EcceNovaFacioOmni Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='Didacus' date='Jun 16 2005, 09:54 AM']So do you take everything in the bible litterally? Somewhere in the old testament, it is said that: "He who has his privee removed shall not enter the kingdom of heaven". That means that a man with his p**** cut off will not enter the kingdom. I will look for that context, but you get the picture... a lot of things in the bible can be very very dangerous if taken litterally. [right][snapback]613195[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I believe you are refering to this: [quote]No one whose testicles have been crushed or whose penis has been cut off may be admitted into the community of the LORD. Deuteronomy 23:2, NAB[/quote] It does not say the kingdom, it means the community of the Israelites. It is condemning castration and vesectomy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 16 2005, 09:11 AM']# Our first parents in paradise sinned grievously through transgression of the Divine probationary commandment. (De fide.) # Through the sin our first parents lost sanctifying grace and provoked the anger and the indignation of God. (De fide.) # Our first parents became subject to death and to the dominion of the Devil. (De fide.) D788. These are dogmas related to the Garden of Eden [right][snapback]613206[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Response, De fide, but probably not true. That's difficult for some conservative Catholics to face. Littleles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote]This is what several priest have told me in regards to Genesis, but none of us are the Pope, or God Himself, so please feel free to disagree.[/quote] I've had priest professors tell me the same thing. However if these priests are teaching that A. There was no paradise 2. Humanity did not come from a single pair iii. There was no fall from grace or original sin Then they are teaching heresy. Debate about six days v six thousand years. Debate the fruit. Debate the talking serpent. Debate whether the serpent was Satan (no mention of that in Scripture) But it is a dangerous statement to say "Adam and Eve.. just a story" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 16 2005, 09:21 AM']Well the only references you were making about Genesis were in regards to the Garden of Eden. You say you don't buy it which is your right. Since you weren't specific on what you believed and what you considered "story", I thought it would be a good idea to show what Catholics are required to believe. [right][snapback]613213[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Response: "Catholics are required to believe." Really? But that has changed so frequently. For example, do you realize that Catholics no longer have to believe that it is the will of God that Lutherans be burned at the stake as heretics? But its still on the books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy the Ninja Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:39 AM']Response: "Catholics are required to believe." Really? But that has changed so frequently. For example, do you realize that Catholics no longer have to believe that it is the will of God that Lutherans be burned at the stake as heretics? But its still on the books. [right][snapback]613260[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Les you really need to get past this "on the books" thing. It grows tiresome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:41 AM']Les you really need to get past this "on the books" thing. It grows tiresome. [right][snapback]613264[/snapback][/right] [/quote] And its been proven false on these debates more times than I can count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:38 AM']I've had priest professors tell me the same thing. However if these priests are teaching that A. There was no paradise 2. Humanity did not come from a single pair iii. There was no fall from grace or original sin Then they are teaching heresy. [/quote] But probably historical fact nonetheless. Littleles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='hot stuff' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:43 AM']And its been proven false on these debates more times than I can count. [right][snapback]613265[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Response, Really? Lets take a look. From Pope Leo X's Bull Exsurge Domine: "With the advice and consent of these our venerable brothers, with mature deliberation on each and every one of the above theses, and by the authority of almighty God, the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul, and our own authority, we condemn, reprobate, and reject completely each of these theses or errors as either heretical, scandalous, false, offensive to pious ears or seductive of simple minds, and against Catholic truth. By listing them, we decree and declare that all the faithful of both sexes must regard them as condemned, reprobated, and rejected….We restrain all in the virtue of holy obedience and under the penalty of an automatic major excommunication...." "33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit." This Bull was directed against Luther and Lutherans. Catholics were required under the penalty of "an automatic major excommunication" to believe that it was the will of God that they be burned at the stake. It's still on the books. Sorry LeRoy and hot stuff. LittleLes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy the Ninja Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:54 AM'] It's still on the books. Sorry LeRoy and hot stuff. LittleLes [right][snapback]613280[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Who is LeRoy? You can't even get the names right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Jun 16 2005, 10:58 AM']Who is LeRoy? You can't even get the names right? [right][snapback]613284[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Kilroy, LeRoy, Roy Rogers.... What's in a name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy the Ninja Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jun 16 2005, 11:02 AM']Kilroy, LeRoy, Roy Rogers.... What's in a name? [right][snapback]613287[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Smilie faces do not make your rudeness less rude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 The Encyclical "Providentissimus Deus" Given by His Holiness Pope Leo XIII November 18, 1893 "But it is absolutely wrong and forbidden, either to narrow inspiration to certain parts only of Holy Scripture, or to admit that the sacred writer has erred. For the system of those who, in order to rid themselves of these difficulties, do not hesitate to concede that divine inspiration regards the things of faith and morals, and nothing beyond, because (as they wrongly think) in a question of the truth or falsehood of a passage, we should consider not so much what God has said as the reason and purpose which He had in mind in saying it-this system cannot be tolerated. For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical, are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error, but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true." So it is not possible for error to co-exist with inspiration. Following this logically then, if error can be demonstrated, what may we conclude about the inspiration of the Bible? I don't think may people take Pope Leo XIII's claim very seriously anymore, but it, too , is "still on the books." Sorry Kilroy (see, I remembered) and hot stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted June 16, 2005 Author Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='Kilroy the Ninja' date='Jun 16 2005, 11:05 AM']Smilie faces do not make your rudeness less rude. [right][snapback]613294[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Sorry Kilroy. The original mistake wasn't deliberate. I know more LeRoy's than Kilroy's and I was typing hurriedly. I apologize. LittleLes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 Debated and refuted You have absolutely no new material. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy the Ninja Posted June 16, 2005 Share Posted June 16, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Jun 16 2005, 11:17 AM']Sorry Kilroy. The original mistake wasn't deliberate. I know more LeRoy's than Kilroy's and I was typing hurriedly. I apologize. LittleLes [right][snapback]613302[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Apology accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts