Pope Francis Coat Of Arms Explained

I’m assuming these are not rhetorical questions so please, since you inquired, open your mind to the answers I have supplied before you simply dismiss them. I used other sites to often say what I mean but would say so eloquently myself. Also, I’m using them as sources support what I would have been attempting to explain myself. Enjoy!

I assume you are refurring to the incedents during the crusades against Jews, though your post is unclear. Here is a response to that question with the website I obtained it from.
“Myth… The Crusades were also waged against the Jews.
No pope ever called a Crusade against Jews. During the First Crusade a large band of riffraff, not associated with the main army, descended on the towns of the Rhineland and decided to rob and kill the Jews they found there. In part this was pure greed. In part it also stemmed from the incorrect belief that the Jews, as the crucifiers of Christ, were legitimate targets of the war. Pope Urban II and subsequent popes strongly condemned these attacks on Jews. Local bishops and other clergy and laity attempted to defend the Jews, although with limited success. Similarly, during the opening phase of the Second Crusade a group of renegades killed many Jews in Germany before St. Bernard was able to catch up to them and put a stop to it. These misfires of the movement were an unfortunate byproduct of Crusade enthusiasm. But they were not the purpose of the Crusades. To use a modern analogy, during the Second World War some American soldiers committed crimes while overseas. They were arrested and punished for those crimes. But the purpose of the Second World War was not to commit crimes.”

As far as the Ten Commandments go, they were not originally in English. Though I’d love to learn the Hebrew, it would be a while before I could actually understand it so I for one appreciate translations despite their imperfections. As far as variations of the Ten Commandments go, check out this website . I think it answers your question and more if I am understanding you properly.

Here is the answer to your question regarding the sabbath. The website gives more information.
“Short answer: Because Christians are not actually bound to observe the Sabbath–we have fulfilled the Sabbath through Christ, and now we celebrate the Lord’s Day, Sunday, the day of His Resurrection. ”

When you make statements such as the church assisting the poor now because they created the poor, I would like a source. I highly doubt the Church is responsible for poverty across the world, and she does assist the poor across the globe. Some of those “poor people” are simply poor by our standards, no one made them that way, they just always have been. Could you supply a source for me so I know of what you are actually adressing? I don’t know about if you giving “the pope was first a Cesar, a ruler of the Roman Empire,” as part of your argument to this due to your punctuation and lack of paragraphs but I’ll assume it is and proceed. The first popes were not Cesars. The first pope was St. Peter. Later on, sure, but like today, the pope is first responsible for the Church, then ruling “their land.”

Numerical value of the words on the papal crown? Uh-okay. I had to google this one to even know what you were referencing simply because I had never heard of it before. This is the response I found easiest to absorb.
“But in the case of VICARIVS FILII DEI, they do add up to 666. Isolate the numbers and this is what you get: 5 (v) + 1 (i) + 100 (c) + 1 (i) + 5 (V) + 1 (i) + 50 (L) + 1 (i) + 1 (i) + 500 (d) + 1 (i) = 666.
But there are problems with this. The first is that Vicarius Filii Dei, or “Vicar of the Son of God,” is not now, nor has it ever been, a title of the bishop of Rome. The second problem is that virtually no one, including many unsuspecting lay Catholics, knows that this papal “title” is a fabrication. To an untrained ear, it sounds enough like one of the pope’s real titles, Vicarius Christi (Vicar of Christ), to pass the test. Unfortunately for those who traffic in this particular piece of pope fiction, the real title, Vicarius Christi, adds up to only a measly 214, not the infernal 666. In fact, none of the pope’s official titles, such as Servus Servorum Dei (Servant of the Servants of God), Pontifex Maximus (Supreme Pontiff), or Successor Petri (Successor of Peter), will add up to 666. That’s why you never see any of them used by anti-Catholics.”

Before you can claim the pope is “fake” you have to understand the Catholic argument for even respecting the authority of a pope. Please read this .
Now that we are on the same page, what agreement do you have that the seccession of the pope since the appointment of Peter, by Christ, as the rock of which the church be built, and subquently the first leader of the the faith since the death and reserection of Christ, is a falsehood?

As far as the churches wealth goes, here is a questions and answers which responds the that root question and supplies some debate so you may educate yourself on the two arguments.

I do hope I supplied adequate answers for your inquiries. I ask in the future that you respond to posts with constructed arguments rather than charged statements such as “The church made people poor,” and “the pope is a fake,” because people don’t respond well to bashing. However, if you explained the stance and used a little less charged language, you would be received better and your opinions would be more respected. Just my two cents, I suppose; you can take it or leave it.