Replies

You consist of an individual interpreting Scripture. How do you call four different accounts, all in contradiction of the other infallible? Do you hold four different views of any event in your real life and consider yourself to have infallible interpretation of it?

You have made it quite obvious that you worship the magesterium in your own mirror every time you split off from what they have decided is doctrine of the Catholic faith. You must know very well that they have made declarations of the infallible, God-inspired, error free Holy Scriptures and assert exactly that in the Catechism you "say" you uphold. You apparently are stuck on the problem you think you see in differing accounts of the resurrection morning and, in truth, it is no more mysterious than voicing the viewpoints of the different people who gave their own accounts to the writer. No retelling of a real event is ever in perfect sync between various people and, if they were, it would prove a prior conspiracy between them to all tell the exact same thing. This, by the way, is a good way police investigating a crime can judge the truthfulness of the witnesses. No one person sees everything it exactly the same was as another especially not when they happen upon a scene at different times.

Your own Magesterium holds that the Holy Spirit "breathed" the very words to the hearts of the writers of Scripture, yet you state time after time that you STILL cannot come to terms with what you say are "discrepancies", which is only a slightly nicer way to say errors or contradictions.

On this point I am closer to the doctrine of Scriptural integrity of your Magesterium than you are. How did THAT happen?

"You have made it quite obvious that you worship the magesterium in your own mirror every time you split off from what they have decided is doctrine of the Catholic faith. You must know very well that they have made declarations of the infallible, God-inspired, error free Holy Scriptures and assert exactly that in the Catechism you "say" you uphold."

The Catholic Church certainly does consider the Scriptures to be infallible, God-inspired, error free Holy Scriptures and Catholics do uphold those. Mark did not say that the Scriptures contradict each other, only that they apparently do. It is up to us to rationalize their unified and comprehensive meaning.

Some believe that God chose these apparently contradictory passages to illustrate that we cannot rely upon the entire Bible in its unified context, not individual versus and snippets. Since none of us are clever enough to learn this by ourselves, we Catholics call upon the Magisterium to decide.

You have made it quite obvious that you worship the magesterium in your own mirror every time you split off from what they have decided is doctrine of the Catholic faith.

Have I? Let us see.

You must know very well that they have made declarations of the infallible, God-inspired, error free Holy Scriptures and assert exactly that in the Catechism you "say" you uphold.

I have been corrected twice here on FR where I differed from the Catechism and have thankfully and publically posted that acknowledgement.

You apparently are stuck on the problem you think you see in differing accounts of the resurrection morning and, in truth, it is no more mysterious than voicing the viewpoints of the different people who gave their own accounts to the writer. No retelling of a real event is ever in perfect sync between various people and, if they were, it would prove a prior conspiracy between them to all tell the exact same thing. This, by the way, is a good way police investigating a crime can judge the truthfulness of the witnesses. No one person sees everything it exactly the same was as another especially not when they happen upon a scene at different times.

There is a difference between infallibility of interpretation and infallibility of text. You claim infallibility of text. Well, let's have it. What is written, infallibly, over the head of Jesus on the Cross? No waffling this time, please.

Inspiration is not dictation. Scripture is only as good as fallible men have received and acted upon the inspiration. We are not the robots of the Reformed who can only do what is programmed. God does not dictate; He inspires. He breathes; we receive and interpret what is breathed. Unless we are perfect (we Catholics are not), then we receive imperfectly. Do you claim personal infallibility?

On this point I am closer to the doctrine of Scriptural integrity of your Magesterium than you are. How did THAT happen?

In the light of day, I don't think so.