It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The Bright and Morning Star "Mary" Queen of Heaven and husband Allah
page: 8share:
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
I think this post should have received a lot more flags. I feel you made your point very well and I agree.
What if the whole sun worship thing started because the Gods really did come out from the sun or their ships looked like the sun.. ;-o just a thought.
I think this post should have received a lot more flags. I feel you made your point very well and I agree.
What if the whole sun worship thing started because the Gods really did come out from the sun or their ships looked like the sun.. ;-o just a thought.
edit on 12-7-2012 by Char-Lee because: sp
So they have all the slaves in the religions, though they also have the Light in some of them as well, forced to put it there or they would be removed
cosmically, and in their lower level mystery school, but the higher up you go its, all simpliifed, they serve Dark Side/Legion, they hope to be
promoted, they torture humanity with chaos, wars and inequality, and degrade women and the equality/cooperation required to raise healthy children,
and Love, the way home. The Progression is Family. And they entrap souls, regress them. And they use unnatural ways to open their pineals.
www.thelostword.dk...
Very dirty secrets at the top.
www.thelostword.dk...
Very dirty secrets at the top.
edit on 12-7-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
I've suspected for a while now that Jesuits (not the angel Gabriel) might have been involved in the writing of the Quran, since Mohammed was apparently illiterate or barely literate. It's also important to remember that the "black sheep" of the family was represented by Judas, who was of Arabic descent.
So now, when we look at current world history, what we see is something that might have begun as a very old feud, including all manner of deception and of an empire playing both sides against the middle, getting totally out of hand, and out of control, almost neccessitating the need for a new crusade spearheaded under the Bush Cheney cabal, even though the Vatican outwardly advised against the invasion of Iraq ("Babylon is fallen?").
I've suspected for a while now that Jesuits (not the angel Gabriel) might have been involved in the writing of the Quran, since Mohammed was apparently illiterate or barely literate. It's also important to remember that the "black sheep" of the family was represented by Judas, who was of Arabic descent.
So now, when we look at current world history, what we see is something that might have begun as a very old feud, including all manner of deception and of an empire playing both sides against the middle, getting totally out of hand, and out of control, almost neccessitating the need for a new crusade spearheaded under the Bush Cheney cabal, even though the Vatican outwardly advised against the invasion of Iraq ("Babylon is fallen?").
Originally posted by FlyersFan
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
But in philosophy your argument is an ad hominem, "attack against the person".
I don't have a philosophy ... I have facts. And the facts say Jack Chick tracts are wrong .. racist .. and ignorant. And for people to say that the tracts are a good source of information makes those people wrong, racist and ignorant. It's just that simple.
Quoting Jack Chick tracts as a reliable source? :shk: OMG.
Defending the use of Jack Chick tracts? That's pretty darn sick. (as the links prove)
I didn't say in your philosophy, I said in Philosophy. As in logic/ formal and informal debate.. Socrates, Plato... et cetra.
Originally posted by EricD
reply to post by NOTurTypical
The reference to Jack Chick isn't a spurious attack on a strawman or an attempt to dissemble. Jack Chick's 'mission' is where Alberto Rivera first gained popularity and gave him the fame/notoriety that supported him for the rest of his life.
Any discussion about Rivera that doesn't include Chick is lacking at best. Dismissing claims about Chick as being out of place during a larger topic on Rivera is like claiming that Engels is irrelevant to the discussion of Marxism.
Eric
I didn't say it was a straw man. I said it was as ad hom fallacy. Completely different variety. Circumstantial specifically and poisoning the well.
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
I've suspected for a while now that Jesuits (not the angel Gabriel) might have been involved in the writing of the Quran, since Mohammed was apparently illiterate or barely literate. It's also important to remember that the "black sheep" of the family was represented by Judas, who was of Arabic descent.
Amongst their other nefarious abilities, do you believe that the Jesuits are able to utilize time travel?
The Jesuits were founded by Ignatious Loyola in 1534. The Quran was compiled around 640.
Eric
Originally posted by NOTurTypical
I didn't say it was a straw man. I said it was as ad hom fallacy. Completely different variety. Circumstantial specifically and poisoning the well.
Ad hom on who, Chick or Rivera? It can't be on Chick as there were no claims by Chick being assaulted unless you are using the term as a subset of Poisoning the Well.
Poisoning the Well is more appropriate, but it becomes a lot less relevant when the statements, although prejudicial, are accurate and germane to the discussion.
Of the three, I believe that a strawman argument is the best fit as it is bringing a new party into the discussion and assailing him instead of the primary subject.
Regardless, Rivera was a fraud and a conman and the bulk of his support came from Chick readers and devotees.
Eric
reply to post by babloyi
That was a well researched and impressive refutation.
I look forward to the OP's response.
Eric
That was a well researched and impressive refutation.
I look forward to the OP's response.
Eric
Originally posted by Unity_99
reply to post by queenofangels_17
Islam was created by Rome and the world leaders. One thing, unlike Christianity, which progresses from violence to peace, it progresses from peace to violence.
Its leader was possibly a Bishop of Rome, and there was alot of evidence that there were many Christians livingin the land at the time. So not just the cult of the moon.
Islam was not created by Rome and the world leaders. If they did then they would be able to control it, but since they can't control it, they try to divide it but since they can't divide it they try to make it appear as the enemy by any means they can.
The Emperor Heraclius (610-641) was the leader of the Roman Empire at the time of the sending of the Prophet Muhammad. One day at court he told his companions about a dream he had, "‘I saw our Empire fall and victory go to a people who do not follow our religion.' At first he thought this must refer to the Jews and he even had it in mind to kill all the Jews living under his rule but then an envoy from the governor of Basra arrived with a message for the Emperor: O Emperor Heraclius. there are some Arabs in the city who are speaking of wonderful happenings in their country', and he then told of what he had heard about the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
On hearing this Heraclius commanded his soldiers: Go and find me someone who can tell me more about this.' The soldiers, however, did not find those who had been talking about the Prophet (pbuh), but instead found Abu Sufyan and some of his companions and brought them before the Emperor. Heraclius asked, 'Is there anyone among you who is a close relative of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh)?' Abu Sufyan replied, ‘I am.’
So the Emperor addressed all the questions to him, thinking he would know the Prophet (pbuh) best. He said, 'Tell me what is the Prophet's position in your tribe"
Abu Sufyan said, 'he is a member of our most respected family.
Did anyone before him say the kinds of things he says?' the Emperor went on. ‘No.’ was the reply. 'And was he ever accused of lying or cheating?'
‘Never.’ And then the Emperor asked: ‘And what about his ideas and opinions, and his powers of reasoning?’ ‘No one has ever had cause to doubt him or find fault with his reasoning’, replied Abu Sufyan. ‘Who follows him, the proud or the humble?’
‘The humble.’ ‘Do his followers increase or decrease?’
‘They increase’, said Abu Sufyan, ‘none of his followers leave him.’
The Emperor then turned to other matters and asked: ‘If he makes a treaty, does he keep it?’
‘Yes’, Abu Sufyan replied.
‘Did you ever fight against him?’ inquired the Emperor.
To which Abu Sufyan answered: ‘Yes. Sometimes we won, sometimes he won, but he never broke his word in any agreement.’
The emperor then asked: ‘What does he say people must do?’
‘To worship one God’, said Abu Sufyan. ‘He forbids people to worship as their fathers worshipped, and says they must pray to Allah alone, give alms, keep their word, and fulfill their duties and responsibilities.’
Abu Sufyan had spoken the truth even though he was an enemy of the prophet (pbuh), and did not become a Muslim until the very end of his life. But he was afraid to lie before the members of his caravan who were also there with him. The meeting ended with these words from the Emperor: ‘I see from this that he is indeed a prophet. You said that his followers don not leave him which proves they have true faith, for faith, does not enter the heart and then go away. I knew he was coming and if what you say is true, he will surely conquer me. If I were with him now, I would wash his feet. You may leave now.’
It was not long after this that the messenger, Dihyah, arrived at the Syrian court bearing the Prophet Muhammad’s letter which said, ‘If you accept Islam you will be safe and Allah will give you a double reward. If you do not, you will have to live with results of your decision.’
He said to Dihyah, ‘I know your master is a true prophet of Allah. Our books tell of his coming. If I were not afraid that the Romans would kill me, I would join Islam. You must visit Bishop Daghatir and tell him every thing. His word is more respected among the people than mine.’
So Dihyah related the message to the Bishop and when he heard it, Daghatir said, ‘Yes, your master whom we call Ahmed is mentioned in our scriptures.’ He then changed from his black ropes into white ones and went and spoke to the people gathered in the church. ’O Romans, a letter has come to us from Ahmed, in which he calls us to Allah. I bear witness that there is no Divinity but Allah and that Ahmed is his slave and messenger
But on hearing this the crowd grew angry and attacked Daghatir, beating him until he was dead.
---- so no, Islam was not created by Rome.
reply to post by queenofangels_17
Is this story a parable or is it supposed to be based on fact?
Do you have any sources for this?
Thanks,
Eric
Is this story a parable or is it supposed to be based on fact?
Do you have any sources for this?
Thanks,
Eric
Originally posted by EricD
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
I've suspected for a while now that Jesuits (not the angel Gabriel) might have been involved in the writing of the Quran, since Mohammed was apparently illiterate or barely literate. It's also important to remember that the "black sheep" of the family was represented by Judas, who was of Arabic descent.
Amongst their other nefarious abilities, do you believe that the Jesuits are able to utilize time travel?
The Jesuits were founded by Ignatious Loyola in 1534. The Quran was compiled around 640.
Eric
Fair enough, thanks for clarifying. But it's interesting how Mary is mentioned more in the Quran than in the Bible, and the mishmash of borrowed material from the Bible, I don't know, there's just something fishy about it is all I can say, and indeed Judas was an Arab, and they sure are getting the scapegoat treatment as the black sheep of the family. Then again, since about every sixth line of the Quran advocates violence, the growth of Islam and it's central tenet of domination can't be taken lightly.
reply to post by queenofangels_17
It seems there is some evidence, testimony that it was, and even logic in history. Not to mention that all these primitive barbaric customs that plague fundmentalism in all the religions, seem to be the slave chaos and suffering the bloodines impose, with actual codes to everything else but spirituality in the religions.
There are light squares in this, but most particularly Christ and Buddha, but sprinkled through. The vedas have some too. There are grass roots forms eerywhere too, such as Native writings. BUT, anyone that teaches harm or retaliation or smiting, or inequality, or forcing, or slavery is Satan/Saturn and dark star coding.
Don't buy into anything wholely. For some reason however I believe most people writing in this way aren't real citizens, but mostly black ops and the like because they really try to herd people into barbaric serfdom.
en.wikipedia.org...
Very very likely that he was a Bishop of Rome.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.redicecreations.com...
Aisha was probably a corruption of Catherine of Alexandria.
en.wikipedia.org...
Red flags to the mystery babylon coding in Islam is muhommad married Aisha at 6, and consummated at 9, and those numbers are quite significant to them. Its all a fairy tale as most of the religions are, and some history and coding, info they keep hidden.
It seems there is some evidence, testimony that it was, and even logic in history. Not to mention that all these primitive barbaric customs that plague fundmentalism in all the religions, seem to be the slave chaos and suffering the bloodines impose, with actual codes to everything else but spirituality in the religions.
There are light squares in this, but most particularly Christ and Buddha, but sprinkled through. The vedas have some too. There are grass roots forms eerywhere too, such as Native writings. BUT, anyone that teaches harm or retaliation or smiting, or inequality, or forcing, or slavery is Satan/Saturn and dark star coding.
Don't buy into anything wholely. For some reason however I believe most people writing in this way aren't real citizens, but mostly black ops and the like because they really try to herd people into barbaric serfdom.
en.wikipedia.org...
Christianity, which originated in the Middle East, was the major religion of the region from the fourth century until the Saracen Muslim Conquests of the 7th century. Christians make up 5% of the population, down from 20% in the early 20th century.
Very very likely that he was a Bishop of Rome.
en.wikipedia.org...
www.redicecreations.com...
Aisha was probably a corruption of Catherine of Alexandria.
en.wikipedia.org...
Red flags to the mystery babylon coding in Islam is muhommad married Aisha at 6, and consummated at 9, and those numbers are quite significant to them. Its all a fairy tale as most of the religions are, and some history and coding, info they keep hidden.
edit on 12-7-2012 by Unity_99
because: (no reason given)
reply to post by EricD
When Muhammad was at peace with the Meccans for a while, he sent out envoys with letters to all the rulers of all the nearby countries- I am not sure which, but they did include Byzantine Rome, Persia and Abyssinia.
I'm not on a computer with a good enough connection to research this just now, but one of these letters is in recorded history.
PS: Thanks for the appreciation. I'm waiting on Lonewolf as well!
When Muhammad was at peace with the Meccans for a while, he sent out envoys with letters to all the rulers of all the nearby countries- I am not sure which, but they did include Byzantine Rome, Persia and Abyssinia.
I'm not on a computer with a good enough connection to research this just now, but one of these letters is in recorded history.
PS: Thanks for the appreciation. I'm waiting on Lonewolf as well!
edit on 12-7-2012 by babloyi because: (no reason given)
These two are very interesting reads, since they have numerology, astrology, cosmology and numerous things coded, electric universe, cycles, etc.
heavenawaits.wordpress.com...
adventofdeception.com...
Now why is it that 666 is treated so differently.
heavenawaits.wordpress.com...
adventofdeception.com...
Now why is it that 666 is treated so differently.
Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
I've suspected for a while now that Jesuits (not the angel Gabriel) might have been involved in the writing of the Quran, since Mohammed was apparently illiterate or barely literate. It's also important to remember that the "black sheep" of the family was represented by Judas, who was of Arabic descent.
So now, when we look at current world history, what we see is something that might have begun as a very old feud, including all manner of deception and of an empire playing both sides against the middle, getting totally out of hand, and out of control, almost neccessitating the need for a new crusade spearheaded under the Bush Cheney cabal, even though the Vatican outwardly advised against the invasion of Iraq ("Babylon is fallen?").
Babylon hasn't fallen yet, that isn't set to happen yet. Muhammad didn't write the Quran, he captured a christian and a jew and told them he'd spare their lives if they wrote him a holy book and so they agreed, but the jew self destructed and encoded the words "i do not believe" and "this does not matter" all throughout the Quran. After the book was finished Muhammad beheaded them both. Avi Lipkin did a segment on it at the bible prophecy club.
The numbers 6 and 9 are occult/kabbala, and illuminati.
And relate to Aisha.
illuminatusobservor.blogspot.ca...
Perhaps why the idea of girls consummating marriages at 9 came into play.
Brian Adams, "the summer of 69" comes to mind.
Red flags. And its not just Islam, but this is an illustration. All the religions are very coded.
I just found this on 6 9:
new-age-spirituality.com...
No coincidences.
And the rest of this article is interesting too:
They really do things by the numbers.
256.com...
Even Delta flight 1989, crew of 9, passengers 69.
I have to add this.
There seems to be a numerological occult code for 2012, in alot of things including the Koran.
imovieshd.blogspot.ca...
And relate to Aisha.
illuminatusobservor.blogspot.ca...
V as 5 is hinge or locking point. V is the Feminine. It is the upper half of the X, hence is 1/2 of the Letter X, which is 10. The Sum of 1:V (5) is 15 is the Letter O, which is the "Feminine" or "the Egg". V clearly links the importance of Roman numbers to the larger Letter Number philosophy or system, which, as sharing properties of X, clearly links qaballistic properties of English lettering to Roman numbers....
In the case of FIVE, the word must then, also equal 69. This is easy to see because in the word FIVE, the Letter F is already a 6 (F is located at 6). What remains is Roman numbers IV, which is 4, which further is added to E, or 5, to reveal (IV)+E=4+5=9.
Clearly SIX = FIVE - if you know how to deconstruct the Code.
All of this, and so much more, hints at the critical importance that Roman numerals play in the larger philosophical construct which is found in English.
Perhaps why the idea of girls consummating marriages at 9 came into play.
Brian Adams, "the summer of 69" comes to mind.
Red flags. And its not just Islam, but this is an illustration. All the religions are very coded.
I just found this on 6 9:
new-age-spirituality.com...
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A B C D E F G H I
J K L M N O P Q R
S T U V W X Y Z
If we change the letters of ANTHONY BLAIR P M to numbers we get the ominous 69 which added is a 15 = 6
No coincidences.
And the rest of this article is interesting too:
PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH is also part of the new world order and his name is also a 6 and THE WAR ON TERROR IS ALSO three sixes, 6 6 6. ISRAEL'S ARIEL SHARON also reduces to a 6. Israel refuses to handover Ariel Sharon for war crimes, yet still commits
”revenge killings” going back to W.W.II
The centre for world Zionism and world trade, is CITY OF NEW YORK which translates to 3-3-6-6 this adds to 6-6-6=9 the material number of man. And the star of David, has six points, six flats and six triangles, again the 6 6 6.
They really do things by the numbers.
256.com...
Even Delta flight 1989, crew of 9, passengers 69.
I have to add this.
There seems to be a numerological occult code for 2012, in alot of things including the Koran.
imovieshd.blogspot.ca...
edit on 12-7-2012 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by babloyi
So you're going to sit there and tell me, with all this symbolism staring you in the face everywhere you or anyone else goes, that you're going to ignore it? Fine by me, not gonna hurt my feelings any. I could reference the bible but if i did that you would attack me on that and since most people on this site lack the Ruach ha Kodesh to show them these things i figured i put it in images people could understand. So what it appears, is that you have a problem with me showing images that lend physical and concrete proof to the deception going on around you because you want to continue on in your fantasy that your religion is the true and right one.
Research the meaning of Heylel ben Shachar. In Arabic it's Hilal. And there's the fact that at Fatima the town named after Muhammad's daughter a so called vision of "Mary" supposedly appeared "clothed in light" who they called "Our Lady" Doesn't strike you as interesting?
Btw read judges 8:21-28 and pay particular attention to 25, thats alot of crescent ornaments from Arabs they gave to Gideon and they ended up "playing the Harlot" with.
There it is again the crescent moon...a.k.a. Heylel.
And here's something else:
www.discerningthetimesonline.net...
First off, it is a bit intellectually dishonest to show random images and image macros with no references and explanations, and then make claims about them. Heck, when EricD asked you about one of them, you had to tell him plainly that you had no idea. This doesn't seem like 7 months of research well spent.
So you're going to sit there and tell me, with all this symbolism staring you in the face everywhere you or anyone else goes, that you're going to ignore it? Fine by me, not gonna hurt my feelings any. I could reference the bible but if i did that you would attack me on that and since most people on this site lack the Ruach ha Kodesh to show them these things i figured i put it in images people could understand. So what it appears, is that you have a problem with me showing images that lend physical and concrete proof to the deception going on around you because you want to continue on in your fantasy that your religion is the true and right one.
Research the meaning of Heylel ben Shachar. In Arabic it's Hilal. And there's the fact that at Fatima the town named after Muhammad's daughter a so called vision of "Mary" supposedly appeared "clothed in light" who they called "Our Lady" Doesn't strike you as interesting?
Btw read judges 8:21-28 and pay particular attention to 25, thats alot of crescent ornaments from Arabs they gave to Gideon and they ended up "playing the Harlot" with.
There it is again the crescent moon...a.k.a. Heylel.
And here's something else:
www.discerningthetimesonline.net...
edit on 12-7-2012 by lonewolf19792000 because: (no reason
given)
Originally posted by EricD
Rivera was a fraud and a conman...
The Catholic Church is the biggest fraud in the history of the world...
Rivera EXPOSED that fraud...
Your posts seem to be DEFENDING it...
This is WHY the Catholic "Church" hates him and many others like him.
Like ALL other frauds, all we see is nothing but LIES
Religion is one BIG lie...
I choose NOT to believe LIES or those who defend them.
Answer To Article In Christianity Today
Three pages of Christianity Today were devoted to "proving Alberto to be a fraud."
"Sixthly, though Rome has proven herself to be the greatest fraud ever put off on mankind, I do not recall your magazine going to any great length to expose her as such, even though such a move on your part would be a most blessed benefit to all of mankind, especially the body of Christ.
Why is Christianity Today so anxious to condemn a man who is exposing a false religious system?
We offer this challenge to any so called "expert on the cults," or any other skeptic. Before you accuse these two fine Christian brethren, first get your facts right. Attacking the cults is good and useful; however, don't focus on the minor cults without exposing the biggest, most evil and dangerous one first. Otherwise, don't be surprised if true born again Bible-believing Christians view your efforts with suspicion.
Answer To Article In Christianity Today
“I know the Jesuits tried to change the truth, saying he never was a priest and destroying all evidence backing that up. They have tried to do the same to me, but Fr. Rivera was telling the truth without question. I know that for a fact” ~ Bishop Bouffard.
Corroborating testimony Bishop Bouffard & Fr. Alberto Rivera (Vatican tried to cover-up both Fr. Rivera and Bishop Bouffard)
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
Oh my goodness OP, you went out of your way to go on about what was mentioned in the "Crusader's Gold Thread."
Hoard of gold coins found at Israel Crusades site
Threads of this nature are subjects I tend to ignore. Whom am I to comment on matters of faith or religious dogmas? To each their own in that regard. However, since you went out of your way to furnish sources as requested in the other thread. I thought it is only reasonable to leave a comment. I don't know where to begin, but I can tell you for certain that Catholics and Muslims get along about as well as Muslims and Jews. That is the truth, and to my knowledge the Pope did not commission agents to Arabia to concoct a Arab messiah. That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. I mean that with all due respect, but who thinks up this nonsense? This thread has turned into a kooky Dan Brown novel. As for that Alberto Rivera person? From what I have read up on the man, it appears that he was never a priest to begin with, and was a two-bit conman?
The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick
There are snippets in the article said to be from prominent evangelical and Protestant publications. So, apparently, they were not swallowing the snake oil as well? I don't know what to make about the your claims, but I will give my opinion on it. I think it is a bunch of esoteric bunk. Read in between the lines all you want, and string together whatever? It does not make it true or substantive to anything about the history of the Roman Catholic Church or Islam for that matter.
Catholics knights killed Muslims during the Crusades and often referred to them as "Infidels," as they refer to Christians and Jews today. Does that look like kinship? To this day, they remain at bitter odds with each other over what took place during the Crusades, and over a whole myriad of religious differences. I see no similarities or kinship between Islam or the Catholic Church. The Catholics recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ, whereas; the Muslims recognize Jesus as a prophet. That ought to put the two at odds right there, and I would consider it a matter of major objection between the faiths. Like trying to fit a square in a circular hole. As for the Mary subject, Catholics do not worship Mary or pray to her as they do God.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
That is straight from the horses mouth, and not some guy stewing in their basement butchering history and biblical text. As for Allah, it is simply an Arabic translation of the English word for God. Arab Christians pray to Allah as much as Muslims. It is the word for God in their language. They are not praying to a pagan moon god. Go speak to a priest or an imam about some of these claims. Go straight to the source, and I am fairly certain they would oblige anyone whom may have honest questions about this subject or anything about their faiths. OP, you provided the source material as requested in the "Crusader Gold Thread," and I thank you for that. However, I am quite skeptical about the voracity of the sources and claims you have made. To each their own I guess.
Oh my goodness OP, you went out of your way to go on about what was mentioned in the "Crusader's Gold Thread."
Hoard of gold coins found at Israel Crusades site
Threads of this nature are subjects I tend to ignore. Whom am I to comment on matters of faith or religious dogmas? To each their own in that regard. However, since you went out of your way to furnish sources as requested in the other thread. I thought it is only reasonable to leave a comment. I don't know where to begin, but I can tell you for certain that Catholics and Muslims get along about as well as Muslims and Jews. That is the truth, and to my knowledge the Pope did not commission agents to Arabia to concoct a Arab messiah. That is the craziest thing I have ever heard. I mean that with all due respect, but who thinks up this nonsense? This thread has turned into a kooky Dan Brown novel. As for that Alberto Rivera person? From what I have read up on the man, it appears that he was never a priest to begin with, and was a two-bit conman?
The Nightmare World of Jack T. Chick
While it is natural to expect Catholics to be upset over Chick and Rivera's outrageous claims, many Evangelicals were upset as well, and they began to investigate Rivera. Prominent Protestant publications, including Christianity Today, Cornerstone, and even Forward—a publication of Walter Martin's Christian Research Institute—did investigations leading to exposés of Rivera as a fraud.
There are snippets in the article said to be from prominent evangelical and Protestant publications. So, apparently, they were not swallowing the snake oil as well? I don't know what to make about the your claims, but I will give my opinion on it. I think it is a bunch of esoteric bunk. Read in between the lines all you want, and string together whatever? It does not make it true or substantive to anything about the history of the Roman Catholic Church or Islam for that matter.
Catholics knights killed Muslims during the Crusades and often referred to them as "Infidels," as they refer to Christians and Jews today. Does that look like kinship? To this day, they remain at bitter odds with each other over what took place during the Crusades, and over a whole myriad of religious differences. I see no similarities or kinship between Islam or the Catholic Church. The Catholics recognize the divinity of Jesus Christ, whereas; the Muslims recognize Jesus as a prophet. That ought to put the two at odds right there, and I would consider it a matter of major objection between the faiths. Like trying to fit a square in a circular hole. As for the Mary subject, Catholics do not worship Mary or pray to her as they do God.
Catechism of the Catholic Church
IN BRIEF
2680 Prayer is primarily addressed to the Father; it can also be directed toward Jesus, particularly by the invocation of his holy name: "Lord Jesus Christ, Son of God, have mercy on us sinners."
2681 "No one can say 'Jesus is Lord', except by the Holy Spirit" (1 Cor 12:3). The Church invites us to invoke the Holy Spirit as the interior Teacher of Christian prayer.
2682 Because of Mary's singular cooperation with the action of the Holy Spirit, the Church loves to pray in communion with the Virgin Mary, to magnify with her the great things the Lord has done for her, and to entrust supplications and praises to her.
That is straight from the horses mouth, and not some guy stewing in their basement butchering history and biblical text. As for Allah, it is simply an Arabic translation of the English word for God. Arab Christians pray to Allah as much as Muslims. It is the word for God in their language. They are not praying to a pagan moon god. Go speak to a priest or an imam about some of these claims. Go straight to the source, and I am fairly certain they would oblige anyone whom may have honest questions about this subject or anything about their faiths. OP, you provided the source material as requested in the "Crusader Gold Thread," and I thank you for that. However, I am quite skeptical about the voracity of the sources and claims you have made. To each their own I guess.
edit on 12-7-2012 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Murgatroid
The Catholic Church is the biggest fraud in the history of the world...
Rivera EXPOSED that fraud...
Your posts seem to be DEFENDING it...
This is WHY the Catholic "Church" hates him and many others like him.
Yes, well, that's interesting, I guess. But could you do me the favor of actually answering the critiques of Rivera's claims that I posted?
You and I are clearly going to disagree about the Catholic Church, so for the sake of the discussion of Rivera, why don't we limit our conversation to the veracity of his statements. I listed about 5 questions a few pages back regarding his claims. If you can shed some light on them, it would be appreciated.
If you can't, it would certainly be understandable.
Eric