In-Reply-To: <002701c5a9c8$dd5648e0$d46537d2@computer>
Thank you Bill.
I value your support in this issue.
Though I may not have made myself clear, my comments were prompted by
much discussion with honest believers, Muslim and Jewish ones.
The conclusion I am now left with is just why should we allow the peoples
of the book to be divided in one relatively minor and somewhat obscure
point of doctrine. When we are in fact in major agreement about the real
issue of morality and the nature of humankind. Particularly Usury.
You touch on the point that I have made, and gained the most browny points
on in the discussions. " Do you believe in a God that can do anything"?
"If so, why do you say that there is something that he would not, or could
not do"?
Ken.
Vice Chairman and Librarian
Christian Council for Monetary Justice.
-------- Original Message --------
X-Envelope-From:
socialcredit-return-2582-kenpalmerton=cix.co.uk@elistas.comReceived: from
q2.elistas.net (q2.elistas.net [216.66.20.200]) by mta05.mx.cix.co.uk
(8.13.4/CIX/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7Q08EiI021545 for
<kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk>; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 01:08:14 +0100Received: (qmail
13773 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2005 02:15:10 +0200Received: from
mail.e-listas.com (66.7.164.206) by 192.168.0.150 with EMQP; 26 Aug 2005
02:15:10 +0200Mailing-List: socialcredit@elistas.com
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Post: <mailto:socialcredit@elistas.com>
Reply-To: socialcredit@elistas.com
List-Help: <mailto:socialcredit-help@elistas.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-unsubscribe@elistas.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:socialcredit-subscribe@elistas.com>
Delivered-To: list socialcredit@elistas.com
Delivered-To: moderator for socialcredit@elistas.com
Received: (qmail 29642 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2005 01:13:15 +0200
Received: from unknown (HELO smtp01.maxnet.net.nz) (202.89.32.6)
by mail.egrupos.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 2005 01:13:15 +0200
Received: from computer (pool101-212.dialip.maxnet.co.nz [210.55.101.212])
by smtp01.maxnet.net.nz (Postfix) with SMTP id BCE973FC8F5
for <socialcredit@elistas.com>; Fri, 26 Aug 2005 10:53:57 +1200
(NZST)Message-ID: <002701c5a9c8$dd5648e0$d46537d2@computer>
From: "W. McGunnigle" <wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
References: <20050825200246.99638.qmail@web60518.mail.yahoo.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 11:01:00 +1200
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1106
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106
Subject: Re: [socialcredit] The Trinity
X-Envelope-To: kenpalmerton@cixcouk.cix.co.uk
X-UIDL: _0QF.w1lDDB.mta05.mx
Reply to W.B.Ryan
Where in our recent discourse about the early Christian
Church did anyone imply that the doctrineof the Trinity was essentially
"evil"? Questions have been asked:Yes! but neither Kenneth nor myself have
made that implication. My statements about the Nicean Synod/conference are
simple historical facts well documented in both ecclesiastical and secular
histories from that era. The purpose of that conference was solely to
standardise Christian doctrine and thinking to prevent a major schism in
theearly church. My earlier statements cover this aspect of the Nicean
conference, and its aftermath. The problem with "doctrines" about Christ is
easy. Doctrines are an attempt by the mind of Man to compartmentalise the
vastness of God i.e. Limit God to that which can be understood by our
ratherpathetic mentality. It has taken me 50 years to understand that this
isimpossible. I don't find questioning Christian beliefs as "threatening"
or"evil", but marvel at the further revelations about the vastness of our
creator it brings to me. I do however question the actions of the
established churches on financial matters. Christ threw money-changers out
of the Temple not because he disagreed with money changing but because they
had usurpted their position as the sole suppliers of the sacred Sheckels
needed to pay the Temple tax. His actions were those of an outraged man who
rightly objected to a sacred obligation towards God being exploited for
purposes far removed from that obligation. I see the present silence by
manyChristian denominations, particularly exteem protestant sects, about
theworld's corrupt and evil financial exploitation of everyone as a damning
condemnation on the witness of those denominations. I became a Socred
follower and monetary reformer as a direct consequence of my own beliefs in
the value and example set by Christ. It matters little to me how anyone
pictures Christ (and God) in a doctrinal form. It does matter to me however
that injustice and corruption particularly in financial areas should be
challenged. Christ openly questioned corrupt money changing so do I. The
love of money is a soulless thing. It reduces individuals to a machine that
thinks of nothing but the next amount of profit. A machine that does not
care about the wellfare of others or the wellfare of our environment. It is
the ultimate in selfishness. I have been there, and now live with the
consequences of those actions. I am sharing this with you all because I
believe our approach to financial matters through Social Credit is a
practical and feasible way to get the world out of its present finacial
mess. People should not be starving or without shelter in this world of
plently, but the international finacial system perpetuates poverty. This is
unstable in the short term even if the world reverts to a totally
repressiveone world government. This is why I am Socred supporter. Social
Credit isnot revolutionary, but Justice. A method whereby the entire world
can beginto develope properly without the handicap of a parasitic
financial system. William H.McGunnigle
----- Original Message -----
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 8:02 AM
Subject: [socialcredit] The Trinity
> You seem to believe that there is something "evil"
> about the Doctrine of the Trinity, as there is about
> "interest" and I suppose "eating pork."
>
> It is true that the Trinity was not explicitly taught
> by the early Christians, although what they did teach
> was not incompatible with it.
>
> The conversion of Constantine was sealed by his
> victory at the Milvian Bridge, having earlier been
> introduced to the Christian faith by his mother,
> Helena. As sole emperor, he ordered the conversion of
> the official Augustinian state cult to Christianity:
> The Augustinian temples became Christian churches, the
> cult's bishops and priests became Christian bishops
> and priests, etc. What we see in the ceremony of
> modern liturgical churches is the court ritual of
> Roman emperors; the vestments, the dress of upper
> class Romans. The modern church's hierarchy the
> hierarchy of Imperial Rome.
>
> Though three Senators had witnessed the ascension of
> the Emperor Augustus to Heaven from his funeral pyre,
> the orientation of the state cult had always been more
> philosophic than religious.
>
> The Trinity of the state cult was derived from Greek
> philosophy. It expresses fundamental truth about the
> nature of God: God the Father who created us; God the
> Son, within us; God the Holy Ghost who can help us
> combat evil. One God in three Persons.
> -
>
>
>
> --- Kenneth Palmerton
> <kenpalmerton@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Quite frankly, A major issue for me as a "member"of
> the Church of England, and a committed Christian. Is
> the debate I have had over some years with Muslim
> friends about the beliefs of the early church, before
> the Romans got their sticky fingers on a new source of
> power.
>
> Was original belief unitarian, or trinitarian?
>
> Was the trinity what Christ taught, or was it a later
> concretion?
>
> Language is one of the clues that we are left with.
> And if Aramaic WAS the first language that any of our
> gospels was written in, then its close connection with
> Arabic is of some significance.
>
> For any monetary reformer who thinks that this
> dialogue has nothing to do with them, then I would
> advise that they actually look at what Christ had to
> say, and what he, as the supreme peacemaker actually
> did in the Temple.
>
> Condemnation of the money changers is nothing new
> :-)))
>
> Ken.
> -
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email wmcgunn@maxnet.co.nz
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
You're subscribed to this list with the email kenpalmerton@cix.co.uk
For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message