| Topic: |
Sociology > Education |
| User: |
"Dominic Torrazzi" |
| Date: |
13 Apr 2006 05:43:24 PM |
| Object: |
You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
If you need any evidence that the theocrats don't understand science,
statistics, or logic - have a read.
You bet your life
Posted: April 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
When Judas Iscariot agreed to deliver Jesus to the chief priests on Maundy
Thursday some 2,000 years ago, he was betting that Jesus was not who He
claimed to be - the son of God. Judas' payoff was 30 pieces of silver.
However, that betrayal cost Judas his life. History has shown this wager was
against impossible odds.
Today, many are going against the odds and making that same wager.
Just what are the odds that Jesus was God's son?
Although, we will not know with absolute certainty until we die and are
confronted by our Maker, overwhelming statistical probability is considered
proof by the scientific community. For example, DNA evidence is often the
proof needed to get a crime conviction, even though the probability of a
match may be 1 in a quintillion (1 with 18 zeros after it) or one in 10 to
the 29th power if using a full profile.
Consider the proof in the Bible that Jesus was who He said He was.
The Hebrew Scriptures pointed the way to the promised Messiah and went into
great detail about His birth, life and death through prophecy. These
prophecies were made many years before Jesus' birth and the Dead Sea Scrolls
confirm that they remained unchanged.
Oxford scholar Alfred Edersheim compiled a list of 456 identifying
characteristics of the Messiah from these prophecies that were fulfilled by
Jesus.
Dr. Peter Stoner, professor emeritus of science at Westmont College,
calculated the probability of one man fulfilling just the major prophecies
with the help of 12 different classes of 600 college students. Then, he took
more conservative figures to the Committee of the American Scientific
Affiliation and had them verified using the data supplied in the Bible.
Stoner looked at these eight prophecies:
Born in Bethlehem (Micah 5:2).
A messenger was sent to prepare the way (Malachi 3:1).
Made a triumphant entry into Jerusalem as a king riding on a lowly donkey
(Zechariah 9:9).
Betrayed by a friend that resulted in wounds in the hands (Zechariah 13:6).
Price of betrayal was 30 pieces of silver (Zechariah 11:12).
The blood money was used to buy a potter's field (Zechariah 11:13).
Offered no defense at his trial (Isaiah 53:7).
His hands and feet were pierced (Psalm 22:16).
The estimate of one man fulfilling all eight of these prophecies was a
staggering 10 to the 17th power, a number with 17 zeroes after it.
In another calculation, he used 48 prophecies and came up with a probability
of 10 to the 157th power, an impossible figure to achieve without Divine
intervention.
Exactly what do these numbers mean?
Stoner gave us this example. Ten to the 17th power would be the number of
silver dollars needed to cover the entire state of Texas, two feet deep.
To help us visualize 10 to the 157th power, Stoner chose one of the smallest
known objects, the electron. An electron is so small that it would take 2.5
x 1,000,000,000,000,000 of them laid side by side to make a line, single
file, one inch long.
Space, according to some estimates, extends in all directions to a distance
of 6 million light-years. Dr. Stoner asked us to imagine a solid ball of
electrons the size of space. Now fit that space-size ball of electrons, into
a ball of electrons 10 to the 157th power. How big of a dent would our
space-size ball make? It would make a hole so small that it would not be
noticeable.
Remember, that number 10 to the 157th power represents the probability of
one man fulfilling just 48 of these prophesies and there were 456 that Dr.
Stoner and his mathematicians could have used.
Let us go back to the odds that one man could have fulfilled just those
first eight prophecies. Imagine that one of the silver dollars covering the
state of Texas, two feet thick, was marked in red fingernail polish. You are
given the task of walking throughout Texas, reaching down and selecting the
right one on the first try. Suppose your very life was on the line. Could
you do it?
Would you bet your life on that?
Of course you would not, but that is, in effect, what you are doing when
you, like Judas, decide to reject the tremendous amount of evidence that
Jesus Christ was the son of God and the only way to the Father.
Christ willingly laid down His life to pay the price for our sins in order
to give us the gift of eternal life. It is a free gift - yours to accept or
reject.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
29 Apr 2006 09:17:09 PM |
|
|
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
We also have the recorded expressed doubts by several of the early
church fathers on whether 2 Peter was valid.
Well, I can understand why they would feel that way. 2 Peter pretty
much condemned what they were doing.
They are the people whose testimony we rely on to know that the other
books are part of Scripture. If you condemn them based on 2 Pater,
then you have no basis to accept anything as scripture.
Peter was head of the church. He was the one who had authority to
decide what was scripture and what was not.
Peter left no known statements as to what was scripture.
You really make some ignorant statements. 2 Peter 1:19 We also have a
more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well to take heed, as unto
a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day
star arise in your hearts:
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.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
30 Apr 2006 12:11:37 AM |
|
|
wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" < > wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" < > wrote:
We also have the recorded expressed doubts by several of the early
church fathers on whether 2 Peter was valid.
Well, I can understand why they would feel that way. 2 Peter pretty
much condemned what they were doing.
They are the people whose testimony we rely on to know that the other
books are part of Scripture. If you condemn them based on 2 Pater,
then you have no basis to accept anything as scripture.
Peter was head of the church. He was the one who had authority to
decide what was scripture and what was not.
Peter left no known statements as to what was scripture.
You really make some ignorant statements. 2 Peter 1:19
Peter did not write that.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
30 Apr 2006 07:59:13 AM |
|
|
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
rbwinn3@juno.com wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
We also have the recorded expressed doubts by several of the early
church fathers on whether 2 Peter was valid.
Well, I can understand why they would feel that way. 2 Peter pretty
much condemned what they were doing.
They are the people whose testimony we rely on to know that the other
books are part of Scripture. If you condemn them based on 2 Pater,
then you have no basis to accept anything as scripture.
Peter was head of the church. He was the one who had authority to
decide what was scripture and what was not.
Peter left no known statements as to what was scripture.
You really make some ignorant statements. 2 Peter 1:19
Peter did not write that.
Peter would be the best one to discuss your idea with. Why don't you
just wait until after the resurrection, and tell Peter your concerns?
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Baxter" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
30 Apr 2006 05:51:02 PM |
|
|
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
<rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1146401953.499154.61010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter did not write that.
Peter would be the best one to discuss your idea with. Why don't you
just wait until after the resurrection, and tell Peter your concerns?
What makes you think you know the mind of Peter or what he wrote?
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
30 Apr 2006 11:50:29 PM |
|
|
Baxter wrote:
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
<rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1146401953.499154.61010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter did not write that.
Peter would be the best one to discuss your idea with. Why don't you
just wait until after the resurrection, and tell Peter your concerns?
What makes you think you know the mind of Peter or what he wrote?
What makes you think you do?
I have a Bible with two epistles written by Peter.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Baxter" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
01 May 2006 03:08:11 PM |
|
|
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1146459029.356057.44600@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Baxter wrote:
<rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1146401953.499154.61010@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Peter did not write that.
Peter would be the best one to discuss your idea with. Why don't you
just wait until after the resurrection, and tell Peter your concerns?
What makes you think you know the mind of Peter or what he wrote?
What makes you think you do?
I have a Bible with two epistles written by Peter.
Except they weren't.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Baxter" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
19 Apr 2006 07:51:06 PM |
|
|
-
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free software - Baxter Codeworks www.baxcode.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145490547.987953.182770@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
I'd explain it to you, but it's that Pearls Before Swine thing.
Nevertheless, clearly you speak from ignorance in your above
assertions. The epistles did Not come down to us in their original
forms, and the several writing committees have edited, bowdlerized,
and changed them in the 1800 or so years they've been extant.
So what? They started out with what the original writer put down.
Actually, some of the "original authors" never wrote a single word.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
19 Apr 2006 07:04:16 PM |
|
|
On 19 Apr 2006 16:49:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
Read your early church history, and then read about how the Holy Tome
itself came into being in its many forms throughout history.
I'd explain it to you, but it's that Pearls Before Swine thing.
Nevertheless, clearly you speak from ignorance in your above
assertions. The epistles did Not come down to us in their original
forms, and the several writing committees have edited, bowdlerized,
and changed them in the 1800 or so years they've been extant.
So what?
Har!
They started out with what the original writer put down.
and changed it Mightily thereafter.
You're far more entertaining that I Ever figured a Fundy would be.
It's most unusual!
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
19 Apr 2006 10:57:34 PM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 19 Apr 2006 16:49:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
Read your early church history, and then read about how the Holy Tome
itself came into being in its many forms throughout history.
I'd explain it to you, but it's that Pearls Before Swine thing.
Nevertheless, clearly you speak from ignorance in your above
assertions. The epistles did Not come down to us in their original
forms, and the several writing committees have edited, bowdlerized,
and changed them in the 1800 or so years they've been extant.
So what?
Har!
They started out with what the original writer put down.
and changed it Mightily thereafter.
You're far more entertaining that I Ever figured a Fundy would be.
It's most unusual!
Well, so this version of the Bible does not have exactly the same words
as that one. Are we supposed to be surprised, or what?
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
20 Apr 2006 10:00:17 AM |
|
|
On 19 Apr 2006 20:57:34 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Well, so this version of the Bible does not have exactly the same words
as that one.
On occasions, the terms used have diametrically different meanings.
And within some there are entirely different books.
Are we supposed to be surprised, or what?
To the willfully and adamantly ignorant, Anything new is surprising.
But they do tend to cover it up if it threatens positions taken
resulting from their formerly displayed ignorance.
Providing information and facts never seem to help, with such cases.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
20 Apr 2006 05:24:50 PM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 19 Apr 2006 20:57:34 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Well, so this version of the Bible does not have exactly the same words
as that one.
On occasions, the terms used have diametrically different meanings.
And within some there are entirely different books.
Are we supposed to be surprised, or what?
To the willfully and adamantly ignorant, Anything new is surprising.
But they do tend to cover it up if it threatens positions taken
resulting from their formerly displayed ignorance.
Providing information and facts never seem to help, with such cases.
Well, I already knew that there were different versions of the Bible.
What were you trying to help me with?
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Larry the J." |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
17 Apr 2006 10:14:48 AM |
|
|
Waiving the right to remain silent, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> said:
No man cometh unto the Father but by the Son.
That sounds rather gay, innit...
--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail
"I've come here to enjoy nature. Don't talk to me
about the environment!" - 'Denny Crane'
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
17 Apr 2006 08:50:46 AM |
|
|
rbwinn wrote:
cognac756@yahoo.com wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
cognac756@yahoo.com wrote:
rbwinn wrote:
Dominic Torrazzi wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1144988485.298773.181110@e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
NeoLibertarian wrote:
Dominic Torrazzi wrote:
If you need any evidence that the theocrats don't understan=
d science,
statistics, or logic - have a read.
You bet your life
Posted: April 13, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
=A9 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
When Judas Iscariot agreed to deliver Jesus to the chief pr=
iests on
Maundy
Thursday some 2,000 years ago, he was betting that Jesus wa=
s not who He
claimed to be - the son of God. Judas' payoff was 30 pieces=
of silver.
However, that betrayal cost Judas his life. History has sho=
wn this wager
was
against impossible odds.
Not only that, they haven't read The Gospel of Judas, either.
Anything written by the Gnostics is garbage. Their theology =
was
founded on the idea that Christ could not have suffered on the=
cross
because he was a God.
You have any evidence they might be wrong?
Well, yeah. There was a motorcycle gang down in Florida that cru=
cified
a woman because they did not like what she did. That woman said =
she
experienced pain. That would seem to me to be evidence that the
Gnostics were wrong.
You don't understand the nature of pain.
Whether Christ suffered on the cross, or not, has nothing to do whe=
ther
he WISHED to be crucified.
He did, by all accounts.
That he ACTUALLY asked Judas to sell him out to the Pharisees is not
important--the canonical Apostles mostly agree he foresaw that Judas
would do so--and even tells him to "go do what's necessary, and do =
so
quickly" after the Last Supper.
However, this isn't the key to Gnostic thought, anyway.
As the name implies, the Gnostics thought that knowledge of the div=
ine
was the path to salvation.
The canon of the Church says obedience is the path to salvation.
The two views can never coincide: A Gnostic does not need the churc=
h:
Gnosticism is a personal journey.
Well, yes, Gnosticism is a personal journey, a personal journey away
from God.
You shouldn't confuse religion and God.
There are many paths to God.
Well, no. There is only one. No man cometh unto the Father but by the
Son.
Yes.
Yet there are still many paths to God.
--
NeoLibertarian
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
14 Apr 2006 11:23:32 AM |
|
|
On 13 Apr 2006 21:21:25 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Anything written by the Gnostics is garbage.
Clearly a political decision, enforced by the Religious Police of the
time.
Their theology was
founded on the idea that Christ could not have suffered on the cross
because he was a God.
There's some more to it than that.
When Xtianity was trying to evolve itself out of Judaism, there were a
whole bunch of different approaches to it that had a coterie of firm
believers.
A series of committee meetings decided who was doctrinally correct,
which decisions were then administered by the temporal powers at the
time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
14 Apr 2006 01:00:08 PM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 13 Apr 2006 21:21:25 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Anything written by the Gnostics is garbage.
Clearly a political decision, enforced by the Religious Police of the
time.
Their theology was
founded on the idea that Christ could not have suffered on the cross
because he was a God.
There's some more to it than that.
When Xtianity was trying to evolve itself out of Judaism, there were a
whole bunch of different approaches to it that had a coterie of firm
believers.
A series of committee meetings decided who was doctrinally correct,
which decisions were then administered by the temporal powers at the
time.
Well, no. There were no committe meetings in the beginning. There
were twelve apostles who had been ordained by Jesus Christ and given
authority to build up his church. As the church expanded there began
to be false teachings such as the teachings of the Gnostics, who were
Greeks trying to incorporate Greek religion into Christianity. The
effect was that they isolated themselves by teaching doctrines that
everyone else knew to be wrong.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bob LeChevalier" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
14 Apr 2006 03:53:42 PM |
|
|
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Well, no. There were no committe meetings in the beginning. There
were twelve apostles who had been ordained by Jesus Christ and given
authority to build up his church. As the church expanded there began
to be false teachings such as the teachings of the Gnostics, who were
Greeks trying to incorporate Greek religion into Christianity.
No - that was what Paul did, adding a liberal dose of Egyptian mystery
religion to the mix.
Gnosticism predates the Hellenic period, and is generally considered
to have originated with the ancient Persian and Babylonian religions.
lojbab
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
15 Apr 2006 01:23:08 AM |
|
|
Bob LeChevalier wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Well, no. There were no committe meetings in the beginning. There
were twelve apostles who had been ordained by Jesus Christ and given
authority to build up his church. As the church expanded there began
to be false teachings such as the teachings of the Gnostics, who were
Greeks trying to incorporate Greek religion into Christianity.
No - that was what Paul did, adding a liberal dose of Egyptian mystery
religion to the mix.
Gnosticism predates the Hellenic period, and is generally considered
to have originated with the ancient Persian and Babylonian religions.
lojbab
Paul was an apostle. He was continually active in trying to combat
false teachings like the ones the Gnostics came up with. The Gnostics
claimed to be Christians, regardless of what you claim they were.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
15 Apr 2006 11:49:32 AM |
|
|
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
16 Apr 2006 07:44:28 AM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
We know of it because he was ordained to that position.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
16 Apr 2006 10:04:09 AM |
|
|
On 16 Apr 2006 05:44:28 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
We know of it because he was ordained to that position.
Only by his own statement.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
16 Apr 2006 08:39:31 PM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 16 Apr 2006 05:44:28 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
We know of it because he was ordained to that position.
Only by his own statement.
No, by the other Apostles.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
17 Apr 2006 11:06:38 AM |
|
|
On 16 Apr 2006 18:39:31 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 16 Apr 2006 05:44:28 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
We know of it because he was ordained to that position.
Only by his own statement.
No, by the other Apostles.
Who learned about it only because Paul/Saul claimed it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
18 Apr 2006 09:18:04 AM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 16 Apr 2006 18:39:31 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 16 Apr 2006 05:44:28 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 23:23:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Paul was an apostle.
Not one of the original ordained by Jesus.
We know of his apostolic authority Only because he claimed to have it.
We know of it because he was ordained to that position.
Only by his own statement.
No, by the other Apostles.
Who learned about it only because Paul/Saul claimed it.
No, the other apostles learned about it because they were the ones who
ordained him.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Don Homuth" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
14 Apr 2006 01:34:48 PM |
|
|
On 14 Apr 2006 11:00:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
When Xtianity was trying to evolve itself out of Judaism, there were a
whole bunch of different approaches to it that had a coterie of firm
believers.
A series of committee meetings decided who was doctrinally correct,
which decisions were then administered by the temporal powers at the
time.
Well, no. There were no committe meetings in the beginning.
Yeah, there surely were. First thing Xrist did was form a committee,
in fact.
There were twelve apostles
Yep -- that's them, all right.
... who had been ordained by Jesus Christ and given
authority to build up his church.
Well, no -- not all of them. Peter was primum inter pares of the
group, according to the Holy Tome.
As the church expanded there began
to be false teachings such as the teachings of the Gnostics, who were
Greeks trying to incorporate Greek religion into Christianity.
Who said so? A committee of other superstitionists, that's who. The
determination of the several church councils had no greater divine
authority than did anyone else. They did have the advantage of the
ear of Constantine, early on, and of other temporal leaders as well.
And yagotta love their means of dealing with those who were not in the
majority of the committee at the time. They just killed them off
entirely, as much as possible.
Might will do that, but those accused of Dread Heresy weren't killed
off by any divine act.
The effect was that they isolated themselves by teaching doctrines that
everyone else knew to be wrong.
Everyone Else "knew" nothing at all, on the matter. They weren't
Heresy until they were declared to be by the several committees that
ruled on such stuff. And as committees will, they ruled according to
what They preferred to believe, and not what was Known to be Wrong.
Just like Xtians do today when they differentiate themselves in their
various sects.
Nothing has really changed in the world of organized superstition.
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
15 Apr 2006 01:17:49 AM |
|
|
Don Homuth wrote:
On 14 Apr 2006 11:00:08 -0700, "rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
Don Homuth wrote:
When Xtianity was trying to evolve itself out of Judaism, there were a
whole bunch of different approaches to it that had a coterie of firm
believers.
A series of committee meetings decided who was doctrinally correct,
which decisions were then administered by the temporal powers at the
time.
Well, no. There were no committe meetings in the beginning.
Yeah, there surely were. First thing Xrist did was form a committee,
in fact.
There were twelve apostles
Yep -- that's them, all right.
... who had been ordained by Jesus Christ and given
authority to build up his church.
Well, no -- not all of them. Peter was primum inter pares of the
group, according to the Holy Tome.
Sorry I do not communicate in dead languages. Peter was ordained by
Jesus Christ the same as the other Apostles and set apart as the
leading apostle.
As the church expanded there began
to be false teachings such as the teachings of the Gnostics, who were
Greeks trying to incorporate Greek religion into Christianity.
Who said so? A committee of other superstitionists, that's who. The
determination of the several church councils had no greater divine
authority than did anyone else. They did have the advantage of the
ear of Constantine, early on, and of other temporal leaders as well.
Well, technically you are correct. Once the apostles were dead, there
was more false teaching than truth. The Council of Nicene had no more
authority than the Gnostics to represent Jesus Christ.
And yagotta love their means of dealing with those who were not in the
majority of the committee at the time. They just killed them off
entirely, as much as possible.
Well, then later on the Bishop of Rome excommunicated the Bishop of
Constantinople, and the Bishop of Constantinople excommunicated the
Bishop of Rome. Which excommunication was the real one?
Robert B. Winn
Might will do that, but those accused of Dread Heresy weren't killed
off by any divine act.
The effect was that they isolated themselves by teaching doctrines that
everyone else knew to be wrong.
Everyone Else "knew" nothing at all, on the matter. They weren't
Heresy until they were declared to be by the several committees that
ruled on such stuff. And as committees will, they ruled according to
what They preferred to believe, and not what was Known to be Wrong.
Just like Xtians do today when they differentiate themselves in their
various sects.
Nothing has really changed in the world of organized superstition.
Well, the Christians who came from Jewish tradition knew better than to
accept the mysticism of the Gnostics. That is what I meant when I said
they knew the teachings of the Gnostics to be wrong. However, as Paul
prophesied would happen in the entire church, false teachings began to
outnumber true teachings, and the entire Christian world went into the
Dark Ages.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "gatt" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
18 Apr 2006 04:00:24 PM |
|
|
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145081869.542909.55640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
However, as Paul prophesied would happen in the entire church, false
teachings began to
outnumber true teachings, and the entire Christian world went into the
Dark Ages.
Meaning God and Jesus were as *****-poor communicators as they were human
resource managers.
-c
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
19 Apr 2006 12:55:11 AM |
|
|
gatt wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145081869.542909.55640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
However, as Paul prophesied would happen in the entire church, false
teachings began to
outnumber true teachings, and the entire Christian world went into the
Dark Ages.
Meaning God and Jesus were as *****-poor communicators as they were human
resource managers.
Well, according to prophecy, they will get the message across next
time. Maybe you could take an opportunity then to express your ideas
in person.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lobby Dosser" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
19 Apr 2006 06:12:54 AM |
|
|
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
gatt wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145081869.542909.55640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
However, as Paul prophesied would happen in the entire church, false
teachings began to
outnumber true teachings, and the entire Christian world went into
the Dark Ages.
Which, it turns out were not so dark as they were under reported and out
shone by the following centuries.
Meaning God and Jesus were as *****-poor communicators as they were
human resource managers.
Well, according to prophecy, they will get the message across next
time. Maybe you could take an opportunity then to express your ideas
in person.
Robert B. Winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "rbwinn" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
21 Apr 2006 12:23:14 AM |
|
|
Lobby Dosser wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote:
gatt wrote:
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145081869.542909.55640@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
However, as Paul prophesied would happen in the entire church, false
teachings began to
outnumber true teachings, and the entire Christian world went into
the Dark Ages.
Which, it turns out were not so dark as they were under reported and out
shone by the following centuries.
In terms of religion, they were dark centuries. The scriptures were
chained to the pulpit, and any common person who read them could be put
to death. It was not until the reformers started to question this kind
of religion and Mr. Gutenburg printed his book that the world began to
come out of its spiritual darkness.
Robert B. winn
.
|
|
|
| User: "gatt" |
|
| Title: Re: You Have Got To Read This Wingnut Column |
21 Apr 2006 12:45:22 PM |
|
|
"rbwinn" <rbwinn3@juno.com> wrote in message
news:1145596994.802178.188320@v46g2000cwv.googlegroups.com...
In terms of religion, they were dark centuries. The scriptures were
chained to the pulpit, and any common person who read them could be put
to death.
Christians do that sort of thing anywhere they can get away with it.
Jesus would disapprove, of course, but therein lies the distance between
organized Christians and the actual teaching of Jesus Christ.
This will, no doubt, fly right over your head.
-c
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
