Why do protestant groups insist on saving people that don’t need saving…?

Er...it does. For example, records of the Inquisition in south-western France in the early 14th century by a chap who went on to be Pope* were meticulously documented, including the replies of the accused Cathars. I forget the details but am happen to look them out for you; in any event, the records are extensively quoted from in Emmanuel LeRoy Ladurie's book Montaillou which I would thoroughly recommend to anyone really interested in the Cathars.

[ETA - HERE'S A LINK to a review of LeRoy Ladurie's book, but just type 'Montaillou' into a Google search and you'll get ample material

*Jacques Fournier, Bishop of Pamiers, later Pope Benedict the something or other]

 

Matt,

Still do you have any record of Albigenes (or Veadois or Devois) or Cathari writen by themselves. Your link doesn't seem to be the ones written by them.

When you charge any Terrorists, do you judge them only according to the Prosecutors arguments?
Are any evidences belonging to the Accused unnecessary?

When a series killer is charged, are the evidence of the accused unnecessary?

Roman Catholic plundered the Albigenes, and they burnt Bibles and literatures. Why didn't they leave any literature or Bible of Veaudois? I heard that Albigenes or Veaudois were quite famous for preserving Bibles and they preserved many Bibles. Where are they now?
Why did Roman Catholic leave no literature of Albigenes?
After the Prosecutors( RC) burnt down all the evidences, now you are asking the Advocators of the victims to present the evidences. Isn't this nonsense?
Albigenes were famous for preserving Bible Scriptures. Why doesn't RC have any Bible possessed by Albigenes?
Is it because RC didn't want to reveal the True Bibles? or it was because RC wanted to slander them with what was not believed by them?
Wasn't it because RC was afraid that RC may be condemned as killing innocent True Believers?

Why does RC try to erase all the evidences and record of the killed by them? What secret do they have about this?

Does your court destroy all the record and evidences after sentencing death penalty to the accused without any proof, but with the claims from the Prosecutors only?

As a Lawyer, please think about this matter logically. Unless you find some fundamental problem with RC's history, you are not a good lawyer even though I am very much and often amazed at your pinpoint use of vocabularies.

 

Eliyahu,

People have been wondering these things regarding the Catholic Church of Rome for a looooooong time now. Its been said many times..."Its hard for dead men to leave documentation"

Of course those are very good and logical points you make.

But be careful. You tread these waters too much and the expected charge of being a dreaded "Anti Catholic hate monger" will come your way.

Grace and peace,

Mike

 

Eliyahu, the defendants' views and their evidencewere recorded. That's the point I was trying to make by linking you to Montaillou: if you take the time to read the book you will see that Fournier's Inquisition meticulously recorded the 'defence statements' of the accused Cathars; the records were preserved because when Fournier became Pope Benedict, he had a sense of self-importance and wanted the records of his earlier work as Bishop-Inquisitor of Pamiers to be preserved for posterity. HERE'S ANOTHER LINK FOR YOU TO THE RECORDS

So, even ignoring as you have the Cathar document of the Ritual Cathare de Lyon, the victims have left us their evidence to inspect - and I would encourage you to inspect it for yourself.

 

Is it your custom that you rely on the rulings of the court when you judge the evidences of the defendants? If you insist that the court rulings or the plaintiff's claims are enough for the evidence and for the judgment, then you are confessing that you are not a qualified lawyer at all.

If I were the lawyer or the attorney for the defendant, I would demand the proofs that the defendants are quilty, and such proofs must have come from the defendants, not from the plaintiff. Throughout the history, plaintiffs and the victors forged and manipulated the evidences all the time.
Let's take the example of Armenian Genocide. Does Turkish government admit it? Nope! Do they provide the evidences of the true reality? Nope!

The information about the Roman Catholic masacres are provided by Roman Catholic? Nope!
They never confess the truth voluntarily but do it when they are pinched and are in impasse as they encounter the challenges by the opponents.

When RC eradicated Albigenes, they must have had certain evidences to torture and kill them, and they had indeed. Then what did RC do with the evidences? Does RC still keep them? If so, they should reveal them. If not, they are forging false accusations.

I believe that Albigenes would have refused calling Mary as Mother of God, refused Infant Baptism, refused making Idols, refused Idol Worship, refused Papacy, refused Purgatory, etc.
Therefore they were branded as Heretics and RC added many false accusations. From God's point of view they were true believers refusing Idol Worship, while RC were Idol worshipping pagan religion with lots of superstitious traditions.

This is why RC destroyed all the true evidences which came from Albigenes.

-What were the assertions of Albi about Infant Baptism? Do you find any evidence?
-what were the evidence of Albi about Idol Worship?
- What did Albi say about Theotokos?
- What did Albi say about Infant Baptism?

Do you have any evidence supporting what Albi believed ?
Do you judge any people only by the accusers evidences? In that case you can hold the Judgment even in the absence of the accused, right?

This is why RC led the medieval age as Dark Age, I believe.

The reason why RC destroyed all the evidences of Albigenes was because Albi's doctrines were more faithful with Bible and RC was afraid that they are found as heretic disobeying the Bible teachings.

 

This makes no sense. You would make your defendant prove his guilt to the court?

 

Maybe, it hasn't been found because it never existed except in the minds of a few conspiracy theorists. Book burners have never been successful to the point of eliminating all of the books. If the Catholic church was so good at eliminating heretical writings, why are the gnostic writings still in existance?

 

What is wrong is wrong, and we must speak up against the false doctrines.
If we look at Rev 7, we notice hundreds of millions of believers are coming out of the Great Tribulation. I am quite hopeful about the future and God will lead the true believers to cleanse themselves with the Blood of Jesus Christ. We must fight the Idolatry and Paganism.
At the time of Elijah, God told him that 7,000 were left who didn't kneel down to Baal. They were the true believers, but only Elijah was the one who fought against Baal while the other 7,000 were quiet. That is why Elijah only enjoyed the Rapture.

What if God says today, only the people who fight the Great Harlot will be raptured and the remainders will be left to experience thru the Great Tribulation? Which way will you choose ?

If you read Rev 11 carefully, 2 witnesses are taken up, and the remnants give glory to God. The 2 witnesses are explained well in Zechariah 4, and they are the key people of the church. This means the partial Rapture.

We must fight in defense of the Truth.

 

Is it your custom that you rely on the rulings of the court when you judge the evidences of the defendants? If you insist that the court rulings or the plaintiff's claims are enough for the evidence and for the judgment, then you are confessing that you are not a qualified lawyer at all.

If I were the lawyer or the attorney for the defendant, I would demand the proofs that the defendants are quilty, and such proofs must have come from the defendants, not from the plaintiff. [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]They did come from the defendants! Didn't you read the transcripts I linked you to?

Eliyahu, I'm really not sure what you're on about here: you ask for something and I give it to you and you then ask for it again.

 

This is the problem with your logic!
Were the documents written by the defendants?

That is what the accusers claim that the defendants said so. I want the literatures written by the defendants directly!

 

Then try the Ritual Cathare de Lyon. You're not going to get much more than that from a predominantly illiterate age.

 

Matt, let's evaluate this case.
As you presented this site:
http://www2.sjsu.edu/depts/english/Fournier/afrancou.htm

The main argument is that Agnes and Raymond refused taking the oath to tell the truth.

Read Matt 5:33-37. How does Jesus tell you about Swearing?
Inquisitors and the Bishop are forcing the women to take the Oath, which is absolutely disobeying the teachings of Jesus, and this woman Agnes refused to do so, in order to keep the faith.

Then she was burnt! Do you think Roman Catholic was right in this case?
Who was Heretic?

Moreover, do you think RC preserved the correct record of those women and their sect?

 

I guess nobody wants to concider this...

Maybe, it hasn't been found because it never existed except in the minds of a few conspiracy theorists. Book burners have never been successful to the point of eliminating all of the books. If the Catholic church was so good at eliminating heretical writings, why are the gnostic writings still in existance?

 

Indeed, Chemnitz. And why did the Catholic Church faithfully record the proto-evangelical beliefs of the Waldenses, but allegedly distort those of the Cathars? Incidentally, it would appear that poor Agnes was a Waldensian rather than a Cathar (the key words there are 'Poor of Lyon', a reference to 'Poor Waldo of Lyon' who some suggest founded the movement). And no, I don't think she was a heretic and it was obviously wrong to burn her. What about the other defendants - would you say they were Christian?

 

I think I've got you a LINK TO THE RITUEL CATHARE DE LYON - the third bullet in particular makes interesting reading... AND HERE'S ANOTHER LINK TO IT

[ETA - the above is a link to a Gnostic website - hope that's OK]

 

Ok, we can refere to a certain irrelevent site too, to verify certain issue.

But, I don't think Albigenes or Cathari had no literatures written by themselves. What you present so far are the literatures written by RC, based on the interrogation conducted by Rc, against Cathari or Albigenes.

Even today, let RC write down a comment on Plymouth Brethren. They would not understand the Lord's Supper, would not know the difference between their Eucharist and Lord's Supper.

In some places, some people go out of Plymouth Brethren, then establish another group, then RC judge them as a part of PB, then ascribe what that new sect claim to be the doctrines of PB too. Watchmanee and Witness Lee are different each other, even though Witness Lee inherited from Watchman Nee mostly. The followers of Lee claim almost the same as Modalism, while Watchman Nee didn't. There are many things about Dispensationalism or Bullingerism too. Therefore judging any group without having their own writings or claims is erroneous.

Main problem is that RC was in the position to keep the record of such sects if they wanted to, but they destroyed all the records as they burnt the Bibles and Texts. This is proven by the fact that the absolute majority of the Bible texts are discovered in the region of Eastern churches. What RC did with the Bible?

Does RC have any Bible preserved by Veaudois or Albigenes because they were famous for preserving Bible?

 

OK, Eliyahu, I give up! The documents I linked to in the last post were Cathar not Catholic. Everytime I give you what you ask for, you ignore it!

I'm exiting this dialogue of the deaf.

 

Again, if the RCC was so proficient at destroying books why are there still copies of the gnostic gospels?

The locations of where archeological digs have found biblical texts does not prove anything about the RCC burning books. What it could prove is there were a sizeable number of Christians in the area, nothing more.

 

Sorry for that. But the reason why I don't accept them is because of the lack of authenticity of them. Sometimes even Wesleyans were handed over unreliable resources. Until I am convinced about their own belief, I would keep them in question. There were strong tendency of RC that they(RC) drove certain groups into their own classified categories such as Gnostics, or Modalism, Manichees etc.
So many atrocities conducted by RC such as Inquisition and fornication, Idol business, Papacy etc are sufficient for us to distrust them.
even though I would not say all records of Rc are wrong, but in general we need very much discretion in accepting their argument.

 

So much easier to continue in delusions when you can ignore the existing evidence because it might, just might be tainted.