Block, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, edit, move, protect
30,891
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 60:
Line 60: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Research help suggestions for "Unbiblical elements": new section
Wishing you well in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. May God richly bless you.<br>--[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 08:30, 12 January 2017 (EST)
Wishing you well in Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. May God richly bless you.<br>--[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 08:30, 12 January 2017 (EST)
== Research help suggestions for "Unbiblical elements" ==
I would encourage you to develop again your "Unbiblical Catholicism" article in the form of a new article, in a way that is not an essay but a more general presentation of accurate information historically and statistically based.
Encyclopedic article contributions (Britannica, etc.) always adopt a neutral presentation of information about a topic, and in this case it would (again) be about objections raised against Catholicism.
For example: revise the title of your original idea for an article as "Objections to Catholicism", or "Common arguments against Catholic doctrines" and then present the arguments that "non-Catholics" and "Protestants" and "Fundamentalists" use, with their interpretations of the Bible, especially their arguments using [[logic]], and the [[Hermeneutics|biblical interpretations]] of the original Protestant Reformers, from their own writings. For balance include brief summary statements of the counter-arguments (protests) used by Catholic apologists, together with ''non-Catholic'' critiques of the Catholic apologists' arguments which evaluate if their arguments make any sense in light of the Bible. However, the counter-arguments need not be detailed. These could be simply factual observations, stating that Catholic apologists use various counter responses, and providing external links to articles voicing their points of view also based on logic and their own particular denominational interpretation of the Bible according to the [[tradition]]al interpretation of the Catholic [[Magisterium]]. This approach avoids the fallacy of [[Confirmation bias]]. You are giving the reader, as to a [[jury]], all information necessary to form an accurate and truthful opinion of the matter—arguments that are ''commonly used'' against Catholicism.
As a useful shortcut to obtaining information for your new article, to help save time, I would strongly recommend doing online searches with the following simply worded queries:
*logical fallacies of Protestantism
*logical fallacies of Catholicism
*logical fallacies of religion
*logical fallacies of heresy
*logical fallacies of magisterial authority
*logical fallacies of sola scriptura
This is about the best positive support I can offer together with a sincere assurance of my genuine interest in the possibility of your development of a new article based on your original [[premise]]: that Catholicism is Unbiblical (according to all Protestant Christian Bible scholars and theologians).
So, with that in mind, I don't expect that I can do more, and you won't need to hear from me again.
I wish you well. God Bless you. Jesus is Lord.
--[[User:Dataclarifier|Dataclarifier]] ([[User talk:Dataclarifier|talk]]) 14:24, 12 January 2017 (EST)