Zone1 What does this Scripture (RE learning..) remind you of?

[norwegen]

It seems to me that the purpose of it is to convince people to believe in religious superstitions.

A way of convincing people to abandon science?

The link doesn't provide any hints.

And even the OP has turned to flaming Democrats instead of this being an honest question that belongs in this section.

The link does provide a hint: 2 Timothy. And Paul didn't write this correspondence in a vacuum. It's in answer to another correspondence. Considering history and the emerging shift in their power structure from temple authority to church authority, we can make some intelligent inferences as to what these primitive Christians were talking about in these one-sided conversations.

The recruitment of followers by false teachers in the fledgling church resulted in another apostasy (separate from the one following Stephen's execution by stoning). This was a general and very widespread apostasy in which Paul related to Timothy his despairing of the faithful, especially the alarming number of gullible women, being fooled by an errant gospel, always learning but never fully comprehending the truth (3:1-7).

 

[Donald H]

The link does provide a hint: 2 Timothy. And Paul didn't write this correspondence in a vacuum.

I've only stated my opinion but,
In fact it's now widely accepted that Timothy and Paul didn't write anything.

 

[Donald H]

I am not lying. Further, I have done research. I am merely presenting what I have learned over the years, and often from scholarly, not Catholic, resources. When one is not open to discussion I agree there is no reason to continue.

I think it's quite silly of you to suggest that the question of the bibles being the literal word of the god wasn't accepted 100 years ago.

And for example, there are still a great number of Americans believing that a man could live in the belly of a whale (fish?).

Or the Noah's ark hocus pocus.

The proper question to ask Christians is whether they believe that their bible in the inerrant, literal word of god.

 

[norwegen]

I've only stated my opinion but,
In fact it's now widely accepted that Timothy and Paul didn't write anything.

Understood. Once again you've only stated your opinion.

 

[notmyfault2020]

If it is written in any of the bibles, it might not be true. All the different versions of the bible are flawed with superstitious beliefs. Christians themselves claim that the bible can't be taken literally.

says you

My opinion is the same as that of Christians who don't believe their bible is to be taken literally. I think they are now the majority.

some of it can be, some cannot

I don't depend on where something is written in order to judge it true or false.

There are some truths in the bibles, I would guess, but with caution.

Uh oh... this sounds kinda Catholic!

 

[notmyfault2020]

Maybe a lot of Christians. There are at most 40,000 different sects or interpretations of the Bible, so 39,999 have it wrong. Or maybe they all have it wrong

Christ established a Church

It was ONE, meaning united until Luther the heretic came along in the 1500s and whined his ass off about whatever his personal, subjective "whine-worthy" thing was RE the Church. As u may know, he was a Catholic priest.. until he wasn't. He couldn't maintain celibacy and chaste-ness. So he apparently thought no one else could either so the Church had to change.. It didn't.

The True Catholic Church went on without him and then Vatican II essentially agreed with the heretic

and here we are .. Morals have gone out the window ubiquitously

etc... etc.. We have bidum for a president. I rest my case.