Why is the Vatican and Catholicism superior?

Status
Not open for further replies.
S

SpiritualAntiseptic

Guest
You say Rome doesn't believe in "theistic evolution" (6,000 year creation time period), and yet look at what this Catholic Answers Web site has to say:

Creation and Genesis

You'll need to quote the website (which can't speak for the Catholic Church anyways) before I can address it.

Basically, it puts more weight in to what the early church fathers have to say, than what the Bible says. Again, tradition trumps Scripture. It clearly states in Genesis 1, over and over again six times: "And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.". What marks out days now and then? Sunset and sunrise.

So called "bible literalism" doesn't mean your interpretation of scripture is the right one.

When people say they pay attention to what the bible says, to "what is plainly written" they show a vast depth of ignorance. What is means is they take an English interpretation of the bible and filter it through their understanding of language and culture. For example, when the bible talks about "the world" westerners commonly think of the planet- when they had no concept of the planet when the bible was written.

[quote[Regarding Paul identifying the Papacy as the Antichrist: The Reformers who were almost all former Catholics who came to believe that the Papacy was the "lawless one" that Paul mentions in II Thess. 2. This is the same person that Daniel and John saw in vision and wrote about as well. One who would exalt himself, would persecute God's true people, and would seek to change God's laws and trump himself up to be like God on earth. The Papacy is a perfect fit, with over 1,500 years of solid evidence to back up the claim.[/QUOTE]

Except it was the Reformers that changed things by combining Islam with Christianity.
 
Upvote 0

PT Calvinist

Legend
Jun 19, 2009
1,376
115
Texas - Near the Coast
✟17,044.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
so basically why did God make people, know that they were going to go to hell?

My response matches with Calvinist Doctrine: here is an excerpt which would be my answer.
First of all, when God made Adam, He made him good. Adam had the freedom to choose to obey or disobey God. Adam is the one who rebelled. God did not make him rebel and God is not responsible for Adam's rebellion. It would be like a parent having a child knowing that the child would eventually disobey the parent. Does this mean that the parent is responsible for the child's rebellion when it occurs because the parent knew it would happen? Of course not. Furthermore, if the parent has more children, does he/she not know that some children may very well turn out good and others bad? Should the parents then not have children because some of them might turn out bad? The skeptic, if he is consistent, would urge parents not to have any children at all lest some of them turn out bad.
But the skeptic might say, "But God knows for a fact who will be bad and good. Why allow the people going to hell to be born in the first place?" But, if this is the case and if God arranged it that no "bad" people were born, then we would all go to hell. You see, Jesus is the only way to be forgiven of our sins. His sacrifice on the cross was necessary in order to make it possible for us to be saved because everyone, "good" and "bad" has sinned. If there were no "bad" people born, then there wouldn't be any "bad" people around who would have sent Jesus to the cross. If that never happened, then we wouldn't be saved from our sins because Jesus would never have been unjustly condemned and His sacrifice would never have happened.


Second, if someone says that it is wrong for God to allow someone to be born who will go to hell, then would he rather have God remove our freedom to rebel against Him so that no one can be blamed for sin? If the critic says he only want those people born who go to heaven, then how are they truly free and how would that fulfill the ultimate plan of God to sacrifice His Son for the redemption of mankind?


Third, God could have reasons for sending people to hell that we cannot understand.


Fourth, God is just and always does what is right. Therefore, sending people to hell is the right thing to do, especially when we understand that God is eternally holy and those who sin against God incur an infinite offense because the infinite God is the one who is offended.


Finally, the Bible simply tells us that people will go to hell. They go there because they are not covered by the sacrifice of Christ. Whether they are created or not does not affect the fact that sinners must be punished; otherwise, the holiness and righteousness of God mean nothing.
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
What are we Amening to? ^_^

Reve 19:4 And fall the elders, the twenty four, and the four living-ones, and worship to the God, to the One sitting upon the throne saying "amen allelouia".
 
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

LittleLambofJesus

Hebrews 2:14.... Pesky Devil, git!
Supporter
May 19, 2015
125,492
28,587
73
GOD's country of Texas
Visit site
✟1,237,240.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

BrightCandle

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
4,040
134
Washington, USA.
✟4,860.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
So called "bible literalism" doesn't mean your interpretation of scripture is the right one.

When people say they pay attention to what the bible says, to "what is plainly written" they show a vast depth of ignorance. What is means is they take an English interpretation of the bible and filter it through their understanding of language and culture. For example, when the bible talks about "the world" westerners commonly think of the planet- when they had no concept of the planet when the bible was written.

We have a 24 hour day now in 2009, that is determined by sunrise and sunset, when did that time period change? It was only about 6,000 years ago when Genesis 1 & 2 took place, wouldn't it make more sense to just take the Bible for what it says, and not try to make it look like evolution took place.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PT Calvinist

Legend
Jun 19, 2009
1,376
115
Texas - Near the Coast
✟17,044.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
We have a 24 hour day now in 2009, that is determined by sunrise and sunset, when did that time period change? It was only about 6,000 years ago when Genesis 1 & 2 took place, wouldn't it make more sense to just take the Bible for what it says, and not try to make it look like evolution took place.
Fallacy.

unless you are an open theist?
 
Upvote 0

BrightCandle

Well-Known Member
Sep 2, 2003
4,040
134
Washington, USA.
✟4,860.00
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Constitution
Fallacy.

unless you are an open theist?

Do you deny that one day is made up of a 24 hour period? Why would that time period go from a 1,000 years to 24 hours? It doesn't make sense unless you believe that it took God a long time to create. God doesn't need all that time. He is infinite and omnipotent. While the God that some are proposing is somewhat impotent.
 
Upvote 0

PT Calvinist

Legend
Jun 19, 2009
1,376
115
Texas - Near the Coast
✟17,044.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Politics
US-Republican
Do you deny that one day is made up of a 24 hour period? Why would that time period go from a 1,000 years to 24 hours? It doesn't make sense unless you believe that it took God a long time to create. God doesn't need all that time. He is infinite and omnipotent. While the God that some are proposing is somewhat impotent.
Which leads me to ask. Why not just say that it really took God 6 hours? Afterall, God dosen't need all that time. Heck why not 6 minutes, better yet 6 seconds.
Carbone dating says 6,000 years.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Status
Not open for further replies.