Re: Side Note

Posted by Steve from ppp-187.col.cableone.net on July 27, 2000 at 11:42:08:

In Reply to: Side Note posted by Mikal C Johnson on July 27, 2000 at 10:04:01:

: Peter was not the founder of the Christian church. If you actually takethe time to read the Bible and not just the comments by skeptics, you will see that there are a number of his fellow Christians who were in dispute with him (both in Acts and mentions inthe letters of Paul).
: Peter was a stone in the foundation... not the foundation itself.

My friend, I have indeed read the entire Bible,because I thought I should not rely on someone else explaining it to me. You are right about the dead sea scrolls, my mistake. I meant to say Nag Hammadi, as this was the site that the 4 gospels were discovered, along with the books of Thomas,and Phillipe. As far as Peter is concerned, I may be wrong, but I thought he was by tradition the first leader of the Catholic church in Rome,and we get the tradition of the apostolic succession from him. Do you agree that the Catholic was the first organized church, and all the other denominations have evolved from this? That is what I was referring to. As far as the contradictions, I feel that your mind is set,and it would be a waste of time to point them out, as I have been through this before. An exercise in futility if you will. I am a believer, but I also feel that men wrote these books, and men put them together. I don't believe God was there directing them in this effort. They took this upon themselves. If you look at the history of Christianity, you will find lots of horrible things commited in the name of God. These acts were commited by supposedly godly men. And that is my point. Regards, Steve

Follow Ups:

Re: Side Note Mikal C Johnson 14:23:16 7/27/2000 (1)
- You are right , I am not up to the challenge,at least not right now, maybe later on though(nm) Steve 15:32:49 7/27/2000 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:    
E-Mail:  
Subject: 
Comments:

: : Peter was not the founder of the Christian church. If you actually takethe time to read the Bible and not just the comments by skeptics, you will see that there are a number of his fellow Christians who were in dispute with him (both in Acts and mentions inthe letters of Paul).
: : Peter was a stone in the foundation... not the foundation itself.

: 
: My friend, I have indeed read the entire Bible,because I thought I should not rely on someone else explaining it to me. You are right about the dead sea scrolls, my mistake. I meant to say Nag Hammadi, as this was the site that the 4 gospels were discovered, along with the books of Thomas,and Phillipe. As far as Peter is concerned, I may be wrong, but I thought he was by tradition the first leader of the Catholic church in Rome,and we get the tradition of the apostolic succession from him. Do you agree that the Catholic was the first organized church, and all the other denominations have evolved from this? That is what I was referring to. As far as the contradictions, I feel that your mind is set,and it would be a waste of time to point them out, as I have been through this before. An exercise in futility if you will. I am a believer, but I also feel that men wrote these books, and men put them together. I don't believe God was there directing them in this effort. They took this upon themselves. If you look at the history of Christianity, you will find lots of horrible things commited in the name of God. These acts were commited by supposedly godly men. And that is my point. Regards, Steve

Optional:

Link URL:   
Link Title: 
Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Indyfan Forum ] [ FAQ ]