[geocentrism] Re: Clueless (Hang Together)
- From: "Jack Lewis" <jandj.lewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2004 12:00:03 +0100
Dear Forum members,
I shall respond to Philip privately on this posting.
Jack
----- Original Message -----
From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 12:13 AM
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Clueless (Hang Together)
>
> Those not concerned can simply delete now. This will be my last word. I
have
> already established a private line with Jack at his initiative. I am only
> going to answer here those questions raised by Jack on this forum. There
is
> no angst. I have no heart remember. I have stated here several times,
reason
> is the only way, blind faith is for those with a heart and no brain. God
has
> given ample revelation for the Brains, and I do not mean the Holy Bible,
> which is an explanation, but not a proof in reason.
>
> My answer/comment will be in {these brackets}
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Philip" <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 12:49 AM
> Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Belief in the obvious
>
>
> Philip > the list?
> > Methinks you are allowing your bigotry/hate to affect your judgement,
Or
> > are you suggesting that Roman Catholics should have no input to this
> > forum.... ?
>
> Jack
> I have no problem with Catholics being on the forum Philip. It's only a
> problem if they use their dogma as part of the posting. As a protestant
> Christian, it makes me feel challenged.
>
> Philip
> { Your feelings (of being challenged) are unnecessary, and unwarranted. It
> is not Catholic to
> challenge anyone. We are allowed to answer, in charity, but never force
our
> will. Only within our own congregation, may the superiors impose his will
on
> the inferiors, and even then with prudence. The ordinary lay person is
> confined to conversion by example. i.e. living an exemplary life in total
> submission to God and His church. (not to say I am such a perfect example)
> You were not challenged. I was supporting
> your own belief in the dogma of geocentrism. If you will begin to doubt
your
> own belief simply because it is Catholic dogma as well, your faith or
> reasoning is
> weak. }
>
> Philip
> > This is entirely false. It is a point of view and a judgement according
to
> > Jack or his minders.
>
> { here Jack left out what I said that was false. If I remember I think I
> said that it was false to say the Church believes in evolution, No
matter. }
>
> Jack
> It's not false, check my other posting to you about Catholic history and
> authority.
>
> Phil
> { There are many histories . Many false. Histories are the works of men,
> and usually biased. Yes even Catholic histories. They do not form part of
> Catholic Sacred Tradition, or the Holy Bible. Our faith is not based upon
> history}
>
> Philip
> > The Word of God cannot take second place to anything. It
> > takes central place in all the liturgies of the Church, and from the
> > beginning has always been available publically in those churches that
> could
> > afford the cost (hand written!) in the language common to all of the
> > educated people of Europe (the Roman Empire,) Latin.
>
> Jack
> Great for the educated, but not too good for the non-educated. Were it not
> for the protestant reformation, you would not enjoy reading the Bible,
that
> is if you do, in English.
>
> Phil
> { This is an emotive response. I know that I am going to answer with what
> could be called biased history. The English language before the
reformation,
> was varied right across England, as was all the languages of Europe. and
the
> world. Latin, due to the Roman Empires influence , was common to all. The
> non educated went to Mass every day. They had the Bible read to them every
> day in their own language by educated clergy. The very same scripture as I
> get read to me today, if I went every day. 365 different parts of the
Bible.
> Your last(point) is pure presumption. At the time of the reformation all
the
> educated could speak and write several languages in addition to Latin.
Today
> very few can speak two. and Latin is not one of them. Education was in
most
> cases provided by the Church. The State provided no free education. Only
the
> bright among the poor ever got a free luinch}{However, though I am only
> putting up one history against another, a serious researcher could easily
> verify it. The Bible had been authorised to be translated into several
> vernaculars long before the reformation rebellion. But sticking to
England,
> we have a copy of the work of Caedmona monk of Whitby, done at the end of
> the 7th century translated to the English of that time. The next Century
the
> Work of the venerable Bede, a monk of Jarrow. These translations continue
> varying with the language. notable is the anglo-Normon middle English work
> Orm, circa 1150. and Salus Animae 1250.
> This is but a few. My fingers tire....All this has protestant historical
> testimony, included in the translators words of the preface of the first
KJV
> authorised version. Even Cranmer in His preface of 1540 mentions the Bible
> of the Saxon tongue......
>
> One more point. Jesus neve spoke of education, but submission, love,
> humility,and suffering
> and sacrifice, and obedience.}
>
> Phil
> > As to the last, only God himself or one appointed by Him may judge a
> person
> > to be a heretic. I find it hard to believe that Jack would claim to have
> > been given such powers to judge.
>
> Jack
> That being the case then the Catholic church has a very exhalted view of
> itself. Tell me what is 'anathema' and how did it come about?
>
> Philip
> { See Jack your feeling of being challenged. You could not answer my
> question of your claim to authority to judge, which is the crux of our
whole
> disagreement. You responded by asking an innocuous question that obviously
> asks why does the Church have the authority more than you or I do. Jesus
> gave the Apostles the power to do all in His Name. He did not give it to
me
> or
> any other. Only the Apostles. Now would not it be a stupidity if He did
not
> also provide for a means of succession, well documented in Acts, by the
> laying of Hands. }
>
> Phil
> HOWEVER, The Roman Church has NEVER
> > recanted or redefined the fundamental dogma, that was based upon Holy
> Writ,
> > and the Fathers of the Church, and Papal decrees, in agreement, that our
> > system is geocentric, and that the world was created in 7 days, some
7,000
> > years ago. To hold a contrary view is still heresy.
>
> Jack
> I accept the Catholic's position on geocentrism but where does the
authority
> for 'Holy Writ' and Papal decrees come from?
>
> {Once again, Jack ignores the statement I was correcting, that the Church
> teaches evolution. He refuses to acknowledge he was wrong, or even
> ask me to prove I was right. His last, "where does the authority
> for 'Holy Writ' and Papal decrees come from?" is answered in the Bible. If
I
> give the quotes I will be accused of using their Bible, as if they owned
it.
> This is a lie, because the Catholic Church nurtured and preserved the
Bible
> for centuries before the advent of the printing press. All hand copied,
> mostly by monks in the monastaries. See above}
>
> Phil
> > What the Church teaches, and what some churchmen or others think it
> teaches
> > are often two entirely different things.
>
> Jack
> As I see it pretty much most of what the Catholic church teaches comes
from
> its own churchmen. If its not in the Bible then it is man's.
>
> Philip
> {If it is not what Jesus taught, then it is baseless. Jesus commanded His
> men to preach in His name, not to write a Book. However, under the
guidence
> of the Holy Spirit they did put down the basic essentials to text, which
> centuries later were collated and authorised as the New Testament. See
these
> quotes...all from your bible, I will include also the latin and the
English
> translation of
> the Vulgate, from long bfore the reformation.....don't ask me to put up
> Martin Luthers original version, even you may get a fright.....}
>
> SOLA SCRIPTURA (BIBLE ONLY)
> Jn 21:25 --- not everything is in the Bible.
> 25 But there are also many other things which Jesus did which, if they
> were
> written every one, the world itself. I think, would not be able to contain
> the books
> that should be written.
> KJV
> 25 And there are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if
> they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself
could
> not contain the books that should be written. Amen.
>
> 2 Thess 2:15; 2 Tim 2:2; 1 Cor 11:2; 1 Thess 2:13 --- Paul speaks of
> oral tradition.
> Acts 2:42 --- early Christians followed apostolic tradition.
>
> 2 Pet 3:16 --- Bible hard to understand, gets distorted.
> 16 sicut et in omnibus epistulis loquens in eis de his in quibus sunt
> quaedam difficilia intellectu quae indocti et instabiles depravant sicut
et
> ceteras scripturas ad suam ipsorum perditionem
> KJV16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in
> which
> are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and
> unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own
> destruction.
> 17 Ye therefore, beloved, seeing ye know these things before, beware
lest
> ye also, being led away with the error of the wicked, fall from your own
> stedfastness
> 2 Jn 1:12; 3 Jn 1:13-14 --- more oral tradition.
> 2 Pet 1:20-21 --- against personal interpretation.
> 20 hoc primum intellegentes quod omnis prophetia scripturae propria
> interpretatione non fit
> 21 non enim voluntate humana adlata est aliquando prophetia sed Spiritu
> Sancto inspirati locuti sunt sancti Dei homines
>
> KJV 20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any
> private interpretation.
> 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy
men
> of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
>
> Acts 8:31; Heb 5:12 --- guidance needed to interpret scriptures.
>
> On Authority!
> PAPACY/INFALLIBILITY
> Mt 10:1-4; Mk 3:16-19; Lk 6:14-16; Acts 1:13; Lk 9:32 --- Peter always
> mentioned first, as foremost apostle.
> Mt 18:21; Mk 8:29; Lk 12:41; Jn 6:69 --- Peter speaks for the apostles.
> Acts 2:14-40 --- Pentecost: Peter who first preached.
> Acts 3:6-7 --- Peter worked first healing.
> Acts 10:46-48 --- Gentiles to be baptized revealed to Peter.
> Jn 1:42 --- Simon is Cephas (Aramaic: Kepha for rock).
> Mt 16:18-19 --- "on this Rock ... keys ... bind ... loose"
> Is 22:22; Rev 1:18 --- keys as symbol of authority.
> Jn 21:17 --- "feed my sheep"
> Lk 22:31-32 --- "Simon ... strengthen your brethren".
> Lk 10:1-2, 16; Jn 13:20; 2 Cor 5:20; Gal 4:14; Acts 5:1-5 --- "vicars"
> of Christ.
> Mk 6:20; Lk 1:70,2:23; Rom 12:1; Act 3:21, 1 Cor 7:14; Eph 3:5; Col
> 1:22 --- humans can be holy ("call no one holy").
>
> Final word. As you know, I do not accept the right for me to privately
> interpret scripture according to my wits, especially if such was to
> contradict dogma defined by the authority of the Church. If I did I have
no
> doubt I would find other quotations that would serve to contradict all of
> the above. I know most of them, so there is no need for anyone to send
them
> to me. Such would only serve to put me in the position mentioned, by
> 2Peter,3 16 As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these
things;
> in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are
> unlearned and
> unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own
> destruction.
>
> And even though I may claim to some learning, I claim no authority
.....Not
> even to the King would I recognise such authority to preach....
>
>
>
> This site will get you to quite a lot of Bibles.
> http://www.holywar.org/indexholy.html
>
> Over and out. have fun...Philip.
>
> Jack
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
