LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for CELTIC-L Archives


CELTIC-L Archives

CELTIC-L Archives


CELTIC-L@LISTSERV.HEANET.IE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CELTIC-L Home

CELTIC-L Home

CELTIC-L  June 1998

CELTIC-L June 1998

Subject:

Re: Enough, Greig!!!

From:

"Bruce L. Jones" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Thu, 11 Jun 1998 12:21:36 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (206 lines)

<some snipped just because>

read with a smile, k?

On Wed, 10 Jun 1998 07:15:33 PDT Matthew Armstrong
<[log in to unmask]> writes:

I scribbled:
>>Sorry, you're wrong. You need a more thorough reference than a
>>dictionary. I certainly wouldn't use the OED.

To which you replied:
>Why not?  Is there something wrong with the OED?

In a word, yes. The acronym stands for the "Oxford English Dictionary" -
quite literally the English language as it is used in the UK.  When
Webster set out to print the first dictionary in the US more than a
century ago he deliberately began a deliberate departure from our former
rulers in Britain, to make our use of the language as distinct as our new
nation (German was even considered as the official language). Spellings
and usages were different as well as additions and omissions of whole
lists of words. In short, our language is similar, but not identical
enough to rely upon "their" interpretation of it. The OED is an
interesting reference, but the official usage of English in the US is
Webster's Unabridged. Being American, I use Webster's.

******************************************************************************************
                                                        W A R N I N G !

DISCLAIMER:  The following contains stuff of a controversial religious
nature. If you are easily offended or like to argue endlessly regarding
the particular concepts of your particular denomination, don't read this.
 I must state that I am not now a practicing Catholic or Protestant. I am
a former scholar of religious philosophy. Even recognizing that this
country (US) was founded on the novel concept of freedom of religion
where any simpleton can erect a spire and worship his particular idol
under it, I am not inviting lengthy debate. What follows is fairly much
off the cuff. If I have to get out a book I charge by the charachter ...
[:  )  Having said that :

******************************************************************************************

With regard to the New Testament:

I opined:
>>The Greek was written by Catholics. You sure you want to go there?

To which you interjected:
>Actually, the Catholics wrote the Latin versions... Vulgate, etc.  The
>Greek manuscripts were written by the 'eyewitnesses' and first-century
>Xians.

I respond:
Ha!!!  I'm ROTFLMAO !!!  Boy, I don't know why I continue to be surprised
by such as
this.  Just WHO do you imagine the "'eyewitnesses' and first-century
Xians" were?
They were ALL Catholics.

The Catholic church was instituted by Jesus of Nazareth. He appointed one
of his beloved disciples (followers) head of his new church by renaming
him. The man was originally named Simon. Jesus changed Simon's name to
"Kephas", the greek word for a substantially sized "rock". The Latin
translation for this was "Petras" the English is "Peter".  Jesus told the
other disciples ... upon this "rock" (Peter) I build my church ...  He
was the first leader - the founding "mortal" as it were, thus the title
equating to "father" which is "Pope" (It comes from the Greek for father:
pappas. As an aside I should mention that even priests in the Orthodox
Church are called "Pope"). All power and authority passed from Jesus to
Peter and through Peter to his successors - the following Popes. Jesus
gave Simon (Peter) the power of his authority on earth, telling him
whatever they (the Popes) endorse he (Jesus) would endorse in heaven.

They called the church "catholic" because catholic means (from the Greek)
"complete, whole" thus the meaning was that it was to be the only - or
"universal" - church of the christians - the followers or believers in
Jesus as Christ as opposed to the old Jewish beliefs. Simon (Peter)
eventually moved his "headquarters" to Rome as it was the governmental
center of the civilized universe at the time. This proved to be a mistake
as he was eventually executed by Nero (probably crucified). Once there,
the geographic association stuck when the church split East - West, hence
"Roman Catholic". An ObCelt: St. Andrew was also crucified; on a "X"
shaped cross as the story goes. This gave rise to St. Andrew's Cross and
him being the patron saint of Scotland.

(Some notes here: the word catholic derives from the Greek "katholikos"
meaning "complete or whole" *through* the Latin 'catholicus" - meaning
"universal" in the same sense, *through* middle English "catholik with
the same meaning. The word "Catholic" as a specific and official name for
the church was not fully codified until sometime after it's use by St.
Ignatus around 107 A.D. The word "church" is a recent invention, being
Middle English in derivation from "chirche" which was taken from the
Greek "kyriake" meaning "Lord's" - inferring the "Lord's House".)

ALL of the other authors of the "gospels"  were members of this first
catholic congregation initiated, described and endorsed by the Christ -
in person. All were "apostles" (messengers) - personally chosen by Jesus
to spread his teachings and make converts to the new religion. Thus, all
of those apostles were the first "priests" - or proto-priest if you
prefer - of the Catholic Church. The writers, St. Matthew, St. Mark, St.
Luke, St. John, St. Jude, St. Thomas, St. Paul, etc.  were *ALL* Catholic
priests. Their teachings, stories etc, were eventually collected and
written down IN GREEK between the FIRST and SECOND CENTURY **AFTER** the
founding of the Catholic Church (many scholars of that and later times
used Greek as an "officious" language). The "church" as you can see from
the above, operated for nearly two centuries *WITHOUT* any official
written material. The church, at that time, was a place to gather for the
common purpose of the daily mass (end of prayer) and to partake of the
eucharist (other prayers were offered throughout the day). The written
Greek scriptures were not given the consideration as "holy word" until
about the fourth century - by the "Catholic church".  As fewer priests
understood Greek over time, a newer translation in a more modern language
was eventually undertaken. The language was Latin, the author, St. Jerome
- a "Catholic priest."

I continue:
>>Not true. Haven't you ever read Exodus; Leviticus ? Lots of capital
>>punishment there.

You inquire:
>Are we arguing capital punishment or violence.  ...

I retort:
*WE* weren't *discussing* it, but since you want to join in, why not . .
.

By simplest definition, capital punishment IS violence (physical force
used to damage or destroy).

More from you:
> ...   I thought the current
>thread o' thought was about violence.  The Torah gave permission to
>deal an equal amount of harm in retaliation.  It limited ...

More retort from me:
*LIMITS* ... it is in current tense, it is still a living document. The
"Torah" is nothing more than the Pentateuch, the first five books of the
Old Testament. As such it is held in current regard by Jews, Christians
and Moslems.

You state:
> ...  But Christ gave a new spin on revenge and violence . . .

I instruct:
If one is able to absorb the sum total of the teaching, the "new spin"
was a slight
modification that essentially says that one should go farther than had
been the custom in the past in tolerating bad behavior before addressing
it and then to be "merciful". The implication of "mercy" is plain. He was
also clear in endorsing the majority of the teachings of the Old
Testament when he said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or
the prophets: I am not come to destroy ..." . The "law" was the Torah,
the prophets, the Jewish prophets.

You continue:
> . . .   I'm not saying that the
>Old Testament is obsolete or outdated or even nec. replaced by the New
>Testament.  I guess I'm just saying that maybe we should look at _all_
>references dealing with a subject, not just the ones that back up
>one's particular theological bent.

Me again:
Well, yes, of course one should. One should begin by wearing out a
library card or two.

I offered:
>>Occam is an excuse to not think. In my work I have found the "razor" to
>be untrue more often than true.

You questioned:
>Why doesn't it work?  I thought that Occam's Razor allowed you to take
>the quick route to Grandma's House.  Not trying to be a smartmouth...
>I was a philosophy minor in college... just wondering why you think it
>fails.  The ever continuing search for truth or something like that...

I instruct:
Occam's [sic] Razor was a concept offered by one William of Ockham, a
Roman Catholic priest of the fourteenth century. He was a "nominalist",
one who did not accept the concept of realism. He thought that "classes"
of things had no independent reality. He was also, evidently, a simple
minded man. The philosophy he espoused was pretty much defunct by the
fifteenth century and he is considered something of a rube by today's
standard's. The only remnant of value is a concept to begin a theorem
from the simplest approach. One must have the initiative to "work up from
there."

You ponder:
>If we can quote Ghandi, maybe we should throw in some Martin Luther
>King Jr. :  "Eye for and eye leaves everybody blind"

I interject:
I wouldn't. King was a notorious plagiarizer ... Gandhi was more
original. His oversimplified quote would leave mostly just criminals
blind, and those who had been their victims  ...

>P.S.  Two posts in less that a week... does this mean i'm no longer a
>professional lurker?

I agree and encourage:
If one goes to a pool, why sit and watch? One must jump in to get the
idea of swimming.

bennachtai/
Bruce L. Jones
Advocatus Veri
The Mojave Desert - The Geographic Center of Nowhere

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
November 2016
August 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
March 2015
February 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
August 2014
June 2014
May 2014
February 2014
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995
December 1994
November 1994
October 1994
September 1994
August 1994
July 1994
June 1994
May 1994
April 1994
March 1994
February 1994
January 1994
December 1993
November 1993
October 1993
September 1993
August 1993
July 1993
June 1993
May 1993
April 1993
March 1993
February 1993
January 1993
December 1992
November 1992
October 1992
September 1992
August 1992
July 1992
June 1992
May 1992
April 1992
March 1992
February 1992
January 1992
December 1991
November 1991
October 1991
September 1991
August 1991
July 1991
June 1991
May 1991

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.HEANET.IE

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager