... on Luther and Swedish Reformation

Mohammed and Joseph Smith Revisited · Lutheran Satire Gave the Word to Luther · ... on Luther and Swedish Reformation · Where "Lutheran Satire" Misses a Nuance on Where Rome Is (eternal vs present)

Here is a video you have already seen on this blog and a comment of mine under it, which also you have already seen, followed by some recent exchange you have not yet seen over here:

A Latter Day Re-Gift
LutheranSatire | 26.VIII.2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7bukaRhbI0

Hans-Georg Lundahl

This is a point for a Lutheran to ponder:

"Reestablishing the one true religion"

What did Luther think he was doing?

The Prayer Army

Luther wasn't searching for the one true religion. He believed in Catholicism, but wanted to reform the Catholic church to reject unbiblical doctrine and follow the Gospel only. Abolishing relics, unbiblical rituals, and superstition. And making the scriptures available to people in their own language so they they could read the Bible for themselves so that they didn't have to blindly take the Church's word for everything. The Catholic church capitalised on biblical illiteracy to exploit the public. Martin was simply trying to bring the corruption to an end, but the Papists love their corruption so they excommunicated him and thus the Protestant reformation was born.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

"He believed in Catholicism, but wanted to reform the Catholic church to reject unbiblical doctrine and follow the Gospel only."

You just contradicted yourself.

Believing in Catholicism and rejecting its doctrine as "unbiblical" (a word where connotations like extra-biblical and anti-biblical are sorely confused) are opposed to each other. You could have said "he believed in Catholicism but wanted to reform the Church by rejecting Catholicism" or "he believed in unbiblical doctrine, but wanted to reform the Church by rejecting unbiblical doctrine". The former from a Catholic, the second from a really Protestant p o v.

"Abolishing relics,"

Contrary to:

"And some that were burying a man, saw the rovers, and cast the body into the sepulchre of Eliseus. And when it had touched the bones of Eliseus, the man came to life, and stood upon his feet."
[4 Kings (2 Kings) 13:21]

Contrary to:

"When she had heard of Jesus, came in the crowd behind him, and touched his garment."
[Mark 5:27]

Contrary to:

"So that even there were brought from his body to the sick, handkerchiefs and aprons, and the diseases departed from them, and the wicked spirits went out of them."
[Acts Of Apostles 19:12]

"unbiblical rituals,"

Which extra-biblical rituals are anti-biblical?

"and superstition."

Where in a seamless garment do you cut up "this is faith" and "this is superstition" if you believe Catholicism?

"And making the scriptures available to people in their own language"

Already done more than once, even in German.

"so they they could read the Bible for themselves"

Not very realistic in a society where few had money to buy books and leisure to read. You confuse Luther with the Gideonites.

"so that they didn't have to blindly take the Church's word for everything."

Contrary to :

"But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."
[1 Timothy 3:15]

If the Church is the pillar and ground of the truth, we MUST take its word for everything. Note, with due diligence a to what is more or what is less likely to be the Church's word, rather than the personal opinion of a Church man. Suppose "John Paul II" had been pope in 1992, even so telling a few scientists nearly in private "Evolution is more than [just] a theory" does NOT trump Trent dogmatising that the Bible must be read according to the Church Fathers (none of whom were evolutionists, all of whom took the creation of each thing except Earth as clearly non-gradual, unless you consider the lapse of some hours between Adam's and Eve's creation as man being "gradually" created).

"The Catholic church capitalised on biblical illiteracy"

No.

Reformers capitalised in biblical illiteracy to be able to pretend being those bringing Biblical literacy to laymen.

"to exploit the public"

Let's see the exact effect of Reformation in Sweden as to Church "exploiting" the public.

• 1) Monasteries and churches had land given back to nobles (well, they were laymen, but hardly the mass of the public) and silver taken first time over to the crown (which while certainly involving laymen was hardly the public);
• 2) cereal tithes had in most dioceses been divided as : 1/3 to parish priest, 2/9 to the bishop, 2/9 to the Church, 2/9 to the poor, at [R]eformation the tithing was reformed to divide as : 1/3 to parish priest, 2/3 to the crown. Before and after it was 10 % of cereals. Non-cereal tithes were 100 % to the parish priest, also 10 % of each revenue;
• 3) Church was discouraged from appealing to generosity. Including for the poor.

"Martin was simply trying to bring the corruption to an end, but the Papists love their corruption so they excommunicated him and thus the Protestant reformation was born."

None of the things you enumerated were both corrupt and true about the Catholic Church.