Non-catholic Arguments

[the lumberjack]

oh likos, ever the astute one.

your hardpressed, Catholic Church stamp of unapproval just enlightened me so much.

[Katholikos]

[quote name='the lumberjack' date='May 6 2004, 01:18 PM']
if the pope were not held to be "kind of" your "earthly king" which is a direct quotation from someone here...I might recognize him as some type of authority. if the pope were not dressed in such ornate vestments and regaled as some kind of spiritual phenomenon, I might recognize him as some type of authority. if the pope were not declared as infallible, i might recognize him as some type of authority. if the pope were not declared to be the "vicar of Christ"...which is by far the largest of reasons I don't recognize the pope as the leader of my faith.



good works for a christian come from faith...never have I said otherwise...yes, good works can come from elsewhere, like our wanting to justify ourselves before God, but that is when our works are in vain. works come from faith, not the other way around...



it is a solemn, spiritual rememberance in where we do remember the death of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ...we do not partake of His sacrifice over and over, we do not continue to sacrifice that which was sacrificed once and for all. His sacrifice for us was made 2000 years ago, and is felt throughout time. His blood and broken body are a redemptive covering that atoned for ALL sins, past, present, and future...



she is blessed among women, and was a very important vessel in God's will...I thank the Lord for her...but I also thank the Lord for Mary Magdelene, who washed the Lord's feet with her tears and hair... and for every other vessel that the Lord has used to accomplish His will. she was human, like the rest of us, and died like a human...

and these are the beliefs held by 99.9987% of all the "noncatholics" I know and fellowship with.

God bless. [/quote]
We're writing, but you're not reading. We're talking, but you're not listening.

What we've told you might as well have been written in invisible ink. You still misrepresent Catholic belief.

Your mind seems to be made up as to what Catholics believe, whether its true or not.

You prefer fiction to fact.

As Our Lord said, "He who hath ears to hear, let him hear" (Mt 11:15 KJV).

The Catholic Church was founded by Christ. It was the first Church, and it's the right Church.

Peace to you and to those "non-Catholics" you "fellowship" with. Please invite them to phatmass.

[Hananiah]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='May 6 2004, 12:27 PM'] Also, I note the sarcasm in this verse in particular. Do those people of which you speak who are arrogant think that the brother means brother in our sense of the word? I'm just curious in layman's terms what they are arguing. Also, it is probably true what the Catholic Church teaches in regards to the fact that it probably means both cousin AND brother. But is there a possibility it could mean brother in our sense of the word? [/quote]
Yes, Eric Svendsen does believe that adelphos means only biological siblings in Biblical Greek. However, the argument I was referencing is his doctoral thesis about the Greek preposition heos hou, which is translated as until in Matt 1:25: "...but kept her a virgin until (heos hou) she gave birth to a Son; and he
called His name Jesus.”

All heos hou is saying here is that Joseph did not have sex with Mary during her pregnancy. Whether or not they had sex afterward in indeterminate; heos hou leaves either possibility open. However, Svendsen believes that around 100BC the meaning of heos hou switched such that, between then and 100AD, it always terminated the action of the main clause of the sentence. So, in his reading, the passage would necessarily mean that they had intercourse after Jesus was born.

His reading has been refuted many times over. There are numerous examples of usage of heos hou in literature of the time period where it clearly does not terminate the action of the main clause. My favorite is the story of Jospeh and Aseneth, which says that a woman cried until (heos hou) the sun went down, and kept crying after (no termination there!).

[Ellenita]

[quote]I'm just checkin to see if you think there are any decent arguments against the Catholic Church. Of course there are some ridiculous claims out there and a lot of variety, but if there are arguments to each of those questions, then the Catholic Church may not stand as you think it does.[/quote]

The Catholic church contains the fullness of Truth.
Why would you even ask if we think there are 'decent arguments' against her truth. You imply that we have no minds of our own and have accepted blindly without having come to understand, using our full intellect, aswell as faith, that her claims are Truth. How you can suggest that, given the weight of intellectual apologetics you have had access to at Phatmass, and the evidence of some of the greatest intellectual minds ever in history being convinced that the claims made by the Catholic church are the truth, is astounding!

You also seek to undermine our faith by suggesting that if we accept that there are 'decent arguments' then our church 'may not stand as you think it does'. You forget that many of us [i]were[/i] protestants. While we might acknowledge that our time in those churches taught us something of the Lord, the fact that we believe that the fullness of Truth was missing within protestant teaching is what drove us to seek out the 'One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church...'

[Katholikos]

Ellenita: <applause applause>

[point5]

more applause

[Dave]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='May 6 2004, 07:44 PM'] The Catholic church contains the fullness of Truth.
Why would you even ask if we think there are 'decent arguments' against her truth. You imply that we have no minds of our own and have accepted blindly without having come to understand, using our full intellect, aswell as faith, that her claims are Truth. How you can suggest that, given the weight of intellectual apologetics you have had access to at Phatmass, and the evidence of some of the greatest intellectual minds ever in history being convinced that the claims made by the Catholic church are the truth, is astounding!

You also seek to undermine our faith by suggesting that if we accept that there are 'decent arguments' then our church 'may not stand as you think it does'. You forget that many of us [i]were[/i] protestants. While we might acknowledge that our time in those churches taught us something of the Lord, the fact that we believe that the fullness of Truth was missing within protestant teaching is what drove us to seek out the 'One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church...' [/quote]
Ellenita should be Church Miltant. dUSt? You reading this?

[Ellenita]

Dave, you've always been one of my most favourite people at Phatmass! :wub:

[Dave]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='May 15 2004, 06:36 PM']

Dave, you've always been one of my most favourite people at Phatmass! :wub: [/quote]
Now it's my turn to

Thank you; you're a great lady yourself!

[Livin_the_MASS]

Wow you can feel the love in this thread, nice! :wub:

[littleflower+JMJ]

[quote name='Ellenita' date='May 6 2004, 06:44 PM']
The Catholic church contains the fullness of Truth.
Why would you even ask if we think there are 'decent arguments' against her truth. You imply that we have no minds of our own and have accepted blindly without having come to understand, using our full intellect, aswell as faith, that her claims are Truth.  How you can suggest that, given the weight of intellectual apologetics you have had access to at Phatmass, and the evidence of some of the greatest intellectual minds ever in history being convinced that the claims made by the Catholic church are the truth, is astounding!

You also seek to undermine our faith by suggesting that if we accept that there are 'decent arguments' then our church 'may not stand as you think it does'. You forget that many of us [i]were[/i] protestants. While we might acknowledge that our time in those churches taught us something of the Lord, the fact that we believe that the fullness of Truth was missing within protestant teaching is what drove us to seek out the 'One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church...' [/quote]
[b]wow.[/b] that was beautiful, amazing and [b]true[/b].

[dairygirl4u2c]

Even if they are all royally stupid, there's gotta be some best arguments. If the sky is blue and someone says it not, you could at least use an argument that he thinks your eyes decieve you if you put this thread in that context.

No one yet has really attempted anything which leads me to believe that you content yourself with knowing that your faith can be defended. (but not proven) I hate to say it, but the very thing most of you put down here you are yourselves espousing. ie you're relying way to much on your emotions. You have to have the truth.. everyone else has to be wrong and you have to be right. Anything that might indicate otherwise, even if it's explainable, isn't even apparently in Catholic thought (that they will admit anyway) and is best suppressed in denial. Someone can say something that doesn't prove anything, just soundbites, and everyone's like so yea. Look back at all these threads and see what I mean.

btw, I will be more than happy to do one of these threads "catholic arguments" and I will actually answer the questions and explain why the do not stand. (but the main thing is I will answer the questions)

Edited May 17, 2004 by dairygirl4u2c

[Katholikos]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='May 17 2004, 08:21 AM'] Even if they are all royally stupid, there's gotta be some best arguments. If the sky is blue and someone says it not, you could at least use an argument that he thinks your eyes decieve you if you put this thread in that context.

No one yet has really attempted anything which leads me to believe that you content yourself with knowing that your faith can be defended. (but not proven) I hate to say it, but the very thing most of you put down here you are yourselves espousing. ie you're relying way to much on your emotions. You have to have the truth.. everyone else has to be wrong and you have to be right. Anything that might indicate otherwise, even if it's explainable, isn't even apparently in Catholic thought (that they will admit anyway) and is best suppressed in denial. Someone can say something that doesn't prove anything, just soundbites, and everyone's like so yea. Look back at all these threads and see what I mean.

btw, I will be more than happy to do one of these threads "catholic arguments" and I will actually answer the questions and explain why the do not stand. (but the main thing is I will answer the questions) [/quote]
DG.

A basic lesson in word meanings:

Good - better - best: a comparative, subjective judgement of the relative value of something.

True, true, and true - objectively true, whether one thinks it is or not. Not
sort of" true, but TRUE.

Catholicism is either true or it isn't true. Period. Millions of brilliant minds more astute than yours or mine have found it to be true.

It's not "best," as if there were a choice between it and some other religion. Catholicism is God-made, by the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity. Therefore, it is objectively True.

Your religion (from among thousands of competing and conflicting opinions) is not true. Therefore, one can say that in one's personal judgment that this is best, or better than that, but it's subjective opinion, not Truth. All Protestant religions are made by man.

JMJ Likos (Jay)

[dairygirl4u2c]

Maybe it'd help if I gave an example. Say you think the best argument is that while we have all this proof for the Catholic Church's validity, perhaps all the dissenting evidence was burned by some pope in time. It's a weak argument, I agree. There are better arguments than this, but no one here gives any of them and I want to see if they do.

Many astute minds have not bought into the Catholic Church either. Citing smart guys isn't gonna get you anywhere cuz there's smart guys in every walk of life.


Even if the arguments are stupid, please, again, state some. Even if the Catholic Church is objectively true.. in fact I'll grant you that for the sake of argument... now point out why all the smart guys who don't by into the Catholic Church don't buy into it. Point out the logical fallacies. Point out the fact that they are denying what is obvious such as someone denying that they exist. Point out that they are denying historical fact. (if you think that's really the case) If it's a formidable/subtle (just not obivously bad ones) heresy that has been defeated, mention it, and you can even say why it doesn't hold water if you want. But please someone say SOMETHING to answer the questions! :ph34r:

[phatcatholic]

i have yet to see the point of this entire exercise....