Catholic Apolgetics boards

[MatureMomG]

Good morning!
Need a suggestion, please.
Since yesterday I have “started” my first on-line apologetics encounter on another board.
(Here is the link for those who are interested- okay to post links like that here? If not, delete.)
(Link removed)

Anyway, I think I’m doing okay (feel free to pray). They (of course) are trying to get me to defend MY faith. I don’t want to go there, as I want to stay ONLY on the topic (which is part of THEIR TOS!).
The topic is who/what had the Authority to say what constitutes the Bible- which books (NOT what those books are, or who decided, or when, just that someone/something DID- an “Authority” which they are accepting as valid. THEN they will be stuck as they ‘only’ accept Sola Scriptura… let the Holy Spirit take it from there…well, He can be in charge all along…)

I only have so much time, and others like you guys are already here to defend the Catholic faith…

So, I keep repeating my question and refuse (pretty much) to discuss my beliefs. BUT I would like a place, a board to send them to to air their concerns. I just quickly looked this morning.
Is this an appropriate place to send them (not the most charitable bunch, I will warn you…)?
A concern I have is that you have to register to get in- they might not want to do that (who knows why…)
Are there other (large, active) apologetic websites that woudl be appropriate that do not require registration?
Be nice to give them more than one option…
Advice, suggestions?
Yours in Christ,
Kathy

 

[epostle]

My advice is to receive Holy Communion every day, and spend an hour a day studying solid Catholic teaching. You are dealing with hate cultist bigots who have their own version of history. Don’t allow yourself to be drawn in to their emotionalism and attack mode. You are already confined to using the King James only for quotes, which itself is full of errors. Here are more of their “rules” that are not expicit, but further limits you:

1. Imitate John Calvin and LIE bold-facedly. Tell people that he Church Fathers taught Protestantism.
2. Imitate Luther and claim that every group that opposed the Papacy and “THE GREAT CHURCH” in the past were true Christians. This would include the Donatists, the Bogomils, the Paulicians, the Cathars, the Albigensians, the Waldenses, the Utraquists, the Lollards, and the Hussites.
3. Imitate an alternative scheme that was invented with Calvin’s blessing that claimed TRUE Christianity was preserved ONLY among the Waldensians in the Alps and in a totally anti-historical canard retroject their origin back to the period before Constantine. This is the position taken by a variety of ‘low church’ groups including Landmark Baptists, Baptist Successionists, and the Campbellite Church of Christ.
4. Imitate John Foxe and just make stuff up and pawn it off as history. This was very similar to what is in modern times known as “Maoist Political Theater”: You take historical figures and situations and create a fictional setting in which the author’s values are read back into the conflict. Foxe was notorious for his deliberate inaccuracies perpetrated in the name of making a point. One caveat is that Foxe generally opposed coercion in matters of religion and when Jesuit Fr. Edmund Campion was put on trial and executed, Foxe protested on his behalf.
5. Pretend that history doesn’t matter and that Christianity is an immediate existential encounter between the reader and the Biblical text.
6. Create a series of ‘dispensations’ in which the truth actually changes from period to the next. This is just a variation on the theme of Hegelian dialectic which was used by the Marxists. For example, in the Jewish dispensation, you cold earn salvation in a Pelagian fashion by keeping the Jewish Law. Before that, no one could be saved except by God’s special election. Now in the Christian dispensation, following the Jewish law leads to damnation.

There are other schemes as well but these are the most popular ones. The one thing they all have in common is that they serve the need of Protestants for affirmation of their disobedience and rebellion.

Here are some web sites on the origins of the Bible:

this chart is taken from Protestant sources
ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ45.HTM

Proving Inspiration. Cultists don’t believe the books of the bible had to be proven inspired, they assume inspiration without authority, and have revised hitorical facts.
catholic.com/library/proving_inspiration.asp
I will take some time in prayer and decide if I am going to jump in to the pig pen.

 

[Joe_5859]

Sending them to CAF (or any other apologetics board) would probably fall on deaf ears, at least for those that regularly participate in the discussion.

You could link to the most articulate, scripturally based defense of Catholic teaching that exists, but they likely will either skip it, skim it, or misinterpret it.

The only thing they will listen to is Scripture. But even if you post Scripture, they will just tell you that you are “twisting it” or that you are only saying that because the pope told you to, not because it’s what the passage actually means. And, of course, we can all presuppose that whatever Rome/the Vatican/the pope says about Scripture is wrong!

However, I still think it is advantageous to fight the good fight. You never know what lurkers there might be that are on the fence. I think the most important thing to do is to always be charitable, and stick to the facts. Those who are lurking on the board who are genuinely searching for truth will notice the difference between charity and verbal attacks. You can’t help but be attracted to those that are more charitable.

One helpful site (besides CAF or CA) would be Catholic Bridges. It’s done by a lay Catholic musician who started the site as a way to explain Catholic teaching to the many evangelicals he interacts with in the Christian music industry. The articles are very simple and easy to understand, and they are written for an evangelical audience, which is helpful since most Catholic apologetics are geared towards a Catholic audience.

Don’t expect too much, though. You likely won’t see any fruit for your labor. But there may be some waiting for you in heaven!

 

[Kay_Cee]

I highly suggest a trip to the Bible Christian Society’s website and a good listen or two to “Apologetics for the Scripturally Challenged.” This is a talk about strategies for engaging in apologetics and defending the Catholic faith.

biblechristiansociety.com/download

 

[guanophore]

Good morning!
Need a suggestion, please.
Since yesterday I have “started” my first on-line apologetics encounter on another board.
(Here is the link for those who are interested- okay to post links like that here? If not, delete.)
(Link removed)

Anyway, I think I’m doing okay (feel free to pray). They (of course) are trying to get me to defend MY faith. I don’t want to go there, as I want to stay ONLY on the topic (which is part of THEIR TOS!).
The topic is who/what had the Authority to say what constitutes the Bible- which books (NOT what those books are, or who decided, or when, just that someone/something DID- an “Authority” which they are accepting as valid. THEN they will be stuck as they ‘only’ accept Sola Scriptura… let the Holy Spirit take it from there…well, He can be in charge all along…)

I only have so much time, and others like you guys are already here to defend the Catholic faith…

So, I keep repeating my question and refuse (pretty much) to discuss my beliefs. BUT I would like a place, a board to send them to to air their concerns. I just quickly looked this morning.
Is this an appropriate place to send them (not the most charitable bunch, I will warn you…)?
A concern I have is that you have to register to get in- they might not want to do that (who knows why…)
Are there other (large, active) apologetic websites that woudl be appropriate that do not require registration?
Be nice to give them more than one option…
Advice, suggestions?
Yours in Christ,
Kathy

Bring 'em on! That is what we are here for. One does not have to register to come in and read, only if one wants to post.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Your post has been edited due to the potential for other forum readers/members to visit someone else’s website for the purposes of Apologetics debate

In an effort to illuminate and explain the Catholic faith, CA makes every effort to provide our participants with a pleasant and informative place on the internet where Catholics and non-Catholics may gather.

It is our hope that respectful dialogue and discussion will lead to better faith understandings. And so in charity, we ask that our forums not be used for encouraging mass visits to other websites. In the past these kinds of efforts, although perhaps well intentioned, leave participants at other websites with negative impressions.

Your cooperation in helping promote these aims of faith exposition, hope for fruitful discussion and charity in implementation are sincerely appreciated.

Sincerely,
MF

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

Hi MatureMomG, the picture you give here does not appear to be what I see going on over there. Basically, you need to demonstrate to them an ability to do exegesis on scripture to impress them. May I suggest, you hop into the “Discussing the prophets in context Isaiah” by posting Isaiah chapter 8 from the King James — they are a King James only boad. And, make comments in a second post of what stands out to you in that chapter.

 

[MatureMomG]

you need to demonstrate to them an ability to do exegesis on scripture to impress them.

Daniel, I know you are over there.
My point is NOT to argue Scripture. (AND I must compliment you as one of the less hostile posters).
My point is that there is an authority outside of Scripture.
If Scripture is the only authority, how can you know what is the right canon? You can apply tests, you can have first hand knowledge and more, but if there is no Infallible Authority behind that, you are believing in man. It baffles me totally how one can say Bible only and NOT accept that someone somewhere decided what the Bible is.

So quoting Scripture is irrelevant for you OR me. If you are willing to say man or an infallible church recognized the canon, how can you KNOW they got it right? So you can quote John or Romans or anything, but how do you know that book belongs there? An INFALLIBLE choice has decided it for you. Infallible means they can be wrong. You know that.

So I don’t need to quote a single verse of Scripture.
Once you realize there WAS Authority behind the church that recognized the canon, you realize that Sola Scriptura is not valid.
THEN, and ONLY THEN, you can begin to try to study and understand that church, the one that had The Infallible Authority to properly recognize Scripture. Who were they? What else did they teach/preach? You can’t blindly accept the recognition of the canon and ignore all else. Because if they had Authority regarding the canon, that God granted them, and they SAY they have other things that fall under that same Authority,you can’t ignore it. They SAID this is the canon. You chose to accept that. They SAID other things as well (Eucharist, Popes, Confession, all the stuff you refute). So you accept their canon, but noting else.
So Daniel is the one who decides what Truth is. They got it right on the canon, but nothing else. Based on my intelligence or study as a historian or whatever. Pick and choose.

Am I making ANY sense to you?
Kathy

 

[Daniel_Marsh]

“Kindly show us in Tradition, any of the direct words of Christ that are NOT already recorded in Scripture. Please.”

try responding the the above thread over there.

 

[Ignatius]

Good morning!
Need a suggestion, please.
Since yesterday I have “started” my first on-line apologetics encounter on another board.

I went and had a look over there. They are not in the least open to the Truth of the Catholic Church. Their minds are made up and they refuse to be confused with the Truth. I wouldn’t wasting my time.

 

[Schabel]

“Kindly show us in Tradition, any of the direct words of Christ that are NOT already recorded in Scripture. Please.”

try responding the the above thread over there.

If you want to understand Sola Scriptura, you need to study the whole system not just parts here and there. For, example Christ Alone, places Jesus as our supreme authority, thus what he taught that can be verified, written down takes the highest authority.

What you’re describing here is not sola scriptura, but prima scriptura, which if correctly understood is emminently compatable with Catholic teaching.

This spills over into Sola Scriptura. What we have in tradition is mostly man’s opinions, nothing more.

Sorry, non-sequitor. And merely an assertion.

Now, it depends on what you mean by “tradition.” If you mean “Apostolic Tradition,” then you’re quite wrong.

 

[epostle]

“Kindly show us in Tradition, any of the direct words of Christ that are NOT already recorded in Scripture. Please.”

try responding the the above thread over there.

Hi Daniel, I’m kepha31. I’m also kepha1 in the archives here. Sorry about the blue text, it’s a sort of trademark of mine. Is green ok? I find all black text to be boring.

You are demanding evidence that neither of us would accept, even if it existed.

You are assuming that only direct words of Christ that are not found in scripture can validate Tradition. This is not how Tradition is defined, and I think I explained the relationship between Tradition and Scripture, and I could go on for pages. Even if we had direct words of Christ that were not in scripture, they would be discounted as uninspired. What we have is the direct “gospel message” that was entrusted to those in authority to preach it, and “gospel message” says nothing about scripture alone. Without Apostolic Succession, “the gospel message” which was later enscripturated, would be the property of each individual believer to preach, and this is contrary to the Bible.

The totality of God’s Divine Revelation includes the oral preaching of the Apostles, which includes Scripture. The “gospel message” went with the office, not each individual believer to teach. If Scripture was to cancel out something as important as Apostolic Succession, then Scripture would have mentioned it somewhere. It doesn’t, but affirms it.

The primary difference between Tradition and Scripture is mode of transmission. They carry the same message as two wings of a bird.

 

[guanophore]

Good morning!
Need a suggestion, please.
Since yesterday I have “started” my first on-line apologetics encounter on another board.
(Here is the link for those who are interested- okay to post links like that here? If not, delete.)
(Link removed)

Anyway, I think I’m doing okay (feel free to pray). They (of course) are trying to get me to defend MY faith. I don’t want to go there, as I want to stay ONLY on the topic (which is part of THEIR TOS!).
The topic is who/what had the Authority to say what constitutes the Bible- which books (NOT what those books are, or who decided, or when, just that someone/something DID- an “Authority” which they are accepting as valid. THEN they will be stuck as they ‘only’ accept Sola Scriptura… let the Holy Spirit take it from there…well, He can be in charge all along…)

I only have so much time, and others like you guys are already here to defend the Catholic faith…

So, I keep repeating my question and refuse (pretty much) to discuss my beliefs. BUT I would like a place, a board to send them to to air their concerns. I just quickly looked this morning.
Is this an appropriate place to send them (not the most charitable bunch, I will warn you…)?
A concern I have is that you have to register to get in- they might not want to do that (who knows why…)
Are there other (large, active) apologetic websites that woudl be appropriate that do not require registration?
Be nice to give them more than one option…
Advice, suggestions?
Yours in Christ,
Kathy

Don’;t start over there. Start here at CAF. Frequent the threads on Apologetics and get your feet wet where you have a lot of support.