Posted on 07/25/2009 8:04:47 PM PDT by bdeaner
Yes, you believe G-d caused a single "big bang" after which the laws of nature took over and formed the universe without any interference from Him. And as I said, everything in the first eleven chapters (that Adam was a real individual who lived 930 years, that Cain really killed Abel, that a worldwide Flood destroyed all life except for those on (or clinging to) the Ark, that G-d instantaneously created the Seventy Languages of the World at the Tower of Babel (prior to which everyone spoke Hebrew), etc., etc., etc.
People who deny all the forgoing who suddenly become "pious illiterate peasants" when it comes to the "new testament" get my dander up, I must admit.
If they get this knowledge from reading your common "holy book," then, no I don't.
As for my Catholic schooling, I was an adult convert. I went through RCIA (with Wilhelm's book). Shoot, they didn't even explain to me that it is heretical to believe that one can ever know with certainty whether or not one is in the "state of grace." No wonder they didn't tell me I was supposed to believe in evolution!
***Last time I looked, we strongly believe that God created the heavens and the earth and everything in it on and on it. Quite a sweeping statement. How about picking out the first 20 and we’ll compare your beliefs to the Catholic ones.
Yes, you believe G-d caused a single “big bang” after which the laws of nature took over and formed the universe without any interference from Him.***
I do? Show me where I believe this.
***And as I said, everything in the first eleven chapters (that Adam was a real individual who lived 930 years, that Cain really killed Abel, that a worldwide Flood destroyed all life except for those on (or clinging to) the Ark, that G-d instantaneously created the Seventy Languages of the World at the Tower of Babel (prior to which everyone spoke Hebrew), etc., etc., etc.***
Why not pick out the first twenty miracles in the Bible and we can discuss them one by one; you with whatever you have, and I’ll bring the Catechism.
***People who deny all the forgoing who suddenly become “pious illiterate peasants” when it comes to the “new testament” get my dander up, I must admit.***
Perhaps your understanding is less than complete of Catholic belief.
***Therefore your statement about me is incorrect. I do not accuse those who claim belief of Gnosticism. I accuse those who claim quasi-intuitive knowledge as the driving force, the means or the path to their personal salvation as Gnostic. Do you see the difference?
If they get this knowledge from reading your common “holy book,” then, no I don’t.***
Gnosticism is largely extra Scriptural and its influence on Christianity came mostly after the NT was written. Therefore the NT does not explicitly address it in depth; that was left to the Church Fathers during that time. The Gnostic scriptures were discarded and the Gnostics were turned out of the Church; they resurfaced a few times but had no traction until the Reformation.
***As for my Catholic schooling, I was an adult convert. I went through RCIA (with Wilhelm’s book). Shoot, they didn’t even explain to me that it is heretical to believe that one can ever know with certainty whether or not one is in the “state of grace.”***
Your Catholic education is far from complete; yet you profess to speak as if you are well catechized.
***No wonder they didn’t tell me I was supposed to believe in evolution!***
Huh?
Yes, you believe G-d caused a single “big bang” after which the laws of nature took over and formed the universe without any interference from Him.***
I do? Show me where I believe this.
Well, thank you so very much for all the help you've been in my weekend-long argument with your co-religionist bdeaner on two different threads (here as well as this one we're on) as he loudly shoots off his bazoo that "Catholics believe in evolution" and "we now know" all sort of things that ancient Jewish and chr*stian theologians were ignorant of. You have been such a help! Really!
You and all the other Catholics who are "shocked--shocked!" at being identified with evolution and liberalism sicken me. Well that's too ding dang bad, my friend. Your co-religionists go around screaming that a belief in evolution is one of the distinguishing characteristics of a Catholic as opposed to those awful Fundamentalist Protestants, and you oh so offended types never show up. You're too busy looking at your watches or defending Mary or something you actually give a hang about (unlike Genesis). So please spare me your smarmy "innocent" routine. I've appealed to "creationist" Catholics all weekend long and they've all run for the hills like cowards.
Wideawake was the only Catholic creationist on this forum. And apparently he is no longer with us. Your loss. The rest of you are worse than useless. So don't you dare play that "where did you ever get that idea?" on me.
***Yes, you believe G-d caused a single “big bang” after which the laws of nature took over and formed the universe without any interference from Him.***
I do? Show me where I believe this.
Well, thank you so very much for all the help you’ve been in my weekend-long argument with your co-religionist bdeaner on two different threads (here as well as this one we’re on) as he loudly shoots off his bazoo that “Catholics believe in evolution” and “we now know” all sort of things that ancient Jewish and chr*stian theologians were ignorant of. You have been such a help! Really!***
Now just calm down and answer my question. You haven’t, you know.
***You and all the other Catholics who are “shocked—shocked!” at being identified with evolution and liberalism sicken me. Well that’s too ding dang bad, my friend. ***
Shocked? Where are you getting all this? Point to some hard evidence, please.
By the way, there is sufficient evidence that evolution does occur; genetic recombination by itself is evidence of it. Does that mean that God did not create the Universe? Of course not. Ding dang? Is this a new ice cream flavour?
***Your co-religionists go around screaming that a belief in evolution is one of the distinguishing characteristics of a Catholic as opposed to those awful Fundamentalist Protestants, and you oh so offended types never show up.***
Show me where I am oh so offended.
***You’re too busy looking at your watches or defending Mary or something you actually give a hang about (unlike Genesis). ***
You accuse me of not caring about Genesis? Proofs, please.
***So please spare me your smarmy “innocent” routine.***
Are you reading my mind and understanding my motives once again?
***I’ve appealed to “creationist” Catholics all weekend long and they’ve all run for the hills like cowards***
It’s Monday. What do you mean by ‘creationist’? If you mean a belief that God created all, then I am a creationist.
***Wideawake was the only Catholic creationist on this forum. ***
Define creationism according to ZC.
***The rest of you are worse than useless.***
What do you define use as, and what standards do you apply to it?
***So don’t you dare play that “where did you ever get that idea?” on me.***
If you stick around long enough and pay enough attention, I can guide you through the Faith, which apparently you didn’t get whatsoever the first time around.
Then go and dispute with your co-religionist bdeaner. Otherwise, cry me a river.
PS: If you take the trouble to follow the debate between myself and my opponent on that other thread you will see how I define "creationism."
You accuse me of not caring about Genesis? Proofs, please.
Then go and dispute with your co-religionist bdeaner. Otherwise, cry me a river.
Please excuse me. I see now that you have already been speaking with bdeaner on this thread in order to agree with him. Since you share his belief that evolutionism is an important part of Catholic belief, your protestations of innocence are revealed as smarmier than ever.
I recall one thing from my pathetic "cathechesis." Unlike Protestantism, I was told, Catholicism rejects fideism. But according to you and your friend kosta50 (whom, as you know, isn't even sure that J*sus actually ever existed), anything other than fideism is gnosticism and arrogance.
No wonder your church is going down the . . . ahem . . . tubes.
Duh. Post #88 was meant for you.
***You accuse me of not caring about Genesis? Proofs, please.
Then go and dispute with your co-religionist bdeaner. Otherwise, cry me a river.***
I am not disputing bdeaner. I am debating you. However, I will have enough decorum to ping him. I asked you for proofs about me. You and I have debated in the past. I am not bdeaner. And I have asked you for proofs of things that you accuse me of.
***PS: If you take the trouble to follow the debate between myself and my opponent on that other thread you will see how I define “creationism.”***
Interesting. You expect me to trail you around FR in the hopes that I can appreciate the dribblings from your lips? I don’t care about that other thread in which you debate somebody else in the context of this thread. I asked you for an answer in good faith. Are you prepared to honor that or not?
***You accuse me of not caring about Genesis? Proofs, please.
Then go and dispute with your co-religionist bdeaner. Otherwise, cry me a river.
Please excuse me. I see now that you have already been speaking with bdeaner on this thread in order to agree with him. Since you share his belief that evolutionism is an important part of Catholic belief, your protestations of innocence are revealed as smarmier than ever.***
I have never protested innocence. I do however will not let you label me. I urge you to answer my questions without staging a scene.
***I recall one thing from my pathetic “cathechesis.” Unlike Protestantism, I was told, Catholicism rejects fideism. But according to you and your friend kosta50 (whom, as you know, isn’t even sure that J*sus actually ever existed), anything other than fideism is gnosticism and arrogance. ***
There is a difference between belief and knowledge. Which do you claim?
***No wonder your church is going down the . . . ahem . . . tubes.***
Not my Church. It’s the Church of Jesus Christ. I just get to participate and follow Him. Sorry to disappoint. Down the tubes? However do you mean?
***Duh. Post #88 was meant for you.***
Wow, more fine language. I congratulate you sir.
Because you agree with him, which is what I said to begin with. There's the proof that you regard the first eleven chapters of Genesis as non-historical.
Interesting. You expect me to trail you around FR in the hopes that I can appreciate the dribblings from your lips?
No. I expect people who throw out their chests and claim there is "no proof" that they believe so-and-so to act like they don't believe the so-and-so I have allegedly falsely accused them of believing. If you're going to deny the first eleven chapters of Genesis then don't act so hurt when somebody calls you on it.
Your choosing to argue with me and agree with bdeaner is proof that you share his beliefs about Genesis 1-11. Debate over.
My bad. I thought that fideism and agnosticism were "Protestant" things.
I'll tell you how I know what I know by asking you the same question I asked your friend kosta50:
There are two sections in the Torah that list kosher and non-kosher species. Chickens are not listed in either category in either section. Yet Jews know that chicken is kosher. How do they know this?
It's not that hard.
The "duh" was directed at myself for my error in posting to myself. How in the world did you interpret it as directed to you?
How do you know that the mitzvot are God's commandments? And which mitzvah says you must believe in God?
Chickens are not mentioned in either list as either permitted or prohibited. Yet Jews know (not "believe") that they are permitted to eat chicken. How do they know this?
I don't have a clue. If I had to guess it would be because they are not mammals and don't ruminate, and they are not carnivorous. But the answer is still dependent on assumption that the Bible is truly God's word.
So you don't consider yourself a chr*stian? What's your word for yourself?
I am who I am (and I don't mean God, so don't jump to nay conclusions). I have no label.
Mr. Rogers: There is the problem. Proof such as you desire exists in mathematics. It is NOT the standard used in court.
Beyond the shadow of a doubt is not the standard in the court?
It is also not the standard you use for any of your decisions.
I use it all the time. I do not touch hot stove tops. I do not jump off tall buildings. I do not stick my fingers into electrical outlets, etc. These are all fact-based decisions. It's called being in touch with reality. Something religion is not. The world of religion is a magical world where donkeys talk sensibly and where people live inside a fish for days, where diseases are cause by 'demons' and where cure for every ill is driving those 'demons' out!
Nor have I ever met anyone who thinks God or any religious belief can be proven like that.
Then why do they believe what cannot be proven? And why do they speak and act as if what they believe in is a fact?
For Noachides it's the prohibition of idolatry. For Jews it's 'Anokhi HaShem 'Eloqeykha 'asher hotze'tikha me'Eretz Mitzrayim, mibet `avadim ("I am HaShem your G-d Who brought you up out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage")--the first of the Ten Utterances at Mt. Sinai.
Chickens are not mentioned in either list as either permitted or prohibited. Yet Jews know (not "believe") that they are permitted to eat chicken. How do they know this?
I don't have a clue. If I had to guess it would be because they are not mammals and don't ruminate, and they are not carnivorous. But the answer is still dependent on assumption that the Bible is truly God's word.
You didn't understand my question, perhaps because you are not familiar with the text. Both sections dealing with kosher and non-kosher species have a paragraph dealing with birds. Birds don't have a hard-and-fast rule like mammals and fish do. All both sections do is simply list a number of birds that are not kosher. Now . . . chickens aren't mentioned at all, one way or another. Neither do we know from other places in the Torah that they are kosher, as we do with doves and partridges. Yet Jews know that chickens are committed. Now, having restated this, try one more time. If you can't do it this time I'll tell you.
So you don't consider yourself a chr*stian? What's your word for yourself?
I am who I am
So is everyone else, yet you don't cut the people you disagree with any slack.
(and I don't mean God, so don't jump to nay conclusions). I have no label.
Yet you hang out here and pretend to be Eastern Orthodox, beating your chest about how it is "real chr*stianity" even though you don't even know that J*sus ever existed. (You really enjoy driving rednecks crazy, don't you? I'll bet you really went to town with magnifying glasses and ants when you were a kid.) And if somebody calls you on it you back up and say "now wait a minute, I didn't actually say I was Eastern Orthodox, did I?" And the "real" Eastern Orthodox on this forum play along with you because twanging rednecks are such an embarrassment to the "glorious chr*stian religion" and need to be put in their place.
BTW, though I doubt you're interested, I have a few labels for you.
***I am not disputing bdeaner.
Because you agree with him, which is what I said to begin with.***
I agree with the Catechism. If bdeaner differs, then I differ with him. If he agrees, then I agree with him.
***There’s the proof that you regard the first eleven chapters of Genesis as non-historical.***
That is not proof. Show me the proof in my postings.
***Interesting. You expect me to trail you around FR in the hopes that I can appreciate the dribblings from your lips?
No. I expect people who throw out their chests and claim there is “no proof” that they believe so-and-so to act like they don’t believe the so-and-so I have allegedly falsely accused them of believing.***
If you accuse me of something, then have the temerity to prove it with evidence.
***Your choosing to argue with me and agree with bdeaner is proof that you share his beliefs about Genesis 1-11. Debate over.***
Debate over? Are you taking on the role of Hamilton Burger?
***There is a difference between belief and knowledge. Which do you claim?
My bad. I thought that fideism and agnosticism were “Protestant” things. ***
Explain.
***I’ll tell you how I know what I know by asking you the same question I asked your friend kosta50:
There are two sections in the Torah that list kosher and non-kosher species. Chickens are not listed in either category in either section. Yet Jews know that chicken is kosher. How do they know this?***
How about you tell me?
***It’s not that hard.***
Sometimes it is. God would have all men be saved. Yet men get their backs up and rebel. The whole OT is the history of the Jewish nation rebelling against God. It’s okay; you can be Catholic again. God still loves all men.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.