Was Peter ever in Rome? What saith the Scriptures?

[Axehead]

That's because Europeans were crusading. King Richard himself was a crusader. Take away that Christian zeal and Muslims would have eventually taken over.

When it's all said and done, you have to thank middle age Christians for defending your religion. Anti-Catholics need to simply drop it. Ther ei snothing but attack after attack, denial after denial, and excuse after excuse, to keep some anti-Catholic agenda propped up.

You all try to discredit or demonize every single thing Catholciism has done. A 2000 year old institution with a grand history that shped the entire western world. And all for the sole reason of being so zealous of your beliefs that you can't let even history illustrate accurately. It's sickening.
Anti-Catholics are waste of oxygen.

SIM,

God has had a remnant in every generation that has been faithful to Him. They are not part of the false religious system. The people of God (church in the wilderness) runs through the Bible alongside the counterfeit church (satanic religious system), from Genesis through Revelation.

From Genesis thru Revelation you have both the true people of God and the false.


Personally, I would never defend Calvin or Luther or anyone who has killed in the "name of God".

I understand why you do it. You are part of a worldly church who has needed to employ military means to survive and then self justify yourselves.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

I understand why you do it. You are part of a worldly church who has needed to employ military means to survive and then self justify yourselves.

You live in the 21st century where you don't have to 'employ military means'.

Case closed. That's all that is needed to be observed to show that you and others on here are simply full of yourselves.

God has a remnant of Saints, and God has a kingdom on Earth which is defended by the Spirit, and th eSpirit works through the people of Christendom.

If it was left to those such as yourself, Christianity wouldn't have lasted more then a couple hundred years after it was established. You all need to wake up from your dreamworld and come back to reality. You sit there and condemn the very people who have defended the faith from tyranny, thinking you are holier. Those such as yourself are abyssmal in your own self-importance, you all should be banned from even using the word.

 

[Episkopos]

That's because Europeans were crusading. King Richard himself was a crusader. Take away that Christian zeal and Muslims would have eventually taken over.

When it's all said and done, you have to thank middle age Christians for defending your religion. Anti-Catholics need to simply drop it. Ther ei snothing but attack after attack, denial after denial, and excuse after excuse, to keep some anti-Catholic agenda propped up.

You all try to discredit or demonize every single thing Catholciism has done. A 2000 year old institution with a grand history that shped the entire western world. And all for the sole reason of being so zealous of your beliefs that you can't let even history illustrate accurately. It's sickening.
Anti-Catholics are waste of oxygen.

The true church has always been built on the blood of the saints...not on the religious zeal of those willing to murder. You may be confusing Jesus with Mohammad.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

The true church has always been built on the blood of the saints...not on the religious zeal of those willing to murder. You may be confusing Jesus with Mohammad.

Jeremiah 48:10; 1 Corinthians 15:58

The Bible is actually pretty plain on the fact that God calls both warrior and martyr, the denial of that is a fabrication by naive Christians who confuse Christianity with pacifism.

 

[Axehead]

You live in the 21st century where you don't have to 'employ military means'.

Case closed. That's all that is needed to be observed to show that you and others on here are simply full of yourselves.

God has a remnant of Saints, and God has a kingdom on Earth which is defended by the Spirit, and th eSpirit works through the people of Christendom.

If it was left to those such as yourself, Christianity wouldn't have lasted more then a couple hundred years after it was established. You all need to wake up from your dreamworld and come back to reality. You sit there and condemn the very people who have defended the faith from tyranny, thinking you are holier. Those such as yourself are abyssmal in your own self-importance, you all should be banned from even using the word.

Our battle is not with flesh and blood, SIM. Where do you see the early church employing military means to defend themselves against Rome?

True, since the church was infiltrated by the world it has continued to employ the arm of the flesh.

The remnant of The Lord does not do this.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Pacifism is the Devil's new deception, it seems. As soon as a liberal world forms together, those like yourself just transfigure from thin air and support pacifism. How convenient. In fact, it's as convenient as accepting homosexuals in this liberal era as living kosher lives.

That is being infiltrated by the world.

 

[dragonfly]

Hi Axehead,

Can you remember the name of the thread where pacifism was discussed? I think it might save some time to link to it, for SIM to see the difference.

Blessings to all.

 

[Axehead]

Pacifism is the Devil's new deception, it seems. As soon as a liberal world forms together, those like yourself just transfigure from thin air and support pacifism. How convenient. In fact, it's as convenient as accepting homosexuals in this liberal era as living kosher lives.

That is being infiltrated by the world.

Jesus was not a Pacifist, SIM. Being infiltrated by the world is trying to establish the Kingdom of God, by force or means of coercion.

Hi Axehead,

Can you remember the name of the thread where pacifism was discussed? I think it might save some time to link to it, for SIM to see the difference.

Blessings to all.

I would have to look for it. But it differentiated between Pacifism (which is worldly) and Non-Resistance, which is what Jesus taught and lived.

 

[dragonfly]

I would have to look for it. But it differentiated between Pacifism (which is worldly) and Non-Resistance, which is what Jesus taught and lived.

Here it is: Non-Resistance and Pacifism

 

[SilenceInMotion]

For he is God's minister to thee, for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear: for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God's minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. (Romans 13:4)

The doctrine of just war was put forth by St. Augustine. He recognized that God never commands only 'non-resistance', or 'pacificism', or whatever you want to call it. He did not command suicide or martyrdom, he demanded peace, and sometimes peace must be brought with violence, it is something that all Abrahamic religion entails. Islam venerates Jesus as a prophet, and they see no contradiction between him and Mohammud. In fact, their line of reasoning is 'killing a man is like killing mankind, and saving a man is like saving mankind'. In Isreal, they have the same exact just war recognition as the Church.

In the Old Testament, God consistently asked the Isrealites to defend themselves, but under the working of peace being the goal. You see that in the New Testament as well, as Jesus never speaks about military, he never curses the one who has a sword. Rather, he states that whoever lives by the sword shall die by the sword (Matthew 26:52) which is speaking about people who love violence. If he was talking about simply just war, he would have never told Peter to bring a sword in the first place.

Paul states that Scripture is adequate for reproof and correction. What he was talking about was not theological disputes, he was talking precisely about things like this. The only thing really excluded from it is the Old Law, the New Covenant does not dismiss Pslams and Proverbs, or the other books. People that propose nonresistence only look at one side of Christianity and God. They do not see the grand picture, which includes the righteousness of God through means of picking up a sword when evil threatens good people.


Paragraph 2309 of the Catholic Catechism (just war):

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;
• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the
  evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs
  very heavily in evaluating this condition.

 

[meshak]

The Church was preventing a dark age.

RCC created dark age by keeping Jesus' words to themselves, kept it form lay people; kept them in the dark, kept all evil practice in the dark.

RCC's is full of evil fruit.

You should come out of it instead of justifying evil deeds.

 

[Axehead]

RCC created dark age by keeping Jesus' words to themselves, kept it form lay people; kept them in the dark, kept all evil practice in the dark.

RCC's is full of evil fruit.

You should come out of it instead of justifying evil deeds.

Very well said. "Keeping the truth from people" and "Keeping people from the truth" will definitely create a "dark age".

 

[SilenceInMotion]

Very well said. "Keeping the truth from people" and "Keeping people from the truth" will definitely create a "dark age".

Lol, just goes to show how ignorant of history your lot are.

The Dark Ages are not called such because they were evil times. Sure, big things were going on, a full rise of Western religion will do that, but those times are called such because history went dark- there isn't a lot of documentation and literature.

The Christian things that were going on historically were pilgrimages and the initial rise of the Church itself *that Jesus started by the way, the timing and massiveness of it's rise couldn't be more solidifying to that truth*.

Rome was battling the barbarians in the North, and then Islam arose. The world started to modernize, and only seems to go 'dark' in the context you speak of because this modernization was coming straight out of the barbaric world- the planet as we know it didn't even rise to greater moral heights until the Middle Ages, and even then, it was nothing like it is now.

Even in the 16th century, actually, when your own church fathers burnt people at the stake. But let's not talk about any of that, that's the kryptonite to the holier then thou pompous Protestant, who would sacrifice a healthy and realistic approach to reality for an abysmal, seflrighteous belief

 

[dragonfly]

HI SIM,

That you justify the killing habits of the Roman church by calling their victims 'barbarians', conflicts directly against Christ's example and teaching.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

HI SIM,

That you justify the killing habits of the Roman church by calling their victims 'barbarians', conflicts directly against Christ's example and teaching.

...they were barbarians. Do you know what a barbarian was? If not, allow me illustrate it for you- imagine a bloodthirsty man charging at you with a two handed battleaxe dressed in hides and war paint hellbent on ending your presence on Earth.
Barbarian.

So you can take that whole 'victim' nonsense somewhere it makes sense. I find the bottomless desperation of your lot hilarious.

 

[Episkopos]

The doctrine of just war was put forth by St. Augustine. He
recognized that God never commands only 'non-resistance', or
'pacificism', or whatever you want to call it.

There is no lie like the bald-faced lie. Don't forget we actually read the bible....we are permitted to do that.

Mat_5:39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Rom_12:21 Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good.

Luk 9:52 And sent messengers before his face: and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him.
Luk 9:53 And they did not receive him, because his face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.
Luk 9:54 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?
Luk 9:55 But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.
Luk 9:56 For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.

 

[Axehead]

For he is God's minister to thee, for good. But if thou do that which is evil, fear: for he beareth not the sword in vain. For he is God's minister: an avenger to execute wrath upon him that doth evil. (Romans 13:4)

Notice, Paul is not talking about the Church of Jesus Christ. He is talking about civil authorities. If a Christian is a civil authority, he must come to terms with what Christ will allow him to do or not do. Roman soldiers that became Christians, refused to fight anymore and were tortured and fed to the lions.

Even John the Baptist, knew better.
Luk_3:14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And what shall we do? And he said unto them, Do violence to no man, neither accuse any falsely; and be content with your wages.

The doctrine of just war was put forth by St. Augustine. He recognized that God never commands only 'non-resistance', or 'pacificism', or whatever you want to call it. He did not command suicide or martyrdom, he demanded peace, and sometimes peace must be brought with violence, it is something that all Abrahamic religion entails. Islam venerates Jesus as a prophet, and they see no contradiction between him and Mohammud. In fact, their line of reasoning is 'killing a man is like killing mankind, and saving a man is like saving mankind'. In Isreal, they have the same exact just war recognition as the Church.

But, we follow Jesus Christ not Augustine. And, I don't know how he "recognized" that Jesus Christ never commands only 'non-resistance' (Jesus did not teach pacifism, you need to know the difference). The Catholic Church is built mostly on Old Testament writings and man-made doctrines. There is very little New Testament teachings recognizable in the RCC. Sorry, but that is just the way it is.

The RCC self-justifies war because the RCC Church has become a political entity. That is why the Pope is said to have all "temporal" (as well as spiritual) power over the kings of the earth. You have ambassadors in every nation. You have your own city (Country-Vatican), you have your own Bank, etc, etc. You justify killing to protect all your political assets.

In the Old Testament, God consistently asked the Isrealites to defend themselves, but under the working of peace being the goal. You see that in the New Testament as well, as Jesus never speaks about military, he never curses the one who has a sword. Rather, he states that whoever lives by the sword shall die by the sword (Matthew 26:52) which is speaking about people who love violence. If he was talking about simply just war, he would have never told Peter to bring a sword in the first place.

Do you know why He told Peter to bring a sword? Because the scriptures prophesied that He was numbered with the transgressors. You see, Jesus can protect Himself. Did He not say that He could call on 12 legions of angels while He was chastising Peter (transgressor) for cutting of someone's ear?

2 swords would not be enough anyway to fend off the soldiers but it was just enough for Peter to transgress and thus fulfill the scripture, that "He was numbered with the transgressors." Isa 53:12

Paul states that Scripture is adequate for reproof and correction. What he was talking about was not theological disputes, he was talking precisely about things like this. The only thing really excluded from it is the Old Law, the New Covenant does not dismiss Pslams and Proverbs, or the other books. People that propose nonresistence only look at one side of Christianity and God. They do not see the grand picture, which includes the righteousness of God through means of picking up a sword when evil threatens good people.


Paragraph 2309 of the Catholic Catechism (just war):

• the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
• all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
• there must be serious prospects of success;
• the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the
  evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs
  very heavily in evaluating this condition.

The RCC's self-justification for slaughter and self-preservation is a stench in God's nostrils.

Here is the difference between Non-Resistance and Pacifism as dragonfly pointed out.

Axehead

You all try to discredit or demonize every single thing Catholciism has done. A 2000 year old institution with a grand history that shped the entire western world. And all for the sole reason of being so zealous of your beliefs that you can't let even history illustrate accurately. It's sickening.
Anti-Catholics are waste of oxygen.

It is too bad you don't show love for your "enemies". You are an example of what we have been saying about your religion. It has no tolerance for those who disagree with it as you are demonstrating. Non-Catholics love Catholics, they just despise their massacre of the Scriptures, and the replacing of the Lord Jesus as Head of the Church. And you replace the Holy Spirit with priests.

That is quite a nasty statement SIM, that "Anti-Catholics are a waste of oxygen". I don't recall anyone responding in kind to you. You have only been here to agitate and try to get others to lash out at you. You set traps for people but no one is falling for them. If I was a moderator, I would ban you because all your posts are the same, vehement attacks on non-Catholics. You don't seem to be here for anything else. You're vulgar and nasty and I hope you stop hiding behind your institution and come to Christ and repent.

Axehead

 

[SilenceInMotion]

That is quite a nasty statement SIM, that "Anti-Catholics are a waste of oxygen". I don't recall anyone responding in kind to you. You have only been here to agitate and try to get others to lash out at you. You set traps for people but no one is falling for them. If I was a moderator, I would ban you because all your posts are the same, vehement attacks on non-Catholics. You don't seem to be here for anything else. You're vulgar and nasty and I hope you stop hiding behind your institution and come to Christ and repent.

Axehead

You all trash my religion, don't go drawing straws about 'you haven't disrespected me specifically'. You have, and that's the bottom line.

And it's your institution and belief that if you aren't a Christian, then you spend an eternity in Hellfire. That belief exists because you can't put away your heresy of imputed righteousness being exclusive only to Christians. You have a warped and absurd belief of the God you call call benelovent and graceful, and yet have the nerve to find fault in others.

If I were a moderator, I would be honest about what counts as being offensive to a person, instead of playing games and making a difference between one's sacred beliefs and one's own self.
Going to sit there and treat people's belief horribly and then when they dish out their opinion of you and your beliefs, you try to act all holy and righteous about it. Those like yourself are hypocrites, and I don't care what rule I'm breaking with saying that- you are a two faced, self-righteous, false witness bearing blowhard.

A moderator tried to tell me that this site was Protestant, and then come to find out it is in fact non-denominational. It just goes to show how far you people will go to extend your agendas. Those such as yourself have been breaking the rules religiously for as long as I've been on here, and likely well before as well. So I don't really care what the rules state- they obviously aren't being applied as they should.

 

[Axehead]

"Anti-Catholics are a waste of oxygen" is still a nasty comment with horrible implications, SIM.

It is a carnal, worldly phrase.

Now listen to me. Jesus Christ is demeaned everyday by non-believers and this is expected in this world. Christianity is demeaned and insulted and we understand why and take no offense. What bothers me (I'm not taking offense) is when a religious organization postures itself as the true church when in fact it has usurped the headship of Jesus Christ on earth and the role of the Holy Spirit in men's lives. If you were really of the truth, you would not be offended and you would love in return, but you are not of the truth and that is why you treat people in a nasty way and you are offended when people don't bow down to your religion and think it is so great.

Now, tell me something. What is that thing that is rising up out of your heart right now? That is what you should really be concerned about. Not whether people respect your religion or not. Are you of the truth, SIM? If so, be secure and content and take no offense and render love in return instead of scolding people like a headmaster in a school. If you are standing in the truth, why act so threatened and insecure? Stop acting so condescendingly towards the "inferior" non-Catholics. You don't understand how your language projects you as somehow superior to everyone else. If you really believe you are on the side of truth, you should be an example of Christ's love.

 

[SilenceInMotion]

"Anti-Catholics are a waste of oxygen" is still a nasty comment with horrible implications, SIM.

It is a carnal, worldly phrase.

Now listen to me. Jesus Christ is demeaned everyday by non-believers and this is expected in this world. Christianity is demeaned and insulted and we understand why and take no offense. What bothers me (I'm not taking offense) is when a religious organization postures itself as the true church when in fact it has usurped the headship of Jesus Christ on earth and the role of the Holy Spirit in men's lives. If you were really of the truth, you would not be offended and you would love in return, but you are not of the truth and that is why you treat people in a nasty way and you are offended when people don't bow down to your religion and think it is so great.

Now, tell me something. What is that thing that is rising up out of your heart right now? That is what you should really be concerned about. Not whether people respect your religion or not. Are you of the truth, SIM? If so, be secure and content and take no offense and render love in return instead of scolding people like a headmaster in a school. If you are standing in the truth, why act so threatened and insecure? Stop acting so condescendingly towards the "inferior" non-Catholics. You don't understand how your language projects you as somehow superior to everyone else. If you really believe you are on the side of truth, you should be an example of Christ's love.

The Church is simply ecclesiastic, it has not 'usurped' anythig of God: it is the Church God instituted, that is what the headline has read since it's very foundation 1500 years before Protestantism even arose. Your beliefs are egocentric, and Christianity is not an egocentic reilgion- it is ecclesiastic.

All I hear on here is anti-Catholic tripe. My statements are completely disrespected, my theologies and knowledge do not get any due examination that they deserve, you all just thrash and thrall anything Catholic with reactionary nonsense and bias.

You all are the one's that don't understand how your 'language' as you call it projects. I know perfectly well how mine projects, I do not pretend I am being kosher- you all need to see what becomes of being so inconsiderate to other's sacred beliefs, which is something you obviously can't handle so instead of keeping on doing it, just desist. It is that simple. Otherwise, you all are doing exactly what I say you all are doing- wasting oxygen.