Mendel is still considered to be the father of genetics and Darwin was not proved wrong. And evolution really isn’t about one species changing into another species. Fundamentally it is about increasing allele frequency and we first learned about genetics from Mendel.
I actually think Zorastrianism is almost as plausible as Judaism. But religion is not about plausibility.
I take it from this post that you’re unable to adress any of the issues he raised in his post. The post you made about Mendel and his relationship to the Catholic Church was simply wrong. Your posts about Copernicus, likewise, were wrong. Your knowledge of the Galileo affair is simplistic at best. It appears you shoot from the hip, throw out gross accusations, and fail to respond when they are disproven.
You would dispute the veracity of of archeological evidence consistent with OT names, places, and events, yet agree with the evidence regarding the “Cradle of Civilization” like the Sumerian culture.
Still another sweeping statement with absolutely nothing offered to back it up.
Not when you consider the context.
All gods require that the sacrifices made to them be eaten at least by the priests, if not also the whole company of the people, whether they be human sacrifices, animal sacrifices, or crop sacrifices, in order that the god may complete the action of the sacrifice in the persons of those who consume it.
Additionally Catholics claim some of the greatest minds in the world, St Augustine, St Jerome, Pope Gregory I, St. Thomas Acquinas, Pope Gregory XIII (Gregorian calendar) Pope Benedict XVI.
Did you even read what I quoted?
Mendel’s alleles were rejected because it conflicted with Darwin’s theory of pangenes, which was later proven wrong. Darwin was the darling of the PC crowd of his time. Secular Society, especially the rabid anti-Catholic sentiment in the US at that time, did not want to admit CC as an acceptable scientifc source.
Still waiting.
I’ve never heard someone invoke pagan gods to justify the Eucharist before. Interesting. So… you believe there is more than one god, or you believe that God likes people to emulate those that follow false gods?
:ehh:Our God sacrificed Himself for us, and (to show us that He is indeed God) requires that we eat Him (the Sacrifice), in order to complete the action of the sacrifice (in this case, salvation from sins) in the persons who consume Him.
I defer to some people when it could not be possible to expect that correction of their errors would result in a change in their behavior.
Could you translate that into English please?
No - instead, I think that the pagans had a partial (either instinctive or revealed) understanding of God, and were trying to worship gods that had certain attributes of God.
The RCC still is not nor should it be accepted as any kind of scientific source whatsoever.
Sometimes, when people make errors I just let them stay stuck. It’s not charitable but it makes me feel better.
I am a catholic and I’ve been through the same situation before, but to say that you have no time to pray is not true. You have to put in the effort of putting time aside to pray. Whether it is a few minutes before sleeping at night or while driving, you have to make the time to pray. It’s not that God don’t want you to be in the catholic religion, but it is us who don’t put in the effort. Pray even when it seems empty and dry, it’s a hurdle we have to go through. The guilt only increased because it’s true that what we are doing is wrong. I’ve learned to overcome it somewhat and is still trying to do so. This is what I believe, I am not trying to offend you in anyway.
So for you, unlike the rest of humanity, you’re implying that the Scripture 'God’s grace is sufficient … ’ doesn’t actually apply to you? That must make you rather special, huh? Paul teaches his great truth, that regardless of weakness, he knows from Our Lord that “My grace is sufficient for thee; for power is made perfect in infirmity” and that applies to all of us - but not to you? That’s quite odd, don’t you think?
Either that or you can’t justify your statement that the CC does not encourage and support thought and the sciences.
That is a very insightful perspective. It helps with my understanding of how the NT fulfills the OT, and how the OT prefigures the New.Not when you consider the context.
All gods require that the sacrifices made to them be eaten at least by the priests, if not also the whole company of the people, whether they be human sacrifices, animal sacrifices, or crop sacrifices, in order that the god may complete the action of the sacrifice in the persons of those who consume it.
Our God sacrificed Himself for us, and (to show us that He is indeed God) requires that we eat Him (the Sacrifice), in order to complete the action of the sacrifice (in this case, salvation from sins) in the persons who consume Him.
Well that’s debatable but we know for sure that we can not accept you as any kind Historical source whatsoever.
I will credit the RCC with some degree of openness regarding the Shroud of Turin investigation. And the current pope is at least open to the idea of common descent. But there are so many examples going the other way too. It took the RCC a very long time to finally admit their error regarding Galileo.