₦airaland Forum

live4dgospel:
You are funny! What's the Inquisition? A group of cardinals presiding over the ruling and passing judgement that so so person has been found guilty of heresy and should be punished. If they handed over the killings to the state, what's the difference? How can a state interfere in Christian faith if it has not befome part of the church, and this is something you continued to deny that Emperor Constantine did not make Roman Catholic a state religion, on this you defended yourself with "civil unrest"! For instance in the case of Galileo, who believed in heliocentric theory, he was still termed a heretic and was put into house arrest till his death. How did he cause civil unrest with his scientific knowledge?

This is a case of Giordano Bruno from wiki


Starting in 1593, Bruno was tried for heresy
by the Roman Inquisition on charges of
denial of several core Catholic doctrines,
including eternal damnation , the Trinity ,
the divinity of Christ, the virginity of Mary,
and transubstantiation . Bruno's pantheism
was also a matter of grave concern, [4] as
was his teaching of the transmigration of
the soul ( reincarnation ). The Inquisition
found him guilty, and he was burned at
the stake in Rome's Campo de' Fiori in
1600. After his death, he gained
considerable fame, being particularly
celebrated by 19th- and early 20th-century
commentators who regarded him as a
martyr for science , [5] although historians
have debated the extent to which his
heresy trial was a response to his
astronomical views or to other aspects of
his philosophy and theology. [6][7][8][9][10]
Bruno's case is still considered a landmark
in the history of free thought and the
emerging sciences.[11][12][13]



Cornelio Da Montalcino was a Franciscan
friar who had embraced Judaism , and was
burned alive on the Campo dei Fiori in
Rome , Italy , in 1554.



This is the case of Jacob Palaeologus


Jacob Palaeologus, born Giacomo da Chio
(c. 1520 – March 23, 1585) was a Dominican
friar who renounced his religious vows and
became an antitrinitarian theologian. An
indefatigable polemicist against both
Calvinism and Papal Power , Palaeologus
cultivated a wide range of high-placed
contacts and correspondents in the
imperial, royal, and aristocratic households
in Eastern Europe and the Ottoman
Empire ; [1] while formulating and
propagating a radically heterodox version of
Christianity, in which Jesus Christ was not
to be invoked in worship, and where
purported irreconcilable differences
between Christianity, Islam, and Judaism
were rejected as spurious fabrications. He
was continually pursued by his many
enemies, repeatedly escaping through his
many covert supporters.
Palaeologus played an active role in the
high politics of European religion and
diplomacy over a period of twenty years
before he lost imperial favour; and having
been extradited to the Papal States , was
executed for heresy by the Roman
Inquisition .


This is the case of Aonio Paleario

In 1542 the Inquisition made his tract Della
Pienezza, sufficienza, et satisfazione della
passione di Christo , or Libellus de morte
Christi (The Benefit of Christ's Death), the
basis of a charge of heresy, from which,
however, he successfully defended himself.
In Siena he wrote his Actio in pontifices
romanos et eorum asseclas , a vigorous
indictment, in twenty testimonia, against
what he now believed to be the
fundamental error of the Roman Church in
subordinating Scripture to tradition, as well
as against various particular doctrines,
such as that of purgatory; it was not,
however, printed until after his death
(Leipzig, 1606). [2]
In 1546 he accepted a professorial chair at
Lucca, which he exchanged in 1555 for that
of Greek and Latin literature at Milan .
Here about 1566 his enemies renewed their
activity, and in 1567 he was formally
accused by Fra Angelo , the inquisitor of
Milan. He was tried at Rome, condemned
to death in October 1569, and executed in
July 1570. [2]

This is the case of Domenico Scandella


Domenico Scandella (1532–1599), also
known as Menocchio, was a miller from
Montereale , Italy , who in the 16th century
was tried by the Inquisition for his
unorthodox religious views, and burnt at
the stake for heresy in 1599. His life and
beliefs are known from the Inquisition
records, and has been the subject of the
book The Cheese and the Worms by Carlo
Ginzburg .[1][2][3][4]
Biography
His parents were Zuane and Menega. He
lived most of his life in Montereale, except
for two years when he was banished from
the town for brawling.
He had learned to read and read a number
of contemporary works on religion and
history. From these, he developed his
religious views that departed substantially
from Catholic orthodoxy of the time.
He was first tried for heresy in 1583, and
abjured his statements in 1584, but spent
another 20 months in prison in Concordia.
Released in 1586, he claimed to have
reformed. He continued to be in house
arrest and had to wear a sign of a burning
cross on his garments as a visible sign of
his crimes. In 1598, he was arrested again
as a lapsed heretic , having continued to
propagate his beliefs. In 1599, he was
declared a heresiarch and was executed by
burning.
During his trial, he argued that the only sin
was to harm one's neighbor and that to
blaspheme caused no harm to anyone but
the blasphemer. He went so far as to say
that Jesus was born of man and Mary was
not a virgin, that the Pope had no power
given to him from God but simply
exemplified the qualities of a good man,
and that Christ had not died to "redeem
humanity ".[5]


This is the case of Pomponio Algerio


Pomponio Algerio (1531 – 22 August 1556)
was an Italian religious martyr.
Algerio was born in Nola, and was a civil
law student at the University of Padua ,
where his Lutheran theological beliefs
attracted the attention of the Roman
Inquisition . [1] At his trial, he wore his
academic hat and gown to remind the
tribunal that, as a student, he had the right
to freely express his ideas. From the
transcript of Pomponio Algerio at his trial:
"I say that the Church deviates from the
truth in so far as it says that a man
could not do anything in any way good
on his own, since nothing praiseworthy
can proceed from our corrupt infected
nature except to the extent that the lord
God gives us his grace... the Roman
Catholic Church is a particular Church
and no Christian should restrict himself
to any particular Church. This Church
deviates in many things from truth."
After refusing to conform to Church
doctrine, he was sentenced to prison and
asked to reconsider his Lutheran beliefs.
After a year behind bars, he still refused to
reconsider. Because Venetian authorities
would not consent to an execution, Pope
Paul IV sent officials to extradite Pomponio
to Rome. In Rome, on 21 August 1555, a
monk from the brotherhood of St John the
Beheaded visited Pomponio in his cell
urging him to repent. If he repented, he
would be strangled before burning. The 24-
year-old student refused.
One year later, on 22 August 1556, he was
executed by civil authorities in the Piazza
Navona, Rome . Maintaining his composure
while he was boiled in oil, he stayed alive
for 15 minutes before dying.


These are just the most outstanding figures who fell victim of the Roman Inquisition, of course there are other thousands if not million cases . Even though I don't side with them on all their views, my message is clear: They were killed by the Roman Inquisition not because they caused civil unrest but because they held different views from that of the Roman Catholic Church.

you just wish to broadcast your ignorance, Constantine didn't make Christianity a state religion, Theodosius was the one who did that.

at least those guys you mentioned were tried and found guilty by a competent court not by a mob which would have been their lot if not for the inquisition

Catholics on nl have been saying this, sola scriptura is a word alone teaching that makes everyone his own Church and fragment the body of Christ, it wasn't practiced in the early Church, it was invented in the 1600s by Martin Luther who used it as an excuse for his schism, he soon found out his system doesn't work after he saw the Anabaptist and Zwingli use his theory and arrive at new heresy. Luther anathematized the other Protestants and started to rethink theology by making himself the standard for right interpretation, same things Calvin did.... but they had already opened Pandora's box and unleashed the weirdest abomination in ecclesiology... a fragmented Christianity with no bearing.

shadeyinka:
Christians are no bound by the rules of Judaism like circumcision, washing of hands etc.

Sunday isn't even special for Christians.

In Saudi Arabia, Christians don't worship on Sundays but on Fridays. Are they hell bound?

Christian in Saudi don't worship on Fridays

valentineuwakwe:
Hello,
Happy weekend to you all....please I need to ask this question and i need sincere answers and comments. we were told the original Sabbath day was Saturday but the early Christians after Christ resurrection change the Saturday Sabbath to Sunday worship, were they right or wrong in doing this act?

on what authority do we judge the early Church?

live4dgospel:
Jesus, of course, is the High Priest according to the order of Melchizedek. But John is the last High Priest according to the order of Aaron, because he performed the de facto role of passing on the sins of the world according to the Old Testament laying on of hands. It was written "For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John."(Matthew 11:13). This means that the baptism of John the Baptist marked the end of the Old Testament sacrificial system ( according to the order of Aaron). John knew why he baptized Jesus, that was the reason the next after he baptized Jesus, while standing with his disciples seeing Jesus walking by, he bore this witness “Behold! The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!"(John 1:29). This means according to the order Aaron Jesus is certainly not a High Priest but rather a sacrificial Lamb.
In Matthew 3:15 "But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him."
Was it not written here that Jesus was baptized to fulfill all righteousness?

there is no need for an aaronic priest, the new high priest has put an end to the priest in the order of Aaron.
neither was john a Aaronic high priest nor was a Aaronic high priest needed.

Jesus began the new sacrificial system where he is both high priest, and Lamb, he needed no other high priest to make his sacrifice.

live4dgospel:
It seems that you have lost focus on the line of the argument, the point is not the number of executions. As I have said earlier there were thousands of executions if not in millions!!! My message is always clear: The purpose of the Roman Inquisition is to draw the attention of the true seekers from finding the fault in Catholicism, thereby powerfully and influentially corrupting the gospel. But this is what you denied, claiming that the Roman Inquisition was developed because of civil unrest, but from the Wikipedia link I shared to you, it was made clear that the Roman Inquisition was developed to combat whatever the Roman Catholic church termed heresy and alternate religious doctrines and as a Counter-Reformation against the spread of Protestantism.

the inquisition it self was created to stem civil unrest and provide a just system, it began in the 12 century and that is true, its aim isn't to stop people from reading the Bible but to make sure the state didn't punish innocent people for crimes they weren't guilty of, you can read that up here.

http://galileo.rice.edu/lib/student_work/trial96/loftis/overview.html




here is a quote.


Another reason for Pope Gregory IX's creation of the
Inquisition was to bring order and legality to the process
of dealing with heresy, since there had been tendencies
in the mobs of townspeople to burn alleged heretics
without much of a trial. Pope Gregory's original intent for
the Inquisition was a court of exception to inquire into
and glean the beliefs of those differing from Catholic
teaching, and to instruct them in the orthodox doctrine.
It was hoped that heretics would see the falsity of the ir
opinion and would return to the Roman Catholic Church.
If they persisted in their heresy, however, Pope Gregory,
finding it necessary to protect the Catholic community
from infection would have suspects handed over to civil
authorities since these her etics had violated not only
Church law but civil law as well. The secular authorities
would apply their own brands of punishment for civil
disobedience which, at the time, included burning at the
stake.

so again I was correct, the Inquisition didn't execute people that was left to the state.

Thegospelman:
Brother note that we don't have history in our hand but the Word of God. So don't waste your time on the things that we may not be able to independently verify. Let's move forward in spreading the gospel of water and the Spirit to the whole world. This is the only gospel of salvation everyone must hear. Those who hear the gospel but despite knowing it still reject it deserve nothing but eternal hell.

just like the new generation Church, always quick to threaten with hell fire

BluntBoy:
It still doesn't convince me that Peter was the first Pope or that God wants a single man to be head of His Church on Earth. I am very aware of offices of bishops but I am also aware that every church had at least two bishops or elders who were not called but chosen by men. I am not aware of one bishop being regarded as leader of the Church on Earth. Christ specifically warned against such hierarchy in His Church by asking that the Apostles take care not to be like the gentile princes.

Look at the Church today and see if so-called church leaders have not become like the gentile princes who lord it over their subjects.

not exactly true,

before the end of the apostolic age the Church already had monarchial singular bishops for each city.... the early Christians bear witness of this., the was a hierarchy in the Church, presbyterous were under the episcopus and so too the deacons. not gentile princes but Christian servants

if you think the apostles didn't have a leader then you'll have to explain why the historic witness of the early Christians say different, how do you explain matt 16:15-16

OkCornel:
Quick one please...who persecuted the Ebionites to near extinction? was it the Roman Catholic church or the early church?

it was neither,


the Ebonites were judaizers, the were first persecuted by the Jews of bar kocbah, the Christians considered them heretical and preached against them....by the time the Christians had power the Ebonites had largely disappeared. the early Church which was the Catholic Church didn't persecute them.

SoulSearching:
Should Religion Be Banned or regulated by government In Nigeria?

Well I know Nigeria is both Muslim and christian. In terms of Nigerian Christianity , should there be only one state controlled denomination , for example , "Nigerian Church of God " and absolutely no other denomination allowed ?
Do you think it will curb religious corruption,denominational bigotry, and hypocritical fanaticism in Nigeria ?

other nationally founded and regulated denominations were : Anglican(Britain) , Catholic (Roman Empire:italy,portugal,spain,greece) , Baptist ,Methodist(American) ,Church of Ethiopia (Ethiopia) , Russian Orthodox (Russia) etc.

Catholic Church isn't Anglican, it is not nationally founded and regulated.

requiescat in Pace

guess the priest will soon be released since he didn't know

nonye6194:
lol no ves, alert no gree enter when I expected to. peace

lol

Lend him a copy of Rome Sweet Home.

I would have if I knew him personally

live4dgospel:
Why are you so convinced about one side of the story. Didn't you see the number of executions there? Didn't you see the considerations of other historians there?

I saw the number of executions. it says

Italian historian Andrea Del Col estimates that out of
51,000 — 75,000 cases judged by Inquisition in Italy
after 1542 around 1,250 resulted in a death
sentence


that is the estimate....


the other historians who had high figures were all refuted right there by other historians, in fact wiki says

Roman Inquisition was seen in a different light. In
contrast with feminist arguments, historians like Clarke
Garrett, Brian Levack, John Tedeschi, Matteo Duni, and
Diane Purkiss pointed out that most witch trials and
executions were conducted by local and secular
authorities. [19][20][21][22][23] Clarke Garrett mentioned
the quick decline and insignificance of the Malleus
Maleficarum. In-depth historical research regarding
minor details of different types of magic, theological
heresies, and political climate of The Reformation
further revealed that Inquisitorial procedures greatly
restrained witch hunting in Italy. Scholars specializing
in the Renaissance and Early Modern period such as
Guido Ruggiero, Christopher F. Black, and Mary O'Neil
also discussed the importance of proper procedures
and sparse use of torture. The low rate of torture and
lawful interrogation, Black argued, means that trials
tended to focus more on individual accusation, instead
of groups.



so upon further research those outrageous figures have been refuted and it seems the Roman inquisition made sparse use of torture, in fact the Protestant and secular courts were more guilty of that, the inquisition had far less executions and prevented the mad supposed witch trial and execution that was common in Protestant areas.

flex04:
they are jus professional argumentaters

yeah, all the Christian who came before us and expressed their Christian Faith and provide clear historic witness of events are all "professional argumentators just because they don't support your case.


that must be bias.

rickyrex:
bro you been a Catholic is not a criteria to make heaven. But how faithful you are to his teachings on earth. So don't get it twisted

been a faithful Catholic will certainly get you there, that is the very reason for which Christ established his Church, that through it we may obtain the tools and graces, the word of life and the sacraments to get us there.

btoks:
Yeah, the poster is basically equating a 'Christian' becoming a Catholic Christian to a Christian becoming LGBT!

Always shake my head for such ignorance

that sort of parallel just weird me out, sound so ....I just don't have words.

this system of interpretation you are using is called type and antitype, it is a very old way of reading scriptures whereby the reader must be attentive to note that the entire old testament was written to be fulfilled in the new testament... it features prominently among the writings of early Christians.


but as I told you before on this issue you are getting it wrong.

the new testament is a fulfillment of the old testament sacrificial system but you have to note something that the Bible is very clear on,

1. Jesus is the new lamb of God, the victim for the oblation.

2. Jesus himself NOT JOHN THE BAPTIST, is the HIGH PRIEST OF the sacrifice. the book of Hebrew is very clear Jesus himself is the high priest of this sacrifice, he himself takes our sins...he becomes high priest in the order of Melchizedek, he is the high priest that offers himself as victim for the new sacrifice. He is the high priest and the sacrifice.


this is very clear in Hebrew 8,9, and 10

live4dgospel:
I'm still saying: you need to read wider. However this is what I just found from wiki , this is online wikepdia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Inquisition

even Wikipedia agrees with me.

from your link


Through further research and available evidence, the
Roman Inquisition was seen in a different light. In
contrast with feminist arguments, historians like Clarke
Garrett, Brian Levack, John Tedeschi, Matteo Duni, and
Diane Purkiss pointed out that most witch trials and
executions were conducted by local and secular
authorities. [19][20][21][22][23] Clarke Garrett mentioned
the quick decline and insignificance of the Malleus
Maleficarum. In-depth historical research regarding
minor details of different types of magic, theological
heresies, and political climate of The Reformation
further revealed that Inquisitorial procedures greatly
restrained witch hunting in Italy. Scholars specializing
in the Renaissance and Early Modern period such as
Guido Ruggiero, Christopher F. Black, and Mary O'Neil
also discussed the importance of proper procedures
and sparse use of torture. The low rate of torture and
lawful interrogation, Black argued, means that trials
tended to focus more on individual accusation, instead
of groups. For the same reason, the notion of the
Black Sabbath was much less accepted in
contemporary Italian popular culture. [1][24][25] The
Holy Office's function in the disenchantment of popular
culture also helped advance rationalism by getting rid
of superstitions. Jeffrey R. Watt refutes s the feminist
claim that the Inquisition was responsible for the death
of so many women. Watt points out that in 1588 the
Roman Curia stated it would only allow testimony
about participation in a Sabbath by the practitioners
themselves and not by outside witnesses. Additionally,
the Inquisition would eventually ban torture for the
procurement of a witchcraft confession

deafeyez:
You are still having wrong mindset.
I have been eating in my dreams and felt it when I wake yet am not afraid. Because God is greater than all other things.
One of my friends would not go a day without having to dream about 6n ladies even by the river side. Yet he still Lives healthy.
Fear not your Imagination, they are not real.

Amen, never let fear rule your life

STEVENcrack:
yes..even many Christians too have left to become gays lesbian transgender bisexuals.
even one leaves for a reason. its either from good to worse or good to better

we are not talking of backsliders... I am talking of ministers with a good congregation, who become Catholic and even become more Christian, preaching, teaching and witnessing the Christian Faith till date.

w
I am talking about conversion for good, people who study scripture and can even translate both Hebrew and koine Greek and who continue to live good Christian life

yomifowe:
EATING IN THE DREAM – PASTOR CHRIS OYAKHILOME

QUESTION: Dear Pastor, if one happens to find his/herself eating in the dream, what does it mean or what should one do? Pastor does it means am possess like many says or something? Please your answer is needed on this.

ANSWER: Give Your Dreams Positive Interpretations.
Jeremiah 29:8 For thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Let not your prophets and your diviners, that be in the midst of you, deceive you, neither hearken to your dreams which ye cause to be dreamed.

In certain Christian circles, many believe that eating in your dream is ominous; they associate it with the activities of demons. But could there possibly be anything wrong with eating in your sleep? What’s the position of God’s Word on the subject? Let’s begin by reviewing
Isaiah 29:7-8: “And the multitude of all the nations that fight against Ariel…shall be as a dream of a night vision. It shall even be as when an hungry man dreameth, and behold, he eateth; but he awaketh, and his soul is empty: or as when a thirsty man dreameth, and behold, he drinketh; but he awaketh, and, behold, he is faint, and his soul hath appetite…”

If a man eats in his dream and still wakes up hungry, it means he really didn’t eat anything. This therefore shows there’s nothing to eating in your dream; it’s just the imagination of your spirit.

Satan thrives on the fear and ignorance of people. If you had a dream for example, and then you’re uncertain about the meaning, satan could launch an attack against your mind by suggesting negative interpretations to that dream. Fear might then creep in, which ultimately could pave way for demons to have a field day. So the problem isn’t with the dream; it has a lot more to do with accepting the negative interpretation of the dream brought to you by satan.

So you ought to be smart to always subject your dreams to the Word of God. Don’t accept the lie from satan that eating in your dream is ominous; if anything, it means prosperity. Throughout the Bible, there’s no place satan gave people food to eat in a dream; only God fed people in their dream, example is Peter (Acts 10:9-15).

If you found yourself eating in your dream, don’t be afraid. Wake up and begin to prophesy: “I was eating in my dream; therefore I shall always have food. I shall always have plenty!” Don’t wake up crying that someone has bewitched you in your dream, for you’re a new creation in* Christ Jesus, and every food you eat is sanctified by the Word of God and prayer. Besides, no weapon fashioned against you shall prosper, be it in your dream or in real life.

Confession:

l’ve learned today to always cream my dreams. I refuse to base the outcome of my life on the lies and suggestions of the enemy. Rather, I see myself in the greater light of God’s Word as the true victor that I am. Hallelujah!

I remember my Rev Fr in Church said the same thing some years back

live4dgospel:
My own history is not just from Wikipedia alone but from history books, but your history is from your church which is greatly flawed. It's just like the different between the Nigerian and Biafran historical records of the War! Or better the difference between the Nigerian Military figures casualties and the eye witnesses figures! The wider you read the better for you!!!

I have read wide on this, that is why I gave you wiki not any church sources, in fact all the guys quoted in that article are secular historians.

planetzoom:
one Old retired catholic cardinal recently called RCCG a business center .
FYI there is a difference between catholism and Christianity.

the cardinal isn't wrong the rccg is one of those "churches" that threaten people with curses if they don't pay tithe, it was set upon the prosperity theory gospel. it certainly gets wealthy by scaring people with God into parting with their money.


it was invented in the last century and has no direct connection to apostolic Christianity apart from the personal Bible interpretation of adeboye and his pastors. God is not mocked, it is a religious business center.

flex04:
leave these guys jare

those guys are Christians who were there long before us and even before the new testament was compiled. they are pretty solid witnesses and they historically set the issue of Peter to rest.


you will only want to leave them if you don't care about the truth.

Imoobot:
*I NEED YOUR OPINION PLS*

Christian sister got pregnant and the Church decided to discipline her since she was not married.

When the elders of the Church met and interviewed her, she told them that she has stayed and remained in the Church for several years and no one is marrying her and she is getting to and approaching the age of menopause where she can't get pregnant even if married.

So after reading some Christian medical journals on this issues, she decided and did artificial insemination since she too wants a child. She tendered both the medical journals and the medical documents that showed that she has done the artificial insemination from a reputable hospital.

The Sister is pregnant without committing fornication nor adultery with any man.

*NOW, COULD THIS BE A SIN?*

Kindly give your reasons for your answer and if possible back it with Scripture, so dat we can learn. You may wish to send to your Christian friends and see their position on the matter.
What's your position?

for Catholic and orthodox Christian it is a sin, they have good reasons for that but I'm too lazy to go about that now,

STEVENcrack:
no offense intended..if u really studied and understand your bible then you would understand why that priest left and maybe also why I left..

and various Protestant ministers who studied the Bible have left Protestantism for the Catholic church in US alone it been about 1,000,000 such conversions in the last 30 years of Protestant ministers.


ever heard of Scott hann?

live4dgospel:
If there were other Inquisitions before 15th century, it was certainly not Roman Inquisition which is formally known as Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Roman
and Universal Inquisition. Moreover we are talking about Italy and The Roman Inquisition, why you are comparing Spanish Inquisition and Edict of Thessalonica. If other Inquisitions were harsher is not the point of contention now, the point was the Roman Inquisition was harsh enough to take the lives of thousands if not millions! To be precise historians put the figure around 100,000 to 9,000,000 executions!!! Again I say to you, you have poor knowledge of church history. I will permit you to research more! You seem to depend on your church side of the event which is hugely flawed. Are you still insisting that the Inquisition was not developed by the Holy See of the Roman Catholic Church as a Counter-Reformation against the spread of Protestantism in 1542? Are also still insisting that the Roman Inquisition was not responsible for tribunal rulings and pronouncements of punishment? Then How great are your lies! I give you more time to investigate!!!

actually what you have above is a lie.

the Roman Inquisition is estimated to have tried 70,000 case not up to a million and and is estimated to have found less than 1300 people worthy of the secular option in over 300 years.


this is wiki


In-depth historical research regarding
minor details of different types of magic, theological
heresies, and political climate of The Reformation
further revealed that Inquisitorial procedures greatly
restrained witch hunting in Italy. Scholars specializing
in the Renaissance and Early Modern period such as
Guido Ruggiero, Christopher F. Black, and Mary O'Neil
also discussed the importance of proper procedures
and sparse use of torture. The low rate of torture and
lawful interrogation, Black argued, means that trials
tended to focus more on individual accusation, instead
of groups. For the same reason, the notion of the
Black Sabbath was much less accepted in
contemporary Italian popular culture. [1][24][25] The
Holy Office's function in the disenchantment of popular
culture also helped advance rationalism by getting rid
of superstitions. Jeffrey R. Watt refutes s the feminist
claim that the Inquisition was responsible for the death
of so many women. Watt points out that in 1588 the
Roman Curia stated it would only allow testimony
about participation in a Sabbath by the practitioners
themselves and not by outside witnesses. Additionally,
the Inquisition would eventually ban torture for the
procurement of a witchcraft confession.

live4dgospel:
I can't imagine what has driven Catholics into such deception! I asked you to present your case with the Bible reference not with some other people I don't know, which you called early church. If at all the Spirit is inside you, why won't you then interprete the Bible? So anyone who does not have access to your so-called early church interpretation will not interprete the Bible? This led me to wonder whether you actually know how the early church received the teachings from the apostles. Let me help you sir, the apostles preached the gospel and make more disciples as commanded by the Lord, then after establishing churches in many places, apostles were teaching in the churches about different issues. If they couldn't personally attend the church to teach, they simply wrote letters to the churches. The born again saints had received the Holy Spirit, so they understood what the apostles taught naturally. Their letters are available to us in the Bible now, so what other private interpretation are you talking about? If at all there were interpretations from your so-called early church, then such interpretations won't contradict the Bible itself for them to be true, so what's your fear. Remember all your fears stem from the questions I asked you: You have already failed woefully for the first one. Can you attempt the second? The question goes this way: Show me from the Bible the apostles teachings about the divinity of Mary the mother of Jesus?

neither the Catholic church nor the early Church nor the Bible teach "the divinity of Mary mother of Jesus", that was a lie you were told Catholics believe... your misconceptions are pretty easy to dismiss because there is no truth in them.

first you were misinformed that Constantine made Christianity a state religion and that was a big lie you were told, it was Theodosius who made Christianity a state religion by the edict of Thessalonica.

2nd you were misinformed that the inquisition was began by the Church in the 15th century, that was another lie you were told, the inquisition actually began in the 12th century before Protestantism began.

3rd the Bible wasn't written as a catalog of all Christian belief, in fact the apostles mainly preached orally and wrote usually to address specific issues in the local churches where they had already committed the fullness of the faith orally. in fact in 2 thess the apostle clearly teach that the Church must hold on to the teaching committed to her both in writing and orally NOT Bible alone. in fact Bible alone is not biblical... the Bible tell us to use both the Bible and the witness of the Church who have received the Gospel orally. that is why the witness of the early Christian is indispensable in getting the context and right interpretation of the Christian belief.

live4dgospel:
I hope that you understand everything that you said here. If you do then let me address the issue. The Roman Inquisition was not established by the state because of civil unrest, this is your first lie! Rather the Inquisition was establised by Holy See of the Roman Catholic Church in the 15th century as Catholic Church's Counter-Reformation against the spread of Protestantism. And Roman Catholic appointed people to preside over it. The purpose of the Inquisition, if you don't know, was to combat whatever Roman Catholic called heresy and alternate religious doctrine, this is your second lie! The Inquisition moved further to tackle some other issues like love magic, witchcraft, cultural morality, superstitions, Judaizing, sorcery, blasphemy, immorality etc. From its inception The Roman Catholic Church was fully responsible for all judgement and prosecution, this is yet another lie from you. It was later after the 18th century that the state started suppressing all the local Inquisitions and finally eliminated the power of the Church to prosecute heresy. Again the trial of Galileo Galilei provided a clue to what the Inquisition was all about, even though he was forced to recant from his view, he was still sentenced to house arrest till his death. This is yet another lie from you for saying that Inquisition gave people chance to abandon their beliefs. There was some other thing you hid, that's "forced confession", the Inquisition was well known for forcing people to make false confession i.e they forced people to say they did what they didn't do by torturing them, especially the rich and wealthy, all in effort to confiscate their properties after executing them! This is still yet a proof that Emperor Constantine not only legalized Catholicism but also made it state religion, this is what you previously denied! Could a church exercise such power, if the state didn't support it? I think, it is either you have poor knowledge of church history or you tried to hide the truth.

again you seem largely ignorant of this topic.



the inquisition began in the 12th century not the 15th century, it predates the Protestant Reformation by over 300 years, so you are incorrect, the inquisition was not started in the 15th century.

the inquisition is a Church trial but it never pronounced a death sentence, it was forbidden from condemning anyone to death, all who were unrepentant heretics were handed over to the magistrate of the state, it was the state who did the sentencing, let me tell you something, in the over 300 years of the Spanish inquisition Spain still has records of over 44000 cases were tried less than 1% was handed over to the state and got a death sentence .... it was the least bloody court in all Europe, in fact criminals in the secular courts usually appealed to be brought before the inquisition because they knew they will have the least sentence... a inquisition of over 300 years only convicted less than 1% for heresy and still less got a death sentence from the secular courts while the Protestant king Henry alone executed an estimated 57000 people in just 12
years... that should tell you how lenient it was.

there was recanting, Galileo was treated harshly as a political matter, he had insulted a few people who used his trial to get him, but even at that he wasn't given death sentence even though he was found guilty of suspected heresy, he was sent to his castle to spend the rest of his days, not even a prison...his property was not confiticated and he still got family around and could write. in a Protestant England he would have been killed just for going to mass.

every court in Europe used torture but none was as guided as the inquisition which was prohibited from drawing blood, from injuring and from loss of limbs with the presence of a doctor and to be used once Protestants didn't have such restrictions.


lastly you should learn to make your research it is wrong to speak in ignorance. Christianity was made a state religion by the Edict of Thessalonica in 380
AD, by Emperor Theodosius I not Constantine. make research and stop spewing untruth

live4dgospel:
If you you can't use the Bible alone then rest your case, I will not entertain presenting 'unknown and imaginary early church members and their interpretation'. This is a deception of the highest order common to all Catholics.

there is nothing imaginary or unknown about the early Christians, unless you are totally averse to making research or intellectually lazy, or so dishonest that you wouldn't even dare to look at their writings.... or all of the above.

there is nothing imaginary or unknown about the early Christians I'll be quoting, there is no deception there, unless of course you are aware that the way you misinterpret the Bible is totally wrong and contradictory to the entire Christian faith.