The Catholic Church is infallible
The first member to accept the challenge becomes the contender.
Debate will be automatically deleted in:
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 20,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
The ultimate goal of this debate is to advance the pursuit of truth. Regardless of who wins or loses, the real victor is the one who gains new knowledge. This debate will examine the basis for the Catholic Church's claim to infallibility.
Opponents of the dogma are the Reformers, who in rejecting the hierarchy also rejected the authoritative teaching-function of the Church; and the Modernists, who deny the Divine institution of the Church and therefore also set aside her infallibility.
Definitions:
Infallible - The impossibility of falling into error. In this context, the term refers to the Church's infallibility in the final decision on doctrines concerning faith and morals.
Rules:
1. Both parties accept the Bible as divinely inspired and authoritative.
2. For consistency, the NRSV Bible will be used as the reference when citing scripture.
3. In the final round, only counterarguments addressing previous points will be allowed; no new arguments may be introduced.
4. Failure to comply with rule #3 will result in an automatic forfeiture.
"debate remains focused on whether the Church’s interpretation and claim to infallibility are valid, based on that shared premise"
I guess, but you wont find many people agreeing that Bible is true and divine. This debate is basically just for Christians who dont think Church gets the final say, but Bible says it actually does, so the premise agreed upon already assumes the topic to be true, making this a truism which cannot even be argued against unless some severe mental gymnastics are used.
I may be interested, but right now I am in 2 other debates that I have to focus on
Not sure how relevant this is to the topic, but with agreement on the NRSV as canon, you may be limited to Orthodox and Protestants who accept the deuterocanonical books (Tobit, both Maccabees, etc.)
Debating the truth of the Bible itself would shift the focus entirely and undermine this specific discussion. By assuming the Bible is true, the debate remains focused on whether the Church’s interpretation and claim to infallibility are valid, based on that shared premise.
"Both parties accept the Bible as divinely inspired and authoritative"
Yeah, this alone makes the debate about the Bible and not about the Church itself.
Basically, opponent has to agree that everything Bible says is true.
I think it'll be a good debate. I would love for my arguments to be so compelling that my opponent is left with no choice but to nitpick semantics — and maybe even invent a new grammar rule just to keep up.
Could be a good debate. Might fall into a battle over semantics, but we'll see.