How Do You Respond To This Argument?

  • Thread starter Thread starter savedbygrace92
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
fpesce said:
Sorry, Theophorus, that may be your opinion, but I do not share your opinion. Unless you are trying to point out that the bible is more than just scientific in nature, but largly spiritual emphasis. I do believe every scientific claim in the bible.
Click to expand...
What I’m pointing out is that it is not a scientific text book nor should it be read as one.

To try and read Euclidean geometry into Sacred Scripture is to misinterpret it. The Bible contains truths for our salvation not necessarily Scientific ones.
 
Theophorus said:
What I’m pointing out is that it is not a scientific text book nor should it be read as one.

To try and read Euclidean geometry into Sacred Scripture is to misinterpret it. The Bible contains truths for our salvation not necessarily Scientific ones.
Click to expand...
Got it. 🙂
 
savedbygrace92 said:
So it’s pretty long and it made me think for a long time. I thought it was actually well-written and the author made some good points, but I don’t know how to respond to it. What are your guys’ thoughts?

The actual posting was too long to include in one huge post so I’ll post the rest of it afterwards.

Here it is:

Why I Think Christianity Is Flawed

Origina Sin

This is my biggest theological beef with Christianity and other religions that have original sin. This concept has been used as justification to murder children and infants, and used as justification for the Holocaust, yet most mainstream Christian denominations still practice it and believe in it- the idea that humans are born sinful beings. The idea that a newborn child is somehow sinful. What sin could a newborn baby possibly commit? Newborns are not yet moral beings, and I do not believe one can sin if you have no concept of right or wrong.
Click to expand...
I do not need to read the rest because the above concept is not what Catholicism teaches about sin, both the one-and-only Original Sin which as a “contracted state” is transmitted with human propagation *and *personal sins which are freely committed.

“Born sinful beings” refers to the false concept that our human nature was totally corrupted by Adam’s Original Sin. Original Sin is not a personal sin committed by babies. Original Sin is a contracted state.i.e., a deprivation of original holiness and justice. Baptism, which imparts the life of Christ’s grace, erases the state of Original Sin. However, the consequences for human nature remain.
 
Origina Sin
This is my biggest theological beef with Christianity and other religions that have original sin. This concept has been used as justification to murder children and infants, and used as justification for the Holocaust, yet most mainstream Christian denominations still practice it and believe in it- the idea that humans are born sinful beings. The idea that a newborn child is somehow sinful. What sin could a newborn baby possibly commit? Newborns are not yet moral beings, and I do not believe one can sin if you have no concept of right or wrong…
Click to expand...
The idea this statment confers, “concepts has been used as justification to murder children and infants,…”, is just plain disgusting and a lie straight from satan himself, but when you think about it, it’s almost laughable.

Here we have an accusation that Christians are this blood thirsty dispicable people that look to shed blood in the blink of an eye. “just give me a reason” type of attitude. Full of hate and condemnation.

But if you look at the facts, who loves? Who is it that consistantly fighting for the lives of children?

Who fights against abortion? Who fights against child sex trade trafficing? Who stands up for poor children? Who truly loves? CHRISTIANS!!!

Then again who fights to kill children through abortion? Who sells children into sex trade industry? Where is the outcry from non-christians?

When radical Muslims attack and kill christians soley because they are christians, where is the outcry?

When radical Hindus attack and kill children and families just because they are christian. Where is the outcry?

Yet, you are going to claim CHRISTIANS are hateful.

Tell me what are the works of radical Christians? Radical LOVE, that is the work of radical Christians.

No, their only purpose is to live for God, the Holy Father, Holy Jesus and the Holy Spirit through loving.

We teach give glory to God through radical love because that is our purpose.

Jesus teaches in John 13:

34 “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 “By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another.”

Please… the accusations made against christians are laughable!
 
fpesce said:
…

Please… the accusations made against christians are laughable!
Click to expand...
You might mean, more precisely, or more usefully, that "accusations against (Christianity, as I understand it, in my opinion) are laughable. Accusations against particular Christians, as we can see from the news, are all too common and too true. And we know from prison demographics that that population pretty much reflects the religious demographic on the “outside.” And, I might add, when such use of language as you display in this instance is seen by non Christians, their position may well be fortified, at least in their own minds.
 
savedbygrace92 said:
So it’s pretty long and it made me think for a long time. I thought it was actually well-written and the author made some good points, but I don’t know how to respond to it. What are your guys’ thoughts?

Why I Think Christianity Is Flawed …etc.
Click to expand...
The comments on here that recommend you breaking these up into different threads is a very useful one. How would you yourself go about repling to something of such length? As it stands, yes, some good points are made by the author you appear to be quoting or paraphrasing. But it is all tooo much to deal with as a single question. Good luck!
 
Where does this guy get his information? Hollywood? This is definitely the most idiotic thing I’ve read since that horrible anti-Catholic protestant site I crossed about a year ago. I stopped reading after the “War with Science” section. His arguments display a blinding amount of ignorance on both history and Christianity that its not even worth responding to. How do you respond to this argument? For starters, I suggest you start read up on basic apologetics and church history. The key is to know your faith from top to bottom, do not be afraid of controversial topics and familiarize yourself with the common misconceptions held by non-Catholics (and they are many) and how to answer them. Knowledge is on our side. 👍
 
Poof said:
Where does this guy get his information? This is definitely the most idiotic thing I’ve read since that horrible anti-Catholic protestant site I crossed a year ago. I stopped reading after the “War with Science” section. His arguments display a blinding amount of ignorance on both history and Christianity that its not even worth responding to. How do you respond to this argument? For starters, I suggest you start read up on basic apologetics and church history. The key is to know your faith from top to bottom, do not be afraid of controversial topics and familiarize yourself with the common misconceptions held by non-Catholics (and they are many) and how to answer them. Knowledge is on our side. 👍
Click to expand...
Actually, that is where it got interesting. For instance the statement about “ex-gay thereapy.” Dr. Spitzer, whose claims all that was founded on, just rescinded his own stand: npr.org/2012/05/21/153213796/spitzers-apology-changes-ex-gay-debate I hope everyone heard the NPR program on that event. And why would you recommend a sanitized version of Church history to anyone? Our history is not pretty, by any means. Who in fact on here is afraid of controversial topics? Since when does denial constitute good apologetics? And “our” side? Truth has sides???
 
Poof said:
Where does this guy get his information? Hollywood? This is definitely the most idiotic thing I’ve read … The key is to know your faith from top to bottom, do not be afraid of controversial topics and familiarize yourself with the common misconceptions held by non-Catholics (and they are many) and how to answer them. Knowledge is on our side. 👍
Click to expand...
Yes, but we must remember it may be easy for us to see because we are in the light and we see from the perspective of the light.

People who make these types of statements are living in darkness. They don’t have the same perspective we have because satan has put a veil over their eyes. They don’t even realize that fact because satan has successfully deceived them.

We need to be able to show our side of the argument without personally attacking the debater as not to alienate them. We can attack any statement or accusation with the real truth and the truth shall set us free.

But we have to keep in mind that the ultimate goal is to break through the veil and show them the truth. In that way we may win a soul to Christ. That is how love conquers all.
 
Gaber said:
You might mean, more precisely, or more usefully, that "accusations against (Christianity, as I understand it, in my opinion) are laughable. Accusations against particular Christians, as we can see from the news, are all too common and too true. And we know from prison demographics that that population pretty much reflects the religious demographic on the “outside.” And, I might add, when such use of language as you display in this instance is seen by non Christians, their position may well be fortified, at least in their own minds.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the english lesson. 🤷
 
Gaber said:
" And, I might add, when such use of language as you display in this instance is seen by non Christians, their position may well be fortified, at least in their own minds.
Click to expand...
Really? What language is that? The truth? The part about radical love of Christains? I am not afraid to speak the truth, nor am I ashamed of it.
 
fpesce said:
Really? What language is that?
Click to expand...
Uh… the usage I commented on in my post?
The truth?
Click to expand...
Which is?
The part about radical love of Christains?
Click to expand...
If it was radical love (do you know the root meaning of that word?) would you distinguish Christians? Or are those whom you consider to be Christians more the children of God than any of His others, or more deserving of His Love?
I am not afraid to speak the truth, nor am I ashamed of it.
Click to expand...
That is good to hear, because then you might alter/altar you language.
 
Gaber said:
Uh… the usage I commented on in my post?

Oh, you mean this comment, “Please… the accusations made against christians are laughable!” Is this to harsh a statement for you? While the statement,"This concept has been used as justification to murder children and infants, and used as justification for the Holocaust, yet most mainstream Christian denominations still practice it and believe in it- Should I candy coat my answers so as not to offend others? No, I don’t think so. Look at the way Jesus spoke to the Pharasies. He never candy coated His words. Although, you may be right in something. Instead of “laughable” I should have used “are lies straight out of the mouth of satan himself and only meant to decieve the truth”.
The truth
Which is?

The truth is Jesus, Him alone do I defend.

John 14:6
Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.

If it was radical love (do you know the root meaning of that word?)

Yes, I do. It’s in God’s word also:
1 John 4:18
There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love. 19 We love, because He first loved us. 20 If someone says, “I love God,” and hates his brother, he is a liar; for the one who does not love his brother whom he has seen, cannot love God whom he has not seen. 21 And this commandment we have from Him, that the one who loves God should love his brother also.

would you distinguish Christians?

I would distinguish Jesus:
John 5:24
“Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

Or are those whom you consider to be Christians more the children of God than any of His others, or more deserving of His Love?

John 3:16
“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. 17“For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. 18“He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19“This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20“For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21“But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.”

Whoever believes in Him and worships God in spirit and in truth.

John 1:12 But to all who believed him and accepted him, he gave the right to become children of God. 13 They are reborn—not with a physical birth resulting from human passion or plan, but a birth that comes from God

That is good to hear, because then you might alter/altar you language.

And what language is that? The one who fears hurting anyones feelings? Let them believe what they like without pointing to the truth. Let them live in darkness until the judgement day? Really, is that your idea of love?

Who has more love? The one who steps out of comfort zone in an effort to bring salvation to some one, or the one who says," Let them believe what they want. I don’t want to hurt any feelings.

2 Cor 7:8

For though I caused you sorrow by my letter, I do not regret it; though I did regret it—for I see that that letter caused you sorrow, though only for a while— 9 I now rejoice, not that you were made sorrowful, but that you were made sorrowful to the point of repentance; for you were made sorrowful according to the will of God, so that you might not suffer loss in anything through us. 10 For the sorrow that is according to the will of God produces a repentance without regret, leading to salvation, but the sorrow of the world produces death.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top