Insert pic: RoseAnn Roseannadana
It's always something. There's the rubber meeting the road. Premise: A "Bible only" church gets a lot right but is "off" on a few things. Next move should be to look elsewhere for less wrong.
Then one can find that a "small wrong thing" in the new church was a big right thing in the previous church. I cite the example of water baptism.
Some "Bible only" faith traditions claim it is essential to salvation. Others teach that while baptism should be done, that its reception is not essential to salvation.
I have tried, sporadically, over the years on this board, for someone who defends sola scriptura to rationalize this. I have never seen it done.
The RCC has MORE inconsistencies . . . contradictions . . . factions . . . cliques . . . political blocks . . . doctrinal groups . . . diversities . . .
I’ve been shocked at the degree of such differences.
Even the primary documents are incredibly convoluted and diverse in perspectives.
And what RC’s have told us hereon is THE TRUEST TRULY TRUE RCC TRUTH
has often been contradicted by other RC’s hereon.
The maze of RCC dogma
as presented
and
as lived out on FR has been one of my greater shocks that RC’s on FR have repeatedly shoved in my face.
I’d have never guessed that was the reality before FR. I’d had hints of such from some of my RC friends before. Maybe I didn’t dig deeply enough in those conversations. I just never had a very significant inkling that the realities within the organization were THAT diverse. The first 50 years of my life, I just assumed it was greatly more homogeneous than it obviously is.
What’s also mystifying to many Proddys is that RC’s on FR seem to virtually all be quite blind to that or in denial of that. Mad Dawg is often an exception but even he seems to overmuch, imho, fairly glibly slide over that rather startlingly significant fact.