There is nothing ad hominem about holding to the One Truth of Christ anymore than Christ Himself spoke of “fools, hypocrites, blind guides, whited sepulchers, murderers, a generation of snakes.” Now, if you insist on polite language we can do that and gently treat the scriptural interpretations of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, David Koresh, Jim Jones, Joel Osteen, and Creflo Dollar.
But at the heart of all this, are Protestant interpretations in clear conflict with the teaching of Christ and of His ONE Church that infallibly assembled the canonical texts in the Synod of Rome in AD 382 and the Church’s infallible authority was so for ELEVEN centuries until the curse of the Reformation that spawned in Hillaire Belloc’s famous words, “a cluster of heresies.”
The ONE teaching and ONE authority extended to Peter and his successors were never questioned. They included the early Church fathers, some of whom were contemporaries of the evangelist John; the early saints and martyrs, and a renowned array of Catholic theologians from Augustine to Aquinas to Newman to Benedict XVI -known as the theological Einstein of our times.
Is this your version of the “herd”?
You ask for some proof of Catholic teaching, and we provide you with the writings of an extraordinary Protestant scholar who sought o show Catholicism was all wrong, and then after several years of careful study ended up converting to Catholicism. He is not alone. These are several other eminent Protestant theologians like him who converted to Catholicism as soon as they waded deep into scripture and theological history.
One must gather from all this that your inquiries are not serious.
Instead, we are asked to accept from a menu of different scriptural interpretations ranging from Billy Graham to Jim Jones and reject the teachings of Catholic and eminent Lutheran theologians who converted to Catholicism, the early Church fathers, the infallibility of Petrine authority that assembled the canonical texts, and of course the early saints and martyrs.
The “herd”?
You can now see the comments I offered about shallow Bible Christianity in the context of all of this.
The term “Bible thumpers” came about from Protestants like TD Jakes and others who rain down cascades of scriptural quotes, give it “their” own interpretation, wave the Bible in the air with a sense of foreboding authenticity.y This is no more like the vapid preachings of Billy Graham, Jimmy Swaggart or Al Sharpton all offering”their” interpretations of scripture, as being the one truth, the one “they” believe.
Now, If you must insist that we use polite terms and not follow the lingo of Christ, well that may be possible too. But we know how Christ referred to such hucksters.
Oops sorry, I used an ad hominem term again. Maybe I should have just gone with “herds” to refer to Peter and his successors.
Why don't you show us where anyone besides YOU invoked these people? You're the ONLY one who brings them up?
But at the heart of all this, are Protestant interpretations in clear conflict with the teaching of Christ and of His ONE Church that infallibly assembled the canonical texts in the Synod of Rome in AD 382 and the Church’s infallible authority was so for ELEVEN centuries until the curse of the Reformation that spawned in Hillaire Belloc’s famous words, “a cluster of heresies.” The ONE teaching and ONE authority extended to Peter and his successors were never questioned. They included the early Church fathers, some of whom were contemporaries of the evangelist John; the early saints and martyrs, and a renowned array of Catholic theologians from Augustine to Aquinas to Newman to Benedict XVI -known as the theological Einstein of our times.
You asserting something over and over and over like a broken record doesn't make it true.
You ask for some proof of Catholic teaching, and we provide you with the writings of an extraordinary Protestant scholar who sought o show Catholicism was all wrong, and then after several years of careful study ended up converting to Catholicism. He is not alone. These are several other eminent Protestant theologians like him who converted to Catholicism as soon as they waded deep into scripture and theological history.
For every Protestant theologian like this, there are thousands who don't swim across the Tiber. I suppose their testimony is to be ignored. What about the Catholics who become Protestants? Their testimony doesn't count, either, right?
One must gather from all this that your inquiries are not serious.
Or that the evidence that you once again provide is not compelling.
You can now see the comments I offered about shallow Bible Christianity in the context of all of this.
So were you showing us "deep end of the pool" analysis? Sorry, I must have blinked and missed it.
But we know how Christ referred to such hucksters.
"Get behind me, Satan"? Oh, wait a minute, that was the First Pope, shortly after his "coronation." Everyone, including you, needs to be careful about presumption - Christ is going to tell some "depart from me, I never knew you."
Steelfish,
You can, of course, post however you wish. It just fails to be persuasive to anyone who does not already pre-believe all the Catholic stuff.
Are you only trying to speak to Catholics?
I spoke to you kindly. I tried to help you view your posts from another’s point of view. I’m guessing you are not aware of how you come across.
Since you fail to use evidence, logic and facts, I conclude you have none.
Your posts are filled with truth claims you do not back up. We watch. We ask. They just fall to the ground like deflated Christmas lawn art when dawn comes.
FRiend, you refer to your converted champion as a “extraordinary Protestant scholar”. Not only is this not true, but it is a logical fallacy of argument. An appeal to authority instead of evidence, logic and facts. As such, it is rejected. I’ve already given you my reasons specific to him, but of course it remains a logical fallacy.
That and ad hominem are the “arguments” of the post.
Already recognized as just air.
Is that all you have???
Kindest regards.