The interesting thing to me is how each of the citations seems to be restating the same thing almost verbatim.. as though it were hastily written and as usual showing no real depth. Catholic Philosophy seems always to Grow and be fleshed out in the latter time rather than being a fully developed doctrine which has been followed from the start. Why is it that clarity and detail seems to creep in over time and is usually always pointing backward to documents that cannot be verified for veracity and exist only in Catholic circles.. The great inigma... It's bad enough that it's unbiblical, but, they want to buy credibility based on popularity or usage by some early person or persons . Or through quotation of Catholics. Is this not like having hitler say, "Aryans are the master race" and then for support seeing him turn around and ask an aryan for a supporting statement. LOL. Strong argument.
Catholic Philosophy seems always to Grow and be fleshed out in the latter time rather than being a fully developed doctrine which has been followed from the start. Why is it that clarity and detail seems to creep in over time and is usually always pointing backward to documents that cannot be verified for veracity and exist only in Catholic circles..
I have often thought what a great tool this thread is for the Catholics to develop their doctrine and clean it up for later use, what other forum gives them every possible argument against their beliefs, but still is known by such a small hand full of people.
Can you see their monks pouring over these threads saying, Hey, here is an angle I never thought of, or that was a good argument so and so made on that point, or let's feed this in to them and see how it flies. (^g^) JH