Comment: um...

(See in situ)


um...

"Most people do not question what they hear in Church. For the Elite, that is perfect."

I've never been to a church that didn't encourage people to look into things for themselves, like the Bereans in Acts 17:11

"Remember, it was the Catholic Church that tried to say you needed a priest to talk to God. This is one reason for the division among the churches. DIVIDE AND CONQUER."

I don't know of any catholic who ever believed that. Talking/prayer to God on your own is encouraged by Catholics, and to my knowledge always was. Disinformation is also a way to cause division. Where the catholic church had a problem was in mediation of sacraments and interpretation, but not in talking to God.

"If the crusaders would kill for it, then the control of information must have been THAT VITAL."

There is a lot of spin applied to historical studies of crusaders. Nominalism is often the problem where religion is blamed.

"Trust me, the Christian religion has been co opted by evil. This is very evident with the hate groups, molestation, UFO propaganda siding hypocritical manifestations."

Aberrations of Christianity do not detract from Christianity itself. If Jesus didn't teach hate/molestation/etc., then you can't blame those things on Christianity when false Christians do it. The bible is full of accounts of corrupt people within Godly communities. Will you blame Jesus for Judas's greed? Why trust you instead of Jesus when he says the following? Matthew 16:18b "...I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

"Furthermore, why do we always except the tale that the Jews killed Jesus? Remember that the only time Jesus ever got physical is when he drove the money changers out of the Temple. Right after that he is crucified. They could have easily been the ones behind it, then using the Jew story to further "divide and conquer""

Well, it was actually the Romans who killed Jesus after being urged to do so by 'some' Jews. Why accept that? Because that is what the historical documentation points to. 'Could have .. would have' stories are not any reason to believe that your proposition corresponds to reality.