A Blood-Soaked Path Through History

[Windmillcharge]

You do realize that Hitler's campaign of atrocity is measured in a handful of years, while the atrocities of the Papacy are measured in centuries -- THIRTEEN CENTURIES to be exact -- right?

Yes, so put them in perspective, if the third rich had lasted a 1000 years how many people would it have killed..

There is just no comparason between the two, the papacy killed 1000's while hitler and others like him killed by the million.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Whoa whoa, now you've gone and done it...you've revealed just how loose your hold is upon reality. Has your blind allegiance to the Whore of Babylon left you unable to see that deception is the co-mingling of truth and error? Nobody will drink poison from a glass marked XXX, but if you mixed a little poison in a nice refreshing glass of orange juice, some might just drink it...in much the same way you papists have drunk the poison KoolAid of the Papacy.

The devil will never come out and admit that he is who he is...it is only by his ACTIONS that he betrays himself. He appeared to my Lord as an angel of light after He fasted 40 days but exposed himself as the arch enemy by soliciting worship from Jesus. Are you so naive as to think that the only way to prove that the Papal Whore is the Antichrist of Scripture is if the Papal Whore openly admits to such? No, my poor deceived, confused, pathetic devotee to the Whore of Babylon, it is only by her ACTIONS that she betrays herself as the whore that she is. Alexander Hislop's book does a magnificent job exposing the Papal Whore for who she really is.

And you, Dead Bread, do a magnificent job exposing yourself as weak and pathetically impotent by arguing that Hislop's book would only be legit if the RCC convened a council and took a vote affirming that she is nothing more than Babylonian Pagan Sun worship perfected (which development I presume would not lessen your sad devotion to her in the least), and then attempt to discredit Hislop by the works of others. If only you would apply your "guilt by association" standard to the sad history of your own church - murderers, extortioners, liars, idolaters, pedophile priests and the cardinals and popes who cover their crimes, etc. - perhaps you might discover what the great Protestant Reformers knew only too well - that in searching for the identify of Antichrist, look no further than the Papacy - the union of the church of Rome and the secular State.

And NONE of your verbose rant has debunked ANYTHING I presented about Alexander Hislop's lies.

Did you read any of the evidence from Ralph Woodrow? I didn't think so.
YOUR purpose here is to repeat the same moronic arguments without doing any homework.

Consider yourself historically spanked . . .

 

[Phoneman777]

Wow, thats a nice tirade....
So you think the Church and state should never be one?

I regret that I didn't take the edge off that post. Thank the Lord He is merciful and forgiving.

History has proven that a church/state confederation always results in the deaths of those who oppose it. Paganism, the Papal persecutions, even the few cases of the brief but unfortunate colonial Protestantism era of state sponsored persecution. Freedom of conscious is God's way and should be our way too.

 

[Enoch111]

This kind of ridiculous nonsense is the kind of drivel that has caused so much division within the Body of Christ over the centuries - especially when so much of it is pure fiction . . .

I am new to this forum, and I am not interested in "bashing" any group. But the truth is the truth, and for you to call it "ridiculous", "drivel" and "fiction" is an attempt to dismiss the truth.

Did the RCC persecute and kill Jews and Protestants? Absolutely. So why not admit what is true. Did the RCC label Protestants as "heretics"? Absolutely.Did the Reformers persecute and kill Anabaptists? Absolutely. So there is nothing fictitious about these facts.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I am new to this forum, and I am not interested in "bashing" any group. But the truth is the truth, and for you to call it "ridiculous", "drivel" and "fiction" is an attempt to dismiss the truth.

Did the RCC persecute and kill Jews and Protestants? Absolutely. So why not admit what is true. Did the RCC label Protestants as "heretics"? Absolutely.Did the Reformers persecute and kill Anabaptists? Absolutely. So there is nothing fictitious about these facts.

The point of the original post is to blame everything on the Catholic CHURCH at large.

MANY of the things listed had NOTHING to do with the Church - but with the wills of individuals.
It is as stupid as blaming the Catholic Church for the Holocaust because Hitler was once a Catholic.

Secondly - YOUR use of "RCC" is offensively ignorant because you don't understand what it means.
What is "RCC" - and why do you blame all of the atrocities in the OP on this "RCC"??

Additionally - the Catholic Church hasn't labeled all Protestants as "heretics". Do you even understand what a "heretic" is in the eyes of the Church?

So, you see - much of the OP IS fictitious drivel and nonsense . . .

 

[Enoch111]

So, you see - much of the OP IS fictitious drivel and nonsense . . .

No, it is not drivel and nonsense, but the truth. According to the Catholic Church:

• If we knowingly reject at least one point of RCC dogma we're heretics.
• c. If we knowingly believe certain ideas the RCC explicitly condemns we're heretics.

Furthermore there are dozens of anathemas (curses) on Protestants in the Council of Trent, and Pope John XXIII speaking at the Second Vatican Council said "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent."

http://reformedanswers.org/answer.asp/file/43371

 

[Philip James]

I regret that I didn't take the edge off that post. Thank the Lord He is merciful and forgiving.

History has proven that a church/state confederation always results in the deaths of those who oppose it. Paganism, the Papal persecutions, even the few cases of the brief but unfortunate colonial Protestantism era of state sponsored persecution. Freedom of conscious is God's way and should be our way too.

I appreciate what you are saying here, and indeed proud and sinful men may (and do) sometimes abuse their authority... but as to freedom of conscience what do you think it means that our Lord will 'rule them with an iron rod' ?

Further, If a Christian king has a duty to protect his people does that not also include protecting them from apostates and heretics as well?


Peace!

 

[Phoneman777]

And NONE of your verbose rant has debunked ANYTHING I presented about Alexander Hislop's lies.

Did you read any of the evidence from Ralph Woodrow? I didn't think so.
YOUR purpose here is to repeat the same moronic arguments without doing any homework.

Consider yourself historically spanked . . .

Not you or anyone else in the Synagogue of Satan is able to "historically spank" any one of us who present Biblical reasons for why the Papacy is the prophesied Antichrist which will be destroyed "with the brightness of His coming". It is YOU who refuses to objectively study the Bible evidence which condemns the Papacy as Antichrist.

Tell us, now, Dead Bread, who did the Reformers believe was the Lion, the Bear, the Leopard, or the Dragon-like beasts of Daniel and Revelation 13?
Or, who did they believe was the Restrainer of 2 Thess.?
Or, why did they reject the Jesuit eschatological interpretations of "Futurism" and "Preterism" which were designed to shift the focus of Protestantism away from the present Papal Antichrist in Rome toward some false Antichrist of the distant past or to the "last seven years of tribulation" at the end of time?

Dead Bread, it seems you won't be satisfied with anything less than all of us reading your RCC apologists, denouncing our Protestantism, and joining up with old Scarlet Harlot. I'm sorry, but we cannot do that. Your failure to accept the evidence you are provided does not make you a victor...it makes you a candidate for destruction, according to Hosea:

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because thou hast REJECTED KNOWLEDGE, I will also reject thee..."

 

[Phoneman777]

Yes, so put them in perspective, if the third rich had lasted a 1000 years how many people would it have killed..

There is just no comparason between the two, the papacy killed 1000's while hitler and others like him killed by the million.

The Papacy killed only thousands? This list which is but a partial account of the total number of casualties reports on millions, not thousands.

 

[BreadOfLife]

No, it is not drivel and nonsense, but the truth. According to the Catholic Church:

• If we knowingly reject at least one point of RCC dogma we're heretics.
• c. If we knowingly believe certain ideas the RCC explicitly condemns we're heretics.

Furthermore there are dozens of anathemas (curses) on Protestants in the Council of Trent, and Pope John XXIII speaking at the Second Vatican Council said "I do accept entirely all that has been decided and declared at the Council of Trent."

http://reformedanswers.org/answer.asp/file/43371

And this is where your ignorance of the Catholic Church comes in.
You have to be a CATHOLIC to be considered a "heretic."

ALL of your Protestant Fathers were Catholic Churchmen. Calvin, Luther, Melanchton, Zwingili - were all Catholics who went into heresy. If you are a lifelong Protestant or were never a Catholic - you cannot be considered a "heretic."

Secondly - an anathema is not a "curse" so much as it is an ipso facto excommunication.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Not you or anyone else in the Synagogue of Satan is able to "historically spank" any one of us who present Biblical reasons for why the Papacy is the prophesied Antichrist which will be destroyed "with the brightness of His coming". It is YOU who refuses to objectively study the Bible evidence which condemns the Papacy as Antichrist.

Tell us, now, Dead Bread, who did the Reformers believe was the Lion, the Bear, the Leopard, or the Dragon-like beasts of Daniel and Revelation 13?
Or, who did they believe was the Restrainer of 2 Thess.?
Or, why did they reject the Jesuit eschatological interpretations of "Futurism" and "Preterism" which were designed to shift the focus of Protestantism away from the present Papal Antichrist in Rome toward some false Antichrist of the distant past or to the "last seven years of tribulation" at the end of time?

Dead Bread, it seems you won't be satisfied with anything less than all of us reading your RCC apologists, denouncing our Protestantism, and joining up with old Scarlet Harlot. I'm sorry, but we cannot do that. Your failure to accept the evidence you are provided does not make you a victor...it makes you a candidate for destruction, according to Hosea:

"My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge; because thou hast REJECTED KNOWLEDGE, I will also reject thee..."

I'll tell you what, my ignorant friend:
When YOU start answering some of the questions and dilemmas with your falsehoods that I put in front of YOU - THEN you can start asking ME questions again.

According to Ralph Woodrow - former follower of the liar Alexander Hislop whom YOU now follow:
"I realized I needed to go back through Hislop’s work, my basic source, and prayerfully check it out.
As I did this, it became clear: Hislop’s “history” was often only an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths. He claimed Nimrod was a big, ugly, deformed black man. His wife, Semiramis, was a beautiful white woman with blond hair and blue eyes. But she was a backslider known for her immoral lifestyle, the inventor of soprano singing and the originator of priestly celibacy. He said that the Babylonians baptized in water, believing it had virtue because Nimrod and Semiramis suffered for them in water; that Noah’s son Shem killed Nimrod; that Semiramis was killed when one of her sons cut off her head, and so on. I realized that no recognized history book substantiated these and many other claims."

"It really is heartbreaking to see a man take such a strong Biblical stand, warning Christians of apostasy, only to fall into apostasy himself."

Do your HOMEWORK, pal . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

The Papacy killed only thousands? This list which is but a partial account of the total number of casualties reports on millions, not thousands.

Please provide historical evidence for this laughable claim - or simply admit that you drank the anti-Catholic Kool-Aid and got caught again with your historical pants down . . . . . .

 

[Truth7t7]

We know the pendulum has to swing all the way over to the right in order that our country "shall repudiate every principle of its Constitution as a Protestant and republican government." Just a matter of time before religious laws force us to choose between allegiance to God or the Papal system.

I don't see the papal system raising It's head, at best the Pope will be the future "False Prophet" performing false miracles before the future antichrist, to deceive the world into taking the mark of the beast.

 

[epostle1]

The Papacy killed only thousands? This list which is but a partial account of the total number of casualties reports on millions, not thousands.

Not once have you ever supported your false histories with any real historians. You are a forum sadist.

 

[Phoneman777]

I'll tell you what, my ignorant friend:
When YOU start answering some of the questions and dilemmas with your falsehoods that I put in front of YOU - THEN you can start asking ME questions again.

According to Ralph Woodrow - former follower of the liar Alexander Hislop whom YOU now follow:
"I realized I needed to go back through Hislop’s work, my basic source, and prayerfully check it out.
As I did this, it became clear: Hislop’s “history” was often only an arbitrary piecing together of ancient myths. He claimed Nimrod was a big, ugly, deformed black man. His wife, Semiramis, was a beautiful white woman with blond hair and blue eyes. But she was a backslider known for her immoral lifestyle, the inventor of soprano singing and the originator of priestly celibacy. He said that the Babylonians baptized in water, believing it had virtue because Nimrod and Semiramis suffered for them in water; that Noah’s son Shem killed Nimrod; that Semiramis was killed when one of her sons cut off her head, and so on. I realized that no recognized history book substantiated these and many other claims."

"It really is heartbreaking to see a man take such a strong Biblical stand, warning Christians of apostasy, only to fall into apostasy himself."

Do your HOMEWORK, pal . . .

It's relatively easy for anyone to deny the validity of another's evidence...or claim the lack thereof. YOU, Dead Bread, are living proof. Though the evidence is continually put before you of the blasphemous claims of the Whore of Babylon, the Antichrist of prophecy, you deny it.

We show you where Dignities and Duties of the Priest teaches that priests who officiate over the Eucharist should be considered "creator of his Creator", and yet you ignore this blasphemy.

We show you Jesus' prohibition, "Call no man father", which you deceptively downplay its use in Catholicism as a mere Biblically mannered term of endearment when you know full well the church considers priests and the pope as "vicars of Christ" - Christ's substitutes.

We show you that "there is one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus", yet you refuse to denounce Catholic mediators, the rejection of which is considered by the RCC "heresy".

We show you that Catholicism claims the power to change God's law written with His own finger in stone and boasts evidence of that power by changing the Sabbath and you justify this by illegitimate extrapolation of Bible texts which speak of limited power granted to church leadership for the purpose discipline - which is neither corporal or capital punishment - the most severe being expulsion from church membership - NOT A PRONOUNCEMENT OF ETERNAL JUDGMENT WHICH PREROGATIVE BELONGS ONLY TO CHRIST - accompanied by tender, loving pleas for the offender to return to a life of surrender to Christ.

We show you the blasphemous claims found in RCC documents bearing the stamp of the Imprimatur which is Latin for "AIN'T NO HERESY IN HERE" such as.....

“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” - On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17​

.....and you refuse to denounce such blasphemies. Tell us, Dead Bread, is Papa Jorge the "Savior"? The "Everlasting Father"? The "Mighty God"? The "One Mediator"? Is he "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners"?

Why do you insist on defending the indefensible? Why do you seek to legitimize such blasphemous, Satanic "doctrines of devils"? What will it take for you to finally see that Papal claims to stand "in the place of Christ", "instead of Christ", "in behalf of Christ", "for Christ" is exactly what the Greek word "Antichristos" means - "Antichrist"?

 

[Phoneman777]

Please provide historical evidence for this laughable claim - or simply admit that you drank the anti-Catholic Kool-Aid and got caught again with your historical pants down . . . . . .

The works of church historians are open for review. I've already directed you to Foxe's Book of Martyrs, by John Foxe - a former RCC apologist like you who once contended with the great Reformer William Tyndale over the supremacy of the laws of the pope over God's Law which left a righteously indignant Tyndale declaring:

"I defy the pope and all his laws. If God spare my life, erelong these years I'll cause a boy that driveth the plough to know more of the Scriptures than he doest."

Foxe eventually saw the light and abandoned the Dead Bread of the RCC for the True Bread of Life and wrote about many of the demonic Papal horrors of countless innocent Christian whose cries reached all the way back to Calvary. Won't you open your eyes, too?

 

[Phoneman777]

Not once have you ever supported your false histories with any real historians. You are a forum sadist.

In case you missed it: I've repeatedly appealed to Foxe's Book of Martyrs - there's enough material there to convince anyone that the Papal Antichrist fulfilled Daniel's prophecies that the Antichrist "shall wear out the saints of the Most High" and "by peace he shall destroy many". In the name of the Prince of Peace, Christ, the Papal Antichrist is responsible for the death of countless victims, whose number will be known to us only after Christ's return.

Perhaps you've not heard that Switzerland was not always the timepiece capital - FRANCE was. The French Hugenots were the timepiece masters...and they were considered "heretics" by the Papacy. After a swift, bloody campaign against them began, the Hugenots dropped everything and fled in the dead of winter through the snow across the Alps into Switzerland - taking their trade with them - and that is how though the Satanic murderous actions of the Papacy, Switzerland became the timepiece capital of the world. It's a matter of history that is open for review.

 

[Phoneman777]

Not once have you ever supported your false histories with any real historians. You are a forum sadist.

Let me guess: the only legit historian is one who says nice things about the Papacy, right? I've repeatedly appealed to Foxe's Book of Martyrs - there's enough material there to convince anyone that the Papal Antichrist fulfilled Daniel's prophecies that the Antichrist "shall wear out the saints of the Most High" and "by peace he shall destroy many". In the name of the Prince of Peace, Christ, the Papal Antichrist is responsible for the death of countless victims, whose number will be known to us only after Christ's return.

Perhaps you've not heard that Switzerland was not always the timepiece capital - FRANCE was. The French Hugenots were the timepiece masters...and they were considered "heretics" by the Papacy. After a swift, bloody campaign against them began, the Hugenots dropped everything and fled in the dead of winter through the snow across the Alps into Switzerland - taking their trade with them - and that is how though the Satanic murderous actions of the Papacy, Switzerland became the timepiece capital of the world. It's a matter of history that is open for review.

 

[epostle1]

Let me guess: the only legit historian is one who says nice things about the Papacy, right? I've repeatedly appealed to Foxe's Book of Martyrs - there's enough material there to convince anyone that the Papal Antichrist fulfilled Daniel's prophecies that the Antichrist "shall wear out the saints of the Most High" and "by peace he shall destroy many". In the name of the Prince of Peace, Christ, the Papal Antichrist is responsible for the death of countless victims, whose number will be known to us only after Christ's return.

Perhaps you've not heard that Switzerland was not always the timepiece capital - FRANCE was. The French Hugenots were the timepiece masters...and they were considered "heretics" by the Papacy. After a swift, bloody campaign against them began, the Hugenots dropped everything and fled in the dead of winter through the snow across the Alps into Switzerland - taking their trade with them - and that is how though the Satanic murderous actions of the Papacy, Switzerland became the timepiece capital of the world. It's a matter of history that is open for review.

You still can't validate your false histories with any scholarly rigor. Foxe's Book of Martyrs is a book written 500 years ago. I don't care if you choose an atheist historian, but you can't even do that much.

Satanic murderous actions of the Papacy is your nightmare world, it isn't real and never was, and the best you can do is cite a polemical book. What you need to do is find any modern scholar that says Fox's book is a reliable source. You can't. Mainly because it is not recognized as a reliable source. Of course, you ignore the horrors that the reformers inflicted on Catholics. I have documentation by Protestant and secular historians, but you will ignore it anyway.

You simply have no proof supporting your false histories. A 500 years old book written by a guy with an axe to grind is not proof.

 

[brakelite]

It's relatively easy for anyone to deny the validity of another's evidence...or claim the lack thereof. YOU, Dead Bread, are living proof. Though the evidence is continually put before you of the blasphemous claims of the Whore of Babylon, the Antichrist of prophecy, you deny it.

We show you where Dignities and Duties of the Priest teaches that priests who officiate over the Eucharist should be considered "creator of his Creator", and yet you ignore this blasphemy.

We show you Jesus' prohibition, "Call no man father", which you deceptively downplay its use in Catholicism as a mere Biblically mannered term of endearment when you know full well the church considers priests and the pope as "vicars of Christ" - Christ's substitutes.

We show you that "there is one Mediator between God and man, the Man Christ Jesus", yet you refuse to denounce Catholic mediators, the rejection of which is considered by the RCC "heresy".

We show you that Catholicism claims the power to change God's law written with His own finger in stone and boasts evidence of that power by changing the Sabbath and you justify this by illegitimate extrapolation of Bible texts which speak of limited power granted to church leadership for the purpose discipline - which is neither corporal or capital punishment - the most severe being expulsion from church membership - NOT A PRONOUNCEMENT OF ETERNAL JUDGMENT WHICH PREROGATIVE BELONGS ONLY TO CHRIST - accompanied by tender, loving pleas for the offender to return to a life of surrender to Christ.

We show you the blasphemous claims found in RCC documents bearing the stamp of the Imprimatur which is Latin for "AIN'T NO HERESY IN HERE" such as.....

“All names which in the Scriptures are applied to Christ, by virtue of which is established that He is over the church, all the same names are applied to the Pope.” - On the Authority of the Councils, book 2, chapter 17​

.....and you refuse to denounce such blasphemies. Tell us, Dead Bread, is Papa Jorge the "Savior"? The "Everlasting Father"? The "Mighty God"? The "One Mediator"? Is he "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners"?

Why do you insist on defending the indefensible? Why do you seek to legitimize such blasphemous, Satanic "doctrines of devils"? What will it take for you to finally see that Papal claims to stand "in the place of Christ", "instead of Christ", "in behalf of Christ", "for Christ" is exactly what the Greek word "Antichristos" means - "Antichrist"?

Awaiting a reasoned response to this...but am not hopeful.