A
- Status
S
StAnastasia
Guest
Is there a “Church of 1616”? I thought there was only one Church.
D
DavidChrist
Guest
Darwin ENHANCED God, not killed him. As a matter of fact, it particularly enhanced Christianity.Hi this is a really interesting documentary broadcast on the BBC, BBC2. It is called ‘Did Darwin Kill God’. It was broadcast on the 31st March. I really hope someone uploads this on YouTube and the other video sharing websites! It is also available too watch on iPlayer, the link below
bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00jhfwt/Did_Darwin_Kill_God/
What the theory of evolution claims is that Spirit has evolved from matter to life to human to god-human (Christ).
Darwin claims (correctly) that ANYONE can evolve into Christ because we all came from the original source that was THAT before the Big Bang.
Unfortunately, to get to be a human/god you have to have knowledge.
The knowledge is out there except that you do not have the courage to accept it. It doesn’t mean rejecting the teachings of Jesus it means understanding them at a deep level.
There are a lot of perils of going deep. Friedrich Nietzsche tried to go deep and he got lost and expired in the abyss. But damn, read him and you will be astounded.
C
Cbailey2
Guest
- If God created all things, is all that is good, and is eternal, how does one enhance God?
- I don’t know what ‘theory of evolution’ you are referring to, but Darwin’s makes no claims with regards to “spirit” evolving.
- Darwin never claimed that humans could evolve into Christ.
- To be a human/god, you also have to be eternal and all-powerful. That’s a little more difficult to obtain than knowledge
- How are you passing judgment on the intellectual courage of others? Do you further claim to understand the teachings of Jesus on a deep level?
- Now you claim to understand the teachings of Nietzsche on a deep level as well?
C
cassini
Guest
There is of course only one Church. The expression ‘Church of 1616’ denotes the date that our one true Church defined and declared the Scriptures state the world is geocentric and that anything that denies this truth of revelation is a heresy. This is also the date that the Catholic Church established its position on faith and science.
By the time Darwin produced his ‘origin of Species’ (not his evidence that species have the (God-given genetic) ability to adjust their make-up over generations to assist them survive changes in their environment) that suggested one kind evolved into another kind by this same method, Churchmen, who from 1741 to 1835 did a U-turn on their understanding of faith and science, thereby lost all credibility in this area. The history of their pathetic attempts to clarify the position of man-from-monkeys for Catholics since then shows us a Church in chaos over faith and science.
Accordingly, Catholic forums have inherited this loss of credibility and they are not the place to find the truth in this field. One would think that the Catholic faith and what is called science, two infallible sources if understood properly, should produce clarity and complete harmony, Alas, there are THOUSANDS of posts on this forum and there is no general concensus thus proving that truth in the field of faith and science is no longer to be found in modern Catholicism.
O
Orogeny
Guest
Especially if one is reading posts from Cassini!
Just for clarification for other posters, Cassini, could you please tell us what you think of the Pope’s acceptance of some form of evolution and apparent rejection of geocentricity?
Peace
Tim
S
StAnastasia
Guest
So if the Church is no longer the true church, then where is it? Is there a Catholic Church of Geocentrism? Does it have congregations here and there?
C
ConallCernach
Guest
The question is actually pretty simple. God gave us divine revelation, are we to abandon trying to further our understanding of God because of His revelation in Divine Revelation?
Pax
C
cassini
Guest
‘Especially if one is reading posts from Cassini!;’ – My but aren’t you a great defender of your position.
I think Pope Pius XII’s heliocentric Big Bang welcome speech to the PAS in 1941 pathetic, a typical Catholicism + false science compromise trying to make the faith comply with science when he should have been defending the teaching of the Church as held by all the Fathers.
I think Pope Pius XII did the same when in 1950 he allowed Catholics to even debate the obnoxious thought that the body of man (made in the image of God - Jesus remember took the same body) might have evolved with the monkeys. To allow debate implies it MIGHT even be true. Another perversion to the tradition of the Church, all to make Catholicism look compatible to ‘science’.
Pope John Paul II will, - in my mind - go down as one of the worst popes in the history of the Church for many, many reasons. (by their fruits you shall know them- today, after 28 years of his ecumenism and anti-tradition etc., Catholicism is an empty shell)) As regards faith and science I think he was full of intellectual pride and spent too much time sitting in the PAS among those atheists whose science was fully endorced by him. He loved the attention and no one knows even to this day what he meant by 'evolution is more than a hypothesis. What I do know is that he believed man evolved from ape-men. He said so in that same speech when he referred to the one with the tool (spear or old baseball-bat) as being the way to know the first human being. Can you imagine such a brute deciding the fate of all mankind and necessitating the Incarnation, God becoming a man to die for that original sin committed by a guy just past his homid form. The absurdity of it all shows me he was just another pope who tried to make catholicism fit the theories and false science of his intellectual peers.
There is a lot to learn from the fact that JP2 when Biship of Cracow loved to refer to himself as ‘the Copernican Canon’. No sooner elected pope than he ordered a commission to ‘examine the Galileo case’. In 1992 their findings were read to the world’s press and the pope himself gave an endorsing speech. Never was there a more dishonorable report. Indeed it was so bad even evolutionists like George Coyne came out against it. Hugely important points were glanced over and made look unimportant and the Church of 1616 and 1633 was literally made look foolish, run by an authority that didn’t know how to interpret Scripture properly and didn’t know how to bend the Scriptures to comply with a heresy.
Pope John Paul II was awarded the ‘Galileo Galilei’ award from Italy’s Luciferian Freemasons after it. Now if that does not tell you something then you have no concept of what has/is being done to the Catholic Church.
Cardinal Ratzinger comes from the same modernist line, remember he was JP2’s right hand man for years. In 1980 they published his version of creation and original sin. For me a convinced creationist having studied all the arguments for and against evolutionism, but especially from having considered the theological objections to it, I have no time for theistic evolutionists. That a pope should teach we evolved from or with the monkeys is UNBELIEVABLE. That he too is a heliocentricist fully complying to modern cosmology is par for the pope these days.
Does that answer your question Orogeny?
C
cassini
Guest
The Church St Anastasia, is the unchanging mystical body of Christ. It complies with Christs promise that the Holy Ghost will guide it always until the end of time. Like God Himself it teaches the truth and NEVER changes that truth.
The Church defined and declared a fixed sun as heresy and a moving earth as contrary to Catholic faith by inference to the Scriptures.
Search as much as you can and you will not find any breach of the rules of faith. The Church does not do U-turns, the Church cannot do U-turns or it is not the Church for that would prove it can promulgate false infallible teachings, can define something as heresy that turns out not to be heresy. Infallible teachings will always comply to the truth.
But there is no such guarantee for the behaviour of Churchmen. Convinced that science proved heliocentricism they LOST FAITH and HID the truth. They could not ABROGATE the truth because the Church does not do abrogations of truth in favour of heresies.
So while the Church retains its infallible teachings, the PRACTICE is not in conformity with the faith and all utterences to the contrary will be found to have NO official status in cannon law.
Does that answer your question St Anastasia ?
C
cassini
Guest
Conall, I haven’t a clue what you are implying or asking.
O
Orogeny
Guest
Yeah, it is a great start, but, if you don’t mind, I would like to clarify a couple of other points for readers of this thread that may not have followed your posts in the past.
Since the Church defined and declared a fixed sun as heresy and a moving earth as contrary to Catholic faith by inference to the Scriptures, would teaching or allowing the teaching of a heliocentric solar system make one a heretic if they are in a position of authority. Like, say, a pope?
Peace
Tim
C
ConallCernach
Guest
Heliocentrists do not hold that the sun is stationary. For the sun would also be moving.
Also, let me try another way of wording the question.
Is it possible to learn about God through natural theology?
C
cassini
Guest
Yes, but because the heresy was hidden from sight in 1835 the heresy would now be considered material, that is, carrying no punishment.
O
Orogeny
Guest
What do you mean by “hidden from sight” and why 1835?
If you know about it, why wouldn’t the Pope?
Peace
Tim
C
cassini
Guest
Absolutely. Indeed this is a crucial point. There is a doctrine on geocentricism. It is substiantial. I can let you have it if you want. A geocentric world is a theocentric world. If one believed the world we live in and witness with our eyes that one could only conclude it was made this way by God. St Cardinal Bellarmine wrote a book in 1614, the Seven Steps to God in which he showed how we can reach to God by our understanding and appreciation of the geocentric universe He has created for us.
Now if there is a creature called the Devil, hell-bent on removing all understanding and vision of God from mankind, then Geocentricism had to be removed from the mind of man.
The Devil achieved his aims, even getting popes to do his dirty work for him even ignoring a Church decree defining and declaring such a system as heresy not to be indulged in by Christians. Perhaps now you will understand what Jesus meant when he described the Devil as the ‘Father of lies.’ Once the popes rejected infallible faith for mans’ fallible ‘science’, the Devil ran rings around them.
As you know, heliocentricism led to evolutionism which led to Big Bangism which provided a ‘complete’ natural philosophy for Agnosticism and atheism. With Catholics endorsing these theories as true facts, the Devil is laughing.
C
ConallCernach
Guest
C
cassini
Guest
Orogeny, what good questions. Thanks for asking them. Usually all I get are insults and smart remarks from posters just so that nobody will get to hear the truth, let alone believe in it.
There is an old adage 'the truth will out - eventually. All it needs is for one to believe and then re-examine the case.
There is a book recently published called RETRYING GALILEO by Maurice A. Finocchiaro. This brilliant researcher has reproduced many of the documents relevant to the wake of the Galileo case right up to the present. In 1741 the first pressure was put on a pope to get rid of the ban on books etc. presenting H as a truth. this was not completed until 1835 when the Index no longer contained any ban on such a belief. The pope at the time, Finocchiaro records, ordered the ban removed ‘WITHOUT EXPLICIT COMMENT.’
Now let us get into the mind of a pope and read between the lines to know what he meant by this. Galileo was found guilty by trial. The only way for him to be vindicated is by another trial. This is true in State law and Canon law. No retrial was ever done.
A pope, as head of the Holy Office, finds Copernicanism contrary to Scripture and thus defines it as formal heresy. Attached to this finding he ordered the Index to prohibit all books suggesting a H world. In 1835 the BAN is removed but WHAT OF THE HERESY? Where is the ABROGATION? You cannot abrogate a definition and declaration of the Holy Office. This would be akin to question EVERY decision made by the Church outside of infallible councils and extraordinary announcements. In other words the ORDINARY infallibility of the Church could be called into question. So, that is why no pope ever ATTEMPTED to abrogate the heresy. They simply removed the ban and ‘WITHOUT EXPLICIT COMMENT’ hid the heresy under the bed in the vatican and hoped no one would notice or bring it to anyone’s attention.
They got away with it for centuries. Catholics made sure the ‘problem’ would never see the light of day. Fr Gill in 1918 said only a LUNATIC would hold the G doctrine, so the word went out, all geocentricists were to be ridiculed and laughed out of sight. See these tactics even on this forum.
But I am with the 1616 Church. I have studied every detail of the heliocentric ‘proofs’ and they do not exist. Only God can know the truth and the Church said He revealed it as G in Scripture. Then I read carefully the arguments put together by Churchmen to get popes to agree to an illegal U-turn. Finocchiaro give them all, word for word. I was ASHAMED to read what was accepted, a complete farce and a perversion of cannon law instigated by the highest authority in the Catholic Church…
The problem is that the Devil has a psychological hold now on humanity when it comes to heliocentricism. Even popes cannot believe the cosmos is geocentric so powerful has the propaganda been. Even when told that science CANNOT determine the truth, all feel safer holding the fixed earth, moving earth ‘science’. So, popes HAVE to HIDE the TRUTH because they believe the Church was wrong in its definition and declaration on heliocentricism.
But there is more. To admit the truth now would expose the 1741-1835 Churchmen as wrong and now that a near saint Pope John Paul II has endorced the ‘findings’ that were in fact the greatest whitewash in the Church’s history, that is a no, no.
When the truth goes out all that is left is CHAOS. Chaos has a place in the Scriptures, just after the Flood. This chaos allowed evolutionism to infiltrate the Church because Churchmen were already corrupted. Since 1835 Modernism entered the Church. Pope St Pius X recognised this virus but could do nothing to stop it because the PRACTICE was inherent even in the papacy but he didn’t know the truth.
Anybody like to challenge this truth? This is anothe truism. The truth is easy to defend, it is the lie that doesn’t know its foot from its elbow.
C
cassini
Guest
Caught up in false science. In fact Lemaitre plaguarised Copernicus. It is not commonly known, but Copernicus was the first to propose an expanding universe, but a geocentric one. Its simple, a revolving universe throws out its bodies due to inertia.
O
Orogeny
Guest
Well, let’s summarize, shall we? According to cassini, the Church infallibly declared that the earth is the stationary center of the universe in 1616. Between 1714 and 1835, the Church was taken over by heretics and has been in a state of heresy since. The popes mentioned in cassini’s previous post knew about the problem, but hid it because the Church was wrong in its definition and declaration on heliocentricism.
Now, the current pope, Pope Benedict XVI, either willfully continues the heresy or is ignorant of the heresy (I’m not clear which). However, people like Maurice A. Finocchiaro, Robert Sungenis and our own cassini know the truth.
I would suggest that someone should notify the Holy Father of his error immediately so that he can come back to the Church ASAP. After all, it isn’t a good thing that the pope is a heretic.
A question for you cassini. Have you attempted to contact the Vatican to correct this error?
Peace
Tim
- Status