The heresy of dispensationalism was invented by a Catholic Jesuit priest named Manuel Lacunza. He was a part of the Papalist Counter-Reformation and he wanted to end Protestantism.
Do you know what is so ironic about this? Despite his anti-Protestant views, his dispensationalist ideology would be picked up by Protestants in the 19th century such as John Nelson Darby and Cyrus Scofield. Today it is the dominant view among Protestant evangelicals, and most of them probably don't even know where it comes from!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Lacunza

bump desu

>>24579255 (OP)
Based stopped clock being right

>>24579255 (OP)
The Counter-Reformation was the single most destructive event in Western culture.

>>24579635
Did you know that the Satanic magician Aliester Crowley was raised in the Plymouth Brethren, one of the early dispensationalist evangelical churches

>>24579681
So Satanic Jesuits hid as Evangelists in the 19th century and then came out as Satanists in the 20th century?

>>24579255 (OP)
I cannot for the life of me understand the difference between covenentialism and dispensationalism except that one divides history into three parts and the other into seven. In any case, Lacunza obviously didn’t get very popular in Catholicism or even the Jesuits in particular, so the blame for it spreading can still be laid on Darby.
>>24579681
>>24579773
I read somewhere online that the Jesuits hyjacked the Freemasons/Rosicrucians to put them under secretive papal control, but it sounds like bullshit. Seeing as Crowley was just the end result of Mathers and Westcott deciding to democratize the Masonic SRIA and open it to everyone, you may be right in a roundabout way.

>>24579803
Dispensationalists claim that Israel and the Church are two different things and that the Jewish people are still God's favorite despite rejecting Him, and some of the most extreme dispensationalists even go so far as to say that Jews can go to heaven without Jesus, which of course contradicts Jesus's own teachings in the Bible. This led to the modern situation today where lots of evangelicals are very devoted towards a certain country in the middle east (I am trying not to get too /pol/ here but you know what I mean).
They erronously refer to non-dispensationalism as "replacement theology" and they ignore lots of things in the Bible that contradict their false theology.

>>24579255 (OP)
Lacunza was a Marrano Jesuit priest. Marrano means a Spanish Jewish convert to Catholicism.

>>24579635
All the Catholics had to do was stop selling tickets to Heaven, but they were too greedy.

>>24579635
Keep coping loser

The dispensationalist John Nelson Darby also had certain occult beliefs which he got from theosophy, such as the notion that humans must bring about the end times of Revelation and make it happen through their own actions, as if they can force God to do it on their own schedule. This probably influenced the occultist Aliester Crowley and the way he saw Revelation as a ritual text, like an instruction manual for how to usher in the new age, a new Luciferian aeon.
There likely is influence from Sabbatean-Frankist Judaism here also.

>>24579815
>Dispensationalists claim that Israel and the Church are two different things
Explain how this is incorrect?

>>24580087
The Counter-Reformation isn't le based Catholicism, it was enormously destructive to Catholic art and culture and caused innumerable suffering and division in Europe all for nothing.

>>24580119
There are multiple fallacies going on simultaneously with regard to that statement.

Firstly, the practitioners of what we call "Judaism" today have no real connection to the Biblical Jews. The only similarity is really the name. They follow a book called the Babylonian Talmud, which wasn't even written in the 1st century AD. On this, see: >>>/his/17722420

So, based on the above, it doesn't even make sense to equivocate between the modern people who claim to be "Jews" and those mentioned in the Bible. From an ancestral perspective you could take any random person from Europe and they would have the same amount of connection to the ancient Jews as a person who follows the Babylonian Talmud or talmudic rabbis and who calls themselves a "Jew" today has. The people who were already in the middle east before the 20th century influx are on average more related to the ancient Judeans on that account. Most Ashkenazim were pagans in Lithuania and Poland who converted to talmudism in the middle ages. And to add on top of that, the talmud isn't even connected in any way to the Bible, either the Old Testament or the New Testament. There is just zero particular connections, no matter how you cut it. There are zero connections between any of these people and the actual Biblical Jews. The people claiming to be Jews today are frauds and impostors in every sense of the word, using a borrowed identity from an ancient group they have no actual connection to.

To even identify the term "Israel" to modern talmudists is thus an equivocation.

Furthermore, if you look in the Bible, you see that the people of God continues to exist among the Christians. Peter himself said it in 1 Peter 2:9-10. He said the following:

"But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:
Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy."
(1 Peter 2:9-10)

The above passage in the book of 1 Peter quotes directly from Exodus 19:6 and Hosea 2:23. These two passages in Exodus and Hosea both foreshadow the spread of Christianity, which followed the first coming of Jesus Christ in the first century AD. Here we see that the people of God being spoken of throughout all three of these Old and New Testament passages is what we call Christianity. There is nowhere in the Bible where it speaks of there being two separate, non-overlapping people of God. Since those who claim to be Jews reject Christ, the people of God cannot be both Christians AND the explicitly non-Christian group just mentioned. It can't be both, it has to be one or the other. The Holy Bible makes it clear, in passages like Romans 11 that gentile believers were grafted into God's people, while nonbelievers were cut off, as branches are cut off a tree. Peter also described this same thing in Acts 3:22-24.

Okay but why is this even LIT??

>>24580528
Protestants were doing this even before the Jesuit rise anon, and it did do something

bumpp

>>24580528
>it was enormously destructive to Catholic art and culture
No it wasn't, they invented the baroque aesthetic which was so influential that even turbo protestants would later adopt it.

>>24580556
>Most Ashkenazim were pagans in Lithuania and Poland who converted to talmudism in the middle ages.
This is complete bullshit though.

>>24580528
>it was enormously destructive to Catholic art and culture
That makes no sense. It was protestants destroying art and the at the council of Trent catholics just decided art should conform more to the text.

>>24581721
Baroque art, with the singular exception of music, is trash. And the only reason music is excepted is because Palestrina was just barely able to convince the Church to not ban counterpoint. The Protestant Germans then freely developed this art far beyond what any Catholics had done. Compare any Catholic composers of the late Baroque, such as Vivaldi and Rameau, great composers as they are, but what an enormous separation in spiritual worth is between them and Bach and Handel et al.

>>24581734
>the council of Trent catholics just decided art should conform more to the text.
It intervened way more than that, this is an easily provable fact. But the most dire consequences are beyond the letter of the law, because it facilitated the ultimate destruction of the Renaissance ideal and plunged art and culture into a dark age of artificiality and aestheticised vulgarity. It was above all a psychological transformation and a spiritual decline.

>>24582076
>Baroque art, with the singular exception of music, is trash.
Only if you accept boorish bourgeois models of art. And if you do you have to accept that Bach is also trash by those same standards, with all his excess in the use of counterpoint and his exaustive thematic development.

>>24580556
>Most Ashkenazim were pagans in Lithuania and Poland who converted to talmudism in the middle ages.
Lots of people say this but it doesn't make sense to me. Why do so many Ashkenazis have more middle eastern/meditteranean looking features like swarthy skin tone, curly hair, big noses, etc? Those are not Slavic/Baltic features.

>>24579255 (OP)
>Lacunza's fully developed system played a major role in the Counter-Reformation, the purpose of which was to remove the stigma of Antichrist from Rome, and as such, is a very important work in regard to the history of the Reformation, and the counter-Reformation which followed, which was a reaction to the teaching of Reformers such as Martin Luther and John (Jean) Calvin that the Papacy is the Antichrist of scripture. In Death of the Church Victorious Ovid Need Jr. asserts that although the Jesuits then tried to introduce this system into Protestant theology several times over the next century, they were not successful until Presbyterian Pastor Edward Irving read Lacunza's work under the pseudonym of "Ben Ezra, A Converted Jew" and then translated it into English:
>The pressure was on Rome, especially the word of God in the hands of the average person. So in order to turn the blame away from the Papacy, the Roman Catholic Jesuits started teaching that the Antichrist was some future individual that would come at the end of time."[23]
What the fuck?

>>24582183
I don't know but William Shatner looks kind of Slavic desu.

>>24579635
Tridentine Reformation was so succesful that there was never a Protestant aesthetic able to equal Baroque, theological school able to compete Second Scholasticism and a mystical tradition able to compete against Saint Teresa of Ávila, Saint Mary Alacoque, Saint John of the Cross, Pascal, Saint John Eudes, Saint John of Ávila, etc.

Never ever there was an alliance against Mahommedanism such as the Holy League. The victories against Saracens in Lepanto, Tunis and the gates of Vienna were historical events of great weight in European history at ending Islam's reign of chaos and terror in Balkans and Mediterranean sea.

And overall, never a movement able to equal the Jesuits influence in all fields. Literature, arts, theology, science, war, subterfuge, politics, etc. They shadow and influence was felt from Europe's universities to the missions of America and the courts of China. India and Japan.

>>24582539
Jesuits were the CIA glowies of their time, just like Freemasons and so on.