I received an email from someone using the AOL email account who said:
I couldn’t help but notice that you are somewhat opposed to Catholicism. Or perhaps “opposed” is the wrong word, but that you believe it to be incorrect theology. I’d love to discuss this with you, but you offer no way to respond to your blog postings. I would like to point out that in your post on the Trinity & the Early Church Fathers you didn’t quote any ECFs, you just quoted “Christian scholars” who are obviously not Catholic. It’s not likely that a non-Catholic would defend a Catholic teaching. Also of note is your debate with the “Catholic defender” on the Divinity of Christ: while it is clear from your version of the retelling of events that he didn’t defend the Church’s position very well, the only defense he did offer is a good one. Try reading the first chapter of John again. Then try explaining John 6.
Okay, I will answer it issue by issue:
Opposed to Catholism:
It might be true that I opposed to Catholicism as Catholicism opposed to the Biblical doctrines. If you’ll only try to examine Catholicism and compare it to the pure teachings of Christ recorded on the Bible and you’ll see how Catholism directly contradicted the true Christianism.
When I say Catholicism, I am referring to the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church. When I say Pure Christianism or Christianism, I am referring to the doctrines of Christ and the Apostles recorded on the Bible.
No Way To Respond on Blog Posting:
I don’t think I am not giving the visitors and readers the ways to respond to my blogposts. Actually, I opened all my blogposts to comments from visitors. Just browse down the page and you’ll see the section for your response, comments or messages.
Quotes From Non-Catholics:
I think, you need to give me the URL’s of those posts that I was quoting non-Catholic scholars so that I can give you my points about it. But, if you will examine my blogposts on religion, most of my quotes are directly taken from the Bible (the version had been specified).
If you really want me to quote the ideas of Catholic scholars about Trinity and God, then maybe I will prepare it these coming days and eventually post it here. Just give me time, and hope you’ll not be surprised.
About the Debate:
Well, what I presented on my blogpost was just the end part of our debate wherein the Catholic Defender gave his conclusions even if he’s task was just to cross examine me. What he did led me to call him dumb which I actually didn’t want to call him like that.
First Chapter of John:
I am always reading the first chapter of John. Maybe you should read it again and again too and ask your self these:
- Is it written on John 1:1 that Christ is God?
- What is really written, “Word was God” or “Christ was God”?
- Is it written on John 1:14 that Christ became flesh?
- What is really written, “the Word became flesh” or “Christ became flesh”?
Think of it and you’ll see why I was answering the Catholic Defender in those way.
Chapter 6:
Maybe you can suggest what part of Chapter 6 should I explain. And tell me what should I explain from there.
Last Words:
Well, thank you so much for dropping by my blog. Just feel free to drop your comments, messages, suggestions, arguments or anything at our comment section below.
| 2.8 |
SELaplana, 9 April 2007 at 
May 2nd, 2007 at 9:23 am
Dear Friend in Christ,
Please forgive me for taking so long to reply to you, and thank you so much for responding to my question.
Let’s begin with John 1:1 (NAB)
“In the begining was the Word,
and the Word was with God,
and the Word was God.”
Then John 1:14
“And the Word became flesh,
and made his dwelling among us,
and we saw his glory,
the glory of the Father’s only Son,
full of grace and truth.”
Okay, so if Jesus isn’t God, then who is the Word that “was with God”, “was God”, “became flesh, and made his dwelling among us”, and is “the Father’s only Son, full of grace and truth.” If it’s not Jesus, then clearly God has a different Son who became flesh, dwelt among us, and was also God. I’ve yet to see any evidence of this in scripture.
As for the Catholic Church, why don’t you tell me where you believe the Church to be in error, rather than me trying to explain 2,000 years of history. I will state emphatically that there is not a single Catholic doctrine that contradicts scripture, and there is nothing in scripture that contradicts Catholic Church teaching.
While there are many Christian denominations (and even some non-Christian religions) that possess varying degrees of truth, only the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church contains the fullness of God’s truth as revealed to man.
I think that’s enogh to start with. I eagerly await your response.
Yours in Christ,
Sar Torai
May 2nd, 2007 at 1:22 pm
I will still prepare my reply on your comments. I will email you if it’s posted already.
you can also visit the blog I started which is dedicated on answering questions raised about God, Christ and the Church. You can visit it here..
May 3rd, 2007 at 2:03 pm
[...] wrote this post because an argument was raised by one of our visitors saying that the proof that Christ is a God is the pronouncement of John in John 1:1, “And the [...]