tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post5898841646049828499..comments2023-10-05T08:25:13.232-04:00Comments on Biblical Evidence for Catholicism: The Myth of Multiple "Millions" Supposedly Killed in the Catholic Inquisitions (Anti-Catholic John Bugay's Groundless Claims)Dave Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07771661758539438173noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-77607094311373229192010-12-08T22:20:39.301-05:002010-12-08T22:20:39.301-05:00And.... What Inquisition? in the XVI, before and e...And.... What Inquisition? in the XVI, before and even after, it was impossible to tell from faith, king and law but it was all a matrix. what is the "Catholic" Inquisition without the state? Blaming Catholicism exclusively for everything without considering the political and/or social factor is a simple anachronism. The only reason d'etre of Protestantism was that the civil authorities could profit from the Church and oppose the emperor. Period.Murgishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17264816743283605997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-8863790616361501392010-06-17T12:28:19.966-04:002010-06-17T12:28:19.966-04:00John Bugay: Thanks for sharing.
Adomnan: You'...John Bugay: Thanks for sharing.<br /><br />Adomnan: You're welcome! Educating you has been a pleasure.Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-70971341851424127962010-06-17T11:50:50.416-04:002010-06-17T11:50:50.416-04:00John Bugay: If you don't trust Barrett and Gor...John Bugay: If you don't trust Barrett and Gordon-Conwell, no one else has compiled this sort of information. <br /><br />Adomnan: No, I don't trust them. They are Protestant Fundamentalists. They probably think Noah left the dinosaurs off the Ark. <br /><br />Even the most casual perusal of their figures shows that they are absurd. 1,811,000 Christians killed by Buddhists? Not on this planet.<br /><br />And, again, where do they get their self-refuting precision? Twenty centuries, many poorly documented, and yet they're pinning the number of martyrs down to the thousands? These are junk stats on the face of it. Totally worthless. <br /><br />And when we point this out to you, you tell us: It must be true. Lampe verifies it.<br /><br />Poor Lampe! His good name is being associated with this drivel just because you're counting on no one having read his book. <br /><br />John Bugay: This is a fitting comment on your saying anything that I have said is preposterous.<br /><br />Adomnan: Another sophomoric "witty" comment. High school is over, Mr. Bugay. <br /><br />Preposterous?: You said in effect that ancient statistics have been preserved (surprisingly!) that enable historians/archaeologists to estimate the number of Christian martyrs over the past two millennia to within a thousand, and you said that a reputable historian and archaeologist confirms this nonsense, when in fact you just made it up. Both of these assertions are preposterous.Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-76696270322599688502010-06-17T03:23:00.561-04:002010-06-17T03:23:00.561-04:00Paul Hoffer: Frankly, your view that Catholics and...Paul Hoffer: <i>Frankly, your view that Catholics and Orthodox should be considered as Christians is a sentiment that should be encouraged among Reformed apologists.</i><br /><br />Frankly, my view is more mainstream than you give credit; we are willing to believe that "Catholics and Orthodox should be considered as Christians," whereas, we are not willing to believe that, in their particular doctrines that have not been derived from Scripture, the institutional Catholic Church and the institutional Orthodox Churches have damaged the faith of many, and But insofar as the individuals name the name of Christ, He is faithful to save all who "turn". (Acts 28:27, for example).<br /><br /><i> the statistical methodology used by Barrett and the institutions you mention is nebulous at best and highly subjective at worst. Why is the Rwandan tragedy or the Spanish subjugation of American natives considered incidents of martyrdom whereas as Adomnan points out the Irish famine is not so considered or for that matter the systemic violence conducted against Catholics by Nativists and Ku Klux Klan members (both movements of which were almost exclusively Protestant) in this country? </i><br /><br />You've obviously spent much more time investigating the details of this than I have. I'll have to tell you, this was never a major interest of mine. I was watching a thread at Green Baggins; Jason Stellman sort of made a joke, Dave Armstrong sort of made a joke; I added a comment which was reproduced above, and all of a sudden I am all over the internet in a headline which reads "THE MYTH OF MULTIPLE "MILLIONS" SUPPOSEDLY KILLED IN THE CATHOLIC INQUISITIONS, REVISITED (ANTI-CATHOLIC JOHN BUGAY'S HISTORICALLY GROUNDLESS CLAIMS".<br /><br />So as we've seen, already several factual errors about my own position merely from that headline have been uncovered, which took several days' worth of patient responses from me, in response to badgering by you and Adomnan. So if the Irish famine is not included in the statistics, and you are in a huff about that, you ought to petition the authors to change their methodology to include crop famines as producing martyrs. I'm sure they will listen to your sound arguments. <br /><br />If you want to question anyone's methodology, it seems as if you should be more interested in questioning the methodology on this very site. As I said above, 2000 years-worth of history is a lot of history. And further, there has been a lot of misinformation thrown about from the earliest times, right down to this present post. Sorting through it all is a major challenge, and knowing who you can trust is critical.<br /><br />If you don't trust Barrett and Gordon-Conwell, no one else has compiled this sort of information. Looking at their site, this is only one small component of the information database that they research and keep up-to-date. You are really barking into the wind, howling at names like Oxford, Gordon-Conwell and Brill. <br /><br />You have got a live example of misinformation right here though. <br /><br /><i>I took the number of years his chart claims that Catholicism has been around and the number of years it shows that Protestantism has existed and divided the number of people Barrett represents each sect martyred by the respective number of years. No more, no less. The very low figures certainly puts your selective use of the the numbers into perspective. </i><br /><br />Unfortunately, your calculations on the Catholic side were off by a factor of 10. You misplaced the decimal on the Catholic calculation. Are you still happy with that perspective? <br /><br /><br />Adomnan<i>Sorry about the double post. I'm at an unfamiliar computer, and it's doing strange things.</i><br /><br />This is a fitting comment on your saying anything that I have said is preposterous.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-79553102787964262442010-06-17T00:37:29.210-04:002010-06-17T00:37:29.210-04:00cont.
I wrote: “That being said, using Barrett...cont.<br /><br />I wrote: “That being said, using Barrett's statistics, they appear to show that Catholics martyred other Christians at the rate of approximately 248 a year and Protestants martyred other Christians at the rate of 297 a year. That being said, using Barrett's statistics, they appear to show that Catholics martyred other Christians at the rate of approximately 248 a year and Protestants martyred other Christians at the rate of 297 a year.”<br /><br />You responded: “This is just speculation on your part, based on indeterminate calculations of yours based on how many Catholics were killed by other Catholics.” <br /><br />Me: No speculation on my part at all, just simple math using Barrett’s chart. I took the<br />number of years his chart claims that Catholicism has been around and the number of years it shows that Protestantism has existed and divided the number of people Barrett represents each sect martyred by the respective number of years. No more, no less. The very low figures certainly puts your selective use of the the numbers into perspective. <br /><br />You wrote: “As I said, I don't condone any of it. But the Roman Catholic notion that Catholicism is superior, offering "the fullness of the faith," really needs to be tempered by humility in some quarters.”<br /><br />Me: I would suggest that perpetuation of the myth that the Roman Catholic Church is more<br />blood-thirsty than its Protestant counterparts is a form of condonation. And since we do not pretend that the Church is not made up of both sinners as well as saints as some Protestants hold, I am not afraid to hold that the Catholic Church is the “fullness of the faith.”<br /><br />You wrote: “I've put up a new posting at Beggar's ALl: "Augustine as Conduit to the Inquisition."<br /><br />Me: With all due respect to Mr. Johnson, the notion of using an inquisition to combat heresy is based on the bible. See, Deuteronomy 12; 13:5-18; 17:2–75; 1 Cor. 5:13.<br /><br />God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-59290548703216386772010-06-17T00:37:10.799-04:002010-06-17T00:37:10.799-04:00Mr Bugay wrote “Paul Hoffer -- Thank you for your ...Mr Bugay wrote “Paul Hoffer -- Thank you for your admission that, in badgering me to the effect that "Orthdodox and Catholics are not Christians," you were in the wrong.” <br /><br />Me: I have no problem admitting my mistakes. I assumed that you did not believe so given<br />the company that you keep over at Beggars All and your fan worship of Professor White. Frankly, your view that Catholics and Orthodox should be considered as Christians is a sentiment that should be encouraged among Reformed apologists. It enables folks to avoid some of the ad hominem stuff and allows us to actually engage on the issues. <br /><br />You wrote: “Your characterization that I "demand" you "accept" as "authoritative" is misplaced. I would strongly suggest that they are legitimate, Schirrmacher notwithstanding -- Gordon Conwell is no slouch of an institution, nor is Oxford, which puts their name behind his work. And as I have learned from checking other sources, there are no other sources for these statistics.” <br /><br />Me: I disagree. Given what I have read thus far, the statistical methodology used by Barrett and the institutions you mention is nebulous at best and highly subjective at worst. Why is the Rwandan tragedy or the Spanish subjugation of American natives considered incidents of martyrdom whereas as Adomnan points out the Irish famine is not so considered or for that matter the systemic violence conducted against Catholics by Nativists and Ku Klux Klan members (both movements of which were almost exclusively Protestant) in this country? That these authors are not willing to provide in detail their methodology for how they determine whether a particular historical event is religious as opposed to political or economic troubles me greatly. For me, such practices are no different than those employed by the global warming crowd. Pseudo-science is not science and should not be countenanced even if such favors one’s own views.<br /> <br />You wrote: “I said they were shaped by their times, which, in turn, were shaped in huge part by the Roman Catholic hierarchy."<br /><br />Me: Here is where I have a bone of contention with your use of Barrett’s statistics. There is no way that you can infer that in any way from the information that he provides. Moreover, your polemically charged language here is merely a dressed-up statement that historically, the unrepentant teaching of heresy was considered a crime against both the Church and the State and was punishable by death since before the Mediaeval times. The use of capital punishment as a remedy against heresy was not invented by the “Roman Catholic hierarchy.” What makes the Reformers’ decision to continue to use it so unique is that Protestants had no problem punishing people who privately exercised their conscience and held in the quiet of their heart religious opinions that differed from the Protestant hierarchy and the civil authorities who concurred with their views. There was a good reason that half the dogs in Reformed Geneva were named Calvin-so their owners could kick them as a form of dissent without being tortured, fined or banished. Frankly, I would be interested in seeing some evidence which supports your broad contention or would even settle for a citation or two.<br /><br />cont.Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-41407117778802223222010-06-16T09:22:51.757-04:002010-06-16T09:22:51.757-04:00Adomnan, Lampe is evidence that we are able to der...Adomnan, Lampe is evidence that we are able to derive huge amounts of information about the ancient world. This does not speak directly to Barrett's situation, but it is just another point, contra all your scoffing, that statistics about historical events, while not precisely accurate, can still give us a very clear picture about what was happening in any given time. <br /><br />How much information do you think that Barrett got from the medieval sources that you think so highly of? <br /><br /><i>One thing is certain, though, Catholicism is responsible for the lion's share of good that has been done in the name of Christ, and I submit the good vastly outweighs the evil. </i><br /><br />You "submit" that, do you? On what evidence? How do you quantify that historically-groundless claim? With all that lost information and all? <br /><br />I would "submit" to you that the British empire, in spite of the "evil" that it did, brought vastly more good to the world than evil.<br /><br />And further, I would feel confident to say that, of the evils of the British empire that you decry, most of them were first learned from the Roman church. <br /><br />So we can spit about that for a while, eh? <br /><br />The fact is, while Christians throughout the ages have done very much good, it's the institutional church generally, and the institutional Roman church in particular, that has failed miserably when it comes to "good done in the name of Christ."<br /><br />Look at the whole Eastern ("Nestorian") church, cast off in the name of "discipline" and "heresy". Twelve million martyrs there (largely at the hands of Islam and others), but where were the cries for "unity" in that day? Now, in 1994, the very thing that Nestorius was most castigated for, "Christotokos," has been accepted by John Paul II. It's no wonder the world mocks Christianity. <br /><br />One can point to instance after instance after instance of that very thing happening in history. <br /><br />It wasn't the papacy that "called the civilization of Western Europe into being," it was the local schools and churches and universities that lifted Western Europe up by the bootstraps, at the time when multiple popes all were continuing (as they had from the beginning), to fight over which of them was greatest. <br /><br />It's God's common grace that lifted up the world in the middle ages. He did it through individual believers, whose lives He touched. And yes, individual believers who heard the Holy Spirit.<br /><br /><i>Adomnan: I don't hear anyone else apologizing.</i><br /><br />Nor do you hear Rome apologizing. What you hear is a failure to take responsibility for its own acts and deeds, and a shifting of blame from itself.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-88981956358637181212010-06-16T08:53:51.027-04:002010-06-16T08:53:51.027-04:00Bugay: Duffy says that Lampe's work "is t...Bugay: Duffy says that Lampe's work "is the starting point for all further discussions on this topic." <br /><br />Adomnan: Eamon Duffy says that Lampe's book is the starting point for all further discussions on the topic of the abundant availability of ancient statistics? Anicient stats, which you claim are surprisingly well preserved, are the topic of this discussion, you know. <br /><br />Bugay: You may say he is "controversial," but nobody is really disagreeing with him.<br /><br />Adomnan: Disagreeing about what? The availability of ancient archives?<br /><br />Bugay: As far as all the other martyrdoms you say we don't know about: God knows perfectly.<br /><br />Adomnan: Oh, so that's where Barrett is getting his information. The Holy Spirit whispers it into his ear. But, again, I thought we were talking about ancient statistics, surprisingly well preserved.<br /><br />Bugay: Christianity as a whole must bear the guilt for the evils that have been wrought in the name of Christ, and it is Rome's imperious spirit that is responsible for the lion's share of these evils. <br /><br />Adomnan: As a person of Irish heritage, whose ancesters were persecuted for centuries merely for being Catrholic, I must disagree with you. The British had an empire, too, spread in the name of Christ. <br /><br />One thing is certain, though, Catholicism is responsible for the lion's share of good that has been done in the name of Christ, and I submit the good vastly outweighs the evil. For one thing, it's thanks to the Catholic Church that we're not all hearkening to the muezzin's call. <br /><br />And the papacy essentially called the civilization of Western Europe into being.<br /><br />Bugay: Apologizing for "the sins of the children of the Church" is far different from apologizing for what the institutional Roman Catholic Church has done. <br /><br />Adomnan: I don't hear anyone else apologizing.<br /><br />When are the Southern Baptists going to apologize for owing their very existence as a denomination to championing slavery? A denomination founded on the subjugation, oppression and murder of black folk, and many millions of them, too. What a shame!Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-22097642478675059542010-06-16T05:38:09.291-04:002010-06-16T05:38:09.291-04:00Adomnan -- Lampe is just the remedial reading. The...Adomnan -- Lampe is just the remedial reading. The Catholic Historian Eamon Duffy says that Lampe's work "is the starting point for all further discussions on this topic." You may say he is "controversial," but nobody is really disagreeing with him. <br /><br />As far as all the other martyrdoms you say we don't know about: God knows perfectly. Christianity as a whole must bear the guilt for the evils that have been wrought in the name of Christ, and it is Rome's imperious spirit that is responsible for the lion's share of these evils. <br /><br />Apologizing for "the sins of the children of the Church" is far different from apologizing for what the institutional Roman Catholic Church has done. That's a charade that everyone sees through.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-74630514971418552802010-06-16T05:32:48.753-04:002010-06-16T05:32:48.753-04:00Paul Hoffer -- Thank you for your admission that, ...Paul Hoffer -- Thank you for your admission that, in badgering me to the effect that "Orthdodox and Catholics are not Christians," you were in the wrong. <br /><br /><i>Thus, according to Barrett which you demand we accept as authoritative there were few if any Protestants were martyred as a result of the Inquisition or other mythical Catholic suppression. So much for Foxe's book of lies (that is if we are to accept your reference as authoritative). </i><br /><br />Your characterization that I "demand" you "accept" as "authoritative" is misplaced. I would strongly suggest that they are legitimate, Schirrmacher notwithstanding -- Gordon Conwell is no slouch of an institution, nor is Oxford, which puts their name behind his work. And as I have learned from checking other sources, there are no other sources for these statistics. <br /><br /><i>BTW, I would concede that Catholics killed Arians, Albigenisians, and Orthodox in large numbers (I myself would suggest that it is not millions). However, if one peruses Barrett's other writings, one would find that he includes in the Catholic figure, Catholics killing other Catholics, such as the Rwandan massacre, the killing of Catholic Mexican natives by conquistadors and Filipino Catholics by Spanish Catholics. Those figures probably do number in the millions. The most Christians killed by Catholics were other Catholics. </i> <br /><br />I'll grant that a large percentage of Catholics killed other Catholics. My point being, that Roman Catholicism was "among the greatest “persecutors,” … [and] I did not say Protestants were “clean”. I said they were shaped by their times, which, in turn, were shaped in huge part by the Roman Catholic hierarchy."<br /><br /><i>Though, I still want you to tell me how you think that citing to Barrett's statistics help you. How many Protestants you think Catholics have supposedly martyred and vice-a-versa? </i><br /><br />As I originally said at Greenbaggins, "perspective." Five million vs. 140,000. None of it is pretty. I would condone none of it. Just look at who's setting the agenda. <br /><br /><i> That being said, using Barrett's statistics, they appear to show that Catholics martyred other Christians at the rate of approximately 248 a year and Protestants martyred other Christians at the rate of 297 a year. That being said, using Barrett's statistics, they appear to show that Catholics martyred other Christians at the rate of approximately 248 a year and Protestants martyred other Christians at the rate of 297 a year. </i><br /><br />This is just speculation on your part, based on indeterminate calculations of yours based on how many Catholics were killed by other Catholics. As I said, I don't condone any of it. But the Roman Catholic notion that Catholicism is superior, offering "the fullness of the faith," really needs to be tempered by humility in some quarters. <br /><br />I've put up a new posting at Beggar's All:<br /><br />"Augustine as Conduit to the Inquisition"<br /><br />http://beggarsallreformation.blogspot.com/2010/06/augustine-as-conduit-to-inquisition.html<br /><br />At the moment, I'm citing the Catholic historian Paul Johnson on this. No doubt you and the others here have an issue with his work as well. But there are many others. And if you cite enough sources all saying the same thing, its hard to argue with the picture that they all paint.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-69510620208255405042010-06-16T00:20:47.302-04:002010-06-16T00:20:47.302-04:00Mr. Bugay, having the opportunity to study this di...Mr. Bugay, having the opportunity to study this dicussion in depth, I want you to take a look at this chart here:http://ockenga.gordonconwell.edu/ockenga/globalchristianity/gd/gd16.pdf. The statistics show that only 3,176,000 Protestants were martyred. The large chart on the page linked above demonstrates that all but a few of the 3,176,000 were martyred in the 20th century. Thus, according to Barrett which you demand we accept as authoritative there were few if any Protestants were martyred as a result of the Inquisition or other mythical Catholic suppression. So much for Foxe's book of lies (that is if we are to accept your reference as authoritative). <br /><br />If we are to accept the claim that Catholics martyred 4,951,000 or over 5,000,000 Christians, then the Christians the unnamed Catholics killed do not include for the most part any Protestants. So much for your notion that Protestants killing Catholics was somehow a legitimate response to mythical systemic Catholic oppression. <br /><br />BTW, I would concede that Catholics killed Arians, Albigenisians, and Orthodox in large numbers (I myself would suggest that it is not millions). However, if one peruses Barrett's other writings, one would find that he includes in the Catholic figure, Catholics killing other Catholics, such as the Rwandan massacre, the killing of Catholic Mexican natives by conquistadors and Filipino Catholics by Spanish Catholics. Those figures probably do number in the millions. The most Christians killed by Catholics were other Catholics. <br /><br />Now that I have had the opportunity to read all of your comments, and based on your earlier remarks that suggest that Orthodox and Catholics are Christians and based on your assertions with respect to Barrett's data, I accept your position that Catholics and Orthodox are also Christians. Thank you for showing us all how to use the statistics.<br /><br />Though, I still want you to tell me how you think that citing to Barrett's statistics help you. How many Protestants you think Catholics have supposedly martyred and vice-a-versa? How many Protestants do you know that have been martyred by Catholics these days? <br /><br />That being said, using Barrett's statistics, they appear to show that Catholics martyred other Christians at the rate of approximately 248 a year and Protestants martyred other Christians at the rate of 297 a year. That sort of puts your delight in the supposed bloodthirstiness of Catholics in perspective when your chosen sect is more bloodthirsty. <br /><br />Please note: I reject Barrett's statistics and your argumentation. I am just showing you the consequences of your reliance on Barrett.<br /><br />God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-76029218131473817292010-06-15T19:44:52.782-04:002010-06-15T19:44:52.782-04:00Bugay: That's the link Paul Hoffer provided to...Bugay: That's the link Paul Hoffer provided to verify the work done by Barrett. It is an evangelical organization; they qualify the statistics saying they may be too skewed in the Catholic direction. So you are precisely wrong.<br /><br />Adomnan: No, I'm precisely right. I looked up the background of this publication, World Christian Encyclopedia, as I recall. It's actually a product of Gorden-Conwell Seminary, an evangelical/Protestant Fundamentalist institution. As you say, "it is an evangelical organization."<br /><br />Barrett himself is a low-church Anglican evangelical minister with associations with Fundamentalists like Packer and Michael Horton, a dying breed but one that was more conspicuous some decades ago.<br /><br />Apparently, Gordon-Conwell merely paid Oxford Press to publish their tomes. Oxford University had no imput and is not at all responsible for the contents. So your putting this stuff under the aegis of Oxford University is rather misleading. <br /><br />Perhaps the Encyclopedia is accurate about the number of Protestant denominations. They would have no motive for skewing that as far as I can see. However, we Catholics do not accept Fundamentalist "scholarship" that touches on our church. And we're under no obligation to do so, anymore than we are obliged to call your bishop "Dr." James White. <br /><br />Bugay: You would then be interested, for example, in the work by Peter Lampe, "From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome during the First Two Centuries."<br /><br />Adomnan: You're always pushing this book. Expand your reading a bit. <br /><br />So your impression of the completeness of records from ancient times comes from Lampe's book? Okay,then, precisely how many Christians were martyred in the first and second century according to Lampe -- and not just in Rome, but everywhere in this centralized empire? No doubt the best archives were kept at Rome and were, as you say, surprisingly well preserved. <br /><br />Bugay: You'll come away from this with a very clear picture of what the early church at Rome was like.<br /><br />Adomnan: Lampe's book is controversial, like all such scholarship. It's hardly the last word. <br /><br />In any event, this is beside the point. Lampe's successful archaeology in first and second-century Rome hardly accounted for all the martyrdoms there and would only be illustrative of the amount of material recoverable from the center of the Empire during one relatively civilized era.Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-60998434180403051362010-06-15T18:09:46.511-04:002010-06-15T18:09:46.511-04:00Where is this from?: ... Is this from the organiza...<i> Where is this from?: ... Is this from the organization that published the stats you're touting? If so, this is proof enough that the stats are from a Protestant Fundamnetalist source and so to be rejected out of hand. </i><br /><br />That's the link Paul Hoffer provided to verify the work done by Barrett. It is an evangelical organization; they qualify the statistics saying they may be too skewed in the Catholic direction. So you are precisely wrong. <br /><br /><i> Hardly any records survived the barbarian invasions and occupation of Europe. ...</i><br /><br />You would then be interested, for example, in the work by Peter Lampe, "From Paul to Valentinus: Christians at Rome during the First Two Centuries."<br /><br />Lampe investigated virtually every primary source from that era, as well as archaeological, epigraphical, historical records and more, to produce the most complete and graphic history of the church from that time. <br /><br />In fact, here's the Google Books link:<br /><br />http://books.google.com/books?id=s98K8snXyeUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Peter+Lampe+Paul+to+Valentinus&hl=en&ei=AfoXTN-FBZquNfnmybQL&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q&f=false<br /><br />You'll come away from this with a very clear picture of what the early church at Rome was like. <br /><br />On the topic ofJohn Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-78455276334036488922010-06-15T12:21:15.683-04:002010-06-15T12:21:15.683-04:00Where is this from?:
"the International Bull...Where is this from?:<br /><br />"the International Bulletin of Missionary Research ist [sic] an ecumenical organisation under Catholic leadership, it reflects views other than those of evangelical researches and thus includes nominal Christians and believers who die under political oppression or in civil wars, such as in Sudan."<br /><br />Is this from the organization that published the stats you're touting? If so, this is proof enough that the stats are from a Protestant Fundamnetalist source and so to be rejected out of hand.<br /><br />Phrases like "evangelical researches" and the assertion that an "ecumenical" organization with Catholic participation would naturally "include nominal believers" is a giveaway. Besides, "believers who die under political oppression or in civil wars" should not be accounted as "martyrs" for the faith. They're the victims of political vicissitudes, just like anyone who dies in any war or purge.<br /><br />John Bugay: You'd be surprised at the accuracy of public records that have been kept through the ages.<br /><br />Adomnan: You must be joking. Hardly any records survived the barbarian invasions and occupation of Europe. Some Irish and Anglo-Saxons annals, other bits here and there; but nothing nearly precise enough to estimate to the nearest 100,000 the number of Chritians that the Vikings, the Huns,the Vandals, etc. killed. How many died in the Sack of Rome in 410 AD?Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-68509971191668960732010-06-15T10:58:14.627-04:002010-06-15T10:58:14.627-04:00And, no, we don't think something is true just...<i>And, no, we don't think something is true just because it's published by Oxford.</i><br /><br />Paul Hoffer published these very [similar] statistics, under the guise of another publisher. <br /><br />You should note further that the numbers that you're blatantly dismissing are produced by a Catholic organization:<br /><br /><i>the International Bulletin of Missionary Research ist [sic] an ecumenical organisation under Catholic leadership, it reflects views other than those of evangelical researches and thus includes nominal Christians and believers who die under political oppression or in civil wars, such as in Sudan. </i><br /><br />(see the link Paul Hoffer posted: http://www.bucer.eu/uploads/media/WEA_GIS_5_-_Thomas_Schirrmacher_-_The_Persecution_of_Christians_Concerns_Us_All.pdf -- page 17)<br /><br />You'd be surprised at the accuracy of public records that have been kept through the ages.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-82632550924947329292010-06-15T10:46:39.441-04:002010-06-15T10:46:39.441-04:00John Bugay: So when James White posts a link, I tr...John Bugay: So when James White posts a link, I trust it. I do so because I have learned to do so.<br /><br />Adomnan: A charlatan who styles himself "Dr." on the basis of a phoney "PhD" from an unaccredited degree mill run by his Fundamentalist pals is hardly trustworthy. <br /><br />As for these stats, I doubt that there have been as many as 10,000 Protestant martyrs in all of history.<br /><br />To get to 3,170,000, they must be including every "Protestant" who died in any conflict that had religious overtones. This probably includes the 19th century Taiping Rebellion in China, started by "Protestants," in which an estimated 20 million people were killed, some of whom were the marauding "Protestants" themselves. <br /><br />That would also explain why this goofy source could claim that Buddhists killed 1,811,000 Christians. The severest Buddhist (really, Shintoist) persecution of Christians took place in 17th-century Japan, with about 1000 martyrs. Well, at least I can see where the "1,000" in 1,811,000 came from. But where did they get the other 1,810,000?<br /><br />The false precision in these stats (not 1,800,000, but 1,811,000; not "about 37,000,000 Orthodox," but 37,444,000) is enough to show they're spurious. Who was keeping such precise records in, say, the 9th century? Does this include people the Vikings whacked?<br /><br />And, no, we don't think something is true just because it's published by Oxford. This wouldn't be the first time Brits have maligned the Catholic Church. After all, it's British Whigs who invented the "Black Legend" of the Inquisition in this first place. Even while they ignored their centuries-long slaughter of millions of Irish Catholics next door, the British establishment regaled the world with lurid and largely fabricated tales of the few dozen Protestants executed by the Spanish Inquisition. I can see that Oxford is continuing this tradition.<br /><br />Alert me when the Irish Academy publishes some revised stats. I've learned to trust those.Adomnanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15746373228302022418noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-53318327590145782562010-06-15T08:24:55.650-04:002010-06-15T08:24:55.650-04:00Paul Hoffer -- Well, dang, not the EXACT same numb...Paul Hoffer -- Well, dang, not the EXACT same numbers -- Barrett and Oxford still have the same 69 million, but the number of martyrs created by Roman Catholics was raised from 4,951,000 to 5,171,000, whereas martyrs created by "other Christians [Protestants] was lowered from 222,000 to 146,000.<br /><br />So Protestants, according to your statistics, have done LESS killing, and Roman Catholics have done MORE killing.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-79078954026715031742010-06-15T08:18:28.056-04:002010-06-15T08:18:28.056-04:00Paul Hoffer -- not sure if you noticed this, but B...Paul Hoffer -- not sure if you noticed this, but Barrett's page 32 and the Oxford World Christian Encyclopedia page 11 seem to be the exact same page, with the exact same chart. In fact, the same numbers (the same ones I cited). <br /><br /><i>Barrett treats Catholics and Orthodox as Christians something you are not willing to do.</i><br /><br />Where have I said this?<br /><br /><i>Again, please show us where in the work you cite states that the 4,951,000 is how many Protestants (a tiny subset of Christians) Catholics allegedly martyred.</i><br /><br />There have been 3,170,000 Protestant martyrs listed. There were 220,000 "martyrs" created by Protestants. It is quite evident, now from the work that you cite, too, that Protestants were, according to percentages, not doing that much persecuting. <br /><br /><br /><i>So ignoring your attempt to thrust your burden of proof off on me, I will repeat my question: please tell us how many of the supposed 4,951,000 Christians that Catholics (individuals not the Church) purportedly martyred were allegedly Protestant in affiliation as opposed to something else like other Catholics or Orthodox as well as heretics such as Arians and Albigensians.</i><br /><br />Show me again where I said that 4,951,000 is the number of Protestants martyred by Catholics. What I really said was (and this is reproduced at the top of this post), "Keep your sense of proportion, though. The same famous Oxford reference work from which Catholic apologists draw your “33,000 denominations” number lists the Roman Catholic Church as among the greatest “persecutors,” nearly 5 million over the centuries, just behind Communist China and the Soviet Union."<br /><br /><br /><br /><i>Your rote recital of the numbers suggests to me that you do not undertand at all the science of statistics.</i><br /><br />Well, here we are citing the same numbers.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-38955016453133966892010-06-15T07:56:45.037-04:002010-06-15T07:56:45.037-04:00Mr. Bugay, please enlighten as to how the definiti...Mr. Bugay, please enlighten as to how the definitions are different. Mr. Barrett's definition of martyr is "a Christian believer who loses his or her life prematurely, in<br />a situation of witness, and as a result of human hostility." How is that any different from the one in the source you cite? His statistics, whether you use the ones from his own book, World Trends, or from the World Christian Encyclopedia, are based on the same definition. Barrett treats Catholics and Orthodox as Christians something you are not willing to do. <br /><br />Again, please show us where in the work you cite states that the 4,951,000 is how many Protestants (a tiny subset of Christians) Catholics allegedly martyred. If you were to read the body of literature quoting his researches that one can glean from the various writings of folks who cite him, one would see that he includes in those figures Catholic on Catholic violence such as that which occurred in the Phillipines when the Spanish killed Filipino and Chinese Catholics; in Mexico when Spanish Catholics killed natives who had converted to Catholicism; and more recently the Rwandan massacres. Of course, your problem is that his statistics in deriving the 4,951,000 number you recite does not show a breakdown of that number before and after 1000 AD (as you pointed out to Dave) so that particular figure would necessarily include Orthodox, Arians and Albigensians that were killed (unless of course you consider them to be Protestants as well).<br /><br />Your rote recital of the numbers suggests to me that you do not undertand at all the science of statistics. The fact that you do not address the point I made about the chart not showing any significant number of Protestants martyred until the 20th century suggests that you do not know how to read a graph either (unless you purposely misrepresented the numbers which I will not impute to you). <br /><br />So ignoring your attempt to thrust your burden of proof off on me, I will repeat my question: please tell us how many of the supposed 4,951,000 Christians that Catholics (individuals not the Church) purportedly martyred were allegedly Protestant in affiliation as opposed to something else like other Catholics or Orthodox as well as heretics such as Arians and Albigensians.<br /><br />I would appreciate it if you would quit obfuscating and just answer the question or take the courageous and Christian step of admitting you are in the wrong.<br /><br />God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-84259697947784050352010-06-15T07:44:21.750-04:002010-06-15T07:44:21.750-04:00By the way, here is the link to that work, World C...By the way, here is the link to that work, World Christian Encyclopedia:<br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/World-Christian-Encyclopedia-Comparative-Religionists/dp/0195103181/<br /><br />Click on "Search inside this book," and do a search on the word "persecutor," it will bring up the result on page 11.<br /><br />Dave Armstrong -- I'm wondering if any apologies will be issuing forth on this topic, from you or your henchmen, about "refusing to back up my ridiculous claims," or "the fool's way out," or whatnot.<br /><br />As you know, I've been interacting with Catholics for a long time. It is always a learning process. There is a lot to have to know, when you're dealing with a process that has lasted 2000 years.<br /><br />One of the first lessons I learned is, it's important who you trust for your information.<br /><br />So when James White posts a link, I trust it. I do so because I have learned to do so. I have learned that when he says something, it is reliable -- he documents it. Your folks may scoff at it, but they should spend more time reading James White and less time scoffing, if they are interested in their own moral qualities.<br /><br />That is why, early on, when I posted that link from his site, I was certain that I could do so with confidence.<br /><br />And it has turned out that he was correct. The Oxford World Encyclopedia does list 4.9+ million martyrs killed by "Roman Catholics" over 2000 years. But it does more. It provides the complete story. It presents the entire context of it. It points to a thirty year study, it lays out its methodology. As I said, there is a reason why it is a standard reference work. <br /><br />Your post here, the catcalls from your audience, and your claims that I "have refused to back up [my] ridiculous claims" are totally out of place. <br /><br />You spent a great deal of time and energy defending yourself over at Green Baggins, but you ought to consider how your words and actions here condemn you far worse than anything the Reformed folks said over there.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-24703292286337843642010-06-15T06:57:41.669-04:002010-06-15T06:57:41.669-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Benhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971132944684765473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-70806604102427548682010-06-15T05:21:33.253-04:002010-06-15T05:21:33.253-04:00Now onto the item in question.
This information a...Now onto the item in question.<br /><br />This information appears on Page 11 of Oxford's "World Christian Encyclopedia of Comparative Religions, Global Diagram 6, <b>"The phenomenon of martyrdom: 70 million Christians killed for their faith in 220 countries across 20 centuries."</b> <br /><br />The methodology given is "Table 5-1 includes 2 columns that describe the whole extent of Christian martyrdom and its martyrs—defined by five criteria: believers in Christ, who have lost their lives, prematurely, in situations of witness, as a result of human hostility. These results are based on a 30-year research investigation into the extent of martyrdom in Christian history up to the present day, in every part of the world, and across all traditions of Christianity."<br /><br /><b>Confession of Victims, AD 33-2000</b><br />(total martyrs of each tradition)<br />Eastern Orthodox 37,444,000<br />East Syrians (Nestorians) 12,400,000<br />Roman Catholics (after AD 1000) 11,000,000<br /><b>Protestants: 3,170,000</b><br />Gregorians (Armenian Apostolic) 1,220,000<br />Coptic Orthodox 1,070,000<br />Anglicans 983,000<br />Catholics (before AD 1000) 838,000<br />Ethiopian Orthodox 651,000<br />West Syrians (Jacobites) 351,700<br />Maronites 153,000<br />Non-White indigenous Christians 140,000<br /><br />Total all Christian martyrs: 69,420,000<br /><br /><br />Persecutors and Their Victims, AD 33-2000<br />Persecutors responsible Martyrs<br />Secular governments 55,597,000<br />Atheists (overlap with above) 31,519,000<br />Muslims 31,519,000<br />Ethno-religionists (animists) 7,469,000<br /><b>Roman Catholics 4,951,000</b><br />Quasi-Christians 2,711,000<br />Buddhists (Mahayana) 1,811,000<br />Eastern Orthodox 600,000<br />Zoroastrians (Farsis) 384,000<br />Other non-Christians 250,000<br /><b>Other Christians [i.e., Protestants] 220,000</b><br /><br />SUBTOTALS: <br />Non-Christian persecutors 64,100,000<br />Christian persecutors: 5,320,000<br /><br />Total All Martyrs: 69,420,000<br /><br />So here we have the numbers, who did what to whom, and by whom it was done.<br /><br /><br />Oxford's definition of martyr seems to be somewhat more broad than Barrett, but not much. I can go through here and provide "number-for-number" comparisons with the Barrett numbers, but you seem to have a fascination with this, so I'll let you try your hand at it.John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-91202692715876193542010-06-15T05:21:07.226-04:002010-06-15T05:21:07.226-04:00Paul Hoffer: Mr. Bugay, given the fact that refer...Paul Hoffer: <i> Mr. Bugay, given the fact that reference work you cite has been demonstrated to be in error over the number of denominations, why should I accept the figure of how many people were purportedly martyred by "Roman Catholics?"</i><br /><br />Mr. Hoffer, the important thing to note, over and over again, is not that the reference itself was in error over the number of denominations, but that those who used this information, actually misused it to come up with the "33,000 denominations myth."<br /><br />Here, again, is the link to the (yes) AOMin site, where this was discussed:<br /><br /><i>Here you have the Protestant denominations listed. Let's pass over all the discussion I've offered of the inclusion of non-Trinitarians in the list, or how irrelevant sola scriptura actually is to how these denominations arose. Here are the facts Steve Ray knows, but won't discuss:<br />FACT: This source lists 27 [major] Protestant groups [categories].<br />FACT: This source lists 8,973 "denominations" under "Protestant"<br /> So what does he do when he has been all along claiming the 33,000 number represents Protestants derived from the Reformation due to sola scriptura? What does he do? Well, he takes the Protestant category, lumps the "Independents" in as "Protestants" (including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Gnostics, Bogomils, and even Swedenborgianists!), then, so desperate is the man, he then grabs such groups as "Arab radio/TV network" … </i><br /><br />Not only has this been proven to be the case, and to have been repeated many, many times, but the very host of this Blog, Dave Armstrong, has admitted that number to be wrong. He said up above, "I immediately (in 2002) gave up a figure from a particular source when reason and the facts (produced by someone — Eric Svendsen — who was a severe critic of mine) warranted and demanded it."<br /><br />(continued)John Bugayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17728044301053738095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-75434191280846199112010-06-15T01:31:26.223-04:002010-06-15T01:31:26.223-04:00BTW, I apologize for poor grammar corrected here: ...BTW, I apologize for poor grammar corrected here: "Assuming arguendo that I should accept Barrett's works as authoritative, here is what I could determine from a review of his work titled, "World Christian Trends 30 AD-2200 AD": your selective citation of his researches demonstrate your reckless disregard for any notion of the truth."Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6422857.post-70377474739466504152010-06-15T01:24:54.717-04:002010-06-15T01:24:54.717-04:00Mr. Bugay, given the fact that reference work you ...Mr. Bugay, given the fact that reference work you cite has been demonstrated to be in error over the number of denominations, why should I accept the figure of how many people were purportedly martyred by "Roman Catholics?"<br /><br />Thomas Schirrmacher, a Protestant, in an article entitled, "The Persecution of Christians Concerns Us All" written in 2008 (which can be found here: http://www.bucer.eu/uploads/media/WEA_GIS_5_-_Thomas_Schirrmacher_-_The_Persecution_of_Christians_Concerns_Us_All.pdf) critiques Barrett's methodology in several places. For example on pg. 16 "Hard to prove guess" and on pg 19<br />"Unfortunately, Barrett, who is known for his unwillingness to share or discuss his data, unlike the team of authors of Patrick Johnstone’s ‘Operation World’, fails to give sufficient information on his statistic methods." <br /><br />Assuming arguendo that I should accept Barrett's works as authoritative, here is what I could determine from a review of his work titled, "World Christian Trends 30 AD-2200 AD" one would see that your selective citation of his work demonstrates your reckless disregard for any notion of the truth. Page 32 has a number of charts on it. First, I would note that he, unlike you and your ilk, consider both Catholics and Orthodox as Christians. Further, one would see that he estimates that the total number of Protestant martyrs killed by Muslims, secular governments, fellow Protestants, Catholics and Orthodox throughout all of history to amount to 3,172,000, almost 2 million less than the number you, White, and your fellow co-religionists bandy about. In contrast, the number of Orthodox martyrs killed amount to 42,798,000, and Catholic martyrs 12,210,000 after 1000 AD. <br /><br />Further, it you had taken the time to review the large chart on page 32 (found here: http://books.google.com/books?id=IMRsJ1gnIYkC&pg=PP8&lpg=PP1&dq=%2Bbarrett+%2Bworld+%2Bchristian#v=onepage&q&f=true) which appears to be used by him in his other works including the one you referenced, it is obvious that the bulk of Protestants supposedly martyred were killed in the 20th century. I am not aware of any Catholic jihads undertaken against Protestants during the last century, are you?. <br /><br />Interestingly, the large chart also shows two incidents where over a million Catholics were martyred in 1500-1600 and one where over 100,000 were martyred between 1600-1700. I wonder how many of the 140,000+ Christians Protestants allegedly martyred happened to be Catholics during those times. Your thoughts?<br /><br />Thus, your claim that millions of Protestants were killed supposedly as a result of the Popes encouraging secular governments during the time of the Reformation to slaughter them is a patent falsehood, that is if we are to accept your claim that Barrett's reseach should be considered as standard reference material that we are to accept as authoritative without question<br /><br />Now, I will acknowledge that I have not actually read Barrett's works (but will track them down if necessary), but only snippets that I could find on the internet. However, based on what I have found, I stand by my assertion that you are engaging in slander and false witness particularly if you are going to continue to base your assertions on Barrett's studies.<br /><br />I pray that you find the courage within yourself to correct your assertions here and to call upon your co-religionists to correct their assertions as well in relying on this information.<br /><br />God bless!Paul Hofferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09182683665344747977noreply@blogger.com