Gay Marriage Foes Face Issue in Schools
David Parker of Lexington, Mass., second from left, speaks during a news conference in Boston, Thursday, April 27, 2006, his wife Tonia, right, Joseph Wirthlin, second from left, and his wife Robin, left, look on. Two Lexington families, Parker and Wirthlin, on Thursday filed a federal lawsuit claiming school administrators violated their civil rights and broke state law when they distributed and read two storybooks that depict gay relationships to their children without prior notification. (AP Photo/Chitose Suzuki, File)
==
Gay Marriage Foes Face Issue in Schools
By JAY LINDSAY, Associated Press WriterFri May 5, 3:44 PM ET
Ever since her 5-year-old brought home a book from kindergarten that depicted a gay family, Tonia Parker has felt that her parenting has been under attack in the only state that allows same-sex marriage.
She and her husband, David, didn't want to discuss sexual orientation yet with their son, and were shocked that the book was included in a "diversity book bag" last year. David Parker subsequently got arrested for refusing to leave a Lexington school after officials refused to meet his demand that he be notified when homosexuality was discussed in his son's class.
Now the Parkers and another couple have sued school officials in federal court, claiming Lexington officials violated their parental rights to teach morals to their own children.
The way they and other opponents of gay marriage see it, the 2003 ruling that cleared the way for same-sex weddings has emboldened Massachusetts gay rights advocates to push their views in schools and ignore those who feel homosexuality is immoral.
"In many parts of the United States, we could have presented our concerns and our objections, and it wouldn't have been a problem," Tonia Parker said.
Glenn Koocher, executive director of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees, said there is no pro-gay campaign in the schools, just isolated cases exaggerated by anti-gay marriage activists who suffer from "narcissistic activist personality disorder."
Carisa Cunningham, spokeswoman for the Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders, said school curriculums haven't changed, just the reaction to them by gay marriage opponents. "Maybe the impact of the law is that it has made people much more defensive and much more afraid," she said.
In Massachusetts, like most of the nation, there is no official education policy on when or how to discuss homosexuality in the classroom.
"It's done purposely to make sure local school boards reflect the values of the local district," said Martha Kempner, a spokeswoman for the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the United States.
Just 10 states have laws that deal with teaching sexual orientation, two of which require some teaching of it and eight of which put restrictions on how it's presented, according to New York-based SIECUS.
Massachusetts guidelines say only that teachers should define the different sexual orientations by the fifth grade. Each school district decides how to do that, and in the past year, Lexington has emerged as the center of debate.
Officials there say that since same-sex marriage is part of life in Massachusetts, it comes up naturally and that it's impossible to notify parents every time the issue is discussed.
"It certainly strengthens the argument that we need to teach about gay marriage because it's more of a reality for our kids," said Paul Ash, superintendent of schools in Lexington. "The children see married, gay couples."
An "opt out" provision in state law requires parental notification and the chance to remove their kids from the classroom if the curriculum "primarily involves human sexual education or human sexuality issues." But same-sex marriage comes up in current events classes and other forums where it's not the primary focus and, educators say, not subject to the "opt out" law.
Kris Mineau of the Massachusetts Family Institute, which opposes gay marriage, says educators are using the perceived loophole to bypass parents. Since the marriages began in May 2004, his organization has compiled about 20 reports from media and parents in towns from Medford to Newton that highlight what his group feels is inappropriate teaching of homosexuality.
Among recent incidents: Parents Joseph and Robin Wirthlin joined the Parkers in the federal suit after a second grade teacher in Lexington read to her class the fairy tale "King and King," which tells the story of two princes falling in love.
Last April, a sexually explicit pamphlet aimed at helping gay men avoid sexually transmitted diseases was distributed at a Brookline High School conference on gay and lesbian issues. School officials said the booklet was mistakenly displayed.
Brian Camenker of the Article 8 Alliance, which opposes gay marriage, said there's been a striking change in tone by gay marriage proponents since marriages started.
"It's like you're dealing with people from Mars, people who feel they're so superior they can use your child's mind as a sandbox for their own personal ideologies," he said.
But Eliza Byard of the Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network said gay families exist everywhere — the only thing different about Massachusetts is that same-sex marriage makes it much harder to push them aside. Public schools must acknowledge gay families, she said, even if it upsets parents who believe same-sex relationships are immoral.
"One of the basic realities of American life," she said, "is that all of us have to deal with beliefs we disagree with."
Sunday, September 2, 2007
jews Polygamy
jews Polygamy
ZARAH — A co-wife, a married woman in relation to the other wives of her husband.
— Soncino Talmud Glossary
Polygamy is a Jewish institution. It is practiced, albeit underground, in Israel today. If the present trend to Orthodoxy among Jews continues, we can expect open polygamy to return soon.
Even for the most Westernized Jews, polygamy (polygyny) is difficult to confront. They obviously feel uncomfortable with the subject: we see them minimize it, excuse it, and defend it (for example, see The Jewish Encyclopedia, Appendix A).
Writing about marriage, the Very Reverend the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, the late Dr. Joseph H. Hertz, states:
The Biblical ideal of human marriage is the monogamous one. The Creation story and all the ethical portions of Scripture speak of the union of a man with one wife. Whenever a Prophet alludes to marriage, he is thinking of such a union — lifelong, faithful, holy. Polygamy seems to have well-nigh disappeared in Israel after the Babylonian Exile. Early Rabbinic literature presupposes a practically monogamic society; and out of 2800 teachers mentioned in the Talmud, one only is stated to have had two wives. Monogamy in Israel was thus not the result of European contact. As a matter of fact, monogamy was firmly established in Jewish life long before the rise of Christianity …
===
Why Is Polygamy OK?
In the above cited Mishnah, Talmud scholar and translator Jacob Shachter tells us the Sages base their justification of polygamy on Deuteronomy 17:17. For full context, let us look at Deuteronomy 17:14-17.
When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.
Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
— Deuteronomy 17:14-17 (KJV)
We see that Deuteronomy 17:17 concerns limitation on the number of wives permitted to future kings of Israel. However, the Sages appear to understand Deuteronomy 17:17 as a rule for all men. They also understand it to permit rather than prohibit multiple wives.
What Is the Limit? 4, 12, 24, 48?
The Sages disagree about the number of wives permitted.
GEMARA. … Rabina objected: Why not assume that 'kahennah' implies twelve, and 'we-kahennah', twenty-four? It has indeed been taught likewise: 'He shall not multiply wives to himself beyond twenty-four.' And according to him who interprets the redundant 'waw', it ought to be forty-eight.
— Tractate Sanhedrin 21aSoncino 1961 Edition, page 113
==
Rabbi Ovadia Yoseph, former Sephardi Chief Rabbi and reputedly the spiritual leader of the Shas political party. "Anthropologist S. Zev Kalifon of Bar-Ilan University in Israel said the call by former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yoseph to legalize polygyny is part of a political movement to restore conservative traditions and lash out against popular notions of social equality. "'They feel that the secular world which they met in Israel when they immigrated in the 1950s destroyed the patriarchal Sephardi family and its values,' said Kalifon. 'The ban on polygyny is seen as something modern, an expression of western or European values.'" — Salt Lake Tribun
http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_4.html
ZARAH — A co-wife, a married woman in relation to the other wives of her husband.
— Soncino Talmud Glossary
Polygamy is a Jewish institution. It is practiced, albeit underground, in Israel today. If the present trend to Orthodoxy among Jews continues, we can expect open polygamy to return soon.
Even for the most Westernized Jews, polygamy (polygyny) is difficult to confront. They obviously feel uncomfortable with the subject: we see them minimize it, excuse it, and defend it (for example, see The Jewish Encyclopedia, Appendix A).
Writing about marriage, the Very Reverend the Chief Rabbi of the British Empire, the late Dr. Joseph H. Hertz, states:
The Biblical ideal of human marriage is the monogamous one. The Creation story and all the ethical portions of Scripture speak of the union of a man with one wife. Whenever a Prophet alludes to marriage, he is thinking of such a union — lifelong, faithful, holy. Polygamy seems to have well-nigh disappeared in Israel after the Babylonian Exile. Early Rabbinic literature presupposes a practically monogamic society; and out of 2800 teachers mentioned in the Talmud, one only is stated to have had two wives. Monogamy in Israel was thus not the result of European contact. As a matter of fact, monogamy was firmly established in Jewish life long before the rise of Christianity …
===
Why Is Polygamy OK?
In the above cited Mishnah, Talmud scholar and translator Jacob Shachter tells us the Sages base their justification of polygamy on Deuteronomy 17:17. For full context, let us look at Deuteronomy 17:14-17.
When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that are about me;
Thou shalt in any wise set him king over thee, whom the LORD thy God shall choose: one from among thy brethren shalt thou set king over thee: thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother.
But he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses: forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you, Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.
Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away: neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold.
— Deuteronomy 17:14-17 (KJV)
We see that Deuteronomy 17:17 concerns limitation on the number of wives permitted to future kings of Israel. However, the Sages appear to understand Deuteronomy 17:17 as a rule for all men. They also understand it to permit rather than prohibit multiple wives.
What Is the Limit? 4, 12, 24, 48?
The Sages disagree about the number of wives permitted.
GEMARA. … Rabina objected: Why not assume that 'kahennah' implies twelve, and 'we-kahennah', twenty-four? It has indeed been taught likewise: 'He shall not multiply wives to himself beyond twenty-four.' And according to him who interprets the redundant 'waw', it ought to be forty-eight.
— Tractate Sanhedrin 21aSoncino 1961 Edition, page 113
==
Rabbi Ovadia Yoseph, former Sephardi Chief Rabbi and reputedly the spiritual leader of the Shas political party. "Anthropologist S. Zev Kalifon of Bar-Ilan University in Israel said the call by former Sephardi Chief Rabbi Ovadia Yoseph to legalize polygyny is part of a political movement to restore conservative traditions and lash out against popular notions of social equality. "'They feel that the secular world which they met in Israel when they immigrated in the 1950s destroyed the patriarchal Sephardi family and its values,' said Kalifon. 'The ban on polygyny is seen as something modern, an expression of western or European values.'" — Salt Lake Tribun
http://www.come-and-hear.com/editor/america_4.html
Repent,' say Orthodox to pope.
Repent,' say Orthodox to pope.(Greek Orthodox Church leaders will not permit a visit to Greece
by Pope John Paul II until he repents and apologizes for the long-lasting ill feeling between the two churches)(Brief Article)From: The Christian Century Date: 11/3/1999 Leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church have ruled out a spiritual pilgrimage by Pope John Paul II to Athens until the Roman Catholic pontiff apologizes and does penance for centuries of enmity between Orthodox and Catholics. "The pope can come to Greece as a head of state but not as a religious leader," Metropolitan Kallinikos, spokesman for the Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church, said September 6, following a meeting of a council of church leaders. "The pope cannot visit Greece as the head of the Catholic Church before asking forgiveness and doing penance for the interventions by the church in the Orthodox world from the epoch of the Crusades until today," the Italian news agency ANSA quoted Kallinikos as saying.
In a letter published in June, John Paul said he hoped to make a spiritual pilgrimage to biblical sites in Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, the Palestine Authority territory, Syria and Greece to mark the start of the third millennium of Christianity. Greek Orthodox leaders immediately expressed opposition to a papal visit to Athens to pay homage to the New Testament account of St. Paul's sermon on the Areopagus, symbolizing the whole of humanity's encounter with the gospel. The synod, headed by Christodoulos, the Orthodox archbishop of Athens and all Greece, formalized that opposition in its September meeting.
Both the Vatican and the Greek government sought to avoid a clash. Cardinal Edward Cassidy, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, in Greece to attend a religious symposium, said in an interview with the newspaper To Vima that the pope has not yet asked to visit Greece. "The pope does not desire to come to Greece soon. It is a desire for the near future," Cassidy indicated. Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis said John Paul "will be welcome in Greece like every head of state," adding that he did not want to interfere in ecclesiastical matters.
But Catholic Archbishop Nikos Foscolo of Athens maintained that the controversy has harmed ecumenical efforts. "The criticisms of a visit by the pope have set back dialogue between Catholics and Orthodox by ten years," he said. Greek Orthodox sources said they want the pope to apologize for the schism of 1054 that divided the Greek and Roman churches; for the Crusades, which saw the conquest and sacking of Constantinople in 1204; and for the Council of Lyons II in 1274, which attempted unsuccessfully to unite the Greek and Roman churches.
Kallinikos also attacked the Eastern churches that follow Orthodox rites but are united with Rome, calling them "Trojan horses of the Catholic Church." Vatican sources said last week the pope may break his pilgrimage into two or more separate segments, starting before the opening of Holy Year 2000 on Christmas Eve and continuing during the millennium celebrations. John Paul is expected to travel in early December to the patriarch Abraham's birthplace at Ur of the Chaldees in southern Iraq, Mount Sinai in Egypt and possibly Damascus. Israeli officials have said he will tour the Holy Land in March.
Posted by yameen at 6:52 PM
Labels: Roman Catholic Church sins of action and omission" against the Christian Orthodox
Roman Catholic Church
sins of action and omission" against the Christian Orthodox.
by Pope John Paul II until he repents and apologizes for the long-lasting ill feeling between the two churches)(Brief Article)From: The Christian Century Date: 11/3/1999 Leaders of the Greek Orthodox Church have ruled out a spiritual pilgrimage by Pope John Paul II to Athens until the Roman Catholic pontiff apologizes and does penance for centuries of enmity between Orthodox and Catholics. "The pope can come to Greece as a head of state but not as a religious leader," Metropolitan Kallinikos, spokesman for the Holy Synod of the Greek Orthodox Church, said September 6, following a meeting of a council of church leaders. "The pope cannot visit Greece as the head of the Catholic Church before asking forgiveness and doing penance for the interventions by the church in the Orthodox world from the epoch of the Crusades until today," the Italian news agency ANSA quoted Kallinikos as saying.
In a letter published in June, John Paul said he hoped to make a spiritual pilgrimage to biblical sites in Iraq, Egypt, Jordan, Israel, the Palestine Authority territory, Syria and Greece to mark the start of the third millennium of Christianity. Greek Orthodox leaders immediately expressed opposition to a papal visit to Athens to pay homage to the New Testament account of St. Paul's sermon on the Areopagus, symbolizing the whole of humanity's encounter with the gospel. The synod, headed by Christodoulos, the Orthodox archbishop of Athens and all Greece, formalized that opposition in its September meeting.
Both the Vatican and the Greek government sought to avoid a clash. Cardinal Edward Cassidy, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, in Greece to attend a religious symposium, said in an interview with the newspaper To Vima that the pope has not yet asked to visit Greece. "The pope does not desire to come to Greece soon. It is a desire for the near future," Cassidy indicated. Greek Prime Minister Costas Simitis said John Paul "will be welcome in Greece like every head of state," adding that he did not want to interfere in ecclesiastical matters.
But Catholic Archbishop Nikos Foscolo of Athens maintained that the controversy has harmed ecumenical efforts. "The criticisms of a visit by the pope have set back dialogue between Catholics and Orthodox by ten years," he said. Greek Orthodox sources said they want the pope to apologize for the schism of 1054 that divided the Greek and Roman churches; for the Crusades, which saw the conquest and sacking of Constantinople in 1204; and for the Council of Lyons II in 1274, which attempted unsuccessfully to unite the Greek and Roman churches.
Kallinikos also attacked the Eastern churches that follow Orthodox rites but are united with Rome, calling them "Trojan horses of the Catholic Church." Vatican sources said last week the pope may break his pilgrimage into two or more separate segments, starting before the opening of Holy Year 2000 on Christmas Eve and continuing during the millennium celebrations. John Paul is expected to travel in early December to the patriarch Abraham's birthplace at Ur of the Chaldees in southern Iraq, Mount Sinai in Egypt and possibly Damascus. Israeli officials have said he will tour the Holy Land in March.
Posted by yameen at 6:52 PM
Labels: Roman Catholic Church sins of action and omission" against the Christian Orthodox
Roman Catholic Church
sins of action and omission" against the Christian Orthodox.
WILL EXPECT WORSHIP
WILL EXPECT WORSHIP
Catholics contend that the whole world is indebted to the Roman Catholic church for the existence of the Bible. This is another of their attempts to exalt the church as an authority in addition to the Bible. Please notice the following from Catholic sources: "If she had not scrutinized carefully the writings of her children, rejecting some and approving others as worthy of inclusion in the canon of the New Testament, there would be no New Testament today. "If she had not declared the books composing the New Testament to be inspired word of God, we would not know it. "The only authority which non-Catholics have for the inspiration of the Scriptures is the authority of the Catholic Church." (The Faith of Millions, p. 145) "It is only by the divine authority of the Catholic Church that Christians know that the scripture is the word of God, and what books certainly belong to the Bible." (The Question Box, p. 46) "It was the Catholic Church and no other which selected and listed the inspired books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament...If you can accept the Bible or any part of it as inspired Word of God, you can do so only because the Catholic Church says it is." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 4). The Catholic writers quoted above state that one can accept the Bible as being inspired and as having authority only on the basis of the Catholic Church. In reality, the Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it so, but because God made it so. God delivered it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and declared that it would abide forever. "All scripture is inspired of God..." (2 Tim. 3:16). "...Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." (2 Pet. 1:21). "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "The grass withered, and the flower has fallen--but the word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Pet. 1:24-25). The Catholics are wrong, therefore, in their assumption that the Bible is authoritative only because of the Catholic Church. The Bible does not owe its existence to the Catholic Church, but to the authority, power and providence of God.
It would seem unnecessary for the Catholic Church to make the boastful claim of giving the Bible to the world when both it and so-called Protestantism accept the Bible as a revelation from God. However, it is an attempt to weaken the Bible as the sole authority and to replace it with their man-made church. If it is true that we can accept the Bible only on the basis of the Catholic Church, doesn't that make the Catholic Church superior to the Bible? This is exactly what Catholic officials want men to believe. Their only problem is that their doctrine comes from their own human reasoning rather than from God. Their logic is a classic example of their "circle reasoning." They try to prove the Bible by the church (can accept the Bible only on the basis of the Catholic Church) and prove the church by the Bible ("has ever grounded her doctrines upon it"). Such is absurd reasoning which proves nothing. Either the New Testament is the sole authority or it is not. If it is the New Testament, it cannot be the church, and if it is the church, it cannot be the New Testament.
Notice, again, the following from Catholic sources "Because it never was a Bible, till the infallible Church pronounced it to be so. The separate treatises, each of them inspired, were lying, as it were dispersedly; easy to confound with others, that were uninspired. The Church gathered them up, selected them, pronounced judgment on them; rejecting some, which she defined and declared not to be canonical, because not inspired; adopting others as being inspired, and therefore canonical." (What Is the Bible? p. 6). "And since the books of the Bible constituting both the Old and the New Testament were determined solely by the authority of the Catholic Church, without the Church there would have been no Bible, and hence no Protestantism." (The Faith of Millions, p. 10). In addition to the above, Catholics often boast that the Bible was written by Catholics, e.g., "All the books of the New Testament were written by Catholics." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 14). When we consider the word "catholic" as meaning "universal," we readily admit that the writers were "catholic" in that sense; they were members of the church universal--the church of Christ which is described in the New Testament Scriptures (Col. 1:18; Rom. 16:16). However, we firmly deny that the writers of the New Testament were members of the Roman Catholic Church as we know it today. The Roman Catholic Church was not fully developed until several hundred years after the New Testament was written. It is not the same institution as disclosed in the New Testament. The New Testament books were written by members of the Lord's church, but they are not its author. God Himself is the author of the New Testament.
The Catholic officials above claim that without the Catholic Church there would be no Bible; they argue that mankind can accept the Scriptures only on the basis of the Catholic Church which gathered the books and determined which were inspired. Surely the Catholic Church cannot claim that it gave us the Old Testament Scriptures. The Old Testament came through the Jews (God's chosen people of old) who had the holy oracles entrusted to them. Paul said, "What advantage then remains to the Jew, or what is the use of circumcision? Much in every respect. First, indeed, because the oracles of God were entrusted to them." (Rom. 3:1-2; see also Rom. 9:4-5; Acts 7:38).
The Old Testament books were gathered into one volume and were translated from Hebrew into Greek long before Christ came to earth. The Septuagint Version was translated by seventy scholars at Alexandria, Egypt around the year 227 B.C., and this was the version Christ and His apostles used. Christ did not tell the people, as Catholics do today, that they could accept the Scriptures only on the basis of the authority of those who gathered them and declared them to be inspired. He urged the people of His day to follow the Old Testament Scriptures as the infallible guide, not because man or any group of men has sanctioned them as such, but because they came from God. Furthermore, He understood that God-fearing men and women would be able to discern by evidence (external and internal) which books were of God and which were not; thus, He never raised questions and doubts concerning the gathering of the inspired books.
If the Bible is a Catholic book, why does it nowhere mention the Catholic Church? Why is there no mention of a pope, a cardinal, an archbishop, a parish priest, a nun, or a member of any other Catholic order? If the Bible is a Catholic book, why is auricular confession, indulgences, prayers to the saints, adoration of Mary, veneration of relics and images, and many other rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church, left out of it?
If the Bible is a Catholic book, how can Catholics account for the passage, "A bishop then, must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher...He should rule well his own household, keeping his children under control and perfectly respectful. For if a man cannot rule his own household, how is he to take care of the church of God?" (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). The Catholic Church does not allow a bishop to marry, while the Bible says "he must be married." Furthermore, if the Bible is a Catholic book, why did they write the Bible as it is, and feel the necessity of putting footnotes at the bottom of the page in effort to keep their subject from believing what is in the text?
The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,
1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6). 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28). 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9). 4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11). 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2). 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5). 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12). 8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9). 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11). 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5). 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27). 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26). 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?
Please notice further quotes from Catholic sources "During those early times parts of the Bible were scattered among the various churches, no one of which had the complete Bible as we have it now. Then in A.D. 390, at the Council of Hippo, the Catholic Church gathered together the various books which claimed to be scripture, passed on the merits and claims of each and this council decided which were inspired and which were not. The Catholic Church put all the inspired books and epistles together in one volume and THAT is the Bible as we have it today. The Catholic Church therefore gave to the people and the World, the Bible as we have it today." (From a magazine advertisement published by the Knights of Columbus bearing the title, "Who Gave the Bible to the People?" "It was not until the Council of Hippo in 390 that the Church gathered these gospels and epistles, scattered about in different churches, and placed them within the covers of a single book, giving the Bible to the world." (The Faith of Millions, p. 152). "Indeed, when you accept the Bible as the Word of God, you are obliged to receive it on the authority of the Catholic Church, who was the sole Guardian of the Scriptures for fifteen hundred years." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 68). "When were all these writings put together? The Catholic Church put all of them in one book between the years 350 and 405." (A Catechism for Adults, p. 10). Thus, Catholics argue that since the Council of Hippo in 390 A.D. proclaimed which books were actually inspired and placed them in one volume, all are indebted to the Catholic Church for the New Testament and can accept it only on the authority of the Catholic Church. There are several things wrong with this. First, it cannot be proven that the church which held the Council of Hippo in 390 A.D. was the same church which is now known as the Roman Catholic Church. For example, the church of 390 had no crucifixes and images because, "The first mention of Crucifixes are in the sixth century" and "The whole tradition of veneration holy images gradually and naturally developed" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, p. 667). The church of 390 took communion under both kinds because that was the prevailing practice until it was formally abolished in 1416 A.D. (See Lives and Times of the Roman Pontiffs, Vol. I, p. 111). The church of 390 was a church altogether different from the Roman Catholic Church today.
Furthermore, in the proceedings of the Council of Hippo, the bishops did not mention nor give the slightest hint that they were for the first time "officially" cataloging the books of he Bible for the world. It was not until the fourth session of the Council of Trent (1545-1563) that the bishops and high ranking officials of the Catholic Church "officially" cataloged the books they thought should be included in the Bible and bound them upon the consciences of all Catholics. (See Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, pp. 17-18).
Secondly, God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church." Can we follow such reasoning?
Thirdly, it cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo. In the following we list some of the catalogues of the books of the Bible which are given by early Christian writers.
326. Athanasius, bishop at Alexandria, mentions all of the New Testament books. 315-386. Cyril, bishop at Jerusalem, gives a list of all New Testament books except Revelation. 270. Eusebius, bishop at Caesarea, called the Father of ecclesiastical history, gives an account of the persecution of Emperor Diocletian whose edict required that all churches be destroyed and the Scriptures burned. He lists all the books of the New Testament. He was commissioned by Constantine to have transcribed fifty copies of the Bible for use of the churches of Constantinople. 185-254. Origen, born at Alexandria, names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments. 165-220. Clement, of Alexandria, names all the books of the New Testament except Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. In addition we are told by Eusebius, who had the works of Clement, that he gave explanations and quotations from all the canonical books. 160-240. Turtullian, contemporary of Origen and Clement, mentions all the New Testament books except 2 Peter, James and 2 John. 135-200. Irenaeus, quoted from all New Testament books except Philemon, Jude, James and 3 John. 100-147. Justin Martyr, mentions the Gospels as being four in number and quotes from them and some of the epistles of Paul and Revelation. Besides the above, the early church fathers have handed down in their writings quotations from all the New Testament books so much so that it is said that the entire New Testament can be reproduced from their writings alone. Thus, the New Testament books were in existence in their present form at the close of the apostolic age. As a matter of fact, the apostles themselves put their writings into circulation. "And when this letter has been read among you, see that it be read in the church of the Laodiceans also; and that you yourselves read the letter from Laodicea." (Col. 4:16). "I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read to all the holy brethren." (1 Thess. 5:27). The holy Scriptures were written for all (1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:1) and all will be judged by them in the last day (Rev. 20:12; John 12:48). Jesus said that His Word will abide forever (Matt. 24:35; 1 Pet. 1:23-25).
Fourthly, the Catholic claim of giving the Bible to the world cannot be true because they have not been the sole possessor of the Bible at any time. Some of the most valuable Greek Bibles and Versions have been handed down to us from non-Roman Catholic sources. A notable example of this is the Codex Sinaiticus which was found in the monastery of St. Catherine (of the Greek Orthodox Church) at Mount Sinai in 1844 and is now in the British Museum. It contains all of the books of the New Testament and all but small portions of the Old Testament. Scholars are certain that this manuscript was made early in the fourth century, not later than 350 A.D. This manuscript found by a German scholar named, Tishendorf, who was a Protestant, and this manuscript which is the most complete of all has never been in the hands of the Roman Catholic Church.
Another valuable manuscript that has never been possessed by the Roman Catholic Church is the Codex Alexandrianus. It, too, is now on exhibit in the manuscript room of the British Museum in London. It was a gift from the Patriarch of Constantinople (of the Greek Orthodox Church) to Charles I in 1628. It had been in possession of the Patriarchs for centuries and originally came from Alexandria, Egypt from which it gets its name. Scholars are certain that this manuscript was also made in the fourth century and, along with the Codex Sinaiticus, is thought to be one of the fifty Greek Bibles commissioned to be copied by Constantine.
In the light of the foregoing, the boastful claim of the Roman Catholic Church that it has been the sole guardian and preserver of the sacred Scriptures down to the present, is nothing but pure falsehood. The Bible is not a Catholic book. Catholics did not write it, nor does their doctrines and church meet the description of the doctrine and church of which it speaks. The New Testament was completed before the end of the first century, A.D. The things in it do not correspond to the Catholic Church which hundreds of years after the death of the apostles slowly evolved into what it now is. The Catholic Church is not the original and true church, but a "church" born of many departures and corruptions from the New Testament church. Even if the Catholic Church could prove that it alone is the sole deliverer of the Scriptures to man today, it still remains that the Catholic Church is not following the Bible and is contrary to the Bible. Furthermore, even if the Catholic Church could show conclusively that it alone is responsible for gathering the books, it does not prove that the Catholic Church is infallible, nor does it prove that it is the author of the Bible. God has at times used evil agencies to accomplish His purpose (Jer. 27:6-8; 43:10; Hab. 1:5-11; John 11:49-52).
We have studied, therefore, that the Catholic Church argues that since one of its councils in 390 selected the sacred books, one can accept them only on the basis of its authority. We have answered by showing: (1) The Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it so but because God made it so. (2) Jesus did not teach the people in His day that they could accept the Old Testament Scriptures only on the basis of those who placed the books into one volume. (3) It is a mere assumption that the Council of Hippo in 390 was a Council of the church which is now the Roman Catholic Church. (4) God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His books only on the basis of councils. (5) The Catholic Church is not solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. (6) The Catholic Church has not been the sole possessor of the Bible at any time. (7) Even if it could be proven that the Catholic Church gathered the books into one volume, it still remains that it is not following the Bible today.
[an error occurred while processing this directive] BIBLIOGRAPHY A Catechism For Adults, William J. Conan, ACTA Publications, Chicago, Illinois, 1959.
Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus, (Fifteen Volumes), The Encyclopedia Press, Inc., New York, 1913.
Canons and Decrees of he Council of Trent, H.J. Schroeder, B. Herder Book company, St. Louis, London, 1950.
Lives and Times of the Roman Pontiffs, Chevalier Artand De Montor, D & J Stadler & Co., New York, 1869.
Question Box, Bertrand L. Conway, The Columbus Press, New York, N.Y., 1913.
Question Box, New Revised Edition, Bertrand L. Conway, The Paulist Press, New York, N.Y., 1929.
The Bible is a Catholic Book, Knights of Columbus Religious Information Bureau, St. Louis, 1948.
The Faith of Millions, John A. O'Brien, Our Sunday Visitor, Huntington, Ind., 1938.
The Faith of Our Fathers, James Cardinal Gibbons, John Murphy Co., Baltimore, Md., 1917.
What is the Bible? W.H. Anderson, International Truth Society, Brooklyn, New York, 1962.
Who Gave the Bible to the People? Knights of Columbus Religious Information Bureau, St. Louis, 1948.
CATHOLIC TRANSLATIONS Confraternity-Douay Version, Timothy Press, Chicago, 1959
Douay-Rheims Version, Catholic Book Publishing Co., New York, 1945.
Catholic Edition-Revised Standard Version, Published by Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd for the Incorporated Catholic Truth Society, London, 1966.
By David J. Riggs
Catholics Assembled Canon?
1 - the Syriac and Coptic versions were translated from the Greek in the second century
2 - Latin Version was translated from Greek in the 2nd century
3 - in 375 the Gothic Version was translated by Ufilas Jerome stated that in his work of revising the Old Latin he used a Greek Bible which belonged to Origen who lived in the early part of the third century
4 - Constantine, the emperor of Rome, at the end of the third century, ordered fifty copies of the Bible transcribed
5 - Origen, born A.D. 185 and died A.D. 254, named all the books of the Bible in his writings 6 - Eusebius, 270 A.D., lists all of the books of the NT Cyril, 315 A.D. to 386 A.D., lists all NT books, except Revelation
7 - Both the Vatican Manuscript and the Sinaitic Manuscript date back earlier than 390 A.D.
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/
Catholics contend that the whole world is indebted to the Roman Catholic church for the existence of the Bible. This is another of their attempts to exalt the church as an authority in addition to the Bible. Please notice the following from Catholic sources: "If she had not scrutinized carefully the writings of her children, rejecting some and approving others as worthy of inclusion in the canon of the New Testament, there would be no New Testament today. "If she had not declared the books composing the New Testament to be inspired word of God, we would not know it. "The only authority which non-Catholics have for the inspiration of the Scriptures is the authority of the Catholic Church." (The Faith of Millions, p. 145) "It is only by the divine authority of the Catholic Church that Christians know that the scripture is the word of God, and what books certainly belong to the Bible." (The Question Box, p. 46) "It was the Catholic Church and no other which selected and listed the inspired books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament...If you can accept the Bible or any part of it as inspired Word of God, you can do so only because the Catholic Church says it is." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 4). The Catholic writers quoted above state that one can accept the Bible as being inspired and as having authority only on the basis of the Catholic Church. In reality, the Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it so, but because God made it so. God delivered it by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and declared that it would abide forever. "All scripture is inspired of God..." (2 Tim. 3:16). "...Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit." (2 Pet. 1:21). "Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away." (Matt. 24:35). "The grass withered, and the flower has fallen--but the word of the Lord endures forever." (1 Pet. 1:24-25). The Catholics are wrong, therefore, in their assumption that the Bible is authoritative only because of the Catholic Church. The Bible does not owe its existence to the Catholic Church, but to the authority, power and providence of God.
It would seem unnecessary for the Catholic Church to make the boastful claim of giving the Bible to the world when both it and so-called Protestantism accept the Bible as a revelation from God. However, it is an attempt to weaken the Bible as the sole authority and to replace it with their man-made church. If it is true that we can accept the Bible only on the basis of the Catholic Church, doesn't that make the Catholic Church superior to the Bible? This is exactly what Catholic officials want men to believe. Their only problem is that their doctrine comes from their own human reasoning rather than from God. Their logic is a classic example of their "circle reasoning." They try to prove the Bible by the church (can accept the Bible only on the basis of the Catholic Church) and prove the church by the Bible ("has ever grounded her doctrines upon it"). Such is absurd reasoning which proves nothing. Either the New Testament is the sole authority or it is not. If it is the New Testament, it cannot be the church, and if it is the church, it cannot be the New Testament.
Notice, again, the following from Catholic sources "Because it never was a Bible, till the infallible Church pronounced it to be so. The separate treatises, each of them inspired, were lying, as it were dispersedly; easy to confound with others, that were uninspired. The Church gathered them up, selected them, pronounced judgment on them; rejecting some, which she defined and declared not to be canonical, because not inspired; adopting others as being inspired, and therefore canonical." (What Is the Bible? p. 6). "And since the books of the Bible constituting both the Old and the New Testament were determined solely by the authority of the Catholic Church, without the Church there would have been no Bible, and hence no Protestantism." (The Faith of Millions, p. 10). In addition to the above, Catholics often boast that the Bible was written by Catholics, e.g., "All the books of the New Testament were written by Catholics." (The Bible is a Catholic Book, p. 14). When we consider the word "catholic" as meaning "universal," we readily admit that the writers were "catholic" in that sense; they were members of the church universal--the church of Christ which is described in the New Testament Scriptures (Col. 1:18; Rom. 16:16). However, we firmly deny that the writers of the New Testament were members of the Roman Catholic Church as we know it today. The Roman Catholic Church was not fully developed until several hundred years after the New Testament was written. It is not the same institution as disclosed in the New Testament. The New Testament books were written by members of the Lord's church, but they are not its author. God Himself is the author of the New Testament.
The Catholic officials above claim that without the Catholic Church there would be no Bible; they argue that mankind can accept the Scriptures only on the basis of the Catholic Church which gathered the books and determined which were inspired. Surely the Catholic Church cannot claim that it gave us the Old Testament Scriptures. The Old Testament came through the Jews (God's chosen people of old) who had the holy oracles entrusted to them. Paul said, "What advantage then remains to the Jew, or what is the use of circumcision? Much in every respect. First, indeed, because the oracles of God were entrusted to them." (Rom. 3:1-2; see also Rom. 9:4-5; Acts 7:38).
The Old Testament books were gathered into one volume and were translated from Hebrew into Greek long before Christ came to earth. The Septuagint Version was translated by seventy scholars at Alexandria, Egypt around the year 227 B.C., and this was the version Christ and His apostles used. Christ did not tell the people, as Catholics do today, that they could accept the Scriptures only on the basis of the authority of those who gathered them and declared them to be inspired. He urged the people of His day to follow the Old Testament Scriptures as the infallible guide, not because man or any group of men has sanctioned them as such, but because they came from God. Furthermore, He understood that God-fearing men and women would be able to discern by evidence (external and internal) which books were of God and which were not; thus, He never raised questions and doubts concerning the gathering of the inspired books.
If the Bible is a Catholic book, why does it nowhere mention the Catholic Church? Why is there no mention of a pope, a cardinal, an archbishop, a parish priest, a nun, or a member of any other Catholic order? If the Bible is a Catholic book, why is auricular confession, indulgences, prayers to the saints, adoration of Mary, veneration of relics and images, and many other rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church, left out of it?
If the Bible is a Catholic book, how can Catholics account for the passage, "A bishop then, must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher...He should rule well his own household, keeping his children under control and perfectly respectful. For if a man cannot rule his own household, how is he to take care of the church of God?" (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). The Catholic Church does not allow a bishop to marry, while the Bible says "he must be married." Furthermore, if the Bible is a Catholic book, why did they write the Bible as it is, and feel the necessity of putting footnotes at the bottom of the page in effort to keep their subject from believing what is in the text?
The following list give a summation of what we have been trying to emphasize. If the Bible is a Catholic book,
1. Why does it condemn clerical dress? (Matt. 23:5-6). 2. Why does it teach against the adoration of Mary? (Luke 11:27-28). 3. Why does it show that all Christians are priests? (1 Pet. 2:5,9). 4. Why does it condemn the observance of special days? (Gal. 4:9-11). 5. Why does it teach that all Christians are saints? (1 Cor. 1:2). 6. Why does it condemn the making and adoration of images? (Ex. 20:4-5). 7. Why does it teach that baptism is immersion instead of pouring? (Col. 2:12). 8. Why does it forbid us to address religious leaders as "father"? (Matt. 23:9). 9. Why does it teach that Christ is the only foundation and not the apostle Peter? (1 Cor. 3:11). 10. Why does it teach that there is one mediator instead of many? (1 Tim. 2:5). 11. Why does it teach that a bishop must be a married man? (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). 12. Why is it opposed to the primacy of Peter? (Luke 22:24-27). 13. Why does it oppose the idea of purgatory? (Luke 16:26). 14. Why is it completely silent about infant baptism, instrumental music in worship, indulgences, confession to priests, the rosary, the mass, and many other things in the Catholic Church?
Please notice further quotes from Catholic sources "During those early times parts of the Bible were scattered among the various churches, no one of which had the complete Bible as we have it now. Then in A.D. 390, at the Council of Hippo, the Catholic Church gathered together the various books which claimed to be scripture, passed on the merits and claims of each and this council decided which were inspired and which were not. The Catholic Church put all the inspired books and epistles together in one volume and THAT is the Bible as we have it today. The Catholic Church therefore gave to the people and the World, the Bible as we have it today." (From a magazine advertisement published by the Knights of Columbus bearing the title, "Who Gave the Bible to the People?" "It was not until the Council of Hippo in 390 that the Church gathered these gospels and epistles, scattered about in different churches, and placed them within the covers of a single book, giving the Bible to the world." (The Faith of Millions, p. 152). "Indeed, when you accept the Bible as the Word of God, you are obliged to receive it on the authority of the Catholic Church, who was the sole Guardian of the Scriptures for fifteen hundred years." (The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 68). "When were all these writings put together? The Catholic Church put all of them in one book between the years 350 and 405." (A Catechism for Adults, p. 10). Thus, Catholics argue that since the Council of Hippo in 390 A.D. proclaimed which books were actually inspired and placed them in one volume, all are indebted to the Catholic Church for the New Testament and can accept it only on the authority of the Catholic Church. There are several things wrong with this. First, it cannot be proven that the church which held the Council of Hippo in 390 A.D. was the same church which is now known as the Roman Catholic Church. For example, the church of 390 had no crucifixes and images because, "The first mention of Crucifixes are in the sixth century" and "The whole tradition of veneration holy images gradually and naturally developed" (Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. VII, p. 667). The church of 390 took communion under both kinds because that was the prevailing practice until it was formally abolished in 1416 A.D. (See Lives and Times of the Roman Pontiffs, Vol. I, p. 111). The church of 390 was a church altogether different from the Roman Catholic Church today.
Furthermore, in the proceedings of the Council of Hippo, the bishops did not mention nor give the slightest hint that they were for the first time "officially" cataloging the books of he Bible for the world. It was not until the fourth session of the Council of Trent (1545-1563) that the bishops and high ranking officials of the Catholic Church "officially" cataloged the books they thought should be included in the Bible and bound them upon the consciences of all Catholics. (See Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent, pp. 17-18).
Secondly, God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church." Can we follow such reasoning?
Thirdly, it cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo. In the following we list some of the catalogues of the books of the Bible which are given by early Christian writers.
326. Athanasius, bishop at Alexandria, mentions all of the New Testament books. 315-386. Cyril, bishop at Jerusalem, gives a list of all New Testament books except Revelation. 270. Eusebius, bishop at Caesarea, called the Father of ecclesiastical history, gives an account of the persecution of Emperor Diocletian whose edict required that all churches be destroyed and the Scriptures burned. He lists all the books of the New Testament. He was commissioned by Constantine to have transcribed fifty copies of the Bible for use of the churches of Constantinople. 185-254. Origen, born at Alexandria, names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments. 165-220. Clement, of Alexandria, names all the books of the New Testament except Philemon, James, 2 Peter and 3 John. In addition we are told by Eusebius, who had the works of Clement, that he gave explanations and quotations from all the canonical books. 160-240. Turtullian, contemporary of Origen and Clement, mentions all the New Testament books except 2 Peter, James and 2 John. 135-200. Irenaeus, quoted from all New Testament books except Philemon, Jude, James and 3 John. 100-147. Justin Martyr, mentions the Gospels as being four in number and quotes from them and some of the epistles of Paul and Revelation. Besides the above, the early church fathers have handed down in their writings quotations from all the New Testament books so much so that it is said that the entire New Testament can be reproduced from their writings alone. Thus, the New Testament books were in existence in their present form at the close of the apostolic age. As a matter of fact, the apostles themselves put their writings into circulation. "And when this letter has been read among you, see that it be read in the church of the Laodiceans also; and that you yourselves read the letter from Laodicea." (Col. 4:16). "I charge you by the Lord that this epistle be read to all the holy brethren." (1 Thess. 5:27). The holy Scriptures were written for all (1 Cor. 1:2; Eph. 1:1) and all will be judged by them in the last day (Rev. 20:12; John 12:48). Jesus said that His Word will abide forever (Matt. 24:35; 1 Pet. 1:23-25).
Fourthly, the Catholic claim of giving the Bible to the world cannot be true because they have not been the sole possessor of the Bible at any time. Some of the most valuable Greek Bibles and Versions have been handed down to us from non-Roman Catholic sources. A notable example of this is the Codex Sinaiticus which was found in the monastery of St. Catherine (of the Greek Orthodox Church) at Mount Sinai in 1844 and is now in the British Museum. It contains all of the books of the New Testament and all but small portions of the Old Testament. Scholars are certain that this manuscript was made early in the fourth century, not later than 350 A.D. This manuscript found by a German scholar named, Tishendorf, who was a Protestant, and this manuscript which is the most complete of all has never been in the hands of the Roman Catholic Church.
Another valuable manuscript that has never been possessed by the Roman Catholic Church is the Codex Alexandrianus. It, too, is now on exhibit in the manuscript room of the British Museum in London. It was a gift from the Patriarch of Constantinople (of the Greek Orthodox Church) to Charles I in 1628. It had been in possession of the Patriarchs for centuries and originally came from Alexandria, Egypt from which it gets its name. Scholars are certain that this manuscript was also made in the fourth century and, along with the Codex Sinaiticus, is thought to be one of the fifty Greek Bibles commissioned to be copied by Constantine.
In the light of the foregoing, the boastful claim of the Roman Catholic Church that it has been the sole guardian and preserver of the sacred Scriptures down to the present, is nothing but pure falsehood. The Bible is not a Catholic book. Catholics did not write it, nor does their doctrines and church meet the description of the doctrine and church of which it speaks. The New Testament was completed before the end of the first century, A.D. The things in it do not correspond to the Catholic Church which hundreds of years after the death of the apostles slowly evolved into what it now is. The Catholic Church is not the original and true church, but a "church" born of many departures and corruptions from the New Testament church. Even if the Catholic Church could prove that it alone is the sole deliverer of the Scriptures to man today, it still remains that the Catholic Church is not following the Bible and is contrary to the Bible. Furthermore, even if the Catholic Church could show conclusively that it alone is responsible for gathering the books, it does not prove that the Catholic Church is infallible, nor does it prove that it is the author of the Bible. God has at times used evil agencies to accomplish His purpose (Jer. 27:6-8; 43:10; Hab. 1:5-11; John 11:49-52).
We have studied, therefore, that the Catholic Church argues that since one of its councils in 390 selected the sacred books, one can accept them only on the basis of its authority. We have answered by showing: (1) The Bible is inspired and has authority, not because a church declared it so but because God made it so. (2) Jesus did not teach the people in His day that they could accept the Old Testament Scriptures only on the basis of those who placed the books into one volume. (3) It is a mere assumption that the Council of Hippo in 390 was a Council of the church which is now the Roman Catholic Church. (4) God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His books only on the basis of councils. (5) The Catholic Church is not solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. (6) The Catholic Church has not been the sole possessor of the Bible at any time. (7) Even if it could be proven that the Catholic Church gathered the books into one volume, it still remains that it is not following the Bible today.
[an error occurred while processing this directive] BIBLIOGRAPHY A Catechism For Adults, William J. Conan, ACTA Publications, Chicago, Illinois, 1959.
Catholic Encyclopedia, Knights of Columbus, (Fifteen Volumes), The Encyclopedia Press, Inc., New York, 1913.
Canons and Decrees of he Council of Trent, H.J. Schroeder, B. Herder Book company, St. Louis, London, 1950.
Lives and Times of the Roman Pontiffs, Chevalier Artand De Montor, D & J Stadler & Co., New York, 1869.
Question Box, Bertrand L. Conway, The Columbus Press, New York, N.Y., 1913.
Question Box, New Revised Edition, Bertrand L. Conway, The Paulist Press, New York, N.Y., 1929.
The Bible is a Catholic Book, Knights of Columbus Religious Information Bureau, St. Louis, 1948.
The Faith of Millions, John A. O'Brien, Our Sunday Visitor, Huntington, Ind., 1938.
The Faith of Our Fathers, James Cardinal Gibbons, John Murphy Co., Baltimore, Md., 1917.
What is the Bible? W.H. Anderson, International Truth Society, Brooklyn, New York, 1962.
Who Gave the Bible to the People? Knights of Columbus Religious Information Bureau, St. Louis, 1948.
CATHOLIC TRANSLATIONS Confraternity-Douay Version, Timothy Press, Chicago, 1959
Douay-Rheims Version, Catholic Book Publishing Co., New York, 1945.
Catholic Edition-Revised Standard Version, Published by Thomas Nelson & Sons Ltd for the Incorporated Catholic Truth Society, London, 1966.
By David J. Riggs
Catholics Assembled Canon?
1 - the Syriac and Coptic versions were translated from the Greek in the second century
2 - Latin Version was translated from Greek in the 2nd century
3 - in 375 the Gothic Version was translated by Ufilas Jerome stated that in his work of revising the Old Latin he used a Greek Bible which belonged to Origen who lived in the early part of the third century
4 - Constantine, the emperor of Rome, at the end of the third century, ordered fifty copies of the Bible transcribed
5 - Origen, born A.D. 185 and died A.D. 254, named all the books of the Bible in his writings 6 - Eusebius, 270 A.D., lists all of the books of the NT Cyril, 315 A.D. to 386 A.D., lists all NT books, except Revelation
7 - Both the Vatican Manuscript and the Sinaitic Manuscript date back earlier than 390 A.D.
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/
CATHOLICS - WORSHIP - IDOLS AND STATUES
The Catholic church declares unto all that are of her church to embrace and gather as many statues, medals, relics, and artifacts to themselves as a sign of holiness unto the Lord God. However, the Creator specifically states...Exodus 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee a graven image, nor any manner of likeness, of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth;
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/catholicismexposed/catholicsdoworshipidols/index.html
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/catholicismexposed/catholicsdoworshipidols/index.html
Christianity : Violent or Peaceful?
Christianity : Violent or Peaceful?
Part 1
Do we have the right to know
The Other Side of the Story
Infidel is a term used to lable anyone who is not a Christian, Jew or Muslim. It did not origiante in Islam, but Infidel is used by English writers to translate the equivalent word used by muslims in speaking of Christians and other disbelievers in Islam.
....................................................................
and also used by christians
(Jefferson was seen as an infidel by his enemies during his election for President)
Pope Urban II
The West must march to the defense of the East. All should go, rich and poor alike. The Franks must stop their internal wars and squabbles. Let them go instead against the infidel and fight a righteous war.
Taking Jerusalem: Climax of the First Crusade By J. Arthur McFall. "The Crusaders spent at least that night and the next day killing Muslims, including all of those in the al-Aqsa Mosque, where Tancred's banner should have protected them. Not even women and children were spared. The city's Jews sought refuge in their synagogue, only to be burned alive within it by the Crusaders. .... The Europeans also destroyed the monuments to Orthodox Christian saints and the tomb of Abraham."
+++++++++++
How do you justify Jesus telling Christians to kill the infidels?
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Martin Luther was one of the most virulent antisemites the world has every seen, believing that the Jews should be isolated from society and potentially killed.
=======
quote:
He said the Quran nowhere forbids close friendship with those of other faiths.
Q. 5:51: "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."
Q. 3:28: "Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah. except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah."
.....................
Befriending the CHRISTIANS and JEWS according to the Quran
http://www.submission.org/christians/friends.html
No compulsion in religion
The teachings of the Prophet on how you and I should treat our Non-Muslim friends and neighbours on a day to day basis as well as how to government should treat a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/ter...sm_verses1.htm
Islam And The People Of The Book
http://www.islamdenouncesantisemitism.com/people.htm
Turkey and the Holocaust: Turkey's Role in Rescuing Turkish and European Jewry from Nazi Persecution, 1933-1945
http://jews-for-allah.org/history-of..._holocaust.htm
Christian History with Jews
http://jews-for-allah.org/messianic-...storywithjews/
Jewish Murders of Christians
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-christia...rs-folder.html
How Mary Holds Muslims and Christians in Conversation
By Cardinal William Keeler With permissionfrom the Cardinal himself
Summery; Virgin Mary is mentioned 34 times in the Quran more thanthe whole New Testament. Venerated by Christians and Muslims, Mary holdsus to work together for Justice and peace, sharing and love.
http://www.al-bushra.org/bvm/keeler.htm
Jesus in Islam
http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark.../7412/1_8.html
Surat MARYAM (MARY)
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/019.qmt.html
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran
/
Recite of the Holy Quran
Surah MARYAM (MARY)
http://www.islaam.com/audio/quran/ram/shatiri/sh19.ram
=========
Jewish Hatred of Christianity
http://www.nationalfront.org/jewhate.html
The Truth about the Talmud
http://www.stormfront.org/jewish/talmud.html
====
Part 3
Do we have the right to know
The Other Side of the Story
"The Bible - Humbug and Horror"
by Michael Glass
"Anti-Semitism"
One measure of the ill-feeling that was felt by early Christians towards Judaism of that time is to list texts in the New Testament that accuse Jews or the Jewish religious leaders of violent intentions or physical violence against Jesus or his followers:
Matthew 12:9-14, 16:21, 20:17-19, 21:33-46, 26:1-5, 14-16, 47-50, 26:57, 66, 27:1-2, 19-26.
Mark 3:1-6, 8:31, 10:33-34, 12:1-12, 14:1-2, 10-11, 43-49, 64, 15:1, 8-15.
Luke 9:22, 20:9-26, 22:1-6, 52-53, 22:26, 23:5, 23:13-25.
John 5:15-18, 7:1, 10-13, 19-20, 28-34, 8:20, 37-40, 57-59, 10:30-39, 11:45-57, 12:9-11, 18:3-14, 19-24, 28-32, 19:6-7, 12-16. Acts 2:22-23, 3:13, 4:22, 5:17-42, 6:8-15, 7:50-60, 8:1-3, 9:1-2, 9:21, 13:28-29, 50, 14:1-6, 19, 17:5-9, 20:19, 21:11, 22:22-23, 23:2-3, 10, 12-15, 20-21, 27, 24:1-9.
2 Corinthians 11:24.
I Thessalonians 2:15-15.
Jesus made scathing attacks on the Jewish religious leaders of his day and their teachings. (Matthew 15:12-14, 16:5-12, 21:12-13, and chapter 23, Mark 11:15-17, 12:38-40, Luke 12:1-3, 16:14-15). His condemnation of those who rejected his message was savage. (Matthew 10:11-15, 11:20-24, Luke 10:13-15). One of the earliest controversies in the church was whether circumcision and Old Testament food taboos applied to non-Jewish converts to Christianity. (Acts 15, 21:17-26, Galatians 2:3-6). One of Paul's letters warns about "unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially those of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake". (Titus 1:10-11).
The Acts of the Apostles shows how much the early Christian missionaries depended on the synagogues to preach and reach potential converts. (Acts 13:14-16, 14:1, 17:1-4, 18:1-4). Indeed in Rome, the Jewish leaders visited him when he came there as a prisoner (Acts 28:16-17, 21-25), and seemed to give him a very fair hearing.
In the Book of Revelations, however, feelings against the Jews were much nastier:
...I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Revelation 2:9.
Behold I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. Revelation 3:9.
Add to this the description of Paul:
...the Jews; who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. I Thessalonians 2:14-16.
Which echo the words of Jesus himself about the Jewish Scribes and pharisees:
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes ... that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias ... All these things shall come upon this generation. Matthew 23:34-36.
And to the lawyers:
Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres. Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: that the blood of all the prophets, which shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation ... verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation. Luke 11:47-50, 51.
Finally, top that off with the words attributed to the crowd just before Jesus' crucifixion:
Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Matthew 27:25.
The horror and suffering that came upon innocent people because of these verses almost defies description. And no wonder. Jesus himself is quoted as saying that all the righteous blood that was ever shed shall come upon these Jews!
Thomas Paine said of the Bible:
...it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind
Certainly that judgment applies to these verses, at least.
Of course there's another side to it in the Bible. Paul warns Gentile believers not to be boastful because some of the original branches of the olive tree (the Jews) had been broken off to graft them in:
For it thou wert cut out of the olive tree which wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Romans 11:24.
And Jesus himself said to the Samaritan woman, "Salvation is of the Jews." (John 4:22).
But the evidence goes further than this. Matthew's gospel records an incident where a Gentile woman begged him to save her daughter from being possessed by a devil...
...But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table. Matthew 15:23-27.
Only when the woman likened herself to a dog snatching crumbs did Jesus relent. Matthew 15:28, (also Mark 7:24-30).
No-one else in the gospels had to struggle in this way to get Jesus to relieve human suffering, but with one exception, all the others appear to be Jewish. The exception was judged 'worthy' as he loved the Jews and had built a synagogue for them. (Luke 7:4-5). Despite comments of the like of Matthew 8:10-12, perhaps Jesus' fundamental attitude towards the Gentiles was to be summed up in the Sermon on the Mount:
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Matthew 7:6.
======
Myth: Muslims reject Jesus
Many non-Muslims are surprised to find out that according to Muslim belief, Jesus, the son of Mary, is one of the greatest messengers of God. Muslims are taught to love Jesus, and a person cannot be a Muslim without believing in the virgin birth and miracles of Jesus Christ, peace be upon him. Muslims believe these things about Jesus not because of the Bible or any other religion, but simply because the Holy Qur'an says these things about him
http://www.thetruereligion.org/m7.htm
Christ in Islam
by Ahmed Deedat
http://jamaat.net/cis/ChristInIslam.html
Do You LOVE Jesus ?
http://www.thetruereligion.org/lovejesus.htm
Jesus
the "Christ" of Islam
Peace Be Upon Him
A Mighty Messenger of The Almighty
http://www.islamtoday.com/everything/jesus.htm
Islam and Christianity a comparative analysis
http://jamaat.net/deedat.htm
The Blessed Jesus peace be upon him and Place of Jews and Christians in Islam:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blessed_jesus.htm
Muslims respect and admire Jesus. Islam teaches that he was one of God's greatest messengers to mankind
http://oh.essortment.com/jesusmuslims_rjxj.htm
Misconceptions about Islam
http://www.islamzine.com/intro/miscons.html
========================================
Antichrist is a male Jew
The Rev. Jerry Falwell said
The Rev. Jerry Falwell said the antichrist is probably alive today and is a male Jew. He also believes the Second Coming of Christ probably will be within 10 years.
http://www.ocbooks.co.nz/news99/eleven/falwell.htm
"Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you" DEUTERONOMY 9:24
"For I know thy rebellious,and thy stiff neck behold ,while I am yet alive with you this day , you have been rebellious against the Lord , and how much more after my death ? DEUTERONOMY 31:27
What does Jesus say about the Jew? Jesus says the Jews are;
DEVILS
{John} 8."Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning" (verse 44).
SERPENTS
Matthew 23 "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees (Jewish leaders), hypocrites! ... Ye blind guides ... Ye fools and blind .... Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (verses 13-33).
MURDERERS
Jesus' denunciations not only of the leaders but also of the nation have fueled the anti-Semite's fire. In Luke 20, Jesus, symbolizing Israel as a vineyard, tells of a master who planted a vineyard and "let it forth to husbandmen" (verse 9).
Later when the servants came to collect the fruit from the master's vineyard, the husbandmen beat them. He sent more servants, and they beat them too. Finally the master says, "I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him" (verse 13).
Instead, the husbandmen killed him! Said Jesus: "What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them? He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others" (verses 15, 16).
"..How can ye escape the damnation of Hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them
shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the *blood of Innocent Abel* unto
the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. *Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation* ." Mt 23:33-36
CHRIST KILLERS
" But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God" John 8:40
"His blood be upon us and on our children" Matthew 27:25. "They killed the Christ."
LIARS
"Now the chief priests (Jewish leaders), and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;" Mt 26:59
"For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together" Mr 14:57
" Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees (Jewish leaders), hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. " (Matthew 23:23)
The New Testament contains 102 references to the Jews of [the] most degrading and malevolent kind Who labels the Jews as hypocrites, apostates, liars, and killers. Who denounces Jewish leaders and the Jewish nation? Who scolds Jewish priests, claims its Temple services are corrupt, and spews forth warnings that God's judgments will fall upon the Jews? Who accuses the Jews of murder, corruption, greed, and robbery - declares that they have forsaken God?
JESUS !!!
http://www.geocities.com/jewsnot4jes...i-semitic.html
========================================
Biblical truth
Jewish Hatred Against Jesus Christ
Was there an organized Jewish conspiracy against the life and ministry of our Savior - the Lord Jesus Christ?
Let the Scriptures speak for themselves!
". . . of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sin alway: For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost."
I Thessalonians 2:14-16
Jewish Accusations Against Jesus Christ
Genesis 3:15
Keeper of bad company - Matthew 9:10-11
Of poor, common-stock - Mark 6:3
Laborer - Mark 6:3
Possessed of Beelzebub - Mark 3:22
From the wrong neighborhood - John 7:41, 52
A deceiver and hypocrite - John 7:10-13
Unlearned - John 7:14-15
Had a persecution complex - John 7:20
Demon possessed--full of the devil - John 7:20, 10:20, 8:48, 52
Provoker to anger - John 7:23
A divider of the people - John 7:43
Unpopular, not recommended by rulers, unrecognized by leaders - John 7:45-49 (v. 48)
False prophet - John 7:50-52
Liar, falsifier - John 8:13
A ******* - John 8:19
Had suicidal tendencies - John 8:22
A half-breed - John 8:48
Dishonorable - John 8:49
Boaster, false representative of God, impostor, self-made man - John 8:53
Ungodly, or cometh not from God - John 9:13-16
A sinner - John 9:13-16
Crazy, insane - John 10:20
Perplexing, causing doubt - John 10:22-24
A blasphemer - John 10:31-33
The Jews Killed Jesus Christ
(v. 18, I Thessalonians 2:14-15)
Jewish Hatred and Murder Attempts
on the Life of Jesus Christ
Matthew 2:16 - As a child Herod tried to kill Him.
Matthew 12:14, Mark 3:6 - Pharisees held a council with the Herodians to discuss destroying Jesus because He healed a man on the Sabbath day.
Luke 4:28-30 - Attempted to throw Him off the hill because of His sermon.
John 5:16 - The Jews persecuted Jesus and sought to kill Him for healing the impotent man on the Sabbath day.
John 5:18 - Jews sought to kill Jesus because He claimed equality with God.
John 7:30-32 - The Jewish plot to arrest Jesus with intent to kill Him for claiming He was from God.
John 7:25 - It was common knowledge that the Jews sought to kill Jesus.
John 7:40-44 - Some people desired to arrest Jesus with intent to kill Him.
John 8:59 - Jews attempted to kill Jesus by stoning Him for claiming that He was God.
John 10:31 - The Jews again attempt to kill Jesus by stoning for claiming His Deity.
John 10:39 - The Jews sought to take Jesus for proving His Deity.
John 11:47 - The chief priests and Pharisees plot against Jesus.
John 11:53-54 - The Jews make a determined effort to kill Jesus.
John 11:55-57 - The Jews sought Jesus even at the Passover Feast.
John 12:9-11 - The Jews even desire to kill Lazarus because of their hatred for Jesus.
John 18:3, 10, 12 - Jesus was arrested by Jewish soldiers.
John 18:13-14 - Jesus was tried by Jewish leaders who had already decided on his guilt.
John 18:36 - Jesus acknowledges that it was the Jews who would kill Him.
John 18:38-40, 19:1-7, 12-15 - The Jews are adamant in their desire to kill Jesus.
John 19:11 - Jesus acknowledges a lesser and a greater sin in those who condemned Him to death.
John 19:16-18 - The Jews led Jesus away to be crucified.
The Talmud
The Talmud is a vast literary work written by Jewish Rabbis that contains civil and religious law. It is not a part of the inspired sacred Scripture. The Palestinian Talmud was written in the 3rd century AD, while the Babylonian Talmud was written around 500 AD. It contains discussions concerning every aspect of Jewish life and thought. The Talmud was written by Jewish Rabbis who were men of 'perverse minds and destitute of the truth'.
Concerning the names of Jesus,
the Talmud refers to Him as:
Immach Schemo Vezikro which means, "May His name and memory be blotted out."
Otho Isch = "That man"
Peloni = "A certain one"
Naggar Bar Naggar = "The carpenter son of a carpenter"
Ben Charsch etaim = "The son of a wood worker"
Talui = "The one who was hanged"
Concerning Christ Himself,
the Talmud accuses Him of being:
Illegitimate
Possessed by the soul of Esau and being Esau himself.
A fool and insane
A conjurer and a magician
An idolater
A seducer
Crucified For His crimes
Buried in Hell
Wrongfully worshipped
An idol
The Talmud condemns the teaching
of Christ as follows:
Falsehood
Heresy
Impossible to observe
Taken from "The Talmud Unmasked"
By Rev. I.B. Pranaitis 1892 pp28-41
"Mr. Freedman publishes the Talmud's description of the birth and death of Christ as follows: 'Jesus is referred to as the son of Pandira, a soldier. Illegitimate and conceived during menstruation. Hanged on the eve of Passover, seduced, corrupted and destroyed Israel. Died like a beast and buried in animal's dirt heap.' Taken from Defender's Magazine October 1957, which quoted Freedman's "Facts are Facts".
The innocence of Christ was declared by:
Pilate's wife - Matthew 27:19
Judas Iscariot - Matthew 27:4
Pilate - Matthew 27:24; Luke 23:22; John 19:6
Thief on the cross - Luke 23:41
Roman soldiers - Mark 15:39
http://www.truthinhistory.org/jews.htm
Why Jews HATE Jesus
Top Ten Reasons
http://www.geocities.com/jewsnot4jesus/hate-jesus.html
========================================
part 1A
Quote
Here is my last "on topic post"
Who are the idolaters, but those who do not worship Allah? (Jews and Christians, etc...)
Who is supposed ot be doing the fighting here? Is it Allah or the followers of Islam?
And Fight who? As we see in the previous verses, the Christians, Jews, etc.. should be fought.
These two verses say why Jews and Christians should be fought: The claim Jesus Christ (the Messiah) as God, and not Ezra. And it claims they raise the rabbi and monks to the lvl of God, which is an untruth. .
Idolaters
Whom they worship idols
Christian and Jews are people of the book
During the cold war USA established Free Europe-Radio Liberty
To inform the people of Soviet Union behind Iron Curtain
About democracy
And also USA fought in Vietnam and Korea against socialism
In The beginning of Islam there was no Radio liberty to inform other nation about the message of Islam
As America fought for the freedom of Korea and Vietnam against socialism the Muslims fought the oppressors to maintain the freedom of choice and belief in the land
As the American citizen
Pay taxes to the government in return of the services of health security and education
Rendered by the government
Also non-Muslims pay taxes in return for protection and freedom of believe
These days no need for these kind of conflict because the world is open for free speech.
009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Again this is in self-defense. Fighting the oppressors to maintain the freedom of choice and belief in the land. This verse cannot be taken by itself without understanding the basic rules of war or fighting in the Quran, specially 2:190 and 60:8-9. The tax system is not different than the IRS in USA. You have to pay your tax, willingly or unwillingly. If you do not pay you get punished
Islam doesn’t allow using war to force others to be Muslims God said in the Holy Quran
002.256
YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
PICKTHAL: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
Muslims are allowed to fight others in the following cases:
1- if others attack Muslims, they must fight in self-defense.
2-If Muslims are driven out of their homeland, they must fight those who drove them out of their land and must restore their land.
Islam does not like aggression whether done by Muslims or by non-Muslims, whether done by individuals or by states. Islam does not allow Muslims to declare War against a peaceful non-Muslim neighbor.
But Islam urges Muslims to go to War in self-defense and especially when some Muslims are driven out of their homeland.
As in the case of people of Palestine, who were driven out by the Israelis in 1948 and 1967.
WHAT DOES ISLAM SAY ABOUT WAR?
Like Christianity, Islam permits fighting in self-defense, in defense of religion, or on the part of those who have been expelled forcibly from their homes. It lays down strict rules of combat, which include prohibitions against harming civilians and against destroying crops, trees and livestock. As Muslims see it, injustice would be triumphant in the world if good men were not prepared to risk their lives in a righteous cause. The Qur'an says:
"Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits. God does not love transgressors." (2:190)
If they seek peace, then seek you peace. And trust in God for He is the One that heareth and knoweth all things. (8:61)
War, therefore, is the last resort, and is subject to the rigorous conditions laid down by the sacred law. The term Jihad literally means 'struggle', and Muslims believe that there are two kinds of Jihad. The other 'Jihad' is the inner struggle, which everyone wages against egotistic desires, for the sake of attaining inner peace.
Many Christians are praised several times in the Qur'an
http://azerilink.homestead.com/nonmuslimsinQuran.html
==============================================
Hence, to say Jesus is the Son of God is to imitate the unbelievers of old. Yet, the unbelievers of old (i.e. the pagans) believed that the gods had wives with whom they cohabited in order to have children.
Eve was made from the rib of a Man, Jesus was made from a womb of a woman, which sounds more miraculous to you?
Secondly, "Who then is Eve's second parent? you can suggest that she is from Adam, who then is Her Mother? Aren't all humans born with a Mother and Father?"
And creation of Adam is more miracles than creation of Jesus because Allah created Adam without Father or Mother
Meaning worship rabbi and monk
Explained how they took their rabbis and priests besides Allah as lords in the sense that they obeyed them in what they knew was forbidden by Allah. In other words, these rabbis and monks and priests would forbid something, which was made lawful to them by Allah, and they would obey them in that. Or they would make to them something lawful which was forbidden by Allah and they would obey them in that, like for instance with the Christians and the issue of multi-marriages, having more than one wife. The Christians have forbidden this even though Allah has made it lawful for them. And, in fact, they find that in their books the Prophets are mentioned having more than one wife. And likewise the Christians have made for themselves lawful to eat the flesh of swine, pig's meat, pork, and this is something, which has been forbidden by the laws of Allah. So they by them obeying them in these matters they have taken them as lords besides Allah
===
Rabbi and monk they give them self the authority as if they are God
by changing the teaching of Christianity according to them benefit
Example
The pope during the time of the indulgence controversy was Leo X , who was pope from 1513-1521. He was the one who decided to begin selling indulgences
Martin Luther protested against the sale and abuse of indulgences and came to reject the teaching altogether. Since the Council of Trent (1562) the buying and selling of indulgences has been unlawful.
The Pope is as it were God on earth
The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God...."
"The Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power, to whom has been intrusted by the omnipotent God direction not only of the earthly but also of the heavenly kingdom...."
"The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine laws...."
http://www.benabraham.com/html/he_blasphemes_god.html
Example of deviation of monk and priest
The Survivors of Clergy Abuse
Linkup’s Homepage
http://www.thelinkup.com/index.html#arc
=======
Bible
Result of cutting and pasting
People today generally believe that there is only ONE Bible, and ONE version of any given verse of the Bible. As we have begun to see, this is far from true. All Bibles in our possession today (Such as the KJV, the NRSV, the NASV, NIV,...etc.) are the result of extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no single one being the definitive reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows up in one "ancient manuscript" but is totally missing from many others. For instance, Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole verses) is completely missing from the most ancient manuscripts available today but show up in more recent "ancient manuscripts." There are also many documented cases where even geographical locations are completely different from one ancient manuscript to the next. For instance, in the "Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript," Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount Gerizim,"while in the "Hebrew manuscript" the exact same verse speaks of "mount Ebal." From Deuteronomy 27:12-13 we can see that these are two distinctly different locations. Similarly, Luke 4:44 in some "ancient manuscripts" mentions "Synagogues of Judea," others mention "Synagogues of Galilee." This is only a sampling, a comprehensive listing would require a book of its own."
Bart Ehram continues:
"Nonetheless, there are some kinds of textual changes for which it is difficult to account apart from the deliberate activity of a transcriber. When a scribe appended an additional twelve verses to the end of the Gospel of Mark, this can scarcely be attributed to mere oversight" [The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, pp. 27-28]
Examples of verses from the NT which scholars admit were interpolated into the NT text at a latter date and are in fact fabrications:
http://www.answering-christianity.co...ars_refute.htm
BIBLICAL CRITICISMS
http://www.muslim-answers.org/bible.htm
=======
part 2A
Divisions within the Religion
In the two millennia of its history Christianity has been divided by schism and roiled by heresy, based on doctrinal and organizational differences. Today there are three broad divisions, Roman Catholic, Orthodox Eastern, and Protestant; but within the category of Protestantism, there is a particularly large number of divergent denominations.
So we can understand that also Islam and Judaism have notes concerning for example
Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus, The Divine sonship of Jesus, The Original Sin, and Atonement.
The doctrine of the Trinity is this -
"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons; nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost.
"But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, so is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.
"The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal.
"And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal. Also there are not three incomprehensibles, not three uncreated: but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.
"So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.
"So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet there are not three Gods: but one God.
"So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords but one Lord.
"For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord; so we are forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.
"The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
"So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.
"And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater or less than others; but the whole three persons are co- eternal together; and co-equal. So that in all things as is aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
"HE THEREFORE THAT WILL BE SAVED MUST THUS THINK OF THE TRINITY."
http://www.antipas.org/books/trinity/trinity1.html
The Doctrine of the TRINITY...
Mystery or Confusion?
http://www.answering-christianity.co...e_students.htm
==============================================
1- Answering Trinity.
2- History of Man's corruption of the Bible.
3- Islam and its Divinity.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm
Four Rules of Pure Monotheism
http://www.muslim-answers.org/4rules.htm
Explanation of the Truth of Monotheism
http://www.quraan.com/Tawheed/TruthOfMonotheism.asp
Islam and the Divinity of Chtist
http://www.answering-christianity.com/jesus.htm
The True Message of Jesus Christ
http://www.al-sunnah.com/true_message_of_jesus.htm
=======
In the case of Christianity what should this tell us
Who committed crimes against civilian and wage wars and use discrimination and genocide against the humanity?
Some examples:
1- Inquisition against Muslims and Jews The Inquisition begins as Pope Gregory IX assigns Dominicans responsibility for combating heresy. Torture used (1252). Ferdinand and Isabella establish Spanish Inquisition (1478). Tourquemada, Grand Inquisitor, forces conversion or expulsion of Spanish Jews (1492). Forced conversion of Moors (1499). Inquisition in Portugal (1531). First Protestants burned at the stake in Spain (1543). Spanish Inquisition abolished (1834).
2- Crusade against Muslims Jews and Christian orthodox In 1095 at Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II calls for war to rescue Holy Land from Muslim infidels. The First Crusade (1096) is assembled in response to Emperor Alexius I. The Christians capture Antioch (1098) and Jerusalem (1099). They establish the Crusader States, ruled by Europeans. It is the only successful crusade. The Second Crusade begins after the Seljuk Turks recapture Edessa, one of the Crusader States, in 1144. It is led by King Louis VIII of France and Holy Roman Emperor Conrad III. Crusaders perish in Asia Minor (1147).
3- The Albigensian Crusade (so named, because the French city of Albi was a Cathar stronghold), lasted for 20 years, from 1209 to 1229. While authorized by the pope, the actual fighting was carried out primarily by secular forces, especially under Simon de Montfort. The suppression of the Cathar heresy established new "standards" for ferocity for the Roman Church in dealing with its own flock. Perhaps the most famous example was on July 22, 1209, when the city of Beziers was sacked, with over 20,000 men, women and children killed by crusaders. The event will forever be framed in history by the words of papal legate Arnaud, whom, when asked if Catholics should be spared during the assault, answered "Kill them all, for God knows His own".
4 - 1202 Pope Innocent III launches fourth Crusade to defeat Egypt. After some setbacks, Crusaders defy the pope and sack Constantinople, center of the Orthodox church. A three-day massacre by the Crusaders alienates the eastern and western churches for centuries.
5- WWI waged by Christian and the dead by million
6 - WWII waged by Christians and the dead by million
7- America attacked japan and used two atomic
bombs
against Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Death toll of Japanese civillian
Hiroshima 118,661
Nagasaki 73,884
Hiroshima Injuries 79,130
Nagasaki Injuries 74,909
8- America used chemical weapon against Korea and Vietnam during war as (agent orange). And the victims was thousands of civilian.
9- Discrimination based on color and race .
10- Black cannot ride bus with whites May 4, 1961 -- Thirteen "Freedom Riders" begin bus trip through the South to test compliance with laws banning segregation in interstate transportation. Black and White riders were bombed and savagely beaten, but their movement
ended segregation interstate transportation facilities.
11- white Christian used apartheid against South African people
12- Racial Nazi Hitler and fascist Mussolini
13 - White supremacy and racial groups like KKK and its racial crime
14- Tulsa massacre against African American
15- Genocide against native American
16- Slave trade
This is only some example of crimes committed
against humanity committed by Christians.
Medical aspect of atomic bomb disaster in Nagasaki (INDEX)
- http://www-sdc.med.nagasaki-u.ac.jp/...medical-E.html
-
discrimination against black and native american
WAGING GENOCIDE
CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES & SMALLPOX,
THE ANDREW JACKSON CONNECTION
http://www.iwchildren.org/missionary.htm
The Great Black Church-burning Hoax
http://www.consumeralert.org/fumento/arson.htm
U.S. 'ethnic cleansing'
The 1921 Tulsa massacre
http://www.geocities.com/anaxfiles/kosovo/artcl11.html
Devastating legacy of Agent Orange still haunts Vietnamese families
http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/2...Stories/12.htm
Condemning Islam while ignoring your own religion's history seems pretty .......?!!!
Religious Persecution in Europe:
Focus on Muslims
http://www.mwlusa.org/news_helsinki.html
USA wages and involves in Wars on average of every 5 years and less Since 300 Years of Independence
about 50 external war and equal number of internal war
http://pub63.ezboard.com/ftheologyfo...picID=85.topic
==========
Muslims respect and accept Jesus as prophet like Prophet Muhammad Peace is upon them and Muslims respect Virgin Marry even more than some Christian's denomination
!
Compare the attitude of Jews against Jesus
What about Jews whom they Killed Jesus according to Christian believe.
Why don't the Jewish people recognize the New Testament?
http://www.geocities.com/Metzad/
Jewish Hatred Against Jesus Christ
Was there an organized Jewish conspiracy against the life and ministry of our Savior - the Lord Jesus Christ?
Let the Scriptures speak for themselves!
". . . of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sin alway: For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost."
I Thessalonians 2:14-16
http://www.truthinhistory.org/jews.htm
======
Logical Prove of Islam's Truth
Does God Exist?
Which Religion is True?
http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel2.htm
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS & THE
CONFIRMATION IN THE QURAN
http://www.beconvinced.com/RELIGION/command10.htm
http://www.beconvinced.com/
=====
Jesus killing his enemies:
"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.' After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 19:26-28)"
Luke 19:26-28 is an obvious contradiction to what Jesus taught from Love toward the enemies. According to Luke 19:11, Jesus was telling a parable or story. But even though he was telling a parable, it is clear that Jesus believed in it, since he preached it by his own mouth, and practiced it as shown below.
Jesus killed the woman's children:
"So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 2:22-23)"
Part 1
Do we have the right to know
The Other Side of the Story
Infidel is a term used to lable anyone who is not a Christian, Jew or Muslim. It did not origiante in Islam, but Infidel is used by English writers to translate the equivalent word used by muslims in speaking of Christians and other disbelievers in Islam.
....................................................................
and also used by christians
(Jefferson was seen as an infidel by his enemies during his election for President)
Pope Urban II
The West must march to the defense of the East. All should go, rich and poor alike. The Franks must stop their internal wars and squabbles. Let them go instead against the infidel and fight a righteous war.
Taking Jerusalem: Climax of the First Crusade By J. Arthur McFall. "The Crusaders spent at least that night and the next day killing Muslims, including all of those in the al-Aqsa Mosque, where Tancred's banner should have protected them. Not even women and children were spared. The city's Jews sought refuge in their synagogue, only to be burned alive within it by the Crusaders. .... The Europeans also destroyed the monuments to Orthodox Christian saints and the tomb of Abraham."
+++++++++++
How do you justify Jesus telling Christians to kill the infidels?
Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Martin Luther was one of the most virulent antisemites the world has every seen, believing that the Jews should be isolated from society and potentially killed.
=======
quote:
He said the Quran nowhere forbids close friendship with those of other faiths.
Q. 5:51: "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people."
Q. 3:28: "Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah. except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. But Allah cautions you (To remember) Himself; for the final goal is to Allah."
.....................
Befriending the CHRISTIANS and JEWS according to the Quran
http://www.submission.org/christians/friends.html
No compulsion in religion
The teachings of the Prophet on how you and I should treat our Non-Muslim friends and neighbours on a day to day basis as well as how to government should treat a Non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state.
http://www.themodernreligion.com/ter...sm_verses1.htm
Islam And The People Of The Book
http://www.islamdenouncesantisemitism.com/people.htm
Turkey and the Holocaust: Turkey's Role in Rescuing Turkish and European Jewry from Nazi Persecution, 1933-1945
http://jews-for-allah.org/history-of..._holocaust.htm
Christian History with Jews
http://jews-for-allah.org/messianic-...storywithjews/
Jewish Murders of Christians
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-christia...rs-folder.html
How Mary Holds Muslims and Christians in Conversation
By Cardinal William Keeler With permissionfrom the Cardinal himself
Summery; Virgin Mary is mentioned 34 times in the Quran more thanthe whole New Testament. Venerated by Christians and Muslims, Mary holdsus to work together for Justice and peace, sharing and love.
http://www.al-bushra.org/bvm/keeler.htm
Jesus in Islam
http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark.../7412/1_8.html
Surat MARYAM (MARY)
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran/019.qmt.html
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/quran
/
Recite of the Holy Quran
Surah MARYAM (MARY)
http://www.islaam.com/audio/quran/ram/shatiri/sh19.ram
=========
Jewish Hatred of Christianity
http://www.nationalfront.org/jewhate.html
The Truth about the Talmud
http://www.stormfront.org/jewish/talmud.html
====
Part 3
Do we have the right to know
The Other Side of the Story
"The Bible - Humbug and Horror"
by Michael Glass
"Anti-Semitism"
One measure of the ill-feeling that was felt by early Christians towards Judaism of that time is to list texts in the New Testament that accuse Jews or the Jewish religious leaders of violent intentions or physical violence against Jesus or his followers:
Matthew 12:9-14, 16:21, 20:17-19, 21:33-46, 26:1-5, 14-16, 47-50, 26:57, 66, 27:1-2, 19-26.
Mark 3:1-6, 8:31, 10:33-34, 12:1-12, 14:1-2, 10-11, 43-49, 64, 15:1, 8-15.
Luke 9:22, 20:9-26, 22:1-6, 52-53, 22:26, 23:5, 23:13-25.
John 5:15-18, 7:1, 10-13, 19-20, 28-34, 8:20, 37-40, 57-59, 10:30-39, 11:45-57, 12:9-11, 18:3-14, 19-24, 28-32, 19:6-7, 12-16. Acts 2:22-23, 3:13, 4:22, 5:17-42, 6:8-15, 7:50-60, 8:1-3, 9:1-2, 9:21, 13:28-29, 50, 14:1-6, 19, 17:5-9, 20:19, 21:11, 22:22-23, 23:2-3, 10, 12-15, 20-21, 27, 24:1-9.
2 Corinthians 11:24.
I Thessalonians 2:15-15.
Jesus made scathing attacks on the Jewish religious leaders of his day and their teachings. (Matthew 15:12-14, 16:5-12, 21:12-13, and chapter 23, Mark 11:15-17, 12:38-40, Luke 12:1-3, 16:14-15). His condemnation of those who rejected his message was savage. (Matthew 10:11-15, 11:20-24, Luke 10:13-15). One of the earliest controversies in the church was whether circumcision and Old Testament food taboos applied to non-Jewish converts to Christianity. (Acts 15, 21:17-26, Galatians 2:3-6). One of Paul's letters warns about "unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially those of the circumcision: whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake". (Titus 1:10-11).
The Acts of the Apostles shows how much the early Christian missionaries depended on the synagogues to preach and reach potential converts. (Acts 13:14-16, 14:1, 17:1-4, 18:1-4). Indeed in Rome, the Jewish leaders visited him when he came there as a prisoner (Acts 28:16-17, 21-25), and seemed to give him a very fair hearing.
In the Book of Revelations, however, feelings against the Jews were much nastier:
...I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan. Revelation 2:9.
Behold I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee. Revelation 3:9.
Add to this the description of Paul:
...the Jews; who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost. I Thessalonians 2:14-16.
Which echo the words of Jesus himself about the Jewish Scribes and pharisees:
Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes ... that upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias ... All these things shall come upon this generation. Matthew 23:34-36.
And to the lawyers:
Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the prophets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their sepulchres. Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they shall slay and persecute: that the blood of all the prophets, which shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation ... verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation. Luke 11:47-50, 51.
Finally, top that off with the words attributed to the crowd just before Jesus' crucifixion:
Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children. Matthew 27:25.
The horror and suffering that came upon innocent people because of these verses almost defies description. And no wonder. Jesus himself is quoted as saying that all the righteous blood that was ever shed shall come upon these Jews!
Thomas Paine said of the Bible:
...it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind
Certainly that judgment applies to these verses, at least.
Of course there's another side to it in the Bible. Paul warns Gentile believers not to be boastful because some of the original branches of the olive tree (the Jews) had been broken off to graft them in:
For it thou wert cut out of the olive tree which wild by nature, and wert graffed contrary to nature into a good olive tree: how much more shall these, which be the natural branches, be graffed into their own olive tree? Romans 11:24.
And Jesus himself said to the Samaritan woman, "Salvation is of the Jews." (John 4:22).
But the evidence goes further than this. Matthew's gospel records an incident where a Gentile woman begged him to save her daughter from being possessed by a devil...
...But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their master's table. Matthew 15:23-27.
Only when the woman likened herself to a dog snatching crumbs did Jesus relent. Matthew 15:28, (also Mark 7:24-30).
No-one else in the gospels had to struggle in this way to get Jesus to relieve human suffering, but with one exception, all the others appear to be Jewish. The exception was judged 'worthy' as he loved the Jews and had built a synagogue for them. (Luke 7:4-5). Despite comments of the like of Matthew 8:10-12, perhaps Jesus' fundamental attitude towards the Gentiles was to be summed up in the Sermon on the Mount:
Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you. Matthew 7:6.
======
Myth: Muslims reject Jesus
Many non-Muslims are surprised to find out that according to Muslim belief, Jesus, the son of Mary, is one of the greatest messengers of God. Muslims are taught to love Jesus, and a person cannot be a Muslim without believing in the virgin birth and miracles of Jesus Christ, peace be upon him. Muslims believe these things about Jesus not because of the Bible or any other religion, but simply because the Holy Qur'an says these things about him
http://www.thetruereligion.org/m7.htm
Christ in Islam
by Ahmed Deedat
http://jamaat.net/cis/ChristInIslam.html
Do You LOVE Jesus ?
http://www.thetruereligion.org/lovejesus.htm
Jesus
the "Christ" of Islam
Peace Be Upon Him
A Mighty Messenger of The Almighty
http://www.islamtoday.com/everything/jesus.htm
Islam and Christianity a comparative analysis
http://jamaat.net/deedat.htm
The Blessed Jesus peace be upon him and Place of Jews and Christians in Islam:
http://www.answering-christianity.com/blessed_jesus.htm
Muslims respect and admire Jesus. Islam teaches that he was one of God's greatest messengers to mankind
http://oh.essortment.com/jesusmuslims_rjxj.htm
Misconceptions about Islam
http://www.islamzine.com/intro/miscons.html
========================================
Antichrist is a male Jew
The Rev. Jerry Falwell said
The Rev. Jerry Falwell said the antichrist is probably alive today and is a male Jew. He also believes the Second Coming of Christ probably will be within 10 years.
http://www.ocbooks.co.nz/news99/eleven/falwell.htm
"Ye have been rebellious against the Lord from the day that I knew you" DEUTERONOMY 9:24
"For I know thy rebellious,and thy stiff neck behold ,while I am yet alive with you this day , you have been rebellious against the Lord , and how much more after my death ? DEUTERONOMY 31:27
What does Jesus say about the Jew? Jesus says the Jews are;
DEVILS
{John} 8."Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning" (verse 44).
SERPENTS
Matthew 23 "But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees (Jewish leaders), hypocrites! ... Ye blind guides ... Ye fools and blind .... Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" (verses 13-33).
MURDERERS
Jesus' denunciations not only of the leaders but also of the nation have fueled the anti-Semite's fire. In Luke 20, Jesus, symbolizing Israel as a vineyard, tells of a master who planted a vineyard and "let it forth to husbandmen" (verse 9).
Later when the servants came to collect the fruit from the master's vineyard, the husbandmen beat them. He sent more servants, and they beat them too. Finally the master says, "I will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence him when they see him" (verse 13).
Instead, the husbandmen killed him! Said Jesus: "What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them? He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others" (verses 15, 16).
"..How can ye escape the damnation of Hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them
shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the *blood of Innocent Abel* unto
the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. *Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation* ." Mt 23:33-36
CHRIST KILLERS
" But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God" John 8:40
"His blood be upon us and on our children" Matthew 27:25. "They killed the Christ."
LIARS
"Now the chief priests (Jewish leaders), and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death;" Mt 26:59
"For many bare false witness against him, but their witness agreed not together" Mr 14:57
" Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees (Jewish leaders), hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cumin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. " (Matthew 23:23)
The New Testament contains 102 references to the Jews of [the] most degrading and malevolent kind Who labels the Jews as hypocrites, apostates, liars, and killers. Who denounces Jewish leaders and the Jewish nation? Who scolds Jewish priests, claims its Temple services are corrupt, and spews forth warnings that God's judgments will fall upon the Jews? Who accuses the Jews of murder, corruption, greed, and robbery - declares that they have forsaken God?
JESUS !!!
http://www.geocities.com/jewsnot4jes...i-semitic.html
========================================
Biblical truth
Jewish Hatred Against Jesus Christ
Was there an organized Jewish conspiracy against the life and ministry of our Savior - the Lord Jesus Christ?
Let the Scriptures speak for themselves!
". . . of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sin alway: For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost."
I Thessalonians 2:14-16
Jewish Accusations Against Jesus Christ
Genesis 3:15
Keeper of bad company - Matthew 9:10-11
Of poor, common-stock - Mark 6:3
Laborer - Mark 6:3
Possessed of Beelzebub - Mark 3:22
From the wrong neighborhood - John 7:41, 52
A deceiver and hypocrite - John 7:10-13
Unlearned - John 7:14-15
Had a persecution complex - John 7:20
Demon possessed--full of the devil - John 7:20, 10:20, 8:48, 52
Provoker to anger - John 7:23
A divider of the people - John 7:43
Unpopular, not recommended by rulers, unrecognized by leaders - John 7:45-49 (v. 48)
False prophet - John 7:50-52
Liar, falsifier - John 8:13
A ******* - John 8:19
Had suicidal tendencies - John 8:22
A half-breed - John 8:48
Dishonorable - John 8:49
Boaster, false representative of God, impostor, self-made man - John 8:53
Ungodly, or cometh not from God - John 9:13-16
A sinner - John 9:13-16
Crazy, insane - John 10:20
Perplexing, causing doubt - John 10:22-24
A blasphemer - John 10:31-33
The Jews Killed Jesus Christ
(v. 18, I Thessalonians 2:14-15)
Jewish Hatred and Murder Attempts
on the Life of Jesus Christ
Matthew 2:16 - As a child Herod tried to kill Him.
Matthew 12:14, Mark 3:6 - Pharisees held a council with the Herodians to discuss destroying Jesus because He healed a man on the Sabbath day.
Luke 4:28-30 - Attempted to throw Him off the hill because of His sermon.
John 5:16 - The Jews persecuted Jesus and sought to kill Him for healing the impotent man on the Sabbath day.
John 5:18 - Jews sought to kill Jesus because He claimed equality with God.
John 7:30-32 - The Jewish plot to arrest Jesus with intent to kill Him for claiming He was from God.
John 7:25 - It was common knowledge that the Jews sought to kill Jesus.
John 7:40-44 - Some people desired to arrest Jesus with intent to kill Him.
John 8:59 - Jews attempted to kill Jesus by stoning Him for claiming that He was God.
John 10:31 - The Jews again attempt to kill Jesus by stoning for claiming His Deity.
John 10:39 - The Jews sought to take Jesus for proving His Deity.
John 11:47 - The chief priests and Pharisees plot against Jesus.
John 11:53-54 - The Jews make a determined effort to kill Jesus.
John 11:55-57 - The Jews sought Jesus even at the Passover Feast.
John 12:9-11 - The Jews even desire to kill Lazarus because of their hatred for Jesus.
John 18:3, 10, 12 - Jesus was arrested by Jewish soldiers.
John 18:13-14 - Jesus was tried by Jewish leaders who had already decided on his guilt.
John 18:36 - Jesus acknowledges that it was the Jews who would kill Him.
John 18:38-40, 19:1-7, 12-15 - The Jews are adamant in their desire to kill Jesus.
John 19:11 - Jesus acknowledges a lesser and a greater sin in those who condemned Him to death.
John 19:16-18 - The Jews led Jesus away to be crucified.
The Talmud
The Talmud is a vast literary work written by Jewish Rabbis that contains civil and religious law. It is not a part of the inspired sacred Scripture. The Palestinian Talmud was written in the 3rd century AD, while the Babylonian Talmud was written around 500 AD. It contains discussions concerning every aspect of Jewish life and thought. The Talmud was written by Jewish Rabbis who were men of 'perverse minds and destitute of the truth'.
Concerning the names of Jesus,
the Talmud refers to Him as:
Immach Schemo Vezikro which means, "May His name and memory be blotted out."
Otho Isch = "That man"
Peloni = "A certain one"
Naggar Bar Naggar = "The carpenter son of a carpenter"
Ben Charsch etaim = "The son of a wood worker"
Talui = "The one who was hanged"
Concerning Christ Himself,
the Talmud accuses Him of being:
Illegitimate
Possessed by the soul of Esau and being Esau himself.
A fool and insane
A conjurer and a magician
An idolater
A seducer
Crucified For His crimes
Buried in Hell
Wrongfully worshipped
An idol
The Talmud condemns the teaching
of Christ as follows:
Falsehood
Heresy
Impossible to observe
Taken from "The Talmud Unmasked"
By Rev. I.B. Pranaitis 1892 pp28-41
"Mr. Freedman publishes the Talmud's description of the birth and death of Christ as follows: 'Jesus is referred to as the son of Pandira, a soldier. Illegitimate and conceived during menstruation. Hanged on the eve of Passover, seduced, corrupted and destroyed Israel. Died like a beast and buried in animal's dirt heap.' Taken from Defender's Magazine October 1957, which quoted Freedman's "Facts are Facts".
The innocence of Christ was declared by:
Pilate's wife - Matthew 27:19
Judas Iscariot - Matthew 27:4
Pilate - Matthew 27:24; Luke 23:22; John 19:6
Thief on the cross - Luke 23:41
Roman soldiers - Mark 15:39
http://www.truthinhistory.org/jews.htm
Why Jews HATE Jesus
Top Ten Reasons
http://www.geocities.com/jewsnot4jesus/hate-jesus.html
========================================
part 1A
Quote
Here is my last "on topic post"
Who are the idolaters, but those who do not worship Allah? (Jews and Christians, etc...)
Who is supposed ot be doing the fighting here? Is it Allah or the followers of Islam?
And Fight who? As we see in the previous verses, the Christians, Jews, etc.. should be fought.
These two verses say why Jews and Christians should be fought: The claim Jesus Christ (the Messiah) as God, and not Ezra. And it claims they raise the rabbi and monks to the lvl of God, which is an untruth. .
Idolaters
Whom they worship idols
Christian and Jews are people of the book
During the cold war USA established Free Europe-Radio Liberty
To inform the people of Soviet Union behind Iron Curtain
About democracy
And also USA fought in Vietnam and Korea against socialism
In The beginning of Islam there was no Radio liberty to inform other nation about the message of Islam
As America fought for the freedom of Korea and Vietnam against socialism the Muslims fought the oppressors to maintain the freedom of choice and belief in the land
As the American citizen
Pay taxes to the government in return of the services of health security and education
Rendered by the government
Also non-Muslims pay taxes in return for protection and freedom of believe
These days no need for these kind of conflict because the world is open for free speech.
009.029
YUSUFALI: Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
Again this is in self-defense. Fighting the oppressors to maintain the freedom of choice and belief in the land. This verse cannot be taken by itself without understanding the basic rules of war or fighting in the Quran, specially 2:190 and 60:8-9. The tax system is not different than the IRS in USA. You have to pay your tax, willingly or unwillingly. If you do not pay you get punished
Islam doesn’t allow using war to force others to be Muslims God said in the Holy Quran
002.256
YUSUFALI: Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.
PICKTHAL: There is no compulsion in religion. The right direction is henceforth distinct from error. And he who rejecteth false deities and believeth in Allah hath grasped a firm handhold which will never break. Allah is Hearer, Knower.
Muslims are allowed to fight others in the following cases:
1- if others attack Muslims, they must fight in self-defense.
2-If Muslims are driven out of their homeland, they must fight those who drove them out of their land and must restore their land.
Islam does not like aggression whether done by Muslims or by non-Muslims, whether done by individuals or by states. Islam does not allow Muslims to declare War against a peaceful non-Muslim neighbor.
But Islam urges Muslims to go to War in self-defense and especially when some Muslims are driven out of their homeland.
As in the case of people of Palestine, who were driven out by the Israelis in 1948 and 1967.
WHAT DOES ISLAM SAY ABOUT WAR?
Like Christianity, Islam permits fighting in self-defense, in defense of religion, or on the part of those who have been expelled forcibly from their homes. It lays down strict rules of combat, which include prohibitions against harming civilians and against destroying crops, trees and livestock. As Muslims see it, injustice would be triumphant in the world if good men were not prepared to risk their lives in a righteous cause. The Qur'an says:
"Fight in the cause of God against those who fight you, but do not transgress limits. God does not love transgressors." (2:190)
If they seek peace, then seek you peace. And trust in God for He is the One that heareth and knoweth all things. (8:61)
War, therefore, is the last resort, and is subject to the rigorous conditions laid down by the sacred law. The term Jihad literally means 'struggle', and Muslims believe that there are two kinds of Jihad. The other 'Jihad' is the inner struggle, which everyone wages against egotistic desires, for the sake of attaining inner peace.
Many Christians are praised several times in the Qur'an
http://azerilink.homestead.com/nonmuslimsinQuran.html
==============================================
Hence, to say Jesus is the Son of God is to imitate the unbelievers of old. Yet, the unbelievers of old (i.e. the pagans) believed that the gods had wives with whom they cohabited in order to have children.
Eve was made from the rib of a Man, Jesus was made from a womb of a woman, which sounds more miraculous to you?
Secondly, "Who then is Eve's second parent? you can suggest that she is from Adam, who then is Her Mother? Aren't all humans born with a Mother and Father?"
And creation of Adam is more miracles than creation of Jesus because Allah created Adam without Father or Mother
Meaning worship rabbi and monk
Explained how they took their rabbis and priests besides Allah as lords in the sense that they obeyed them in what they knew was forbidden by Allah. In other words, these rabbis and monks and priests would forbid something, which was made lawful to them by Allah, and they would obey them in that. Or they would make to them something lawful which was forbidden by Allah and they would obey them in that, like for instance with the Christians and the issue of multi-marriages, having more than one wife. The Christians have forbidden this even though Allah has made it lawful for them. And, in fact, they find that in their books the Prophets are mentioned having more than one wife. And likewise the Christians have made for themselves lawful to eat the flesh of swine, pig's meat, pork, and this is something, which has been forbidden by the laws of Allah. So they by them obeying them in these matters they have taken them as lords besides Allah
===
Rabbi and monk they give them self the authority as if they are God
by changing the teaching of Christianity according to them benefit
Example
The pope during the time of the indulgence controversy was Leo X , who was pope from 1513-1521. He was the one who decided to begin selling indulgences
Martin Luther protested against the sale and abuse of indulgences and came to reject the teaching altogether. Since the Council of Trent (1562) the buying and selling of indulgences has been unlawful.
The Pope is as it were God on earth
The Pope is of so great dignity and so exalted that he is not a mere man, but as it were God, and the vicar of God...."
"The Pope is as it were God on earth, sole sovereign of the faithful of Christ, chief of kings, having plenitude of power, to whom has been intrusted by the omnipotent God direction not only of the earthly but also of the heavenly kingdom...."
"The Pope is of so great authority and power that he can modify, explain, or interpret even divine laws...."
http://www.benabraham.com/html/he_blasphemes_god.html
Example of deviation of monk and priest
The Survivors of Clergy Abuse
Linkup’s Homepage
http://www.thelinkup.com/index.html#arc
=======
Bible
Result of cutting and pasting
People today generally believe that there is only ONE Bible, and ONE version of any given verse of the Bible. As we have begun to see, this is far from true. All Bibles in our possession today (Such as the KJV, the NRSV, the NASV, NIV,...etc.) are the result of extensive cutting and pasting from these various manuscripts with no single one being the definitive reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows up in one "ancient manuscript" but is totally missing from many others. For instance, Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole verses) is completely missing from the most ancient manuscripts available today but show up in more recent "ancient manuscripts." There are also many documented cases where even geographical locations are completely different from one ancient manuscript to the next. For instance, in the "Samaritan Pentateuch manuscript," Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount Gerizim,"while in the "Hebrew manuscript" the exact same verse speaks of "mount Ebal." From Deuteronomy 27:12-13 we can see that these are two distinctly different locations. Similarly, Luke 4:44 in some "ancient manuscripts" mentions "Synagogues of Judea," others mention "Synagogues of Galilee." This is only a sampling, a comprehensive listing would require a book of its own."
Bart Ehram continues:
"Nonetheless, there are some kinds of textual changes for which it is difficult to account apart from the deliberate activity of a transcriber. When a scribe appended an additional twelve verses to the end of the Gospel of Mark, this can scarcely be attributed to mere oversight" [The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, Bart Ehrman, pp. 27-28]
Examples of verses from the NT which scholars admit were interpolated into the NT text at a latter date and are in fact fabrications:
http://www.answering-christianity.co...ars_refute.htm
BIBLICAL CRITICISMS
http://www.muslim-answers.org/bible.htm
=======
part 2A
Divisions within the Religion
In the two millennia of its history Christianity has been divided by schism and roiled by heresy, based on doctrinal and organizational differences. Today there are three broad divisions, Roman Catholic, Orthodox Eastern, and Protestant; but within the category of Protestantism, there is a particularly large number of divergent denominations.
So we can understand that also Islam and Judaism have notes concerning for example
Trinity and the Divinity of Jesus, The Divine sonship of Jesus, The Original Sin, and Atonement.
The doctrine of the Trinity is this -
"We worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity; neither confounding the persons; nor dividing the substance. For there is one Person of the Father; another of the Son, and another of the Holy Ghost.
"But the Godhead of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, is all one: the Glory equal, the Majesty co-eternal. Such as the Father is, so is the Son, and such is the Holy Ghost.
"The Father uncreate, the Son uncreate, and the Holy Ghost uncreate. The Father incomprehensible, the Son incomprehensible, and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible. The Father eternal, the Son eternal, and the Holy Ghost eternal.
"And yet there are not three eternals, but one eternal. Also there are not three incomprehensibles, not three uncreated: but one uncreated, and one incomprehensible.
"So likewise the Father is Almighty, the Son Almighty and the Holy Ghost Almighty. And yet there are not three Almighties, but one Almighty.
"So the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God. And yet there are not three Gods: but one God.
"So likewise the Father is Lord, the Son Lord, and the Holy Ghost Lord. And yet not three Lords but one Lord.
"For like as we are compelled by the Christian verity to acknowledge every person by himself to be God and Lord; so we are forbidden by the Catholic religion to say, There be three Gods, or three Lords.
"The Father is made of none; neither created, nor begotten. The Son is of the Father alone: not made, nor created, but begotten. The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son; neither made, nor created, nor begotten, but proceeding.
"So there is one Father, not three Fathers; one Son, not three Sons: one Holy Ghost, not three Holy Ghosts.
"And in this Trinity none is afore, or after other, none is greater or less than others; but the whole three persons are co- eternal together; and co-equal. So that in all things as is aforesaid: the Unity in Trinity, and the Trinity in Unity is to be worshipped.
"HE THEREFORE THAT WILL BE SAVED MUST THUS THINK OF THE TRINITY."
http://www.antipas.org/books/trinity/trinity1.html
The Doctrine of the TRINITY...
Mystery or Confusion?
http://www.answering-christianity.co...e_students.htm
==============================================
1- Answering Trinity.
2- History of Man's corruption of the Bible.
3- Islam and its Divinity.
http://www.answering-christianity.com/at.htm
Four Rules of Pure Monotheism
http://www.muslim-answers.org/4rules.htm
Explanation of the Truth of Monotheism
http://www.quraan.com/Tawheed/TruthOfMonotheism.asp
Islam and the Divinity of Chtist
http://www.answering-christianity.com/jesus.htm
The True Message of Jesus Christ
http://www.al-sunnah.com/true_message_of_jesus.htm
=======
In the case of Christianity what should this tell us
Who committed crimes against civilian and wage wars and use discrimination and genocide against the humanity?
Some examples:
1- Inquisition against Muslims and Jews The Inquisition begins as Pope Gregory IX assigns Dominicans responsibility for combating heresy. Torture used (1252). Ferdinand and Isabella establish Spanish Inquisition (1478). Tourquemada, Grand Inquisitor, forces conversion or expulsion of Spanish Jews (1492). Forced conversion of Moors (1499). Inquisition in Portugal (1531). First Protestants burned at the stake in Spain (1543). Spanish Inquisition abolished (1834).
2- Crusade against Muslims Jews and Christian orthodox In 1095 at Council of Clermont, Pope Urban II calls for war to rescue Holy Land from Muslim infidels. The First Crusade (1096) is assembled in response to Emperor Alexius I. The Christians capture Antioch (1098) and Jerusalem (1099). They establish the Crusader States, ruled by Europeans. It is the only successful crusade. The Second Crusade begins after the Seljuk Turks recapture Edessa, one of the Crusader States, in 1144. It is led by King Louis VIII of France and Holy Roman Emperor Conrad III. Crusaders perish in Asia Minor (1147).
3- The Albigensian Crusade (so named, because the French city of Albi was a Cathar stronghold), lasted for 20 years, from 1209 to 1229. While authorized by the pope, the actual fighting was carried out primarily by secular forces, especially under Simon de Montfort. The suppression of the Cathar heresy established new "standards" for ferocity for the Roman Church in dealing with its own flock. Perhaps the most famous example was on July 22, 1209, when the city of Beziers was sacked, with over 20,000 men, women and children killed by crusaders. The event will forever be framed in history by the words of papal legate Arnaud, whom, when asked if Catholics should be spared during the assault, answered "Kill them all, for God knows His own".
4 - 1202 Pope Innocent III launches fourth Crusade to defeat Egypt. After some setbacks, Crusaders defy the pope and sack Constantinople, center of the Orthodox church. A three-day massacre by the Crusaders alienates the eastern and western churches for centuries.
5- WWI waged by Christian and the dead by million
6 - WWII waged by Christians and the dead by million
7- America attacked japan and used two atomic
bombs
against Japanese cities Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Death toll of Japanese civillian
Hiroshima 118,661
Nagasaki 73,884
Hiroshima Injuries 79,130
Nagasaki Injuries 74,909
8- America used chemical weapon against Korea and Vietnam during war as (agent orange). And the victims was thousands of civilian.
9- Discrimination based on color and race .
10- Black cannot ride bus with whites May 4, 1961 -- Thirteen "Freedom Riders" begin bus trip through the South to test compliance with laws banning segregation in interstate transportation. Black and White riders were bombed and savagely beaten, but their movement
ended segregation interstate transportation facilities.
11- white Christian used apartheid against South African people
12- Racial Nazi Hitler and fascist Mussolini
13 - White supremacy and racial groups like KKK and its racial crime
14- Tulsa massacre against African American
15- Genocide against native American
16- Slave trade
This is only some example of crimes committed
against humanity committed by Christians.
Medical aspect of atomic bomb disaster in Nagasaki (INDEX)
- http://www-sdc.med.nagasaki-u.ac.jp/...medical-E.html
-
discrimination against black and native american
WAGING GENOCIDE
CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES & SMALLPOX,
THE ANDREW JACKSON CONNECTION
http://www.iwchildren.org/missionary.htm
The Great Black Church-burning Hoax
http://www.consumeralert.org/fumento/arson.htm
U.S. 'ethnic cleansing'
The 1921 Tulsa massacre
http://www.geocities.com/anaxfiles/kosovo/artcl11.html
Devastating legacy of Agent Orange still haunts Vietnamese families
http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/2...Stories/12.htm
Condemning Islam while ignoring your own religion's history seems pretty .......?!!!
Religious Persecution in Europe:
Focus on Muslims
http://www.mwlusa.org/news_helsinki.html
USA wages and involves in Wars on average of every 5 years and less Since 300 Years of Independence
about 50 external war and equal number of internal war
http://pub63.ezboard.com/ftheologyfo...picID=85.topic
==========
Muslims respect and accept Jesus as prophet like Prophet Muhammad Peace is upon them and Muslims respect Virgin Marry even more than some Christian's denomination
!
Compare the attitude of Jews against Jesus
What about Jews whom they Killed Jesus according to Christian believe.
Why don't the Jewish people recognize the New Testament?
http://www.geocities.com/Metzad/
Jewish Hatred Against Jesus Christ
Was there an organized Jewish conspiracy against the life and ministry of our Savior - the Lord Jesus Christ?
Let the Scriptures speak for themselves!
". . . of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men: Forbidding us to speak to the Gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sin alway: For the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost."
I Thessalonians 2:14-16
http://www.truthinhistory.org/jews.htm
======
Logical Prove of Islam's Truth
Does God Exist?
Which Religion is True?
http://www.iol.ie/~afifi/BICNews/Sabeel/sabeel2.htm
THE TEN COMMANDMENTS & THE
CONFIRMATION IN THE QURAN
http://www.beconvinced.com/RELIGION/command10.htm
http://www.beconvinced.com/
=====
Jesus killing his enemies:
"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them--bring them here and kill them in front of me.' After Jesus had said this, he went on ahead, going up to Jerusalem. (From the NIV Bible, Luke 19:26-28)"
Luke 19:26-28 is an obvious contradiction to what Jesus taught from Love toward the enemies. According to Luke 19:11, Jesus was telling a parable or story. But even though he was telling a parable, it is clear that Jesus believed in it, since he preached it by his own mouth, and practiced it as shown below.
Jesus killed the woman's children:
"So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (From the NIV Bible, Revelation 2:22-23)"
Crimes against Christianity
Crimes against Christianity
Introduction
For the Zionists the Palestinian Christians represent an obstacle to their plan to create a Jewish State in Palestine that would be 100% Jewish.
In 1948, the Zionists expelled from Palestine 100,000 Christians. During the 1948 war, Zionists destroyed desecrated and profaned Christian churches, convents and institutions throughout the Occupied area of Palestine.
During the June the June war of 1967 Israeli forces shelled and damaged many churches in the old city of Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.
Israeli forces opened the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to Jews who poured into the holiest place in Christendom indecently dressed behaving disrespectfully joking, singing and pouring pharisaic hate and insults against Christianity and against Jesus Christ inside the Holy Sepulchre and next to the tomb of Jesus Christ.
Israeli Authorities censor all films and plays to prevent mentioning the name of Jesus Christ.
The Zionist reflected with their action the deep-felt hatred of everything Christian embedded in the Zionist ideology. Testimony shows that this hatred went so deep that the Zionist authorities removed the international “+” sign from mathematics textbooks because of the resemblance of the plus sign to the Christian Cross.
Previous Articles
Destruction of a Christian Site on Mount Abu Ghniem
St. Barbara’s shrine destroyed by Israeli army
Persecution of Christians in the Holy Land
Israel keeps annexing more Palestinian land
Ultra-Orthodox Jew sentence to jail
Appeal on behalf of Dr. Attallah Hanna
The Jewish hatred towards Christianity
The Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem
Israeli Occupation of Lutheran Church in Beit Jala
Israeli army destroyed Orthodox Church near Ramallah
Bethlehem stands as monument to Israeli destruction
Muslims and Christians together
Church of the Nativity of the Nativity or a gun battle field?
Virgin Mary Statue Desecrated by Israeli Occupation
Attacks on Christianity 1967& After
Desecration in Peace: 1949-67
The War against Christians PA. 1948-49
Destruction and Desecration of Christian Holy Places in the 40's
Zionist's Hate against Christianity
January 15, 1984
Destruction and Desecration of Christian Holy Places after 1948
Preventing the Mention of Jesus and Christianity
Israel Shells Church of Nativity
Attack against Christians
Continuation of All Christian Denomination...
PA Christians Community Pays the Price.
Beating Christian Women...
All Christian Denominations Attacked
Continuing Persecution of Baptist: Arson
Zionist attack Jewish-Christian Meeting
Persons killed and wounded by Zionist...
Bitter in Bethlehem
Target of Hate
Murder of the Warden of Garden Tomb
Persecution of mixed Christian-Jewish Families
Palestine Christians Oppose Partition and Creation of Jewish State
A campaign against Christian Missionaries
Desecration and Profanation of Christian Holy Places in 1948
Obliteration of Christian Shrines
The Persecution of Christians in Israel
Uprooting Christianity from the Holy Land
Desecration of Christian Holy Places in 1948
Desecration of Christian Holy Places 1967-69
Destruction of three biblical villages
Christianity and the State of Israel
Statement of the Heads of Christian Communities in Jerusalem, 1989
An open letter to fundamentalist Ministers
Introduction
For the Zionists the Palestinian Christians represent an obstacle to their plan to create a Jewish State in Palestine that would be 100% Jewish.
In 1948, the Zionists expelled from Palestine 100,000 Christians. During the 1948 war, Zionists destroyed desecrated and profaned Christian churches, convents and institutions throughout the Occupied area of Palestine.
During the June the June war of 1967 Israeli forces shelled and damaged many churches in the old city of Jerusalem and the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem.
Israeli forces opened the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to Jews who poured into the holiest place in Christendom indecently dressed behaving disrespectfully joking, singing and pouring pharisaic hate and insults against Christianity and against Jesus Christ inside the Holy Sepulchre and next to the tomb of Jesus Christ.
Israeli Authorities censor all films and plays to prevent mentioning the name of Jesus Christ.
The Zionist reflected with their action the deep-felt hatred of everything Christian embedded in the Zionist ideology. Testimony shows that this hatred went so deep that the Zionist authorities removed the international “+” sign from mathematics textbooks because of the resemblance of the plus sign to the Christian Cross.
Previous Articles
Destruction of a Christian Site on Mount Abu Ghniem
St. Barbara’s shrine destroyed by Israeli army
Persecution of Christians in the Holy Land
Israel keeps annexing more Palestinian land
Ultra-Orthodox Jew sentence to jail
Appeal on behalf of Dr. Attallah Hanna
The Jewish hatred towards Christianity
The Episcopal Diocese of Jerusalem
Israeli Occupation of Lutheran Church in Beit Jala
Israeli army destroyed Orthodox Church near Ramallah
Bethlehem stands as monument to Israeli destruction
Muslims and Christians together
Church of the Nativity of the Nativity or a gun battle field?
Virgin Mary Statue Desecrated by Israeli Occupation
Attacks on Christianity 1967& After
Desecration in Peace: 1949-67
The War against Christians PA. 1948-49
Destruction and Desecration of Christian Holy Places in the 40's
Zionist's Hate against Christianity
January 15, 1984
Destruction and Desecration of Christian Holy Places after 1948
Preventing the Mention of Jesus and Christianity
Israel Shells Church of Nativity
Attack against Christians
Continuation of All Christian Denomination...
PA Christians Community Pays the Price.
Beating Christian Women...
All Christian Denominations Attacked
Continuing Persecution of Baptist: Arson
Zionist attack Jewish-Christian Meeting
Persons killed and wounded by Zionist...
Bitter in Bethlehem
Target of Hate
Murder of the Warden of Garden Tomb
Persecution of mixed Christian-Jewish Families
Palestine Christians Oppose Partition and Creation of Jewish State
A campaign against Christian Missionaries
Desecration and Profanation of Christian Holy Places in 1948
Obliteration of Christian Shrines
The Persecution of Christians in Israel
Uprooting Christianity from the Holy Land
Desecration of Christian Holy Places in 1948
Desecration of Christian Holy Places 1967-69
Destruction of three biblical villages
Christianity and the State of Israel
Statement of the Heads of Christian Communities in Jerusalem, 1989
An open letter to fundamentalist Ministers
Bible Errors
Bible Errors
Bible Errors
A few choice mistakes from the Good Book
http://www.goatstar.org/
http://atheism.about.com/cs/errorsinthebibl/
http://www.hevanet.com/refugee/bibleerr.htm
A List of Biblical Contradictions
Jim Merritt
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html
101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible
http://www.themodernreligion.com/comparative/christ/not/bible_contradiction_clear.htm
Bible Errors
A few choice mistakes from the Good Book
http://www.goatstar.org/
http://atheism.about.com/cs/errorsinthebibl/
http://www.hevanet.com/refugee/bibleerr.htm
A List of Biblical Contradictions
Jim Merritt
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/jim_meritt/bible-contradictions.html
101 Clear Contradictions in the Bible
http://www.themodernreligion.com/comparative/christ/not/bible_contradiction_clear.htm
Arab contributions to mathematics
Arab contributions to mathematics and the introduction of the Zero
By holyland
Arab contributions to mathematics and the introduction of the Zero
Regional, Science, 4/22/1998
Arab contributions to human civilization are noteworthy. In arithmetic the style of writing digits from right to left is an evidence of its Arab origin. For instance, the numeral for five hundred in English should be written as 005, not as 500 according to English's left-to-right reading style.
Another invention that revolutionized mathematics was the introduction of the number zero by Muhammad Bin Ahmad in 967 AD. Zero was introduced in the West as late as the beginning of the thirteenth century. Modern society takes the invention of the zero for granted, yet the Zero is a non-trivial concept, that allowed major mathematical breakthroughs.
Arab civilizations also made a great contribution to fractions and to the principle of errors, which is employed to solve Algebra problems arithmetically.
Concerning Algebra, al-Khawarzmi is credited with the first treatise. He solved Algebra equations of the first and second degree (known as quadratic equations, and are are prevelant in science and engineering) and also introduced the geometrical method of solving these equations.
He also recognized that quadratic equations have two roots. His method was continued by Thabet Bin Qura, the translator of Ptolemy's works who developed Algebra and first realized application in geometry. By the 11th century the Arabs had founded, developed and perfected geometrical algebra and could solve equations of the third and fourth degree.
Another outstanding Arab mathematician is Abul Wafa who created and successfully developed a branch of geometry which consists of problems leading to equations in Algebra of a higher degree than the second. He made a number of valuable contributions to polyhedral theory.
Al-Karaki, of the 11th century is considered to be one of the greatest Arab mathematicians. He composed one arithmetic book and another on Algebra. In the two books, he developed an approximate method of finding square roots, a theory of indices, a theory of mathematical induction and a theory of intermediate quadratic equations.
Arabs have excelled in geometry, starting with the transition of Euclid and conic section of Apolonios and they preserved the genuine works of these two Greek masters for the modern world, by the 9th century AD. and then started making new discoveries in this domain.
In his book translated by Roger Bacon, Ibn al-Haitham wrote a book on geometrical optics, dealing with problems that would be difficult to solve even now.
It is also at the hand of the Arabs that the geometry of conic sections was developed to a great extent.
However, Arab achievements in this field were crowned by the discovery made by Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan, known as Nassereddine al-Tusi. Al-Tusi separated trigonometry from astronomy. This contribution recognizes and explains weakness in Euclid's theory of parallels, and thereby may thus be credited as founder of non-Euclidian geometry.
By holyland
Arab contributions to mathematics and the introduction of the Zero
Regional, Science, 4/22/1998
Arab contributions to human civilization are noteworthy. In arithmetic the style of writing digits from right to left is an evidence of its Arab origin. For instance, the numeral for five hundred in English should be written as 005, not as 500 according to English's left-to-right reading style.
Another invention that revolutionized mathematics was the introduction of the number zero by Muhammad Bin Ahmad in 967 AD. Zero was introduced in the West as late as the beginning of the thirteenth century. Modern society takes the invention of the zero for granted, yet the Zero is a non-trivial concept, that allowed major mathematical breakthroughs.
Arab civilizations also made a great contribution to fractions and to the principle of errors, which is employed to solve Algebra problems arithmetically.
Concerning Algebra, al-Khawarzmi is credited with the first treatise. He solved Algebra equations of the first and second degree (known as quadratic equations, and are are prevelant in science and engineering) and also introduced the geometrical method of solving these equations.
He also recognized that quadratic equations have two roots. His method was continued by Thabet Bin Qura, the translator of Ptolemy's works who developed Algebra and first realized application in geometry. By the 11th century the Arabs had founded, developed and perfected geometrical algebra and could solve equations of the third and fourth degree.
Another outstanding Arab mathematician is Abul Wafa who created and successfully developed a branch of geometry which consists of problems leading to equations in Algebra of a higher degree than the second. He made a number of valuable contributions to polyhedral theory.
Al-Karaki, of the 11th century is considered to be one of the greatest Arab mathematicians. He composed one arithmetic book and another on Algebra. In the two books, he developed an approximate method of finding square roots, a theory of indices, a theory of mathematical induction and a theory of intermediate quadratic equations.
Arabs have excelled in geometry, starting with the transition of Euclid and conic section of Apolonios and they preserved the genuine works of these two Greek masters for the modern world, by the 9th century AD. and then started making new discoveries in this domain.
In his book translated by Roger Bacon, Ibn al-Haitham wrote a book on geometrical optics, dealing with problems that would be difficult to solve even now.
It is also at the hand of the Arabs that the geometry of conic sections was developed to a great extent.
However, Arab achievements in this field were crowned by the discovery made by Abu Jafar Muhammad Ibn Muhammad Ibn al-Hassan, known as Nassereddine al-Tusi. Al-Tusi separated trigonometry from astronomy. This contribution recognizes and explains weakness in Euclid's theory of parallels, and thereby may thus be credited as founder of non-Euclidian geometry.
Families Need Fathers
Families Need Fathers
Keeping Children and Parents in Contact since 1974
An important change for unmarried couples in England and Wales (Nov 2003)
Note: This does not apply to births registered before 1 December 2003.
the right to be responsible for your child
The law changed on 1 December 2003 to make it easier for unmarried fathers to get equal parental responsibility: all you have to do is for both parents to register the birth of your baby together.
Parental responsibility for your child gives you important legal rights as well as responsibilities. Without it, you don't have any right to be involved in decisions such as where they live, their education, religion or medical treatment. With parental responsibility, you are treated in law as the child's parent, and you take equal responsibility for bringing them up.
Unlike mothers and married fathers, if you are not married to your baby's mother you do not automatically have parental responsibility for them.
Before this change, you could only gain parental responsibility by later marrying the child's mother, signing an official agreement with the mother or getting a court order. You can still get responsibility in these ways - you might want to think about this if you have other children.
See also Amendments of The Children Act 1989
Those in Northern Ireland were lucky enough to have this law come into force on 17th July 2001, however those in Scotland are unfortunately still waiting.
http://www.fnf.org.uk/pro.htm
Keeping Children and Parents in Contact since 1974
An important change for unmarried couples in England and Wales (Nov 2003)
Note: This does not apply to births registered before 1 December 2003.
the right to be responsible for your child
The law changed on 1 December 2003 to make it easier for unmarried fathers to get equal parental responsibility: all you have to do is for both parents to register the birth of your baby together.
Parental responsibility for your child gives you important legal rights as well as responsibilities. Without it, you don't have any right to be involved in decisions such as where they live, their education, religion or medical treatment. With parental responsibility, you are treated in law as the child's parent, and you take equal responsibility for bringing them up.
Unlike mothers and married fathers, if you are not married to your baby's mother you do not automatically have parental responsibility for them.
Before this change, you could only gain parental responsibility by later marrying the child's mother, signing an official agreement with the mother or getting a court order. You can still get responsibility in these ways - you might want to think about this if you have other children.
See also Amendments of The Children Act 1989
Those in Northern Ireland were lucky enough to have this law come into force on 17th July 2001, however those in Scotland are unfortunately still waiting.
http://www.fnf.org.uk/pro.htm
Fathers' rights
Fathers' rights
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup.
This article or section seems not to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
To meet Wikipedia's quality standards, this article or section may require cleanup.
This article or section seems not to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia entry. Please improve the article or discuss proposed changes on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.
Men's rights
Men's rights
By holyland
Men's rights
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Men's rights is a stream in the men's movement. It is closely related to the fathers' rights movement and began as a recognisable movement in the 1960s, largely as an outgrowth of men's divorce societies. (The earliest organization which has been documented is the United States Divorce Reform, founded in Sacramento, California, by Ruben Kidd and George Partis in 1960.) Its professed aim is to promote the health and well-being of all men and boys, as part of a general human rights, civil rights or equal rights agenda. It is frequently concerned with wellness, economic fairness and family law. There is no single unifying manifesto or organization which can claim to speak for the entire movement and the term is often used in various, even conflicting ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men's_rights
By holyland
Men's rights
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Men's rights is a stream in the men's movement. It is closely related to the fathers' rights movement and began as a recognisable movement in the 1960s, largely as an outgrowth of men's divorce societies. (The earliest organization which has been documented is the United States Divorce Reform, founded in Sacramento, California, by Ruben Kidd and George Partis in 1960.) Its professed aim is to promote the health and well-being of all men and boys, as part of a general human rights, civil rights or equal rights agenda. It is frequently concerned with wellness, economic fairness and family law. There is no single unifying manifesto or organization which can claim to speak for the entire movement and the term is often used in various, even conflicting ways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men's_rights
Nudist pastor
Nudist pastor to hold naked services
By holyland
Ananova:
Nudist pastor to hold naked services
A naturist church minister has called on like-minded Christians to join him in celebrating religion in the nude
Pastor Robert Wright, 51, is to hold weekly fellowship meetings at a nudist resort near Brisbane, reports the Australian Daily Telegraph.
Mr Wright, who has been a naturist for more than 16 years, said: "I am not trying to get Christians to become nudists, I am catering for Christians who are nudists."
Mr Wright, who was ordained three years ago, is also to open a naked music festival at nearby Cabarita and lead services there.
Even security guards will be naked at the event, Raw Cabarita, which promises "an awesome three-day party where clothes aren't necessary".
But Mr Wright added: "Nude is not rude, and the festival will not be like a '69 Woodstock-type thing.
"There are more Christians in it than people realise. We are not into sex orgies, we are very well-adjusted people."
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1324405.html?menu=news.quirkies
By holyland
Ananova:
Nudist pastor to hold naked services
A naturist church minister has called on like-minded Christians to join him in celebrating religion in the nude
Pastor Robert Wright, 51, is to hold weekly fellowship meetings at a nudist resort near Brisbane, reports the Australian Daily Telegraph.
Mr Wright, who has been a naturist for more than 16 years, said: "I am not trying to get Christians to become nudists, I am catering for Christians who are nudists."
Mr Wright, who was ordained three years ago, is also to open a naked music festival at nearby Cabarita and lead services there.
Even security guards will be naked at the event, Raw Cabarita, which promises "an awesome three-day party where clothes aren't necessary".
But Mr Wright added: "Nude is not rude, and the festival will not be like a '69 Woodstock-type thing.
"There are more Christians in it than people realise. We are not into sex orgies, we are very well-adjusted people."
http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1324405.html?menu=news.quirkies
Water from Fatima
Water from Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe & the Jordan River
By holyland
Water from Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe & the Jordan River
(Water from the sites of the apparitions of the Blessed Mother)
By holyland
Water from Fatima, Lourdes, Guadalupe & the Jordan River
(Water from the sites of the apparitions of the Blessed Mother)
SPINDOCTORING THE INQUISITION
SPINDOCTORING THE INQUISITION
Spin-doctoring the Inquisition
Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth. In mid June of this year the Pope spearheaded a public relations ploy designed to place the infamous Office of Inquisition in a better light. This pope, and his media experts, have bluntly lied about this hellish office so as to make all those they seek to attack appear as “conspiracy theorists” by those duped into believing their lies. As is always the case, the grand majority of the people of this world are spiritually lacking and completely unable to see what they’re up to. This is why Satan is able to control the masses. This is also why in Noah’s day only EIGHT people survived the global deluge. And this is also why we true Christians will in fact be looked upon as conspiracy theorists. The following article was released by the online Roman Catholic publication known as Zenit organization…
Crucial to Have the Facts About Inquisition, Says Pope
Writes a Letter for the Publication of Minutes of 1998 Congress
VATICAN CITY, JUNE 15, 2004 (Zenit.org).- John Paul II reiterated the importance of historical research so that the Church can purify her memory of the sins of her children, in particular, the Inquisition.
"Instead of offering to the world the witness of a life inspired by the values of faith," the Pope continued, Christians on occasion "indulged in ways of thinking and acting which were truly forms of counter-witness and scandal."
Borromeo explained that Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241) was the first to establish "inquisitors," "delegates of the Apostolic See with the task of combating heresy in certain areas."
"Obviously, a request for forgiveness can only affect real and objectively recognized events. Forgiveness is not asked for images spread by public opinion, which are part of a myth and do not correspond to reality," he said.
Cardinal Cottier said that the minutes have been published after a long delay due to a series of health problems affecting the scholars.
ZE04061509
this article, as well as many others, the Pope is seeking to make the Inquisition appear “not as bad” as some report. The wording alone seeks to downplay the horrendous and torturous acts this church performed on 100% innocent people, most of whom were true Christians dying for their faith. The Vatican stated that Christians "indulged in ways of thinking and acting which were truly forms of counter-witness and scandal.” Can you imagine? This evil church is saying FOLLOWERS OF CHRIST did these hellish acts when in fact it was the Catholic church that did these things. Christians do NOT boil people in oil, bury them alive, burn them alive, skin them alive, or torture them for days on end before finally killing them. Christians simply are unable to do acts of demons. Only the Roman Catholic forefather did this! STILL this so called apologetic man in Rome is seeking to place the blame on others for acts the Vatican itself has done! And he does so at a time when Muslims already have an inbred hatred for Christians. They hate Christians because of what the Catholic church did to them in the past. This is historic fact that no one dares to debate. It is that well known. But still, those nations, and even religions that were attacked by Rome think Rome was a Christian entity doing those acts merely because Rome CLAIMS Jesus as Lord! Thing is, NOTHING can be further from the truth! Roman Catholicism is by no means a Christian religion. It is actually a religion designed by Satan to destroy Christianity by masquerading as Christians while doing hellish acts.
On March 12, 2000 when the Pope “supposedly” apologized, he stated that "...Catholics at times "have not been faithful to the great commandment of love, sullying in this way the face of the Church," His church predecessors tortured and killed countless millions, but as usual the Vatican and Pope of this day says the Catholic people did it!? When will the Catholic people realize their Pope is blaming them for what the Church leaders openly did. Have you ever heard of a Catholic pulling someone down to their basement to strip them of their skin? No! Have you heard of priests doing it? Yes! Have you heard of priests telling the governing officials of the day to torture people? Yes again. So why is Rome constantly blaming their faithful congregations for what they themselves did? BECAUSE THEY LET THEM! There is no other reason. It’s no different then the countless millions who stay in a church that not only admitted to killing innocent people, they also admitted to molesting their sons TO THIS DAY and these Catholics stay in this church.
Why isn’t there an uproar regarding these statements? Because for one, the media is controlled, and two, many fear Rome and can see how they manipulate the truth, and how stupid the masses truly are. They know that if they do say something, the Vatican has proven time and time again that they are very capable of lying, twisting the facts, and forcing certain “men in power” to bow to their commands, even if it means to murder. So, those that want to speak out, usually choose not to, figuring it will come to no avail anyway.
The article also stated, “Forgiveness is not asked for images spread by public opinion, which are part of a myth and do not correspond to reality” In other words, the Pope is stating they seek no forgiveness for the “so called” gossip we see in such works of literature as the “Foxes Book of Martyrs” and other globally known sources of information that list the atrocities of this church. He is not talking about actual “gossip” that is running amuck. He is no doubt talking about those works of literature because those books document his church’s past. So he needs to belittle them as a defense lawyers rips into their defendant's victims. All along the church has claimed Foxe’s book, and those like it nothing but myths, as well as out and out “gossip” from what they define as anti-Catholics. Yet, the true Christians and their families do understand these things ARE quite true. In fact, MANY ex-Catholic priests and nuns have stepped forward to voice the truth regarding same over the years. Problem is, most of them, after doing so, simple wind up missing, or are literally found dead. This again affords the Vatican another opportunity to prevent further problems. FEAR reigns supreme in many who do not trust the Lord when He said plainly He has NOT given us a spirit of fear.
I ask… Why would the pope be looking for positive public relations (PR) for the Inquisition?? And why now? Because he himself RE-INSTATED IT IN 1991! And the Vatican plans to USE IT soon. If they had no plans to use it then WHY re-instate it? They know that when the word gets out this office is once again being used, the “so called” gossip concerning it will cause problems for Rome. So, common sense says they need to bathe this hellish office in a light that is far more acceptable to the grand majority of sheeple out there that are truly incapable of seeing the truth for what it is. What better time than now? It’s the twilight hours of the last days, Satan is about to burst forth in all his hellish glory, and the majority of the people the world over are sufficiently conditioned to fall for such hogwash as this. So they jump at the chance!
HOLY OFFICE STILL EXISTS
Pope John Paul II Revives Inquisition
By Kathleen R. Hayes Feb 1991, NRI Trumpet Page 3
The thought of a revived Holy Office of the Inquisition would pacify some and offend others. Nevertheless, the "Holy Office" still exists. Only it's name has been changed. Pope John Paul II has been instrumental in its revival. One may argue that this Ratzinger run agency is merely an attempt by the Catholic Church to root out communism or backslidden priests and their practices. However, with John Paul II's objective to implement "God's mandate" by creating a global church-state which will administer from traditional Roman Catholic theology, is enough cause for alarm. Malachi Martin has already stated in his book, "The Keys of this Blood," that the pope will not tolerate any belief systems that oppose his, not on a civil or church level. In John Paul II the world will behold a tyrant who will coldly execute direct orders against those whom he deems are heretics or immoral. Moreover, like his papal predecessors, John Paul II will carry out his "Godly mandate" in the name of Christ, or perhaps Mary. May God help us all.
The positive PR the Vatican cronies are looking to create is designed to make their actions appear not only moral, but it will also make anyone speaking out against The Vatican to appear as wierdos. It’s similar to the way Hollywood has portrayed the Christian for the last few decades. Have you ever noticed the strange looking people Hollywood places in the crowd scenes of their movies? Check it out the next time you see a movie setting inside a stadium or something like that. Once in a while they will show a person with a multicolored clown wig holding up a large sign that says, “JOHN 3:16” on it! I have seen this more than once over the years. They look to make Christianity appears as a ridiculous faith. And by the way, it’s not just Rome doing this today. Look at the Pentecostal churches, or the folks that dance with snakes in Georgia. They make Christians appear strange! When people walk into the churches and see how strange and ridiculous the people act, they decide Christianity is a joke and not worthy of investigating.
Countless scores of people have exposed Rome and its lies, and yes, countless scores have been killed for it. PLUS, it’s no longer as if the Vatican is trying to hide it’s evil past, or present. Still, people that willfully allow this satanic agency to blind them, are the very ones who defend it. The media is literally drenched today with everything from child molestation, to drunken bishops killing people in hit and run accidents. But those of us that expose Rome are called the evil ones according to this church and it’s media drones. And everyone believes them over those that have bonafide factual data exposing this Antichrist! Amazing isn’t it?
Vatican 'dispels Inquisition myths'
By Verity Murphy BBC News Online
The Inquisition reached its peak in the 16th Century. The Vatican has published a new study on the abuses committed by the medieval Inquisition and come to a rather surprising conclusion - that in fact the much feared judges of heresy were not as brutal as previously believed. According to the 800-page report, the Inquisition that spread fear throughout Europe throughout the Middle Ages did not use execution or torture to anything like the extent history would have us believe. In fact the book's editor, Professor Agostino Borromeo, claims that in Spain only 1.8% of those investigated by the notorious Spanish Inquisition were killed. Nonetheless, as the report was published, Pope John Paul II apologised once more for the interrogators' excesses, expressing sorrow for "the errors committed in the service of the truth by the recourse to non-Christian methods".
… The punishments meted out for wrongdoers ranged from being forced to visit churches and make pilgrimages, to life imprisonment or execution by burning at the stake.
…The accused did not have the right to face and question their accuser and it was acceptable to take testimony from criminals and excommunicated people.
The Inquisition reached its peak in the 16th Century as it battled the Reformation, but its most famous trial was that of Galileo in 1633, condemned for claiming the earth revolved around the sun. Death by burning
The Spanish Inquisition which became independent from the Vatican in the 15th Century, carried out some of the most infamous abuses under its "autos da fé" or act of faith, shorthand for death by burning. They zealously tortured victims, held summary trials, forced conversions and passed death sentences.
"There is no doubt that at the start, the planned procedures were applied with an excessive rigour, which in some cases degenerated into true abuses," the Vatican study simply says of this dark period. But the Vatican report, the product of a six-year investigation, insists that the Inquisition was not as bad as often believed. Professor Borromeo says for example that for 125,000 trials of suspected heretics in Spain, less than 2% were executed. He says that often mannequins were burned to represent those tried in absentia and condemned to death and heretics and witches who repented at the last minute were given some sort of relief when they were strangled before being burnt. Little comfort But for those connected with victims of the Inquisition, Vatican claims that it was not as bad as thought carry little weight. Galileo was the Inquisition's most famous victim
Among those targeted by the interrogators were the Waldensians, members of a Protestant sect declared heretical in the 12th Century. "If there are many or few cases, it doesn't matter. What's important is you don't say, 'I am right and you are wrong and I burn you'," said Thomas Noffke, a US-born Waldensian pastor in Rome.
Who in their right mind is going to believe this pack of lies? I wonder, would this article have been released BEFORE the Roman Catholic Commercial I like to refer to as "The Passion of the ANTI-Christ?" Countless scores of Protestants are now looking at Rome as a "moral" entity thanks to this blasphemous film. Had these articles about the Inquisition been released BEFORE the film, I am sure most people would think, "Who do they think they are trying tell us about history?" But now that so many accept that Catholic commercial as biblically accurate, and they look to Rome as being Christian again, Rome goes for it! Problem is, there are the Elect of God that Rome has to contend with. We know this church has lied before. Plus we know they lied in the past during the Inquisitions. We also know they lied about helping Hitler. And we also know they lied about molesting their own children for as long as there is recorded history, up and including to this day! So I ask, do we think they’re not lying now? I literally chuckle at the stupidity of that assumption.
After the article states, only 1.8% were actually killed, it says, “Nonetheless… Pope John Paul II apologized once more for the interrogators' excesses, expressing sorrow for "the errors committed in the service of the truth by the recourse to non-Christian methods".
Using the word “Nonetheless” to start that comment off is to say, “We don’t need to apologize for such a small number of murders, but, “nonetheless,” the pope did anyway at this time. That disgusts me to no end! What a sickening way to downplay the deaths of innocent people as if they are not worthy of even an apology! Plus, did you also notice this article ADMITS to using the exact same methods our “so called” Homeland Security liars use today? The article stated, The accused did not have the right to face and question their accuser and it was acceptable to take testimony from criminals and excommunicated people.”
They did this to Jesus in His day, they did it during the 1260 year “Great Tribulation” Jesus spoke of, they did it in Hitler’s day, and they are doing it in our day. Another obvious trivializing of the truth was found when the article stated, "There is no doubt that at the start, the planned procedures were applied with an excessive rigour, which in some cases degenerated into true abuses," Is that why they say “it’s not as bad as it seems” because they fudged the numbers to allow for abuses they say they never condoned anyway? How convenient? This is no different than the fudged numbers released by the Vatican in February of 2004 regarding the priests that molested little boys over the years. They even admitted in the articles they didn’t add the number of priests that have died over the years into the total number released to the press, because they felt it wasn’t necessary due to the fact they were dead! That alone gave a false sense of security to the easy to manipulate Catholic who chooses to stay in that church. This “fudging” of the numbers regarding the Inquisition is no different. Sadly, so is the end result. Some will believe the lies Rome spews, simply because Rome never tells the whole story!
In the article “Professor Borromeo says for example that for 125,000 trials of suspected heretics in Spain, less than 2% were executed.” Ok, let’s assume for a moment that the Vatican’s Professor is telling the truth here. Let’s assume that all the historic facts that prove otherwise are wrong, and this pack of biased wolves from the Vatican itself are correct in saying only 125,000 went to trial, and only 2% were burned at the stake or killed in other torturous ways. That means the Vatican admits to torturing and KILLING over 6250 people! “Nonetheless” they apologized anyway.
By the way, all those believing “mannequins were burned” please raise your hands. Not many I’m sure.
One last point I would like to make regarding this article. It was said that those that “repented at the last minute were given some sort of relief when they were strangled before being burnt.” Can you imagine what they said to get them to deny Christ as Lord? They no doubt offered them freedom, and life if they denied the Jesus of the Bible for the Jesus of Rome. And then to Satanically seal their fate as one who just openly denied Jesus Christ before Heaven and man, THEY STRANGLED THEM anyway so as to assure Satan gets his number! So.. in the future… those of you standing before possessed Roman Catholic priests, I implore you to remember. To deny Christ is to die, TWICE! Rome cannot be trusted anyway, but Christ CAN be trusted! No matter what you say, they’re going to kill you anyway! Common sense affords us the reality that if they let you live after denying Christ, they no doubt fear you will tell others of their torturous methods to get you to the point of denial. So.. deny Christ.. they kill you. Refuse to deny Christ, they kill you as well. Of course the difference here is, if they kill you for not denying Christ you will live forever!
By the way, were you aware that MODERN DAY Vatican chit chat is such that they speak of the benefits of burning Christians at the stake right now as we speak? On my “Evils of EWTN” page in the “RCC Exposed” section of the website I have a conversation that was posted on the EWTN Message board online! For those that aren’t aware, EWTN is a National Roman Catholic Television Network in the USA! They posted that conversation in May of 2002. After word got out about some websites gleaning the conversations to show others, EWTN promptly deleted those statements. Too late tho.. Here is just a small excerpt of what they had on that page…
Re:Heretics
Question from Jared on 05-13-2002:
Dr. Carroll, in response to the post by Michael Edwards-Ronning on 5-11-02: I think that the popes during that time felt that the killing of heretics was just. To figure, wouldn't it be a lot better for the general population if a few mainstream heretics were killed, so that the whole population was not "infected" by the heresies of the few? What I am trying to say is that it wasn't a terrible idea. Kill a few heretics to save the eternal souls of the population. That may seem harsh, but that is the basis of my assumption. Thanks.
Answer by Warren H. Carroll, Ph.D on 05-15-2002:
Well stated. I agree with you. - Dr. Carroll
COPYRIGHT 2002 EWTN
What amazes me here is that no one seems to mind when the Vatican and their priests speak of torturing innocent people. No one seems to mind that Roman Catholic “doctors of divinity: openly agree that killing a few people by flames is an agreeable and acceptable act of the church. This graphically evil organization obviously feels no threat from the “so called” authorities. Why do you suppose that is? Can anyone see the forest for the trees here now? For those of you seeking confirmation that the US Government has been completely taken over by Rome, lets do the math. Prophecy states an image of the beast must be set up. Since the Lateran Treaty was signed in 1929 by Cardinal Gasspari making the Vatican a church and State again, it has slowly but surely been taking over the United States Government. Then in October of 2002 the “Christian Coalition” started to graphically seek governmental changes designed specifically to make the US Government into both a church and state entity. You can see all the facts regarding this by reading my October 2002 Truth Provided Newsletter.
Now of course this is only one topic. One can take just about any topic of evil, look to Rome to see it’s inception, and then peer into the halls of Washington D.C. to see the USA accepting it. Students of prophecy are not blind to the fact that the USA is in fact the prophesied lamb horned beast that gives power unto the beast in Rome. Everything from the Roman Catholic contrived blue laws of 1962, to the Government vouchers for Catholic schools just a few years back confirm this nicely. However, the perfect image will have to do as Rome does behind closed doors as well. Rome favor force, terror, torture, and murder to get their agenda realized. So, the USA must do as she.
For example, on the topic of torture, and Government takeover alone:
History confirms Pagan Rome tortured and killed people
History also confirms Papal Rome tortured and killed people in their Inquisitions.
The US Government shows “open” signs of a Vatican takeover since the “blue laws” of 1962.
Ronald Reagan “faces the Mall” at his inauguration, confirming Rome controls Washington D.C. from within.
The Vatican re-instates the Office of Inquisition in February of 1991.
30,000 guillotines are shipped to American soil. (Click here for proof)
The IRS, the Senate, the Congress, and the Supreme Court are all “speaking and causing” laws of Rome to be put in effect.
The US Government is using torture, as well as seeking legislation to make it legal in the mainland as well.
And “beheadings” are now becoming common place in the News media.
US turns to torture to crack prisoners of war
By Dana Priest and Barton Gellman
December 27 2002
Deep inside the forbidden zone at the United States-occupied Bagram air base in Afghanistan are a cluster of metal shipping containers protected by a triple layer of concertina wire. The containers hold the most valuable prizes in the US-led war in Afghanistan - suspected al-Qaeda operatives and Taliban commanders.
Those who refuse to co-operate inside the secret CIA interrogation centre are sometimes kept standing or kneeling for hours, in black hoods or spray-painted goggles, intelligence specialists familiar with CIA interrogation methods say. At times they are held in awkward, painful positions and deprived of sleep with a 24-hour bombardment of lights - subject to what are known as "stress and duress" techniques.
Those who co-operate are rewarded by interrogators whose methods include feigned friendship, respect, cultural sensitivity and, in some cases, money. The most hardened cases are turned over - "rendered", in official parlance - to foreign intelligence services whose practice of torture has been documented by the US Government and human rights organisations.
While the US Government publicly denounces the use of torture, all of the national security officials interviewed defended the use of violence against captives as "just and necessary", and they were confident the American public would back their view. The CIA, which has responsibility for interrogations, declined to comment.
"If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job," said one official who has supervised the capture and transfer of accused terrorists. "I don't think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this."
The off-limits patch of ground at Bagram is one of a number of secret overseas detention centres where US due process does not apply. Another is Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean that the US leases from Britain.
In other cases, usually involving lower-level captives, the CIA ds them to foreign intelligence services, notably those of Jordan, Egypt and Morocco, with a list of questions the agency wants answered. These "extraordinary renditions" are done without resort to legal process and usually involve countries with security services known for using brutal means.
According to one official who has been directly involved in transferring captives the understanding is: "We don't kick the [expletive] out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the [expletive] out of them."
At a joint hearing of the House and Senate intelligence committees in September, Cofer Black, then head of the CIA Counterterrorist Centre, spoke cryptically about the agency's new forms of "operational flexibility" in dealing with suspected terrorists. "All you need to know is that there was a before 9/11, and there was an after 9/11," Mr Black said. "After 9/11 the gloves come off." -The Washington Post
One source of the original article is at http://www.victoria.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/10737.php
Rumsfeld approved torture techniques: top brass
June 4, 2004
Washington AP: United States Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld personally approved four special interrogation techniques used on two al-Qaeda operatives held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who then talked about the terrorist network and its plans, the commander of US forces in Latin America said today.
Army General James Hill, who heads the US Southern Command, declined to describe the techniques. He said other detainees might "figure out a way to resist those techniques" if they were disclosed. –SMH.com.au
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/04/1086203599711.html?oneclick=true
US 'is using torture techniques' to interrogate top al-Qa'ida prisoners
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles 27 December 2002
The United States is subjecting top-level al-Qa'ida captives in its custody to extraordinary physical and psychological coercion, blurring the line between acceptable interrogation techniques under international law and outright torture, according to a detailed report in yesterday's Washington Post. –Independent.co.uk News
This “light torture” as some would call it always leads to graphic torture. Even Rome admitted that long ago. History proves the Vatican tried to do it “lightly” at first, but after men possessed by demons got a taste of torturing and killing Christians, the methods were “abused” as Rome put it. Spiritually speaking, they just got “blood thirsty” as is a natural human as well as animal reaction. In fact, this is why the plague of blood is administered unto them.
Revelation 16:6, "For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy."
As is so apparent in the first article, some people AREN’T cracking under the pressure the lamb horned beast of Revelation is administering. So our Government sends them to other countries where they will use much more intense methods of torture to get the information they seek. Rome did this first, and now the lamb horned beast follows suit. They even admitted in the article that they send them there with a list of questions they need answered during the torture! This is exactly what Rome did long ago! On March 12, 2000 the pope admitted, as did many others, that they sent “heretics” to the local authorities with “questions” they needed answered. The church felt it would be better if they themselves weren’t directly involved in administering the torture. So they got their Roman Catholic authorities controlled to do it for them! And did you also notice that other countries have known about the US Government’s problem with torture before most of us in the states heard anything about it? This has been going on for some time it seems!
By the way, this is not the only thing that has been going on for some time. In Canada we see a bevy of strange laws popping up all over the place designed to benefit Rome as well as glorify sin. This no doubt allows the “sectioned off regions” of a Global Government to have certain laws in place in each continent. All this is of course done for convenience. That way they can make sure their evil desires are accessible without much travel time slowing things down.
Canada preparing to enforce Islamic law
Judges will give legal sanction to disputes between Muslims
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 27, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
©_2003_WorldNetDaily.com
Canadian judges soon will be enforcing Islamic law, or Sharia, in disputes between Muslims, possibly paving the way to one day administering criminal sentences, such as stoning women caught in adultery.
Muslims are required to submit to Sharia in Muslim societies but are excused in nations where they live as a minority under a non-Muslim government. Canada, however, is preparing for its 1 million-strong Muslim minority to be under the authority of a Sharia system enforced by the Canadian court system, according to the Canadian Law Times.
Muslim delegates at a conference in Etobicoke, Ont., in October elected a 30-member council to establish the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice. The institute is classified in Islamic law as a Darul-Qada, or judicial tribunal. Its bylaws are scheduled to be drafted and approved by Dec. 31.
Cases will be decided by a Muslim arbitrator, but the local secular Canadian court will be the enforcer.
How blind do these people think we are? The Vatican did the exact same thing during the Inquisitions, and now we see Canada following suit word for word. Imagine if you will some people in the USA or even Mexico for that matter that have been accused of certain crimes they didn’t commit. Now suppose the Government want’s them dead as per the Vatican’s command. All one needs to do is what the USA is already doing regarding torture. Just ship them to countries where certain barbaric acts are allowed! And now it appears we have one just across the border so as to allow the job to get done the same day!
To this day the Vatican has declared they “thought” they were doing God’s will when they kicked people out of churches and then eventually tortured and killed them. WHERE I ask in the Bible is such decadence as this being allowed? I can see it in the Quran of the Muslim, that Pope John Paul II himself KISSED. But I see it nowhere in the Word of God. HOW can they pretend to tell the masses, a God of mercy would suggest such evils as this? Especially after His Word openly condemns it!
Luke 3:14, "… Do violence to no man”
Luke 9:54-56, "And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village."
We have the Word of a Mighty God that proves the Vatican is indeed home to Satan. Our job is clear. TELL THEM what this Word says! Tell them their own church is mentioned as home to Antichrist in numerous prophetic confirmations from history. (Click here for a large list to help prove this point) Tell them their priests do exactly as Jesus said Antichrist would do…
John 16:2-3, "They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me."
I hope you see clearly now as to why Rome seeks positive PR for their Office of Inquisition. The American government is their pawn. But their pawn cannot do the graphic atrocities it wants to do. So, they need to make the Inquisition look acceptable so that the US Government can better facilitate their torturous demands even on US soil! Or at best, Canadian soil.
One last note to help drive this all home. It’s just a bit off topic, but it ties in quite nicely. Do you recall the Newsletters, audio clips, and radio broadcasts I shared regarding the Homosexual agenda of Rome? Do you recall how the Truth revealed in this matter was to help Rome get her so called “Christian” agenda realized in Washington DC for a national Church & State conglomerate? Do you also recall the Christian Coalition movements in this regard?
Now see this…
TESTING THE FAITH
Christians look to form 'new nation' within U.S.
Same-sex marriage called last straw prompting plan for 1 state to secede
Posted: May 24, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Joe Kovacs
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Calling the approval of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts "the straw that broke the camel's back," a group of Christian activists is in the beginning stages of an effort to have one state secede from the United States to become its own sovereign nation.
"Our Christian republic has declined into a pagan democracy," says Cory Burnell, president of ChristianExodus.org, a non-profit corporation based in Tyler, Texas. "There are some issues people just can't take anymore, and [same-sex marriage] might finally wake up the complacent Christians."
Burnell is leading the charge for a peaceful secession of one state from the union, and after originally considering Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina due to their relatively small populations, coastal access, and the Christian nature of the electorate, Burnell says South Carolina has been selected as the target location.
…Burnell, a math teacher and cell-phone dealer, stresses he's not looking for bloody battles that took place in the American Revolution and the Civil War, but is rather seeking a "political divorce." "It's got to be different today," he says. "It has to be peaceful, brokered." But he admits if the federal government decides to use military force to stop the effort, "Then it can't happen."
Already a dozen people are actively working on the project, and some 1,500 by e-mails of support have been received.
If all goes according to plan, Burnell is hoping to have a constitutional convention by 2014, with a president of the new nation – still to be known as South Carolina – elected in 2016, which is also a presidential election year in the U.S. He says the nation would be founded on Christian principles, and the people writing its constitution would have to hash out details to safeguard it as a Christian republic. For now, Burnell prefers to shy away from specifics on the precise laws governing the country. "Independence first, details later," he says
They are using the Homosexual marriage war to push for a religious form of government!! My opinion? It will never happen. Burnell is merely a pawn of the Roman US Government who is testing the masses on this. Common sense people! Does anyone think the Government controlled media would allow anything like this to get out so freely? Is it any wonder the privately owned World Net Daily News service had to break the news on this? One thing WILL happen however, there will be a “Religious” form of Government in this nation. Prophecy proclaimed it, and our God can’t lie. Will it be ONLY situated in South Carolina? Not according to the Word of God. It will be GLOBAL!
For more info on the Roman Catholic Office of Inquisition, see the following links: (I have not checked these sites out 100%, so be forewarned, they may link out to areas I don’t condone)
http://www.questia.com/Index.jsp?CRID=inquisition&OFFID=se4
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/64.htm
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm
The above was used by permission from Nicholas at http://www.remnantofgod.org/
For proof of present day persecutions by the Roman Catholic church click here
====
BURIAL BOX OF JAMES
The burial box of James
Not too long ago, something happened in the global arena that put the Roman Catholic Church once again in the spotlight as a lying entity. Of course I am speaking of the Ossuary, or burial box of James the brother of Jesus Christ. When the story first broke, I purposely remained silent on the issue because I wanted to see what the Roman Catholic Church would do about it. The only comment they made to the press at first was a feeble attempt to blow off the discovery. Anyone that has been watching the Vatican long enough knows, this happens to be the norm for the Roman Catholic Church. They always skirt the issue and dance around it when it places a spotlight upon them and their spurious doctrines. They later solicited the help of a questionable source so as to help them appear vindicated. We will get into that a bit later.
In an interview by the Associate Press, Roman Catholic scholar Joseph Fitzmeyer, acknowledges the writing style on the ossuary 'fits perfectly' with other first century examples and admits the joint appearance of these three famous names is 'striking,' he nevertheless concludes, "But the big problem is, you have to show me the Jesus in this text is Jesus of Nazareth, and nobody can show that." Ignoring the obvious is an infamous technique of Babylon that is designed to permeate the hearts of their congregation. Sadly, this is the case, as many devoted Catholics are now echoing Fitzmeyer's strange testimonial.
Intense curiosity and controversy I might add has been at the forefront globally as far as I can tell since the announcement of the discovery of an ancient limestone bone box dated 63AD, called an ossuary, (pronounced alternatively, "osh-oo-ary" or "os-yoo-ary") inscribed in Aramaic, which was the language of the Jews in Jesus day. The inscription reads, "Ya'akov bar Ysef a khui Yeshua" which translated is, "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Historical fact is, boxes like this were commonly used by Jewish families between 20BC and 70AD to store the bones of their loved ones. James is known to have been martyred in 62 AD, and the box has been dated 63AD. Tradition of that day was to place the body in a tomb until the flesh disintegrated, (1 year) and then move the bones to a ossuary to await resurrection.
Another interesting fact is that out of the hundreds of such boxes that were found, only TWO mention a "brother" in the inscriptions upon the burial box. Some scholars have confirmed that this alludes to the fact that the brother must have been famous or extremely important at the time so as to be mentioned upon a burial box of a sibling. The names James, Joseph, and even Jesus were considered common names in Jerusalem for that day.
Professor Lemaire, who teaches at the Sorbonne in Paris, wrote in a recent issue of the Biblical Archaeology Review that it was "very probable" that the box belonged to Jesus Christ's brother James. In a city as large as Jerusalem was in that day (about 40,000) Lemaire estimates that as many as 20 men who were named James, would have had brothers named Jesus, and fathers named Joseph. However, he also concludes that the odds would be stacked greatly against the probability that there would be more than one person named James who had a brother that was as important or well known as Jesus was at that time. Looking back, one can see plainly that historic fact actually confirms it. All one needs do is research this and you will find that there is no mention recorded in history of a man named "Jesus" for that period of time that had anywhere near the life changing fame of Jesus the Messiah. In fact, the Biblical Archaeology Review has researched an inventory of 900 ossuaries. Out of the 900, 19 of them have the name Joseph inscribed on them, and 10 have the name Jesus on them and only ONE had the name Jesus as the son of Joseph and brother of James inscribed on it. ONLY ONE! (For more info see,"Evidence Of Jesus Written In Stone," Biblical Archaeological Review.
I have been watching this story with particular interest to see if Rome will once again ADMIT to lying before the world for the last 149 years since Pope Pius IX proclaimed, "The Immaculate Conception" of Mary was dogmatic fact. This Roman Catholic doctrine stipulates that Mary was a virgin till death, and Jesus never had any siblings. We all saw in the "Mea Culpa" of John Paul II back in March of 2000 a bevy of admissions that proved the Roman Catholic church is no stranger to fabricating lies to further its agenda. We now have concrete historic fact they admitted it in writing. Will they do right on this issue? The blunt defiance in Fitzmeyer's earlier statement paints an obvious picture of what Rome plans to do. They seek to take the defensive stance proclaiming "Your going to have to show me proof before I believe it! And as far as I can tell no one can." You would think that Fitzmeyer would use his "credentials" a bit more wisely then just shouting like a spoiled child and then stomping his feet as he flees the scene. A normal response I am sure for one caught red handed. Seriously, what other course does he have? He MUST openly deny the now concrete evidence before him so as to keep the Roman lie afloat. To do otherwise would be disasterous!
History proves that once the agenda of the Vatican is threatened, they will go to absolutely ANY lengths to assure they can keep doing business as usual. Even if it means millions must die. The world saw dozens of Bishops and Cardinals stepping forward back in March of 2000, not only agreeing with the Pope's list of admissions, but also speaking of numerous vile and disgusting acts they themselves have done as well!
hey did this to save face because certain facts were no longer easy to hide for the Vatican, especially since it's possible now for even some of the poorest families in the World to access the historic facts online. Families in the poorest nations have access to the Internet in libraries or Internet cafés the world over. The Vatican’s only demonically "wise" course at that time is to admit they killed millions and ask for forgiveness so as to appear to be genuinely concerned about what history so graphically records. Regardless of the fact that the Vatican is still in the business of threatening and even killing those that deny their doctrines to this day. For evidence of this fact CLICK HERE. However, with the discovery of the Ossuary of James, this is in no way an easy admission for Rome to proclaim as we saw by the knee jerking response, and hastened exit of Fitzmeyer. Their counterfeit doctrinal statements regarding Mary depend completely on them keeping that lie going. This is Babylon, and Babylon worships the "Queen of Heaven" as Scriptures so openly proclaims. To deny their Pagan god, is to deny their way of life.
For a Biblical expose' of the "Queen of Heaven" start your study with these verses...
The Bonebox with the inscription (James Brother of Jesus)
Jeremiah 7:18
Jeremiah 44:17-19
Jeremiah 44:25
Imagine if you will that Rome ADMITTED the Ossuary of James to be authentic. This would mean they LIED to literally billions upon billions of Catholics as well as non-Catholics since the lie was fabricated regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary. Rome knows that this is not just some face saving lie that can be shrugged off as "mere sins of the flesh" as we saw paraded before us in all it's graphic decadence on March 12, 2000 when Rome admitted to killing over 500 million souls. Rome can easily afford to admit the sins of the flesh because it affords them the natural ability to play "the priest, cardinal, bishop, or pope is only a man" card, and get away with it by asking forgiveness from their church members and the world. Asking forgiveness from those that believe, is the Christ-like thing to do. It is also a very powerful tool in the art of this ongoing religious deception. Because if you don't forgive them, you can be tagged a NON-believer, and then they again stand supreme above you even though they ADMITTED they are the ones that killed millions. It's a win win situation for Rome to admit to the mass murders. However, to admit to lying about the perpetual virginity of Mary, as well as her "immaculate conception," would cause a MASSIVE upset in the halls of Rome that anyone with an ounce of sense can tell Rome is simply not prepared to do!
Think of it!
If Rome admits the Ossuary of James is authentic, and Jesus did in fact have siblings as Matthew chapter 13 already truthfully proclaims He did, that would mean a BEVY of doctrinal issues would have to be scrapped by the Roman Church.
On more obvious note to ponder... As blessed and loved as Mary was of God. Do you honestly believe that the Almighty and ever living God of all creation would punish her with a barren womb after submitting to His perfect will without question and having His only begotten Son? Remember that it was considered a blessing to have children back then, unlike today's society with their millions of self centered flesh pleasing abortions. Some women actually murder their children to avoid getting stretch marks! Can you imagine how cold a heart must wax to do such a thing? The massive number of abortions alone prove the prophetic statement of Matthew 24:12 an absolute confirmed fulfillment! Mary in her day would never seek a barren womb like many women today. PLUS, would it not be considered sin on Mary's part to DENY Joseph's carnal desires towards his wife, in that pre-birth control pill era? Is it not written plainly in.. 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, "Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, …”
Yes, it appears Rome knows it will have to admit a LOT MORE than just murdering 500 million Christians as they did on March 12, 2000. If they admit the Ossuary of James is authentic, they will have to give up quite a few doctrines of demons and traditions of men. And I don't think they are prepared to do that. A few of these spurious doctrines in a list might look like this...
They will have to admit they lied about…
Mary being ever virgin
Mary was born without sin
The Feast of "Immaculate Conception"
Mary being co-redeemer / co-savior
Numerous Popes claiming "Mary saves souls"
Mary being the "bright and morning star"
"Mary" appearing before children. Rome must admit it's a demon
"Mary" sending messages from Heaven
Mary telling them to pray the Pagan rosary
All the weeping Statues of Mary
Mary having an and sinless immaculate heart
Mary sharing in the cross with Christ
Mary telling them to wear the "scapular"
Pope John Paul will have to remove "Mary I am all yours" from etchings on his robes
The "blue league/army" of Mary
Thousands of churches named after the 'Virgin Mary' would have to change names
The thousands of Hospitals named after 'Virgin Mary' would have to change names
Mary as the "Queen of Heaven"
The term "Mother of God" for Mary
The literal millions of books with references to "Mary being ever virgin."
The thousands of convents that seek to emulate Mary
The doctrines that duped millions of people into becoming "dedicated to Mary"
Tens of thousands of statements made over the centuries by Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, nuns and lay people that refer to Mary and her perpetual virginity.
Fatima and how it was designed to lure the Muslims into praying to Mary
References of "Mary" in the Quran itself
Artists who made paintings and sculptures of the 'Virgin Mary'
Symbols of Mary’s perpetual virginity
The "assumption of Mary" that alludes to Mary going to Heaven before the rest of us
All the 'apparitions' of "Mary"
All the "statements" made from the apparitions of Mary
The Roman Catholic "saint" Alphonsus De Liquori's stating Mary is an "Omnipotent Intercessor"
The "Apostolate of Mary" and therefore scrap the doctrine that states Mary shares in the priesthood of Christ
The actual "Apostolate of Mary" would have to be disbanded worldwide
Virgin worship
Salvation through Mary
Proclaiming that Catholics must worship Mary through John Paul II
In the Catholic Encyclopedia regarding "Mary worship."
The "Fatima Apostleship"
(For more information to above facts CLICK HERE)
If I was a betting man, AND I AM NOT, I would have to ask, who wants to lay odds on the final response of the Vatican? Will they jump at the chance to now lie again and say Joseph had children from a previous marriage? Virtually no Christian church holds to that view today. However, that never stopped Rome before has it?
By the way... To claim Joseph had a previous marriage, would mean yet another a re-write of Scripture for the church of Rome. For it is NOT written that Joseph had a previous marriage in the Word. "YET"
Burial box 'held the bones of Jesus's brother'
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor and Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
(Filed: 18/04/2003)
Tests on a 2,000-year-old stone box support claims that it once held the bones of James, said to have been the brother of Jesus and an important early Christian leader, scientists have concluded.
The results of the experiments, which are disclosed in a television documentary, back the suggestion that the "bone box", or ossuary, may be the oldest archaeological link with Christ.
Last year, the tomb ossuary, inscribed with the words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus", came to light in Israel, prompting speculation over whether it was genuine or a fake and whether it referred to Jesus of Nazareth.
Since then, the box has been subjected to tests which are consistent with it coming from the right place and the right time, said Dr Ed Keall, a curator at the Royal Ontario Museum. "It is a genuine box with a genuine inscription, dating from first century AD, likely from the Silouan Valley, Jerusalem," he said.
He argued that it was rare for the inscription to refer to a brother - they usually mentioned the father - although he agreed that this fell short of proof that it contained the bones of James.
The findings will revive interest in James, whose major role in early Christianity has been eclipsed by St Peter and St Paul. He is described in two of the Gospels as the brother of Jesus, but in some traditions he is thought of as merely a cousin.
Scholars believe that he became the leader of the early Christian movement in Jerusalem following Jesus's crucifixion, but he may have regarded himself as a member of a sect of Judaism rather than of a new religion. Fr Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, the uncle of the Archbishop of Westminster and leading Biblical authority, said: "James was a Jew who became a follower of Jesus and remained true to his Jewish faith.
"He was the leader of the Mother Church, the Church of Jerusalem, during its adolescent years, its whole formative period."
The limestone burial box measures 20in by 22in by 10in and carries a worn pattern of six pointed stars on one side. On the other is an inscription with distinctive letters: "Ya'akov, bar Yosef, akhui di Yeshua" - "James [Ya'akov], son of Joseph [Yosef], brother of Jesus [Yeshua]." The words are in Aramaic, the language spoken by Christ, and close to ancient Hebrew.
The palaeographers date the style of lettering to around 50 AD. This timing is just right for a memorial to James who, according to the "Jewish Antiquities" of Josephus, was stoned to death for his beliefs in AD 62.
In the journal Biblical Archaeology Review, Prof Andre Lemaire of the Sorbonne, Paris, concluded that it could be the earliest artefact relating to Jesus. Now scientists have backed his contention with tests.
A team at the Geological Survey of Israel extracted the patina, a cream-coloured film adhering to the stone, and found it matched that inside one of the letters after a study with electron microscopy, as would be expected with the genuine item.
The Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto subjected the inscription to a tougher test, using long-wave ultraviolet light which should highlight attempts to fake it. Again, it looked genuine, said Dr Keall.
Prof Camil (fooks) Fuchs, of Tel Aviv University, analysed the probability that the James ossuary refers to the Jesus of the New Testament, after critics said James, Jesus and Joseph were common names in first century Palestine.
He concluded that the inscription on the ossuary probably referred to James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus of Nazareth. "Also, I have to point out that out of the thousands of ossuaries that have been found, there is only one - other than the James ossuary - that mentions not just the deceased, and his father, but the brother," said Prof (fooks) Fuchs.
Because the ossuary did not come from a controlled excavation, where archaeologists plot every detail and possible clue to a discovery's context, scholars said they despaired of ever knowing the inscription's meaning beyond doubt.
Another issue is how many times the ossuary has been used. There is no way to tell that the bone fragments it contains are of St James or of a later lodger.
The present owner, Oded Golan of Tel Aviv, bought the box from a Jerusalem antiques dealer in the 1970s. Mr Golan said he never suspected the ossuary could be linked to Christ.
Usually only the father of the deceased would be mentioned on a ossuary. The reason Jesus’ name was added to the ossuary was because of His fame.
ROMAN CATHOLIC "EXPECTED" RESPONSE... (Found on "Catholic Answers" website) Notice how Jimmy Akin does exactly as expected. As usual the Roman Church seeks to cloud the issue regarding the word "brother" or "brethren." On my “Jesus had Siblings?” page in the RCC Doctrines section of the website I share ample proof regarding the so called perpetual virginity of Mary, as well as the smoking gun passage in Matthew 13:55,56 that proves Rome lied. (my brief comments are in BOLD ITALICS below)
Bad Aramaic Made Easy
By Jimmy Akin
In 2002 a unique archaeological find was announced: a limestone ossuary (bone box) that may have held the remains of James the “brother” of Jesus. The box dates to first century Palestine and is inscribed in Jesus’ native language, Aramaic, with the words “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.”
New attention was drawn to the ossuary by a book titled The Brother of Jesus, by Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington. Shanks is the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review; Witherington is a New Testament professor. To publicize it, the two wrote a tie-in piece in USA Today's weekend magazine, in which Witherington (the primary author) asserted the following:
It is possible the inscription on the ossuary--"James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus"--provides us with a challenge in regard to some basic Christian assumptions about James. The Roman Catholic tradition is that Jesus' brothers and sisters actually were cousins; Orthodox Christians believe they were Joseph's children by a previous marriage. The inscription conflicts with both of those Christian traditions, in fact, for there certainly was an Aramaic word for "cousin" that could have been used in this inscription but was not. If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states. --"In the Name of the Brother," USA Weekend, April 13, 2003
Witherington's statement proved highly controversial. Though his characterization of Catholic teaching is not without problem, his assertion that there is an Aramaic word for cousin was egregious. (A GREE JUS) (Conspicuously bad or offensive)
The Source of the Controversy
The New Testament is explicit that Mary was a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit. Christian tradition--later infallibly affirmed by the Church--acknowledges that she remained a virgin afterwards. The great majority of Christians acknowledges this. Only the Protestant community dissents.
The better way to explain that is to say that "Catholic tradition" is what acknowledges Mary as a virgin for life. Nowhere in the Bible does to say that. Not one solitary verse. There is not as single Christian denomination that claims she was a perpetual virgin either. Only in Catholicism do you see this, on my Mary Worship page in the RCC Exposed section of the website you can see why they teach this.
But there are certain questions to be answered, such as who the "brethren" or "brothers" of Christ mentioned in Scripture are. In English when we say "brother" we usually mean full brother--a male sibling sharing both biological parents.
Jimmy Akin uses the word "usually" to confirm his opinion? Fact is, I "usually" don't believe anyone that has no confidence in their message. Do you?Think about it. He seeks to convince us by his lack of factual evidence. That “usually” means they have no evidence.
But the term has a broader range of meanings. It can include half-brother (male sibling sharing one biological parent), step-brother (male sibling sharing one parent by marriage), and adoptive brother (male sibling adopted into the family). It can be given figurative meanings, such as "comrade," as when military men are described as "a band of brothers."
No solid, or researchable proof. Just "opinions" of Jimmy Akin are used here. Nowhere does the Word or even the Ossuary intimate that any of these opinions apply.
Which applies to the brethren of Christ in Scripture?
It is unlikely that the term "brother" is being used figuratively or mystically because all Christians are Christ's brothers in that sense, making it pointless to single out certain individuals for this description. Full brother is impossible, as Protestants also acknowledge, since Jesus was not the biological child of Joseph. Half-brother is ruled out by the fact that Mary remained a virgin.
Again, a lack of confidence in his own theory is intimated when words like, “unlikely” come into play. Still, here Jimmy assumes we as Protesting Christians BELIEVE Mary remained a virgin for life, and therefore we must throw out the "half brother" assumption? That statement alone proves he is grasping at straws in a desperate manner. One would think that if Jimmy Akin had Biblical proof of that statement he would use it. And as is always the case, they merely use assumptions to preach as if they have concrete evidence.
I ask Jimmy Akin... Show me one verse that says Mary was a virgin for life. Or show me one verse that shows me Joseph did NOT consummate his marriage to Mary. Or show me one verse that shows me Mary denied her husbands carnal desires for his WIFE. I know Jimmy cannot do this, however a babe in Christ would have no trouble finding the verses that do prove Mary was not a virgin for life, Joseph did consummate that marriage, and Mary did not refuse her husband’s carnal desires.
It is possible they were adoptive brothers, but there does not seem to be any evidence for this in the biblical or patristic record. More plausibly, they were step-brothers: children of Joseph who were Jesus' brothers by marriage.
Plausibly? “Possible? Jimmy Akin is still "suggesting" an opinion here, nothing more nothing less. I have yet to see any Scriptural or historic proof denying that which I laid out previously. Nor do I see Jimmy sharing any Biblical verses proving his perpetual virgin theory. Friends... NEVER accept an "opinion" when there are FACTS laid out for inspection. This is a foolish act for anyone to embrace. Would you walk into a burning building that you see totally engulfed in flame after a friend suggests it appears to them to be safe? The facts never lie. This is why Jimmy avoids them repeatedly here.
There is some evidence for this in the writings of early Christians. The earliest discussion of the matter that we have--in a document known as the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 120)--states that Joseph was a widower who already had a family and thus was willing to become the guardian of a consecrated virgin. Though not inspired, the document was written within living memory of Mary, when Christ's family was still well known, as other sources attest (e.g., second century historian Hegisippus). It may contain accurate traditions regarding the family structure.
This is all Catholic documentation (notice the LATIN title)and therefore 100% untrustworthy. Rome lied in the past, and Rome lies today. In fact, Rome admitted they lied for all its history in the pope’s Mea Culpa of March 2000. So, should we trust Roman documentation that Jimmy himself admits is uninspired? This is another tactic of Rome, if they cannot find proof in the Bible to back their doctrines, they will look for it in MAN’S WORD! And according to Scripture that is a foolish act. Babylon is the house of Antichrist. For proof, CLICK HERE for a FLASH animation.
The step-brother hypothesis was the most common until St. Jerome (the turn of the fifth century), who popularized the idea that the brethren were cousins. One would not guess this from a casual reading of the New Testament, but many have tried to deduce it from statements in the New Testament.
Jimmy admits here that for 5 CENTURIES most people did not agree with his church's theory UNTIL it was "popularized." And it was a Hypothesis that was popularized. In other words, and educated GUESS was accepted as proof, and now we are expected to believe this to be the final say? Still, just because an idea is "popular" it doesn't make it right. Truth is, Cocaine is "popular" eh?
Part of the issue turns on the meaning of the word "brother." Thus far we have been discussing the English word brother for simplicity. The Greek equivalent (adelphos) includes the same concepts in its range of meaning. But Greek also has a word for "cousin" (anepsios), which seems to have been the normal word used when referring to cousins. An advocate of the cousin hypothesis would need to explain why it wasn't used if Christ’s brethren were cousins.
Again, Jimmy is displaying no confidence at all in his own assumptions. This is well noted when he states, "which seems to have been the normal word used" in the above excerpt. My friends, when they have no PROOF they always use "assumptions" to try and get YOU to believe them. Why should we believe them when they themselves don’t believe what they say? Plus, if in fact James was a cousin as Rome proclaims, and since both Aramaic and Greek do in fact have a word for cousin, I ask why wasn’t it used if in fact James was only a cousin?
The standard explanation is that the New Testament isn't ordinary Greek. Some have suggested that parts of it may be translations from Aramaic. It is unknown if or how much of the New Testament had an Aramaic original, but even if none did, Aramaic had a strong influence on it. Probably all the New Testament authors except Luke were native Aramaic-speakers, and much of the dialogue in the Gospels originally occurred in Aramaic. Sometimes the Gospels even tell us the original words (e.g., “Talitha cumi” in Mark 5:41).
In the above paragraph we see Jimmy Akin using the following words...
suggested
it may be
unknown
probably
sometimes
None of which are strong words of confidence by any stretch of the imagination. ALL these words are used in the context of someone who is UNSURE of his message.
This is important because the meaning of the Aramaic word for "brother" (aha) not only includes the meanings already mentioned but also includes other close relations, including cousins.
In fact, there was no word for "cousin" in Aramaic.
Here we see Jimmy speaking untruthfully. Professor Witherinton who was quoted in USA Today stated there is in fact an Aramaic word for cousin.
If one wanted to refer to the cousin relationship, one has to use a circumlocution such as “the son of his uncle” (brona d-`ammeh). This often is too much trouble, so broader kinship terms are used that don’t mean “cousin” in particular; e.g., ahyana ("kinsman"), qariwa ("close relation"), or nasha ("relative"). One such term is aha, which literally means “brother” but is also frequently used in the sense of “relative, kinsman.”
Again, here he is expecting his readers to believe him on mere "opinion" or "circumstantial evidence." Not one shred of provable evidence either Scriptural or historic has yet to have been used to CONFIDENTLY portray his message as being authentic. Not one. In my book this is the message of a liar seeking to hide something.
The first Christians in Palestine, not having a word for cousin, would normally have referred to whatever cousins Jesus had with such a general term and, in translating their writing or speech into Greek, it is quite likely that the Aramaic word aha would have been rendered literally with the Greek word for brother (adelphos).
The word "likely" used here again proves HE IS UNSURE. And the fact that there is a word for cousin in both Aramaic and Greek proves he is lying.
Which James?
There may be as many as seven men named James mentioned in the New Testament. For our purposes the most important are:
* James “the brother of the Lord” (Matt. 13:55, Acts 15:13-21, 1 Cor. 15:7, Gal. 1:19)
* James “son of Zebedee” (Matt. 4:21, 10:2, 17:1, Acts 12:2)
* James “son of Alphaeus” (Matt. 10:3, Acts 1:13)
It is the first whose ossuary may have been found. He often was called “James the Just” and was martyred in the A.D. 60s (Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20:9). He is not the same as James son of Zebedee, who was martyred earlier (Acts 12:2). Advocates of the cousin interpretation commonly seek to identify him with James son of Alphaeus.
Here Jimmy Akin is trying to "confuse" the issue further. Did you know the definition of the word "Babylon" is "to mix" truth with error? Jimmy is doing exactly as Rome has always done. Pray for him people. It is sad when it is so obvious to those of us with eyes that see what he is actually doing here. He truly can't see what he is doing. If he did, he would know how absurd it is.
Engaging the Argument
In the USA Weekend piece, Witherington criticized both the step-brother and the cousin hypotheses. Regarding the former, he wrote, "If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states."
This argument seems flatly erroneous. The inscription does not state that Jesus and James were "literally" brothers. It says that they were brothers, period. It doesn't say "James, son of Joseph, literal brother of Jesus."
This is a common technique of Rome. They use a lie as truth. They do the same with Scriptures at every turn. When the Word of God is bluntly stating Truth, Rome will always seek a way to place a "twist" on what the Lord said so as to confuse the issue. Those of us that are God's children understand easily what's being said in His Word. For His children DO hear His voice. Those that aren't His children, seek to look for ways around what's being said by the Lord. Case in point. Study up on how Satan has always used "what God said" in a way to make it appear He says something else. He has done this since the Garden of Eden.
So, since Jimmy Akin seeks a "literal" proof here. (even though it's already there for those with eyes that see) I ask. Jimmy Akin, where is the one verse that LITERALLY proves Mary was a virgin until death? Or how about the verse that LITERALLY proves Joseph never consummated the marriage? Or the one verse that LITERALLY states Mary denied Joseph's carnal desires towards his God given WIFE? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander I always say, so Jimmy, I ask, where is your LITERAL proof?
And what does Witherington mean by "literally"? To most ears, the most literal meaning of “brother” is full brother, all the other senses being in some sense accommodated to this primary sense. But we know that James can't be a full brother because Joseph was not Jesus' biological father. (A point that Witherington, who has written a book critical of liberal reinterpretations of Jesus, presumably acknowledges.)
Did you catch that? Jimmy Akin is now using the exact same method Bill Clinton used to define sex so as to get away with an evil act. He takes an obvious fact and twists it to generate some question. No matter how vague the twist may be, it’s effective for those that have no faith.
Witherington is trying to get too much out of the single word "brother" in the inscription. It's range of meaning is simply too broad to rule out James being a step-brother.
Truth is folks, Jimmy is trying to do the exact same thing with the word "cousin" here. Yet we are expected to believe him over documented facts?
Even in English, which has a gigantic vocabulary that includes a term for step-brother, we tend to use just "brother." Someone making introductions is more likely to say "This is my brother" than "This is my step-brother," unless family relations are unusually icy.
Again, Jimmy Akin is using "assumptions" to preach this error. More LACK of confidence from Jimmy Akin leads to one thing, and one thing only. A lack of confidence in those that hear him and his message. I praise the Lord for His Word and the factual evidence He supplies for His followers. It’s amazing how this God of ours never leaves us without evidence of His truth as does Rome leave its preachers fumbling about in the dark looking for crafty lies to deceive the masses.
What I truly find amazing is how Jimmy thinks he can compare a flippant statement with an etched epilog. How can anyone assume calling a step-brother “brother” in a casual manner as most people do is comparable to etching “brother” instead of “step-brother” on a bone box? Like today’s tombstones, one doesn’t find it a good idea to be inaccurate when etching in stone the final, and permanent, last statement of a person’s life and or title. Still, Jimmy uses this method to try and pull the onus off the fact that he has yet to share one speck of viable evidence to support his theories.
Witherington dismissed the cousin hypothesis by simply asserting, "there certainly was an Aramaic word for 'cousin' that could have been used in this inscription but was not." For this argument to work, several premises have to be granted:
Fact is, the word "BROTHER" was used on the ossuary, and Jimmy Akin is trying to make us all believe it should have been "COUSIN." The easy and blunt thing to notice here is. THE WORD COUSIN IS NOT ON THAT BOX. That fact alone is what’s got Jimmy blood up.
If you want to see the rest of the article, click the URL below. But understand this. Jimmy Akin merely repeats assumptions, lies, and twists facts as he has done here. I believe I made that crystal clear by simply using common sense. Plus, nowhere does Jimmy Akin prove his side of the story as did the actual Scientists that authenticated the box, or the historians that verified the words, or the preachers that shared the Scriptures that tied the two together.
I will share one more tidbit from Jimmy Akin's article. He said, regarding Witherington's facts...
"Witherington behaved irresponsibly by asserting in popular print that there is such a word. In so doing he misled people of multiple religious persuasions, disturbed the faith of some, confused others, and sparked a round of needless arguments."
Jimmy... You just did exactly what you accused Witherington of doing with the word "cousin." And we now have it in POPULAR PRINT as well.
Original article URL= http://www.catholic.com/library/Bad_Aramaic_Made_Easy.asp
The above was used by permission from Nicholas at http://www.remnantofgod.org/
===
RELICS, BONES AND BODYPARTS
Roman Catholics love relics
The Catholic church has a thing about things. Things like bits of bone, desiccated flesh, random body parts, scraps of cloth, splinters of wood and stuff like that. They like to use such things in the practice of those arcane rites which only those in the RCC clerical hierarchy appear to really understand. Now, in the animistic or shamanistic religions, such objects would be called fetishes, and would be given unreasonably excessive attention or reverence. The Roman church calls these things relics and would have her faithful consider them as means to focus on the Lord God. Well, that is what they say, anyway.
1674. Besides sacramental liturgy and sacramentals, catechesis must take into account the forms of piety and popular devotions among the faithful. The religious sense of the Christian people has always found expression in various forms of piety surrounding the Church's sacramental life, such as the veneration of relics, visits to sanctuaries, pilgrimages, processions, the stations of the cross, religious dances, the rosary, medals,[Cf. Council of Nicaea II: DS 601; 603; Council of Trent: DS 1822.] etc. Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)
In ancient times, there was a regular cult of the dead. It existed before the birth of Christ. In the morning of Christianity, the Church presented no coherent opposition to it. In fact, some of the early church fathers and some bishops participated in the pagan practices of the cult of martyrs and some even encouraged them.
In the early centuries of our Christian faith, there was a wide trade in "relics," or bits and pieces of dead martyrs and "saints." Seems just about every town and church wanted its own piece of some dead church hero or something that hero had touched or worn. Those who could afford it, bought such relics and either enshrined them in their homes or places of business or wore them on their persons.
This was such a lucrative trade that folks began to invent martyrs. No grave was safe, for the unscrupulous – or the excessively religious – were wont to dig up the remains and hustle the various body parts and bits of clothing to some other town in need of a martyr of its own. Sometimes, country folk would erect a little shrine to Saint Somebody-or-other to attract visitors and their custom. This practice became so rampant that, in Africa, the assembled bishops resolved in 401 A.D. that:
...altars set up here and there in the countryside and along roads as if in memory of martyrs, in which it is shown that no body or relics of martyrs have been deposited, shall be overthrown, though, if this is impossible because of demonstrations by the people, at least the population should be admonished. . ." --L. T. Lefort, Le Chasse aux reliques des martyrs en Egypte au IV siecle, La Nouvelle Clio 6 (1954), pp. 225-230)
For centuries, people reported all manner of fantastic experiences, either their own of someone else's, and visitations from angels, spirits of the dead and, of course, Mary. What was behind this surge of religious activity and the incredible growth of the cult of martyrs in the latter years of Constantine's rule? Emperor Constantine, by the Edict of Milan, legitimized Christian worship throughout the Roman Empire, an act which certainly facilitated church growth. Converts began to flock to the new religion, which seemed not to fully meet their spiritual needs:
For by their own act, they found themselves without gods. A strange way to put it. Surely they understood that the one Omnipotence was enough. But no, the answer was overwhelmingly no. That was because the concerns of the little people were little, and they were therefore not accustomed to apply to Jupiter or Zeus for succor; nor to Yahweh, after conversion. Like the great Lex, they thought, great gods cared nothing "de minimis;" great gods were lords and masters, not the fathers they hoped to appeal to (so Apollonius had once put it). Conversion and the repudiation of their old patrons and rescuers among the divine ranks had left an emptiness, a loneliness in times of trouble, not comfortably to be filled by the Power preached from urban pulpits. --Ramsay MacMullen, Christianity & Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, (C) 1997 Yale University Press, pp. 120-121)
Sure, leaders of the early church made an effort to convince people that Almighty God was big enough and caring enough and accessible enough to handle all their problems, even the littlest of them. Augustine, time and again, struggled against his congregation's reluctance to go to God with the routine problems of ordinary living:
There are those who say God is good, great, the top, beyond our perception, incorruptible, who will give us eternal life and that incorruptibility which he has promised in the resurrection, while temporal matters and matters of this world belong to "daemons."
"Let us reduce it to the very least things: he sees to the salvation of your hen."--Augustine, En. In ps. 34.1.7, In Ioann. Ev. Tract. 34.3f, and En. In ps. 26.2.19
The Bishop of Hippo rebuked "those misguided men who count God as necessary for eternal life, for that life of the soul, but thinks these Powers must be worshipped by us on account of temporal matters." (Ibid.)
What to do now? Christianity taught that God was sufficient to meet all man's needs, yet the common people did not feel confident in approaching so great and illustrious a Being with their "little" problems. They missed their many "little" gods, the lower order superhuman beings to whom they were accustomed to applying for help and protection. Fortunately, there was a Christian answer: they could appeal to sanctified martyrs.
Early Christians were well-served by their dead martyrs in the early days of the church. We have no record of any of these martyrs accomplishing any miracle involving hens, but St. Felix could cure larger animals as well as find those who ran away. Sts. Hypatius and Thecla could do about the same. St. Martin once exorcised a demon from a mad cow, and St. Fides is said to have resurrected a mule. St. Germanus, while still alive, ministered to a rooster who had lost his cock-a-doodle-do (Constantius, "Vita Germani II")
From Augustine and Basil, "The principal business of the martyrs, by far, then as for a thousand years to come, was to restore fertility, straighten limbs, clear the sight, or untwist the mind. Like Asclepieia, like sacred springs presided over by their healing deities, the martyria served as hospitals to urban and rural masses alike . . .The need for divine help, as the traditional was banished by mission and persecution together, was no doubt enormous; to supply it, the Christian God might seem very distant; but the beneficience of the sanctified dead was close and comfortable. The traditional world of antiquity thus retained or resumed its traditional character "under new management."--Ramsay MacMullen, Christianity & Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, (C) 1997 Yale University Press, pp. 121-122
Even today, in the RCC way of religion, God is presented as virtually inaccessible and Christ seems aloof and even somewhat to be feared. After all He is the Judge Who will seal for all eternity the fate of the lost at His judgment seat. Scripture tells us there is but one mediator between God and man, our Savior Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5). How can we, insignificant and virtually powerless, dare to take our petitions straight to the Omnipotence? Rome provides a more loving and nurturing mediatrix to intercede with THE Mediator in our behalf – Mary, Queen of Heaven.
969. 'This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.'[LG 62.]--CCC, Op. cit.
And if a problem requires the services of a specialist, why there are plenty of saints, many of them martyrs, to call on. Why bother God over a coming traffic court appearance? St. Jude can help you. The RCC pantheon of saints not only replaces the old college of pagan gods and demigods, it actually makes it better. Where as before, folks only were able to appeal to a few hundred deities for help, Rome provides a list numbering in the thousands.
And how are these ministering spirits and unacknowledged deities to be recompensed for their labors in our behalf? Why by rendering them worship and reverence, of course. In keeping with Rome's wordplay, these spirits of the dead are to be rendered a type of worship other than that rendered to the Almighty One. God alone, in His Three Persons, is to be adored with latria. Only Mary qualifies for the second level of worship, labeled hyperdulia. However, all those spirits of the dead and even the bits and pieces of their mortal remains or appurtances, as well as odds and ends of things or emanations, are to be honored with the lowest level of worship, which Rome terms dulia. Seems only fair, doesn't it?
Can. 1186 To foster the sanctification of the people of God, the Church commends to the special and filial veneration of Christ's faithful the Blessed Mary ever-Virgin, the Mother of God, whom Christ constituted the Mother of all. The Church also promotes the true and authentic cult of the other Saints, by whose example the faithful are edified and by whose intercession they are supported.--Code of Canon Law (CCL), I IntraText Edition LT © 2003 Èulogos
Rome is so caught up in the worship of spirits and things that they like to keep relics in their churches, chapels, shrines, and similar places. Shoot! There is a scrap of rag, or a shrivelled up body part, or splinter of wood or some other things once belonging to a "saint" or martyr in most permanent altars maintained by Rome. It used to be that every permanent altar had to hold relics, but that changed in this ecumenical era of the Novus Ordo Mass. The Code of Canon Law and General Instruction V of the Roman Missal still appear to continue the tradition of relics in altars, but the Nova Ordo does not require them
Can. 1237 §2 The ancient tradition of placing relics of Martyrs or of other Saints within a fixed altar is to be retained, in accordance with the rites prescribed in the liturgical books.--CCL, Op. cit.
Now, doesn't that call to mind the pagan religions Rome so eagerly incorporated into her own religious practice? Rome is so big on the ghoulish business of worshipping body parts or involving them in their worship that some really bizarre situations have developed.
One example of the silliness that has risen up around the cult of saints and martyrs is the fact that the Vatican is in possession of TWO skulls which they claim were Peter's. One is enshrined in the Cathedral of St. John Lateran and at "Peter's burial site" in the graffiti wall in the Vatican. Peter was quite a guy, but I doubt he had two heads.
Then, there's the story of how a merchant paid a hooker to use her skills to obtain an arm of John the Baptist as her price for servicing the sexual needs of an hospitaler. John's relics were in demand. In 1016, monks in Aquitaine claimed they had come into possession of the head of John the Baptist. This "discovery" seemed not to create any distress, although another head supposedly having also belonged to John had been on display in Antioch for a very long time.
Anything that had touched the body of Christ was particularly desirable. One such object was the Spear of Destiny, the very weapon that was said to have pierced the side of Christ as He hung on the cross. Some stories claim this spear has existed since the beginning of recorded time, being passed from dynasty to dynasty. Adolf Hitler, who was deeply involved with things occult, was fascinated by the Spear. On the very day Germany annexed Austria, March 12, 1938, Hitler was in Vienna, where he went to the Hofmuseum to personally take charge of the Spear, which was on display there. After Germany had been defeated, General Patton, himself a believer in reincarnation and other curious things, was shocked to learn that Germany had been in possession of the Spear. The general was concerned that the Allies might have to resort to the use of nuclear weapons to fulfill the Spear's destiny.
Other relics held and revered by Catholic faithful and the Roman church included Christ's Holy Navel, Holy Tears, Hair, Fingernails and Holy Foreskin. Of course, Mary's milk, tears, hair and such were in great demand as well.
Little has changed since the early days when the church, in her zeal to "make converts," adapted pagan beliefs and rituals and legitimized them by tacking on the label "Christian." Do you reckon God is fooled by that label? I'll be posting details of some of the strange things the Catholic church has said and done as regards the ghoulish practice of using "holy" body parts in her worship. For now, I urge all those who participate in the pagan ways of Rome to read and bear in mind the very serious way God has dealt in the past with those who would not heed His commandants and worshipped as heathens:
And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the LORD their God, and they built them high places in all their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city. And they set them up images and groves in every high hill, and under every green tree: And there they burnt incense in all the high places, as did the heathen whom the LORD carried away before them; and wrought wicked things to provoke the LORD to anger: For they served idols, whereof the LORD had said unto them, Ye shall not do this thing. Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God. And they rejected his statutes, and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and they followed vanity, and became vain, and went after the heathen that were round about them, concerning whom the LORD had charged them, that they should not do like them. And they left all the commandments of the LORD their God, and made them molten images, even two calves, and made a grove, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination and enchantments, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger. Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only. Also Judah kept not the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they made. And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight.--2 Kings 17:9-20
Do you reckon God has changed His mind? That the things that bothered Him in the Old Testament no longer concern Him? That believers are not under the Law and therefore need not worry?
With thanks to www.sxws.com/charis
====
IS ROMAN CATHOLICISM A CULT?
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
On this page I would like to better define the lines between a Christian church and an actual cult. All too often the word cult is addressed to people that believe in the second coming, trust the Bible, or just plain home school children. What amazes me is how often it is the Catholic church that tags people with the title cult, when they themselves sport all the earmarks of a cult.
When the Sabbath keeping prophecy understanding children of God came out of hiding about 200 years ago, the Roman church with their many millions of members decided they should be tagged a cult. Reason being, not only were these Sabbath keeping Christians embracing the Law of God as a fruit of true Christianity, they also had an uncanny ability to match prophetic facts with historic documentation. Rome of course didn’t like that one bit. They feared their message because they were the ones being unmasked. Every prophecy that has ever been uttered in Scripture regarding Antichrist was now being PROVEN with rock hard evidence to in fact be the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. History had now afforded these Christians with ample evidence that was readily available, as well as the Bible itself was now being printed for the common man. This has allowed almost anyone with a competent knowledge of history a valid method by which to identify Antichrist. So Rome yelled CULT as loud as she could to try and prevent problems.
Now, common human nature has proven that the natural reaction to the mass opinion is to always go with the crowd. In other words, if everyone is saying it, it must be true. Problem with that thought process is, when it comes to Scriptural facts, the crowd theology, or the majority is always wrong. Case in point, the ENTIRE PLANET in Noah’s day thought Noah was just some crazed lunatic building a boat on dry land that was preaching the end of the word was coming by a flood. Science has already proven that at this time in earth’s history it had NEVER rained before on the planet. No one believed Noah. The great firmament was still in place, the great deep was still just under the earth’s crust that was not only watering the soil and roots, it was gently warming it as well due to the close proximity of the earth’s magma. So, rain as we see today was not necessary. The plants had all the water they needed, the atmosphere was hyperbolic in nature, and so the thought of rain, let alone clouds in the air seemed absolutely insane to the majority. Yet, did their adamant disbelief somehow stop the now scientifically proven global flood from coming? No it did not. Scientists have not only proven a global flood, they have found pillow lava on mountain tops as well as large salt formations on Mt. Ararat. Not to mention the actual petrified ark of Noah that has been probed, flown over and even photographed over the years. In fact…
Marco Polo wrote of seeing it during his travels
· In 1883 a Turkish expedition documented the ark’s existence upon Mt Ararat
· In 1916 during World War I, Russian pilot Lt. Zabalotski photographed the ark while on a recognizance mission
· In 1944 a photo of the ark appeared in an issue of the “Stars & Stripes” publication of the US military
· In 1959 F100 Jet Fighter pilot Gregor Schwinghammer sighted the ark
· And Ron Bennet, UPI White House photographer, during the Carter administration was on board Air Force One, while on an escorted flight over Mt. Ararat. He was told along with everyone else on board to look out their windows and see for themselves NOAH’S ARK!
That ark is there, and there was a global flood. We now know this. The MAJORITY, or “crowd theologians” in Noah’s day stated Noah was wrong. The MAJORITY, or shall I say the ENTIRE PLANET figured since everyone else thought Noah was mistaken in his prophetic declarations, he must be wrong. How can the whole planet be wrong they thought? How can this one man and his small family be the only true followers of God?
Well, it’s no different today! When the Sabbath keeping child of God came out of hiding directly after Rome stopped killing the Christians, they started to proclaim prophetic facts that angered the dragon. Satan knew his methods of deception, and crowd theology worked real well in Noah’s day, and as the saying goes, if it works don’t fix it, right? So, the Devil prodded the prelates of Rome to proclaim the true Christians to be a CULT simply because they didn’t go along with the MAJORITY of Roman Catholic theologian’s. Not to mention the hundreds of millions of Catholics that were taught to blindly accept what their leaders said as truth. These peculiar people that are keeping what they called the “Jewish Sabbath,” had to be a cult. Look at how strange they are Rome said! They don’t go to church in Sunday like we do! They don’t embrace the doctrines we do! They don’t believe our Pope is holy as we do! So they must be a cult.
Problem with this lie of Rome was, there will always be people out there that WILL open their bibles to verify the Truth. They are called the elect! And according to Matthew 24:24, the elect can NOT be deceived. Now I know some of you have heard your pastors say that “even the elect” can be deceived. But have you READ Matthew 24:24 lately? It doesn’t say that at all. Remember that verse.. MATTHEW 24:24.. jot it down, and then later look at it and you will see, you have been LIED to.
So.. how can we tell the difference between a cult and a Christian church? Well, finding a Christian church is rather easy. It’s one that will adhere to the Christian God’s Bible as the sole authority. I have a page on the site, called “Remnant Christian Fruits” in the “Bible Truths” section of the website that lays out 8 of the major biblical teachings that we can use to identify the true remnant church, or Bride of Christ in the last days. If we were to look for this church we must not settle for just any church, we must make sure it is exactly as the Word of God describes it to be. It must be God's church! It won’t step off that platform of Truth no matter what the cost! I won't settle for anything less for my self or my family. Why should you?
However a cult is a little more difficult to find sometimes. They don’t rely on Scripture at all. In fact they rely on what Jesus refers to as doctrines of demons and traditions of man over and above the Scripture. So there’s a key we will use in our investigation. Plus the cult will always seek to go against biblical jurisprudence, or actual Christian truths. All one needs to do in this respect is to look at the church in question, investigate its doctrines and teachings and do as the Berean’s of Acts chapter 17 did. We must see what they have to say then open a Bible to see if those things are so.
So.. let’s do that with Roman Catholicism shall we? Does it stand up to the acid test of truth? Do they go by whatsoever saith the Lord? The Vatican does claim to be a CHRISTIAN church does it not? So let’s see if that is so? If they are a Christian church, then they won’t have a problem with the Christian Bible. Biblical jurisprudence is defined by Isaiah rather bluntly when he says, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20) So bringing a Bible into the mix is an absolute necessity when a church proclaims to be Christian. You can use a Bible to expose non-Christian faiths as well of course, but not as effectively as you can with so called followers of Christ, because Muslims, Buddhists, or even Zoroastrian nuns don’t accept him as Lord. So when you walk up to them with a Bible they don’t understand that book as truth. So they ignore it. In that respect the Bible is only effective to the BELIEVER that holds it. But as I said earlier, Rome claims Christ as Lord, so the Bible will have to be the method by which she must be tested! Isaiah made that very clear.
In my research over the years I have found MANY signs of cultic activity in many churches. Of course there are way too many of these signs to mention, so I will concentrate on what I like to refer to as the SIX MAJOR SIGNS OF A CULT. If they have more then one of these, this is a church that has no doubt stepped off the platform of truth and should be avoided at all cost. But if they have ALL SIX, then this is most assuredly a bonafide, died in the wool actual CULT we are dealing with.
Sign 1 that the Roman Catholicism is a cult
Every cult has a single powerful human leader. In fact, all cult leaders will proclaim themselves a god on earth. Do you recall Jim Jones? or Charles Manson? They both proclaimed themselves to be Jesus Christ did they not? Did you know the Pope does this as well? Listen to what the Pope's of Rome have to say in that regard.
"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.
"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,
"For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109
The title "Lord God the Pope" is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4, In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, "Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam" (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In a Paris edition, they are found in column 140.
"The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land . . . He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords"--La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871.
"It seems that Pope John Paul II now presides over the universal Church from his place upon Christ's cross," said Bishop Dunn, who traveled with seven other prelates to Rome. Taken from an article entitled, "Auckland Bishop Says Pope Presides From the Cross" AUCKLAND, New Zealand, SEPT. 20, 2004 -Zenit.org (Article ZE04092001)
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/catholicismexposed/isromancatholicismacult/index.shtml
====
Current estimates of Roman Catholic priests in the U.S.= 49,000 to 50,000
Estimates of pedophile priests = 3,000 (6.1%) to 8,000 (16.3%)
188 Dioceses in the U.S. Divide 3,000 by 188 = 16 perpetrators per diocese
Divide 8,000 by 188 = 42 perpetrators per diocese
Current experts claim a pedophile could abuse 200-265 children in a lifetime.
200 x 16 perps/diocese = 3,200 victims/diocese
200 x 42 perps/diocese = 8,400 victims/diocese
3,200 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 601,600 victims in U.S.
8,400 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 1,579,200 victims in U.S.
Average American family consists of 4-6 people
(3,200 victims/diocese) 601,600 victims x 4 family members = 2,406,400 indirect victims
60l,000 victims x 6 family members = 3,609,600 indirect victims
(8,400 victims/diocese) 1,579,200 x 4 family members = 6,316,800 indirect victims
1,579,200 x 6 family members = 9,475,200 indirect victims
These numbers are a reflection of immediate family only and do not reflect the indirect victims within the parishes that are affected.
188 Bishops are responsible for the pain of at least 601,600 direct victims and as many as 9,475,200 indirect victims — a total of as many as 10,076,800 people. Clearly, something is wrong.
Using the lower numbers the number of direct victims and survivors alone could populate a city larger than Boston. Using the higher numbers, it would be the fourth largest city in the U.S.— one between the size of Houston and Chicago..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Quotes...
Tom Brokaw stated on NBC nightly News on March 18, 2002, that Since the mid 80's the Roman Catholic church has paid out over 1 billion dollars in lawsuits stemming from child molestations by their priests.
"Some of these guys cooperate more with evil than they do with God."-FATHER GARY R. HAYES,on priests who abused him and others who covered it up. June 12, 2002, NY Times.
"From a canonical point of view, the bishop or religious superior is neither morally nor legally responsible for a criminal act committed by one of his clerics." THE REV. GIANFRANCO GHIRLANDA, dean of the canon law faculty at Gregorian University in Rome, as quoted by the NY Times, May 18, 2002.
Father McBride on "Meet the Press" 4-28-02 said Gay men should be allowed to become Roman Catholic priests.He also admitted that many of the Roman Catholic priests are gay. Father Richard Newhouse also said that Jesus Christ as well as the Gospels declare men of God should be celebit,
All articles will "pop up" in new windows...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexuality
Priest downloaded gay porn images
Rector's book on clergy, sex is best seller - among priests
Religion, homosexuality can coexist
Catholic church reaches out to gays
Priests with AIDS
Catholic church worried about link between priests, AIDS
Cliques of gay priests are dividing the Church
Priests with AIDS - Crisis within Catholic church
AIDS in the priesthood
Bishop admits sex with priest
Homosexual Valentines day on Catholic campus
Bishop suspends priest who declared self a practicing homosexual
Priest in Spain announces his homosexuality
Spain’s first openly gay priest said...
'Gay' culture in Catholic Church grows
Gay test for aspiring priests
Confab pushes homosexuality in Church
Gay Catholics celebrate mass together
Sydney´s archbishop pell on communion for open homosexuals
Gays and the Seminary
Homosexuals better priests, Jesuit says
Bishops Avoided 'Real' Issues of Celibacy and Homosexuality, Activists Say
Spanish priest steps down after former gay lover distributes graphic video
While in California on sick leave, Boston priest bought racy gay resort
Gay association to ask Pope for homosexual patron saint
Homosexuals taking over catholic priesthood
History's Gayest Pope
Homosexuality is divinely ordered, say catechism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Molestation
Priest told to step down after sex-abuse accusations
Sanchez abuse kept quite
Vatican studies sex abuse by priests
Pope's new policy is to promote pedophile priests
A dark journey of the soul
Abuse inquiry at top Catholic school (Priest may have transmitted AIDS to children!)
Pedophile Irish priest dies in jail - shocking case topples government
Documents show bishops transferred known abuser
Former altar boys get $119 million in sex-abuse case
U.K. Church report urges police checks of clergy
Child abuse and the priesthood
Priest in Innu community faces sex abuse charges
The Doyle ~ Mouton Report
Priest deserves jail for molesting children
Pastor's arrest stuns parishioners
Priest admits being in bed with 11 year old boy
Popery's plague of pedophile priests
Priest says paedophilia was good for children
Bishop guilty of concealing paedophile priest
French bishop, priest, found guilty in paedophile cases
Six more priests removed on allegations of abuse
DA's given names of 49 more priests
Six Priests Suspended After Claims of Sex Abuse
A Church Dealing With Accusations
Reports of Priests' Abuse Enrage Boston Catholics
Child abuse priest housed by Church
Child sexual abuse: the church´s days of reckoning
2 Massachusetts Priests Suspended -Sexual Abuse of Minors
Scores of priests involved in sex abuse cases
Boston Archdiocese Gives Authorities Names of Priests Abusing Children
Catholics Debate Boston Leadership
Priest says he, too, molested boys
More Catholic Priests dismissed in Child Sex Abuse
Archdiocese Could Pay Up to $30 Million...
Dioceses Sell Land, Borrow Money to Pay Settlements in Sexual Abuse Cases
Pope may sack Polish prelate in sex scandal
Boston Priests Doubting Cardinal After Sex Scandal
Hundreds now claim priest abuse
Rome pays $110 MILLION to settle child sex abuse cases in Ireland
'95 ruling a shield for clergy
Weakland gives priests abuse data
Archdiocese defends secrecy
Church sex scandal taints holy week
6 priests linked to abuse (6 known pedophiles allowed to serve)
Church too lenient on sex-abuse priests -poll
Sex predator: the priest who got away
Victim claims he's 'breaking chain of abuse' (priest takes porno pics of kids)
Suit names archdiocese, N.H. bishop
Victim abused by priest: 'Floodgates will open'
Priest asks victim, "would you like to kiss Jesus?"
Gay test for aspiring priests
Catholic church computer seized in child porn probe
Philadelphia Archdiocese Reveals 35 Pedophile Priests
Vatican wrestles with pedophilia scandals
Portland Main Diocese remove 2 pedophile priests
Florida bishop admits sexual abuse of seminary student
Bishops back offf of OUSTING Priests
Bishops spokesman shielded gay priests
Priests hiding behind confession seal
As Lawsuits spread, Church faces questions on finances
Catholics learning sex from Kinsey's disciples (Known Pedophile)
111 U.S. Roman Catholic Bishops Kept Priests
Catholic Bishops Who Resigned in Sexual Misconduct Scandals
Accused bishop of lexington, kentucky, resigns
Bishops' Meeting on Catholic Sex Abuse Crisis an Echo of 1992 Gathering
Abuse Victims Sue to Void Secrecy Provisions of Settlements With Church
At Least 300 Church Abuse Suits Filed
Hundreds Of Priests Removed Since '60s
Australia Catholic Church Apologizes
Cops check ex-priests yard for remains
Survey Finds Most Catholics Unhappy with Church Handling of Scandal
Florida Priest Held in Michigan on Sex Charges
Archdiocese Ponders Legality of Damage Caps
14 priests in Miami diocese accused of abuse
When priests commit suicide
Weakland denies he abused man archdiocese paid $450,000
Vatican Lawsuit Liability Could Reach $1 Billion in US
Roman Catholic Church uses High Powered Lawyers to Harrass accusers
Egan Paid Accused Priest
Vatican Lawyer Says Bishops Should Not Reveal Abuse Claims
D.A. Demanding Evidence from Catholic Cardinal
Angry Catholics pack sessions on sex abuse
Accused Priest Apparently Kills Self
Priest Who Admitted Sex with Teen Shot in Baltimore
Powerful Cardinal in Vatican Accused of Sexual Abuse Cover-Up
Catholics seek UN action against Vatican
Church reneges on cash for paedophile priest victims
Priests linked to teen sex -Diocese never reported incidents
Former Kansas priest unregistered as sex offender in South Dakota
Former altar boy says priests ran boys' prostitution ring
CATHOLIC CHURCH KNEW OF CHILD MOLESTATION BACK IN 1985!
Priest kept working after abuse cases
Cardinal Law says plaintiffs contributed to alleged abuse
Ex-Boston Priest Arrested in Rape
Dioceses in 46 States Feel Impact of Sex Abuse Scandal Among Clergy
Catholic Military Chaplains Punished
450 MORE VICTIMS COME FORWARD!
Americans target the Holy See
Sex Abuse by Clergy a Global Problem
Priest praised sex with boys in '79 talk
Church allowed abuse by priest for years
Priest molested boy, 12, at rockaway beach: da
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Molestation OVERFLOW...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52505,00.html
Monks, Parishioners Clean Nativity Church
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52362,00.html
Church confessionls remain private ? Discussion
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52318,00.html
Law: 'I Don't Remember Sex Abuse Accusations'
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52228,00.html -- Related ^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52289,00.html -- Related ^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52075,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52066,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51971,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52281,00.html -- Priest pleads guilty
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51968,00.html
Priest released on bail in Hong Kong -- child sex abuse
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52234,00.html
Retired Mass. Priest Pleads Innocent to Charge He Raped 12-Year-Old Boy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52240,00.html
A HIP CATHOLIC PRIEST TV SHOW -- COMMING
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52113,00.html
Shanley Pleads Not Guilty; Bail Set at $750,000
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52214,00.html
Retired Priest Arrested in Boston Area
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52048,00.html
Is the Media Overdoing the Scandal in the Catholic Church? Discussion
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52110,00.html
Accused Ex-Priest Extradited to Boston
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52073,00.html
Priest Resigns Over Mardi Gras Photo
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51961,00.html
Church May Mortgage Properties to Compensate Abuse Victims
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51848,00.html
Ex-Boston Priest Arrested for Child Rape
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53126,00.html
Priest gets shot by one he molested
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53018,00.html -- Related ^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53076,00.html
Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Parishioners of Sex Abuse by Priests
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53004,00.html
Priest commits suicide
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52842,00.html
Interview with priest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALL Networks have information on...
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEDOPHILE PRIESTS
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/03/21/vatican.sex.abuse/index.html
CBS http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/20/national/main504125.shtml
NBC http://www.msnbc.com/news/727393.asp?cp1=1
ABC http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/pope_blakemore020321.html
FOX http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48430,00.html
USA http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/03/21/pope.htm
CWNhttp://www.cwnews.com/news/getstory.cfm?recnum=17752
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More articles are coming! However, due to the massive amount of decadence in this church, I have run a bit behind schedule in updating this page, especially the "child molestation section.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sexual Abuse
Vatican Acknowledges Sex Scandal
Report says priests sexually abusing nuns
Vatican admits to priests raping nuns
Priest Charged Over Date-Rape Drug
Years later, some charge sexual abuse by nuns
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sex in the Confessional
Lewd questions asked of young girls and married women in the confessional
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCC Cover ups
Church Sex Abuse Cover-up
Court case seeks to define Catholic priest's family
Powerful Cardinal in Vatican Accused of Sexual Abuse Cover-Up
Head of Australia's Catholic Church Refuses to Resign Over Cover-Up Claims
Abuse Victims Sue to Void Secrecy Provisions of Settlements With Church
Vatican Lawyer Says Bishops Should Not Reveal Abuse Claims
Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Parishioners of Sex Abuse by Priests
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCC Survivors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misc
Pedophilia advocate featured in Catholic Church concert
French bishops address scandal of pedophilia
Court dubious on priest sex suit
Public Masturbating priest gets five years probation
Vatican encourages sexual deviancy by teens
Vatican seeks help of sexual Rock & Rollers to lure teens
Catholic Priest in trouble for posing nude
Catholic parents arrested trying to stop church teaching masturbation & homosexuality
Priest Pleads Guilty to Making Date-Rape Drug
Priest showers gay live in lover with gifts from $300,000.00 of church funds
Vatican firmly opposed to handover of information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Links on these topics
Survivors of Clergy abuse in Catholic seminaries
Clergy Crimes
Sanchez deposition
Lechery in the church of Rome exposed
SNAP Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
Sexual abuse by Catholic Priests
Catholic Pedophile Priests stats! (Check out these numbers!!)
Tremont & Sheldon Law Offices (Check out the actual cases on file against the pedophile priests of Rome!)
ABUSE TRACKER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to top
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's an article that I think sums it up...
Ala. Court Rules Against Gay Mother
Fri Feb 15,10:30 PM ET
By PHILLIP RAWLS, Associated Press Writer
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - In awarding custody of three teen-agers to their father over their gay mother, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court on Friday wrote that homosexuality is "an inherent evil" and shouldn't be tolerated.
The nine-judge panel ruled unanimously in favor of a Birmingham man and against his ex-wife, who now lives with her gay partner in southern California. The parents weren't named in court documents to protect the identity of the children, ages 15, 17 and 18. Chief Justice Roy Moore wrote that the mother's relationship made her an unfit parent and that homosexuality is "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature." Moore also quoted scripture, historical documents and previous state court rulings that he said backed his view.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.remnantofgod.org/
Spin-doctoring the Inquisition
Christian greetings everyone in these last days of life on earth. In mid June of this year the Pope spearheaded a public relations ploy designed to place the infamous Office of Inquisition in a better light. This pope, and his media experts, have bluntly lied about this hellish office so as to make all those they seek to attack appear as “conspiracy theorists” by those duped into believing their lies. As is always the case, the grand majority of the people of this world are spiritually lacking and completely unable to see what they’re up to. This is why Satan is able to control the masses. This is also why in Noah’s day only EIGHT people survived the global deluge. And this is also why we true Christians will in fact be looked upon as conspiracy theorists. The following article was released by the online Roman Catholic publication known as Zenit organization…
Crucial to Have the Facts About Inquisition, Says Pope
Writes a Letter for the Publication of Minutes of 1998 Congress
VATICAN CITY, JUNE 15, 2004 (Zenit.org).- John Paul II reiterated the importance of historical research so that the Church can purify her memory of the sins of her children, in particular, the Inquisition.
"Instead of offering to the world the witness of a life inspired by the values of faith," the Pope continued, Christians on occasion "indulged in ways of thinking and acting which were truly forms of counter-witness and scandal."
Borromeo explained that Pope Gregory IX (1227-1241) was the first to establish "inquisitors," "delegates of the Apostolic See with the task of combating heresy in certain areas."
"Obviously, a request for forgiveness can only affect real and objectively recognized events. Forgiveness is not asked for images spread by public opinion, which are part of a myth and do not correspond to reality," he said.
Cardinal Cottier said that the minutes have been published after a long delay due to a series of health problems affecting the scholars.
ZE04061509
this article, as well as many others, the Pope is seeking to make the Inquisition appear “not as bad” as some report. The wording alone seeks to downplay the horrendous and torturous acts this church performed on 100% innocent people, most of whom were true Christians dying for their faith. The Vatican stated that Christians "indulged in ways of thinking and acting which were truly forms of counter-witness and scandal.” Can you imagine? This evil church is saying FOLLOWERS OF CHRIST did these hellish acts when in fact it was the Catholic church that did these things. Christians do NOT boil people in oil, bury them alive, burn them alive, skin them alive, or torture them for days on end before finally killing them. Christians simply are unable to do acts of demons. Only the Roman Catholic forefather did this! STILL this so called apologetic man in Rome is seeking to place the blame on others for acts the Vatican itself has done! And he does so at a time when Muslims already have an inbred hatred for Christians. They hate Christians because of what the Catholic church did to them in the past. This is historic fact that no one dares to debate. It is that well known. But still, those nations, and even religions that were attacked by Rome think Rome was a Christian entity doing those acts merely because Rome CLAIMS Jesus as Lord! Thing is, NOTHING can be further from the truth! Roman Catholicism is by no means a Christian religion. It is actually a religion designed by Satan to destroy Christianity by masquerading as Christians while doing hellish acts.
On March 12, 2000 when the Pope “supposedly” apologized, he stated that "...Catholics at times "have not been faithful to the great commandment of love, sullying in this way the face of the Church," His church predecessors tortured and killed countless millions, but as usual the Vatican and Pope of this day says the Catholic people did it!? When will the Catholic people realize their Pope is blaming them for what the Church leaders openly did. Have you ever heard of a Catholic pulling someone down to their basement to strip them of their skin? No! Have you heard of priests doing it? Yes! Have you heard of priests telling the governing officials of the day to torture people? Yes again. So why is Rome constantly blaming their faithful congregations for what they themselves did? BECAUSE THEY LET THEM! There is no other reason. It’s no different then the countless millions who stay in a church that not only admitted to killing innocent people, they also admitted to molesting their sons TO THIS DAY and these Catholics stay in this church.
Why isn’t there an uproar regarding these statements? Because for one, the media is controlled, and two, many fear Rome and can see how they manipulate the truth, and how stupid the masses truly are. They know that if they do say something, the Vatican has proven time and time again that they are very capable of lying, twisting the facts, and forcing certain “men in power” to bow to their commands, even if it means to murder. So, those that want to speak out, usually choose not to, figuring it will come to no avail anyway.
The article also stated, “Forgiveness is not asked for images spread by public opinion, which are part of a myth and do not correspond to reality” In other words, the Pope is stating they seek no forgiveness for the “so called” gossip we see in such works of literature as the “Foxes Book of Martyrs” and other globally known sources of information that list the atrocities of this church. He is not talking about actual “gossip” that is running amuck. He is no doubt talking about those works of literature because those books document his church’s past. So he needs to belittle them as a defense lawyers rips into their defendant's victims. All along the church has claimed Foxe’s book, and those like it nothing but myths, as well as out and out “gossip” from what they define as anti-Catholics. Yet, the true Christians and their families do understand these things ARE quite true. In fact, MANY ex-Catholic priests and nuns have stepped forward to voice the truth regarding same over the years. Problem is, most of them, after doing so, simple wind up missing, or are literally found dead. This again affords the Vatican another opportunity to prevent further problems. FEAR reigns supreme in many who do not trust the Lord when He said plainly He has NOT given us a spirit of fear.
I ask… Why would the pope be looking for positive public relations (PR) for the Inquisition?? And why now? Because he himself RE-INSTATED IT IN 1991! And the Vatican plans to USE IT soon. If they had no plans to use it then WHY re-instate it? They know that when the word gets out this office is once again being used, the “so called” gossip concerning it will cause problems for Rome. So, common sense says they need to bathe this hellish office in a light that is far more acceptable to the grand majority of sheeple out there that are truly incapable of seeing the truth for what it is. What better time than now? It’s the twilight hours of the last days, Satan is about to burst forth in all his hellish glory, and the majority of the people the world over are sufficiently conditioned to fall for such hogwash as this. So they jump at the chance!
HOLY OFFICE STILL EXISTS
Pope John Paul II Revives Inquisition
By Kathleen R. Hayes Feb 1991, NRI Trumpet Page 3
The thought of a revived Holy Office of the Inquisition would pacify some and offend others. Nevertheless, the "Holy Office" still exists. Only it's name has been changed. Pope John Paul II has been instrumental in its revival. One may argue that this Ratzinger run agency is merely an attempt by the Catholic Church to root out communism or backslidden priests and their practices. However, with John Paul II's objective to implement "God's mandate" by creating a global church-state which will administer from traditional Roman Catholic theology, is enough cause for alarm. Malachi Martin has already stated in his book, "The Keys of this Blood," that the pope will not tolerate any belief systems that oppose his, not on a civil or church level. In John Paul II the world will behold a tyrant who will coldly execute direct orders against those whom he deems are heretics or immoral. Moreover, like his papal predecessors, John Paul II will carry out his "Godly mandate" in the name of Christ, or perhaps Mary. May God help us all.
The positive PR the Vatican cronies are looking to create is designed to make their actions appear not only moral, but it will also make anyone speaking out against The Vatican to appear as wierdos. It’s similar to the way Hollywood has portrayed the Christian for the last few decades. Have you ever noticed the strange looking people Hollywood places in the crowd scenes of their movies? Check it out the next time you see a movie setting inside a stadium or something like that. Once in a while they will show a person with a multicolored clown wig holding up a large sign that says, “JOHN 3:16” on it! I have seen this more than once over the years. They look to make Christianity appears as a ridiculous faith. And by the way, it’s not just Rome doing this today. Look at the Pentecostal churches, or the folks that dance with snakes in Georgia. They make Christians appear strange! When people walk into the churches and see how strange and ridiculous the people act, they decide Christianity is a joke and not worthy of investigating.
Countless scores of people have exposed Rome and its lies, and yes, countless scores have been killed for it. PLUS, it’s no longer as if the Vatican is trying to hide it’s evil past, or present. Still, people that willfully allow this satanic agency to blind them, are the very ones who defend it. The media is literally drenched today with everything from child molestation, to drunken bishops killing people in hit and run accidents. But those of us that expose Rome are called the evil ones according to this church and it’s media drones. And everyone believes them over those that have bonafide factual data exposing this Antichrist! Amazing isn’t it?
Vatican 'dispels Inquisition myths'
By Verity Murphy BBC News Online
The Inquisition reached its peak in the 16th Century. The Vatican has published a new study on the abuses committed by the medieval Inquisition and come to a rather surprising conclusion - that in fact the much feared judges of heresy were not as brutal as previously believed. According to the 800-page report, the Inquisition that spread fear throughout Europe throughout the Middle Ages did not use execution or torture to anything like the extent history would have us believe. In fact the book's editor, Professor Agostino Borromeo, claims that in Spain only 1.8% of those investigated by the notorious Spanish Inquisition were killed. Nonetheless, as the report was published, Pope John Paul II apologised once more for the interrogators' excesses, expressing sorrow for "the errors committed in the service of the truth by the recourse to non-Christian methods".
… The punishments meted out for wrongdoers ranged from being forced to visit churches and make pilgrimages, to life imprisonment or execution by burning at the stake.
…The accused did not have the right to face and question their accuser and it was acceptable to take testimony from criminals and excommunicated people.
The Inquisition reached its peak in the 16th Century as it battled the Reformation, but its most famous trial was that of Galileo in 1633, condemned for claiming the earth revolved around the sun. Death by burning
The Spanish Inquisition which became independent from the Vatican in the 15th Century, carried out some of the most infamous abuses under its "autos da fé" or act of faith, shorthand for death by burning. They zealously tortured victims, held summary trials, forced conversions and passed death sentences.
"There is no doubt that at the start, the planned procedures were applied with an excessive rigour, which in some cases degenerated into true abuses," the Vatican study simply says of this dark period. But the Vatican report, the product of a six-year investigation, insists that the Inquisition was not as bad as often believed. Professor Borromeo says for example that for 125,000 trials of suspected heretics in Spain, less than 2% were executed. He says that often mannequins were burned to represent those tried in absentia and condemned to death and heretics and witches who repented at the last minute were given some sort of relief when they were strangled before being burnt. Little comfort But for those connected with victims of the Inquisition, Vatican claims that it was not as bad as thought carry little weight. Galileo was the Inquisition's most famous victim
Among those targeted by the interrogators were the Waldensians, members of a Protestant sect declared heretical in the 12th Century. "If there are many or few cases, it doesn't matter. What's important is you don't say, 'I am right and you are wrong and I burn you'," said Thomas Noffke, a US-born Waldensian pastor in Rome.
Who in their right mind is going to believe this pack of lies? I wonder, would this article have been released BEFORE the Roman Catholic Commercial I like to refer to as "The Passion of the ANTI-Christ?" Countless scores of Protestants are now looking at Rome as a "moral" entity thanks to this blasphemous film. Had these articles about the Inquisition been released BEFORE the film, I am sure most people would think, "Who do they think they are trying tell us about history?" But now that so many accept that Catholic commercial as biblically accurate, and they look to Rome as being Christian again, Rome goes for it! Problem is, there are the Elect of God that Rome has to contend with. We know this church has lied before. Plus we know they lied in the past during the Inquisitions. We also know they lied about helping Hitler. And we also know they lied about molesting their own children for as long as there is recorded history, up and including to this day! So I ask, do we think they’re not lying now? I literally chuckle at the stupidity of that assumption.
After the article states, only 1.8% were actually killed, it says, “Nonetheless… Pope John Paul II apologized once more for the interrogators' excesses, expressing sorrow for "the errors committed in the service of the truth by the recourse to non-Christian methods".
Using the word “Nonetheless” to start that comment off is to say, “We don’t need to apologize for such a small number of murders, but, “nonetheless,” the pope did anyway at this time. That disgusts me to no end! What a sickening way to downplay the deaths of innocent people as if they are not worthy of even an apology! Plus, did you also notice this article ADMITS to using the exact same methods our “so called” Homeland Security liars use today? The article stated, The accused did not have the right to face and question their accuser and it was acceptable to take testimony from criminals and excommunicated people.”
They did this to Jesus in His day, they did it during the 1260 year “Great Tribulation” Jesus spoke of, they did it in Hitler’s day, and they are doing it in our day. Another obvious trivializing of the truth was found when the article stated, "There is no doubt that at the start, the planned procedures were applied with an excessive rigour, which in some cases degenerated into true abuses," Is that why they say “it’s not as bad as it seems” because they fudged the numbers to allow for abuses they say they never condoned anyway? How convenient? This is no different than the fudged numbers released by the Vatican in February of 2004 regarding the priests that molested little boys over the years. They even admitted in the articles they didn’t add the number of priests that have died over the years into the total number released to the press, because they felt it wasn’t necessary due to the fact they were dead! That alone gave a false sense of security to the easy to manipulate Catholic who chooses to stay in that church. This “fudging” of the numbers regarding the Inquisition is no different. Sadly, so is the end result. Some will believe the lies Rome spews, simply because Rome never tells the whole story!
In the article “Professor Borromeo says for example that for 125,000 trials of suspected heretics in Spain, less than 2% were executed.” Ok, let’s assume for a moment that the Vatican’s Professor is telling the truth here. Let’s assume that all the historic facts that prove otherwise are wrong, and this pack of biased wolves from the Vatican itself are correct in saying only 125,000 went to trial, and only 2% were burned at the stake or killed in other torturous ways. That means the Vatican admits to torturing and KILLING over 6250 people! “Nonetheless” they apologized anyway.
By the way, all those believing “mannequins were burned” please raise your hands. Not many I’m sure.
One last point I would like to make regarding this article. It was said that those that “repented at the last minute were given some sort of relief when they were strangled before being burnt.” Can you imagine what they said to get them to deny Christ as Lord? They no doubt offered them freedom, and life if they denied the Jesus of the Bible for the Jesus of Rome. And then to Satanically seal their fate as one who just openly denied Jesus Christ before Heaven and man, THEY STRANGLED THEM anyway so as to assure Satan gets his number! So.. in the future… those of you standing before possessed Roman Catholic priests, I implore you to remember. To deny Christ is to die, TWICE! Rome cannot be trusted anyway, but Christ CAN be trusted! No matter what you say, they’re going to kill you anyway! Common sense affords us the reality that if they let you live after denying Christ, they no doubt fear you will tell others of their torturous methods to get you to the point of denial. So.. deny Christ.. they kill you. Refuse to deny Christ, they kill you as well. Of course the difference here is, if they kill you for not denying Christ you will live forever!
By the way, were you aware that MODERN DAY Vatican chit chat is such that they speak of the benefits of burning Christians at the stake right now as we speak? On my “Evils of EWTN” page in the “RCC Exposed” section of the website I have a conversation that was posted on the EWTN Message board online! For those that aren’t aware, EWTN is a National Roman Catholic Television Network in the USA! They posted that conversation in May of 2002. After word got out about some websites gleaning the conversations to show others, EWTN promptly deleted those statements. Too late tho.. Here is just a small excerpt of what they had on that page…
Re:Heretics
Question from Jared on 05-13-2002:
Dr. Carroll, in response to the post by Michael Edwards-Ronning on 5-11-02: I think that the popes during that time felt that the killing of heretics was just. To figure, wouldn't it be a lot better for the general population if a few mainstream heretics were killed, so that the whole population was not "infected" by the heresies of the few? What I am trying to say is that it wasn't a terrible idea. Kill a few heretics to save the eternal souls of the population. That may seem harsh, but that is the basis of my assumption. Thanks.
Answer by Warren H. Carroll, Ph.D on 05-15-2002:
Well stated. I agree with you. - Dr. Carroll
COPYRIGHT 2002 EWTN
What amazes me here is that no one seems to mind when the Vatican and their priests speak of torturing innocent people. No one seems to mind that Roman Catholic “doctors of divinity: openly agree that killing a few people by flames is an agreeable and acceptable act of the church. This graphically evil organization obviously feels no threat from the “so called” authorities. Why do you suppose that is? Can anyone see the forest for the trees here now? For those of you seeking confirmation that the US Government has been completely taken over by Rome, lets do the math. Prophecy states an image of the beast must be set up. Since the Lateran Treaty was signed in 1929 by Cardinal Gasspari making the Vatican a church and State again, it has slowly but surely been taking over the United States Government. Then in October of 2002 the “Christian Coalition” started to graphically seek governmental changes designed specifically to make the US Government into both a church and state entity. You can see all the facts regarding this by reading my October 2002 Truth Provided Newsletter.
Now of course this is only one topic. One can take just about any topic of evil, look to Rome to see it’s inception, and then peer into the halls of Washington D.C. to see the USA accepting it. Students of prophecy are not blind to the fact that the USA is in fact the prophesied lamb horned beast that gives power unto the beast in Rome. Everything from the Roman Catholic contrived blue laws of 1962, to the Government vouchers for Catholic schools just a few years back confirm this nicely. However, the perfect image will have to do as Rome does behind closed doors as well. Rome favor force, terror, torture, and murder to get their agenda realized. So, the USA must do as she.
For example, on the topic of torture, and Government takeover alone:
History confirms Pagan Rome tortured and killed people
History also confirms Papal Rome tortured and killed people in their Inquisitions.
The US Government shows “open” signs of a Vatican takeover since the “blue laws” of 1962.
Ronald Reagan “faces the Mall” at his inauguration, confirming Rome controls Washington D.C. from within.
The Vatican re-instates the Office of Inquisition in February of 1991.
30,000 guillotines are shipped to American soil. (Click here for proof)
The IRS, the Senate, the Congress, and the Supreme Court are all “speaking and causing” laws of Rome to be put in effect.
The US Government is using torture, as well as seeking legislation to make it legal in the mainland as well.
And “beheadings” are now becoming common place in the News media.
US turns to torture to crack prisoners of war
By Dana Priest and Barton Gellman
December 27 2002
Deep inside the forbidden zone at the United States-occupied Bagram air base in Afghanistan are a cluster of metal shipping containers protected by a triple layer of concertina wire. The containers hold the most valuable prizes in the US-led war in Afghanistan - suspected al-Qaeda operatives and Taliban commanders.
Those who refuse to co-operate inside the secret CIA interrogation centre are sometimes kept standing or kneeling for hours, in black hoods or spray-painted goggles, intelligence specialists familiar with CIA interrogation methods say. At times they are held in awkward, painful positions and deprived of sleep with a 24-hour bombardment of lights - subject to what are known as "stress and duress" techniques.
Those who co-operate are rewarded by interrogators whose methods include feigned friendship, respect, cultural sensitivity and, in some cases, money. The most hardened cases are turned over - "rendered", in official parlance - to foreign intelligence services whose practice of torture has been documented by the US Government and human rights organisations.
While the US Government publicly denounces the use of torture, all of the national security officials interviewed defended the use of violence against captives as "just and necessary", and they were confident the American public would back their view. The CIA, which has responsibility for interrogations, declined to comment.
"If you don't violate someone's human rights some of the time, you probably aren't doing your job," said one official who has supervised the capture and transfer of accused terrorists. "I don't think we want to be promoting a view of zero tolerance on this."
The off-limits patch of ground at Bagram is one of a number of secret overseas detention centres where US due process does not apply. Another is Diego Garcia, an island in the Indian Ocean that the US leases from Britain.
In other cases, usually involving lower-level captives, the CIA ds them to foreign intelligence services, notably those of Jordan, Egypt and Morocco, with a list of questions the agency wants answered. These "extraordinary renditions" are done without resort to legal process and usually involve countries with security services known for using brutal means.
According to one official who has been directly involved in transferring captives the understanding is: "We don't kick the [expletive] out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick the [expletive] out of them."
At a joint hearing of the House and Senate intelligence committees in September, Cofer Black, then head of the CIA Counterterrorist Centre, spoke cryptically about the agency's new forms of "operational flexibility" in dealing with suspected terrorists. "All you need to know is that there was a before 9/11, and there was an after 9/11," Mr Black said. "After 9/11 the gloves come off." -The Washington Post
One source of the original article is at http://www.victoria.indymedia.org/news/2002/12/10737.php
Rumsfeld approved torture techniques: top brass
June 4, 2004
Washington AP: United States Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld personally approved four special interrogation techniques used on two al-Qaeda operatives held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, who then talked about the terrorist network and its plans, the commander of US forces in Latin America said today.
Army General James Hill, who heads the US Southern Command, declined to describe the techniques. He said other detainees might "figure out a way to resist those techniques" if they were disclosed. –SMH.com.au
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/06/04/1086203599711.html?oneclick=true
US 'is using torture techniques' to interrogate top al-Qa'ida prisoners
By Andrew Gumbel in Los Angeles 27 December 2002
The United States is subjecting top-level al-Qa'ida captives in its custody to extraordinary physical and psychological coercion, blurring the line between acceptable interrogation techniques under international law and outright torture, according to a detailed report in yesterday's Washington Post. –Independent.co.uk News
This “light torture” as some would call it always leads to graphic torture. Even Rome admitted that long ago. History proves the Vatican tried to do it “lightly” at first, but after men possessed by demons got a taste of torturing and killing Christians, the methods were “abused” as Rome put it. Spiritually speaking, they just got “blood thirsty” as is a natural human as well as animal reaction. In fact, this is why the plague of blood is administered unto them.
Revelation 16:6, "For they have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink; for they are worthy."
As is so apparent in the first article, some people AREN’T cracking under the pressure the lamb horned beast of Revelation is administering. So our Government sends them to other countries where they will use much more intense methods of torture to get the information they seek. Rome did this first, and now the lamb horned beast follows suit. They even admitted in the article that they send them there with a list of questions they need answered during the torture! This is exactly what Rome did long ago! On March 12, 2000 the pope admitted, as did many others, that they sent “heretics” to the local authorities with “questions” they needed answered. The church felt it would be better if they themselves weren’t directly involved in administering the torture. So they got their Roman Catholic authorities controlled to do it for them! And did you also notice that other countries have known about the US Government’s problem with torture before most of us in the states heard anything about it? This has been going on for some time it seems!
By the way, this is not the only thing that has been going on for some time. In Canada we see a bevy of strange laws popping up all over the place designed to benefit Rome as well as glorify sin. This no doubt allows the “sectioned off regions” of a Global Government to have certain laws in place in each continent. All this is of course done for convenience. That way they can make sure their evil desires are accessible without much travel time slowing things down.
Canada preparing to enforce Islamic law
Judges will give legal sanction to disputes between Muslims
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: November 27, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
©_2003_WorldNetDaily.com
Canadian judges soon will be enforcing Islamic law, or Sharia, in disputes between Muslims, possibly paving the way to one day administering criminal sentences, such as stoning women caught in adultery.
Muslims are required to submit to Sharia in Muslim societies but are excused in nations where they live as a minority under a non-Muslim government. Canada, however, is preparing for its 1 million-strong Muslim minority to be under the authority of a Sharia system enforced by the Canadian court system, according to the Canadian Law Times.
Muslim delegates at a conference in Etobicoke, Ont., in October elected a 30-member council to establish the Islamic Institute of Civil Justice. The institute is classified in Islamic law as a Darul-Qada, or judicial tribunal. Its bylaws are scheduled to be drafted and approved by Dec. 31.
Cases will be decided by a Muslim arbitrator, but the local secular Canadian court will be the enforcer.
How blind do these people think we are? The Vatican did the exact same thing during the Inquisitions, and now we see Canada following suit word for word. Imagine if you will some people in the USA or even Mexico for that matter that have been accused of certain crimes they didn’t commit. Now suppose the Government want’s them dead as per the Vatican’s command. All one needs to do is what the USA is already doing regarding torture. Just ship them to countries where certain barbaric acts are allowed! And now it appears we have one just across the border so as to allow the job to get done the same day!
To this day the Vatican has declared they “thought” they were doing God’s will when they kicked people out of churches and then eventually tortured and killed them. WHERE I ask in the Bible is such decadence as this being allowed? I can see it in the Quran of the Muslim, that Pope John Paul II himself KISSED. But I see it nowhere in the Word of God. HOW can they pretend to tell the masses, a God of mercy would suggest such evils as this? Especially after His Word openly condemns it!
Luke 3:14, "… Do violence to no man”
Luke 9:54-56, "And when his disciples James and John saw this, they said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down from heaven, and consume them, even as Elias did? But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of. For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village."
We have the Word of a Mighty God that proves the Vatican is indeed home to Satan. Our job is clear. TELL THEM what this Word says! Tell them their own church is mentioned as home to Antichrist in numerous prophetic confirmations from history. (Click here for a large list to help prove this point) Tell them their priests do exactly as Jesus said Antichrist would do…
John 16:2-3, "They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me."
I hope you see clearly now as to why Rome seeks positive PR for their Office of Inquisition. The American government is their pawn. But their pawn cannot do the graphic atrocities it wants to do. So, they need to make the Inquisition look acceptable so that the US Government can better facilitate their torturous demands even on US soil! Or at best, Canadian soil.
One last note to help drive this all home. It’s just a bit off topic, but it ties in quite nicely. Do you recall the Newsletters, audio clips, and radio broadcasts I shared regarding the Homosexual agenda of Rome? Do you recall how the Truth revealed in this matter was to help Rome get her so called “Christian” agenda realized in Washington DC for a national Church & State conglomerate? Do you also recall the Christian Coalition movements in this regard?
Now see this…
TESTING THE FAITH
Christians look to form 'new nation' within U.S.
Same-sex marriage called last straw prompting plan for 1 state to secede
Posted: May 24, 2004 1:00 a.m. Eastern By Joe Kovacs
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Calling the approval of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts "the straw that broke the camel's back," a group of Christian activists is in the beginning stages of an effort to have one state secede from the United States to become its own sovereign nation.
"Our Christian republic has declined into a pagan democracy," says Cory Burnell, president of ChristianExodus.org, a non-profit corporation based in Tyler, Texas. "There are some issues people just can't take anymore, and [same-sex marriage] might finally wake up the complacent Christians."
Burnell is leading the charge for a peaceful secession of one state from the union, and after originally considering Alabama, Mississippi and South Carolina due to their relatively small populations, coastal access, and the Christian nature of the electorate, Burnell says South Carolina has been selected as the target location.
…Burnell, a math teacher and cell-phone dealer, stresses he's not looking for bloody battles that took place in the American Revolution and the Civil War, but is rather seeking a "political divorce." "It's got to be different today," he says. "It has to be peaceful, brokered." But he admits if the federal government decides to use military force to stop the effort, "Then it can't happen."
Already a dozen people are actively working on the project, and some 1,500 by e-mails of support have been received.
If all goes according to plan, Burnell is hoping to have a constitutional convention by 2014, with a president of the new nation – still to be known as South Carolina – elected in 2016, which is also a presidential election year in the U.S. He says the nation would be founded on Christian principles, and the people writing its constitution would have to hash out details to safeguard it as a Christian republic. For now, Burnell prefers to shy away from specifics on the precise laws governing the country. "Independence first, details later," he says
They are using the Homosexual marriage war to push for a religious form of government!! My opinion? It will never happen. Burnell is merely a pawn of the Roman US Government who is testing the masses on this. Common sense people! Does anyone think the Government controlled media would allow anything like this to get out so freely? Is it any wonder the privately owned World Net Daily News service had to break the news on this? One thing WILL happen however, there will be a “Religious” form of Government in this nation. Prophecy proclaimed it, and our God can’t lie. Will it be ONLY situated in South Carolina? Not according to the Word of God. It will be GLOBAL!
For more info on the Roman Catholic Office of Inquisition, see the following links: (I have not checked these sites out 100%, so be forewarned, they may link out to areas I don’t condone)
http://www.questia.com/Index.jsp?CRID=inquisition&OFFID=se4
http://www.bibletopics.com/biblestudy/64.htm
http://www.cuttingedge.org/news/n1676.cfm
The above was used by permission from Nicholas at http://www.remnantofgod.org/
For proof of present day persecutions by the Roman Catholic church click here
====
BURIAL BOX OF JAMES
The burial box of James
Not too long ago, something happened in the global arena that put the Roman Catholic Church once again in the spotlight as a lying entity. Of course I am speaking of the Ossuary, or burial box of James the brother of Jesus Christ. When the story first broke, I purposely remained silent on the issue because I wanted to see what the Roman Catholic Church would do about it. The only comment they made to the press at first was a feeble attempt to blow off the discovery. Anyone that has been watching the Vatican long enough knows, this happens to be the norm for the Roman Catholic Church. They always skirt the issue and dance around it when it places a spotlight upon them and their spurious doctrines. They later solicited the help of a questionable source so as to help them appear vindicated. We will get into that a bit later.
In an interview by the Associate Press, Roman Catholic scholar Joseph Fitzmeyer, acknowledges the writing style on the ossuary 'fits perfectly' with other first century examples and admits the joint appearance of these three famous names is 'striking,' he nevertheless concludes, "But the big problem is, you have to show me the Jesus in this text is Jesus of Nazareth, and nobody can show that." Ignoring the obvious is an infamous technique of Babylon that is designed to permeate the hearts of their congregation. Sadly, this is the case, as many devoted Catholics are now echoing Fitzmeyer's strange testimonial.
Intense curiosity and controversy I might add has been at the forefront globally as far as I can tell since the announcement of the discovery of an ancient limestone bone box dated 63AD, called an ossuary, (pronounced alternatively, "osh-oo-ary" or "os-yoo-ary") inscribed in Aramaic, which was the language of the Jews in Jesus day. The inscription reads, "Ya'akov bar Ysef a khui Yeshua" which translated is, "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Historical fact is, boxes like this were commonly used by Jewish families between 20BC and 70AD to store the bones of their loved ones. James is known to have been martyred in 62 AD, and the box has been dated 63AD. Tradition of that day was to place the body in a tomb until the flesh disintegrated, (1 year) and then move the bones to a ossuary to await resurrection.
Another interesting fact is that out of the hundreds of such boxes that were found, only TWO mention a "brother" in the inscriptions upon the burial box. Some scholars have confirmed that this alludes to the fact that the brother must have been famous or extremely important at the time so as to be mentioned upon a burial box of a sibling. The names James, Joseph, and even Jesus were considered common names in Jerusalem for that day.
Professor Lemaire, who teaches at the Sorbonne in Paris, wrote in a recent issue of the Biblical Archaeology Review that it was "very probable" that the box belonged to Jesus Christ's brother James. In a city as large as Jerusalem was in that day (about 40,000) Lemaire estimates that as many as 20 men who were named James, would have had brothers named Jesus, and fathers named Joseph. However, he also concludes that the odds would be stacked greatly against the probability that there would be more than one person named James who had a brother that was as important or well known as Jesus was at that time. Looking back, one can see plainly that historic fact actually confirms it. All one needs do is research this and you will find that there is no mention recorded in history of a man named "Jesus" for that period of time that had anywhere near the life changing fame of Jesus the Messiah. In fact, the Biblical Archaeology Review has researched an inventory of 900 ossuaries. Out of the 900, 19 of them have the name Joseph inscribed on them, and 10 have the name Jesus on them and only ONE had the name Jesus as the son of Joseph and brother of James inscribed on it. ONLY ONE! (For more info see,"Evidence Of Jesus Written In Stone," Biblical Archaeological Review.
I have been watching this story with particular interest to see if Rome will once again ADMIT to lying before the world for the last 149 years since Pope Pius IX proclaimed, "The Immaculate Conception" of Mary was dogmatic fact. This Roman Catholic doctrine stipulates that Mary was a virgin till death, and Jesus never had any siblings. We all saw in the "Mea Culpa" of John Paul II back in March of 2000 a bevy of admissions that proved the Roman Catholic church is no stranger to fabricating lies to further its agenda. We now have concrete historic fact they admitted it in writing. Will they do right on this issue? The blunt defiance in Fitzmeyer's earlier statement paints an obvious picture of what Rome plans to do. They seek to take the defensive stance proclaiming "Your going to have to show me proof before I believe it! And as far as I can tell no one can." You would think that Fitzmeyer would use his "credentials" a bit more wisely then just shouting like a spoiled child and then stomping his feet as he flees the scene. A normal response I am sure for one caught red handed. Seriously, what other course does he have? He MUST openly deny the now concrete evidence before him so as to keep the Roman lie afloat. To do otherwise would be disasterous!
History proves that once the agenda of the Vatican is threatened, they will go to absolutely ANY lengths to assure they can keep doing business as usual. Even if it means millions must die. The world saw dozens of Bishops and Cardinals stepping forward back in March of 2000, not only agreeing with the Pope's list of admissions, but also speaking of numerous vile and disgusting acts they themselves have done as well!
hey did this to save face because certain facts were no longer easy to hide for the Vatican, especially since it's possible now for even some of the poorest families in the World to access the historic facts online. Families in the poorest nations have access to the Internet in libraries or Internet cafés the world over. The Vatican’s only demonically "wise" course at that time is to admit they killed millions and ask for forgiveness so as to appear to be genuinely concerned about what history so graphically records. Regardless of the fact that the Vatican is still in the business of threatening and even killing those that deny their doctrines to this day. For evidence of this fact CLICK HERE. However, with the discovery of the Ossuary of James, this is in no way an easy admission for Rome to proclaim as we saw by the knee jerking response, and hastened exit of Fitzmeyer. Their counterfeit doctrinal statements regarding Mary depend completely on them keeping that lie going. This is Babylon, and Babylon worships the "Queen of Heaven" as Scriptures so openly proclaims. To deny their Pagan god, is to deny their way of life.
For a Biblical expose' of the "Queen of Heaven" start your study with these verses...
The Bonebox with the inscription (James Brother of Jesus)
Jeremiah 7:18
Jeremiah 44:17-19
Jeremiah 44:25
Imagine if you will that Rome ADMITTED the Ossuary of James to be authentic. This would mean they LIED to literally billions upon billions of Catholics as well as non-Catholics since the lie was fabricated regarding the perpetual virginity of Mary. Rome knows that this is not just some face saving lie that can be shrugged off as "mere sins of the flesh" as we saw paraded before us in all it's graphic decadence on March 12, 2000 when Rome admitted to killing over 500 million souls. Rome can easily afford to admit the sins of the flesh because it affords them the natural ability to play "the priest, cardinal, bishop, or pope is only a man" card, and get away with it by asking forgiveness from their church members and the world. Asking forgiveness from those that believe, is the Christ-like thing to do. It is also a very powerful tool in the art of this ongoing religious deception. Because if you don't forgive them, you can be tagged a NON-believer, and then they again stand supreme above you even though they ADMITTED they are the ones that killed millions. It's a win win situation for Rome to admit to the mass murders. However, to admit to lying about the perpetual virginity of Mary, as well as her "immaculate conception," would cause a MASSIVE upset in the halls of Rome that anyone with an ounce of sense can tell Rome is simply not prepared to do!
Think of it!
If Rome admits the Ossuary of James is authentic, and Jesus did in fact have siblings as Matthew chapter 13 already truthfully proclaims He did, that would mean a BEVY of doctrinal issues would have to be scrapped by the Roman Church.
On more obvious note to ponder... As blessed and loved as Mary was of God. Do you honestly believe that the Almighty and ever living God of all creation would punish her with a barren womb after submitting to His perfect will without question and having His only begotten Son? Remember that it was considered a blessing to have children back then, unlike today's society with their millions of self centered flesh pleasing abortions. Some women actually murder their children to avoid getting stretch marks! Can you imagine how cold a heart must wax to do such a thing? The massive number of abortions alone prove the prophetic statement of Matthew 24:12 an absolute confirmed fulfillment! Mary in her day would never seek a barren womb like many women today. PLUS, would it not be considered sin on Mary's part to DENY Joseph's carnal desires towards his wife, in that pre-birth control pill era? Is it not written plainly in.. 1 Corinthians 7:3-5, "Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise also the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other, …”
Yes, it appears Rome knows it will have to admit a LOT MORE than just murdering 500 million Christians as they did on March 12, 2000. If they admit the Ossuary of James is authentic, they will have to give up quite a few doctrines of demons and traditions of men. And I don't think they are prepared to do that. A few of these spurious doctrines in a list might look like this...
They will have to admit they lied about…
Mary being ever virgin
Mary was born without sin
The Feast of "Immaculate Conception"
Mary being co-redeemer / co-savior
Numerous Popes claiming "Mary saves souls"
Mary being the "bright and morning star"
"Mary" appearing before children. Rome must admit it's a demon
"Mary" sending messages from Heaven
Mary telling them to pray the Pagan rosary
All the weeping Statues of Mary
Mary having an and sinless immaculate heart
Mary sharing in the cross with Christ
Mary telling them to wear the "scapular"
Pope John Paul will have to remove "Mary I am all yours" from etchings on his robes
The "blue league/army" of Mary
Thousands of churches named after the 'Virgin Mary' would have to change names
The thousands of Hospitals named after 'Virgin Mary' would have to change names
Mary as the "Queen of Heaven"
The term "Mother of God" for Mary
The literal millions of books with references to "Mary being ever virgin."
The thousands of convents that seek to emulate Mary
The doctrines that duped millions of people into becoming "dedicated to Mary"
Tens of thousands of statements made over the centuries by Popes, Cardinals, Bishops, Priests, nuns and lay people that refer to Mary and her perpetual virginity.
Fatima and how it was designed to lure the Muslims into praying to Mary
References of "Mary" in the Quran itself
Artists who made paintings and sculptures of the 'Virgin Mary'
Symbols of Mary’s perpetual virginity
The "assumption of Mary" that alludes to Mary going to Heaven before the rest of us
All the 'apparitions' of "Mary"
All the "statements" made from the apparitions of Mary
The Roman Catholic "saint" Alphonsus De Liquori's stating Mary is an "Omnipotent Intercessor"
The "Apostolate of Mary" and therefore scrap the doctrine that states Mary shares in the priesthood of Christ
The actual "Apostolate of Mary" would have to be disbanded worldwide
Virgin worship
Salvation through Mary
Proclaiming that Catholics must worship Mary through John Paul II
In the Catholic Encyclopedia regarding "Mary worship."
The "Fatima Apostleship"
(For more information to above facts CLICK HERE)
If I was a betting man, AND I AM NOT, I would have to ask, who wants to lay odds on the final response of the Vatican? Will they jump at the chance to now lie again and say Joseph had children from a previous marriage? Virtually no Christian church holds to that view today. However, that never stopped Rome before has it?
By the way... To claim Joseph had a previous marriage, would mean yet another a re-write of Scripture for the church of Rome. For it is NOT written that Joseph had a previous marriage in the Word. "YET"
Burial box 'held the bones of Jesus's brother'
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor and Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
(Filed: 18/04/2003)
Tests on a 2,000-year-old stone box support claims that it once held the bones of James, said to have been the brother of Jesus and an important early Christian leader, scientists have concluded.
The results of the experiments, which are disclosed in a television documentary, back the suggestion that the "bone box", or ossuary, may be the oldest archaeological link with Christ.
Last year, the tomb ossuary, inscribed with the words "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus", came to light in Israel, prompting speculation over whether it was genuine or a fake and whether it referred to Jesus of Nazareth.
Since then, the box has been subjected to tests which are consistent with it coming from the right place and the right time, said Dr Ed Keall, a curator at the Royal Ontario Museum. "It is a genuine box with a genuine inscription, dating from first century AD, likely from the Silouan Valley, Jerusalem," he said.
He argued that it was rare for the inscription to refer to a brother - they usually mentioned the father - although he agreed that this fell short of proof that it contained the bones of James.
The findings will revive interest in James, whose major role in early Christianity has been eclipsed by St Peter and St Paul. He is described in two of the Gospels as the brother of Jesus, but in some traditions he is thought of as merely a cousin.
Scholars believe that he became the leader of the early Christian movement in Jerusalem following Jesus's crucifixion, but he may have regarded himself as a member of a sect of Judaism rather than of a new religion. Fr Jerome Murphy-O'Connor, the uncle of the Archbishop of Westminster and leading Biblical authority, said: "James was a Jew who became a follower of Jesus and remained true to his Jewish faith.
"He was the leader of the Mother Church, the Church of Jerusalem, during its adolescent years, its whole formative period."
The limestone burial box measures 20in by 22in by 10in and carries a worn pattern of six pointed stars on one side. On the other is an inscription with distinctive letters: "Ya'akov, bar Yosef, akhui di Yeshua" - "James [Ya'akov], son of Joseph [Yosef], brother of Jesus [Yeshua]." The words are in Aramaic, the language spoken by Christ, and close to ancient Hebrew.
The palaeographers date the style of lettering to around 50 AD. This timing is just right for a memorial to James who, according to the "Jewish Antiquities" of Josephus, was stoned to death for his beliefs in AD 62.
In the journal Biblical Archaeology Review, Prof Andre Lemaire of the Sorbonne, Paris, concluded that it could be the earliest artefact relating to Jesus. Now scientists have backed his contention with tests.
A team at the Geological Survey of Israel extracted the patina, a cream-coloured film adhering to the stone, and found it matched that inside one of the letters after a study with electron microscopy, as would be expected with the genuine item.
The Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto subjected the inscription to a tougher test, using long-wave ultraviolet light which should highlight attempts to fake it. Again, it looked genuine, said Dr Keall.
Prof Camil (fooks) Fuchs, of Tel Aviv University, analysed the probability that the James ossuary refers to the Jesus of the New Testament, after critics said James, Jesus and Joseph were common names in first century Palestine.
He concluded that the inscription on the ossuary probably referred to James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus of Nazareth. "Also, I have to point out that out of the thousands of ossuaries that have been found, there is only one - other than the James ossuary - that mentions not just the deceased, and his father, but the brother," said Prof (fooks) Fuchs.
Because the ossuary did not come from a controlled excavation, where archaeologists plot every detail and possible clue to a discovery's context, scholars said they despaired of ever knowing the inscription's meaning beyond doubt.
Another issue is how many times the ossuary has been used. There is no way to tell that the bone fragments it contains are of St James or of a later lodger.
The present owner, Oded Golan of Tel Aviv, bought the box from a Jerusalem antiques dealer in the 1970s. Mr Golan said he never suspected the ossuary could be linked to Christ.
Usually only the father of the deceased would be mentioned on a ossuary. The reason Jesus’ name was added to the ossuary was because of His fame.
ROMAN CATHOLIC "EXPECTED" RESPONSE... (Found on "Catholic Answers" website) Notice how Jimmy Akin does exactly as expected. As usual the Roman Church seeks to cloud the issue regarding the word "brother" or "brethren." On my “Jesus had Siblings?” page in the RCC Doctrines section of the website I share ample proof regarding the so called perpetual virginity of Mary, as well as the smoking gun passage in Matthew 13:55,56 that proves Rome lied. (my brief comments are in BOLD ITALICS below)
Bad Aramaic Made Easy
By Jimmy Akin
In 2002 a unique archaeological find was announced: a limestone ossuary (bone box) that may have held the remains of James the “brother” of Jesus. The box dates to first century Palestine and is inscribed in Jesus’ native language, Aramaic, with the words “James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus.”
New attention was drawn to the ossuary by a book titled The Brother of Jesus, by Hershel Shanks and Ben Witherington. Shanks is the editor of Biblical Archaeology Review; Witherington is a New Testament professor. To publicize it, the two wrote a tie-in piece in USA Today's weekend magazine, in which Witherington (the primary author) asserted the following:
It is possible the inscription on the ossuary--"James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus"--provides us with a challenge in regard to some basic Christian assumptions about James. The Roman Catholic tradition is that Jesus' brothers and sisters actually were cousins; Orthodox Christians believe they were Joseph's children by a previous marriage. The inscription conflicts with both of those Christian traditions, in fact, for there certainly was an Aramaic word for "cousin" that could have been used in this inscription but was not. If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states. --"In the Name of the Brother," USA Weekend, April 13, 2003
Witherington's statement proved highly controversial. Though his characterization of Catholic teaching is not without problem, his assertion that there is an Aramaic word for cousin was egregious. (A GREE JUS) (Conspicuously bad or offensive)
The Source of the Controversy
The New Testament is explicit that Mary was a virgin at the time she conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit. Christian tradition--later infallibly affirmed by the Church--acknowledges that she remained a virgin afterwards. The great majority of Christians acknowledges this. Only the Protestant community dissents.
The better way to explain that is to say that "Catholic tradition" is what acknowledges Mary as a virgin for life. Nowhere in the Bible does to say that. Not one solitary verse. There is not as single Christian denomination that claims she was a perpetual virgin either. Only in Catholicism do you see this, on my Mary Worship page in the RCC Exposed section of the website you can see why they teach this.
But there are certain questions to be answered, such as who the "brethren" or "brothers" of Christ mentioned in Scripture are. In English when we say "brother" we usually mean full brother--a male sibling sharing both biological parents.
Jimmy Akin uses the word "usually" to confirm his opinion? Fact is, I "usually" don't believe anyone that has no confidence in their message. Do you?Think about it. He seeks to convince us by his lack of factual evidence. That “usually” means they have no evidence.
But the term has a broader range of meanings. It can include half-brother (male sibling sharing one biological parent), step-brother (male sibling sharing one parent by marriage), and adoptive brother (male sibling adopted into the family). It can be given figurative meanings, such as "comrade," as when military men are described as "a band of brothers."
No solid, or researchable proof. Just "opinions" of Jimmy Akin are used here. Nowhere does the Word or even the Ossuary intimate that any of these opinions apply.
Which applies to the brethren of Christ in Scripture?
It is unlikely that the term "brother" is being used figuratively or mystically because all Christians are Christ's brothers in that sense, making it pointless to single out certain individuals for this description. Full brother is impossible, as Protestants also acknowledge, since Jesus was not the biological child of Joseph. Half-brother is ruled out by the fact that Mary remained a virgin.
Again, a lack of confidence in his own theory is intimated when words like, “unlikely” come into play. Still, here Jimmy assumes we as Protesting Christians BELIEVE Mary remained a virgin for life, and therefore we must throw out the "half brother" assumption? That statement alone proves he is grasping at straws in a desperate manner. One would think that if Jimmy Akin had Biblical proof of that statement he would use it. And as is always the case, they merely use assumptions to preach as if they have concrete evidence.
I ask Jimmy Akin... Show me one verse that says Mary was a virgin for life. Or show me one verse that shows me Joseph did NOT consummate his marriage to Mary. Or show me one verse that shows me Mary denied her husbands carnal desires for his WIFE. I know Jimmy cannot do this, however a babe in Christ would have no trouble finding the verses that do prove Mary was not a virgin for life, Joseph did consummate that marriage, and Mary did not refuse her husband’s carnal desires.
It is possible they were adoptive brothers, but there does not seem to be any evidence for this in the biblical or patristic record. More plausibly, they were step-brothers: children of Joseph who were Jesus' brothers by marriage.
Plausibly? “Possible? Jimmy Akin is still "suggesting" an opinion here, nothing more nothing less. I have yet to see any Scriptural or historic proof denying that which I laid out previously. Nor do I see Jimmy sharing any Biblical verses proving his perpetual virgin theory. Friends... NEVER accept an "opinion" when there are FACTS laid out for inspection. This is a foolish act for anyone to embrace. Would you walk into a burning building that you see totally engulfed in flame after a friend suggests it appears to them to be safe? The facts never lie. This is why Jimmy avoids them repeatedly here.
There is some evidence for this in the writings of early Christians. The earliest discussion of the matter that we have--in a document known as the Protoevangelium of James (c. A.D. 120)--states that Joseph was a widower who already had a family and thus was willing to become the guardian of a consecrated virgin. Though not inspired, the document was written within living memory of Mary, when Christ's family was still well known, as other sources attest (e.g., second century historian Hegisippus). It may contain accurate traditions regarding the family structure.
This is all Catholic documentation (notice the LATIN title)and therefore 100% untrustworthy. Rome lied in the past, and Rome lies today. In fact, Rome admitted they lied for all its history in the pope’s Mea Culpa of March 2000. So, should we trust Roman documentation that Jimmy himself admits is uninspired? This is another tactic of Rome, if they cannot find proof in the Bible to back their doctrines, they will look for it in MAN’S WORD! And according to Scripture that is a foolish act. Babylon is the house of Antichrist. For proof, CLICK HERE for a FLASH animation.
The step-brother hypothesis was the most common until St. Jerome (the turn of the fifth century), who popularized the idea that the brethren were cousins. One would not guess this from a casual reading of the New Testament, but many have tried to deduce it from statements in the New Testament.
Jimmy admits here that for 5 CENTURIES most people did not agree with his church's theory UNTIL it was "popularized." And it was a Hypothesis that was popularized. In other words, and educated GUESS was accepted as proof, and now we are expected to believe this to be the final say? Still, just because an idea is "popular" it doesn't make it right. Truth is, Cocaine is "popular" eh?
Part of the issue turns on the meaning of the word "brother." Thus far we have been discussing the English word brother for simplicity. The Greek equivalent (adelphos) includes the same concepts in its range of meaning. But Greek also has a word for "cousin" (anepsios), which seems to have been the normal word used when referring to cousins. An advocate of the cousin hypothesis would need to explain why it wasn't used if Christ’s brethren were cousins.
Again, Jimmy is displaying no confidence at all in his own assumptions. This is well noted when he states, "which seems to have been the normal word used" in the above excerpt. My friends, when they have no PROOF they always use "assumptions" to try and get YOU to believe them. Why should we believe them when they themselves don’t believe what they say? Plus, if in fact James was a cousin as Rome proclaims, and since both Aramaic and Greek do in fact have a word for cousin, I ask why wasn’t it used if in fact James was only a cousin?
The standard explanation is that the New Testament isn't ordinary Greek. Some have suggested that parts of it may be translations from Aramaic. It is unknown if or how much of the New Testament had an Aramaic original, but even if none did, Aramaic had a strong influence on it. Probably all the New Testament authors except Luke were native Aramaic-speakers, and much of the dialogue in the Gospels originally occurred in Aramaic. Sometimes the Gospels even tell us the original words (e.g., “Talitha cumi” in Mark 5:41).
In the above paragraph we see Jimmy Akin using the following words...
suggested
it may be
unknown
probably
sometimes
None of which are strong words of confidence by any stretch of the imagination. ALL these words are used in the context of someone who is UNSURE of his message.
This is important because the meaning of the Aramaic word for "brother" (aha) not only includes the meanings already mentioned but also includes other close relations, including cousins.
In fact, there was no word for "cousin" in Aramaic.
Here we see Jimmy speaking untruthfully. Professor Witherinton who was quoted in USA Today stated there is in fact an Aramaic word for cousin.
If one wanted to refer to the cousin relationship, one has to use a circumlocution such as “the son of his uncle” (brona d-`ammeh). This often is too much trouble, so broader kinship terms are used that don’t mean “cousin” in particular; e.g., ahyana ("kinsman"), qariwa ("close relation"), or nasha ("relative"). One such term is aha, which literally means “brother” but is also frequently used in the sense of “relative, kinsman.”
Again, here he is expecting his readers to believe him on mere "opinion" or "circumstantial evidence." Not one shred of provable evidence either Scriptural or historic has yet to have been used to CONFIDENTLY portray his message as being authentic. Not one. In my book this is the message of a liar seeking to hide something.
The first Christians in Palestine, not having a word for cousin, would normally have referred to whatever cousins Jesus had with such a general term and, in translating their writing or speech into Greek, it is quite likely that the Aramaic word aha would have been rendered literally with the Greek word for brother (adelphos).
The word "likely" used here again proves HE IS UNSURE. And the fact that there is a word for cousin in both Aramaic and Greek proves he is lying.
Which James?
There may be as many as seven men named James mentioned in the New Testament. For our purposes the most important are:
* James “the brother of the Lord” (Matt. 13:55, Acts 15:13-21, 1 Cor. 15:7, Gal. 1:19)
* James “son of Zebedee” (Matt. 4:21, 10:2, 17:1, Acts 12:2)
* James “son of Alphaeus” (Matt. 10:3, Acts 1:13)
It is the first whose ossuary may have been found. He often was called “James the Just” and was martyred in the A.D. 60s (Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20:9). He is not the same as James son of Zebedee, who was martyred earlier (Acts 12:2). Advocates of the cousin interpretation commonly seek to identify him with James son of Alphaeus.
Here Jimmy Akin is trying to "confuse" the issue further. Did you know the definition of the word "Babylon" is "to mix" truth with error? Jimmy is doing exactly as Rome has always done. Pray for him people. It is sad when it is so obvious to those of us with eyes that see what he is actually doing here. He truly can't see what he is doing. If he did, he would know how absurd it is.
Engaging the Argument
In the USA Weekend piece, Witherington criticized both the step-brother and the cousin hypotheses. Regarding the former, he wrote, "If Jesus was the son of only Mary, and James was the son of only Joseph, then Jesus and James would not literally have been brothers, as this inscription states."
This argument seems flatly erroneous. The inscription does not state that Jesus and James were "literally" brothers. It says that they were brothers, period. It doesn't say "James, son of Joseph, literal brother of Jesus."
This is a common technique of Rome. They use a lie as truth. They do the same with Scriptures at every turn. When the Word of God is bluntly stating Truth, Rome will always seek a way to place a "twist" on what the Lord said so as to confuse the issue. Those of us that are God's children understand easily what's being said in His Word. For His children DO hear His voice. Those that aren't His children, seek to look for ways around what's being said by the Lord. Case in point. Study up on how Satan has always used "what God said" in a way to make it appear He says something else. He has done this since the Garden of Eden.
So, since Jimmy Akin seeks a "literal" proof here. (even though it's already there for those with eyes that see) I ask. Jimmy Akin, where is the one verse that LITERALLY proves Mary was a virgin until death? Or how about the verse that LITERALLY proves Joseph never consummated the marriage? Or the one verse that LITERALLY states Mary denied Joseph's carnal desires towards his God given WIFE? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander I always say, so Jimmy, I ask, where is your LITERAL proof?
And what does Witherington mean by "literally"? To most ears, the most literal meaning of “brother” is full brother, all the other senses being in some sense accommodated to this primary sense. But we know that James can't be a full brother because Joseph was not Jesus' biological father. (A point that Witherington, who has written a book critical of liberal reinterpretations of Jesus, presumably acknowledges.)
Did you catch that? Jimmy Akin is now using the exact same method Bill Clinton used to define sex so as to get away with an evil act. He takes an obvious fact and twists it to generate some question. No matter how vague the twist may be, it’s effective for those that have no faith.
Witherington is trying to get too much out of the single word "brother" in the inscription. It's range of meaning is simply too broad to rule out James being a step-brother.
Truth is folks, Jimmy is trying to do the exact same thing with the word "cousin" here. Yet we are expected to believe him over documented facts?
Even in English, which has a gigantic vocabulary that includes a term for step-brother, we tend to use just "brother." Someone making introductions is more likely to say "This is my brother" than "This is my step-brother," unless family relations are unusually icy.
Again, Jimmy Akin is using "assumptions" to preach this error. More LACK of confidence from Jimmy Akin leads to one thing, and one thing only. A lack of confidence in those that hear him and his message. I praise the Lord for His Word and the factual evidence He supplies for His followers. It’s amazing how this God of ours never leaves us without evidence of His truth as does Rome leave its preachers fumbling about in the dark looking for crafty lies to deceive the masses.
What I truly find amazing is how Jimmy thinks he can compare a flippant statement with an etched epilog. How can anyone assume calling a step-brother “brother” in a casual manner as most people do is comparable to etching “brother” instead of “step-brother” on a bone box? Like today’s tombstones, one doesn’t find it a good idea to be inaccurate when etching in stone the final, and permanent, last statement of a person’s life and or title. Still, Jimmy uses this method to try and pull the onus off the fact that he has yet to share one speck of viable evidence to support his theories.
Witherington dismissed the cousin hypothesis by simply asserting, "there certainly was an Aramaic word for 'cousin' that could have been used in this inscription but was not." For this argument to work, several premises have to be granted:
Fact is, the word "BROTHER" was used on the ossuary, and Jimmy Akin is trying to make us all believe it should have been "COUSIN." The easy and blunt thing to notice here is. THE WORD COUSIN IS NOT ON THAT BOX. That fact alone is what’s got Jimmy blood up.
If you want to see the rest of the article, click the URL below. But understand this. Jimmy Akin merely repeats assumptions, lies, and twists facts as he has done here. I believe I made that crystal clear by simply using common sense. Plus, nowhere does Jimmy Akin prove his side of the story as did the actual Scientists that authenticated the box, or the historians that verified the words, or the preachers that shared the Scriptures that tied the two together.
I will share one more tidbit from Jimmy Akin's article. He said, regarding Witherington's facts...
"Witherington behaved irresponsibly by asserting in popular print that there is such a word. In so doing he misled people of multiple religious persuasions, disturbed the faith of some, confused others, and sparked a round of needless arguments."
Jimmy... You just did exactly what you accused Witherington of doing with the word "cousin." And we now have it in POPULAR PRINT as well.
Original article URL= http://www.catholic.com/library/Bad_Aramaic_Made_Easy.asp
The above was used by permission from Nicholas at http://www.remnantofgod.org/
===
RELICS, BONES AND BODYPARTS
Roman Catholics love relics
The Catholic church has a thing about things. Things like bits of bone, desiccated flesh, random body parts, scraps of cloth, splinters of wood and stuff like that. They like to use such things in the practice of those arcane rites which only those in the RCC clerical hierarchy appear to really understand. Now, in the animistic or shamanistic religions, such objects would be called fetishes, and would be given unreasonably excessive attention or reverence. The Roman church calls these things relics and would have her faithful consider them as means to focus on the Lord God. Well, that is what they say, anyway.
1674. Besides sacramental liturgy and sacramentals, catechesis must take into account the forms of piety and popular devotions among the faithful. The religious sense of the Christian people has always found expression in various forms of piety surrounding the Church's sacramental life, such as the veneration of relics, visits to sanctuaries, pilgrimages, processions, the stations of the cross, religious dances, the rosary, medals,[Cf. Council of Nicaea II: DS 601; 603; Council of Trent: DS 1822.] etc. Catechism of the Catholic Church (CCC)
In ancient times, there was a regular cult of the dead. It existed before the birth of Christ. In the morning of Christianity, the Church presented no coherent opposition to it. In fact, some of the early church fathers and some bishops participated in the pagan practices of the cult of martyrs and some even encouraged them.
In the early centuries of our Christian faith, there was a wide trade in "relics," or bits and pieces of dead martyrs and "saints." Seems just about every town and church wanted its own piece of some dead church hero or something that hero had touched or worn. Those who could afford it, bought such relics and either enshrined them in their homes or places of business or wore them on their persons.
This was such a lucrative trade that folks began to invent martyrs. No grave was safe, for the unscrupulous – or the excessively religious – were wont to dig up the remains and hustle the various body parts and bits of clothing to some other town in need of a martyr of its own. Sometimes, country folk would erect a little shrine to Saint Somebody-or-other to attract visitors and their custom. This practice became so rampant that, in Africa, the assembled bishops resolved in 401 A.D. that:
...altars set up here and there in the countryside and along roads as if in memory of martyrs, in which it is shown that no body or relics of martyrs have been deposited, shall be overthrown, though, if this is impossible because of demonstrations by the people, at least the population should be admonished. . ." --L. T. Lefort, Le Chasse aux reliques des martyrs en Egypte au IV siecle, La Nouvelle Clio 6 (1954), pp. 225-230)
For centuries, people reported all manner of fantastic experiences, either their own of someone else's, and visitations from angels, spirits of the dead and, of course, Mary. What was behind this surge of religious activity and the incredible growth of the cult of martyrs in the latter years of Constantine's rule? Emperor Constantine, by the Edict of Milan, legitimized Christian worship throughout the Roman Empire, an act which certainly facilitated church growth. Converts began to flock to the new religion, which seemed not to fully meet their spiritual needs:
For by their own act, they found themselves without gods. A strange way to put it. Surely they understood that the one Omnipotence was enough. But no, the answer was overwhelmingly no. That was because the concerns of the little people were little, and they were therefore not accustomed to apply to Jupiter or Zeus for succor; nor to Yahweh, after conversion. Like the great Lex, they thought, great gods cared nothing "de minimis;" great gods were lords and masters, not the fathers they hoped to appeal to (so Apollonius had once put it). Conversion and the repudiation of their old patrons and rescuers among the divine ranks had left an emptiness, a loneliness in times of trouble, not comfortably to be filled by the Power preached from urban pulpits. --Ramsay MacMullen, Christianity & Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, (C) 1997 Yale University Press, pp. 120-121)
Sure, leaders of the early church made an effort to convince people that Almighty God was big enough and caring enough and accessible enough to handle all their problems, even the littlest of them. Augustine, time and again, struggled against his congregation's reluctance to go to God with the routine problems of ordinary living:
There are those who say God is good, great, the top, beyond our perception, incorruptible, who will give us eternal life and that incorruptibility which he has promised in the resurrection, while temporal matters and matters of this world belong to "daemons."
"Let us reduce it to the very least things: he sees to the salvation of your hen."--Augustine, En. In ps. 34.1.7, In Ioann. Ev. Tract. 34.3f, and En. In ps. 26.2.19
The Bishop of Hippo rebuked "those misguided men who count God as necessary for eternal life, for that life of the soul, but thinks these Powers must be worshipped by us on account of temporal matters." (Ibid.)
What to do now? Christianity taught that God was sufficient to meet all man's needs, yet the common people did not feel confident in approaching so great and illustrious a Being with their "little" problems. They missed their many "little" gods, the lower order superhuman beings to whom they were accustomed to applying for help and protection. Fortunately, there was a Christian answer: they could appeal to sanctified martyrs.
Early Christians were well-served by their dead martyrs in the early days of the church. We have no record of any of these martyrs accomplishing any miracle involving hens, but St. Felix could cure larger animals as well as find those who ran away. Sts. Hypatius and Thecla could do about the same. St. Martin once exorcised a demon from a mad cow, and St. Fides is said to have resurrected a mule. St. Germanus, while still alive, ministered to a rooster who had lost his cock-a-doodle-do (Constantius, "Vita Germani II")
From Augustine and Basil, "The principal business of the martyrs, by far, then as for a thousand years to come, was to restore fertility, straighten limbs, clear the sight, or untwist the mind. Like Asclepieia, like sacred springs presided over by their healing deities, the martyria served as hospitals to urban and rural masses alike . . .The need for divine help, as the traditional was banished by mission and persecution together, was no doubt enormous; to supply it, the Christian God might seem very distant; but the beneficience of the sanctified dead was close and comfortable. The traditional world of antiquity thus retained or resumed its traditional character "under new management."--Ramsay MacMullen, Christianity & Paganism in the Fourth to Eighth Centuries, (C) 1997 Yale University Press, pp. 121-122
Even today, in the RCC way of religion, God is presented as virtually inaccessible and Christ seems aloof and even somewhat to be feared. After all He is the Judge Who will seal for all eternity the fate of the lost at His judgment seat. Scripture tells us there is but one mediator between God and man, our Savior Jesus Christ (1 Timothy 2:5). How can we, insignificant and virtually powerless, dare to take our petitions straight to the Omnipotence? Rome provides a more loving and nurturing mediatrix to intercede with THE Mediator in our behalf – Mary, Queen of Heaven.
969. 'This motherhood of Mary in the order of grace continues uninterruptedly from the consent which she loyally gave at the Annunciation and which she sustained without wavering beneath the cross, until the eternal fulfilment of all the elect. Taken up to heaven she did not lay aside this saving office but by her manifold intercession continues to bring us the gifts of eternal salvation .... Therefore the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix.'[LG 62.]--CCC, Op. cit.
And if a problem requires the services of a specialist, why there are plenty of saints, many of them martyrs, to call on. Why bother God over a coming traffic court appearance? St. Jude can help you. The RCC pantheon of saints not only replaces the old college of pagan gods and demigods, it actually makes it better. Where as before, folks only were able to appeal to a few hundred deities for help, Rome provides a list numbering in the thousands.
And how are these ministering spirits and unacknowledged deities to be recompensed for their labors in our behalf? Why by rendering them worship and reverence, of course. In keeping with Rome's wordplay, these spirits of the dead are to be rendered a type of worship other than that rendered to the Almighty One. God alone, in His Three Persons, is to be adored with latria. Only Mary qualifies for the second level of worship, labeled hyperdulia. However, all those spirits of the dead and even the bits and pieces of their mortal remains or appurtances, as well as odds and ends of things or emanations, are to be honored with the lowest level of worship, which Rome terms dulia. Seems only fair, doesn't it?
Can. 1186 To foster the sanctification of the people of God, the Church commends to the special and filial veneration of Christ's faithful the Blessed Mary ever-Virgin, the Mother of God, whom Christ constituted the Mother of all. The Church also promotes the true and authentic cult of the other Saints, by whose example the faithful are edified and by whose intercession they are supported.--Code of Canon Law (CCL), I IntraText Edition LT © 2003 Èulogos
Rome is so caught up in the worship of spirits and things that they like to keep relics in their churches, chapels, shrines, and similar places. Shoot! There is a scrap of rag, or a shrivelled up body part, or splinter of wood or some other things once belonging to a "saint" or martyr in most permanent altars maintained by Rome. It used to be that every permanent altar had to hold relics, but that changed in this ecumenical era of the Novus Ordo Mass. The Code of Canon Law and General Instruction V of the Roman Missal still appear to continue the tradition of relics in altars, but the Nova Ordo does not require them
Can. 1237 §2 The ancient tradition of placing relics of Martyrs or of other Saints within a fixed altar is to be retained, in accordance with the rites prescribed in the liturgical books.--CCL, Op. cit.
Now, doesn't that call to mind the pagan religions Rome so eagerly incorporated into her own religious practice? Rome is so big on the ghoulish business of worshipping body parts or involving them in their worship that some really bizarre situations have developed.
One example of the silliness that has risen up around the cult of saints and martyrs is the fact that the Vatican is in possession of TWO skulls which they claim were Peter's. One is enshrined in the Cathedral of St. John Lateran and at "Peter's burial site" in the graffiti wall in the Vatican. Peter was quite a guy, but I doubt he had two heads.
Then, there's the story of how a merchant paid a hooker to use her skills to obtain an arm of John the Baptist as her price for servicing the sexual needs of an hospitaler. John's relics were in demand. In 1016, monks in Aquitaine claimed they had come into possession of the head of John the Baptist. This "discovery" seemed not to create any distress, although another head supposedly having also belonged to John had been on display in Antioch for a very long time.
Anything that had touched the body of Christ was particularly desirable. One such object was the Spear of Destiny, the very weapon that was said to have pierced the side of Christ as He hung on the cross. Some stories claim this spear has existed since the beginning of recorded time, being passed from dynasty to dynasty. Adolf Hitler, who was deeply involved with things occult, was fascinated by the Spear. On the very day Germany annexed Austria, March 12, 1938, Hitler was in Vienna, where he went to the Hofmuseum to personally take charge of the Spear, which was on display there. After Germany had been defeated, General Patton, himself a believer in reincarnation and other curious things, was shocked to learn that Germany had been in possession of the Spear. The general was concerned that the Allies might have to resort to the use of nuclear weapons to fulfill the Spear's destiny.
Other relics held and revered by Catholic faithful and the Roman church included Christ's Holy Navel, Holy Tears, Hair, Fingernails and Holy Foreskin. Of course, Mary's milk, tears, hair and such were in great demand as well.
Little has changed since the early days when the church, in her zeal to "make converts," adapted pagan beliefs and rituals and legitimized them by tacking on the label "Christian." Do you reckon God is fooled by that label? I'll be posting details of some of the strange things the Catholic church has said and done as regards the ghoulish practice of using "holy" body parts in her worship. For now, I urge all those who participate in the pagan ways of Rome to read and bear in mind the very serious way God has dealt in the past with those who would not heed His commandants and worshipped as heathens:
And the children of Israel did secretly those things that were not right against the LORD their God, and they built them high places in all their cities, from the tower of the watchmen to the fenced city. And they set them up images and groves in every high hill, and under every green tree: And there they burnt incense in all the high places, as did the heathen whom the LORD carried away before them; and wrought wicked things to provoke the LORD to anger: For they served idols, whereof the LORD had said unto them, Ye shall not do this thing. Yet the LORD testified against Israel, and against Judah, by all the prophets, and by all the seers, saying, Turn ye from your evil ways, and keep my commandments and my statutes, according to all the law which I commanded your fathers, and which I sent to you by my servants the prophets. Notwithstanding they would not hear, but hardened their necks, like to the neck of their fathers, that did not believe in the LORD their God. And they rejected his statutes, and his covenant that he made with their fathers, and his testimonies which he testified against them; and they followed vanity, and became vain, and went after the heathen that were round about them, concerning whom the LORD had charged them, that they should not do like them. And they left all the commandments of the LORD their God, and made them molten images, even two calves, and made a grove, and worshipped all the host of heaven, and served Baal. And they caused their sons and their daughters to pass through the fire, and used divination and enchantments, and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke him to anger. Therefore the LORD was very angry with Israel, and removed them out of his sight: there was none left but the tribe of Judah only. Also Judah kept not the commandments of the LORD their God, but walked in the statutes of Israel which they made. And the LORD rejected all the seed of Israel, and afflicted them, and delivered them into the hand of spoilers, until he had cast them out of his sight.--2 Kings 17:9-20
Do you reckon God has changed His mind? That the things that bothered Him in the Old Testament no longer concern Him? That believers are not under the Law and therefore need not worry?
With thanks to www.sxws.com/charis
====
IS ROMAN CATHOLICISM A CULT?
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
On this page I would like to better define the lines between a Christian church and an actual cult. All too often the word cult is addressed to people that believe in the second coming, trust the Bible, or just plain home school children. What amazes me is how often it is the Catholic church that tags people with the title cult, when they themselves sport all the earmarks of a cult.
When the Sabbath keeping prophecy understanding children of God came out of hiding about 200 years ago, the Roman church with their many millions of members decided they should be tagged a cult. Reason being, not only were these Sabbath keeping Christians embracing the Law of God as a fruit of true Christianity, they also had an uncanny ability to match prophetic facts with historic documentation. Rome of course didn’t like that one bit. They feared their message because they were the ones being unmasked. Every prophecy that has ever been uttered in Scripture regarding Antichrist was now being PROVEN with rock hard evidence to in fact be the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. History had now afforded these Christians with ample evidence that was readily available, as well as the Bible itself was now being printed for the common man. This has allowed almost anyone with a competent knowledge of history a valid method by which to identify Antichrist. So Rome yelled CULT as loud as she could to try and prevent problems.
Now, common human nature has proven that the natural reaction to the mass opinion is to always go with the crowd. In other words, if everyone is saying it, it must be true. Problem with that thought process is, when it comes to Scriptural facts, the crowd theology, or the majority is always wrong. Case in point, the ENTIRE PLANET in Noah’s day thought Noah was just some crazed lunatic building a boat on dry land that was preaching the end of the word was coming by a flood. Science has already proven that at this time in earth’s history it had NEVER rained before on the planet. No one believed Noah. The great firmament was still in place, the great deep was still just under the earth’s crust that was not only watering the soil and roots, it was gently warming it as well due to the close proximity of the earth’s magma. So, rain as we see today was not necessary. The plants had all the water they needed, the atmosphere was hyperbolic in nature, and so the thought of rain, let alone clouds in the air seemed absolutely insane to the majority. Yet, did their adamant disbelief somehow stop the now scientifically proven global flood from coming? No it did not. Scientists have not only proven a global flood, they have found pillow lava on mountain tops as well as large salt formations on Mt. Ararat. Not to mention the actual petrified ark of Noah that has been probed, flown over and even photographed over the years. In fact…
Marco Polo wrote of seeing it during his travels
· In 1883 a Turkish expedition documented the ark’s existence upon Mt Ararat
· In 1916 during World War I, Russian pilot Lt. Zabalotski photographed the ark while on a recognizance mission
· In 1944 a photo of the ark appeared in an issue of the “Stars & Stripes” publication of the US military
· In 1959 F100 Jet Fighter pilot Gregor Schwinghammer sighted the ark
· And Ron Bennet, UPI White House photographer, during the Carter administration was on board Air Force One, while on an escorted flight over Mt. Ararat. He was told along with everyone else on board to look out their windows and see for themselves NOAH’S ARK!
That ark is there, and there was a global flood. We now know this. The MAJORITY, or “crowd theologians” in Noah’s day stated Noah was wrong. The MAJORITY, or shall I say the ENTIRE PLANET figured since everyone else thought Noah was mistaken in his prophetic declarations, he must be wrong. How can the whole planet be wrong they thought? How can this one man and his small family be the only true followers of God?
Well, it’s no different today! When the Sabbath keeping child of God came out of hiding directly after Rome stopped killing the Christians, they started to proclaim prophetic facts that angered the dragon. Satan knew his methods of deception, and crowd theology worked real well in Noah’s day, and as the saying goes, if it works don’t fix it, right? So, the Devil prodded the prelates of Rome to proclaim the true Christians to be a CULT simply because they didn’t go along with the MAJORITY of Roman Catholic theologian’s. Not to mention the hundreds of millions of Catholics that were taught to blindly accept what their leaders said as truth. These peculiar people that are keeping what they called the “Jewish Sabbath,” had to be a cult. Look at how strange they are Rome said! They don’t go to church in Sunday like we do! They don’t embrace the doctrines we do! They don’t believe our Pope is holy as we do! So they must be a cult.
Problem with this lie of Rome was, there will always be people out there that WILL open their bibles to verify the Truth. They are called the elect! And according to Matthew 24:24, the elect can NOT be deceived. Now I know some of you have heard your pastors say that “even the elect” can be deceived. But have you READ Matthew 24:24 lately? It doesn’t say that at all. Remember that verse.. MATTHEW 24:24.. jot it down, and then later look at it and you will see, you have been LIED to.
So.. how can we tell the difference between a cult and a Christian church? Well, finding a Christian church is rather easy. It’s one that will adhere to the Christian God’s Bible as the sole authority. I have a page on the site, called “Remnant Christian Fruits” in the “Bible Truths” section of the website that lays out 8 of the major biblical teachings that we can use to identify the true remnant church, or Bride of Christ in the last days. If we were to look for this church we must not settle for just any church, we must make sure it is exactly as the Word of God describes it to be. It must be God's church! It won’t step off that platform of Truth no matter what the cost! I won't settle for anything less for my self or my family. Why should you?
However a cult is a little more difficult to find sometimes. They don’t rely on Scripture at all. In fact they rely on what Jesus refers to as doctrines of demons and traditions of man over and above the Scripture. So there’s a key we will use in our investigation. Plus the cult will always seek to go against biblical jurisprudence, or actual Christian truths. All one needs to do in this respect is to look at the church in question, investigate its doctrines and teachings and do as the Berean’s of Acts chapter 17 did. We must see what they have to say then open a Bible to see if those things are so.
So.. let’s do that with Roman Catholicism shall we? Does it stand up to the acid test of truth? Do they go by whatsoever saith the Lord? The Vatican does claim to be a CHRISTIAN church does it not? So let’s see if that is so? If they are a Christian church, then they won’t have a problem with the Christian Bible. Biblical jurisprudence is defined by Isaiah rather bluntly when he says, "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8:20) So bringing a Bible into the mix is an absolute necessity when a church proclaims to be Christian. You can use a Bible to expose non-Christian faiths as well of course, but not as effectively as you can with so called followers of Christ, because Muslims, Buddhists, or even Zoroastrian nuns don’t accept him as Lord. So when you walk up to them with a Bible they don’t understand that book as truth. So they ignore it. In that respect the Bible is only effective to the BELIEVER that holds it. But as I said earlier, Rome claims Christ as Lord, so the Bible will have to be the method by which she must be tested! Isaiah made that very clear.
In my research over the years I have found MANY signs of cultic activity in many churches. Of course there are way too many of these signs to mention, so I will concentrate on what I like to refer to as the SIX MAJOR SIGNS OF A CULT. If they have more then one of these, this is a church that has no doubt stepped off the platform of truth and should be avoided at all cost. But if they have ALL SIX, then this is most assuredly a bonafide, died in the wool actual CULT we are dealing with.
Sign 1 that the Roman Catholicism is a cult
Every cult has a single powerful human leader. In fact, all cult leaders will proclaim themselves a god on earth. Do you recall Jim Jones? or Charles Manson? They both proclaimed themselves to be Jesus Christ did they not? Did you know the Pope does this as well? Listen to what the Pope's of Rome have to say in that regard.
"The Pope is not only the representative of Jesus Christ, he is Jesus Christ himself, hidden under the veil of flesh." Catholic National July 1895.
"We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty" ...Pope Leo XIII Encyclical Letter of June 20, 1894,
"For thou art the shepherd, thou art the physician, thou art the director, thou art the husbandman, finally thou art another God on earth." Labbe and Cossart's "History of the Councils." Vol. XIV, col. 109
The title "Lord God the Pope" is found within a gloss of Extravagantes of Pope John XXII, title 14, chapter 4, In an Antwerp edition of the Extravagantes, the words, "Dominum Deum Nostrum Papam" (Our Lord God the Pope) can be found in column 153. In a Paris edition, they are found in column 140.
"The pope is the supreme judge of the law of the land . . . He is the vicegerent of Christ, and is not only a priest forever, but also King of kings and Lord of lords"--La Civilta Cattolica, March 18, 1871.
"It seems that Pope John Paul II now presides over the universal Church from his place upon Christ's cross," said Bishop Dunn, who traveled with seven other prelates to Rome. Taken from an article entitled, "Auckland Bishop Says Pope Presides From the Cross" AUCKLAND, New Zealand, SEPT. 20, 2004 -Zenit.org (Article ZE04092001)
http://www.answeringcatholicism.com/catholicismexposed/isromancatholicismacult/index.shtml
====
Current estimates of Roman Catholic priests in the U.S.= 49,000 to 50,000
Estimates of pedophile priests = 3,000 (6.1%) to 8,000 (16.3%)
188 Dioceses in the U.S. Divide 3,000 by 188 = 16 perpetrators per diocese
Divide 8,000 by 188 = 42 perpetrators per diocese
Current experts claim a pedophile could abuse 200-265 children in a lifetime.
200 x 16 perps/diocese = 3,200 victims/diocese
200 x 42 perps/diocese = 8,400 victims/diocese
3,200 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 601,600 victims in U.S.
8,400 victims/diocese x 188 dioceses = 1,579,200 victims in U.S.
Average American family consists of 4-6 people
(3,200 victims/diocese) 601,600 victims x 4 family members = 2,406,400 indirect victims
60l,000 victims x 6 family members = 3,609,600 indirect victims
(8,400 victims/diocese) 1,579,200 x 4 family members = 6,316,800 indirect victims
1,579,200 x 6 family members = 9,475,200 indirect victims
These numbers are a reflection of immediate family only and do not reflect the indirect victims within the parishes that are affected.
188 Bishops are responsible for the pain of at least 601,600 direct victims and as many as 9,475,200 indirect victims — a total of as many as 10,076,800 people. Clearly, something is wrong.
Using the lower numbers the number of direct victims and survivors alone could populate a city larger than Boston. Using the higher numbers, it would be the fourth largest city in the U.S.— one between the size of Houston and Chicago..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recent Quotes...
Tom Brokaw stated on NBC nightly News on March 18, 2002, that Since the mid 80's the Roman Catholic church has paid out over 1 billion dollars in lawsuits stemming from child molestations by their priests.
"Some of these guys cooperate more with evil than they do with God."-FATHER GARY R. HAYES,on priests who abused him and others who covered it up. June 12, 2002, NY Times.
"From a canonical point of view, the bishop or religious superior is neither morally nor legally responsible for a criminal act committed by one of his clerics." THE REV. GIANFRANCO GHIRLANDA, dean of the canon law faculty at Gregorian University in Rome, as quoted by the NY Times, May 18, 2002.
Father McBride on "Meet the Press" 4-28-02 said Gay men should be allowed to become Roman Catholic priests.He also admitted that many of the Roman Catholic priests are gay. Father Richard Newhouse also said that Jesus Christ as well as the Gospels declare men of God should be celebit,
All articles will "pop up" in new windows...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homosexuality
Priest downloaded gay porn images
Rector's book on clergy, sex is best seller - among priests
Religion, homosexuality can coexist
Catholic church reaches out to gays
Priests with AIDS
Catholic church worried about link between priests, AIDS
Cliques of gay priests are dividing the Church
Priests with AIDS - Crisis within Catholic church
AIDS in the priesthood
Bishop admits sex with priest
Homosexual Valentines day on Catholic campus
Bishop suspends priest who declared self a practicing homosexual
Priest in Spain announces his homosexuality
Spain’s first openly gay priest said...
'Gay' culture in Catholic Church grows
Gay test for aspiring priests
Confab pushes homosexuality in Church
Gay Catholics celebrate mass together
Sydney´s archbishop pell on communion for open homosexuals
Gays and the Seminary
Homosexuals better priests, Jesuit says
Bishops Avoided 'Real' Issues of Celibacy and Homosexuality, Activists Say
Spanish priest steps down after former gay lover distributes graphic video
While in California on sick leave, Boston priest bought racy gay resort
Gay association to ask Pope for homosexual patron saint
Homosexuals taking over catholic priesthood
History's Gayest Pope
Homosexuality is divinely ordered, say catechism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Molestation
Priest told to step down after sex-abuse accusations
Sanchez abuse kept quite
Vatican studies sex abuse by priests
Pope's new policy is to promote pedophile priests
A dark journey of the soul
Abuse inquiry at top Catholic school (Priest may have transmitted AIDS to children!)
Pedophile Irish priest dies in jail - shocking case topples government
Documents show bishops transferred known abuser
Former altar boys get $119 million in sex-abuse case
U.K. Church report urges police checks of clergy
Child abuse and the priesthood
Priest in Innu community faces sex abuse charges
The Doyle ~ Mouton Report
Priest deserves jail for molesting children
Pastor's arrest stuns parishioners
Priest admits being in bed with 11 year old boy
Popery's plague of pedophile priests
Priest says paedophilia was good for children
Bishop guilty of concealing paedophile priest
French bishop, priest, found guilty in paedophile cases
Six more priests removed on allegations of abuse
DA's given names of 49 more priests
Six Priests Suspended After Claims of Sex Abuse
A Church Dealing With Accusations
Reports of Priests' Abuse Enrage Boston Catholics
Child abuse priest housed by Church
Child sexual abuse: the church´s days of reckoning
2 Massachusetts Priests Suspended -Sexual Abuse of Minors
Scores of priests involved in sex abuse cases
Boston Archdiocese Gives Authorities Names of Priests Abusing Children
Catholics Debate Boston Leadership
Priest says he, too, molested boys
More Catholic Priests dismissed in Child Sex Abuse
Archdiocese Could Pay Up to $30 Million...
Dioceses Sell Land, Borrow Money to Pay Settlements in Sexual Abuse Cases
Pope may sack Polish prelate in sex scandal
Boston Priests Doubting Cardinal After Sex Scandal
Hundreds now claim priest abuse
Rome pays $110 MILLION to settle child sex abuse cases in Ireland
'95 ruling a shield for clergy
Weakland gives priests abuse data
Archdiocese defends secrecy
Church sex scandal taints holy week
6 priests linked to abuse (6 known pedophiles allowed to serve)
Church too lenient on sex-abuse priests -poll
Sex predator: the priest who got away
Victim claims he's 'breaking chain of abuse' (priest takes porno pics of kids)
Suit names archdiocese, N.H. bishop
Victim abused by priest: 'Floodgates will open'
Priest asks victim, "would you like to kiss Jesus?"
Gay test for aspiring priests
Catholic church computer seized in child porn probe
Philadelphia Archdiocese Reveals 35 Pedophile Priests
Vatican wrestles with pedophilia scandals
Portland Main Diocese remove 2 pedophile priests
Florida bishop admits sexual abuse of seminary student
Bishops back offf of OUSTING Priests
Bishops spokesman shielded gay priests
Priests hiding behind confession seal
As Lawsuits spread, Church faces questions on finances
Catholics learning sex from Kinsey's disciples (Known Pedophile)
111 U.S. Roman Catholic Bishops Kept Priests
Catholic Bishops Who Resigned in Sexual Misconduct Scandals
Accused bishop of lexington, kentucky, resigns
Bishops' Meeting on Catholic Sex Abuse Crisis an Echo of 1992 Gathering
Abuse Victims Sue to Void Secrecy Provisions of Settlements With Church
At Least 300 Church Abuse Suits Filed
Hundreds Of Priests Removed Since '60s
Australia Catholic Church Apologizes
Cops check ex-priests yard for remains
Survey Finds Most Catholics Unhappy with Church Handling of Scandal
Florida Priest Held in Michigan on Sex Charges
Archdiocese Ponders Legality of Damage Caps
14 priests in Miami diocese accused of abuse
When priests commit suicide
Weakland denies he abused man archdiocese paid $450,000
Vatican Lawsuit Liability Could Reach $1 Billion in US
Roman Catholic Church uses High Powered Lawyers to Harrass accusers
Egan Paid Accused Priest
Vatican Lawyer Says Bishops Should Not Reveal Abuse Claims
D.A. Demanding Evidence from Catholic Cardinal
Angry Catholics pack sessions on sex abuse
Accused Priest Apparently Kills Self
Priest Who Admitted Sex with Teen Shot in Baltimore
Powerful Cardinal in Vatican Accused of Sexual Abuse Cover-Up
Catholics seek UN action against Vatican
Church reneges on cash for paedophile priest victims
Priests linked to teen sex -Diocese never reported incidents
Former Kansas priest unregistered as sex offender in South Dakota
Former altar boy says priests ran boys' prostitution ring
CATHOLIC CHURCH KNEW OF CHILD MOLESTATION BACK IN 1985!
Priest kept working after abuse cases
Cardinal Law says plaintiffs contributed to alleged abuse
Ex-Boston Priest Arrested in Rape
Dioceses in 46 States Feel Impact of Sex Abuse Scandal Among Clergy
Catholic Military Chaplains Punished
450 MORE VICTIMS COME FORWARD!
Americans target the Holy See
Sex Abuse by Clergy a Global Problem
Priest praised sex with boys in '79 talk
Church allowed abuse by priest for years
Priest molested boy, 12, at rockaway beach: da
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Child Molestation OVERFLOW...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52505,00.html
Monks, Parishioners Clean Nativity Church
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52362,00.html
Church confessionls remain private ? Discussion
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52318,00.html
Law: 'I Don't Remember Sex Abuse Accusations'
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52228,00.html -- Related ^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52289,00.html -- Related ^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52075,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52066,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51971,00.html -- Related ^^^^^^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52281,00.html -- Priest pleads guilty
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51968,00.html
Priest released on bail in Hong Kong -- child sex abuse
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52234,00.html
Retired Mass. Priest Pleads Innocent to Charge He Raped 12-Year-Old Boy
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52240,00.html
A HIP CATHOLIC PRIEST TV SHOW -- COMMING
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52113,00.html
Shanley Pleads Not Guilty; Bail Set at $750,000
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52214,00.html
Retired Priest Arrested in Boston Area
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52048,00.html
Is the Media Overdoing the Scandal in the Catholic Church? Discussion
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52110,00.html
Accused Ex-Priest Extradited to Boston
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52073,00.html
Priest Resigns Over Mardi Gras Photo
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51961,00.html
Church May Mortgage Properties to Compensate Abuse Victims
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,51848,00.html
Ex-Boston Priest Arrested for Child Rape
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53126,00.html
Priest gets shot by one he molested
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53018,00.html -- Related ^^^
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53076,00.html
Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Parishioners of Sex Abuse by Priests
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,53004,00.html
Priest commits suicide
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,52842,00.html
Interview with priest
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALL Networks have information on...
ROMAN CATHOLIC PEDOPHILE PRIESTS
CNN http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/europe/03/21/vatican.sex.abuse/index.html
CBS http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/03/20/national/main504125.shtml
NBC http://www.msnbc.com/news/727393.asp?cp1=1
ABC http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/DailyNews/pope_blakemore020321.html
FOX http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,48430,00.html
USA http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2002/03/21/pope.htm
CWNhttp://www.cwnews.com/news/getstory.cfm?recnum=17752
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
More articles are coming! However, due to the massive amount of decadence in this church, I have run a bit behind schedule in updating this page, especially the "child molestation section.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sexual Abuse
Vatican Acknowledges Sex Scandal
Report says priests sexually abusing nuns
Vatican admits to priests raping nuns
Priest Charged Over Date-Rape Drug
Years later, some charge sexual abuse by nuns
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sex in the Confessional
Lewd questions asked of young girls and married women in the confessional
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCC Cover ups
Church Sex Abuse Cover-up
Court case seeks to define Catholic priest's family
Powerful Cardinal in Vatican Accused of Sexual Abuse Cover-Up
Head of Australia's Catholic Church Refuses to Resign Over Cover-Up Claims
Abuse Victims Sue to Void Secrecy Provisions of Settlements With Church
Vatican Lawyer Says Bishops Should Not Reveal Abuse Claims
Vatican Official: No Need to Tell Parishioners of Sex Abuse by Priests
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RCC Survivors
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Misc
Pedophilia advocate featured in Catholic Church concert
French bishops address scandal of pedophilia
Court dubious on priest sex suit
Public Masturbating priest gets five years probation
Vatican encourages sexual deviancy by teens
Vatican seeks help of sexual Rock & Rollers to lure teens
Catholic Priest in trouble for posing nude
Catholic parents arrested trying to stop church teaching masturbation & homosexuality
Priest Pleads Guilty to Making Date-Rape Drug
Priest showers gay live in lover with gifts from $300,000.00 of church funds
Vatican firmly opposed to handover of information
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Links on these topics
Survivors of Clergy abuse in Catholic seminaries
Clergy Crimes
Sanchez deposition
Lechery in the church of Rome exposed
SNAP Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests
Sexual abuse by Catholic Priests
Catholic Pedophile Priests stats! (Check out these numbers!!)
Tremont & Sheldon Law Offices (Check out the actual cases on file against the pedophile priests of Rome!)
ABUSE TRACKER
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to top
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's an article that I think sums it up...
Ala. Court Rules Against Gay Mother
Fri Feb 15,10:30 PM ET
By PHILLIP RAWLS, Associated Press Writer
MONTGOMERY, Ala. - In awarding custody of three teen-agers to their father over their gay mother, the chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court on Friday wrote that homosexuality is "an inherent evil" and shouldn't be tolerated.
The nine-judge panel ruled unanimously in favor of a Birmingham man and against his ex-wife, who now lives with her gay partner in southern California. The parents weren't named in court documents to protect the identity of the children, ages 15, 17 and 18. Chief Justice Roy Moore wrote that the mother's relationship made her an unfit parent and that homosexuality is "abhorrent, immoral, detestable, a crime against nature, and a violation of the laws of nature." Moore also quoted scripture, historical documents and previous state court rulings that he said backed his view.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.remnantofgod.org/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
