Jesus was not the son of God according to new amazon doc

Casablanca

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2011
Messages
7,328
Tut tut - the approved phrase is 'formal heretic'. As distinct from an informal one.

The distinction is a complex canonical matter best interpreted by the magisterium - but the outward sign is that Benny still wears the Papal jocks and is refusing to hand them over to the nuns for cleansing. Without the True Jocks Frankie can only wear informal ones and cannot make ex-Cathedra pronouncements. Hence the heresy. Which is formal.
My theological knowledge is very much based on the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, 1969 edition, a simple book with a green cover which is all that the likes of me needed to understand. I’m pretty sure that somewhere therein between such Truths as Limbo and Lay People not touching Holy Wafers, there was a line about formal heretics wearing proper Oxford Brogues in black and informal heretics wearing Oxblood Loafers or, God forbid, desert Boots.

I accept that I may be mixing up the Catechism and the City & Guilds manual on Cordwaining.
 


midlander12

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
5,766
As regards the 'not the son of God' bit, I think most of us had figured that out a long time ago without the intervention of Amazon. Still, it was a great old yarn while it lasted, and remains so for a large proportion of the world's population.
 

publicrealm

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
5,902
My theological knowledge is very much based on the Catechism of the Roman Catholic Church, 1969 edition, a simple book with a green cover which is all that the likes of me needed to understand. I’m pretty sure that somewhere therein between such Truths as Limbo and Lay People not touching Holy Wafers, there was a line about formal heretics wearing proper Oxford Brogues in black and informal heretics wearing Oxblood Loafers or, God forbid, desert Boots.

I accept that I may be mixing up the Catechism and the City & Guilds manual on Cordwaining.
I think you are correct - my memory is a bit rusty but the bit about Lay People not touching their wafers outside of marriage rings a bell.
 

Casablanca

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2011
Messages
7,328
I think you are correct - my memory is a bit rusty but the bit about Lay People not touching their wafers outside of marriage rings a bell.
Thank you. Wafer touching was indeed a most dreadful sin. Touching your Curlywurly while close dancing was another IIRC. However this was commuted to being a mere occasion of sin if you didn’t take pleasure in it.

As was the style at the time.
 

Herr Rommel

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
9,068
Maybe they have him confused with Brian of Nazareth.
 

recedite

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
1,538
I'm not convinced by this Apollonius guy.
What's his record when it comes to turning water into wine?

(Yes, I know anyone with a bladder can turn wine into water. What we are looking for here is somebody with special powers)
 

Degeneration X

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 14, 2017
Messages
7,155
I'm not convinced by this Apollonius guy.
What's his record when it comes to turning water into wine?

(Yes, I know anyone with a bladder can turn wine into water. What we are looking for here is somebody with special powers)
Hmm...most people's bladders can't do this, wine into urine for sure, perhaps you have a magic bladder.
 

Baron von Biffo

Well-known member
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
12,290
As regards the 'not the son of God' bit, I think most of us had figured that out a long time ago without the intervention of Amazon. Still, it was a great old yarn while it lasted, and remains so for a large proportion of the world's population.
Speak for yourself! The title of this thread triggered me. And not in a nice way.
 

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
12,846
Why do you assume he was buried in a tomb?! Usually, those crucified were left on the cross for days (as carrion for animals) and eventually thrown into a common grave, a pit.

Anyway, why would those responsible have worried about Jesus' body after he died? There was no expectation among Jews or Romans that he would 'rise'; he would simply have been seen as a deluded loser who met the same fate as countless other deluded losers.
You obviously don't know your history. He claimed to be the messiah and had become a serious threat to the status quo. If news broke of a supernatural aspect to his death, there would have been a revolution
 

Wagmore

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 17, 2015
Messages
12,846
There is a thread about a scholer who claims Jesus was entirely a mythical figure, and the deeds ascribed to him were borrowed or invented.

Story of Jesus Fabricated Claims US scholar Joseph Atwill

This scholar's thesis is actually more interesting than the one on which this OP is based. Apollonius of Tyana is fairly well known, and the resemblance to Jesus' have been noted before.

Apollonius of Tyana - Wikipedia

It is quite possible that Jesus was a mythical figure, but it is hard not be feel that, like other mythical figures such as King Arthur or Robin Hood, there was a real person behind the stories.
No, with respect, that's the typical wishy-washy BS you get a lot of these days. There can be no grey areas with JC. To paraphrase CS Lewis, JC was an out and out crazy person or, alternatively, who he said he was. We all make are own call on that but i's important to know what you're making your call on before you accept or deny.
 

publicrealm

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
5,902
It would be instructive to know what the Second Temple Jews and the Pre-Nicene Christian Church had to say about this.

Sadly, that expert knowledge is no longer available to us on P.ie.
 

man-in-street

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
566
Twitter
n/a
I s'houldn't have to keep saying this.

Jesus was an Irishman, look at the evidence.

He trained as a carpenter to work on the buildings.
He was unemployed.
He had twelve drinking buddies.
He lived with the Mammy until he was thirty.
He thought the Mammy was a virgin and
His Mammy thought he was God.
 
D

Deleted member 45466

Hmmmm....

I'm shewer Comyns Beaumont came up with a similar hypothesis 90 years ago.
 

JimmyFoley

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
9,475
You obviously don't know your history. He claimed to be the messiah and had become a serious threat to the status quo. If news broke of a supernatural aspect to his death, there would have been a revolution
I'm not sure you understand the point. We'll assume that Jesus did claim to be the Messiah; so what? Messiah=A victorious figure of power and authority, not a crucified 'subversive'. There was no expectation that the Messiah would rise from the dead etc. In fact, if you ever get round to reading Paul's letters, you'll see his trying to grapple with the problem.

Your understanding of the Messiah is based on later Christian theology, not on Judaism.
 

Casablanca

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 21, 2011
Messages
7,328
The think the role of Fallen Angels breeding with humans and the consequent trouble caused should also be examined.

Fact or Myth?
 

JimmyFoley

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 28, 2016
Messages
9,475
No, with respect, that's the typical wishy-washy BS you get a lot of these days. There can be no grey areas with JC. To paraphrase CS Lewis, JC was an out and out crazy person or, alternatively, who he said he was. We all make are own call on that but i's important to know what you're making your call on before you accept or deny.
False choice. Youre assuming that what was reported about Jesus is accurate.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top