Is Secularism To Blame For Church Crisis?

Is Secularism To Blame For Church Crisis?

Is Secularism To Blame For Church Crisis?

The following conversation took place recently, between our blogger Petrus and a Glasgow priest. The identity of the priest really doesn’t matter. Since Petrus was not speaking to him on behalf of Catholic Truth we decided not to publish his name. In any case it could be any priest in Glasgow and, indeed, beyond. Given the confused mind of the Prefect for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith evident in this interview, it’s no wonder that the clergy are mixed up.

PETRUS IN CONVERSATION WITH A GLASGOW PRIEST…

PETRUS: I go to Mass at a chapel of the Society of Saint Pius X. Am I a Catholic in good standing?

FATHER: Well, it’s really an issue of Church law.

PETRUS: It’s not an issue of Church law. The Vatican have said that the laity fulfil their obligation by going to a Mass at the SSPX chapels. Canon Law says that any Catholic Rite fulfils our obligation. So, am I a Catholic in good standing?

(Father nods his head in agreement)

FATHER: Yes, I suppose you are.

PETRUS: Do you accept that there is a crisis in the Church?

FATHER: Yes, I do, but it wasn’t caused by the Second Vatican Council.

PETRUS: But didn’t Pope Paul VI say just after the Council that from some fissure the smoke of Satan had entered into the Church?

FATHER: The Council didn’t cause the crisis.

PETRUS: Well, Cardinal Ratzinger said it was only a pastoral Council but had come to be regarded as some sort of super dogma.

FATHER: Well, if he said that….it wasn’t just a pastoral Council.

PETRUS: It defined nothing.

FATHER: But the Deposit of Faith cannot change.

PETRUS: True. So why did certain Church teachings become obscure at the Council and why were things that were condemned previously suddenly allowed?

FATHER: I don’t accept that.

PETRUS: What about ecumenism?

FATHER: The teaching on Ecumenism didn’t change, it was updated for our times. Pope Francis said at the beginning of his pontificate that we had to be meek. Sitting in a room discussing things is much more productive.

PETRUS: But weren’t Catholics forbidden from worshipping with non-Catholics before the Council?

FATHER: Yes, but it’s faith in Christ and faithful to his prayer that the Church may be one.

PETRUS: Isn’t the only way that can happen is for those outside the Church to convert? Isn’t the Catholic Church the one, true Church?

FATHER: Of course.

PETRUS: So isn’t the most charitable thing to do is to explain that outside the Church there is no salvation?

FATHER: Well, perhaps we should be preparing for the Second coming.

PETRUS: But surely the only way to prepare is to be united to Christ’s bride, the Catholic Church?

FATHER: Of course.

PETRUS: The ecumenical movement leads to indifferentism. In fact it is completely orientated towards Protestantism.

FATHER: There could be some truth in that.

PETRUS: So what is the point? Surely we should be making the teaching of the Church explicit? For example, would you discuss the Real Presence or the Rosary in the company of Protestants?

FATHER: I do do that.

PETRUS: The ecumenical movement causes Catholics to lose their faith. The Church is in crisis, Father. The Second Vatican Council is a bog problem. What’s your solution?

FATHER: I don’t agree it’s a problem. I said earlier that it didn’t cause the crisis.

PETRUS: What did?

FATHER: Secularism. That’s why ecumenism can help. We can join together with other Christians to combat secularism and moral problems.

PETRUS: But haven’t the Protestant groups moved further away on moral issues? The Anglicans are ordaining homosexual bishops and the Church of Scotland are blessing civil partnerships.

FATHER: The leadership of these churches might have moved further away, that’s true.

PETRUS: So, ecumenism is utterly pointless?

FATHER: Well, other people will not sit in the same room as Catholics.

PETRUS: Let’s get back to the crisis. What’s the solution?

(Father points to a crucifix)

FATHER: He’s the solution. We should focus on the cross.

PETRUS: Well, (compare) the Traditional Mass (with) the New Mass. Doesn’t the Traditional Mass make the Sacrifice of Calvary more explicit?

FATHER: Absolutely not. I reject that.

PETRUS: Doesn’t the way of receiving Holy Communion in the Traditional Mass make the Church’s teaching on the Real Presence clearer than receiving Communion in the hand?

FATHER: Not at all. Anyway, many more sins are committed with the tongue.

PETRUS: But Father think of the particles being dropped.

FATHER: When I divide the Host particles go up into the air.

PETRUS: But the Church puts procedures in place to minimise this. Communion in the hand multiples it.

FATHER: I don’t agree.

PETRUS: Another sign that priests and people are utterly confused is that anyone and everyone can and does receive Communion, even public sinners.

FATHER: Now you are sounding Jansenist. We can’t say who is worthy and who is not.

PETRUS: Well, if you know someone is a public sinner – in a homosexual relationship or living with a partner outside marriage, would you still give them Holy Communion?

FATHER: What do you want me to do? Embarrass them publicly?

PETRUS: But you are charged with protecting the Sacrament from abuse. You permit that person to commit another mortal sin by making an unworthy Communion.

FATHER: I’m trying to encourage them and help them.

PETRUS: Well you can do that in private by explaining why they can’t receive Communion and how they can mend their ways.

Silence.

PETRUS: Father, what are the fruits of the Second Vatican Council?

FATHER: A greater awareness of the church’s catholicity. Before the Council not many people knew the eastern Catholic Churches existed.

PETRUS: Is that all?

FATHER: No. A greater understanding of the universal call to holiness.

PETRUS: Was this lacking before the Council? Didn’t the Legion of Mary do this very well?

FATHER. Yes, of course they did.

PETRUS: Father, the Church was in a position of strength before the Council. Look at it now. Priests and religious have abandoned their vocations.

FATHER: Yes.

PETRUS: Seminaries are closing, Mass attendance is plummeting.

FATHER: Yes.

PETRUS: There’s terrible confusion. People are ignorant of the Church’s teaching. They aren’t being catechised.

FATHER: That’s not true of everywhere.

PETRUS: So, there has been a decline since the Council. I can only see bad fruits.

FATHER: I disagree. END

Comments (142)

  • spiritustempore

    Blah, blah, blah.

    More hysterical ignorance from the atheist in the corner.

    I doubt anyone’s really listening.

    August 14, 2013 at 3:10 pm
    • editor

      I’m watching, if not listening, spiritustempore – I want to see that list of reliable, verifiable sources, requested from our resident atheist, somewhere on this blog…

      Since she claims that Jesus of Nazareth never existed – nay, that NAZARETH itself didn’t exist – can’t wait for her to supply that list (watch for a list of books written by er atheists!)

      Luv you really Arkenaten. When you finally give in and join us, I’ll pay for the celebration cake and coke (liquid kind!)

      August 14, 2013 at 3:30 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Your blatant sarcasm is indicative of the insecurity rife within religion all religion..
        Any evidence I linked you to you would dismiss, yet I am always open to Christians producing evidence to back any of their claims. So far not a single Christian has been able to.

        August 14, 2013 at 4:42 pm
  • spiritustempore

    A-r-k-e-n-a-t-e-n,

    Why don’t you stop your somewhat transparent diversionary tactics and post the evidence you claim to have?

    You do have evidence don’t you?

    Time to put up or shut up.

    August 14, 2013 at 5:40 pm
  • Marcantonio Colonna

    I am only a young student, but at school i learn that flavio giuseppe (sorry, i do not know it in english), a roman writer and man of politics, a pagan also, clearly writes about jesus who is called the christ…he did exist in this world!

    August 14, 2013 at 6:22 pm
    • Arkenaten

      @ Marcantonio.
      Che Giuseppe Flavio scrisse di Yeshua era una interpolazione cristiana

      http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flavio_Giuseppe

      August 14, 2013 at 6:51 pm
      • spiritustempore

        Don’t push your luck, A-r-k-e-n-a-t-e-n.

        We’re still waiting for your much-vaunted ‘proof’ that “neither Jesus nor Nazareth” existed.

        I’m sure that Editor’s Italian is good enough to recognise atheist proselytising when she reads it.

        August 14, 2013 at 7:11 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Listen, Smart Alec, I wrote it in Italian because Marcantonio is Italian and he stated he did not know it in English.
        I was being polite…

        This is the translation…..as per Chrome.

        ”That Josephus wrote that Yeshua was a Christian interpolation.”

        Basically, the TF was subject to Christian Interpolation.Happy now?

        As for my ”much vaunted proof’ regarding Jesus and Nazareth are you really really interested or are you merely going to be snide?

        I’m serious. I’ll post everything I have if you are keen for a history and archaeology lesson, but clear it with Editor first, okay?
        Your call….

        August 14, 2013 at 7:24 pm
      • Arkenaten

        S-P-I-R-I-T-U-S-T-E-M-P-O-R-E.
        Sheesh, that is hell to type, why do you bother?

        August 14, 2013 at 7:26 pm
      • spiritustempore

        To avoid my posts joining yours in moderation. As Editor has released you from moderation, there is no longer any need.

        Editor has reminded you to post proof of your assertions that neither Jesus nor Nazareth existed.

        I’ve now asked you to do so three times and still you try to deflect.

        While you’re about it, please also back up your claims that Flavius Josephus made up his reference to Christ’s existence.

        No atheist polemics: cold, hard historical fact please.

        As previously posted, put up or shut up time.

        And please try to make it concise and coherent.

        August 14, 2013 at 9:18 pm
      • Arkenaten

        The core of the TF…that which states that Jesus was a wise man etc is recognized as a christian interpolation.
        Even the Catholic Church believe so.
        You can find all the relevant info on Wiki. Just type Josephus.
        I can offer a link that shows it is all fake if you are interested, but i doubt you would believe this much, right?
        Fir more info on the TF and orher related topics try Professor Carrier’s site:

        http://freethoughtblogs.com/carrier
        Just trawl around. It is a very interesting site.

        Nazareth.
        http://www.nazarethmyth.info/‎

        Oh, and for the record. The Catholic Priest that first surveyed the area, was called Bagatti. And he found zip to suggest the village existed at the time of Jesus.

        Have fun.
        Any other questions or queries feel free to ask.
        All the best.
        The Ark

        August 14, 2013 at 9:35 pm
      • editor

        Er, could I remind you that the topic of this thread is, is Secularism to blame for the crisis in the Church?

        What on EARTH does that have to do with Josephus, Nazareth or the freethoughtsblog?

        I’m trying to be patient, Arkenaten. Trying very hard. Thing is, I don’t think I’m half as trying as you…

        Come on, co-operate.

        August 14, 2013 at 9:39 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Your mate just asked me to post links for crying in a bucket.!
        Read her comment. She also said put up or shut up!
        I don’t care a monkey’s uncle if she believes or not, it wont alter the facts one way or another.

        ”Editor has reminded you to post proof of your assertions that neither Jesus nor Nazareth existed.”

        PLEASE do me a favour and delete the comment with the links and the info on Josephus etc. Really, then she can go whistle for any info in future.

        August 14, 2013 at 9:44 pm
      • Athanasius

        Arkenaten,

        I thought you might find this link helpful in proving the existence of God. I have other such links, as well as a few showing without doubt the existence of the devil. They are real life exorcisms, so quite disturbing. Let me know if you want to see them.

        By the way, this linked website is not a Catholic one, so that should add to credibility.

        http://listverse.com/2007/08/21/top-10-incorrupt-corpses/

        August 14, 2013 at 10:15 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Are you extracting the Michael?
        You are, aren’t you? A real chain yank, yes?
        Only a complete moron would believe this.
        I am assuming you are sitting in front of your laptop having a good old chuckle…as am I.
        Thanks for the laugh. 🙂

        August 14, 2013 at 10:29 pm
      • editor

        Arkenaten,

        I seem to have given mixed signals on the matter of sticking to the topic, more complicated than usual since this topic is “secularism.”

        I’m getting myself out of the muddle I’ve created by issuing the following royal command….

        Once you have provided the evidence requested on the points you’ve raised, end of. OK? (no need to waste a post replying “OK” – let’s take that as read.)

        And just for interest, I thought the following piece about the history of Nazareth might be of use in helping correct your notion that it didn’t exist at the time of Christ…

        Nazareth in Ancient Times

        The city of Nazareth was a small and insignificant agricultural village in the time of Jesus. It had no trade routes, was of little economic importance and was never mentioned in the Old Testament or other ancient texts. Archaeological excavations indicate Nazareth was settled continuously from 900 – 600 BCE, with a break in settlement until 200 BCE, from which time it has been continuously inhabited.

        Nazareth, the Home of Mary and Joseph

        During the lifetime of Mary, Joseph and Jesus, it is believed the population did not exceed 500. Nazareth was a small Jewish village where people knew one another, and like Jesus, lived, prayed and studied in the Jewish tradition. They gathered in the synagogue, meeting for prayer and holidays. To this day, visitors can see the Synagogue Church, dating from the Crusader period, which was built to commemorate the spot where it is believed Jesus prayed and preached (see Nazareth sites and attractions). The New Testament mentions Nazareth many times, referring to it as the home of Mary and Joseph, the town that inspired Jesus during his childhood and early manhood, the place of the Annunciation and his clash with fellow citizens who disapproved of his non-conventional way of thinking.
        Click here to read more

        August 15, 2013 at 12:30 am
  • spiritustempore

    Sorry Arkenaten. Not good enough.

    I asked you for solid, authoritative historical sources, and specifically not atheist polemics (or polemicists).

    You made the assertions. You provide the evidence. Not flaky opinion pieces from Wikipedia contributors or fellow atheists, with an airy ” find it yourself”.

    Now, provide first, credible sources please.

    August 14, 2013 at 9:39 pm
    • Arkenaten

      What! What is ”flakey” about Professor Richard Carrier?

      Have you checked his credentials?
      The Wiki article has plenty of other links if you’;re not happy and the consensus regarding the TF is that the reference to ”…if he was indeed a man etc” is a Christian interpolation.
      Your church even says so!
      Are the Catholic not a credible source? If you doubt them then maybe you should jump ship and become a Protestant. Oh..wait a moment, they ALSO think the TF is a fraud.
      What more do you want for crying out loud? A signed confession from Josephus?
      Ironically the TF never appeared on the theological radar until Eusebius made an appearance.
      How interesting is that , I wonder?

      Maybe you should start with Israel Finkelstein, then?. He is an archaeologist and he has shown conclusively that Moses was fictional, the Exodus never happened and neither did the invasion of Canaan. And the Israeli government accepts his finds and this has been known for over 25 years!
      Now as this is all fake and Jesus mentioned Moses and the likes of Abraham etc that makes Jesus either ill informed or he didn’t know anything about his own Jewish traditions.
      Or are you going to tell me that Finkelstein’s work is atheist polemics as well?

      Read , don’t read. You asked. I posted.

      August 14, 2013 at 9:56 pm
      • spiritustempore

        Arkenaten,

        See if you can work it out.

        My request:

        No atheist polemics: cold, hard historical fact please.

        Your source

        Richard Cevantis Carrier (born December 1, 1969) is an American blogger and a writer on philosophical and historical topics.

        He is best known for his writings on Internet Infidels, otherwise known as the Secular Web, where he served as Editor-in-Chief for several years.

        As an advocate of atheism and metaphysical naturalism, he has published articles in books, journals and magazines, and also features on the documentary film The God Who Wasn’t There, where he is interviewed about his doubts on the historicity of Jesus.

        I’m not interested in atheist sources, and I’m less than impressed with your being permitted to proselytise atheism on this site.

        I’m not interested in your biased opinions, or those of atheism’s talking heads.

        I’m interested in objective fact. Something you are patently unable to provide.

        August 14, 2013 at 10:04 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Okay, you don’t like Professor Carrier.
        Did you investigate what the Catholic Church says about Josephus and the TF by the way?
        How about Crossan or Ehrman,? Will they do?
        Ignore them entirely and focus on Israel Finkelstein and Zeev Herzog,
        Their Jewish.
        Let’s rather do the whole Moses thing and then we can follow the inevitable thread to its ultimate conclusion if you like?
        No atheist ‘polemic’, no ‘flaky’ stuff. Just solid hard core facts.
        Well? You game for a heartbreak ride or are you going to pull tongues at me all night?

        August 14, 2013 at 10:10 pm
  • spiritustempore

    I don’t care a monkey’s uncle if she believes or not, it wont alter the facts one way or another.
    PLEASE do me a favour and delete the comment with the links and the info on Josephus etc. Really, then she can go whistle for any info in future”.

    “Believes”?

    In what? Your selection of atheist websites and Wikipedia ‘factoids’ that happen to coincide with your desired view of the world?

    You seem to struggle to differentiate between Arkenaten’s personal opinions and cold, hard objective fact.

    If you hold out your ignorant personal assertions as fact, you can expect to be challenged to back them up with credible evidence. Each and every time.

    As it appears you can’t put up, it would appear to be “shut up” time.

    I suggest that you do so.

    August 14, 2013 at 9:53 pm
    • Arkenaten

      And what do consider ”creditable” info regarding Josephus?
      Eusebius? As our dear host says. Gerragrip….

      If you can’t trust your own church then nothing will convince you. Best you simply believe what you wish.

      There is only ever going to be two views. The religious and the secular.
      In all honesty, considering what we are dealing with which do you truly believe is likely to suffer from lack of objectively?
      Who has more to lose, the church/religion or secularism?

      Be at peace with what you believe.

      August 14, 2013 at 10:01 pm
      • spiritustempore

        There are only ever two possible positions.

        One based on verifiable, objective fact from credible sources.

        The second based on individuals’ subjective prejudices and biases.

        You repeat confidently as fact matters that are simply conjecture and projection from vested interests. It cuts no ice whatsoever.

        I trust my Church. I certainly don’t trust your interpretations of what it does or does not say……always and conveniently without any credible source to back up your assertions.

        Now I think you’ve probably had enough attention for one night.

        August 14, 2013 at 10:09 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Sulking already?

        August 14, 2013 at 10:11 pm
      • Arkenaten

        Here you go. The Catholic Encyclopedia
        Try reading the piece as objectively as possible, okay?
        And don’t say I don’t so anything for you…

        http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

        August 14, 2013 at 10:25 pm
      • spiritustempore

        From the Catholic Encyclopaedia:-


        Attempts have been made to refute the objections brought against this passage both for internal and external reasons, but the difficulty has not been definitively settled. The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations.

        The fact that the “Antiquities” testifies to the truth of Divine Revelation among the Jews as among the Christians, and confirms the historical facts related in the Bible by the incontrovertible testimony of pagan authors, renders this work of Josephus of extreme value for the history of the chosen people.

        The accounts which he gives of the rise and mutual relations of the different Jewish sects, which are so important in the history and sufferings of the Saviour; his information regarding the corruption of the ancient Jewish customs and institutions; his statement concerning the internal conflicts of the Jews, and lastly his account of the last war with the Romans, which put an end to the national independence of the Jews, are of prime importance as historical sources.

        So the excerpt confirms that:-

        1. Attempts have been made to discredit Josephus’ references to the physical existence of Jesus Christ. Nonetheless, they have not been refuted.

        2. Josephus confirms historical facts related in the Bible.

        You assert that the Catholic Church supports your position that Jesus Christ did not exist.

        You seek to use the text above to buttress your position.

        Fail on both counts.

        August 15, 2013 at 12:14 am
      • editor

        spiritustempore,

        I was about to post the Catholic Encylopaedia link earlier, for the reasons you highlight, but decided not to fearing that Arkenaten would dismiss it as a merely “Catholic” source. I couldn’t believe she then posted it herself to support her own argument.

        Truly, you couldn’t make it up.

        August 15, 2013 at 12:27 am
      • spiritustempore

        Editor

        I’m not entirely sure that Arkenaten has done much research into the position she claims to hold, or that her position is anything other than an adolescent attempt to be ‘contravershul’.

        August 15, 2013 at 12:39 am
      • editor

        Well, I think, in charity, we have to presume that she means what she says, since we have no way of reading her mind and soul.

        August 15, 2013 at 12:49 am
      • spiritustempore

        No need to read her mind or soul….just read her posts. Or her blog.

        Ed: (no reply button so I’m responding here)

        That is precisely what I mean – we can tell that Arkenaten actually believes what she says and thus she will be viciously anti-Catholic. She is convinced by the atheist propaganda she’s imbibed and thinks the entire history of Christendom is a fabrication. That is her embedded mindset. Hence patience is required on our part to help, if possible, correct some of her errors. We ought not to presume bad will on her part – that’s what I meant.

        August 15, 2013 at 12:52 am
      • Arkenaten

        What are you blathering on about?

        ”You assert that the Catholic Church supports your position that Jesus Christ did not exist.”

        What nonsense is that? Why would I say the church supported an argument that denied Jesus’ existence? Are you smoking your socks?

        I stated that the Catholic Church agrees that the TF has suffered from Christian interpolation and this article states the same

        ”The passage seems to suffer from repeated interpolations.”

        . This is all I said about the Catholic Church and I also said try to read it objectively.
        Are you feeling all smug and self-important now that you believe you have trashed the argument of the ”nasty atheist?”

        Do you truly believe I just ‘found’ this five minutes before posting it for you?
        Do you HONESTLY think I haven’t read and studied this passage from the Catholic Encyclopedia?

        Which is a darn sight more than can be said from a supposed devout Catholic like yourself. Lol.
        Well, at least you can;t say I haven;t educated you a little, right?

        Really, you are so funny..

        August 15, 2013 at 8:50 am
      • spiritustempore

        You may have read it. You patently have difficulties with interpretation, as the passage you quote refutes your argument, rather than supporting it.

        I’m not terribly interested in your hysterical diatribes – if you had an argument at all, you wouldn’t find yourself continually falling back on bluster and childish ranting to fill the holes where reasoned argument should be.

        You appear to have some fairly deep-seated emotional issues – perhaps you would be better served by seeking medical or spiritual help, rather than desperate attention-seeking on the internet.

        August 15, 2013 at 9:05 am
      • Arkenaten

        We were talking about the Testimonium Flavium, and the Catholic Church’s standpoint.
        I cited them solely because they too recognise that is has been butchered by interpolation, and quite likely by Eusebius.

        ”You appear to have some fairly deep-seated emotional issues ”

        Lol…Thank you for your concern regarding my mental and emotional well being. Which reminds me…I must take all my pills with breakfast. 🙂

        Well at least I got you to read something historical and have enlightened you just a bit, Including some stuff on the Catholic Church you didn’t know before. Believe me, you now know more than most in this regard. How cool is that?
        Look up Louis Feldman. He is considered the number one expert on the TF.

        Now you are aware of the T.F., and know a bit more about Josephus. You may now even be encouraged to read a bit more? Who knows, right? It is all fascinating stuff.

        Whether you believe or not, you can’t ever dismiss it.
        That is at least a start.

        Baby steps.

        It’s been fun.
        Maybe it will continue to be so?

        Peace.

        August 15, 2013 at 9:23 am
  • spiritustempore

    And as for the non-existence of Nazareth:-


    In December of 2009, Nazareth made worldwide headlines. Archaeologist Yardena Alexandre and her colleagues uncovered a small structure that they dated to the time of Christ (Hadid, 2009). The Israel Antiquities Authority official press release hailed this discovery as the first of its kind in which a residential structure was uncovered. The announcement noted the importance of the discovery, and quoted Yardena:

    “The discovery is of utmost importance since it reveals for the very first time a house from the Jewish village of Nazareth and thereby sheds light on the way of life at the time of Jesus. The building that we found is small and modest and it is most likely typical of the dwellings in Nazareth in that period. From the few written sources that there are, we know that in the first century CE Nazareth was a small Jewish village, located inside a valley”.

    August 15, 2013 at 12:34 am
    • editor

      Very interesting, spiritustempore. I’ve just added the following to a post of mine above, but in case it gets missed, here it is again – on the subject of the “fictitious” Nazareth…

      Nazareth in Ancient Times

      The city of Nazareth was a small and insignificant agricultural village in the time of Jesus. It had no trade routes, was of little economic importance and was never mentioned in the Old Testament or other ancient texts. Archaeological excavations indicate Nazareth was settled continuously from 900 – 600 BCE, with a break in settlement until 200 BCE, from which time it has been continuously inhabited.

      Nazareth, the Home of Mary and Joseph

      During the lifetime of Mary, Joseph and Jesus, it is believed the population did not exceed 500. Nazareth was a small Jewish village where people knew one another, and like Jesus, lived, prayed and studied in the Jewish tradition. They gathered in the synagogue, meeting for prayer and holidays. To this day, visitors can see the Synagogue Church, dating from the Crusader period, which was built to commemorate the spot where it is believed Jesus prayed and preached (see Nazareth sites and attractions). The New Testament mentions Nazareth many times, referring to it as the home of Mary and Joseph, the town that inspired Jesus during his childhood and early manhood, the place of the Annunciation and his clash with fellow citizens who disapproved of his non-conventional way of thinking. Click here to read more

      August 15, 2013 at 12:50 am
      • Arkenaten

        Smile.
        A lie will be up and about before the truth has had chance to get its boot on.

        You really ought to read Josephus. Truly.

        Merely posting only those things that give you a feeling of “I told you so” without checking your sources only damages its credibility and ensures that you only regard a heavily slanted theological perspective.
        This is choice, I realise. But wouldn’t you really like to know the truth?
        I mean the proper truth.
        Aren’t you curious abut the geography and topography of the area? Where this cliff was that the multitude want to throw Jesus from?
        Aren’t you curious why Josephus mentions many many towns and villages but makes no mention of Nazareth and yet it was supposed to be less than 2 miles from the town he lived in, Yapha?

        August 15, 2013 at 9:08 am
    • Arkenaten

      @Spiritusteempore
      Sigh….And now you can feel very clever that you have dug up this press release from how long ago?
      And if it wasn’t for the nasty atheist you wouldn’t know diddly about it anyway.
      The building is dated LATE FIRST CENTURY.

      NONE of the findings were offered up for peer review and still haven’t been.
      Are you even vaguely aware how much money the USA has invested with the Israeli government and tourist board to ensure this Nazareth Village gets developed?
      Do you know ANYTHING about the history of the area and previous archaeology?
      Are you aware that when Yardenna and Pfan issued their Nazareth Farm Report it underwent a 20 page review simply because someone pointed put that what they had claimed re certain findings was wrong?
      Don’t you care one iota for the truth or just what makes you feel comfortable
      By the way.
      This building has since been covered over and built upon.This is how IMPORTANT a find it was…they built on top of it!

      August 15, 2013 at 9:00 am
      • spiritustempore

        Poor Arkenaten, you remind me of a certain type of Catholic traditionalist.

        So determined that the world should conform to your personal expectations, and so hysterical when you find that it does not. You can stick your fingers in your ears and scream ‘la-la-la’ as much as you like, nothing changes.

        You seem to think that atheists and secularists pronounce holy writ and that anything and everything that factually disagrees with them just simply doesn’t exist and is to be dealt with just as dishonestly as you can muster.

        Your only sources are atheistic, your agenda childishly nihilistic. I doubt that you would know ‘truth’ if it kicked you up the backside and shouted ‘surprise’.

        YOU claimed that Nazareth did not exist. The archaeological record shows that it existed – and remained in occupation – from the Bronze Age until the present day. You can read the findings of the various authorities online….if you can manage to get past the atheist propaganda, that is.

        August 15, 2013 at 9:14 am
      • Arkenaten

        No, the archaeological does not show it existed at the time that Jesus was supposed to have lived.
        What “various authorities?”
        Offer at least a name or two.
        Someone besides Yardena and Pfan.
        Anyone…..
        I have read more about Nazareth than is probably good for me.
        The christian version is nonsense, I am afraid. It really is. You can try to shoehorn what evidence there is as much as you wish, but sadly, it just won’t fit.
        And when compared alongside Josephus and the account in Luke it just becomes even more silly.
        Even Bagatti was aware of this. And the Nazareth Farm Project tells nothing about what this supposed village was like at the beginning of the first century.
        Albright failed in his religious quest to uncover the archaeology of the bible and so have many others.
        I have no desire to waste any more time on close minded souls such as yourself. No matter how the ‘evidence’ is presented it won’t alter the truth.
        They made it up…
        Deal with it.

        August 15, 2013 at 9:30 am
      • spiritustempore

        No, Arkenaten.

        You and your dubious sources make it up as you go along and you just can’t get past it.

        You can bang on and on and on as much as you like – it makes no difference.

        Assertions are not fact: refusal to consider information that conflicts with your desired world-view, rubbishing anyone and anything that disagrees with your intellectually stunted ‘arguments’ convinces no-one of anything.

        Beyond the obvious fact that reasoned argument is not your strong-point and you patently have ‘issues’.

        You spend an inordinate amount of time online, desperately trying to start arguments with people you say you see as ‘evil’ so that you can pour out your bile and hatred of them on your own blog to an extremely small readership. If capable of self-examination, you might discover that your problem is self-loathing, rather than religion.

        It’s a major part of your life and yet it isn’t making you a particularly happy or well-adjusted individual.

        You’re happily creating your own personal hell on earth, and the best illustration of the fruits of atheism that I’ve yet encountered.

        Carry on.

        August 15, 2013 at 10:43 am
  • spiritustempore

    Thanks for the info Editor.

    August 15, 2013 at 12:53 am
  • editor

    Look Arkenaten,

    There is no use continuing a discussion where you do not accept anything we say. You go on about peripheral matters – e.g. you claim that Eusebius did not mention Nazareth although he lived nearby. I have my copy of Eusebius in front of me as I type, as it happens, but just don’t have the time to check that out partly because it is irrelevant and I have a birthday card for a soon-to-be 12 year old to go out and buy. But I live less than an hour from Edinburgh and even closer to Stirling and in all the email correspondence I’ve had with several American readers, I don’t think I’ve ever mentioned either place. Who cares? There could be any number of reasons for that Eusebius omission (if it’s true – as I say I’d need to check it, but – in any case – he’s not infallible); however, since you dismiss any and every piece of evidence put before you, opting instead for the atheist propaganda, there is really no point in continuing this alleged discussion.

    I’m going to close this thread down before any real nastiness sets in. It’s disappointing but there it is. Thank you, Arkenaten, for commenting here and for the tips about smiley faces. I’ll master that in due course and always remember you for helping me with that key research! See, it’s not ALL propaganda, spiritustempore! Which reminds me…

    Sincere thanks to spiritustempore who, despite the frustration of the task, engaged with Arkenaten, and provided excellent sources, all of which have been rejected – no point in continuing, therefore, so over and out – amen!

    August 15, 2013 at 10:42 am

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: