IcePrincessKRS Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 I think as long as Les claims to be Catholic it qualifies as Catholic vs. Catholic, no qoutation marks. Even though we know he doesn't represent and show real Church teaching he seems to think he is. I just think he needs a new hobby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Knight Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 Littleless same old tricks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Sep 7 2005, 10:56 PM']No catholic on catholic debate is permitted. [right][snapback]715045[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: So if a Catholic claims on Phatmass that the sun revolves around the earth , it has to be accepeted and not challenged by another Catholic? Does this type of restriction come from Catholic practice that once the Church says something it can never be questioned? LittleLes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 I guess I'll bring this up again... [quote name='Winchester']You lost me with the condescending beginning. You don't debate, Les, you insult and make points based on your assumptions. That's baiting, not debating.[/quote] [quote name='Littleles']RESPONSE: "It's important that our conclusions be correct. It's not important that they be popular." [/quote] How does your "quote" fit in with his complaint about your tactics, especially with the insulting and baiting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 8 2005, 07:23 AM']RESPONSE: So if a Catholic claims on Phatmass that the sun revolves around the earth , it has to be accepeted and not challenged by another Catholic? Does this type of restriction come from Catholic practice that once the Church says something it can never be questioned? LittleLes [right][snapback]715251[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Are you the "master baiter"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 Double post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 7 2005, 10:36 PM']DeeDee, the first quote I suspect you're misreading. All it says is that we are conceived with sin on us. That is a well-established and central dogma of Christianity and it's apostasy to deny it. RESPONSE: No. It's not well established. The "sin on us" or "stain" theory was developed by Augustine's reading of a mistranslation of Romans, as we shall see. LittleLes [right][snapback]714942[/snapback][/right] [/quote] This coming from someone who doesn't accept the Gospel of John... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='Paladin D' date='Sep 8 2005, 07:47 AM']I guess I'll bring this up again... How does your "quote" fit in with his complaint about your tactics, especially with the insulting and baiting? [right][snapback]715297[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: Your claim. And evidence? I think most readers realize that you don't have an argument to present, so you are falling back on the old "ad hominum" ploy to divert the discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='Raphael' date='Sep 8 2005, 08:43 AM'] This coming from someone who doesn't accept the Gospel of John... [right][snapback]715352[/snapback][/right] [/quote] RESPONSE: You need to do some serious reading. This discuassion involves the writings of Augustine (not in the Bible) and Paul's Romans (in the Bible). The Gospel of the writers we term John isn't involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleLes Posted September 8, 2005 Author Share Posted September 8, 2005 Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." As has been shown, unless one wants to believe that all living things were created in six days (the Genesis legend), the claim that Adam's sin was the cause of death entering the world is spurious. Animals were being born and dying long before the human animal evolved. And the Catholic claim - which would clearly be an injustice - that all men became sinners because of Adam's Original Sin is clearly contrary to a number of Old Testament passages: "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father..." Ezek 18:20. See also Deut 24:16, 2 king 14.6, Ezek 33:20, and Jer 31: 29-30. So the dogma of Original Sin is contrary to both science and scripture. Those interested in this topic might want to read a similar thread on Beliefnet Catholic Debate. Beliefnet does not restrict Catholic debate with Catholics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 8 2005, 11:10 AM']RESPONSE: You need to do some serious reading. This discuassion involves the writings of Augustine (not in the Bible) and Paul's Romans (in the Bible). The Gospel of the writers we term John isn't involved. [right][snapback]715510[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Nor did I say it was. I'm merely asserting that you hold no credibility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laudate_Dominum Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='IcePrincessKRS' date='Sep 8 2005, 03:06 AM']I think as long as Les claims to be Catholic it qualifies as Catholic vs. Catholic, no qoutation marks. Even though we know he doesn't represent and show real Church teaching he seems to think he is. I just think he needs a new hobby. [right][snapback]715194[/snapback][/right] [/quote] It seems to me that people who spend their time trying to "debunk" Catholicism cannot be Catholic. Just because someone claims to be Catholic doesn't mean they are. If you deny and attack essential doctrines and things and yet remain in the religion you do so in bad faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted September 8, 2005 Share Posted September 8, 2005 [quote name='LittleLes' date='Sep 8 2005, 11:16 AM']Romans 5:12 "Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned." As has been shown, unless one wants to believe that all living things were created in six days (the Genesis legend), the claim that Adam's sin was the cause of death entering the world is spurious. Animals were being born and dying long before the human animal evolved. And the Catholic claim - which would clearly be an injustice - that all men became sinners because of Adam's Original Sin is clearly contrary to a number of Old Testament passages: "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father..." Ezek 18:20. See also Deut 24:16, 2 king 14.6, Ezek 33:20, and Jer 31: 29-30. So the dogma of Original Sin is contrary to both science and scripture. Those interested in this topic might want to read a similar thread on Beliefnet Catholic Debate. Beliefnet does not restrict Catholic debate with Catholics. [right][snapback]715516[/snapback][/right] [/quote] While I would be slow to call it formal in your case (full knowledge of mind and will being required), to deny original sin is apostasy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now