Inquisition

[John317]

Yes, I agree. I think everyone would agree that as a church and as individuals we must tell the truth. I'm certain that SDAs, such as Frank Braeaden, were not lying when they said that "it's been estimated" that 50 million were killed for their faith during the Middle Ages.

The question, then, is, what is the truth about this topic? What do you believe is the truth as to how many Christians were put to death for their faith from about 400 AD to 1700 AD?

[Bravus]

OK, quick response to John317's question above and also a few of the other issues and questions raised while I was sleeping.

I think 5 million is a reasonable upper bound on the total count. The uncertainties are huge - the fatilities reported in particular incidents vary by factors of 5 or more in almost all cases (which is not only an ancient phenomenon - without getting political, have a look at how many people various sources say were at Glenn Beck's rally in Washington just this year!)

I arrive at that estimate by looking at all the available historical records for the period. Those of you claiming a larger figure have consistently brought what you claim is evidence for that, but which actually talks on the order of thousands for individual incidents and 100,000 or so for whole periods.

I think, as I said earlier, part of the problem is not recognising how dramatically human population has grown in the past century. In 1900 world population was about 1 billion, now it's approaching 7 billion. The millions killed in World War 2 were in the 20th century when there were something like a billion people in Europe. Throughout the period under consideration the population of Europe peaked at about 70 million total. Plague may have killed a third to a half of that number, in successive waves over centuries. There simply were not the number of people - in stigmatised minority groups, not in the mainstream of society - to *allow* 50 million people to be killed in that period.

Gerry, you need to read what I write carefully. The 2-3,000 figure was in relation to discussion of the Waldenses specifically. I stand by that figure for that discussion. But John317 has broadened the discussion to the entire period of papal supremacy, and *of course* that number is far larger. As I said, there are fairly credible figures on the order of hundreds of thousands for the assaults on the Albigenses, for example.

The evidence is patchy, and much of it is partisan. You'll get a different number reported by a Protestant historian who is essentially writing a tract against the papacy than by a dispassionate historian without a dog in the fight. (Just as you'll get a different estimate for numbers at the Beck rally from Fox vs MSNBC - and note that I don't think either of those numbers will be right, but the truth will lie somewhere in between.)

No-one has brought any historical account at all to this discussion that suggests anywhere *close* to the 50 million figure.

[skyblue888]

There are Seventh-day Adventist publications which speak of 50 million martyrs. One such publication states that "it is conservatively estimated that during the Middle Ages, 50,000,000 martyrs perished under the Papal sword. For centuries the soil of Europe was crimsoned with martyr blood. Great armies were raised and crusades were launched for the sole purpose of exterminating the so-called 'heretics.'"

The above was publisehd by the Australasian Conference of SDAs.

That's it John. You just confirmed my belief on this.

I believe that when the Lord opens the books we will be surprised to learn that the number even exceeded 50 millions.

sky

[Gerr]

Gerry, you need to read what I write carefully. The 2-3,000 figure was in relation to discussion of the Waldenses specifically. I stand by that figure for that discussion. But John317 has broadened the discussion to the entire period of papal supremacy, and *of course* that number is far larger. As I said, there are fairly credible figures on the order of hundreds of thousands for the assaults on the Albigenses, for example.

G: I went back to page one to make sure I was not being sloppy. There was no mention of the Waldenses before this post of yours: "Given that the population of the whole world at the time of the Inquisition was around 500 million, clearly there's no way a relatively small phenomenon in Spain killed 100 million. The Wikipedia article suggests total deaths on the order of 2-3,000 and that seems reasonable given the historical evidence." So I got the impression that your thinking was the total deaths amounted to a mere 2-3000. That's when I brought up the 3000+ Waldensians that perished alone in a cave.

Quote:

B: The evidence is patchy, and much of it is partisan. You'll get a different number reported by a Protestant historian who is essentially writing a tract against the papacy than by a dispassionate historian without a dog in the fight. (Just as you'll get a different estimate for numbers at the Beck rally from Fox vs MSNBC - and note that I don't think either of those numbers will be right, but the truth will lie somewhere in between.)

G: That I'd like to see, i.e. a dispassionate, totally unbiased historian. Unfortunately, history is not as scientific as we would like to think. The only way we can prove something in history is to dig up more evidence. But these "evidences" are not subject to experimentation. And how many is TOO many to be killed solely because they want to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience? I have no desire to exaggerate the number of victims, but neither do I want to minimize the magnitude.

[Bravus]

G: I went back to page one to make sure I was not being sloppy. There was no mention of the Waldenses before this post of yours: "Given that the population of the whole world at the time of the Inquisition was around 500 million, clearly there's no way a relatively small phenomenon in Spain killed 100 million. The Wikipedia article suggests total deaths on the order of 2-3,000 and that seems reasonable given the historical evidence." So I got the impression that your thinking was the total deaths amounted to a mere 2-3000. That's when I brought up the 3000+ Waldensians that perished alone in a cave.]

Sorry, yes, I was a little sloppy in the post you just quoted, I apologise. I realise now that I was talking about the Inquisition - the initial topic of this thread - which I referenced as 'a relatively small phenomenon in Spain'. I also stand by the number of 2-3,000 (not 100 million) for the Inquisition. The Waldenses were not in Spain.

Quote:

And how many is TOO many to be killed solely because they want to worship God according to the dictates of their conscience? I have no desire to exaggerate the number of victims, but neither do I want to minimize the magnitude.

One is too many. Absolutely. 5 million, or whatever the number is, is *far* too many. We're not in disagreement on that. Every one of these deaths was wrong and horrible.

That's why it's important that we *don't* exaggerate. Do we somehow think that a bigger number gives our case more emphasis? It doesn't. It weakens it because it is not the truth.

[skyblue888]

We are merely talking about those who refused to pay homage to the papal power during the 1260 years of her supremacy. I do believe that there were at least 50 millions as it has been reported. And this is supposed to be a conservative figure. These were literally massacred in great numbers, burned at the stake, tortured to death, or left to perish in dungeons, etc, etc,

But what about the many that were deceived by her, that were spiritually maimed and killed by the wine of her false doctrines? It is said that she has made all nations drunk with the wine of her fornication. How many? Countless millions! This the judgment will reveal.

And the work of this first beast of Revelation 13 is not yet over. She will bring many more millions down to hell before it is all over. But she will not be alone in making herself worthy of her name, the first beast of Revelation 13. In this awful work the so-called Protestant churches will unite with her and we are told in the book The Great Controversy that it will be far worse than what took place during the Middle Ages!

The lie is to minimize the destructive and deceptive power of this beast of Revelation 13. She has not changed.

sky

[Bravus]

The lie is to minimize the destructive and deceptive power of this beast of Revelation 13. She has not changed.

See, this is something I realised only this morning (I'm a little slow sometimes). Some here might be assuming that my motivation is to minimise the sins and crimes we're talking about by reducing the number. But that's not it at all. (And, not that me being insulted is the point, but I m a little insulted that people assume I'm arguing on behalf of the Beast.)

Rather, my point all along has been that if some entity is guilty of crime X but is then loudly and publicly accused of crime X times 10 which it did not commit, the credibility of the accuser is damaged so that even the testimony about crime X is unlikely to beleieved.

If we don't tell the truth, how can we claim to be standing up for the Truth?

[skyblue888]

Bravus, just think about what you are saying. You know that we were merely talking about how many of her enemies she destroyed. In the scheme of things, even 50 millions of these actually represent a small fraction compared to the hundreds of millions that were deceived by her false teachings and as a result will lose their eternal life. She has made all nations drunk with the wine of her false doctrines for more than fourteen hundred years and she is not yet done. In a very short space of time countless millions will be slaughtered physically and spiritually before Jesus returns.

In the book The Great Controversy, we are told that at the time of the fifth plague, the multitudes of the earth will realize for the first time that they have been deceived. What will happen then? They will be filled with rage. First they will accuse one another for being lost eternally but they will all agree to put the blame on their religious leaders. Think of the carnage that will then ensue from coming to the realization that the first beast of Revelation 13 (the little horn of Daniel 7) is none other than the papal power? This they were told during the loud cry but they just could not believe it then and their leaders were able to again deceive them into believing that those who brought that message to them were deluded.

We cannot yet comprehend the magnitude of the sins of Babylon.

sky

[skyblue888]

This is not about condemning but about studying history, prophetic history, from a Bible standpoint and the facts of history. It is not about us condemning anybody but finding out what God Himself has said about these powers.

sky

[LifeHiscost]

That's why it's important that we *don't* exaggerate. Do we somehow think that a bigger number gives our case more emphasis? It doesn't. It weakens it because it is not the truth.

Not being an expert nor being able to always differentiate between symbolism and literal numbers, maybe we ought also to question God about His figures.

"...saying to the sixth angel who had the trumpet, “Release the four angels who are bound at the great river Euphrates.” So the four angels, who had been prepared for the hour and day and month and year, were released to kill a third of mankind. Now the number of the army of the horsemen was two hundred million; I heard the number of them."Rev 9:14-16

NKJV

Then again, if that's too far in the future, maybe this would be acceptable.

"And the great dragon was thrown down, the serpent of old who is called the devil and Satan, who deceives the whole world; he was thrown down to the earth, and his angels were thrown down with him."Rev 12:9-14 NASB

Seems I remember a percentage somewhere. Anyone able to verify?

God's blessings!

[Kountzer]

I learned long time ago not to believe msg board historians.