I notice there were no questions about evolution, higher criticism, or myths and errors in the Bible. Why is that always left out of such things?
What relevance does this have with the article above?
Broadly speaking it is on topic. The article is written to “neutralize prejudices”. Zionist Conspirator’s chief concern is the Catholic doctrine of Biblical inerrancy, which he finds too liberal. I agree with him that it would be among legitimate questions put to Catholics, albeit not in the first tier of questions, because after all Protestant views on Biblical inerrancy range as well.
I notice there were no questions about evolution, higher criticism, or myths and errors in the Bible. Why is that always left out of such things?
What relevance does this have with the article above?
It's relevant because I'm interesting in learning how other converts to Catholicism from a Fundamentalist background deal with the issues I mentioned. Do they cave in and become evolutionists and errantists themselves? Do they maintain their inerrantism while feeling guilty for "being bad Catholics?" Do they persevere?
I'm genuinely interested and genuinely puzzled at how little Protestant converts talk about this. But you know good and well that they have to deal with it. I just wonder how.