Walter Veith arrested in Germany for exposing Catholicism??

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Is this the same branch of the SDA church that went against GC policy and cozied up to the Nazi regime?

Serious charges. Would you have impeccable, verifiable historical

evidence?

God blesses!

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

And you responded with a list of quotations. Were those quotations meant to agree with what I had said of just the opposite? Just wondering!

At this point when looking at the first post and my response, I'm uncertain where my mind was at the time the scriptures were given. Trying to look at the response logically I would suggest I was referring to the fact that it makes no difference where one is spiritually at any given time, anyone need only give God His rightful place in their lives and He will insure his/her future for the better.

God blesses!

[Gerr]

Quote:

Is this the same branch of the SDA church that went against GC policy and cozied up to the Nazi regime?

Serious charges. Would you have impeccable, verifiable historical

evidence?

God blesses!

Just google "German Seventh-day Adventist Church cooperation with the Nazis."

[BobRyan]

Quote:

A paramount regret, the statement indicated, was that German and Austrian Adventist congregations "excluded, separated and left [church members who were] . . . of Jewish origin to themselves so that they were delivered to imprisonment, exile or death."

Under various racial decrees, some Adventist congregations expelled members of Jewish heritage. One, Max-Israel Munk, was placed in two concentration camps by the Nazis and survived and returned to his church after the war. He said he did not wish to act toward his congregation in the way in which he had been treated, according to Daniel Heinz, a church archivist at Friedensau Adventist University who has studied Adventist activities during the National Socialist era.

Along with Machel, the other leaders who signed the statement were Klaus-Juergen van Treeck, North German Union Conference president, and Herbert Brugger, president of the Adventist Church in Austria. Pöhler and Johannes Hartlapp, church historian at Friedensau, drafted the statement on which the declaration is based. All three church geographic areas voted to approve the text, Pöhler said.

http://www.adventistreview.org/article/92/archives/issue-2005-1540/adventist-news

By contrast -

Quote:

The SDARM General Conference operated under this German registration until 1936 when the association was dissolved by the Gestapo

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

And there is always - http://www.history.ucsb.edu/projects/holocaust/Research/Proseminar/corrieschroder.htm

The German SDA church had been struggling to take a valid position all through the first and second world war. And simply apologized after each wrong turn - when it became expedient to do so.

One wonders if they will one day be apologizing to Dr. Veith for claiming that all the world is being "herded" by the King of the North and then daring to admit that the Jews are part of that world being herded down a planned path by the King of the North.

in Christ,

Bob

[Nic Samojluk]

1. The RCC has never stated that the inquisition was in error.

Please, read the following statement copied from a Catholic web site:

“What’s wrong with apologizing for the Inquisition?” asked my friend Jan, when she saw my consternation over the most recent apology of John Paul II for the supposed wrongdoings of the Holy Inquisition. “Isn’t it right for the Church to apologize for something that was so unjust and extreme?”

I am referring to the John Paul II’s letter of June 15, 2004 addressed to Cardinal Roger Etchegaray on the occasion of the release of the “Report of the International Symposium on the Inquisition.” In it, he reiterated the apology he made in his Apostolic letter Tertio millennio adveniente. He also repeated the petition of forgiveness he offered on the year 2000 Day of Forgiveness (March 12). This apology, he stated, would be “valid” for the “dramas linked to the Inquisition as well as for the wounds they have caused in the memory.”

[Nic Samojluk]

4. There is still persecution against non-Catholics in some areas of central and South America where the RCC can get by with it.

Please, identify the countries and state how many have been burned at the stake or killed as a result of Catholic persecution.

[Nic Samojluk]

How many of her false doctrines has the RCC given up?

Is doctrine more important than behavior. Will God judge us on doctrine or behavior?

The Bible states that the Devil believes and trembles, but he will not alter his behavior.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

How many of her false doctrines has the RCC given up?

Is doctrine more important than behavior. Will God judge us on doctrine or behavior?

The Bible states that the Devil believes and trembles, but he will not alter his behavior.

Doctrine in the heart determines behavior.

[Bravus]

The truth is important. Thanks, Nic, for fact-checking a bunch of assertions about the Catholic church, most of which turned out to be wrong.

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

It is true that Rome persecuted innocent people in the past. The church did apologize for the sins of Inquisition more than once. Is Rome burning heretics on the stake today?

The problem with your post is that the premise is not true - at almost every point.

1. The RCC has never stated that the inquisition was in error.

2. The RCC has never stated that the rule of Canon Law set forth in Lateran IV calling for the extermination of Jews and heretics - was flawed or that this is not infallible to this very day.

3. Rule on infallibility according to the RCC is that BOTH the Papal decrees AND the ecumenical councils such as Lateran IV - are alike infallible to this very day. In the case of the Popes they get to play the shell game of "what is spoken ex cathedra and what is not" but in the case of the ecumenical councils - the Canon law that they produce is a matter of public record.

4. There is still persecution against non-Catholics in some areas of central and South America where the RCC can get by with it.

But if all these realities were to disappear - then your following idea that we simply let bygones be bygones would play out very well.

However in real life - those things you are ignoring are just not going away.

I tried this out on two notable Catholics in the past. One was Dr William Carroll of EWTN - the official answer-person when it came to Church History. I asked him if JPII actually apologized for any specific event in the dark ages - such as say... the inquisition. And I pointed out that IF in fact the Pope admitted that this was a flawed idea - that they would then need to resolve the problem of the claim to infallibility because of the way the inquisition was sanctioned by both Pope and ecumenical councils calling for extermination.

He stated several times - that JPII never apologized for any specific act of the Church. That the apology was limited to non-specific vague references that let the infallibility claim stand.

Next I tried this out on a catholic priest over at Spectrum who was ranting against the idea that some SDAs actually still believe SDA doctrine.

I suggested that we not be intolerant of the views of those who did not think as we did. I asked if he could join with me in affirming that we now in this modern age understand and agree that it is wrong to persecute or to exterminate those who differ with our theology. He could not affirm that point and was very upset that I asked him to join me in making that statement.

In fact Spectrum saw the problem quickly - and shut the thread down for fear that this failure to join me in this very obvious, liberal, and open minded position - would expose them to a degree.

How sad.

[Nic Samojluk]

Doctrine in the heart determines behavior.

Intellectual assent to doctrine does not modify behavior.

[Nic Samojluk]

Ahh - yes there is that one small detail of burning at the stake that is not going on in all the other acts of persecution in the Americas.

Small detail? I asked you how many innocent individuals is Rome killing today! Will you provide me with a factual answer?

You are dismissing behavior, but the Lord is not. Read what we find in Ezekiel 18:

New International Version (©1984)

"But if a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him. Because of the righteous things he has done, he will live. Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live?

It says nothing about doctrine! Talk is cheap! Even the Devil believes, says the Bible.

I suggest that you compare Rome's behavior regarding abortion with that of our own church. Rome stands as a rock in defense of the unborn's right to life, while we have allowed our own hospitals to profit from the killing of innocent babies.

Read what James White and the other pioneers have written about the killing of the unborn! We have compromised with evil and need to confess our sin and repent on this issue.

The U.S. has allowed the killing of 55 million innocent human beings. This is a great sin. No wonder we have little respect for human life as evidenced in Newtown.

[doug yowell]

Nic, while the Bible certainly condemns the persecuting practices of Protestants, it doesn't identify protestants as the little horn of Daniel 8, and it also doesn't identify protestants as "man of sin" or the "great whore" of Rev. 16. The Bible makes clear that these-- as well as the sea-beast of Rev. 13-- refer to the papal system.

It does, however, identify that other beast of Rev. 13 as having replaced the authority of the first beast of the chapter. We have traditionally taught that that last beast is the USA and it's apostate Protestantism. Notice that the lamblike appearance does not detract from it's ability to exercise "all the authority of the first beast". And it is the last beast that convinces and later empowers the creation of and power of the image to the first beast.

[Gerr]

Originally Posted By: Gerry Cabalo

Doctrine in the heart determines behavior.

Intellectual assent to doctrine does not modify behavior.

Intellectual belief that is not assimilated into the heart and life is useless. "Not everyone who says, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven."

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: Nic Samojluk

It is true that Rome persecuted innocent people in the past. The church did apologize for the sins of Inquisition more than once. Is Rome burning heretics on the stake today?

The problem with your post is that the premise is not true - at almost every point.

1. The RCC has never stated that the inquisition was in error.

2. The RCC has never stated that the rule of Canon Law set forth in Lateran IV calling for the extermination of Jews and heretics - was flawed or that this is not infallible to this very day.

3. Rule on infallibility according to the RCC is that BOTH the Papal decrees AND the ecumenical councils such as Lateran IV - are alike infallible to this very day. In the case of the Popes they get to play the shell game of "what is spoken ex cathedra and what is not" but in the case of the ecumenical councils - the Canon law that they produce is a matter of public record.

4. There is still persecution against non-Catholics in some areas of central and South America where the RCC can get by with it.

But if all these realities were to disappear - then your following idea that we simply let bygones be bygones would play out very well.

However in real life - those things you are ignoring are just not going away.

I tried this out on two notable Catholics in the past. One was Dr William Carroll of EWTN - the official answer-person when it came to Church History. I asked him if JPII actually apologized for any specific event in the dark ages - such as say... the inquisition. And I pointed out that IF in fact the Pope admitted that this was a flawed idea - that they would then need to resolve the problem of the claim to infallibility because of the way the inquisition was sanctioned by both Pope and ecumenical councils calling for extermination.

He stated several times - that JPII never apologized for any specific act of the Church. That the apology was limited to non-specific vague references that let the infallibility claim stand.

Next I tried this out on a catholic priest over at Spectrum who was ranting against the idea that some SDAs actually still believe SDA doctrine.

I suggested that we not be intolerant of the views of those who did not think as we did. I asked if he could join with me in affirming that we now in this modern age understand and agree that it is wrong to persecute or to exterminate those who differ with our theology. He could not affirm that point and was very upset that I asked him to join me in making that statement.

In fact Spectrum saw the problem quickly - and shut the thread down for fear that this failure to join me in this very obvious, liberal, and open minded position - would expose them to a degree.

How sad.

[Bravus]

I realised when he wrote it that adding 'burned at the stake' was a mistake because it gave you an easy out.

The underlying question is valid: please back up these allegations of current persecution with some facts.

[BobRyan]

Because then -- every detail of his post is false - not just most of them?

[BobRyan]

Has everyone seen this -- yet...?

Quote:

"The Catholic Church has persecuted...when she thinks it is good to use physical force she will use it...Will the Catholic Church give bond that she will not persecute?...The Catholic Church gives no bonds for her good behaviour." Western Watchman (Catholic Paper), December 24, 1908.

"You ask if he (the Roman Catholic) were lord in the land, and you were in a minority, if not in numbers yet in power, what would he do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend upon circumstances. If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you: If expedient, he would imprison you, banish you, fine you; possibly, he might even hang you. But be assured of one thing: He would never tolerate you for the sake of 'the glorious principles of civil and religious liberty'...Catholicism is the most intolerant of creeds. It is intolerance itself, for it is truth itself." The Rambler (English Roman Catholic Journal), "Civil and Religious Liberty," September 8, 1851, p 174, 178.

"The archbishop of St. Louis said: 'Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all people are Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as crimes....

"'Every cardinal, archbishop, and bishop in the Catholic Church takes an oath of allegiance to the pope, in which occur the following words: 'Heretic, schismatics, and rebels to our said lord (the pope), or his aforesaid successors, I will to my utmost persecute and oppose.'" Josiah Strong, in "Our Country," ch. 5, pars 2-4.

"Communists destroy churches because they are God's enemies; Catholic's destroy (non-Catholic) churches because they are God's friends...Against such men-founded churches...Catholics in Latin America should arise and wipe them out with fire." John J. Oberlander, in The Voice of Freedom, 1954, p. 20.

"When confronted with heresy, she (The Catholic Church) does not content herself with persuasion, arguments of an intellectual and moral order appear to her insufficient, and she has recourse to force, to corporal punishment, to torture." H.M.A. Baudrillart, Rector of the Catholic Institute of Paris, in "The Catholic Church, The Renassance, and Protestantism", p 182-183.

"I do declare from my heart, without mental reservation. That the Pope is Christ's vicar-general and is the true and only head of the Universal Church throughout the world, and that by virtue of the Keys of binding and loosing given to his Holiness by Jesus Christ, he has power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths and governments, all being illegal without his sacred Confirmation, and that they may safely be destroyed. Therefore, to the utmost of my power, I will defend this doctrine and his Holiness' rights and customs against all usurpers of the Protestant authority whatsoever, especially against the now pretended authority of the Church of England and all adherents, in regard that they may be usurped and heretical, opposing the Sacred Mother, the Church of Rome.

"I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to any Protestant king, prince, or state, or obedience to any of their inferior officers. I do further declare the doctrine of the Church of England, of the Calvinist, Huguenots, and other Protestants, to be damnable and those to be damned who will not forsake the same.

"I do further declare that I will help, assist, and advise, all or any of his Holiness' agents, in any place wherever I shall be, and to do my utmost to extirpate the Protestant doctrine and to destroy all their pretended power, regal or otherwise." Oath Taken by a Catholic Priest, by John Lyons, ex-catholic priest in a tract circulated in Glenside, Pa. (To view the entire Oath of the Priest, click here.)

"If Catholics ever gain sufficient numerical majority in this country, religious freedom is at an end. So our enemies say; so we believe." Peter Richard Kenrick, Archbishop of St. Louis, Missouri, in "The Shepherd of the Valley" (a weekly journal published from 1850-1854).

"Cut off from the Body (Catholic Church) into which alone the graces of Christ flow, you are deprived of the benefit of all prayers, sacrifices, and Sacraments. You will gain nothing except perhaps to be tortured somewhat less horribly in the everlasting fire than Judas, or Luther, or Zwingli." St. Edmund Campion, LFS, p. 175-176, (quoted in Apostolic Digest, by Michael Malone, Book 2: "The Book of Salvation", Chapter 2: "Salvation is Found Only in the Catholic Church").

"I do further promise and declare, that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do to extirpate and exterminate them ...Congressional Record of the U.S.A., House Bill 1523, Contested election case of Eugene C. Bonniwell, against Thos. S. Butler, Feb. 15, 1913, pp. 3215-3216.

[Bravus]

1908, 1851... a tract circulated...

Some *recent*, *credible* sources would be nice.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Some *recent*, *credible* sources would be nice.

How about something from approximately 2,000 years ago.

Jesus answered, “My Kingdom is not an earthly kingdom. If it were, my followers would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But my Kingdom is not of this world.”John 18:36 NLT

God blesses!

[Bravus]

Um, so, the fact that his kingdom is not of this world makes it OK to spread malicious lies about our fellow believers in him?

Not following that logic *at all*.

[LifeHiscost]

Quote:

Adventists in Nazi Germany

The Silent Church, Human Rights, and Adventist Social Ethics

Dr Zdravko Plantak, author of The Silent Church: Human Rights and Adventist Social Ethics, is a Seventh-day Adventist scholar and the Chairman of the Religion Department, Columbia Union College.

Here is a brief excerpt from Plantak's book, published by Macmillan Press (UK) & St Martin's Press Scholarly and Reference Division, New York, N.Y. (USA), 1998. (Text excerpted from pp. 17-21).

Adventists in Germany

The German Adventists seem to have fallen short of their proclamation of religious liberty at the time of World War I, between the two wars and during World War II. In imperial Germany, most Adventists espoused extreme nationalism and active military collaboration. An Adventist author argued in December 1915 that 'the Bible teaches first, that participation in war is not against the sixth commandment; second, that fighting on the Sabbath is no transgression of the fourth law'. The German church leaders, however, recognized the error of their policies after the war and confessed their loyalty to the worldwide Adventist community at the European Division meeting at Gland, Switzerland on 2 January 1923.

This declaration, however, was weakened by an additional pronouncement which recognized that each member possessed 'absolute liberty to serve his country, at all times and in all places, in accord with the dictates of his personal conscientious conviction'. This statement allowed German Adventists to repeat the mistake from the First World War during Hitler's regime under the Third Reich.

As Erwin Sicher has rightly observed in 'Seventh-day Adventist Publications and the Nazi Temptation', Adventists failed in numerous ways in regard to the Nazi regime. As early as 1928, before Adolf Hitler came to power, Adventists were calling for a strong Führer. Article after article dealt with this Führer ideal in German writings as well as in Adventist publications.

Later, Adventist writers welcomed the apparent rebirth of Germany in their publications and also by vote. The Adventist town of Friedensau had voted by 99.9 per cent for the Nazi parliamentary state. When some Adventists refused to salute the Swastika flag and to use the Hitler greeting, the President of the East German Conference, W. Mueller, argued that it was bad for the church's image. He concluded that 'under no circumstances did any Adventist have the right to resist the government, even if the government prevented him from exercising his faith. The resistance would be unfortunate because it would mark Adventists as opponents of the new state, a situation that should be prevented. Another prominent Adventist writer and the editor of various Adventist church papers, Kurt Sinz, saw Hitler's strong command at the beginning of National Social rule as designed by God. Otto Bronzio went a step further, saying in the official Adventist paper, Der Adventbote, that 'the National Socialist Revolution was the greatest of all time, because it made the maintenance of a pure inheritance the basis of its ethnic life'. Some suggest that what he meant may be gleaned from a boxed quotation from Hitler—on the question of blood—which appeared on the same page.

This idea of a 'pure inheritance', instigated by Hitler and carried throughout the German nation, also afflicted German Adventists. Although blatant racism seldom appeared in Adventist publications, Adventists did frequently print negative comments about the Jews, they tacitly supported sterilization of the mentally disabled, and many were caught in the quickened pride of German nationalism. The same doctrine of German superiority to other nations was carried into Adventist education in Germany where students were encouraged to learn to 'will and to think in German'. To will in German was a mystical Nazi concept; for, the Party taught, Germans 'will' differently from any other nationals. Educator W. Eberhardt insisted, in addition, that Adventist schools nurtured 'the National Socialist Spirit' between class periods, when they reviewed the news, studied Nazi ideals and sang German national songs.

With growing pressure for greater collaboration, many Adventists of all age groups joined Nazi organizations such as the Hitler Youth, the BDM (Association of German Girls), the Labour Service and the German Red Cross. All these clubs were designed for the purpose of Nazi indoctrination, and although Adventists knew that a significant percentage of the Labour Service participants were members of the SA, SS and Stanhelm, the most fanatical Nazi groups who indoctrinated and militarized the youth, they approved of participation in the clubs. Johannes Langholf strongly supported the Labour Service. He wrote in Aller Diener, 'We expect every member to follow the divine command, "pray and work". It would be absolutely contrary to our understanding if we refuse the Labour Service.' Patt suggested that the principal reason for Adventists joining the Nazi Labour Front was unemployment and other economic hardships and that 'most Adventist workingmen succumbed to the pressure and became members of the labor service to save their families.' Yet, joining a party organization was not obligatory, and some joined the party as well.

One doesn't like to accept the realities of poor judgment at the highest level in organizational circles. Perhaps the Boy Scouts should be dissolved since numbers of leaders were found to be involved in child molestation. It all has to do with the controversy between Christ and Satan. Those who yield to the carnal will if unrepented of, lose their place in the kingdom. Salvation is not given enmasse to the Church, but by Jesus to the individual.

Perhaps this would help to convey some reason for misapprehension of some in Germany. Confidence in our own wisdom and capacity always leads to less than desirable results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UD0LGY9lMRM&feature=endscreen&NR=1

God blesses!

[Nic Samojluk]

Bob,

Let me add the following: I read that six decades ago the U.S. was the largest creditor in the world. Today our nation is the largest debtor there has ever been in history. Have you wondered why?

Could it be that we have compromised with evil regarding the right to life of the most vulnerable members of the human race?

We Adventists are blind on this issue. We have developed a blind spot regarding the right to life, and I afraid that Veith does share our blindness over this!

How can the Lord continue to bless a nation bent on the killing of the innocents?

[Nic Samojluk]

What exactly is your argument?

That no one is being persecuted in central and S. America by the RCC??

That the RCC has now rejected it's claim to infallibility when it comes to the command to "exterminate" the heretics as found in Lateran IV canon law?

I did answer your question today in a previous post. Please, read it!

Now, regarding infallibity, don't we have a similar attitude towards our own past pronouncements? Have you tried to convince the GC to alter our doctrine and practice regarding abortion? I have for more than two decades now, and all I get is stonewalling.

Didn't Jesus say that we need to get the beam out of our eyes before attempting to help someone else improve his vision?

[debbym]

whenever we start saying God's judgements are falling because of this sin or because of that sin, we are on the ground of those who will punish whoever they believe are doing wrong and causing the judgements of God to fall. and this is persecution.

Yes there are consequences to sin. And we are all perfectly fallen, and the enemy does work to increase lawlessne4ss, it is to His glory. But the righteousness of God is not wrought by the wrath of man. Our anger over sin is not the righteous arm of God against sin.

their will be infants in heaven, but there will not be fetus's. If someone caused a woman to lose her unborn child in the old testament, the punishment was not the same punishment as for murder. The person who did the wrong was not required to run to a city of refuge to be safe from the avenging family.

a fetus does not have the same status as a born child.

yes it perfectly pulls on our hearts, what is more vulnerable then an unborn child trying to receive nourishment from the mother and live. And yes the pain of abortion is an untold agony to the mothers and those who willed that unborn to live.

when the Jews cried at the crucifixion, His Blood be on us and on our children.... this is the wrath of God that will fall on the world, and bring destruction. When we see the world rejecting the mercy of God, then we can fear for the destruction that will come. The long suffering of God toward sin and sinners of every kind is what is holding up all things. When that mercy is rejected, woe to this world.

when the world doesn't know or understand God, their war against God is in part... When Jesus came he very clearly revealed the Character of god, the war took crystal clear definitions, and Jerusalem was utterly destroyed, after the time of grace was expired. The guilt and the consequences were very specific and concrete and truth was very real in it's consequences.

How can the world reject Christ if His people do not reveal Christ. This is coming, this will bring the world to it's end. it is not the increase of wickedness. All manner of sin can be forgiven. However horrible it is to us to live through seeing various degrees to the awful magnitude of sin, even the antediluvian world was not lost because they were great sinners, The antediluvians were not lost because they were terrible and deeply corrupted, they were lost because they disbelieved and did not enter the ark.

when Walter Veith stands up and points to the man of sin, he also points to the Savior, and this is really what the great controversy is about. A Hatred of Christ, and hatred for those who would make the conflict between Christ and Satan crystal clear, and who the players are.

There is Great Hope and Great Mercy that knows no depths and no heights. When it is refused there is no hope left. The Greatness of how sinful sin is, is not the issue.

deb

deb