Pagan Origins of the Christian Faith (Phil. Daily Inquirer)

[bluedes]

---

kahibalo mo, the church exercises authority in interpretation within its ownself. unlike other sects, other institutions, other pretentious people, orthodoxy continues to run in the entire church since it is not dependent upon half-baked interpretation of some people, either because he felt he saw light above him or he had an overdose of a certain exotic herb.

as a regulating tenet, the Church as the Magisterium is an authority in the interpretation of God-Talk within at least itself. NOw, i dont understand why people outside the church find that problematic, since they are not catholics and they do not have to deal with it.

if you ask me, would i rather believe on an institution tested by time - a product of great mind, or some questionable scholar or attempting to be scholars who for the sorry lack of decent foundation in the topic results to charlatan tricks. to go against an institution tested by time for a millennia, a person who will be able to bring a paradigm shift must be a genius. in this age, there are none that fits that quality.

all we have are parlor tricks desperate for full professorships.

funny you mention this.. not in our time maybe, but Martin Luther was one who questioned such authority.. and yet he succeeded. The Catholic Church actually reformed itself even though it really did not acknowledge Martin Luther for some of its changes.

[Hellblazer 2.1]

NO its not contradicting, cus even if your from a different religion or sect but your teaching on morals e.i. faith, hope and love then its not contradicting, however every religion and denomination differs in doctrines in which " what is acceptable to them is acceptable to us, and what is acceptable to us is not acceptable them too, so on and so forth".

However christian heresies have a different case, since they where teaching the faithful doctrines which was not accepted by the whole church, however if there was any mistake in the magisteriums end then it didnt have any reserve to have it corrected.

Gnostic writings teach on morals i.e., faith, hope, and love too, you know. so it SHOULD not be contradicting to christian teachings per se. you know tonio, i wouldn't mind the church not accepting Gnostic teachings altogether. albeit, the church wouldn't understand the esoterica behind it. it's not for mainstream christianity man sad. so it's ok to be a heretic these days. it's not like we'll still be burned at the stake, right tonio? so from a non-practicing catholic to another catholic, let me go my way into Esoteric Christianity and you go yours. respect is the word, tonio.

[Hellblazer 2.1]

one paradigm shift coming right up. would you like large fries to go with that?

[The_Child]

funny you mention this.. not in our time maybe, but Martin Luther was one who questioned such authority.. and yet he succeeded. The Catholic Church actually reformed itself even though it really did not acknowledge Martin Luther for some of its changes.

succeeded in what dividing the church? one could not solely credit luther for reforming the church, oh no, instead of reforming it, he pave the way for division.

although he had his contribution, his contribution was i believe overrated. nevertheless important, but overrated.

other people also worked for the reform of the church, among them was Erasmus.

[handsoff241]

nevertheless important, but overrated.

Hehehe...

[st.anthony]

Gnostic writings teach on morals i.e., faith, hope, and love too, you know. so it SHOULD not be contradicting to christian teachings per se. you know tonio, i wouldn't mind the church not accepting Gnostic teachings altogether. albeit, the church wouldn't understand the esoterica behind it. it's not for mainstream christianity man sad. so it's ok to be a heretic these days. it's not like we'll still be burned at the stake, right tonio? so from a non-practicing catholic to another catholic, let me go my way into Esoteric Christianity and you go yours. respect is the word, tonio.

I did not ever say that all of you should go back to the church, its your freedom to do so, however its always by my faith to invite everyone back. by the way i read a thread here that your a freemason, is that true?

[Hellblazer 2.1]

I did not ever say that all of you should go back to the church, its your freedom to do so, however its always by my faith to invite everyone back. by the way i read a thread here that your a freemason, is that true?

i'm a Mason, tonio. but my personal beliefs are my own and not of my Brotherhood. thanks for the invite though. i appreciate your respecting my freedom, tonio.

[st.anthony]

i'm a Mason, tonio. but my personal beliefs are my own and not of my Brotherhood. thanks for the invite though. i appreciate your respecting my freedom, tonio.

By the way why are you so vocal of your brotherhood, cus the way i know mason is that you wont even know that they are members except if they tell personally or you see there cars with the masonic symbol, by how come your too different from them and telling every one about it? are you really a member?

[bluedes]

succeeded in what dividing the church? one could not solely credit luther for reforming the church, oh no, instead of reforming it, he pave the way for division.

although he had his contribution, his contribution was i believe overrated. nevertheless important, but overrated.

other people also worked for the reform of the church, among them was Erasmus.

your "overrated" statements are subjective.. without martin luther's contradictions, there would have been no one courageous enough to initially test that authority. he did not only divide the church, but he also changed it.. and like i said earlier, the church did not acknowledge martin luther for the "changes" it undertook. changes like the abolishment of indulgences, the focus on ceremony to the focus on scriptures, more stringent behavior on the part of the priests...

anyway, i am not glorifying martin luther for what he has done.. i'm merely putting him in place of what his functions were in history.

also, it would be nice if you backed up your statements with something factual, and not ignore key people in history to the point of sounding as if the subjective remarks you have made were actually substantial..

[regnauld]

For every THESIS (Church Dogmas) there is always an ANTI-THESIS (Protestant Teachings) and the challenge should be to SYNTHESIZE all these thesis and anti-thesis in order to be UNITED once again!

The two churches have NO MIDDLE GROUND! That's why GNOSTICISM is the inner or Esoteric side of Christianity!