The Seeds of Jihad

The current global resurgence of Islamic militancy in many parts of the world today is hinged on several reasons.

From the Islamic standpoint, the whole world is divided into two- the house of Islam (Darl-ur-Islam) and the house of Unbelief (Darl-ur-Harb).

It doesn’t matter what religion you adhere to or whether you have no religion at all, so long as you are outside the fold of Islam, you are in the fold of kafirdom, the house of unbelief – you are an infidel. Therefore, Islam is basically at war with the whole world.

Professor Bernard Lewis points out that:

“The greater part of the world is still outside Islam, and even inside the Islamic lands, according to the view of the Muslim radicals, the faith of Islam has been undermined and the law of Islam has been abrogated. The obligation of holy war therefore begins at home and continues abroad, against the same infidel enemy” (The Atlantic Monthly, 266.3: 49).

This is what motivates Islamic militant groups to arise with the agenda of imposing a pure Islam – free from all Western influences – on others.

Many of the Western teens who join these Islamic terrorist groups didn’t suddenly become bloodthirsty jihadists. Their indoctrination had lasted over a period of time until they were “ripe” for the task.

Interestingly, the so-called “moderate Muslims” are often at the forefront of justifying jihad. One of them said “Muslims kill a lot because they are killed a lot.”

This statement alone highlights the mindset of a typical Muslim: blame shifting. Finger-pointing is a nature of Islam. It’s a mentality Muslims got from Muhammad. He was always accusing his opponents of plotting against him, of persecuting him, or speaking against him till he killed everyone of them.

Muslim think-tanks argue that jihad is for the liberation of the Arab world from the oppression and injustices of their enemies. Of course, this is a more safer excuse than admitting that Islam is a religion of hate that divides and conquers.

It’s these perceived “injustices” Muslims think they are suffering from that serve as the ingredients and tools that recruiters of Muslim terrorists utilize to train, manipulate and motivate new jihadists for the cause of Allah.

These are tactics the Al-Qaeda, ISIS, Boko Haram, Al-Shabbab and the Hamas use to brainwash and pollute the minds of Muslim youths to make them join the jihad train.

Muhammad too used this tactic to incite hostilities against the Meccans. The Meccans didn’t drive out the Muslims or kill them, rather, it was Muhammad who insisted they must migrate with him even resorting to death threats:

“…And those who believed but did not leave their homes, ye have no duty to protect them till they leave their homes” (Sura 8:72)

“They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them and choose no friend nor helper from among them.” (Sura 4:89)

Muhammad’s goal was to make his followers be willing to fight the Meccans. He forced them to go on exile to make them feel persecuted.

He used the hardship, isolation and “oppression” they experienced to instill in them hate and rage so they will be ready to fight and kill their fellow Arabs. He kept inciting their emotions to commit murder by telling them: “Oppression is worse than slaughter” (Sura 2:217).

To rule over ignorant people and make them side with you, you have to give them an enemy. The same is applied on today’s jihadists.

They are lectured about the imaginary and often exaggerated “oppression” and “injustices” Muslims suffer from the West and Israel. This is sometimes done through Islamic media outlets (like Aljazeera).

They are first programmed to see themselves as the victims and the Jews or West as the “oppressors.” They are then called upon to “play their part” in the Islamic struggle.

When these recruits go to the Quran with this new worldview, and they realize from many of its verses that murder of non-Muslims is a binding decree on the Muslim faithful, their hate and hostility against Jews, Christians and pagans is increased.

These evil verses of the Quran have inspired Islamic militancy for 14 centuries now.

There are some Muslims that go to the Quran, but do not become terrorists, because there are still some other conditions.

For instance, personal frustration or crises in the lives of Muslim youths (since Islam fails to address vital questions of life) makes suicide a viable option.

Combine this with the hate that the Quran has already instilled into them, they reach a point where they see suicide as a means of both killing the infidels and at the same time as a route of escape from their squalid lives. This is why most suicide bombers are losers. They seek glory through martyrdom.

Muhammad also appealed to his followers’ carnal desires by promising them sex with many beautiful virgins in paradise and rivers of wine. These same promises used to gear up young jihadists today. To them, to leave this bad world is to be comforted with sex in paradise.

Muhammad made obedience to Allah and himself the ultimate priority: “…and whosoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily for him is the Fire of Hell, he shall dwell therein forever.” (Sura 72:23)

“If it be that your fathers, your sons, your brothers, your mates, or your kindred; the wealth that ye have gained; the commerce in which ye fear a decline or the dwellings in which ye delight- are dearer to you than Allah or his messenger  or the striving in his cause; then wait until Allah brings about his decision; and Allah guides not the rebellious.” (Sura 9:24)

Total obedience to Muhammad and his deity and striving in their cause are the main priorities of Islam. All its other rites – pilgrimage, fasting, salat or alms giving are just mere window dressing to give Islam a look of “piety.”

When it comes to jihad, Muslims are to lay aside all morality, ethic, family or societal bonds and sanctity of human life in order to obey Allah’s dogmas. This is what emboldens jihadists to kill and rape with such impunity.

Jihadists-to-be also have people who encourage them and embolden them, and this often comes from various underground terrorist networks, Islamic leaders, mosques and even Muslim relatives.

This is what motivates so much rejoicing in the Islamic world each time many of their enemies (Jews or westerners) are killed.

Like that mother who received the news of her daughter who had died as a suicide bomber. When she learnt some Jews were also killed, she jumped up with joy and began to sing to her daughter’s picture, saying “Today is your wedding day.” Poor demon-possessed woman.

I saw a documentary about a Palestinian suicide bomber who bombed up a place in Israel. When his wife was interviewed, she was smiling with joy. She said:

“He had long told me how he was going to be a shahid [martyr] and he finally did it. I hope our children too emulate his example. Alhamdulillah!”

These ones have lost their humanity and are filled with pure evil. By means of lies, threats of Hell or fury from a sadistic Allah, Islamic leaders raise these mindless killing zombies for Allah.

Maya Gebelly, a journalist, conducted an online interview with some ISIS recruits to know what inspired them to become jihadists. One of them said:

“We are friendly! Unless you are an enemy. Just because people are in ISIS doesn’t mean that they go around on a killing rampage. They are humans, they laugh, they joke, they goof with each other. The beheading, execution in public are messages to ISIS enemies, but are also part of Sharia law and shows they implement it fully.”

This man’s mind has been so warped by Muhammad’s evil teachings that he doesn’t even see anything wrong with people being killed, so long as they are “enemies” or “infidels.”

All jihadists have their minds held by an evil grip. Until a Muslim’s heart is changed by Christ, anger, hate and violence are his trademarks.

There is no amount of peace talk or presidential appeal that can quench the fire of hate that rages in the heart of a real Muslim. This is why the war against radical Islam can’t succeed until the evil mindset sustaining and motivating Islamic terrorism is totally demolished through the Truth.

However, God has promised those who leave Islam: “I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 11:19).

New Age Bible Versions?

“KJV Onlyism” is a relatively new movement among Christians. It affirms that the King James bible version of 1611 is the only inspired, true and perfect Bible in the world today.

Thus, they reject the NIV, NLT, RSV, NASB, and all other modern Bible translations (even the NKJV) because they were allegedly drawn from “corrupted” Egyptian manuscripts.

As a former KJV onlyite who used to view fellow Christians using modern Bible versions as “apostates”, it was the ill-logic, fanaticism and intellectual dishonesty that mare this position that ultimately led me out of it.

In the early 90’s, a KJV-only theory came up that all Bible versions except the KJV were textually laced with New Age ideas by two scholars – Fenton Hort and Brooke Westcott.

This idea came from a woman named Gail Riplinger, through her book, New Age Bible Versions (published in 1993). Her theories are still adhered to by a number of King James onlyites.

Although I can’t endorse some very flawed Bible translations (e.g. New World Translation, the Clear Word bible etc.) and I have some reservations toward liberal paraphrases like the Message bible, I consider it destructive for a Christian to regard all English Bible versions except the KJV as “the devil’s bibles.”

Riplinger claims that the purpose of her book is to prove that there is “an alliance between the new versions of the Bible (NIV, NASB, Living Bible and others) and the chief conspirators in the New Age Movement’s push for a One World Religion” (p. 1).

This statement indicates that her approach wasn’t objective, because she had already decided on her conclusion. The book is actually based on a conspiracy theory – an attempt to find New Age philosophies behind every bush and shadow.

Most of what she did in the book was to collect New Age concepts, teachings and strategies and impose them upon modern Bible translations, while at the same time rationalizing away the KJV’s similar vulnerability.

Anyone who knows about New Age spirituality will find the claim of the New Age movement forming an alliance with Bible translators to create a one world religion to be quite outlandish and in fact, a leap in the dark.

For one, the New Age movement doesn’t see (or use) the Bible as their final authority. The conspiracy theory appended to them by KJVOs appears to be a convenient rationale to evade the scholarly reasons for the differences between the KJV and modern English translations.

There are other problems with Riplinger’s book:

I. On page 2 she quotes Edwin Palmer, an editor of the NIV, who said: “[F]ew clear and decisive texts say that Jesus is God.”

There is nothing “New Age” about this statement, it’s a fact. No matter which Bible version you use, there are fewer than 10 places in the New Testament that explicitly say that Jesus is God, though hundreds more verses implicitly reinforce this basic truth.

2. On page 318 she said: “Real references to Jesus as ‘the Christ’ are rare; however the NKJV and new versions literally paint their pages with this pawn.” (p. 318)

The term ‘the Christ’ doesn’t imply a New Age connection. In 1 John 2:22, the KJV has the word ‘the Christ,’ does this also makes it New Age?

The word ‘the Christ’ occurs in the KJV 19 times and 3 times in the New Revised Standard Version, so using Riplinger’s weird logic, then the KJV would be more New Age than the NRSV.

‘The Christ’ occurs in these passages because in Greek, the word (Cristov) has a definite article (“the”). The only exception is 2 Cor. 13:3 which many modern translations didn’t render as ‘the Christ.’

3. The NIV for instance, is accused of removing up to 64,000 words from the Bible. Actually, no words are “removed.” The problem is that KJV onlyists are using the KJV as the standard by which all other Bible versions are to be judged. But the KJV is not the standard and cannot be the standard.

There were several English translations of the Bible – Wycliffe Bible, Tyndale Bible, Geneva Bible, The Bishop’s Bible – before the KJV of 1611. So why not choose one of these as the “standard”?

The Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek manuscripts should be the real standard of determining if words were or weren’t added to the text, not a 17th century English translation.

One can as well use the NIV as the standard and say “The KJV has 64,000 words added to the Bible.” Is that reasonable?

To an unbiased mind, the areas of differences between both translations are minimal and do not affect any doctrine. There is no “conspiracy” on the part of newer versions to hide the deity of Christ or any essential doctrine.

For example, let’s compare Galatians 4:7 in the KJV and NIV.

The former has the phrase “through Christ” (though it’s not found in the more ancient manuscripts) while the latter doesn’t.

Using Riplinger’s logic, we would conclude that, “The new versions deny the centrality of Christ in salvation.” But this is untrue because in Romans 5:1, 11  and other places in the NIV, we are shown the role of “our Lord Jesus Christ” in saving us.

If the NIV or modern translations wanted to hide the role of Christ, such words wouldn’t have appeared in them at all.

On the other hand, there are places in the NIV/NASB/ASV etc.  where the Lord Jesus Christ is mentioned but the KJV curiously omits it. Jude 1:25 in the NIV reads :

“To the only God our Savior be glory, majesty, power and authority, through Jesus Christ our Lord, before all ages, now and forevermore! Amen.”

But the KJV says: “To the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.”

Romans 1:4 in the NASB reads: “who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,

But the KJV reads: “And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”

Using the logic of KJV onlyites, we would say: “The KJV has denied the Lordship of Christ!”

4. On page 81, she wrote: “Luke 4:34 reveals that only the devils call Jesus the ‘Holy One of God“.

This argument is banal. Jesus is called the “Holy One” in Acts 2:27 (KJV). Does this mean the KJV is New Age?

5. The NIV is attacked for replacing the word “God” with “He” in 1 Timothy 3:16. This is somewhat questionable, but the NIV does indicates “God” in its textual footnote, so I fail to see a New Age conspiracy there.

On the other hand, there are places where the NIV has the name of “Jesus” but the KJV has “he” instead e.g Matt. 4:19

NIV: “Come, follow me,”Jesus said, “and I will send you out to fish for people.” 

KJV: “And he saith unto them, Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men.”

Again, in Acts 4:25, the KJV omitted the word “by the Holy Spirit” while modern translations did not.

NLT: “You spoke long ago by the Holy Spirit through our ancestor David, your servant, saying,‘Why were the nations so angry? Why did they waste their time with futile plans?”

KJV: “Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Why did the heathen rage, and the people imagine vain things?”

If the case were to be in reverse, that the NIV, NLT and ESV omitted “the Holy Spirit” in one single text, we will never hear the end of it, how “mutant versions are pushing the Holy Spirit into the closet.”

But to attack modern translations at one point while ignoring the KJV when it fails on that same point is intellectual suicide, inconsistency and rank prejudice. A sound argument is always consistent.

6. It is claimed that the name Lucifer was “removed” from Isaiah 14 of modern versions (by New Age translators?) and replaced with the title “morning star” so as to make the passage refer to Jesus.

This is where the research and competence of the author should be doubted by every reasonable believer. The Hebrew word in the text is llyh which means “shinning one” or “morning star.”

The Brown Driver and Briggs Hebrew lexicon states that llyh means “shinning one, epith of king of Babylon” (“How are thou fallen, shinning one, son of dawn!” i.e. star of the morning). The Liddel and Scott Lexicon defines llyh as “bringer of the morn, morning star.”

The term “Lucifer” doesn’t appear in modern translations because it only appeared in Jerome’s Catholic Vulgate which the KJV translators used. (It was the Bible of Western Europe for more than 1000 years). Jerome translated llyh as “Lucifer” which according to Cassell Latin Dictionary means “light-bearing, light-bringing.”

The Septuagint, Targum Jonathan and the Peshitta, which are all ancient versions of the OT, do not have the word “Lucifer” in Isaiah 14:12.

Just because modern Bible versions do not follow Jerome’s translation doesn’t mean they are identifying Jesus with Lucifer!

7. Mark 10:21 in both KJV and NIV were compared and it was stated that “New Versions” delete the word “take up the cross” (p. 22)

The omitted word didn’t appear in the NIV because the early Greek texts (Nestle Aland) used didn’t contain it.

The word “take up the cross” occurs in all other places such as in Mark 8:34, Luke 9:23 and Matthew 16:24, referring to the same story. The command doesn’t become less important because it wasn’t contained in the same number of times as the KJV.

8. The NIV is said to be “New Age” because it deletes 13 words from 1 John 4:3, thus “denying that Jesus is the Christ.”

On comparison, the only part that seems to be missing is “Christ has come in the flesh.” Though the reason for its removal here is unknown, on a closer look, we see that the phrase actually appears in verse 2! This is it:

“This is how you can recognize the Spirit of God. Every spirit that acknowledges that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God“.

So the NIV actually contains the very word KJV onlyists accuse it of trying to remove! New Age conspiracy? Nope.

9. The NIV and NASB rendering of Romans 1:20 was labelled New Age for not containing the term “Godhead” (p. 184)

The KJV used the term “Godhead” in Acts 17:29, Romans 1:20 and Colossians 2:9. But the KJV translators rendered different Greek words in Rom. 1:20 and Col. 2:9 as the same English word.

In Romans 1:20, the word there is qeiothj meaning “divinity” or “divine nature” whereas in Colossians 2:9, it’s qeothj which means “deity” (the state of being God). Yet, due to ignorance misinformed individuals have been roused to slander a more accurate rendition.

10. Several tables are presented in this book comparing the KJV with modern versions.

On pg. 1, a table is titled “Do You Have a “holy bible?” It lists out 10 Bible verses in the KJV and NIV where the word “holy” wasn’t used in the latter.

In one of these 10 verses, Matt. 12:31 (KJV), the word “holy” was in italics because it wasn’t in the original text; it was supplied by the translators. Yet Riplinger found it convenient to include it as example of modern versions being “unholy.” She’s using the KJV to judge the Greek text of the NT! How preposterous.

Now, if this criteria is valid, then the NKJV meets up as a holy Bible and it shouldn’t be attacked, yet Riplinger says that the New King James Version is also of the Antichrist! (pp. 101-2). This is highly irrational.

Now, does it mean it’s a sin for the KJV to have “the book of life” in Rev. 22:19 when every Greek manuscript has the “tree of life”? What of Acts 8:37 and 1 John 5:7 which have very slim manuscript support?

If one wants to use this same methodology, one can also make a table titled “Do you have a spooky Bible?” and list out 10 places where the KJV uses the word “ghost” instead of “Spirit”?

Or how about we compare the KJV and other English translations and point out places where the KJV uses “it” rather than “he” for the Holy Spirit (John 1:32, Romans 8:16, 26 and 1 Peter 2:11)? What will these prove? It would rather prove that no translation is perfect!

11. On pg. 2 Riplinger wrote:

“The Greek text used to translate the NIV, NASB and others was an edition drastically altered by a Spiritualist (one who seeks contact with the dead through séances), who believed he was in the ‘new age‘.”

This is another rhetoric meant to poison the well. There was an end note there referring the reader to The Life and Letters of Brooke Foss Westcott, Volume II (London, 1903), p. 252 which actually says: “…the Son of Man will vindicate His sovereignty by showing that He satisfies every need and every capacity which the struggles of a new age have disclosed.”

Riplinger took this man’s words out of context in order to link all modern Bible versions with the occult – and this deceitful trend reverberates all through her book.

Several Christian scholars, including KJV defenders like David Cloud have also pointed out the many holes in this absurd “New Age bible” theory.

KJV onlyism thrives on lies and sensationalism and even worse, such falsehoods have done much spiritual damage to Christians who were saved by reading these Bible translations.

It bears the bad fruitage of divisions, fear and false accusations within the church. But I will say this: don’t let anyone destroy your faith in God’s Word with cunningly devised fables.

The Horror of the Inquisition

Many Christians today are oblivious of their history. Books have been re-written; facts have been covered up and our generation is kept ignorant.

We need to dig up historical facts for us all to see what lies beneath the facade of Roman Catholicism. One of such skeletons of the past is the Catholic Inquisition.

The Inquisition is a general term for a tribunal or “holy office” operated by the Roman Catholic Church responsible for torturing, imprisoning and executing those who deviated from the church’s beliefs.

The Inquisitions (Roman, Medieval and Spanish) were Rome’s method of suppressing any form of heresy and enforcing allegiance to the Pope.

Many of the-so called heretics were Bible believing Christians who rejected the false doctrines of Rome, and others who refused to be subservient to the devious purposes of the religious behemoth. The Inquisition was operated for several centuries by the Catholic church and it covered Europe and the Americas.

Pope Innocent III (1160-1216) commanded the archbishop of Auch in Gascony saying:

“We give you a strict command, that by whatever means you can, you destroy all these heresies … you may cause the princes and people to suppress them with the sword.” [1]

A Catholic historian explains that: “The binding force of the laws against heretics lay not in the authority of secular princes, but in the sovereign dominion of life and death over all Christians claimed by the Popes as God’s representatives on earth, as Innocent III expressly states it.” [2]

Contrary to the claim of modern Catholic apologists, the Inquisition wasn’t the work of the state, but of the Popes who ruled over the civil authorities. In 1252, Pope Innocent IV issued a bull “Ad Exstirpanda”, decreeing that heretics were to be “crushed like venomous snakes.” It also endorsed the use of torture.

“The aforesaid bull ‘Ad Exstirpanda’ remained thenceforth a fundamental document of the Inquisition, renewed or reinforced by several popes. Alexander IV (1254-61), Clement IV (1265-68), Nicholas IV (1288-92), Boniface VIII (1294-1303) and others. The civil authorities, therefore, were joined by the popes, under the pain of excommunication, to execute the legal sentences that condemned the impenitent heretics to the stake.” [3]

The Father of the Inquisition

The Popes got their models for the Inquisition from Augustine of Hippo (354-430). During his time, he contended against the Donatists who believed that the church ought to be separate from the world and consist only of true Christians.

Augustine, however, believed both Christians and non-Christians were to be in the church because the catholic church was God’s kingdom on earth, so she should use the state as her secular arm in dealing with heretics:

“Why therefore should not the Church use force in compelling her lost sons to return? … The Lord Himself said, ‘Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in [Luke 14:23] …’ Wherefore is the power which the Church has received … the instrument by which those who are found in the highway and hedges- that is, in heresies and schisms are compelled to come in…” [4]

To Augustine, “whoever was not found within the Church was not asked the reason, but was to be corrected and converted.” His legacy of forced conversion and abuse of Luke 14:23 however contradict his other teachings on determinism and irresistible grace.

Thomas Aquinas also said that non-Catholics, could, after a second warning should be killed because “they have merited to be excluded from the earth by death.”

Rather than abolishing this evil, subsequent Popes endorsed it by handing it over permanently to the Dominicans. A Catholic historian wrote:

“Of eighty popes in a line from thirteenth century on not one of them disapproved of the theology and apparatus of the Inquisition. On the contrary, one after another added his cruel touches to the workings of this deadly machine.” [5]

The Code of Canon law (333:3) states that: “There is neither appeal nor recourse against a decision or decree of the Roman Pontiff”. Once the popes had issued the binding decree, no authority could kick against it.

The Extent of the Inquisition

In 1184, the Synod of Verona made it a law for heretics to be burnt at stake. There were also direct wars against “heretics.” In 1209, for instance, the city of Beziers was taken by men promised by the pope that they would bypass purgatory after death. Sixty thousand people perished in this crusade and blood flowed on the streets. [6]

In 1211, the governor of Lavaur was hanged and his wife was thrown into a well and crushed with stones. Four hundred people were burned alive. The crusaders went for Mass in the morning and afterward continued their slaughter. More than 100,000 Albigenses died in one day.

The 4th Lateran Council (1215) decreed that:

“Convicted heretics shall be handed over for due punishment to their secular superiors, or the latter’s agents…Catholics who assume the cross and devote themselves to the extermination of heretics shall enjoy some indulgence and privilege as those who go to the Holy Land” (Canon 3).

In 1229, thirty-two thousand Albigenses were killed and had their properties stolen. There were also “witch trials” as reflected in Pope Innocent VIII’s bull:

“Men and women straying from the Catholic faith have abandoned themselves to devils, incubi and succubi [demonic sex partners], and by their incantations, spells, conjurations … have slain infants yet in the mother’s womb, as also the offspring of cattle, have blasted the produce of the earth…” [7]

An awful book, Malleus Maleficarum (Witch Hammer) full of folklore about witches was later written as a guideline on how to detect and execute a suspected “witch” (e.g checking for birthmarks, warts or scars – “the Devil’s mark” – on their bodies). Tens of thousands of people in Europe (mostly women) were fished out and executed as a result.

In 1487, Innocent VIII promised to forgive the sins of those who kill the Vaudois Christians. At Merindol, “heretic” women were pitifully raped and children slain. About 500 women were locked in a barn and set ablaze.

In 1562, Pius IV sent his armies to slay men, women and children, resulting in the massacre of Orange.

After 10,000 French Protestants were massacred in Paris on “St Bartholomew’s Day” in 1572, the French king went to Mass to give thanks (to God?) for all the heretics that were slain. The papal court received the news with great rejoicing and pope Gregory XIII went to the church of St Louis to give thanks. A coin was minted by the pope to commemorate this event. [8]

In Spain, as Paul Johnson points out in The History of Christianity, the Inquisition “became a state instrument, almost a national institution, like bullfighting, a mystery to foreigners but popular among the natives.”

The Spanish Inquisition also targeted tens of thousands of Jews and Moors. Emelio Martinez wrote that “In just one year, 1481, and just in Seville, the Holy Office [of the Inquisition] burned 2000 persons; the bones and effigies of another 2000 … and another 16,000 were condemned to varying sentences.” [9]

Modern Catholic apologists dismiss these historical evidence and claim only 3,000 people died. One even argued that no one died! They have taken an oath of allegiance to defend their “church” at the cost of history and truth.

Torture Instruments

The idea behind the Inquisition was that people separated from the Catholic Church would be lost eternally, so it was better to torture their bodies temporarily now than lose their souls for eternity.

Since heresy was concealed and difficult to prove, different techniques and methods were devised to produce the most torture and pain that would make heretics “confess”:

(a) Rack – a long table on which the accused was tied by the hands and feet, back down and stretched by the rope. This would dislocate the joints and cause great pain.

(b) Heavy pincers used to tear out fingernails or were applied red hot to sensitive body parts.

(c) Heretics were rolled back and forth over rollers with sharp knife blades and spikes.

(d) Thumbscrews were used to dis-articulate fingers.

(e) “Spanish boots” were used to crush the legs and feet.

(f) The “Iron Virgin,” a hollow metal instrument, the size and figure of a woman into which heretics were placed. It had knives arranged in it such that the accused locked inside it was lacerated in its embrace. The Latin words “Glory be only to God” was inscribed on it. [10]

Many “heretics” were choked to death with mangled pieces of their own bodies or faeces. Some had molten lead poured into their ears and mouth.

Some had their eyes gouged out and were forced to jump from cliffs onto long spikes from which they slowly died. Little wonder an anonymous Catholic wrote: “It would be better to be an atheist than believe in the God of the Inquisition.”

“These were real people,” wrote Dave Hunt, “all with hopes and dreams, with passions and feelings, and many with a faith that could not be broken by torture or fire. Remember that this terror, this evil of such proportions that is unimaginable today, was carried on for centuries in the name of Christ by the command of those who claimed to be vicar of Christ.” [11]

Ridpath’s History of the World includes an illustration of the Inquisition in the Netherlands. Twenty-one Protestants are shown hanging from the tree, with a man on a ladder about to be hanged. During these tortures, priests would hold up crosses before the victims in case they wanted to recant.

Similarly, in Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, when Francis Gamba, a Protestant, was sentenced to death at Milan, a monk held out a cross to him. He said: “My mind is so full of the real merits and goodness of Christ that I want not a piece of senseless stick to put me in mind of Him.”

For this statement, his tongue was bored through and was burned.

Catholics love to cite the cruelty and intolerance exhibited by the Reformers in the persecution of Anabaptists, trials of heretics, the Thirty Years War or murder of Catholics. This is a tu quoque (“you too”) diversionary tactic.

This is just like a thief defending himself by saying “but others too are stealing.” Evil is evil and it must be denounced wherever it is found.

True Christians do not deny or justify such acts by the Reformers, though they didn’t claim to be infallible like the popes. They invariably imbibed this mentality from their Catholic upbringing, particularly from Augustine, the father of the Inquisition.

Some of the popes that are lauded as “great” today lived and thrived during those times, why didn’t they stop the killing machine? Why did 80 “infallible” popes endorse such grievous cruelty against humanity?

What does the Inquisition tell us about Roman Catholicism? One, it shows us that the pope is not the earthly representation of Christ and is not infallible in faith and morals.

Two, it reveals the nature of the spirit operating in Catholicism – it is not the Spirit of God. Three, it is pointer to the fact that the church of Rome has for centuries displayed the exact opposite of the love, justice and piety which it now try to display.

Recently, Pope Francis, in a letter to the International Commission against the Death Penalty wrote that Capital punishment “does not render justice to the victims, but rather fosters vengeance … there is no humane ways of killing another person.” [12]

Could he be ignorant of his church’s history of the Inquisition and Crusades?

The Holy Office is now given a re-branded name: the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. Sadly, many Protestants today have bowed before the same Rome that millions of Believers chose to die rather than succumb to.

The very false gospel of Rome that the martyrs rejected is now deemed “orthodox” by some Evangelical leaders. This is what happens when history has been abjured.

Notes

1. Will Durant, The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster, 1950, 4:773.

2. J. H. Ignaz von Dollinger, The Pope and the Council, London, 1869, p. 195.

3. Catholic Encyclopedia 8:34

4. Quoted by E. H. Broadbent in The Pilgrim Church, London, 1999, p. 49.

5. Peter De Rosa, The Dark Side of the Papacy, Crown Publishers, 1988, p.175.

6. R. W. Thompson, The Papacy and the Civil Power, New York, 1876, p. 418

7. Quoted in The Dark Side of the Papacy, p. 182.

8. Ralph E. Woodrow, Babylon Mystery Religion, 1966. The Inhuman Inquisition.

9. The Tablet, November 5, 1938.

10. Smith Homer, Man and His Gods, Brown and Co, 1952, p. 286

11. A Woman Rides the Beast, Harvest House: Oregon, 1994, p. 250.

12. The Associated Press March 20, 2015.