Do you observe the Sabbath?

You've really gone off the tracks now.

I heard a Catholic Bishop explaining how Inquisitions worked. The Catholic Church did not kill anyone during the Inquisitions, the secular authorities executed those that were found guilty. See, the Inquisitor has no blood on his hands.

I heard a Catholic Bishop explaining how Inquisitions worked. The Catholic Church did not kill anyone during the Inquisitions, the secular authorities executed those that were found guilty. See, the Inquisitor has no blood on his hands.

The Inquisitor reviews the evidence and determines the sentence.

Inquisitions are legal procedures with the purpose of protecting the doctrine of the church.

You will be handed over to the secular authorities which carry out the sentence.

No blood on my hands.

Mwhaaaaaaaaaaaaaa.

Or he has revealed his true fruit...

I believe if he actually had his way then what he’s saying would be true.

Out of the abundance of the heart... We must seek the LORD as to how to endure what seems to be intensifying...

If it’s it’s okay with you, I’ll message you and tell you how bad it seems to be getting

I'm not saying the Jews didn't debate about what days were appropriate for fasting because we the historical record of that fact.
The context does give us some clues about" the eating and not eating" in the above verse 2 For one believes that he may eat all things: another, who is weak,eateth herbs then Paul ties in;
verse 14 "I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself, but to him that esteemeth anything to be
unclean, to him it is unclean.
verse 20 ......all things indeed are pure; but it is evil for that man who eateth with offense.........or anything whereby thy brother stumbleth.............or is made weak.
I am certainly not saying you can't use this passage to for setting people free from judging one another. Fasting is definitely a disputable matter, but I think it primarily was dealing with meats that were clean or unclean. The law had changed with the new covenant coming in and there were weaker brethren that thought some meats were unclean still or that it was sacrificed to other pagan gods.
My humble take on it.
Shalom!

I heard a Catholic Bishop explaining how Inquisitions worked. The Catholic Church did not kill anyone during the Inquisitions, the secular authorities executed those that were found guilty. See, the Inquisitor has no blood on his hands.

The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper.

That isn't how it works. Those who handed over Jesus to Pilate were guilty of murder.

Acts 3
15You killed the author of life, but God raised him from the dead. We are witnesses of this. 16By faith in the name of Jesus, this man whom you see and know was made strong. It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has completely healed him, as you can all see.
17“Now, fellow Israelites, I know that you acted in ignorance, as did your leaders.

That is what the Jewish leaders did to Jesus

No it's not. Pontius Pilate was the judge on that case. Pontius Pilate asked the public to declare His guilt or innocence. The public wanted Him crucified and Barabbas was set free.

We decided the fate of Jesus, not the Jewish leaders, the Jewish leaders could not execute anyone.

The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper, see also Frederick II at Padua.

Ultimately, the decision of God to have a people to Himself decided Jesus' fate.

England was not under the reign of the Catholic Church. King Henry the 8th asked the Pope for a divorce.

The problem with that statement, is that those supposedly 'secular' authorities, weren't 'secualr', but very 'religious', such as Spain, Portugal, England, Germany, Geneva, France (before it bcame secular) and the north countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland), as each were Roman Catholic at the higest levels of government, such as Ferdinand and Isabella of Spain, 'Bloody' Mary, even the German Emperor, whose aunt was the first wife (Catherine of Aragon, also Catholic) of Henry VIII (who himself was a staunch Catholic, and merely had divorce issues).

The St. Bartholomew's Day massacre was carried out by Catholics, even as a Catholic author and historian, Lord Acton, and others have stated. So the whole ideology, that such was carried out by 'secular' authorities is revisionist history, and not accurate all. In other words, those states (political entities) were so thoroughly Catholic in principle, they were simply carrying out the papacy's directives, and believed it to be proper, see also Frederick II at Padua.

Hello. If King Henry VIII had to "ask" the "pope" for a divorce, then what was the religion of King Henry VIII, and the rule of law in K.H.VIII's country?

Besides, he (KH8) didn't just ask. He begged, pleaded, and cajolled for years about that one divorce. I always say it was one of the longest attempts at divorce in history, with all the letters (and emmisaries) flying from England to the 'pope', to the German Emperor, to the King of France, etc.