Chris Pinto's radio show today is about a Polish film that has recently come out, about a massacre of Jews in a small town in Poland during WWII, by the Catholic residents of the town, in keeping with the Catholicism-inspired Nazi murders of Jews. Pinto touches on other similar stories he's covered in the past.
The Jedwabne Massacre
Here's a Jewish source on the massacre
And here's another
Tuesday, November 5, 2013
Monday, November 4, 2013
Another one from Chris Pinto: The Final Antichrist
Radio show 11/04/13: The Final Antichrist gets into many questions about the identity of the Antichrist as understood down the centuries, most of them, non-Catholic anyway, identifying the papacy, and how it all relates to the FINAL Antichrist as described in Revelation.
Mentions that the familiar practice we often encounter today in discussions of end times prophecy, of guessing that this or that world leader is THE Antichrist, is "historically a Catholic thing to do," while Protestants have always identified him as the Pope. From quotes shows how it took Luther a couple of years to be convinced that the Pope is the Antichrist, then gets into quotes from Francis Turretin a century or so later, who also arrived at the conclusion that the Pope is the Antichrist.
Some of the amazing claims of the papacy to be above all law, "the lawless one."
Some discussion of the meaning of the Mark of the Beast according to Turretin
Historical understanding of being forbidden by the Antichrist to buy or sell.
Mentions that the familiar practice we often encounter today in discussions of end times prophecy, of guessing that this or that world leader is THE Antichrist, is "historically a Catholic thing to do," while Protestants have always identified him as the Pope. From quotes shows how it took Luther a couple of years to be convinced that the Pope is the Antichrist, then gets into quotes from Francis Turretin a century or so later, who also arrived at the conclusion that the Pope is the Antichrist.
Some of the amazing claims of the papacy to be above all law, "the lawless one."
Some discussion of the meaning of the Mark of the Beast according to Turretin
Historical understanding of being forbidden by the Antichrist to buy or sell.
Monday, January 21, 2013
Wednesday, December 19, 2012
Prayer Request: Catholic Church Persecuting Bible Believers in Mexico
Chris Pinto starts out his radio show today with a plea for prayer for pastors in Mexico who are being persecuted by the Catholic Church there. I've transcribed his email below, but you can hear the whole thing and Pinto's comments in the first six minutes of his show at this link:
(the rest of the show is a continuation of his discussion about the gun control movement in the wake of the Connecticut school murders, focusing on the situation in Australia, conclusing with some interesting comments about how the Church has been "disarmed" by the corruptions of the Bible..)
I've got to make this comment for anyone who listens to the radio show. Pinto describes the evangelizing efforts in Mexico as "compeling" the Catholics to become Bible believers, and I know he doesn't mean that they were in any sense FORCING the people to become Bible believers, but for some reason Pinto uses the word "compel" at times when he really means "convinced" them.
Here's the email:
"Brother Humberto Gomez just called me. His Indian preachers from the mountains of Hidalgo have again been imprisoned by the Indian Catholic Church. They are hanging up their bodies in torturous fashion, like the Inquisition, and threaten to switch to hanging by their necks until dead unless they sign a document recanting their nonCatholic Biblical faith.The government rarely intervenes in cases like this, Brother Humberto said. It's on the news already in Mexico but though they've been imprisoned and tortured no help has arrivdes. Please pray for for help to arrive quickly. Please pray for these men of God to be rescued."Then there is a note added by Brother Humberto:" Please keep praying. they just pulled out all the brethren to the meeting place, all the Christian evangelicals have been beaten and they had the main pastor, Celestino Cruz Hernandez, hanging by his arms and are threatening to hang him by the neck if he continues to refuse to recant his faith.All the Catholics have the area surrounded so the rest will not escape and that the authorities will not come near. The ladies and the children are very scared and they are not allowed to leave the village, and the Catholic leaders do not intervene."
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
The Protestant Reformation as skewed by Rome
I've been learning that it's very hard to find a source of information about anything to do with Protestant-Catholic conflicts that isn't skewed by Rome. It's everywhere. Here's a typical example from Wikipedia:
The word "schism" implies that the Protestant Reformation was nothing more than a division BETWEEN Christian churches, and of course implies that this was a serious error by the Protestants themselves, as a mere schism would be a violation of scripture.
It was not a schism, it was an absolute rejection of the Roman Catholic church by Catholics themselves, mostly priests, who had come to recognize that Rome was not Christian at all but in fact the Harlot Church of the Book of Revelation, and that the papacy is the seat of the Antichrist, or "man of sin."
It was a total condemnation of Rome, it was no "schism."
It's a very long article too, no doubt full of all kinds of scholarly facts and even some truth, but with a beginning like the above there is no doubt in my mind that the whole point is to lead the reader away from the truth down dozens of primrose-bordered rabbit trails.
Perhaps I'll be back with more.
The Protestant Reformation was the 16th-century schism within Western Christianity initiated by Martin Luther, John Calvin and other early Protestants.What's wrong with this?
The word "schism" implies that the Protestant Reformation was nothing more than a division BETWEEN Christian churches, and of course implies that this was a serious error by the Protestants themselves, as a mere schism would be a violation of scripture.
It was not a schism, it was an absolute rejection of the Roman Catholic church by Catholics themselves, mostly priests, who had come to recognize that Rome was not Christian at all but in fact the Harlot Church of the Book of Revelation, and that the papacy is the seat of the Antichrist, or "man of sin."
It was a total condemnation of Rome, it was no "schism."
It was sparked by the 1517 posting of Luther's Ninety-Five Theses. The efforts of the self-described "reformers", who objected to ("protested") the doctrines, rituals, and ecclesiastical structure of the Roman Catholic Church, led to the creation of new national Protestant churches. The Reformation was precipitated by earlier events within Europe, such as the Black Death and the Western Schism, which eroded people's faith in the Catholic Church and the Papacy that governed it. This, as well as many other factors, such as the mid 15th-century invention of the printing press, and the fall of the Eastern Roman Empire, contributed to the creation of Protestantism.[1]This is hardly more than a complicated Red Herring to distract from the real issues, the violations of the Church of Rome of the principles of Christianity and especially the true gospel of salvation. It's kind of a word salad of irrelevant facts designed to put the reader to sleep. Trying to pin the Reformation on the circumstances of the time rather than the moral and theological enormities of Rome is jesuitical deviousness.
It's a very long article too, no doubt full of all kinds of scholarly facts and even some truth, but with a beginning like the above there is no doubt in my mind that the whole point is to lead the reader away from the truth down dozens of primrose-bordered rabbit trails.
Perhaps I'll be back with more.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Catholic Priest calls for an end to The Vatican as contrary to the true faith
Another bit of fascinating news from Chris Pinto on today's radio show: CATHOLICS VOTE TO END VATICAN? A priest, Father John Mannion, retired from San Antonio, Texas to his native Galway, has written an article for the Irish Times, Faithful should distinguish between Catholic faith and Vatican state, clearly distinguishing between the power structure in Rome and the basic beliefs of Catholics, and suggesting maybe it's time to pray for an end to the Vatican state.
He gives some history of the Vatican in the article, and discusses the Inquisition:
He gives some history of the Vatican in the article, and discusses the Inquisition:
Current Catholic justice has its origin in the Roman Inquisition founded by pope Gregory IX in 1232, which ushered in one of the most shameful episodes in all of human history. It formalised the practices of killing, burning or imprisoning heretics.
Modified over time, it still exists under a changed name (Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith), but its rules owe much to its history and very little to contemporary standards of justice. Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was its head for a quarter of a century before he became pope in 2005. In its mode of operation the suspect gets very little information.
There is no independent judge, prosecutor or jury. An unknown defender is appointed from within the system. The accused is denied access to all documents related to the charge. All who take part in the trial are bound to secrecy, and there is no right of appeal.
Recently, Pope Benedict on his visit to Cuba pleaded for freedom for the Catholic Church there, but freedom within the church is a different matter.
At the time of the unification of Italy in 1870 the papal states stretched from Rome across to the Adriatic Sea and north to the river Po.
Jesus Christ might have said “my kingdom is not of this world”, but Pius 1X ordered a military defence of the papal states, shedding the blood of many, including Irish soldiers recruited by the Irish bishops, precisely because he could not function as vicar of Christ unless he had an earthly kingdom.
After unification, the new Italian parliament guaranteed the independence of the Holy See and offered compensation for lost territories, but Pius IX rejected the offer. In 1929 the Vatican state was set up by agreement between Mussolini and pope Pius XI, and Italy compensated it for the lost papal states.
The bishops of the second Vatican Council (1962-1965) proclaimed the church as the people of God, but failed to address the paradox inherited from Vatican I in 1870. At that time Pius IX persuaded the council to declare that “the pope has supreme, full, immediate and universal ordinary power in the church and he can always freely exercise this power” (canon 313 of the current code of canon law).
This contradicts the model of church in the Acts of the Apostles. So the ideals embodied in Vatican II have been essentially sidelined in the subsequent years because, as an English commentator recently noted, “the Vatican is the sole remaining absolute monarchy in Europe”.
Even the college of bishops is cut off because absolute power is vested in one office only, the papacy. Lord Acton said “power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. A convert to Catholicism, he was writing about the papacy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)