Friday, October 05, 2012

The European Union Creed - the emerging One World Religion

Further to the European Union joining with the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, the Arab League and the Commission of the African Union to declare ‘the importance of respecting all prophets’, His Grace has forged the emerging orthodox creed from their declaration.

By definition, a creed is a summary or statement of what one believes. We are beginning to see the religious orthodoxy to which all citizens of the EU (and, thanks to Baroness Warsi, the UK) are to be subject.

The words of this new creed are all theirs; the literary skill His Grace's. He would like to call it 'The Euro-Beast Creed' (aka the supranational, pantheistic, syncretised multi-faith declaration of faith), but that would attract all manner of millennialist End-Time prophets. So, instead, he pondered the precedents set by the ecumenical creeds of Christendom - the Nicene Creed, the Apostles' Creed, and the Athanasian Creed. Equivalents might be the Brussels Creed, the Elders' Creed, and the Benedictine Creed. But since His Holiness had no hand in this, and since the distinguished World Elders have been usurped by such political nonentities as Baroness Ashton (European Union), Ekmeleddin İhsanoğlu (OIC) and Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma (African Union), and since Brussels is a little too parochial, His Grace has settled on:
The European Union Creed

We believe in the importance of respecting all prophets,
regardless of which religion they belong to.
We share a profound respect for all religions.
We are united in our belief in the fundamental importance
of religious freedom and tolerance.
We condemn any message of hatred and intolerance.
We call for an end to violence wherever it has appeared.

Reason rather than rage must prevail.
We call for peace and restraint.
We reiterate our strong commitment
to work for full respect of religion.
What joins us together across regions and religions
is far greater than what separates us.
The only answer to the darkness of intolerance and ignorance
is the light of mutual respect.
This 'light of (mutual) respect' is more than a little concerning in its implications for the orthodox adherents of all faiths and none. There should be no compulsion to 'respect' the heresies, blasphemies and superstitions of others. Indeed, the secularists and humanists of the Enlightenment in particular need to be increasingly vigilant. But for the Christians, as it is written: 'And many false prophets shall rise, and shall deceive many.' The recusants will be persecuted, and heretics tortured and executed. We have been warned.


Blogger gentlemind said...

The truth supports itself, whereas lies need to be enforced. The One World Religion will have to be enforced. The harlot riding the beast.

5 October 2012 at 10:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

this religion just will not work, When one person is sincere and genuine to their faith, they take their God above all else how on eaarth can they accept other Gods and be tolerant towards them.

For example, a Isalmic person who is gernuine towards Allah as being the only one God can never come into relationship with a dedicated Messianic Jewish person.

A Christian who said that jesus Christ is the only way to heaven (like I beleivwe) just can not be tolerant and/or accept other beleifs s we are the only way.

All other Gods are wrong.

5 October 2012 at 11:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This religion is stupid; It is not logic for two different fundamental beleifs who say that they are the only way to accept this.

What i would ask if they are wrong and fundamentaly beleive that they are right,

Well then who is essense has the ultimate right

This is logic, not the new one world relgion. To me it sounds like the false prophet

5 October 2012 at 11:26  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

I don't know, Your Grace, doesn't look all that bad to me. What with having to conjure up synogogue membership fees and school tuition from the thin Ether itself, I'm open to all options. Perhaps if we get in on this racket early? Let's put the Creed you wrote up to a peppy tune, or what about a Mutual Respect Credits exchange? New Holy Day cards? So many ideas, Your Grace. How's about we meet up at Starbucks with our laptops to chew over some ideas?

5 October 2012 at 11:57  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Avi Barzel, one thing is certain, the new world religion will come pre-loaded with Schism.

On the general topic, Your Grace, your communicant is currently enjoying Robin Lane Fox's work 'Pagans and Christians in the Mediterranean World'. It occurred to your communicant that it was timely to reverse engineer the rise of Christianity, with a view to gaining insight into the religion's apparent decline within its founder populations.

5 October 2012 at 12:12  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Good point, Bluedog, when His Grace and I meet up at Starbucks to launch the concept stage of the project, we'll probably start up another schism over the respective holiness levels of blue mountain versus arabica grinds.

5 October 2012 at 12:41  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Hilarious picture..very original and creative YG. Great take on PC. As I am to be executed shortly as a recusant I would like to make two requests

1. That I can use your pic on my blog with acknowledged credit for artwork to you of course and

2.That I am executed in a different place to the rest of the recusants on this blog as I would not want be seen dead with any of them!

5 October 2012 at 12:56  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Uh, uh, Miss Cressida, not so fast, martyrdom won't be granted willy-nilly, on the strength of principles, convictions or similar theatrics. Nor does it come cheap. His Grace and I will be drawing up lists of criteria and benchmarks and a fee schedule, so start on some ideas for your application and await your turn like everyone else.

5 October 2012 at 13:05  
Blogger EU Community Inquisitor AIB said...

Now then now then now then!

Mr Avi Barzel, I'm afraid you appear to have incorrectly filled in your application form to become an EU Prophet (Respect be upon us all).

You appear to have ticked the box marked "male" in the Equal Opportunities Religious Ecstasy Disclosure form. Quite clearly this indicates an alarmingly cisgendered world view, not to mention the disturbing possibility that you might actually be male, when the form clearly implies that EU Prophets (Respect be upon us all) shall only be hermaphrodites who experience both their genders as trans.

I also see you've marked your height in feet, and your weight in stones and ounces. A Community Removal Team will be at your address shortly to sort out this discrepancy.

5 October 2012 at 13:21  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I am a Catholic Princess ..Barzel,you should understand about the princess phenomenon. I am first in line,I have a nice outfit lined with rose thorns and if you execute me anywhere near those others I will reincarnate myself as an anti semite.

5 October 2012 at 13:26  
Blogger Manfarang said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

5 October 2012 at 14:21  
Blogger Manfarang said...

The United Religions Initiative (URI) is an international, grassroots, interfaith bridge-building organization modeled after the United Nations. It aims to create social change by promoting "enduring, daily interfaith cooperation," ending "religiously motivated violence", and promoting "cultures of peace, justice, and healing for the Earth and all living beings."

5 October 2012 at 14:22  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Nice! Good Luck!

5 October 2012 at 14:57  
Blogger William said...


I like your idea of a Mutual Respect Credits exchange. Presumably if I built up enough credit then I could walk around with a placard saying "Mohammed was a false profit" for half an hour and no one could touch me.

5 October 2012 at 15:18  
Blogger William said...

Although I would check my spelling before writing the placard obviously. What does it prophet a man to write a comment in haste?

5 October 2012 at 15:38  
Blogger Mr Integrity said...

Are you not aware of the 'Dump Starbucks Campaign' because of their corporate support for SSM. I on principle no longer go there. (I actually don't like their coffee any more either.)

5 October 2012 at 15:53  
Blogger John Magee said...

Since Islam isn't capable of abiding any of the lofty ideals his HG's imagined Euro Credo. It is doomed from the start.

Religion has been the cause of persecution and wars in Europe (and all over the world) since the beginning of recorded history. Why didn't the Euro geniuses today take a lesson from their those Yankee rebels 259 years ago who's Founding Fathers, being children of the European Enlightenment, who knew all too well about the problems religion caused in the Europe they left behind. Use their experience in such matters which inspired them to come up with and include in the very first words of of the opening paragraph in our Constitution the simple yet profound words...

" Congress shall make no law respecting an established religion, or prohibiting the free exersize thereof....."

Then they wrote.." "or abridging the freedom of speech...."

Those few words above will never become archaic and were a brilliant concept 230 years ago which immediately solved the problem of religious conflicts such as a state church for the new American Republic, at that time in history, and for as long as it exists. A few words similar to these are all that is needed for the EU Constitution or civil rights documents today to solve the "problem" of religion. So far as I know there is no mention of either. The EU bureaucrats and social engineers are obsessed with PCness instead of real freedoms.

Making the EU "religious neutral" is going to be difficult as Christianity dominates almost every aspect of European Culture and history. This fact has to be accepted by all to avoid future conflicts. Governments may change but people's minds don't. The mess in Northern Ireland only ended a decade or so ago yet still fizzles and there is the religious fighting bewteen Muslims and Orthodox Christians still going on in Kosovar and elsewhere in the Balkans today.

Ending the few established churches in Europe would also go a long way to help change attitudes.

It's that simple or that complex depending on your point of view.

5 October 2012 at 17:10  
Blogger Nicodemus said...

If then the light in you is darkness, how great is the darkness!

Oh ... I'm not sure this is part of the new creed.

5 October 2012 at 17:18  
Blogger John Magee said...


As the "King" of typos here I know what you mean...

5 October 2012 at 17:19  
Blogger Irene's Daughter said...

Come Lord Jesus - soon

5 October 2012 at 17:36  
Blogger IanCad said...

Good for you Magee @ 17:19

We are all flesh and blood and haste and hurry.

5 October 2012 at 17:38  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Indeed Archbishop, the idea of guff like that enshrined sends a shiver down a free man’s spine, and no mistake.

One is keen that the first principle of religion be upheld. That you can take it or leave it (…one is thinking of you Gregory…). And if you leave it, you can also despise it (…Gregory again !), or turn away from false creeds as surely that which are not Christian must be.

What nefarious plot abounds to control a man’s mind !

Scurrilous EU. No good will come of this it ever comes to pass, for liberty and free thought will not go down without a fight…

5 October 2012 at 17:40  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The perennial philosopher has always sought common ground in the primal spirit of the matter

The primitive is universal and general at the civil level

What would seem to be at odds here is that original cultures live according to their own roots and the EUs Rootless Centralisation is a matter which all cultures should oppose

5 October 2012 at 17:54  
Blogger Naomi King said...

It's Baal all over again.

5 October 2012 at 18:21  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


If you are going to start up this new Church of the Holy European Union, you are going to have to (you know) cut the hair and trim the beard. Nice new suit. You'll probably need a trophy wife. And no more trucks with 18 gears. You'll need a Lexus. Oh and the whiskey and salty fish combination is right out. From now on, its upscale wine and cheese.

Got all that? Good. Don't forget your Media Relations seminar at 9:00 am.


5 October 2012 at 18:42  
Blogger EU Community Inquisitor AIB said...

I hope you all know that persuant to EU Regulation 616 - Rehabilitation of Non-Respecting Individuals, I have noted the names of those people who have expressed anything less than their utmost joy and support for this idea in my trust EU Community Notepad (metrically ruled).

Bigots - we're coming for you!

5 October 2012 at 18:49  
Blogger non mouse said...

Thanks to Your Grace and today's communicants. Good posts!

Your Grace's parody wonderfully highlights the illogic of religions (and governments) that are united under any but The One Almighty God. Of course, Ole Rompos is merely mortal. Like those for whom his institutions provide all this guff, he is dust that shall return to dust, thereby providing fodder for the legless eater of dust (cf Gen 3:14-19). Logos he cannot be.

I'm therefore fascinated that even Your Grace's consummate skill reflects no beauty where there is none. Methinks the reason is that the leaden words of claptrap artists are irredeemable: simply because they are not fed by the Word (Logos). Why, I can't even make the neu "creed" scan with the 'Odour to Joy'!

5 October 2012 at 19:09  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Now that Abu Hamza (...or ‘that one handed bastard son of a camel’ as he is known in royal circles, probably) is on his way to a life of incarceration Uncle Sam style, it is a calm moment to reflect on what our controllers may be expecting of us. It quite simply can’t be done, what !

5 October 2012 at 19:13  
Blogger G. Tingey said...

Actuallt it highlights the ridiculous nature of all religions.
Tell'em all to get stuffed!

5 October 2012 at 19:25  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Gregory darling, it’s you ! Where have you been lately. Inspector worried sick, don’t you know !,

5 October 2012 at 19:27  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I have never imagined you in the role of Constable Plod Belfast but as you are the Wizard,sorry the Inquisitor ,Will there be a sort of roster system where everyone will be e.g Jews for a week and then Muslim for a week etc
to ensure egalitarianism and equal opportunity ( I'm not quite sure for what)

5 October 2012 at 19:31  
Blogger John Magee said...


The EU is it's own recipe for self destruction. It can't continue to expand like some sort of Euro universe eventually including even North Africa and The Middle East. I've read this is an unbelievable dream of the French and Germans.

The Russian wolf is licking his chops.

The Islamic camels are already flocking into the Euro sheeples homelands.

The American Eagle better fly out of NATO and go home if it wants to keep all it's feathers intact.

5 October 2012 at 19:41  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cressida, Belfast is no doubt imagining himself as a ‘B’ special. With a piece of four by two in lieu of a truncheon :- >

5 October 2012 at 19:44  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Inspector how mean of you! You went to the expense of paying for a boob job on your girlfriend but too cheap to buy her a t shirt.

5 October 2012 at 19:48  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cressida. The Bank of England is considering a limited edition run of tenners with our future queen Kate on the front. There she is in all her glory...

5 October 2012 at 20:00  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Not a great idea!

5 October 2012 at 20:10  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What did the Tower of Babel represent and what was its aim?.

It was the attempt of man to reach God by his own efforts.This is the basis of all religions.

And the aim of Atheists is to become their own' gods' they decide what is 'right' and what is 'wrong'by whatever they judge is moral(in their own eyes).

Of course Jesus came to restore the broken relationship between fallen man and a Holy God and it was by the power of the Holy Spirit that Jesus carried out his Earthly mission. 'Jesus gave them this answer: "I tell you the truth, the Son can do nothing by himself; he can do only what he sees his Father doing, because whatever the Father does the Son also does.'(John 5:19)

Religion(in the worst sense of the word) is man' trying to be good'by his own efforts and this is 'the treadmill' that man strives on until he gives up exhausted and dejected or becomes a religious hypocrite and denies all that he sees that is Godless within himself.

Religion fuelled by pride and arrogance is probably satan`s greatest work because it gives the illusion of being better than others and leads to self righteousness and further away from God.Jesus gave' lessons' in humility for this very reason!.

This last days unholy multi faith religion(you might scoff but it is closer than you think) will entrap many if the power of the holy Spirit does not give them revelation as to their true condition and the remedy which is faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ on the Cross of Calvary alone.

We are saved FOR good works not BY them!.

5 October 2012 at 20:16  
Blogger Preacher said...

Ladies & Gentlemen.
I posted on this on the good Doctor's blog of 25/9/12.
Although I like a good laugh, I think that we should contemplate the plans of the E.U regarding a One World faith more soberly.
The Lord Himself warns about the end times & the signs accompanying it in the gospels, then again in the Revelation.
One of Satan's best tricks was to be represented as a ridiculous little creature with a pitchfork, horns & tail in a hideous shade of Red. What happened? Everybody laughed at such a parody & the devil was delighted.
Reflect if you will on the current political amoral stance & the Laws that are gagging & suffocating the freedom that we all once held dear, listen to the non gospel trash that is presented as 'Christian' that flows from so many false prophets every Sunday,tickling the ears of the people. When did you last hear of the Wrath of God & the day of His judgement preached upon. may I submit to you the fact that if there is no danger of death, loss & condemnation to eternal darkness. Then God's love & mercy shown by His sacrificial death in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ to freely save those who accepted it to redeem them from their Sins was not necessary.
If there is no danger, there is nothing to be saved from. But if there is that danger, The gospel is God's only solution & it must be freely preached & made available to all.

5 October 2012 at 20:26  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

len hypocrisy is part of the human condition and not just pertaining to religion. You must know that.

Satan is alive and well in many forms has always been within us and out of us.Faith (and I can only comment on mine) gives you the awareness of what evil is ,a kind of sensitivity to its presence.You cannot keep constantly referring to scriptures to validate every single thing you
say. This could be part of your problem.
I agree with you that evil pervades our world cossetted and camaflouged to look like good but your mind is closed to all religion because of religious hypocrisy...not all the apples are rotten and the barrel is

5 October 2012 at 20:47  
Blogger John Magee said...


Interesting you should mention the Tower of babel.

Sooner or later the EU is going to have to chose a common language for the smooth functioning of government, commerce, and easy communication among the many peoples of the numerous countries clinging to the EU Tower of Babel.

Which will it be? German, English, Italian or French.

Pick one and one only as the common language of Europe.

If it's German can you imagine how the French, English, or Spanish will tolerate their children learning German at school as the language of a United Europe?


Imagine the Queen giving her annual Christmas Message on TV or addressing Parliament in German or even in Italian if it is chosen as the common Euro language (although Queen Victoria did speak fluent German in private with her husband Prince Albert and her children and other family members).

How will the people in countries that speak obscure languages which were the basis for creating their nation states after the Austro-Hungarian Empire collapsed after WW I feel today if their children are taught one of these languages, especially German,as their first language?

Will the minority languages in Europe survive?

Many of these people are already bilingual but to force them to become trilingual or multi-multilingual is an impossible demand. The EU must chose one common language and do it soon to educate children today to function in the EU of the 2020's with one common language.

People fight over language just as much as they used to fight over religion. Language defines who you are. Belguim is on the brink once again of splitting over language so are the Basques in Spain. What will it be like when they all have to speak one common language and start thinking about the loss of their ethnic and national identies?

I can't wait to see the sparks fly over the debates that will come in Strasbourg or Brussels over which language will to be the official language of the EU in the future.

Maybe they should consider Latin?

Another question. Why do individual EU nations still have embassies? A truly United Europe should have one EU Embassy to represent all the nations of the EU in the capitals of other nations. All flying the European Union Flag over their new embassies.

5 October 2012 at 20:53  
Blogger Preacher said...

John Magee.
Personally I can't see why the EU would need one language to gain it's objectives, either politically or religiously. It seems to be thriving quite well at the moment with the use of interpreters who deliver its laws & diktats in the languages of all its 'members'. A form of Esperanto could possibly be developed. But IMO it's not a necessity as it's raw power & World domination that they're after.

5 October 2012 at 21:12  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Cressida. Well done that girl. Len of course is a bit a simpleton when it comes to the human condition. God knows our limitations. After all HE created as and has none to blame but himself if displeasure comes into it...

5 October 2012 at 21:32  
Blogger Avi Barzel said...

Thank, thank you my children for the wonderful comments and your devotions. A funny read. Had to actually labour today, imagine that, and heading for my Sabbath soon and then 2 more days off for end of Sukkoth. So quickly; fine, anything for a Princess as long as no whining takes place; hmmm never thought that one can have fun with the new credits...I'll need a lot; Starbucks has the best wireless and the one near me has kosher bagel and cream cheese; the beard and the hair stay, a new suit...white, with sequins...would be nice; I better check with the wife about this trophy wife thing and a gold plated Lexus 18-wheeler sounds great. Oh, yes, and I'm sure I'll meet the cisgendered, trans-gendered, non-gendered, or gender-nailed-to-the-wall requirements after wife and I have the chat about the new trophy wife.

Good weekend to all, a shabbat shalom, chag sameach....

5 October 2012 at 22:58  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

The new religion:

When we drink, we get drunk.
When we get drunk, we fall asleep.
When we fall asleep, we commit no sin.
When we commit no sin, we go to heaven.
So, let's all get drunk, and go to heaven!

The ethos of the one commonwealth:

May you never lie, steal, cheat or drink.
But if you must lie, lie in each other's arms.
If you must steal, steal kisses.
If you must cheat, cheat death.
And if you must drink, drink with us, your friends.

And, the only curse permitted:

May those who love us love us.
And those that don't love us,
May God turn their hearts.
And if He doesn't turn their hearts,
May he turn their ankles,
So we'll know them by their limping!

Dodo the Dude
(Peace be upon me)

5 October 2012 at 23:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

I see Hans Kung, the Pope that never was, is 'at it' attempting to stir up protestation and revolt against the Vatican.

Ponder this.

Küng has recently distilled the ideas of Weltethos – which seeks to create a global code of behaviour, or a globalisation of ethics – into a capricious musical libretto. Mixing narrative with excerpts from the teachings of Confucianism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism, Islam and Christianity, Küng's writings have been incorporated into a major symphonic work by the British composer Jonathan Harvey that will have its London premiere on Sunday at the Southbank Centre.

Küng says the musical work, like the foundation, is an attempt to emphasise what the religions of the world have in common rather than what divides them.

(Guardian on line)

I thank God he holds no influence in the Church.

5 October 2012 at 23:48  
Blogger John Magee said...


I wasn't joking when I suggested Latin as the language that could unite the EU. It served that purpose before and during the Middle Ages when Western Christendom was united. Latin was still an international language in Western Europe for the RC Church and even Protestants as well as scholars and others after the Reformation.

Why not revive Latin as the language of the EU. One incentive is that Latin serves as the basis for most if not many of the words in all the present EU member states.

Its a thought. A wonderful thought.

It would also be a delightful twist of fate.

6 October 2012 at 00:15  
Blogger non mouse said...

Oh, truly---unless we can convert the profitising propheseers to Indo-European, I think they should display their patriarchal charity by enforcing Classical Greek. The Greeks taught the Romans how, after all.

That way, the euros could ensure that even fewer people would understand them. No one would even know they can't rise above claptrap in any language! And they would prove once more that theirs is the power ... to eradicate civilisation.

6 October 2012 at 03:34  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


The tragedy of the condition of 'fallen man' is that he desires to do 'good'and indeed can do good but he is also bound to do evil.This is the two sides of the same coin. 'I don't really understand myself, for I want to do what is right, but I don't do it. Instead, I do what I hate.'(Romans 7:15)

This the the 'treadmill'.

The Cross and rebirth is the way of escape from this human dilemma(which the Inspector doesn``t or rather will not understand.His arrogance is what I was referring to .He(and others) are too proud to accept that they cannot save themselves and must therefore rely entirely on Christ)
I fully understand the 'human condition'and' the religious'unless they too understand are bound to their religions ,their 'Churches 'who cannot save them only Christ can!.

6 October 2012 at 08:28  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I think we will deal with this in sections. We both agree on that man is made up of good and evil"the human condition".To escape this condition completely would make you no longer human.We would all have wings and be angels.Christ died for our sins the idea being you attempt to avoid sinning as much as possible by following his teachings and if you lapse( and everyone does)at least ensuring they are not of the serious grievous variety.So we are reliant on the scriptures of Christ and having free will we must take responsibility for our choices. Some have more difficulty dealing with temptation than others and that is why Christ provided us with a Church to disseminate information,celebrate the Eucharist to provide support and pastoral care and to give confession which is also another supportive factor for the everyone to gain salvation. Humans are tribal animals who function as a group and for most to attain salvation in isolation
without a Church would be too difficult and was not intended anyway. Why don't you believe what St Peter was told "upon this rock I will build my Church and I will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven"? meaning you Peter are in charge of this institution and it is your commission to ensure salvation for the people.Jesus and his Church are the hope for salvation. Before Christianity was the darkness and with Christ's sacrifice came the rebirth and light manifested in his creation of His Church.

6 October 2012 at 10:52  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Now listen Len, you born again loon, one fully realises that much in this world, both spiritual and temporal, is a cess pit. As you sit above human creation condemning us, spare a thought for the billions who are not worthy of you. We just get on with it best we can. As for ‘Arrogant’ would that be term for someone who defies the word, not of Christ, but of his near equal, Len. Would it help if this man spent the rest of his life crawling on his stomach ?

6 October 2012 at 11:26  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

prophet len (peace be upon him) said ...

"Religion fuelled by pride and arrogance is probably satan`s greatest work because it gives the illusion of being better than others and leads to self righteousness and further away from God."

How true - and doesn't he just walk the talk of his religion too?

6 October 2012 at 12:28  
Blogger bluedog said...

Mr Inspector, a technical question, would that be ten pounds for two or just the one in view?

6 October 2012 at 12:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


From your comments you imply that our 'Human Condition' is unchangeable that we must do 'the best we can 'and accept that we will fail to live up to God`s Standard. this describes dead ' religion' perfectly.

If what you are saying is correct then Jesus really didn`t have to be crucified at Calvary all He really needed to do was to say " Do the best you can and God will make up the difference"

Which of course He didn`t!

Jesus said" take up your Cross and follow Me."
(I probably don`t need to remind anyone that the Cross is an instrument of execution)
Jesus also commanded" you must be born again!"(This is not an option but a command from God!)

So if you want to follow your religion' do the best you can' and accept you will fail constantly then go ahead but God will not bless your efforts.Jesus will weep over those who reject Him and settle for a dead religion instead.

Regarding my previous point 'good' and 'evil' being the two sides of the same coin.James Savile did much good in the form of raising money for Charity but also did much evil if the allegations against him are to believed.
This is the' human condition' to which God has given the remedy.God does not try to re-educate fallen man, teach him to' be good,' or follow religious practices God crucifies Him and makes a new man out of the 'ashes' of the old.

We either belong to the 'old Adamic' creation under sentence of death or we have been translated into the Kingdom where Christ Reigns.'

'Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated us into the kingdom of his dear Son'(Col 1:13)

6 October 2012 at 13:42  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


God sees fallen man as' dead.'This includes all who rely on their own efforts to save themselves be they Catholics Muslims or any other who attempt to be their own' saviour'.

Jesus describes Himself as a 'door'which leads into the Kingdom of God.Unless we go through' the door' ordained by God we will be refused entry.
By relying on our 'own goodness 'we are in effect attempting to bypass Jesus Christ and 'make our own way in.'
The arrogance of this move is quite breathtaking if you realise the implications.But if you 'religious beings' feel you can meet Gods criteria than by all means give it a go?.

6 October 2012 at 13:51  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Len. Why don’t you admit it. Only you and a few other keyboard loons deserve to be in paradise. The rest of us were put here by a callous creator who is looking forward to our eventual ceasing to exist. A supreme being who laughs at our attempts to do right, and laughs again as he consigns our immortal souls to a eternity of hell.

What a small minded wicked bastard you are...

6 October 2012 at 14:30  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

We are not relying on our goodness we must confess and atone for our sins. This is not arrogance len.
You have never answered the question about Jesus saying to Peter "upon this rock I will build my church etc.If you reject this then you are in fact rejecting Jesus command for salvation. It is very clear so I am not sure how you are justifying your position.

Catholics are not relying on their own goodness for salvation.It is through the new testament,and the sacraments"the door" that we enter the kingdom of God.For someone who has been here for so long you do not have any understanding of Catholicism at all.

6 October 2012 at 15:11  
Blogger John Magee said...

Not long ago I asked a question of the audience here about what "remarks removed by the author" meant.

The only person who was kind enough to answer my question was Len.

My fellow Catholics were silent.

Thank you Len for the help.

6 October 2012 at 17:58  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cressida ,
The Catholic Church needed to find something to base 'its authority' on and this initially was 'The Donation of Constantine' the problem was this was discovered to be a not very cleverly fabricated forgery.So the Catholic Church sought some other means to base their 'authority' on.They discovered the apparent ambiguity of Matthew 16:18.

Let us ask Peter who the 'Rock' is because he actually tells us.

1 Peter 2:4–9 (ESV)
4 As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, 5 you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. ...................................

You’ll notice in verse 4 – Come to him – [this would be the Lord–Christ Jesus]. Come to him, a living stone – [the Real Cornerstone–the primary Stone–from which all the other stones draw their life]. Come to him, a living stone, rejected by human beings but chosen and precious in the sight of God. This can only be Jesus Christ of Nazareth.

6 October 2012 at 19:32  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

That`s ok Mr Magee pleased to help.

6 October 2012 at 19:34  
Blogger Preacher said...

John Magee.
To be honest, it wouldn't matter to me if the EU NWO chose Latin, Greek or Swahili as their Global language as I have no intention of being a slave to their planned Multi-faith religion. I'd rather be one of the persecuted, hunted & executed lot instead of selling out because of fear.
To quote James Graham on the eve of his execution in Edinburgh when taunted by an enemy, "We all have to face death sometime, it's just a question of when, how & where!".
But out of interest, why do you think they will NEED a universal language?.

Blessings. Preacher.

6 October 2012 at 19:35  
Blogger non mouse said...

Indeed the serpent is subtle, Your Grace!!! The euSSR approaches the destruction step by step, but it runs the steps into the same deceptive plane:

1. Subvert all the reformers/reformed Christians and 'persuade' them to unite - with each other, but under the rule of their masters, the holy Romans.

2. At the same time, 'persuade' said more-holy-than-socks woppers to kow-tow to their Brothers-in-the-Prophet-Abraham. (I wonder if the euros will include Israel in their jurisdiction, at any point).

3. Continue subverting education so that no religion is "acceptable" to the young of any euro habitat; these innocents have computers, i-phones, etc., so they know far more than the generations that invented the instruments or the "myths" (whatever their primitive elders may say).

4. Thus incited, the ensuing Battles for Respect will eventually reach their zenith; whereafter, the euSSR's militias will unite so as to enforce steps 1-3. That'll contribute to Population Control, too; especially if the animus goes nuclear.

Incidentally, I spoke yesterday to a young gentleman whose Humanities Professor advocates something similar: "Christians and Islamists should learn to get along; they must stop imagining that they know everything- they need to understand that they're falsely comfortable in a fuzzy bubble of creation myths." The lad shrugged his shoulders at the spectre of nuclear threats from Islamists like, say, Iran. Doesn't think nuclear bangs are anything to worry about, apparently....

From yet another boy (or was that a "female"?), I learned it's urgent for everyone to accommodate those who are so right about ssm. "Not everyone's a Christian," he felt constrained to explain.

Now what was that word... "begotten (not created)"? Ooops, we English Christians have made a mess of our spelling. It's: b-i-g-o-t** (Chambers sez "OFr origin disputed." No wonder the term feeds the schizophrenia so beloved of decons!

** A person blindly and obstinately devoted to a particular set of ideas, [or a] creed or political party and dismissive towards others [Well, a person would have to be blind to do anything required by that posturing personage with the german title].

6 October 2012 at 19:56  
Blogger John Magee said...


Language is the major if not the only force of unity in a diverse country or empire.

Latin gave stability and unity to vast Roman Empire.

In the recent past it was, of course, English that united the global British Empire and French for the French and Belgian colonies. The German language was the glue that held the Austro-Hungarian Empire together in spite of it's many peoples who constantly used language as a rallying point for nationalism. Hungarian was the first language of the Hungarians of course but when they went to the Vienna the capital of that Empire they spoke German too in order to be undestood by all the other nationality groups. The Austro-Hungarian Empire worked until WW I came along and it's many peoples wanted their own homelands and languages once again when Austria along with Germany lost that War in 1918.

Tsarist Russia and its replacement the USSR was held together by the Russian language. All that blew up instantly when the USSR collapsed in 1991 and it's many Republics broke off immediately from the USSR formog their own independent nations once again and reinstituted their ancient native languages.

English was what finally united the many peoples and languages of India and made it more or less one country.

In our modern age, even with all it's sophisicated computer technology used for translating you must have the people from northern Norway able to talk in a common language with the people of Sicily and the people of Ireland able to talk in a common language with the Slovaks. Finns must be able to talk with the Spanish in a common language. If this doesn't happen the whole show will fall to pieces during or after it's first major crisus.

The English language unites the immensely diverse USA from Alaska all the way across North America to the USA Virgin Islands in the Carribean and from Maine all the way across the globe to Hawaii and then another 1,000 miles to the Island of Guam.

Millions of illegal Spanish speaking immigrants are doing their best to use language to divide and they hope to eventually cause the South West USA to secede for the USA. That is how serious language is in our world.

Within the past 20 years Quebec has at tried at least twice to secede from Canada over language and their French cultural identity.

The language of the EU will will eihter be German, French, or English with an outside chance it could be Italian. I wasn't joking when I suggested Latin.

What do you think?

I think it will be German because the Germans are rich and control the wealth of the EU. For that reason German stands a good chance of being the language your grandchildren will learn in school in 2030 as a common European language they will talk in their everyday life outside their homes in England and when they travel to Italy a holiday in 2045.

If not German then French.

Turns out the Germans just might be the ultimate victors of WW II.

I don't like this concept at all.

6 October 2012 at 22:50  
Blogger Matt A said...

Inspector, your posts this evening are not up to your usual quality, even descending to call Len a "born again loon". Either Len is not born again, in which case he needs our prayers, or (as seems likely from his writings) he is born again, in which case he is a brother. Christ said that you MUST be born again, so to use this term in a negative way is not very nice.

Rant over, normal service now resumed.

6 October 2012 at 23:13  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Matt A. The Inspector is mere flesh and blood. Len brings out the worst in him, and he freely admits hands up to that. He is also a breath taking hypocrite.

You see, the man despises organised religion. Yet he is warmly applauded by protestant types, the very protestants who themselves worship through organised religion. Yet, not a peep out of him about the Archbishop of Canterbury being the whore of Babylon. The man is also Draconian in nature. If you are familiar with that historical figure, Draco had no empathy with the human condition and condemned those who came before him to death most of the time. He thought it right and proper punishment. Len goes one further, he condemns souls to the eternity of hell.

There you have it. From the heart. Blood boiling even now. A good night to you sir.

6 October 2012 at 23:56  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

non mouse said ...

"Your Grace!!! The euSSR approaches the destruction step by step, but it runs the steps into the same deceptive plane:

1. Subvert all the reformers/reformed Christians and 'persuade' them to unite - with each other, but under the rule of their masters, the holy Romans.

2. At the same time, 'persuade' said more-holy-than-socks woppers to kow-tow to their Brothers-in-the-Prophet-Abraham. (I wonder if the euros will include Israel in their jurisdiction, at any point)."

Your ignorance of both politics, protestantism and the Vatican is astonishing!

The Catholic Church abandoned the prostestant Hans Kung's approach to ecumenicalism years ago. It stands firmly on its traditional doctrines, dogmas and teachings. To be united with Rome means choosing to accept the spiritual authority of the Church. It will not compromise Truth for the sake of unity.

You really think this one world religion nonsense is something any true Pope would countenance?

As for your *opinion* on relationships between Islam, Judaism and Catholicism, you really think Europe, or the Catholic Church, wants Islam to prevail over Christianity?

The Catholic Church and Europe is not so strongly committed to the 'end time' prophecies of the 'evangelists' that drive millions of Americans to offer unconditional support to Israel. Her re-emergance is part of God's plan and, in the 'final showdown', God's people will stand with her. Thereafter, you can pick from a plethora of scenarios, just so long as you accept this. Lutherism and Calvinism, let alone Catholicism, does not accept these speculations as a sound basis for foreign policy. Nor, for that matter, does Obama.

Best stick with your little lectures about the English language. Most more informative and enjoyable.

7 October 2012 at 00:25  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


the prostestant Hans Kung

Cheap shot, that. If a Roman Catholic can be defined doctrinally, then so can a Protestant. We don't define ourselves as "not Catholic." Everyone who rejects the authority of Rome is not by definition a Protestant.


7 October 2012 at 00:52  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Matt A

The prophet len (peace be upon him) infuriates some bloggers because he speaks with such apparent *authority* on a subject he knows nothing of substance about - the Catholic Church.

Now, let me tell you, Catholic teaching is that we are born again in Christ and, through His Grace, we remain one with Him. The Church is God's instrument for teaching us about Him and, as a channel of His Grace, supporting us in our walk with Him.

We do not accept the "born again" theology of Grace, that can or cannot be resisted, depending on which protestant variant you accept. Nor do we accept that this "encounter" with the Holy Spirit is a once and for all 'event' in the life of a totally depraved person that, having taken place, covers all sin, past and future, and assures one of salvation.

On top of all that he is, as the Inpector pointed out, a "born again loon". Why? Not because all who who believe in this are loons. No, although they may well be, but because his expressed confidence in his own salvation doesn't ring quite true. In my experience, people who go around asserting and bragging they have some gift that others do not have are generally unsure about this and trying toprove something to themselves.

This is manifest in prophet lens (peace be upon him) aggression towards Catholics. Telling us we do not know our Saviour and are damned, indeed! Such arrogance, combined with his irrational hatred of the Catholic Church, based on ignorance and fuelled by anti-Catholic websites, just tries one patience.

7 October 2012 at 00:58  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


I have read through all of len's posts on this thread to determine the source of your reaction. Now I must admit I did find some serious theological deficiencies in what he said. For example, he said The tragedy of the condition of 'fallen man' is that he desires to do 'good' and indeed can do good but he is also bound to do evil. This is correct, but only from a narrow perspective. Fallen man can do good in the eyes of other men, but he cannot do anything good in the eyes of God. And again God sees fallen man as' dead.' No, God declares that natural man is spiritually dead. He confuses the outworking of sanctification with the outworking of man's will in his natural state. Above all, his presentation of the Gospel is distressingly Arminian. But I must say, that overall, I find no fault with his posts. They do not justify the harsh words you have spoken to him.

The root of your problem is found in this statement:

Only you and a few other keyboard loons deserve to be in paradise.

No one deserves paradise, OIG. We all deserve to be condemned to Hell. This is the beginning of the Gospel. We are all the same by nature. We are all children of wrath fit only for destruction. There is nothing that any of us can do to change this. We don't queue up to do good works in the hope that God will accept us despite the evil that coats us like tar. We don't use the sacraments to make ourselves righteous upon forensic examination. We will never possess a righteousness that we can claim is ours by right of merit. That is the fundamental basis of all Christian anthropology. We can do nothing of ourselves to please God. Our righteousness before God is founded in Christ alone. We contribute nothing. We do nothing. We add nothing. That is all len has been saying. That is what every Christian has said for the last 2000 years.

This is not what the RCC says, of course. And that is the source of the conflict. (That for example is why the WCF originally called the Pope the Antichrist - because of the willful corruption of the Gospel into a pale recreation of Old Testament Temple Judaism.) Your intemperate remarks have only served to illustrate that you do not understand your opponent's position, but have instead prefer to construct Potemkin fortresses that may be easily conquered.

Len condemns no one to Hell. He does not consider himself better than others. He is not Draconian but accurately states the relationship between God and natural man. You prefer an anthropomorphized God who is little more than a super-sized human father. Of course men prefer such a concept. It's far less threatening to man's pride. He doesn't have to come to the Cross naked and destitute with nothing but sin in his hand. Instead, he can boast of his efforts. It imagines that salvation is within a man's reach that he may do something to earn his position before God. That is the ultimate exertion of man's pride after all - to earn his place before God.

But he can't do it. The effort, though it be oh so natural, originates in a lie from the pit of Hell.


7 October 2012 at 01:41  
Blogger John Magee said...


Before your blood boils over into a stew what does your new picture symbolize?

7 October 2012 at 02:56  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Len there is no ambiguity in Matthew particularly if you read it in context of what comes before and after. It has just occured to me that this must be clearly irksome to Protestants as it establishes indisputably the authority of the Pope of a religion that is anything but dead ,len.You need to be reborn len in the real scriptural meaning of that term.

Carl your alarming post had a touch of the Waco about it with its Pasolini images of naked destitute men sin in hand before the cross (wow,your total depravity thing has fried your brain) blandishing sweeping statements about the Catholics doctoring the scriptures to having absolute knowledge of the nature of God. I am assumimg that all the genuine sacred texts are buried in an American desert guarded by F Troop!

7 October 2012 at 09:12  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


What a shocking image of God and His creation Calvinists hold!

Not only is man seen as totally depraved and coated in evil, with no ability to respond to his conscience, merely helpless. But God, before we are conceived, decides who will be saved or not, regardless of anything we do or say. No free will; no option; saved or damned and all predetermined by God.

If len has a touch of Arminianism in his views then it is a glimmer of light that will lead him to a correct appreciation of the cooperation between God and man that is at the heart of the Gospel message. It is the same view that drove the development of early Methodism.

Prompted by the Holy Spirit, we freely choose to go to the foot of the cross. Once there, again, we choose whether to respond to God's call. And, once we choose Christ, we can loose Grace through our own actions and grievious sin.

And, Hans Kung is a "protestant". What else? He is protesting against the Church he is a member and also an ordained Priest. His modernism, that so badly influenced the Church in the early 1960's, has now been firmly rejected and he is seeking to undermine the authentic Gospel through an organisation he established to preach a corrupted version of the Gospel - a search for what unites all religions rather than the Truth.

What would you call him? The term "protestant" has no real theological or doctrinal meaning. It has to be attached to something one is demonstrating against - and that is the Catholic Church. It is a term that misleadingly suggests unity amongst a plethora of competing beliefs where really very little exist.

You are a self identified Calvinist; others Lutherian; others Evangelist (whatever this means); others Reformed Catholics (again, whatever this means); and others, like len, goodness only knows what.

7 October 2012 at 12:01  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dodo Catholics make statements which 'sound right'but are based on error.

You state that you are' born again but this'in Catholicism is by 'infant baptism a sprinkling of water over an infant.Where does repentance come into this?.And what about freedom of Choice for the infant?.
We use the same phrases but with entirely different meanings!.This is why debate is so important and freedom to discuss ones chosen religion.
I am not going to discuss mindless rants however.
Catholicism has survived by 'devouring' its opposition either by eliminating or integrating opposition.It did this with paganism and will do the same with Evolution and eventually with multi faith doctrines. I believe a few 'feelers have already been put out in this respect?

The Pope has no authority over Christians other than which he has assumed.
Jesus Christ is the Head of the Body and the Head of the Church.

Whilst we are speaking of 'ambiguities'the Pope calls himself 'Vicarius Christ'which is a 'substitute Christ' or indeed 'another Christ'this is exactly what Jesus warns Christians of. "For many will come in my name, claiming, 'I am the Christ,' and will deceive many." (Matthew 24:5)

Do I hate Catholics?...Certainly not!. I do not 'hate' people who are under deception because they are in a demonic trance and sleepwalking towards eternity.

Do not confuse passion with aggression!.

7 October 2012 at 12:35  
Blogger IanCad said...


This is getting to be a concern.
I agreed with you on a recent thread now I find myself doing it again on this one.
I have to endorse the first two paragraphs that you posted @ 12:01.


What's up with Synge then?
This fellow just does not seem to be OIG material.

7 October 2012 at 13:26  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

'Vicarius Christus' does not mean substitute Christ. It means Vicar of Christ. There is no suggestion in either English or Latin that there is an interchangability between Christ and his representative.Only Christ can be God.Your biblical interpretations are not semantically correct.
I would classify your description of more than one billion people being in a 'demonic trance'as mindless rant, len, making any discussion with you futile.

7 October 2012 at 13:29  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

What the Inspector has read today is highly disturbing. Is this the core belief of Protestantism – that God has created a monster in man ! Not a creation that can choose between good and evil, but who will always be intrinsically evil ? So evil that a mere 144,000 of ‘pre-destined’ types out of the hundreds of billions who at one time will exist will ever know the greatness of God at first hand as one of your more extreme sects believes ?

What a sordid story of contempt. And what would Jesus Christ make of you all. His message was a simple one, it had to be. The average human is no philosopher. “Come with me” was the simple message. He placed no hoops or jumps in the way. You’ve done that...

You people have taken the bible, dissected it. Taken it out of context. Ignored translation issues. Placing great emphasis on doom laden passages. And turned it into a weapon to beat people with. And you wonder why this Roman Catholic man is furious with what you have done...

7 October 2012 at 13:30  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

God did not create a monster in Man!
God`s Creation was good!. In all respects.

Man was given free will as to who he would derive life from (which Tree?)God did not create a race of 'robots'because free will is essential to respond in love.

Adam choose the' Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil'which was independence from God.This of course God respected but this act cut Adam of from receiving Life from The Spirit of God .Adam lived thereafter by the power of his soul(mind will and emotions)He became spiritually dead although he lived physically for many years.
(Man cut of from the influence of God is opened to all sorts of other influences many not good at all!)
Jesus Christ(the last Adam) came to give man the chance to re-connect with God spiritually through His atonement for man`s sin on the Cross of Calvary and His Resurrection.

This takes a revelation of fallen man`s true condition and a union with Christ in His Death and resurrection.(Some call this being re -born re- created.God`s Spirit has actually blown the breath of Life into the dead Spirit of Man.

A Question ...How long after Adam chose independence from God did evil start to gain the upper hand?

7 October 2012 at 14:16  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


Nothing I wrote in my first post was explicitly Calvinist. Nothing. The most rock-ribbed Arminian would have agreed with every word. So all your shock and astonishment at the 'Calvinist God' is somewhat misplaced. This simply one more manifestation of the eternal conflict between Protestant and RC over justification - you with your sacraments, and your treasury of merit, and your good works, and your indulgences, and Purgatory. We with nothing. Nothing at all.

Save Christ and Him crucified.


7 October 2012 at 14:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Religion will save no one, 'your Church' will not save you, even holding to the 'right theology' will not save you(though it might point you in the right direction)

What a dead man needs is Life!.
God sees all without his Spirit as dead already.

Jesus came that we might have Life and Life to the full.

'So it is written: "The first man Adam became a living being"; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit'(1 Corinthians 15:45)

Jesus turned no one away all who came to Him and repented were given eternal Life as a gift

7 October 2012 at 14:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.( Romans 6:23)

Eternal Life is IN Christ Jesus not something dispensed by' The Church.'

A 'gift' is not earned otherwise it is no longer a gift.

7 October 2012 at 14:54  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


You should try making posts that aren't so laced with invective. It would at least preempt a charge of hypocrisy when you complain about being insulted by other commenters.

And have you actually ever seen an episode of 'F Troop?'


7 October 2012 at 14:58  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


You are not so far away from Catholicism as you like to think, as Carl hinted.

Evil "gaining the upper hand" is really not the same as total depravity. It suggests a wounding and spiritual battle which Satan, without Christ's intervention and Grace, will win. We all share in and are wounded by the guilt of the First Adam; we all share and are redeemed in the death and resurrection of the Second Adam.

Catholics do believe in the efficacy of infant Baptism as a channel of rebirth, yes. However, once washed and cleansed of the stain of Original Sin, we believe we have to establish and sustain a relationship with Christ as we grow in our faith and come to know Him. Baptism is necessary but not sufficient for salvation. Once we reach the age of personal responsibility we have to resist evil and accept Grace. Being reborn from above simply means the old covenant of natural birth as a Jew and the circumcision ritual is no longer the required path to God.

Adam's fault, known by God before it happened, was the forerunner to all men and women being able to actually joining the Godhead by uniting with Jesus, the man, and Christ, our God. His death was so much more that atonement for man's crime.


Jolly good - hope springs eternal!

Now we just need to re-examine the error of your views about the Pope and one or two other matters of theology and doctrine.

7 October 2012 at 15:05  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


You are not so far away from Catholicism as you like to think, as Carl hinted.

I hinted no such thing. The heart of RCism is a false gospel based on sacramentalism. That in one sentence is why Protestants reject it, and all its works, and all its ways. You can't be close to RCism if you reject its very essence.


7 October 2012 at 15:42  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

I do not appreciate your scurrilous invective about Catholicism Carl and if you cannot stand the heat get out of the kitchen.I expect nothing less but insults from the deplorable examples of humanity that comment on this site with very few exceptions,so a lecture from the likes of you is really out of order.
Someone sent me a clip of F troop.
The infantile ridiculousness of it reminded me of you.Is every American stuck fast at a prepubescent level of intellectual
response or is it just you?Don't worry your boyfriends will be along shortly to give you that needed support.

7 October 2012 at 16:10  
Blogger IanCad said...

I'm feeling lazy today.
Now I agrree with Carl.

As I also second Len's comments.

Sorry Dodo, I am an unrepentant "Antipope,"

7 October 2012 at 16:21  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Len.God did not create a monster in Man!. Ah, a concession from you.

God`s Creation was good!. In all respects.. In as much as we have free will. free will to do good as well as bad.

Adam choose the' Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil'. No he didn’t choose anything. Adam was the first true man. Have a guess at his IQ. Perhaps it was as high as 10. The only thing he could have chosen is where to bed down for the night.

Jesus Christ(the last Adam). The what ? Don’t be bloody stupid.

Being alive is NOT a sin. God does not shake his stick at all of us. Stick that on your sandwich board next Saturday. A supreme being doesn’t create something then despise it, he leaves that to extreme protestants like you...

7 October 2012 at 16:30  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Carl Jacobs said ...

"The heart of RCism is a false gospel based on sacramentalism."

Is that right? My, my, after nearly 60 years of being a Catholic I just didn't realise this!

I always thought the essence of Catholicism was a relationship with Christ strengtened and sustained by channels of Grace gifted to us through His appointed Church.

And Arminiasm is not far away from Catholicism and as len's theology (today, at least) contains elements of it, then he is moving in the right direction spiritually.


But of course you agree with Carl and len (well, in part).

Like all *protestants* you keep your options open. And, naturally, you're anti-pope. I mean, it's really the only defining feature of *protestantism*.

7 October 2012 at 18:29  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


To crib Lord of the Rings:

"I am Adam, or rather, Adam as he should have been"

The relevant passage to which Len alludes is 1 Corinthians 15:44b-49, specifically verse 47.

However! It's worth noting that the passage in question has two different variations:

The NU-Text variation is:

"The first man was from the earth, a man of dust; the second man is from heaven." (ESV UK)

The M-Text (or Majority Text) variation is:

" The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven." (KJV)

Douay-Rheims takes the NU-Text version, because the Epistles in the Vulgate were largely derived from the Egyptian (N-Text) tradition via the Old Latin tradition (probably not translated by Jerome himself, but someone after his death). Which is the historical explanation for why this particular phrase may not be familiar to you.

7 October 2012 at 18:30  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Sorry - last sentence could be confusing: the Vulgate has updated (rather than translated) versions of the Old Latin Epistles, which were probably not updated by Jerome.

7 October 2012 at 18:32  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Interesting Belfast, one made a point earlier on translation difficulties. God alone knows the truth in some of the efforts produced.

Consider the Inspector suitably bashed on the head with a bible...

(...though privately he has no idea what the passage means and doesn’t have much inclination to find out either...}

7 October 2012 at 18:38  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


Didn't mean to bash - or to enter in on a particular side, just wanted to explain that it wasn't ignorance of the Bible that had produced the debate on that point, but different translations.

The Catholic Encylopedia makes reference (in its entry for Adam) to the passage as one of an analogy - which makes sense within the Douay-Rheims version, which takes a de-personalised rendition of the terms. Len is probably working from a KJV edition which renders the passage in personal terms regarding Christ. In fact the 21st Century KJV makes this even more prominent by capitalising "Spirit" in verse 45.

NIV and ESV take the D-R version, whilst Young takes the KJV version, and again emphasises the personal.

Even without getting down to the nitty gritty of a single perfect text (which is very much a modern, and particularly Protestant notion), I'd say that the passage could quite easily support both an analogical reading and a personal one.

7 October 2012 at 18:50  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


I do not appreciate your scurrilous invective about Catholicism

I shall give that observation all the attention it deserves.

... deplorable examples of humanity ... infantile ridiculousness ... prepubescent level of intellectual
response ...

Ah, Cressida. Your kindness is exceeded only by the gentleness of your tongue.


7 October 2012 at 19:26  
Blogger John Magee said...

Carl Jacobs

I mean no disrespect but history is on the side of Catholics both Latin and Eastern Orthodox.

What was the only Church in Europe before the Reformation? There were no Protestants or national churches before Luther broke with Rome or before the Church excommunicated him. There had been heresies but they were suppressed and they faded away.

The early Church celebrated the exact same 7 sacraments Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox do today. This is an unbroken link that can be traced directly from today in 2012 all the way back to the first days of the Church.No one who knows the history of Christianity can deny this fact.

If your Christian ancestors came from Europe, were Chrstians from the Middle East, Egypt, or Ethiopia they also went to Mass or the Devine Liturgy in the Eastern Church at some point in time before they became Protestants.

Why did The Emperor Nero use as an excuse to burn the early Christians accusing them of being "cannibals" after he himself ordered the fires to be lit that burned most of Rome for his "entertainment" in 64 AD? The pagans of the Roman Empire believed that the Christains were "cannibals" because of the lie and false rumor pagans spread claiming Christians ate human "flesh" at their gatherings. Of course this was their wrongful interpretation of the Sacrament of the Eucharist. Only 30 years after the death of Jesus and his giving us the Eucharist at his last Passover feast, what we call the "Last Supper", the Eucharist being the atcual body and blood of Jesus was known even to the pagan Romans. In in a false way of course. In 64 AD there were still elderly people who saw Jesus before and after his Death on the Cross and His Resurrection.


If it hadn't been for the Pre-Reformation Catholic Church there would be no Bible. It was because of the work and patience by scribes in monasteries who hand copied the Bible for centuries until the invention of the moveable printing press by Guttenburg in the 1480s and before them other Caholic scribes from the first days of the Church that the Bible was preserved and passed down generation by generation from the life time of the oldest Apostle's until shortly before the Reformation.

No Catholic Church, no Bible. It's that simple.

7 October 2012 at 20:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I don't know why there needs to be so much tension here between Christians. Surely as John and Paul once said "all you need is love"? Or this that too much of an old man's dream?

7 October 2012 at 20:33  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Lavendon old chap. The good news is that we are not about to slit each others throats, unlike the lesser races who embrace Islam, with their doctrinal differences...

7 October 2012 at 21:35  
Blogger Marya said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 22:18  
Blogger non mouse said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 22:24  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Marya, you should not see Roman Catholics as threat. We are your spiritual brothers and sisters. His Grace is a most generous ghost host. Can we work together ?

7 October 2012 at 22:24  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah Inspector,


On other news, the government is willing to sell out to the Germans on BAE Systems- are the Tories hell bent on reducing us to a defenceless third world, peasant society, whilst Germany dictates (as in the past) to the rest of Europe and takes everyone else's industry, including Britain??

Cameron, who talks of taxing the working man (yet again) to pay for the benefit scroungers (yet again) only to MOVE yet more British industry and job creation into the hands of the enemy; he seems to have the backbone of a Mollusc? Why anyone who has moderate centre -right beliefs (such as me)will vote Tory again is beyond me- Vote UKIP!

7 October 2012 at 22:27  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Lord Lavendon

The wording of All You Need is Love is ambiguous having been inspired by Hinduism with a touch of LSD. Far better is The Word. However, both are anti-religious/faith songs probably suited to be hymns of any 'one world religion'.

Good on a night though after a few pints of Guiness a whiskey chasers!


Back to the Francoesque avitar we all protested against a little while ago.

7 October 2012 at 22:31  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Dodo,

I think Uncle is quoting the Apostles St Paul and St John?

7 October 2012 at 22:37  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Lord Lavendon,

The war ended 67 years ago, so Germany isn't the "enemy" anymore!

7 October 2012 at 22:37  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, I was actually quoting the Beatles!

And I'll be dammed if I have my banana's grown to a perfect Euro standard and especially not ones with a taste of garlic, as a concession to the French!

7 October 2012 at 22:41  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

John Magee:

History is of course rarely safely on anyone's side, but it is true that a question which all Protestants should at least consider is the way in which they regard the many generations of the faithful who would have understood Christianity in terms of the Catholic (and indeed catholic) Church.

But Catholics too might do well to ponder the heterogenity of the history of the Catholic Church. That for long periods there was not one Pope but many, that many points of doctrine were openly disputed between wings of the Church, and that central authority was often peculiarly absent - a charge which Catholics often levy at Protestants today. Those of us who cherish the history of the Church might also find time to reflect on the changing nature of Christian beliefs and practices, not to mention the ways in which our understanding of Scripture has evolved.

If that all sounds remarkably like some sort of postmodern, or worse, post-religious rot, then I offer my own take, which is that the history of the Church is messy, just as the lives of Christians have been messy - both in the sense of disorganised and occasionally chaotic, but also, woefully, in the sense of the stains of sin, both personal and institutional. But through all this mess, and all the detritus of human activity and failure, the strands of faith, hope, and charity (or love) run clean. The God who is our Comfort today, was the Comfort of those who knew Him before us, and will be, God willing, the Comfort of many more to come.

7 October 2012 at 22:44  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Saints John and Paul never collaborated on a joint epistle that I'm aware of or set it to music. Has a lost text been found in a cave somewhere in Israel?

7 October 2012 at 22:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, my dear, if Germany is not the enemy, then why is half of Europe and proud nation states being bullied and dictated to into bailouts- Ireland, Greece, Cyprus, Spain, Portugal [England's oldest ally] to save the same's banking system?

These are "bailout", states, i.e. a bailout of German and French banks, but the meaning of a bailout to the German government, is a loan, with stringent conditions- high tax, high employment, cuts in basic public provisions, the destruction of democracy and break up of countries and usurious interest.

7 October 2012 at 22:49  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


Hinduism with a touch of LSD.

Heh. That is an inspired description of the Beatles. Brilliant, even. I'm still laughing. I shall shamelessly plagiarize it. With permission, of course. Something like "Two parts hedonism, one part Hinduism, one part bad drumming, and a hint of LSD."

You're a genius.


7 October 2012 at 22:59  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

AIB said ...

" ... the history of the Church is messy ... both in the sense of disorganised and occasionally chaotic, but also, woefully, in the sense of the stains of sin, both personal and institutional.

Indeed and Jesus was aware of this and God had a plan.

"That thou art Peter; and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."

The Christian Church will survive and Truth will prevail over modern heresies as it has over past ones - we have God's promise.

7 October 2012 at 23:13  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Yeah, I guess the Germans do seem to be being a bit hard on the Greeks and Irish.

Also, The Beatles aren't that bad!

Inspector, why have you adopted what looks like a European fascist picture- bring back the 'tash! Or preferably, the "Kate" 10 pound note picture!

7 October 2012 at 23:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Carl - why thank you!

7 October 2012 at 23:16  
Blogger William said...


Bad drumming? Nonsense. Ringo's backbeat was superb and part of the genius of the band.

Apart from that, carry on.

7 October 2012 at 23:16  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Hannah, the Germans rule the EU. If you don’t see that, then as the Americans would say “You ain't alive hon”

7 October 2012 at 23:17  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Hannah - I preferred the 'thru'penny bits' too!

7 October 2012 at 23:18  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Dodo, as winter closes in, the Inspector is in a no nonsense martial mood. The avatar stays for now. (...It’s the spitting image of the Inspectors Uncle Jim who departed this life thirty three years ago...)

7 October 2012 at 23:23  
Blogger carl jacobs said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 23:25  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 23:32  
Blogger carl jacobs said...


Also, The Beatles aren't that bad!

Yes, actually they are. What are they really but the voice of a whiny pampered self-indulgent self-important 60's generation with a highly inflated sense of entitlement? Nothing but promiscuous sex, drug use, utopian dreams, and bad haircuts.


7 October 2012 at 23:33  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

Yes, I do see that Germany has the greatest influence in the EU, which is a reason to get out of it!

7 October 2012 at 23:34  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

7 October 2012 at 23:38  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Carl,

Well, no surprise there then! Whilst I was going to make a joke about Cromwell and him banning music, perhaps we could say what you say against almost every music band since the '60s.

And yes, I do understand your antipathy for that generation, the baby boomers; they had everything for free and are now making the current generation pay out (e.g. pensions and tuition fees,spring to mind).

7 October 2012 at 23:40  
Blogger non mouse said...

Yes, I agree, AIB @ 22.44: . . .the Church is messy, just as the lives of Christians have been messy - both in the sense of disorganised and occasionally chaotic, but also, woefully, in the sense of the stains of sin, both personal and institutional.

And I daresay there would have been no reformations had RCs managed to be perfect Christians who didn't involve themselves in power and politics -- but of course, they weren't Christ Himself. So it's a pity about the nastiness, but 'twas ever thus; some people can’t help trying to dominate others.

I’m just glad that we in Britain had early exposure to the Greek influences of Theodore and Hadrian. They favoured the development of vernacular Christianity. It is even claimed (Penrose) that, thereafter, Bede began to translate the Gospel of St. John into English. I think, also, we should never forget the contribution of the cowherd with the Celtic name: Caedmon, who chose to sing in English. We kept on responding to Scripture ourselves, regardless: one early gloss (tenth century) exists on the Lindisfarne Gospels.

We were also fortunate in being a long way from rome. We retained much of our independence despite the normans, and our monks saved manuscripts that prove it.

However, by the end of the 14th century criticism of church practices was strong, and Langland, Chaucer, and even the egregious Margery are among those who display some of the problems. I’d guess poor Julian reflects them too. Oh ... and there was Wyclif, who preceded Luther in wanting reform, and who also encouraged production of vernacular Scripture. The changes and reforms were made for good reasons and after much toleration of abuse; and they remain in place for the same reasons.

Personally, I choose to stay with this tradition; it is not in my nature to betray my forefathers by accepting what foreign power-mongers tell us to believe-- just because they say so–- no matter how much blood they pretend to extract from stone. Whatever excuses people proffer when they face the Judge ... He gave me my conscience and perceptions; and He gave them theirs.

And I thank His Grace for providing this British space.

7 October 2012 at 23:43  
Blogger John Magee said...


Yes. That was my point. How can any Protestants today possibly imagine that Christianity was in the "dark" for it's first 1,500 years before Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox and all the rest including King Henry VIII suddenly discovering the truth in the Bible. All this happened because of a few sleazy Pope's in the early 1500's who abused their power. Or the stupidity of Rome at that time (and for a few centuries previously) selling indulgences as a way to get money to build a new and bigger St. Peter's Basilica and other examples of Church greed?

The Church was corrupt in Rome before the Reformation. That is a fact we can't gloss over . But a few corrupt and greedy Italian Popes involved in even sleazier Italian Renaissance city-states politics and wars should have never meant the those who wanted to reform real corruption they saw in the Church in the 1520s by throwing the baby out with the bathwater and wrecking the unity of Christendom forever while causing wars, hatred, and the deaths of innocent people on all sides was a catastrophe for all Christians then and now.

I can symathize with the Reformers in a few ways but they should have had patience. If they had maybe the Church could have worked with them (most were ordained RC priests)instead of making them vicious enemies with all parties concerned acting in very unChristian ways hating each other and their never ending nit -picking at each other over Biblical quotes and interpretations for centuries. This Biblical nit-picking goes on here endlessly.

Someone mentioned the Beatle's earlier. If a Blog can have a theme song I suggest the Beatle's 60's song "All You Need is Love" as background music for HG's happy Blog.

@Inspector I have always been a big fan of General Franco. He saved the Catholic Church in Spain from terrible persecution had the Reds won the Spanish Civil War in the late 1930's. It was horrible enough that the Reds killed thousands of priests, monks, and nuns, even a few Bishops during that War. They would have done worse had they won. Let's also remember Franco let the USA build an AF base in Spain and allowed NATO ships to use Spanish ports for over 30 years before Spain finally became a member of NATO in 1982.

7 October 2012 at 23:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Calm down that man!

There were some great artists in the 60's and the lyrics to many songs all point towards a search for a meaning to life above materialism and the mundane.

In my opinion, the generation, myself included, got it wrong because it failed to understand the true meaning of the words "love" and "freedom" and many attempted to use drug induced short-cuts to "peace".

Strange times the 1960's. A time when so many false and destructive ideas were released upon the world and took root.

8 October 2012 at 00:05  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

John Magee

The lyrics to "All You Need is Love":

"There's nothing you can do that can't be done
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game
It's easy ....

There's nothing you can make that can't me made
No one you can save that can't be saved
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you in time
It's easy ....

All you need is love
All you need is love
All you need is love, love
Love is all you need

There's nothing you can know that isn't known
Nothing you can see that isn't shown
There's nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be
It's easy ...."

You think this a sound message?!

8 October 2012 at 00:13  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Well, may God have received your Uncle Jim into Heaven (an hour before the Devil knew he was dead!)and if your avatar reflects your current mood, so be it.

8 October 2012 at 00:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rather Ironic that the Beatles 'all you need is love' and 'imagine' couldn`t even get on amongst themselves let alone Global peace and love!.

God`s solution to the problem of fallen man is the ONLY solution.
Telling everyone to love one another just don`t work!.

Its is the love of God in the hearts of believers overflowing out towards fellow man that is the solution.
This needs a radical change in the hearts of men which is why Jesus said "you must be born again... born from above"

8 October 2012 at 08:23  
Blogger William said...

John Magee

How can you advocate patience if the religion that you follow is governed by corruption and greed (as you say) and insists on total adherence to such? The only option is reform and if it doesn't happen from within then it has to happen from without. We only get three score years and ten to establish the truth of our lives (even less in those days). Patience was not an option.

You lament the destruction of Christian unity, and yet the alternative was to unite with the corruption and greed that you rightly deplore.

8 October 2012 at 08:56  
Blogger Preacher said...

John Magee.
I take my hat off to you for your honesty & your willingness to talk & debate instead of resorting to an attack of sarcasm & vitriol as some others here have resorted to.

You make your point well about the language that is a foundation stone of civilised societies, but I still feel that it is unimportant,as the Euro stassi will tell us what to say, (Probably, Yes Sir) how to say or whine it with the right tone of voice & the language to use.

William has a good point about the need for reformation in the Church & the reason for the breaking of unity. As a result of corruption in leadership this was inevitable & the persecution came from within the Church in the form of the 'Holy Office' & the inquisition.

Among those martyred for refusing to return were many of the top theologians & even ex Bishops of Rome, i.e Latimer, Cranmer & Ridley Who surely were all men worthy of an unbiased audience & an honest consideration of their views.
Due to the action taken I would say that they were forced to leave, the alternative was as William said, to bow to a corrupt regime & deny the leading of their consciences.

The relevance is I feel important in this debate, as when we are faced with the same choices introduced by the EU Unified One Faith movement, we will be in the same position & our choices will not necessarily be a question of our denomination, but of individual beliefs that we are prepared to die for. Even as the Lord's chief accusers were leaders of His own faith.

8 October 2012 at 10:26  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

William and Preacher

The protesters showed an absence of trust in the words of Jesus Christ that that the "gates of hell" would not prevail against His Church. Men like Saint Thomas More stood by the Church, as did other reformers, without tearing Christianity apart and letting loose so many competing theologies and heresies.

As for Cranmer, was he really a faithful Bishop with integrity? Didn't he break his sacred vows to God as a Priest and a Bishop, secretly marry whilst in Germany and then smuggle his wife into England?

8 October 2012 at 16:16  
Blogger John Magee said...

Carl Jacobs

I agree with you about the Beatle's. But only the Beatle's after 1967. Before that their pop songs were the typical sugary boy meets girl songs of the "bubble gum era" that spans the late 1950s until the advent of the sex, drugs, and rock n roll era that started about 1967. The Beatle's songs "I Want to Hold Your Hand","She Loves You Yeah, Yeah, Yeah", "Love Me Do", etc. were innocent and happy songs about things teens still dreamed about then. Ever listen to "Hey Jude"? That was one of their later songs which I liked very much.

I have to admit Carl, when I listened to pop music back in the 50s and early 60s, I paid more attention to the music than the lyrics. Many of the songs had stupid titles and lyrics. Elvis Presley's "You Ain't Nothing but Houndog" is one of a long long list of examples.

Ever listen to the R&B song form the early 1950's called "Sixty Minute Man" by the Dominos? Here are part of the lyrics and remember this was 1952:

"There'll be fifteen minutes of kissin' Then you'll holler "Please don't stop" (Don't stop!) There'll be fifteen minutes of teasin' Fifteen minutes of squeezin' And fifteen minutes of blowin' my top"

Amazing isn't it? That was on the radio 60 years ago. Of course only on R&B's stations.


I thought it was funny when the wife and former wife of the Greatful Dead singer Jerry Garcia after his death went to court and fought like cats and dogs over his fortune. These hippy hags lost their feelings of "love and peace' when they went to war over Garcia's fortune and recording rights. Most of those peacenick musicians back then with their peace symbols, tie dyed cloths, and long hair cared about making money just like the rest of society.

@ Inspector

It's good you still remember your beloved uncle Jim. He lives as long as you remember him.

8 October 2012 at 16:20  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

John. One believes the Spanish Civil War was the dirtiest of its kind ever fought. An interesting ‘what if’ ponder had the Republicans triumphed. Maybe Soviet Missiles there instead of Cuba in 1962 ? A red hot cold war…

Jim was a great man for a morning fry up 7 / 7, as many were back then. Note the ‘were’ – we know know what a big mistake that was. He would have been 92 this year had he lived. One wonders how David B is getting on. We can but hope he came through...

8 October 2012 at 18:14  
Blogger William said...


The protesters were protesting against the encroachment of the gates of Hell. To wit the corruptions and distortions of the papacy. Perhaps the good Lord used the protesters, as He has many men and women throughout the scriptures, to do His will in this regard.

8 October 2012 at 19:10  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


But you would say that, wouldn't you?

Show me anywhere in Scripture where God sanctioned or encouraged active rebellion against either the High Priest of Israel or the Kings of Israel. God permitted external forces or powers to discipline His people when they failed to follow Him.

Jesus also established authority in the Church, linked to His promise of Divine protection:

"And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."

Truthfully, with the benefit of distance, do you really believe the Reformation advanced Christianity?

8 October 2012 at 19:50  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dodo(,8 October 2012 16:16)

What is' the Church'which Jesus spoke of?.Many connect the word 'church' intimately with Matthew 16:18, and think that Jesus spoke about the formation of a religious organisation, a 'church'.
The word 'church' is not a translation of the NT Greek noun ekklêsia which is assembly or congregation.The difference may seem subtle but is immense.
A' Church'when it relates to a building can be owned and controlled. A' congregation' cannot.
King James gave specific instructions to the translators of the Bible not to use the word ekklesia but 'Church' instead for this very reason.
The English word 'church' comes from the'lord’s house'.

Which brings us to an interesting point who is 'The Lord'.?People assume this to be Christ but this could be just about anybody .

And the foundation?

Jesus himself was the Petra, the Rock – the bedrock-foundation of the immortal assembly which he said he would form. The apostle Simon the son of Jona, also called Kêphas and Petros (Aramaic and Greek for “stone”), was not the foundation; Jesus the Petra or Rock was. Simon Petros and the other apostles were in that analogy merely stones which were then laid on the foundation which consisted of Jesus the Petra, Rock.

All true believers are 'living stones' resting on the foundation which is Christ..There is no other Foundation.

8 October 2012 at 20:32  
Blogger William said...


"But you would say that, wouldn't you?"

Not necessarily. I don't have any allegiance to the reformers.

"Show me anywhere in Scripture where God sanctioned or encouraged active rebellion against either the High Priest of Israel or the Kings of Israel. God permitted external forces or powers to discipline His people when they failed to follow Him."

David, whom God described as a man after His own heart, was in active rebellion against the first king of Israel.
Jesus, who we believe to be the Son of God, was in active rebellion against the religious leaders of His day.

"Truthfully, with the benefit of distance, do you really believe the Reformation advanced Christianity?"

Well, who knows how much lower the church would have sunk without it?

8 October 2012 at 20:47  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

William said ...

"David, whom God described as a man after His own heart, was in active rebellion against the first king of Israel."

Now, I'm no biblical scholar, but my recollection is that David fled Saul'shatred and jealousy and never openly rebelled against him. At one time he sneaked into Saul's camp and thrust his spear into the ground near where Saul slept, to show he couldkill him, and prevented his associates from doing so. Regicide would prove him no more worthy than Saul. David eventually persuaded Saul to reconcile with him and the two swore never to harm one another.

However, David did feel insecure, lacking in trust, and so made an alliance with the Philistines - an act of rebellion. I'm not sure if God approved of this!

"Jesus, who we believe to be the Son of God, was in active rebellion against the religious leaders of His day."

No he wasn't! In fact, he told the people:

"The scribes and the Pharisees have sitten on the chair of Moses. All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe and do: but according to their works do ye not; for they say, and do not."

Not exactly a call to rebellion, now is it? And not a call for schism.

"Well, who knows how much lower the church would have sunk without it (the reformatiion)"?

See, there's that lack of trust in Christ's promise. Just consider the depths Christianity sank to after the protesters broke rank.

8 October 2012 at 21:26  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Len. Doing Satan’s work for him as usual. Once you have dismantled organised Christian worship, do let the Inspector know how long it would be before Christianity becomes a mere internet ‘interest’ attracting loons such as yourself....

8 October 2012 at 21:57  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Well as we are discussing the Beatles, I came up with this :

"In the Country where I was born,
Lived a man who was burned to death,
And he told us of his life,
In the land of the Angles,

So we sailed on to the sun,
Till we found the land of green,
And settled in this Anglican place,
In our Jewish scene,

We all like the Cramner
Cranmer Blog,
Cranmer Blog,
We all like the Cranmer Blog,
Cranmer Blog, Cranmer Blog.

And our friends are all aboard,
Many more of them come from Canada and America,
And the band begins to play.

(Trumpets play)

We all like the Cramer blog,
Cranmer blog, Cranmer ,
We all like the Cranmer blog,
Cranmer Blog, Cranmer blog

Full speed ahead, Mr. Inspector, full speed ahead!
Full speed over here, sir!
All together! All together!
Aye, aye, sir, fire!
Captain! Captain!)

As we debate the meaning of life (meaning of life )
Every one of us(every one of us) says all we want ,(all we want )
Blue Sky Thinking (Blue sky Thinking) and land of green,(land of green)
On The Cranmer (on the Cranmer) blog.(blog) ( Haha! )

We all like the Cramer blog,
Cranmer blog, Cranmer ,
We all like the Cranmer blog,
Cranmer Blog, Cranmer blog "

8 October 2012 at 22:40  
Blogger david kavanagh said...

Well if all you need is Love, love, love... what about "I would do anything for love"? Classic meatloaf.

8 October 2012 at 22:51  
Blogger William said...


Mar 2:23-28 is an example of Jesus openly defying the religious leaders of His day who did not understand the meaning of the Law.

and He clearly had a dim view of them e.g. Mat 23:13-15.

So although He did not call for open rebellion, He was would defy them and was quite clearly calling for reform (of their behaviour).

"See, there's that lack of trust in Christ's promise."

No. It is believing that God's promise was partly fulfilled through the Reformation. As I said earlier; God often (usually) acts through His people.

8 October 2012 at 23:06  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

8 October 2012 at 23:18  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

8 October 2012 at 23:21  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

If you want to be a military person, couldn't you adopt something Irish as an avatar, like the Duke of Wellington, rather than the Fascist-type you've got now?

Don't forget during the battle of cable street Irish and Jewish combated the Black shirts together!

8 October 2012 at 23:24  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Same drum; same tune!

Okay, have it your way:

"And Jesus answering, said to him: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-Jona ... And I say to thee: That thou art Peter; and upon this rock/stone I will build my church/congregation/assembly, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

And I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. And whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, it shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose upon earth, it shall be loosed also in heaven."

Now, how exactly do your suggested changes effect this? Jesus is clearly using an analogy to give Peter authority to lead His church/congegation and giving him - delegating to him - His own power i.e the keys to the Kingdom.


9 October 2012 at 00:27  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


Jesus spoke about the Law with authority as the Son of God. He was critical of how some Jewish leaders were behaving. However, He never advocated rebellion against the Chair of Moses - quite the opposite.

It's always seemed to me that 'Reformation' is a bit of a misnomer for the disobedience of the protesters and their rebellion.

"As I said earlier; God often (usually) acts through His people."

Yes He does; and at other times He permits evil in order that good may from it. The Church needed reforming at a human, institutional level, not schism and bitter disunity based on individual interpretations of scripture often supported because of individual and national self interest.

9 October 2012 at 02:30  
Blogger John Magee said...


Fascism is much more complex than Hitler, Sir Oswald Mosley and his British Blackshirts of the early 1930's, and other stereotyped individuals or countries people like to talk about today.

Fascism is about nationalism. Pride in one's nation and culture and it's accomplishments. Hitler was not a true fascist but a racist National Socialist and he was not in the same league with Franco and Mussolini. Both loved their countrie's and did not hate other nations or people based on race or religion and both wanted to prevent a Communist takeover.

Benito Mussilini made a hudge mistake when he started to side with Hitler in the mid 1930's and made Italy an ally of Nazi Germany and then went along with Hitler's anti-Semitic policies. That was the beginning of his downfall. I remember reading once the first time Mussolini met Hitler in Venice I think in 1934 he thought Hitler was a fool or else crazy.

The roots of fascism in the 20th century start with Benito Mussolini, a former Socialist, turned nationalist in Italy before WW I and include the support of his Jewish mistress at the time Margherita Sarfatti the daugter of a wealthy lawyer. In 1911, Margherita Sarfatti met, and started an affair with, Benito Mussolini. As a highly educated and intellectual woman, she played a significant role in the rise of fascism. Italian Fascist ideology was free of any elements of anti-Semitism, and the party's membership rolls were open to Jews. Sarfatti was know as the mother of Italian Fascism and along with many Jewish Italian businessmen in the small but ancient Italian Jewish population, who feared Communism like their Catholic neighbors, helped get Mussolini's Fascist movement off the ground and eventually take control of Italy in 1922.

Mussolini was admired by a lot of people from all walks of life for his accomplishments in building a "New Italy" in the 1920s. People from Britain, the USA, Europe and other places wrote and supported the social aspects of his rebuilding Italy. The famous saying "he made the trains run on time" comes from this era. Mussolini's admirers in the 1920s include the then Govenor of the USA State of New York Franklin D Roosevelt, British writer George Bernard Shaw, Winston Churchill, and many others.

@ inspector

I love to speculate on the "ifs" of history too.

Did you know that in 1939 when the Soviet "advisors" and troops were rushing to leave Spain in the face of a defeat by Franco's army the Soviets loaded the entire Spanish government's gold reserve onto ships and sent it back to Moscow?
That might be the greatest bank robbery in history.

9 October 2012 at 03:03  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dodo, the instruction given to Peter(and all the disciples ) was to "feed my sheep".

This was clearly and instruction to preach the Gospel and to disciple converts.

The tragedy is that the Roman Church (instituted by Constantine )took' the sheep' belonging to Jesus into their' own sheepfold'and claimed them as their own.They also fed them their own version of 'Christianity'against God`s Written Word.

The House of Rome is a 'House built on Sand and I believe the only reason it exists is to test believers as to whether the will be true to God or 'the religion' devised by Man.

9 October 2012 at 08:23  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dodo IF your supposition about Peter being the' foundation Stone of the Church 'was true then ALL the disciples would have acknowledged this .
None did......and Peter never claimed to be the 'foundation stone', in fact Peter claimed Jesus was! and Peter was the Apostle to 'the circumcised.'Rather strange don`t you think.

Paul was the Apostle to the gentiles.

9 October 2012 at 08:29  
Blogger William said...


"Jesus spoke about the Law with authority as the Son of God."

The Popes also claim/claimed this authority as the "Vicar of Christ".

"The Church needed reforming at a human, institutional level, not schism and bitter disunity based on individual interpretations of scripture often supported because of individual and national self interest."

It's hard to disagree with this (although I would add the church also needed reform at the spiritual level) and I would also say that I believe the Roman Catholic church would be in a far worse state if it hadn't been for the Reformation. However, I suspect that "ifs" and "buts" will get us nowhere.

People are coming to know Christ through Protestant and Catholic initiatives at a rapid rate throughout the world. I myself came to faith in Christ with no Catholic input. Where is your faith Dodo? Don't you think that Christ knows what He is doing? Or perhaps you think that salvation isn't possible other than via Roman Catholicism?

9 October 2012 at 09:51  
Blogger Rambling Steve Appleseed said...

Can't say we weren't warned.

9 October 2012 at 12:27  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Hannah, it’s actually a pre free state Irish police officers uniform. Seems damn appropriate as we try to hold back the march of secularism, and militant homosexuality...

9 October 2012 at 17:56  
Blogger John Magee said...


The Catholic Church didn't suddenly materialize from nowhere after the Conversion of the Emperor Constantine to Christianity in the early 300s AD. The Church had already existed for almost 300 years with it's priests, bishops, seven sacraments, theology,the Bishop of Rome as leader of all Catholic Bishops (first among equals) East and West and head of the Universal Church and was using the name "Catholic" (from the Greek word katholikos meaning "universal")for over 100 years before Constantine was even born.

If you are a member of a Protestant Church which repeats the Nicean Creed or the later Apostle's Creed during your services each Sunday please remember it was the Emperor Constantine who called a Council of all the Bishops of the Catholic Church to meet at Nicae,(in what is now Turkey), 325 AD in order that they may define once and for all time universal Christian beliefs which are summarized in the Nicean Creed later called the Apostle's Creed.

If you are a Christian who knows and understands history you must be a Catholic.

Surely you must realize this.

9 October 2012 at 19:15  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

9 October 2012 at 19:20  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


As I've said, Jesus clearly used an analogy to give Peter authority to lead His church/congegation and gave him - delegated to him - His own power i.e the keys to the Kingdom.

And Jesus' instruction to feed His sheep/lambs was given directly to Peter, not all the disciples. Do read your bible - John 21:15-17.

The Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ. It is you who 'makes it up as you go along'.

9 October 2012 at 19:26  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


I'm genuinely intrigued now - I always thought the RIC had dark green uniforms. Or is it the IRP uniform?

9 October 2012 at 19:56  
Blogger Preacher said...

Sorry all my Catholic friends, but I can't accept Transubstantiation, Purgatory, Indulgences, (including the Plenary ones), a man claiming the title of HOLY Father, the founding of the Inquisition, plus the attempts to suppress the translation, printing & distribution of the Bible even to the extreme of burning those responsible to death. As Christian practice.
Do you really, honestly believe that the Lord Jesus Christ would approve of & sanction such wicked behaviour?.

9 October 2012 at 20:25  
Blogger Hannah Kavanagh said...

Hi Inspector,

If the picture is an Irish-British bobby then that's OK.

9 October 2012 at 20:28  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Belfast , possibly an ADRIC uniform. One can understand them leaning towards khaki in that period. The tie would be green...

9 October 2012 at 20:53  
Blogger Office of Inspector General said...

Belfast , in case you think this man is a lickspittle unionist at any price, consider this. He would have put down Carson’s people in the north, and bloody ruthlessly if needed. Irish home rule was that important...

9 October 2012 at 20:58  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


I have no doubt at all about the promise Christ made to Peter and the Apostles about His Church. It's because of the faithfulness of the Church down the generations, in the face of many human failings, that so many have been brought to Him - even protestants.

I do believe the Catholic Church represents the authentic message of Christ and that its authority comes directly from Him.

As for salvation, I think God has His own ways of returning His people home.

9 October 2012 at 21:28  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


Let it never be said that your politics is straightforward :)

9 October 2012 at 21:29  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...


The authority to develop dogmatic teachings and institute sacramental practices was clearly given to an Apostolic Church by the Christ.

So far as human failings are concerned, I'm sure Christ looks upon these with sorrow and will judge the actions of men according to the needs of the times and the motives of those involved.

9 October 2012 at 21:42  
Blogger John Magee said...


It's obvious I am not any sort of a Biblical scholar here but didn't Jesus say at his last Passover Feast the night before His Crucifixion, what we call the Last Supper, when he took the bread and wine in his hands and said to the Apostle's gathered at the same table perhaps as they lay on cushions as he broke the bread and drank the win and shared it with them (I think he shared it with them)), "this IS My Body and this IS my Blood shed for the forgiveness of sins....". Didn't He sacrifice His life for the forginess of our sins for all time and didn't his blood shed on the Cross wash away our sins for all time if we are truly sorry for them? Jesus didn't suggest the bread and wine could be, might be, should be, isn't MY body and Blood did he? The essence of the bread and wine, the atoms, become the body and blood at the moment of Consecration at Mass. It's a beautiful concept that gives people hope, comfort, and is a miracle to those who have believed in it for almost 2,000 years.

Since the days after Jesus's Ascension there hasn't been a second that has passed by that somewhere on earth this Eucharistic miracle hasn't been constantly celebrated. I am certain your ancestors if they came from countries that were Catholic before the Reformation went to Mass every Sunday and Holy Day of Obligation for centuries. I am also pretty certain they were very happy being Catholics.

I agree with you that indulgences are not Biblical. Is a TV Evangelist laying hands on a TV set claiming to cure people in the name of the Lord Biblical or theological? The concept of Purgatory has never been an issue I chose to doubt because I don't care if it's true or isn't. It sounds like a good idea to me though. A sort of "half way house" for average sinners after they die to contemplate their unsavory lives on earth. As for calling the Pope "Holy Father" it's a title of respect. That's all. I'm more concerned about the red shoes he wears. Not conservative winged tip Brooks Brothers or Savile Row are they?

The Pope's red shoes and white socks are awful.

I may personally think a person's title is silly but I would still respect that person and their right to be called by any title or name they had so long as they represent a widely recognized and respected organization or institution.

10 October 2012 at 04:17  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It is interesting that the 'Church Fathers' made no claim to Peter being the 'rock' on which the Church is built!.Origen, Chrysostom,Hilary,Augustine,Cyril, Theodoret,Jerome, never made this claim!.

They all made the correct conclusion that Christ is' the Rock'.
So what changed within the Catholic Church?.

The 'Donation of Constantine' was found to be a forgery and Catholic theologians needed another source for their'authority'.

Not one of the 'fathers' speak of a transference of power from Peter to those who succeed him.....The Gospels do not support the Papacy the Papacy 'leaned' on the Gospel for support whilst in fact there is none!.

10 October 2012 at 08:27  
Blogger Preacher said...

John Magee.
Hi John. Thank you for your response. Re: The Last Supper. The feast was that of Passover, which is rich in symbolism. The various foods were symbols of the Israelites escape from Egypt. The bitter herbs representing the persecution & hard labour that they were forced to undertake, the salt, the tears that they shed & so on. The Lord told them to keep this feast in annually in memory of the Exodus. Why? Because this would be a sign of the Messiah, Who would come to fulfil an even greater & more comprehensive release from slavery. Remember John the Baptist's description when Jesus approached him at the Jordan, "Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the Sin of the WORLD!".
The timing of the last supper was crucial. Those present were all Jewish & would understand the Symbolism of Jesus' words & actions as Him identifying Himself as the promised Messiah by referring to the Wine as His Blood & the bread as His body. Becoming the Sacrifice that heralds the fulfilment of the Old Covenant & the start of the New One.
He Says "Do this in REMEMBRANCE of me" as a new command that we must remember His sacrifice until His return, just as the passover was a symbolic act to the Jews, but not the re-enactment of the original, so the Communion is the New Covenant equivalent but not Jesus being Re-sacrificed.
As the book of Hebrews tells us, His sacrifice was once, for all not needing to be repeated as in the Old Covenant.

The laying on of hands & prayer for the sick is in response to the promise "Lay hands on the Sick & they will recover". A confirmation of the truth of the gospel by signs following.

Purgatory seems like a 'Good idea' but how often do we hear "Well it seemed like a good idea at the time!" following some catastrophe? & of course the old saying 'the road to Hell is paved with good intentions'.

The less said about the Pope's shoes, the better & indeed some of the daft outfits that all members of clergy in many denominations wear!.

Regarding the title Holy, I think you will find that this is only a title that is applicable to God, & He guards it jealously. But as it translates as 'Whole' or complete, I guess He's entitled to.

It's good to share with you John & I hope my response hasn't sounded too proud or authoritarian, as it wasn't meant to.

Blessings on you & yours. Preacher.

10 October 2012 at 12:14  
Blogger John Magee said...


I always enjoy reading your intelligent and civil posts which are not in the least "proud or authoritarian".

Thank you for reading my feeble attempts to share my point of view.

Pax Vobiscum

10 October 2012 at 15:06  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

John Magee

You need to read your cathecism about pergatory and indulgences. The dogmatic concept is more than a "good idea" and one that, as a Catholic, you should understand and give internal concent.


Jesus established a priesthood at the Last Supper and the sacrament of the Eucharist - Holy Communion. His actions were not merely 'symbolic'. He was indeed replacing the Mosaic sacrificial system with His own death.

"Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you."
(John 6:53)

Read the full passage and the shock this statement caused. It's clear to me Jesus was not speaking figuratively. The people present knew he meant it literally. That's why so many left him.

The Pope's favoured title is "Servant of the Servants". Catholics believe he carries delegated authority directly given by Christ to Peter.

10 October 2012 at 21:43  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Magee it seems that you skipped some important chapters in your conversion course.Before you start authoratively pontificating on your new religion it might be an idea to know what you are talking about.

11 October 2012 at 03:45  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Going back to the original point.

The 'Tower of Babel' represents the attempt of man to reach God by his own means.It really is as simple as that!.
The satanic suggestion is that you can be as 'gods' and this applies to all who attempt to be their own 'saviour' or to those who deny God and rely on their own' wisdom'to judge what is 'right and moral'.

Islam denies the Deity of Christ and ones' works'(good or evil) are weighed in the balance and which ever is' the weightier' decides the outcome.

Catholicism is more subtle (lip service is paid to Christ and to 'Grace') but the result is similar.

Of course co -operation with Christ in salvation is necessary but this is by and through faith in the finished work of Christ at Calvary Christ HAS DONE 'the works'and if we have been born again from above Christ lives in us to continue to guide and instruct us.

"This is the covenant I will make with them after that time, says the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and I will write them on their minds."(Hebrews 10:6)

The Old Covenant put the entire responsibility on man (You keep my Laws)

The New Covenant puts the entire responsibility on God.(with the co-operation of man by faith)

It is actually a lack of faith in the finished work of Christ that induces man to use religion as a 'crutch' to help God along.'Religion' also fuels pride which 'helps God' bring about salvation'(in the mind of those who practice' religion' at least)

It is only Christ who saves if we put our faith in 'the church' , in our own goodness,then God will judge us on whatever we put in the place of Christ.

In short if we live by the Law we will be judged by the Law.By' the Law'I mean ANY means we add to Christ`s Finished work at Calvary

11 October 2012 at 08:26  
Blogger Preacher said...

You are referring to a totally different situation. This was Not the last supper was it?.Jesus often spoke in parables, answered questions with questions & used figurative language, e.g "I am the door of the sheep!" so does that mean that He was literally a wooden structure with hinges, or we are woolly creatures that eat grass?. The question we are looking at here is, Transubstantiation, when a priest conducts the Mass, does the wine actually, physically turn into the literal Blood of Jesus, Yes or No?.
Regarding Purgatory.
"The Blood of Christ cleanses us from ALL sin". There is nothing we can do to add or detract from this.
So where does Purgatory fit in?.

Do you deny that 'Holy Father' is a title that the Pope accepts & will respond to?.

I will leave aside all the other issues that I raised & that you have not answered, unless you want to continue.

I may not agree with John Magee on many issues of faith, but he is entitled to develop & hold his own beliefs & opinions.
If he wants to he can seek advice from clergy or friends that he trusts.
My prayers are with him.

11 October 2012 at 11:32  
Blogger IanCad said...


That we are saved by faith is a given.
However, to contend that salvation in the OT times was by the law only seems inaccurate.
Hebrews 11:17 clearly states it was through faith that Abraham offered Isaac. The entire chapter is a lesson in faith. From Abel, Noah, Sarah and Abraham through to Moses, Rahab aand David it serves to illustrate that God's plan of salvation has never changed.

The fault with the Old Covenant was with man.
We failed to meet the conditions.
The conditions were changed in the New Covenant.
The substance of the Covenants were and have not changed.
It is The Ten Commandments.

Matt 5:18.
"--not one jot or tittle shall pass from the law--"

Romans 3:31.
"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

There is a danger in thinking we are no longer obligated to heed the Law of God.

John's vision of Heaven in Rev.11:19 revealed the Ark in the temple. Thus further illustrating the centrality of the obedience demanded by God, through the strength of Christ, to the requirements of the immutable Ten Commandments.

11 October 2012 at 12:52  
Blogger John Magee said...

What are you talking about?

How am I, a total nobody, suggesting the creation of a "new religion" with my questioning the concept of indulgences and their SALE in the late Middle Ages by the RC Church? A Church which I am a member today.

I defend the Seven Sacraments, the Papacy, the historic Catholic Church and its role as the valid defender of the truth in the Gospels and its traditions. It Seems you have a selective memory about what I post.

My main objection was the SELLING of indulgences in the past. Plenary Indulgences didn't exist in the Latin Church officially until Pope Urban II's declaration at the Council of Clermont (1095) that he remitted all penance incurred by crusaders who had confessed their sins in the Sacrament of Penance, considering participation in the crusade equivalent to a complete penance.

Please explain to me why Eastern Orthodox Christians, who are the other "half" of the Catholic Church, do not recognize the concept of indulgences. Are our brother and sister Eastern Orthodox Catholics wrong?

Why did our Catholic Church at the Council of Trent in 1567 finally ban the SALE of indulgences over 40 years after Martin Luther tacked his 95 Theses (The Ninety-Five Theses on the Power and Efficacy of Indulgences) on the church door at Wittenberg?

Why did it take our Church over 40 years and the division of Christendom forever and religious wars that caused millions of lives to finally admit at the Council of Trent in 1567 that the SALE of indulgences was wrong?

Think of the millions of poor the Church took money from selling indulgences it finally admits was wrong and ends up banning.

Please don't put words into my mouth I never said or ones you think you know I believe.

God bless you.

11 October 2012 at 17:29  
Blogger John Magee said...


Catholic priests are no less trustworthy than Protestant ministers and vice versa.

11 October 2012 at 17:48  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


It would seem that I have presented salvation in the same way as Paul did.
Paul was accused of preaching against the Law.Which he didn't.
Paul said the Law was good but man wasn`t so he couldn`t keep the Law.

The Law is a 'schoolmaster' to bring one to Christ.

The Law tells you what you should do but does not enable you to keep the Law..rather it exposes the weakness and inadequacies of man.

The Spirit of Christ is the Power that enables one to live a righteous life(providing one has been born again and walks according to the power of the Spirit.)

11 October 2012 at 18:43  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Mr Magee,

'Catholic priests are no less trustworthy than Protestant ministers and vice versa.'

I agree with your statement.I don`t doubt there are many honest , genuine , Catholics who believe that they are serving God and that their religion is the only way to please God.

However there are many Muslims who are doing exactly the same.

The Bible and revelation by the Holy Spirit is the only means of obtaining the truth.

'But when he, the Spirit of truth, comes, he will guide you into all truth. He will not speak on his own; he will speak only what he hears, and he will tell you what is yet to come.'(John 16:13)

The Holy Spirit will confirm Scripture and never go against the Word of Him.

11 October 2012 at 18:53  
Blogger IanCad said...

Len, @ 8:43

If I had read your post a little slower I probably wouldn't have commented.
I think we're both in agreement.

11 October 2012 at 19:58  
Blogger John Magee said...


Catholicism can in no way, shape, or form be compared to Islam.

We both know Islam denies the concept of the Trinity and that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. The Trinity and Jesus the Messiah are core beliefs shared by Catholics and most Protestants.

The definition of the Trinity was defined at 4th century Catholic Church Councils.

As Christians let's all concentrate on what have in common in the coming storms with secularism and Islamic Jihad rather than tear each other to shreds over details and weaken our common faith.

Pax Vobiscum

11 October 2012 at 21:18  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Preacher said ...

You are referring to a totally different situation. This was Not the last supper was it?.Jesus often spoke in parables, answered questions with questions & used figurative language, e.g "I am the door of the sheep!" so does that mean that He was literally a wooden structure with hinges, or we are woolly creatures that eat grass?.

The link with the institution of the Eucharist is plain. As you know, John never included this in his Gospelnarrative.

Read the passage. It is clear His listeners understood this He was not talking figuratively. The way Jesus pushed and repeated the statement underlines this. It caused great scandal.

"The question we are looking at here is, Transubstantiation, when a priest conducts the Mass, does the wine actually, physically turn into the literal Blood of Jesus, Yes or No?."

But of course I believe this to be so! Is the Ppe a Catholic? That's what Christ instituted at the Last Supper and asked His Apostles to do, and its what Christians from the very first have always believed.

"Regarding Purgatory.
"The Blood of Christ cleanses us from ALL sin". There is nothing we can do to add or detract from this.
So where does Purgatory fit in?."

It does have a biblical basis and was understood by the very first Christians. Why else would they have prayed for the dead? It's based on the ancient Jewish practice of prayer for the dead, as mentioned in Scripture:

"Therefore [Judas Maccabeus] made atonement for the dead, that they might be delivered from their sin."
(2 Macc 12:46)

The early Christians continued this practice. From the beginning the Church has honoured the memory of the dead and offered prayers in suffrage for them, so that, thus purified, they may attain the beatific vision of God. Inscriptions on the walls and tombs of the Catacombs testify to the belief of many early Catholics in Purgatory.

The words of the Apostles in the New Testament also clearly tell us about being "tested by fire" (1 Pet 1:7). St. Paul warns us that if someone builds on the true foundation of Christ but doesn't take care to build well, "the person will be saved, but only as through fire" (1 Cor 3:15).

"Do you deny that 'Holy Father' is a title that the Pope accepts & will respond to?."

Of course not! What on earth is your objection to referring to God's servants, those given His priestly authority, as Father? It's been done for centuries.

You're not going all fundamentalist are you? Misunderstanding Jesus' words:

"Call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven"
(Matt. 23:9)?

Put the words in their context and you'll understand them better. St Paul did:

"I do not write this to make you ashamed, but to admonish you as my beloved children. For though you have countless guides in Christ, you do not have many fathers. For I became your father in Christ Jesus through the gospel."
(1 Cor. 4:14–15)

11 October 2012 at 23:27  
Blogger Preacher said...

I feel that you should read the Book of Hebrews, slowly & carefully.
I'm sorry that you hold to the teaching of transubstantion, it's pure Shamanism & hocus pocus. please make the connection between the lamb of sacrifice at the passover & the lamb of God (Jesus), did the Jewish people drink the Blood of the lamb, either on the first passover or after?.

Fundamental or not, the words of Jesus in Matt 23.9 still stand, we know that we all have Physical fathers, so what Father was Jesus referring to?.
Paul does say that he is in some context the father of the Corinthian Church, IN CHRIST JESUS, THROUGH THE GOSPEL. but the one important word missing is HOLY. Only God is Holy, so in my book, appropriating the title 'Holy' means that one is claiming equality with God.
I'm pleased that John Magee has answered you & agree with him that nit picking is a waste of time.
We must all have the freewill to accept & reject what we believe & who we believe. Only on the day of judgement will we find out the truth. Let us hope that we all have the grace to accept it & apologise to each other for the mistakes we are all prone to make.

12 October 2012 at 10:24  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

In fairness to Dodo:

Prayer for the Dead was part of early Christian practice, and continued for many centuries. Unlike many of our theological traditions, which derive from Hellenic/Judo-Hellenic routes, this one is squarely Jewish in origin. Jesus would have prayed for the dead at Temple, unless he was unusually unobservant.

A form of transubstantiation was also present from the earliest days of the Church - in the sense that the Eucharist was not merely symbolic, nor the sustenance given by it merely a metaphor.

However both of the doctrines which Dodo defends have much later origins in the Middle Ages. Thus, whilst the Church has always, in some form or another, prayed for the dead, its formal relationship doesn't get solidified until much much later as the formal doctrine of Purgatory - as both a place and actual objective state of the afterlife. Orthodox Christians, for instance, working from the same theological patrimony, do not accept Purgatory in its Roman Catholic formulation, but they do pray for the dead, and they do affirm various purifications of the soul after death. The difference is largely one of firm ontological cosmology. It's worth mentioning that the original cosmology included Limbo - which has since been discarded in favour of the cautious but non-dogmatic hope that characterises Orthodox beliefs on the dead in general.

The same goes for transubstantiation - the term itself doesn't crop up until the Middle Ages, and, again, its earlier iterations were far less dogmatically literal and more uncertain - in the philosophical sense rather than in the sense of being confused or ignorance (though if you know your medieval mysticism "Unknown" would be a good word).

It's always worth bearing in mind that many of greatest developments in Catholic Theology occurred at a time when the Church was riven with schism (there were two concurrent Papacies at Rome and Avignon, and numerous anti-Popes throughout the period) and faced a number of extremely widespread cults - a good many of which Protestants would be leary of as well. Although theology didn't necessarily have its roots in the politics - there is no question that theological distinctions acquired a political dimension in the degree to which they were insisted upon and enforced as "infallible" doctrine (infallible doctrine itself being an even later development). This in itself is nothing new: the Church has been doing it ever since the Emperor insisted we sort our stuff out at Ecumenical Councils, but most of the biggies (the Trinity, real Christ, fully human Christ) had already been solved fairly early in the life of the Church, which left a lot more of the nitty-gritty details to fight over.

Dodo's faith rests on the teaching of the Catholic Church that Christ's promise to Peter constituted a firm and binding conferral of power on the institution of the Church. Of course, we have to accept that on faith, because that too was a later development... Bit of a tricky one really.

One thing is clear though: the Protestant break from certain traditions was equally dogmatic, and certainly marks a disconnect with early Church tradition. That may not be an entirely bad thing - no denomination really follows the early Church in every aspect, but it is always good to be aware of when one is doing so, I think.

12 October 2012 at 11:26  
Blogger Preacher said...

Thank you for your input & clarification of these beliefs.

Blessings. Preacher.

12 October 2012 at 13:04  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Belfast the term 'transubstantiation'
may not have shown up until the middle ages but this would have been one of the most important concepts from the beginning as the celebration of the Mass is the celebration of the Eucharist,the most important part of Catholicism.

St John's quote(6:53) makes his intention of the meaning explicit and this one definitely indicates that it is not symbolism by the nature of the semantics.I do hope the Preacher is not really a Preacher feeding his unfortunate congregation with a lot twaddle being far too quick to condemn things hocus pocus because of his own intellectual limitations and failings.The nit picking, Preacher, is what distinguishes Jews from Catholics and Catholics from Protestants.And ,incidentally Preacher as a Christian( soi-disant) you are supposed to be more tolerant of the beliefs of others even if you have no respect for them.

As a preacher it is incumbent upon you to display an appropriate level of tolerance.

The presence of Christ/God in the consecrated host is a metaphysical presence that enters into and communes with the receiver who must be in a state of grace (without sin) to receive the host.

This is a mystery of religion and like quantum physics these concepts defy human understanding.
It is arrogant and myopic to assume that everything must be understood by one's limited experience and vision. If a neatly packaged and easily digestible solution does not fall immediately to hand, then a concept is not necessarily hocus pocus or mumbo jumbo.

12 October 2012 at 17:36  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

12 October 2012 at 20:06  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

( Hebrews 7)
25 Therefore he is able to save completely those who come to God through him, because he always lives to intercede for them.

26 Such a high priest truly meets our need—one who is holy, blameless, pure, set apart from sinners, exalted above the heavens. 27 Unlike the other high priests, he does not need to offer sacrifices day after day, first for his own sins, and then for the sins of the people. He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself.

He sacrificed for their sins ONCE.

Scripture could not be clearer .Christ`s sacrifice on the Cross took place ONCE for all time and is never to be repeated because it paid the full penalty for sin.

The Mass in Catholicism is Christ being repeatedly sacrificed at the command of a Catholic Priest.
This Catholic doctrine directly contradicts the Bible.

Jesus was trying to explain spiritual matters in physical terms to a people who were spiritually blind.Jesus said He was the 'bread of Heaven' He did not mean that he was a 'loaf'.

Spiritual discernment is needed other wise we become involved in un- Biblical' mysteries' such as Transubstantiation'

12 October 2012 at 20:08  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

You use the term "hocus pocus" to describe the Eucharist!

How can man possibly comprehend and explain the changing of bread and wine into the very substance of Christ's body and blood? We use the philosophical concepts available to us at the time. You try explaining the Trinity or the Hypostatic Union.

What is in no doubt is what Christ instituted and what He commanded His Apostles to do.

As far back as the Acts of the Apostles and Saint Paul's epistles, we find descriptions of the Christian community gathering to celebrate the Lord's Supper, the Eucharist.

In the catacombs in Rome, the tombs of martyrs were used as altars for the celebration of the earliest forms of the Mass, making the tie between the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, its re-presentation in the Mass, and the strengthening of the faith of Christians explicit.

The Mass is an "Unbloody Sacrifice". Very early on, the Church saw the Mass as a mystical reality in which the sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is renewed. Responding to Protestants who denied that the Eucharist is anything more than a memorial, the Council of Trent (1545-63) declared that "The same Christ who offered himself once in a bloody manner on the altar of the cross, is present and offered in an unbloody manner" in the Mass.

This does not mean, as some protestants claim that the Church teaches that, in the Mass, we sacrifice Christ again. Rather, the original sacrifice of Christ on the Cross is represented to us once more.

len, said ...
"The Mass in Catholicism is Christ being repeatedly sacrificed at the command of a Catholic Priest."

This is nonsense. It is the priest joining Christ at at Calvary, not re-sacrificing Him. You have been informed of this repeatedly so you are both either very dim, deluded or a liar (all three are possible).

12 October 2012 at 20:43  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


Simple answer re:Transubstantiation is that there was an expectation that Christ was active and present in the Eucharist as a kind of baseline, and then a range of positions, including something resembling transubstantiation but also the whole range of positions. That's why Lateran IV had to debate it.

Luther of course, stuck to that baseline - and of course the Orthodox Church also stick to that baseline. Protestants from a more Baptist/Anabaptist heritage see it as principally symbolic - though they wouldn't dispute John 6:53 as being true, they'd simply read it in analogical terms, so that partaking in the flesh and blood of Christ is understood as being in full spiritual communion with God rather than a literal requirement to partake of the Host. Speaking of which: doesn't the laity omit to drinking the wine/blood?

My position on this is the same as it is on a lot of Protestant/Catholic/Orthodox divides: much of it can be explained by the various parties insisting on the exclusion of all other theories. I take the less defined principle to be true: that wherever Christians gather to share bread and wine in earnest fellowship with God, they partake of the flesh and blood of Christ. What that means precisely, I'm afraid I don't have enough spiritual discernment to say, and certainly not to the extent of valdiating one of the mutually exclusive theories. But I think there is something important about the Eucharist as the model for Christian fellowship and unity, which may suggest one way to proceed on the issue.

12 October 2012 at 21:10  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

There is no consumption of wine by the laity.Only a thin wafer called a host.We differ on the point of gathering together in earnest fellowship with God and that being enough to fulfil the partaking of the flesh and blood of Christ.I think that that is a bit too casual for such an important event. It needs to have an extra spiritual dimension to it.That is one of the reasons I do not have a problem in believing in a priest's power to consecrate a host.
Although I do understand that this would be a hurdle for anyone who was not raised in Catholic culture
with its ancient rituals and mystery and which is also the antithesis of Protestant belief.

To proceed for Christian unity?
Do you really think this is possible with the chasm of the fundamental differences between Protestant and Catholic?

12 October 2012 at 22:21  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

AIB said ...

"I take the less defined principle to be true: that wherever Christians gather to share bread and wine in earnest fellowship with God, they partake of the flesh and blood of Christ."

That's really the easy bit. And is what Christians have believed since Christ's resureection.

However, it gets more complicated when one considers the words of concecration.

"What that means precisely, I'm afraid I don't have enough spiritual discernment to say, and certainly not to the extent of valdiating one of the mutually exclusive theories."

None of us can really fully comprehend this great gift and mystery.

Do you believe any Christian can repeat Christs words when He declared the bread and wine to be His body and blood? Was His command to repeat the Last Supper in remembrance of His sacrifice the creation of an Apostolic Priesthood?

Behind most of the decisions of of Church Councils was an intention to resolve or clarify a doctrinal matter causing division. That's why they were convened - with the exception of Vatican II.

And Catholics do now receive the Eucharist under both forms although one is sufficient.

12 October 2012 at 22:33  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Cressida & Dodo:

Having been raised in a generally Anglo-Catholic tradition, I have no problem personally with recognising the place of the Host within devotional practice, nor with the liturgical priesthood per se. I suppose if I'd stayed in an Anglo-Catholic church, that would be my "hard line" too, but in my ecumenical wanderings I've encountered some rather less liturgically-minded Christians who nevertheless, it seemed to me, were sustained on the flesh and blood of Christ.

I think Dodo, you're absolutely right about the mystery of faith. If I might make reference to one of the Catholic faithful: when Maximilian Kolbe celebrated the Mass in Auschwitz did the absence of bread or wine make any difference to the real presence of Christ in that most infernally situated church? Does any of us doubt that there, in the midst of profound evil, was Christ?

I think that's how I see the Eucharist - it is something wholly beyond me, and yet something which is instantly recognisable.

"Do you believe any Christian can repeat Christs words when He declared the bread and wine to be His body and blood? Was His command to repeat the Last Supper in remembrance of His sacrifice the creation of an Apostolic Priesthood?"

I believe that where two or three are gathered in His Name, there He is. I believe that there is no substitute for earnest belief, and that God could furnish any gathering of believers with His Presence. I think that, where men have ensured that there are no priests, it is no barrier to God's presence there. So, I do not deny or refute the importance of the laying on of hands, and the lineage of faith, but nor do I see in them the sole and exclusive Eucharistic workings of God. I believe the stones would cry out if no-one remained to say the words.

"Do you really think this is possible with the chasm of the fundamental differences between Protestant and Catholic?"

The honest answer to that, Cressida, is that I'm just one man, and not a particularly special one at that. But I'd say that if there was to be hope in the true unity of the divided Church then a good place to start would be the flesh and blood of Christ.

12 October 2012 at 23:30  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Did Fr Kolbe celebrate Mass in Auschwitz?Christ was certainly present in Fr Kolbe. I can never understand how he could pray for his tormentors .I am definitely not sainthood material.

Interesting posts Belfast. Thank you for some thought provoking concepts.God's presence is everywhere from the minute you open your eyes in the morning regardless of how many people are gathered in his name.The eucharist presence seems to be more important and I think there is more to it than just Christians convivially breaking bread together. Difficult to explain, I will have to think about this one!

Who said you weren't special? You are especially good at inspiring mental gymnastics in spite of your inclination towards the nongish:)

13 October 2012 at 00:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dodo The sacrifice of Jesus was given at the Cross not at 'the last supper'.

'Transubstantiation'this is where Catholics literally 'take the biscuit'and this biscuit 'magically transforms itself into the body of Christ.This is pure 'shamanism'.

Jesus Christ said" I am the vine you are the branches"(I wonder what Catholics make of that!)

The ONLY reason Catholics have invented' the magic biscuit'is that they Catholic hierarchy want to remain 'a closed shop' and administer' salvation' to all its adherents alone(this by- passes Christ also)

Christ said "Come to me".

Catholics disobey this very clear instruction and go to the Catholic church instead.

Dodo your 'smear tactics' are the last resort of someone who clearly has lost the argument and hasn`t the courage to face facts.

Jesus was attempting to give spiritual facts to spiritually dead people. He did this by parables and using similarities.The only way we can 'consume Christ' is Spiritually and this is done by being born again sharing one spirit with Christ.This is a 'spiritual union' with Christ "...'that He would grant you, according to the riches of His glory, to be strengthened with power through His Spirit in the inner man, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith; and that you, being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all the saints what is the breadth and length and height and depth, and to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God.' (Ephesians 3:16-19)

13 October 2012 at 08:02  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Rather interestingly(for me at least) we have gone full circle and returned to' the Tower of Babel'.

Remember how Genesis describes the tower of Babel as reaching into the heavens? (Genesis 11:4). The top of Babylonian pyramids, like the Tower of Babel, was one of many portals into the heavens through which shaman priests and priestesses contacted the spirit world.

But, when the Babylonians created Babylonian religion out of shamanism, some things changed. Most prominent was a distinct bias towards the material world.

Classic shamanism had an equal interest in both material and spirit worlds.

But the Babylonians had just invented the first great civilization, so they were obsessed with success in the material world.

They retained typical shaman ideas about creating portals to the spirit world, but their interest was primarily in what they could get from the spirit world that would let them prosper in material existence in our world.

'Transubstantiation' seems to be an attempt of' opening the portals' into the spirit World rather than coming to Christ for salvation.

13 October 2012 at 08:14  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...


Thanks for that er... lopsided compliment!

"The eucharist presence seems to be more important and I think there is more to it than just Christians convivially breaking bread together."

I couldn't agree more.

13 October 2012 at 13:35  
Blogger Cressida de Nova said...

Of course it's a compliment Belfast with a pin prick for ole times. I am not going to indulge in all that prepubescent huggy kissy number that you have all become accustomed to here!

13 October 2012 at 16:46  
Blogger AnonymousInBelfast said...

Glad to hear it! The schmaltz and sentimental affection at Cranmer's is enough to drown a soul! :)

13 October 2012 at 18:34  
Blogger John Magee said...


Didn't Jesus give us specific instructions at his last Passover Feast, the Last Supper, the night before His death on the Cross as to what we must do in his memory and what the meaning of the bread and wine is all about?

He didn't leave us floundering without an instruction manual on what items we should use when we celebrate His sacrifice on the Cross, what exactly to do, and why. He left explicite instructions in the Gospels when we read about the Last Supper.

It's sad to think both Catholics and Protestants are still fighting about this most beautiful and most important event in the Gospels after Christ's Resurrection and Acension.

As a Catholic I share the belief along with High Church Anglicans, the Eastern Orthodox, and some Lutherans that Jesus is truly present in the Eucharist at the moment of consecration at Mass. Protestants have their own view of those events and I am sure this pleases God too.

It's 2012. Islam is at our front door and in our national houses ready to break it down and destroy our civilization. Let's stop fighting about Medieval stuff.

13 October 2012 at 20:01  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

Wise words, indeed, and very insightful too, but I sometimes get the feeling your intelligence and knowledge gets in the way of simple commitment. As my first true religious mentor once said: "Sometimes one can think too long and hard about certain matters."

God is spiritually present always to those united with Him in Christ. The Holy Spirit ever draws us to the Father. Christ's actual physical presence, His very body and blood made real in the bread and wine, and the mystical and mysterious re-presentation of His sacrifice at Calvary, is a great gift bestowed on humanity by Christ until His return in Glory. He is with us both in Spirit and in His physical at the Mass.

14 October 2012 at 02:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

John Magee,

Jesus said the broken broken bread and the wine at the last supper were to be taken in remembrance of Him..Jesus wanted us to remember Him his teachings and His sacrifice at Calvary.

Paul also remarked on this 'Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him'(2 Timothy 2:11)
Jesus wanted His disciples (and us)to know that there was much more to His death than mere punishment by the authorities.
Jesus wanted us to reflect upon the greater meaning of His Crucifixion.

IF you only have Christ present at your Catholic Mass then you have missed God`s plan for salvation.

Christ is to dwell in the hearts of Believers by faith not in some 'magical act' orchestrated by the church!.

If Catholic theologians had stuck to the Scriptures and not invented their 'own doctrines' then the Church would not be fragmented today and Islam would not have been able to rise into a prominent position caused by the vacuum created by those practising 'religion'instead of spirit filled Christianity.

14 October 2012 at 16:36  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

"I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever; and the bread that I will give, is my flesh, for the life of the world.

The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying: How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them: Amen, amen I say unto you: Except you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you shall not have life in you. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath everlasting life: and I will raise him up in the last day."

To receive the body and blood of Christ is a divine precept.

"For my flesh is meat indeed: and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, abideth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father; so he that eateth me, the same also shall live by me. This is the bread that came down from heaven. Not as your fathers did eat manna, and are dead. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. These things he said, teaching in the synagogue, in Capharnaum.

Seems clear to me.

15 October 2012 at 01:19  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

This too:

"And taking bread, he gave thanks, and brake; and gave to them, saying: This is my body, which is given for you. Do this for a commemoration of me. In like manner the chalice also, after he had supped, saying: This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which shall be shed for you."

15 October 2012 at 01:22  
Blogger The Way of Dodo the Dude said...

The consecration of bread and wine, the Eucharistic Mass, dates back to the very beginning of the Christian Church.

15 October 2012 at 01:23  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older