i think the futility of proving anything definitively when it comes to beliefs or views - including determining who is rational, and who is a fool - pretty much consigns argumentation of any kind into irrelevance…clearly, the scientific-academic method is only one avenue to knowledge worth exploring…other methods that existed long before it, and that persist for good reason, aren’t going anywhere…
I agree that there are any numbers of paths to knowledge, all of which-since the are the product of finite human minds-are inherently incomplete, essentially subjective and merely approximate.
This also implies that no human knowledge can be absolutely conclusive or utterly objective.
Thus I see ultimate knowledge, or knowing anything absolutely, as a journey as opposed to a destination and beliefs are simply scenic overlooks, or rest stops along the way, where we can take a break before getting back out on the road.
it sounds like you’re overlooking the possibility of divine perfection and intervention, or consigning it to just one more human invention…but just because divinity cannot be qualified or quantified, so as to escape completely the suspicion of uncritical subjectivity, isn’t evidence that it doesn’t exist, or intervene to make real progress in experiential knowledge possible…
what if there really is a transcendent power unseen, undetectable and uncontrollable, who guides the minds of those who meet his conditions…what if these conditions can be found in understandable terms in what we call the bible…and what if this avenue to knowledge has existed and been accessed by various individuals for thousands of yrs…
I always thought it was Santa Claus who made the naughty and nice list. Seems my education was deficient. Or maybe that’s just a conspiracy.
You’re starting to sound like a nerd who thinks it’s better to read about women than to date and get to know them.
I’m not overlooking the possibility of divine perfection or intervention I’m saying that if it is real, it seems more likely that knowledge of it can best be achieved through an ongoing personal experience as opposed to rehashing the incomplete “truthiness” of an imperfect book.
If you believe studying a 2,000 year old compilation of magical stories is the way to go, that’s your prerogative but I’m out.
LOL - the papacy is pretty much at its nadir of influence, and exists today as little more than a tourist attraction. Aside from the funny hats and the swiss guard outfits, the papacy is all but irrelevant today.
but it looks like you’re overlooking the possibility that that imperfect book can be inspired, and substantially more than a 2,000 yr-old compilation of magical stories…
do you think you’re maybe expecting too much too soon…give it time…we know the papacy was all but extinguished when Napoleon imprisoned Pope Pius VI in 1798 (which itself is a fulfillment of prophecy when read in a certain way)…the point is, what we’re seeing now can be thought of as an ongoing “healing” from that low point, which was a measly 224 yrs ago…
Hardly - the 1798 incident was essentially a non-event in the history of the papacy, just one more in the long list of popes who were imprisoned, attacked, murdered, etc. It was no “deadly wound”, not at all.
And remember that the papacy was never more than a regional power, rarely exerting influence beyond the reach of the Western European empires, and never having had any influence in the regions of the world where the largest mass of humanity resides.
For example : Emperor Sigismund at first had Jan Hus burned at stake to please the Pope - as usual in these times - -and shortly afterwards he had the same Pope being arrested and guided into prison in some more remote castle - -
Alas ! What did unite the European nations to defeat Napoleon ? - -Leipzig, Waterloo ? The Papacy at once was giving some ideas !
Historical facts are pesky things…
Well, if men had read the “manual” about women many would have avoided a lot of problems.
Like you said earlier, there are several paths to knowledge. Difficulties arise when one taking a particular path thinks that only his or her path is the only true one. Now it can be true that one path leads to a dead end but even that brings knowledge and, hopefully, wisdom.
This is where you are completely wrong.
Don’t confuse discretion with impotency. The Catholic Church is very active while the Protestants are sleeping and unaware.
At present we have a Catholic president with a majority of Justices being Catholic as well. Don’t you think that it may be a little premature to say that the papacy is at its nadir of influence?
I some how ended up on an email list for some independent ministry that makes a big deal about mainstream entertainment, holidays, etc. This group watches certain programs or movies then points out things that they claim have pagen origins, secret society rituals, etc. Its as if they think they are the only ones spirituality discerning enough to watch this media, and they think the general population are complete ninacompoops who are going start doing pagen rituals if they watch certain shows or participate in traditional Halloween, Easter and Christmas traditions.
Then there’s the popular frog in the warming water metaphor where the person who gets a Christmas tree or answers the door to trick or treaters on Halloween are slowly going down a slippery slope that will end in revelry and full blown licentiousness.
I find this attitude of such ministries to be dichotomous, erroneous, sensationalist, immature, insulting to people’s intelligence, a stumbling block to the simple minded and a distraction from personal growth in Jesus Christ and the gospel commission.
It would have been just as easy for there to be Protestant justices enstated who would have voted the same way. There are news articles about how there are significantly less nuns and priests. Also there are articles about how a good percentage of Catholic women use birth control. Adherence from members to the Catholic church varies from region to region. It would probably take some phenomenal upheaval in society and even some supernatural phenomenon for people to become more interested in what the Catholic church is doing, despite the fact that they are a prime focus of some independent ministries.
You are missing the point.
You said that “it would have been just easy for there to be Protestant justices enstated” but the fact remains that, in spite of this supposedly easiness, 6 to 7 justices (out of 9) are Catholic… in a so-called Protestant nation.
The fact that you seem not to question this “anomaly” shows how “acceptable” the Catholic presence has become in America, which is exactly what was predicted.
You mentioned the fact that there are less nuns and priests. So what? Like in the military, power is not any longer defined only by the numbers of people you have in your “armies” but by technology. It is easier than ever for the Vatican to reach out and the events of January 6th showed how easy (via social media, for example) it is to mobilize a crowd of people ready to do your bidding (if you have enough clout).
You made a good point when you spoke of “phenomenal upheaval in society” or of “supernatural phenomenon”. I personally believe that some major events are coming our way, not because I believe in a particular conspiracy but because it is a necessity as the power represented by the Beast of Revelation would not be able to impose its mark, regime, and oppressive measures without a good crisis justifying its actions.
Another point to consider is that the Catholic church doesn’t need to be the center of interest or to be necessarily at the center of the action as she has allies who can act in her behalf.
This is not a so called Protestant nation any longer. It’s pluralistic in case that shift has been missed.
Secondly, it seems that you’re missing the point. Protestant or conservative judges of any stripe making the same rulings could have been installed. The fact that you are making an issue over the fact that there are SCOTUS justices who are Catholic simply sounds like the religious bigotry with which you’ve been inculcated under the guise of eschatological belief. It sounds more like eschatological hysteria.
Sonya Sotomayer is also Catholic. I went to the same Catholic high school with her. She is possibly the most liberal justice on the court. She spoke out in the dissent to the abortion ruling, and the prayer on the fifty yard line case. Her Catholic background did not stop her from taking such stances. You have no idea what Catholicism is like in practice and how varied and multiple views exist and are tolerated.
Additionally, unless you have some sort of pipeline, where do you see this pope trying to influence American jurisprudence?
The Papacy is far more interested in being relevant to today’s world and people than the SDA Church is. It is also far more interested in being relevant than in clinging to old beliefs anchored in tradition.
In the 70’s and 80’s many social justice movements in Central and South America were started and run by priests and nuns, and many gave their lives as a result. This is also true of Asia, the Philippines in particular.
If the Catholic Church was interested in global domination, it would have been far easier to work with the authoritarian regimes in the 70’s and 80’s rather than fight against them.
The only place the Catholic Church dominates is in the minds of those who fear them.
The adventist church is increasingly at odds with science. For example, see the discussion on the age of the earth. How can a church fight conspiracy theories that teaches at the same time that the scientific methods are very unreliable? How can you debunk a conspiracy theory after devaluing scientific thinking?
As is the case when Christians claim that direct access to our creator is only possible through Jesus, by studying the NT, or in acceding to their insistence that theirs is the only true organized religion.
All of this without any evidence that anyone other than Jesus’ self-anointed sycophants ever made such claims, or that Jesus asked anyone to read or write books about him, to say nothing of the question of whether or not their assertions about Jesus and our creator are necessarily correct.
Similarly, there is no reason to assume that Paul, Joe Smith, EGW and their ilk can tell anyone anything conclusive about accessing the divine as each of them only knew Jesus’ “reality” in their dreams. Is it possible to glimpse our maker through such imperfect perspectives? I suppose. Just as a nerd might get some sense of what it’s like to be married by reading dozens of self-described “manuals” on women. But given the choice-and since I’m only concerned with subjective prerogatives here as opposed to anything absolute-I would prefer go to The Grand Canyon and see it for myself rather than to have someone try to tell me what that experience is like to based what they’ve read in a book or “seen” in one of their visions!
Nope ! They are very reliable as soon they seem to prove EGWS infallacy ! _ See Professor Davidson on some atheist “dietitian” professor stating that vinegar is a poison !