Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

Assalamu aleikoum Brothers & Sisters,

i think that many people would be probably shocked of this info.

This Church (mother of the other Christian Churches, except Nestorian and partly Tewahedo) is in fact pagan bloodthirsty worship of the sun - go google photos ,,Christianity Sun worship".

The Latin Church after Constantine's accepting of Christianity many pagan traditions became part of that faith and the Roman Empire started never-ending war against the ,,pagans" and heretics, for example war against Christian Arianism faith or later crusades against the Muslims, Orthodox (Eastern) Christians, Christian Albigensians and later against the northern and eastern European Pagans.

And also how this bloodthirsty ,,Church" behaved towards my people - the Romani people (known as Gypsies, the G-word is somewhat racist), when we were called by the Catholic ,,Church" Pagans or filthy unbelievers even in Europe we were Christian as the local population but we took religion little bit differently than the local White-European population and it was what ,,Church" saw as herezy - it was a part of Witch-hunt and Inquisition.

Another example of this sick bloodthirsty ,,religion" is a way how al-Andalus (Spain and Portugal) was re-Christianised and what happened after it, yes i am speaking about the Inquisition and also about Spanish and Portuguese colonisation of Americas and Inquisition there.

Also there were pogroms on the Jews done or at least supported by this ,,Church" and the Jews often found freedom of religion in Muslim lands, same way as after fall of al-Andalus.

And i should also mention the European Wars of Religion between the Catholic Church and it´s daughters Reformed Churches, which was very bloody and inquisition was working in enormous scale. After the 30 years war between the Catholics and Lutherans in the lands which were regained by the Catholics happened bloody re-Catholisation which in the Czech Lands took life of at least 60% of population and in Hungary around 40%, re-Catholisation was orchestrated by the Church and by the Austrian state.

Christianity got under control because of French Revolution which was not only anti-Monarchist but also anti-Catholic and in general anti-Religious, this formed modern-day Europe, if this revolution was not successful Europe and Americas would be probably till now in Dark Ages and full of bloodshed of the innocents.

But wait this is not an end of the story! I have to mention that the Catholic Church also supported Nazi Germany and Independent State of Croatia (Nazi pro-German state) which both were doing genocide of the Jews, Romani people, Serbs, Poles and other people who were seen as inferior races.

I mentioned before that the Catholic (Latin) Church is a mother of other churches, i must to mention that also other churches supported witch-hunts, anti-Jewish pogroms and called the Romani people pagans which led to genocides of the Romani people.

And this is not still the end of a story because last shadows of reality of this Church and it´s daughter Churches we see in Africa where the Christianity is often still so bloodthirsty as it was in Europe before and in fact we have seen it in Europe (or Asia?) recently when the Armenian Catholics started (again) doing genocide of the Muslims in nowadays Eastern Turkey (between 1830 to 1916) and of the Azerbaijanis (since 1830´s with some pauses in all the lands of Azerbaijan and last time between 1988 to 1994 in Azerbaijani land of Karabakh) and also we have seen how Orthodox Christians many times did genocides of the Muslims in Bosnia (many times since 1790´s, last time between 1992 to 1995), Kosovo (last time in 90´s), western part of Turkey (1919-1922), Algeria (Africa- done by the Catholics - 1830 to 1962) Cyprus (1960´s to 1974) and Lebanon (Asia - done by the various Christians - 1975 to 1995).

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Quote

Great cultures created by Mayas, Aztecs and other native people – cultures much more advanced than those of the Europeans, have been crushed, tricked, cheated, and finally forced into submission. Local gods were ‘sent to a permanent exile’ and Catholicism, under the threat of death or torture or both, was forced down the throat of everyone.

 

Yes, Western colonialism often takes truly bizarre, surreal, forms. What example should I provide, to illustrate ‘magic imperialism’? For example, this one: in Cholula, near the city of Puebla, Spaniards slammed their church on top of the biggest (by volume) pyramid on Earth – Tlachihualtepetl. It is still sitting there, even now as I write this essay: the church is sitting on top of the pyramid, unapologetically. Local authorities are even proud of its presence, promoting it as a ‘major tourist site’. I hope, one day, UNESCO includes it in the “memory of humanity” list, as a symbol of cultural vandalism.

I summoned the curator at a local museum, Ms. Erica, asking her about this insanity. She explained, patiently:

We are strongly discouraged from speaking about brutality of the past. Mexico’s attitude towards its own history is truly schizophrenic. On one hand we know that our country was plundered, raped and abused, by the Spanish colonizers, by the French, and then by the U.S. But we, scholars, teachers, curators, are literally ordered to ignore it, to ‘be positive’; to ‘look for good things’ in what was done to us, and what we inherited.”

Clearly, Ms. Erica has had enough. She speaks openly, passionately:

“In the past, the church had been hit and damaged by lightning, on several occasions, and the local people believe that it happened because of the wrath of local gods, who were protesting against the desecration of their site and an architectural masterpiece – the pyramid. However, the structure was always quickly restored by the religious and state authorities. The church still dominates the landscape, visible from as far as the city of Puebla, while the grand pyramid looks humiliated and belittled, like nothing more than a forested hill.” ...

Mexico is ancient and deep, and as mentioned above, it gave birth to some enormous civilizations, which were self-sufficient and much more advanced than the cultures of those who came to attack it, to plunder and enslave it.

These civilizations, however, were robbed of their identity by the invaders, forcefully Christianized, then reduced to the level of ‘minorities’ in their own land. Natives were forced into slave labor, and used to mine their own silver and other raw materials, which were quickly shipped far away, enriching first Europe and later North America. ...

The Supreme Indigenous Council of Michoacan, Mexico, accused the Catholic Church of being complicit in the killing of over 24 million Indigenous people.

Some 30 Indigenous communities of Michoacan, Mexico, have released a statement demanding Pope Francis apologize for the genocide committed with the complicity of the Catholic Church against their people during the Spanish invasion of the Americas in the 16th century.

“For over 500 years, the original people of the Americas have been ransacked, robbed, murdered, exploited, discriminated and persecuted,” the Supreme Indigenous Council of Michoacan said in a statement. ...

I was filming at the splendid Bellas Artes, one of the most beautiful theatres on Earth. There, a Soviet-trained conductor was facing a brilliant ‘youth orchestra’, which consisted of once poor boys and girls from deprived communities. On the stage, the legendary Folkloric Ballet of Mexico was performing; with proud native themes, and with young women holding rifles, marching towards the redness of the revolution. The audience roared. People, strangers, were embracing, shaking hands. There were tears; tears of joy.

Source

Quote

Evidence still exists in Mexico that the “Indians” did develop advanced and sophisticated cities and civilizations. This doesn’t fit the American narrative that the “Indians” accomplished nothing. So the portrayal of the Aztecs and Maya as blood-thirsty savages that committed human sacrifice helps the Americans diminish the accomplishments of these civilizations. ... The lesson was that the Aztecs had a large empire and built large cities with pyramids but did not have a written language and were blood-thirsty monsters that committed large scale human sacrifices including children. But they were so pathetic, it only took 500 Spanish to defeat them very quickly. And the Aztecs were the “best” the “Indians” had to offer. Meaning, the Aztecs were the pinnacle of achievements by “Indian” peoples, and they were nothing to brag about. The strategy of almost totally excluding the “Indians” from history lessons further helps cement the perception that they did not accomplish anything. ...

...one reason this article brings out extreme arguments is because it indirectly dispels the myth that Europeans are inherently superior to other peoples. And some people cannot accept that world view. Especially in the USA and other parts of the Americas where negative portrayals of the “Indians” are used to justify their conquest and genocide. Ever hear Americans justify their conquest and genocide of the “Indians” by saying that the “Indians” did nothing with the land while they, the Europeans, turned it into the most powerful nation in history? Portraying as them as savages committing human sacrifice gives European Americans an air of superiority and justification for what they did. Meanwhile, when the Spanish were perpetrating the human sacrifice myth, they themselves were sacrificing Jews and Heretics to Jesus by burning them at the stake. By describing the Spanish killing of Jews in this, am I doing the same thing that the Spanish and later historians have done regarding the Aztecs’ said treatment of their war prisoners? ...

To them (the Aztecs – ed.), killing captured enemies was a way to ensure the sun kept turning in the sky, to ensure that the humans would be blessed by the fruits of the earth, that the cycle of life and agriculture would keep on. Yes, the Aztecs were warriors, but they were also farmers, and like any farmers they acknowledged the extreme interdependence on the goodwill of the Forces of Nature. That concept is very real, not bloodthirsty or barbaric. The Aztecs simply wanted the world to keep turning. Farming was their main concern. ...

1. There are no credible documents confirming that the Mexica performed human sacrifice.
a. The sources and basis for the human sacrifice myth are documents prepared by the Spanish (Cortez, Diaz, etc.) or chronicled by Spanish priests. These sources are not reliable because the documents were prepared to suit the writer’s own agenda.
i. The grand Spanish agenda in creating and propagating the human sacrifice myth was to justify the war against the Mexica to the Spanish Crown and the Pope. Remember, the conquistadors were not sent to conquer the Mexica by the Spanish Crown. Cortez’s company took that action upon themselves and later needed to justify their actions to their superiors.
ii. The Spanish were not beyond lying when chronicling their actions or justifying them. Another myth, that the Mexica believed that Cortez was a returning god was invented by the Spanish priests. The Spanish priests initially claimed that the Mexica believed that Cortez was their god of War in person but another Spaniard spoke up that this was not true. The priests kept pushing and eventually their lie that the Mexica believed that Cortez was Quetzalcoatl stuck. Quetzalcoatl is not the god of War that they initially claimed but a different God.
iii. Diaz, wrote that he witnessed the sacrifice of other Spaniards in Tenochtitlan from the bank of the lake. Many people have actually sourced him in the comments of this article. But careful study has proven that Diaz could not have seen anything from the bank of the river since that would have meant that he was some three to four miles away from the Mexica temple. There is no way he would be able to see that far and much less be able to see a heart still pumping in the Mexica priest’s hand from that distance.
iv. While the Spanish priests used Mexica to develop their chonicles in which they helped cement the human sacrifice myth, the Spanish were the final editors of this work which brings the completed works into question.
b. All pre-contact histories and records developed and maintained by the Mexica were destroyed by the Spanish priests. Then the Spanish priests went about recreating the Mexica histories and chronicling their culture. This is very suspicious. Why not keep the original materials as reference but instead try to recreate them from the native’s memory? This reeks of the Spanish rewriting or at least editing the Mexica’s history to meet the Spanish agenda. Many scholars have even pointed out that the Mexica interviewed by the Spanish priests were not reliable (i.e. either too young to be witnesses to the events described [such as human sacrifice], or were zealous followers of the Spanish priests. At any rate, the Spanish priests were the final editors of the interviews. There are no documentational proof from prior to the Spanish contact supporting the human sacrifice myth. All the sources are post-conquest and they are all influenced by the Spanish in one way or another.

a. There is a circular argument occurring in interpreting archaeological finds. Archaeologists based their assumptions on historians who based their assumptions on the Spanish and post-conquest sources. As such, these archaeologists interpret anything they find as human sacrifice without doing further analysis. These archaeologists then publish their work, which in turn further cements our common knowledge that the Mexica practiced human sacrifice. ...

Bodies buried in the temple are immediately shown as support for human sacrifice. Nine to ten children were found buried in either Templo Mayor or in the neighboring Tlatelolco site. Archaeologists provide no proof that the children were sacrificed. But they assume this relying on the baggage of their education. In the articles that I read, these archeologists only provide as proof of human sacrifice that the bodies were buried in the temple mounds and that they bodies were carefully positioned at the time of burial. These archaeologists did not explore other options, such as maybe the children were buried there for other reasons other than because they were sacrificed. As the records that may have shed light on these burials were destroyed by the Spanish, we cannot reference them. But what if the children died of natural causes and were buried there after the temple was built? Were they the children of nobles that died naturally and were buried there? Were the children holy persons and were buried in the Temple after it was built? The altar in every Catholic church contains a relic, a bone or body part of a saint (holy person). These relics can be a small finger, tooth, a knee, a shin, anything that came from the saint. The saint was not killed to have their body parts placed under alters. Why should we then assume that these children were killed to be buried under the pyramid?
iii. The above applies to any body found buried in the temple. ...

One thing lightly touched here is the Spanish chronologists’ bias. Making the Mexica (Aztecs) into terrible people justified killing so many. Estimates of over 70% Mexica dying from diseases or violence may be low.
To justify conquest, the Spanish (and others) have always painted pictures of brutish people with horrid religious practices who needed the guidance of priests--Catholic or otherwise. If you study the culture, you see that Mexica captives were often given to families, where they were educated and given rights of citizenship. This was a masterful way of “conquering” people. ...

As I’ve said in another comment, there is no clear evidence that there were human sacrifices happening. The explanation from the people who still carry on the tradition is that these glyphs are of surgery.

Source

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@HamidCZ

The heathen, pagan part you are correct about.

But there is little to no evidence about Sun or Moon worship.

[Similarity is not enough. Example: Tetrapods share many of the same characteristics, yet a dog is not a cat or otter.]

lt, most churches, are about Satanism.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Quote

To invade, search out, capture, vanquish and subdue all Saracens and pagans whatsoever, and other enemies of Christ wheresoever placed, and to reduce their persons to perpetual slavery. - Papal Bull Romanus Pontifex that authorized the conquest and genocide of the non-Catholic world (1455)

The culture that made the Nazi death camps possible was not only indigenous to the West but was an outcome of its fundamental (dualistic, Trinitarian – ed.) religious traditions that insist upon a dichotomous division of mankind into the elect and the reprobate. - Richard Rubenstein, The Cunning of History (1978)

Colonization is civilization. If we, the superior race, take the land of other races, we must utterly destroy the previous inhabitants (following the model of the ancient Israelites in Canaan – ed.) … The disappearance of our local Indians is of little consequence. - Sir Edward Bulwer-Lytton, co-founder of British Columbia and Member of the Legislative Assembly, 1868

I believe the conditions are being deliberately created in our Indian schools to spread infectious diseases. The death rate often exceeds fifty percent. This is a national crime. - Dr. Peter Bryce to Indian Affairs Deputy Superintendent Duncan Campbell Scott, April 12, 1907, prior to his dismissal by Scott

If I were to choose to kill off half the Indian children under our care, there is no better instrument to use than your typical residential school. - Neil Parker, Indian Affairs Superintendent, 1949

The fact that European powers deliberately exterminated millions of non-Christian indigenous people in the New World is historically undeniable, constituting as it does the numerically largest genocide in world history. (7) The participation of Canadian church and state in the same crime has been and continues to be denied, especially by Canadians, despite overwhelming evidence.

Broadly speaking, it would be a strange paradox indeed for Euro-Canadians not to have conquered, de-populated, legally constrained and eradicated the Indian nations they encountered after 1497, operating as they were from precisely the same mentality and practice of “Superior Christian (bourgeois-feudal – ed.) Dominion” (8) that animated every other Vatican-authorized nation. Those who would claim a “Canadian exceptionalism” to the norm of European genocide have yet to produce any evidence to show that indigenous nations somehow fared better under Canadian rule.

On the contrary, a simple peeling back of the Great Canadian Myth of benevolence towards Indians reveals a rancid, hidden history of war crimes and mass murder on par with any criminal regime in the world. The outcome for native nations has been the same, whether in Canada, America or Brazil. ...

The economic 33 importance of eastern woodland tribes like the Huron and Iroquois to the Canadian fur trade and their usefulness as military allies ruled out a Spanish Solution of outright extermination of these Indians. But when such usefulness passed, their eradication proceeded just as thoroughly.

The very fact that the conquering Europeans had to be more circumspect and strategic in their treatment of their brown skinned targets made the role of religion all that more crucial to the success of the Canadian genocide, which can truthfully be described as a religious enterprise from start to finish. Indeed, the predominance of the churches in forming and operating colonial policy towards Indians, and in establishing and maintaining, against periodic government opposition, the murderous Indian residential school system for over a century, is unique when compared to most other nations' genocide track record.

(9) The fact that the Canadian Holocaust occurred in prolonged waves under the leadership of Roman Catholicism and Anglicanism – and their offshoots – and did so under “benevolent” guises of education and missionary proselytizing, has done much to fog and camouflage the reality of Genocide in Canada, and not accidentally. British imperialism always presented itself as a “civilizing” force wherever it exterminated local populations, a “hammer in a velvet glove” approach epitomized by General George Maitland, who in 1843 described British treatment of African tribes as “A good thrashing followed by great kindness”. (10)

Give us a child for seven years and he will be ours for life” said the 16th century Jesuit founder Ignatius Loyola – and it should be added, in the Canadian context, “at least, the few who survive.”

The full gamut of genocidal crime in Canada is outside the scope of this report. Instead, we are scrutinizing that specific Group Crime called the Indian residential school system – again, a term designed to deceive – by which all of the indigenous nations in Canada were finally brought down and decimated; and how their church, state and their corporate sponsors.

Source, pp. 31–4

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

It is also interesting to note that the rise of feudalism and the Roman Catholic Church coincided with the breakdown of the Roman Empire, the loss of scientific knowledge, and a significant decrease in the European birthrate that did not undergo reversal until the Renaissance. The start of the Renaissance, itself a byproduct of the ruinous Crusades, coincided with the expulsion of the Muslims and Jews from Spain and the so-called “Age of Exploration” by European Trinitarians (Catholics). This “Age of Exploration” destroyed non-Western societies and imposed foreign models that led to disastrous famines and population reductions relative to Europe. This trend is ongoing today with the latest version of eugenics imposed by Bill Gates and his “vaccines” for nonwhite, “heathen,” impoverished populations in the West and abroad. The Roman Catholic Church and its offshoots, especially the Anglican Church, have long played a major, covert role in financing and implementing eugenic policy. “Kill with (fake) kindness.” For example, missionaries have long served as agents of the Crown (Vatican) and have sterilised or otherwise exterminated nonwhites. The Church, as mentioned, still controls the Western-run financial system vis-à-vis the Swiss Templars and the Knights of Malta. So the Church is also behind the rise of “free love,” contraception, and sexual deviation as well as fascism, Nazism, antisemitism, and anti-Islam sentiment. After all, the Church and its offshoots worship Gaia, the Earth-goddess, using the Virgin Mary as camouflage, hence the globalists’ emphasis on “sustainability” and depopulation. Trinitarian Christians have always sought to impose one-world, centralist, syncretistic, “Aryan” (white-supremacist), “solar” paganism at the expense of rival paganisms, religions, civilisations, societies, and modes of development.

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
Quote

Jesuit control of Great Britain was the real force behind Zionism and the re-establishment of a Jewish homeland in Israel.

the Jesuits stirred up the pogroms and Holocaust of Europe to drive Jews to their safe haven in the Middle East.

The SS had been organized by Himmler according to the principles of the Jesuit Order.

Rudolph Kastner, "then one of Israel's most honored leaders, was a traitor who had cooperated with the Nazi leaders of Germany including Adolph Eichmann to deport Jews from Hungary."

Zionist Israel is a creation of the Jesuit Order. Its purpose is to secure Jerusalem for the Jesuits "infallible" Pope, that he may receive worldwide worship from Solomon's rebuilt Temple. If the Masonic Zionists betrayed their own Jewish race into Pius XII's concentration camps overseen by the Jesuit Order, would they not betray the nation of Israel by giving Jerusalem to the Pope in preparation for the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple?

we are living under the preeminence of a Gentile Jesuit conspiracy. It employs notorious Masonic Jews and Gentiles as their agents. This furthers the deception of an international Jewish conspiracy oppressing the nations. Using this lie, the Jesuit General in creating global, anti-Jewish fury again.

Source

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Northwest, you have really good sources about Catholic terror, i am glad to see it here, as i always want to bring more people knowledge about what that ,,Church" had done and what is doing now.

Nowadays is for example known for paedophile cases and i would like to write it here, but it´s really a long list, so if you find time, you should help with that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • Advanced Member
On 11/11/2020 at 12:23 PM, HamidCZ said:

Nowadays is for example known for paedophile cases and i would like to write it here, but it´s really a long list, so if you find time, you should help with that.

Here are some excellent and comprehensive references to begin with:

Le Cercle Pinay: CIA, MI6, Mossad, the Vatican, and fascism (part one)

Opus Dei, Operation GLADIO, the strategy of tension, Satanism, and fascism (part two)

Le Cercle Pinay: further inspection (part three)

The American Security Council, the Vatican’s P2 Lodge, and Nazism (part four)

Quote

“Antagonism to the Jews of today must not be extended to the books of Pre-Christian Judaism.”
– Cardinal Michael von Faulhaber in the Advent sermons, delivered in 1933

The Vatican’s definitive statement, “We Remember: Reflections on the Holocaust,”  claims that Nazism was the antithesis (!) of the Catholic church:

“Logically, such an attitude also led to a rejection of Christianity and a desire to see the Church destroyed or at least subjected to the interests of the Nazi state.

It was this extreme ideology which became the basis of the measures taken first to drive the Jews from their homes and then to exterminate them. The Shoah was the work of a thoroughly modern neo-pagan regime. Its anti-semitism had its roots outside of Christianity and, in pursuing its aims, it did not hesitate to oppose the Church and persecute her members also.”
[My emphasis – J.I.]

Not only does “We Remember” claim that the church fought Nazi antisemitism, but it quotes Pope John Paul II apparently absolving the Catholic hierarchy from responsibility for the belief (one of the foundations of Christianity) in Jewish culpability for the death of Jesus:

“In the Christian world – I do not say on the part of the Church as such – erroneous and unjust interpretations of the New Testament regarding the Jewish people and their alleged culpability have circulated for too long, engendering feelings of hostility towards this people.”

– Pope John Paul II, quoted in “We Remember: Reflections on the Holocaust

Reading this remarkable statement, one is compelled to ask: if Christians did not get their belief in Jewish culpability from the Christian church, pray tell where did they get it?

Joseph Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, answered this question when he was a top advisor to John Paul II:

“‘Even if the most recent, loathsome experience of the Shoah (Holocaust) was perpetrated in the name of an anti-Christian ideology, which tried to strike the Christian faith at its Abrahamic roots in the people of Israel, it cannot be denied that a certain insufficient resistance to this atrocity on the part of Christians can be explained by an inherited anti-Judaism present in the hearts of not a few Christians.’”

[My emphasis – J.I.]

– Joseph Ratzinger as quoted by (hardcore Revisionist Zionist and admirer of Meir Kahane, having attended the latter’s funderal – ed.) Abe Foxman in an Anti-Defamation League (ADL) press release welcoming Ratzinger’s election as Pope.

So Joseph Ratzinger claims that: a) Nazism was “anti-Christian”; b) Christianity erred only by “a certain insufficient resistance” (notice the modifier, “a certain,” which limits the insufficiency - i.e., it wasn’t so very insufficient!) to Nazism, not by complicity or active support; c) even this error resulted from individual Christian’s religious hostility to Judaism – “an inherited anti-Judaism present in the hearts of not a few Christians” –  which rather avoids the question: from whom did they inherit it, if not the church? ...

Although at Yad Vashem, in the year 2000, Pope John Paul II described the Nazis as having “a Godless ideology,” in 1933, when it mattered, the Vatican ordered German Catholics to love, honor, obey and protect the Nazis.
 
During the 1920s, the church-controlled Centre party (Zentrum) did clash with the Nazis. As Hitler wrote (see quote below) their quarrel was over politics, not Catholic religious teachings. The Nazis themselves claimed they were fighting against atheism, specifically Bolshevist atheism, which they depicted as a Jewish-created movement.  In attacking the Jews, the Nazis routinely employed Christian symbolism and traditional Christian antisemitic arguments, with which Europeans were already indoctrinated, making it an easy sale. ...
 
Hitler addressed the Reichstag (parliament) saying the Nazis were fighting for Christianity:
 
“While the Government is determined to carry through the political and moral purging of our public life, it is creating and insuring prerequisites for a truly religious life. The Government sees in both [Catholic and Protestant] Christian confessions the most important factors for the maintenance of our folkdom. It will respect agreements concluded between them and the States. However, it expects that its work will meet with a similar appreciation. The Government will treat all other denominations with equal objective justice. It can never condone, though, that belonging to a certain denomination or to a certain race might be regarded as a license to commit or tolerate crimes. The Government will devote its care to the sincere living together of Church and State.” ...
 
...the Vatican and the Nazi government signed their Concordat, putting the official Vatican stamp on the alliance of the German church and the Nazi state. Article 16, reproduced below, required that Catholic bishops swear to honor the Nazi government, to make their subordinates honor it, and to hunt for and prevent action that might endanger it.
 
“‘Before God and on the Holy Gospels I swear and promise as becomes a bishop, loyalty to the German Reich and to the [regional - EC] State of . . . I swear and promise to honor the legally constituted Government and to cause the clergy of my diocese to honor it. In the performance of my spiritual office and in my solicitude for the welfare and the interests of the German Reich, I will endeavor to avoid all detrimental acts which might endanger it.’” ...
 
As Samantha Criscione explains in a work in progress, (see footnote 2), here are the differences:

First, the Vatican translation omits the crucial statement that the bishop’s post has been assigned to him.

Second, the Vatican takes the statement, of which the accurate translation is, “I will...strive to prevent any harm that could threaten it,” meaning that the Vatican is ordering bishops to seek out (“strive”) and repress (“prevent”) action that could harm the Nazis, and translates it “I will endeavor to avoid all detrimental acts which might endanger it, which would mean the Vatican was only ordering bishops to avoid engaging in anti-Nazi acts, themselves. A demand for pro-actively defending Nazism is softened, in the Vatican translation, to a demand for passively avoiding doing the Nazis harm. A world of difference. ...

The fact that German Catholic-Nazi relations were not always smooth sailing does not mitigate the horrific truth that:

* By voting to give Hitler dictatorial powers, the Catholic Centre party (Zentrum) made it possible for Hitler to set up his dictatorship with a phony appearance of legality;

* By then dissolving Zentrum, the German Church eliminated the powerful party, through which many Catholics had opposed Nazism and through which they were trying to continue opposing Nazism up until the moment Zentrum was dissolved;

* By rescinding the ban on Catholics joining the Nazi Party, the Church made Nazism the only church-approved vehicle for political action;

* By drafting and signing the Concordat, the Vatican literally (i.e., in the form of specific rules, laid out in the Concordat, such as Article 16) ordered German Catholics to support the Nazis, telling millions of Catholics not only in Germany but worldwide that the Pope was allied with Fascism, meaning that they must ally with it as well;

* By giving Hitler their vote-winning support for his Enabling Act, dissolving Zentrum, rescinding the ban on Nazi membership, and drafting/and signing the Concordat, the Vatican wrapped Hitler in a cloak of Vatican acceptance at a crucial moment, when the infant racist state was suffering extreme international isolation. ...

With German Christians divided on Nazism, the Vatican intervened, committing every one of its thousands of German clerics to honor the Nazi dictatorship and hunt for actions that might harm it.

...read as the pro-Nazi faction within the Catholic church giving Hitler a weapon to help him suppress German anti-Nazi sentimentincluding, indeed especially, inside the German Catholic church, whose party (Zentrum) had once opposed Nazism - the Concordat was a great success.

For the Vatican and the Nazis, job #1 was to crush anti-Nazism, i.e., to crush the ideas that had annoyed the Vatican for a hundred and fifty years, and this document, which ordered German clerics to serve as adjuncts to the Nazi political police was a vital weapon in Hitler’s hands.

Forced conversion of Serbs to Catholicism

The Nazi-like Croatian Ustashi state, set up immediately after the Nazi German invasion of Yugoslavia, was based on fanatical Catholicism. Orthodox Christian Serbs who refused to convert were butchered in their villages, or at the Jasenovac death camp, or thrown into mountain crevaces. Hitler referred to the Ustashi as “Our Nazis.”

Slavko Kvaternik explained [in a radio program on April 10, 1941, the day the ‘Independent State of Croatia’ was formed] how a pure Croatia should be built - by forcing one third of the Serbs to leave Croatia, one third to convert to Catholicism, and one third to be exterminated. Soon Ustasha bands initiated a bloody orgy of mass murder of Serbs unfortunate enough not to have converted or left Croatia on time.

“The enormity of such criminal behavior shocked even the conscience of German commanders, but Pavelic had Hitler’s personal support for such actions which resulted in the loss of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Serbs in Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. In addition, the Ustasa regime organized extermination camps, the most notorious one at Jasenovac where Serbs, Jews, Gypsies, and other opponents were massacred in large numbers.”

[Quote from “Encyclopedia of the Nations” ends here]

Source

Ratline: the Vatican, the Nazis, and the American military-industrial complex

Bosnia: the Knights of Malta, Iran-Contra network, and NATO’s dissolution of Yugoslavia

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

I neither agree nor disagree with the following sentiment(s), but it amply shows just how the Vatican and its offshoots have destroyed our world:

Personally, I found that most of the respondents seemed rather indifferent to the perspective of the contributor @Gabenowa.

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 10/31/2020 at 6:06 PM, HamidCZ said:

Assalamu aleikoum Brothers & Sisters,

i think that many people would be probably shocked of this info.

This Church (mother of the other Christian Churches, except Nestorian and partly Tewahedo) is in fact pagan bloodthirsty worship of the sun - go google photos ,,Christianity Sun worship".

The Latin Church after Constantine's accepting of Christianity many pagan traditions became part of that faith and the Roman Empire started never-ending war against the ,,pagans" and heretics, for example war against Christian Arianism faith or later crusades against the Muslims, Orthodox (Eastern) Christians, Christian Albigensians and later against the northern and eastern European Pagans.

And also how this bloodthirsty ,,Church" behaved towards my people - the Romani people (known as Gypsies, the G-word is somewhat racist), when we were called by the Catholic ,,Church" Pagans or filthy unbelievers even in Europe we were Christian as the local population but we took religion little bit differently than the local White-European population and it was what ,,Church" saw as herezy - it was a part of Witch-hunt and Inquisition.

Another example of this sick bloodthirsty ,,religion" is a way how al-Andalus (Spain and Portugal) was re-Christianised and what happened after it, yes i am speaking about the Inquisition and also about Spanish and Portuguese colonisation of Americas and Inquisition there.

Also there were pogroms on the Jews done or at least supported by this ,,Church" and the Jews often found freedom of religion in Muslim lands, same way as after fall of al-Andalus.

And i should also mention the European Wars of Religion between the Catholic Church and it´s daughters Reformed Churches, which was very bloody and inquisition was working in enormous scale. After the 30 years war between the Catholics and Lutherans in the lands which were regained by the Catholics happened bloody re-Catholisation which in the Czech Lands took life of at least 60% of population and in Hungary around 40%, re-Catholisation was orchestrated by the Church and by the Austrian state.

Christianity got under control because of French Revolution which was not only anti-Monarchist but also anti-Catholic and in general anti-Religious, this formed modern-day Europe, if this revolution was not successful Europe and Americas would be probably till now in Dark Ages and full of bloodshed of the innocents.

But wait this is not an end of the story! I have to mention that the Catholic Church also supported Nazi Germany and Independent State of Croatia (Nazi pro-German state) which both were doing genocide of the Jews, Romani people, Serbs, Poles and other people who were seen as inferior races.

I mentioned before that the Catholic (Latin) Church is a mother of other churches, i must to mention that also other churches supported witch-hunts, anti-Jewish pogroms and called the Romani people pagans which led to genocides of the Romani people.

And this is not still the end of a story because last shadows of reality of this Church and it´s daughter Churches we see in Africa where the Christianity is often still so bloodthirsty as it was in Europe before and in fact we have seen it in Europe (or Asia?) recently when the Armenian Catholics started (again) doing genocide of the Muslims in nowadays Eastern Turkey (between 1830 to 1916) and of the Azerbaijanis (since 1830´s with some pauses in all the lands of Azerbaijan and last time between 1988 to 1994 in Azerbaijani land of Karabakh) and also we have seen how Orthodox Christians many times did genocides of the Muslims in Bosnia (many times since 1790´s, last time between 1992 to 1995), Kosovo (last time in 90´s), western part of Turkey (1919-1922), Algeria (Africa- done by the Catholics - 1830 to 1962) Cyprus (1960´s to 1974) and Lebanon (Asia - done by the various Christians - 1975 to 1995).

Wa alaikum salaam brother,

This text reminds me of how non Muslims sometimes put all of Muslims in one pot, or for instance some shia treat all sunis as daesh. This very old religion and political landscape of the "holy roman empire", that had its capital over a millennium in vienna, and its spiritual HQ at the vatican, has lots of emperors, lots of stories, good and bad. Here this Roma angry person lists all the negative things he could find in order to demonise this major Christian denomination. There are over a billion catholics that you are addressing here, and let me tell you that I personally know many catholics, including my extremely religious ancestors, who serve God with the Bible at hand. If you have am issue with details of your faith, remember that yours isn't perfect either. There is no religious denomination on earth, or sect, that has even anything near to perfect worship. This post is fitna in my opinion, and sweeping insults against the biggest group of Christians on earth. Let me add that Catholicism has tons of sub sections that exist with different mentalities. Each pope is different, each emperor was different, and some were very good. If you look at the austria of the late emperor Franz Joseph, you will see an empire that was anything but a dark age. He gave ownership rights to Jews again, built Vienna as we know it today (#1 in the world in terms of life quality). You are saying that the dark ages reigned in the Catholic world when they were fertile ground for the likes of Mozart, Gregor Mendel (father of genetics), who even after centuries of warfare against the muslim turks, were allied with Muslim Otomans in ww1. The darkest of ages began once the communists took over, along with the civilan-targeting capitalists. It wasnt the catholics who adopted an official doctrine of nuking and destroying entire civilian centers as a premeditated military tactic. The Roman Catholic church along with the entire Catholic world has many great people and religious scholars who deserve praise. They have great warriors, culture, arts, science, and it is very wrong to attack an entire religion like that by cherry picking mistakes we find in literally an empire over hundreds of years. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 10/31/2020 at 6:06 PM, HamidCZ said:

known as Gypsies, the G-word is somewhat racist),

I beg to differ, my wife's family has distant relatives from a famous gypsy family that came to the middle east long time ago and converted to all three abrahamic religions, and they refer to themselves as gypsy. I have heard many gypsies using this term in a very serious and repectable way. I'm not a gypsy so am not an expert, but I doubt there is anything wrong with this term. An Egyptian friend of mine told me that the term actually comes from the word gyptus,  which is the Greek root word of the word egypt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Sorry that I keep writing posts,  but I keep thinking of things I want to say concerning this topic.

Irish are catholics and are great people who are generally pious. Even the French were catholics that is visible in the Notre Dame great church of Paris. Referring to the entire pre-illuminati-french revolution history as bloody dark ages isnt accurate either. France and the Frankish people among the converts from the Normen, including the celtic converts have both good and bad applications of the roman Catholic religion. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
18 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

This very old religion and political landscape of the "holy roman empire", that had its capital over a millennium in vienna, and its spiritual HQ at the vatican, has lots of emperors, lots of stories, good and bad. Here this Roma angry person lists all the negative things he could find in order to demonise this major Christian denomination.

This ,,very old Religion" started in times of Roman Emperor Constantine who saw a Cross in the Sky and decided that all Roman Empire converts to Christianity when he converted on his deathbed in year 337, later this ,,Religion" came under Religious changes throught various councils which changed the Religion of God to Religion of 3 godish persons (so called ,,Trinity") because of some Epistles written by someone known as Apostle Paul which contradict other Epistles written by real disciples of Jesus (unfortunately later changed by the Roman Empire, to make it more comfortable to what the fake Apostle Paul wrote).

This Trinity thing created huge persecution of the Arians, it was a Christian denomination led by Arianus who refused Trinitarian dogma introduced by the Roma Empire and Arianism was declared as herezy and every heretic has to be killed.

,,The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" (its full name) is not same as The Roman Empire which was divided by Diocletian on Western & Eastern in year 395 (Eastern became later known as Byzantine Empire and Western fell with invasion of Germanic tribes).

This ,,Christian" denomination is largest because of constant war against the ,,heretics" and people who were ,,pagans", for example we can take in notice what Frankish Empire did since Karloman became its king. How looked Christianisation of Saxons, Slavic people, later Christianisation of Scandinavia under rule of Norwegian kings. Who were main propagators and initiators of Crusades? Yes Franks and also Franks were those who had for a long time main word in the Vatican and for some time the ,,Holy See" was on the soil of nowadays France with Frankish Pope there.

We can't also forget later re-Catholisation of countries which became Protestant (Reformed), for example both my home-countries (nowadays Czech Republic & Hungary). In the nowadays Czech Republic re-Catholisation took over 60% of population to death, in Hungary it was 40%.

And how the Roman Catholic Church became biggest denomination in South, Central & North Americas knows everyone, same as in many parts of Africa.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

This text reminds me of how non Muslims sometimes put all of Muslims in one pot, or for instance some shia treat all sunis as daesh.

Look, i am talking about history, if you don't like it, it´s your problem, i just gathered facts, i am sorry for that, but i took a historical viewpoint, plus also added the viewpoint of the history of my people which survived harsh persecution which can be labelled genocide on the hands of this Church.

I also added that i don't think that it´s normal to be freely Catholic without being ashamed of a bloody history and this history is undeniable, as it´s same as someone was a active member of DAESH some decades from now and played a ,,good boy" (of course if DAESH was a Church or Religious movement).

You also can't deny that this Church haves also problems with monks which abuse kids, actually 8 of 10 monks are paedophiles and this Roman Church only moves those monks to another locality or pays people to keep silent.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

There are over a billion catholics that you are addressing here, and let me tell you that I personally know many catholics, including my extremely religious ancestors, who serve God with the Bible at hand. If you have am issue with details of your faith, remember that yours isn't perfect either.

I am sorry bro, but i can say that i am former Roman Catholic (for some part of my life and Bible was first book i ever did read when i was able to read, i'd also read some Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church and also Prayer books like Heart of Jesus), so probably i know this Church very well and of course, i know many Catholics (like 40% of my family are officially Catholic, but in majority of them i never saw them going to the church nor to pray or read Bible) i also know deeply believing Catholics who are good people but it doesn't changes my unfavourable views of this Church. I was also Orthodox Christian for few years, in my family this denomination makes like 10%, if i count well.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

There is no religious denomination on earth, or sect, that has even anything near to perfect worship.

Wrong bro, the Islam is perfect, the Shia' Ja'afari madhab is perfect denomination and True Islam, unfortunately, there are some people who are trying to corrupt it.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

This post is fitna in my opinion, and sweeping insults against the biggest group of Christians on earth.

How can be my post Fitna? The Roman Catholic Church itself is Fitna within Christianity.

And when we talk about Fitna, the Fitna or exactly Schism (as our word Fitna haves far more deeper meaning than Schism) between the Western & Eastern Church in 1053 to 1054 was over the Creed and exactly about one added word by the Western Church (later known as Roman Latin Church or Roman Catholic Church) which ended in a bloodshed, as Eastern Church was excommunicated and declared heretical. The word is known as Filioque.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

Let me add that Catholicism has tons of sub sections that exist with different mentalities.

I can name them - The Roman Catholic Church, The Greek Catholic Church and the Old Catholic Church. But my article is mainly about the Latin Church which means The Roman Catholic Church.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

You are saying that the dark ages reigned in the Catholic world when they were fertile ground for the likes of Mozart

It was in the time of Age of Enlightenment, after the French Revolution when the Church was little bit less powerful.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

The darkest of ages began once the communists took over, along with the civilan-targeting capitalists.

I was born in the former Eastern Bloc or Socialist Bloc just 3 years after the fall of ,,Communist" Regime in CzechoSlovakia (in fact Communism was never reached, so we had only so called ,,Real Socialism" or how it´s called by the Anarchists ,,State Capitalism").

Then happened Privatisation, many factories ended, people became unemployed, same things happened in the whole Socialist Bloc.

I am not praising the Communist Party at all, we were persecuted in that time, great part of the family was killed by the Communists as early as in 1918, as my family lived in Russia. Another parts of family were also dissidents in Czechoslovakia since 1948. And also one part of family were Communists until end of rule of president Gottwald in Czechoslovakia, as in times of so called ,,Prague's Spring" were shown political killings under Gottwald to people and same goes with the Soviet leader Stalin.

By the way, those who were dissidents in time between 1948 to 1989 are now voting the Communist Party. Why? Because they want people getting work, to have better life, free health care etc. I understand it actually, but i will never vote something what tried to kill our culture and what tried to destroy any religion, those Communists are still same Communists as before 1989. But the Social policies of Communism are nice, free healthcare, free education, everyone gets what he needs etc. PS, i am not Communist myself, or at least not Bolshevik.

And i must mention that in the Czechoslovakia under ,,Communist" Regime was never something like unemployment, hunger and any kind of malnutrition. Only Freedom was an issue here, since failed ,,Prague's Spring" in 60´s.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

It wasnt the catholics who adopted an official doctrine of nuking and destroying entire civilian centers as a premeditated military tactic.

I am not sure what would happen if they had this technologies like we do today, they would probably nuke everyone and thanks God they hadn't this.

Actually about destroying entire civilian centres i should say that they did it, but of course Genghis Khan was better at it, well he was not Catholic, but probably Tengriist.

19 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

The Roman Catholic church along with the entire Catholic world has many great people and religious scholars who deserve praise. They have great warriors, culture, arts, science, and it is very wrong to attack an entire religion like that by cherry picking mistakes we find in literally an empire over hundreds of years. 

Of course they had and have, i am not disputing at all.

Sorry, this were not mistakes but constant ordered activity, how many Churches were (or maybe still are?) excommunicated by the Roman Catholic Church?

I doubt that they ended seeing Nestorians as heretics, well maybe i am wrong, but i really think that they still see them as heretics.

For example we, the Roma, even 40% of us are Catholics got official apology by the Pope like 2 years (if i remember right). After how many years since the Roman Church declared us heretical pagans in 14th Century and everyone was allowed to hunt us down as animals?

20 hours ago, Allah Seeker said:

I beg to differ, my wife's family has distant relatives from a famous gypsy family that came to the middle east long time ago and converted to all three abrahamic religions, and they refer to themselves as gypsy. I have heard many gypsies using this term in a very serious and repectable way. I'm not a gypsy so am not an expert, but I doubt there is anything wrong with this term. An Egyptian friend of mine told me that the term actually comes from the word gyptus,  which is the Greek root word of the word egypt.

Actually, some sub-ethnic groups of the Roma origin who lost language are more open to use the G-word.

We actually use the word Gypsy for all the groups of nomadic life in Europe (except of Saami) and for every nomadic group of Indian origin (also in India itself) to make it easier to call them some known name. But in Europe the word Gypsy means also European-White people, for example the Pavee of British Isles (known as Irish Travellers), Highland Scottish Travellers (who are distinct of half-Romani Lowland Scottish Travellers), Resande of Scandinavia, Yéniche\Jenischen of German-speaking lands and half-Romani Světští or Jauneráci from the Czech Republic (they are mixed Yéniche with original Czech Roma).

The word ,,Gypsy" in Europe, especially Czech version ,,Cikán" was used even before the arrival of actual Roma to name simply any Nomadic peoples.

The word ,,Gypsy" in English, ,,Gitan" in Spanish, ,,Cigány" in Hungarian, ,,Zingar" in Italian, ,,Cygan" in Russian or ,,Tsiggan" in Greek can also be traced back to some group of heretical Christian-like group of people of Egyptian (probably) origin known as sect of Atsiggánoi in Greek who came to the Byzantine Empire just before the arrival of the actual Roma. And i known that they were not of Romani origin because of their behaviour which was against the actual Romani cultural taboos, laws and traditions of ritual chastity.

Another slur used by the people of Europe on the Roma is ,,Gyftoi" in Greek or ,,Farahuni" in Slovak pointing on Egyptian origin, from that also can be a word ,,Gypsy", as our ancestors came to Byzantine Empire as de facto Refugees from nowadays Iraq (after failed attempt to create own state there under Abbasid rule around year 800), so our Kings (yes we had kings, it were those who led us) were saying a story to Christian Europeans that we are pilgrims of Egypt and people trying to repent by aimless walk on the Earth from the sin of forging the nails for the Jesus Christ's Cross.

But real name of our people is the Roma (plural) and the Rom (male singular) and Romňi (female singular), the word Rom comes from the name of Indian Caste of Dom, with the D becoming R, to us are probably somewhat connected the Domari People of the Middle East (but culturally we see that they're somewhere like Indian untouchables, as they do ritually unclean things, probably at least part of them are such people) and another related group are the Lom People of Caucasus where Rom became Lom. But actually we the European Wing - the Roma or Romani People we still speak language closest to Prákŕt dialects of India.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
1 hour ago, HamidCZ said:

Wrong bro, the Islam is perfect, the Shia' Ja'afari madhab is perfect denomination and True Islam, unfortunately, there are some people who are trying to corrupt it.

Bro thanks for your long post, I will God Willing review it and answer it in more detail when and if I get the chance. Just this part I would like to comment that a madhab is like a curriculum designed by scholars who think they know what original Islam is all about. According to all of them, the Islamic madhab of the later days will become worse and worse. This nation just like the Christian nation has been leaderless since over a millenium. No direct prophet or caliph to guide in what people today see in their varied madhaheb. Of course each group thinks his madhab is the only perfect one, which it definitely isn't. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Hi HamidCZ,

This is a very informative discussion and I don’t want to intrude, but I would like to add something about the faulty trinity doctrine. --- I am not a Trinitarian, and though my profile reads Shia Islam, I am a Christian as my profile used to say, and I have asked the Moderators to change it back. --- However I am learning more from the insight of you and Allah Seeker, --- And I agree with him on one point.

Quote from his post: “There is no religious denomination on earth, or sect, that has even anything near to perfect worship.”

And your response Quote: “Wrong bro, the Islam is perfect, the Shia' Ja'afari madhab is perfect denomination and True Islam, unfortunately, there are some people who are trying to corrupt it.” 

--- The fact that you identify with one ‘madhab’ you may see it as perfect, but it is one of other ‘madhabs,’ and branches in Islam like the Twelvers, where each is like a varied denomination. --- Also in Islam, the differences between the Shias and Sunnis.  

 

But I am learning from the much history you bring in and the history of the Roman Catholic Church that started on a wrong footing and, as you said, wanted to identify as a mother church by using the word ‘Catholic’ which means ‘universal.’ It did not unite the Churches but caused the Evangelicals to go underground through the Dark Ages.

--- And considering the moral sins of the Church leaders, there is a verse in the Quran that explains it quite well. It is found in Surah 57:

25 We sent aforetime our apostles with Clear Signs and sent down with them the Book and the Balance (of Right and Wrong), that men may stand forth in justice; and We sent down Iron, in which is (material for) mighty war, as well as many benefits for mankind, that God may test who it is that will help, Unseen, Him and His apostles: For God is Full of Strength, Exalted in Might (and able to enforce His Will).

26 And We sent Noah and Abraham, and established in their line Prophethood and Revelation: and some of them were on right guidance. But many of them became rebellious transgressors.

 

27 Then, in their wake, We followed them up with (others of) Our messengers: We sent after them Jesus the son of Mary, and bestowed on him the Gospel; and We ordained in the hearts of those who followed him Compassion and Mercy. --- But the monasticism which they invented for themselves, We did not prescribe for them: (We commanded) only the seeking for the Good Pleasure of Allah; but that they did not foster as they should have done. --- Yet We bestowed, on those among them who believed, their (due) reward, but many of them are rebellious transgressors.

 

28 O ye that believe! Fear God, and believe in His Apostle (Muhammad), and He (God) will bestow on you a double portion of His Mercy: He will provide for you a Light by which ye shall walk (straight in your path), and He will forgive you (your past): for God is Oft- Forgiving, Most Merciful.

29 That the People of the Book may know that they have no power whatever over the Grace of God, that (His) Grace is (entirely) in His Hand, to bestow it on whomsoever He wills. For God is the Lord of Grace abounding.

--- The 'monasteries' that they built to house the prospective pastors, were coupled with the older teachers to learn the new doctrines that were devised for the new ‘universal’ Church, --- but they were separated from women and not allowed to marry.

This is against human nature and against God’s teaching on marriage and family, so the new pastors would start off with a distorted concept of faith in God. --- And where men are living together, their moral problems develop. --- Therefore, "Many of them were rebellious transgressors." 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Hi HamidCZ,

Quote from your post: This ,,very old Religion" started in times of Roman Emperor Constantine who saw a Cross in the Sky and decided that all Roman Empire converts to Christianity when he converted on his deathbed in year 337, later this ,,Religion" came under Religious changes throught various councils which changed the Religion of God to Religion of 3 godish persons (so called ,,Trinity") --- This Trinity thing created huge persecution of the Arians, it was a Christian denomination led by Arianus who refused Trinitarian dogma introduced by the Roman Empire and Arianism was declared as herezy and every heretic has to be killed.

--- To add some details, The Roman Government had constantly persecuted the Christian Churches. And while they were no threat militarily, the Romans opposed their influence and felt that if they were left to themselves they would grow strong and perhaps become a threat.  When Constantine decided to favor the Christians he also wanted to solve a problem.

There was a dispute between the Arians and others about the Person of Christ. Bishop Arius had said, “There was a time when Christ was not,” meaning that Christ was a created being.

--- (In the Book of Daniel Christ is called the Son of Man, And ‘son of’ speaks of a second generation, in heaven as well as on earth. --- This is a long and interesting story, and through the Gospels the name Son of Man refers to Christ, and not to Jesus.)

We know that Jesus was born on earth from a human mother Mary, and that Christ came from heaven as a Spiritual Being to indwell the physical body, as it says in Hebrews 10:5 

Therefore, when He (Christ) came into the world, He said: "Sacrifice and offering You did not desire, but a body You have prepared for Me." .

Constantine did not want controversy in his kingdom so he decided to call the compromising bishops in to resolve the problem. Most disagreed with Arius because they saw Jesus Christ as one person that came from God, with the idea therefore that Jesus Christ was more than God’s representative, but God Himself.

--- The Emperor suggested, or supported the suggestion, that Jesus was God and they decided to write a document and the Nicean Creed started out this way in 325 AD:

"We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of all things visible and invisible.

 And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father [the only-begotten; that is, of the essence of the Father, God of God,] Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten, not made, consubstantial with the Father;"

This was the first wording and they began to consider that Jesus was equal with God.

As I said, the folly is that Christ being ‘called the Son of God,’ speaks of a second generation, so He could not be God. --- But they focused on Jesus who was from earth, as it says in Hebrews 2:9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, that He, by the grace of God, might taste death for everyone.

--- Being made a little lower than the angels would hardly make him ‘equal with God.’ --- But they considered Jesus as the ‘begotten Son' of God. Again, when it mentions ‘son,’ it speaks of a second generation, or more, which cannot be the original.

As a final line in the first Creed they added: --- “And we believe in the Holy Ghost.” --- Not really a trinity.

So we will continue with their next Creed in 381 AD.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/28/2020 at 6:58 AM, HamidCZ said:

This ,,Christian" denomination is largest because of constant war against the ,,heretics" and people who were ,,pagans"

Hi I'm back and will answer as much as comfortably possible for now.

Which religious fanatics of any religion did not do the same? But Catholicism was and still is more successful than almost any religion, because God chose for them to be so. 

On 11/28/2020 at 6:58 AM, HamidCZ said:

We can't also forget later re-Catholisation of countries which became Protestant (Reformed), for example both my home-countries (nowadays Czech Republic & Hungary). In the nowadays Czech Republic re-Catholisation took over 60% of population to death, in Hungary it was 40%.

I highly doubt the number 60% is true, and would love to see the evidence for this. The 30 year war started when a roman Catholic diplomat was thrown out of a window of a tower in Prague i believe. My ancestors were successfully involved in this war, and were recognised by the current emperor Ferdinand II for their services. At the same time we also fought the Muslims from the orient who also were killing people for being pagans. I have family ancestral letters describing that it was routine for muslims to impale local priests of villages that were conquered, if they didn't surrender willingly. Still I chose Islam, because it is obvious that not every action done in the name of a religion, must have anything to do with that religion. People fight amongst each other, and between religions, but a Christian regardless of sect, has the opportunity to be a good person, as they can follow the way of Christ, with bible at hand. 

 

On 11/28/2020 at 6:58 AM, HamidCZ said:

And how the Roman Catholic Church became biggest denomination in South, Central & North Americas knows everyone, same as in many parts of Africa.

As much as crimes were committed by SOME catholics for missionary purposes, that would usually only work with populations that truly had religions which were more pagan than the catholic religion. Islam is a path, and sometimes an imperfect doctrine is the path to a better one in a right direction. Cathlicism is in other words in all probability closer to islam than the mostly nature and ancestor worshipping folk of pre-columbian (who was apparently crypto Jewish ) of the Americas, and the aboriginal tribes of other continents too. Even with the trinity and son of God story. I believe it is all a preparation for the final victory of God.

On 11/28/2020 at 6:58 AM, HamidCZ said:

Look, i am talking about history, if you don't like it, it´s your problem,

My problem is your sweeping generalisations that are not historic fact! So that is actually.

.....

I wrote for about an hour after this and it all got erased for some mysterious reason when this window refreshed. It is really sad because I had answered every single detail that you addressed. 

The reason y it got refreshed was because I went to another window to get a YouTube video after responding to your last part. 

God didn't want me to tell you all these things apparently, but maybe in good time I can repeat it all. For now I will leave it at that and make a basic summary of points:

1 - A church consists of people and not just one man. So if a politically powerful person takes a decision in the name of the church, it does not include the good elements of the church

2 - church is based on teachings of christ that include thou shalt not kill and love your enemy. Give the other cheek, etc. That is the reason why atheistic movements like communism and atheism are champions when it comes to mass killing and crimes. The bible ties the hands of satan. 

3 - pedophilia etc is a problem everyhere including especially wahabi muslims.

4 - your information on your background and the Roma is extremely interesting. In the German speaking region they are known as Zigeuner.

5 - I asked you what happened after the french illuminatinement period during and after the illuminati masonic revolution. 

6 - if I think of anything else I said,  will let you know. Ah yes, my families from both sides were victim to communist socialist satanic influences, and thankfully we have knowledge of how the world was so much better before ww1 for instance. Most educated families of today have maybe one or two generations of literacy, so most people don't know that the world was actually better when religious kingdoms ruled versus todays mostly godless governments.

7 - I was sharing with you some theories I studied about the link between roma - aria - Atlantic pre deluge survivors of nephelim (jinn), who sprang up in Iraq Region after Noah landed with his ship, and then they migrated to India etc. BTW jinn is not something necessarily bad, as most people think.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

Hi HamidCZ,

To continue with the ‘doctrine of trinity’:

In the Constantinople Creed from 381AD, instead of just saying, “And we believe in the Holy Ghost.” --- They added this:

 “And we believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father, who with the Father and the Son together is worshiped and glorified, who spake by the prophets.”

This added a new dimension but it is not very true because ‘How could the Giver of life proceed from the Father who was already living? --- And if there was a Father, was the Holy Spirit another Personage from the Father?

It says in Genesis 1:1 “In the beginning God (Elohim) created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form and void and darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.” So the Spirit of God brought life to the sea.

--- The Spirit of life was with God. Was He a part of God, or the origin of God?

It seems that through the Scriptures the Holy Spirit is the ‘Servant of God,’ who spoke through the Prophets, which leads to another mystery. --- If the Holy Spirit is not God, does He deserve to be worshipped? Was ‘Almighty God,’ who is the only God, not above Elohim --- which is a plural name for God?

Also the Son associated with God could not be a human, so that rules out Jesus.

The Catholic Church likes to leave certain things clouded in mystery, so that they can try to explain them. --- They discouraged the reading of Scriptures by the common people because they wanted the priority of explaining them. That secured their position as leaders, but they were misleading the people with their new doctrines of celibacy, calling Mary ‘the Mother of God,’ because she was the Mother of Jesus. --- And their faulty trinity doctrine which could not be explained.

However, the Catholics were not completely to blame for the widespread doctrine in the Christian Churches. --- Somebody came up with a three sided diagram that put God in the middle with arrows going from Him, saying: God IS the Father, God IS the Son, God IS the Holy Spirit. --- Then around the outside the arrows go to say, the Father IS NOT the Son, the Son IS NOT the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit IS NOT the Father.

--- So there we have it. --- Something more complicated that can’t be explained.

But people are not lost because they believe a false doctrines, they are lost because they don’t believe in Jesus Christ as their Savior and Lord. --- Because the Scripture says: “For there is no other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved.”

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 11/28/2020 at 5:58 AM, HamidCZ said:

I was born in the former Eastern Bloc or Socialist Bloc just 3 years after the fall of ,,Communist" Regime in CzechoSlovakia (in fact Communism was never reached, so we had only so called ,,Real Socialism" or how it´s called by the Anarchists ,,State Capitalism").

Then happened Privatisation, many factories ended, people became unemployed, same things happened in the whole Socialist Bloc.

By the way, those who were dissidents in time between 1948 to 1989 are now voting the Communist Party. Why? Because they want people getting work, to have better life, free health care etc. I understand it actually, but i will never vote something what tried to kill our culture and what tried to destroy any religion, those Communists are still same Communists as before 1989. But the Social policies of Communism are nice, free healthcare, free education, everyone gets what he needs etc. PS, i am not Communist myself, or at least not Bolshevik.

And i must mention that in the Czechoslovakia under ,,Communist" Regime was never something like unemployment, hunger and any kind of malnutrition. Only Freedom was an issue here, since failed ,,Prague's Spring" in 60´s.

@HamidCZ

It is interesting that the Roman Catholic Church failed to solve social problems for hundreds of years but the atheistic Bolsheviks did so in short order. If religion leads to a better society than atheism does, then why did the Communists eradicate and/or suppress homosexuality, prostitution, drug use, etc. while providing for the general welfare of the masses better than the “religious” Church did? All the social ills and sins came back during privatisation and the banning of socialism, the same timeframe in which organised religion such as the Church was once again able to operate independently. If anything, wouldn’t this seem to indicate that atheistic socialism, once in power, was actually more “Christian” than the Church? Aside from atheism, many of the things it did resonated with Christianity and its social mission, being oriented toward society instead of self and so on. A lot of people on this forum seem to assume that atheism is automatically bad, and I agree that it often can be, but the record of the Communists is actually better than that of the organised religions, at least in some of the Eastern European countries, and it is only today under religion-friendly capitalism/privatisation that many social problems have returned. I wonder if Shia Islam, applied properly, can address the material as well as the spiritual needs as well as the Communists did. It can certainly address the spiritual aspect, but can it address the economic to the same degree? Aside from banning usury and prohibiting criminal activities, e.g., prostitution, drugs, sexual perversion, it doesn’t really seem to offer a comprehensive economic revolution, unlike the Communist programme. I’m not opposed to the social dimension of Shia Islam, of course, but part of me wishes for a stronger economic component as well. Yet I know that only socialism in the USSR under Stalin was able to implement the industrial and other reforms needed to win the Great Patriotic War against Western imperialism (fascism/Nazism). I’m still not entirely convinced that the Islamic model in Iran is yet able to perform a similar or greater feat against the international/Western bloc, though it has and is currently doing many impressive deeds on its own.

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

When the Emperor Constantine began to favor the Christians instead of oppose them, the compromising Pastors joined him in the suggestion of starting a new Church, which would be all inclusive. The intention was that it would solve the problem of sects or denominations and bring all religions under one ‘umbrella.’ --- In doing this they dropped the name Christian and called it Roman, under the leadership of Rome. Then to make it universal they used the word ‘Catholic,’ which means ‘universal.’ --- Since most of the Pastors were in favor of new doctrines to be accepted by all, the dissenting ones were persuaded, because who argues with the Emperor. --- The Church was organized after the pattern of Pharisaic Judaism, with scribes and priests, --- So the new Church could use all of the Pastors in the leadership and they would all be ‘employed’ by the Church.

The old 'adage' worked out well for Constantine, --- “If you can’t beat them, join them, and then beat them.” --- With new doctrines, the former Pastors were obligated to impose the new doctrines on the local and outlying Churches. So now Constantine was using the former Pastors to oppose the Evangelical Christians.

At this time the Arians were considered heretics, and some Pastors of independent Churches were threatened or imprisoned. This is when the Churches went underground to survive. One Church Reformer, Pastor John Huss, was burned at the stake, giving the evidence of how ‘unchristian’ the new ‘church’ had become.

--- Through the dark ages, there was very little Christian literature produced as the Roman Church dominated. --- The Church took a political role and was engaged in wars, etc.

Martin Luther, a German Monk, disagreed with the Roman Church and its practices and nailed his ‘95 Theses’ on the door of the Wittenberg Chapel, which brought him death threats. --- But in the 1500’s, this was the beginning of Church reform. It was at the beginning of the 16th century that the Douay Bible was translated from the Latin Vulgate, and the King James Bible was translated from the Hebrew and Greek Manuscripts. The new movement began with what was called the Protestant Reformation.

The dark ages lasted for 1260 years until 1798. Napoleon defeated the Papal troops in 1796 and arrested Pope Pius IV in 1798 and imprisoned him in France, where he died a year later.

--- From then on the Gospel Churches were free to minister. The denominations did not emerge as different faiths, but the same faithful groups that had been quietly active in different countries. The Lutherans in Germany, the Anglicans in England, the Armenians, the Presbyterians, and other denominations from different area like the Baptists and Pentecostals. --- So we have Denominational Groups something like the Twelve Tribes of Israel, still spreading the Gospel as the Apostles did.

--- Quote from Wikipedia: Cardinal Miloslav Vlk of Prague was instrumental in crafting an apology by John Paul II for the "cruel death" of the famed medieval Czech reformer John Hus in 1415. In his 18 December 1999 speech in Prague, John Paul expressed "deep sorrow" for Hus' death and praised his "moral courage." 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

This is why Trinitarian Christians such as the Catholics are politically—and often, but not always, individuallyamong the worst barbarians in the history of mankind:

@THREE1THREE

This fully explains the monstrous crimes in the history of Catholicism and its offshoots within Western Christendom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
  • Advanced Member
Quote

The Ustaše viewed religion and nationality as being closely linked; while Roman Catholicism and Islam (Bosnian Muslims were viewed as Croats) were recognized as Croatian national religions, Eastern Orthodoxy was deemed inherently incompatible with the Croatian state project.[34] They saw Orthodoxy as hostile because it was identified as Serb.[162] On 3 May 1941 a law was passed on religious conversions, pressuring Serbs to convert to Catholicism and thereby adopt Croat identity.[34] This was made on the eve of Pavelić's meeting with Pope Pious XII in Rome.[163] The Catholic Church in Croatia, headed by archbishop Aloysius Stepinac, greeted it and adopted it into the Church's internal law.[163] The term "Serbian Orthodox" was banned in mid-May as being incompatible with state order, and the term "Greek-Eastern faith" was used in its place.[164] By the end of September 1941, about half of the Serbian Orthodox clergy, 335 priests, had been expelled.[158]

The Ustaša movement is based on religion. Therefore, our acts stem from our devotion to religion and the Roman Catholic church.

— the chief Ustaše ideologist Mile Budak, 13 July 1941.[165]

Source

So it is clear that all the crimes of the Roman Catholic Church throughout history are inextricably based on religion, at least in the minds of the rank-and-file perpetrators, even if the very top is carrying out financial objectives, at least in part. The fact that most rank-and-file Catholic militants who committed these crimes were genuinely driven by religious fanaticism, or believed themselves to be acting on a religious basis, shows how religious fervour provided the justification for the use of any and all means in service of the desired or imagined end. Of course, the Vatican itself was founded by Satanist/Zionist bankers, linked to the occult bloodlines of Rome, who then used religious cultism as a tool to control the masses and gradually establish a New World Order over millennia, vis-à-vis such actions as the Crusades, the genocide of indigenous people(s) and “infidels,” etc. For example, the Vatican as an institution has consistently sided with (the objectives of) the financial elite throughout history, even if its activities and beliefs eliminate the substance of true faith (Deen), create a false dichotomy between faith and reason, commit all manner of perversion and atrocity in the name of religion, etc. The main point is that for too long the powers that be have excused and concealed these and innumerable other crimes committed in the name of religion but on behalf of the secret societies. During the twentieth century, for instance, the Vatican consistently backed every single instance of Western imperialism in the name of anticommunism, e.g., the instigation of the Cold War by Truman/Churchill; Zionist-backed right-wing dictatorships in Latin America, Africa, and Asia, including puppet dictators such as Pinochet, the Videla junta, the apartheid regime in South Africa, the Shah of Iran, the Saudi regime, the Lebanese Falange, and the various American-backed “anticommunist” regimes from Indochina to South Korea, Taiwan, and Japan; the various Western wars for resources in the Third World; and so on. This does not even belabour to mention the role of the Vatican in protecting thousands of Nazis and fascists in monasteries and in shipping them overseas to the U.S., U.K., Canada, Latin America, and other parts of the Western capitalist world, including all NATO-dominated countries. There is even credible evidence in numerous sources that Hitler, Bormann, Himmler, Goebbels, and other Nazis never died as officially indicated, but escaped overseas to resume control of the Nazi financial empire, with the active assistance of the Western, Catholic, and Zionist elite(s), in order to serves as a bulwark against the Soviet Union and anti-imperialist movements in general. All in the name of protecting religion and Western “Christendom”! Now when the same elites that founded the Vatican order it to discard its last vestiges of religion by endorsing overt Satanism, the LBGTQ+I agenda, Agendas 21/2030, Bill Gates, etc., the latest Pope, handpicked like all previous Popes, accedes just as promptly to the bankers’ interests as did all the previous popes at earlier stages in history. Whatever agenda suits the elites of a particular era is adopted by the Vatican.

Edited by Northwest
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 2/16/2021 at 1:32 PM, 313_Waiter said:

@Northwest thoughts, refutations...?

It is rather evident, historically, that the Catholic Church, Seljuks, and Saladin (Illuminati) collaborated vs. the Fatimids and Byzantines during the various Crusades.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On 12/2/2020 at 1:40 PM, Northwest said:

It is interesting that the Roman Catholic Church failed to solve social problems for hundreds of years but the atheistic Bolsheviks did so in short order. If religion leads to a better society than atheism does, then why did the Communists eradicate and/or suppress homosexuality, prostitution, drug use, etc. while providing for the general welfare of the masses better than the “religious” Church did? All the social ills and sins came back during privatisation and the banning of socialism, the same timeframe in which organised religion such as the Church was once again able to operate independently.

Hi both of Catholic Church & Bolsheviks have failed to solve any social  problem which Bolsheviks only have put social  problems under the rug & just made " homosexuality, prostitution, drug use, etc " as underground  activities but haven't  fixed any problem  which banning  socialism  just have lead to resurfacing  the social  problem which Catholic  church has used it for gaining  wealth by activities  like receiving  money for forgiving  sins in confession  so increasing  social problems & sins has encouraged  by it just for promotion  of catholic  church business because any sect of christanity  has no tool in it's toolbox for fixing these problems .

 

On 12/2/2020 at 1:40 PM, Northwest said:

I wonder if Shia Islam, applied properly, can address the material as well as the spiritual needs as well as the Communists did. It can certainly address the spiritual aspect, but can it address the economic to the same degree? Aside from banning usury and prohibiting criminal activities, e.g., prostitution, drugs, sexual perversion, it doesn’t really seem to offer a comprehensive economic revolution, unlike the Communist programme. I’m not opposed to the social dimension of Shia Islam, of course, but part of me wishes for a stronger economic component as well. Yet I know that only socialism in the USSR under Stalin was able to implement the industrial and other reforms needed to win the Great Patriotic War against Western imperialism (fascism/Nazism). I’m still not entirely convinced that the Islamic model in Iran is yet able to perform a similar or greater feat against the international/Western bloc, though it has and is currently doing many impressive deeds on its own.

Indeed Shia Islan can solves all problem in every aspect of life either economically or socially or spiritually  better than Communist  program if all of it's rules applies in society wich your conclusion about Communism  & Stalin is wrong  same as your wrong conclusion  from shia narrations which at start of WWII Stalin & communists were greatest ally of Hitler & Western imperialism (fascism/Nazism) which has lead to genocide of Polish people by USSR  more sever than brutality  of Germany  against  them which genocide  of polish people has continued by communist until they have been saved by Iran &   people of USSR just have defended from their motherland against  foreign  invasion which communist  party & Stalin hve just used their patriotism  in their favour & about Islamic model of Iran has founded for preparing  Iran & it's people & rest of Shias for reappearance  of Imam Mahdi not as a complete  & final system because the fial complete  system of Islamic governance  only will apply by Imam Mahdi (aj) by purging (Shia) Islam & returning of it to it's original  state at time of prophet  Muhammad (pbu) inshaAllah .

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

what do u mean by Catholic Church’s involvement and Saladin being Illuminati ? My history knowledge is poor.

On 2/18/2021 at 2:49 AM, Northwest said:

Catholic Church, Seljuks, and Saladin (Illuminati)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
21 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

what do you mean by Catholic Church’s involvement and Saladin being Illuminati ? My history knowledge is poor.

@313_Waiter

Many Masonic awards, emblems, coats of arms, orders, medals, and so on are named after—that is, commemorate—Saladin, whom the leaders/commanders of the Latin (Frankish) Crusades greatly respected. Saladin, like the Latin Crusaders, also opposed both the Orthodox Byzantines and the Shia (Ismaili) Fatimids. Saladin’s personal standard also featured the double-headed phoenix (so-called “eagle”) that is a common signifier of Masonic bloodlines or dynasties worldwide. All Masonic bloodlines respect and collaborate with one another against the masses and the truth(s) throughout history for millennia, even today. Bear in mind that the Masons date back to the antediluvian or Atlantean civilisation and were revived by Nimrod after the Flood. Most or all royal dynasties throughout history are Masonic or “pharaonic” in origin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...