This is a dated article. But it reflects Kasper's heretical thought. And helps explain why Bergoglio has chosen him to be one of his point men in his "moral revolution".

Great. A cardinal who doesn’t believe the Gospel. Just great.

These reports tend to make me believe St. Malachi is going to be proven perfectly correct.

>>in the light of form criticism to be projections of the experiences<<

In other words in the light of Bultmann et al, who are certain scholars more predisposed to discounting supernatural events as a course because of a predisposition to disbelieve them. They can’t accept the word of God as is, because “miracles don’t actually happen.” Ect. Blah blah, enter atheism and a construction of the authentic Jesus who says only what we want him to say.

Don’t be so negative. The important thing is that sodomites have access to young boys.

Did the Miracles and Prophesies of Jesus Really Happen?
= = =

If they did not, then we do not have to have this discussion.

We are all just evolved from slime.

Your flavor of slime may vary; that is all that is left.

And it all started with evolution. But just try getting most Catholics to see that.

Take your trick pony and bring it back home. He’s boring.

Take your trick pony and bring it back home. He’s boring.

Sorry, but the chickens are coming home to roost. Trying to ignore it won't make it go away.

Why would someone who denies the Divinity of Christ keep up his incessant rants, unless he is possessed?

Why would someone who denies the Divinity of Christ keep up his incessant rants, unless he is possessed?

Now you're just being silly. Haven't you got other issues to be concerned about other than merely objecting when I post on a thread? If you don't want me to post, then caucus the thread. Then I won't post.

The truth and reliability of Genesis and the entire Hebrew Bible exist quite apart from a chrstian religion which they pre-existed by at least one thousand years. Everyone, whether they except J*sus' "divinity" or not, is correct to defend the Hebrew Bible, which will outlive chrstianity just as it pre-existed it.

Get over yourself.

Hey, isn’t this from the church that tries to claim it gave us the Bible in the first place?

Now they’re saying that it’s filled with lies, that what they wrote didn’t really happen?

And we’re supposed to trust them in anything else they say?

right.......

I just want others to know that you deny the divinity of Christ and therefore they should pay no heed to you, nor your rants.

Dominus tecum.

Hey, isn’t this from the church that tries to claim it gave us the Bible in the first place?

Claiming that they gave the world the Hebrew Bible is an anachronism, but that doesn't stop them from continuing to do so.

Now they’re saying that it’s filled with lies, that what they wrote didn’t really happen?

All the ancient churches--Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Non-Chalcaedonian, Nestorian--are uninterested in the facticity of religious truth. To them everything is symbol, parable, and fable. They accuse Fundamentalist Protestants of "nineteenth century positivism" for assuming that "true" means "true" instead of something else. And non-fundamentalist Protestants are perhaps the worst of all. And we’re supposed to trust them in anything else they say?

right.......

I am afraid I can't agree with your ultimate conclusion to this syllogism, but we can agree with its first two parts.

Dear Cardinal, we all know that faith can be difficult to find and that it is at least in part a gift. Still, an important part of your duty should be proper teaching, imho. Please pray over it...because James did warn us....

“Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers and sisters, because you know that we will be judged more strictly ...”(as teachers than in other lines of work)....

.
>> “Dominus tecum.” <<

In the language of the occult!

Should we pay any attention to your rants?
.

I just want others to know that you deny the divinity of Christ and therefore they should pay no heed to you, nor your rants.

My denial of the "divinity" of Chr*st does not detract from the Divine Authorship of the Torah or the inspiration of the Na"KH. It is what it is. Why you think that the Hebrew Bible's validity hinges on a religion that was not even in existence at the time is merely another example of anachronism.

Everyone on this forum either knows or should know that I am a Noachide. There are a couple other Noachides here and Orthodox Jews as well, and they all accept the Divine Authorship of the Torah. I'm sorry if you think that should be a monopoly for a religion that wasn't even there in the beginning.

Furthermore, all your trouble is being caused by fellow chrstians who supposedly accept the "divinity" of J*sus. Yet that acceptance doesn't keep them from dismissing not only the Hebrew Bible, but now even your own "new testament" as pre-modern mythology. Your problem is being caused by liberal chrstians, not non-chrstians. But by all means feel free to continue screaming at non-chrstians for the failure and even the treachery of your own religious leaders.

I don't think I will respond to you again on this thread. I am quite aware that you don't like me (no matter how many ways you choose to restate that fact) and don't need to be reminded further. Plus I have other things to do.

And as I said before, if you don't want me to respond on a thread, then caucus it. If you fail to do so you cannot forbid anyone from responding . . . as my own threads for Jews and Noachides will amply attest.

My final word, identical to my first, is that any church that rejects the factual accuracy of the Holy Torah is going to eventually reject everything else. The Catholic Church asked for this when it adopted nineteenth century Protestant higher criticism and evolution. It asked for it and it's going to continue to get it until it stops its blasphemies and lies about the total inerrancy of the Hebrew Bible.

Well what do you expect when catholics are given the ok to question the Genesis account as six days.

Catholics are at liberty to believe that creation took a few days or a much longer period, according to how they see the evidence, and subject to any future judgment of the Church (Pius XII’s 1950 encyclical Humani Generis 36–37). They need not be hostile to modern cosmology. The Catechism of the Catholic Church states, "[M]any scientific studies . . . have splendidly enriched our knowledge of the age and dimensions of the cosmos, the development of life forms, and the appearance of man. These studies invite us to even greater admiration for the greatness of the Creator" (CCC 283). Still, science has its limits (CCC 284, 2293–4).

https://www.catholic.com/tract/creation-and-genesis

Fortunately we can know for sure. Exodus 20:11

11“For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea and all that is in them, and rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and made it holy. Ex 20:11 NASB

All the ancient churches--Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Non-Chalcaedonian, Nestorian--are uninterested in the facticity of religious truth. To them everything is symbol, parable, and fable. They accuse Fundamentalist Protestants of "nineteenth century positivism" for assuming that "true" means "true" instead of something else. And non-fundamentalist Protestants are perhaps the worst of all. And we’re supposed to trust them in anything else they say?

Except when it comes to the eucharist.

Then it's literal, carved in stone literal.

They just pick and choose what is literal and what is not, depending.

I didn't really mean they were right. I guess the /s wasn't the given I thought it was.

In John 10:25-26 for example, Jesus explained that healing people was a sign that He is the Christ.