Quote:
Originally Posted by Willy Jacks
I'm trying to understand your point here. What you outlined seems to go against the point I believe you're trying to make. It appears that you are contradicting yourself. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
You said:
You underlined:
Your question does not say that Paulicians are Manicheans. It says that the Paulician cured,or
Are you thinking that "Manichaeism" was a form of Modalist?
Manichaeism (in Modern Persian آیین مانی Āyin e Māni; Chinese: 摩尼教) was one of the major dualistic religions, originating in Sassanid Persia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manichaeism
God Bless |
Here is what I am saying: the Paulicians were NOT Manicheans. I had a discussion going with Believer, I quoted the Wiki article about Paulicians... the first sentence of the Wiki article as I accessed it was "The Paulicians were a Christian sect that flourished....". Then Believer gets on Wiki, edits the article, and then proceeds to cite the edited article "The Paulicians were a
Gnostic and Manichean Christian sect...." So then i go on to show that the Paulicians COULD NOT HAVE BEEN Manichean, because both articles, the original one and the edited one say they anathematized Mani and the Manicheans... are you following this? Ok good...
Threaded Mode
