TRUMP AHEAD?

[Immanuel Can]

Such caused the Reformation. They have nobody to blame but themselves.

Carry on. I unnerstan. There are likely other areas where some agreements have been or could be forged.

"Agreements"? You mean, agreements between me and you, or agreements between Reformers and the Catholic hierarchy?

The latter seems less likely than the former. The former might well happen. The latter, in retrospect? Not so much.

The Catholic authorities had already installed a set of corrupt and unscriptural practices and rituals, like the selling of offices, the deification of the "saints," and exploitative "indulgences," had already rejected the five "solas" of the Reformation as heretical, and had attempted to use inquisitorial tactics against anybody who even proposed a reform. And at the start, that was all the Reformation seems to have been about -- making a few basic reforms to bring the Catholics back in line with Scripture. But in the end, if the differences were intractible, that was not on the reformers' side, but on the Papacy's. The members of the Catholic hierarchy were apparently simply not willing to allow themselves to lose their excessive privileges and end up standing in attendance on Biblical authority.

[Harbal]

Hurray, we agree on something!!

It’s a rebel’s position though. You could hold priests or officiants in contempt if that is your predilection, and you could also value those men for a host of good reasons.

The project of the undermining of hierarchy … is also one of a civilizational termite.

Well I think you are treated with the respect you deserve, even if you don't.

[Immanuel Can]

Hurray, we agree on something!!

It’s a rebel’s position though. You could hold priests or officiants in contempt if that is your predilection, and you could also value those men for a host of good reasons.

The project of the undermining of hierarchy … is also one of a civilizational termite.

Well, your criticism would be appropriate only if "hierarchy" in itself, were always good. But some hierarchies are warranted, and others are not. Hierarchies determined by quality and achievement are both inevitable and good; hierarchies created by nothing more than arbitrary authority and the use of force are not.

So we must ask which the Catholic hierarchy had become: were they the product of the valuing of quality, of moral integrity, of intellect and goodness, or of personal achievement? Were they the "highest" of the Biblical scholars and the models of the best in Christian piety? Or were the Catholic hierarchy of the Reformation Period the product of corruption (such as the lavish wealth of Rome) and arbitrary tyranny (such as exemplified in the indulgences), enforced by the use of raw power (such as inquisitorial techniques)?

I would say the question answers itself, historically, does it not?

[Alexis Jacobi]

"Agreements"? You mean, agreements between me and you, or agreements between Reformers and the Catholic hierarchy?

I said other areas.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Well I think you are treated with the respect you deserve, even if you don't.

You mistake personal respect, which I certainly have, for respect in more abstract (non-personal) areas.

[Gary Childress]

Hurray, we agree on something!!

It’s a rebel’s position though. You could hold priests or officiants in contempt if that is your predilection, and you could also value those men for a host of good reasons.

The project of the undermining of hierarchy … is also one of a civilizational termite.

I don't doubt that there are some very fine and knowledgeable priests and theologians out there. What I am a "rebel" toward are the charlatans and phonies. I have nothing seriously against them per se, I'm just not interested in their nonsense. If they have a problem with that, then all I can say is stop spouting nonsense and then I might listen to them. Otherwise, they're welcome to go find some idiot out there who will believe them if they want followers that badly.

[attofishpi]

but in hindsight having since read the Gospels — we were taught the important stuff

I can only [feigning humility] suggest that without about a month reading fundamental materials that your conception is limited, insufficient and susceptible to Protestant influences.

Examine those today who attempt to re-assimilate themselves back into traditional Catholicism.

The Reversion of the Round Pegs!

I still don't think you understand my position - that I have had all along, and that is if Christ ain't said it\done it (NT Bible) then I don't much care for it.

Thus I feel Christ would be proud of me for not concerning myself with whatever Clergy have decided - re Catholicism or any other form of "Christianity".

Now, in saying that what may concern me is any material that may have been removed from inclusion in the Bible that I might be missing out on that I would see pertinant to my belief in Christ - beyond that, I don't care.

So. (and based on the above)

What reasoning should I spend that month reading whatever it is you are suggesting?

BTW. I have never mentioned this before, but about 5-6 months ago, the man himself - Christ - told me off - told me to get "perfect" - off the booze.
I have heared on many occasions -sometimes when I am walking my dog and contemplating my past - the voice states "Good Christian" - ergo - I think the powers that be have NO issue with the way I have formed my Christianity

[attofishpi]

Sounds sensible to me. If there's a God, then let ordinary people determine that for ourselves and establish our own relationship with him/her/it (or whatever). If there's a God, then God is in charge, not high priests. And if there's no God, then there's no need to have high priests claiming there is one, so again, no need for high priests.

Right. Exactly. There's no need for a "priest" caste at all.

Hurray, we agree on something!!

LOL! - You always seem to have agreement with people whenever I feel disagreement!!

IC - Who is going to feed you the body of Christ?

[Alexis Jacobi]

I don't doubt that there are some very fine and knowledgeable priests and theologians out there. What I am a "rebel" toward are the charlatans and phonies.

Our rebellion, human rebellion, is far more extensive than you seem aware.

Can’t fool me

[accelafine]

I don't doubt that there are some very fine and knowledgeable priests and theologians out there. What I am a "rebel" toward are the charlatans and phonies.

Our rebellion, human rebellion, is far more extensive than you seem aware.

Can’t fool me

Interesting. 'Alexis Jacobi' is a woman, yet I always assumed you were a man without even thinking about your name. I wonder why that would be...

[Gary Childress]

I don't doubt that there are some very fine and knowledgeable priests and theologians out there. What I am a "rebel" toward are the charlatans and phonies.

Our rebellion, human rebellion, is far more extensive than you seem aware.

OK. What are you rebelling against? Who are you rebelling on behalf of? By "human rebellion" do you mean you're rebelling against non-humans?

[Immanuel Can]

I don't doubt that there are some very fine and knowledgeable priests and theologians out there. What I am a "rebel" toward are the charlatans and phonies.

Our rebellion, human rebellion, is far more extensive than you seem aware.

Can’t fool me

Well, Alexis...what sort of regime would you consider legitimate to "rebel" against? You say the Reformation-period Catholic hierarchy would not qualify, even though they were venial as heck, authoritarian, immoral in methods and outright disobedient the very Book they claim to give them their authority, commanding their followers to do the opposite of God's will...truly "charlatans and phonies," at the very least, and yet, you consider conserving their rule a matter of prime obedience?

Or is there anything they did, or could have done, that would have justified Gary's rejection of them?

Or were you just trolling?

[attofishpi]

Right. Exactly. There's no need for a "priest" caste at all.

IC - Who is going to feed you the body of Christ? I'm pretty certain you arn't going to Q at McDonalds for your serve..

[Immanuel Can]

Right. Exactly. There's no need for a "priest" caste at all.

IC - Who is going to feed you the body of Christ? I'm pretty certain you arn't going to Q at McDonalds for your serve..

Well, the point of everybody being able to have a Bible (which the Catholic hierarchy opposed so strongly they strangled and burned people for doing, because they didn't want their monopoly on access to it broken) is to read it for oneself, so as to be self-feeding, and able to engage fully and analytically with the teaching one receives, and arrive at one's own convictions based on that, and live by those convictions. And I might add, I have met many lay preachers and scholars who vastly exceed the knowledge, humility and skill in communication, all those posers-in-frocks who style themselves "priests."

So it's not really a problem. The so-called "expertise" of the priests is mostly in extra-Biblical traditions, rote ritual and dogma, and other such nonsense. We could do very nicely with just ourselves and our Bibles. Many Christians do. And a living, developing faith depends on one being willing to read for oneself.

[Harbal]

Right. Exactly. There's no need for a "priest" caste at all.

IC - Who is going to feed you the body of Christ? I'm pretty certain you arn't going to Q at McDonalds for your serve..

Well, the point of everybody being able to have a Bible

Get your updated copy now now from Donald J Trump for just $59.99.

https://youtube.com/shorts/9Xw_piCtutE? ... putfiMqDl3