|
Post by Stephen on Feb 10, 2006 14:59:17 GMT -5
"How well we know what a profitable superstition this fable of Christ has been for us." - Pope Leo X (1513-1521)
Ken, I don't think the tag line jabs at the people you want to insult.
Prior to the Reformation, the Roman Catholic church invented "purgatory," a sort of halfway house between heaven and hell. In 1476, Sixtus IV declared that indulgences (forgiveness-of-sin grants purchased from the church) could be applied to souls in purgatory. The only way the family could get their deceased into heaven was by purchasing indulgences from the church, which granted remission of sins.
With this system, in 1502 - barely a decade prior to the quote you use above - the Catholic church held 75% of the cash currency in France. Twenty years later they had accumulated half of all the hard wealth of Germany.
In 1517, the same Leo you quote held a fire sale on indulgences when he declared that they could even be purchased in advance of the sin! So if you wanted to steal a cow you could purchase your forgiveness from the church prior to the crime. Under Leo's new plan, the church profited as never before.
Neither indulgences nor Purgatory are found anywhere in scripture and Christ never once spoke of them. When Leo spoke of superstitions and fables, he was not taking a shot at Jesus Christ, those who studied the life of Christ or even his teachings... he was referring to the blind, gullible people who allowed the Catholic church to steal every last cent from them.
I believe your intent was to take a jab at modern day Christian Protestents by using the quote as a tag line, but in fact, the only people who will feel slighted by the quote are a bunch of dead, 500-year-old Roman Catholics. Is that who you were trying to jab at?
|
|
kazorm
Lieutenant
2005-06-07 Indy Squadron Champion
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." - Ghandi
Posts: 245
|
Post by kazorm on Feb 10, 2006 19:28:26 GMT -5
No Stephen, he meant EXACTLY what he said. When I come down this month I will bring you a book I bought and read that will explain it all. The author compiled it from an unbelievable number of sources over 12 years of full time research. Tell me, what do you know of jesus' twin brother judas krestus?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Feb 10, 2006 23:26:56 GMT -5
Same as the Gospel of Thomas and Nicodemus. They failed comparitive textual criticism and for that reason and many others are discounted by religious and non-religious scholars alike. Regardless, I didn't want you to be overly disappointed when all the right people aren't really upset at the tag line. Even Martin Luther agreed with it. A few months after Leo's quote, he posted his 95 Theses on the Wittenberg Castle door. You guys would have gotten along great!
|
|
KevinR
Group Commander
2003, 2009 Indy Squadron Champion
Posts: 753
|
Post by KevinR on Feb 11, 2006 2:34:01 GMT -5
Ken, Sorry to disappoint you, but while Jesus had siblings he had no twin brother. The siblings came AFTER Jesus was born and were conceived in the normal husband and wife relationship. Someone has been pulling your leg I am afraid. Jesus could not have had a twin brother because his mother was a virgin at the time he was conceived. What exactly is their "smoking gun" so to speak to PROVE that Jesus had a TWIN brother? Here is a link for you to check out in the meantime if your mind is not already completely made up. www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-t008.html#2As I told you in person and will say to you now, I would seriously keep an open mind to all possibilities, or at least ask yourself the question if you have underlying reasons why you just will not accept that Jesus Christ is God and that he rose from the dead no matter what information you are given to the contrary....... Praying for your mind to be opened to the truth Ken! Kevin
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Jul 26, 2006 15:25:32 GMT -5
Ken's tag line took on a different slant for me when I recently learned that at the Council of Nycea (the one where the books of the bible and which gospels made it and didn't, took place) the Church leaders took a vote to decide (there is a record of the vote) whether they were going to proceed promoting Jesus as a prophet or the Son of God. Apparently, Jesus' status was still in doubt 300 yrs after his birth. Knowing that they voted to treat Jesus as the Son of God, it certainly looks as though they loaded the New Testament with the Gospels that fit their agenda and declared the other Gospels as 'heresy', even though the authors of the heresy were hand picked by Jesus to be his chosen few. How could He pick a heretic to be one of His chosen? I don't think it is Jeus who made the mistake.
Now that I have your attention, has anyone received an Aerodrome since Milwaukee?
Dan
|
|
|
Post by bergovoy on Jul 27, 2006 16:29:19 GMT -5
I haven't seen one, but I know Mike is finishing it now, he was gone in Europe for a month and then waiting on submissions. I can tell you that the Spring Mini Con stuff has been submitted and should be there.
Are we going to see you at Gen Con?
Keep em flying
George
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 28, 2006 23:21:27 GMT -5
Packing material inside the jars in which the Gnostics were originally found date the documents to mid-second century, meaning that the Gospel of Thomas post dates most canonical gospels by 50-120 years. Obviously, the Gospel of Thomas post dates Thomas as well. This means two things: 1) that the actual author could not have been Thomas, and 2) that the actual author relied heavily on the canonical gospels for his writings. Hence, the Gospel of Thomas is not a new, alternate first-hand view of the life of Christ, but rather a loose and frequently erroneous collection of quotations originating in the canonical gospels which the Council of Nicea chose to accept.
The Gospel of Thomas actually embellishes the sayings of Christ in several cases, making the book indispensable to any effort at "promoting" Jesus. Odd that the council would vote to exclude material that propagated the man they were promoting.
The Gospel of Judas was written between 130-170 AD, more than a century after Judas' death. The canonical gospels, however, were written between AD 50-90, when the authors of the gospels were still living and when living witnesses to Jesus' life could openly read the documents and compare their texts to what tens of thousands of eyewitnesses had seen with their own eyes.
What we modern readers often fail to realize is that the Council of Nicea was really unnecessary since the church had been using the same first hand texts from Jesus' apostles since they had been written more than two hundred years before the council ever met. The Council's work was primarily a response to other holy texts being introduced by other religions which prompted a more organized response from Christians. What the council said or did had virtually no impact on the contemporary church which had possessed direct accounts of Jesus' life dating back nearly to the man himself.
But in the end, the operative question hasn't changed regardless of what one believes about canonical or Gnostic texts - was Jesus Christ in fact "the way, the truth and the life, and no man comes to God except by me"? If he was, it is perhaps wise to consider his instructions. If he was not, then whether one accepts or rejects either the Gnostics or the canonical gospels is irrelevent.
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Jul 30, 2006 11:59:01 GMT -5
Apparently, Jesus' status was still in doubt 300 yrs after his birth. Very true. Jesus' status was most certainly in doubt 300 years after his birth. Jesus' status was also in doubt during his life, when Pontius Pilate asked him if he was truly the son of God. Jesus' status was in doubt in 1517 when Martin Luther wrote his 95 Theses claiming that Jesus was the atonement for sin, not Roman Catholic indulgences. Jesus' status remains under discussion by various denominations today. Jesus' status remains in doubt this afternoon as we have this conversation on this forum. So the fact that Jesus' status was debated at the Council of Nicea is really rather insignificant because it is merely one minor extenstion of the same debate has raged for 20 centuries. In the end, no council or preacher or atheist can make this decision for any of us. If Jesus actually was who he claimed to be, our decision has tremendous consequences. So... back where we started. Jesus claimed to be the way, the truth and the life and said that no one can get to God except through him. He was either right or he was wrong. If, as Patrick Henry suggested, the depth of debate should equal the magnitude of the subject, the question of Jesus' status is worthy of genuine, unbiased research from each of us and is time well spent. It is perhaps the most important question we will ever ask.
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Aug 19, 2007 11:12:08 GMT -5
What section of the Bible contains the verse that " only through Jesus can you attain heaven?
Dan
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 19, 2007 19:43:24 GMT -5
In John 14, Jesus was speaking to his disciples over dinner the evening before being arrested by government agents. It was a long conversation - the biblical account takes up some four chapters. He spoke at length about his ascension into heaven where he would prepare a better place for them. He indicated that they already knew "the way to the place where I am going."
But Thomas was confused. Before Jesus finished, Thomas interrupted him to ask for a clarification. Thomas said "Lord, we don't know where you are going, so how can we know the way?"
In verse 6 Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you really knew me, you would know my Father as well. From now on, you do know him and have seen him."
Philip piped up about this time, still unsure if Jesus was claiming to be God himself. He asked "Lord, show us the Father and that will be enough for us."
In verse nine Jesus answered: "Don't you know me, Philip, even after I have been among you such a long time? Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father. How can you say, 'Show us the Father'?"
I'd recommend reading, at the very least, John 12-18, to get a full sense of the context of the conversation. The entire book would be better... its not really that long.
Paul repeated the assertion that Jesus was the only way to heaven in Romans 10 -
"If you confess with your mouth, 'Jesus is Lord,' and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved.... for there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all."
The 4th chapter of Acts also claims that "salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."
Of course there are other places where Jesus is mentioned as the only way to heaven, but this is a good start. I hope the above is useful to you in your studies. We missed you at Gen Con!
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Aug 19, 2007 20:51:10 GMT -5
Thanks for the info. Well, I may be down in the Fall. You'll proly se me next year at GenCon. And.. it is nice to be missed once in a while ; )
Should I email the Freikorps history to you?
Dan
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Aug 24, 2008 14:36:50 GMT -5
Some people consider the Bible to be the verbatim word of God ,written by men who were inspired by God to write it. in Luke 2:39 he indicates that the Holy family went back to Nazereth after their time in Bethlehem. In Matt2:19-22 he indicates the Holy family escaped to Egypt after their time in Bethlehem.
How did God get this wrong if God is a perfect being?
|
|
|
Post by Stephen on Aug 26, 2008 9:31:23 GMT -5
Some people consider the Bible to be the verbatim word of God ,written by men who were inspired by God to write it. in Luke 2:39 he indicates that the Holy family went back to Nazereth after their time in Bethlehem. In Matt2:19-22 he indicates the Holy family escaped to Egypt after their time in Bethlehem. How did God get this wrong if God is a perfect being? Judging by the way your question is worded, there is no answer that will satisfy you. You have to believe what you want to believe. Predisposition is far more important to most people than literal possibilities or evidence. The statements that you cite above are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for the family to go from Bethlehem to both Egypt and Nazareth, just as it is possible for you to stop by both the grocery store and the gas station on the way home from work. The Matthew 2 passage refers to the time span from Jesus' birth to the visit of the Magi. The date of the visit it unknown, but most scholars believe that Jesus was 3-5 yrs old at the time of their visit. The Luke 2 passage refers to the time span from the point where Mary realized she was pregnant (a minimum of 8 wks into the pregnancy) until at least three days after Jesus' 12th birthday, representing an absolute minimum time span of at least 12 years, 7 months and 3 days. This does not prove that the family did or did not go to the places that scripture suggests. It does demonstrate, however, that 13 years is more than sufficient to visit both places should the family have been compelled to do so. This information is readily available and you could have found it with little effort. Again, predisposition and what one wants to believe are generally more important than actual possibilities and evidence. If we're debating scripture, a far more important question is this: was Jesus of Nazareth actually the son of God? There are three possibilities: 1) He was correct 2) He was incorrect 3) Scripture is lying and he never made the claim The 3rd possibility is very weak, because the gospels making the claim were written from 30-70 years after Jesus' death. Had he not made the claims, many thousands of people would have left testimonies denouncing them. No such testimonies exist. On the contrary, secular, non-biblical historians as early as the 2nd century specifically referred to Jesus' claim of divinity. So while #3 remains a theoretical possibility, logic and evidence make an extremely poor case for it. The available evidence strongly suggests that Jesus did, in fact, claim to be the son of God. That leaves numbers 1 and 2.
|
|
noski
Captain
"Richthofen lived where the rest of us go , only in our greatest moments." Udet
Posts: 286
|
Post by noski on Aug 26, 2008 12:45:12 GMT -5
In Mark 14:12 and 15: 25 it says Jesus was crucified the day after the Passovermeal was eaten. John says he was crucified the day before it was eaten (John 19:14). So it is a diference of a day , not the possibility of what happenned up to 12 years. Again, how could God get this wrong? AND, there is another answer to my first query that is perfectly acceptable and simple. But I don't think you can bring yourself to admit it.
|
|
albpilot
Ace of Aces
Red Baron Fight XVIII Champ
I'm not frightened of terrorism, so please don't go and create a police state on my account...
Posts: 1,181
|
Post by albpilot on Aug 27, 2008 12:37:56 GMT -5
Some people consider the Bible to be the verbatim word of God ,written by men who were inspired by God to write it. in Luke 2:39 he indicates that the Holy family went back to Nazereth after their time in Bethlehem. In Matt2:19-22 he indicates the Holy family escaped to Egypt after their time in Bethlehem. How did God get this wrong if God is a perfect being? Judging by the way your question is worded, there is no answer that will satisfy you. You have to believe what you want to believe. Predisposition is far more important to most people than literal possibilities or evidence. The statements that you cite above are not mutually exclusive. It is possible for the family to go from Bethlehem to both Egypt and Nazareth, just as it is possible for you to stop by both the grocery store and the gas station on the way home from work. The Matthew 2 passage refers to the time span from Jesus' birth to the visit of the Magi. The date of the visit it unknown, but most scholars believe that Jesus was 3-5 yrs old at the time of their visit. The Luke 2 passage refers to the time span from the point where Mary realized she was pregnant (a minimum of 8 wks into the pregnancy) until at least three days after Jesus' 12th birthday, representing an absolute minimum time span of at least 12 years, 7 months and 3 days. This does not prove that the family did or did not go to the places that scripture suggests. It does demonstrate, however, that 13 years is more than sufficient to visit both places should the family have been compelled to do so. This information is readily available and you could have found it with little effort. Again, predisposition and what one wants to believe are generally more important than actual possibilities and evidence. If we're debating scripture, a far more important question is this: was Jesus of Nazareth actually the son of God? There are three possibilities: 1) He was correct 2) He was incorrect 3) Scripture is lying and he never made the claim The 3rd possibility is very weak, because the gospels making the claim were written from 30-70 years after Jesus' death. Had he not made the claims, many thousands of people would have left testimonies denouncing them. No such testimonies exist. On the contrary, secular, non-biblical historians as early as the 2nd century specifically referred to Jesus' claim of divinity. So while #3 remains a theoretical possibility, logic and evidence make an extremely poor case for it. The available evidence strongly suggests that Jesus did, in fact, claim to be the son of God. That leaves numbers 1 and 2. Your reply here is very curious considering you are one of the most adamant 'the Bible is 100 LITERAL meaning exactly what the current translation indicates' that I have ever met. How do you reconcile the statements above that require conjecture (ex: most scholars believe) with the many arguments we have had over the gaming table on what the definition of IS is? (Devils Advocate extraordinaire)
|
|