excerpt from John Allen’s Telegraph article starts here]

 

“the German bishops rescinded their ban on Nazi party membership. On April 1, Cardinal Adolf Bertram of Breslau addressed German Catholics in a letter, warning them ”to reject as a matter of principle all illegal or subversive activities“. To most Catholics, it looked as if the church wanted a modus vivendi with Hitler. [Yes, I suppose when you vote to make a Nazi maniac dictator of your country it would appear that you want a modus vivendi with said maniac - J.I.]

The same impression [! - J.I.] was created a few weeks later when Hitler held a plebiscite to endorse his decision to pull Germany out of the League of Nations, which received the endorsement of the Catholic press and of several Catholic bishops.”
http://tinyurl.com/jj2g4

[Excerpt from John Allen’s Telegraph article ends here]

Three and a half months later, on July 6, 1933, the Catholic church’s Centre party, Zentrum, dissolved itself. 

Two weeks after that, the Vatican and the Nazi government signed their Concordat, putting the official Vatican stamp on the alliance of the German church and the Nazi state. Article 16, reproduced below, required that Catholic bishops swear to honor the Nazi government, to make their subordinates honor it, and to hunt for and prevent action that might endanger it. - Continue Reading.. PLS CLICK HERE.

Myth About Martin Luther: He was Anti-Semitic | Luther, Jews and the Nazis (Uwe Siemon-Netto, PhD)

Uwe Siemon-Netto explains that German Reformer Martin Luther was in no way anti-semitic. Futhermore, Uwe also explains how the Nazis took Luther completely out of context in order to propagate their anti-Jewish campaign. Buy Siemon-Netto's book The Fabricated Luther: Refuting Nazi Connections and Other Modern Myths - https://www.amazon.com/The-Fabricated-Luther-Refuting-Connections/dp/0758608551

Siemon-Netto, Uwe, The Fabricated Luther: Refuting Nazi Connections and other Modern Myths, 2007, Second Edition. Saint Louis: Concordia Publishing House. Review by Karla Poewe, Department of Anthropology, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta. In a world ripe with propaganda it is refreshing to find a book dissecting a cliché that was used for just such purposes by people as far apart as Josef Goebbels and Alan Dershowitz, namely, that Luther was the “spiritual predecessor of Adolf Hitler” (p. 23). Siemon-Netto’s book traces the origin of the cliché that “linked Luther to Hitler“ back to the liberal theologian Troeltsch who passed it on to the writer Thomas Mann who, in turn, shared it with the author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich William L. Shirer (p.24). From there it was picked up by the Germanophobic propagandist Lord Vansittart as well as by archbishops and priests of the Church of England. It was also popular among America’s Union Theological Seminary faculty in the early thirties and is used by U.S. historians like Robert Michael and Lucy Dawidowicz, among many others, today (p. 23). In fact, those who were primarily responsible for the Holocaust and generally for the brutality on the Eastern Front of World War II were men who had not only left Christianity but were intent on destroying the entire Judeo-Christian tradition because it was unGerman. To show the ludicrous nature of the cliché that blamed the Holocaust on the line of descent from the Protestant Luther, SiemonNetto points out that many perpetrators were born into homes and countries (Austria and Poland, for example) that were formerly or nominally Roman Catholic. He raises this point only, however, to emphasize “the absurdity of the charge that one Christian denomination’s theology paved the way for genocide“ (p. 66). Holocausts were also perpetrated by Turkish Muslims, Orthodox Russians, and Cambodian Buddhists, yet these religions are not linked with their crimes (p.66). At issue is rather the thing that Luther warned against with his “two realms“ doctrine, namely, the danger that comes with blurring state and church or politics and religion. When blurring occurs secular “isms“ are quick to follow. Politicized Christianity, like that of the German Christians, for example, was easily absorbed by the political religion of National Socialism (pp. 74-76). By contrast, Luther’s two realms doctrine “de-ideologizes politics” and “de-idolizes” the state (p.77). Far from confirming a line from Luther to Hitler, Siemon-Netto shows the role that Lutheranism played in the resistance against the Hitler regime. The author is particularly strong in his analysis of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Carl Goerdeler. Bonhoeffer understood “two realms” to refer to the fact that Lutherans live before God and with God in a world without God, that is, in a secular world. He could therefore easily co-operate with secular conspirators to kill Hitler. Bonhoeffer also accepted the teaching “that all who take up the sword will perish by the sword.” He knew it to refer to him and his circle. It is in this spirit too that he could say “I  pray for the defeat of my country, for I think this is the only possibility of paying for all the suffering that my country has caused in the world” (p. 101). According to Siemon-Netto, Goerdeler, the mayor of Leipzig who was executed by the Nazis, was rooted in nineteenth-century Protestant liberalism (p. 111) but he internalized the “ethos and attitude” of Lutheranism (p. 112). As his daughter Marianne Meyer-Krahmer confirmed when Siemon-Netto interviewed her, Goerdeler warned all and sundry against the danger of Hitler. Her father valued and stood up for Leipzig’s Jewish heritage and citizens and saw as clearly as his other close Lutheran colleagues in the resistance that Hitler was determined to destroy three enemies: the Jews first, then the Christians, and finally capitalism (p. 106, 116). It is a sad chapter in human history that brave men like Goerdeler too were defeated by men who could not understand his subtle Lutheran distinctions and the necessity of thinking on two levels. Goerdeler’s sense, on the one hand, that a moral catastrophe had befallen Germany that would be a danger to the world and his political point, on the other, that National Socialism was largely the result of the injustice of Versailles was seen as deception by Vansittart (p. 145). In response, Vansittart soon used a race-based “militarism” cliché that fired the hate of the British for a war that could possibly have been averted in 1938 had Goerdeler’s plan of action been debated in British parliament (p. 120, 126, 130). Instead, revenge against and punishment of the Germans lasted until 1949 and beyond (p. 136, 142), and it came from the top: the Roosevelts (p. 134-139), Vansittart (p.126), Churchill (p.128), and the British Bomber Command (p.129).But Luther was vindicated. Luther’s “two realms” doctrine as it was applied in the German Democratic Republic, which German humor says was neither German, nor Democratic, nor a Republic, was one of the most powerful tools to defeat the Stalin made dictatorship peacefully. The two realms doctrine simply enabled the Christian “to be guided by natural reason while operating in the secular realm without losing his citizenship in the spiritual realm” (p.173). More than vindicating Luther, it shows how Germany’s resistance of the Nazi regime, the core of it based on Lutheranism, might have toppled Hitler’s government given time and external moral support. That did not happen, and so Siemon-Netto, a son of the city of Leipzig, tells how the “anti-Nazi Confessing Church, having learned from the past, carried on as a brotherhood within the Landeskirche” after the Second World War, supplying the church with “the theological ammunition in its dealing with the Communist state” (p161). Its theologians compared Christianity and Marxism-Leninism and concluded, “Marxism-Leninism is an anti-Christian doctrine of salvation” (p.161). With precisely this knowledge, the churches opened their doors to the secular world, Christians listened to their secular compatriots, and together they started candlelight marches that attracted overwhelming numbers of people.Perhaps because Siemon-Netto is both a journalist and a theologian, he has produced a unique book that shows theology affect politics and indeed bring down a state without, as Lutherans are so careful to emphasize, mixing religion and politics into an unwholesome brew. Montgomery’s book (1970) was an earlier attempt to defend Martin Luther. But when he briefly visited East Germany it was still frozen in totalitarianism. Montgomery, therefore, cleared the political rubbish from Luther’s core beliefs about salvation and the two realms dogma and like Siemon-Netto also shows how a person whose heart is imbued with the Gospel uses his reason in the secular world to keep human beings from destroying themselves (Montgomery 1970: 138).Another book that complements Siemon-Netto’s effort to make explicit the meaning of the two kingdoms in a world gone awry is that of Rasmussen (2005) about Dietrich Bonhoeffer. Rasmussen shows the development of Bonhoeffer’s theology in relationship to the resistance against Hitler’s national socialist system. To Bonhoeffer, the two realms became also the inevitable condition of having to live at two levels: appearing to be with the government while actively working to bring it down. Bonhoeffer’s thinking about living with God and before God but in a secular world where he had to work with communists and military men to assassinate a tyrant, was no longer as sharply dichotomous as SiemonNetto’s insistence on the absolute distinction between the two realms. But even Siemon-Netto’s concern not to brew politics and religion together received a peculiar twist in the situation of the demise of East German communism. The people who were selected to be the negotiators for unification were precisely “servants of the spiritual realm,” so that pastors became government ministers, members of parliament at all levels, county executives, and mayors. They stepped into the worldly realm because it lacked personalities that were untarnished by the previous government and yet capable of maintaining the secular order during a time of transition (Siemon-Netto 2007: 155).But why did the resisters of Hitler’s Germany end up as mere martyrs? Rasmussen sees the inevitability of their failure in their ethically based rejection to use methods similar to those of the Nazis. But as Siemon-Netto makes abundantly clear, they failed because the Allies who, from the beginning of war, had invested all in Germany’s total defeat and unconditional surrender were simply unwilling to contemplate anything else. By contrast, the GDR had the outside support it needed. More importantly, the support came unexpectedly from Gorbachev of the Soviet Union just as it came expectedly from Kohl of the Federal Republic. What is more, the three leaders who first negotiated the Unification Treaty, namely, Kohl, Gorbachev, and Lothar de Mazière (who headed the new East German Government in 1990) were Christian. De Mazière was born into a devout Protestant family descended from genteel Huguenot exiles from France. Gorbachev, who met Pope John Paul II in 1989, has confessed openly that he is Christian.For anyone who wants to understand the relevance of Luther’s two realms belief in recent history, The Fabricated Luther deserves a place on your shelf. Indeed, I know of no other book that combines so naturally and effectively theology and Realpolitik, without politicizing the former or sacralizing the latter. Finally, the book has the virtue of being easy to read.Bibliography Montgomery, John Warwick 1970 In Defense of Martin Luther. Milwaukee, Wisconsin: Northwestern Publishing House.Rasmussen, Larry L. 2005 Dietrich Bonhoeffer: Reality and Resistance, 2005, Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press.

【約伯記：看不見的戰爭】史蒂夫勞森（2010牧者大會） The Invisible War - Steve Lawson

我們會在困境當中敬拜上帝嗎？當我們被擲入火窯時，我們會讚美他的名嗎？當我們在事奉中與到困難的時候，在家庭問題上遇到瓶頸時，我們私人生活遇到挫折時，我們會收攤回家，還是咒詛上帝還是試著逃避？還是我們會說：耶和華的名是應當稱頌的！----史蒂夫勞森 Shepherds' Conference｜Mar 5, 2010｜General Session 8 - The Invisible War｜Steve Lawson｜Job 1

Shepherds' Conference, Mar 5, 2010 General Session 8 - The Invisible War Steve Lawson Job 1
http://www.shepherdsfellowship.org

MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT (Revelation 17:5)

Origins Of The Babylonian Mystery Religion. History Of The Roman Catholic Church, & The One True Church Part 1 of 2. 

Origins Of The Babylonian Mystery Religion. History Of The Roman Catholic Church, & The One True Church Part 2 Of 2.




Mystery Babylon the Great
The Babylonian Roots of Catholicism

  "And upon her forehead was a name written MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." These words, written by John in Revelation 17:5, are given to describe the woman who is symbolic of the one world church system set up by the Antichrist. The fact that she is of the Antichrist is obvious. First, she is said to be the great whore in verse 1 of chapter 17. The true churches of God are known as the Bride of Christ. "Babylon is designated a harlot because of her unfaithfulness to Christ the bridegroom through her friendship and unholy alliance with the kings and inhabitants of the earth.''(1) Thus, because of the designation of "whore", it is obvious that the woman is a false religious system. Secondly, it is obvious that the system is of Antichrist because of the description of the woman in verse six. She is said to be "drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs." Thus, it is seen that the false religious system of Antichrist has been one that has persecuted the Christians down through the centuries. It is this type of religious system that is called Babylon The Great.

      What is meant by the name, Babylon The Great? Some would say that this refers to the city in which this wicked ecclesiastical system shall be errected. However, it should be obvious from verse six that this is not the correct interpretation. The city of Babylon by the Euphrates river has never been drunk with the blood of the saints. In fact, quite contrary, Babylon is nothing more than stones and rubble piled up. It has been completely destroyed, and has not through history lived up to the definition of verse six. Also, it is interesting to note that the inscription on the forehead of the woman referred to MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT. This indicates that the name Babylon should not be taken literally, but rather that it is a secret name which stands for something else.(2) It is commonly believed that the name of Babylon thus refers to the ecclesiastical system of Babylonianism founded in Genesis chapter ten, which has existed in one form or another up until this present age and will continue until the return of Christ.

      The religious system known as Babylonianism received its name from the city in which it was founded: Babylon on the plain of Shinar. The founder of this city was Nimrod. Nimrod appears for only a brief time in the Bible. His name is mentioned only in Genesis chapter ten, verses 8-10. Verse eight teaches that Nimrod was begotten "by Cush, and that he was a mighty one in the earth." Verse nine expands to tell that he was a mighty hunter before the Lord. On first glance this description appears innocent enough, but a closer examination will show the true nature of this individual. First of all, the name Nimrod comes from the Hebrew verb"nimrode" which is translated, "let us revolt." This in itself indicates the type of individual that Nimrod was. He is referred to as a "mighty one." This phrase comes from the Hebrew word, "gilor" which means "tyrant." So it becomes evident that Nimrod was not just a powerful man on the earth at that time. Rather he was a tyrannical leader of men. The phrase "a mighty hunter before the Lord" has interesting connotations as well. First of all, it is interesting to question why the hunting exploits of one individual would make the Lord take special notice of him. The Hebrew phrase "liphne yahweh", which can be rendered "in the estimation of Jehovah", carries with it the idea of a superlative, but "a superlative that bears the meaning that even Yahweh was impressed by this hunter's prowess and achievements."(4) There must have been more to Nimrod's hunting than would be evidenced in the life of any other hunter. Secondly, the word translated "before" in Genesis 10:9 carries with it a hostile meaning, and could probably be translated "against". Putting this all together, it becomes plain that it was not wild beasts that Nimrod was hunting, but men. Having hunted them he would enslave them and have a tyranical hold over them. And all this was done in direct opposition to the Lord. The Jewish Encyclopedia sums up the life of Nimrod by referring to him as "he who made all the people rebellious against God."(5)

      The Bible teaches that the beginning of the Kingdom of Nimrod was at Babel, or in other words, Babylon. The wickedness of Babylon is evidenced by the story of the tower of Babel, which is related in Genesis chapter eleven. The people of Babel determined that they would build a huge tower in their city in direct defiance to God. They were in defiance toward God because they did not want to be scattered across the face of the earth as God had commanded Noah and his descendants in Genesis 9:1. In order to avoid this, they wanted to build this tower that would make a name for them. They felt that this would help to bind them together and keep them from scattering. But all this was in disobedience to God. God forced them to do His will by confounding their language and forcing them to disperse and try to regroup according to a common tongue. But this small incident is very indicative of the people who followed after Nimrod in his rebellion against God.

      Following the death of Nimrod, his heathen form of worship was continued by his wife, Queen Semiramis. She claimed that her husband had become the Sun god, and was to be worshipped. Some time after this, Queen Semiramis conceived through adultery and gave birth to an illegitimate son whom she named Tammuz. It is interesting to note here that Ezekial 8:14 records the incident of women weeping in lamentation for Tammuz. The prophet is told that he will someday see greater abominations than this one, which indicates that even sorrow for Tammuz was wicked and idolatry. Upon the birth of Tammuz, Semiramis declared that he was actually Nimrod reborn. In addition to this, she also claimed that her son was supernaturally conceived. Now Semiramis undoubtedly knew of God's promise of a Redeemer. Satan used her knowledge of this to enduce her to set up a counterfeit plan of God's redemption by having her claim that Tammuz was to be the saviour of the world.(6) However, even though Semiramis claimed to have given birth to a saviour, it was she that was worshipped, not the son. She was worshipped as the mother of the gods.(7) So from this point on the principle role of the woman as opposed to the Son is seen.

      Many different ideas from the Babylonian religion have come down through the generations. Probably the key doctrine is that of the mother-son relationship. As the Babylonian people were scattered throughout the world, they took with them the idea that Semiramis had miraculously conceived and given birth to Nimrod reincarnated. Thus, all through the world, men began to worship a divine mother and god-child, long before the birth of Christ. The woman appears in different ways, and is called by different names, but she is always the same person. The Chinese called her Shingmoo. The Germans worshipped Hertha. The Scandanavians worshipped Sisa. In India, she was known as Indrani.(8) But the woman was really Semiramis, the queen of Babylon. Even Israel, when it fell into apostasy, worshipped Ashteroth, who was known to the Jews as the "queen of Heaven" as told in Jeremiah 44:17-19. The spread of this doctrine was great at the time of Christ.

      The worship of the Great Mother,.. was very popular under the Roman Empire. Inscriptions prove that the two (the mother and the child) received divine honors... not only in Italy and especially in Rome, but also in the providences, particularly in Africa, Spain, Portugal, France, Germany and Bulgaria.(9) So it is apparent that the whole world was aware of, and probably worshipped the Mother-Son relationship.

      It was into this time period that Christ was born. As He accomplished His ministry, and as the apostles went out and started churches, the Word of God spread throughout the world. However, as the centuries passed, many of these churches fell into apostasy. Paganism began mingling with "Christianity". Constantine professed to become a Christian and began to push Christianity on the pagans; not by conversion, but simply by letting them join. Many of these pagans who joined the "church" brought with them their beliefs about the Great Mother. They had grown up with this belief so long that they did not want to give it up. So the "church" compromised. Rather than force the pagans to give up the Babylonian idea of the Great Mother, they decided (in order to increase their numbers) to adopt this belief into the church. Mary, the mother of Jesus, became the Great Mother to the pagans. This satisfied both sides. The "Christians" were happy because the pagans were "worshipping" the Christian God. The pagans were happy because they had their Great Mother to worship. Thus, little by little, the worship of Mary worked its way into the "church" which is known today as the Catholic Church.

      There are other similarities which show that the Catholic doctrine of Maryolotry is an offshoot of Babylonianism. In his deified form, Ninrod the Sun god is known as Baal. Semiramis, as the female divinity, would be called Baalti. This word translated into English means "My Lady." In Latin it would be translated "Mea Domina". This name becomes the name "Madonna" which is the name by which Mary is often referred. The same reasoning can be applied to the name of "Mediatrix", which Mary is also called. Since the Bible teaches that there is only one mediator between God and man, and that One being Jesus Christ (I Timothy 2:5), it is obvious that Mary did not receive that title in a Biblical way. She instead acquired it from "Mylitta" (mediatrix) which was one of the names of the Mother Goddess of Babylon.(10) "The Queen of Heaven" is another name for Mary that has been adopted from the pagan Babylonian religions. Thus it is obvious that the Catholic doctrine of Maryolotry is nothing more than the ancient Babylonianism dressed up in Christian terminology.

      Babylonianism has been passed down through the ages in the form of symbolism also. The Babylonians were very symbolic in everything they did, and these symbols of worship can still be seen today. One of these religious symbols is the rosary. This article is not an invention of the papacy, but has been around since the earliest times and is almost universally found in the pagan nations.(11) It was used as a sacred instrument by the Mexicans and it is repeatedly referred to in the Hindu holy books. In fact, images of the goddess Diana show her to be wearing rosary beads. So this Catholic ritual holds its origin in the pagan religions which stemmed from Babylon.

      A second symbol of importance within Babylonian religion is the obelisk or tower. The obelisks were found all throughout the areas of Babylon and Egypt. Often these obelisks have been transported to places of high esteem, such as the entry to Saint Peter's Cathedral in Rome. In Babylonian religion, these obelisks served two purposes in worship. First of all, they were associated with Sun worship. They pointed to the sun in a form of homage to it as the great life giver. Yet these monuments also stood as sexual symbols. They were representative of the phallus which, along with the sun, was considered to be a symbol of life. So these obelisks were really a combination of sex and sun worship.(l2) When Israel backslid, they errected these at the entry to the temple in defiance against God (Ezekiel 8:5). This makes it very interesting when it is shown that such an abolisk does sit at the entrance to Saint Peter's. It is also interesting to note that when the obelisk was to be errected at Saint Peter's, the Pope attached the Death Penalty to the workers should the monument be broken.(l3) Obviously, much importance must be placed on this pagan monument by the Catholics. This is another example of how Babylonian paganism has continued down until this time.

      Another doctrine of Babylonianism which has been carried on till today is that of the celibacy of the priesthood. This practice started with Queen Semiramis. This practice quickly spread throughout the pagan world. It finally arrived in Rome through the worship of the Babylonian goddess Cybele.(l4) This practice has been continued down through the years in the Catholic church. Going along with the oath of celibacy was the priestly tonsure. A tonsure is the shaving or clipping of a round spot on the head of priests at their ordination. This practice was a carry over from the ordination of the priests of Bacclus, which is another name for the illegitimate son of Queen Semiramis. So even this mark which priests receive as an initiatory rite has its origins in the pagan religions of Babylon.

      One final area which will be discussed is the Catholic doctrine of purgatory. The first real evidence of this doctrine in Catholocism occurred when Pope Gregory the Great claimed the existence of a third state, one different than Heaven and Hell. The idea was not officially adopted into Catholic dogma until the Council of Florence in 1459. From that point on, the Catholic church has freely taught the concept of purgatory as a purification place for souls. However, this doctrine was in effect long before the time of Gregory the Great. In the 4th Century B.C., Plato spoke of certain teachers of his day who believed in purgatory. Buddhism, Stoicism, and the Moslim fathers also believed in a place of purification where souls must go before they can attain Heaven. These beliefs have their root in Babylon. The most probable source is that of the worship of Molech. Many pagan nations felt that fire was necessary to cleanse from sin. This is probably because they were worshippers of the sun god, and his power on earth was represented by fire. This was evidenced in the worship of Molech, as young infants were made human sacrifices and burned in the arms of the idol. God made special mention of Molech and forbid his worship in II Kings 23:10 and Leviticus 18:21. In fact, Molech is simply another name for Nimrod. The name Tammuz sheds light on this as well. ''Tam" means "perfect"; "Muz" means "by burning". (15) This shows that the idea of purification by fire has its roots in the Babylonian worship of Nimrod.

      From the time of Nimrod until the present there has always been a false religious system in operation. This system has its life in Babylonian religion. This religion is evidenced today in the Catholic church. The Catholic doctrine of Maryolotry has its roots in the divine mother-child relationship of Queen Semiramis and her illegitimate son Tammuz. The symbol of the rosary has its beginnings in Babylon. The obelisk as a monument is a symbol of Babylonian sun and sex worship. The initiation rites of priests are the same as those for the priests of Babylon. Even the doctrine of purgatory directly coincides with the Babylonian practice. Many other examples could be cited. But even these few are more than sufficient to show that the Catholic church is not a "Christian" religion. It is nothing more than a copy of the pagan religions of Babylon. It is the religious system symbolized as MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT in Revelation 17:5, and it will someday be destroyed as Christ in His glory returns to earth to set up His kingdom.


(1)J. B. Smith, A Revelation of Jesus Christ (Scottdale: Herald Press, 1961), p. 240.
(2) Ibid., p. 242.
(3)H. C . LeuPold, Exposition of Genesis (Grand Rapids: Baker Book Ilouse, 1965), p. 366.
(4) Ibid., pp. 366-367.
(5) Ralph Woodrow. Babylon Mystery Religion (Riverside: Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Associaton, Inc., 1966), p. 9.
(6) Ibid., p. 10.
(7) Alexander Hislop, The Two Babylons (Neptune: Loizeaux Brothers, 1916), p. 5.
(8) Woodrow, op. cit., p. 14.
(9) Ibid., p. 15.
(10) Ibid., p. 18.
(11) Hislop, op. cit., p. 187.
(12) Woodrow, op. cit., p. 39.
(13) Ibid., p. 42.
(14) Hislop, p. 220.
(15) Woodrow. P. 73.
Bibliography

Hislop, Alexander. The Two Babylons. Neptune, NJ: Loizeaux Brothers, 1916
Leupold, H. E. Exposition of Genesis. Grand Rapids: Baker Book Houes, 1965.
Smith, J. B. A Revelation of Jesus Christ. Scottdale: Herald Press, 1961.
Woodrow, Ralph. Babylon Mystery Religion. Riverside Ralph Woodrow Evangelistic Association, Inc., 1966.


By
Pastor Mark Montgomery
Ambassador Baptist Church
1926 Babcock Blvd
Pittsburgh, PA 15209
(412)822-7255

The Reformation and Calvinism.

This year (2017) marks 500 years since the Reformation.
Over the coming months, we will cover the events leading up to October 31 1517, the date Martin Luther nailed his ‘post’ to the church door in Wittenberg. This event is in many ways symbolic of the beginning of the Reformation.
But are the details behind the Reformation still important for Christians to know about today?
The answer is yes. In fact, our everyday lives as Christians in 2017 are in countless ways built on the foundation laid by the events of the Reformation. What we have now is because of what happened then.
So what exactly was the Reformation? When did it happen? Who was involved? And what difference does having ‘reformed theology’ really make in our lives?
Throughout this year we will be answering questions like these so that you can learn why, even in 2017, the Reformation matters. - to continue reading pls click HERE.

Read the whole Article HERE - http://www.ets.ac.uk/engage/

"The Reformation is often dated to 31 October 1517 in Wittenberg, Saxony, when Luther sent his Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences to the Archbishop of Mainz. The theses debated and criticised the Church and the papacy, but concentrated upon the selling of indulgences and doctrinal policies about purgatory, particular judgment, and the authority of the pope. He would later in the period 1517–1521 write works on the Catholic devotion to Virgin Mary, the intercession of and devotion to the saints, the sacraments, mandatory clerical celibacy, monasticism, further on the authority of the pope, the ecclesiastical law, censure and excommunication, the role of secular rulers in religious matters, the relationship between Christianity and the law, and good works.
Reformers made heavy use of inexpensive pamphlets as well as vernacular Bibles using the relatively new printing press, so there was swift movement of both ideas and documents.
MAGISTERIAL REFORMATION
Parallel to events in Germany, a movement began in Switzerland under the leadership of Ulrich Zwingli. These two movements quickly agreed on most issues, but some unresolved differences kept them separate. Some followers of Zwingli believed that the Reformation was too conservative, and moved independently toward more radical positions, some of which survive among modern day Anabaptists. Other Protestant movements grew up along lines of mysticism or humanism, sometimes breaking from Rome or from the Protestants, or forming outside of the churches.
After this first stage of the Reformation, following the excommunication of Luther and condemnation of the Reformation by the Pope, the work and writings of John Calvin were influential in establishing a loose consensus among various groups in Switzerland, Scotland, Hungary, Germany and elsewhere.
The Reformation foundations engaged with Augustinianism; both Luther and Calvin thought along lines linked with the theological teachings of Augustine of Hippo.[citation needed] The Augustinianism of the reformers struggled against Pelagianism, a heresy that they perceived in the Roman Catholic Church. In the course of this religious upheaval, the German Peasants' War of 1524–1525 swept through the Bavarian, Thuringian and Swabian principalities, including the Black Company of Florian Geier, a knight from Giebelstadt who joined the peasants in the general outrage against the Roman Catholic hierarchy. Zwinglian and Lutheran ideas had influence with preachers within the regions that the Peasants' War occurred and upon works such as the Twelve Articles. Luther, however, condemned the revolt in writings such as Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants; Zwingli and Luther's ally Philipp Melanchthon also did not condone the uprising. Some 100,000 peasants were killed by the end of the war." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reformation
CALVINIST  the Movie by Les Lansphere will be AVAILABLE OCTOBER 2, 2017. Calvinist is a film about a generation that rediscovered an ancient Big-God theology. Join teachers like R.C. Spoul, Paul Washer, and Shai Linne in a Biblical journey to uncover the truth about who God is and who we are.


Watch the official trailer for Calvinist, a documentary about an unexpected generation of the church being overtaken by an old, and often misunderstood theology. They've become obsessed with reading difficult theology books and trying to convince their friends of some seemingly offensive things.

Featuring: R.C. Sproul, Paul Washer, Ligon Duncan, Kevin DeYoung, Voddie Baucham, James White, Joe Thorn, Jeff Durbin, Tim Challies, Steven Lawson, Carl Trueman, Shai Linne, R. Scott Clark, TImothy Brindle, Scott Oliphint, Michael Horton, and many more.




The Story of Calvinism by Phil Johnson
The Christian doctrine of 'Election' has caused more difficulties to believers than any other. It is indeed one of the most frequently misunderstood of all Biblical teachings. Many have been distressed by what they think this teaching means. But rather than causing Christians concern, this doctrine is actually one that should fill believers with comfort and a much better grasp of the great and sovereign God that they serve.

In the first message Phil introduces us to this doctrine, and begins by dispelling the myth that election was an addition to the gospel invented by the Apostle Paul, and which cannot be found in the teaching of Christ. But as Phil shows us, this is simply not the case, and he then goes on to explain what election is really all about, directly from the teaching of Christ.

The second message provides a very helpful overview of Calvinism and its history, which actually sets the doctrine of election in the context of the Biblical teaching with which it is most commonly associated. Once correctly understood, election is seen to be actually a demonstration of the Lord's love for his people. These two recordings will be a great help to those who are struggling to understand this most difficult, yet wonderful, doctrine.





"A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God's truth is attacked and yet would remain silent." 
 John Calvin

Amazing Grace: The History & Theology of Calvinism

“Amazing Grace – The History and Theology of Calvinism” is the first video documentary that answers these and other related questions. This fascinating three-part, four-hour presentation is detailed enough so as to not gloss over the controversy. At the same time, it is broken up into ten “Sunday-school-sized” sections to make the rich content manageable and accessible for the average viewer.

Part One explores the history of the debate. It begins with the pivotal dispute between Augustine and Pelagius and continues through the semi-pelagian controversy; focusing particularly on the debate between Martin Luther and Desiderius Erasmus. Many viewers will be shocked to discover that free-will theology was NOT the doctrine of the Reformation but instead the teaching of an increasingly apostate Roman Catholic Church. The history section ends with a definitive historical explanation of the issues that arose during the Calvinist/Arminian controversy. By examining the five points of Arminianism and the Synod of Dort’s response, the viewer will clearly see that the Protestant Church understood how the Gospel would be compromised if Arminianism prevailed.

Part Two opens the Word of God, our ultimate authority for life and faith. The five points of Arminianism are put on trial as what would later come to be known as the “five points of Calvinism” are clearly and forcefully presented.

Part Three asks and answers the provocative question: If Calvinism is true, if God is absolutely sovereign; then why should we evangelize? It also explores the vital issue of how to and to whom the gospel should be presented so as to be faithful to the great doctrines of God’s sovereignty, man’s depravity, and the miracle of amazing grace.

Rich in graphics, dramatic vignettes, and biblical analogies, Amazing Grace – The History and Theology of Calvinism also features many of the finest reformed thinkers and pastors of our time: Dr. R.C. Sproul, Dr. D. James Kennedy, Dr. George Grant, Dr. Stephen Mansfield, Dr. Thomas Ascol, Dr. Thomas Nettles, Dr. Roger Schultz, Pastor Walt Chantry, Dr. Joe Morecraft, Dr. Ken Talbot, Pastor Walter Bowie and Dr. R.C. Sproul, Jr..

Come learn what the great Baptist preacher C.H. Spurgeon meant when he said,“…to deny Calvinism is to deny the gospel of Jesus Christ.”

“This video series boldly, clearly, and winsomely sets forth the glorious, saving grace of God in its splendor and will help thousands to understand the gospel better and so to be filled with praise for their Savior.” Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, Associate professor of historical theology and social ethics, Knox Theological Seminary, Ft. Lauderdale, Florida

“I want you to know that ever since my wife and I bought our first copy when it was new and being mentioned in World Magazine, we have been excited about the product. We’ve ordered more copies for friends. This year my church asked if I would facilitate an eight-week discussion using your DVD. Week after week in our Adult Sunday school some twenty or thirty people have sat riveted by your presentation. The message and the abundant quantity of Scripture, the well-known and not so well-known speakers – all of them excellent communicators, as well as the extremely high production quality – camera angles, lighting, sets and sound, the humorous vignettes have captured everyone’s attention.  The Doctrines of Grace are, of course, a wonderful gift from our Lord, but your production is an excellent instructional tool, and if others and their churches are benefiting the way we have been, then I think the Lord must be pleased.”  Jack Blake, Charlotte, North Carolina

Available on DVD - PLS CLICK HERE.

God Has a Plan

"It is unthinkable that a God of infinite wisdom and power would create a world without a definite plan for that world. And because God is thus infinite His plan must extend to every detail of the world's existence. If we could see the world in all its relations, past, present, and future, we would see that it is following a predetermined course with exact precision. Among created things we may search where we will, as far as the microscope and the telescope will enable the eye to see, we find organization everywhere. Large forms resolve themselves into parts, and these parts in their turn are but organized of other parts down as far as we can see into infinity. Even man, who is but the creature of a day and subject to all kinds of errors, develops a plan before he acts; and a man who acts without design or purpose is accounted foolish. Before we make a trip or undertake a piece of work all of us set our goal and then work to attain that goal in so far as we are able. Regardless of how some people may oppose Predestination in theory, all of us in our every-day lives are practical predestinarians. As E. W. Smith says, a wise man "first determines upon the end he desires to attain, and then upon the best means of attaining it. Before the architect begins his edifice, he makes his drawings and forms his plans, even to the minutest details of construction. In the architect's brain the building stands complete in all its parts before a stone is laid. So with the merchant, the lawyer, the farmer, and all rational and intelligent men. Their activity is along the line of previously formed purposes, the fulfillment, so far as their finite capacities will allow, Of preconceived plans." [The Creed of Presbyterians, p. 159.]

The larger our enterprise is, the more important it is that we shall have a plan; otherwise all our work ends in failure. One would be considered mentally deranged who undertook to build a ship, or a railroad, or to govern a nation without a plan. We are told that before Napoleon began the invasion of Russia he had a plan worked out in detail, showing what line of march each division of his army was to follow, where it was to be at a certain time, what equipment and provisions it was to have, etc. Whatever was wanting in that plan was due to the limitations of human power and wisdom. Had Napoleon's foresight been perfect and his control of events absolute, his plan or we may say, his foreordination would have extended to every of every soldier who made that march. And if this is true of man, how much more is it true of God! "A universe without decrees," says A. J. Gordon. "would be as irrational and appalling as would be an express train driving on in the darkness without headlight or engineer, and with no certainty that the next moment it might not plunge into the abyss." We cannot conceive of God bringing into existence a universe without a plan which would extend to all that would be done in that universe. As the Scriptures teach that God's providential control extends to all events, even the most minute, they thereby teach that His plan is equally comprehensive. It is one of His perfections that He has the best possible plan, and that He conducts the course of history to its appointed end. And to admit that He has a plan which He carries out is to admit Predestination. "God's plan is shown in its effectuation to be one," says Dabney. "Cause is linked with effect, and what was effect becomes cause; the influences of events on events interlace with each other, and descend in widening streams to subsequent events; so that the whole complex result is through every part. As astronomers suppose that the removal of one planet from our system would modify more or less the balance and orbits of all the rest, so the failure of one event in this plan would derange the whole, directly or indirectly." [Theology, p. 214.]

If God had not foreordained the course of events but waited until some undetermined condition was or was not fulfilled, His decrees could be neither eternal nor immutable. We know, however, that He is incapable of mistake, and that He cannot be surprised by any unforeseen inconveniences. His kingdom is in the heavens and He rules over all. His plan must, therefore, include every event in the entire sweep of history. That even the small events have their place in this plan. and that they must be as they are, is easily seen. All of us know of certain "chance happenings" which have actually changed the course of our lives. The effects of these extend throughout all succeeding history in ever-widening influences, causing other "chance happenings." It is said that the quacking of some geese once saved Rome. Whether historically true or not it will serve as a good illustration. Had not the geese awakened the guards who gave the alarm and aroused the defending army, Rome would have fallen and the course of history from that time on would have been radically different. Had those geese remained silent who can imagine what empires might have been in existence today, or where the centers of culture might have been? During a battle a bullet misses the general by only an inch. His life is spared, he goes on commanding his troops, wins a decisive victory, and is made the chief ruler of his country for many years, as was the case with George Washington. Yet what a different course history would have taken had the soldier on the other side aimed the slightest trifle higher or lower! The great Chicago fire of 1871, which destroyed more than I half of the city, was started, we are told, when a cow kicked over a lantern. How different would have been the history of Chicago if that one motion had been slightly different! "The control of the greatest must include the control of the less, for not only are great things made up of little things, but history shows how the veriest trifles are continually proving the pivots on which momentous events revolve. The persistence of a spider nerved a despairing man to fresh exertions which shaped a nation's future. The God who predestinated the course of Scotch history must have planned and presided over the movements of that tiny insect that saved Robert Bruce from despair." [The Creed of Presbyterians, p. 160.] Examples of this kind could be multiplied indefinitely.

The Pelagian denies that God has a plan; the Arminian says that God has a general but not a specific plan; but the Calvinist says that God has a specific plan which embraces all events in all ages. In recognizing that the eternal God has an eternal plan in which is predetermined every event that comes to pass, the Calvinist simply recognizes that God is God, and frees Him from all human limitations. The Scriptures represent God as a person, like other persons in that His acts are purposeful, but unlike other persons in that He is all-wise in His planning and all-powerful in His performing. They see the universe as the product of His creative power, and as the theater in which are displayed His glorious perfections, and which must in all its form and all its history, down to the least detail, correspond with His purpose in making it. In a very illuminating article on "Predestination," Dr. Benjamin B. Warfield, who in the opinion of the present writer has emerged as the outstanding theologian since John Calvin, tells us that the writers of Scripture saw the divine plan as "broad enough to embrace the whole universe of things, and minute enough to concern itself with the smallest details, and actualizing itself with inevitable certainty in every event that comes to pass." "In the infinite wisdom of the Lord of all the earth, each event falls with exact precision into its proper place in this unfolding of His eternal plan; nothing, however small, however strange, occurs without His ordering, or without its peculiar fitness for its place in the working out of His purposes; and the end of all shall be the manifestation of His glory, and accumulation of His praise. This is the Old Testament (as well as the New Testament) philosophy of the universe a world-view which attains concrete unity in an absolute decree, or purpose, or plan of which all that comes to pass is the development in time." [Biblical Doctrines, pp. 13, 22.]

The very essence of consistent theism is that God would have an exact plan for the world, would foreknow the actions of all the creatures He proposed to create, and through His all-inclusive providence would control the whole system. If He fore-ordained only certain isolated events, confusion both in the natural-world and in human affairs would be introduced into the system and He would need to be constantly developing new plans to accomplish what be desired. His government of the world then would be a capricious patch work of new expedients He would at best govern only in a general way, and would be ignorant of much of the future. But no one with proper ideas of God believes that He has to change His mind every few days to make room for unexpected happenings which were not included in His original plan. If the perfection of the divine plan be denied, no consistent stopping place will be found short of atheism. In the first place there was no necessity that God should create at all. He acted with perfect freedom when He brought this world into existence. When He did choose to create there was before Him an infinite number of possible plans. But as a matter of fact we find that He chose this particular one in which we now are. And since He knew perfectly every event of every kind which would be involved in this particular world-order, He very obviously predetermined every event which would happen when He chose this plan.

His choice of the plan, or His making certain that the creation should be on this order, we call His foreordination or His predestination. Even the sinful acts of men are included in this plan. They are foreseen, permitted, and have their exact place. They are controlled and overruled for the divine glory. The crucifixion of Christ, which is admittedly the worst crime in all human history, had, we are expressly told, its exact and necessary place in the plan (Acts 2:23; 4:28). This particular manner of redemption is not an expedient to which God was driven after being defeated and disappointed by the fall of man. Rather it is "according to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord," Ephesians 3:11 . Peter tells us that Christ as a sacrifice for sin was "foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world," 1 Peter 1:20. Believers were "chosen in Him before the foundation of the world" (or from eternity), Ephesians 1:4. We are saved not by our own temporary works, "but according to His purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal," 2 Timothy 1:9. And if the crucifixion of Christ, or His offering up Himself as a sacrifice for sin, was in the eternal plan, then plainly the fall of Adam and all other sins which made that sacrifice necessary were in the plan, no matter how undesirable a part of that plan they may have been. History in all its details, even the most minute, is but the unfolding of the eternal purposes of God. His decrees are not successively formed as the emergency arises, but are all parts of one all-comprehending plan, and we should never think of Him suddenly evolving a plan or doing something which He had not thought of before. The fact that the Scriptures often speak of one purpose of God as dependent on the outcome of another or on the actions of men, is no objection against this doctrine. The Scriptures are written in the every-day language of men, and they often describe an act or a thing as it appears to be, rather than as it really is. The Bible speaks of "the four corners of the earth," Isaiah 11:12, and of "the foundations of the earth," Psalm 104:5; yet no one understands this to mean that the earth is square, or that it actually rests upon a foundation. We speak of the sun rising and setting, yet we know that it is not the motion of the sun but that of the earth as it turns over on its axis which causes this phenomenon. Likewise, when the Scriptures speak of God repenting, for instance, no one with proper ideas of God understands it to mean that He sees He has pursued a wrong course and changes His mind. It simply means that His action as seen from the human view-point appears to be like that of a man who repents. In other places the Scriptures speak of the hands, or arms, or eyes of God. These are what are known as "anthropomorphisms," instances in which God is referred to as if He were a man. When the word "repent," for instance, is used in its strict sense God is said never to repent: "God is not a man, that He should lie, Neither the son of man, that lie should repent." Numbers 23:19; and again, "The Strength of Israel will not lie nor repent; for He is not a man, that He should repent," 1 Samuel 15:29.

The contemplation of this great plan must redound to the praise of the unsearchable wisdom and illimitable power of Him who devised and executes it. And what can give the Christian more satisfaction and joy than to know that the whole course of the world is ordered with reference to the establishment of the Kingdom of heaven and the manifestation of the Divine glory; and that he is one of the objects upon which infinite love and mercy is to be lavished?

SCRIPTURE PROOF
1. God's plan is eternal: 2 Timothy 1:9: (It is God) who saved us, and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before times eternal. Psalm 33:11: The counsel of Jehovah standeth fast for ever, The thoughts of His heart to all generations. Isaiah 37:26: Hast thou not heard how I have done it long ago, and formed it of ancient times? Isaiah 46:9, 10: I am God and there is none like me; declaring the end from the beginning, and from ancient times things that are not yet done. 2 Thessalonians 2:13: God chose you from the beginning unto salvation in sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. Matthew 25:34: Then shall the King say unto them on His right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. 1 Peter 1:20: (Christ) who (as a sacrifice for sin) was foreknown indeed before the foundation of the world. Jeremiah 31:3: Jehovah appeared of old unto me, saying, Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love. Acts 15:18: Saith the Lord, who maketh these things known from of old. Psalm 139:16: Thine eves did see mine unformed substance; And in thy book they were all written, Even the days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was none of them.

2. God's plan is unchangeable: James 1:17: Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom can be no variation, neither shadow that is cast by turning. Isaiah 14:24: Jehovah of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely, as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand. Isaiah 46:10, 11: My counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure: . . . yea, I have spoken, and I will also bring it to pass; I have purposed I will also do it. Numbers 23:19: God is not a man, that He should lie, Neither the son of man, that He should repent; Hath He said, and shall He not do it; Or hath He spoken, and shall He not make It good? Malachi 3:6: I, Jehovah, change not; therefore, ye, O sons of Jacob, are not consumed.

3. The divine plan includes the future acts of men: Daniel 2:28: But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets, and He hath made known to the King Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days. John 6:64: For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who it was that should betray Him. Matthew 20:18, 19: Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests and scribes; and they shall condemn Him to death, and shall deliver Him unto the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify ; and the third day He shall be raised up. (All the Scripture prophecies which are predictions of future events come under this heading. See especially: Micah 5:2; Cp. with Matthew 2:5, 6 and Luke 2:1-7; Psalm 22:18, Cp. John 19:24; Psalm 69:21, Cp. John 19:29; Zechariah 12:10, Cp. John 19:37; Mark 14:30; Zechariah 11:12, 13 , Cp. Matthew 27:9, 10; Psalm 34:19, 20, Cp. John 19:33, 36.)

4. The divine plan Includes the fortuitous events or chance happenings: Proverbs 16:33: The lot is cast Into the lap; But the whole disposing thereof Is of Jehovah. Jonah 1:7: So they cast lots, and the lot fell on Jonah. Acts 1:24, 26: And they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show of these two the one whom thou has chosen . . . And they cast lots for them; and the lot fell on Matthias.Job 36:32: He covereth His hands with the lightning, And giveth it a charge that it strike the mark. 1 Kings 22:28, 34: And Micaiah said, If thou (Ahab) return at all in peace, Jehovah hath not spoken by me . . . And a certain man drew his bow at a venture, and smote the king of Israel between the joints of the armor. Job 5:6: For affliction cometh not forth from the dust; Neither doth trouble spring out of the ground. Mark 14:30: And Jesus said unto him (Peter), Verily I say unto thee, that thou, today, even this night. before the cock crow twice shall deny me thrice.(Cp. Genesis 37:28 and 45:5; Cp. 1 Samuel 9:15,16 and 9:5-10.)

5. Some events are recorded as fixed or inevitably certain: Luke 22:22: For the Son of man indeed goeth, as it hath been determined; but woe unto that man through whom He is betrayed. John 8:20: These words spake He in the treasury, as He taught in the temple; and no man took Him; because His hour was not yet come.Matthew 24:36: But of that day and hour (the end of the world) knoweth no one, not even the angels in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father only. Genesis 41:32: And for that the dream was doubled unto Pharoah, it is because the thing is established of God, and He will shortly bring it to pass.
Habakkuk 2:3: For the vision is yet for the appointed time, and it hasteneth toward the end, and shall not lie; though it tarry, wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not delay. Luke 21:24: And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled. Jeremiah 15:2: And it shall come to pass when they say unto thee, Whither shall we go forth? then thou shalt tell them. Thus saith Jehovah: Such as are for death, to death; and such as are for the sword, to the sword; and such as are for famine, to the famine; and such as are for captivity, to captivity.Job 14:5: Seeing that his days are determined, And the number of his months is with thee, And thou has appointed bounds that he cannot pass. Jeremiah 27:7: And all nations shall serve him (Nebuchadnezzar), and his son, and his son's son, until the time of his own land come; and then many nations and great kings shall make him their bondman.

6. Even the sinful acts of men are included in the plan and are overruled for good. Genesis 50:20: As for you, ye meant evil against me (Joseph), but God meant it for good. Isaiah 45:7: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I am Jehovah that doeth all these things. Amos 3:6: Shall evil befall a city and Jehovah hath not done it?Acts 3:18: The things which God foreshowed by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer, He thus fulfilled. Matthew 21:42: The stone which the builders rejected, the same was made the head of the corner.Romans 8:28: To them that love God all things work together for good, even to them that are called according to His purpose."

Extracted from; The Reformed Doctrine Of Predestination by Loraine Boettner you can read it all HERE. Download PDF file.