The Pope Strikes Again! (Page 4)

Zanjan: Well, I'm Canadian and I can tell you there's only one place in Canada where there's any restrictions - that's Quebec, which insists on French speaking only. Many Canadians fled that province when it executed the language law. The rest of Canada is officially bi-lingual and unofficially English; and, practically speaking, it's broken-English (multi-language).

However, that was hardly the beginning of Quebec's woes - that province has been attempting to separate from Canada for decades because it's just too corrupt to obey Canadian rules - it wants its own. I'm not saying that to be negative - it's simply a fact. So far, Quebec has been unable to fly on its own - it must face justice, like everyone else.

Incidentally, the largest concentration of Catholics in Canada is in Quebec; however, their numbers have been greatly declining since the 60s. I suppose this was the canary in the coalmine. If their numbers ever increase, it wont be in *this* province, be sure of that.

As for Gays, there is a strong LGBT community here across the country - the only thing they've accomplished is legalizing gay marriage and organizing gay pride parades. Neither have anything to do with the rest of us. There is no law that says you're required to watch them carry on.

chronology: That is not what visitors to Canada are saying Zan. They say that while in the United States you can anything you like at a Public Meeting regarding Gays, hen you cross over the boarder into Canada you have to be careful what you say or face Prosecution regarding 'Hate Speech' Laws.

The same with discussion about The Holocaust. While the U.S. allows any discussion, Canada has Laws that can see you arrested or Fined.

Other countries have all kinds of restrictions on Free Speech. Personally I always try and show as much respect as possible when Blogging. on Sites in U.S. Territory, if people are generous enough to allow you to speak in Public you should show proper respect of that freedom.

Trust me Zan there are practically no other countries like the US. for allowing Free Speech.

Zanjan: Chron, you've just reminded me of a woman I once met on the ferry across Lake Huron. She said "I've been to Canada and I didn't like it". (for American readers, Lake Huron is in Canada)

Canada comprises a big chunk of the planet - you can't be everywhere at once. Furthermore, the only people who go to gay meetings are gays. Most tourists plan to shop, visit landmarks, and have fun, not to attend Canadian political meetings.

Our hate laws don't apply to discussions - they apply to soliciting, slander, rioting and all forms of violence. This includes walking into schools and gunning people down; to my recollection, that's only happened once in Canada.

shadowline: "Hislop's work is sound."

You must be making a little joke, chronology. Hislop's "work" is unsubstantiated pseudo-scholarship retailing myth, fabrication, and misapprehension for the purpose of hate-mongering.

To take no harder to access a source than Wikipedia -

"The book has been severely criticized for its lack of evidence, and in many cases its contradiction of the existing evidence: for instance, the Roman state religion before Christianity did not worship a central Mother Goddess, and Jupiter was never called 'Jupiter-Puer.' Likewise, Semiramis lived centuries after Nimrod, and could neither have been his mother, nor married him. Hislop also makes unacceptable linguistic connections and fanciful word plays, e.g. the letters IHS on Catholic Holy Communion wafers are alleged to stand for Egyptian deities Isis, Horus and Seth, but in reality they are an abbreviation for Ihsous, the Latin spelling of Jesus's name in Greek (Ιησους), although popularly, they stand for the Latin Iesus Hominum Salvator meaning Jesus, Savior of Mankind (which also fits the teaching of Transubstantiation, where the wafer and wine are said to become the body and blood of Christ).”

(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Hislop)

shadowline: "Year's ago Zan I used to read the writings of Cromwells soldier's during the Civil War in England. The words and comments used by Cromwells men were identical to the words used 300 years later by Hislop."

Now I'm sure he's joking. The cohorts of Oliver Cromwell are supposed to have been an authority on religious history?

"American independent churches have no reason at all to doubt Hislop in his work."

Of course they don't. They are thoroughly convinced for their own reasons of the truth of his position. They are simply biased in the same direction, and would be if they never read a word of Hislop's.

What professional historians have to say about it is what you need to consult. Find me one of those who thinks Alexander Hislop is worth a moment's consideration.

Good Lord.

chronology: Hi Shadow, well let's whack at the ball you have thrown my way about Hislop. Was he a catholic hating scotch bigot? I have no idea and suspect you do not know either. Investigating the life of Nimrod, who lived approximatly 10.000. years ago is difficult today, and must have been more so for Hislop, but his general finding about Nimrod are agreed with by dozens of well grounded researchers. Can I bring you a Brick with Nimrods name on it from Babylon? no, can I get his passport for you from his homeland of Iraq? no, no such documents existed back then. But we can build a picture of what a cunning and conspiring person he and his wife were. He was the first ever world leader, and he created a 'Cult of Personality' about himself, so did his wife. But if the conspiracy theorists are correct, there is some kind of Cult associated with Nimrod whose symbols festoon America to this day.

As for Cromwell's Army, his men were more interested in studying their Bibles than weapons training. Many were Puritans from America, others were protestants alarmed at the King's actions. The King was supported by mostly catholic and Anglican people. Cromwell himself was a Puritan, but like his men he was given to daily prayers and Bible study.

So Cromwells men, who made the same conclusions Hislop did hundreds of years before him are valid facts in the debate about Hislop.

shadowline: Okay, chronology, suit yourself. I confess that that stuff just doesn't seem to me to be worth answering.

I repeat, though, that what you need to do is find out if there is such a thing as a professional historian teaching at a university who considers Alexander Hislop to be a scholar worth reading, or who would ever make use of his writing as a reference. I'm pretty sure there isn't a single example of that.

chronology: Can you name one who wouldn't?

shadowline: Oh, that's clever. How about this? I name every professional historian there is. Sorry, I can't type all those names.