Friend says bible has changed from original

[PRmerger]

You are being disingenuous. I don’t need to trust the literature on Julius Caesar… It makes no difference to me either way. Trusting in the Gospels and the Tradition of the Catholic Church is a lot more critical. If it is a major foundation to your belief system, then trust is crucial. Since I don’t need to trust Julius Caesar, I don’t think about it.

Let’s take your argument step by step, nmg.

Your first proposition is that we should be skeptical of any historical document until we can prove its authenticity.

I agree.

I am simply saying that you have very, very different levels of skepticism for what is religions vs what is secular.

I think you should have the same level of skepticism.

Does that seem judicious to you?

 

[nmgauss]

Let’s take your argument step by step, nmg.
Your first proposition is that we should be skeptical of any historical document until we can prove its authenticity.
I agree.
I am simply saying that you have very, very different levels of skepticism for what is religions vs what is secular.
I think you should have the same level of skepticism.
Does that seem judicious to you?

Why is there a need to be judicious over skepticism? Justice is not necessary here. I read what I want to read, and I am skeptical of anything I feel like being skeptical about. I believe what I want to believe and nobody can tell me to do otherwise… I am not out to proselytize anybody and I am not practicing exclusivity. Many Catholics love to condemn me for not following the Catechism. Does that make them right and me wrong?

Making war on somebody because they have a different belief system is stupid. That is what is happening in Iraq between the Sunni’s and Shi’ites. That is what happened in Western Europe during the Reformation when terrible religious wars were fought. What a terrible waste?

Just because I don’t believe what you believe does not make me wrong.

 

[nmgauss]

What is the purpose of “Defending the Faith”? Why does the Faith care whether I cast aspersions on it? Are you likely to be personally insulted because I criticize your Faith?

 

[PRmerger]

Why is there a need to be judicious over skepticism? Justice is not necessary here.

Of course it is necessary. Quite.

Otherwise, what it makes it appear is that you are already skewed into having some sort of weird criteria for one historical document, but not another.

You should apply the same degree of disbelief to all things.

Or else risk looking like a bigot. Someone who has no intention of believing.

 

[PRmerger]

I am skeptical of anything I feel like being skeptical about.

Bingo.

This is exactly what is so wrong with your approach here. And your approach to Christianity in general and Catholicism specifically.

Rather than being a true investigator of truth, what you are is simply someone who is a fundamentalist.

You believe things with no evidence whatsoever.

I thought you showed that in your pridian posts when you declared, without a shred of evidence, that all things that are true must be written in some text.

That is why unless you provide proof in writing for your original sources, I am unlikely to believe you.

That, of course, has never been proven.

You believe that based on blind faith.

And it appears now that you have demonstrated that again, with your blind faith in your own skepticism.

You are, sadly, not a seeker.

 

[nmgauss]

Of course it is necessary. Quite.

Otherwise, what it makes it appear is that you are already skewed into having some sort of weird criteria for one historical document, but not another.

You should apply the same degree of disbelief to all things.

Or else risk looking like a bigot. Someone who has no intention of believing.

Everybody has a bias. Do I care that I might look like a bigot? I could not care less. And why is my intention of believing at stake here? What if I have no intention of believing? Is that so terrible?

 

[PRmerger]

Many Catholics love to condemn me for not following the Catechism. Does that make them right and me wrong?

Actually, it would make them wrong.

Catholics cannot condemn people. It is above our paygrade.

It would be fun for you to actually know the Catholic faith better than these Catholics who “love to condemn” you. For you could tell them, “Actually, the Catholic faith does not give Catholics permission to condemn anyone.”

Oh! Would that you had been catechized in the faith of your grandmother!

Making war on somebody because they have a different belief system is stupid. That is what is happening in Iraq between the Sunni’s and Shi’ites. That is what happened in Western Europe during the Reformation when terrible religious wars were fought. What a terrible waste?

Indeed. Very Catholic pronouncements you have just made!

Just because I don’t believe what you believe does not make me wrong.

Do you think this should be the mantra of the Reverend Fred Phelps? Does he have the right to say that, too, nmgauss?

Hypothetical conversation between nmgauss and RFP:
RFP: God hates homosexuals.
nmg: I don’t believe in God, but if I did, he wouldn’t hate.
RFG: Just because I don’t believe what you believe does not make me wrong.

How would you respond, nmg?

 

[PRmerger]

Everybody has a bias. Do I care that I might look like a bigot? I could not care less. And why is my intention of believing at stake here? What if I have no intention of believing? Is that so terrible?

All it does is show that you are intransigent to Truth.

That is a very, very ignoble paradigm to espouse, nmgauss.

One to be pitied, really.