Protestantism was falsified here on TOL
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
The church has become so corrupted by our time that Jesus is standing on the outside seeking anyone inside to allow Him to come in.
Revelation 3
14 And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God;
15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.
16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.
17 Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked:
18 I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eyesalve, that thou mayest see.
19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
You're arguing against yourself!
There isn't one syllable of that gibberish that a protestant couldn't have said against you! Swap out the word "Protestant" with "Catholic" and how would you respond to it?
Any response you would make would be equally valid in the mouth of a Protestant.
Why?
Because you are arguing here against logic itself! Whether you intended to do so or not isn't clear but, one way or another, that's what you've done.
Logic (i.e. sound reason) is THE "valid universal authority". It is the ONLY - I repeat - it is the ONLY means your mind has to know ANYTHING. Nothing can be proven nor can anything be falsified apart from sound reason - period. Any argument you make presupposes both the veracity and necessity of logic. You cannot utter a single intelligible syllable without the use, and therefore the tacit endorsement of and submission to the authority of logic.
If two people claim to have used logic to arrive at contradictory conclusions then one or both have made an error in their use of logic and it is by the very same logic that it can be objectively determined who has made an error and what that error was. This is true even in matters of opinion because it requires reason to declare a thing to be a matter of opinion and thus one's error may well be treating a matter of opinion as though it were a matter of fact. In any case, no argument could be made on either side without the use of reason, which you're entire theological worldview (Catholicism) intentionally undermines.
John 1:1 In the beginning was Logic, and Logic was with God, and Logic was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.
Resting in Him,
Clete
Is that why the RCC makes and bows before statues, which God forbids, because they make their own doctrines by ignoring scripture ?
Derf
Well-known member
The Catholic church isn't catholic.
Right Divider
Body part
That is completely INCORRECT, but I expect that from Cathaholics like yourself.
The "two or three gathering together" is about JUDGEMENT. Look the the fuller passage without your RCC blinders on.
That refers to the Law:
Right Divider
Body part
What stops me from going to "Mass" is that I avoid evil as much as possible.
Right Divider
Body part
That paragraph should be made into a "sticky" and everyone that logs in here should be made to read it and agree to it before they can post here.
Idolater
Ultra MAGA
Literally no qualified credentialed biblical translators ever chose "logic" to render the underlying koine Greek word there. Why not? If it were at least not unreasonable then at least someone would have selected "logic" like you have here, but nope. Meaning it's unreasonable to suppose that this is what the Apostle John meant here.
Your imagination is clearly vivid, that's good, but this is a bridge too far. It means 'word', it means 'speech', but not 'logic' or 'reasoning'. It doesn't mean "In the beginning was 'valid inference' and 'valid inference' was with God and 'valid inference' was God." It doesn't mean that.