Curséd Tribalism

In Reality, the Catholics were criminals, Luther was a criminal, and the fruits of both are predictably desolation and failure. 

"He told the truth, you hate him for that."
https://nitter.fdn.fr/GraniRau/status/1594937596756492289

"If Martin Luther knew nailing his theses to the doors of the Wittenberg churches would eventually lead to lesbian bishops, rock concert worship, and grape juice communion, he would have just sucked it up and paid his indulgences."

It's not a victory when a criminal calls out another criminal. More of a takes one to know one situation.

 

When outgroup is condemned, it doesn't mean the condemner is ingroup. In most cases the enemy of my enemy is just also my enemy. If someone seems like your enemy, it's probably best to trust your gut over lifeless cliches... 

 

Luther is played up as some heroic figure. In Reality he was a Sophist and a vandal. A petty crook who happened to be good at lying.

Hey, protip: don't prop up Satanists simply because they're having a go at some other Satanists. Parasitism is negative-sum, they in-fight all the time. It's not special.

Again, I invite you to imagine that you have an issue with how your dad runs your household. What kind of hole would you need to have in your brain to think that ruining the finish on his front door is a persuasive strategy and not a childish tantrum? 

Luther was indulged. As by an indulgent parent.
"the Pope warned Luther with the papal bull (edict) Exsurge Domine that he risked excommunication unless he recanted"

Oh no! Not risked excommunication! Luther ruined the finish on his dad's front door because he knew his dad was a licentious softy who would let him get away with it.

Again, I invite you to imagine. Imagine you nail a list of 95 inherent racial differences on the front door of your university. (With citations, because you're already going too far...) Do you think they are going to use their words on you? Especially if you are a full professor at the time? Or is your treatment going to be closer to someone telling Hillary you have information that might lead to her arrest? You fool, you absolute rube, you will wish you were only ordered to bake the cake.

Luther was instead invited to speak for Congress. He knew this would happen. Wuss.

I mean, the current Catholic pope is almost certainly a fudge-packing butt bandit. Sure, the technical content of Luther's accusations were not false. However, this is not a compliment of Luther's character, and personnel is policy.

Modern Fascism is also not wrong in a certain way. The correct answer to someone like Luther isn't, "Hey! Quit it!" What, are going to tell Daddy on him? 

The correct response to Luther is to treat him as the Luddite he was. "The harsh sentences of those found guilty, which included execution and penal transportation, quickly ended the movement." When an alleged adult throws a tantrum, the correct reply is to hang the bastard so he stops bothering decent folk. He was 33 at the time, don't act like he wasn't old enough to know better.

This was also the correct response to the original Christians. Though P.S. the temples wouldn't have had the issue in the first place if they hadn't adopted a parasitic revenue stream as their lifeblood. 

 

P.P.S. Ad hominem also works in reverse. Just because a terrible person is saying it doesn't make it false, and saying something true is hardly evidence that the person saying it is an honourable individual.