1.The burning of Joan of Arc was a political move. The English wanted her out fo teh way since she was a major pain in the ass. Mark Twain a non Catholic who researched his book Joan of Arc for 10 years admitted that the court who tried her was corrupt and did not represent the Church.
It still does not disprove the original point of me bringing her up - that women CAN and HAVE been great leaders in history.
2. The Catholic Church can show from now right to the apostles a line of legitmate Bishops. No other Church can do that. I fail to see how that is an assumption. You can go thorugh history and see who teh Apostles consecrated and who their successor created and so on and they will all end up Catholic.
Your assumption is that a church is made by there being apostles. It doesn't matter at all - a Church is formed once it has enough followers and a religious hierarchy, not if there's people from old times.
I never said the apostles were perfect. I said that they taught despite not being perfect and yet a perfect creature did not teach. If both women and men were allowed to be priests it would be logical to chose a perfect person would it not?
The apostes were taught by Jesus. How can you teach a perfect person anything? He's already perfect. That's the reason why Jesus didn't teach Mary - you keep dodging that.
4. I'm saying that you and I can choose what we want to believe. This is shown throught the placebo effect. People take drugs that do not scientifically work yet countless claims have been made by the takers that they do work. This is because they want to believe that it has worked.
Placebo works because having an optimistic outlook releases certain hormones which strengthen the immune system. Immune system equals more capability to fight an illness. However, you can eat placebo all you want - you're not getting cured from AIDS. Because it has already killed your immune system.
5. Yes the police would arrest me but really would I have done wrong. Common sense says no. Double effect is when your action has two outcomes both good and bad. For the action to be lawful you must want the good and it must outwiegh the bad. Otherwise you can say that fighting Nazis german was wrong and Britain should have left them to it.
Yes, you would have. You would have taken something that rightfully belongs to somebody else and used it for your own personal benefit - which is to make you feel better about donating to a just cause. You're still a thief looking out for your own good - even if it's not material. And yes - fighting Nazi Germany was bad. Just like every single other war in existence was bad. But Britain had a commitement in the form of an alliance, and it had to help it's allies. Going out on a signed contract usually bodes bad for the country backing out of it. Britain didn't fight because it wanted to save the world from the evil Nazis(which were far less evil than the Soviets) - but because they had a commitement.
6. If you claim to follow a mans teachings then you have to follow his teachings. He is the precedent.
So you're learning to walk on watter tomorrow, then?
7.Religion is not something that can be proven by a formula but rather through logic. 2+2=5 not being true doesn't mean people won't believe in it. Its an extrremely crude example of relativism which is a commonly held philosopy today.
Formulas are pure logic - they use maths, which is the base to all logic. No religion in the world has ever been based on logic - only on logical flaws. It is a common held philosophy in the mid 19th century that smoking is good for you. Being comonly held doesn't make the philosphy right,
8.Everyone coming from africa is a theory. It is taught in schools because most Goverments are secular i.e. religion is a nothing to them. There is more evidence that the cradle of civilisation is mesopotamia (israel-iran area) they have found actual ancient cities and records of law and order and written languages. In africa they found a skull. You choose want you want to believe.
Finding the "skull"(which is actually countless bones and other fossils) proves that man as a species originated in Africa. Cities, pots and everything else shows that civilisation first originated there. Have in mind China got it's fair share of cities and stuff at roughly the same time as the ones in Messopotamia.
9. Exactly the HRe was not around in 96 Ad so could they have burned all the original bibles when we have bibles from 96ad? There was a ruined ship found in mesopotamia on a hill dating to BC times. Ever wondered why even aboriginal religions have a flood story?
And that's exactly why the one who mentioned the books being burned said it happened when the HRE existed. Which means - not in 96 AD. You still haven't proven there being a Pope in 96 AD. The reason why most tribes have a flood story is because of the massive impact the whole melting of the ice and thusly floods that happened at the end of the last ice-age. I'm pretty sure seeing entire tribes whiped out from the low lands, drowned completely, would be something to pass on, generation to generation.
10. Therefore its is impossible to do nothing you are either actively doing evil or actively doing good.
Which is our point - evil isn't the lack of good, but an active thing. Therefore, if God created good - he created evil too.
11. Mortal sins kill Gods life in your soul, they do not destroy it.
And then what happens?
