WHY are you NOT a Catholic?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PJM
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
MountCarmel said:
Whether or not Luther’s mental state was also influenced by demonic forces is something else to ponder upon, since a ‘chaotic and distressed mind’ is less likely to be bound by traditional constraints/restraints/considerations of ‘rational and logical’ thinking. It seems rather unlikely that God would have such a ‘tormented’ person ‘oversee’ a remodelling or overturning of the Church that He had first authorised - let alone, as a result open the flood-gates to so many ‘variants’ of that church - some 40,000 different types and growing in number it is claimed.
Click to expand...
You realize that your post responded to virtually nothing I wrote. Right?
I don’t know how we got off into his mental state, but your attempt at causation here ( as you alone know what God was like or unlikely to do?) is weak at best. And using the silly 40,000 number doesn’t help.
Luther has nothing to do with any group other than the Evangelical Catholics who took the slur Lutheran an made it their own. Zwingli, the Anabaptists, Calvin, and their many groupings are their own movements. But if that is the argument, well off topic, I might add , you want to make , it can rightly be said that each and every one of those 40,000 are splinters off of the Roman Catholic Church, whose corruption made the Reformation possible, and in the view of many, necessary.
Perhaps we should look into the psychological health of Leo X and Johann Eck.
 
Last edited:
I’m not a Prostestant, nor even a Christian, but I will give my reasons.

The Catholic Church fails to live up to many of its claims. First and foremost, its claim of indefectability, it simply isn’t the indefectable ‘body of Christ’ it claims to be; quite a few changes in its morals and dogmas and the like have occurred, and therefore the claim falls. Secondly, the perpetuity of the papal office is outright false, for it to be true there should be no breaks whatsoever, if the papacy was essential then any pope dying without an immediate successor is akin to a body without a head i.e. fatal; but yet, the church functions normally when a pope dies. Immortality of the pope is not necessary for the office to be perpetual, the pope appointing his successor would have fulfilled this claim, the successor should never have been elected by his lessers (laymen don’t ordain priests, nor do priests ordain bishops).

Another issue is that of the Trinity and Incarnation. I understand, that using our reason alone, we could only know about God in general, and not in detail; but how could doctrines which blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God in general be considered valid details about God? Not only that, there is no way to distinguish between a true Prophet and a false prophet in Catholicism; the good life and such are not necessary for prophecy according to the church’s theologians.
 
Last edited:
SalamKhan said:
Another issue is that of the Trinity and Incarnation. I understand, that using our reason alone, we could only know about God in general, and not in detail; but how could doctrines which blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God in general be considered valid details about God?
Click to expand...
I’m not Catholic, but this particular comment involves all of Christianity. Please explain why you believe that the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, both rather clearly spoken about in scripture, and affirmed by the early councils, “blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God”?
 
@JonNC You missed the point and the context of what I wrote. What we know about Allah in general, that He is the necessary existent, without beginning and without end, that He is unlike contingent things, that He is self subsistent, that He is one, that He is living, knowing, powerful, willing, etc. can all be known by reason alone. But, what we know about Allah in detail, that He is seeing, hearing, speaking, that He rewards goodness and punishes evil, etc. this cannot be known by reason alone regardless of if they are not impossibilities, and since these are unseen matters then we can only accept them with certainty from authority; that is, a trustworthy teacher.

And yet, Christians believe in the Trinity and Incarnation, both of which blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God in general.
 
SalamKhan said:
And yet, Christians believe in the Trinity and Incarnation, both of which blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God in general.
Click to expand...
That was an eloquent restating of your first post, but it doesn’t answer the question. Please explain why you believe that the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation, both rather clearly spoken about in scripture, and affirmed by the early councils, “blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God”?
 
And once again you have missed the point (or perhaps you need to rephrase your question?). I had just stated that what is necessarily known about God in general can be known from reason alone. If a supposed revelation teaches doctrines in which details about God clearly are in conflict with what is known about God in general, then the supposed revelation cannot be true. What you call scriptures, I’m not convinced of their authenticity (of being ascribed to their purported writers), and I don’t accept the authority of the councils, because I’m not Christian.
 
Last edited:
SalamKhan said:
And once again you have missed the point (or perhaps you need to rephrase your question?). I had just stated that what is necessarily known about God in general can be known from reason alone. If a supposed revelation teaches doctrines in which details about God clearly are in conflict with what is known about God in general, then the supposed revelation cannot be true.
Click to expand...
The doctrine of the Trinity and of the Incarnation are known. Scripture first predicts it, then affirms it. Following, the Church in council declares what is known.
What you call scriptures, I’m not convinced of their authenticity (of being ascribed to their purported writers), and I don’t accept the authority of the councils, because I’m not Christian.
Click to expand...
That’s fine. I’m not Muslim, so I certainly don’t accept your teachings either. Mohammed is a false prophet. But you made a statement, asked a question. There’s your answer.
 
My friend, thank you for posting in reply to my OP’s question.

The NEW space restrictions are woefully inadequate for serious apologetics; more so when multiple concerns are expressed

May I ask WHAT brings you to CAF?

WHAT precisely has the RCC changed on Her Morals Teaching?

And exactly WHAT Dogma has She Changed as you charge? As a Catholic-catechist,

I am unaware of either being the case.

As to the perpetuity of the papal office being “outright false” …on what specific calm do you ground this claim?

I’ve been teaching, sharing, explaining and defending when necessary my Catholic Faith for nearly 30 years. In that time I have never heard of the charge that the RCC is “indefectible”; indeed I find the charge to be a bit strange. After all we are some 2,000 years old and continuing despite near constant attacks of one sort of another, both from within Judas to our present challenges, and from without. Islam for example

Islam dates from 610AD [“AD” standing for After [Christ] Death

Here is the List of ALL Popes & their dates of service:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12272b.htm

& Liber Pontificalis [the history of the Popes]

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09224a.htm

Tthere is another issue here and that is the Bishops, and the Catholic Magisterium. The Pope is considered to be “the first Bishop among ‘equals‘ ” as was Peter:

Eph. 2: 19-21 “So then you are no longer strangers and sojourners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure is joined together and grows into a holy temple in the Lord” & Mt 18: 18 where Christ extends the authority of the other Apostles: Mt 15:18-19, Mt 18:18 And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it” I will give YOU the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." …Matt.18:18 Truly, I say YOU whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven [READ verses 1-17 also]

Reply continues on next post
 
REPLY Cont.

As you point out the Church does not simply fold and disappear when ANY Pope dies. The Bishops take over Her governance in the interim, as was anticipated and planed for.

The MAGISTERIUM & Tradition

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/15006b.htm

When a Pope dies the RCC is A Church without The head; NOT “a head” as you seem to think.

Is there not a head Iman? What happens when he dies?

The RCC is Organic & Pragmatic. There was as ought to be expected an evolution of thought on how the new-pope was to be named.

http://www.cuf.org/2002/11/pillar-a...llibility-magisterium-of-the-catholic-church/

I have seen other list which do show some short periods without a Pope. I tend to accept the unbroken list of the Catholic encyclopedia as it is OUR history, and therefore the records are reasonably more accurate.

Also you miss understand the term “immediate”; in our understanding it means not “right away”; but when duly elected or appointed.

PLEASE SEE NEXT REPLY
 
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS REPLY

Another issue is that of the Trinity and Incarnation. I understand, that using our reason alone, we could only know about God in general, and not in detail; but how could doctrines which blatantly conflict with what is necessarily known about God in general be considered valid details about God? Not only that, there is no way to distinguish between a true Prophet and a false prophet in Catholicism; the good life and such are not necessary for prophecy according to the church’s theologians.
Click to expand...

My friend, you’re asking more questions than space permits a response to. Please consider asking only 1 of 2 questions at a time so that we can respond to you
FRIEND, I am compelled to ask by what authority do YOU make these claims? You obviously have at best a shallow understanding of the Church & Her God granted & PROTECTED authority, and the exercise of it.

As for our knowledge of GOD:

Isa. 55: 7-8 “For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, says the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thought”
Your lack of understanding of the Power & Authority granted to Peter & his successors is profoundly inadequate

Mt 10:1-2 and he [CHRIST] called to him his twelve disciples and gave them authority over unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal every disease and every infirmity. The names of the twelve apostles are these: first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zeb’edee, and John his brother…

Mt 16: 18-19 “And I tell YOU, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give YOU the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever YOU bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever YOU loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."

CONTINUED ON NEXT REPLY
 
REPLY CONTINUED

It is the literally unlimited POWER & authority of the key’s that your lacking right understanding. At that time and place Caesarea Philippi, where the region’s largest pagan temple was located, God passed on to Peter all that was necessary for total unlimited GOVERNANCE of the NEW FAITH He came to earth to establish. At that time & place walled in cities like Jerusalem were common; they did gave gates & key’s and as the NORM, a KING. That king would appoint a visar to whom HE GRANTED unlimited governance of the cities day- to- day affairs ANSWERABLE only to the KING. That is precisely what Christ envisioned for Perter and his successors. And WHY there was no opposition to this empowerment.

To bind and to loose meant at that time, the unfettered authority to make and recind laws, regulations & even mandate beliefs.

Jn. 17:17-20 “Sanctify them in the truth; thy word is truth. As thou didst send me into the world, so I have sent them into the world. And for their sake I consecrate myself, that they also may be consecrated in truth. [NO OTHER FAIH CAN MAKE THE CLAIM & PROVE IT TO HAVE GOD AS THE WARRANTY OF HER INFALLIBILITY OF TEACHINGS TRUTH ALONE ONN ALL MATTERS OF FAITH & MORALS] "I do not pray for these only, but also for those who believe in me through their word”

Mt 28:19-20 “[YOU] Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded YOU; and lo, I am with YOU always, to the close of the age."

The Trinity is among the most profound & mysterious of all Catholic beliefs; yet it is solidly biblical [can the Koran be doubted?]…

Jn. 3: 14-17 “But John stayed him, saying: I ought to be baptized by thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus answering, said to him: Suffer it to be so now. For so it becometh us to fulfill all justice. And Jesus [GOD THE SON] being baptized, forthwith came out of the water: and lo, the heavens were opened to him: and he saw the Spirit of God [GOD THE HS] descending as a dove, and coming upon him. And behold a voice from heaven, saying: This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased [GOD THE FATHER]… all 3 “persons” in one place at one time. And accounts of each are numerous in the NT

Wish we had more space. Look forward to your reply.

Blessings,
Partick
 
My Friend, I disagree:smiley:

One Can KNOW OF God without actually knowing God.

By reason one can KNOW OF God; BUT NOT presume to actually KNOW-God

Regards
Patrick
 
OK, we’re not communicating here:smiley:

So please share with us what it is YOU think you can know about God by human logic alone.

Regards
Patrick
 
My friend, your description of ALLAH falls far short of a correct one for God.

Further, I [Me here] don’t see where logic alone can attribute all of the attributes you shared for Allah.

Regards,
Patrick
 
@JonNC Ah, I had a feeling that I may have misunderstood what you were asking me. But, it turns out that you had missed my point after all. I say reason, yet you mention scripture. Keep saying, citing. quoting, etc. scripture at every non Christian, regardless of what they’re actually saying.
 
SalamKhan said:
@JonNC Ah, I had a feeling that I may have misunderstood what you were asking me. But, it turns out that you had missed my point after all. I say reason, yet you mention scripture. Keep saying, citing. quoting, etc. scripture at every non Christian, regardless of what they’re actually saying.
Click to expand...
You’re right. I’m still missing the part where you know what is “necessarily known” about God in general, but Christians don’t.
Perhaps you can elaborate on it.
 
@PJM Yes, I meant that one can know of God in general by reason alone, but one cannot know of God in detail by reason alone. I used the phrase “know about” quite a few times. Do you believe one can know of God in general by reason alone? Which would be coming to know of His existence, His pre-eternality, His endurance, His self subsistence, His dissimilarity to contingent things, His oneness, His life, His knowledge, His power, His will, all from reason alone?
 
Last edited:
SalamKhan said:
@PJM Yes, I meant that one can know of God in general by reason alone, but one cannot know of God in detail by reason alone. This is I used the phrase “know about” quite a few times. Do you believe one can know of God in general by reason alone? Which would be coming to know of His existence, His pre-eternality, His endurance, His self subsistence, His dissimilarity to contingent things, His oneness, His life, His knowledge, His power, His will, all from reason alone?
Click to expand...
No…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top