irishmom:
He did say though, that if you look into a mirror and see an image of yourself, it is a perfect image of yourself.
Except that it’s TOTALLY reversed, two dimensional, and strictly speaking, it’s distorted, as no mirror is perfectly made.
Furthermore, it’s a lame analogy, because only a JW (or a Mormon) would think that “image of God” means that Christ LOOKS like God the Father.
Double furthermore, what’s his point?
Triple furthermore, with heretics (JWs, Mormons, and, frankly, all non-Catholics to some degree or another) you have to be on the offensive, not the other way around. THEIR claims are the “different gospel”, not ours. No matter WHAT they say, it is not justified by the Bible, because the Bible (New Testament) is a Catholic document… and not even the first one! It’s like someone using your own words to tell you what you ~really~ meant, rhetorical nonsense.
We can practice here:
Me: “The early Christians actually taught that the SkyPony was going to come and give free shoes to all the barefoo…”
You: “No, young man, you are very confused, I think you ought to go study hist…”
Me: “You’re not even going to hear out my Sky Pony Gospel of Shoes!? How intolerant!”
You: “I don’t have to follow you if you’re headed in the wrong direction. Before you ask me to accept your alternative history, you need to tell me what’s wrong with the real history we already have, so, let’s look at what the early Fathers had to say…”
