[geocentrism] Re: Malleus Maleficarum
- From: "Jack Lewis" <jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 21:53:23 +0100
Dear Neville,
Are suggesting that a newborn baby is without sin? According to my Bible only
Jesus was born and lived without sin. I would suggest that most parents do not
teach very young children evil, they are usually very positive in how they
nurture the child but a baby will soon start to do things that are wrong. This
is when they receive their first disciplinary act. There has to be a first
time! What you may mean is, could there be a point when God decides how old a
child must be before he is aware of right and wrong? There is a reference in
Isa7:14-16 which may refer to the inability of a child to refuse evil and
choose good, but it may be referring only to Jesus. I believe the R.C's say it
seven years of age - that is when they make their first confession and first
holy communion. The Bible makes not lower age limit other than a reference to
'being [innocent?] as little children' this could also refer to have a simple
faith as like children.
Regarding quoting from the Bible, I agree entirely with you the only problem
for me is that I have been down this road with you and many others before and
find that it is always fruitless. You have changed your position many times and
I haven't. I find it difficult to hold 'a ray of hope' for you Neville because
of your outright rejection of scripture and the Trinity etc. no matter how
sincere you may be. I believe this kind of hope is a false hope, the only true
hope I cling to is that which the Bible describes, the hope of life ever
lasting. Yes I would like to think that my offspring will get saved and I pray
for them to that end and hope they do but this is not the same kind of hope as
express for my belief in God.
The Bible I believe in today is the same Bible I have always believed in. I
draw a line between 'discussing' the Bible and going through academic and
theological contortions. I know what I believe and I'm prepared to come before
God and declare it - that is what I call faith. I do not expect to 'argue'
people into believing in God or the Bible. I tell them what I and many other
mainstream Christians believe, after that it's then up to the Holy Spirit to
convict them.
Regards
Jack
PS
1 The Bible was not put together by the Roman Church, it happened before the
Roman Church. The Roman Church later hijacked it.
2 Even if the Roman Church did have a hand in forming the Bible, its their
interpretation of the Bible plus all their traditions, dogma and superstitions
that I reject.
----- Original Message -----
From: Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 3:13 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Malleus Maleficarum
Dear Jack,
There is nothing naughty about a new-born baby. It has no conception of right
and wrong. It is not born with "sin" in it, but rather with the propensity to
develop a good side and a bad side. We teach it bad things as it grows.
But as for the bible, if I am quoting things that occur in your bible, then
surely you accept them, right? After all, it is not me that is the author of
them. The fact that I reject large chunks that you adhere to is irrelevant in
your acceptance of those things that I do hold are truthful and genuine. Surely
you should be pleased that I have not thrown the whole book in the bin? Surely,
in your opinion, that holds out some ray of hope for me?
The point in this discussion was the tribal information contained in the
Hebrew scriptures. Where do you get the idea from that you cannot quote to me
passages that you accept as true? If you feel that I might present an argument
against what you hold to be true, that is a different ball game.
Just like the evolutionists, however, if your position is strong then it will
stand up to criticism. If it is not, then it will collapse. No one is stopping
you quoting bits of "your" bible, a book whose content was decided upon by a
church that you have rejected.
Neville.
-----Original Message-----
From: jack.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sun, 15 Jul 2007 10:37:59 +0100
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Malleus Maleficarum
Dear Neville, you keep speaking of the Bible, but your Bible does not
appear to be the same one that mainstream Christianity use. Unless there is
agreement on what the Bible is then nobody, in conversation with you, can use
quotes from the 'Bible'. My Bible says that we are all born in sin. You do not
have to teach children to be naughty, you have to teach them to be good.
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: Neville Jones
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2007 11:23 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Malleus Maleficarum
"Are there 'Bloodlines' of good and evil people?"
This is a good question. There are definitely bloodlines, doesn't the
bible speak of tribes and are not those tribes assumed to have certain
characteristics?
And does not history teach us that certain tribes have been consistently
evil? I think that it does, even though those same wicked people try to distort
and rewrite history to paint themselves as being persecuted.
And are not the goyim caught in exactly the same traps that they have
always been caught in? Me thinks that they are.
Although most people are neither good nor evil, I tend to support the
view that some people are intrinsically evil. Not a product of their
environment or upbringing, but of their father ... you know who.
Neville.
-----Original Message-----
From: bbrauer777@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Sat, 14 Jul 2007 14:07:10 -0700 (PDT)
"But they are all doing the beckoning of the Devil's offspring..."
Are there "Bloodlines" of good and evil people?
Bernie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Prevent accessing dangerous websites - Protect your computer with Free Web
Security Guard!
More information at www.inbox.com/wsg
Other related posts:
