Reading ON Catholicism, and ACTUALLY READING our Scripture, commentary, documents, lives of the Saints, Sacred Tradition, etc. are two different things.
>>What I find interesting is that when roman catholic beliefs are shown to be false, the catholic defaults back to "we have been around xxxx number of years,<<
If you check back on the post, it was you who put the numbers in, not I.
>>or we have the magisterium, or sacred tradition, etc. They cannot and will not support their positions with the Word. It is telling they don't.<<
For a Catholic, the three go together. That's simply how it is. There is no obligation on our part to explain to anyone. It is what we believe, and can seem very complex to those ignorant of our teachings, or misinformed.
As for what it tells, it tells that generations of Spirit have guided us through tribulations, scandals, rebellion, and yet the Word remains. It is when people presume they know more and can formulate ideas based on error and semantics that confusion begins. A true Catholic understands the humility and obedience required to accept the Church's authority, together with the hand-in hand relationship between faith and our obligation of love to God and to one another to do good works. It isn't an easy road to follow. It's much easier to interpret as one feels and independently follow one's own rules on how to live their life. That is not the "Catholic arrogance" spoken of earlier in our discussion.
Reading ON Catholicism, and ACTUALLY READING our Scripture, commentary, documents, lives of the Saints, Sacred Tradition, etc. are two different things.
Uhhh, no they're not.
Sorry, the texts in your Bible are the same as in mine except for the apocrypha.
Can you point to a specific Scripture that says Mary was immaculately conceived?
You cannot. How do I know this....I've read catholic apologists who admit it! Absolutely no support for this false teaching is in the Word, yet when this is pointed out catholics run from it like it's the plague. Which I guess to them it is.
When discussing the "perpetual virginity" of Mary and the Greek is used to show Jesus had siblings, what do catholics do? Duck their heads in the sand and fall back on "you don't know what the word "until" means or "the Greek word can mean cousins/brothers" when the clear context of the verse tells you Jesus had siblings.
>>or we have the magisterium, or sacred tradition, etc. They cannot and will not support their positions with the Word. It is telling they don't.<<
For a Catholic, the three go together. That's simply how it is. There is no obligation on our part to explain to anyone. .
Good thing Paul didn't have that kind of an arrogant attitude in explaining Christianity. I believe the NT tells us we are to be ready in season and out of season to give a defense of the Gospel.
Guess catholicism doesn't share that desire. And we still are waiting for an explanation of just what "sacred tradition" catholics claim was handed down by the apostles that isn't found in the Word.
Please keep in mind that on these threads there are only 2-3 prots that are actually Christians. The haters will never understand the distinction that you have made.