Author Topic: Was this video faked? (Read 10329 times)

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #45 on:** August 14, 2015, 04:09:04 PM »

I have to say that I find roscoe's denial of the inerrancy of Holy Scripture outrageous.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #46 on:** August 14, 2015, 08:04:17 PM »

Indeed roscoe's pertinacity has quickly become manifest ... to the point that it's hard to see how there isn't formal heresy here.

roscoe · « **Reply #47 on:** August 14, 2015, 09:15:08 PM »

A strange remark coming from someone who has accused St Thomas( Doctor of Holy Church) of being "wrong about the Immaculate Conception( an Opinion he shared with Card Pecci) and a few other things"

What is meant by ' a few other things' has never been explained.... :ready-to-eat:.

BTNYC · « **Reply #48 on:** August 15, 2015, 09:28:44 AM »

Quote from: roscoe

A strange remark coming from someone who has accused St Thomas( Doctor of Holy Church) of being "wrong about the Immaculate Conception( an Opinion he shared with Card Pecci) and a few other things"

What is meant by ' a few other things' has never been explained.... :ready-to-eat:.

If you can't see the difference between saying that a particular saint was wrong about a particular subject and saying, as you have that "The Bible is wrong" and "The Bible was written by a man( or men) who are capable of being mistaken," then I don't know what to tell you... other than to stop smoking so much dope.

Even St. Thomas Aquinas is not infallible, nor are his writings absolutely inerrant. Sacred Scripture, on the other hand, is inerrant. That is Catholic Dogma.

If you hold St. Thomas so dear, then heed his words:

Quote from: St. Thomas Aquinas

It is absolutely false to maintain, with reference to the truths of our faith, that what we believe regarding the creation is of no consequence, so long as one has an exact conception concerning God; because an error regarding the nature of creation always gives rise to false idea about God.

- Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 2 Ch. 3

roscoe · « **Reply #49 on:** August 15, 2015, 12:44:33 PM »

You are missing the point of my post.

I am simply asking Lad---- what are the 'few other things' that St Thomas had 'wrong'??? What is meant by this remark???

Sacred Scripture is not infallible)like book of Mormons) in matters of physical( natural) science.

Fact is that E has been proven to rev around S..... :shocked:

roscoe · « **Reply #50 on:** August 15, 2015, 12:52:35 PM »

BTW--- when I say the Bible is wrong, I am only referring to 'a particular subject' and a physical one at that.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #51 on:** August 15, 2015, 01:01:02 PM »

BTNYC wrote:

Quote

Sacred Scripture, on the other hand, is inerrant. That is Catholic Dogma.

Roscoe, to deny this is formal heresy. There is no debate. It is settled because it is dogma.

With a benefit of the doubt again, perhaps you don't fully understand? I just can't accept that you persist in this - it must be ignorance of this dogma (I've met a number of novus ordo Catholics over the years who honestly did not know that Scripture is inerrant!), or perhaps due to pride. Either way, please take the correction of your brothers - by the grace of the Holy Ghost - to heart. If nothing else, speak with a priest. Just don't stay fixed in this sin.

I must add that your continued profession, and mocking those who attempt to help you understand, is scandalizing and disappointing.

PerEvangelicaDicta · « **Reply #52 on:** August 15, 2015, 01:09:50 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

BTW--- when I say the Bible is wrong, I am only referring to 'a particular subject' and a physical one at that.

My friend, the Word of God cannot be "wrong" about anything. For a Catholic to make such a statement is not logical.

With respect, I suggest that you speak to a priest asap and get your head and soul straightened out.

roscoe · « **Reply #53 on:** August 15, 2015, 01:15:31 PM »

And E continues to rev around S :cheers:

roscoe · « **Reply #54 on:** August 15, 2015, 01:57:19 PM »

Quote from: BTNYC

Quote from: roscoe
A strange remark coming from someone who has accused St Thomas( Doctor of Holy Church) of being "wrong about the Immaculate Conception( an Opinion he shared with Card Pecci) and a few other things"

What is meant by ' a few other things' has never been explained.... :ready-to-eat:.

If you can't see the difference between saying that a particular saint was wrong about a particular subject and saying, as you have that "The Bible is wrong" and "The Bible was written by a man( or men) who are capable of being mistaken," then I don't know what to tell you... other than to stop smoking so much dope.

Even St. Thomas Aquinas is not infallible, nor are his writings absolutely inerrant. Sacred Scripture, on the other hand, is inerrant. That is Catholic Dogma.

If you hold St. Thomas so dear, then heed his words:

Quote from: St. Thomas Aquinas

It is absolutely false to maintain, with reference to the truths of our faith, that what we believe regarding the creation is of no consequence, so long as one has an exact conception concerning God; because an error regarding the nature of creation always gives rise to false idea about God.

- Summa Contra Gentiles, Book 2 Ch. 3

BTW---- Ladislaus is NOT talking about ' a particular subject' as he refers to ' a few other things' as well.

I OTOH AM talking about a 'particular subject'--- that E rev around S... :cheers:

Jehanne · « **Reply #55 on:** August 15, 2015, 07:48:32 PM »

From Phil Plait

Ladislaus · « **Reply #56 on:** August 16, 2015, 07:52:00 PM »

Quote from: roscoe

And E continues to rev around S :cheers:

And your mind continues to revolve around formal heresy ... and may even have come in for a landing.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #57 on:** August 16, 2015, 07:54:43 PM »

Quote from: Jehanne

From Phil Plait

I'm afraid that there just aren't enough :facepalm:s for this if you think this disproves geocentrism. You're obviously in over your head when it comes to math, physics, and science.

roscoe · « **Reply #58 on:** August 16, 2015, 09:26:54 PM »

Quote from: Ladislaus

Quote from: roscoe
And E continues to rev around S :cheers:

And your mind continues to revolve around formal heresy ... and may even have come in for a landing.

The Forum awaits a clarification of your post claiming that St Thomas was wrong about a 'few other things' .....

Few, I believe, means at least 3.

What do you mean by this??? :confused1:

cassini · « **Reply #59 on:** August 17, 2015, 05:08:19 AM »

Quote from: Jehanne

From Phil Plait

What we have here is a comparison of the sizes of the sun as seen at aphelion and perihelion, the two places where the sun is nearest and furthest from the earth. It simply demonstrates that the sun does not revolve around the earth in a circle.

Copernicus and Galileo believed, as did 99.9% of all philosophers before them, that orbits were perfect circles. They believed they represented perfection because they were God's or Gods' orbits. Kepler, using Tycho de Brahe's measurements GUESSED they were ellipses. Newton based all his THEORIES on ellipses and others called them LAWS proving heliocentrism.

Along came God's astronomer Domenico Cassini and measured the size of the sun every DAY for a year. Thus he was able to show the TRUE orbit of the sun and it is not an ellipse but a Cassinian oval. This in turn turned out to be related to Phi, also called the ‘Perfect’ or ‘Divine Proportions’ found is the shapes of leaves, shells, electromagnetic effects and even blood cells.

Oh, just noticed the bottom attached heliocentric website. Note he tells all the earth orbits in an ellipse. Based on that it goes on with the rest of their heliocentric propaganda.