[geocentrism] Re: Several posts
- From: "Niemann, Nicholas K." <NNiemann@xxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 18:47:21 -0500
Dear Neville,
Thank you for your follow up. Although I think it would have been upright of
you to answer, rather then dodge, my simple question on whether you claim to
be infallible on religious matters, especially since in the same paragraph you
have rendered yet another anti-Catholic opinion on religious matters, this time
when you claim Catholic teachings on geocentrism go against the Bible.
With reference to your claim that statements by the Catholic Church on
geocentrism go against Biblical teaching on the matter, will you please cite us
to the specific sources so those who are interested can review them. And will
you please state your basis for your anti-Catholic claim rather than just
lobbing an accusation against the Catholic Church.
It's your forum, so you can draw a "halt" anytime you want, but I think to be
intellectually consistent you would need to also draw a halt to any of your
references to the Bible. My inquiry into this was to address the foundation,
the source, of the Bible. Your continued use of the Bible shows you accept the
Catholic Church acted infallibly in putting it together, yet you give no valid
reason as to why you can arbitrarily choose other areas where you think the
Catholic Church lost its doctrinal infallibility. If you yourself are
infallible in religious matters, then you can make such a competing claim
(provided you can prove you are infallible). Until you can show why we, to
whom the book was not handed, should rely on the accuracy of the Bible, you
have not made your case as to why any scientific conclusion needs to give way
to it. Did the Catholic Church act infallibly when it put the Bible together
(and when it rejected other alleged scriptures), as it did in the year 397, and
if so on what basis do you claim it lost its infallibility. Please answer the
hard question and don't dodge the issue, since this goes to the heart of your
Biblical claims. I think this is germane to what I understand to be the
stipulations of the host, but obviously you have the power to cut me off should
you wish.
Thanks again.
Regards,
Nick.
-----Original Message-----
From: Dr. Neville Jones [mailto:ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 3:43 PM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Several posts
In an effort to keep the size of posts down, I have combined several replies in
one:
Nick,
True to your word, you have responded to my Catholic doctrine e-mail. I now
draw a halt to any further discussions of Roman Catholicism on the forum. It
was not set up for this purpose, and is not in keeping with the stipulations of
our host (freelists.org). You have now had the "last say," which I think is
proper, because I suppose I did start this thread by picking up on a comment
that Philip had made, and if you wish we can leave it like that. Alternatively,
we can debate it further in private (well, together with Jack and Philip and
anyone else who cares to tell one of us that they would like to join in).
Henceforth there will be no more postings on church doctrine, please, with but
one exception. The Catholic Church has had more to say than most on
geocentrism, only recently going against Biblical teaching on the matter, and a
discussion of this aspect of RC doctrine would still be within the remit of our
forum.
-- No attachments (even text) are allowed --
-- Type: text/plain
-- File: InterScan_Disclaimer.txt
Other related posts:
