Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Un-frackin-believable.
Topic Started: Mar 17 2009, 06:02 PM (2,126 Views)
The Punisher
Member Avatar

Thanks, some folks are blinded by their faith.
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Gringa
Member Avatar

Yep, aint that the truth... so to speak
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Big Earl
Member Avatar
Ostrich Sized
­
Edited by Big Earl, Jun 7 2009, 02:12 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Mtnman
Member Avatar

I'm with Earl. ;thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Nevski
Member Avatar

A bit of background, TP. I hold degrees in biblical studies, philosophy of religion, and theology. After receiving my Masters in theology from an institution that was Evangelical Protestant in its orientation, I spent a decade reading about Byzantine faith and practice, which entailed delving more deeply into church history and historical theology than I had previously done. All this was in keeping with a shift in my thinking from Protestant to "Catholic", which ultimately resulted in my conversion to Orthodox Christianity in the early 1990s.

I don't mean to boast, but not only am I pretty well-read in these areas, I know how to argue these issues. I've been engaging Evangelicals regarding the issues that divide us for about ten years, and I'm reasonably certain that my participation in one long-standing debate with one Calvinist online outfit eventuated in its disappearance.

I know every single argument an Evangelical Christian poses against historic Catholic faith, and I know how to counter every one. I'm therefore tempted to answer you point by point. Only thing is, I'm getting old and tired, but most importantly bored when it comes to the kind of "apologetics" I've referenced here. So, I will take one shot at your post, and maybe a reply or two, depnding on how your respond, and then move on. Frankly, I don't have the time or the energy to expend trying to instruct someone who hasn't a clue as to what he's talking about. But for the sake of at least trying to provide a bit of illumination for you, I'll play along briefly.

Quote:
 
I disagree Nevski...
Let's look at what the “Good Book” says and compare it to what the “Church” has changed…
If I’m incorrect please enlighten me.


I'll try my best. But why the scare quotes around the word "church?" Doesn't the "Good Book" indicate that Christ left one behind?

Somewhere you've found some online source that begins as follows:

Quote:
 
Exodus 20:2–17, Exodus 34:11–27 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21

Division of the Ten Commandments by religion/denomination
Commandment Jewish (Talmudic)**** Anglican, Reformed, and other Christian Orthodox Catholic, Lutheran** ([Snip]


You don't cite the source (shame on you), but it's clear it's some sort of fundy, "negative biblicist" repository of anti-Catholic spew. Would you care to name it for us?

The source sets forth the typical hoo-haw about the Decalogue and idolatry. Answer me this, however: if the commandment re: graven images means what you think it does, why did Solomon's temple have images? Why did the Hellenic synagogues at Dura-Europa and other places have images? Do you suppose that maybe the commandment against images had something to do with the PAGAN WORSHIP of surrounding cultures? Have you examined the immediate and broader contexts of that proscription, which contexts suggest that this is precisely the case?

Fr. John Whiteford on images and their veneration:

http://www.orthodoxinfo.com/general/icon_faq.aspx

Quote:
 
Notes:*The Roman Catholic Church uses the translation 'kill' (less specific) instead of 'murder'.[3]


Actually, virtually all Protestant Bibles do as well. Have a look sometime.

Quote:
 
1) I am the Lord your God. (Yet Catholics pray to Mary, and all those Saints


Catholics and Orthodox *invoke* the assistance of Mary and the Saints. They do not “pray” to them as deities. They *solicit* their prayers, much as you would solicit the prayers of your fellow believers. The fact that Mary and the Saints are no longer living on this earth is irrelevant. The barrier between the Church Triumphant and the Church Militant is a thin one indeed.

Quote:
 
{WTH? There are more than 10,000 Roman Catholic saints and beatified people).
2)You shall have no other gods before me (Same as above)


They’re not "gods". Read up on it sometime.

Quote:
 
3)You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God (The Pope proclaims that his words are GOD’S words)


Even if the doctrine of papal infallibility (ex cathedra) did entail the notion that “his words are God’s words” (which it doesn’t), it bears no relation whatsoever to the content of the Third Commandment.
Quote:
 
4)Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy (As long as you go to confusion (which it’s in the “Good Book”, and church on Sunday, you can do want ya want Sunday after church)


Huh? Once more with clarity, TP.

Quote:
 
5)Honor your father and mother (Can’t complain, except the Catholics call Priests “Fathers” and Nuns “Mothers”, Why do ya think they do that?, I’m assuming that father/mother would mean your parents)


“Call no man ‘father’”: http://www.synaxis.org/cnet/stjohn/call-no-man.html

St. Paul, speaking of himself: “For if you were to have countless tutors in Christ, yet you would not have many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I became your father through the gospel.” I Cor. 4:15. That's just one verse of a number that show your objection to be the silliness that it is.

Quote:
 
6)You shall not murder* (I understand why they would change the word “Kill” to murder, OK with that. They’re was that little Crusade thing, going on)


Again, huh? Where do you get this stuff? That’s just moronic.

Here’s a little primer for you on the Crusades, BTW: http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/history/world/wh0055.html

Quote:
 
8)You shall not steal*** (Now I have a problem with this the Catholic Church has stolen lands, minds, hearts, & souls)


Hoo-boy. You’re obviously a fundy - and a very much *cultic* - anti-Catholic bigot. I’m done with you’re running commentary on the Decalogue. I think my work is done in that regard, anyway. So, moving on:

Quote:
 
Show me where the “Good Book” says we have to put water and make the sign of the cross on my forehead, “blessed” by a sinful man?

Show me where in the “Good Book” where it says that I have to genuflect, before I can sit down in “HIS” house.


Argument from silence. Show me where the “Good Book” approves building church edifices. Or saying the Pledge of Allegiance. Or voting for politicians. Or any number of things that you mindless negative biblicists do.

Quote:
 
BTW, MY GOD doesn’t require rites, ceremonies, communion, rituals, confession, pittance, incense, uniforms…


Really? You might want to have another look at the Old Testament sometime. And then you might consider the works of liturgical historians such as Gregory Dix, who show how Jewish rites were naturally copied to some degree by early Christians.

By the way, it’s “penance”, not “pittance.”

Moreover, show me where the "Good Book" clearly establishes the proposition that all matters of faith and practice are to be adjudicated by reference to the "Good Book." In other words, show me the scriptural foundation of the Protestant doctrine of sola Scriptura.

Search far and wide for it, Punisher. But I assure you it isn't there.

Lastly, you set forth an incoherent argument peppered with proof texts about “legalism.” You clearly have no clue as to what legalism really is, and the flip side of that is that you clearly haven’t grappled with the issue of antinomianism. But that’s what we’d expect from ignorant Protestant fundamentalists caught up in the “Easy Believism” heresy. Try Bonhoeffer’s book The Cost of Discipleship for the needed antidote. Read what he says there about "cheap grace."

I think I’ve asked you once before, and you declined to answer, but what, exactly, is your faith tradition? You don’t have to name the church; just indicate the denomination if you would. I believe your answer will speak volumes.

I don’t mean to offend, but I’ve rarely if ever encountered someone who knows so little about the issues, someone who is so woefully unread, as you. And that’s why, as I stated previously, I don’t intend to waste much of my time with you. You’re about as ignorant of biblical, theological and historical matters as you are of conservatism.

Sorry, but there it is.
Edited by Nevski, Mar 26 2009, 11:44 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Nevski
Member Avatar

Quote:
 
Ratzinger's is a history rife with scandal and controversy. Not unlike *most* holy persons, but this one has been rather popularly labled as a Nazi (Google the name Joseph Ratzinger and take a look at the decidedly polarized results that appear). Call me closed-minded, but I fail to see how a Nazi is holy by any standards, let alone the standards of any majority.


It's not so much that you're "closed-minded", Yhitzak. It's more like you're patently, and I would say willfully, ignorant. Anyone who "thinks" that B16 was or is a Nazi is simply not paying attention to all the pertinent evidence. And anyone who willfully persists in that kind of idiocy simply isn't worth giving the time of day.
Edited by Nevski, Mar 26 2009, 11:57 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Hello again
Member Avatar

Nevski, where are your degrees from?
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Yhitzak
Member Avatar

Nevski
Mar 26 2009, 11:50 PM
Quote:
 
Ratzinger's is a history rife with scandal and controversy. Not unlike *most* holy persons, but this one has been rather popularly labled as a Nazi (Google the name Joseph Ratzinger and take a look at the decidedly polarized results that appear). Call me closed-minded, but I fail to see how a Nazi is holy by any standards, let alone the standards of any majority.


It's not so much that you're "closed-minded", Yhitzak. It's more like you're patently, and I would say willfully, ignorant. Anyone who "thinks" that B16 was or is a Nazi is simply not paying attention to all the pertinent evidence. And anyone who willfully persists in that kind of idiocy simply isn't worth giving the time of day.
Willfully ignorant, eh? Coming from a self-professed Orthodox Christian, I think I'm doing just fine on that count. Heh. It's not willful ignorance or persisting in idiocy to take into account the man's history, beliefs, and actions, especially when he's supposed to be God's representative on Earth. But this is why I am not a follower of organized religion: I believe in freedom of thought and of belief. Ratzinger's holiness is not for you, me, or anyone but those members of the church who rank high enough to vote to determine, and your explanation or response is extremely base. I challenge that you don't have the answer, but instead of admitting so, you'd rather just tell me that I'm not worth the time of day. This is all a matter of perspective, and you're putting your ideas forth as though they are incontrovertible truth.

I've said it before and I'll say it again:
From "A Fish Called Wanda"
Otto: Apes can't read philosophy!
Wanda: Yes, they can, Otto! They just don't understand it!
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
Mtnman
Member Avatar

http://www.speedydegrees.com/
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
dumblonde
Member Avatar

Funny. To me it's all superstition, so this is like listening to you guys arguing about whether breaking a mirror or walking under a ladder are worse luck.
Offline Profile Quote Post Rules
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Free Forums. Reliable service with over 8 years of experience.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic »
Add Reply