Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position  (Read 57628 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position
« Reply #110 on: August 31, 2017, 11:25:38 AM »
Neil, before you give this crowd another "feeding", remember that for those who are so hopelessly confused about the difference between doctrine and allegory, tenets of Faith versus idioms, there is precious little hope of edification.
These people have shown they'll deny their own 5 senses in favor of some whackjob with nonsensical, but bright and pretty animations on youtube, so what chance that they will ever want to to understand rational discussion?
I had thought the midnight sun in the arctic/antarctic circles would give them enough pause to wake the left side of at least one such brain, but no! There's a youtube "explanation" for that too - Antarctica doesn't exist, and the sun is always above the pizza-earth, but only radiates a conical beam of light. How incredibly, mind-bogglingly idiotic!


* I personally know a guy who did a 9 month tour at South Pole Station. It really exists.

Re: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position
« Reply #111 on: August 31, 2017, 11:38:46 AM »
The only thing mind bogglingly idiotic is believing trillions of gallons of water stick to a giant spinning ball hurdling through space at 1,050, 67,000mph and 500,000 mph as NASA and modern science claims. 


Re: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position
« Reply #112 on: August 31, 2017, 11:52:27 AM »
Neil, before you give this crowd another "feeding", remember that for those who are so hopelessly confused about the difference between doctrine and allegory, tenets of Faith versus idioms, there is precious little hope of edification.
These people have shown they'll deny their own 5 senses in favor of some whackjob with nonsensical, but bright and pretty animations on youtube, so what chance that they will ever want to to understand rational discussion?
I had thought the midnight sun in the arctic/antarctic circles would give them enough pause to wake the left side of at least one such brain, but no! There's a youtube "explanation" for that too - Antarctica doesn't exist, and the sun is always above the pizza-earth, but only radiates a conical beam of light. How incredibly, mind-bogglingly idiotic!


* I personally know a guy who did a 9 month tour at South Pole Station. It really exists.
I have seen the Flat Earth Horizon with my own 2 eyes; It is you who denies what is clearly perceived through the senses. 

Re: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position
« Reply #113 on: August 31, 2017, 12:18:16 PM »
Jesus is leading me to continue to promote the flat earth. Just imagine someone from cathinfo.com going to the judgment claiming they didn't know the flat earth is described in Genesis. We told them so. The people who refuse to believe the descriptions of the flat earth in Genesis have no good excuse as to why they keep endorsing the Freemasonic agenda. I believe the vast majority of Catholics' who refuse to believe the Genesis descriptions of the Flat Earth also refuse to believe all Infallibly Define Dogma of the Council of Trent. I believe their fruit is rotten to the core.
 
Now it is all very well sparring about a flat-Earth or a global-Earth but when this debate enters the realm of Church teaching it is a very serious matter. This is what you flat-Earthers are now doing, insisting a flat-earth is Church teaching, and it seems some are actually falling for this unorthodoxy. The Church teaches no such thing. You may believe it yes, but you cannot insist anyone else believes it on canonical grounds. 

Here are the rules, so let us see what Pope Leo XIII's Providentissimus Deus said about a FLAT EARTH in Scripture:
 
’18: To understand how just is the rule here formulated [BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION] we must remember, first, that the sacred writers, or to speak more accurately, the Holy Ghost “Who spoke by them, did not intend to teach men these things (that is to say, the essential nature of the things of the visible universe), things in no way profitable unto salvation.” (St Augustine) Hence they did not seek to penetrate the secrets of nature, but rather described and dealt with things in more or less figurative language, or in terms which were commonly used at the time, and which in many instances are in daily use at this day, even by the most eminent men of science. Ordinary speech primarily and properly describes what comes under the senses; and somewhat in the same way the sacred writers - as the Angelic Doctor also reminds us – “went by what sensibly appeared,” [LIKE A FLAT EARTH] or put down what God, speaking to men, signified, in the way men could understand and were accustomed to. The unshrinking defense of the Holy Scripture, however, does not require that we should equally uphold all the opinions which each of the Fathers [as distinct from ALL OF THE FATHERS] or the more recent interpreters have put forth in explaining it; for it may be that, in commenting on passages where physical matters occur, they have sometimes expressed the ideas of their own times, and thus made statements which in these days have been abandoned as incorrect. Hence, in their interpretations, we must carefully note what they lay down as belonging to faith, or as intimately connected with faith, what they are unanimous in. For “in those things which do not come under the obligation of faith, the Saints were at liberty to hold divergent opinions, just as we ourselves are,” according to the saying of St. Thomas Aquinas. And in another place he says most admirably: “When philosophers are agreed upon a point, and it is not contrary to our faith, it is safer, in my opinion, neither to lay down such a point as a dogma of faith, even though it is perhaps so presented by the philosophers, nor to reject it as against faith, lest we thus give to the wise of this world an occasion of despising our faith.” The Catholic interpreter, although he should show that those facts of natural science which investigators affirm to be now quite certain are not contrary to the Scripture rightly explained, must nevertheless always bear in mind, that much which has been held and proved as certain has afterwards been called in question and rejected.’

So dear Truth is Eternal, to suggest a flat-earth interpretation of the Bible is Catholic teaching according to Trent is what a Protestant might say. Now you can believe what you like but please do not present this nonsense, proven so by the science ogeodesy, [ Earth measurement on a large scale] as infallible Catholic teaching.

Re: The Fruits of the Flat Earth Position
« Reply #114 on: August 31, 2017, 12:55:06 PM »
Neil, before you give this crowd another "feeding", remember that for those who are so hopelessly confused about the difference between doctrine and allegory, tenets of Faith versus idioms, there is precious little hope of edification.
These people have shown they'll deny their own 5 senses in favor of some whackjob with nonsensical, but bright and pretty animations on youtube, so what chance that they will ever want to to understand rational discussion?
I had thought the midnight sun in the arctic/antarctic circles would give them enough pause to wake the left side of at least one such brain, but no! There's a youtube "explanation" for that too - Antarctica doesn't exist, and the sun is always above the pizza-earth, but only radiates a conical beam of light. How incredibly, mind-bogglingly idiotic!


* I personally know a guy who did a 9 month tour at South Pole Station. It really exists.
No flat earth proponent of whom I am aware has ever claimed that the "South Pole" doesn't exist. That is a perfect example of a straw man argument. At least look at a map of the flat earth to see where Antarctica is.