How accurate is this?

I'd rather trust Time magazine-

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,928041-1,00.html

A quote:

When the great and fake oath was first penned or by whom, nobody can say. It was circulated first in Chester County, Pa., about 1912; it was read into the Congressional Record during a discussion in regard to the seating in Congress of the Hon. Thomas S. Butler, charged with its circulation in an effort to excite religious antipathies. It is doubtful whether Thomas Butler himself wrote the oath. The career of the bogus oath has been obscure; five years ago it was considered obsolete; recently no less than a million copies have been handed about. The Knights of Columbus offered $25,000 to anyone who could prove it to be part of their ritual. No one bothered to do so.
​

 

Do you folks remember the "Rules for Revolution written by the Communist Party" that were passed out in some schools including mine during the cold war era of the 60's?

It had a goofy list of things the communists would commit to using and was suposedly their true rules for revolution such as "Get the kids of America's minds on sports instead of religion.";"Rewrite all the history books to make communism look great.", etc. etc.

. . . was later found to be a bunch of bunk some duffus wrote and passed around--possibly well-meaning, but a lie as far as "it did NOT come from the U.S.S.R. as they stated?"

When I use "Fiction" or "Fact books" below I am referring to the genre it would fall in a library, even though it may be a bunch of conspiracy theory. I am not saying a "Fact book" is true. Understand?

Sounds like the books about Jesus being married and His blood-line continues to this day? and is protected by the Knights Templar who found the secret while occupying Jerusalem.

The fiction sold so well, they came up with a fact book claiming many things that were not even true.

Even though someone had already written a fact book using the same conspiracy theory where the fiction writer got the idea for the fiction book.

In fact, the Knights Templar did come back rich, while living and rooting around in the areas of temple and were rumoured to have stolen a lot of gold there.

When I was in Israel in 1983. I was told, by a Jew who lived in Jerusalem that the reason the ruins of the temple had very little excavation is that the Jews still feel the Holy of Holies could be violated as in the Old Testament and those archeologists could be in a lot of trouble--since the Jews still follow the Old Testament. Much of this changed as Revised Jewish Faith or Liberalized Jewish Faith came along where the OT rules were only for the people going through the desert and do not apply today. It is said that about 80% of the temples in Israel are the modernized, but they MUST by government law apply as an Orthodox temple and then they do what they want. I heard this directly from an Israeli Engineer I work with.

However, the Jews still do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah. Many now do not believe in a physical Messiah; it was more like the parables told by Jesus according to the teachings of the synagogue. Now, the Jews you see by the wailing wall with black-hats, coats and ringlet-hair are the Orthodox Jews who actually still believe in the Old Jewish Religion. They abhore the Modern young Jews who do not follow their path.

Many people do not realize that Israel has one of the highest athiest population in the world and is considered a big party country by many. That's the reason ship's often park there for R and R and let the kids run wild. I found this to be true because I was in college, the same age as the Jewish Army guys and girls and I was not much of a Christian (actually not one then, though I thought I was) and I partied with them on the night ending the sabbath on the beaches of Nahrahya a very beautiful small town close to the Northern border of Israel. The girls were as wild as the boys. It was much more like America is today. Beer and Outdoor Pizza Parlors lined the walk from the beach mostly occupied by jewish soldiers both male and female from 21 to 22 (girls) and 21 to 23 (boys).

And some officers who were both young and included men and women; who were partying right along with the kids. It was fun, when I thought that kind of play was fun; before I grew up.

Anyway, the Knights templar got a reputation from becoming rich and it was said the church bought them off to keep its secrets (RCC). When in reality, it is generally assumed they took everything they could find while living in the tunnels under the old city and looting all of the ancient gold pieces in place before the Roman's tore it up in around 70 A.D. and the walls of the old city built higher and in the same fashion in the 1600s.

From then on the Knights templar, the Masons (who do do weird things but mostly just watch them acted out on stage in old costumes and make oaths they don't keep--remains a men's social club and not much more.)
all make for excellent conspiracy stories.

But, since I work for DOD I can't talk about the secret flying saucer in Building 51 in Roswell. :thumbs:

 

This just in- I have it on good word that PHILLIP IS AN ALIEN- Chick comic being prepared as I write this!!!


:laugh:

 

Simple facts are...

Jack Chick is extremely KJVO. He hobnobs with several KJVO authors. He places some of their hooey into certain of his comix.

Jack Chick utterly despises the RCC. He might even buy into the preterist/7th day adventist myth that the line of popes is the antichrist. (Scripture proves this is utter nonsense.) Mr. Chick has tried to blame the RCC for mosta the world's evils.

When Chick got away from simply making his excellent "how to be saved" comix & tracts, his stuff often degenerated into REAL "comix".

 

Jack Chick produces material about three steps below the National Enquirer.

 

From the page noted in the Opening Post (O.P.):

// Also beware of Bible footnotes. \\

// They often favor the Alexandrian texts. \\

This statement is true. But when you find out what it means, you find the first statement to be highly suspect as being a LIE.

There are several kinds of footnotes:
1. Joyce Meyer's comentary on the Holy Bible is full of her opinions regarding the scripture. Opinions come in footnotes. The Geneva Bible which predated the KJV was chock full of anti-authoritarian (divine right of Kings) opinions. King James 1 of England (he was King James 6 of Scotland) did not like this undercutting of his empire. So he commissined the Bible to be retranslated. The most likely conspiracy theory concerning the Tranlsation of the KJV is that the British Crown and the church under it's thumb (Church of England = CoE) conspired to suppress the perfectly good Geneva Bible. Those saints fleeing the British Crown brought their Geneva Bible. The orioginal KJV did not have very many of these type footnotes. Most of them in the KJV have only to do with various measures between the time of writing and 1600. Some of these actually have errors in them as well as some misleading information.
2. There are cross-reference footnotes. The usefulness of these footnotes depends on the theology of the cross-reference note makers. The referrence footnotes show other scriptures related to the given scripture. The original KJV had cross-reference footnotes.
3. There are translator footnotes. The original KJV had translator notes in the left and right margin of each page (a two column per page format was used in the original printings of the KJV1611 Translations (AKA: KJV1611 edition(s). These translator footnotes show variations among the original language sources (and early foreign language translations). Note that the KJV was not all translated ONLY from original langugae sources but included some early fireign language translations, especially the then 1100-year-old Catholic Version: the Latin Vulgate*. The orginal KJV had these translator footnotes in them. Modern Versions are damned by Chick for doing what the KJV translators did: having a little honesty about the fact: there are multiple 'orignial' sources of the Scriptures (O.T. & N.T.). They did not always agree even in 1611 -- but the KJV Translators used translator footnotes to document the variation among the Received Text (N.T.)

* note that when this Bilbe was called "Latin Vulgate" the word 'vulgate' pertained to the common or ordinary language. There is nothing vulgar (or obscene) about the Bible -- well, most places

Ain't it convienent how the KJVO heresy loves to intorduce self-contradictions and other logical arguments into their 'man-made doctrine'

Beware of versions &/or editions of the KJV that exclude the translator footnotes. They are hiding (note 'occult doctrines' are hidden doctrines) something -- probably things they do not understand?

// They often favor the Alexandrian texts. \\
True. because some Modern Versions (like the nKJV) do have footnotes that "favor the Alexandrian texts". The reason the footnotes "favor the Alexandrian texts". is because the nKJV translators chose the Received Text sources over the Alexandrian sources. So they had to document the variation to be hones.

Strange, Chick damns the nKJV because it it is honest. Well, it is my opinion and I am sticking with it. Note that the translators of the KJV back in 1604-1611 did not have the so called "Alexandrian sources" to check out. They just document in footnoters the souces that they had. What is the matter J.C (jack chick)? why do you damn the Modern Versions for doing what the translators of the beloved KJV did: make translator footnotes to document variant sources?

 

I'm speaking as an independent, fundamental Baptist who has used and even translated one of Chick's tracts: he has a track record of being fooled by fakes, and Alberto is one more in a line of alleged fakes.

The first to allegedly fool him was Johnny Todd, supposedly saved out of witchcraft. I myself was easily able to disprove various things said by Todd on his cassette tapes.

Another case was a couple of women supposedly saved out of witchcraft. I forget their names, though I have them on file somewhere.

The upshot is that while I'm sure he means well and wants to see souls saved, in particular out of Catholicism, I don't trust Jack Chick's knowledge and/or sources in any historical matter or any matter concerning Bible history.

 

That is an excellent synopsis!

 

Alberto may have been a real priest and he may be a real Christian. But much of what he has said about Catholicism is patently ridiculous--and I am certainly anti-Catholic. Given Jack Chick's record of being fooled, I'm afraid I give Alberto no credence.

Here is what a mission executive wrote, urging that our name not be publicly linked with Chick's in a translation project: "Chick wrote some anti-Catholic material some years ago which he could not or would not document when asked to do so. He discredited himself in that situation. I don't want us to be i8dentified with him, but this is a good tract and there should be no problem with translating it."

Concerning Johnny Todd, who fooled Chick into promoting him, Jack Chick wrote my friend after all was said and done that Todd had gone back into the occult. The two women who fooled Chick also did so, as I remember, though I haven't found what I have in my files about that. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

 

Very true. I was not saying he didn't have some good points on the ten or eleven point list, but that was the only one I could remember, because it was the first, I believe.

My whole point was, if you are going to hand it to kids in grade-school, make sure it did come from the Communist party rather than a con.

By the way, someone mentioned the guy who was in witchcraft? Who was the guy who wrote the book about becoming a devil worshiper and they were going to burn him alive and while he was in the hospital he was told he had to give two or three fingers for repentence and he drove a van around on the school assembly circuit and people found out he had never even belonged to such a group? The book was something like: The Devil and I or something other? He claimed a dead dog talked to him telling him to join the Devil Church of Anton Levea, but he wouldn't mention his name for threat of retribution (I assume a lawsuit.)

I have no doubt the guy Chick talked about was real, doesn't mean he saw any documents; or did the Mormon's just happen to loose their gold plates on purpose?

No, I am not an alien, I have lived her 20 years of my 53 year life, so I am naturalized.

I did have to keep kind of low the first 10 years upon arriving on Earth, however, and I do wish that Chick would not sick his private spies on me, I like it on this planet.

(Oh, for those of you who have not taken physics, due to the speed of light and my people's technology, I am actually 192 of your Earth years, but didn't age. So, I use my relative age since it fits my looks and working capabilities. The government would owe me a lot of back SS money, and my agreement with them to let me share my technology with the Army is to keep it at 53. (I don't need money, I have a synthesizer that makes Star Trek's Next Generation look like a piece o junk.)

Have a good day! I just love Earthhlings, they are so nice (except to each other..............

 

Wikipedia is not a scholarly source, but someone has done some research there:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alberto_Rivera

 

I LOVE your sense of humor!!

 

Thanks Mexdeaf, But, I have to give you humans the credit. My planet didn't know what jokes were. I learned them here on Earth. :thumbs: :laugh:

Have a great day, friend!

 

Interesting, Tulsa and Broken Arrow, not far; I could do some snooping. After all I had to work as a Private Investigator in OK mostly in that area for a while and have contacts in the PD of both cities and in the records departments. Might find out if there was any truth to the unmarked grave theory. Will provide pictures of it if I can find people who were alive back then and/or possibly passed the story down. Or copy any legal documents I can get concerning the disposal and legalities of burying his body. That's one thing I can do pretty well is investigate, I was good at it and enjoyed it. I just didn't like investigations involving the gangs in Tulsa, bad there. Nice town, just like all cities, some areas you stay away from. Lots of gangs are there and lots of crack. Broken arrow/Tulsa Cemetary area are in a fairly nice part of town; no problems working a little there.

If someone can do some net research and come up with an address in Tulsa I can always check to see if he owned a home, because he would have had to pay taxes which are still on record. Utility companies also still have records even if a renter was there. Lots of tracks to follow. I'll let you folks know if I come up with anything. Anybody who knows any more about that part of his life and part of Broken Arrow he supposedly lived in would be a starting point.

 

I really don't think this verse is applicable. Here is a better one: "The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his going" (Prov. 14:15). I'm not calling you "simple," but please, take Alberto's claims with a grain of salt. They've never been proven, and no one has made the same claims about Catholicism that he did. If Alberto was on target, why was he the only person in the world to make those claims? There are many other ex-priests out there.

The question at hand is, can Alberto's information be trusted? I say no, it can't. I have the following excellent books about Catholicism, and none of them have Alberto's accusations in them: Roman Catholicism by Boettner, The Two Babylons by Hislop and the shorter version of Catholicism Against Itself, by O. C. Lambert. I've also read the excellent 50 years in the Church of Rome by former priest Charles Chiniquy, and though he makes some terrible (and true I believe) charges against Catholicism, he does not confirm at all Alberto's charges.