Gullible Christians

[Itsnotgonnaspankitself...]

Done, and done!

and/or maybe some ice-cold beer...

[sybarite]

These are the 95 Theses Martin Luther nailed on the church door at Wittenburg, October 31, 1517. Simply put, they are 95 statements that were to challenge the religious leaders to consider the unbiblical practices of the Roman Catholic church. While Martin Luther went much further as time went on, these were just the beginning. Their purpose was not to split the church but to challenge it to reform. I did not post them here as it would be too long, but Martin Luther, (who was training for the Catholic Priesthood) did not fall into the trap!Lion Tracks QnA -- 95 Theses of Martin Luther that started the Protestant Reformation

[sybarite]

If you just read the first sentence of each paragraph you get the gist of it!!


Pope Stephen VI: had his predecessor exhumed, tried, de-fingered, and thrown to the river
Stephen VI was Pope from 896 to 897. Fueled by his anger with Pope Formosus, his predecessor, he exhumed Formosus's rotting corpse and put "him" on trial, in the so-called "Cadaver Synod" in January, 897.

With the corpse propped up on a throne, a deacon was appointed to answer for the deceased pontiff, who was condemned for performing the functions of a bishop when he had been deposed and for receiving the pontificate while he was the bishop of Porto, among other revived charges that had been leveled against Formosus in the strife during the pontificate of John VIII.

The corpse was found guilty, stripped of its sacred vestments, deprived of three fingers of its right hand (the blessing fingers), clad in the garb of a layman, and quickly buried; it was then re-exhumed and thrown in the Tiber. All ordinations performed by Formosus were annulled.

The trial excited a tumult. Though the instigators of the deed may actually have been Formosus' enemies of the House of Spoleto (notably Guy IV of Spoleto), who had recovered their authority in Rome at the beginning of 897 by renouncing their broader claims in central Italy, the scandal ended in Stephen's imprisonment and his death by strangling that summer.

Pope Benedict IX: the Pope who sold the papacy

Benedict IX was Pope from 1032 to 1044, again in 1045, and finally from 1047 to 1048, the only man to have served as Pope for three discontinuous periods. Benedict gave up his papacy for the first time in exchange for a large sum of money in 1044. He returned in 1045 to depose his replacement and reigned for one month, after which he left again, possibly to marry, and sold the papacy for a second time, to his Godfather (possibly for over 650 kg /1450 lb of gold). Two years later, Benedict retook Rome and reigned for an additional one year, until 1048. Poppo of Brixen (later to become Pope Damascus II) eventually forced him out of Rome. Benedict’s place and date of death are unknown, but some speculate that he made further attempts to regain the Papal Throne. St. Peter Damian described him as “feasting on immorality” and “a demon from hell in the disguise of a priest” in the Liber Gomorrhianus, a treatise on papal corruption and sex that accused Benedict IX of routine homosexuality and bestiality.



Pope Sergius III: ordered the murder of another pope and started the "pornocracy"
Sergius III was Pope from 897 to 911, and has been the only pope known to have ordered the murder of another pope and the only known to have fathered an illegitimate son who later became pope; his pontificate has been described as "dismal and disgraceful." The pontificate of Sergius III was remarkable for the rise of what papal historians call a "pornocracy," or rule of the harlots, a reversal of the natural order as they saw it, according to Liber pontificalis and a later chronicler who was also biased against Sergius III. This "pornocracy" was an age with women in power: Theodora, whom Liutprand characterized as a "shameless whore... [who] exercised power on the Roman citizenry like a man" and her daughter Marozia, the mother of Pope John XI (931–935) and reputed to be the mistress of Sergius III.

Pope John XII: raped female pilgrims and invoked pagan gods

John XII was Pope from 955 to 964. On 963, Holy Roman Emperor Otto I summoned a council, levelling charges that John had ordained a deacon in a stable, consecrated a 10-year-old boy as bishop of Todi, converted the Lateran Palace into a brothel, raped female pilgrims in St. Peter's, stolen church offerings, drank toasts to the devil, and invoked the aid of Jove, Venus, and other pagan gods when playing dice. He was deposed, but returned as pope when Otto left Rome, maiming and mutilating all who had opposed him. On 964, he was apparently beaten by the husband of a woman with which he was having an affair, dying three days later without receiving confession or the sacraments.

Pope Leo X: sold indulgences, killed cardinals

Leo X was Pope from 1513 to his death in 1521. He is known primarily for the sale of indulgences to reconstruct St. Peter's Basilica and his challenging of Martin Luther's 95 theses.

According to Alexandre Dumas, "under his pontificate, Christianity assumed a pagan character, which, passing from art into manners, gives to this epoch a strange complexion. Crimes for the moment disappeared, to give place to vices; but to charming vices, vices in good taste, such as those indulged in by Alcibiades and sung by Catullus." When he became Pope, Leo X is reported to have said to his brother Giuliano: “Since God has given us the papacy, let us enjoy it.”

His extravagance offended not only people like Martin Luther, but also some cardinals, who, led by Alfonso Petrucci of Siena, plotted an assassination attempt. Eventually, Pope Leo found out who these people were, and had them followed. The conspirators died of “food poisoning.” Some people argue that Leo X and his followers simply concocted the assassination charges in a moneymaking scheme to collect fines from the various wealthy cardinals Leo X detested.

Pope Alexander VI: nepotism, orgies and the rise of the Borgia family

Alexander VI was Pope from 1492 to 1503. He is the most controversial of the secular popes of the Renaissance, and his surname (Italianized as Borgia) became a byword for the debased standards of the papacy of that era. Originally Cardinal Borgia from Spain, Pope Alexander's claims to fame were taking over much of Italy by force with the help of his son Cesare (yes, his son), a racy relationship with his daughter Lucrezia (some say her son was his), and his affinity for throwing large parties, bordering on orgies, that usually culminated with little naked boys jumping out of large cakes.

Pope Innocent IV: introduced torture on the Inquisition

Innocent IV was Pope from 1243 to 1254. Certainly the Inquisition represents the darkest of Roman Church history, and it was Innocent IV who approved the use of torture to extract confessions of heresy. He aggressively applied the principle that “the end justifies the means.” It is shocking to learn about the deranged instruments of torture that were used on so many innocent people. One of the most famous people to suffer at the hands of Roman inquisitors was Galileo. The church condemned Galileo for claiming that the earth revolved around the sun.

Pope Urban VI: complained he did not hear enough screaming when his Cardinals were tortured

Urban VI was Pope from 1378 to 1389. He was the first Pope of the Western Schism (which ultimately lead to three people claiming the Papal throne at the same time). Once elected, he was prone to outbursts of rage. The cardinals who elected him decided that they had made the wrong decision and they elected a new Pope in his place, so he took the name of Clement VII and started a second Papal court in Avignon, France. Later he would launch a program of violence against those he thought to have been conspiring against him, imprisoning people at will and mistreating them brutally. Later historians have considered seriously that he might have been insane.

The second election threw the Church into turmoil. There had been antipopes, rival claimants to the papacy, before, but most of them had been appointed by various rival factions; in this case, the legitimate leaders of the Church themselves had created both popes. The conflict quickly escalated from a church problem to a diplomatic crisis that divided Europe. Secular leaders had to choose which pope they would recognize. The schism was repaired forty years later when all three of the (then) reigning Popes abdicated together and a successor elected in the person of Pope Martin V.

Pope John XV: split the church's finances among his relatives

John XV was Pope from 985 to 996. The Pope's venality and nepotism had made him very unpopular with the citizens, as he split the church's finances among his relatives and was described as "covetous of filthy lucre and corrupt in all his acts."

Pope Clement VII: his power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked

Clement VII was Pope from 1523 to 1534. A member of the powerful Medici family, Clement VII possessed great political and diplomatic skills - but he lacked the understanding of the age necessary to cope with the political and religious changes he faced. His relationship with Emperor Charles V was so bad that, in May 1527, Charles invaded Italy and sacked Rome.

Imprisoned, Clement was forced into a humiliating compromise which forced him to give up a great deal of secular and religious power. Eventually, Clement became ill and never recovered. He died on September 25, 1534, hated by the people of Rome, who never forgave him for the destruction of 1527.

[Tsalagi]

Originally Posted by hortysir

I'm bound for hell

Unless Patrish accepts Vatican II over Boniface. After all, the Pope is infallible! But which Pope?


Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!

Tsalagi

[Tsalagi]

Originally Posted by Patrish

Need sleep - will try to return.

Well General McArthur returned to the Philippines too. Four years later.

Tsalagi

[sybarite]

Hmmmmm! Interesting site!

Satanism In The Vatican!

[Flynn]

There really are some people who should question what and why they do it, I know I do, it's so cathartic.

You'd have to think the word cathartic comes from the word Catholism.

As each of those words is a derivitive of the other so Christianity has many off shoots.

The Catholic church was born through the belief in Jesus Christ, Christianity was born.

The Church of England was born because a King wanted to divorce his wife, his Anglican Church evolved ( now there's a strange concept when discussing religion, evolution, but I digress ) and that evolution enabled others to self interpret Christianity which enabled them to spawn their own Christian religious beliefs.

Baptists, Protetants, Methodists, Presbyterians and even those Good Ole Boys from Texas who worship Jesus by praying with rattle snakes what they have in common is their individual beliefs would not be in existence had it not been for the Catholic Church.

The common denominator between all the Christian religions is they are not very Christian in their attitude to Christians who have different system of worship to themselves.

Individually, whether Christians are Catholics, schooled at home variety or belong to any of the local Christian Churches, there is just as much chance that they will have as many child abusers, wife beaters, cheats, liars and adulterers as any other religious group has.

Not every Catholic should be held responsible for the sins of their Church, it happens in every Church and it even happens in those lovely little homes with a white picket fence out front.

[sybarite]

Originally Posted by Flynn

There really are some people who should question what and why they do it, I know I do, it's so cathartic.

You'd have to think the word cathartic comes from the word Catholism.

As each of those words is a derivitive of the other so Christianity has many off shoots.

The Catholic church was born through the belief in Jesus Christ, Christianity was born.

The Church of England was born because a King wanted to divorce his wife, his Anglican Church evolved ( now there's a strange concept when discussing religion, evolution, but I digress ) and that evolution enabled others to self interpret Christianity which enabled them to spawn their own Christian religious beliefs.

Baptists, Protetants, Methodists, Presbyterians and even those Good Ole Boys from Texas who worship Jesus by praying with rattle snakes what they have in common is their individual beliefs would not be in existence had it not been for the Catholic Church.

The common denominator between all the Christian religions is they are not very Christian in their attitude to Christians who have different system of worship to themselves.

Individually, whether Christians are Catholics, schooled at home variety or belong to any of the local Christian Churches, there is just as much chance that they will have as many child abusers, wife beaters, cheats, liars and adulterers as any other religious group has.

Not every Catholic should be held responsible for the sins of their Church, it happens in every Church and it even happens in those lovely little homes with a white picket fence out front.

Flynn, there is no historical proof Christianity was "born" from the Catholic Church. That is "history" according to the Catholic Church. There is no record of Peter ever being in Rome. The Bible said Paul was the one who got Christianity started in Rome. Any Church that says no one can have salvation unless you belong to it and follow it's doctrine should be raising red flags. The Bible specifically says to believe that Jesus is the Son of God and died for your sins is the basis of salvation, not following a bunch of rules some leader of a Church says you have to follow. The Bible says, Matthew 7:15-7:20 "Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. 16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? 17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. 20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them."

The Church's you mentioned above prosecute abusers and nip it in the bud as soon as it happens. Instead of handing over abusers to the authorities, the Catholic Church just ships them to different Churches to abuse and molest again and again. They cannot admit they are WRONG about anything. The Catholic Church says it is "God's chosen Church" and you cannot obtain salvation unless you belong to it. I do not believe for one minute that a bunch of child molesters, murderers, (Inquisition) and abusers is God's chosen Church. The every day Catholic sheeple are just following and believing what they have been indoctrinated to do since they were little sheeple. Most of them are good hearted. They truly believe their Church is the only way and will do nothing but believe what the leaders tell them to believe. If the Pope said he got a message from God and told the sheeple to follow him off a cliff they would do it without question because he's God on earth. It's very sad really.

[hortysir]

Well, howdy, then.....
I was going to applaud Flynnn for his response. And I still will **applause***, because it is well-deserved!
Then I read Syabrite's rebuttal.
And I double my applause for Flynn!
Sorry, Syb (you know I love you dearly), but your rebuttal lent (no pun) credence to one of Flynn's remarks:
=== The common denominator between all the Christian religions is they are not very Christian in their attitude to Christians who have different system of worship to themselves.====
As to the issue of who begat whom; I think it is correct that Catholicism came first, and the Protestant (protest) movement followed. The only inaccurate part of Flyyn's post I saw is, whereas the other denominations he named are all "protestant" religions.
All in all, what had started out as a Christian-bashing thread (in my opinion) has grown to be quite an informative discussion.
But it seems to have evolved into a Catholic-bashing thread (again, in my opinion), and that doesn't make it any more right.
In closing I'd like to refer to Flyyn's closing statement of his last post....
Not every Christian should be held accountable for the 'Gullibleness' of others, either.

[sybarite]

Originally Posted by hortysir

Well, howdy, then.....
I was going to applaud Flynnn for his response. And I still will **applause***, because it is well-deserved!
Then I read Syabrite's rebuttal.
And I double my applause for Flynn!
Sorry, Syb (you know I love you dearly), but your rebuttal lent (no pun) credence to one of Flynn's remarks:
=== The common denominator between all the Christian religions is they are not very Christian in their attitude to Christians who have different system of worship to themselves.====
As to the issue of who begat whom; I think it is correct that Catholicism came first, and the Protestant (protest) movement followed. The only inaccurate part of Flyyn's post I saw is, whereas the other denominations he named are all "protestant" religions.
All in all, what had started out as a Christian-bashing thread (in my opinion) has grown to be quite an informative discussion.
But it seems to have evolved into a Catholic-bashing thread (again, in my opinion), and that doesn't make it any more right.
In closing I'd like to refer to Flyyn's closing statement of his last post....
Not every Christian should be held accountable for the 'Gullibleness' of others, either.

I don't believe I am "bashing" anyone. I feel that I am rebutting a Church that says it is the only way to salvation and giving reasons why it is not, but everybody is entitled to their own opinion. You made me realize I'm too fervent in my posting and need to tone it down. Sometimes I need a good kick in the arse to straighten me up. I apologize to all!! BTW, I love ya too!