• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

The greatest forgery in history

Toke

Godless Socialist
Toke
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
8,171
Location
Denmark
I just had a 4 page pamplet dump in my letterslit.

It starts with the sabbat being holy, not sunday, and that the catholich church commited a forgery of the bible in year 336.
The cc even admids that it is its mark.

This is then confirmed by luther calling the cc for animal and antichrist.
It is then regretted that he collaporates in this lie.

The EU is part of a sunday movement trying to spread this mark of the beast.

There are also two different versions of 10 commandments.

The US is a evil force procecuting the christians (and terrorists) on behalf of the fundamentatist christians/powerelite.


The whole thing originates from www.endtimes.net

Can anyone tell me if this is fringe lunatics or mainstream??


Good news: "no one will feel gods anger unless they know the truth and rejects it."
I have newer read the bible and are safe, Piggy you are in truble
 
Last edited:
It doesn't sound much different than the stuff that Tony Alamo has been peddling for years; usually pamphlets written in very small fonts that go on and on about the Catholic church...
 
Interesting. I just had a co-worker tell me they used to be an athiest until they realized that the Catholic Church had edited the Bible and obviously did it so people would follow the Pope and not Jesus.


Never heard of someone GAINING faith for that reason.......


"Tony Alamo"? Sounds like the name of a cartoon show from the 70's.
 
I've been debating a Creationist on another forum for a long time who thinks that Piltdown Man was the greatest forgery/hoax in history. I'll provide more details upon request.
 
I knew before reading this that the bible was assembled at a church meeting in 300 some.
Wonder how they decided what to include, and what happended to the rest, bookburning?

If my summary above sounds incoherrent/selfcontradiction, it is because it is translated from a incorherrent text in danish.
 
Major religions are the greatest forgery in history -- just not the kind he's thinking of.
 
Pious scams include saints. All religions include them, to give the oppressed some illusion of reward for remaining oppressed instead of improving their lot by leaving the religion.
Tony and Susan Alamo used to have a vigorous presence here in So. Cal, but she died, and her body vanished. Tony is currently under investigation for child molestation in Texas.
His group here still litters the Mall parking lot with their flyers.
 
Last edited:
It is an important part of most religions to accept your lot in life, and hope for a better afterlife.
Peasant rebelions are most ungodly.
 
Toke said:
I knew before reading this that the bible was assembled at a church meeting in 300 some.
Wonder how they decided what to include, and what happended to the rest, bookburning?

If my summary above sounds incoherrent/selfcontradiction, it is because it is translated from a incorherrent text in danish.
Click to expand...

The Council of NiceaWP in 325CE was called to codify what the Christian church believed (I'll call it Christian, because it was the only church at the time forwarding the divinity of Christ). Up to that point, under on-again, off-again persecution by Rome, the church had gone in myriad directions, each more or less along the lines of it's most outspoken local priest/minister. Constantine (the Roman Emperor, sitting in the eastern capital of Constantinople who had converted to Christianity) called it because for his purposes an official church of the Roman Empire, to be useful, had to have a solid administration and a firm direction, to cut out the divisiveness. The outcomes of the council were decided by vote of the bishops attending, and those who lost were labeled heretics and enjoined by both by the church and by the empire from spreading their interpretations. Bookburning would, of course, have been part of that.

One of that council's goals was to set the definition of Easter, which it did. This fact that it was defined to have happened on a Sunday later was to set Sunday as the pattern for he day of worship.

According to doubtful legend, part of the deliberations of that council was to determine what exactly the bibleWP was. In actuality, the books of the Bible were defined by tradiion and set in stone by practice, especially when Constanine ordered 50 bibles to be created in 340CE.

It is really funny that the Protestants rail against all this, inasmuch as they were still 1200 years in the future. The Protestant moral forbearers in Nicea did exactly what everyone else did, and bowed down to it, unless you want to class those Protestant forbearers as the heretics, who also bent or died as was the strength of their belief in their own theories. With the exception of the Pope's assumed authority, all Protestants essentially accepted the results of Nicea (and all the five following ecumenical councilsWP) with only minor modifications when it was their time to do so.
 
Last edited:
Greediguts said:
Interesting. I just had a co-worker tell me they used to be an athiest until they realized that the Catholic Church had edited the Bible and obviously did it so people would follow the Pope and not Jesus.


Never heard of someone GAINING faith for that reason.......


"Tony Alamo"? Sounds like the name of a cartoon show from the 70's.
Click to expand...
A great description of it here: http://tonyalamochurch.com/
 
fuelair said:
A great description of it here: http://tonyalamochurch.com/
Click to expand...

Ick. I remember this guy. I didn't know he was so anti-Catholic though....


I love his statement he posted to help prove his innocence:

"I do not promote polygamy, but I do preach the Bible. I do not promote teenage marriages or young marriages, but I do preach the Bible. God prefers women who have reached puberty to marry rather than commit fornication and first degree murder by aborting their children. Both of these sins send the person to hell and to the lake of fire." - Taken from Tony Alamo's statement found here.

How does he think this helps prove his innocence???? During his trial, will he actually use the Bible in his defense? I'd love to hear those arguments!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom