[geocentrism] Re: Zeitgeist : Jesus-Christ assumed to be a false God
- From: "philip madsen" <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "geocentrism list" <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 15:42:41 +1000
OK I'm fresh, its morning, and I'm not befuddled.. A short indepth response..
below.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 2:10 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Zeitgeist : Jesus-Christ assumed to be a false God
Philip M
After sending my last, I realised I had not made any reference to your
specific points.
Your strongest point -- and that of many others -- that He rose from the dead
occurred at a point in time with which we have reasonable continuity and thus
the witnesses at first sight might seem plausible. However the only record of
the Resurrection is found in the Bible and that was written by those with a
vested interest in its being believed. A vested interest in being believed, no
doubt, like Saul who was no nut, as you can tell by his writings, had a vested
interest in changing sides and becoming a martyr to a life of suffering. To be
a Christian in those times was not the sort of career a deciever would want to
take on. Yet thousands did immediately after, as history outside the Bible
shows. Then we have the Jews record.. "His body must have been stolen to
support his story that He would rise again?"
The official records of the time -- Roman -- I understand contain a reference
to Jesus' Crucifixion but not his Resurrection.
And despite what may be said as a conspiracy of silence, and a century of
severe persecution, does it seem of no minor significance that we today, the
entire world, Jew Mahommet, or athiest is bound to a calandar AD 2008. A
workable device, and do not doubt that is about to be rectified in the near
future. ... " they stole his body...."
The contents of -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea --
give some idea of how the current christian theology came about -- essentially
by democratic action of men.
You personally would not oppose any democratic process. What you fail to
discern, and this is understandable for an athiest, is the power of God in
investing this group with the power to not err in their delivery. If it was the
just democratic process, then "policy" reverses could be obtained by future
groups in council. This cannot happen, and has never happened despite 2000
years of such councils. .. If it did the basic dogmatic process fails.
Then there is the 'fixing' of the contents of the Bible. I didn't find a
reference for that but I didn't look very hard -- I'm sure several of you here
can enlighten me. It is all about silencing the minority, the tyranny of the
majority. It aims to define orthodoxy -- the greatest short term strength and
the greatest long term weakness of any philosophy.
You talk of vested interests as though there were career paths involving
great prosperity or power to individuals. Of course there have always been the
Judas Escariots among men, but these types are not prone to taking on the
martyrs crown. They are gravitate to the treasury positions. Even Jesus had
Judas as the treasurer.. He knew he was a thief.. but I guess someone had to
do the job.
But the saints of the church throughout the millenia, it was they who
provided the spirit and life to the church.. and theirs was no easy life. None
will deny the suffering they endured , indeed still endure. Many not attaining
long lives. I could talk of the regime of what it takes to be a Priest or monk.
long hours of compulsory prayers on their knees from 2am till 10pm every day.
Not counting the several years of study just to get there.
I could talk about the celibacy aspect, much condemned by my Anglican
friends, yet that sect lost many members to the church when during one of the
great plagues, Anglican ministers were restrained from ministering to the dying
and sick, on the grounds that it was not their own lives but those of their
wives and children who would be at risk.. The Catholic priest had no such
worries, and history is replete with many many such martyrdoms where men and
women ( the nuns, also rediculed) undr celibacy offered up their lives for the
lepers and plague ridden sick and deseased humanity..
Yep they do indeed have a vested interest in maintaining the integrity of
scripture..
Paul D and Philip And why go to the outside for info without balancing it
from the other insider viewpoint.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Council_of_Nicaea
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11044a.htm
A short exerpt:
Of all the Acts of this Council, which, it has been maintained, were
numerous, only three fragments have reached us: the creed, or symbol, given
above (see also NICENE CREED); the canons; the synodal decree. In reality there
never were any official acts besides these. But the accounts of Eusebius,
Socrates, Sozomen, Theodoret, and Rufinus may be considered as very important
sources of historical information, as well as some data preserved by St.
Athanasius, and a history of the Council of Nicaea written in Greek in the
fifth century by Gelasius of Cyzicus. There has long existed a dispute as to
the number of the canons of First Nicaea. All the collections of canons,
whether in Latin or Greek, composed in the fourth and fifth centuries agree in
attributing to this Council only the twenty canons, which we possess today. Of
these the following is a brief résumé:
a.. Canon 1: On the admission, or support, or expulsion of clerics
mutilated by choice or by violence.
b.. Canon 2: Rules to be observed for ordination, the avoidance of undue
haste, the deposition of those guilty of a grave fault.
c.. Canon 3: All members of the clergy are forbidden to dwell with any
woman, except a mother, sister, or aunt.
d.. Canon 4: Concerning episcopal elections.
e.. Canon 5: Concerning the excommunicate.
f.. Canon 6: Concerning patriarchs and their jurisdiction.
g.. Canon 7: confirms the right of the bishops of Jerusalem to enjoy
certain honours.
h.. Canon 8: concerns the Novatians.
i.. Canon 9: Certain sins known after ordination involve invalidation.
j.. Canon 10: Lapsi who have been ordained knowingly or surreptitiously
must be excluded as soon as their irregularity is known.
k.. Canon 11: Penance to be imposed on apostates of the persecution of
Licinius.
l.. Canon 12: Penance to be imposed on those who upheld Licinius in his war
on the Christians.
m.. Canon 13: Indulgence to be granted to excommunicated persons in danger
of death.
n.. Canon 14: Penance to be imposed on catechumens who had weakened under
persecution.
o.. Canon 15: Bishops, priests, and deacons are not to pass from one church
to another.
p.. Canon 16: All clerics are forbidden to leave their church. Formal
prohibition for bishops to ordain for their diocese a cleric belonging to
another diocese.
q.. Canon 17: Clerics are forbidden to lend at interest.
r.. Canon 18: recalls to deacons their subordinate position with regard to
priests.
s.. Canon 19: Rules to be observed with regard to adherents of Paul of
Samosata who wished to return to the Church.
t.. Canon 20: On Sundays and during the Paschal season prayers should be
said standing.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: John Roodt <johnroodt@xxxxxxxxx>
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, 20 October, 2008 11:53:52 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Zeitgeist : Jesus-Christ assumed to be a false God
Hi Phil, and Paul
I'm in Sydney, Phil.
Also, I wasn't angered or offended by the word "brainwashed" -- it was
amusing. I'm not surprised that you and Marc consider me as brainwashed -- and
vice versa. But isn't that what deception implies? One or other party is
sincere and almost right. But a miss is a miss? The tragedy of deception is
that the victim sincerely believes that he is correct -- but isn't?
It's understandable that Paul wonders at the conflict amongst the different
groups who share the same Bible. I'd respond to Paul but I think he's having a
dig at us and probably isn't interested in an answer.
Am I right Paul?
John
On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 7:58 PM, philip madsen <pma15027@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On second thoughts, Paul, though I am reluctant to print during my happy
hour, and this has been a four hour binge, I was nevertheless inspired to make
a comment immediately.
Your question is exactly the same in principle, as that thrown at Jesus on
the Cross.. "If you are God, then deliver yourself from the cross and we will
believe you..."
Now how far do you think christianity upon which the calandar you use today
was based , would have lasted if He had done that, and came down off the cross?
He did better... He rose from the dead as promised, on Sunday, your first
day of the week, before many and enough witnesses.. That is what started it.
Philip.
----- Original Message -----
From: Paul Deema
To: Geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 6:13 PM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Zeitgeist : Jesus-Christ assumed to be a false
God
Greetings all
I usually pass over the theology stuff but this one seems tailor made for
me.
We are told God not only exists but is Omniscient, Omnipotent and
Omnipresent. You'd think that He would be capable of protecting Himself from
the efforts of His detractors but it seems that this is not so since the only
way these detractors come to grief is if His followers visit harm upon them.
Oddly, many of these detractors claim also to be His followers. One would think
this OOO God would have been able to communicate His needs unambiguously to His
creatures so that they would know, and could demonstrate unequivocally, who was
a detractor and who a follower.
Paul D
Send instant messages to your online friends
http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
