catholic truth scotland
We’re busy, on this thread, defending the Church against dissenters who double as heretics-into-schismatics.
The people over at Catholic Truth Scotland are busy having mutually affirming discussions about the nature of ‘truth’. They didn’t appreciate atheists joining the discussion and I’ve been banned, spammed and left with a number of lingering questions that I’m hoping some more open-minded Catholics might help me with.
In my experience, Catholic Church adherents are of the view that their religious institution can be traced back with utter consistency to the times of the character Jesus. I don’t wish to delve into the power struggles, schisms and paths chosen over the last 2000 years, and I’ll save an exploration of how consistent core tenants of their faith are with the teachings of Jesus for a later post, because what interests me here is this myth of unchanging consistency that I have now heard on several occasions. Because it’s a myth that’s used to justify continuing discriminatory attitudes towards women and gay people.
The Catholic Church has in fact a long history of amending its attitude and beliefs, dependent on evidence available and the current generally accepted moral standards of society. Three areas immediately spring to mind:
1. Slavery. Down through most of the history of the Catholic Church, popes and bishops, like most others in their positions of power, had slaves. As recently as 1866, Pope Pius IX affirmed that “it is not contrary to the natural or divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, exchanged or given, provided in the sale, purchase, exchange or gift, the due conditions are strictly observed which the approved authors describe and explain”. Most modern societies now find any form of slavery to be morally repugnant. Would it be fair to say that the Catholic Church was wrong in its teachings and that it has changed stance significantly on this subject?
2. Persecuting, torturing and murdering those of differing faiths. Most people are pretty familiar with stories of brutality and violence committed in the name of the Catholic Church against anyone who expressed views that diverged from official doctrine. For example, against the ‘heretical’ 12th Century Waldensian movement which advocated following the teachings of Jesus. Witches were also considered a genuine problem, as a papal bull issue by Pope Innocent XIII in 1484 tells us “they hinder men from performing the sexual act and women from conceiving, whence husbands cannot know their wives nor wives receive their husbands; over and above this, they blasphemously renounce that Faith which is theirs by the Sacrament of Baptism,” Would it be fair to say that the Catholic Church was wrong in its teachings and actions, and that it has changed stance significantly in this area?
3. Fear of scientific fact. The most famous case is of course that of Galileo, who was sentenced to life imprisonment for suggesting that the Earth isn’t the centre of the universe. Would it be fair to say that the Catholic Church was wrong in its teachings and actions, and that it has changed stance significantly?
Returning for a moment to the beliefs of Catholic Truth Scotland, whose current object of vitriol is a priest who “advocates that two men should be able to marry” and is therefore “trying to create a false god in the image and likeness of his own ideas”. I suggested to folks on this blog that perhaps this priest was of the ilk who would have called for an end to slavery in the days when the Catholic Church allowed and exploited the use of slaves; he would have denounced the persecution and murder of people for their beliefs as immoral in the days when the Catholic Church hunted down and punished any form of dissent; and he would have realised that science can tell us more about the universe than the Bible, in the days with the Catholic Church fearfully tried to ban books containing scientific facts. Perhaps this priest can see that same sex couples form relationships that are just as healthy, natural and productive as any heterosexual relationship, and that if they wish to express their bond through the traditional ritual of marriage, there is no reason to deny them this right.
Perhaps the fact that the Bible has nothing to say about homosexual marriage is an invitation to use evidence and common sense, and not rely on opinions presented in times of ignorance and irrational fear. I hope that in its quest for ‘truth’, the people at Catholic Truth Scotland don’t lose sight of the fact that every aspect of human society is constantly evolving, and that thankfully their church is not, and never has been, immune to change.
The error in the is post is that the author is applying his modern understanding of human rights (brought to the world by Jews and Christians, by the way) to an institution that was conceived, born and reared in ancient times.
The total understanding of the Gospel didn’t just pop into the minds of Christians. It has developed over time. Jesus Christ taught the core of His Revelation to the Apostles, however.
And that is what has remained unchanged in the Church.
During the American Civil War, Northern Christians fought their Southern Christian brothers in order to free black slaves.
No other religion, culture or people fought to abolish slavery, EVER in human history.
Atheist apply the Nirvana Fallacy to whatever belief or person they wish to impugn.
Why aren’t atheist ever concerned that their atheist brethren are responsible for the greatest mass murders in human history?
LikeLike
The error in this comment is that you clearly didn’t read, or understand, the post. I’m not criticising the Catholic Church for its past behaviour, I’m making the point that it has changed its opinion on many matters throughout the ages, and that individuals who believe there is an unchanging ‘truth’ to cling to, are seriously misled. As for your last question, see my response here:
LikeLike
My comment expressed my total understanding of your post and tore it to shreds.
You are expressing the absurd philosophy of skepticism: whatever doesn’t fit your limited atheistic worldview, you simply deny.
Atheism, by definition is irrational. So rational arguments will be completely opaque to them.
LikeLike
What did I deny?
LikeLike
“Why aren’t atheist ever concerned that their atheist brethren are responsible for the greatest mass murders in human history?”
Oh wow… tell me, who killed in the name of Atheism?
LikeLike
I got banned from a graduate class forum for objecting to the stance of the Catholic Church regarding the American Civil War South.
The professor just couldn’t abide any criticism of the Church. I realize that we cannot apply our modern values to other cultures and time periods.
But my case was that 1865 was modern times.
The automobile and the airplane are barely 30 years into the future and the telephone was soon to be, if not already, invented.
And since Abraham Lincoln’s case for abolition were based on Natural Law, which is a subset of Divine Law, I think in this case the Church deserves criticism.
LikeLike
Interesting. So do you agree that the Catholic Church changes its stance on matters over time?
LikeLike
The Gospel of Jesus Christ never changes.
But human understanding of it and practice of it develop over time. The word “develop” is meaningful. The word “change” is not.
The sacrament of Confession is a notable example. In ancient times, people would confess their mortal sins publically and go through months of public penance.
But what if I confessed that I, a mere servant, had been having animal sex with the king’s daughter since she was 9 years old? Or that I had habitually stolen from my more well to do neighbor?
Such confessions would not only be dangerous to the sinner, but they would tear entire communities apart since everyone sins in a grave and scandalous manner.
So out of Medieval Ireland came missionary priests preaching the Word in mainland Europe. And they brought with them their custom of totally private, confidential Confession.
Well, the totally private, confidential Confession caught on like wild fire and received the imprimatur of the Church.
LikeLike
First atheism has no name. It is that worthless of a philosophy.
Second, while religions, especially Judeo-Christianity, civilize mankind by teaching him to attenuate his baser appetites, atheism does absolutely nothing to attenuate man’s baser proclivities.
Consequently, regimes that impose atheism necessarily destroy religion. That means there are no institutions at work in the atheist society that dissuade men from their baser appetites.
Vladimir Lenin, founder of the USSR, stated categorically that “atheism is necessary to the Communist program.”
So it was in the Communist atheist regimes of Lenin, Stalin and Mao that the greatest mass murders in human history took place.
The atheists slaughtered 100,000,000 of their own people. That is even worse than the NAZI mass murders of 12,000,000 and the total dead from World War II of 64,000,000.
Atheism drips with blood, oppression and carnage. Whereas Christianity powered the rise of the greatest civilization in human history, Western Civilization.
LikeLike
Absolute bollocks. So, i’ll give you one more chance: Name a single person who has killed in the name of atheism.
You seem pretty sure someone has, so let’s hear it….
LikeLike
Atheists deny everything that doesn’t conform to their religious faith.
What you are doing is setting a completely arbitrary standard, killing in the name of atheism, and then condemning my argument because it fails to meet your completely arbitrary standard.
“Killing in the name of atheism,” is an absurdity.
Sophists present absurdities to their opponents in the hope of deviating a rational discussion into the fairy realm of nonsense.
LikeLike
See above. I have answered your question twice.
LikeLike
You are correct. I cannot answer the absurdity, “Who killed in the name of atheism.”
That bit of nonsense ranks just below the other atheist nostrum, “If God is all-powerful can he create a stone too heavy for Him to lift?”
LikeLike
Ahhh, so you can’t actually name one person in all of human history who has killed in the name of atheism. Now, of course, i can name many, many, many people who’ve killed in the name of the Holy Roman Catholic Church.
So, the lesson we learn from this is, think before you spew your drivel.
LikeLike
There is no Gospel of the Egyptians as far as orthodox Christian doctrine is concerned. There is only the Gospel of Jesus Christ and it comprises the New Testament.
From the book of Acts of the Apostles we learn the destructive nature of heresy (aka reform) and how the Apostles fought it.
The Church has continued to work against heresy over the millennia by calling councils where the bishops of Christendom would meet and hash out the issues of the day and clearly define Church dogma.
LikeLike
(re-posting this… accidentally went to the wrong spot)
I really don’t give a damn if you (or some fledgling church composed of deceitful men) chose to ignore those works. The facts are there are 50 canonical books regarding a 1st Century messianic gnostic character named Jesus and I accept them all as evidence. You have no authority over me, so the works stand.
Alas, the character Jesus I recognise slaughtered an entire mob of hideous, fire breathing, winged DRAGONS when he was just aged two. (Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew)
The character I recognise was a coercive, rather creepy homosexual promising “secret information” in return for sexual favours (James 2nd Apocalypse and the Secret Gospel of Mark: “Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth came to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God.”
The character I recognise murdered three children when he was just five years old. (Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and Thomas)
The character I recognise was nailed to a living tree, not a Roman cross, which then spewed forth fruit like an exploding piñata. (Gospel of Truth)
The character I recognise preached for the total separation of the sexes and demanded no man have sex with a woman. (Gospel of the Egyptians)
The character I recognise blinded all the adults in Nazareth (Infancy Gospel of Thomas).
LikeLike
“The Gospel of Jesus Christ never changes.”
Really? Then please tell me what happened to the Jesus in the Gospel of the Egyptians who not only demands total abstinence but preaches for the outright separation of the sexes, stating that sorrow and error will remain with man “As long as women bear children.”
Seems that message has been ignored….
LikeLike
Silenceofthemind… i’m still waiting for your answer: tell me, who killed in the name of Atheism?
LikeLike
Simply proclaiming, “Absolute bullocks,” indicates that you are unable to reason past your own profound bias and any proof that atheism is a philosophical disaster.
To be rational, you must argue your point with systematic thinking, not simply issue a proclamation that denies reality.
LikeLike
I asked you to name a single person, and you couldn’t. You named political despots whose tyrannical rule for political ends. Seems you failed.
LikeLike
Arguably, Stalin killed in the name of atheism. It is not entirely clear, as the Russian Orthodox Church was strongly bound to the Tsarist state, and when I googled for “Christians in the gulag” I found horrible arguments that the Gulag was run by Jews, implying that the Holocaust was not so bad really.
So did Stalin, Mao, the Kim dynasty, Hoxha, etc kill for Atheism or because the church might be a hotbed of rebellion? I don’t think the atheism can be entirely taken away from the motive.
LikeLike
Clare, Stalin didn’t kill in the name of atheism. He was a mentally deranged lunatic, a despot who purged his own country for reasons of political power. If you believe that then you might as well say Hitler killed in the name of Vegetarianism.
LikeLike
People act in accordance with their own self interest. So “killing in the name of…” is a way of lending righteousness to pursuing self interest through murder.
The atheist mass murders of the 20th century were lent righteousness by “killing in the name of” social justice.
Social justice is how all leftist ideologies including atheism justify government oppression be it mass theft of wealth or mass murder.
LikeLike
I really don’t give a damn if you (or some fledgling church composed of deceitful men) chose to ignore those works. The facts are there are 50 canonical books regarding a 1st Century messianic gnostic character named Jesus and I accept them all as evidence. You have no authority over me, so the works stand.
Alas, the character Jesus I recognise slaughtered an entire mob of hideous, fire breathing, winged DRAGONS when he was just aged two. (Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew)
The character I recognise was a coercive, rather creepy homosexual promising “secret information” in return for sexual favours (James 2nd Apocalypse and the Secret Gospel of Mark: “Jesus told him what to do and in the evening the youth came to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the kingdom of God.”
The character I recognise murdered three children when he was just five years old. (Infancy Gospel of Pseudo-Matthew and Thomas)
The character I recognise was nailed to a living tree, not a Roman cross, which then spewed forth fruit like an exploding piñata. (Gospel of Truth)
The character I recognise preached for the total separation of the sexes and demanded no man have sex with a woman. (Gospel of the Egyptians)
The character I recognise blinded all the adults in Nazareth (Infancy Gospel of Thomas).
LikeLike
Meaning no disrespect, but you don’t get to define orthodox Christian Scripture.
That was done at the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and reaffirmed at the Council of Trent in 1545 AD.
So you are over a 1000 years worth of days late and a few dollars short.
If you have any interest in reality, you can see it for yourself at http://www.newadvent.org/bible/gen001.htm, where it is written in Greek, Latin and English.
Or you can go to a bookstore and look at the New American Bible
LikeLike
Like i said, i’m not bound to your limited, censored product. I accept all “records.” I, therefore, am more truthful than you.
LikeLike
I seriously hope you have no contact with any children. You’re mentally unstable.
LikeLike
Right. You blame me for atheist mass murders being a bunch of self-interested psychopaths.
Hopefully one day you’ll gather enough courage to look at reality instead of the atheist concocted version of unreality.
LikeLike
Yes, we all know Hitler committed mass murder in the name of Vegetarianism.
Or was it Christianity?
“I believe today I am acting in the same way as the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lords work!”
-Adolf Hitler, speech delivered in 1936.
“Secular schools can never be tolerated because such a school has no religious instruction and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith…. We need believing people.”
-Adolf Hitler, April 26, 1933
LikeLike
Always a show-stopper when one holds up quotes from Dear Adolf attesting to Christianity. I am surprised the Christians don’t break out in a fit of gagging? They really are such abysmal liars.
And there is plenty of photographic evidence of Die Fuhrer cavorting with the Catholics .
The Christians are sometimes as bad as the Holocaust deniers.
And as I mentioned they never ( not in blogville at any rate) show any contrition for the documented and proven crimes committed in the name of their religion or their god.
LikeLike
I had not known they formerly forbade cremation on pain of excommunication, or indeed that a Pope had spoken up for slavery in 1868.
But- they are busy attacking Catholics, the “Collegiate” heresy which is “Modernist”. They are a particular strong flavour of Catholic. I find Turvey Abbey far more welcoming than this lot.
LikeLike
Clare, cremation is still banned here in Brazil because of the church. It’s insane.
LikeLike
I just found a very enlightening article on them, and noted to Ark that they’re not just the bunch of random ignorant people chatting in public that they seem to be, but a seriously nasty organisation:
http://www.scottishchristian.com/catholic-witch-hunt-to-expose-gay-clergy/
LikeLike
Oh, you have got to read the Testament of Jean Meslier, 1729, for his ‘appraisal’ of the Catholic Church.
http://www.marxists.org/history/france/revolution/meslier/1729/testament.htm
________________________________________
LikeLike
That’s so long! I have the attention span of a gnat. Any highlights to share??
LikeLike
He (a priest) details the “proofs” that the church is wrong. Here’s one bit that resonated with me:
Since there is no particular sect that doesn’t claim to have been truly founded on God’s authority and to be entirely exempt from all errors and impostures that can be found in the others, it is up to those who claim to establish the truth of their sect to show through clear and convincing proofs and testimonies that they were divinely instituted. Lacking this, it must be taken as certain that they were of merely human invention, full of errors and falsehoods. For it is not credible that an omnipotent, infinitely good God would have given laws and ordinances to men and that he wouldn’t have wanted them to bear purer and more authentic marks of truth than those of the imposters that exist in such great numbers. Yet there is not a single Christ-lover, of whatever sect, who can clearly prove that his religion is truly of divine institution. As proof of this there is the fact that though for many centuries they have contested each other on this subject, going so far as to persecute with fire and blood in order to support their opinions, there has nevertheless been none from among them that has been able to convince the others through such evidence. This would certainly not be the case if there was on one side or the other clear and certain proof of divine institution. For, since no one of any sect or religion, enlightened and acting in good faith, claims to support and favor error and falsehood, and since on the contrary each side claims to support the truth – the true means of banishing all errors and of gathering all men together in peace with the same sentiments and in the same form of religion – these convincing proofs and evidence of truth should be produced, and in this way it would be shown that such-and-such a religion is truly of divine institution, and none of the others. Then all will surrender to this truth, and no one will dare to combat this evidence, nor support the party of error and imposture without being at the same time confounded by contrary proofs. But since these proofs can be found in no religion, this leaves room for imposters to daringly support all sorts of falsehoods.
LikeLike
Chapter 3 also gives a useful summary of ‘miracles’ and the like stolen from mythology. He sounds really tired at the end:
I will finish by begging God, so outraged by that sect, to deign to recall us to natural religion, of which Christianity is the declared enemy. To that simple religion that God placed in the hearts of all men, which teaches us that we only do unto others what we want to have done unto us. Then the universe will be composed of good citizens, of just fathers, of submissive children, of tender friends. God gave us this religion in giving us reason. May fanaticism no longer pervert it! I die more filled with these wishes than with hopes.
This is the exact summary of the in-folio testament of Jean Meslier. We can judge how weighty is the testimony of a dying priest who asks God’s forgiveness.
LikeLike
Quoting Hitler in this conversation is a failure of reason not a rational argument.
LikeLike
Ha! Says the foolish man (or woman) who tried (but failed miserably) to say more people have been killed in the name of atheism than anything else.
Seriously, i mean it: i really hope you don’t have any contact with children. You’re unstable.
LikeLike
Another atheist resorting to petty name calling.
It looks like a trend.
Goodbye. Farewell.
LikeLike
Ahhhh, so you were caught in your own lie and now run away. Pathetic.
LikeLike
I am under no obligation to submit to the verbal abuse of a complete imbecile.
If you can cobble together even a rudimentary argument based on rationality, reality and facts, I’m game.
LikeLike
Oh, you’re hilarious! Do i have to remind you (again) that it was you, sir, not me, who proffered the ridiculous statement that more people have been killed in the name of atheism than anything else. I merely proved you DEAD WRONG, and now you’re embarrassed.
LikeLike
Smile, aren’t they funny, John!
LikeLike
This guy’s a gem! I do hope fundamentalism is classified a mental illness soon because its quite clear he needs some serious help.
LikeLike
Come and read this bloke… Noel’s been having a chat on another post, but this one is a flaming pearler!
LikeLike
Yeah, i read Noels post and was going to comment then figured i just couldn’t be bothered right now. Silenceofmind drained me of motive 😉
LikeLike
You were beginning to sound like i usually do for a few comments back there. I honestly thought you were going to go ballistic.
I’ve been thinking about trying a new strategy to posting that avoids the Cols, and Paarsurrys and unklee’s of the world but still gets the point across succinctly.
Not easy for me.
LikeLike
I’m just catching up. I was thinking that John was sounding uncharacteristically flustered. Silenceofmind is so moronic I wondered why he even bothered, but it’s frustrating when someone doesn’t even come close to sticking to topic. And Ark, you love the Cols, Paarsurrys and Unklees – you bait them all the time!!
LikeLike
True, you know me so well, dear heart! 😉
But …1 Corinthians 13:11 ►
We’ll see…..
LikeLike
That’s kind of sinister. You’re talking about changing your ways, and chucking Bible verses around …
LikeLike
There was a level of silly i hadn’t encountered before 🙂
LikeLike
I think Silenceofmind is a tool of the Vatican, sent to drain atheists with irrelevant rambling. Don’t be fooled! Keep up the fight! 🙂
LikeLike
I think you might be onto something there 🙂
LikeLike
”Why aren’t atheist ever concerned that their atheist brethren are responsible for the greatest mass murders in human history?”
On reading Silenceofnomind I am reminded once again why it is that whenever religion is blamed over the atrocities is has committed its adherents immediately attack atheists and try to play the Numbers of Deaths game?
Even if it could be demonstrated that the Usual Atheist Suspects committed the atrocious genocides in the name of atheism or simply because the individuals concerned were atheist ( and it has never been demonstrated) I have never read or heard a religious person express any form of contrition for the religious organisation they belong to or the deaths committed by those who share their faith. Not one.
If the godless heathens are responsible for the millions upon millions of deaths BECAUSE they are godless and without morals then ”We” at least have an excuse: we are obviously Tools of Satan ( and watch John make a religious case out of that; as Satan was an angel remember!)
Now, for the religious, this sort of behaviour should be anathema. Yet it isn’t; simply because they consider they are acting under Divine Command, thus arrogating responsibility. Event the religious crazies who kill their kids or shoot up malls ,schools or Mosques feel the same.
Their reason is usually a variant on the theme of: “God wills it!”
How can you fight against this sort of mentality?
LikeLike
Pointing out the raw bias that powers atheists and their irrational, faith-based religion isn’t an attack.
It’s a statement of the cold hard first principle of atheism.
LikeLike
You are simply an ignoramus.I will not engage further.
LikeLike
If all you can do is call people names and deny reality you are doing everyone a favor by silencing yourself.
Thank you.
LikeLike
You rationalize like every fundamentalist, by almost never answering a direct question, which was perfectly illustrated by you first repose to my initial post.
Should you behave like an adult and do so then maybe you will be worth discussing with.
Until such time…..
LikeLike
I don’t want you think I’ve got nothing better to do with my time, but it’s lots of fun looking for Catholic Truth Scotland online. If you can bear it, read the article here and following discussion, where Editor and her chums have a go at other Catholics and reveal even lower levels of bigotry and ignorance than we experienced:
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2011/04/13/should-there-be-a-guild-of-catholic-bloggers-and-would-it-be-dominated-by-%E2%80%98taliban-catholics%E2%80%99/
“It’s very serious to accuse someone of grave sin. So, show me where the Church teaches it is a grave sin to question the Holocaust? I am not a Holocaust denier. I know little and care less about the Holocaust. What I do know is that it cannot be a grave/mortal sin to question it.”
LikeLike
I’ll go have a look. But I begin to grind my teeth after a while with stuff like this.
It’s like expecting even a semi-rational reply from Silenceofnomind, or PeW or Col or any number of these far left field oddballs..
You keep thinking..maybe, just maybe…so you give it one more try.
Eventually you have to walk away or hide all the sharp objects.
let me make quick cup of tea and a slice of toast.
back in a mo.
LikeLike
Lol…She brought her Effed up buddies with her ! I am hosing myself laughing! They are completely bonkers!
Catlicks whipping Catlicks.
Priceless.
Should we play?
LikeLike
It’s interesting to see the response to them. They’ve obviously been at this a long time and are a bit of an embarrassment.
LikeLike
Reading their diatribe one can easily see how and why there were so many fights during the early formation of the church.
I suspect that if it wasn’t for the intervention of Constantine there was every chance Pauline Christianity would have fragmented so much it would have become a nonentity.
This is why they were forced to eradicate as much heresy as possible.
Can you IMAGINE Editor and her cronies in any position of power during the time of the Inquisition?
Shudders…Hell hath no fury and all that…
LikeLike
What a frightening thought! Their collective wet dream come true I have no doubt.
LikeLike
Oh,…I just realised the post is two years old. Oh well… I’ll read a few more of the posts.
LikeLike
Here’s an interesting one.
http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/commentandblogs/2013/08/15/rowan-williams-is-wrong-if-christians-in-britain-face-persecution-they-should-not-be-afraid-to-complain/
LikeLike
Oh yes, I’ve already had a chat with a Catholic about that quote. She claimed that as an outspoken Catholic publicly blogging about the evils of abortion and same sex marriage she’d be unable to find an employer (?). There’s a really bizarre culture of ‘feel sorry for us’.
LikeLike
Well, maybe Jesus will still want them for sunbeams?
LikeLike
“The error in [this] post is that the author is applying [her] modern understanding of human rights … to an institution that was conceived, born and reared in ancient times.”
No. That wasn’t the error. That was the premise. The church “was conceived, born and reared in ancient times” and has modernized over the centuries, changing with the times while claiming to be unchanging.
LikeLike
Well exactly. And no-one’s dropped by to attempt a justification so I can only conclude that they’ve all realised they’re wrong! 🙂
LikeLike
I’m sure that’s exactly what’s happened. 🙂
LikeLike
For you to be banned and spammed, you really must have irked the guys at CTS, which must be an oxymoron.
Meanwhile SoM must be a real dreamer. He believes strongly that Jesus existed and that he taught some fishermen and that we now have transferred to us a record of his teachings. As JZ says, complete bollocks.
LikeLike
I reckon I hit a nerve and the Editor was afraid my clever words were going to deconvert her entire following. It’s the only explanation. 🙂 The jury’s out on Silenceofmind – may well be PeW incognito with one too many whiskey’s in him.
LikeLike
B’wahahaaa 🙂
LikeLike
Universal human rights keep changing too.
LikeLike
Well of course! We’re in a constant state of evolution. The absurdity is when people deny it.
LikeLike