more anti-papal arguments

[Benedict]

Dairygirl, this is like asking someone to argue that the sky is plaid. No one could truly put his heart into something like that.

Those of us who once argued against the papacy and discovered the errors of our arguments simply cannot put much, if any, effort into repeating something we now know/believe is false and flawed.

[cathqat]

[quote name='dairygirl4u2c' date='Jan 8 2005, 11:35 PM']I am trying to make you internalize the arguments.[/quote]

Arguments against the papacy don't [i]get[/i] any more "internalized" than believing the pope is the "antichrist."

[quote]if this is the extent that you know of.. then you better re-exam your beliefs.[/quote]

If I find that "no arguments against the papacy bear the weight of reasonable scrutiny" then I should re-examine my beliefs? Are you suggesting that I should begin accepting and internalizing ideas that [i]contradict[/i] reason? That's nonsensical.

If you think that I do not regularly [i]study and examine[/i] arguments against the papacy, you are sadly mistaken. I've been doing this [i]for years[/i], and in much more serious venues than this.

But I have never found a "good" argument against the papacy because, as I said, none of them bear the weight of reasonable scrutiny. They all fall away under the light of truth and reason.

[HomeTeamFamily]

how do you expect someone who has the truth and knows it, enough so to consider the opposition and prepare defenses of it, to be "converted" to change their belief?

and why cant we challege you to do the same thing for our point of view, the truth

[Eucharistaholic]

All right Dairygirl,

I'll bite, since I have had this same discussion while practicing some apologetics on a "born again" site. I'll give you some stuff they told me and you can refute it.

Nowhere in the Bible does it mention the pope. How can you say there is a pope, when it is obviously not in the Bible?

Peace,
E-aholic

[Guest JeffCR07]

Moreover, if those worthless catholics would go back to the Greek, they would obviously see that "Petras" means "little pebble" and Christ was not asserting that Peter is the cornerstone of the Church - only [i]Christ[/i] is, duh

[Catalyst]

true indeed.

[Benedict]

Four words: "Sweet God the Pope."

[FilmGuy127]

could the pope decide that there should be no pope, and fire himself?

just curious--

[Benedict]

[quote name='FilmGuy127' date='Jan 12 2005, 06:09 PM'] could the pope decide that there should be no pope, and fire himself?

just curious-- [/quote]
The Pope could resign but a much higher authority than he set up the office.

However, I have always wanted to be elected the (false) Prophet of the LDS Church so I could abolish it.

[cathqat]

[quote name='Benedict' date='Jan 12 2005, 08:11 PM'] I have always wanted to be elected the (false) Prophet of the LDS Church so I could abolish it. [/quote]
It would take too much effort to rise that far in the ranks, though. You'd have to be temple-worthy and rise through the ranks of bishop and such... and even if you made it to the top tier of apostles, you'd have to outlive everyone....

Too much work.

[Eucharistaholic]

Amen

[Benedict]

[quote name='cathqat' date='Jan 13 2005, 01:30 PM'] It would take too much effort to rise that far in the ranks, though. You'd have to be temple-worthy and rise through the ranks of bishop and such... and even if you made it to the top tier of apostles, you'd have to outlive everyone....

Too much work. [/quote]
If I knew it would happen, I would gladly endure that.

[cathqat]

[quote name='Benedict' date='Jan 13 2005, 10:09 PM'] If I knew it would happen, I would gladly endure that. [/quote]
Blech, you have a stronger stomach than I do

(I do study Mormonism for fun, though. It's hard to believe anyone believes this stuff.)

[PHATMike]

Yes I find the same to be true.

Nobody has ever given me a good argument against the Pope. But I know that the Eastern Orthodox church recognizes the pope as the Bishop of Rome just like any other Bishop...just that he does not have any other power. Although I do believe when the apostles had questions on faith they went to Peter for the answer. But's its not a question of Theology. All 22 Catholic Churches (one western 21 easter) under the pope hold different theology.

The Pope makes sense...thats all there is to it. The Church is not a democracy....there is a right and a wrong and the pope lays it out.

Peace.

[Benedict]

[quote name='cathqat' date='Jan 14 2005, 12:38 PM'] Blech, you have a stronger stomach than I do

(I do study Mormonism for fun, though. It's hard to believe anyone believes this stuff.) [/quote]
I live right in the midst of Mormon country. My cousins are Mormon.

I study Mormonism to bring it down and bring them out.

[cathqat]

[quote name='Benedict' date='Jan 14 2005, 11:57 PM'] I study Mormonism to bring it down and bring them out. [/quote]
Good for you! I have tried myself, but the closest I got was convincing some missionaries to read some Catholic books (Catechism, Dei Verbum, Apostolic Fathers). I think they were taken off their mission, because I never heard from the same guys after that.

[Eucharistaholic]

[quote name='Benedict' date='Jan 14 2005, 11:57 PM']I live right in the midst of Mormon country.  My cousins are Mormon.

I study Mormonism to bring it down and bring them out.[/quote]
Benedict,

I live just to the south of you, right in the heart of Mormon country AZ. Keep up the good fight!

E-aholic

[PolyCarp of Smyrna]

[color=red][font="Geneva"]DAIRY GIRL:
“also... I want to expressly state my motive. I'm not looking for you to convert to anything per se. I am trying to make you internalize the arguments. I'm looking for this because I want you to understand all arguments before choosing a position theologically. i also hope that you begin to live Christ's true messages instead of just going through rituals and thinking you're doing God's will... if that's all you're doing i mean.”[/color][/font]

[color=purple][font="Arial"]It seems that you are recommending that we (Catholics) be open to the “truth” (aka…”understand all arguments”) and make an objective “choice” not influenced by pre-supposed notions or out of human tradition. The most unfortunate aspect about this statement, is in suggesting that our motive for being Catholic is based on something other than objective truth, is exposing your own adherence to human tradition and the effect your pre-supposed notions weighs on your view of Catholics.[/color][/font]

[font="Geneva"][color=red]DAIRYGIRL:
“If you can relay to me the best of the opposition and still want to be catholic, then I respect that like it's nobody's business. I'll disagree, but still respect.”[/color][/font]

[font="Arial"][color=purple]This begs the question “have you no respect for Catholics at present?” You have set up a conditional IF you do X THEN I will do Y, to which the converse is if X is not completed or performed, then Y will not be done either. In this case, IF we don’t “relay the best opposition” to you, THEN you will not respect “that it is like nobody’s business” meaning us Catholics. Therefore, upon entering this discourse, you clearly haven’t already had any of us to relay the best opposition to you, hence, as per your own conditional statement, you have no respect for Catholics from the onset. Try doing that with any other class of people and see what you get. Why don’t you go to an African American board and ask them to “relay to you their best argument FOR slavery”. Can’t you just imagine what kind of response you’d get? How about asking a atheists to explain what the best reason for belief in God is?

I like how you subtly admit that should we supply you with your requested arguments and continue to maintain our Catholic faith as true, then you will respect it, BUT you then say “I’ll disagree, but still respect”. Dairygirl, just WHO is not open to the truth here? If you want to request anyone else to be objective, then you are going to have to stand on that same plank as they do. This means, that if you make statements of the sort that say “no matter what the facts are, I refuse to change my position”, then your whole premise is suspect and most likely fraudulent, for you care not what the truth is if it means that you might be wrong.[/color]

[font="Geneva"][color=red]DAIRYGIRL:
“on, this type of examination is what Jesus wants of all of us. i think i'm doing His will.”[/color][/font][/font]

[font="Arial"][color=purple]If you are convinced you are doing His will, then where in His WORD is this prescription for “this type of examination”? Jesus gave the apostles many commands, but I don’t recall either the gospels, nor any of the rest of the New Testament, nor the Old Testament, requiring or even suggesting that “a true believer will be able to purport the greatest arguments against his/her faith, thus saith the Lord”.

What makes you THINK you are doing His will Dairygirl?


Pax Christi,

Thom[/color][/font]

[dairygirl4u2c]

[quote]is in suggesting that our motive for being Catholic is based on something other than objective truth[/quote]
the saddest aspect of this statement is that you feel you've based your decision on objective facts. Objective truth you may or may not have, but on a level for humans can determine, I have not seen anything based on objective fact. if you have based it on fact, then that's that.

If you would read the whole thread as a whole before responding, you would see that I am looking for Catholic who do not look at all arguments to examine their beliefs. I am also testing Catholics who think they have. If you'd read the whole thing before replying you'd see that if you have studied all of it, then I respect you a lot. If you don't, then I still respect you but not as much. You are jumping to conclusions by saying I only respect you if etc. I never said that.

Of course we should all examine our beliefs. It says to study scripture etc. I think you can for the most part make it say whatever you want, but the point is that it's there. Also, even if it wasn't, doesn't it make sense that God would want us to examine our beliefs by the chance that the beliefs we do hold happen to be wrong so that we can move on to the truth?


plus it'd be nice if you could take my challenge. Let's see if you can give me more than all the other's have given me. Give the best remember. For example, don't say well some say the pope is really an alien, but he's not an alien! Then maybe at best prove he's not an alien, but at worst, think you've been comprehensive or by any means effective in the purpose of this thread.. whichis to give the best arguements objectively speaking.. for example.. if one argument is the pope is an alien and another is the pope is just a man and a sham.. the man one is more realistic and objective, even if for the sake ofargument it is wrong.

[Scofizzle]

The only real reason I could see for a thread like this one is to practice your apologetics..you know kind of like getting to know the other teams plays. Other than that I don't really see the point.

In a debate of any subject matter you have an advantage when making your argument. the debaters heart is in the argument. someone cannot simply make a good strong argument against something they strongly believe in.

for a Catholic who is devout, there is no argument against the papacy. The Church says "it" is to be and it is. there are a these things called infallibility and devine inspiration that the church ahs on its side.

but I guess if you must know i found something you may enjoy. It is not my work so I will link you to it. It is not of the about the papacy in general but more specifically about JPII. It is utter nonsense that uses quotes taken out of context from JPII's works but enjoy none the less. [url="http://www.truecatholic.org/heresiesjp2.htm"]bull[/url]