Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO
0 Members and 75 Guests are viewing this topic.
The passages flat earthers refer to on the shape are not figurative, nor are they a meraphorical part of a story, as in her example.
You struggle with comprehension.You hold the second view, the liberal one, an error. Pope Leo holds the traditional view. You do NOT hold Pope Leo's view. Nor do ypu agree with Benedict XV that the individual words are infallible. You stand in contradiction to both Popes.
The problem is, it can't be at odds with scripture. Every description of earth in scripture describes not a ball but a flat earth. And all the Fathers who TAUGHT or extrapolated on the form of the earth also describe it not as a ball, but flat with a dome.
She does nothing of the sort.
And you are entitled to that opinion. Other good Catholics have disagreed with you.
Also, you never answered my question: you find flat earth passages off-putting, as you stated. Do you find the other literal dogmatic truths equally off putting? Eat my flesh drink my blood?
Spot the metaphor:"Hast thou with Him spread out the sky, which is strong, and as a molten looking glass?"Him: literalSpread out: literalSky: literalStrong: literalAs: likeLooking glass: metaphorThe Firmament of the sky is strong and like a looking glass.
I have not ruled out FE myself ... from a scientific standpoint. Nevertheless, I find the flat-earther allegation that this is basically dogmatic truth to be really offputting. I've already explained why I find that completely untenable.