This little exposé on the absurd level of ahistorical idiocy was sparked by a ruminant like creature who has previously exhibited her stupidity in the same ruminant like fashion that a cow chews the cud. Oblivious to everything around her except the sound of her own mouth flapping about as excrement spews out the other end in the same eyes-glazed-over fashion.
This orbital nuke is, of course, personal to her specific stupidity, but it is in any case instructive for all those who behave similarly, so I hope you take note as you enjoy the radioactive glow of truth left in the smoking crater of her ego.
Months ago, this same moron, who goes by the rather revelatory name of CactusEaterBear on Social Galactic, made the ridiculous statement that the passage in the New Testament where Jesus tells Peter he is the Rock on which He will build His Church, really doesn’t mean what it plainly says because the word “rock” in Greek is really “pebble”.
The overarching stupidity, ignorance, illiteracy, and complete lack of any understanding of linguistics exhibited with this kind of idiotic statement is enough to make someone who actually knows anything, want to banish such people to a gulag in Siberia.
Not for the stupidity. Not for the ignorance. After all, idiots can’t help what they are and ignorance can be cured in those willing to learn.
No, the banishment is for the sheer arrogance that such a creature has in opening its mouth in the first place, because she is fully aware she doesn’t know what she is talking about, as she has been informed of it in multiple and undeniable ways by several people, of which I was not even the foremost. Her response, is typical and cliched: to block the people involved because she literally had zero arguments back. And secondly, she belongs in the gulag because she is, of course, that type who will never learn anything based on facts.
It’s all hormonal hysterics and feelings with such ruminant beasts.
So behold her own self-immolation in retardation:
I mean, truly, one has to be linguistically, historically, logically and theologically a complete moron to make a statement like that. I would assume only that variety of Protestant that says Jesus only drank grape juice and spoke American English but like in the King’s James Bible would stoop this low, and I would expect them to be Calvinists/Puritans to boot. And yes, yes, she was in fact raised Puritan. Hence the rising acidity has clearly corroded any brain she might have had at birth. Catholics from Italy, Spain, Portugal and France will get that last sentence, the Anglos will not, but no matter.
For the sake of the monolingual, let us go to an interlinear Greek Bible and look at the passage in question, Matthew 16:18
18 And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter (Petros), and upon this rock (petra) I will build my church; and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
19 And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of Heaven: and whatsoever thou shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven: and whatsoever thou shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven.
I added Matthew 16:19 just to make it clear the rock being discussed is Peter and NOT Jesus as the Protties keep trying to say, in typical, need-to-twists-my-brain-and-languages-into-a-pretzel-to-make-it-“work” fashion.
Now, what this monolingual ruminant beast is clearly ignorant of, is that Greek, like most of the Romantic languages has masculine and feminine genders that apply to objects and various word forms. Pietro or Petrus is a masculine name for a boy or men DERIVED from the word for stone or rock which in Greek, like in Italian or Latin is not quite the same as the English word rock or stone. In fact, the word stone is somewhat closer in technical meaning to the Greek petra or Italian pietra (which are actually analogous between Greek and Italian unlike Greek and English).
Jesus, being the master orator He was is telling Simon that he is now Peter (implying he is now a rock, or stone, to make it abundantly clear to both Peter and everyone who follows, that he (Peter/Simon) is the rock on which Jesus will build His Church.
Poetically however, rock is a better fit due to the meaning that has in the English language, as it conveys a sense of solidity and permanence that is not transmitted as well by the word stone.
In Greek or Italian however, the sense of permanence or solidity is inferred from the context of the sentence and the circumstance od it, so there is no need to have a different word. This is also self-evident by the fact that a petra (Greek), or pietra, (Italian) can be any kind of stone from the size of a pebble to the size of a massive boulder, or even in certain contexts, an entire cliff-face.
The original Greek, as well as the original translation into Latin that became the Vulgate (from around the 4th Century shortly after the entire Bible was put together) by Saint Jerome, is perfectly clear to a native speaker as to what is intended and what it says.
This is why really only people who are linguistically removed from the original works and then have had 500 years of satanic indoctrination can possibly misrepresent that passage as saying anything other than what it plainly states. Which is that Jesus, put Peter as the Head of the Church. As anyone who has actually read the Bible will know, Jesus spoke in such a way that those who could, would see deeper levels of information, but in any case, the core message would remain the same for the plainest minds as well as the most astute, as long as they were honest, of course.
Now please note that the Cactus Eater’s bovine statement doesn’t even make sense in its own right. Let us ASS-U-ME that her idiotic rendition of the Bible verse was correct, what on Earth would it even mean?!
But no, you see, this moron, who tries to pre-empt being called a moron, that is a factual moron, an idiot, an imbecille, an ignorant ruminant, by the also idiotic statement that no Catholic has been able to answer this without name-calling, is literally misrepresenting the Bible to the point that if you were to accept her idiocy the entire passage becomes nonsense. But does this prevent her from doing it anyway? NOOOOO. Of course not!
Does it spark even the remotest thought in the anti-chamber of her flatulent mind that MAYBE she’s about to write a completely idiotic sentence? NEVER! Her GRRRRRLLL PURITAN POWER is in fact, Truly Invincible Ignorance.
My response, of course, was kind and gentle, given the stupidity, accusations and vitriol of this cow-brained female.
Another denizen, correctly dispensing with dialectic, because it is clearly pearls before not even a pig (pigs are quite smart) but a dumb ruminant, posted this, which at least made everyone sane laugh.
So now you know, the level of intellect of this dumb beast, allow me to present to you her latest missive, which concerns the fact that a contributor to the Digital Kurganate has started a series on the Trivium. The Trivium is a method of educating or teaching that can be applied to literally any skill and because founded on objective reality is extremely effective in producing excellent results in people who are used to thinking with it.
The Trivium was originally taught in ancient Greece and Rome and later adopted as classical education by Catholicism and in fact is directly responsible, along with several Catholic monks for the creation of the scientific method. The Trivium is as Catholic as it gets, as Catholic as the Bible if you like, because it too had origins (the Old Testament) that predated Jesus, but inevitably, Christianity is Catholic. The Bible was put together by Catholics and there was only one Christianity for over a millennia, the true one, i.e. Catholicism; and just so the Trivium.
But apparently, this ruminant beast wrote somewhere (which everyone remained perfectly unaware of since she gets ignored a lot) about the Trivium, and she posits it was all to do with the puritans and THEIR education methods.
This contention is as retarded as the petra/Petrus one above. The Puritans have done absolutely nothing for humanity other than creating a whole avalanche of sexual deviants, of course, and they have no more claim on the Trivium than the Protestants do in putting together the Bible. They simply hijacked something good and true and perfect and made whatever demonic influenced nonsense out of it. But she of the dulled bovine mind accused me of taking her “wisdom” and “jumping in front of it” and then going on to make a Trivium series on the Digital Kurganate (link at the bottom). The absurdity of this completely solipsistic nonsense of course is that
a) no one I know but her was aware of her mentioning the Trivium
b) even if she did mention it, I assure you, not a soul on the planet took notice of it at all
c) she herself claims she mentioned it on one of my YouTube streams in the chat, but also says I accused her of being drunk in the same chat. Which goes to show how much attention I would have paid to her. As that is basically my kind way of telling the babbling female to stop babbling, as no one is amused or listening to their nonsense.
d) perhaps most telling os all, the Trivium series is not done by me at all. It is done by a contributor that also has never heard of this cow mentioning it before either. So aside from absurd, the accusation is just flat out false.
But why, why, would someone act this way? Two reasons:
- no one has ever called her out on her ignorance, stupidity, arrogance and the fact that she clearly gets all her deepest knowledge from a sound byte she heard in passing from her “pastor”, or the TV, or possibly Vogue magazine or maybe a vision she gets from eating cactuses of the peyote variety.
- I have dismissed her and her blathering as the ignorant nonsense they are. Which for this type of female translates to the rejection by a male she now will “definitely NOT have sex with”. Those who are familiar with the theory of female attraction mechanics will understand this last sentence; and laugh knowingly at it pole-axe-like veracity and accuracy..
Here was her idiocy, posted immediately before she blocked me hoping I would not notice.
And the reply from the creator of the series.
There really isn’t anything more to say, is there?
Except that, well, I did notice before she blocked me, in the usual cowardly fashion of the Grrrll Puritan Spiralling Female ™.
So, now, my cow of the field, you have had all the attention you deserve. Enjoy it, I am sure it will bring you years or rage fuelled sexual release in your private moments.
I have heard this idiocy many times. It’s a very prominent belief in the denominations I grew up in. They teach it at Protestant seminaries. Just like all lies of Protestantism the words can’t possibly mean what they say. I have seen commentaries that say literally that. They quote a passage (usually only one proof text) and even taking the passage out of context they still can’t get it to say what they want so they add commentary that quite literally says the verse doesn’t mean what it says.
Speaking of which, if you can make your own interpretation of the scriptures why do you a commentary? Strange thing that…
Imagine my surprise when I saw that you found a stupid comment made by a protty. I don’t want to hate on all Protestants (I’ve had great theological conversations with a few recently), but the ignorance for most knows no bounds. A Calvinist once told me (by using John 1:1) that the Bible was eternal and written by God. I’ve heard others reference how the Church condemned all heresies throughout history, but refuse to acknowledge that it was the Catholics that protected Christian dogma since the Ascension. The problem is theology without the logic (logos).
I think either he or you misunderstood the argument. The typical argument is that although petra means boulder petrus mean small rock, so Peter can’t be the boulder being talked about because Peter is only a small rock. Anyway, all that is irrelevant to me.
To me, the fact that only one gospel contains this, and its in direct contradiction to Mark where Peter is merely told in this same context to not tell anyone yet that Jesus is the Christ….here in Matthew some big Catholic prooftext for the papacy is mounted. The reason is obvious to me. To Augustine, Matthew was the first gospel. Thus a Catholic editor following Augustine’s theory would not feel the need to inject the church or papacy in all 4 gospels, but only in Matthew. And what do we find? Only Matthew has this! AND what’s worse, only Matthew uses the word “church” of all the gospels. Church is really Paul’s creation, and clearly was not originally mentioned in any gospel. That “church” and some association of it with Peter is found is Matthew and Matthew ALONE of the gospels, is simply proof that the Catholics edited Matthew to add it in.
You at least named yourself appropriately, a double dick.
Your first sentence shows your reading comprehension approaches zero.
1. It’s a woman
2. No. I literally explained the meaning of the words, and you just ignore that altogether.
But the rest also confirms your utter irrelevance.
3. Your complete idiocy concerning the fact that “not telling everyone yet He is the Christ” has absolutely nothing to do with the issue of Peter being the head of His Church on Earth is also a spectacular display of Protestant non sequitur and general idiocy delving deeply into the absolutely retarded level of mental malformations.
4. Once again, the stupidity of your statement concerning “Catholic editing” is quite phenomenal. You absolute DICK; there was NO OTHER DENOMINATION when the gospels were written, you total cretin. Who was the supposed editing meant to fool? The 7th day asventists, mormons, jehovas witnesses, evangelicals, baptists or anabaptists or any of the other 40,000 denominations that would not exist yet for over a thousand years?!
My God but your kind are stupid.
I’m sure ex-Catholics like myself will gain quite the ire amongst you all.