As to the nicolaitan hierarchy of the RCC, I agree on those points.
I do not ascribe them to any particular individual believer.
Hislop was debunked by other protestants about 160 years ago. Hislop has bad archaeology, bad sociology and bad theology worthy of Dan Brown himself!
“He claimed Nimrod was a big, ugly, deformed black man. His wife, Semiramis, was a beautiful white woman with blond hair and blue eyes. But she was a backslider known for her immoral lifestyle, the inventor of soprano singing and the originator of priestly celibacy.”
Hislop’s gonna need a [[citation needed]] on this.
“The subtitle for Hislop’s book is “The Papal Worship Proved to Be the Worship of Nimrod and His Wife.” Yet when I went to reference works such as the Encyclopædia Britannica, The Americana, The Jewish Encyclopædia, The Catholic Encyclopædia, The Worldbook Encyclopædia - carefully reading their articles on “Nimrod” and “Semiramis” - not one said anything about Nimrod and Semiramis being husband and wife. They did not even live in the same century. Nor is there any basis for Semiramis being the mother of Tammuz.”
In short Hislop is a fabricator.
You deserve better than to fall to a liar.