Anti-Myth Revelation Industrial Complex | Desert Narrative Demolition | Sanctified Fiction Exposer | Deprogramming the Sacred | Divine Delusion Mortician
Mars
Joined May 2025
- Tweets5.3K
- Following627
- Followers1.9K
- Likes17K
Pinned Tweet
Gue gak butuh bantuan tuhan versi kalian
Gue pernah ada di posisi kalian mengkonsumsi dongeng yang sama, takut sama 'ancaman' yang sama. Tapi bedanya, gue memilih untuk UPGRADE AKAL.
Gue milih jadi 'Kafir yang Bangga' karena sekarang gue punya otoritas penuh atas logika gue sendiri. Gue nggak perlu nunggu 'ayat' buat tahu mana yang bener, gue punya DATA, FORENSIK, dan SEJARAH.
Kalau Islam sampai ke zaman sekarang, itu bukan 'Kuasa Tuhan', itu cuma hasil dari sistem yang melarang orang buat berpikir kritis selama 1.400 tahun. Begitu akal dicolok ke internet dan sains, sistem kalian langsung Error 404.
Stay in your cage, I'll enjoy the view from the high ground
Dear Holy Father,
The footage of Stedfast Baptist teaching children to smash statues of the Blessed Virgin Mary is a total pedagogical bankruptcy.
When disputatio is replaced by a hammer show, fides is stripped of ratio. As St. John Paul II wrote, faith without reason withers. This breeds raw iconoclastic radicalism in young minds.
We respectfully ask the Holy See:
1. Where is the line for "Separated Brethren" (Unitatis Redintegratio) §3, when hatred against Catholic identity is systematically catechized to children?
2. Should Caritas continue unconditional aid to factions that act as hostile antagonists toward local Catholics in the same territory?
Caritas in Veritate requires veritas. Charity without truth is not charity; it is funding our own persecution.
Your unworthy son in Christ.
In recent days, a humanitarian operation has been carried out to assist the civilian population in the city of Oleshky. I hope that the cooperation between the parties, which made this necessary humanitarian act possible, will strengthen the desire for dialogue and lead to new concrete peace initiatives. Let us entrust to Mary, Queen of Peace and of All Saints, all those throughout the world who are suffering because of war.
🧵
Beloved Catholics...
Destroying a wooden or plaster statue on an altar can never invalidate the 1842 account of Ratisbonne’s conversion, erase the medical records of healings at Lourdes, or revise the literary works of Zolli or Scott Hahn. Such acts of physical destruction are merely a manifestation of epistemological insecurity by those who have run out of evidence to present.
Alphonse Ratisbonne—a Jewish banker from Strasbourg, who considered himself immune to "Catholic superstitions" and was staunchly anti-Catholic—lost his fiancée and his inheritance from the family bank, all because he happened to be waiting at the church of Sant'Andrea delle Fratte on January 20, 1842. There was nothing for him to gain by lying.
Bernadette Soubirous—a poor, asthmatic, and nearly illiterate girl—lived in Massabielle, not Paris. Had it been Paris, I myself would not have believed her story, as Paris was a hub for theater and spectacle. Lourdes, by contrast, was a place where pigs scavenged for food. And she spoke the words, "Que soy era Immaculada Counceptiou" ("I am the Immaculate Conception")—a phrase she herself did not even understand.
Israel Zolli—certainly no marginal figure—was the Chief Rabbi of Rome during the Shoah. A man deeply versed in the Torah, he authored *Da Eva e Maria* ("From Eve to Mary"). He willingly faced expulsion from his own community and took the name Eugenio in order to become Catholic.
Scott Hahn—author of *Hail, Holy Queen*—was a Presbyterian minister whose very job was to dissuade people from becoming Catholic. As a theology professor with an anti-Catholic stance, he eventually surrendered his position after studying chapters 11 and 12 of the Book of Revelation regarding the Ark of the Covenant.
Roy Schoeman—a young Jewish professor at Harvard Business School, who was anti-Christian and a practical atheist—received a vision through a dream; it did not happen in a church, nor did it occur following a religious retreat.
Five witnesses from five different backgrounds: a Jewish banker, a simple and impoverished girl, a Chief Rabbi, a *Sola Scriptura*-adhering minister, and an atheist Harvard professor. Though they may be strangers to one another, separated by centuries and different nations, the pattern remains the same: those who are the most resistant—those with the least to gain from lying—are the very ones who end up seeking baptism.
Those who lack corroborating witnesses, and who rely solely on their own personal interpretations of scripture, require physical acts to convince themselves. They must smash things, break things, and shout—all to create the appearance of victory. This is psychology, not theology. If a testimony is truly robust, history will preserve it—just as the account of Ratisbonne is preserved in papal records, or the experience of Bernadette is documented in the police reports of Jacomet and the accounts of prosecutor Dutour—rather than leaving it confined merely to devotional literature.
Destroying a statue will not erase Ratisbonne from the archives of Sant'Andrea delle Fratte. It cannot erase the words "Que soy era Immaculada Counceptiou" as spoken by the nearly illiterate Bernadette; it cannot erase the medical records from Lourdes, the testimony of the former Chief Rabbi of Rome, Israel Zolli, the analyses of Scott Hahn, or the conversion account of Roy Schoeman.
There is no reason to react with vehemence upon seeing a statue of Mary destroyed. The legal principle *Lex Romana*—*Testis Unus, Testis Nullus* ("one witness is no witness")—combined with Deuteronomy 19:15, is sufficient to anchor the truth.
*Fides et Ratio* (Faith and Reason)
*Fides Quaerens Intellectum* (Faith Seeking Understanding)
*Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam* (For the Greater Glory of God)
Happy "Reformation" Day.
Theology is the introductory narrative, but archives and territorial maps are the reality.
St. Martin Luther remained consistent in one regard: the survival of his teachings and his own salvation were absolute.
If the world had to bleed, if 100,000 peasants had to be beheaded, if synagogues had to be burned, and if the borders of Vienna had to be left hanging in the balance—all to secure the epicenter of his movement in Germany—he would draft a theological justification for it overnight.
*Sancte Luthere, Ora Pro Nobis* (Saint Luther, pray for us).
Pray for those of us who still struggle to distinguish between theology and land deeds.
Pray, too, for those of us still confused about which statues may be smashed with a hammer—as was done by Andreas Carlstadt, your own mentor whom you later had expelled by the Prince’s decree—and which statues may be photographed.
Around 350 AD, Arianism held sway among approximately 80% of bishops; Nestorianism dominated the East, while Monophysitism prevailed in Egypt. Each of these movements invoked biblical verses as justification.
The task of history is not to persuade or to seek validation for the sake of sociological comfort, but rather to lay the evidence out on the table.
History is impartial and dispassionate; it bows only to the supremacy of evidence, archives, and comparative manuscripts. History has no obligation to satisfy sentiments or to validate anyone’s beliefs.
Arius the heretic taught that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was created, not co-eternal with the Father, and that there was a time when He did not exist! 😭
He denied the eternal Divinity of Jesus Christ, teaching that the Son was not equal to the Father in divine nature.
And St. Nicholas? According to a famous tradition, he was so outraged by this heresy that he slapped Arius across the face at the Council of Nicaea! 😭😭❤️❤️
“Begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father.” ✝️
St. Nicholas, Defender of the truth of Christ, pray for us! 🙏❤️
🧵
St. Luther + Philip I of Hesse
In 1540, Martin Luther granted a secret dispensation for the bigamous marriage of Philip I of Hesse.
Philip I, Landgrave of Hesse, was a key political leader and a primary patron of the Protestant Reformation. He faced difficulties in his first marriage and wished to marry Margarethe von der Saale without divorcing his first wife, Christine of Saxony. This was not merely a matter of political alliances; Christine was the daughter of George, Duke of Saxony—a staunch Catholic—and a unilateral annulment would have triggered a local war, incited the wrath of the broader Saxon family, and cost Philip his political alliance with Saxony. George the Bearded—Luther’s arch-enemy and a hardline Catholic who had authored a 300-page anti-Luther tract—would have had a legal pretext to invade Hesse, supported by the Catholic Duchy of Saxony and Emperor Charles V. The Reformation could have collapsed—not due to theological debate, but because of a civil war involving Saxony.
Philip convinced Luther, Philipp Melanchthon, and Martin Bucer that it was biblical—citing the examples of the Old Testament patriarchs—for a man to have more than one wife, arguing that it served to prevent adultery.
Philip I of Hesse was the principal financial and military backer of the Schmalkaldic League. He threatened to defect to the Pope or Emperor Charles V if his request for a bigamous dispensation were denied. Had the Pope granted such a dispensation to a Protestant prince, the Reformation would have been morally compromised. Driven by political insecurity and the need to ensure that his royal patron did not abandon the Protestant alliance, Luther issued a secret dispensation. The document was signed by Luther and his associates in December 1539, and the secret marriage took place in March 1540.
Luther opposed divorce. He mistakenly believed that secret bigamy (having two wives) was a better pastoral solution than a public divorce—a line of reasoning similar to one he had once offered to Henry VIII.
Luther granted this permission on the absolute condition that the second marriage remain entirely secret—a "secret dispensation"—to prevent a major scandal that could undermine the Protestant movement.
Within months, the secret was exposed, drawing sharp criticism from both Catholics and fellow Protestants, and damaging the moral reputation of Luther and other Reformation theologians.
Following the exposure of Philip I of Hesse’s bigamy, Martin Luther’s response was marked by a combination of deep regret, moral panic, and defensive efforts to shield the Reformation movement from reputational ruin.
Luther invoked the seal of confession (*Beichtsiegel*), suggesting a "good, downright lie": he advised Philip to publicly deny the second marriage if questioned by imperial authorities. Luther argued that because the permission had been granted within the context of confidential pastoral counseling—protected by the seal of confession—Philip was entitled to answer "no" to prevent a greater scandal for the church. He asserted that "a good, downright lie" was preferable to allowing the secret of the confession to be revealed. Does this not constitute a form of moral relativism that stands in contradiction to the principle of *Sola Scriptura*?
A perfect example of *Sola Scriptura*—the guiding principle of "Scripture Alone"—where every individual, every local "pulpit prince," gains the authority to become his own pope (*Sola Ego*).
Any pastor can bring a second wife to the altar and label the act as "biblical."
"Bible-based" simply means "whatever fits the pastor's personal desires today."
complex.com/life/a/backwoods…
ibtimes.co.uk/ohio-pastor-in…
timeslive.co.za/news/2026-10…
When Philip urged Luther to write a theological defense justifying bigamy—one that could be made public to secure his legal standing—Luther firmly refused, declaring that he would never allow polygamy to become a generally recognized, legal practice. Was it appropriate to execute such a sudden U-turn the moment it threatened his movement? (A private dispensation cannot serve as a public precedent; Luther found himself trapped between private pastoral care and the public laws of the Empire, which carried the penalty of beheading.)
This scandal triggered a moral crisis within the inner circle of the Reformation. One of Luther’s closest associates, Philipp Melanchthon, even fell gravely ill from profound guilt—a fact that added a heavy psychological burden to Luther during that period.
In his private correspondence, Luther viewed the exposure of this scandal as a spiritual assault by the devil, intended to destroy what the Protestant movement had built; he also saw it as a sobering reminder of the human frailty inherent in church leaders. So, Luther is permitted to be wrong, yet the Pope—whom he labeled the Antichrist—is not? That is a classic case of special pleading!
Under the criminal code of the Holy Roman Empire—known as the *Constitutio Criminalis Carolina* (the Carolina Constitution), enacted by Emperor Charles V in 1532—bigamy or polygamy was classified as a capital offense, punishable by death (typically by beheading). This clandestine compromise not only damaged the moral credibility of the Reformation but also failed to secure Philip’s loyalty; once the secret was exposed, Philip was ultimately forced to capitulate and strike a private deal with Emperor Charles V to save himself from execution. When a modern-day pastor in Ohio claims that polygamy is "biblical," remember that the path was already blazed by Martin Luther in 1540 through the bigamy scandal of Philip I of Hesse.
*O Sancte Luthere, ora pro nobis*—pray for those of us who still have to explain from the pulpit why 1 + 1 wife does not equal 1.
christianity.stackexchange.c…
patheos.com/blogs/davearmstr…
faithonview.com/polygamy-and…
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consti…
A perfect example of *Sola Scriptura*—the guiding principle of "Scripture Alone"—where every individual, every local "pulpit prince," gains the authority to become his own pope (*Sola Ego*).
Any pastor can bring a second wife to the altar and label the act as "biblical."
"Bible-based" simply means "whatever fits the pastor's personal desires today."
complex.com/life/a/backwoods…
ibtimes.co.uk/ohio-pastor-in…
timeslive.co.za/news/2026-10…
Those with truly deep historical roots tend to be more composed. They feel no need to constantly point out that others are misguided just to validate their own righteousness. They have no need to seek out "broken mirrors" elsewhere in order to make their own reflection appear whole and perfect.
Factions that have undergone internal fragmentation—giving rise to tens of thousands of new denominations since 1517, each negating the others—invariably require an external enemy to conjure an illusion of unity.
Labeling others as "idolaters" or "apostates" serves as a psychological compensation, a way to mask the cracks within one’s own house.
The more an individual or a group busies itself with declaring others infidels, passing judgment, or consigning them to hell, the more evident it becomes that their foundational identity is insecure. A robust identity is not built upon the notion that "we are purer than they are," but rather upon something far deeper and more stable.
Those who are insecure need enemies; those who are self-assured simply tend to their own house.
True historical authority has no need to raise its voice or cast stones to prove its existence. When a house is built upon a foundation of unbroken continuity spanning nearly two millennia—supported by the records of ecumenical councils and the blood of some 70 million martyrs—it has no need to search for broken mirrors in the outside world; it can simply let those records speak for themselves.
Nemu di jalan:
Silakan untuk Para Ukhti Khaira Ummah yg sedang cari pendamping Pria Tampan + Mapan dan Islami
Saran aja:
Kalo masih sayang nyawa lbh baik jgn daftar, Pria yg beneran "mapan dan tampan" secara sosiologis akan manfaatkan jaringan sosial berkelas, institusi profesional/ perantara keluarga terhormat. Bukan tempel iklan di gardu Fiber Optic jalanan publik berdampingan - iklan sedot WCd+ pinjaman cepat
Apa sih yg gak bertentangan dgn Islam?
Terompet
Aurat
Musik
Alkohol
Ucapkan salam ke kafir
Bank - riba + gharar
Ironisnya masih manfaatkan hak kebebasan berpendapat, platform media sosial buatan Kafir, kalo seluruh sistem luar Islam dianggap "kafir/bertentangan", logically mereka harus mundur total dari seluruh fasilitasi dunia modern
Kalo wajib diturutin OS Islam, Hampir Semua Elemen Hidup Islami Anda Hari Ini Juga Bertentangan.
🧵
I once thought Martin Luther might have had a clinical disorder (bipolar), but historical records suggest he acted as a purely pragmatic politician, using theology as an instrument for power brokering.
Early 1520s:
Luther wrote *Erklärung der 95 Thesen* (Explanation of the 95 Theses):
He argued against fighting the Turks, claiming they were the "Scourge of God"—a divine rod used to punish the Pope for selling indulgences. If the corrupt Pope were punished by the Turks, that would be God’s justice. Furthermore, participating in a Crusade would imply acknowledging the Pope’s authority—even though Luther had just declared the Pope to be the Antichrist.
1529: Suleiman led an army of approximately 120,000 troops to lay siege to Vienna. The threat was no longer directed at Rome, but at Wittenberg, Saxony—the very territory of the princes who had hidden Luther at Wartburg. If Vienna fell, the path to Germany would lie wide open.
Within six months, Luther produced two pamphlets:
*Vom Kriege wider die Türken* (On War Against the Turks, 1529)
*Heerpredigt wider den Türken* (A Sermon Against the Turks, 1529)
His argument: "Now, war is mandatory! But this is not the Pope’s war; it is the secular Emperor’s war. Same enemy, different label."
This shift occurred because the party under threat was no longer his adversary, but his own patron—Frederick the Wise, who had protected him from suffering the same fate as Jan Hus, who was burned at the stake in 1415.
During the Peasants' War (1524–1525), 300,000 peasants invoked Luther’s principle of *Sola Scriptura*, asking: "If we are free before God, why must we remain slaves to landlords?" Initially, Luther supported them in his *Ermahnung zum Frieden* (Admonition to Peace).
However, once the peasants began burning the castles of the princes who supported him, Luther immediately wrote *Wider die mörderischen Rotten der Bauern* (Against the Murderous, Thieving Hordes of Peasants), declaring: "Stab, strike, strangle—kill them just as one would put down a mad dog." Around 100,000 peasants died at Frankenhausen, and Thomas Müntzer was beheaded.
Regarding the Jews—in 1523, Luther wrote *That Jesus Christ Was Born a Jew*, taking a gentle tone and hoping that Jews would embrace his "pure" Gospel, which he contrasted with the "wicked" Catholicism.
The Jews did not convert en masse; some even engaged in counter-arguments. Twenty years later, Luther wrote *On the Jews and Their Lies*, calling for synagogues to be burned, property to be seized, and Jews to be expelled—all because his pride had been severely wounded.
Meanwhile, in 1571, Pope Pius V assembled a Catholic fleet—comprising forces from Spain, Venice, and the Papal States—to confront 200 Ottoman ships at Lepanto, thereby saving Europe.
In contrast, what the Protestants did was this:
The Schmalkaldic War:
German Protestants took up arms against the Catholic Emperor Charles V, who was, at the time, attempting to hold back the Ottomans at the border. Moritz (Maurice)—dubbed the "Judas of Meissen" by his fellow Protestants—was a Protestant prince who defected to ally himself with the Catholic Emperor Charles V during the Schmalkaldic War, all to destroy his own cousin, Johann Friedrich. His reward? Moritz secured the title of Elector and the territory of Saxony! This act of double-betrayal, carried out between 1546 and 1552, serves as the clearest evidence of the doctrine of *Sola Ego* ("Self Alone")—a pursuit of territorial expansion cloaked in the mantle of the Reformation. (I shall discuss this further elsewhere.)
It is proof that, among the princes of the Reformation, territorial ambition far outweighed any dogmatic loyalty.
Protestants conveniently ignore the fact that the "Reformation" was launched with the help of secular rulers at a time when the Catholic Church was busy defending Europe from the Ottoman Turks (Muslims). The Protestants left the defense of Europe to the Catholics and exploited the situation for their own advantage.
Pope Pius V mustered a navy from Catholic countries to defeat the Muslims in the Battle of Lepanto in 1571, while Protestants worked against the Catholic Church in Europe.
In short:
The Catholics shed their blood at Lepanto, and at the gates of Vienna in 1683—where Sobieski descended from the Kahlenberg, crying out, *Non nobis Domine* ("Not unto us, O Lord").
The Protestants, meanwhile, used their strength to fight fellow Christians (the Catholics) within Europe, all while enjoying the security provided by those very Catholics, who stood guard at the gates.
It was a form of inconsistent, bipolar behavior—whereas Luther, by contrast, was consistent:
"As long as my teachings are secure and my sponsors are safe, I am an idealist. But the moment my sponsors are threatened, or others reject my teachings, I become an executioner."
This was no mental disorder.
*Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders* ("Here I stand, I can do no other")—it sounds like the declaration of a martyr, but to me, it implies: "I cannot be wrong; therefore, the world must adapt to me."
Faith can be engineered from the pulpit, and emotions can be manipulated through rhetoric—but the archival records of the 16th century cannot be altered. The Schmalkaldic War proves that without the swords of German princes—men hungry for land and wealth—the movement of 1517 would never have survived. When one examines primary sources in the archives, theology steps aside, and raw political ambition takes center stage!
This act did not emerge from a vacuum—it was nurtured by centuries of supremacist texts and the enabling of sectarianism.
Hadith Bukhari 25:
"Umirtu an uqatila an-nas hatta yashhadu..." ["I have been commanded to fight the people until they testify..."]
No one simply wakes up in Karak, grabs an AK-47, travels 120 km from Amman to the village of Hmood, enters St. George’s Church during a funeral, and shoots seven mourners—all out of mere "whim" or for "economic" reasons.
Human rights activists and social media celebrities suddenly find their "batteries running low" whenever the victims of a massacre happen to be Orthodox Christians in the Middle East.
Human rights have become a selective commodity. When the victims are *kuffar* (infidels)—Syahrul Barriyah—the global machinery of activism, usually so vocal, falls completely silent.
What I’d like to know is: where are the records of a "Council of Sola Scriptura" from before the 16th century? Keep in mind that *digi.vatlib.it* is open to the public—in fact, even Protestant scholars frequently access the Vatican Apostolic Library (BAV).
Nicaea (325 AD) — available at *digi.vatlib.it/mss/detail/21…* — contains the Canons of the Council of Nicaea; it deals with Arianism and the date of Easter, not *Sola Scriptura*. • Constantinople (381 AD) — concerns the Holy Spirit.
• Ephesus (431 AD) — concerns the *Theotokos*.
• Chalcedon (451 AD) — concerns the two natures of Christ.
• Constantinople II (553 AD) and Nicaea II (787 AD) — concern icons.
• Trent (1545–1563 AD) — it was only here that the Church had to formally define "Scripture + Tradition," because the *Sola* theory had only just been introduced in 1517.
If *Sola Scriptura* were an apostolic teaching that had been lost and then rediscovered by Luther, there ought to be some trace of it in the BAV. The BAV holds approximately 80,000 manuscripts—ranging from the P52 papyrus fragment to the *Codex Vaticanus* (B) and the writings of the Church Fathers.
Irenaeus of Lyon (180 AD) — *Adversus Haereses* 3.1.1: "The tradition of the Apostles is manifest throughout the world; it is present in every Church, and anyone who wishes to see it may do so."
Basil the Great (375 AD) — *De Spiritu Sancto* 27:66: "Of the dogmas and kerygma preserved in the Church, some we possess from written teaching, while others we have received from the apostolic Tradition, handed down in secret." Augustine, 397 AD — *Contra Epistolam Manichaei* 5.6: "I would not believe the Gospel, were I not moved to do so by the authority of the Catholic Church."
The consensus is: Scripture + Tradition.
If *Sola Scriptura* were true, there ought to be a single sheet of parchment—perhaps accessible via *digi.vatlib.it*—that states: "Scripture alone; Tradition is not binding." No such document exists.
I have no interest in interpretations; I require an archive that can be verified. Thank you.
The figure on the right in the photo is Father Jacques Hamel.
• July 26, 2016, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, Normandy — 10 km from Rouen.
• At 85 years old, while celebrating morning Mass, he was confronted by two ISIS members shouting "Allahu Akbar" and was slaughtered in front of the altar.
• Pope Francis immediately declared him a martyr; the process for his beatification is already underway.
He is not the only one:
A list forgotten by Macron:
1. Fr. Jacques Hamel (2016) — murdered at the altar because he was Catholic.
2. Fr. Olivier Maire (2021) — murdered by a Rwandan immigrant whom he had taken in at his home in Saint-Laurent-sur-Sèvre.
3. Systematic burning of churches: According to the French Ministry of the Interior, there have been over 1,000 anti-Catholic attacks per year in France between 2022 and 2024—statues beheaded, altars urinated upon, and the 2019 fire at Notre-Dame (which remains a mystery).
4. Rouen itself, 2024: A synagogue was set on fire, but prior to that, Catholic churches in Rouen had also been targeted.
Is this the first time? Tell that to Father Jacques Hamel, who was slaughtered at the altar; tell that to the 1,000 churches attacked every year. You haven’t forgotten, Mr. Macron—you are simply erasing the blood of the martyrs from your speeches to save political face.
AD 250: "Petrus et Paulus, orate pro nobis" ("Peter and Paul, pray for us")
More than a century before the Bible [as a completed canon].
Graffiti in the Triclia, Catacombs of San Sebastiano, Rome.
Third-century pilgrims scribbled this on the walls during the *memoria* (commemoration) of Peter and Paul—reflecting the liturgical practices and piety of the Early Church, long before the structure of the New Testament canon was formally compiled.
This dates to the year 250, whereas the Bible was only officially canonized at the Councils of Hippo (393) and Carthage (397)—by the very Church that some now accuse of "idolatry" for the practice of asking the dead to pray for the living.
Worms, 1521: "Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders. Mein Gewissen ist gefangen in Gottes Wort" ("Here I stand, I can do no other. My conscience is captive to the Word of God")—it sounds heroic. But in essence, it is: "I refuse to submit to Councils, the Pope, or 1,500 years of Church Fathers—because *my own* conscience is the ultimate arbiter of truth."
*Sola Scriptura* (Scripture alone), or *Sola Ego* (the self alone)?
An Augustinian monk who had taken a vow of obedience found himself unable to obey his superiors, nor the Church that had nurtured him from poverty to his status as a Doctor of Theology. Ultimately, he constructed a new theology in which rebellion is equated with truth.
If the Catholic Church is "heretical" because of the practice of praying to the dead, then how can you accept a Bible that only exists because of that same "heretical" Church?
To label the Church that compiled the canon as "heretical" is to effectively undermine the very authority of the Bible that one claims to revere.
If you brand the third-century Church as "heretical," then on what basis do you believe that the Bible—compiled by that very Church—is valid?
Luther was not a reformer; he was a revolutionary who relied on *special pleading*. He needed the Catholic Church to provide him with the Bible, yet he spat upon the very Church that gave it to him.
Pride is everything. And pride never apologizes; it only seeks justification.
The Deir Dibwan/Binyamin area is a hotspot for livestock theft. The price of sheep in the West Bank has reached insane levels.
A mature Awassi sheep now fetches 2,500–4,000 shekels (approximately 1,000–1,100 USD)—a realistic market price in Israel and the West Bank for high-quality breeds (such as the Assaf breed, or premium stud/breeding stock). A single garage holding 15–20 sheep is effectively worth the price of a new car.
At Chesed L’Avraham—a new farm in Binyamin—the sheep are marked with ear tags and specific paint, allowing the owner to identify them immediately when a garage door is opened.
In the villages surrounding Ramallah, many two- or three-story houses feature ground-level garages used to conceal stolen livestock—stolen not only from Israelis but, at times, from fellow Palestinians as well. The sheep are shorn, their markings are removed, and by the following morning, they are sold in the markets of Nablus or Hebron.
This is not an isolated incident; in April 2026 alone, B'Tselem recorded an event in Khirbet Abu Falah (Ramallah District) where Israeli settlers broke into a Palestinian farm and stole dozens of sheep.
Conversely, there have been reports this month of the reverse occurring, indicating a reciprocal cycle of livestock theft in the area.
The mature Awassi sheep raised at Chesed L’Avraham have a live weight of 70–90 kg.
• At 22 shekels per kg, an 80 kg sheep is worth 1,760 shekels for slaughter.
• However, if the animal is a productive ewe, a superior stud ram, or a sheep with established breeding credentials and vaccinations, the black-market price can reach 3,000–4,000 shekels per head. They aren’t sold by the kilo as meat; they’re sold alive for breeding purposes.
That is why Battalion 202 and the Binyamin police are so seriously tracking them down—it’s not just about two or three sheep; it’s the equivalent of a small-scale bank robbery.
This week, Israeli soldiers and police tracked sheep stolen from an Israeli farm (Chesed L’Avraham) to the garage of a Palestinian mansion in a village roughly 15 km northeast of Ramallah.
The homeowners refused to open the garage. When they finally complied, the stolen flock was found inside.
The farm owner identified the sheep by their markings, and they were returned.
The moment I remember most vividly is when John Paul II, after being shot, immediately forgave Ali Agca from his hospital room at Gemelli Hospital. He asked the faithful to pray for and forgive "my brother who shot me, whom I have sincerely forgiven"—doing so unconditionally, without waiting for the perpetrator to repent, and without any dramatic invocation of retributive justice.
On December 27, 1983, after celebrating Mass in the chapel of Rebibbia Prison in Rome, Pope John Paul II personally forgave the man during a 15-minute meeting inside a prison cell. Ali Agca had been sentenced to life imprisonment for shooting the Pope on May 13, 1981, during a weekly general audience in St. Peter's Square.
The Pope held the hands of the man who had attempted to end his life, listened to the confusion of Agca—who was obsessed with the "Third Secret of Fatima"—and reaffirmed his forgiveness face-to-face. Agca himself later admitted to feeling a sense of awe at a moral strength that required no bodyguards or retaliatory weapons—the humility of a victim who refused to perpetuate the cycle of hatred.
tempo.co/internasional/paus-…
voi.id/memori/342308/sejarah…
