Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

โ† Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

Digital image by Judy Green

It seems the biggest irony that Pope Benedict XV a German should be under pressure at this time because of the role the Catholic has played in covering up sex offences through the years. Perhaps now more than at any time in recent history the moral authority of the Church is being challenged. Other denominations may want to believe that they are absolved from the growing public perception that problems in the Church is confined to one or the other. The reality of the situation is that the perception of the Church is probably seen by many as having a more amorphous meaning. The Church still represents to many the moral anchor, the possibility that it maybe losing its relevance at a time when cultural relativism is on the rise continues to be a big concern to many.

In 1989 the dismantling of the Berlin Wall signalled the end of the cold war period, Reagan the Capitalist had triumphed over Gorbachev the Communist, from their current locations they both might agree it was truly an epiphanous event. Some are wondering at this Eastertide if Pope Benedict XV will demonstrate the courage to use his position to signal to the world once and for all that the Catholic Church is ready to exorcise the sex demon which continues to besmirch the work of the Church.ย  Twenty years after the felling of the Berlin Wall we live in a world which still wants to believe that there is someone greater, they maybe ready for yet another epiphanous event.

In any society there is always a place for the wise and intellectual among us. One thing we know is that to believe in God requires faith, no amount of debate whether in a docile or rancorous form can change this reality. While some may argue that religion has been used to brainwash the ignorant; there is the value position which some forget religion teaches of good and bad which has played its role in weaving modern day societies now under threat from moral degradation. If we are to believe that religion has no place in the emerging multicultural societies the question must be answered โ€“ What will replace it?

Last week a caller to a radio show who we identified to be Marsha Hinds-Layne, a call-in moderator in her own right, used the fact that there is now a growing distrust of the Church because of the sex scandals. She went on to make the point that many may feel disincline to send their children to Sunday School because of it. One would hope if a parent saw the benefit to be had of sending their children to Sunday School, there are simple remedies which could be put in place to counter the fear expressed by Mrs. Hinds-Layne.ย  More importantly what the argument has exposed are those who would say that they are Christians but would surrender at the first sighting of a challenge to their faith. What if Jesus Christ would have been so meek?

Easter represents an important event on the Christian calendar.ย  To quote Wikipedia,ย  The New Testament teaches that the resurrection of Jesus, which Easter celebrates, is a foundation of the Christian faith.[6] The resurrection established Jesus as the powerful Son of God[6] and is cited as proof that God will judge the world in righteousness.[7] God has given Christians “a new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead”.[8] Christians, through faith in the working of God[9] are spiritually resurrected with Jesus so that they may walk in a new way of life.[10]

Alluded to above, the Church is losing its relevance in today’s world and we can debate why. The pragmatists among us see the urgent need for the Church to give itself a chance by cleaning up its act. It will be hard enough for those who represent the Church to win the hearts and souls of the heathens among us without the distractions which have become part and parcel of religion nowadays. The sex scandals, the greed, the hypocrisyโ€ฆ

Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety – Proverbs 11:14


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

201 responses to “Moral Authority Of The Church Under Threat At Eastertide”


  1. @ GP, The following is a very insightful exposition by the late E.W. Bullinger in his great work, ‘Figures of Speech Used in the Bible’ taken from the chapter dealing with ‘Metaphor or, Representation’ as he throughly explains Jesus words in Matthew 26: 26.

    “This is my body” (touto esti to soma mou)

    “Few passages have been more perverted than these simple words. Rome (RC) has insisted on the literal or the figurative sense of words just as it suits her own purpose, and not at all according to the laws of philology and the true science of language.”

    “Hence the Latin idiom, “agere paenitentiam,” ‘repent’ has been rendered literally in all her (RC) versions from the Vulgate, in various languages, “do penance,” except when God is said to repent! Rome dared not translate ‘agere paenitentiam’ in these cases, which proves her design is thus systematically perverting the Word of God: and false doctrine is thus forced into the words under a show or semblance of literal translation. So the *Metaphor*, “This IS my body,” has been forced to teach false doctrine by being translated literally.”

    “No perversion of language has been fraught with greater calamity to the human race. Tens of thousands suffered martyrdom at the hands of Rome (RC) rather than believe the ‘blasphemous fable’ forced into the words. The exquisite tortures of the Inquisition were invented to coerce the consciences of men and compel them to accept this LIE!”

    “What a solemn and instructive lesson as to the importance of a true understanding of the figures of language.”

    “The whole figure, in a metaphor, lies, as we have said, in the verb substantive “IS”; and not in either of the two nouns; and it is a remarkable fact that, when a ‘pronoun’ is used instead of one of the nouns (as it is here), and the two nouns are of different genders, the pronoun is always made to agree in gender with that noun to which the meaning is carried across, and not with the noun from which it is carried, and to which it properly belongs. This at once shows us that a figure is being employed; when a pronoun, which ought, according to the laws of language, to agree in gender with its own noun, is changed, and made to agree with the noun which, by Metaphor, represents it.”

    “Here, for example, the pronoun “this” (touto) is neuter, and is thus made to agree with “body” (soma), which is neuter, and not with bread (artos), which is masculine.”

    “All of this establishes our statement that, in a Metaphor, the two nouns (or pronoun and noun) are always literal, and that in the vast number of cases where the language is literal, and there is no metaphor at all, the verb is omitted altogether. Even when a Metaphor has been used, and the language passes suddenly from figurative to literal, the verb is at ONCE dropped, by Ellipsis, as not being necessary for the literal sense, as it was for the previous figurative expression: e.g., in 1 Cor 12:27, “Ye ARE the body of Christ,” Here is a metaphor, and consequently the verb is used. But in verse 29, which is literal, the change is at once made, and the fact is marked by the omission of the verb, ” [Are] all apostles? [are] all prophets? [are] all teachers? [are] all workers of miracles?”

    Next compare other examples of Metaphors which are naturally used in the explanations of Parables. Note the Parables of the Sower, and of the Tares (Matt. 13: 19-23, and 37-43).

    “He that soweth the good seed IS (i.e., represents) the Son of man.”

    “The field IS (i.e., signifies) the world.”

    “The good seed ARE the children of the kingdom.”

    “But the tares ARE the children of the wicked one.”

    “The enemy that sowed them IS the devil.”

    “The harvest IS the end of the age.”

    “And the reapers ARE the angels.”

    “In all these (as in every other Metaphor) the verb means, and might have been rendered “represents” or “signifies.”

    “So in the very words that follow “this IS (i.e., represents or signifies) My body,” we have an undoubted Metaphor. “He took the cup…saying…this is my blood.” Here, thus, we have a ‘pair’ of metaphors. In the former one, “this” refers to “bread” and it is claimed that “IS” means changed into the “body” of Christ. In the latter, “this” refers to “the cup” but it is not claimed that the cup is changed into “blood.” At least, we have never heard that such a claim has been put forward. The difference of treatment which the same figure meets with in these two verses is the proof that the former is wrong.”

    “In 1 Cor. 11:25 we read “this cup is the new covenant,” Will Romanists, in and out of the Church of England, tell us how this “cup” became transubstantiated into a “covenant”?”

    “Is it not clear that the figure in the words, “This is My body,” is forced into a literal statement with the set purpose and design of making it teach and support erroneous doctrine?”

    “Other examples of Metaphor in this immediate connection are:”

    ” 1 Cor 10: 16. – “The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not (i.e., does it not represent ) the communion of the blodd of Christ.” through which all blessings comes to us.”

    “The bread which we break, is it not (i.e., does it not represent the communion of the body of Christ?| ie., does it not signify the fellowship of all the members of Christ’s mystical body, who, being many ARE one body ( 1Cor. 12:12)? “For we being many ARE one bread, and one body,” as 1 Cor. 10: 17 declares.” ( Figures of Speech Used in the Bible, pp. 738, 739, 740, 741) emphasis added.

    When I take a picture of my departed Father, to show someone, I say, ‘This IS my father, (i.e., represents what my father looked like).

    We can safely say, that some foot-ballers ‘eat and drink’ football, to mean Metaphorically that they love the game so much, we use the terms ‘eat’ and ‘drink but, they do not literally eat and drink the turf or the football.

    When Jesus said except you ‘eat’ and drink’ My blood, you have no life in you, in John 6, He was not referring to any such literal eating and drinking as the Catholics insist He meant, but, rather to, the extent that we pursue with all of the earnestness and diligence, in Prayer, serious study of His Word, fellowship, worship, evangelism, teaching, preaching, etc, etc, THEN, we come to the Lord’s Supper, to partake of and in the elements of bread and grape juice, which He instituted as a memorial of His, ONCE-FOR-ALL Sacrifice on Calvary, which ALONE can Redeem us, from the penalty of our SINS, and give Him all the Praise, Worship, and Glory for having saved us from all that was taking us to eternal damnation.

  2. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    @ Iain Edghill

    Thanks for your teaching that the RC organization actually allowed / tolerated married priests for over 800 years of its existence and concerning the โ€œduelโ€ of sorts between those who held to Bible doctrine of marriage between men and women, as it was from the beginning, and those who sought to embrace and impose the dogma of priestly celibacy in the Roman Catholic organization

    This dogma VS Doctrine is a major cause for church splits and is one of the โ€œholes in the bucketโ€ raised by Islander or islandman.

    The Anglican or Episcopalian church evolved because of a split off from the RC organization because the King wanted to impose his dogma versus the churchโ€™s doctrine concerning divorce and remarriage.

    John Wesley & George Whitfield (original Methodists) slit because the at the time unsaved Wesley did not believe in the doctrine of the eternal security of the believer as taught clearly in John 6:37 & John 10:27-30. Whereas part of the Methodist Church has lost its way and at least its vibrance the Wesley Holiness or Pilgrim Holiness continue to teach sound Bible doctrine.

    The Brethren church (which never set out to be a denomination) and which still continue to teach the Word soundly though dying out as in England for example continues in its dead orthodoxy and dwelling in much dogma, or/and the inability to separate the spirit from the letter of the law ( the ipsima vox from the ipsimae verbae). The Brethren church church has split several times. The fact that we have three groups of brethren in Barbados is testimony to that.

    Another church group that teaches the Word but which has tended to self destruction and this relative ineffectiveness, because of it turning the doctrine of separation in to a dogma such that they restrict their unity for function are the Baptists. Here is a group that stresses the individual priesthood of the believer but is often ruled by heavy handed SOLITARY pastors. Baptists practice the autonomy of the local church and prize this so much that churches in a region have been known not to come together for purchasing purposes to get price breaks on buying necessary church supplies.

  3. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Great post Zoe on what is basically again Hermeneutics. By recognizing the use of metaphor in the passages you so rightly divided you were able to make the issue clear to me; and as has been declared we all know that I am not so sharp. So if I can understand it, any one else can.


  4. @Zoe

    What happen to the Webster dictionary of the meaning of “BODY” and BLOOD”
    It think webster meanings are self explainable .No conflict! NO confusion!


  5. “It was not until around 1215 that the papacy finally succeeded in imposing priestly celibacy, which indicates that for over 800 years of its existence, the Roman Church had tolerated married priests.”

    Mea culpa! I should have used the word “suggests” instead of “indicates.” Apologies!

  6. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    In John 10:8 Jesus said that he is a door. What does that mean. Shall we use Webster dictionary’s meaning of door too. Would there be No conflict! NO confusion! there too?

    Or should we decide that Jesus was using a metaphor. Is this sort of thing still taught in school? My children were doing metaphors for common extrance 20 years ago.

    Can we walk through Jesus or slam him shut?


  7. In fact, there were married priests. The Popes had their wives, mistresses and children living in the Vatican. Celibacy was instituted to stop the bleeding of “Church wealth” which some popes and priests squandered on their families. There was no separation between church belongings and the popes’ or priests’. Just goes to show how material the church has always been. How it centered part of its doctrine on the accumulation of riches. Today the Catholic Church is the richest institution in the world and is still raping the poor who practise this religion. cheupse.

    Remember the Borgias? Remember Pope Alexander VI (i think)?

  8. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Pat
    You have forgotten the Pope that was a woman!
    Now thats an interesting one I read about about 40 years ago LOL. She was Pope Joan (really Joanna)

    When she fell sick in mass and delivered a baby, they said it was a miracle.

    Have you taken your Vitamin D today Pat?
    It is now the cure for everything!

    Take your Vit D and live for ever! Its the cure for all!

    Perhaps we can work out the mechanism of action and the pharmacokinetics and phamacodynamics together, and mek a likkle money. Wuh you say?


  9. Fair warning to all Georgie Porgie will never give up i truly believes he has the answer, even if he did it is no help to anyone because he simply cant put it in English he can only quote words from the Bible.

    Ready


  10. @GP
    The use of the word “Door” is a poor example. You don’t expect me to believe the
    word “body” and Blood as use in the context and connected with eating and drinking of a person is entirely the same as the word “door” . Jesus did explain want he wanted us to do at the last Supper.


  11. Roman Catholicism: Alias Paganism!

    Evils of the Union of Church and State. Secularization of the Church.

    Here begings for all intent and purpose the birth of Roman Catholicism, which bears no resemblance to the true Apostolic Church.

    As Schaff writes:

    “Constantine, the first Christian Caesar, the founder of Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire, and one of the most gifted and energetic, and successful of the Roman Emperors, was the first representative of the imposing idea of a Christian theocracy, or a system of policy which assumes all subjects to be Christians, connects civil and religious rights, regards church and state as the two arms of one and the same government on earth.” (History of The Christian Church, Vol 111, Nicence and Post Nicene Christianity, A.D. 311-600, p.12).

    Can any true Christian imagine Peter, Paul, John or Jude, the contenders of the FAITH, (body of doctrinal truth) ONCE for all delivered to the saints (Jude 3b), condescending to such vile paganistic, idolatrous union with an Emperor of Rome? They would rather be martyred for the cause of Christ, than to pollute, contaminate, and corrupt the pure Gospel of The Lord Jesus Christ.

    Regarding Constantine, Schaff goes on to say:

    “…and down to the end of his life he retained the title and the dignity of a Pontifex Maximus, or high priest of heathen hierarchy…died a few days after, on Pentecost, May 22, 337…so passed away the first Christian Emperor…the first Imperial patron of the Papal see, and of the whole Eastern church, the first founder of the holy places, Pagan and Christian, orthodox and heretical, liberal and fanatical” (Ibid., pp. 36,37)

    Let us not forget that up to this point in time, no such office or title of Pope existed, but as Schaff points out:

    “This was the end of Graeco-Roman Heathenism…but although ancient Greece and Rome have fallen forever, the spirit of Graeco-Roman paganism is not extinct. It still lives in the natural (sinful) heart of man, which to this day as much as ever needs regeneration by the Spirit of God. It lives also in the many idolatrous and superstitious usages of the Greek and Roman churches, against which the pure Spirit of Christianity has instinctively protested from the beginning, and will protest till all remains of the gross and refined idolatry shall be outwardly as well as inwardly overcome, and baptized and sanctified…also with the Spirit and fire of the Gospel…the dark side of the union of the church with the state…grew out of their altered relation after the time of Constatine, and which continue to show themselves in the condition of the church in Europe to our own time.”

    “The line between church and the world, between regenerate and unregenerate, between those who were Christians in name and those who were Christians in heart, was more or less obliterated, and in place of the former hostility between the two parties, there came a fusion of them, in the same outward communion of baptism and confession. This brought the conflict between light and darkness, truth and falsehood, Christ and antichrist, into the bosom of Christianity itself.” (Ibid., pp. 125,126)

    Catholicism in the Empire.

    Prior to the beginning of Roman Catholicism, the official state/church union, with Constantine and his edict of toleration in 313, Christianity, as Schaff says:

    “…had already, without a stroke of sword or intrigue, achieved over false religion the internal victory of spirit over matter, of truth over falsehood, of faith over superstition, of worship of God over idolatry, or morality over corruption.”

    “Under three hundred years of oppression, it had preserved its irrepressible moral vigor, and abundantly earned its new social position.” (Ibid., p.92).

    It is vital to always remember that God never leaves Himself without a witness to the True Gospel of The Lord Jesus Christ; and even though the hybrid state/church of the Empire produced Roman Catholicism, there has always being a remnant of true believers, and to this fact, Scaff asserts:

    “…that the dissenting sects, who derived no benefit from this union, but were rather subject to persecution from the state and from the established Catholicism. In this regard, Tertullian had ever held the Christian profession to be irreconcilable with the office of a Roman Emperor. That these evils may be summed up under the general desigination of the secularization of the church. By taking the whole population of the Roman empire, the church became, indeed, a church of the masses, a church of the people, but at the same time more or less a church of the world.”

    “The number of hypocrites and formal professors rapidly increased; strict disciplne, zeal, self-sacrifice, and brotherly love proportionally ebbed away; and many heathen customs and usages, under the altered names, crept into the worship of God and the life of the Christian people.”

    Therefore, as Schaff continues to correctly point out from historical facts: “The reign of Constatine the Great marks the transition of the Christian religion from under persecution by the secular government, to union with the same; the beginning of the state/church system, Roman Catholicism.” (Ibid., pp. 4, 5, 125).

    Sir George Sinclair could not have described Roman Catholicism more succinctly, when he wrote:

    “Romanism is a refined system of Christianized Heathenism, and chiefly differs from its prototype in being more treacherous, more cruel, more dangerous, more intolerant.”

  12. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Jesus said this is my body and it is taken literally
    Jesus said this is my blood and it is taken literally

    But when Jesus said he is the door that is not to be taken literally?

    When Jesus said “Behold I stand at the door and knock” in Rev 3 is that to be taken literally too?

    When Jesus says I am the Vine is that to be taken literally too?

    When Jesus says I am the resurrection and the life or I am the light of the world is that to be taken literally too?

    Wonder what it means when he says I am THE WAY, the truth and the life?

    I guess that is why 56% of so called evangelicals say that they are many paths to God and many other ways.

    I guess all these folk who are into Ophrah’s and OH BAM A’s new age teaching are using Websters Dictionary to interpret the Bible.

    Maybe they didnt learn about metaphor in school either.

    The other problem they have is that the KKV NIV etc is not in English, its only in Bible Words.

    I must confess that I have not met many dummies in my secondary or tertiary schooling, nor have I met them in teachng medical students…………………….but on BU where folk try to defend the indefensible and challenge this well read (but 3/10 teacher) the dummies come out in force. And I have to pull teeth like a dentist!

    But I guess one must listen to and obey the advice of the first Pope who established the RC church in Rome some 200 years after his death when he wrote in 2 Peter 1: 5-7
    . And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; 6. And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance PATIENCE


  13. Mr. Halsall claims that I have misrepresented him. Itโ€™s very important to be clear about this.

    Here is Mr. Halsall:

    โ€œI feel I *must* respond to Mr. Shermanโ€™s twisting of my words โ€ฆ I will refrain from quoting my own language which Mr. Sherman has twisted.โ€

    Mr. Halsall, you canโ€™t have it both ways. Though you might refrain from quoting your own language, I wonโ€™t so refrain. You said this:

    โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yours.โ€

    Thatโ€™s a straightforward, textual quotation. Itโ€™s not twisted in any way. Itโ€™s literally cut-and-pasted from your post.

    Now, you can add as many late qualifiers as you want to that, Mr. Halsall. Later, you can qualify it so much that the original assertion is meaningless. But the original assertion stands, forever, as an absolutely clear and unambiguous statement of your personal opinion. Either you believe it or you donโ€™t believe it.

    Either you believe this: โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yoursโ€ or you do not believe it.

    I donโ€™t know you from Adam, Mr. Halsall, but what little Iโ€™ve read of your writings suggests to me that you are a reasonably decent person who generally means well. Thatโ€™s why Iโ€™m both surprised and saddened to read your making an absolutist assertion so obviously ill-thought that it sounds comically and almost dramatically adolescent.

    Let me quote you again, without twisting a single word:

    โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yours.โ€

    Pure nonsense, in my wholly subjective view. I DO NOT and NEVER WILL respect the โ€œbeliefsโ€ of others who โ€œbelieveโ€ that all non-whites should be expelled from the UK, that Shia mosques in Baghdad should be bombed by Sunnis, that female genital mutilation is acceptable, that apartheid was a good idea, and that one of the most regular contributors to this blog isnโ€™t a deeply unsettling douchebag.

    Hope thatโ€™s clear. And I hope it helps. And I hope I didnโ€™t โ€œtwistโ€ your words.

    Best wishes to you, sir.

  14. Little boy who has lost his home! Avatar
    Little boy who has lost his home!

    **** ******** “Respect” also means: : to pay proper attention or consideration to: to respect Swiss neutrality. Reduced to being corrected by the natives, shame.


  15. @Mr. Sherman: “Either you believe this: โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yoursโ€ or you do not believe it.

    You appear to have an agenda to discredit me.

    You claim you are new here, so I will forgive your claiming to not having read my many posts from the past two plus years here on BU (and over on BFP (hmmm…)) where my position is very clearly defined.

    However, you seem fixated on a single sentence, trying to claim that I must agree with genocide and hatred.

    Are you familiar with the word “context” Mr. Sherman?

    The sentence you keep quoting, and trying to leverage upon, was rendered within the context of religious beliefs.

    Namaste to you. And to all.


  16. CH is learning!
    He has now grasped the understanding of the word “context” a word frequently used on BU by “the Bible teachers.”
    If the dyslexic CH can grasp the concept of context, anyone can!


  17. Mr. Halsall (and it truly saddens me to say this, since he has always seemed to be one of the4 few thoughtful people on this blog) persists in being disappointing.

    He says this:

    โ€œYou claim you are new here, so I will forgive your claiming to not having read my many posts from the past two plus years here on BU โ€ฆโ€.

    Mr. Halsall: please quote me chapter and verse, with links if it pleases you, when I have claimed

    1. To be โ€œnew hereโ€.
    2. To having not read your many posts.


  18. @Adam Sherman: “2. To having not read your many posts.

    @Adam Sherman: “I donโ€™t know you from Adam, Mr. Halsall, but what little Iโ€™ve read of your writings suggests to me that you are a reasonably decent person who generally means well.

    Will that suffice Mr. Sherman?


  19. Mr. Halsall has another question. Itโ€™s a reasonable question posed by a reasonable man.

    Mr. Halsall quotes me at the start of his question. Here is Mr. Halsallโ€™s question:

    โ€œ@Adam Sherman: โ€˜I donโ€™t know you from Adam, Mr. Halsall, but what little Iโ€™ve read of your writings suggests to me that you are a reasonably decent person who generally means well.โ€™
    Will that suffice Mr. Sherman?

    You misunderstood me, Mr. Halsall, but in this case the failing is mine. I should have been specific enough to make plain that your writings to the โ€œBU familyโ€ (and man, that term still makes me laugh out loud every single morning) are all I have read of you. Iโ€™d taken it as a given that itโ€™d be understood I hadnโ€™t read, say, your personal correspondence. But I have read your messages when you communicate with the โ€œBU familyโ€. Sometimes, when Iโ€™m reading the views of the โ€œBU familyโ€ in the morning, I have to clean coffee off my monitor because they are so hysterically demented that they really do, quite literally, make me laugh out loud.

    You strike me as a decent person, Mr. Halsall. To reiterate: thatโ€™s precisely why itโ€™s disheartening to read you writing an opinion so endlessly adolescent and intellectually bankrupt as this one:

    โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yours.โ€

    Best wishes to you, Christopher.


  20. @All…

    Please note the empirical above…

    When the antagonist faces something which will obviously result in defeat, the context suddenly changes…

    Welcome to “media” in the “new dark ages”….

  21. Little boy who has lost his home! Avatar
    Little boy who has lost his home!

    Little boy who has lost his home!

    **** ******** You cannot stay away so great is the attraction; you are nothing unless you are here..


  22. @ Little boy who has lost his home! // April 8, 2010 at 4:08 PM

    Little boy who has lost his home!

    **** ******** You cannot stay away so great is the attraction; you are nothing unless you are here..
    _____________________________________________________________

    Who is **** ******** ?
    Are You KPMG / Eversheds Bully boys?

  23. Little home who has lost his boy! Avatar
    Little home who has lost his boy!

    Right. Sure. Whatever.


  24. @ all

    Please note all above.

    When Mr. Halsall finds himself cornered, unable to make any empirical argument, he disappointingly resorts to the worst form of infantile demagoguery (that is: he relies on your idiocy to make his point).

    I have tried to be polite to Mr. Halsall. I have paid him respect.

    Mr. Halsall thinks this, which forever will stand as a statement of his world outlook:

    โ€œIf one can not respect anotherโ€™s beliefs, then one should not expect others to respect yours.โ€

    Not even a child would say that.


  25. @All…

    I am slowly learning there is advantage in not responding.

    Particularly to idiots….


  26. We see Halsall talking to himself (i.e,Adam Sherman) and carrting on a conversation in which they curse each other with the hope thast this thread will be closed just as the last religious thread was.

    This is the obvious ploy. It is very easy to see that.


  27. @GP

    You have to bring a clearer perspective in order for a person to understand the significance of the Lords Supper and its relevance in partaking of his Body and Blood . If in todays society a religious denomination would use such terminology it would be consider a “cult”.


  28. @GP
    iI have been away for some time; reason for my late response.

    Please note:
    1. I do have Dr. Walter Martin’s book:”Kingdom of the Cults”. I have owned it for 21
    years. I am yet to see where he labels the SDA’s as a cult, as you have so
    forthrightly done.
    Please give me the page, and I’ll check it. You can never tell, I might have missed it.

    2.Referring us to Galations and Ephesians as your basis for labelling the church as
    a cult will not do. You have to tell us what the verses say, and your interpretation of
    the verses

    3. You said that the SDA’s are a spin off from the Baptist. WRONG! DEAD
    WRONG! You know not what you are saying
    If they are a spin-off from the Baptists, kindly inform us who the fouding fathers
    were.

    4. I thought the SDA’s were a church that believed in salvation by Grace. I thought
    this was entrenched and documented in their Statement of Beliefs. But it is obvious
    you seem to have a different version of their cannons.

    I am wondering Dr Georgie, if your beef with the adventists comes down to “the Sabbath”

    Have a good evening. I have to go right now.

    When you respond, please quote simple English so that we all can understand and do our research.

    Your friend….CULT

  29. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    @
    CULT

    I am glad you have Dr. Walter Martinโ€™s book :โ€Kingdom of the Cultsโ€ for 21 years

    So then you can read it. I lent out my copy and have never got it back.

    Re 2.Referring us to Galations and Ephesians as your basis for labelling the church as
    a cult will not do. You have to tell us what the verses say, and your interpretation of
    the verses

    I know what Galatians says about Law & Grace . You need to read it for yourself and interpret it for your self. I donโ€™t have to do a thing Sir. If you donโ€™t agree with what I have said. Come teach me about it.

    Maybe Zoe can address you on cults.. That is his area of expertise.

    Re 3. You said that the SDAโ€™s are a spin off from the Baptist. WRONG! DEAD
    WRONG! You know not what you are saying

    Texts of Church History state clearly the origin of the SDA. The SDA is a relatively late group on the โ€œchurchโ€ scene. Both SDAโ€™s and JWโ€™s are both spin offs from the Baptist church. If they are a spin-off from the Baptists, kindly inform us who the fouding fathers
    were.

    Sir I know who the FOUNDER OF THE CHURCH IS. I could not care two hoots who founded the SDA church. If you are a SDA you should know that.

    Re 4. I thought the SDAโ€™s were a church that believed in salvation by Grace. I thought
    this was entrenched and documented in their Statement of Beliefs. But it is obvious
    you seem to have a different version of their cannons.

    Do you think Sir or do you know?

    I have no beef with the SDAโ€™s or any one else. When folk in my church group err. I donโ€™t hide to say so You see I donโ€™t defend a denomination . I try to align myself and my thinking with what the Bible teaches.

    Re When you respond, please quote simple English so that we all can understand and do our research.

    I speak and write good English despite my keyboard problems. If you donโ€™t understand my vocabulary, LOOK UP THE WORDS! This is not an English class.

  30. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Zoe
    Can you respond to Cult
    And also delve into the Ordinance of the Lord’s Supper and its significance, and the various ways it is observed here and there?

    I have some Biochem to teach. Cant do any Dentistry now


  31. Georgie Porgie // April 8, 2010 at 12:13 AM

    Nope! I did not take it for the last week. It has been very sunny and I have been outdoors. However, I take it during the winter! It is recommended to overcome SAD. That is supposed to be “seasonal adjustment disorder”, which affects our moods during the winter when there is less sun, less light, less out doorsy activities. The government recommeds that adults and children take it. They were even suggestions of adding it to food other than milk.

    Send me the plan by private e-mail and I will see have we can develop the business venture. I am serious. If we are early on the bandwagon, we can capitalize big time.


  32. Anon // April 8, 2010 at 6:00 PM

    We see Halsall talking to himself (i.e,Adam Sherman) and carrting on a conversation in which they curse each other with the hope thast this thread will be closed just as the last religious thread was.

    This is the obvious ploy. It is very easy to see that.

    Can you share your method of determining this?
    Why do you people make ridiculous comment that you can not prove. If you said you felt or thought this, you can be excused but to blatantly make such an ignorant statement that you know this well… *sigh*.

  33. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Pat
    Re Take your Vit D and live for ever! Its the cure for all!
    Perhaps we can work out the mechanism of action and the pharmacokinetics and phamacodynamics together, and mek a likkle money. Wuh you say?

    I was sure that you realized that I was very sarcastic. Wuh happen ole girl? You losing it or wuh? Read my comments on the Vit D thread and give me your thoughts.

    David raised the issue probably to stimulate interest or discussion, and some one called Researcher seem to want to capitalze or jump on the bandwagon to get all the folk in Bim that read BU out there spending there money on it.

    I can understand the use for SAD, but NONE of the articles linked explained HOW Vit D is doing all these wonderful things for every malady known to man.

    NONE of the articles linked explained what is happening to calcium levels and phosphate levels while the Vit D levels are low. That bothers me. Plus they are talking about increasing the RDA!

    NONE of the articles linked explained the mecahism of action of Vit D in the indications postulated or what the body is doing to the Vit D, or what the Vit D is doing to the body that is different to what we know already.

    I was taught NEVER BE THE FIRST TO EMBRACE THE NEW OR TO ABANDON THE OLD. LOL

    I will consult my cousin (physician and naturopath on this and get back to you on this privately.

    OK David YOu will get your cut, I will not treat you like MME did us with the apoptosis almost 2 years now ! LOL.

  34. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Techie ma boy

    Re Why do you people make ridiculous comment that you can not prove. If you said you felt or thought this, you can be excused but to blatantly make such an ignorant statement that you know this wellโ€ฆ *sigh*.

    I have to agree with you 100 % my friend. Anon is remiss. But a few weeks ago I didnt hear you come out when RIDICULOUS IGNORANT BLATANT UNPROVEABLE LOW DOWN LIES WERE TOLD ABOUT ME.


  35. @GP,
    Sorry. I think you misunderstood me. I wasn’t referring to you command of English. Your English is impeccable; i mean’t your Latin quotes.

    GP, I usually laud you when you write on theological matters. In fact, I find them interesting and stimulating. However, this is one where you have no answer. On this you score a big zero.
    In deed, you cannot fight against truth.

    Your solicitation of back-up help from Zoe sounds like a serious request for help.

    You can now go to your Biochem. class, as you are over an hour late. I hope your students are still waiting.

    CULT


  36. @ Dr. Georgie

    Man, sure you were not taking me seriously. ha, ha, ha. I would need the proof of any of these so called cures. Besides, I have already had my foray into ‘small business’ and being an entrepreneur.

  37. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Cult
    Biochem was good

    Zoe is the expert on cults and isms and schisms. I am into Eschatology and Methods of Bible Study (a ka Hermemeutics and exegesis).

    Plus all of my books are in Barbados, so I am limited in checking my sources. Dont much use the internet for this. I can usually find stuff that I have marked in my books.

    You cant mean quid dixi scripsique, dixi scripsique. You cant get it more elegant than that— putting que after the word instead of putting dixi et scripsi.

  38. Georgie Porgie Avatar

    Pat

    I just glad to be reassured that you still in control of your game. Cause I didnt get a peep out of you on the matter. We cant let these snake oil salesmen try to fool BU folk.

    They fool think he can fool us.
    He ought to have stuck to one disease! But he come wid a cure fuh all.

    I dont really have the time to give him a proper whipping!


  39. @ GP…

    I have to agree with you 100 % my friend. Anon is remiss. But a few weeks ago I didnt hear you come out when RIDICULOUS IGNORANT BLATANT UNPROVEABLE LOW DOWN LIES WERE TOLD ABOUT ME.

    That is for you to defend GP. Those lies were addressed to you personally and I can see from your track record that you can defend yourself well.

    What I and commenting about is technology, I defend ignorance of it the same way you would defend correct Bible study..ah lie?

  40. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Techie

    Quae cum ita sint (= that being the case) it is note worthy in Anon’s defence that neither of these two ??? have apeared together arguing except on religious blogs. Ah lie? LOL

    Anon’s conclusion may indeed be incorrect, but it is noticeable that Anonnymous had, and shared the same opinion.

  41. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Annonymous

    I am still waiting to hear your thoughts on who are “Evangelicals”.


  42. @GP: “Quae cum ita sint (= that being the case) it is note worthy in Anonโ€™s defence that neither of these two ??? have apeared together arguing except on religious blogs.

    As I hope (and trust) you know GP, correlation does not mean causality. And the record will show that I’ve never interacted with Mr. Sherman before this single blog entry.

    As I’ve said many times before, I only post under my own (real) name.

    I personally believe only a coward would hide behind an alias.


  43. Mr. Halsall,
    Are you saying that GP and anon are one and the same person?
    Why would a Christian practice such deceit?


  44. halall didnt say it…you are! Ah lie?

    And just in case GP and anon are one and the same person, when Saul of Tarsus was called deceit was that deceit? Does calling Jacob Israel constitute deceit or calling Cephas, Peter.

    And I am sure that there are at least 316 names for Christ in the Bible according to one Brethren scholar from New Zealand as recorded in his books THE INCOMPARIBLE CHRIST. (Sorry you cant google dat.) I suppose he was decitful too.Eh?

    Off course Tecchie will not come to my defence here either.

    With respect to who are called Evangelicals or Fundamentalists, Miss.

    At the turn of the last century it was generally decided that Evangelicals or Fundamentalists were any church group that believed and taught

    the Deity of Christ
    the Virgin Birth of Christ
    the sacrificial substitutionary death of Christ as the only way for salvation
    the resuirrection of Christ
    the visible return of christ.

    This involved an amorphous collection of groups. To call a “church” evangelical is in my view an oxymoron , or at best redundant, since by definition evangelism is one of the 5 purposes of a ;ocal “church” according to NT teachings.

    Many of the “churches” that are today called “evangelical” have very little in common.

  45. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    Now you see I have gone from GP to Anon to Annoymous, while all the time of course being totally annonymous. What irony! What hilarity! Where shall I go next?


  46. @”Georgie Porgie”: “Now you see I have gone from GP to Anon to Annoymous, while all the time of course being totally annonymous. What irony! What hilarity!

    Rather trivial, isn’t it?

    @””Georgie Porgie”: Where shall I go next?

    That’s up to you.


  47. the teachers on this blog is not doing a good job in educating the students. Maybe it because the classroom is not in acontrol setting as they are used to. Rather than saying they don’t know they would continue to demean the student or dismiss a question as irrelevant. However everything has rellevancy in one way or another. Maybe some of these “TEACHERS” need to go back to TRAINING COLLEGE


  48. The Pope Benedict story continues to heat up. Note the role of the press in unearthing the letter.

    Pope Benedict accused of delaying unfrocking of sex abuse priest

    Pope Benedict XVI resisted pleas to unfrock an American priest with a record of sexually molesting children, arguing that the negative publicity would damage the church in a 1985 letter bearing his signature.

    By Tom Leonard in New York and Nick Squires in Rome
    Published: 10:50PM BST 09 Apr 2010

    The 1985 letter typed in Latin and signed by the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger said any decision to remove Stephen Kiesle, a San Francisco priest, from the priesthood must take into account the โ€œgood of the universal churchโ€.

    The letter, obtained by the Associated Press news agency, could provide the first direct evidence to undermine the Vaticanโ€™s insistence that the Pope was never involved in blocking the removal of paedophile priests during his two decades as head of the Catholic Churchโ€™s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the department that deals with sex abuse cases.

    Related Articles

    Text of 1985 letter

    Pope willing to meet more sexual abuse victims

    Pope Benedict XVI unfrocks Medjugorje priest

    Vatican to use psychologists to weed out homosexual priests

    Pope Benedict XVI calls for rebirth of Middle East at Christian burial site

    Founder of Catholic order Legionaries of Christ fathered child with mistress

    The Pope has already been accused of failing to act on accusations of abuse in previous roles as a cardinal in his native Germany, and in Rome. The Vatican has dismissed these claims as โ€œunfounded insinuationsโ€.

    The Vatican refused to comment on the contents of the letter on Friday but a spokesman confirmed that Cardinal Ratzingerโ€™s signature was genuine.

    Father Federico Lombardi, the Vatican spokesman, on Friday acknowledged that the Church had lost public trust and reiterated Pope Benedictโ€™s willingness to meet more victims of abuse.

    The letter was among years of correspondence between the California diocese of Oakland and the Vatican over the Fr Kiesleโ€™s future.

    Kiesle was sentenced in 1978 to three yearsโ€™ probation after making a plea of no contest to charges of lewd conduct related to tying up and molesting two young boys in a San Francisco Bay area church rectory.

    When his probation ended in 1981, Kiesle asked to leave the priesthood and the diocese supported him, submitting papers to Rome requesting to unfrock him.

    It was the same year in which Cardinal Ratzinger took over the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, the Vatican office responsible for disciplining priests.

    In his earliest letter to the cardinal, Bishop John Cummins of Oakland warned in 1982 that returning Kiesle to ministry would cause more of a scandal than removing him from the priesthood.

    But according to the correspondence, the case languished at the Vatican for four years before the cardinal wrote back to the bishop in 1985.

    In his letter, then Cardinal Ratzinger acknowledged the case for removing Kiesle was of โ€œgrave significanceโ€ but said it required a careful review and more time to consider.

    Urging the bishop to provide Kiesle with โ€œas much paternal care as possibleโ€ in the meantime, he noted that a decision to unfrock him must take into account the โ€œdetriment that granting dispensation can provoke within the community of Christโ€™s faithful, particularly considering the young ageโ€. Kiesle was 38 at the time.

    While Kiesleโ€™s future was being considered, he volunteered as a youth minister as a suburban church.

    He eventually left the priesthood in 1987, but continued to volunteer to work with children until an outraged official confronted Bishop Cummins over the situation.

    Kiesle was charged in 2002 with 13 counts of child molestation from the 1970s. All but two were thrown out after the US Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a California law extending the statute of limitations.

    He pleaded no contest in 2004 to molesting a young girl and was sentenced to six years in state prison.

    Bishop Cummins, now retired, said he could not recall writing to the cardinal about the case.

    โ€œI wish I did write to Cardinal Ratzinger. I donโ€™t think I was that smart,โ€ he said.

    Jason Berry, a US-based Vatican expert and author of two books on the sex abuse which rocked the Catholic Church in the US, said: โ€œI donโ€™t think itโ€™s a smoking gun. I think we have to bear in mind carefully the mindset of the 1980s. Sex abuse by priests was not an issue on many peopleโ€™s radar screens 25 years ago.

    โ€œAnd the concern that scandals might harm the Church was embedded in the mindset of cardinals.

    โ€œI think the big issue is the Popeโ€™s silence today, rather than any mistake he made 25 years ago. Why is he not speaking out, why is he not reacting to the cases that are emerging?"


  49. ac // April 9, 2010 at 6:47 PM

    the teachers on this blog is not doing a good job in educating the students.
    ************************************

    Hello ac:

    This teacher will give you a leg up.

    The sentence above, the first in your post, has two grammatical errors.

    No, no, no! I am not Jack Bowman nor Adam Sherman. There are more in the same post, but I don’t want to pick nits.


  50. @PAT

    CORRECTION

    The teachers onthis blog are not doing a good job educating the students. O.K.

    However teacher I prefer to have my legs down or sit crossed leg.

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading