A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The perpetual calendar



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old February 27th 10, 06:20 AM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Peter T. Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default The perpetual calendar

On Feb 26, 9:04*pm, " wrote:
On Feb 26, 6:57*pm, "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:





On Feb 26, 6:33*pm, " wrote:


On Feb 26, 3:49*pm, "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:


On Feb 26, 10:10*am, "
wrote:


On Feb 26, 9:21*am, "Peter T. Daniels" wrote:


On Feb 25, 10:51*am, "
wrote:


FWIW, the Catholic resources I've looked at don't seem to limit their
use of "Christian" to those who believe in the Nicene Creed. *Hardon's
_Modern Catholic Dictionary_ says:


Christian: A person who is baptized. A professed Christian also
believes in the essentials of the Christian faith, notably in the
Apostles' Creed.


The Apostles' Creed is a later document. I've never noticed it
included in a Missal. (But then, I haven't looked at a Missal in
decades.) It's the creed usually said in Protestant churches (and also
at Episcopal Morning Prayer) when a creed is recited.


Historically, the content of the Apostle's Creed predates the Nicene
Creed (its credos are found, for instance, in the writings of Irenaeus
c. 200 AD, over a century before the Council of Nicea), though the
precise wording used by modern churches has changed some since then.
The Protestant version that you refer to, used by Episcopalean
Churches among others, is a _much_ later formulation--it's also
obviously not what the Catholic dictionary I quoted has in mind.


Then perhaps you should say what you mean by "the Apostles' Creed" if
you don't mean the Apostles' Creed.


_I_ don't mean anything by the Apostle's Creed--it's the Catholic
dictionary that uses "the Apostle's Creed" in the quoted definition,
and (being Catholic) what they mean is quite clearly not a Protestant
formulation.


It ought to be pretty obvious that Catholics generally mean the
Catholic version of the Apostle's Creed when they use that phrase.


Once again you have not addressed the key point about the Nicene Creed
and have instead dwelt on a tangent.-


Did you have a "key point"?


Yes: that the Nicene Creed is not used by all Christian churches.

For some reason you deflected the
discussion to the Apostles' Creed


The introduction of the definition which mentioned the Apostle's Creed
was completely responsive to the original question that involved me in
this thread, not a deflection:

The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.

I'm sure there are, and gave examples of Christians who may believe in
the Nicene dogma but not use the creed (e.g. most Quakers--Mike Lyle
pointed out that not all Quakers are Christians) and also of
Christians who don't believe in the dogma of the Nicene creed at all
(a long list, still available upthread).

At that point you claimed they are "by definition, not Christians".


Sigh. The essence of Christian dogma is encapsulated in the Nicene
Creed.

I offered English definitions of "Christian", which include no mention
of the Nicene Creed or Trinitarianism. *I also offered a Catholic
dictionary definition as one example of how even the largest Christian
denominations don't require belief in the Nicene creed to fall within
their definition of "Christian": according to that Catholic
definition, a Christian is one who a) is baptized and b) believes in
the Apostle's Creed.

For some reason, you then completely avoided the core point (that the
definition of Christian used doesn't include any reference to the
Nicene creed) and stated that the BCP version of the Apostle's Creed
is newer than the Nicene creed. *I responded saying that the timeline
is irrelevant, but also pointing out that the BCP version wasn't
relevant to the definition of "Christian" cited. *You then asked what
I meant by the Apostle's Creed, to which I replied that _I_ don't mean
anything by it, I was citing a definition from a Catholic dictionary
and so the relevant question is what _they_ mean by it (which is
obviously the Catholic form).

You still have no offered any definition of Christian, let alone
explained why it might be a superior definition to that given in
Webster's, or the OED, or a Catholic dictionary; in the absence of
that, I'm not sure that there's anything left to debate regarding the
original question.

which you claim exists in Catholic-
land as something other than the familliar Apostles' Creed.


I find your use of "familiar" here somewhat baffling. *Do you mean
more familiar to you? *If so, I'm not sure what the relevance is. *If
not, the Catholic version is both older than and used by more people
than the Book of Common Prayer version, so in general there's no
reason to assume that it isn't the "familiar" version to most people.
I'd personally avoid using that term, though, unless I were
specifically discussing familiarity with respect to some group.

The context should make the version used pretty obvious, anyway. *A
Catholic dictionary is generally going to refer to Catholic forms,
unless they're specifically discussing other faiths. *If someone
quoted the Episcopalian dictionary, the Apostle's Creed would
generally refer to the BCP version.


I have still seen nothing, other than your assertion, to indicate that
there's a "Catholic Apostles' Creed" that's different from the one in
any Protestant prayer book.

It's much like discussing the Bible--when a Catholic refers to the
Bible, they're most likely referring to a book which includes the Book
of Baruch (as one example). *When an Episcopalian is speaking, they
probably mean a different version from which Baruch is excluded.-


One day I happened to notice a plethora of Biblia Sacra's at the local
Wal-Mart (in Secaucus) and got curious. Not one of them -- neither the
traditional version dating from about the same time as the Douai
version, nor recent translations -- contains what since Luther we have
called the apocryphal books. Aren't most Spanish-speaking Americans
Catholics?
  #2  
Old February 27th 10, 08:39 AM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Hatunen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 97
Default The perpetual calendar

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
wrote:

The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.


Although an atheist myself, I sometimes find myself in situations
when the concept of "Christian" may need clarifying, especially
since I also belong to Unitarian-Uniersalist church. To me, one
is only a Christian if one believes that there was a Jesus Christ
who was the son of God and who died to redeem the sins of [fill
in the blank: everyone; the chosen; the confessed, etc.].

None of this "I believe Jesus had good ideas stuff".

I'm sure there are, and gave examples of Christians who may believe in
the Nicene dogma but not use the creed (e.g. most Quakers--Mike Lyle
pointed out that not all Quakers are Christians) and also of
Christians who don't believe in the dogma of the Nicene creed at all
(a long list, still available upthread).

At that point you claimed they are "by definition, not Christians".


Sigh. The essence of Christian dogma is encapsulated in the Nicene
Creed.


But you don't have to say it explicitly to be a Christian.

--
************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
  #3  
Old February 27th 10, 11:23 AM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 37
Default The perpetual calendar

On Feb 27, 2:39*am, Hatunen wrote:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

wrote:
The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.


Although an atheist myself, I sometimes find myself in situations
when the concept of "Christian" may need clarifying, especially
since I also belong to *Unitarian-Uniersalist church. To me, one
is only a Christian if one believes that there was a Jesus Christ
who was the son of God and who died to redeem the sins of [fill
in the blank: everyone; the chosen; the confessed, etc.].

None of this "I believe Jesus had good ideas stuff".


I'd basically agree with that definition, or something pretty close.
Note that that definition would include a lot of faiths like Jehovah's
Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, etc that don't believe in the Nicene
Creed, because they think that Jesus was made when God impregnated the
Virgin Mary, or that Jesus was God's son but was a separate being, or
something else that contradicts Nicene Trinitarianism.
  #4  
Old February 27th 10, 11:58 AM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Prai Jei[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default The perpetual calendar

set the following eddies spiralling through the
space-time continuum:

The Old Testament: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers,
Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, 1 and 2 Samuel, 1 and 2 Kings, 1
and 2 Chronicles, Ezra and Nehemiah, Tobit, Judith, Esther, 1 and 2
Maccabees, Job, Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, the
Wisdom of Solomon, Sirach (Ecclesiasticus), Isaiah, Jeremiah,
Lamentations, Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel, Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah,
Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zachariah and
Malachi.


Are the books called that in the RC bible? I would have expected Ruth to be
followed by 1, 2, 3 and 4 Kings (i.e. Samuel and Kings), then 1 and 2
Paralipomenon (i.e. Chronicles) and 1 and 2 Esdras (i.e. Ezra and Nehemiah)
before Esther.

In Article VI (Of the Sufficiency of the holy Scriptures for salvation) of
the XXXIX Articles of Religion of the Anglican church, Ezra and Nehemiah
are called 1 and 2 Esdras, but the other books are known by their
conventional (to us) names. Our position on the Apocrypha follows St.
Jerome as given in the Article: "And the other books (as /Hierome/ saith)
the church doth read for example of life and instruction of manners; but
yet doth it not apply them to establish any doctrine". The list leads off
with 3 and 4 Esdras (what we generally call 1 and 2 Esdras).
--
ΞΎ Proud to be curly

Interchange the alphabetic letter groups to reply
  #5  
Old February 27th 10, 04:00 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Peter T. Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default The perpetual calendar

On Feb 27, 2:39*am, Hatunen wrote:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"

wrote:
The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.


Although an atheist myself, I sometimes find myself in situations
when the concept of "Christian" may need clarifying, especially
since I also belong to *Unitarian-Uniersalist church. To me, one
is only a Christian if one believes that there was a Jesus Christ
who was the son of God and who died to redeem the sins of [fill
in the blank: everyone; the chosen; the confessed, etc.].

None of this "I believe Jesus had good ideas stuff".

I'm sure there are, and gave examples of Christians who may believe in
the Nicene dogma but not use the creed (e.g. most Quakers--Mike Lyle
pointed out that not all Quakers are Christians) and also of
Christians who don't believe in the dogma of the Nicene creed at all
(a long list, still available upthread).


At that point you claimed they are "by definition, not Christians".


Sigh. The essence of Christian dogma is encapsulated in the Nicene
Creed.


But you don't have to say it explicitly to be a Christian.


You have to accept it. You probably have to affirm it at Confirmation
(if you were baptized as an infant) or at Baptism (if baptized as an
adult).

I wonder whether sjedvnull would be satisfied with, If you're baptized
in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then you're a
Christian.
  #6  
Old February 27th 10, 04:01 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Peter T. Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default The perpetual calendar

On Feb 27, 5:23*am, " wrote:
On Feb 27, 2:39*am, Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"


wrote:
The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.


Although an atheist myself, I sometimes find myself in situations
when the concept of "Christian" may need clarifying, especially
since I also belong to *Unitarian-Uniersalist church. To me, one
is only a Christian if one believes that there was a Jesus Christ
who was the son of God and who died to redeem the sins of [fill
in the blank: everyone; the chosen; the confessed, etc.].


None of this "I believe Jesus had good ideas stuff".


I'd basically agree with that definition, or something pretty close.
Note that that definition would include a lot of faiths like Jehovah's
Witnesses, Oneness Pentecostals, etc that don't believe in the Nicene
Creed, because they think that Jesus was made when God impregnated the
Virgin Mary, or that Jesus was God's son but was a separate being, or
something else that contradicts Nicene Trinitarianism.


And thus they're not Christians.
  #7  
Old February 27th 10, 04:39 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Tony Cooper
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 21
Default The perpetual calendar

On Sat, 27 Feb 2010 00:39:25 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:20:00 -0800 (PST), "Peter T. Daniels"
wrote:

The discussion was about whether there are Christians who don't use
the Nicene creed.


Although an atheist myself, I sometimes find myself in situations
when the concept of "Christian" may need clarifying, especially
since I also belong to Unitarian-Uniersalist church. To me, one
is only a Christian if one believes that there was a Jesus Christ
who was the son of God and who died to redeem the sins of [fill
in the blank: everyone; the chosen; the confessed, etc.].



A denomination might be Christian only if it subscribes to "there
was a Jesus Christ who was the son of God...", but "one" - the
individuals who are of that denomination - are not non-Christians
because they don't accept this particular bit as truth. One needn't
accept the whole package to be part of a denomination.


--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida
  #8  
Old February 27th 10, 08:21 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Skitt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25
Default The perpetual calendar

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Hatunen wrote:
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:


Sigh. The essence of Christian dogma is encapsulated in the Nicene
Creed.


But you don't have to say it explicitly to be a Christian.


You have to accept it. You probably have to affirm it at Confirmation
(if you were baptized as an infant) or at Baptism (if baptized as an
adult).

I wonder whether sjedvnull would be satisfied with, If you're baptized
in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then you're a
Christian.


Naah, I was baptized when I was sixteen (for convenience's sake, so as not
to disappoint those who were helping our family immigrate into the USA), and
for the same reason, I was confirmed in the Lutheran church after arrival in
the States. I don't believe in any of that stuff, but what are you gonna
do? It made our helpers happy, and no believers were harmed in the process.
Why, I even joined the YMCA, as it was our official sponsor. The YMCA had
great pool tables and a table tennis facility, so all was not lost.

--
Skitt (AmE)
What? Me Christian?

  #9  
Old February 27th 10, 09:53 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Peter T. Daniels
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 200
Default The perpetual calendar

On Feb 27, 2:21*pm, "Skitt" wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:
Hatunen wrote:
"Peter T. Daniels" wrote:
Sigh. The essence of Christian dogma is encapsulated in the Nicene
Creed.


But you don't have to say it explicitly to be a Christian.


You have to accept it. You probably have to affirm it at Confirmation
(if you were baptized as an infant) or at Baptism (if baptized as an
adult).


I wonder whether sjedvnull would be satisfied with, If you're baptized
in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then you're a
Christian.


Naah, I was baptized when I was sixteen (for convenience's sake, so as not
to disappoint those who were helping our family immigrate into the USA), and
for the same reason, I was confirmed in the Lutheran church after arrival in
the States. *I don't believe in any of that stuff, but what are you gonna


But you said that you did, at either Baptism or Confirmation or both.
If you had "mental reservation," as it's sometimes put, then
presumably the sacraments were not legitimately performed.

do? *It made our helpers happy, and no believers were harmed in the process.
Why, I even joined the YMCA, as it was our official sponsor. *The YMCA had
great pool tables and a table tennis facility, so all was not lost.


I don't think you have to be Christian (or Young) to use the YMCA ...
you certainly don't have to be Jewish (or male) to use the YMHA; the
92nd St. Y is one of New York City's great cultural institutions.
(They don't seem to use the MHA in their name any more.)
  #10  
Old February 27th 10, 11:16 PM posted to sci.math,sci.physics,sci.astro,sci.lang,alt.usage.english
Skitt
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 25
Default The perpetual calendar

Peter T. Daniels wrote:
"Skitt" wrote:
Peter T. Daniels wrote:


I wonder whether sjedvnull would be satisfied with, If you're
baptized in the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then
you're a Christian.


Naah, I was baptized when I was sixteen (for convenience's sake, so
as not to disappoint those who were helping our family immigrate
into the USA), and for the same reason, I was confirmed in the
Lutheran church after arrival in the States. I don't believe in any
of that stuff, but what are you gonna do?


But you said that you did, at either Baptism or Confirmation or both.


Yeah, well, when necessary I say all sort of things, especially when I don't
take the happenings seriously. You know -- religious hocus-pocus and such.

If you had "mental reservation," as it's sometimes put, then
presumably the sacraments were not legitimately performed.


And yet, I keep on living.

It made our helpers happy, and no believers were harmed in the
process. Why, I even joined the YMCA, as it was our official
sponsor. The YMCA had great pool tables and a table tennis facility,
so all was not lost.


I don't think you have to be Christian (or Young) to use the YMCA ...


Not to use, but there was some sort of commitment that had to be expressed
to join the Y.

you certainly don't have to be Jewish (or male) to use the YMHA; the
92nd St. Y is one of New York City's great cultural institutions.
(They don't seem to use the MHA in their name any more.)


I used to play table tennis also at Newman Hall in San Jose. Also at some
sort of an Episcopal facility, when I was kicking around with the son of the
then San Jose Police Chief (Blackmore).

--
Skitt (AmE)
What? Me religious?

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The perpetual calendar Andrew Usher Astronomy Misc 1189 August 9th 11 07:43 PM
Perpetual Gregorian Calendar Mr. Emmanuel Roche, France Astronomy Misc 22 November 24th 09 10:34 PM
(More) Perpetual Motion Machines G=EMC^2 Glazier[_1_] Misc 3 November 9th 09 03:35 PM
The first perpetual motion machine gb[_3_] Astronomy Misc 2 March 12th 08 10:13 PM
Perpetual motion... gb6726 Astronomy Misc 5 November 12th 07 04:34 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.