How can people believe Peter is the rock but still not be Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter catholic1seeks
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Did Jesus love his step father? His brothers and sister? Not sure I can agree with His following perfectly the 10 commandments = Marian doctrine.

The early did not have a pope for 400 years, then it did not function like the modern version. I suppose It would be unifying if it were biblical and historical, but if fails on both counts.
kaycee, please observe the Forum Rules. You are a guest of the Catholic Church here and in our house. Leading a person away from the Catholic Church is most unwelcome.
Forum Rules:
CONDUCT RULES
-Do not view the discussion area as a vehicle for single-mindedly promoting an agenda.

-Non-Catholics are welcome to participate but must be respectful of the faith of the Catholics participating on the board.

DISCUSSION FORUMS
Messages posted to threads should be on-topic. If you wish to discuss another topic, start a new thread.
Rather than attacking 5pint, please address the OP. Thank you. 👍
 
kaycee, please observe the Forum Rules. You are a guest of the Catholic Church here and in our house. Leading a person away from the Catholic Church is most unwelcome.
Rather than attacking 5pint, please address the OP. Thank you. 👍
Sorry, I was not attacking 5pint in any way. Guess that is i find major problem with the written conversation and emails. Its very hard to catch the writters specific intent and mood.
 
Did Jesus love his step father? His brothers and sister? Not sure I can agree with His following perfectly the 10 commandments = Marian doctrine.

The early did not have a pope for 400 years, then it did not function like the modern version. I suppose It would be unifying if it were biblical and historical, but if fails on both counts.

Yikes, It is a dreadful witness to protestants to hear the ridiculous 35,000 sect numbers. The same “source” lists well over 250 Catholic Churches. If they want to be taken seriously a little bit more truth in numbers would refreshing.

hmm, 2 Pet 1:20 is talking about the prophets own interpretation, not the readers interpretation. Peter is saying the prophecy is from God and the prophet was in no way interpreting this prophecy from God.

2 Pet 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture **came about **by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Why? It did not work too well for the Orthodox church. And before that id did not work at all for first 400 years. Jesus said He would send the Holy Spirit, is the Pope the Holy Spirit?
First of all… Since I’m guessing you subscribe to “Sola Scriptura” correct? In Scripture, does it not say that we are to imitate Christ? And did he not love BOTH his mother and brothers (cousins)? Therefore, if we are the adopted brothers of Christ, shouldn’t we love his mother, which in case is OUR mother?

2nd. Maybe you’re right that the RCC didn’t have a pope for 400 years, but that didn’t mean the office didn’t exist… Correct? In the beginning stages of the Reformation: Luther was the Pope of the Lutheran church… Calvin was the Pope of the Calvinists… Wesley was the Pope of the Methodists… and the list goes on and on.

Even if they didn’t rule as a Pope, their followers still followed the “interpretation” of scripture as thier leader saw fit. All protestant denominations had to develop over time… and are constantly changing. The office is biblical, AND historical… and that can be proven, so it does not fail on any account, except through protestant lenses.

The astounding # of protestant sects is no joke, and is a consensus that has been tallied by the World Christian Encyclopedia by Barrett, Kurian, Johnson (Oxford Univ Press, 2nd edition, 2001). From World Christian excyclopedia dealing with the 242 Catholic “denominations” around the world.

"However, since virtually all of these western and smaller eastern rites are in union with the Pope (I am not sure of some of them), there is actually one Catholic Church, not 242 churches or denominations. Based on the encyclopedia’s own definition of “denomination” the editors appear to be separating and counting by country which is how you get to 242 (or 238 countries plus 4) “denominations” of Roman Catholics.
The Catholic Church in Canada is not a different “denomination” from the Catholic Church in the U.S., which is not a different Catholic Church from the one in England, etc. If you search the available “World Christian Database” online, there is indeed one Catholic Church in the U.S.A., (see also Barrett, Encyclopedia, volume 1, page 783 for the U.S.A.) and in the world there are indeed 238 “Roman Catholic” denominations (for exactly 238 countries), i.e. one Catholic Church for each country.

Here’s the facts:
www.bringyou.to/apologetics/a106.htm

As my wife pointed out to me… The Catholic church here in our home town will be using the same missal (service book) as the one in San Diego, CA as well as in Canada. How’s that for unity?
As opposed to protestant ministers interpreting and composing sermons, and picking out hymns for the congregation to sing, every sunday. The pastor of the Presbyterian church here in town will teach something completely different than the one a couple of miles away! 🤷
 
Did Jesus love his step father? His brothers and sister? Not sure I can agree with His following perfectly the 10 commandments = Marian doctrine.

The early did not have a pope for 400 years, then it did not function like the modern version. I suppose It would be unifying if it were biblical and historical, but if fails on both counts.

Yikes, It is a dreadful witness to protestants to hear the ridiculous 35,000 sect numbers. The same “source” lists well over 250 Catholic Churches. If they want to be taken seriously a little bit more truth in numbers would refreshing.

hmm, 2 Pet 1:20 is talking about the prophets own interpretation, not the readers interpretation. Peter is saying the prophecy is from God and the prophet was in no way interpreting this prophecy from God.

2 Pet 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture **came about **by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Why? It did not work too well for the Orthodox church. And before that id did not work at all for first 400 years. Jesus said He would send the Holy Spirit, is the Pope the Holy Spirit?
As for 2 Pet 1:20… You have to look at ALL the translations for that verse today…

There are only 2 versions of the bible that I can find that support your claim that 2 Pet 1:20 talks about the Prophet’s own interpretation. These are the NLT (New Living Translation) and the NIV (New International Version).

I have found 11 other versions of Scripture that support 2 Pet 1:20 as talking about “private interpretation”. These versions are composed of:
  1. DR (Douay-Rheims)
  2. KJV (King James Version)
  3. NKJV (New King James Version)
  4. ESV (English Standard Version)
  5. NASB (New American Standard Bible)
  6. RSV (Revised Standard Version)
  7. ASV (American Standard Version)
  8. YLT (Young’s Literal Translation)
  9. DBY (Darby Translation)
  10. WEB (Webster’s Bible)
  11. HNV (Hebrew Names Version)
By majority vote, all of these versions of Holy Scripture say that the correct translation is “private” and not “prophet” in 2 Pet 1:20. As for the Orthodox Church problem, I’m waiting for someone else to jump in here, b/c I don’t know what you’re specifically talking about.:ehh:
 
The early did not have a pope for 400 years, then it did not function like the modern version. I suppose It would be unifying if it were biblical and historical, but if fails on both counts.
Please do not come onto a Catholic site as a non-catholic and tell us that we did not have any Popes until … Whenever. This has been disproven so many times here that it surprises me to keep seeing it pop up.
As to your statement regarding it not functioning then as it does now, I will readily agree. Many things were different 1900 years ago than they are now.
Yikes, It is a dreadful witness to protestants to hear the ridiculous 35,000 sect numbers. The same “source” lists well over 250 Catholic Churches. If they want to be taken seriously a little bit more truth in numbers would refreshing.
While I agree that this 35,000 number is inflated due to the way in which the survey was conducted, no one can deny that the number of Protestant Churches is large and getting larger. Even if the true number is one tenth of this, it is too large to allow any credance to be given the notion of Sola Scriptura.
hmm, 2 Pet 1:20 is talking about the prophets own interpretation, not the readers interpretation. Peter is saying the prophecy is from God and the prophet was in no way interpreting this prophecy from God.
2 Pet 20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture **came about **by the prophet’s own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.
Why? It did not work too well for the Orthodox church. And before that id did not work at all for first 400 years. Jesus said He would send the Holy Spirit, is the Pope the Holy Spirit?
Let us look at the “First 400 years of the Church”, when you say we had no Pope, and then at the first 500 years of Protestantism.
Between Pentacost (ca 33) and the year 400 the Early church Fathers;
  1. Spread the Gospel throughout the known world,
  2. Established Churches under the authority of Bishops,
  3. Met in various councils to discuss and confirm each other in the Truth of Christ’s Church
  4. Wrote, reviewed, assembled and published the authoritative list of the Books of the Canon of Scripture.
  5. Successfully defended Christ’s truth against numerous heresies
  6. Survived and Prospered in the face of almost continious persecution.
All of the Above resulted in a Single, Unified, Authoritative, Spirit Guided, Christ Protected Church headed on Earth By the Successor of Peter. Those learned men within the Church who disagreed with certain aspects of the faith, spoke their minds and debated with each other, but submitted their personal opinions to the Authority of Christ’s Church.

Contrast that to the first 500 years of the Protestant reformation.
  1. Luther began by assaulting the Bible. Removing Entire Books and Portions of others that had been held as sacred for 1000 years by the Church.
  2. Sola Scriptura - Tore the Holy Scriptures away from the Rock and foundation of the Church which had protected it and placed it in the hands of people who were ill trained to properly understand an interpret it.
  3. The Founding Fathers of the “Reformation” soon fell into disputes, and instead of meeting and formulating a united, consistant teaching to combat the supposed “Corrupt Catholic Church”, they seperated and fought among themselves.
  4. Without the humility to submit to the Church’s legitimate authority individual inerpretation of scripture results in continual strife within the Protestant communities.
  5. Since temporal authority is now cast off, there is no “Tradition” to measure interpretation against. No “Church” to take disputes to as Christ Commanded.
The result is that today, there are easily hundreds, if not thousands of independant Christian Churches all claiming the same, truncated bible, and claiming the inerancy of Scripture and adhering to Sola Scriptura yet each with a different doctrine, even contradictory doctines and yet all claim to be Spirit led.

Conclusion:
Years 33 - 400: Christ’s One Holy and Apostolic Church developed in Grace, Unity, Authority and Organization led by the Vicar os Christ and Successor to Peter.
Years 1530 - Present : Protestantism has developed into fractured, disunited, unorganized, competing sects that seem united only by their dislike and distrust of Catholics. They are led by no one because they cannot submit to any authority except their own personal interpretation.

Peace
James
 
Let us look at the “First 400 years of the Church”, when you say we had no Pope, and then at the first 500 years of Protestantism.
Between Pentacost (ca 33) and the year 400 the Early church Fathers;
  1. Spread the Gospel throughout the known world,
  2. Established Churches under the authority of Bishops,
  3. Met in various councils to discuss and confirm each other in the Truth of Christ’s Church
  4. Wrote, reviewed, assembled and published the authoritative list of the Books of the Canon of Scripture.
  5. Successfully defended Christ’s truth against numerous heresies
  6. Survived and Prospered in the face of almost continious persecution.
All of the Above resulted in a Single, Unified, Authoritative, Spirit Guided, Christ Protected Church headed on Earth By the Successor of Peter. Those learned men within the Church who disagreed with certain aspects of the faith, spoke their minds and debated with each other, but submitted their personal opinions to the Authority of Christ’s Church.

Contrast that to the first 500 years of the Protestant reformation.
  1. Luther began by assaulting the Bible. Removing Entire Books and Portions of others that had been held as sacred for 1000 years by the Church.
  2. Sola Scriptura - Tore the Holy Scriptures away from the Rock and foundation of the Church which had protected it and placed it in the hands of people who were ill trained to properly understand an interpret it.
  3. The Founding Fathers of the “Reformation” soon fell into disputes, and instead of meeting and formulating a united, consistant teaching to combat the supposed “Corrupt Catholic Church”, they seperated and fought among themselves.
  4. Without the humility to submit to the Church’s legitimate authority individual inerpretation of scripture results in continual strife within the Protestant communities.
  5. Since temporal authority is now cast off, there is no “Tradition” to measure interpretation against. No “Church” to take disputes to as Christ Commanded.
Conclusion:
Years 33 - 400: Christ’s One Holy and Apostolic Church developed in Grace, Unity, Authority and Organization led by the Vicar os Christ and Successor to Peter.
Years 1530 - Present : Protestantism has developed into fractured, disunited, unorganized, competing sects that seem united only by their dislike and distrust of Catholics. They are led by no one because they cannot submit to any authority except their own personal interpretation.

Peace
James
WOW. 👍
 
Ditto for me. That is exactly what I was thinking as I was reading it. Very simply profound!

JRKH, this is the most perfect sentence. 5) Since temporal authority is now cast off, there is no “Tradition” to measure interpretation against. No “Church” to take disputes to as Christ Commanded.

Thank you JRKH.
 
5pintlutheran,

I think you should offer to teach the RCIA class at your local Catholic parish in 2009.

I am grinning from cheek to cheek reading your response to Kaycee.

EXCELLENT!!!

Would you be willing to e-mail my siblings for me? Are you for hire? 😃 😉
 
5pintlutheran,

I think you should offer to teach the RCIA class at your local Catholic parish in 2009.

I am grinning from cheek to cheek reading your response to Kaycee.

EXCELLENT!!!

Would you be willing to e-mail my siblings for me? Are you for hire? 😃 😉
Right, but you have to BE Catholic to teach Catholic,lol, and I’m enlisting in the Navy next month. Besides, I still have much to study and learn. Yeah, I’ll probably be enrolling in RCIA next year to see if the Lord wants me to be Catholic or not. 👍
 
Right, but you have to BE Catholic to teach Catholic,lol, and I’m enlisting in the Navy next month. Besides, I still have much to study and learn. Yeah, I’ll probably be enrolling in RCIA next year to see if the Lord wants me to be Catholic or not. 👍
OK. Sounds like a plan. Just don’t be like me: Catholic for 25 years in my heart, mind and soul before making it legal.
 
OK. Sounds like a plan. Just don’t be like me: Catholic for 25 years in my heart, mind and soul before making it legal.
OK. I Promise.👍

It can be a help or hiderance if you have Protestant parents and friends, who can’t seem to get the mud out of their eye.
I’ve only been investigating the faith without “protestant lenses” for about 6 months, so even though I know some of the dogmas of Catholicism, I’m just starting to learn them all again.:newidea:
 
OK. I Promise.👍

It can be a help or hiderance if you have Protestant parents and friends, who can’t seem to get the mud out of their eye.
I’ve only been investigating the faith without “protestant lenses” for about 6 months, so even though I know some of the dogmas of Catholicism, I’m just starting to learn them all again.:newidea:
Hate to say it, but you’re probably way ahead of a lot of us ‘cradles!’ 😃 But then again, it’s a journey.
 
OK. I Promise.👍

It can be a help or hiderance if you have Protestant parents and friends, who can’t seem to get the mud out of their eye.
I’ve only been investigating the faith without “protestant lenses” for about 6 months, so even though I know some of the dogmas of Catholicism, I’m just starting to learn them all again.:newidea:
OK. So 6 months and 25 years are two different things! For some, it takes months. For others it is decades. The questions are large and they involve your eternal destiny.

Do whatcha gotta do.
 
First of all… Since I’m guessing you subscribe to “Sola Scriptura” correct? In Scripture, does it not say that we are to imitate Christ? And did he not love BOTH his mother and brothers (cousins)? Therefore, if we are the adopted brothers of Christ, shouldn’t we love his mother, which in case is OUR mother?
Sorry, but I think theology based on assigning to God imperfect human emotion gets everyone into trouble. Theology based on what is fitting ends up the same way. Creating what we would like to see happen in theology is bad.
2nd. Maybe you’re right that the RCC didn’t have a pope for 400 years, but that didn’t mean the office didn’t exist… Correct?
Only to the ultramontane party of RCC.

You might be interested in what a former priest historian of the RCC found close to the time of the Pope declaring a Marian doctrine had to say.
pravoslavieto.com/books/papacy_abatt_guette.htm
The Catholic Church in Canada is not a different s. “denomination” from the Catholic Church in the U.S., which is not a different Catholic Church from the one in England, etc. If you search the available “World Christian Database” online, there is indeed one Catholic Church in the U.S.A., (see also Barrett, Encyclopedia, volume 1, page 783 for the U.S.A.) and in the world there are indeed 238 “Roman Catholic” denominations (for exactly 238 countries), i.e. one Catholic Church for each country.
I dont think Phil Vaz is telling the whole story. Only the parts he likes.

it is clear that (Barret) he does not think of these as major distinctions; for that is something he reserves for another category. Barrett breaks down each of these traditions into smaller units **that might have significant differences (what he calls “major ecclesiastical traditions,” and what we might normally call a true denomination) **Referring again to our seven major ecclesiastical “blocs” (mentioned above, but this time in reverse order): For (1) **Catholic (Non-Roman), there are four traditions, **including Catholic Apostolic, Reformed Catholic, Old Catholic, and Conservative Catholic; for (2) Marginal Protestants, there are six traditions; for (3) Anglican, there are six traditions; for (4) Non-White Indigenous, which encompasses third-world peoples (among whom can be found traces of Christianity mixed with the major tenets of their indigenous pagan religions), there are twenty traditions, including a branch of Reformed Catholic and a branch of Conservative Catholic; for (5) Orthodox, there are nineteen traditions; for (6) Protestant, there are twenty-one traditions; and for (7) Roman Catholic, there are sixteen traditions, including Latin-rite local, Latin-rite catholic, Latin/Eastern-rite local, Latin/Eastern-rite catholic, Syro-Malabarese, Ukrainian, Romanian, Maronite, Melkite, Chaldean, Ruthenian, Hungarian, plural Oriental rites, Syro-Malankarese, Slovak, and Coptic. It is important to note here that Barrett places these sixteen Roman Catholic traditions (i.e., true denominations) on the very same level as the twenty-one Protestant traditions (i.e., true denominations). In other words, the true count of real denominations within Protestantism is twenty-one, whereas the true count of real denominations within Roman Catholic is sixteen. Combined with the other major ecclesiastical blocs, that puts the total number of actual denominations in the world at ninety-two—obviously nowhere near the 23,000 or 25,000 figure that Roman Catholic apologists constantly assert—and that figure of ninety-two denominations includes the sixteen denominations of Roman Catholicism
ntrmin.org/30000denominations.htm

I think its quite dishonest to say that 1500 independent Southern baptist churches are counted as 1500 denominations when in reality the vast majority them have identical doctrine! Don’t you?
As my wife pointed out to me… The Catholic church here in our home town will be using the same missal (service book) as the one in San Diego, CA as well as in Canada. How’s that for unity?
As opposed to protestant ministers interpreting and composing sermons, and picking out hymns for the congregation to sing, every sunday. The pastor of the Presbyterian church here in town will teach something completely different than the one a couple of miles away! 🤷
Guess I am not sure why lockstep unity is preferred. It certainly is not achievable until the Lord returns

St. Augustine says: In essentials unity, In doubtful things liberty,
But in all things love. This is certainly a tacit admission by Augustine that there WAS NOT lockstep unity in all things.
 
Sorry, but I think theology based on assigning to God imperfect human emotion gets everyone into trouble. Theology based on what is fitting ends up the same way. Creating what we would like to see happen in theology is bad.

Only to the ultramontane party of RCC.

You might be interested in what a former priest historian of the RCC found close to the time of the Pope declaring a Marian doctrine had to say.
pravoslavieto.com/books/papacy_abatt_guette.htm

I dont think Phil Vaz is telling the whole story. Only the parts he likes.

it is clear that (Barret) he does not think of these as major distinctions; for that is something he reserves for another category. Barrett breaks down each of these traditions into smaller units **that might have significant differences (what he calls “major ecclesiastical traditions,” and what we might normally call a true denomination) **Referring again to our seven major ecclesiastical “blocs” (mentioned above, but this time in reverse order): For (1) **Catholic (Non-Roman), there are four traditions, **including Catholic Apostolic, Reformed Catholic, Old Catholic, and Conservative Catholic; for (2) Marginal Protestants, there are six traditions; for (3) Anglican, there are six traditions; for (4) Non-White Indigenous, which encompasses third-world peoples (among whom can be found traces of Christianity mixed with the major tenets of their indigenous pagan religions), there are twenty traditions, including a branch of Reformed Catholic and a branch of Conservative Catholic; for (5) Orthodox, there are nineteen traditions; for (6) Protestant, there are twenty-one traditions; and for (7) Roman Catholic, there are sixteen traditions, including Latin-rite local, Latin-rite catholic, Latin/Eastern-rite local, Latin/Eastern-rite catholic, Syro-Malabarese, Ukrainian, Romanian, Maronite, Melkite, Chaldean, Ruthenian, Hungarian, plural Oriental rites, Syro-Malankarese, Slovak, and Coptic. It is important to note here that Barrett places these sixteen Roman Catholic traditions (i.e., true denominations) on the very same level as the twenty-one Protestant traditions (i.e., true denominations). In other words, the true count of real denominations within Protestantism is twenty-one, whereas the true count of real denominations within Roman Catholic is sixteen. Combined with the other major ecclesiastical blocs, that puts the total number of actual denominations in the world at ninety-two—obviously nowhere near the 23,000 or 25,000 figure that Roman Catholic apologists constantly assert—and that figure of ninety-two denominations includes the sixteen denominations of Roman Catholicism
ntrmin.org/30000denominations.htm

I think its quite dishonest to say that 1500 independent Southern baptist churches are counted as 1500 denominations when in reality the vast majority them have identical doctrine! Don’t you?

Guess I am not sure why lockstep unity is preferred. It certainly is not achievable until the Lord returns

St. Augustine says: In essentials unity, In doubtful things liberty,
But in all things love. This is certainly a tacit admission by Augustine that there WAS NOT lockstep unity in all things.
Ah, “Dr” Eric Svendsen is the one who wrote that article on the link. He’s not even a real scholar! "Dr."James White, who is on the anti-Catholic train as well, is lacking in the scholar dept. as well! Even though he’s an accomplished debater, I’ll give him that.

Many things have been brought up on how “Scholarly” these guys really are, and what their educational background really says…

catholic-legate.com/articles/heos-drsham.html

I’m not fond of “mud-slinging” scholars, and take what they say with a huge grain of salt. Svendsen, as well as White both are making money by belittling anyone who is not of the Reformed faith and who is not on the “anti-Catholic” bandwagon. Even White’s sister saw the rage in his eyes, and converted to Catholicism.🤷
 
You might be interested in what a former priest historian of the RCC found close to the time of the Pope declaring a Marian doctrine had to say.
pravoslavieto.com/books/papacy_abatt_guette.htm
Abbé Guettée is not a Church Father. There were many priest heretics then and continue through today.

Arius,was presbyter of the church at Alexandria. The Arian heresy was named for him. The Arian heresy denies that the Son is of one essence, nature, or substance with God; He is not consubstantial (homoousios) with the Father, and therefore not like Him, or equal in dignity, or co-eternal, or within the real sphere of Deity.
Guess I am not sure why lockstep unity is preferred. It certainly is not achievable until the Lord returns.
The CC and Jesus disagree with you on this, for Jesus promised to send the Advocate so the gates of hell would not prevail.
St. Augustine says: In essentials unity, In doubtful things liberty,
But in all things love. This is certainly a tacit admission by Augustine that there WAS NOT lockstep unity in all things.
Not sure what you mean by “lockstep,” but unity is what Christ wanted
John 17:22-23***
22"The glory which You have given Me I have given to them, that they may be one***, just as We are one;
23I in them and You in Me, that they may be perfected in unity, so that the world may know that You sent Me, and (BA)loved them, even as You have loved Me.

Divisions in the Church 1 Corinthians 10:10-13
  • 10I appeal to you, brothers, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree with one another so that there may be no divisions among you and that you may be perfectly united in mind and thought. 11My brothers, some from Chloe’s household have informed me that there are quarrels among you. 12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas[a]”; still another, “I follow Christ.”
    13Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized into** the name of Paul? **
I think you are confusing TEACHING with individual opinions. And certainly there must be unity in Teaching.*
 
Sorry, but I think theology based on assigning to God imperfect human emotion gets everyone into trouble. Theology based on what is fitting ends up the same way. Creating what we would like to see happen in theology is bad.

Only to the ultramontane party of RCC.

You might be interested in what a former priest historian of the RCC found close to the time of the Pope declaring a Marian doctrine had to say.
pravoslavieto.com/books/papacy_abatt_guette.htm
Thanks for that link, kaycee; I’ll definitely be setting aside time to work through the entire writing. Thanks again.
 
Ah, “Dr” Eric Svendsen is the one who wrote that article on the link. He’s not even a real scholar! "Dr."James White, who is on the anti-Catholic train as well, is lacking in the scholar dept. as well! Even though he’s an accomplished debater, I’ll give him that.

Many things have been brought up on how “Scholarly” these guys really are, and what their educational background really says…

catholic-legate.com/articles/heos-drsham.html

I’m not fond of “mud-slinging” scholars, and take what they say with a huge grain of salt. Svendsen, as well as White both are making money by belittling anyone who is not of the Reformed faith and who is not on the “anti-Catholic” bandwagon. Even White’s sister saw the rage in his eyes, and converted to Catholicism.🤷
A person would do well to use reputable scholars if he/she would like credibility. 👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top