[geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
- From: "Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 13:43:42 -0600
Cheryl,
If you want me to help you understand where you've gone wrong on your
religious thinking, I can visit with you outside of Neville's list. Just
contact me directly at my email address, but realize I don't put up with
the fuzzy self-centered contradictory type of thinking you demonstrate,
since it doesn't pass for or arrive at the actual Truth.
Regards,
Nick.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cheryl B. [mailto:c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:21 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
Nicholas: You said: "Every word that comes out of a person who holds
office in the Church is not necessarily the official teaching"
I thought the Pope was far more than a "person who holds office in the
Church." I thought he was Christ on Earth. I thought when he makes
pronouncements, written pronouncements given officially and never
retracted or amended, that means this is "official church doctrine."
Of course, these official pronouncements oftentimes contradict each
other, but oh well.
Good grief. The Catholics and I don't even read the same Bible. I'm a
KJV-only girl. Far as I'm concerned, all the other so-called bibles are
New Age counterfeits, full of errors and omissions, all with hidden and
not-so-hidden agendas. Only the good old King James 1611 is the true,
inerrent Word of God, preserved by Almighty God for us unto the ends of
time.
The only point where the Catholics and I may meet is in the writings of
some of the early church fathers, things such as the Didache, the
writings of Ireneus, Clement. I also can see that God used the
Catholic Church to establish and preserve his Word in the Canon. He
also used the King of England to establish and preserve his Word in the
translation. But these are instruments God used, not to be worshipped
in and of themselves.
The Catholics are always getting sidetracked by the messenger or the
prop used to illustrate the message -- and missing the message. Yes, we
all agree the Catholic Church was correct (or at least I'm about 90
percent convinced at this point) about the earth being the center of the
universe.
That doesn't mean we make that church our god or idol because of this
good deed or correct judgment they made.
Cheryl
----- Original Message -----
From: "Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:46 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
> Cheryl,
> It seems that whether one wants to talk about religion or science,
> it's prudent to be careful about making sweeping conclusions,
> especially when you admit you don't know it all. For example, you
> admit that for all these years you overlooked what the Bible says
> about the earth being fixed. Likewise, in all honesty, you'd need to
> admit that if you missed that (which is present numerous times in the
> Bible), you can be equally wrong about not knowing what the Bible all
> has to say which supports the Catholic Church. You really don't know
> what you are still missing do you.
> Hopefully I'm in keeping with Neville's limitation, which I respect.
> I'm commenting only because your discussion about science on this link
> (at least as far as I'm concerned) will lack credibility if you draw
> uneducated sweeping conclusions about an area that you know little
> about (which is different than inquiring about something to learn
> more). For example, regarding your comment on the Pope: as to what
> this Pope said on evolution or what current Church leaders may say
> about the earth's movement, I can only suggest that you need to study
> the official teachings of the Church on these topics, which I believe
> will surprise you. Every word that comes out of a person who holds
> office in the Church is not necessarily the official teaching. If you
> don't understand this or know the difference, I suggest you study the
> topic before you criticize, because you really don't know what you are
> talking about.
>
> Regards,
> Nick.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cheryl B. [mailto:c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 6:17 PM
> To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
>
> Re debating the Catholics, I figure that if that's all somebody's
> agenda is, proving that the Mother Church was right all along, that we
> should never have doubted "her," -- I say, save it. I'm not
> interested in becoming a Catholic. If the Catholic Church was so
> perfect, the current pope wouldn't
> be championing a belief in evolution. I am a KJV only person,
believe
> it's
> the inerrent Word of God, and I'm ashamed of myself for all these
> years overlooking what it said about the earth being fixed and the sun
> "Running."
>
> Cheryl
>
> Cheryl
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 7:32 AM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
>
>
> > Dear Cheryl,
> > Just a friendly word of warning. Some of us have already tried to
> > debate R.C. doctrine with those on the forum who are RCs. It was a
> waste of time.
> >
> > Neville has discouraged this type of discussion because it gets
> > nowhere
> and
> > he has respectfully asked us not to debate these kind of issues but
> > rather to stick to the point of the forum namely things geocentric.
> >
> > Love in Christ
> >
> > Jack
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Cheryl B." <c.battles@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 2:17 AM
> > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
> >
> >
> > > Philip, If a church or person lines themself up with the
> > > scriptures
> > > --
> is
> > it
> > > the person or group or church or the scriptures that are
> > > besmirched when somebody supposedly comes along and "proves" the
> > > scriptures, or
>
> > > interpretation of those scriptures, wrong?
> > >
> > > The RC church has in the past agreed with the scriptures at times
> and at
> > > times not. Likewise with any man or group you care to name, bar
> none.
> > >
> > > But it is the Scriptures that are our standard of authority -- not
> > > the
> men
> > > or groups who deign to interpret those scriptures.
> > >
> > > God gave authority only to Jesus and to His Word -- not to any
> > > manmade tradition. The church is the body of believers, those who
> > > have
> "received
> > > the love of the truth," -- not necessarily members of any certain
> > > group
> or
> > > church.
> > >
> > > As the Bible says, all believers are priests unto God.
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 8:37 PM
> > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
> > >
> > >
> > > > Nick I will compile a resume.
> > > > The Galelleo affair was before the rules of infallibility were
> defined,
> > so
> > > this allows the evolution/creationists, (slow creation LOL) a
> > > reason
>
> > > to
> > make
> > > controversy of it. I t was the work of a "protestant" Irish
> > > Catholic
>
> > > priest, who did not accept the TRUTH about Genesis, who set about
> > > to
> prove
> > > that certain decrees were infallible, simply to make the
> > > Infallibility doctrine, and the Church stupid and wrong, because
> > > as he believed, "everybody and his dog knows that the world
> > > rotates and
> moves around a
> > > stationary sun" Fr. Roberts..
> > > >
> > > > Obviously "Rome" believes that today, so it has "given up the
> Ghost"
> > and
> > > gone to bed with the devil...
> > > >
> > > > But I do have on file a very good compilation of the history wih
> comment
> > > supporting the GC view. I will send it privately to any requesting
> > > it, Titled,
> > > > The Theological Status of Heliocentrism October 1997 by J. S.
> > > > Daly
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Chapter 2 begins like this with a long list of dates....
> > > > Documents and Facts Bearing Upon the Church's Attitude to
> Heliocentrism
> > > > 24th May 1543: Nicolas Copernicus' De Revolutionibus Orbium
> Caelestium
> > is
> > > published with ecclesiastical approval on the day of its author's
> death.
> > The
> > > study argues in favour of heliocentrism in several places but is
> prefixed
> > by
> > > a preface explaining that heliocentrism is advanced only
> hypothetically.
> > > This preface was commonly assumed for some years to have been
> > > written by Copernicus himself, though it is now established that
> > > its
>
> > > true author
> was
> > > Osiander.
> > > >
> > > > 18th February 1564: Galileo Galilei is born at Pisa.
> > > >
> > > > 1600: Giordano Bruno is tried for heresy. During his trial the
> > Consultors
> > > of the Inquisition listed among the unorthodox propositions taught
> > > in
> his
> > > writings several in favour of heliocentrism, based on Copernicus.
> > > Pope Clement VIII deleted these from the list of propositions he
> > > was
>
> > > to
> abjure.
> > > Bruno was burned at the stake.
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: Niemann, Nicholas K.
> > > > To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Sent: Friday, February 18, 2005 10:53 AM
> > > > Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Gary asked for it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Philip,
> > > > I think you've stated this well.
> > > > Can you save me from hunting. Where is the Church's
> > > > definition on
> the
> > > > immobility of the earth.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Nick.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> -- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
> -- Type: text/plain
> -- File: InterScan_Disclaimer.txt
>
>
>
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: text/plain
-- File: InterScan_Disclaimer.txt
Other related posts:
