So you think Catholisim is wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dolphinlove
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Relativism is what it is called. The same old rants:

My church and faith is all good and so is yours.

Either God revealed absolute Truth or he did not?

What we have here is the classical case of an either/or dichotomy.
OK, just prove that God revealed the absolute Truth through Catholicism, and the argument will be settled once and for all!
 
Now I don’t understand.

Why should Jesus choose people at all to do work for him then? Forgiving sins for instance?

MJ
And here is our disagreement on the matter…you accept the gospel records as historical fact…I see them as statements of faith by the emerging faith community of proto-orthodoxy over and against all other forms of early Christianity.

To use a ā€œlabelā€, our paths don’t necessarily run parallel or cross…I am ā€œliberalā€ā€¦my assumption is you are ā€œconservativeā€ when it comes to religious history and biblical study…I am not…I find the writings of John Spong, Marcus Borg, John Dommic Crossan, Burton Mack, Eilene Pagels, Joan O’Grady, Bart Erhman, Robert Price to be much more compelling and ā€œtruthfulā€ to history than the 'faith affirming history" set forth by most conservative Christians. I see such histories set forth in the same vein as I view the multi-volume ā€œHistory of the Churchā€ published by the LDS…a very skewed and ā€œfaith affirmingā€ history which denies the validity of secular and ā€œliberalā€ historians.

Christianity as it exists today took centuries of internal struggles with the competing ā€œversionsā€ of Christianity that formed in the decades after the death of Jesus of Nazarethā€¦ā€œorthodoxyā€ finally won primacy. There was never one pristine early Christian church.šŸ™‚
 
And here is our disagreement on the matter…you accept the gospel records as historical fact…I see them as statements of faith by the emerging faith community of proto-orthodoxy over and against all other forms of early Christianity.

To use a ā€œlabelā€, our paths don’t necessarily run parallel or cross…I am ā€œliberalā€ā€¦my assumption is you are ā€œconservativeā€ when it comes to religious history and biblical study…I am not…I find the writings of John Spong, Marcus Borg, John Dommic Crossan, Burton Mack, Eilene Pagels, Joan O’Grady, Bart Erhman, Robert Price to be much more compelling and ā€œtruthfulā€ to history than the 'faith affirming history" set forth by most conservative Christians. I see such histories set forth in the same vein as I view the multi-volume ā€œHistory of the Churchā€ published by the LDS…a very skewed and ā€œfaith affirmingā€ history which denies the validity of secular and ā€œliberalā€ historians.

Christianity as it exists today took centuries of internal struggles with the competing ā€œversionsā€ of Christianity that formed in the decades after the death of Jesus of Nazarethā€¦ā€œorthodoxyā€ finally won primacy. There was never one pristine early Christian church.šŸ™‚
Im sorry you feel this way. 🤷

MJ
 
Are you looking for specifics? Or in general.

In general, far, far more right than wrong.

Jon
Love it! šŸ‘

I’m about to go on a major posting spree here… i might need that bunker that you used a while ago. 😃
 
Are you sure you’re the 1 true church? Because the Mormons would disagree with you they say they are the 1 true church. And they make the same apostolic claims you do, they also claim that Jesus Christ started their church so who’s right you, or them?
Moral Relativsim at its finest.

Try Joseph Smith for your interest in the starting of Mormonism.
 
OK, just prove that God revealed the absolute Truth through Catholicism, and the argument will be settled once and for all!
Just prove that God DIDNT reveal the Truth to the Catholic Church and the argument will be settled once and for all!!
 
Just prove that God DIDNT reveal the Truth to the Catholic Church and the argument will be settled once and for all!!
You can’t prove a negative. The burden of proof rests with those making the positive assertion - that God did reveal the Truth through Catholicism.
 
You can’t prove a negative. The burden of proof rests with those making the positive assertion - that God did reveal the Truth through Catholicism.
Christ instituted the Catholic Church.He is The Truth…
 
OK, just prove that God revealed the absolute Truth through Catholicism, and the argument will be settled once and for all!
How do you know God did not? Did God tell you? The HS reveal this to you?

And what is your basis for your belief?

It looks like you have already decided on the fork of the road leading to that the catholic claim is not true…so that nothing will convince you. 🤷
 
OK, just prove that God revealed the absolute Truth through Catholicism, and the argument will be settled once and for all!
I’d like to see you prove that you are not still Catholic…you can’t wash off the indelible mark on your soul you know.šŸ‘
 
How do you know God did not? Did God tell you? The HS reveal this to you?

And what is your basis for your belief?
I don’t know what God did or did not do. Do you? If so, how do you know?

The basis for my belief is simply reason.
 
I’d like to see you prove that you are not still Catholic…you can’t wash off the indelible mark on your soul you know.šŸ‘
I don’t know that I have any indelible mark - I see no evidence of such. Again, it’s just an assertion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top