Right Divider
Body part
That is a Metaphor!
The Joys of Catholicism
- Thread starter Idolater
- Start date
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Don't forget you're on record.
Taste your own medicine and MAKE A CASE instead of just giving us "your useless opinions" RD.
"METAPHOR" poser.
Right Divider
Body part
I guess that making a fool of yourself is your main goal in life.
A "cloud of witnesses" can only be a metaphor. There is NO literal way to take that.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Maybe you should be a professional gambler if you're so sure of your guesses.
Oh yeah wow good point.
I mean ... except for the way which the Church has always taken it.
Right Divider
Body part
Your retarded posts are all the proof that I need.
Fallacious arguments are your only "comeback"?
Appeal to authority (especially a fake one) is a FALLACY!
I don't care that your phony "Church" cannot understand obvious figures of speech (or that the book to the HEBREWS is to the .... HEBREWS).
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Your retarded posts.
Prove it without begging the question, which means, without appealing to authority. Namely, an authority on what constitutes a logical fallacy.
You won't, because you can't.
There was literally One Church for 1000 years RD. Unless you want to say that Arians and other heretics count as the Church.
MAKE A CASE. Poser.
Irrelevant. The departed Saints either surround us or they don't, it doesn't matter whom Hebrews was written to.
Right Divider
Body part
Your 6th grade comeback?
That is retarded, but par for the course with Idolator.
Try to make an actual argument instead of repeating your fallacies.
Fake news. Paul never submitted to Peter, so that alone disproves the authority of your "Church".
"Cloud of witnesses" is a figure of speech called a METAPHOR, despite your silly protestations.
Appeal to tradition is a logical fallacy.
Don't base your beliefs on logical fallacies.
As stated above, in this case, it's not an appeal to authority, it's an appeal to tradition.
Appeal to authority is "X is an authority, X said P, therefore P must be correct."
Appeal to tradition is "P has always been done, therefore P is correct."
Quit provoking other members.
How about the rules of grammar.
"Cloud of witnesses" cannot be anything other than a figure of speech.
Hypocrite.
So what?
Doesn't make them correct.
Hypocrite.
Right Divider
Body part
Agreed, though in the case of RCC people, it's often both.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Derf
Well-known member
Certainly, since appeal to tradition is a subtype of appeal to authority.
The argument supports a position by appealing to long-standing or traditional opinion, as if the past itself were a kind of authority.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
The argument supports a position by appealing to long-standing or traditional opinion, as if the Apostles themselves are a kind of authority.
Fixed it.
Which is fallacious. Traditions can be wrong.
The Apostles WERE authorities. And they WILL BE authorities... in the coming Kingdom of Israel. Currently, their ministry is NOT authoritative,
I advise against putting words in other people's mouths that they clearly did not mean or say.
click here for timestamp: https://www.youtube.com/live/2tDPdFlbV9M?si=Hm8b-zEFwVPLYdcO&t=5093
click here for full video:
click here for full video:
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Yeah but not traditions originating with the Apostles.
Yes they are. We don't have any reason to think otherwise. If the Apostles taught it, it's canonical Christianity.
They can be if the tradition is that they originated with the Apostles.
That's what's in dispute.
Not currently.
Yes, we do. It's called Acts.
The Apostles taught that you must be circumcized on the 8th day after birth.
Paul showed that no, you do not have to be circumcised at any point.
Therefore your claim, "If the Apostles taught it, it's canonical Christianity" is false.
Idolater
"Foundation of the World" Dispensationalist χρ
Only in your mind, because you broke apart the sentence. It was a complete thought, the sentence.
Cite?
Literally all the Apostles and all the bishops /elders /overseers /presbyters at the Acts 15 Council agreed.
Depends a ton on whether you can demonstrate any Apostle teaching circumcision.
One which begged the question that the tradition originated with the Apostles, which you have yet to establish, and have only merely asserted.
Genesis 17:9-14; Leviticus 12:3; John 7:22-23; Matthew 28:19-20; Acts 7:8, 10:45, 11:2, 15:1; Romans 2:25; Galatians 2:4, 7, 9, 12 (cf Acts 15:1).
Because Paul had convinced them. (cf Galatians 2)
Done and dusted.