| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| prechristian |
Posted - 09/14/2004 : 01:05:37
I am not here to bring up controversies. I just found this chart from the internet: http://www.exchangedlife.com/trail_of_blood.htm.
The main line in it is: Baptists have an unbroken line of churches since Christ and have fulfilled His prophecy -- "I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH AND THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT PREVAIL AGAINST IT." I am not a Baptist. I call myself a pre-Christian (because I hope to go into the narrow path one day but it is really narrow indeed from my study of scripture) that does not belong to any denomination but has been seeking the truth. I do not have an opinion of the chart at this point. In fact, I am not sure if the "Anabaptists" in the chart would call themselves with such a name if a separate line existed. My belief is that if God exists, He always leaves remnants from the rest of people His elects at any time. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/17/2004 : 12:53:12
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
quote:
Astralis says he has no regrets about it. That tells me his conscience must be seared with a hot iron, as Paul said.
LOL! I said there is no regrets for burning heretical literature. You're putting words in my mouth.
Okay then, Admin, I'll retract on my last paragraph seeing that I inferred more than what was in your original statement.
SchracktheBaptist |
| Astralis |
Posted - 09/16/2004 : 23:40:54
quote:
Astralis says he has no regrets about it. That tells me his conscience must be seared with a hot iron, as Paul said.
LOL! I said there is no regrets for burning heretical literature. You're putting words in my mouth. |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/16/2004 : 23:11:25
quote:
Originally posted by bamark
She. I just wanted to see if you actually bothered to look at what I posted and who the author was:
Nina G. Garsoian, The Paulician Heresy. A Study in the Origin and Development of Paulicianism in Armenia and the Eastern Provinces of the Byzantine Empire. Publications in Near and Middle East Studies. Columbia University, Series A 6. The Hague: Mouton, 1967. pp.296.
I don't need to know her publications, I need to know the sources she uses to determing Paulician doctrine. What are they? You brought her up as your witness, not me, so you provide her sources.
quote:
Oh, you made an inference.
There was no inference other than the fact that you cannot substantiate, from the Paulician's own writings, what you and your predecessors accuse them of.
quote:
Yes, I did, and it goes on to say: The heretical literature has to a great extent either perished or been completely changed; but much has also survived in a modified written form or through oral tradition...The old Slavonic lists of forbidden books of the 15th and 16th centuries also give us a clue to the discovery of this heretical literature and of the means the Bogomils employed to carry on their propaganda. Much may also be learnt from the doctrines of the numerous heretical sects which arose in Russia after the 11th century.
This writer does not identify the literature he is speaking of, nor does he tell us how we can know that these writings, whatever they may be, can be attributed to the Bogomils, or what was contained in them. All we have is the word of the Catholics. And that isn't good enough.
quote:
Since you have the book what does it say here: FC Conybeare, The Key of Truth, pp. 73 sqq. and specially pp. 238 sqq. (Oxford, 1898).
Page 73 deals with the proper administration of baptism, which is purely baptistic in practice:
Wherefore also our Lord first asked for faith, and then graciously gave healing; and after that bestowed holy baptism on believers; but not on unbelieving catechumens.
And my book shows no page 238. It ends with an index at pg. 201. Of course, mine is a photocopy of the book that was given to me so there may have been more pages, but the teachings of the Key itself end at pg. 124.
quote:
Yes, and it continues on: "Their system was dualistic. There are two principles, two kingdoms.
LOL, even Jesus taught two kingdoms. The kingdom of Satan (Matt. 12:26) and the kingdom of God (Mk. 1:15). I suppose if Jesus were a Paulician, you'd call him a dualist too.
quote:
The Evil Spirit is the author of, and lord of, the present, visible world; the Good Spirit, of the future world. Of their views about the creation of man, little is known...
King of kings, Lord and Creator of all beings, who didst create our first father out of the clay and o |
| bamark |
Posted - 09/16/2004 : 21:25:30
quote:
Originally posted by Schrack
quote:
I didn't question the author, I questioned his sources. What are his sources, do you know?
She. I just wanted to see if you actually bothered to look at what I posted and who the author was:
Nina G. Garsoian, The Paulician Heresy. A Study in the Origin and Development of Paulicianism in Armenia and the Eastern Provinces of the Byzantine Empire. Publications in Near and Middle East Studies. Columbia University, Series A 6. The Hague: Mouton, 1967. pp.296.
quote:
I didn't say you pulled from a papal bull. I was contrasting my ability to prove what I say as opposed to your inability to do the same.
Oh, you made an inference.
quote:
And even if you were convinced of what I say, I wouldn't expect you to admit it openly on a forum such as this.
Back at cha. 
quote:
http://www.fact-index.com/b/bo/bogomils.html
Did you happen to read this in the article?
It is a complicated task to determine the true character and the tenets of any ancient sect, considering that almost all the information that has reached us has come from the opponents.
Yes, I did, and it goes on to say:
The heretical literature has to a great extent either perished or been completely changed; but much has also survived in a modified written form or through oral tradition...
The old Slavonic lists of forbidden books of the 15th and 16th centuries also give us a clue to the discovery of this heretical literature and of the means the Bogomils employed to carry on their propaganda. Much may also be learnt from the doctrines of the numerous heretical sects which arose in Russia after the 11th century
Since you have the book what does it say here:
FC Conybeare, The Key of Truth, pp. 73 sqq. and specially pp. 238 sqq. (Oxford, 1898).
quote:
http://www.fact-index.com/p/pa/paulicians.html
And in this article we find the same:
Little is known of the tenets of the Paulicians, as we are confined for information to the reports of opponents and a few fragments of Sergius' letters which they have preserved.
Yes, and it continues on:
"Their system was dualistic. There are two principles, two kingdoms. The Evil Spirit is the author of, and lord of, the present, visible world; the Good Spirit, of the future worid. Of their views about the creation of man, little is known but what is contained in the ambiguous words of Sergius... This passage seems to teach that Adam's sin of disobedience was a blessing in disguise, and that a greater sin than his is the sin against the church."
quote:
So I will say again that the sources from which most writers reference to describe the beliefs of these churches comes fr |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 18:41:08
quote:
Originally posted by bamark
If you had read my second link (yahoo) you would have seen the author:N G Garsoian. Professor Garsoian is professor Emeritas of Armenian History at Columbia University. He is also a corresponding Fellow of the British Academy, as was F.C. Conybeare.
I didn't question the author, I questioned his sources. What are his sources, do you know?
quote:
I did not pull info from a papal bull. What makes you think I'm upset Schrack? You're the ex-Catholic that's got his panties in a wad over some past transgression that you think the Catholic church pulled on you. You've been prosletyzing on this board for two years(?) and you have yet to convince anyone. That includes me.
I didn't say you pulled from a papal bull. I was contrasting my ability to prove what I say as opposed to your inability to do the same.
And even if you were convinced of what I say, I wouldn't expect you to admit it openly on a forum such as this.
quote:
Rather is a Liberal. I'm conservative. He's more like you when it comes to reporting. A little from here, a little from there, now lets mush it all together and make it come out they way we want.
I wasn't referencing Dan Rather's liberal views and applying them to you, but was rather referring to the recent exposure of his inability to authenticate his report on the records of George Bush's military service, and liking that to your inability to substantiate the error with which you accuse the Paulicians.
quote:
But since you're fond of pulling from the Encylopedia (as you did in a quote to Admin):
http://www.fact-index.com/b/bo/bogomils.html
Did you happen to read this in the article?
It is a complicated task to determine the true character and the tenets of any ancient sect, considering that almost all the information that has reached us has come from the opponents.
quote:
http://www.fact-index.com/p/pa/paulicians.html
And in this article we find the same:
Little is known of the tenets of the Paulicians, as we are confined for information to the reports of opponents and a few fragments of Sergius' letters which they have preserved.
So I will say again that the sources from which most writers reference to describe the beliefs of these churches comes from where? Their enemies, the Catholics, both Roman and Greek, who persecuted them, and as I have explained to Admin, such a source is not altogether trustworthy any more than what the Nazis had to say about the Jews.
quote:
MikeJuli also gave you a very good link.
Astralis posted an excerpt from this article before mikeJuli posted the entire article, and as I pointed out to Astralis before, this article presents a problem for you Catholics because it dismisses one of your main accusations against them:
A lot of the i |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 17:14:52
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
quote:
You folks still can't touch my straightening out of the historical revisionism you played on the deuterocanonicals.
What are you talking about?
This: http://www.speroforum.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1259
SchracktheBaptist |
| bamark |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 15:05:06
quote:
Originally posted by Schrack
Duh, where do you think these got their information?? The Catholic church, of course.
If you had read my second link (yahoo) you would have seen the author:N G Garsoian. Professor Garsoian is professor Emeritas of Armenian History at Columbia University. He is also a corresponding Fellow of the British Academy, as was F.C. Conybeare.
quote:
Not at all. Unlike you I can prove what I say, not just from a papal bull but other historical references that your church murdered them almost into extinction. That is not calumny, my friend, that is historical fact! I can understand, though, why this upsets you...it used to upset me too when I was Catholic, because I didn't want to think that my religion was the wrong one. But I came to find out it was! Little by little, the walls of Catholicism come crumbing down when the light of truth shines upon it.
I did not pull info from a papal bull.
What makes you think I'm upset Schrack? You're the ex-Catholic that's got his panties in a wad over some past transgression that you think the Catholic church pulled on you. You've been prosletyzing on this board for two years(?) and you have yet to convince anyone.
That includes me.
quote:
You won't get that from their writings. Your sources, then, are exposed as false and corrupt. Do you feel like Dan Rather yet?
Rather is a Liberal. I'm conservative. He's more like you when it comes to reporting. A little from here, a little from there, now lets mush it all together and make it come out they way we want.
But since you're fond of pulling from the Encylopedia (as you did in a quote to Admin):
http://www.fact-index.com/b/bo/bogomils.html
http://www.fact-index.com/p/pa/paulicians.html
MikeJuli also gave you a very good link.
quote:
Again, you won't get that from their writings, of which I posted above to prove you all to be wrong and tainted by your Catholic hatred for people who were better than those who murdered them.
How do you know what's in my heart?
quote:
By the way, did not Paul call Satan the "god of this world"? I guess according to your definition he must be a dualist manichaean too!
When the Bible says that Satan is the "god of this world" it is not saying that he has ultimate authority. It is conveying the idea that Satan himself rules over the unbelieving world in a specific way. In the case of 2 Corinthians 4:4, the unbeliever follows Satan's agenda.
There are no un-believers on this Forum Schrack. That's where your problem lies.
According to the Key of Truth:
"Baptism should be in rivers, or other water in the open air."
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/thailand/PC-B-053.HTM
Does the VMBC baptize that way? Or, is it in that little baptismal tub behind the podium inside your church?
Mark
|
| Astralis |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 13:42:05
quote:
You folks still can't touch my straightening out of the historical revisionism you played on the deuterocanonicals.
What are you talking about? |
| Diana Holberg |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 12:49:52
quote:
Originally posted by Schrack
Prayerfully you too will see the Light one day and be led out of the darkness of Catholicism, and sin itself. I know this is difficult for you to accept now, but when you truly get born again (and I believe someday you will) you'll understand what I say.
SchracktheBaptist
[oo] |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 12:19:36
quote:
Originally posted by Benedict
You, like Elder John, read too much into the text.
What are you talking about? Either Paul said the Corinthians were begotten through the Gospel or he did not. Perhaps it is you who read too much into the text, putting in baptism where baptism is nowhere mentioned.
SchracktheBaptist |
| Benedict |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 11:45:50
You, like Elder John, read too much into the text. |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 10:58:54
quote:
Originally posted by AbidingNHim
quote:
Originally posted by Schrack
ANH. I was a sinner like every other man, wholly unworthy but then saved by the grace of God through faith in Christ, born again by the will of God,
guess what, schrack...ME TOO!!! 
Sinner, yes; born again, no. This is because you trust in the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, as opposed to how one is truly regenerated. Please, listen to the apostle:
1 Cor. 4:15: "for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel."
Not through baptism, says the apostle, but through the Gospel, the good news of Jesus Christ. When your heart comprehends this, then you will be in a position to call upon the name of the Lord and truly be born again from above, not down here below.
SchracktheBaptist
|
| AbidingNHim |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 10:15:22
quote:
Originally posted by Schrack
ANH. I was a sinner like every other man, wholly unworthy but then saved by the grace of God through faith in Christ, born again by the will of God,
guess what, schrack...ME TOO!!! |
| Schrack |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 07:44:14
quote:
Originally posted by Admin
That's what the neo-Gnostics say about the Catholic Church too. No regrets. Read the history of Gnosticism and you'll discover that those who were not orthodox don't get to write history because they're heretical. Or, perhaps the Gnostics were correct and it is us who are not orthodox?
The Key seems to me to be dualistic and rejects some orthodox tenets that cannot be rejected to be Christian.
You can grovel in the claim they were dualistic and gnostic all you want, but the Key proves that you and all your Catholic predecessors liars and persecutors and the true heretics. By the way, there is nothing "orthodox" about persecution. Persecution is the devil's doctrine, not Christ's.
quote:
I think the charges were definitely warranted from what I've read in the Key, including your commentary which I didn't find convincing.
Of course you don't find it convincing, not when you pull quotes out of context and refuse to comprehend the actual argument that they are making. That, sir, is sloppy scholarship.
quote:
We have many different writings against the Paulicians and one document of theirs (which is actually debated to be theirs in the first place) which harbours dualism. It seems the Catholic Church wasn't off-base about them after all. You, though, reject all writings about them and take their sole document and create mental gymnastics to make them seem like they were just like you.
No, I only reject the testimony of those who chased them down, tortured them and put them to death, and all in the name of Christ who never laid a finger to harm or persecute anyone and taught his true followers to be just like him, harmless as doves. Say, why don't we just let the Nazis tell us all that we should believe about the Jews, eh?
quote:
You can't prove there are more writings that were destroyed anyhow.
Sure I can. But if the above be the case, then I suppose you also can't prove their dualism either, since you haven't a single primary source from the Paulicians that any of your perseucting predecessors can quote their heresy from, and the Key certainly doesn't support the accusation of dualism either. The only logical conclusion that anyone can come to is your church threw calumny after calumny upn them so that they could have an excuse to persecute, which they did with all the fury that hell could muster up. Nice legacy you have there, Admin.
SchracktheBaptist |
| mikejuli |
Posted - 09/15/2004 : 04:44:15
http://www.angelfire.com/ok3/apologia/paulicans.html |
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS