Do you observe the Sabbath?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Inquisitor said:
I heard a Catholic Bishop explaining how Inquisitions worked. The Catholic Church did not kill anyone during the Inquisitions, the secular authorities executed those that were found guilty. See, the Inquisitor has no blood on his hands.
Click to expand...

Of course this is ignoring the crusades, when Catholics murdered many thousands of people. And then they came to the Western hemisphere and killed many thousands more.
 
Inquisitor said:
The Inquisitor reviews the evidence and determines the sentence.

Inquisitions are legal procedures with the purpose of protecting the doctrine of the church.

You will be handed over to the secular authorities which carry out the sentence.

No blood on my hands.

Mwhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.
Click to expand...
That is what the Jewish leaders did to Jesus
 
ServantoftheMostHigh said:
I'm not saying the Jews didn't debate about what days were appropriate for fasting because we the historical record of that fact.
The context does give us some clues about" the eating and not eating" in the above verse 2 For one believes that he may eat all things: another, who is weak,eateth herbs then Paul ties in;
verse 14 "I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself, but to him that esteemeth anything to be
unclean, to him it is unclean.
verse 20 ......all things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offense.........or anything whereby thy brother stumbleth.............or is made weak.
I am certainly not saying you can't use this passage to for setting people free from judging one another. Fasting is definitely a disputable matter, but I think it primarily was dealing with meats that were clean or unclean. The law had changed with the new covenant coming in and there were weaker brethren that thought some meats were unclean still or that it was sacrificed to other pagan gods.
My humble take on it.
Shalom!
Click to expand...
Perhaps you can start a thread on that subject, so we do no detract from this one? I disagree with your present position, and would like to share a few things with you, but not here, if you please.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MessengerofTruth and HopeinHim4ever
Inquisitor said:
I heard a Catholic Bishop explaining how Inquisitions worked. The Catholic Church did not kill anyone during the Inquisitions, the secular authorities executed those that were found guilty. See, the Inquisitor has no blood on his hands.
Click to expand...
The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper, see also Frederick II at Padua.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMS
ItsAdventageous said:
The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper.
Click to expand...
Yes you're right! Church and state were together in those countries.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMS and MessengerofTruth
Runningman said:
That isn't how it works. Those who handed over Jesus to Pilate were guilty of murder.

Acts 3
15You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. 16By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has completely healed him, as you can all see.
17“Now, fellow Israelites, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders.
Click to expand...
We were discussing the Inquisition not the trial of Jesus.
 
Beckie said:
That is what the Jewish leaders did to Jesus
Click to expand...
No it's not. Pontius Pilate was the judge on that case. Pontius Pilate asked the public to declare His guilt or innocence. The public wanted Him crucified and Barabbas was set free.

We decided the fate of Jesus, not the Jewish leaders, the Jewish leaders could not execute anyone.
 
Inquisitor said:
No it's not. Pontius Pilate was the judge on that case. Pontius Pilate asked the public to declare His guilt or innocence. The public wanted Him crucified and Barabbas was set free.

We decided the fate of Jesus, not the Jewish leaders, the Jewish leaders could not execute anyone.
Click to expand...
Ultimately, the decision of God to have a people to Himself decided Jesus' fate.
 
ItsAdventageous said:
The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper, see also Frederick II at Padua.
Click to expand...
That's the position of the Catholic Church on this matter.

The guilty were handed over to the civil authorities because the Catholic Church, cannot execute anyone.

Whether or not the civil authorities were Catholic is a difficult question to answer.

England was not under the reign of the Catholic Church. King Henry the 8th asked the Pope for a divorce. The Pope refused. So King Henry set up the Church of England, then got His divorce.

I don't think the Scandinavian countries had an Inquisition.

Nor do I think Germany had an Inquisition.
 
Cameron143 said:
Ultimately, the decision of God to have a people to Himself decided Jesus' fate.
Click to expand...
Yes, God used that hatred of Jesus as the instrument of grace and forgiveness. A stroke of divine brilliance.

Not sure many folk would realize how clever God really is.
 
Inquisitor said:
England was not under the reign of the Catholic Church. King Henry the 8th asked the Pope for a divorce.
Click to expand...
Hello. If King Henry VIII had to "ask" the "pope" for a divorce, then what was the religion of King Henry VIII, and the rule of law in K.H.VIII's country?

Besides, he (KH8) didn't just ask. He begged, pleaded, and cajolled for years about that one divorce. I always say it was one of the longest attempts at divorce in history, with all the letters (and emmisaries) flying from England to the 'pope', to the German Emperor, to the King of France, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TMS
ItsAdventageous said:
The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper, see also Frederick II at Padua.
Click to expand...
The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre (French: Massacre de la Saint-Barthélemy) in 1572 was a targeted group of assassinations and a wave of Catholic mob violence, directed against the Huguenots (French Calvinist Protestants) during the French Wars of Religion. (wikipedia)

We love violence and wars. Our history is overflowing with violence and war, it never really stops.

We can't even maintain peace in our own homes. In our country, thirty percent of Police call-outs are for domestic violence.

I doubt whether, the general population at any time in history has ever been religious.

In my country, the census might state that 60% of the population believes in a God. Yet, probably only 1% of the population would bother going to a church.

Were the government authorities Catholic or Protestant?

Not in any descernible way.
 
ItsAdventageous said:
Hello. If King Henry VIII had to "ask" the "pope" for a divorce, then what was the religion of King Henry VIII, and the rule of law in K.H.VIII's country?

Besides, he (KH8) didn't just ask. He begged, pleaded, and cajolled for years about that one divorce. I always say it was one of the longest attempts at divorce in history, with all the letters (and emmisaries) flying from England to the 'pope', to the German Emperor, to the King of France, etc.
Click to expand...
Henry VIII rarely if ever referred to his divorce from Catherine of Aragon as a divorce. He referred to it as "the great matter". The divorce took six years.

I doubt whether the royalty in England were Catholic in any real way.

They probably went to a Catholic Church but does that make them Catholic?

We can see that Henry quickly discarded Catholicism for the entire nation, at a flick of the switch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back