Posted on 10/25/2009 5:47:50 AM PDT by NYer
Just look at his homepage.
As a note, in OUR jargon, eternal = outside of time. TO us it's NOT the same as "for ever."
You got your L'olam, your secula seculorum, etc - all of which sort of pile duration on top of duration. THEN you got your "Eternal". That's our usage -- explaining, not arguing.
If Peter had stuck with, "A thousand ages in Thy sight are like an evening gone," then the Vast extent of "for ever" would fit perfectly. But, I think, the minute he adds "A day is like a thousand years," THEN we are taking a new approach to time, saying a new thing about God and time.
The problems are many. But one is what, so to speak is God's measure of time when, with repsect to one thing or issue a thousand years is like a day, but, presumably with respect to something else a day is like 1000 years. Is there some 3rd time which is His?
Back this evening.
Baloney.
>>> Constantine was NEVER pope of the Catholic Church. <<<
Yah. He was never the Archbishop of Constantinople, either. So what? That's not what I'm arguing, and you should know that by now. Constantine the Great WAS pontifex maximus at the time that Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire. Which is not the same thing as saying he was a "papa." Once again, P.F. was a title not adopted by the Bishop of Rome (pope, papa, papas, etc.) until much later.
What you meant to say was that Sylvester I was the Bishop of Rome in 325, and that one of the titles used at the time to designate A leader of A Christian community was "papa" or "pope." So, of course Constantine the Great wouldn't be in a list of the bishops of Rome...but then, we're discussing the history and use of the title "P.F.", not the bishops of Rome and not the title "papa."
>>> No, what I meant to say is that His Holiness Sylvester I was pope of the Catholic Church in 325. If I want your opinion of what you think I mean to say I will ask you for it. <<<
Don't worry, wagglebee. I give my arguments freely, without waiting for the prior approval of you or anyone else. Just thought I would re-phrase your point in more historically accurate language.
Pontifex Maximus wasn't adopted as a title by the Bishop of Rome until AFTER Gratian abandoned it in the fourth century. "Pontifex" and its variations weren't used to refer to the Bishop of Rome (and other bishops, by the way) until the sixth century.
>>> The papacy proceeded the title and Saint Peter's journey to Rome. <<<
Which title? Your vagueness is confusing.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to terminate our dialogue. You appear to be purposefully slow, vacuous and dense. It seems that you are employing the usual entrapment practiced by RCs. I do not discern any lovingkindness of Yah'shua. So: Have wonderful journey on the wide road of life.
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
wagglebee: The papacy proceeded the title...
Poe White Trash: Which title?
LOL
Are you doing a superior dance now?
You appear to be purposefully slow, vacuous and dense.
It seems that you are employing the usual entrapment practiced by RCs.
I'll take this as an acknowledgement that you have been unable to locate a Catholic Bible with an apocryphal New Testament.
485
No, Constantine retained the title of pontificus maximus of Roman PAGANISM.
Are you a member of one of these sects that believes that Easter and the Trinity are pagan traditions?
Don't worry, wagglebee. I give my arguments freely, without waiting for the prior approval of you or anyone else. Just thought I would re-phrase your point in more historically accurate language.
Which you have yet to accomplish.
Which title? Your vagueness is confusing.
Pope of the Catholic Church.
Yes, my post was in response to 485.
Where is your lovingkindness of Jesus Christ in trashing wagglebee in 485?
Personal attacks are not permitted in the Religion Forum.
Are reruns allowed?
The high priest of the Roman Collegium Pontificum held the title of P.M. long before there was a "papa" for the city of Rome.
As far as I can tell, P.M. and "papa" have only been connected since about the sixth century AD.
>>> LOL <<<
Actually, the amusing matter here -- sad, actually -- begins with the answer to this question: why did the Emperor Gratian abandon the title of PM?
I’m surprised he responded at all, I told him not to bother until he could produce a Catholic translation of the New Testament with ANYTHING apocryphal.
People of character typically respond by acknowledging their mistakes; the churlish attack, thinking it will mask their ignorance.
JimRob let him change his name, say you wanted to change from narses to “Calvin, Prince of Darkness”, everything would just change to that.
Bzzzt. Not so.
- Pontifex Maximus was the title applied to the head of the official Roman religion of paganism.
- St. Constantine set aside the paganism and made Christianity the official Roman religion.
- Therefore . . . wait for it . . . Pontifex Maximus became the title applied to the official Roman religion of Christianity.
Make up your mind.
But they persist in demonstrating their demonic influence There are those who have been asked not to stalk and trash everyone.
SBC has Bible verses in church too. In fact, the pastor of the one I attend has been going through the Bible verse by verse for years. Why do you think that only Catholics do that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.