H
Harmony1988
Guest
None, adstrinity seems to have fallen for some atheistic skeptical proposals.
You seem to be committing a fallacy of generalizing based on an exception. Namely viewing his opinion as an official catholic opinion.
- Status
You seem to be committing a fallacy of generalizing based on an exception. Namely viewing his opinion as an official catholic opinion.
P
Pastor_Jim
Guest
So then there are disagreements within Catholicism?
So are you now saying that Catholics don’t ever disagree?
No, I just asked a question based on what one of your fellow Catholic posters said. If you have a problem with that, you need to take it up with him.
H
Harmony1988
Guest
Can you show me what I said that even remotely implied that there are disagreements within catholicism? Catholicism is held together by the official teaching of the magesterium, not by opinions held by the general public.
Opinions by catholics aren’t official and not the standard of the church. Some Catholics view contraception as ok, however the church does not (subject of example is irrelevant).
Btw, you still committed a logical fallacy by once again arguing from an exception to a generalization. Best clear this issue up lest you fall into more logical errors and then we’d be back to philosophy 101 again.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Dear Pastor Jim:
Just to clear things up for you, neither “The Catholic Church” nor “its hierarchy” nor indeed these bishops have claimed that the Bible is no longer true.
In fact, here is what the Catholic Church officially teaches about the Bible’s truth. It is ‘official’ because it is right there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
This is what it says:
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70
106 God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."71 107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72
Please feel free to verify it for yourself. Here is the site for the catechism itself–the whole thing. scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
Just to clear things up for you, neither “The Catholic Church” nor “its hierarchy” nor indeed these bishops have claimed that the Bible is no longer true.
In fact, here is what the Catholic Church officially teaches about the Bible’s truth. It is ‘official’ because it is right there in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.
This is what it says:
105 God is the author of Sacred Scripture. "The divinely revealed realities, which are contained and presented in the text of Sacred Scripture, have been written down under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit."69
"For Holy Mother Church, relying on the faith of the apostolic age, accepts as sacred and canonical the books of the Old and the New Testaments, whole and entire, with all their parts, on the grounds that, written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and have been handed on as such to the Church herself."70
106 God inspired the human authors of the sacred books. "To compose the sacred books, God chose certain men who, all the while he employed them in this task, made full use of their own faculties and powers so that, though he acted in them and by them, it was as true authors that they consigned to writing whatever he wanted written, and no more."71 107 The inspired books teach the truth. "Since therefore all that the inspired authors or sacred writers affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, faithfully, and without error teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to see confided to the Sacred Scriptures."72
Please feel free to verify it for yourself. Here is the site for the catechism itself–the whole thing. scborromeo.org/ccc.htm
H
Harmony1988
Guest
That’s not what I said? For the fear of sounding like I’m responding to a 2nd grader, nvm, I’ll explain it word by word.
Pastor Jim, catholics disagree with each other all the time. However there is an ‘official teaching’, even though people may have disagreed to come down to a consensus in the teaching, in the end, the teaching holds when it comes to faith and morals.
You reading responses here by other Catholics and taking on the stance that this must be what all catholics believe is simply a logical error.
The problem I have is not with who was asking questions or what was being said, but your logical errors. If you have a problem with this, please consult a book on logical errors, namely fallacies. In particular take note of the fallacy of accident and converse fallacy of accident.
H
Harmony1988
Guest
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Always glad to help, Harmony! Can’t wait until I get my ‘hard copy’ of the Catechism (I wound up giving my first copy to my brother) so I don’t always have to look on-line, but I surely am grateful we have it on line.
P
Pastor_Jim
Guest
'Nuff said. Bye bye.
How funny that when Catholics run into something they can’t refute, they always have to resort to personal attacks.
C
Contarini
Guest
Why do you trust secular British reporters as theological authorities? This makes no sense. Just because they interpret the Catholic statement as a denial of the Bible’s truth doesn’t mean that that’s what it is. British reporters can’t tell a theological idea from a hole in the head (the same famous newspaper you cite once ran an article on the Plymouth Brethren which referred to this egalitarian sect, which doesn’t even ordain people in its strict form, as having “priests”).
The actual quote they give is fully defensible. The Bible is not designed to give us details about science or even history. The Bible is a story of salvation history. Its infallibility (or, if you prefer, inerrancy, though the latter word is often used for the stricter view which I do not hold) covers all matters pertaining to divinely revealed truth, whether they be theological, scientific, historical, or whatever. It is not restricted to some ethereal “religious” meaning. But neither does that infallibility cover every scientific and historical belief stated or implied by the human authors.
Edwin
H
Harmony1988
Guest
I agree it was an ad hominem.
But what you’ve done here is again generalize based on an exception. FALLACY
Because Harmony1988 attacked me, I shall generalize and say catholics resort to personal attacks. (which is what you just said).
Btw you called someone a fool in another post today at 11:20. Then you conveniently removed it. But I saw that. Hypocrite. You know which one I am talking about, it was your argument with Mizer.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Um, Pastor Jim, This Catholic (me) answered your question; would you kindly acknowledge this?
Thank you.
Thank you.
C
Contarini
Guest
God didn’t get any of it wrong. The Bible says exactly what God meant it to. But God worked through human beings, and had no reason to override their free will and make them write things that were alien to their cultural context, where this was not necessary for the transmission of divine truth (indeed, I would question whether it is ever necessary–what is wonderful about the books of Scripture is that they make sense as texts of their times, while also being the revealed Word of God).
Edwin
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
Absolutely right, Edwin.
Let’s see if Pastor Jim reads the relevant passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and comes back to apologize for misunderstanding the news report and jumping to conclusions about the Catholic Church that turned out to be incorrect.
Let’s see if Pastor Jim reads the relevant passage from the Catechism of the Catholic Church and comes back to apologize for misunderstanding the news report and jumping to conclusions about the Catholic Church that turned out to be incorrect.
P
Pastor_Jim
Guest
Actually, I never even addressed the news report.
One of your fellow Catholics said that some of the Bible was incorrect and I just asked him to clarify it.
But I’m sure you’ll apologize for your false accusation.
No, I’m just kidding! I know you’d never do that.
M
MarcoPolo
Guest
Unfortunately there are too many who do not know Catholicism who circumvent what is said here or in Scripture and instead end up projecting a personal caricature of the Catholic Church, even though the evidence at issue calls for no such thing.
D
Dan-Man916
Guest
Incorrect in what? faith, morals, scientific facts, history, the weather tomorrow?
If you are interested in an honest debate of ideas, you might want to address some of the questions posed to you, unless, of course, your only interest is to play the role of the accuser.
“Incorrect” is a meaningless word unless it is explained just as to what one asserts is incorrect about it?
Do you believe that the veracity of Scripture is dependent upon every word in the bible being actually historically factual in the sense in which the way history is reported is understood today?
D
Dan-Man916
Guest
Pastor Jim,
One of the things that always tends to telegraph a posters internal dispostion to something is the way they present their post.
I wonder why it is that you didn’t address the topic this way;
“I have read that some Catholics say that the bible is incorrect. How does one reconcile errors in Scripture with the belief that All scipture is God-breathed. It seems to me that you would then be inferring that God can be in error. It sounds to me like your doctrines are contradictory here, so how do you reconcile this?”
But instead of posting with that tone, you posted in an adversarial way.
That’s not really the type of evangelizing called for in Scripture, now is it, and it ends up questioning your intentions from the get-go.
One of the things that always tends to telegraph a posters internal dispostion to something is the way they present their post.
I wonder why it is that you didn’t address the topic this way;
“I have read that some Catholics say that the bible is incorrect. How does one reconcile errors in Scripture with the belief that All scipture is God-breathed. It seems to me that you would then be inferring that God can be in error. It sounds to me like your doctrines are contradictory here, so how do you reconcile this?”
But instead of posting with that tone, you posted in an adversarial way.
That’s not really the type of evangelizing called for in Scripture, now is it, and it ends up questioning your intentions from the get-go.
P
Pastor_Jim
Guest
I didn’t accuse anybody of anything. I just asked a question. I’m sorry that you find asking somebody to clarify something he said so offensive, but it seems pretty reasonable to me.
I’m sorry you didn’t like my asking him to clarify what he said.
I am not evangelizing. I just asked a question.
I’m not Catholic, so I’m already considered suspect by the Catholics here.
Why don’t you channel some of your feigned indignation and ask tantum ego why he made false claims about me? Oh, I’m sorry. You only object when non-Catholics ask questions in a way that doesn’t meet your approval. You don’t have time to ask Catholics why they would misrepresent what I said.
H
Harmony1988
Guest
It seems you forgot what you were arguing about in the middle.
T
Tantum_ergo
Guest
A false accusation?
You responded to a post which was itself responding to the news report.
Forgive me for not making it crystal clear that you had not bothered to read the report but were **only **responding to a poster, even though that poster was responding to the news report which is the very opening post and explains the title of this thread.
Now would you mind, having made your own little ‘false accusation’ about me, responding to the post about what the Catechism says?
- Status