Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius!
Beauseant!
Posted on 05/22/2006 9:36:23 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
But you said that it was filled with "facts". What book(s) do you recommend?
It is filled with facts...all you have to do is separate fact from supposition.
Was the Albigensian Crusade not a fact?
Was the prosecution of the Templars by a Pope acting as an agent to a King not a fact?
Was the attempted assassination of a Pope by that same King not a fact?
Read, and think.
Yes it is a fact but did it happen the way it is reported in the book, no. Hyperbole, assumptions are misleading information is the rule in this book
Was the prosecution of the Templars by a Pope acting as an agent to a King not a fact?
No, it is not a fact. Pope Clement V did not authorize the "investigation" by Philip IV. In fact, he protested the trials and suspended the powers of the Bishops and others involved. The Templars were subject directly to him. This is another of the so-called facts in this book that are B.S.
Was the attempted assassination of a Pope by that same King not a fact?
I know Pope Boniface VIII was arrested by King Philip IV but even if an attempt was made upon Pope Boniface VIII, I don't understand why this would be a slight on the Church. Which Pope are you speaking about with regards to this assassination attempt?
Pick a book and tell me when it has been reported differently.
Clement abolished the order on what grounds exactly?
You don't undertand how an arrest and possible murder attempt on a Pope by a King could be a slight on The Church?
Clement V dissovled the order, he did not condemn the order
from the Council of Vienne 1311-1312:
[3]. Clement, bishop, servant of the servants of God, for assurance in the present and for future record. The inquiries and various processes commissioned not long ago by the apostolic see through all parts of Christendom against the former order of Knights Templar and its individual members, concerning accusation of heresies, brought them into grave disrepute. In particular there was the accusation that the brothers of the former order at, and sometimes after, their reception denied Christ and spat in his dishonour on a cross held out to them, and sometimes trampled it underfoot. The master of the order, the visitor of France, the chief preceptors and many brothers of the order confessed at their trial to these heresies. The confessions cast grave suspicion on the order. In addition, the widespread disgrace, the strong suspicion, and the clamorous charges of the prelates, dukes, communes, barons and counts of the kingdom of France also gave grave scandal which could hardly be allayed without suppression of the order. There were many other just reasons mentioned in the legal process which influenced us. We therefore, with the approval of the sacred council, our heart filled with great bitterness and sorrow, suppressed and abolished the said former order of the Temple and its constitution, habit and name and we forbade its restoration.
Heresy, sacrilege...
Confessions obtained via torture.
Nice Church these guys ran.
Well Luis, seems you deflect my questions and merely counter with another question to send me scurrying for an answer.
I have referred you to a site of one that can answer your questions effectively and does there on his site.
http://www.doesgodexist.org/Phamplets/TheRealJesusOfHistory/TheRealJesusOfHistory.html
If you are really interested, you can correspond with him by email to discuss different questions as he indicates he is willing to discuss and debate with people - not just for discussion sake but for answers.
He has done the research and presents his conclusions there. I can vouch that he is sincere, a Christian and has spent 30+ years giving the information he has investigated and resolved to others - not to teach a particular denomination's doctrine but to investigate the biblical teachings.
So, if you are sincere in your debating, you will check out the proofs of a man who is versed in biblical teachings and has proven them coming from the point of view of an atheist.
I could never come close to what this brilliant scientist has laid out should others be interested.
I really hope you will check it out because I think, if nothing else, you would find the material extremely interesting based on your comments.
May God bless and lead you in your questioning.
Nice Church these guys ran.
Who was doing the torture? The Pope? I don't think so...
You are incorrect. The pastor of my church is conducting a 4-week sermon series about the DaVinci Code. This coming Sunday he will be discussing how the books of the Bible were chosen. An audio copy of this sermon will be online by Monday. I'd love to ping you to it if that's OK.
Right! I saw that one too and it was pure violence and murder. Mel was a bad guy in it, but so was everyone else.
Passion of the Crist to Benny Hill music
Forgive me Lord, for I know not what I do!
The torture was being done by the Church.
No, you are.
"The pastor of my church is conducting a 4-week sermon series about the DaVinci Code."
You are spending four weeks in Church discussing a work of fiction?
Something about that book scares the hell out of organized religion.
The torture was bing done without the sanction of the Church and the vast majority of the torture was being done by secular authorities.
The Church is made up of human beings, sinners. The Church has had it's faults. Should I give up my faith in Christ's Church? No. Has the Church asked for forgiveness for its past sins? Yes.
I ask you this: Because slavery was once legal in the United States, will you be giving up your citizenship?
We are since the book hits on so many topics relevant to modern-day faith. This was the perfect opportunity for the pastor to address topics such as Gnosticism, the divinity of Jesus, and the role of women in the early church.
Something about that book scares the hell out of organized religion.
I go to a non-denominational Bible believing church so we are not an "organized religion" in the sense of the Catholics, nor are we "Scared". As I said, this movie presented an opportunity to discuss different issues and to find out what the Bible says about them.
And there's the crux of the problem.
The Bible was constructed by the Church, who now goes about the task of explaining why everything in the movie is wrong.
Sort of a redundancy, don't you think?
Even is most of what the movie said was found to be true, what would be proven wrong was what the Church has been saying about Jesus, not what Jesus Himself said.
There are interesting points being brought up by a whole lot of books, the most significant being on the issue of whether Jesus was married or not.
The Bible is silent on that question, however, Jesus Himself is not:
"Some Pharisees approached him, and tested him, saying, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any cause whatever?" He said in reply, "Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?" -- Mt 19:3-9
Yet, the Church would have us believe that He was not married.
Taking all debates aside, one must ask himself, what makes more sense, when all is taken under consideration?
For a man of Jesus age, in Jesus time to be married, or not to be married?
The answer, to me anyway, is to be married.
Comes the next question...if He had in fact be married, what changes?
Certainly not His message, but long established Church beliefs on the subject would.
What irks me is that The Church paints any questions on itself as questions on Him...not true at all.
That's laughable.
Secular authorities obtaining confessions on religious matters from members of a society that according to a Pope's own decree, answered to no one except the Pope, yet, you argue that the Church had no guilt...other than its own lack of actions in the defense of their own.
Let me answer your question on slavery and my citizenship in proper perspective...because there was the slavery of communism, I gave up my citizenship and came here. Yet, I don't spend time excusing off either communism there, or past slavery here.
Caedite eos! Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius!
Beauseant!
Some of these mistakes have been exaggerated and used by tinfoil wearing kooks to advance moonbat theories and secret arterial motives. But that is alright because there is only one Truth and His name is Jesus Christ.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.