For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: http://911blogger.com/news/2011-02-27/condemnation-investigation-height-ignorance-did-einstein-said
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!

"Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance"- Did Einstein said this?


This short sentence has a powerful message, with a straight reasoning. I do not know, since when parts of our movement started to use it, but it is commonly used right now. The last time I read it was by Joshua Blakeny here http://www.rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/campus-quotes/2011/02/has-national-post-declared-fatwa-911-studies (sorry "student" , no offense)
Other researchers did use it as well.

But: Did Einstein said this? In wanted to know when and where he made it. I searched Wikiqoutes for it, but found nothing.
Only a similar statement, under missattributed:

Contempt prior to investigation is what enslaves a mind to Ignorance.
This or similiar statements are more often misattributed to Herbert Spencer, but the source of the phrase "contempt prior to investigation" seems to have been William Paley, in A View of the Evidences of Christianity (1794): The infidelity of the gentile world, and that more especially of men of rank and learning in it, is resolved into a principle which, in my judgement, will account for the inefficacy of any argument, or any evidence whatever, viz. contempt prior to examination.
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein

Under Herbert Spencer we can read:
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance — that principle is contempt prior to investigation.
Attributed to Spencer in the pamphlet Alcoholics Anonymous (1939) and all subsequent editions, but there are no records of him ever saying or writing this, with the first attribution to him occurring in 1931. It seems to be derived from a remark attributed to William Paley, in Anglo-Israel or, The British Nation: The Lost Tribes of Israel (1879) by Rev. William H. Poole:
There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all argument, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance. This principle is, contempt prior to examination.
This in turn seems to be a paraphrase derived from a slightly different statement of Paley in A View of the Evidences of Christianity (1794):
The infidelity of the Gentile world, and that more especially of men of rank and learning in it, is resolved into a principle which, in my judgment, will account for the inefficacy of any argument, or any evidence whatever, viz. contempt prior to investigation.
For further research on the misattribution of this quote see "The Survival of a Fitting Quotation" (2005) by Michael St. George
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Herbert_Spencer

***snip

So without a confirmation that Einstein did indeed used this phrase, we shoud be carefully avoid using it, attributing it to Einstein. You may know about disinformation tactics, delivering false quotes is a very subtile but strong one, I point to the "I'm a most unhappy men. I have unwittingly ruined my country" lie, a sentence that was put in front of a otherwhile right quotation by Pred. Woodrow Wilson. Such things were done with a reason. We should examine quotes before using them, as we do with all infos we stand behind.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven

So the point is .....do you condemn things without doing your diligence?


How about a pre tribulation rapture?

Did you investigate

A pre Wrath Rapture ?

Did you investigate?

A rapture?

Did you investigate?

What does rapture mean?

Is the earth Hollow?

Was America born a Christian nation?


Do you condemn the aprocryphal?

Is there nothing of value?



From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to: navigation, search


For the section found in some bibles called Apocrypha, see Biblical apocrypha. For the X-Files episode, see Apocrypha (The X-Files).

"Apocryphal" redirects here. For the adjective, see wiktionary:apocryphal.


Ambox current red.svg
This article's factual accuracy may be compromised due to out-of-date information. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. (December 2012)

Apocrypha are statements or claims that are of dubious authenticity. The word's origin is the medieval Latin adjective apocryphus, "secret, or non-canonical", from the Greek adjective ἀπόκρυφος (apocryphos), "obscure", from verb ἀποκρύπτειν (apocryptein), "to hide away".

It is commonly applied in Christian religious contexts involving certain disagreements about biblical canonicity. The pre-Christian-era Jewish translation (into Greek) of holy scriptures known as the Septuagint included the writings in dispute. However, the Jewish canon was not finalized until at least 100–200 years into the A.D., at which time considerations of Greek language and beginnings of Christian acceptance of the Septuagint weighed against some of the texts. Some were not accepted by the Jews as part of the Hebrew Bible canon. Over several centuries of consideration, the books of the Septuagint were finally accepted into the Christian Old Testament, by A.D. 405 in the west, and by the end of the fifth century in the east. The Christian canon thus established was retained for over 1,000 years, even after the 11th-century schism that separated the church into the branches known as the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox churches.

Those canons were not challenged until the Protestant Reformation (16th century), when both the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Churches reaffirmed them. The reformers rejected the parts of the canon that were not part of the Hebrew Bible and established a revised Protestant canon. Thus, concerning the Old Testament books, what is thought of as the "Protestant canon" is actually the final Hebrew canon. The differences can be found by looking here or by comparing the contents of the "Protestant" and Catholic Bibles, and they represent the narrowest Christian application of the term Apocrypha.

Among some Protestants, apocryphal began to take on extra or altered connotations: not just of dubious authenticity, but having spurious or false content, not just obscure but having hidden or suspect motives. Protestants were (and are) not unanimous in adopting those meanings. The Church of England agreed, and that view continues today throughout the Lutheran Church, the worldwide Anglican Communion, and many other denominations. Whichever implied meaning is intended, Apocrypha was (and is) used primarily by Protestants, in reference to the books of questioned canonicity. Catholics and Orthodox sometimes avoid using the term in contexts where it might be considered disputatious or be misconstrued as yielding on the point of canonicity. Very few Protestant published Bibles include the apocryphal books in a separate section (rather like an appendix), so as not to intermingle them with their canonical books.

Explaining the Eastern Orthodox Church's canon is made difficult because of differences of perspective with the Roman Catholic church in the interpretation of how it was done. Those differences (in matters of jurisdictional authority) were contributing factors in the separation of the Roman Catholics and Orthodox around 1054, but the formation of the canon was largely complete (fully complete in the Catholic view) by the fifth century, six centuries before the separation. In the eastern part of the church, it took much of the fifth century also to come to agreement, but in the end it was accomplished. The canonical books thus established by the undivided church became canon for what was later to become Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox alike. The East did already differ from the West in not considering every question of canon yet settled, and it subsequently adopted a few more books into its Old Testament. It also allowed consideration of yet a few more to continue not fully decided, which led in some cases to adoption in one or more jurisdictions, but not all. Thus, there are today a few remaining differences of canon among Orthodox, and all Orthodox accept a few more books than appear in the Catholic canon. Protestants accept none of these additional books as canon either, but see them having roughly the same status as the earlier Apocrypha. As Protestant awareness of the Eastern Orthodox increases in nations like the United States, interest in the full Orthodox canon might also increase enough for them to be published in the Apocrypha of some Protestant Bibles. That is not common yet in 2013, so they are not as widely available in English.

Before the fifth century, the Christian writings that were then under discussion for inclusion in the canon but had not yet been accepted were classified in a group known as the ancient antilegomenae. These were all candidates for the New Testament and included several books which were eventually accepted, such as: The Epistle to the Hebrews, 2 Peter, 3 John and the Revelation of John (Apocalypse). None of those accepted books can be considered Apocryphal now, since all Christendom accepts them as canonical. Of the uncanonized ones, the Early Church considered some heretical but viewed others quite well. Some Christians, in an extension of the meaning, might also consider the non-heretical books to be "apocryphal" along the manner of Martin Luther: not canon, but useful to read. This category includes books such as the Epistle of Barnabas, the Didache, and The Shepherd of Hermas which are sometimes referred to as the Apostolic Fathers.


==============================================

The roman church also along with science said the earth is flat.....

Lastly the bible is canonical the aprocryphca is not considered canon.

Pray for God to guide you to all truth.

God Bless

Steven

...or similarly how about this quote - 'It is a capital mistake to theorize before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts.'

Sherlock Holmes Quote

-A Scandal in Bohemia

"Condemnation before investigation is the height of ignorance"- Did Einstein said this?

I don't know who said it but the words sure do ring true.