Catholic Persecution of Christians

[Brother Rick]

If you're looking for recent history on Catholic atrocities look no further than WWII.  Rome signed a concordant with Hitler and Mussolini, they were good Catholics who were eager to "spread the kingdom."

 

Another thing, Abraham Lincoln said the following:

“This war would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits.  We owe it to popery that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noblest sons. Though there were great differences of opinion between the South and the North of the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis nor anyone of the leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had they not relied on the promises of the Jesuits, that, under the mask of Democracy, the money and arms of the Roman Catholic, even the arms of France would be at their disposal if they would attack us.  I pity the priests, the bishops and the monks of Rome in the United States, when the people realize that they are, in great part, responsible for the tears and the blood shed in this war.  I conceal what I know, on that subject, from the knowledge of the nation; for if the people knew the whole truth, this war would turn into a religious war, and it would at once, take a tenfold more savage and bloody character.” (Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the ‘Church’ of Rome, pg. 296-297) 

[Brother Rick]

Who's a good guy, who's a bad guy, who's worse than who, who's technically a Protestant or not, blah, blah, blah...    James, in the end history is irrelevant when one considers eternity. 

 

What are you trusting in to save your soul?

 

If it's a title or a feeling, a church or a group, a premonition or even an idea - you're doomed.  You are a sinner in need of a Saviour: Jesus Christ.  If you're trusting in anything other than Jesus and what He did for you on the cross, you're trusting in the wrong thing.   

[DaveW]

I know that but whether you like it or not.....You really are!

You see this kind of wording from you is what keeps me confused about your stand.

You keep heavily defending the catholics, and then don't include yourself as "one of us".

This exactly the kind of talking I would expect of a catholic, but you continue to say you are not one.

It just doesn't seem to match up? Edited April 23, 2013 by DaveW

[kaoticprofit]

If you're looking for recent history on Catholic atrocities look no further than WWII.  Rome signed a concordant with Hitler and Mussolini, they were good Catholics who were eager to "spread the kingdom."

 

Another thing, Abraham Lincoln said the following:

“This war would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits.  We owe it to popery that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noblest sons. Though there were great differences of opinion between the South and the North of the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis nor anyone of the leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had they not relied on the promises of the Jesuits, that, under the mask of Democracy, the money and arms of the Roman Catholic, even the arms of France would be at their disposal if they would attack us.  I pity the priests, the bishops and the monks of Rome in the United States, when the people realize that they are, in great part, responsible for the tears and the blood shed in this war.  I conceal what I know, on that subject, from the knowledge of the nation; for if the people knew the whole truth, this war would turn into a religious war, and it would at once, take a tenfold more savage and bloody character.” (Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the ‘Church’ of Rome, pg. 296-297) 

 

 

 

You said,

 

If you're looking for recent history on Catholic atrocities look no further than WWII.

 

I say,

 

If you're looking for recent history on Islamic atrocities look no further than this passed week! 

 

2013.04.23 (Muqdadiya, Iraq) - At least ten people bleed to death as Shiites send mortars into a Sunni mosque.

2013.04.23 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Muslims bomb a rival mosque, killing seven worshippers.

2013.04.22 (Fallujah, Iraq) - Nine people at a restaurant are taken out in mid-bite by Mujahid bombers.

2013.04.21 (Pattani, Thailand) - A 49-year-old Buddhist woman is gunned down in a targeted attack by Muslim militants.

2013.04.21 (Paktika, Afghanistan) - Three civilians at a shopping mall are blown to bits by a Shahid suicide bomber.

2013.04.20 (Khar, Pakistan) - A female Fedayeen blows herself up outside a hospital, taking four innocents with her.

 

Sources for individual incidents can be provided upon request.

 

While I'm at it I would like to edit a post I made here about what happened in Pakistan.

 

I made a lot of mistakes on it...

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) says hundreds of women were killed in so-called honor killings in the country last year. In its annual report, the HRCP said 913 girls and women, including 99 minors, were killed in 2012.

The report said 604 were killed after being accused of having
illicit relations with men.

Around 191 were reported slain for marrying their own choice of husbands and going against their families' wishes. Honor killings are illegal in Pakistan, but such killings are still carried out in remote tribal areas. The number of honor killings in Pakistan usually ranges between 600 and 900 each year.

In Kolkata India on December 7 another killing in the name of "honor" and there has been a surge in such attacks over the past several months.

Nilofar Bibi, 22, was only 14 years old when she left home in an arranged marriage. Alleging torture carried out by her in-laws, Bibi returned to her parents on November 28, but vanished days later.

Her brother, Mehtab Alam, 29, had discovered his sister was living with an old boyfriend, Firoz, an auto-rickshaw driver. Alam stormed into the home and dragged Bibi onto the street in broad daylight.

Passers-by looked on in horror as he cut off Bibi's head while saying "she had sinned and had to be punished".

Alam left his sister's body in a pool of blood on the road, and calmly walked to the police station, her head in hand, to surrender himself. The siblings' family expressed support for Alam, saying they were proud he upheld their honor.

_____________________________________

Any questions?

Edited April 24, 2013 by kaoticprofit

[John81]

I'm amazed at so much misinformation being put forth by so many in one thread to the ruination of their own arguments.

[1Timothy115]

You said,

 

If you're looking for recent history on Catholic atrocities look no further than WWII.

 

I say,

 

If you're looking for recent history on Islamic atrocities look no further than this passed week! 

 

2013.04.23 (Muqdadiya, Iraq) - At least ten people bleed to death as Shiites send mortars into a Sunni mosque.

2013.04.23 (Baghdad, Iraq) - Muslims bomb a rival mosque, killing seven worshippers.

2013.04.22 (Fallujah, Iraq) - Nine people at a restaurant are taken out in mid-bite by Mujahid bombers.

2013.04.21 (Pattani, Thailand) - A 49-year-old Buddhist woman is gunned down in a targeted attack by Muslim militants.

2013.04.21 (Paktika, Afghanistan) - Three civilians at a shopping mall are blown to bits by a Shahid suicide bomber.

2013.04.20 (Khar, Pakistan) - A female Fedayeen blows herself up outside a hospital, taking four innocents with her.

 

Sources for individual incidents can be provided upon request.

 

While I'm at it I would like to edit a post I made here about what happened in Pakistan.

 

I made a lot of mistakes on it...

The Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) says hundreds of women were killed in so-called honor killings in the country last year. In its annual report, the HRCP said 913 girls and women, including 99 minors, were killed in 2012.

The report said 604 were killed after being accused of having
illicit relations with men.

Around 191 were reported slain for marrying their own choice of husbands and going against their families' wishes. Honor killings are illegal in Pakistan, but such killings are still carried out in remote tribal areas. The number of honor killings in Pakistan usually ranges between 600 and 900 each year.

In Kolkata India on December 7 another killing in the name of "honor" and there has been a surge in such attacks over the past several months.

Nilofar Bibi, 22, was only 14 years old when she left home in an arranged marriage. Alleging torture carried out by her in-laws, Bibi returned to her parents on November 28, but vanished days later.

Her brother, Mehtab Alam, 29, had discovered his sister was living with an old boyfriend, Firoz, an auto-rickshaw driver. Alam stormed into the home and dragged Bibi onto the street in broad daylight.

Passers-by looked on in horror as he cut off Bibi's head while saying "she had sinned and had to be punished".

Alam left his sister's body in a pool of blood on the road, and calmly walked to the police station, her head in hand, to surrender himself. The siblings' family expressed support for Alam, saying they were proud he upheld their honor.

_____________________________________

Any questions?

What does Islam have to do with the OP question about the Roman Church? Are you attempting to justify the atrocities of the Roman Church by the atrocities of another religion? Are you attempting to say the New Testament is speaking of Islam?

[kaoticprofit]

What does Islam have to do with the OP question about the Roman Church? Are you attempting to justify the atrocities of the Roman Church by the atrocities of another religion? Are you attempting to say the New Testament is speaking of Islam?

No.  I'm trying to justify the fact that Rome will have nothing to do with the atrocities mentioned in the prophecies of the last days.

Sorry for the derailment.

[JerryNumbers]

James, I know you've said you can't be bothered to debate the particulars anymore, but given you just challenged Salyan to explain her sources, maybe you'll be willing to briefly comment on her reply. You've said that Catholicism doesn't have a concept of continual sacrifice, yet Salyan's just posted a link to a conventional Catholic apologetic website that does talk about continual sacrifice. Do you have any comment on what the website says? Is the website misrepresenting Catholics, in your opinion?

 

Cheers

 

Carl

 

I did not make this post, & I don't know who did.

 

And it seems I cannot edited the post, there's also two post under Changing Screenames that I did not make, I do not know if there are others are not.

 

It seem someone has manged to get control of my account, I changed my password so hopefully that will stop them until Bro. Matt gets on here.

[JerryNumbers]

 

If you're looking for recent history on Catholic atrocities look no further than WWII.  Rome signed a concordant with Hitler and Mussolini, they were good Catholics who were eager to "spread the kingdom."

 

Another thing, Abraham Lincoln said the following:

“This war would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits.  We owe it to popery that we now see our land reddened with the blood of her noblest sons. Though there were great differences of opinion between the South and the North of the question of slavery, neither Jeff Davis nor anyone of the leading men of the Confederacy would have dared to attack the North, had they not relied on the promises of the Jesuits, that, under the mask of Democracy, the money and arms of the Roman Catholic, even the arms of France would be at their disposal if they would attack us.  I pity the priests, the bishops and the monks of Rome in the United States, when the people realize that they are, in great part, responsible for the tears and the blood shed in this war.  I conceal what I know, on that subject, from the knowledge of the nation; for if the people knew the whole truth, this war would turn into a religious war, and it would at once, take a tenfold more savage and bloody character.” (Chiniquy, Fifty Years in the ‘Church’ of Rome, pg. 296-297) 

 

I don't believe there would be very many people in this United States of America that would believe it, even if the whole truth started them directly in their eyes. The RCC has the world fooled, yet, they will never fool Jesus. And the latter is what counts.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Jerry80871852

[TheSword]

This is what makes debating this unfruitful. You can copy and past a mound full of useless stuff and I don't want to deal with that. I know what Catholicism teaches and I'm not encouraging it. I want to know what the Word of God teaches. There's one fundamental difference between the way you people interpret scripture than the way I do. You look at Catholicism and shoehorn it into scripture. I look at scripture first in the lexicons and see if that criteria fits into what I'm considering.....or trying to make it fit into. There is a difference. You can make anything fit into the bible. But you can't make the bible fit into anything.

When the word of God say's antichrist is one who denies Christ came in the flesh.... I believe it. That alone excludes Catholicism like it or not!
I believe in the inspired Word of God and accept what it say's regardless if it goes against what I already believe. Do you?

Yes, of course I do. However, I think you're misinterpreting what I've done above. I look at the numerous passage in the Old Testament that talk about how God despises idol worship and paganism in all of it's forms regardless of its original intent. I also see how God consistently tells His people to remain separate from them so that they are not seduced and defiled by their practices. I also then examine the New Testament that tells me how, as a Christian, to deal with people/churches who promote false/unbiblical doctrine because a little leaven (false doctrine/sin) will destroy a church (see Rom 6:17-20; 2 Thess 3:6; Matt 16:6-12; 1 Cor 5:13; Gal 1:8-9; 2 John 1:9-11; 1 Thess 5:22; 2 Cor 6:14-18)

Therefore when I, as a discerning Christian, see a practice that is unbiblical and goes against God's will I have very clear guidance on what to do. First separate from them (see verses above). Second, admonish, rebuke, and correct them (2 Thess 3:13-15; Eph 5:11-17). I also have the following guiding priciples regarding false teachers/teachings/doctrine to guide me in discernment.

- Don't believe everyone who stands in a pulpit. Test their doctrine against Scripture first (1 John 4:1-6; Deu 18:20-22)
- Watch out for false teachers/prophets (Acts 20:26-32)
- Not everyone who claims the name of Christ is truly a Christian (Matt 7:13-23)

You see, my approach to determining what is right or wrong about a church's practices come straight from Scripture and no where else. When we see an incorrect teaching we are to mark (note as you said in an earlier post) it, avoid it, rebuke it, and correct it.

Therefore, when I as a discerning Christian, see what Scripture tells me is an ungodly practice in the Catholic dogma of the veneration of Mary I mark it, avoid it, rebuke it, and correct it. Now, nowhere in my post did you see me call the Catholic church antichrist; but if nothing else they are overly pro-Mary which is against God's commands. Nowhere did I try to fit the Catholic church into the Bible. I applied the Bible to a Catholic practice which deemed it wrong.

You can equivocate on ecumenism all you like, but it doesn't change the Biblical principle of separation outlined above. I disagree with practices and doctrines of the Catholic church, therefore I remain separate in every way from it and rebuke/correct its false teaching when it comes across my path. That doesn't mean I'm on a crusade to bring it down and spew venom at it. God is perfectly capable of snuffing it out when He sees fit; however that doesn't negate my responsibility to stand against it when presented with an applicable situation.

 

**edit: spelling/grammar correction

Edited April 24, 2013 by TheSword

[TheSword]

This is what makes debating this unfruitful.  You can copy and past a mound full of useless stuff and I don't want to deal with that.  I know what Catholicism teaches and I'm not encouraging it.  I want to know what the Word of God teaches.  There's one fundamental difference between the way you people interpret scripture than the way I do.  You look at Catholicism and shoehorn it into scripture.  I look at scripture first in the lexicons and see if that criteria fits into what I'm considering.....or trying to make it fit into.  There is a difference.  You can make anything fit into the bible.  But you can't make the bible fit into anything.

 

When the word of God say's antichrist is one who denies Christ came in the flesh.... I believe it.  That alone excludes Catholicism like it or not! 

I believe in the inspired Word of God and accept what it say's regardless if it goes against what I already believe.  Do you?

 

Additionally, this is not "useless stuff" when examining whether Catholic practices and doctrines are Biblical or not.  The excerpt is from an apologetic commentary blessed and endorsed on August 10, 2004 by the Bishop of San Diego, Robert H. Brom, who gets his authority from the Archbishop who gets his authority from the Pope who claims to be the "vicar of Christ".  The statements and defense of those practices just don't get any more authoritative.  It is not a statement or description by an average Catholic church member blogging their feelings.  It is an official positional statement by the church itself and is thus subject to Biblical scrutiny as applied to the whole of the church.

[Brother Rick]

The people of the prince that shall come who destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD were Romans, therefore the prince that shall come is a Roman.

 

90% of the indicators concerning the Whore of Revelation point straight to Rome.

 

The position of the man of sin was revealed in the first century to be the head of Rome.

 

The Roman Catholic church is the descendent of the old Baalite religion: black-robed priests, vestal virgins, mother-goddess and all.

 

Rome ruled the world when Jesus came here the first time, and they'll be in charge when He comes back the second time.

Edited April 24, 2013 by Brother Rick

[Ukulelemike]

Bible:

  "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: [it is] the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast." (Eph 2:8,9)

 

Cahtolic Church:

 

“If anyone says that justifying faith is nothing else than confidence in divine mercy, which remits sins for Christ's sake, or that it is this confidence alone that justifies us, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Sixth Session, Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 12).

 

“If anyone says that the justice received is not preserved and also not increased before God through good works, but that those works are merely the fruits and signs of justification obtained, but not the cause of its increase, LET HIM BE ANATHEMA” (Sixth Session, Canons Concerning Justification, Canon 24).

 

“For it is the liturgy through which, especially in the divine sacrifice of the Eucharist, 'the work of our redemption is accomplished,' and it is through the liturgy, especially, that the faithful are enabled to express in their lives and manifest to others the mystery of Christ and the real nature of the true Church” (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Introduction, para. 2).

 

“As often as the sacrifice of the cross by which 'Christ our Pasch is sacrificed' (1 Cor. 5:7) is celebrated on the altar, the work of our redemption is carried out” (Vatican II, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Chapter 1, 3, p. 324).

 

“From the most ancient times in the Church good works were also offered to God for the salvation of sinners, particularly the works which human weakness finds hard. Because the sufferings of the martyrs for the faith and for God's law were thought to be very valuable, penitents used to turn to the martyrs to be helped by their merits to obtain a more speedy reconciliation from the bishops. Indeed, the prayers and good works of holy people were regarded as of such great value that it could be asserted that the penitent was washed, cleansed and redeemed with the help of the entire Christian people” (Vatican II, Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, Apostolic Constitution on the Revision of Indulgences, chap. 3, 6, pp. 78,79).

 

You cannot take one aspect of scripture and apply it as the end-all, be-all of whether a church is true or false. The Bible is a big book, made up of 66 books, all of which are the very word of God, and are to be taken as a whole. When a church has official statements that disagree with clear scripture, that must be marked as a sign that it may be a false church. Now, there are those that have error, and error can be reparied-it doesn't necessarily mean false, just error. But when an organization piles error upon error, and even goes to such lengths to supress any disagreement to those errors, as to kill any who publicly disagree, THAT is a false church, and the enemy of Christ. Remember, Jesus said,

" They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service."

This doesn't refer just to the Jews, but many, and for hundreds of years, the RCC killed, tortured and persecuted millions of Jews and true Christians, all while holding a cross and declaring the name of Jesus. Whether or not they seem to nhave become a benevolent organization today does not change the fact of their murderous history, a history which has never been repented of, and, indeed, is often denied. 

 

They are a false church, who bow to idols, who pray to the dead, who follow a man and traditions over God and His word.

[Salyan]

[Alimantado]

I did not make this post, & I don't know who did.

 

And it seems I cannot edited the post, there's also two post under Changing Screenames that I did not make, I do not know if there are others are not.

 

It seem someone has manged to get control of my account, I changed my password so hopefully that will stop them until Bro. Matt gets on here.

 

For those interested, this was my fault and I've explained my actions