[geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Dan
- From: "Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 14:41:35 -0500
All,
Thank you Philip for a great discussion, which goes to the heart of much
of what is wrong today.
I wanted to add one tidbit. You mentioned there is no "Biblical
evidence" that Peter went to Rome. Perhaps there is no absolute
Biblical "proof" (though there is historical proof), but I understand
there is actually some Biblical "evidence".It is apparently understood
by scholars that Peter's greetings from "Babylon" referred to the
common, derisive name given to Rome by first-century Jews and
Christians. Stephen Ray recounts this in the book I mentioned the other
day. The Haydock commentary in the Douay-Rheims Bible also discusses
this (in the footnote for I Peter 5:13). This passage in Peter refers
to the "church, which is in Babylon". The ancients understood this to
mean in Rome, so called not only on account of the extent of its empire,
but also for its idolatry and vices. Haydock goes on to say "In this
text, where all the lights of antiquity understand Rome by Babylon, they
[referring to certain seceders] deny it; and in the book of Revelations,
where all evil is spoken of Babylon, there they will have it signify
nothing else but Rome: yes, and the Church of Rome, not (as the holy
Fathers interpret it) the temporal state of the heathen empire."
Regards,
Nick.
_____
From: Dr. Neville Jones [mailto:ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 9:15 AM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Saul of Tarsus.. Nick & Dan
I was not going to continue contributing to this thread, but this
(below) is an excellent posting from Philip (I also like ja's response
to the issues I raised with him).
Allen cannot yet see the problem and I would therefore urge him to read
Philip's posting, which covers it better than I. Allen stated, in his
latest posting, that I "have yet to show how [he has] mishandled
scripture." In this posting, though, he quotes TEN "scriptures" that
were written by Saul of Tarsus. This is simply the same circular
reasoning that evolutionists employ all the time, though he does not
accept his error.
Philip can see it. He can even see it with the Catholic Church, under
the proviso that he makes clear. My understanding is that he is a
Catholic because he really does believe in the Roman Catholic Church and
believes in the events at Fatima, for example, not because he cannot see
the problem which is inherent in that church if Saul of Tarsus really is
the anti-Messiah. This is exactly the same problem that exists for all
"Christian" churches if Saul of Tarsus really is the anti-Messiah.
And ja, regarding your interpretation of the conflicting accounts of the
robbers - yes, I agree with you. Yours is a possibility. But please
consider that there is another possibilty, which is what this whole
thread was started off by me to debate: that Saul of Tarsus, influenced
by the devil himself, has sowed tares amongst Our Father's words - in
the scriptures themselves.
Yes, I know that this makes it difficult to tell what is added (as
Philip also alluded to early on), but it should not be impossible, if we
forget Allen's stance (which is not self-supporting), and go back to
rock-solid facts that we know must be correct. This means restoring the
Law, not saying that it has been "done away with."
Neville.
Philip <joyphil@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sorry, ja, but you are mistaken on many fronts here. It is
certainly not a "moot" point, it is an extremely important point. Who
exactly was Yeshuwa' asking his Father to forgive? ............Neville.
I usually snip off the post to save data space, but this post by
Neville requires to be retained. For a few reasons applied to my
response. .
Reason No 1.
Neville beat me to the punch in that I was about to say the
following to Allen and Ja. (by the way ja what about a Christian name ?)
In light of what Neville says about Saul, and if the Catholic
Church is not the Church of Jesus Christ, then Nevilles arguments upon
analysis stand. Why do I say that? Because you all in opposing him, use
the Bible or one based upon, adulterated or otherwise since, this
Catholic Bible. Therefore logic demands that to find Truth we must go
back before the cannons of the NT as promulgated by the RC church. There
is no Biblical evidence that Peter went to Rome. Only Paul went. This I
say only if the Church is not the Church of Christ.
Reason 2.
I hear much about translations of the original Hebrew and greek.
Give us a break.
Apart from a few fragments pf hand writtten copies there is no
such thing.
Add to that the only truly inspired writ is the original,
common sense demands this, as the Holy Spirit , if He is to protect
Truth, must ensure that only one version is ever available to souls, and
this is not the case, then it becomes logically obvious that God
provides some human agency with God given authority to declare which is
and which isn't TRUTH.
To those of you who believe in THE BIBLE ALONE for individual
personal use, is all you need, I ask you to consider. Was that the way
the Jews of the OT did it? Is that the way they still do it?
Allen Ja Neville, all of you, my heart feels for us all when I
see these divisions. I am sure I just reflect the heart of Jesus
Himself. Each one of us is sincere. That is why I feel so despondent as
I witness the disputes. There is no real physical material answer to
our problems. It is really a spiritual problem . And the answer is
deeply spiritual. It requires the complete abandonment of prideful
knowledge, a willingness to be open to new ideas, yes even myself, and
with a complete submission to the will of God. This can be obtained if
one asks God in humble prayer for guidance. Much prayer indeed. There
can be no response from God if one has any preconceived ideas based upon
pride of knowing already. Save of course knowing the difference between
good and evil. God gave us His commandments to help us there.
There are a some things in Catholic Dogma that disturb me. There
are a lot of things about the God of the OT that disturb me. I am sure
there were a lot of things about Gods rule in Heaven that disturbed the
highest intelligent creature among the angels Lucifer. It pays to be
quiet, and not follow Lucifer's lead to PROTEST. ant.
Philip.
_____
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday snaps for
FREE with Yahoo! Photos. Get Yahoo! Photos
<http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mail/uk/taglines/default/photos/*http://uk.photo
s.yahoo.com/>
This message and any attachments are confidential, may contain privileged
information, and are intended solely for the recipient named above. If you are
not the intended recipient, or a person responsible for delivery to the named
recipient, you are notified that any review, distribution, dissemination or
copying is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, you should
notify the sender by return email and delete the message from your computer
system.
Other related posts:
