Have you debated a catholic theologian?

[Ag_not]

There are sooooo many circular arguments here - same issues keep getting brought up - same non catholics keep repeating the same old lines, catholics keep giving the same old defences… neither seem to be able to hear or take on board what the other is saying (bit of a sweepng generality here, but hey its lunchtime, why not, you know what I mean). So I got to wondering, have any non catholics actually debated their points with a properly qualified catholic theologian, and if you did, what was the outcome?

 

[cathopologist]

…have any non catholics actually debated their points with a properly qualified catholic theologian, and if you did, what was the outcome?

Catholicism is for intellects. However, that being said, Protestantism has its fair share of a few accomplished and honest theologians as well. But they lose out especially when it comes to historical, Biblical facts.

I have heard of some parishes in Singapore organize ecumenical live debates/dialogues with learned Protestant ministers or theologians (though its rare for a theologian to take part) and i’ve been told how they have stuttered when they are unable to provide logical explanations for tough questions. Perhaps they must feel uncomfortable when they see a crucifix of Christ?

 

[a_mirror_dimly]

I’m sure that there have been debates in which a Catholic theologian has gotten a weak response from a Protestant theologian and vice versa. Even more often I’m sure have been situations where each side came away feeling that their representative gave the better argument.

Anecdotal evidence isn’t likely to be helpful is drawing any overarching conclusions here, but searching for videos might be a good start. If you’re looking to show that one side of the other is right because they always prevail in equally matched debates, you’re probably going to come up disappointed.

 

[Ruthie]

Here’s one.

I think I’ve mentioned our own Karl Keating’s book, Catholicism and Fundamentalism. He goes over a few of his debates in it.

I know Jimmy Akin has been in a few debates, but his website seems to be down at the moment. Either that, or my ISP is. I’ll find out when I send this… Here we go…

Love,

Ruthie

 

[Wonderboo]

There are sooooo many circular arguments here - same issues keep getting brought up - same non catholics keep repeating the same old lines, catholics keep giving the same old defences… neither seem to be able to hear or take on board what the other is saying (bit of a sweepng generality here, but hey its lunchtime, why not, you know what I mean). So I got to wondering, have any non catholics actually debated their points with a properly qualified catholic theologian, and if you did, what was the outcome?

Yes I have, the outcome? I married him. My husband aside, I have a theology degree from THE Catholic University so I’ve had my fair share of them, the end result is normally laughing about something crazy in either of our churches. I have known many very smart Catholic theologians and many dumb ones and the same goes for the Episcopalians I know.

 

[Ag_not]

Yes I have, the outcome? I married him.

Has got to be the best answer ever

What I mean by the very badly phrased question wasnt if there were debates between catholic and non catholic theologians - I know there are - rather, has any non catholics here taken the issues they keep bringing up to a catholic theologian to discuss.

I think I would.

What I mean is, there are several people here (no names) who are, well, erm, a bit full of themselves, and that’s being charitable. They very clearly are being dishonest about their agenda here (In my humble and irrelevant opinion I must add for insurance purposes ). They keep bringing up the same arguements and from what Ive read, it’s based on THEIR reading of the scriptures, or what they read in a book or heard from a preacher, and it ‘‘clicked’’ with them. The same arguements keep getting refuted, but they just dont accept the refutation.

Now that got me wondering - if they were genuinely interested in the points being raised, and not just looking for a platform, and they werent getting anywhere on the forum - would the next logical thing not be to check out their arguements with a properly qualified catholic theologian.

You know something - I dont even know if what Im writing makes sense now

never mind - its been a hard day at work today Ignore me

 

[notsmart]

I don’t think breaking out the theologians or debates are the only ways to get someone to see the weakness of their position.
But, it would be nice to see Tim Staples or Karl Keating post here or there once and a while, by surprise.
I bet if they made guest appearances here from time to time, that would help add interest.

 

[Mirdath]

No famous ones. The poster john doran has a doctorate in philosophy, I believe, and we’ve hashed various topics out several times and failed utterly to convince each other (and in fact, once we got over that we’ve teamed up against plain ol’ Bad Philosophy and hit it from both ends). And cpayne, for whom I hold nothing but the highest respect, teaches something related to theology/philosophy; again, we’ve waged a friendly war across several fora and have both come out thoroughly unconvinced of each others’ views but at least more understanding

Specific points… we’ve done the ‘proofs of God’ to death, and while cpayne still has a fondness for Plantinga’s modified ontological argument I seem to recall ateista and I have independently trashed it (it’s okay, I still like Anselm’s original just for its simplicity and elegance, even though it’s wrong wrong wrong). More generally, we seem to have come to something approaching an understanding (at least from my point of view) that attempting to prove God is an exercise in human arrogance, that while the Catechism may state that God may be known by human reason that that doesn’t translate to ‘God is beholden to logic’, and that proofs of God are pretty much just ego-stroking for believers.

We’ve gotten into morality as well, but since we’re all absolutists of one stripe or another there isn’t a whole lot to debate – in particular, john doran and I both came down on people saying ‘the irreligious are incapable of having a consistent ethic’ with ‘sure they/we can, it just doesn’t involve the words God Sez Thou Shalt’.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Has got to be the best answer ever

What I mean by the very badly phrased question wasnt if there were debates between catholic and non catholic theologians - I know there are - rather, has any non catholics here taken the issues they keep bringing up to a catholic theologian to discuss.

I think I would.

What I mean is, there are several people here (no names) who are, well, erm, a bit full of themselves, and that’s being charitable. They very clearly are being dishonest about their agenda here (In my humble and irrelevant opinion I must add for insurance purposes ). They keep bringing up the same arguements and from what Ive read, it’s based on THEIR reading of the scriptures, or what they read in a book or heard from a preacher, and it ‘‘clicked’’ with them. The same arguements keep getting refuted, but they just dont accept the refutation.

Now that got me wondering - if they were genuinely interested in the points being raised, and not just looking for a platform, and they werent getting anywhere on the forum - would the next logical thing not be to check out their arguements with a properly qualified catholic theologian.

You know something - I dont even know if what Im writing makes sense now

never mind - its been a hard day at work today Ignore me

Why don’t you purchase some of the debates between Catholic apologists such as Pacwa, Sungenis, Staples, Michuta, etc. and James White? I think you will find many of the professional Catholic apologists aren’t making the same arguments you will find being made on this forum by the catholic posters.

 

[Steadfast]

I have.

I had to. You see I was a Jesuit candidate when the process of my conversion began, so I questioned a number of men with masters degrees and in one case a doctorate in theology.

These men were mostly congenial, though one did get a bit annoyed with me when I didn’t just toe the line he laid down for me.

The upshot is that yes, I have debated them and with the greatest of motives: my own peace of mind and salvation and they were not able to satisfy me.

 

[reteeks21]

Catholicism is for intellects. However, that being said, Protestantism has its fair share of a few accomplished and honest theologians as well. But they lose out especially when it comes to historical, Biblical facts.

I have heard of some parishes in Singapore organize ecumenical live debates/dialogues with learned Protestant ministers or theologians (though its rare for a theologian to take part) and i’ve been told how they have stuttered when they are unable to provide logical explanations for tough questions. Perhaps they must feel uncomfortable when they see a crucifix of Christ?

And the rest of us, if we aren’t swinging from trees, are busy picking lint out of our belly buttons. You got us…we have no clue what has gone on throughout history, and we are lucky to have just a few people you find to be intelligent enough to sit amongst the intellectual catholic giants. Since you make it clear that they aren’t very many intellectual protestants, are there any catholics theologians out there who are intellecutually dishonest?

 

[sambos671]

No. I haven’t though I would like to speak in depth with one. Not necissarily debate because the more I study the more catholic I become. I would like to ask a few pointed questions and have them rounded out by a thologian worth his salt. However, I have discussed issues I’ve considered with a Rome trained Catholic priest of the Diocese I am in. He works in Canon Law and has been a great source of information. I’ve read Karl Keatings book already mentioned on this thread and have asked a few questions regarding it. I’ve also read Scott Hahns Rome Sweet Home but it was a great testomony but not something I would look at as on the level of Keating’s book.

 

[cfrancis]

I have.

I had to. You see I was a Jesuit candidate when the process of my conversion began, so I questioned a number of men with masters degrees and in one case a doctorate in theology.

These men were mostly congenial, though one did get a bit annoyed with me when I didn’t just toe the line he laid down for me.

The upshot is that yes, I have debated them and with the greatest of motives: my own peace of mind and salvation and they were not able to satisfy me.

Jesuits*, go figure…

• = not all Jesuits, but the Jesuits as a whole.

 

[Among_Strangers]

There are sooooo many circular arguments here - same issues keep getting brought up - same non catholics keep repeating the same old lines, catholics keep giving the same old defences… neither seem to be able to hear or take on board what the other is saying (bit of a sweepng generality here, but hey its lunchtime, why not, you know what I mean). So I got to wondering, have any non catholics actually debated their points with a properly qualified catholic theologian, and if you did, what was the outcome?

Ag_not,

I am Catholic and I had a debated with “properly qualified catholic theologians,” several times. One time I was speaking with Dr. Germain Grisez. We were discussing 2 Tim. 3:16-17 All scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, equipped for every good work.

Specifically, the first part on biblical divine inspiration. He was giving a lecture on it and stated that not all of Scripture can be held to this standard. When I asked him to elaborate on that in light of St. Paul’ words he had this argument.

The first stanza of the 14th Psalm reads: The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good.

So, the phrase “There is no God” is found in Scripture. God cannot lie or deceive. Therefore, he cannot deny Himself. This phrase, although contained in Scripture cannot be divinely inspired. It would be a contraction.

I thought that was pretty slick. The outcome was: I smiled.

 

[With_Questions]

There are sooooo many circular arguments here - same issues keep getting brought up - same non catholics keep repeating the same old lines, catholics keep giving the same old defences… neither seem to be able to hear or take on board what the other is saying (bit of a sweepng generality here, but hey its lunchtime, why not, you know what I mean). So I got to wondering, have any non catholics actually debated their points with a properly qualified catholic theologian, and if you did, what was the outcome?

I used to debate anyone and everyone when I was a newer Christian and knew a whole lot more than I know now.

Now that I know a whole lot less, I prefer asking silly questions to debating. Somehow, I have my doubts whether God gave us His Holy Written word to try to impress others on how smart we are.

 

[Among_Strangers]

I used to debate anyone and everyone when I was a newer Christian and knew a whole lot more than I know now.

Now that I know a whole lot less, I prefer asking silly questions to debating. Somehow, I have my doubts whether God gave us His Holy Written word to try to impress others on how smart we are.

Can I be your friend?

 

[ralphinal]

a_mirror_dimly is correct, usually both sides consider themselves the winner no matter what.

Steadfast, I either missed any times that you had said you were a Jesuit candidate or I forget it. Wow.

 

[Steadfast]

Jesuits*, go figure…

• = not all Jesuits, but the Jesuits as a whole.

I know you’re going to say you’ve known bunches but I have to ask, how many Jesuits have you actually known? Or have you been listening solely to your creepy trad friends on this one?

Jesuits are not the liberal church deconstructors you seem to think, especially after JPII’s crackdown.

In fact, I’d say that, in a great number of cases, the majority are far more orthodox than is the case with parish priests.

And I’ll tell you this:

If there is ANYONE who can persuade a person with argument, it’s a Jesuit (regardless of doctrinal bona fides).

 

[Steadfast]

a_mirror_dimly is correct, usually both sides consider themselves the winner no matter what.

Steadfast, I either missed any times that you had said you were a Jesuit candidate or I forget it. Wow.

Yes, I was a candidate almost right up until I got married.

I remain in contact with a few SJ’s to this day.

 

[ralphinal]

Yes, I was a candidate almost right up until I got married.

I remain in contact with a few SJ’s to this day.

Cool.