Bob Sungenis makes an error

[marineboy]

I think you make a good point --however I beleive Sungenis was wrong in saying that if "someone is not water baptized we dnt know–we do know!!! we know if someone dies with baptsm of desire, provided he has committed no other mortal sins, he gets to heaven–we know that—also i am not trying to ruinhis reputation please people get alife!!! i highly doubt that me pointing ths out could ruin his reputation–its sloppy language not hersey–he should be more careful

 

[trth_skr]

From:

marineboy:

…Which is it BOBBy?? Are you trying to be the “all star apologist.?”…

and,

marineboy:

…Are you trying to kiss up to those so called traditionalists?? Tell those feenyites to go shove it!!! …

and

marineboy:

…HE SOUNDS LIKE A REAL WIMP IN MY OPINION!!! C’MON BOBBY DONT CAVE BROTHER DONT CAVE!!! BE CONSISTENT WILL YA!!!..

To:

marineboy:

…(AS SLOPPY SUNGENIS DID)

… etc."

And Finally,

marineboy:

…its sloppy language …

It sure takes you a while to concede a point (even partially)!

I guess I can’t fault your vigor!

I would question whether it is even sloppy language in the context I pointed out, plus the fact that a few letters previous he was even more explicit (as you pointed out), but its not worth going too much futher on this. Keep in mind he is answering a series of e-mails. Taking one out of context (and even a single statement within one out of context) is similar to the protestant trick of taking a single Bible verse and building a religion on it (I am not accusing you of the latter).

In Jesus,

MJW

 

[trth_skr]

marineboy:

I know I said:"…its not worth going too much futher on this…", but, you said:

"I beleive Sungenis was wrong in saying that if “someone is not water baptized we dnt know–we do know!!! we know if someone dies with baptsm of desire, provided he has committed no other mortal sins, he gets to heaven–we know that…”

Maybe, but what we do not know is

1. if someone dies with baptsm of desire

or

2.if someone dies…[that he] has [not] committed…mortal sins

So we cannot know that he “…gets to heaven…”.

Conversely even if he is baptized, and dies WITH MORTAL SIN, and we are not aware of it, he will not go to heaven, nor can we presume that he has. We hope he did not die with mortal sin and / or had last rites etc. Unless of course he is canonized.

There are NO GUARANTEES.

Peace,

MJW

 

[marineboy]

O f course we cant specualte on individuals–WE KNOW THAT SO PLEASE, WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, SHUT UP ON THAT POINT— we are talking about a theological teaCHING–WHICH IS OBJECTIVE-go back and read what good old Bobby wrote—he says that water baptism should be our guiding rule and the rest we should leave to God—then he says “…I wouldnt say it is impossible for someone to get to heaven who does not recieve water baptism…” to me this implies that there is an argument that one could make that you could say that someone who dies without water baptism definetley doesnt go to heaven-- (AND THAT IS WRONG–BAPTISM OF DESIRE HELLO)and that is where good old Bobby makes his mistake-- LIKE I SAID ITS SLOPPY LANGUAGE AT BEST AND AT WORST HE IS BEING WIMPY AND CAVING INTO THOSE TRADITIONALISTS WHO HOLD THE FEENEY POSITION—THEY ARE WRONG BY THE WAY

 

[jp2fan]

marineboy-

I am not going to argue with your points, because, a) they have already been quite decisively disproven, b) your points are insanely hard to understand- they are not even complete sentences, and c) you are not listening to a word anyone says anyway.

I merely wanted to say that you are giving some of the most unChristian responses I have heard in a while. Do you claim to be a Christian? Why are you not answering anyone’s questions? You have been asked to tell us a little about yourself so we know where you are coming from. All you have told us (and rather rudely) is your degree. You have been asked what sect of Christianity you claim, and you have ignored it. You have sarcastically called people “genius” and “retarded.” You need to treat people with more charity, or noone will ever listen to what you are saying.

jp2fan

 

[MrS]

jp2fan:

marineboy-

I am not going to argue with your points, because, a) they have already been quite decisively disproven, b) your points are insanely hard to understand- they are not even complete sentences, and c) you are not listening to a word anyone says anyway.

I merely wanted to say that you are giving some of the most unChristian responses I have heard in a while. Do you claim to be a Christian? Why are you not answering anyone’s questions? You have been asked to tell us a little about yourself so we know where you are coming from. All you have told us (and rather rudely) is your degree. You have been asked what sect of Christianity you claim, and you have ignored it. You have sarcastically called people “genius” and “retarded.” You need to treat people with more charity, **or noone will ever listen to what you are saying. **

jp2fan

It appears the thread is dying… and you are right, no one is listening to what’s-his-name. He oughta make a great theologian… as Fr Corapi says “He has educated himself into imbecility.”

 

[marineboy]

I use to teach speciAL education so I do have patience in dealing with “special people.” I consider most of you “special.” See how fondley I think of all of you?? Now I will go slow–I apologize --sometimes when i type fast I dont get my point across–I am a much better speaker than writer–ok Sungenis states “I would not say that it is impossible for someone to attain heaven who did not reciece water baptism.” My point is wth DOES THIS MEAN?? ITS SLOPPY BECAUSE IT SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT ONE CAN ARGUE THAT YOU COULD ASSERT ITS POSSIBLE THAT ONLY WATER BAPTISM SAVES ALL THE TIME—ITS A DOGMATIC FACT THAT IF SOMEONE DIES WITH BAPTISM OF DESIRE, PROVIDED THE PERSON IS FREE FROM MORTAL SIN, HE GOES TO HEAVEN.-----AS i SAID SUNGENIS DOESNT ASSERT THAT----SO TO ME ITS SLOPPY AT BEST AND AT WORSE IT IS A DELIBERATE ATTEMP TO CAVE TO THE FEENEYITES–SINCE AT OTHER TIMES SUNGENIS HAS ASSERTED THE INFALLIBILITY OF B.O.D…I HOPE THAT IS CLEAR FOR ALL YOU "SPECIAL " PEOPLE… P.S. LIGHTEN UP PEOPLE WILL YA

 

[Stevereeno]

marineboy:

ITS A DOGMATIC FACT THAT IF SOMEONE DIES WITH BAPTISM OF DESIRE, PROVIDED THE PERSON IS FREE FROM MORTAL SIN, HE GOES TO HEAVEN.

I’m sorry if this is off the topic of “railing on Sungenis”, but… When does one receive baptism of desire? At their death or when they first desired it? This seems to be an issue since baptism of desire is the only way for some to be forgiven of their mortal sins. We all know how easy it is to commit a mortal sin.

 

[jimmy]

marineboy:

the question was NOT REFERING TO BABIES UNBAPTIZED --I T WAS ASKING IF(WATER) BAPTISM IS NECESSARY ALL THE TIME–AND SUNGENIS WAS WRONG IN HIS ANSWER GO READ MY LAST THREE POSTS–U ALL STILL HAVENT RESPONDED TO THEM–

The question specifically refered to infant baptism.

 

[challenger]

marineboy:

I use to teach speciAL education so I do have patience in dealing with “special people.” I consider most of you “special.”

Did you talk like that to your students? And are you now a marine because they fired you from that job?

marineboy:

See how fondley I think of all of you?? Now I will go slow–I apologize --sometimes when i type fast I dont get my point across–I am a much better speaker than writer–

I hope you’re a more polite speaker than writer, too.

marineboy:

ok Sungenis states “I would not say that it is impossible for someone to attain heaven who did not reciece water baptism.” My point is wth DOES THIS MEAN??

IT MEANS THAT HE ACCEPTS BAPTISM OF DESIRE, MARINEBOY

 

[marineboy]

Well I hope he does --and it seems he does but the way he worded his answer, in my opinion, seems to leave room for another argument against b.o.d.----read my last post —he says --“I wopuldnt argue…etc” would he say that about another dogma of the faith–seems wishy washy to me–AND I DONT LIKE IT!!!

 

[trth_skr]

stevereeno says:

“…When does one receive baptism of desire? At their death or when they first desired it? This seems to be an issue since baptism of desire is the only way for some to be forgiven of their mortal sins…”

Good point. I would say logically they would have to have been desiring baptism (i.e., intending to receive water baptism as soon as legally possible) at the moment of their death. For instance, if you desired baptism 27 yrs. ago while a catechumen, then gave up and did not get it and continued your life, then died- I would not think BOD applies. This definition (surely not official) fits the known supported cases that have significant support, i.e., catechumens who die while in the process of converting and Martyrs who die for Christ. I am sure there are other cases where we could speculate application of BOD.

MJW

 

[Deus_Solus]

I think this thread has gone on too long…:banghead:

 

[trth_skr]

Deus Solus:

I think this thread has gone on too long…:banghead:

I agree. I was done arguing with marineboy, but wanted to comment on stevereeno’s interesting point on BOD.

MJW

 

[PhilVaz]

IF YOU CAN READ THIS YOU ARE TOO CLOSE, PLEASE STEP BACK FROM THE SCREEN ABOUT 500 PACES. THANK YOU.



Phil P

 

[PhilVaz]

THIS IS THE OFFICIAL THREAD FOR PEOPLE WITH POOR EYESITE WHO ARE INTERESTED IN THE NUANCES OF BAPTISM OF DESIRE AND ROBERT SUNGENIS. THANK YOU.



Phil P

 

[challenger]

Fine, maybe he could have worded it better. But that’s not what you came on here to say, is it? You started a post with the title “Bob Sungenis makes an error”, and your first post read like this: "The Holy Office’s interpretation is a little more reliable then you or me or even Bob Sungenis… Which is it BOBBy?? Are you trying to be the "all star apologist.?"You changed your tack to try to save face.

 

[marineboy]

The rror is in how he worded his statement–he should know better with all HIS EXPERINCE–ESPECIALLY THE AY SOME OF YOU PEOPLE THINK OF HIM TOO-ANYWAY–I DIDNT CHANGE MY APPROACH --I MERELY ASKED A FW QUESTIONS AT THE END OF MY ORIGINAL POST–WHICH IS IT BOBBY? CAUSE It SEEMS TO BE IN CONTRADICTON TO HIS EARLIER ANSWER? or could be. and i asked IF HE WAS TRYINGTO BE THE ALL STAR APOLIGIST? SO WHAT I DIDT CHANGE MY TACTIC-

 

[Theodred]

marineboy:

The rror is in how he worded his statement

That’s the bacon calling the sausage fattening.