Logic, reason, and today’s PhD

[dustup]

i never claimed i was not.  So are you.

And SO what......Obama lied! 

[ivanm]

So you are to the Southern Left of Obama  

How Wonder Boy ended up the right of center beats the piss out of me?  I'd like to see the answers to his poll questions, and I would like to see who  took the survey on his behalf. 

[johnhp]

And SO what......

You claimed above you were to his right.

[johnhp]

How Wonder Boy ended up the right of center beats the piss out of me?  I'd like to see the answers to his poll questions, and I would like to see who  took the survey on his behalf.  

Who took your survey?  You ended up left of center.  On the other hand, of all posters on this site, i am the least authoritarian and most left.

[johnhp]

But let's remember it is all about the father of this thread.  Mornac.

--That’s something different from the Catholic God then. Ours has no shape, form, or substance. That is why He cannot be depicted.  He exists everywhere.

For Catholics God has no shape or form?  Heresy.  Someone has forgotten the Nicene Creed.  There is this fellow you may have heard of.  We call him Jesus the Christ.  Here is what the Nicene creed says about Him:

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
    the only Son of God,
    eternally begotten of the Father,
    God from God, Light from Light,
    true God from true God,
    begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
    Through him all things were made.
    For us men and for our salvation,
        he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
    he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

Canons of Constantinople (553)

3. If anyone says that God the Word who performed miracles is one and Christ

who suffered is another, or says that God the Word was together with Christ

who came from woman, or that the Word was in him as one person is in

another, but is not one and the same, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of

God, incarnate and become human, and that the wonders and the suffering

which he voluntarily endured in flesh were not of the same person, let him

be anathema.

4. If anyone says that the union of the Word of God with man was only

according to grace or function or dignity or equality of honor or authority

or relation or effect or power or according to his good pleasure, as though

God the Word was pleased with man, or approved of him, as the raving

Theodosius says; or that the union exists according to similarity of name,

by which the Nestorians call God the Word Jesus and Christ, designating the

man separately as Christ and as Son, speaking thus clearly of two persons,

but when it comes to his honor, dignity, and worship, pretend to say that

there is one person, one Son and one Christ, by a single designation; and

if he does not acknowledge, as the holy Fathers have taught, that the union

of God is made with the flesh animated by a reasonable and intelligent

soul, and that such union is according to synthesis or hypostasis, and that

therefore there is only one person, the Lord Jesus Christ one of the holy

Trinity -- let him be anathema. As the word "union" has many meanings, the

followers of the impiety of Apollinaris and Eutyches, assuming the

disappearance of the natures, affirm a union by confusion. On the other

hand the followers of Theodore and of Nestorius rejoicing in the division

of the natures, introduce only a union of relation. But the holy Church of

God, rejecting equally the impiety of both heresies, recognizes the union

of God the Word with the flesh according to synthesis, that is according to

hypostasis. For in the mystery of Christ the union according to synthesis

preserves the two natures which have combined without confusion and

without separation.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const2.txt

Council of Ephesus (431)

111. For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and made flesh, nor yet that it was changed into the whole man (composed) of soul and body but rather (we say) that the Word, in an ineffable and inconceivable manner, having hypostatically united to Himself flesh animated by a rational soul, became Man and was called the Son of Man, not according to the will alone or by the assumption of a person alone, and that the different natures were brought together in a real union, but that out of both in one Christ and Son, not because the distinction of natures was destroyed by the union, but rather because the divine nature and the human nature formed one Lord and Christ and Son for us, through a marvelous and mystical concurrence in unity. . . . For it was no ordinary man who was first born of the Holy Virgin and upon whom the Word afterwards descended; but being united from the womb itself He is said to have undergone flesh birth, claiming as His own the birth of His own flesh. Thus [the holy Fathers] did not hesitate to speak of the holy Virgin as the Theotokos (Mother of God).

113    Canon. 1.  If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema (condemned, i.e. excommunicated).

114    Can. 2. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God the Father was united to a body by hypostasis [union in a single Person] and that one is Christ with his own body, the same one evidently both God and man, let him be anathema.

115    Can. 3. If anyone in the one Christ divides the subsistences [divine and human natures] after the union, connecting them by a junction only according to worth, that is to say absolute sway or power, and not rather by a joining according to physical union [union in the one Christ], let him be anathema.

116    Can. 4. If anyone portions out to two persons, that is to say subsistences, the words in the Gospels and the apostolic writings, whether said about Christ by the saints, or by Him concerning Himself, and attributes some as it to a man specially understood beside the Word of God, others as befitting God alone, to the Word of God the Father, let him be anathema.

117    Can. 5. If anyone ventures to say that Christ is a man inspired by God, and not rather that He is truly God, as a son by nature, as the Word was made flesh and has shared similarly with us in blood and flesh, let him be anathema.

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mother.htm

We Catholics have an Image of God.

[Mornac]

Go crawl back on top of your mother's fetid corpse.

[johnhp]

  --Some of us will always have the Church. At least we know that isn’t going away.

Some of us will.  You have abandoned it.

--That’s something different from the Catholic God then. Ours has no shape, form, or substance. That is why He cannot be depicted.  He exists everywhere.

For Catholics God has no shape or form?  Heresy.  Someone has forgotten the Nicene Creed.  There is this fellow you may have heard of.  We call him Jesus the Christ.  Here is what the Nicene creed says about Him:

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
    the only Son of God,
    eternally begotten of the Father,
    God from God, Light from Light,
    true God from true God,
    begotten, not made, one in Being with the Father.
    Through him all things were made.
    For us men and for our salvation,
        he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
    he was born of the Virgin Mary, and became man.

Canons of Constantinople (553)

3. If anyone says that God the Word who performed miracles is one and Christ

who suffered is another, or says that God the Word was together with Christ

who came from woman, or that the Word was in him as one person is in

another, but is not one and the same, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Word of

God, incarnate and become human, and that the wonders and the suffering

which he voluntarily endured in flesh were not of the same person, let him

be anathema.

4. If anyone says that the union of the Word of God with man was only

according to grace or function or dignity or equality of honor or authority

or relation or effect or power or according to his good pleasure, as though

God the Word was pleased with man, or approved of him, as the raving

Theodosius says; or that the union exists according to similarity of name,

by which the Nestorians call God the Word Jesus and Christ, designating the

man separately as Christ and as Son, speaking thus clearly of two persons,

but when it comes to his honor, dignity, and worship, pretend to say that

there is one person, one Son and one Christ, by a single designation; and

if he does not acknowledge, as the holy Fathers have taught, that the union

of God is made with the flesh animated by a reasonable and intelligent

soul, and that such union is according to synthesis or hypostasis, and that

therefore there is only one person, the Lord Jesus Christ one of the holy

Trinity -- let him be anathema. As the word "union" has many meanings, the

followers of the impiety of Apollinaris and Eutyches, assuming the

disappearance of the natures, affirm a union by confusion. On the other

hand the followers of Theodore and of Nestorius rejoicing in the division

of the natures, introduce only a union of relation. But the holy Church of

God, rejecting equally the impiety of both heresies, recognizes the union

of God the Word with the flesh according to synthesis, that is according to

hypostasis. For in the mystery of Christ the union according to synthesis

preserves the two natures which have combined without confusion and

without separation.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/const2.txt

Council of Ephesus (431)

111. For we do not say that the nature of the Word was changed and made flesh, nor yet that it was changed into the whole man (composed) of soul and body but rather (we say) that the Word, in an ineffable and inconceivable manner, having hypostatically united to Himself flesh animated by a rational soul, became Man and was called the Son of Man, not according to the will alone or by the assumption of a person alone, and that the different natures were brought together in a real union, but that out of both in one Christ and Son, not because the distinction of natures was destroyed by the union, but rather because the divine nature and the human nature formed one Lord and Christ and Son for us, through a marvelous and mystical concurrence in unity. . . . For it was no ordinary man who was first born of the Holy Virgin and upon whom the Word afterwards descended; but being united from the womb itself He is said to have undergone flesh birth, claiming as His own the birth of His own flesh. Thus [the holy Fathers] did not hesitate to speak of the holy Virgin as the Theotokos (Mother of God).

113    Canon. 1.  If anyone does not confess that God is truly Emmanuel, and that on this account the Holy Virgin is the Mother of God (for according to the flesh she gave birth to the Word of God become flesh by birth), let him be anathema (condemned, i.e. excommunicated).

114    Can. 2. If anyone does not confess that the Word of God the Father was united to a body by hypostasis [union in a single Person] and that one is Christ with his own body, the same one evidently both God and man, let him be anathema.

115    Can. 3. If anyone in the one Christ divides the subsistences [divine and human natures] after the union, connecting them by a junction only according to worth, that is to say absolute sway or power, and not rather by a joining according to physical union [union in the one Christ], let him be anathema.

116    Can. 4. If anyone portions out to two persons, that is to say subsistences, the words in the Gospels and the apostolic writings, whether said about Christ by the saints, or by Him concerning Himself, and attributes some as it to a man specially understood beside the Word of God, others as befitting God alone, to the Word of God the Father, let him be anathema.

117    Can. 5. If anyone ventures to say that Christ is a man inspired by God, and not rather that He is truly God, as a son by nature, as the Word was made flesh and has shared similarly with us in blood and flesh, let him be anathema.

http://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/mother.htm

We Catholics have an Image of God.

[Mornac]

You have mistaken your clit for my penis.

--Anyone here remember your dad speaking this way?

[ivanm]

--Anyone here remember your dad speaking this way?

I don't imagine Joan knows who her father is.

[SufferedMoreThanJesus]

Jesus' name ruled unconstitutional.  LOL.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=361461

[ivanm]

Jesus' name ruled unconstitutional.  LOL.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=361461

I think this is so petty and asinine.  Not mentioning Jesus is one thing, so what is next, no prayers at all?   If praying at the meetings reflects the wishes of the majority of the consttuents then it should be allowed.  Isn't that the fair way to go about it?

[Mornac]

Go fuck yourself Ivan. 

[Mornac]

Utah Professor Charged With Watching Child Porn On Flight To Boston

November 28, 2011

BOSTON (CBS) — A professor at the University of Utah pleaded not guilty Monday to charges he viewed child pornography on his laptop during a flight from Salt Lake City to Boston.

47-year-old Grant Smith of Cottonwood Heights, Utah was arraigned in East Boston District Court. Bail was set at $75,000.
 
If he is released, Smith will not be allowed to have any contact with children without supervision.
 
State police say Smith was sitting in first class on a Delta flight Saturday afternoon when another passenger saw the pornographic images and alerted the flight crew.
 
The passenger also e-mailed a relative and asked them to call police.
 
Investigators say he began to erase the files after the flight attendent told him to shut off his computer.
 
State troopers met Smith after the plane landed at Logan Airport and took him into custody.

Police say they found several disturbing files on his laptop, including photos of children, mostly girls, ranging from 5-to-14 years old.
 
Smith has been charged with possession of child pornography. He was also ordered to stay off the Internet, unless it’s for business purposes.
 
Smith is a divorced father of two young children. He is a professor of material science and engineering and an adjunct professor of chemical engineering at the University of Utah.
 
Prosecutors say his laptop was purchased with grant money.
 
Smith does not have a criminal record, but prosecutors said Monday he admitted to police that he has traded pictures of teens over the Internet.
 
State police spokesman David Procopio issued this blistering statement about the arrest Sunday.
 
In the view of the State Police, child pornography is a form of child sexual abuse–nothing less. Those who possess it — a crime unto itself — foster an evil network that sexually abuses and exploits children irreparably.
 
Stopping child pornographers is a critical part of our mission to protect children. Along with our federal and local partners, we execute dozens of warrants related to this wicked crime each year. One hopes there is a special place in Hell for the evil people who make, trade, and possess child pornography. Until they get there, we are committed to putting them in jail.
 
Smith is due back in court December 27th.

http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/11/28/utah-man-charged-with-watching-child-porn-on-flight-to-boston/

[Malone22]

It's epidemic...