Some Call It Christian Antisemitism

'The Jews Killed Jesus': Blood Libel or Biblical Truth? | Ep 1301
Allie Beth Stuckey | 9.II.2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LUfXGtQoYuk

1:54 Sounds you agree with St. Ignatius of Loyola, "omnia in maiorem Dei gloriam".

Nice to see one Catholicism point here!

5:45 Could I amend "at the behest of the Jewish people" to "at the behest of a Jewish crowd, which decades later came to define the Jewish people" (and still doesn't define it in Heavenly Jerusalem, see certain verses Apoc 2 and 3)?

10:00 It can be noted, after a Christian boy was found killed around a Jewish passover, one of the Jews converted, became a monk and stated that this was a magic ritual to further a kind of proto-Zionist cause.

Ah, here it is, St. William of Norwich:

Thomas of Monmouth's account is attributed to the testimony of a monk and former Jew named Theobald of Cambridge. Theobald alleged that the murder was a human sacrifice and that the "ancient writings of his fathers" required the yearly killing of a Christian on Good Friday. This was allegedly for two reasons: to one day return to the Holy Land during the Messianic Age and to punish Jesus Christ for the religious persecution that the Jewish people continued to experience at the hands of his followers.

In this case, it may be noted there was no trial. However in this case there was:

The events themselves have been reconstructed from a careful study of the trial records by American historian Ronnie Hsia. Simon, almost two and a half years old, went missing about 5 p.m. on the evening of Thursday, 23 March 1475. The following day, Good Friday, Simon's father approached the prince-bishop to ask for help in finding his missing child. ...

You could of course agree with Ronnie Hsia, who probably considers the Jews innocent.

Or you could find this detail somewhat more decisive:

An examination of the corpse by city doctors determined that Simon had not died of natural causes but had been exsanguinated.

Basically, there are only two possibilities on this one. Either the Jews of Trent were very corrupt, or the Christian magistrate of Trent was very corrupt.

I guess it was the Jews of Trent who were so.

Nevertheless, when it comes to St. Andrew of Rinn, I think the uncle could have been the culprit, and if he wasn't, the persons who posed as Jews before the uncle could have been a witch cult with little to no connection with Judaism. Now, if the uncle was the culprit, Andrew is still a martyr, for his mother's chastity or perhaps even his own. As long as he was alive, the widowed mother could not get a dispensation to marry the uncle as per OT levirate laws. Didn't stop the uncle from lusting, though.

10:03 I'm not aware of any Medieval account saying red matzoth were a Passover meal.

On my guess of what Jews of this sort could have been doing (based on Theobald's view), the kidnapping of a Christian boy was eventually followed by sending out of either white or red matzoth, the latter with his blood.

White matzoth would have meant, the boy "agreed" (at c. age 3 and up, before puberty) to become a Jew, got circumcised, had his first Passover meal. Red matzoth would have meant "mission failed" ....

Remember a few things:

• Theobald mentioned the idea of punishing Christians;
• Christian apologists had made a point of Genesis 49:10, adding that the Messiah must have come before Jews lost the right to execute (in this context, confer John 8 and Acts 7 with John 18:31), sth which happened in AD 6 when Archelaus was deposed;
• so, Jews counted Christians above puberty as so sinful, that executing an adult or teen Christian wouldn't have targetted specifically Christianity.

10:12 What is your credible view of Sts Simon of Trent and William of Norwich?

These boys very certainly existed and were buried before reaching puberty.

I've already exonerated the Jews as to St. Andrew of Rinn, whose relics were recently removed from the village church, as if exoneration of Jews automatically meant he was no martyr.

10:33 I the 19th C, in Xanten, a boy was found, determined by doctors to be exsanguinated.

On 29 June 1891, Johann Hegemann, the five-year-old son of a local cabinet maker, was found dead in a neighbour's barn, with his throat cut from ear to ear.

10:45 Actually, Austro-Fascism was encouraging as, shall we say, propaganda against Orthodox Judaism, the idea that four killed boys in the area (I think they were all in the area), including Sts Simon and Andrew, were killed by Orthodox Jews because they were very strict.

The problem, apart from those in the case of St. Andrew of Rinn, is, things that every Jew did in the Middle Ages, and things that Orthodox Jews do now, coincide to a large degree. So, they may have been wrong in singling out Orthodox Jews, one could think of secular Zionists ...

11:27 St. Paul did mention the Jews killing Jesus:

For you, brethren, are become followers of the churches of God which are in Judea, in Christ Jesus: for you also have suffered the same things from your own countrymen, even as they have from the Jews Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and the prophets, and have persecuted us, and please not God, and are adversaries to all men
[1 Thessalonians 2:14-15]

Now, to be very fair, he also mentioned his adressees being their countrymen, so, presumably ethnically Jewish.

But he's starting to use "the Jews" as it has been used through Christian history.

Help her with attorney, or financing one, if you can

I’m Being Threatened With a Lawsuit for Speaking About My Life.
The Anti-Alienation Project | 5 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lr8hEDAYBTQ

First Video by Heschmeyer I Actually Gave a Dislike: Let's Handle Sexual Morality vs Hypocrisy Better

Lots are splendid, but the things that aren't stand out like sore thumbs. So does the fact my comments were censored, cannot be interacted with, since disappeared from under the video.

Are Christians Just Sexual Hypocrites?
Shameless Popery | 6 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYM5w4wtiLo

1:59 I think there are occasions for throwing batteries in the Mediterranean.

Like, when you want a tracker to note where your ship is intercepted.

That's perhaps a good point if the interception, masked as an arrest is outside the arresting power's territorial waters. Making it an act of piracy.

3:12 If you say that a "homosexual is called to chastity" and don't add "like anyone else, and obviously including marital chastity, i e fertility and faithfulness" you are not setting a high bar, you are setting a wrong bar.

1) Because prior to Montini actual Popes have not set that as the bar (a document from 1568 concerns sodomites caught after already obliging themselves to celibacy, and they are obliged to celibacy ... and loneliness and shame ... because of that kind of vow).
2) Because to "Catholics" who believe that, calling someone homosexual, whether true or false, becomes a dog whistle for preventing him from marrying, therefore fulfilling a prophecy St. Paul gave St. Tim. I mean, such people may have sufficiently seared consciences to also prevent the same person from fasting.

4:51 The point of the 1568 document was, celibates should not have to live together with Sodomites.

And the point of things prior to Montini, celibacy is chosen. Including by persons who are feeling same sex attraction (but in that case they do well to stay out of seminaries and convents). It is not an obligation.

There are SSA people who are more allergic to OS than to celibacy. There are SSA people who are more allergic to celibacy than to opposite sex. And there are people who are not (or not very) SSA in the first place and who get squeezed because a sectarian of Montini believes a Priest of Apollo Delphicus (more usually shrink than tarot reader) that so and so is SSA.

8:13 That's not just too high for normalcy, but also too high for toying around with ideas like "that boy grew up without a father, ergo he's probably SSA" ...

Even in 1968, the number of boys this happened to by far surpasses the number of homosexual men today.

8:33 "single moms doing their best"

Which is sometimes very well indeed. I think my mother heard what you said from Heaven (in her case, I don't count Purgatory as realistic, she was a white martyr).

9:04 OK, you have shrinks speaking probabilities, like the Priests of Delphic Apollo they are.

With sodomy, you only bring up AIDS, which is a new problem.

Have you considered the punch line in St. Thomas' basis?

Sin against nature depopulates. And old generation of 5 million is likely to die pretty uncomfortably if all they gave life to under age 60 are just 1 million. Among Albigensians, this was not totally unheard of, btw.

A little tamer but closer to our reality, a girl the age I might like to marry one regretted the degradation of the "mentor" archetype. She brought up 1977's Obi Wan Kenobi (Alec Guiness, RIP or OPN, whichever) and compared to more recent films.

I made stats on this issue. That is, I compared US census stats from 1977 and 2025. The sections age 20 to 24 have gone down from 4.6 / 4.7 % of the population to 3.4 / 3.2 %. The mentor ages (above 60) have increased their portion, from 60 to 64, 2.0 / 2.3 % then and 3.1 / 3.1 % now, to 90 to 94, 0.1 / 0.1 % then, 0.2 / 0.4 % now.*

Supply and demand. A young person is less likely to want a mentor now. An old person is likelier to want someone to mentor now.

Some of the bad solutions involve pushing people into caring homes to avoid having them as mentors. And some of the bad solutions involve chasing non-young people one could also mentor. For instance, someone of age 57, whom some think of as 17 just because some network spread the rumour he grew up without a dad, and who has not succeeded, this man in this situation thinks I have had opportunity on opportunity wasted by people wanting, very improperly, to mentor me. My youth was misspent by people wanting to mentor me. Including a granny who couldn't, because she was atheist and my mother had made me a Christian.

9:30 Teen abortions would go away if teens could marry, but no one could abort, instead of many being able to abort (depending on state and moment of detection) but most teens not being able to marry.

In Sweden, teen abortions are a higher percentage of abortions than in France. Sweden also raised marital age or nuptial age for women to 18 way earlier than France, whose benighted president Chirac did so in 2006. 7 years nearly on the date before the legalisation of SS-"M" (just exchange the 3 and 4 from month to second digit of day).

10:03 Yes, there certainly are reasons to regret the passing of régimes like Benito's and Francisco's (mother made an essay on their patron saints, while in school) in which abortion was simply a crime, and could simply be punished.

Like 2 to 5 years, both for mother above 14 aborting with medical assistance and for the one providing such. Codice Rocco, 1930, Italy.

If the mother was under 14 or mentally deficient, she was legally not deemed to have decided the abortion, but someone else to have forced her. 6 to 12 years.

13:05 I don't like the comparison to drivers' licences.

Reminds me too much of how in some places doctors can deny people marriage licences, just as they can lock them up, on too loose grounds.

Forbidding to marry, to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving by the faithful, and by them that have known the truth
[1 Timothy 4:3]

16:58 Just in case someone wants to demonise my blogs as those of someone oversharing my faults, no, I'm not.

It's more likely that someone complaining of my "oversharing" is complaining of my sharing the story of their wrong doing (like people who take turns destroying my sleep some nights) or think of things as discrediting which I definitely do not find discrediting. If you drink beer with the food, do you think you should hide that from either your children or your audience? Me neither. You probably have Bavarian heritage, I was raised partly in Austria.

20:23 I definitely can't tell some drinker in Paris' streets I used to drink too much, because it didn't happen.

It was so far from happening that I'm not even fit to advise any drinker on how to stop.

You recall that Irish writer who said "na, I'm not a writer with a drinking problem, I'm a drinker with a writing problem" ... my own writing problem being so grave, it very much stifled me as a prospective drinker. I never got around to habitually getting drunk.

On healthy definitions, Bavarian and Austrian ones, not Arabic or Swedish ones.

21:43 "sexual sin or addiction"

Sorry, were you a Catholic or into the cult that a Christian Emperor rooted out from Delphi, again?

Addiction, if real, is a weakness, not a sin. However, a habit may or may not be from addiction.

If I had belonged to a religion saying "even a small quantity is forbidden" (which thank God I have not done), drinking a beer per day might be a sign of weakness, for instance the weakness of addiction. But belonging to the Catholic Church, I do not think it is sinful to get very slightly tipsy if that wasn't the main reason, I do not think it is sinful to get a heightened tolerance to alcohol, I do not think it's sinful to drink a pint of beer per day, and usually not get tipsy.

Therefore, doing so is not a sign a weakness, and addiction should not even be considered.

But some people read in their tea leaves that someone else is addicted, and some people read it in their own (false) religion and their inability to fathom the Catholic one. Let's briefly touch on cases where some might suspect addiction, like people smoking diverse not very legal things to sleep in the subway. Some of these are people who are being continuously sleep deprived and have a repeated need for some compensation, in my case usually coffee in morning hours and up to past noon. In the case of some others, they are being sleep deprived by people despising as "addiction" the habits they have of getting a douse lasting some hours.

* Mentor / Mentoree Dynamics Changing with Age Pyramid
https://assortedretorts.blogspot.com/2025/08/mentor-mentoree-dynamics-changing-with.html

First third of a video by Mr. Zod against CSL as Apologist

Why I called CS Lewis a Garbage Christian Apologist
Mr. Zod Extracurricular | 4 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rpCDOZK-lk

1:48 Starting the video.

Combativeness doesn't discredit people to me, or to many CSL fans who have also liked Repicheep. However, a term like that, to me, isn't a sign of combativeness, but trying to win by walkover, by deterring undecideds from examining your opponent.

3:14 "everybody, since it came out?"

I think CSL, as an actual scholar of literature, has a bigger overview over what people have been saying about Paradise Lost than you and I.

Now, it is some time since I read his preface to one of the editions, but unless he mentioned and I forgot, or overlooked Pope (whom he was too allergic to), what he said about making Satan sympathetic started with Byron. A good century and a half if not two since the poem.

Perhaps I missed sth, perhaps I misrecalled, perhaps CSL missed Pope (he was under the impression of there being something Satanically arrogant in saying "I must be proud to see, men not afraid of God, afraid of me" ... he was probably rejoicing in heard prayers, like "da mihi virtutem contra hostes tuos"), but can you point to someone (including Pope if you know his work better) who agreed with Byron closer to when Milton wrote?

4:21 Simplification doesn't equal garbage.

5:04 My lay XXth C. bastion of Christian thinking is more like Chesterton, Belloc, to some extent Tolkien, and CSL fills in some chinks, but not unimportant ones.

6:56 "silly and juvenile"

Preferable to senile and judgy, perhaps?

He'd have thought it. But what can one expect from a principal ... was it Wyvern or Experiment House?

7:37 Oh, dear ... you will consider this a shortcut then.

We see Sun, Moon, "system Planets" and fix stars move around Earth each day. Closer observation has shown that what we observe is too intricate an order to be credible as purely accidental or following from simple laws of nature only, or rather the causalities described by such laws, and obviously, since Epicure, people haven't really been eager to uphold his theory this is a vortex, nor has a better mechanism of purely mechanistic order been proposed for Geocentrism.

So.

Geocentrism can't be explained without God.

From here, we can reason two ways.

Geocentrism can't be explained without God.
God doesn't exist.
Therefore Geocentrism doesn't hold.

Geocentrism can't be explained without God.
Geocentrism is observed.
Therefore God exists.

8:13 Just to be clear. I have read Narnia, Till We Have Faces, Screwtape Letters, Space Trilogy, The Great Divorce, Pilgrim's Regress.*

Even so, I have the impression to have read at least as much of his Apologetics prose in essay collections.**

On some very few issues, he actually was shoddy, and that's why I credit Tolkien, Chesterton and Belloc more than him. In dismissing Belloc, for instance. Apologetics isn't one of them, except he was sloppy enough in Miracles chapter 3 to pretend that the big story of Evolution (not pepper moths) is sth we know from reason.

8:48 I'm very sorry, but you were sloppy enough to glide from Atheism (in the shape it was known to him back then) to Atheists, as you know them from personal acquaintance now.

I think there is plenty of attestation in 20th C. Atheists' writings on the topic, they thought the Universe didn't have any meaning, unless you shut out the visions about the Cold Death*** of the universe, and concentrated only on Evolution while ongoing. And that wouldn't be assigning meaning to the universe, but to the ecosystem we live in, which is a different affair.

CSL wasn't speaking of AtheisTs, as individuals. He was speaking of the AtheisM he had wholeheartedly held and was therefore familiar with.

8:51 "meaning is made within people's minds"

Ouch. You are playing humpty dumpty. You are redefining words.

And in other words, you are also saying, in a different phrasing, that the universe, being on your view not in or of a mind, has no inherent meaning.

So, you are not really criticising Lewis for speaking untruth about your lot, you are just complaining he doesn't use your phrasing.

9:03 Is understanding about connections you create, or is there an objectively correct understanding, on at least some levels?

If there is no objectively correct understanding, on any level, you have just given up what used to be the claims of science to understand the world we live in correctly. You have also given up logic.

10:18 There is a good way to do presuppositionalism and a bad way.

We don't presuppose Christianity to be true in our premisses for Christianity. But we do presuppose reason to be reason, i e objectively correct, before we use it.

The former would be a circulus in probando. The latter is just what you need in order to reject circulos in probando.

Unlike Hovind Jr. (Erik or Eric?) CSL is doing it the good way.

10:18 bis. Saying "presuppositionalism is a sad place to be" and saying "CSL is a garbage Christian apologist" is pretty much the same thing.

a) It's the same form of dismissiveness.
b) through Miracles, a preliminary study, CSL and presuppositionalism are closely connected.

CSL does presuppositionalism on reason and morals in Mere Christianity and in Miracles, and at least on morals once again in Abolition of Man. It is I think also at least strongly hinted at in The Problem of Pain. Years since I read these, but still.

9:50 (returning to)

"if you break it down"

If you are any thing like intelligent, you can obviously see that CSL's argument is nonsense and the Emperor's new clothes are magnificent.

Like that fictional example of gaslighting, you did however leave the work to the other guys intelligence ... or shame.

No, I do think CSL has a valid point about what kinds of things we can make points about. Especially on Evolutionary assumptions. On your assumption, a universe without visible light would have not developed eyes in any creature. And obviously to all, "light" and "dark" are meaningless to those born blind. Unless they get their sight belatedly through operation or miracle.

10:27 "that God must exist or sth like that"

Thanks for providing an example of the simplification that's really not just glossy, but dishonest.

The full argument would be sth less easy to debunk.

1) Reason cannot evolve. Cannot emerge from evolution. Is not a simple brain movement (or a complicated one, for that matter).
2) Man hasn't always been around.
3) Man's ancestry (yes, he's supposing Evolution to be true, which I disagree with, but which gives an excellent "even from your pov") didn't have reason.
4) Man's existence depends, insofar as Man is reasoning, on an eternal reason, so non-emergent, and supra-human, since we are emergent.

Try debunking that if you like.

10:38 I would rather say, two things.

1) An abstraction, as such, is not a substance.
2) It is however always some aspect of a substance, or of an aspect.

There are guys who feel they are good at handling abstractions while forgetting these. Who think that the abstraction we Christians deal with is anyway just a minor subset or special case.

Yes, compared to algebra with imaginary numbers, classic geometry and arithmetic are indeed special cases insofar as they are directly based in reality. You actually do not escape St. Tommy's "infinitum non est pertransire" by calling him bad at abstractions and you do not escape a conclusion about a First mover by pretending 1 only comes after zero and zero only after minus 1. Reality is a special case insofar as it is actually real. The number line, isn't, unless you speak of "relative numbers" ... it is plus one that is on the other side of minus one around zero and plus one means "one more than" ... but numeric actual amounts are still starting at 1.

10:51 That "thought is generated in our heads" is, not a proven fact, not a well explained theorem, but, rather, a claim on the Atheist side, and one disputed by the Christian side.

The question isn't if the movements can conform to reason. The question is if reason, even as abstraction, can be about those movements. A very different question.

The atheist gets it as "it has to be, since there is nothing over and above that" ...

The problem is, this is logically impossible, it cannot explain the experience that reason is there. In fact, not even as an illusion.

[Tried to add:]

Thanks for showing your willingness to deflect from debate in favour of a vague impression of giving conventional (so presumably correct) information.

---

I break off here for today, since my comments after "9:50 (returning to)" have been deleted.

---

* These works are works of fiction. The last one auto-fiction. ** And in his autobiography, selected passages, and in various passages of these fictions, most of all Pilgrim's Regress. *** This has since then been denied by Carl Sagan who wants to imagine universes following on eachother in a series of Big Bang's and Big Crushes, rather than a single universe with a Big Bang in the far past and a Big Freeze in the far future. Obviously, Sagan wasn't around in Lewis' time.

Nigeria

BREAKING: 162 Killed in Nigeria Massacre
CBN News | 4 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PouT7DuMiwQ

No, I'm NOT Protestant

Ruslan Thought He Dunked on Catholics
Sips with Serra | 5 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqWOZtnmRD8

2:36 Maybe this will be upcoming, but historically up to a certain date or person ... could be Billy Graham, not sure ... Evangelicals have been pro-choice and pro-contraceptives.

Some have clearly shared more mainline Protestant denominations' stand on being back then pro-sterilisation.

In Canada, a certain time, Amerindians were sterilised, and the hospitals that did that were owned by Calvinists or Methodists, but not the ones owned by Catholics.

And Billy Graham was friends with Fulton Sheen.

10:55 Evangelicals are a late-comer to Protestantism, and excessively Puritan and (to my taste back then, at least) emortional. You know, Dostoyevski vibes.

Back in 1983, I therefore went from non-practising Evangelical to Lutheran, my baptism was in 1984.

But I retained pro-life and creationist views that clearly weren't welcome among those Lutherans.

I converted to Catholicism and could have both. Historical and non-Puritan faith, sobriety about the need to conversion, not hysteria. AND. Pro-life and YEC. Plus, which I hadn't been aware of originally, this was the safest place to believe the Real Presence and the possibility of Absolution, and I converted to believing the Sacrifice of the Mass.

My conversion was to what I would now call the Vatican II sect, but the priest I converted before was a true priest, ordained 1958, well before the new Pontificale.

Among Catholics opposed to Vatican II, of which I'm one, or especially to some post-Vatican II "popes", it is also still perfectly OK (or even required) to be YEC.

JJ1789

@JJ-ki6sv

It is not okay for you to deny the legitimacy and authority of the Pope though. That is not Catholic. Vatican 2 is not a sect it is an ecumenical council of the Catholic Church.

To deny the Pope is Protestant, please don't do that

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@JJ-ki6sv Protestantism is not a synonym for "heresy" or "schism", however so much you may find my position either heretical or schismatic.

Protestantism is a specific schism, other than that of Nestorians or that of Caerularius, it is a specific set of errors often combined with those of the Jansenists, but unlike Jansenism also redefining sacraments.

You are either ill-informed (other than about Trads' sensibilities) or ill-willed if you mischaracterise any part of the Trad movement as "Protestantism".

JJ1789

@hglundahl Brother, call it what you like, but please don't call it Catholic. To bash and denigrate the Pope is in league with some of the most anti-Catholic of Protestant brothers and sisters. Like them, I hope you come to realize there is nothing good down that path. Schism is grave, and picking out things to judge the Church by that are not central to the faith is a way to end up there. Ubi Petrus, ibi ecclesia.

Your "true priest" I hope was not teaching this disobedience of his superiors to whom he owes his obedience. If so, like another priest ordained in 1958, Theodor McCarrick, is doing much damage to the faith of many. Lastly, YEC has NEVER been required belief in the Church. Of the things not required, we should not make idols of them. YEC is not central to the gospel in much of any way. We are required to believe that God created each unique human soul, and in his provident hand in all of creation. The specifics do not have to be literal to be true.

It is "Trad" to be with the Church, like my brother Adrian, running this channel.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@JJ-ki6sv "Your "true priest" I hope was not teaching this disobedience of his superiors to whom he owes his obedience."

On the contrary, he degraded from obedience, and I watched it.

He had in Spain celebrated Mass on a beach in beach clothing at a volleyball party, because that was what his superiors ordered.

"To bash and denigrate the Pope"

Like I've seen what you'd call "Catholics" call Pope Michael I a mental case. That's denigrating the Pope.

"Schism is grave,"

So, stop going in schism with past Popes, then!

"If so, like another priest ordained in 1958, Theodor McCarrick, is doing much damage to the faith of many."

The victims of McCarrick, certainly a Theistic Evolutionist, are a geat argument against obeying the Vatican II sect. You might recall he had a fairly high position. Wasn't it one Wojtyla who handed it over to him?

"Lastly, YEC has NEVER been required belief in the Church."

Thank you for showing how the loyalty of the Vatican II Sect is based on ignorance in laity and deception from clergy ... or ignorance there too, and therefore sloppiness. A bishop is required to know all of the faith, and so is in breach with his duties if he's that sloppy.

Every Christmas, the Church has been saying in the Latin rite, for centuries, Christ was born 5199 after the Creation, 2957 after the Flood and a few more items, but these two most closely related to a young earth.

There have been certain decades from 1830 to 1920 in which, without any apostasy, two other theories were taught, namely what's called "day-age" and "gap theory" which are today basically only believed by Fundies, but in such a way that they respected the Biblical timeline from Adam and him being the first man.

In 1941, Pius XII gives a half-and-half indirect and therefore not fully magisterial (as in 1950 Humani Generis) free pass for believing Adam had a biological pedigree. That's around the time when the MacCarrick type abuses start, I'd put it down to clergy using that abusive licence no longer worshipping the true God and their passions being a punishment as in Romans 1. These then led to Vatican II, the episcopates who hijacked the council (see Wiltgen) being the same where you had big support for Theistic Evolutionism and were more likely to have problems with the Teddy types you mention.

JJ1789

I'm sorry it even needs to be to said: David Bawden was not ever a Pope. Please return to the true Church. Don't be outside. Ask Jesus is a fractured tiny schism what he really intended, or is our family with Pope Leo where we need to be together.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@JJ-ki6sv Did Christianity look like a fractured tiny schism on Pentecost?

Or, if you want to argue, Wojtyla was actually Pope, did Assisi 1986 and CCC § 283 never happen?

Here

I had an answer comment, then answered it, then saw my answer disappear. I'm giving you the answer I do a second time over.

JJ1789

@hglundahl no, the church was decidedly not in schism at Pentecost. Quite the opposite actually. It was small because it had not grown yet. You might say it was like a mustard seed, that could grow into the greatest of trees. Yes that's a good metaphor. Because trees don't turn back into seeds. And the Christ guaranteed the Church's protection

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@JJ-ki6sv "the church was decidedly not in schism at Pentecost."

From the POV of the Temple? A little more than seven weeks earlier, Caiaphas was God's own last "Pope" for the OT, just as Cephas was now on Pentecost God's own first Pope for the NT.

"It was small because it had not grown yet. ... Because trees don't turn back into seeds."

They are however sometimes reduced to bonsai trees.

Christ asked about the end times "will the Son of Man find faith when He returns?" indicating that the actual Catholics of the end times would be few.

"And the Christ guaranteed the Church's protection"

From a total apostasy or distortion, yes, from a reduction to a few, no.

@JJ-ki6sv You deflected from not just one, but two questions.

A) Did Assisi 1986 and CCC § 283 not happen; B) Did the Church at Pentecost look like a schism? You deflected from the latter by answering it was in fact not in schism, which I agree on.

10:55 bis While he hasn't debunked Catholicism, he has however shown Evangelicals are on some key issues more Catholic than classic Protestant denominations.

I'd count YEC as one of these issues, Pope Michael II would probably agree, Pope Michael I did.

Larry Taunton and Whataboutism

A Response to Tucker Carlson on Israel, Gaza, and Christian persecution.
Larry Alex Taunton | 5 Febr. 2026
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UmpdRSHJyc4

I would certainly have linked to Allie Beth Stuckey's episode on Nigeria, if either the Nigerian Christian hadn't stated such an atrocious thing as saying "Muslims use women as baby machines", meaning, not only are Nigerian Christians endorsing contraception, but they are even demonising Muslims (and by implication Catholics too) for not doing so. Meaning they aren't really Christians. OR, if I had had the time as in internet access to make a full length comment on her episide, stopping it every two minutes or so to make a comment, collecting them on a post, and posting this with a link.

The people persecuted in a sense "for the name of Christ" would deserve it, even if they are heterodox, the issue of Muslim genocidal guilt in Nigeria isn't doubtful by the statistics he gave.

However, I would also not give them a blanket endorsement, since their doctrine has issues. Just as if a Mormon population in Nigeria were being persecuted, I would not endorse Mormonism while calling this out.

However, the fact that Nigeria has a genocide against Christians doesn't mean Israel doesn't have tendencies like that.

And Christian Palestinians are the fulfilment of Isaias 11, a population that's been in place, of mixed Judaean and Samarian origin, since Acts 2 and Acts 8.

I don't need Tucker Carlson to testify to that, there are Catholic priests in place, and also the Lutheran quasi-priest, Munther Isaac.

Settlers, Jews for Judaism, anti-proselytising laws and so on are doing a miniature of Acts 8:1. Against Hebrews, like back then.

Most of them are also Catholic or Orthodox, and so, despite the schism of 1054 or Vatican II related errors have far less doctrinal issues than the Protestant community in Nigeria.

Answered

three times, I, II and III.

I

Sanni Epstein

@sanniepstein4835

Both Afghani and Saudi men have been quoted as saying "boys/men for fun, women only for babies". It does sound as though they regard women as unloved breeders.
And what does that have to do with contraception?

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@hglundahl

@sanniepstein4835 You know, there is cultural and geographic distance from Saudis and Afghanis to Nigerians.

Homosexual practises, by the way, are a pretty radical form of contraception, which is why God condemns it.

II

Larry Alex Taunton

@IdeasHaveConsequences

Christians are being slaughtered in Nigeria by Muslims. Period. I have no interest in ABS take. I have been there and seen it. She has not.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@IdeasHaveConsequences She had an interview with someone who had been there.

It's however nearly an hour long.

III

Larry Oxentine

@larryoxentine8310

Long winded anti semitic rant

Answered

twice, a and b.

a

Larry Alex Taunton

9 minutes is too much for your ADHD? LOL. Go elsewhere.

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@IdeasHaveConsequences Were you answering the right comment?

He might have meant my comment and not your video. I challenge anyone who wants to read my comment aloud, with no interruption, and take nine minutes doing so.

Larry Oxentine

@hglundahl you are right, I meant the insult for you your comment, but that has never stopped the globe trotting defender of the faith or his minions or the AI program inserting his thin skinned unwanted opinions into his channels commentary. Hopefully LT can learn to identify a real enemy of the faith in his personal quest for glory, ( hint) look in the mirror.

b

Hans-Georg Lundahl

@larryoxentine8310 What's Antisemitic about defending Christian descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?