T
TheDefaultMan
Guest
3 days ago, I made a topic called “I’m leaving Catholicism” because I wanted to outline my philosophical objections to the Church’s teaching on the Trinity. I didn’t think there would be so many who would view it and who would comment on it, and I am grateful to everyone who participated in the discussions. More specifically, I would like to thank @Theban, @OrbisNonSufficit, @Wesrock, and many others who charitably engaged with my arguments. I did not think that, at the end of the day their counter-arguments were successful. Nevertheless I must give credit where credit is due.
I will no longer comment or respond to any posts as I have been doing so for 3 days straight. It will still be left open, and anyone is free to respond to what I’ve said already.
My thoughts are that
A ) I do not think that, at the end of the day, the counter-arguments succeeded. Most of the counter-arguments hinged on the concept of relational distinctions which I argued, if real, entails an ontological distinction, which could not exist in an Absolutely Simple God. There were also counter-arguments that explored very strange notions that I’ve never heard before. I’ve never seen responses and counter-arguments so dissimilar. It was fascinating.
B ) I found it very odd that more than half of the people who responded did so by appealing to Divine Revelation (which is odd because I made it clear that I rejected it). This saddened me more than anything else because, usually, Catholics are quick to say that their faith does not contradict reason. And yet they are dangerously close, in my view, to the protestant view known as “presuppositionalism”, which presupposes that Divine Revelation is true when arguing against skeptics. This is notoriously fallacious, and the Church itself seems to be harsh in its condemnation against it.
and C ) I think both sides, my side and the side of some (but not most) of the apologists arguing against me, should have been more charitable. On my end, I was too quick to be rude and cold when presenting my arguments and my counter-arguments. I should’ve made it more clear that I do not hate the Church or hate Catholics, and that I have nothing but respect for what the catholic Church has done. On their end, there have been many people who have claimed that I was somehow arrogant for trying to point out contradictions in God, stating that I just don’t understand him and that human reason is just feeble. Not only does this, as I have already mentioned, move dangerously close towards presuppostionalism, it is also an insult to thousands of years of the Catholic intellectual tradition, which has spent years of intellectual effort to making sense of God and pointing out logical contradictions in heresies.
I hope everyone has a good day, and I hope we could all learn something from my topic thread.
I will no longer comment or respond to any posts as I have been doing so for 3 days straight. It will still be left open, and anyone is free to respond to what I’ve said already.
My thoughts are that
A ) I do not think that, at the end of the day, the counter-arguments succeeded. Most of the counter-arguments hinged on the concept of relational distinctions which I argued, if real, entails an ontological distinction, which could not exist in an Absolutely Simple God. There were also counter-arguments that explored very strange notions that I’ve never heard before. I’ve never seen responses and counter-arguments so dissimilar. It was fascinating.
B ) I found it very odd that more than half of the people who responded did so by appealing to Divine Revelation (which is odd because I made it clear that I rejected it). This saddened me more than anything else because, usually, Catholics are quick to say that their faith does not contradict reason. And yet they are dangerously close, in my view, to the protestant view known as “presuppositionalism”, which presupposes that Divine Revelation is true when arguing against skeptics. This is notoriously fallacious, and the Church itself seems to be harsh in its condemnation against it.
and C ) I think both sides, my side and the side of some (but not most) of the apologists arguing against me, should have been more charitable. On my end, I was too quick to be rude and cold when presenting my arguments and my counter-arguments. I should’ve made it more clear that I do not hate the Church or hate Catholics, and that I have nothing but respect for what the catholic Church has done. On their end, there have been many people who have claimed that I was somehow arrogant for trying to point out contradictions in God, stating that I just don’t understand him and that human reason is just feeble. Not only does this, as I have already mentioned, move dangerously close towards presuppostionalism, it is also an insult to thousands of years of the Catholic intellectual tradition, which has spent years of intellectual effort to making sense of God and pointing out logical contradictions in heresies.
I hope everyone has a good day, and I hope we could all learn something from my topic thread.
Last edited by a moderator:
