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

[John_oxios]

You are simply a bigot.

Again? is that all you got priest? All you’ve shown me is your own history, your own lodge writings… and you expect everyone to accept your word like its a gospel.
How about you act like a priest and we stick to the issue at hand instead of name calling.

I respect and try to understand other peoples beliefs, but that doesn't mean when they tell me a false statement about The RCC, I have to sit there and accept.. and it doesn't make me a bigot.  

The real joke is, that you believe everyone a bigot, who doesn't believe what you believe!  :thumbsup:    I think i read a definition to a word like that on an earlier post :harp:

God bless,
John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

John,

Well try harder. I said that your are a bigot, nobody else. You take it as name calling. It is not name calling at all, it is a valued serious judgement that I hope that you will take on board and do something about.

Not only a bigot, but a closet Moderns freemason trying to justify the unjustifiable. If you are a Roman Catholic, and a Moderns freemason, then it is your ticket to Hades.

 

[PeterClatworthy]

You also stated that St Patrick wasn’t Roman Catholic?
Clearly He was Ordained a Roman Catholic Priest and later Bishop, to Ireland.

The Druids enjoyed an important status in Ireland. The high kings of Ireland made no major decision without the (name removed by moderator)ut of their most important Druid, Crom Cruach. For example the seventh century King Laoghaire, a most respected King consulted the Druids. The people however worshiped Bel or Baal so upon arrival in Ireland Patrick challenged outward worship of Baal and even challenged the Druid power to heal with the result that Laoghaire was convicted and later allowed Patrick to baptize his daughters. So his witness continued. Patrick, after establishing his standing within the Druidistic Culdee community regarded himself as the ‘chief bishop’ of the whole Irish people. Patrick, according to Low’s Celtic Christianity and Nature was regarded as a Superdruid in his day as his powers seemed to supersede the old Druidistic ritual powers. However regardless of this perception he planted a church wherever he made a few converts and could obtain a grant from the chief of a clan. He then placed a bishop **ordained by himself **over it. Thus was the beginnings of the Tuatha Celtic church in Ireland. Killen the Presbyterian historian states that Patrick “Preached the gospel in Hibernia in the fifth century; that he was a most zealous and efficient evangelist, and that he is eminently entitled to the honorable designation of the Apostle of Ireland." **As his fame grew he may have been perceived by the less learned as a chief Druid, but in fact he replaced Druidism by evangelising and promoting the Culdee church **and the worship of Christ. **But in principle Patrick was only reinforcing the Christian faith or religion when he returned to Ireland to preach there. It was not a new faith he preached but an old ritual faith held previous to the Druidistic backsliding of the sifted Hebrew or Hebers (Hibernia’s) people. **Many Druids and Clan Chieftains were then converted to the Culdee Church and out of that came the Celtic church in Ireland. It was the Druids who had created and adhered to their own ‘Brehan laws’ passed them down through the synthesis of time. So in fact later monks (After Patrick) lived in a retreat and separated from the world as Christians, and sent missionaries abroad to evangelise the lost. The Irish Culdee druidic Church held its ground for sometime and there were Culdee Churches of Armagh, Banchor or Bangor (558), Clonard (500), Clonmacnoise (528), Derry (555), Glendolough (618) and the change to evangelical emphasis took place. From this beginning to the 7th century it was a time of literary renaissance with the establishment of ‘monastic universities’, the founding of training schools and the production of illuminated manuscripts such as the Book of Kells and the Book of Durrow. But this renaissance was not inspired by the Roman Catholic Church as its influence was not until a later date. * (SOURCE: Complete Guide to Celtic Mythology by Bob Curran) *

St Patrick was NOT a Roman Catholic.

History.

 

[John_oxios]

PeterClatworthy;6131018]He was sent to convert the population of Ireland to Christianity at a time when the battle was being lost. He was the only man with sufficient credibility due to his direct Royal family connections. No Roman could possibly have succeeded

.

Okay Pete,
Sent by Whom???

There is nothing in your posting, except propaganda, to suggest that St Patrick was a Roman Catholic and I know enough about him, and Ireland, to know that he would NEVER have conceded power to Rome.

Let me spell it out to you, What is the most influential Church in the Roman Empire in the time of St Patrick? Where did he study?

Now he spent how many yrs in France in Lerins? lets see:

your quote from post 592
**S. Patrick, likewise imbued with monastic zeal **which he had acquired both at Lerins and at Tours

Abbey of Lerins (monastery, France) – Britannica Online

Britannica online encyclopedia article on Abbey of Lerins (monastery, France), Cistercian monastery, **originally founded about 410 by St. Honoratus of Arles **on a Mediterranean island opposite Cannes (now in France). … The following are some people associated with “Abbey of Lerins”
www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/337004/Abbey-of-Leri…

the other place mentioned: Tours france and

the first came from S. Martin through S. Ninian to Whithorn, in Galloway, whence, through S. Finnian it passed to Moville in Ireland and from Moville through S. Columba to Iona and the Celts of Scotland in 563 A.D.

Basilica of St. Martin - Tours, France
The Basilique de St-Martin in Tours is a neo-Byzantine basilica on the site of previous churches built in honor of St. Martin, bishop of Tours in the 4th century. Next to it are … France Map France Books France Photos France Tours France Hotels France Hostels France Rail Passes France Flight Search France Timeline…
www.sacred-destinations.com/france/tours-basilica-st-ma…

you can find this on

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_of_Tours

St Martin a bishop of the Eastern Orthodox Monastery of the Theotokos and St Martin, Cantauque, Provence.
…The abbey continued to grow and in 1096, Pope Urban II consecrated a new chapel. In 1162, **Pope Alexander III **consecrated the Chapel of Saint Benoit. Huguenot Protestants pillaged the abbey a second time at the onset of the French Wars of Religion. The abbey recovered but was disestablished in 1799 during the French Revolution.[8]

**
You are deluded and propagandised John, and I will not hear any more such nonsense. A Culdee would NEVER do such a thing and St Patrick was a Culdee**.

Notice how these references refer to St Patick’s mentors as Bishops of the Catholic Church, that he spent years in a Roman Catholic/Eastern Orthodox MONASTERY! NOT in masonarie. That those Abbeys were under the direct influence of the Popes Urban and Alexander Of Rome.

Let’s do the Math, St Patrick spent yrs in a Roman Catholic environment with Eastern Orthodox influences, was ordained there, and was sent to Ireland by the Pope at his bishops request with the blessings of the RCC.

But you say, he wasn’t Roman Catholic? And he didn’t answer to the :banghead::banghead: Pope?The RCC nor its Bishops? That He didn’t establish a holy See?

One of my strengths is I try to read everything on a subject and then ascertain through prayer, reason, even logic to see/find truth. It seems to me there is monumental evidence against what your telling me what I ought to believe.
That would make you a false prophet.

PeterC.You have NOT dealt with my previous posting about your bigotry over the difference between the Moderns and ourselves. As I said, you are not being honest.

I have dealt with al your notions on a one by one basis, but it seems I’m just beating a dead horse, you sound like a broken record playing the same tune over and over again and again… seems like you’d want us to all give up so you can get the last word in… and than claim Victory!

Martin Luther on that subject, four hundred yrs. ago:

 "Society today seems to think, that the person who gets in the last word, the last blow, the last gesture is the victor.  Not so, t**he person who gets in the Last word, the last blow,  or the last gesture has to live with that the rest of their lives.**"

I live this mistake every day of my life

So present your facts, if I or anybody else do not find them credible, than either you presented your case very poorly ( EvenThe apostle Paul, messed up in Athens) or we don’t believe you!

You have to have strong feelings about something to be a bigot, I really don’t care about the differences, first of all there aren’t any of your lodges here in N.Y as far as I know, second I consider myself a practicing Catholic, I spend my spare time in Service to the Roman Catholic Church, Attend Bible Studies, and Mass several times a week as well as Sundays. And if on Judgement day, The Great Almighty God, holds me accountable for not joining your completely different ‘lodge of masonrie’ I’ll raise my hand and say ‘guilty’ and pay the temporary penalty in Purgatory.

God bless,
John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

John you are cherry picking again. I was educated at St Ignatius Jesuit College in London. That does not make me a Roman Catholic. The boy who sat next to me was called Lionel Reisman. He was a Sephardic Jew.

 

[John_oxios]

T
For example the seventh century King Laoghaire, a most respected King consulted the Druids. The people however worshiped Bel or Baal so upon arrival in Ireland Patrick challenged outward worship of Baal and even challenged the Druid power to heal with the result that Laoghaire was convicted and later allowed Patrick to baptize his daughters. So his witness continued. Patrick, after establishing his standing within the Druidistic Culdee community regarded himself as the ‘chief bishop’ of the whole Irish people. Patrick, according to Low’s Celtic Christianity and Nature was regarded as a Superdruid in his day as his powers seemed to supersede the old Druidistic ritual powers. However regardless of this perception he planted a church wherever he made a few converts and could obtain a grant from the chief of a clan. He then placed a bishop ordained by himself over it. Thus was the beginnings of the Tuatha Celtic church in Ireland. Killen the Presbyterian historian states that Patrick “Preached the gospel in Hibernia in the fifth century; that he was a most zealous and efficient evangelist, and that he is eminently entitled to the honorable designation of the Apostle of Ireland." As his fame grew he may have been perceived by the less learned as a chief Druid, but in fact he replaced Druidism by evangelising and promoting the Culdee church and the worship of Christ. **But in principle Patrick was only reinforcing the Christian faith or religion when he returned to Ireland to preach there. It was not a new faith he preached but an old ritual faith held previous to the Druidistic backsliding of the sifted Hebrew or Hebers (Hibernia’s) people. **… But this renaissance was not inspired by the Roman Catholic Church as its influence was not until a later date. * (SOURCE: Complete Guide to Celtic Mythology by Bob Curran) *

St Patrick was NOT a Roman Catholic.
History.

Hello PeterC,
Every writer has a slant or bias, when reading material we have to look or see what that slant or bias is.
Your author Bob Curran, ignores St Patrick’ s RCC training and beginnings… He places St Patrick Baptizing in the 7th Century (?)baptizing the kings daughters??

He also states St. Patrick was perceived by the LESS LEARNED to be a Chief Druid. I think this statement still rings true.

Some other mythologies by Bob Curran:

Books by Bob Curran: A Field Guide to Irish Fairies, Vampires: A Field Guide To The Creatures That Stalk The Night, Encyclopedia of the Undead: A Field Guide to Creatures That Cannot Rest in…, The Haunted: The True Story of One Family’s Nightmare, The Creatures of Celtic Myth, The Dark Spirit: Sinister Portraits from …

www.librarything.com/author/curranbob
Bob Curran, The Truth about the Leprechaun
; (Wolfhound, 2000) … Bob Curran, in his revealing book The Truth about the Leprechaun, explains the true folklore of the ubiquitous wee folk. These leprechauns aren’t prettified in adorable little suits of green, nor are they happy-go-lucky bundles of blarney in gay pursuit…

It seems you both are some kind of experts on folklore, and not Church history.
He writes about it, you proclaim it… some people still believe in the tooth fairy, most are under ten.

God Bless,
John

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Hello PeterC,
Every writer has a slant or bias, when reading material we have to look or see what that slant or bias is.
Your author Bob Curran, ignores St Patrick’ s RCC training and beginnings… He places St Patrick Baptizing in the 7th Century (?)baptizing the kings daughters??

He also states St. Patrick was perceived by the LESS LEARNED to be a Chief Druid. I think this statement still rings true.

Some other mythologies by Bob Curran:

Books by Bob Curran: A Field Guide to Irish Fairies, Vampires: A Field Guide To The Creatures That Stalk The Night, Encyclopedia of the Undead: A Field Guide to Creatures That Cannot Rest in…, The Haunted: The True Story of One Family’s Nightmare, The Creatures of Celtic Myth, The Dark Spirit: Sinister Portraits from …

www.librarything.com/author/curranbob
Bob Curran, The Truth about the Leprechaun
; (Wolfhound, 2000) … Bob Curran, in his revealing book The Truth about the Leprechaun, explains the true folklore of the ubiquitous wee folk. These leprechauns aren’t prettified in adorable little suits of green, nor are they happy-go-lucky bundles of blarney in gay pursuit…

It seems you both are some kind of experts on folklore, and not Church history.
He writes about it, you proclaim it… some people still believe in the tooth fairy, most are under ten.

God Bless,
John

What has Bob Curran’s book, The Truth about the Leprachaun got to do with the issue of St Patrick the Culdee?

Oh, I see, character assassination of the author rather than dealing with the issues. I see. Yes, you are a Moderns freemason.

"Dr. Bob Curran was born in County Down, Northern Ireland. Leaving school without any formal qualifications, he worked in a number of jobs as well as travelling to various obscure corners of the world. Returning to Ulster he went back to education, gaining ** a doctorate in Educational Psychology**.

Since then, he has successfully written in both the fields of popular and academic folklore studies where his works have been translated into French, German, Italian, Japanese and Hebrew. Affectionately known as “Dr. Bob”, he is much in demand as an international broadcaster with BBC Radio 4 on a variety of subjects. He has also been involved in a number of important regional cross-border cultural bodies helping to develop historical and cultural tours in both Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic.

He lives in Coleraine, County Derry with his school-teacher wife and young family. Has written Bloody Irish – Great Irish Vampire Stories for Merlin and The Truth About The Leprechaun for Wolfhound."

 

[PeterClatworthy]

“I, Patrick, a most untutored sinner and lowest of all the faithful and the most despicable in the eyes of many, am son of Calpurnius, a deacon who was the son of Potitus, a priest, from the village of Bannavem Taberniae, who had an estate near it, where I was taken prisoner. At the time I was about sixteen years of age, I had no knowledge of the true God and I was borne away into captivity in Ireland with thousands of people …” (SOURCE: St. Patrick, Confessio)

"After his capture and around 6 years later, St Patrick returned home to Kilpatrick and was welcomed back by his family but a vision convinced him to go back to Ireland and preach the gospels.

“When Patrick was taken to Ireland, the homesick Saint set up a church in Armagh on a druid’s sanctuary.”* (SOURCE: History of Drumchapel)*

He was NOT a Roman Catholic. He gained his Celtic Christian faith in Ireland.

 

[John_oxios]

John you are cherry picking again. I was educated at St Ignatius Jesuit College in London. That does not make me a Roman Catholic. The boy who sat next to me was called Lionel Reisman. He was a Sephardic Jew.

  For a Jesuit educated person, with a degree? you can't hold a glass of water next to a self educated, Truck driver with only one year of College (me).

I am aware of people of non Catholic religions being taught @ Roman Catholic Universities, Fr. Walter who was at my Parish Church for five yrs. teaches @ St John’s, he is also a member of the Pope Benedict’s counsel on Ecumenism, we speak all the time about religious differences and understanding because of my various religious background… Talk about Cherry oickin’ you seem to take a half truth and make it a whole truth…
So was the Sephardic Jew ordained a priest during or after his Educational training @ St. Ignatious? Did he convert as a result of that 1st class education?

Did he spend 15 yrs in a RC monastery as a result of the Roman Catholic influnce?

No so again your pitiful example doesn’t change historical fact, held by many even outside the Roman Catholic church.

So what happened to you? Did you vehemently scream Idolator, when the mere mention of the Pope?

God Bless,
John

 

[John_oxios]

“I, Patrick, a most untutored sinner and lowest of all the faithful and the most despicable in the eyes of many, am son of Calpurnius, a deacon who was the son of Potitus, a priest, from the village of Bannavem Taberniae, who had an estate near it, where I was taken prisoner. At the time I was about sixteen years of age, I had no knowledge of the true God and I was borne away into captivity in Ireland with thousands of people …” (SOURCE: St. Patrick, Confessio)

He was NOT a Roman Catholic. He gained his Celtic Christian faith in Ireland.

Hello Peter C,
So he never whet to France as even your sources back up??? ]

If the above statement isn’t what you clasify as Cherry Pickin’ ? I don’t know what else could be!

This is most definitely taken out of Context by you because he is stating AT “16 yrs of age!!!”
He spent fifteen yrs after this in France and was not ordained til 47 yrs of age and then was sent back to Ireland, by theHoly See of Roman Catholic Church of Rome.

** Turn the page and read the rest of the boo**k, already!!!

Text without context is a pretext

PRETEXT:

1. something that is put forward to conceal a true purpose or object; an ostensible reason; excuse: The leaders used the insults as a pretext to declare war.
2. the misleading appearance or behavior assumed with this intention: His many lavish compliments were a pretext for subtle mock

ery

C’mon, one sentence out of entire book?

 

[PeterClatworthy]

John,

I have warned you about your bigotry, and where it will take you. Now you can decide to repeat your propaganda, or deal with the issues. Where St Patrick was educated or where he preached the Word of God did not decide his Christian faith. His tutor was a Druid called Milcho.

“In the Druidic order indeed centered, and from it radiated to the whole world, civil and ecclesiastical knowledge of the realm: they were its statesmen, legislators, priests, physicians, lawyers, teachers, poets; the depositories of all human and divine knowledge; its Churches and parliament; its courts of law; its college of physicians and surgeons; its magistrates, clergy and bishops.” (SOURCE: St. Paul in Britain, Rev’d R. W. Morgan: 1860)

“St Patrick had a Druidistic Master and Tutor, Milcho, and perhaps knowing what the doctrine of the old religion helped him develop a path of revival and lead the people away from **quasi-Levitic rites and ceremonies **to real spiritual Christianity and the worship of Christ.” (SOURCE: Annals of the Kinghdom of Ireland by the Four Masters)

" … the Christian Church in Ireland as founded by St. Patrick, existed for many centuries free and unshackled…and differed in many points from Rome”. (SOURCE: O’Driscoll)

St Patrick was NOT a Roman Catholic.

 

[PeterClatworthy]

“All the medieval writers of his life, save the very earliest, and even his modern biographers, date his arrival in Ireland 27 years later, making it fall about 432. The reason for this is that Celestine, Bishop of Rome, sent a bishop named Palladius to Ireland about the year 431. The monkish biographers of Patrick had Palladius on their hands, and being careful of his honor, and of his master in Rome, they adjusted the mission of Patrick so as to harmonize with the mission of Palladius. It was to the converts of Patrick that Palladius was sent as their bishop.” (SOURCE: Island of Saints and Scholars, Hibernia or Scotia at the time of St. Patrick)

St Patrick was NOT a Roman Catholic. History should be reported, not invented for bigoted political reasons.

 

[alongexpected]

The Bible is historically true from Genesis on. That modern “scholarship” currently holds sway does not make that scholarship accurate. It does not mean that history is complete or covers every detail unless that was the intend of the Holy Spirit and the author. But the way some people think really makes scripture useless if what they believe about it is true. I would just as soon leave the faith (as I have seen many do who have had their faith destroyed by what the were told was how we should view the Bible) if I believed what some did about the Bible because they feel it needs to be re-imagined as to appear enlightened to an unbelieving world.

Scripture is to be read in faith and according the genre of each book. That some try to make, say Genesis or other books to be a different genre to make them feel more comfortable with science or so called scholarship is of no consequence. Let God be true and every man a liar.

Of course scripture is not a science text but when people try this baloney about the historical narratives in the Bible being “true myths” it is just nonsense conjured up by latew 19th century and 20th century skeptics with flimsy theories that sadly hold sway. The Patrisitic and historical-grammatical methods of studying scripture make much more sense and line up with the general study of literature in general much better than higher criticism. Which would be laughrd at if applied to nearly any other literary study. It is embarrassing how weak it is and yet scholars feel compelled to tow the line simply because that is the school that their profs adhere to. So you cannot progress if you deviate from the new orthodoxy.

Read scriptures in faith. If it is cleary a narrative take it as such. ingore novel theories that did not exist for 1900 years of church history.

If Fall did not literally happen then it renders the need for a literal redemption and the entire reason for the second Adam non-existent. No first Adam, no need for a second Adam. And really why would God not tell us what really happened and instead give us a myth instead? Ten seconds of thoughts makes such ideas absurd. Jesus and the Apostles believed in a literal Adam and a literal Noah. Nothing more needs to be said. If the second person of the Trinity believed it. It was true. End of discussion.

 

[alongexpected]

Sorry about that. What I meant to say there was that it’s so hard, really next to impossible, to read Genesis literally. Doing so contradicts everything that science has shown us. Do you really not believe in the theory (is it even a theory anymore, hasn’t it been all but proven?) of human evolution, and think that homo sapiens magically came into existence in one second some 6,000 years ago? Do you really not believe all the astronomers and cosmologists who teach that the Earth is more than four billion years old? Do you really believe that dinosaurs, chickens, tigers, and on and on were all living side by side in a big boat?

I really cannot understand Biblical literalists. They ignore every piece of scientific knowledge that mankind has been fortunate enough to discover over the years.

P.S. The Church itself does not condemn human evolution, nor support it. They’re doing this to protect themselves just in case it is ever proven wrong. But trust me, Catholicism as a whole, I mean the entire establishment, is clearly leaning towards reading parts of the Bible symbolically.

But hey, just because the crowd’s doing it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s right. Look at the evidence and make up your own mind, like I did. And there’s a helluva lot of it.

 

[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.

 

[John_oxios]

=PeterClatworthy;6137556]John,

I have warned you about your bigotry, and where it will take you. Now you can decide to repeat your propaganda, or deal with the issues. Where St Patrick was educated or where he preached the Word of God did not decide his Christian faith. His tutor was a Druid called Milcho.

Oooo, what do you masonries people got people to report me too?
Go ahead!!! So I’ve been warned… I take your warnings with a grain of salt… report me to whomever… crucify me for presenting the Truth, backed with more reference’s than yours. I said it before when you have to resort to name calling you’ve already know you lost the discussion.

If I’m a bigot, than every source I use as a reference are of bigots! Its not my view but a world view of St. Patrick you disagree with!
You remind me of trying to have a dialogue with an Imam of the Muslim faith… Every time time ya mention God as Father, he’ll jump up and down screaming 'Blasphemy" Mention the trinity and they’ll stand up and yell blasphemy! they then treaten to walk out of the discussion if we blaspheme again… so how can you preach Christ, the trinity or the Christian faith? Ya can’t without being called a blasphemer? So eventually the Iman walks out, end of discussion.
Its the same with you any Jehovah witness, Mormon, Baptist and any other anti pope religions… were always wrong, you guys are always right… The unfortunate truth is… each and every one of those religions rewrote their own history to suit the religious beliefs.
So what’t the difference with your organization? were masons but we’re not like those masons over there? The why Identify with that name???

“In the Druidic order indeed centered, and from it radiated to the whole world, civil and ecclesiastical knowledge of the realm: they were its statesmen, legislators, priests, physicians, lawyers, teachers, poets; the depositories of all human and divine knowledge; its Churches and parliament; its courts of law; its college of physicians and surgeons; its magistrates, clergy and bishops.” (SOURCE: St. Paul in Britain, Rev’d R. W. Morgan: 1860)

Give me a break!!!

“St Patrick had a Druidistic Master and Tutor, Milcho, and perhaps knowing what the doctrine of the old religion helped him develop a path of revival and lead the people away from **quasi-Levitic rites and ceremonies **to real spiritual Christianity and the worship of Christ.” (SOURCE: Annals of the Kinghdom of Ireland by the Four Masters)]

So you say!

" … the Christian Church in Ireland as founded by St. Patrick

, existed for many centuries free and unshackled…and differed in many points from Rome”. (SOURCE: O’Driscoll)

Liar, liar pants on fire… Even your Literature claims St. Patrick spent time at

The monkish biographers of Patrick had Palladius on their hands, and being careful of his honor, and of his master in Rome, they adjusted the mission of Patrick so as to harmonize with the mission of Palladius. It was to the converts of Patrick that Palladius was sent as their bishop." (SOURCE: Island of Saints and Scholars, Hibernia or Scotia at the time of St. Patrick)

poppy cock!!

St Patrick was NOT a Roman Catholic.

OHHH YES HE WAS!!!

 

[John_oxios]

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.

Shame on you Priest? You’re no priest at all, Christian anyway!
Theory of Evolution was first proposed by Freud, Born 1865, died 1939, but even he said, something had to give it an initial push, if you want to call it God, well that’s okay.

It was Herbert Spencer who is considered the Father of Evolution, he gave it the philosophy/ credence to accept Evolution with all its holes in it as a viable theory.

Now if you as a ‘Priest’ will choose Evolution over Christ??? Well let me tell you it takes more faith to believe in Evolution than it does in Christ, who lived and breathed and back up all the Scriptures of the New Testament.

Evolution fits in with non-christian believers, athiests and agnostics, if you want to believe one man in the 20th century can wipe out 2000 yrs of Christianity, and six thousand yrs of God in action through His Word in the Scriptures… to prove you ridiculous fictional beliefs… peddle your wares in some protestant or pagan, or Wicca, forum, www.wicca-spirituality.com/wicca-beliefs-jesus.html

heck you may even hook a few believers, lesser minds think alike!!!

God bless,
john

 

[John_oxios]

alongexpected;6137699]

Sorry about that. What I meant to say there was that it’s so hard, really next to impossible, to read Genesis literally. Doing so contradicts everything that science has shown us. Do you really not believe in the theory (is it even a theory anymore, hasn’t it been all but proven?) of human evolution, and think that homo sapiens magically came into existence in one second some 6,000 years ago? Do you really not believe all the astronomers and cosmologists who teach that the Earth is more than four billion years old? Do you really believe that dinosaurs, chickens, tigers, and on and on were all living side by side in a big boat?

hello Al…expected,
YES,

Peter Kreeft, Ronald k.Tacelli "Handbook of Catholic Apologetics’ (pg 225)
… if there is no Adam, if the fall is not historical at all? then its effects - suffering, death- are not historical. If sin is not historical in its effects, it must be hisorical in its cause.

2nd If Adams’ fall didn’t really happen, then Christ’s salvation need not have really happened either. Paul juxtaposes and parrallels these two in Romans6, calling Christ the ‘New Man’ or the second Adam. If the first Adam was not historical, than the cure can merely be mythic, not historical"

If the fall didn’t happen IN HISTORY than God rather than humanity is to blame for sin, for God must have created us as sinners rather than innocents. If there was never any real unfallen state, then we were sinners from the first moment of our creation, and God was wrong to declare everything as Good.

So the story must be historical, but need not be literal, for the two trees, the talking snake and the magic fruit seem to be poetic symbols rather than the literal, physical things"

From the book ‘The beginning of Wisdom’ Reading Genesis, Author Leon B. Kass, asks " Why a tree?’
Paraphrased,
Everybody knows knowledge doesn’t grow on trees. A tree, stands alone, to stand before it man is in awe of its size, it seems to be self sufficient, by simply looking at it, we don’t see how God cares for it, by watering it, nourishing through the soil, and enriching it with the Sunshine God provides.
So the tree represents independence, outside of God.

I really cannot understand Biblical literalists. They ignore every piece of scientific knowledge that mankind has been fortunate enough to discover over the years

.

And what scientific knowledge was that?
Jesus in Matthew 19:4 states, Mat 19:4 "Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,

Science backs up the order of creation in Genesis, for Moses to do that by himself the chances of him doing that picking all ten in the right order are something like 300,00 to one.

There is nor was there ever a mixing of the kinds.

P.S. The Church itself does not condemn human evolution, nor support it. They’re doing this to protect themselves just in case it is ever proven wrong. But trust me, Catholicism as a whole, I mean the entire establishment, is clearly leaning towards reading parts of the Bible symbolically.

Never, Baptist do when it is convient, The Bible is painted words, it uses imagery, a0 because it was easier to remember in the Oral tradition, b) people tend to remember images rather than words on a page. So what you sem to call symbolic was more than that… to a Jew symbol is ‘Reality distilled.’

Sorry, but the Church, believes Adam and Eve are the first beings made in His image, whom he breathed a soul into into his image.
There is no proof of evolution it is all speculation, horses came from horses, Chickens from Chickems etc… etc… there are no mutations of the kinds!

refer to Jesus’ words in Matt 19:4, “In the Beginning he made them male and female…”

But hey, just because the crowd’s doing it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s right. Look at the evidence and make up your own mind, like I did. And there’s a helluva lot of it.

Time to look up some more especially if you think the RCC is going change 2000 yrs of biblical interpretation.

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Oooo, what do you masonries people got people to report me too?
Go ahead!!! So I’ve been warned… I take your warnings with a grain of salt… report me to whomever… crucify me for presenting the Truth, backed with more reference’s than yours. I said it before when you have to resort to name calling you’ve already know you lost the discussion.

If I’m a bigot, than every source I use as a reference are of bigots! Its not my view but a world view of St. Patrick you disagree with!
You remind me of trying to have a dialogue with an Imam of the Muslim faith… Every time time ya mention God as Father, he’ll jump up and down screaming 'Blasphemy" Mention the trinity and they’ll stand up and yell blasphemy! they then treaten to walk out of the discussion if we blaspheme again… so how can you preach Christ, the trinity or the Christian faith? Ya can’t without being called a blasphemer? So eventually the Iman walks out, end of discussion.
Its the same with you any Jehovah witness, Mormon, Baptist and any other anti pope religions… were always wrong, you guys are always right… The unfortunate truth is… each and every one of those religions rewrote their own history to suit the religious beliefs.
So what’t the difference with your organization? were masons but we’re not like those masons over there? The why Identify with that name???

Give me a break!!!

]

So you say!

Liar, liar pants on fire… Even your Literature claims St. Patrick spent time at

poppy cock!!

OHHH YES HE WAS!!!

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

St Patrick: what’s myth and what’s history? Ask your friends in Rome. I thought you were claiming to be a patriotic Irishman? Bon journo signor!

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.

 

[PeterClatworthy]

Accidental duplication - my apologies.