Unbiased apologetics websites

[LittleLes]

LittleLes is back.!

Apparently my two week suspension for debating another Catholic has ended.

Precisely how one is suppose to know the religion of other posters is unclear, nor is the reason why Catholics cannot debate Catholicism among themselves convincingly stated. Unless, of course, one maintains that there can be no error in Catholic teachings and hence debate is impossible.

Moreover, the practice of "locking" a topic when a defense of the Catholic position becomes untenable seems intellectually dishonest.

This suggests a less than open debate and even a biased one.

To his credit, in a e-mail, DUST admits as much:

It says that phatmass is biased.
I thought that was fairly obvious though.

dUSt
----------

For those who would prefer an open, objective, and unbiased debate of Catholic teaachings, may I suggest the apologetics sites on Yahoo Groups?

LittleLes

[Brother Adam]

We prefer the orthodox Catholic teaching of phatmass.

[Noel's angel]

unbiased debate of Catholic teachings-that doesn't make an awful lot of sense I'm afraid

[homeschoolmom]

[quote name='Noel's angel' date='Aug 18 2005, 10:33 AM']unbiased debate of Catholic teachings-that doesn't make an awful lot of sense I'm afraid
[right][snapback]688931[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
There is no such thing...

[Aloysius]

as long as you don't claim to represent the Church, we can continue debating as much as you want. dUSt pays big bucks to own this website, it is his perogative as to what message he wants this website to get accross. he doesn't want to be paying big bucks to promote an idea about the Church that he doesn't agree with. therefore, he doesn't want "catholics" saying things that misrepresent Catholocism.

you should feel privledged that he tolerated your nonsense on his website that he pays big bucks for as long as he did.

you can continue to spout nonsense, i suppose, just don't claim yourself to be a member of the Catholic Church because frankly, you are not. for:

"And those who say "there once was when he was not", and "before he was begotten he was not", and that he came to be from things that were not, or from another hypostasis or substance, affirming that the Son of God is subject to change or alteration -- these the Catholic and Apostolic Church anathematises."
-Nicaea I

First and foremost you cannot be Catholic and deny the divinity of Christ. We settled that 1700 years ago.

[IcePrincessKRS]

an unbiased religious forum? suuuure.

No one here has ever, ever denied that we are biased. We're talking about our FAITH here, if we should be biased about anything it should be that!

[popestpiusx]

I'm not biased in any direction. Nor do I have opinions of anything whatsoever.

[Aloysius]

the debate table (super happy friendly happy dialogue corner) moderation should be unbiased, and it is to the extent that opposing non-Catholic viewpoints can be posted as much as they like.

however, if you claim to be Catholic then you are held to a higher standard and should rep the Church.

all LittleLes must do is honestly admit he isn't Catholic. I could come up with a thousand council anathemas that apply to him and show that he is not in communion with the Catholic Church from the Church's view.

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Brother Adam' date='Aug 18 2005, 10:16 AM']We prefer the orthodox Catholic teaching of phatmass.
[right][snapback]688919[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]


RESPONSE:

If "orthodox" teachings cannot survive rational examination, you are welcome to them.

But I prefer to examine the evidence . And if error or contradiction is found, then rethinking is required.

But, of course, "true believers" can't accept that any errors in their belief system might exist. Maybe that's why they aren't allowed to debate, you think??? :

[Aloysius]

we accept rational examination. however, the Catholic and Apostolic Church has anathamized your view, therefore if your rational examination has led you to this view (I'm mostly concerned about the Divinity of Christ, one of the central doctrines of the Church) then you must logically admit you are no longer Catholic. Then we can continue to debate and there will be no problem, our orthodox catholic view will be rationally examined by your non-catholic view. If your non-catholic view were to convince me, I would cease to be catholic. it's that simple.

[Era Might]

LittleLes, LittleLes, how I would have desired to gather you under my wings as a hen gathers her brood, but you would not.

Edited August 18, 2005 by Era Might

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 18 2005, 11:45 AM']the debate table (super happy friendly happy dialogue corner) moderation should be unbiased, and it is to the extent that opposing non-Catholic viewpoints can be posted as much as they like. 

however, if you claim to be Catholic then you are held to a higher standard and should rep the Church.

all LittleLes must do is honestly admit he isn't Catholic.  I could come up with a thousand council anathemas that apply to him and show that he is not in communion with the Catholic Church from the Church's view.
[right][snapback]688987[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Does the "higher standard" that Catholics are held too include admitting error when it exists? Or aren't they allowed to do that?

And you have to be consistent here. If I was put on suspension for debating a Catholic as a Catholic, then I must be Catholic.

Incidently, Aloysius, if you, like most Catholics, do not believe that it is the will of God that (Lutheran) heretics be burned at the stake, you are already excommunicated. In fact; "a major automatic excommunication."(See Exsurge domine, #33 - on the web).

LittleLes

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Aug 18 2005, 12:53 PM']RESPONSE:

If "orthodox" teachings  cannot survive rational examination, you are welcome to them.

But I prefer to examine the evidence . And if error or contradiction is found, then  rethinking is required.

But, of course, "true believers" can't accept that any errors in their belief system might exist.  Maybe that's why they  aren't allowed to  debate, you think??? :
[right][snapback]689003[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

As a non-catholic you can hold any view you choose. So if you want to go to a garage and call yourself a car - go right ahead.

Catholicism has been discussed and debated for 2000 years by the greatest minds of every age.
The smart ones admitted defeat and joined the Church.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='LittleLes' date='Aug 18 2005, 01:46 PM']RESPONSE:

Does the "higher standard" that Catholics are held too include admitting error when it exists? Or aren't they allowed to do that?

And you have to be consistent here. If I was put on suspension for debating a Catholic as a Catholic, then I must be Catholic.

Incidently, Aloysius, if you, like most Catholics, do not believe that it is the will of God that (Lutheran) heretics be burned at the stake,  you are already excommunicated. In fact;  "a major automatic excommunication."(See Exsurge domine, #33 - on the web).

LittleLes
[right][snapback]689061[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I believe the execution of heretics who cause trouble by a Catholic society in its defense is not against the will of God if that's what you mean. that's not to say that it is always and everywhere the will of God.

For example, if I were in charge of a Catholic Country, and someone went around like Martin Luther burning every book but the Bible and threatening members of the Church with either convert or be killed, I'd send in the military and have every last one of those heretics executed in the defense of my society.

same thing in the secular world if an entire group of people revolted and committed treason against your country, you'd be justified in protecting your country to sentence them to death.

but off of that red herring...

You were suspended for claiming to be a Catholic and thus participating in Catholic vs. Catholic debate. Admit you are not Catholic, for your views have been anathemized, and we can continue to debate.

The higher standard means that if you are to claim to be Catholic, you do not disagree with those things the Church says you must agree with to be Catholic. If you find those things to be in error, you should simply cease to be Catholic. if you convinced me of most of the supposed "errors" you think exist, I would cease to be Catholic.

it's about personal honesty and intellectual honesty. the Catholic Church says that to join her you must believe certain things. it leaves the joining and believing part up to you. It is intellecutally dishonest to not believe those things and claim to be Catholic.

if you don't believe them, if you think they are wrong... fine. then you aren't Catholic.

[Sirklawd]

i think the reply your looking for (to go to another forum) is....


no.

[Didacus]

welcome back LittleLes... back to your usual mischief I see....

Play nice now...

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 18 2005, 11:55 AM']we accept rational examination.  however, the Catholic and Apostolic Church has anathamized your view, therefore if your rational examination has led you to this view (I'm mostly concerned about the Divinity of Christ, one of the central doctrines of the Church) then you must logically admit you are no longer Catholic.  Then we can continue to debate and there will be no problem, our orthodox catholic view will be rationally examined by your non-catholic view.  If your non-catholic view were to convince me, I would cease to be catholic.  it's that simple.
[right][snapback]689007[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

So you are saying you accept rational examination, but you are anathmatized for not accepting only what the Church tells you to accept regardless of the result of rational examination. Is that your statement?

"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.... "

And among the condemned, reprobated, and rejected theses is this:

"33. That heretics be burned is against the will of the Spirit. "

So unless Catholics believe its the will of God that heretics (in the case of Exsurge domine, it is Lutheran heretics) be burned at the stake, these Catholics are already excommunicated.

Didn't Exsurge meet all the criteria established by Vatican I for an infallible ex cathedra papal teaching?

But somehow I don't think I have to believe this of God. Do you?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 18 2005, 12:54 PM']


The higher standard means that if you are to claim to be Catholic, you do not disagree with those things the Church says you must agree with to be Catholic. If you find those things to be in error, you should simply cease to be Catholic. if you convinced me of most of the supposed "errors" you think exist, I would cease to be Catholic.

RESPONSE:

Yes. An "orthodox Catholic can never question the party line.

Shouldn't you warn your Lutheran neighbor that you are an orthodox Catholic?

[LittleLes]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='Aug 18 2005, 12:46 PM']
Catholicism has been discussed and debated for 2000 years by the greatest minds of every age.
The smart ones admitted defeat and joined the Church.
[right][snapback]689063[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

RESPONSE:

Any evidence here or is this something you were told you must believe. And, of course, it is self -fulfilling. If someone joins the Church, he is by your definition, smart. But if he doesn't he must be dumb. That's the proof, eh? :

[LittleLes]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='Aug 18 2005, 12:54 PM']
I believe the execution of heretics who cause trouble by a Catholic society in its defense is not against the will of God if that's what you mean. that's not to say that it is always and everywhere the will of God.

RESPONSE:

It either is or is not against the will of God to burn heretics at the stake. And the Pope says you must believe that it is the will of God.

Not simply executing mid you, but burning!!!!