“So, the Church, by consensus, and based on a belief, gave itself the authority to infallibly define what God is, based on the “raw” material found to be useful for the narrow agenda, in various writings the Church later canonized, while rejecitng (and even destorying) everything that did nto suit her purpose and goal. And all this was made “legitimate” by claiming the Holy Spirit was behind it!
First, by consensus, you give yourself (arrogate) the power to make something “holy,” then you use that “authority” to proclaim that something is “holy,” which “confirms” that you are “holy” because you base your “holiness” on that which you made “holy.”
Sometimes, I wonder if people claim their believe in God simply because they consider themselves holier than others, and God is nothing but a projection of their own ego.”
Sorry Kosta mou, I’m with Alex on this one...except for this part:
“...people claim their believe in God simply because they consider themselves holier than others....”
I know that’s why I do it, but of course I am Greek and therefore excused!
Thou art excused, Grekolotronaki mou.
That's okay. I don't take it personally. This is not a contest to me. As long as it is given as belief and not on belief claimed as "fact," I have no issues.
...except for this part: “...people claim their believe in God simply because they consider themselves holier than others....” I know that’s why I do it, but of course I am Greek and therefore excused!
Εντάξει, είναι δικαιολογημένη! :)