Green Gaia
Veteran Member
Where is the outside proof of this?trishtrish10 said:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
the tree of knowledge
- Thread starter trishtrish10
- Start date
trishtrish10
Active Member
John paul 11, every pope has been accounted for since peter annnd lay beneath his tomb
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
So a Pope said it's true, then it's true? Sounds like circular reasoning to me.trishtrish10 said:
trishtrish10
Active Member
moses was given the ten commandments. before then, most people followed their innate or inner conscience. since then, they have been elaborated upon and the finer knowledge of sin has evolved.
Scott1
Well-Known Member
Maize............ History teaches that this is true. Outside sources, and there are several, can prove the unbroken line from Peter to JP II.Maize said:
Take a look at my thread:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1630
I can show you others writing from the first 100 or so years after Christ to prove anything you like about the Papacy......... just let me know............. or check with Catholic Answers: http://www.catholic.com/library/church_papacy.asp
Peace,
Scott
linwood
Well-Known Member
SOGFPP said:
I could be wrong but I think Maizes concern isn`t with the unbroken papal line but with the assertion that each Pope is chosen by god himself when we know that the choice is made by nomination and later acceptance by Catholic leaders.
When does god cast his vote?
The Adam and Eve story could be true or it may not.
The reality of what is being said in the story if true would be seen in todays human activity because the story says all mankind follows Adam and Eve.
The answer needs to be found in human activity today and all the dynamic situations that occur and where they start.
Knowledge is something mental or of the mind.
Sorcery has a man of knowledge and the power is in belief.
Adam could have been the first self realized master or a man of knowledge. He gave up the knowledge of God.
Everyone now in society is affected by an ability to hold own belief and then use that in an attempt to impose it on someone else. It is a power in the mind. Mental power then needs to be exerted to hold own belief against someone elses.
Humans all tend to protect there own selfbelief which is what they are in their essence or inner being even into risk and possible death.
People talk about getting inside someone elses head. Others will say they didn't let the person effect them. What are they saying? Most humans are equally empowered.
The way to avoid conflict is learnt and requires some social skills.
Is another person able to say something with enough power to upset the physiology in a receiving person. Or is a person able to manipulate and control another using mental skills only?
The reality we see today is what it is all about.
There is a realm of the mind that actively makes everybody sick because of the amount and type of energy required to maintain and balance the belief within it, actively resisting another persons attempt to dominate.
There is a way of escaping this realm of the mind and then avoiding all conflict.
It is well documented in the Bible and Science could measure changes in physiology.
There is a process to extract a participant and install that person in a place of a new and different mind.
The reality of what is being said in the story if true would be seen in todays human activity because the story says all mankind follows Adam and Eve.
The answer needs to be found in human activity today and all the dynamic situations that occur and where they start.
Knowledge is something mental or of the mind.
Sorcery has a man of knowledge and the power is in belief.
Adam could have been the first self realized master or a man of knowledge. He gave up the knowledge of God.
Everyone now in society is affected by an ability to hold own belief and then use that in an attempt to impose it on someone else. It is a power in the mind. Mental power then needs to be exerted to hold own belief against someone elses.
Humans all tend to protect there own selfbelief which is what they are in their essence or inner being even into risk and possible death.
People talk about getting inside someone elses head. Others will say they didn't let the person effect them. What are they saying? Most humans are equally empowered.
The way to avoid conflict is learnt and requires some social skills.
Is another person able to say something with enough power to upset the physiology in a receiving person. Or is a person able to manipulate and control another using mental skills only?
The reality we see today is what it is all about.
There is a realm of the mind that actively makes everybody sick because of the amount and type of energy required to maintain and balance the belief within it, actively resisting another persons attempt to dominate.
There is a way of escaping this realm of the mind and then avoiding all conflict.
It is well documented in the Bible and Science could measure changes in physiology.
There is a process to extract a participant and install that person in a place of a new and different mind.
Scott1
Well-Known Member
Nope......... God (The Holy Spirit) guides the Cardinals:linwood said:
1556 To fulfill their exalted mission, "the apostles were endowed by Christ with a special outpouring of the Holy Spirit coming upon them, and by the imposition of hands they passed on to their auxiliaries the gift of the Spirit, which is transmitted down to our day through episcopal consecration."
God would never leave his children alone!
Peace,
Scott
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
How do they know they are being guided and not just responding to the unconscious emotional influences of their brains? Does god talk to them?
Scott1
Well-Known Member
Ceridwen,
They know because CHRIST TOLD THEM SO.
Pope Clement I
"Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy" (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 5859, 63 [ A.D. 80 ] ).
Hermas
"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [ A.D. 80 ] ).
Ignatius of Antioch
"Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father" (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [ A.D. 110 ] ).
"You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force" (ibid., 3:1).
I can go on and on.......... Christ lived. He rose from the dead. People saw the Risen Lord, and they told others........ and so on and so on........... So many athiests keep talking about the lack of "logic" in Christian teaching..... tell me this: how logical is it to ignore eyewitness accounts and hundreds of written teachings about the Risen Christ?
Peace,
Scott
I envy the fact that you have no position to defend....... it must be so easy not to have to repeat yourself OVER AND OVER AGAIN.......
They know because CHRIST TOLD THEM SO.
Pope Clement I
"Owing to the sudden and repeated calamities and misfortunes which have befallen us, we must acknowledge that we have been somewhat tardy in turning our attention to the matters in dispute among you, beloved; and especially that abominable and unholy sedition, alien and foreign to the elect of God, which a few rash and self-willed persons have inflamed to such madness that your venerable and illustrious name, worthy to be loved by all men, has been greatly defamed. . . . Accept our counsel and you will have nothing to regret. . . . If anyone disobey the things which have been said by him [God] through us [i.e., that you must reinstate your leaders], let them know that they will involve themselves in transgression and in no small danger. . . . You will afford us joy and gladness if being obedient to the things which we have written through the Holy Spirit, you will root out the wicked passion of jealousy" (Letter to the Corinthians 1, 5859, 63 [ A.D. 80 ] ).
Hermas
"Therefore shall you [Hermas] write two little books and send one to Clement [Bishop of Rome] and one to Grapte. Clement shall then send it to the cities abroad, because that is his duty" (The Shepherd 2:4:3 [ A.D. 80 ] ).
Ignatius of Antioch
"Ignatius . . . to the church also which holds the presidency, in the location of the country of the Romans, worthy of God, worthy of honor, worthy of blessing, worthy of praise, worthy of success, worthy of sanctification, and, because you hold the presidency in love, named after Christ and named after the Father" (Letter to the Romans 1:1 [ A.D. 110 ] ).
"You [the church at Rome] have envied no one, but others you have taught. I desire only that what you have enjoined in your instructions may remain in force" (ibid., 3:1).
I can go on and on.......... Christ lived. He rose from the dead. People saw the Risen Lord, and they told others........ and so on and so on........... So many athiests keep talking about the lack of "logic" in Christian teaching..... tell me this: how logical is it to ignore eyewitness accounts and hundreds of written teachings about the Risen Christ?
Peace,
Scott
Mr Spinkles
Mr
How logical is it to ignore eyewitness accounts and the hundreds of written teachings about Muhammad? What about Achilles? Hmm....
standing_on_one_foot
Well-Known Member
Hmm...theoretically speaking, what would happen if the pope said he was fallible? I mean, if he's infallible, he has to be right, but if he's right there then he doesn't have to be right...sort of a papal paradox. Or is he not always infallible, just at certain occassions? Sort of a silly question, but I would seriously like to know. How does it work?
Oh, and a side note: You're right, it's not logical to ignore. It is, however, perfectly within the bounds of logic to look at a source and decide if it's credible or not. Several eyewitness accounts does not a case make if they're not too credible...I'm not arguing either way, look you, I'm just saying that I can see how it could be logical.
Oh, and a side note: You're right, it's not logical to ignore. It is, however, perfectly within the bounds of logic to look at a source and decide if it's credible or not. Several eyewitness accounts does not a case make if they're not too credible...I'm not arguing either way, look you, I'm just saying that I can see how it could be logical.
Scott1
Well-Known Member
You can't be directing this question at me.........???????Mr Sprinkles said:
STRAWMAN......... do you know what that is?
I, and all faithful Catholics, do not doubt the life of Muhammad......... or doubt the love they have for the ONE TRUE GOD. Members of the Moslem faith are our brother and sisters.........
Where in the heck did you get the idea that I ignored Muhammad? Fact is, you just made it up...... please don't presume to know what I think or believe, just ask..... that's what this forum is for.
As far as Achilles......... isn't that Greek mythology? Eyewitness accounts? Please enlighten me.
Peace,
Scott
Scott1
Well-Known Member
Hmm...... theoretically speaking, what would happen if the pope said that he was applesauce?standing_on_one_foot said:
Good point...... the problem is deciding how credible those early Christians were..... you know, the ones that gave up their life for faith in Christ (by the sword, crucifiction etc.).... I guess they did that because they knew it was a lie........
This thread has drifted far enough...... if you truly would like to understand Papal infallibility, start a new thread, and I would be happy to educate you on the subject.
Peace,
Scott
Peace,
Scott
Ceridwen018
Well-Known Member
Lol, it gets boring from time to time actually. I'd love it for someone to turn the tables on me.
What Mr. Spinkles meant on this one, was not that you ignore Muhammed or Achilles, but that you do not consider them as part of the 'truth'. Jesus supposedly had eyewitnesses, yes, but so did Muhammed and Achilles (The Illiad, anyone?).
What makes you believe what Jesus taught, but not what Muhammed taught? Why don't you worship Achilles?
standing_on_one_foot
Well-Known Member
I think I will start a new thread; I'm curious now. So I assume that, by your example of applesauce (hmm, now I'm hungry), there are times when he's fallible?
Just because someone believes something to be true doesn't make it true, you know. Even if they believe strongly enough to die for it.
Oh, and hate to say it, but the Illiad was written a few centuries after the events...so much as I agree with the point, methinks it is perhaps not too credible a source? Not that it matters, really, but as long as this going waaaay off topic =P
Just because someone believes something to be true doesn't make it true, you know. Even if they believe strongly enough to die for it.
Oh, and hate to say it, but the Illiad was written a few centuries after the events...so much as I agree with the point, methinks it is perhaps not too credible a source? Not that it matters, really, but as long as this going waaaay off topic =P
Mr Spinkles
Mr
SOGFPP, please accept my apologies, I was not implying that you ignore Muhammad. I am merely pointing out the fact that "eyewitness accounts" are not unique to the New Testament, and supposed eyewitness accounts do not necessarily give validity to a story. For example, despite purported eyewitness accounts in the Koran, few Christians accept that Muhammad performed miracles (including splitting the moon in half), or that the angel Gabriel told him Jesus was merely a prophet. Remember, there have even been "eyewitness accounts" of sailors having encounters with mermaids.
Anyway, you're right, this is all off topic. We should get back to discussing the tree of knowledge.
Anyway, you're right, this is all off topic. We should get back to discussing the tree of knowledge.
Pah
Uber all member
Eating of the fruit from the tree of knowledge of good and evil gave humankind that knowledge through Adam and Eve. Is that not the Christian concept? It gave us, all of the beleivers and non-believers alike, the same knowledge of good and evil that God possess. Is that not what the bible says? Genesis 3
Why then, if mankind knows of good and evil ...
-pah-
Why then, if mankind knows of good and evil ...
- was it necesary to deliver to Moses the commandments and the law?
- is it necessary to impose further definition of good and evil in society?
-pah-