Bible Contradictions

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
681

[quote]fattymcfatso wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]fattymcfatso wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]fattymcfatso wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

[quote]fattymcfatso wrote:
So, I have not read all 600 something posts on this thread, so I don’t know if this one has been addressed already. Why does god feel the need to to create light on 2 seperate occasions? I started reading the Bible a couple years ago and within 5 minutes I had found a ridiculous contradiction. Genesis 1:3, 1:4, 1:5 and Genesis 1:14, 1:15, 1:16.

If you already made light on the first day, Why remake it on the fourth day? Was it not to your liking the first time? Do gods make mistakes? It clearly states that the light was made to seperate the day from night on both days. I know you are “supposed to read the Bible as a whole” But really? The very first page? Come on.[/quote]
For the most part we read the creation account as metaphor, as divinely inspired poetry, with the point being that all that exists is here because God created it. If that doesn’t do it for you that’s fine. Also I think you are making a contradiction where there is not one. Gen 1:3-5 talks about God creating light (the radiation), while 1:14-16 is about God creating lights (stars etc…).[/quote]

I have heard this response before, and have always been amused by it. When do you decide something is written as a metaphor and when something actually happened? Was Jesus actually killed on a cross or was that a metaphor, Was mary a virgin or was that also a metaphor? Seems too convenient to use that term wherever it fits in an argument. The Bible clearly states that the lights created on both days were used to seperate day from night and there is only one thing that can do that. We only have one sun. [/quote]
Well, if you’ve only ever interacted with protestant Christians about this I can see how this might amuse you, because given only the text who’s to say when it is metaphor and when it is not. Being a Catholic though we have a Church guided by the Holy Spirit, who being the author of Scripture is it’s most excellent and authentic interpreter. So, in effect I do not decide when it is metaphor and when it’s not.

As, to your other point. It says in the first part as I pointed out God created light and then in the second part he created lights. There is a difference. Also, you can look at what separates night from day two ways, ultimately light is what separates the two, and the sun is now it’s origin. [/quote]

What is the difference between light and lights aside from the obvious (light comes from lights)? How was the earth lighted enough to have a day and night if he had not created the sun and stars until the 4th day? Does not make sense. What used to be the seperator of night and day before the sun? By the way, I used to be Catholic. [/quote]

He created the sun the first day or a general light. On the fourth day he order and distributed the lights so as it is said in verse 16 “God made two great lights: a greater light to rule the day; and a lesser light to rule the night: and the stars”

The first light just divided the day and night, the other time he divided and distributed the light so that both night and day were ruled by a great light, darkness having the lesser light. I have heard some people equate the lesser light as Mary. I would have to look deeper into it but when looking at Genesis 3:15 and Revelations 12:1-17 it seems there might be a case.[/quote]

I take it that there were no light bulbs “in the beginning” so where else could light possibly come from on our planet other than from our sun. And if I am not mistaken, the way we tell night from day is by the earth rotating on it’s axis and the sun shining on one half of the earth and not the other. If god created a light to seperate night from day or dark from light then it had to be the sun. Period. If you already have a sun, why do you need to tweak your day and night situation? “The lesser light as Mary” really?! I love it! [/quote]

Because the light needs to rule all. In the creation story they did not have any light to rule the darkness, so God divided and distributed on the fourth day for the lesser light, the moon, to rule the darkness.

[quote]
I also love how much time god spent on creating the trillions of galaxies that totally dwarf our whole solar system. What was it half a day? But he needed a 2 whole days to create all of the wildlife on our tiny insignificant planet. [/quote]

I think you would benefit the from reading In the Beginning by Cardinal Ratzinger, too. I do not take the creationist story from a literalistic view, but a literal view of what a deeper meaning besides that God created the universe. To only stay on the top layer of the creation story is like saying the ocean is beautiful…and not jumping in to see the lower levels of the ocean with the bright colors, animals, and plants under the sea.

682

[quote]SpnKick540 wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
You have to differentiate between literalistic view and literal view. I take it from a literal view, that Adam lost the initial grace for all of man kind. If you want to understand the different layers you can pick up from the Genesis story you can read In the Beginning…: A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fal by Cardinal Ratzinger, it is about ten dollars, so it’s not too much of a financial burden if you want to understand the creation story.
[/quote]
I think you need to look up the word “literalistic” if you’re going to use it to distinguish interpretation. Literalistic is simply the adj. form of literal or literalism. When you say “literal” I believe you mean “figurative.”
[/quote]

I am talking about Biblical interpretation. There is several schools of thought, the Catholic holds to the literal meaning of the message, the literalistic school hold to the literal meaning of what is written words.

Um…I am not sure were you got your theology (I am guessing a fundamentalist might have influenced you), but OS is not a debt. It’s a mere lacking of grace, nothing that is hanging over our head. Theologically, a baby (unbaptized) has no personal sin and would be able to enter into Heaven if it were to die before baptism and before it came to a rational mind. There is no debt to OS, it’s a lack of grace.

Adam is the first man (homo sapien sapien) who God supernaturally infused a soul into. Beyond that I do not know, but I can get back to you on that.

[quote]
If he’s literally our father, the Old Testament’s lineage can be traced and the Earth would have to be accepted as 6,000 years old by ALL practicing Catholics. If it’s figurative, then why are we all paying back a debt from a figurative person in a story?[/quote]

That seems to be a false dichotomy, I will do some research and get back to you on it.

OS is not a debt, OS is taken care of with baptism, baptism is not something we do for God, but God does for us to give us back our initial grace that Adam lost for us.

683

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.

684

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t.

685

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying :wink:

686

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?

687

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.

688

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.[/quote]

Where does it say in the Bible that you’re guided by the Holy Spirit?

689

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

Jesus’s parables were allegorical, stories to make a point. Just sayin’. Are you claiming that the parables Jesus told were actual events?

690

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.[/quote]

The reality of his creation tells a different story. The story is between 5000 and 7000 years old. People trying to explain God’s creation with what they were able to understand.
Actually, a while back I read in Sirach a brief reference to creation that is actually more closely to what we know. I’ll have to look it up, it’s been a while.

691

What happened? How long? How old? Did you go to mass? Were you confirmed? Just kind of curious… I am always interested to hear people’s stories.

692

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.[/quote]

Where does it say in the Bible that you’re guided by the Holy Spirit?[/quote]

John 14:26

John 16:13â??15

1 Corinthians 2:12â??13

Ephesians 6:17

Romans 8:14

Better question. Why would God not want people to be guided by the Holy Spirit to understand scripture? Why would he limit this understanding?

693

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

Jesus’s parables were allegorical, stories to make a point. Just sayin’. Are you claiming that the parables Jesus told were actual events? [/quote]

You are correct and I never said Jesus’ parables were literal events. Quite the contrary. My point was, scripture indicates when something is symbolic. If it is not pointed out as symbolic (like creation) then I take it as literal.

Is it beyond God’s capabilities to have created the world in six days?

694

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.[/quote]

The reality of his creation tells a different story. The story is between 5000 and 7000 years old. People trying to explain God’s creation with what they were able to understand.
Actually, a while back I read in Sirach a brief reference to creation that is actually more closely to what we know. I’ll have to look it up, it’s been a while.[/quote]

God gives understanding. Besides that point, Moses (if he indeed wrote the Pentateuch) would not have required understanding. He would simply have to write what God spoke to him.

695

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]I will not stand before the judgment seat of Christ having to explain why I told the world that people were Christians without knowing it. How there are heretics under grace. I really don’t wanna fall back into war with you guys, I really don’t. I also don’t know what you want me to say Pat. Is there a way I can say that what Chris said in the above post brings joy to the heart of Satan so that you won’t accuse me of hating him… and you? Should I violate my deepest convictions and conscience according to the unmistakable declarations of the Word of God and just agree, to keep the peace? I won’t do it. This is goin absolutely nowhere. I mean like really nowhere. I can’t even find a way to have an upbeat lighthearted attitude about something like this.
Romans 10:13-17 ESV

[quote]13-For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”
14-How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? 15-And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, “How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!” 16-But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?” 17-So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ.[/quote]I know, I know, it requires special authority to make passages like this say something other than what they clearly say.

696

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

What happened? How long? How old? Did you go to mass? Were you confirmed? Just kind of curious… I am always interested to hear people’s stories.

[/quote]
I guess it ended when I started actually reading the Bible when I was about 16 years old. I actually used to ride my bike to Mass by myself because my family didn’t go. I was confirmed, went to sunday school, youth group etc.

697

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
How there are heretics under grace.
[/quote]

Explain to me Tirib, how Von Til was under grace, and where I said that Von Til was under grace*. I said he was after truth. He held some truths of the Catholic Church and therefore holds relation to us through partial Salvific truth.

If not a formal Catholic the only sacraments and instruments of grace that one has to his advantage is baptism and Holy Matrimony. He is not able to receive the other five sacraments, until he formally comes into the Catholic Church.

698

[quote]fattymcfatso wrote:

[quote]jakerz96 wrote:

What happened? How long? How old? Did you go to mass? Were you confirmed? Just kind of curious… I am always interested to hear people’s stories.

[/quote]
I guess it ended when I started actually reading the Bible when I was about 16 years old. I actually used to ride my bike to Mass by myself because my family didn’t go. I was confirmed, went to sunday school, youth group etc. [/quote]

Ah sounds like you lacked some guidance. How did your family feel about it?

699

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
How there are heretics under grace.
[/quote]

Explain to me Tirib, how Von Til was under grace, and where I said that Von Til was under grace*. I said he was after truth. He held some truths of the Catholic Church and therefore holds relation to us through partial Salvific truth.

If not a formal Catholic the only sacraments and instruments of grace that one has to his advantage is baptism and Holy Matrimony. He is not able to receive the other five sacraments, until he formally comes into the Catholic Church.[/quote]In your opinion, and don’t give me this, “well only God knows the heart” crap. In YOUR opinion, to the best of your knowledge with your sacerdotal slide ruler in hand, did he go to heaven? IN YOUR OPINION, yes or know? That’s pretty much the same question as do YOU believe that if Jesus were to crack the eastern sky right now that I would go to heaven. What do YOU believe. If I were to drop dead this second, according to your vaaaaaaaast store of divine tradition, what saith the church? Come on Chris. Make a frickin stand here will ya?

700

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]forbes wrote:

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
Heretics after God’s heart.
[/quote]

Why would it need to be in the Bible, we have one from the first couple of centuries.

The Greeks, Justin Martyr pointed out that their pursuit for truth was the pursuit of Christians, and their pursuit of the source and their love for the source of truth was the same as our pursuit of and love for Jesus, since Jesus is truth.

The Greeks were Christians without knowing it. Von Til may have been a man after God, like the Greeks after the truth (which is Jesus), both having heretical ideas does not disqualify them from being after God.

His pursuit may have been genuine, doesn’t mean he was right. Your knowledge of heresy is a little shaky it seems. Just because someone is a heretic (depending on what it is) doesn’t disqualify them from being someone who is after the truth, Jesus.[/quote]There is just no possible way I could ever be a Catholic.
[/quote]

Why? Afraid of truth? We’re not biblical literalists, but neither are you. The difference is that we know it and you don’t. You cannot cherry pick what you want to be literal about. That which is, is, that which isn’t, isn’t. [/quote]

True, but nothing indicates that the Genesis account of creation was a story or parable of what actually happened. It was a literal event. Just saying ;)[/quote]

Do you believe the Holy Spirit has told you the earth was literally created in 6 days? How confident are you in that belief?

By, what authority do you determine if the creation story was a parable or not?[/quote]

Ummm, by guidance of the Holy Spirit? Cannot the Holy Spirit guide whom he wills? The Bible makes clear when something is just a story (as in Jesus’s parables for example). If it is not indicated as a story or symbol of another event, then I take it as literal.[/quote]

Do you believe the Holy Spirit told you the earth was literally created in 6 days? How confident are you in that belief?