e v e
Active Member
i am sorry too ,
i was not attacking you but expressing
what i understand , and I do know
that what I expressed is not what you personally believe
you and i have never spoken
and i do not know fully what you believe
I used to teach ancient and medieval philosophy,
with a theology component since it was at a catholic
university. (no, i am not catholic... and i would
get in trouble for that, when i'd note
to students that their relationship
was to God not the pope : )
So on my syllabus was that this course would
view philosophy as against what God said, that we
would study philosophy as required by the school
but that we would compare that to Christianity
and see where philosophy fails, since it does.
then they began a lottery... before that lottery
all the students were mostly catholic
and i simply stuck to common things,
since i am not a preacher or a theologian,
such as loving God, Christ, etc.. and not
getting into argumentation...
because the theology dept bishop
had already gotten angry at me once..
I was being reported by students essentially
for deviating from catholicism, and showing a more
basic form which needs no vatican or virgin mary weirdness..
so I was teaching and studying pre-christian texts...
such as plato and aristotle, and then also
medieval such as augustine, descartes, newton,
kant... and then also in the ancients, hieroglyphic texts.
As to that lottery, they then started to give me
a new mixture of students, for DEI purposes..
such as a percent of every religion including atheist, hindu, buddhist,
protestant, catholic, and everything in between.
So now I had the atheist reporting me for saying the word "Christ" outloud
as a serious concept...and then I had to remind that student,
he was yelling in front the class! that the syllabus already
stated the class would be conducted from the Christian point of view,
this giving prospective students as chance to choose a different phi 101
than mine... because the other phi 101 were taught by feminists, leftists
and trans no joke. So this sort of stuff was quite normal and
the woke to the max chair of the dept even called me to to explain
I needed to do a class with diversity.
In summary, I don't view 'ancient' texts as what God said..
I also know, from reading posts by an Evangelical academic bible expert
that he himself admitted that in translation and managing bible texts, that
speculation as well as cut and paste! is conducted. this same
bible scholar did not accept the resurrection was real
Christ is the bottom line... accepting and following christ...
and that idea of a natural mind cutting and pasting biblical texts
while it sounds bad is exactly what has gone on, known by scholars
for thousands of years.
thus even daniel speaks of it, calling that corruption the 'sealed vision.'
Of course this is my understanding and I am not expecting you to agree
with it.
reading what the enemy says is not fruitless... even in this world
the usa studies russia, china etc., and analyzes their communications
and activities... i feel reading all ancient texts, be it rg veda or hieroglyphs
is helpful in that regard... and in my case, the point is not to cut and paste
anything.. but to determine what was pasted in or cut out by some bible scholar
like the one i mentioned from the other forum... and yeah, i could even give
his handle but for privacy i will not. the admins may have deleted that post
anyway, since it sort of reflected badly on the idea that the text was
inspired... but my question there on 'inspired' is.. we know who the prophets
were, their names, and the apostles..but who are the scribes writing the inspired ?
Well, ptolemy, a greek pagan who overlaid those concepts onto this rule
as a mask over christianity, found those to translate from the hebrews
vetting them... so imagine, democrats would not hire right wing to do any
reporting... and ptolemy viewed himself as correlate to zeus' follower..
(cf., aristeas letter). then, we have James, allowing John Dee, a known
sorceror, magician mason, helping oversee the production of the kjv,
along with the 1611 masonic symbols.
So, for context about the ancient texts, sure I read them, lists of them,
not so much now though since I had to leave the wokeness and retire.
I'm not longer in academia and that is ALL for the better! But, I do not view
them as my reality, the truth God says, or anything of Him...rather, as heathen texts.
Why did I have to study them? Two things. 1. at the time I began my phd,
I was not christian. that came midstream. 2. which is why I even chose philosophy,
which is not aligned to God's words. 3. It is required for philosophy phd and any degree
in philosophy to study Everything in history of philosophy, even some history in general,
and be heavily tested on it...
Last edited:
