God Conquers Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 Hey Littleles, I've been trying to keep up with all the threads you've been posting on. You say that Jesus didn't found the Catholic Church as we know it. You say that the papacy is not infallible. You've alluded that bishops aren't direct spiritual descendents of the apostles. You question the infallibility of scripture. All the while, you criticize people who do believe these things. "True believers" you call them. Your posts have been started you say, to make us think and to challenge us... which clearly they have, just look at how long they are. I am frankly intrigued at where you're coming from. Considering your alluded to beliefs, why are you Catholic? I mean this very seriously. What do you believe the Catholic Church is? What is its purpose? Why are you a member? Matt PS- I don't want anyone posting about what they THINK, or ripping on Littleles cause I'd like a real answer and not smartmouth because he's(?) been insulted or presumed already on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasJis Posted March 30, 2005 Share Posted March 30, 2005 God Conquers, This is from a closed thread that doesn't show up on the first page on Debate Table. They are complete, unedited, cut and past quotes from LittleLes himself. [quote]Hi Folks, I'm Roman Catholic and I have no "animosity" toward the Church. But I insist on separating fact from fiction, and unfortunately a lot of the latter has gotten into Catholicism over the years. I am a bit intolerant of "true believers." These are those who insist that the "party line" be adhered to regardless of the evidence. And anyone who doesn't, or even questions them, are ignorant and enemies of Christ. Do you ever wonder what makes people think like that? LittleLes[/quote] [quote]Yes, apologists try the "discipline" rather than "doctrine" argument, when the doctrine is proven to be absurd. It's a very predictable defense. Or else, when they have no valid rebuttal, they lapse into the inquistitional mode. Is that what you are trying, Archangel? And sorry, Yiannii, One only has to follow the truth to be Catholic. Not the "party line." For example, I don't really have to burn heretics at the stake to prove orthodoxy. Do you? Little Les This post has been edited by LittleLes on Mar 25 2005, 08:21 PM [/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted March 30, 2005 Author Share Posted March 30, 2005 Thanks Jas, But that still doesn't answer my questions. I mean, it gives us insight into his thinking, but I'd like to know what he believes the Church IS, not what it is NOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted March 30, 2005 Author Share Posted March 30, 2005 [quote name='Littleles']I've concluded that clattel slavery is immoral despite former Church approval. There is no sin in charging reasonable interest on money loaned, despite former Church condemnation. The earth really does move, despite the former Church teaching. Contributing to the spread of AIDs by prohibiting the use of condoms is morally wrong. Torturing and killing heretics is not the will of God, despite Exsurge's claim. Silencing theologians wo don't entirely support the party line is morally wrong. Jesus really didn't ride two animals when entering Jerusalem. Matthew got it wrong. In short, I'm not a gullible Catholic. But I know a lot of Catholics who are. [/quote] What DO you believe in? What is the CHurch? What does it mean to be Catholic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 Are you going to answer here? You won't let us in on what you believe? How can you save us from our folly otherwise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Good Luck getting him to respond. I think that jasJis nailed it though. However, I am interested in what he would have to say as well. Cam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archangel Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Although he says he's Roman Catholic, he does not believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ. [quote] Jesus was believed to be a Messiah but not necessarily divine by his original disciples. The Ebionite/Nazarene movement was made up mostly of Jewish Israelites who had been followers of John the Baptist, and later Jesus. They were concentrated in Palestine and the surrounding regions and led by James the Just, the oldest brother of Jesus. Although predictably disparaged and minimized by Catholic apologists who, for doctrinal reasosn, don't want to acknowledge their existence, even the Catholic Encyclopedia admits the following: [url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/o5242.htm"]http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/o5242.htm[/url] (CE - Ebionites) "Recent scholars have plausibly maintained that the term (Ebionite) did not originally designate any heretical sect, but merely the orthodox Jewish Christians of Palestine who continued to observe Mosaic Law." "They denied the Divinity and virginal birth of Christ, and clung to the observance of Jewish Law, they regarded St. Paul as an apostate, and used only a Gospel according to St. Matthew." The divinity of Christ continued to be debated up until the Council of Nicea in 325 at which it received the majority vote of the bishops. I more or less agree, then, with the original Christian view of Jesus.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted March 31, 2005 Author Share Posted March 31, 2005 That's interesting.... If Jesus isn't God... what's the point? Like St. Paul says: "...and if Christ has not been raised, your faith is in vain; you are still in your sins." (1Corinthians15:17) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JeffCR07 Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 Christ is either God or a liar, but he cannot be simply a "good man." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 OW I bumped my head... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cam42 Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Ooops...sorry, I [u][i][b]BUMPED[/b][/i][/u] into hot stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Ow Cam that really hurt!! Bumps back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
God Conquers Posted April 4, 2005 Author Share Posted April 4, 2005 Stop BUMPING into each other! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy the Ninja Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Since it's apparent Littleles isn't going to engage in this thread, may I suggest it be allowed to die? I'm sure I'm going to get some flak about closing threads today so, please guys... can we let it go? It's sort of an inappropriate thread to begin with. God Bless! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 (edited) Hi All, Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa! Somehow, until this morning, I've completely missed this thread. I must confess (sorry), that I post on a number of cites and generally read them quickly. I didn't catch that it was my name under the banner "an invitation." Unfortnately, it appears that a number of questions have been asked. Perhaps whoever originated the thread - was it God Conquers?- could restate a single question he'd likle me to answer. I don't do "shotgunning, "inquisitions." URL's, or 81 question questionaires. But if there is a single legitimate question, I'll try to answer it. After that, perhaps I can answer another. This way the size of posts remains manageable. LittleLes Edited April 4, 2005 by LittleLes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts