Good Samaritan,

Guest actually forget to sign in, sorry, but he did sign MNW.

MNW

People are citing records supposedly held by the catholic church but can they be trusted? If the catholic church had its way we would not even have a Bible. I realise this post is not about the Bible issue but the inquisition but my point is I do not trust the catholic church.

Forget historical documents that may or may not exist, what about modern day events. Where the catholic church is in the majority they still oppress the people. Try leaving the catholic church in Mexico.

I also find it hard to believe that the gold laden, jewel wearing, cathedral building, heaven selling army welding catholic church could not counter the proposed propaganda of protestants.

Maybe it is just a matter of believing what you want to believe and leaning on the evidence that suits you best. However, to say the inquisition never happened demands much proof which so far has not been forth coming.

Our evidence is in all the history books around the world.

MNW

That's rich. Start a thread on that and then provide objective evidence of it. The records have been deemed reliable by Catholic and non-Catholic scholars alike. Let's not start conspiracy theories we can't evidence, ok?

They exist, it's just that Jim's outdated sources didn't know it at the time. I see you've chosen to ignore the evidence provided on this issue and move on to another argument. If you want to discuss the Church in Mexico, start a thread and again, back it up with more than your opinion, please. Let's be fair here.

The Catholic Church has been given the responsibility of saving souls, not waging propaganda wars. It does not waste its time with false accusations like Jim's or even silly stuff like DaVinci Code. It's job is to baptize all nations in the name of the Father, SOn and Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all Christ commanded. It is entrusted with the souls of all men, not organized media battles. You seem to have an issue with the so-called riches of the Church as if it had something to do with the veracity of its teachings. You are mistaken on both accounts. Again, irrelevant to this topic but if you'd like to discuss it, PM me or start a thread.

This proves you have not read my posts. I have admitted that there were 3 distinct periods of Inquisition. I have NOT denied that it existed in any way. My argument is that the case Jim has made is neither convincing, nor is it based on legitimate scholarship. This makes it polemical in nature and false witness against the Church. I've asked for a certain burden of proof to be met here but nobody seems to be willing.

It isn't called the 'Black Legend' for nothing. The stuff of history books is exactly what makes up this long perpetuated lie. The Church admits that certain people within the Inquisition acted immorally and has apologized for the effects of that behavior. This is a world apart from the accusations made by Jim, which have been denied and shown to be embellished and patently false in some cases.
As an example, please tell me what you know about Black history. Native American history? Women's history? Our history books say little to nothing about these topics, so let's not be so arrogant as to adhere to history books written by white, anglo-saxon, protestants as gospel truth. God Bless.

Ron

Okay, the Inquisition never really took place, just a little protective pruning by those nice people in the vatican. The inquisition that we all know was made up by protestants to make the catholic church look bad.

So, which protestant group had the means, organisation and opportunity to out wit and slander the catholic church's good name?

MNW

Again, here I am locking this thread. All parts of the inquisition were addressed on the very first post, then accused of not being addressed, another indication of the blindness of these people.


You said:

So who is the one not reading the posts?