Scripture: What's myth and what's history?

[PeterClatworthy]

“In the monestary at Innisfallen there lived, in the days of Brian Boru, a remarkable scolar, by the name of Maelsuthain O’Carroll who enjoyed the honour of being confessor and personal secretary to the Irish High King.” In 1005 Brian Boru visited Armagh and had O’Carroll write the following into the Book of Armagh:

“St. Patrick, going up to heavan, commanded that all the fruit of his labour, as well as baptisms, as of causes and of alms should be carried to the Apostolic City, which is called Scotice (in Gaelic) Ardd Macha.”

It is also found in the Book of the Scots. ‘I, Calvus Perennis (Maelsuthiain, Bald forever) have written this in the sight of Brian, Emperor of the Scots; and what I have written, he has determined for all the Kings of Macerim (Stone Fort, Cashel)’. (SOURCE: The O’Brien Clan, Book of Armagh)

Peter Joseph Calvus Clatworthy/O’Brien - Bald forever

 

[John_oxios]

That’s right shoot the messenger. Don’t deal with the issue.

St Patrick was NEVER, NEVER, NEVER a Roman Catholic. He was a Johannine Celtic Christian Bishop, opposed to Rome and its heretical claim to the Apostolic succession of St Peter. He was NEVER appointed a Bishop or sent to Ireland by the Pope and the history of the period in Ireland proves it, whether you like it or not.

Hello PeterC.

     Some more sources for you to report to  the 'freemasonrie police' too.

By the way 1 lantern if they’re coming by land, 2 lanterns if they’re coming by sea,
I’ll alert the other Irish Catholics that the 'masonrie police are coming."

            [wilstar.com/holidays/patrick.htm](http://wilstar.com/holidays/patrick.htm)

The person who was to become St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, was born in Wales about AD 385. His given name was Maewyn, and he almost didn’t get the job of bishop of Ireland because he lacked the required scholarship.

Far from being a saint, until he was 16, he considered himself a pagan. At that age, he was sold into slavery by a group of Irish marauders that raided his village. During his captivity, he became closer to God.

He escaped from slavery after six years and went to Gaul w**here he studied in the monastery under St. Germain, bishop of Auxerre **for a period of twelve years. During his training he became aware that his calling was to convert the pagans to Christianity…
**Patrick was quite successful at winning converts. And this fact upset the Celtic Druids. **Patrick was arrested several times, but escaped each time. He traveled throughout Ireland, establishing monasteries across the country. He also set up schools and churches which would aid him in his conversion of the Irish country to Christianity…
…His mission in Ireland lasted for thirty years. After that time, Patrick retired to County Down. He died on March 17 in AD 461. That day has been commemorated as St. Patrick’s Day ever since.

Some of this lore includes the belief that Patrick raised people from the dead. He also is said to have given a sermon from a hilltop that drove all the snakes from Ireland. Of course, no snakes were ever native to Ireland, and some people think this is a metaphor for the conversion of the pagans. Though originally a Catholic holy day, St. Patrick’s Day has evolved into more of a secular holiday.

www.theholidayspot.com/patrick/historyofpatrick.htm

Patrick was the son of Calpurnius, a Roman-British army officer. He was growing up as naturally as other kids in Britain. However, one day a band of pirates landed in south Wales and kidnapped this boy along with many others. Then they sold him into slavery in Ireland. The was there for 6 years, mostly imprisoned. This was when changes came to him. He dreamed of having seen God. Legend says, he was then dictated by God to escape with a getaway ship.

Finally, he did escape and went to Britain. And then to France. There he joined a monastery and studied under St. Germain, the bishop of Auxerre. He spent around 12 years in training. And when he became a bishop he dreamed that the Irish were calling him back to Ireland to tell them about God. The Confessio, Patrick’s spiritual autobiography, is the most important document regarding this. It tells of a dream after his return to Britain, in which one Victoricus delivered him a letter headed “The Voice of the Irish.” …

So he set out for Ireland with the Pope’s blessings. There he converted the Gaelic Irish, who were then mostly Pagans, to Christianity. He was confident in the Lord, he journeyed far and wide, baptizing and confirming with untiring zeal. And, in a diplomatic fashion he brought gifts to a kinglet here and a lawgiver there,but accepted none from any

.
another source to report to the masonrie police:

www.stpatsassoc.org/07_History/HistoryStPat.htm
Patron Saint of Ireland born in the 5th Century in South Wales. Brought Christianity to Ireland.
When he was 16 yrs.old he was kidnapped, taken to Ireland, used as a slave and put to work as a shepherd. His Christian upbringing helped him endure many hardships for the next 6 yrs, when he escaped to France, to a small island off the south coast, known as St. Honorat. He then went to a monastery in Auxerre in central France.
During his time away there, he had a calling to go back to Ireland to spread the gospel. His courage and faith so impressed even the Irish king, “Loganaire”, that he gave him protection.
St. Patrick was said to have used the shamrock to spread the gospel. Being a three-leafed symbol to represent the Trinity (God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost) Christianity was there before he arrived, but was not wide spread until then.
He introduced Latin as the church language in Ireland and in so doing, helped build an interest of the Classics. He also wrote, in Latin, 2 short works giving an account of his life, e.g. the “Confessio” an autobiography of his Christian life, and the “Epistola” an account of the treatment of the Irish Christian peoples by the British.
There is also another interesting story of St.Patrick. He was supposed to have taken all the snakes in Ireland and put them in a box and threw them into the sea. This being the reason there are no snakes in Ireland, and when the sea rages, it is because the snakes are rumbling about in their box and trying to get out.
St. Patrick’s day is celebrated on the 17th.March each year on the anniversary of his death.
Most American cities have their own St. Patrick’s Day celebrations but it is a day of unity and joy the world over.

 

[PeterClatworthy]

John,

You carry on with your Roman version of “History” which is a combination of myth, legend, fact, interpretation, belief, character substitution and quotations from “holidayspot”.

I will carry on with the academic history of Ireland, here in the British Isles, free from Roman interference.

Now we have gone full circle.

 

[John_oxios]

John,

I will carry on… … free from Roman interference.

Now we have gone full circle.

Hello PeterC,
First honest statement I’ve read from you yet!!:clapping: finally you’ve stated your unequivocal bias

  God Bless, :highprayer:
           John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Oh no. Bias suggest an inherent prejudice. No such thing. Remember, I am NOT a Roman Catholic and I recognise when history is being distorted for political reasons, and I understand why.

Now the subject of this thread is Scripture: What’s myth and what’s history? I have made my opinions on the subject perfectly clear and I believe that our debate about St Patrick illiustrates the point admirably:

history: myth, legend, fact, interpretation and belief.

Thank you. I have enjoyed it.

 

[John_oxios]

II Tim 3:16-17 All Scripture [is] given by inspiration of God, and [is] profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.

II Pet 1:20-21 knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation,for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke [as they were] moved by the Holy Spirit.

How could such verses allow for any of it to be myth? It’s all history.
It fits with history and science just fine. In fact there’s a lot in the bible that took science a long time to catch up on. I think the reason why lots of cultures have a flood story is because it happened but the story was made up or got jumbled and they didn’t have the scriptures to get the story right.

I like 1 tim 3:
14 I hope to come to you soon, but I am writing these instructions to you so that,
15 if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth

AND
Eph 3:10 that through the church the manifold wisdom of God might now be made known to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places.

Eph 3:11 This was according to the eternal purpose which he has realized in Christ Jesus our Lord,

 

[John_oxios]

The catholic church teaches the bible is not infalliable when it comes to History or science?

Is there any documentation that shows that?

So the church only believes its infalliable when it comes to theological and moral truths? I d really like some clairty on this issue…

Hello Soul Rebel,
How about you show us where the Bible is fallible concerning history and science??

From ‘Thinking about Religion,‘ Richard Purtill,

It is sometimes claimed that historians simply a historians regard Old and New Testament history as unreliable on some independent historical grounds. But …many events which are regarded as firmly established historically have less documentary evidence than biblical events, and documents on which historians rely for much secular history are written much longer after the event than many records of biblical events. Furthermore, we have many more copies of biblical narratives than secular histories; and the surviving copies are much earlier than those on which our evidence for secular history is based.

Why then do modernists doubt the biblical accounts?

If the biblical narratives did not contain accounts of miraculous events or have reference to God, angels, etc., biblical history would probably be regarded as much more firmly established than most of the history of, say, classical Greece and Rome. But because the biblical accounts do mention miracles and do involve reference to God, angels, demons etc., considerations other than purely historical ones come into the picture…{modernists} are convinced as part of their general worldview don’t happen… those who wish to demythologizeScripture reject particular accounts of miracles in Scripture because they hold a general view about the meaning of miracle stories.

(Thinking about Religion, Prentice Hall, 1978, Chapter 6)

Handbook of catholic Apologists, pg. 218

Modernists want to deny the authority of scripture for an obvious reason: Scripture clearly contradicts modernist theology on at least five crucial points

Do miracles happen? Is the supernatural world real? Are there angels and devils? Does God ever reach down and fear?

Is there a supernaturally given moral law? Did God, not just Moses, invent the Ten Commandments? Are there, then any moral absolutes- objective, unyielding moral laws that do not change when our feelings or societies change?

Is Christ Divine and thus infallible and absolutely authoritative in everything He says?

Is human life on Earth a spiritual warfare? (This would follow from the first three points. work it out). Are the stakes in life infinite? Is there a real heaven or hell at the end? Do our choices matter very much?

Is there one objective and true way to heaven - Jesus - himself as He claims (Jn 14:6)? Or are all the religions of the world equal and thus generic human sincerity and niceness the only requirements for Salvation?

Scripture unequivocally and repeatedly answers yes to all these questions. The typical modern mind answers no. Modernists want to make peace between these two minds.
They also wish Scripture would answer less loudly, less clearly , more subtly so that only a scholar could properly interpret it. That would make scholars feel very important.

Unbelievers say that (1) Christianity is what the N.T. teaches and (2) Christianity is false. Christians say that (1) Christianity is what the New Testament teaches and (2) Christianity is true. Modernist theologians with both sides, so they say that (1) Christianity is not what the New Testament, at face value, teaches but instead ia what modernists have selected out of the New testament (the love ethic without the miracles) as something that will be acceptable to both unbelievers and believers and (2) this redefined Christianity is true.

   But will Scripture allow Christianity to be redefined?

Galatians

Gal 1:6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel–
7 not that there is another gospel, but there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But even if we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you a gospel contrary to that which we preached to you, let him be accursed.
9 As we have said before, so now I say again, If any one is preaching to you a gospel contrary to that which you received, let him be accursed.
10 Am I now seeking the favor of men, or of God? Or am I trying to please men? If I were still pleasing men, I should not be a servant of Christ.
11 For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel.
12 For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ.

God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

“It’s all history” ? So let’s see: you’ve just committed yourself to the historicality of​

• talking animals
• seven-headed dragons
• God’s fight with a sea serpent
• God’s fight with the monster Rahab
• skipping hills
• the fall of satan from Heaven in about 29 AD
• the creation of the sun after 72 hours had elapsed
• monsters from the sea
  & so on It’s all in the Bible - the composers of the Biblical texts did not have our obsession with history, so why must we ? They were quite happy to use a great variety of types of literature, including parable & myth: if they were, why cannot we be too ? Historical truth is only one kind of truth - & it’s not even the most important: there’s not much history in Heaven.

Hello,
Can’t explain this in one post properly… first of all your applying a finite mentality to the eternal God.

If you did a little homework, this stuff would become rudimentary.

But St. Augustine said, “He who doesn’t understand numerals does not understand the Scripture” Look up Gematria its where we get the number of the beast from, 6 is the number of the day man and beast were created, so six is the number of man before he comes to Christ, once he comes to Christ he becomes a seven (Complete).
Sis is the number of man, doubling a makes it more prominent, so ‘66’ becomes a powerful man, 666 is a most powerful man like world leader, or mankind itself.

developed in 500 b.c. Pythagorus developed this system to show a relationship the letters and the numbers they represented… (back in the day Letters were numbers) the Jews picked this system up approx. 350 b.c. they all knew in the first century. what these numbers represented. 1 is the number of God, its indivisible, two is a duality/ three is a totality, four all inclusive i.e. the ‘four corners’ of the Earth, five represents five senses we sin with, or As Hebrews did and Catholics also do Worship with during the Mass, there are five types of characters, five types of people, five types of wounds known to the medical community… 6 I stated, Seven Completeness, Eight + New Beginnings, after Jesus Life death and Resurrection the Church celebrated the Mass on the Eighth Day, New Beginning in Christ. If you doubt any of these? Well, the musical scalewe presently use today is the same musical Scale developed by Pythagorus.

10 a number of perfection.
Learn your numbers and you’ll understand the bible Better!
Take for instance 666 is first used to describe Solomon, who became a tyrant near the end of his reign.

forty = long enough

Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the windows of the heavens were opened"

The Earth is cleansed on the seventeenth day, 17 is the number of salvation.
remember 17 is the number of salvation!!!

Let’s go to john:
John 21:5 Jesus said to them, “Children, have you any fish?” They answered him, “No.”
Jhn 21:6 He said to them, "Cast the net on the right side of the boat.
hn 21:11 So Simon Peter went aboard and hauled the net ashore, full of large fish, a hundred and fifty-three of them; and although there were so many, the net was not torn.

The net represents the Church, it is the only time Jesus designates which side to throw the net too.
153 is the number of the sum total of 17, 17 represents
the TEN COMMANDMENTS + the SEVEN GIFTS of the Holy Spirit.
Each of these stands on it own so if you add 1+2+3+4+5+6+7+8+9+10+11+12+13+14+15+16+17 = 153.

Ergo When it is not the Literal word its words of imagery, to paint pictures with words. Imagery doesn’t make it unhistorical, just a way to tell the story.

Seven is the Number of Completeness, So the seven headed Dragon represents the complete opposite of God’s Holy Spirit, whom is represented by the seven Spirits before His throne, seven Golden Lampstands, etc…etc…

As far as the Sea monster, the Hebrews believe Leviathan, is/was a literal creature, created for the sole purpose of swallowing Jonah. Who are we to deny that??

The sea represented Chaos, just about anything coming from the sea in Biblical imagery meant something threatening to man.

I could go on and on and on with these images…

God bless,
john

 

[John_oxios]

“It’s all history” ? So let’s see: you’ve just committed yourself to the historicality of​

• talking animals
• seven-headed dragons
• God’s fight with a sea serpent
• God’s fight with the monster Rahab
• skipping hills
• the fall of satan from Heaven in about 29 AD
• the creation of the sun after 72 hours had elapsed
• monsters from the sea
  & so on It’s all in the Bible - the composers of the Biblical texts did not have our obsession with history, so why must we ? They were quite happy to use a great variety of types of literature, including parable & myth: if they were, why cannot we be too ? Historical truth is only one kind of truth - & it’s not even the most important: there’s not much history in Heaven.

maybe you ought to commit!!!

some more!!

When Jesus says He saw satan falling, it doesn’t mean he saw him in 29a.d. your applying finite mentality to the eternal.

David Guzik, a protestant view of Luke 10:18,

a. Even the demons are subject to us in Your name: When we look carefully at the commission Jesus gave these seventy (Luke 10:9), we see that Jesus had not originally commissioned them to cast out demons (as He did the twelve disciples in Luke 9:1-2). Therefore, this was an unexpected blessing of their ministry.

i. When we step out and do what Jesus tells us to do, we should expect that He would bless us with even more than He told us to expect.

b. I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven: What is Jesus talking about? The Bible actually mentions four falls of Satan.

i. From glorified to profane (Ezekiel 28:14-16).

ii. From having access to heaven (Job 1:12, 1 Kings 22:21, Zechariah 3:1) to restriction to the earth (Revelation 12:9).

iii. From the earth to bondage in the bottomless pit for 1,000 years (Revelation 20:1-3).

iv. From the pit to the lake of fire (Revelation 20:10).

c. Here, Jesus speaks of Satan’s “first” fall, from glorified to profane. What Jesus just saw in the disciples was evidence that Satan had already lost his position of power. He is a conquered enemy, and when we act in the name of Jesus, victory is assured.

d. In remembering the fall of Satan, Jesus also warns them against pride. After all, if Satan could fall like lightning from his place of high spiritual status and privilege, so could they

As far as Creation goes, whether its a literal seven days or any number of days in between each day.

Gen 2, ‘The Earth was void and formless’ Some will say something of Catastrophic/ cosmic proportion happened between vs 1 and 2, its where they 'll point to the fall of the angels. Why? because in

Isa 45:18 For thus says the LORD, who created the heavens (he is God!), who formed the earth and made it (he established it; he did not create it a chaos, he formed it to be inhabited!): "I am the LORD, and there is no other.
God says he didn’t create it a chaos.

So the first technical day does’t take place till Gen 1:5, anything could have happened before the establishment of he first day. Which is the establisment of Time as we know it.
But as WE are told in:
2Pe 3:8 But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

For me I do not doubt the LORD who can use a jackass as he instrument to warn Ballaam, Scripture says:

Num 22:28 **Then the LORD opened the mouth of the *****, and she said to Balaam, "What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?

I believe it!! I don’t have to see to believe, faith come by hearing the Word of Jesus Christ.

Then again God uses what we know to explain what we need to know, He is our Creator, and the Creator of all things… he used seven days to explain that to us…
does it make it a fable folklore? No. After all Science today backs up this order of Creation.

God bless,
John

 

[rdscheirer]

The Bible is a history and instruction to arrive at the final and definitive commandment of God through his Son. “Love God with all your heart and mind and soul. Love your neighbor as yourself”.

 

[John_oxios]

The Bible is a history and instruction to arrive at the final and definitive commandment of God through his Son. “Love God with all your heart and mind and soul. Love your neighbor as yourself”.

here’s an acryonym the Protestants like to use,

:bible1:

Biblical Instruction Before Leaving Earth.:takeoff::takeoff:

there’s another one I just can’t think of @ the moment.

God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

“It’s all history” ? So let’s see: you’ve just committed yourself to the historicality of​

• talking animals
• skipping hills
• monsters from the sea
  & so on It’s all in the Bible - the composers of the Biblical texts did not have our obsession with history, so why must we ? They were quite happy to use a great variety of types of literature, including parable & myth: if they were, why cannot we be too ? Historical truth is only one kind of truth - & it’s not even the most important: there’s not much history in Heaven.

Hi,
Man tends to criticize what he does not understand. Not types of Literature, IMAGERY. They painted pictures with words.

Let’s take:
Mat 17:20 He said to them, “Because of your little faith. For truly, I say to you, if you have faith as a grain of mustard seed, you will say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move; and nothing will be impossible to you.”

Can we move mountains? Simply by our words? Our words are a power, they carry on into eternity. Maybe someday we’ll move material mountains.

we can build or destroy with a word, we can edify, tear down, blot out with a word.

But the mountains we can move? Are the mountains/ obstacles that keep us from God. The things we hang on to that squeeze Him out.

As far as talking animals and skipping hills? Ask Matthew, Mark, and it was so important for Luke to get this message across he says it twice in his gospel:

Mat 19:26 But** Jesus looked at them and said **to them, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible."

Mar 10:27 Jesus looked at them and said, “With men it is impossible, but not with God; for all things are possible with God.”

Luk 1:37 For with God nothing will be impossible."

Luk 18:27 But he said, “What is impossible with men is possible with God.”

And don’t forget the all important
Hbr 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him.

The name Rahab means pride, and ever since the garden of Eden, the serpent has been associated with satan. This would poetic terms for God’s victory over satan. Will you now tell me this is not historical? Again the writer uses imagery to preach to the people of his time.

God Bless,
John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

As far as the Sea monster, the Hebrews believe Leviathan, is/was a literal creature, created for the sole purpose of swallowing Jonah. Who are we to deny that?

The sea represented Chaos, just about anything coming from the sea in Biblical imagery meant something threatening to man.

I could go on and on and on with these images…

God bless,
john

John this is where you lose your argument. Firstly, you ask a question that is easily answered. We are God’s creatures who have been given a brain that is imbued with the ability to think for ourselves and the discern when allegory is being used for the purooses of illustration.

You then go on, indeed in your very next paragraph, to explain an allegorical significance in the Biblical imagery of the raging sea,

 

[John_oxios]

John this is where you lose your argument. Firstly, you ask a question that is easily answered. We are God’s creatures who have been given a brain that is imbued with the ability to think for ourselves and the discern when allegory is being used for the purooses of illustration.

You then go on, indeed in your very next paragraph, to explain an allegorical significance in the Biblical imagery of the raging sea,

Think for ourselves? Scripture has never bee a think for yourself interpretation, it always had to be explained. Even Martin Luther’s notion of Sola Scriptura, is not what he meant as it is used today.

In the ancient world the idea of writing dispassionate, objective history to chronicle events, with no ideological purpose, was unheard of. Nobody wrote history if there wasn’t a lesson to learn from it.

In Acts 8:26, An Angel speaks to Philip, yes, well if you don’t believe in angels or the fall of man, heaven or hell… anyone could interpret it the way they want, there are some 28,000 so called guided by the Holy Spirit churches with thousands of different interpretations suited to their own philosophies…

Scripture tells us…Act 8:30 So Philip ran to him, and heard him reading Isaiah the prophet, and asked, “Do you understand what you are reading?”

Act 8:31 And he said, “How can I, unless some one guides me?” And he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

Act 8:39 And when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught up Philip; and the eunuch saw him no more, and went on his way rejoicing.

So what do you believe in these vss 8:31 -8:39?

Can you reason Philip being caught up (transported physically?)
Paul was caught up, John also. Where do you draw the line for believable and poppycock?

 The Church is Guides guiding light on interpretation of Scripture.  Remember the Church was teaching Scripture Scripture twenty yrs before Paul even tarted writing, Mark is written in 60 -65 A.D.  It is through the Church from which  N.T. Scripture comes not the other way around.

Martin Luther:
Reason cannot rightly accord to God His deity. Nor attribute it to him as his own, Though it rightly belongs to him alone. It knows God exists. But who or what person it may be who is properly called God it does not know…Thus Reason plays a blind man’s bluff with God, and makes vain errors, and always misses the mark, calling God what is not God, and not calling God what is God.

Martin Luther
The Words of the Spirit are transmitted through language, words are Vehicles. They are like the shrine in which God’s truth is found. The more a man brings to the Bible the more he gets from it

Not anybody can open the Bible an decide who, what, they can decide what is and what isn’t

Does God really act on behalf of man in the bible or is it as some say… man acting saying it was God’s hand?

Where do you draw the line? Seems to me, you compare the Bible to movies like Jason and the Argonauts. They both tell unbelievable stories?

God bless,
John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Did I compare the Bible to those films? “No” is the answer.

 

[John_oxios]

Did I compare the Bible to those films? “No” is the answer.

No compared the Bible to Evolution as just a story.

Faith is a gift of God which the appropriate response is belief.

If you don’t believe in the six days of creation,

What would the reference be here? Remember the Bible according to the Church can be read from four senses: Literal or Historical, The allegorical, the anagogical (a mystical sense signifying heaven, the afterlife, or communion with God)

Mat*17:1 And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John his brother, and led them up a high mountain apart.
And after six days Jesus took with him Peter and James and John, and led them up a high mountain apart by themselves; and he was transfigured before them,

Mk 8:38, ‘Whoever is ashamed of me and of my words in this faithless and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of when he comes in his Father’s glory with the holy angels."

The word ‘ashamed’ not the ‘shame of the Cross’ But the half hearted disciples apologetic attitude, easily changing to positive disloyalty, one of the deadliest weapons of Early Christianity was ridicule, and was employed no doubt, from the first, in Galilee in Jesus’ day, in Palestine in the apostles day, and in Rome in the days of Nero and Mark. (Lost the reference on this)

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Did I mention evolution? - “No” is the answer.

Did I say that I do not believe in God’s creation? - “No” is the answer.

This is rapidly becoming a dialogue of the deaf. John, I possess a reasonable facility for the English language. I do not need an interpreter.

 

[John_oxios]

Did I mention evolution? - “No” is the answer.

Did I say that I do not believe in God’s creation? - “No” is the answer.

This is rapidly becoming a dialogue of the deaf. John, I possess a reasonable facility for the English language. I do not need an interpreter.

Hello,

Really PeterC.? Then who actually wrote this post???

Post #611
Originally Posted by PeterClatworthy
Everything evolves but the theory of evolution suggests that there was no such thing as a supernatural God made “beginning” and that is where, IMHO, Christianity, Judaism and Islam parts company with the theory, and it is a theory.

History? It depends on your definition of history. As an academic, I have no doubt that history comprises Myth, Legend, Fact, Interpretation and Belief.

We must also never forget that God gave us a brain so that it may be used

.

Yes you did, you used it I believe to bolster your so called argument about Roman Catholic Church history by comparing it to a two thousand yr. old Tradition of the Church Created by Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit, who through apostolic succession, provided the World with His Inspired Word. So you threw in a wrench? Comparing a 1928, non believers theory (guess or conjecture), which takes more faith to believe in than the gospels.( Which are witness accounts to Jesus Christ.
Heck Freud couldn’t pull it off on his own, without Herbet Spencers help.

You say you believe in the Gospels? Have you not heard?

than you must believe this:
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that** he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,**

I’ll leave you with this:

"If you believe what you like in the gospels,
and reject what you don’t like,
it is not the gospel you believe but yourself."
~ St. Augustine

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Hello,

Really PeterC.? Then who actually wrote this post???
.

Yes you did, you used it I believe to bolster your so called argument about Roman Catholic Church history by comparing it to a two thousand yr. old Tradition of the Church Created by Christ, guided by the Holy Spirit, who through apostolic succession, provided the World with His Inspired Word. So you threw in a wrench? Comparing a 1928, non believers theory (guess or conjecture), which takes more faith to believe in than the gospels.( Which are witness accounts to Jesus Christ.
Heck Freud couldn’t pull it off on his own, without Herbet Spencers help.

You say you believe in the Gospels? Have you not heard?

than you must believe this:
Mat 19:4 He answered, "Have you not read that** he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,**

I’ll leave you with this:

"If you believe what you like in the gospels,
and reject what you don’t like,
it is not the gospel you believe but yourself."
~ St. Augustine

Deliberate and totally dishonest quote out of context where I pointed out that the theory of evolution was exactly that, a theory and your very selective partial definition is also dishonest, as you very well know.

You are not a Christian at all. In fact you disgust me.

 

[John_oxios]

Deliberate and totally dishonest quote out of context where I pointed out that the theory of evolution was exactly that, a theory and your very selective partial definition is also dishonest, as you very well know.

You are not a Christian at all. In fact you disgust me.

HI PeterC,

First you say you didn’t bring the subject up? I refer to evidence Post #633, so I show you yes you did, Now you accuse MOI, of being deliberate and dishonest?

and there you go again, ya caught contradicting yourself again, so you resort to name calling. Lost another one EH?? (I’m not even from Canada Eh?

You brought it as as silly excuse not to believe in the RCC History, from which point I took it not history at all, but in the same line of the theory of Evolutionwhich was deliberate, please go back over your posts and PLEEEASE esplain to me what exactly you meant?
You brought it up, I relied, and then you deny bringing it up at all, then I quote, Now you accuse me of misquoting you? You calll me bigot, and whatever…

How what is it, evolution can be a selective and partial definition be dishonest?
When the theory of is a false theory, show me one bit of evidence that a horse came from a fish?
How about Man came from ape, and I’ll show you SOMEBODIES TRYING TO MAKE A MONKEY OUT OF YOU!!!