Replies

Let's see:

Try again.
you seem to skirt issues
regurgitating Doctrine

Still neither polite nor informative.

Now, what I wrote was:

That the Bible is inspired, the nature and meaning of the inspiration, and similar issues are -- guess what -- Church Doctrine! What books are in the Bible and which aren't? Church Doctrine! I can't talk about one without talking about the other.

And I say again: one of the things made a matter of doctrine centuries after the ascension of God the Son of God (if you're going to be contentious and intransigent, why shouldn't I?) was which writings made up the Bible, and what part the Bible should play in determining Doctrine. In other words, the Bible itself is a tradition -- a thing handed down. Consequently, your effort to set the Bible over against the other authoritative teachings and tradtitions of the body which authoritatively determined what the Bible was (and is) can not oblige me to respond in the way you want me to.

Further, not only do I not agree with your interpretation of the passage from Philippians, but I say again that you misrepresented the portion you cited. Consequently I do not think that exploring Scripture with you will serve my needs or any good I can imagine

Finally, you write

I still go to Mass, only I study scripture and take Church Doctrine with a heavy grain of salt.

As far as I can tell that makes you a dishonest and disobedient Catholic. At virtually every Mass the congregation says a creedal formula asserting, inter alia the Divinity of Christ. I'm not saying it's dishonest not to believe that. I AM saying that it IS dishonest to act like a member of an organization and to take part in its services, all the while withholding assent from matters which the organization considers central. The Church rejected Arianism more than a thousand years ago. It seems weird to persist in being a member of a body which so wholeheartedly anathematizes what you believe while you consider its beliefs and customs blasphemous.

Basta! Find somebody else to play with. I don't like this game and I think it's bad for you.

How did I misinterpret Phil? Never heard of kenosis?

Jesus makes your argument null and void about "tradition".

"Then the Pharisees and scribes asked, why walk not thy disciples according to the tradition of the elders, but eat bread with unwashen hands?
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men...

And he said unto them, Full well YE REJECT THE COMMANDMENT OF GOD, THAT YE MAY KEEP YOUR OWN TRADITION.

Making the word of God of none effect through your tradition, which ye have delivered: and many such like things do ye."

Mark 7:5-9, 13

How do you know "Church Doctrine" is the inspired word of God? This doctrine coming from people who forbade any person to read the Bible without a license from a Roman Catholic bishop or inquisitor.

Why don't you do a little research will you.

Arianism denied the divinity of Christ. I guess you think Christ= Mary if you accuse me of that.

You are confused about the example I used. Jesus is divine being before His human birth. Jesus is divine after his death. The Bible makes it clear Jesus was not divine during his human incarnation. Look up kenosis.