bigd9832
Chicago, IL
64, joined Oct. 2007
|
Merriam-Webster tells us what a vested interest is...
1: an interest (as a title to an estate) carrying a legal right of present or future enjoyment; specifically : a right vested in an employee under a pension plan
2: a special concern or stake in maintaining or influencing a condition, arrangement, or action especially for selfish ends
3: one having a vested interest in something; specifically : a group enjoying benefits from an existing economic or political privilege
I suppose it is easier to spot a vested interest in those who are benefiting financially from it. If someone is collecting some type of financial reward from an organization then he/she will promote that organization and even fight to defend it.
A political vested interest can be quite similar. Some persons are invested in some way from a political candidate, then it would follow that he/she would promote and even fight to protect that investment.
But there are other types of vested interests in our world today. Some that do not involve monetary compensation or political gain. Some that just involve the ego of an individual, or what the Japanese call "saving face."
Perhaps I said that that rain is good for the garden. But I had not taken into account the devastating effect of acid rain in a particular area. And let us suppose that science had invented a way we can make it rain. Those who might be more likely to promote such an invention might be those who have said, in the past, that rain is good for the garden, ignoring the negative effects that rain might have.
And why would these individuals be more likely to promote artificial rain? Why? To save face, naturally. We want to be able to say that we were right. And depending on how large that individual's ego is, might determine Just how far he/she might go to promote/defend this artificial rain.
And so it can be with religion.
If it is known that I am part of a religious organization, it would make sense that I might promote and defend its beliefs, doctrines, and even it's politics.
If I were Catholic, for example, my affiliation with that organization might sway my opinions and beliefs. I might see the Bible from a Catholic perspective only, closing my mind to what might be the workings of the Holy Spirit. I might have heard other Catholics throw around words such as "Ancient Manuscripts" and "Abrogated Law," just as an example.
Of course, it would not be necessary for me to have studied or even know anything about such subjects. As I had heard them from the Catholic church I could just defer to that organization's stand on the subject. It might even appear that I know what I am talking about.
There was a young Catholic man who visited for a time here at DH. When an interpretation was in question he would post a Greek word or line and claim it came from the "Ancient Koine Greek." He would say, "The Ancient Koine Greek doesn't lie."
The problem was, he did. He was getting these words and quotes from A blue Bible web site that only contained copies of Modern Greek manuscripts and had no Ancient Koine Greek text to offer.
But this didn't daunt our young Catholic poster. He bravely continued to represent these Modern Greek texts as Ancient Greek, about 1000 years older than they actually were.
There was another Catholic poster who backed him, never realizing that he was using the Modern Greek versions all the time, and buying into his "Catholic" interpretations of the Ancient Grek text.
This is a perfect example of a vested interest. This young man was trying to fool everyone by trying to fake more knowledgeable that he actually had. And the other Catholics didn't mind because they had a vested interest. It seemed that the Catholic church was right. So they were proud to back his calls.
That is until he was found out as the fraud he was. Then, one by one the Catholics here backed away from DH.
Why?
Perhaps to "save face." They were caught as "wrong." Now it was time to pay the price. And without these phony Ancient Koine Greek words and phrases, their sources had dried up.
Oh, their own Catholic sources were just fine. The problem with those are only Catholics believed them. Protestants and non-Catholics don't generally hold that Mary is the mother of God, or that the eucharist actually changes into the body of Christ.
And now ludlow is trying to cast doubt and confusion on to what has been established as tried and true. His thread "So Many Ancient Manuscripts" reflects his own doubts and fears, and not that of those of us who have studied.
The oldest and most complete Ancient Greek manuscripts are as follows...
Vaticanus (a & b)
Alexandrinus
Sinaiticus
These are the oldest and most complete Ancient Koine Greek manuscripts we have today. There are no others. These are the manuscripts that every English version is checked against.
ludlow might be confused about what a Greek manuscript is, but the facts speak for themselves.
These Ancient Koine Greek manuscripts are older than the Synod of Hippo. This proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Catholic church did NOT "put together" the Bible, as ludlow and others claim.
There are non-Catholic scholars who do not believe that the Catholic church put together the Bible, as ludlow and other Catholics have claimed.
And, I might mention, that the what we call the OT are the same books the Jews used in the Tanakh, written hundreds of years before Jesus come. Again, the Catholic church had nothing to do with "putting together" the OT. Rarely does ludlow ever make that distinction.
And down through the centuries, the remarkable thing is that the Church never changes her core teachings.
Again, this is a man who is trying to protect his vested interest.
All one has to do is follow the evolution of the doctrine of the "trinity" to discover that is not true. Anyone can read for his/her self how the "trinity" has changed over the years. Would the doctrine of "trinity" be considered a "core belief"?
This is a picture of the stained glass window on the west side of Fairford, St Mary's Church in England. This church possibly goes back to about the 11th century, and certainly back as far as the 13th century. Non-Catholic scholars tell us that originally "hell" was thought of as far from God and a very cold place. Blue demons illustrated the freezing cold of "hell."
Yet a few hundred years later these demons became red, reflecting the tremendous heat of "hell." The Ancient Koine greek term 'gehenna' had been added to the mix.
That same church shows a picture of a blue serpent next to Eve in the Garden.
More blue devils from the same church.
Would "hell" be considered part of the "core beliefs" of the Catholic church?
It would appear that these Catholics know no boundaries when it comes to bending the truth to support their church.
Meet singles at DateHookup.dating, we're 100% free! Join now!
|