T
theAuthor
Guest
Adventistnomore, thanks for your kind words. Some kind words from Catholics mean everything to me at the moment. I need them to stay the course.
Jmcrae, I will indeed take your advice and make sure I know my prayers for the Sacrament of Reconciliation back to front to avoid any embarrasment. I am easily embarrased, so thanks for the tip!
Contarini, some good points there. However many Catholics have told me that Peter was the first Pope, the first Bishop of Rome, etc and we both agree he was not the first Bishop of Rome Nor was Rome necessarily the centre of early Chriatianity. That is my point, that if you dig a little bit, it is not so simple after all, and certainly not as simple as many Catholics believe. The word Pope certainly was not bandied about as many Catholics believe, in Peter’s day. Same with the authorship of the gospels. It is important because the whole Catholic faith relies on a few verses (Jesus talking to Peter, and 1 Peter 2), so a scholar who argued for a later authorship could also argue that such verses cannot be taken word for word, and thereby raise doubts as to the Biblical foundation to such doctrines as the primacy of Peter.
As for accepting theistic evolution, it undermines the Bible. Not because I am fundamentalist, but beacuse much of Geneis needs to be at least somehow literal for the rest of the Bible to “work.” I will start a new thread on that one, because it can be shown that if Genesis was not literal in some way, neither are many of Jesus’ words true. So the whole Bible hangs on it.
Techno, I will do as you say, and have done so before. Can you post a link for me of indulgences? ie What indulgences are granted for which acts?
Jmcrae, I will indeed take your advice and make sure I know my prayers for the Sacrament of Reconciliation back to front to avoid any embarrasment. I am easily embarrased, so thanks for the tip!
Contarini, some good points there. However many Catholics have told me that Peter was the first Pope, the first Bishop of Rome, etc and we both agree he was not the first Bishop of Rome Nor was Rome necessarily the centre of early Chriatianity. That is my point, that if you dig a little bit, it is not so simple after all, and certainly not as simple as many Catholics believe. The word Pope certainly was not bandied about as many Catholics believe, in Peter’s day. Same with the authorship of the gospels. It is important because the whole Catholic faith relies on a few verses (Jesus talking to Peter, and 1 Peter 2), so a scholar who argued for a later authorship could also argue that such verses cannot be taken word for word, and thereby raise doubts as to the Biblical foundation to such doctrines as the primacy of Peter.
As for accepting theistic evolution, it undermines the Bible. Not because I am fundamentalist, but beacuse much of Geneis needs to be at least somehow literal for the rest of the Bible to “work.” I will start a new thread on that one, because it can be shown that if Genesis was not literal in some way, neither are many of Jesus’ words true. So the whole Bible hangs on it.
Techno, I will do as you say, and have done so before. Can you post a link for me of indulgences? ie What indulgences are granted for which acts?