Comments on: Mouthing off about the early Gospels https://didacticmind.com/2023/03/mouthing-off-about-the-early-gospels.html Strategic Defence of the Mantle of Responsibility Sat, 11 Mar 2023 17:11:37 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4 By: furor kek tonicus ( your mom's favorite kind of Asian ) https://didacticmind.com/2023/03/mouthing-off-about-the-early-gospels.html#comment-7761 Sat, 11 Mar 2023 17:11:37 +0000 https://didacticmind.com/?p=17625#comment-7761 while i agree that the Cathars were heretical, this is yet another example of historical religious genocide carried out by the Catholic Church … well after their own apostasy from the Biblical requirements for the elders and bishops of the church, which dates from the Donatism controversy.
.
further, the history of pogrom against the Cathars indicates such outrageous lying, hypocrisy and malfeasance on the part of the RCC that this incident, alone, would be enough to indicate to me that the Catholics are not the actual manifestation of Christ’s material church. if you research this you will find that the genocide was initiated because of the death of Pierre de Castelnau … with which the Cathars were not in any way responsible, but which was ( possibly ) committed by men owing allegiance to the Catholic Raymond of Toulouse.
.
what was the response of the RCC to the murder of Pierre? the genocide of the Cathars for a crime of which they were completely innocent. what happened to Raymond? ah, well you see he was excommunicated. for a time. but the Catholics allowed Raymond to BUY his repentance and he died in the good graces of the RCC. after six marriages.
.
after an example like the above, you can see why Henry the VIII was so aggravated that the RCC wouldn’t validate his divorces.

]]> By: dave faloni https://didacticmind.com/2023/03/mouthing-off-about-the-early-gospels.html#comment-7759 Fri, 10 Mar 2023 22:20:15 +0000 https://didacticmind.com/?p=17625#comment-7759 I spent the better part of today reading firsthand accounts of the Arian controversy because from what I remembered of it reading about it in my 20s (in my 40s now) I suspect Arius was only a different type of Trinitarian.

Hence I disagree with the statement “Mr. Dreizin is right that the Council of Nicaea did not fully resolve the issue of Jesus’s Divinity.” Arius claimed to believe that Jesus is God but nonetheless somehow created (before time) by the Father and has a beginning. So nobody was arguing Jesus is not God; the argument was on whether Jesus always existed or was a creation (before time) of the Father who was nonetheless still God despite having a beginning.

When modern Christians libel Arius as denying the deity of Christ they actually help atheist make the boneheaded argument that Nicea voted Jesus to divine honors. That is not what happened. They voted that Jesus was God who always existed juat like the Father rather than God that was created by the Father (before time) and yet still somehow God. That distinction is important because saying it wrong helps them create a narrative.

]]>