pro_universal's reasons for leavin the Catholic Church

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Mr. Ex-Nihilo, i think i got my answer you can go on

Check Point 1: Clear.

This only my opinion but…

I follow pretty exclusively the Baltimore Catechism. Back in on those days, one had to be careful getting into arguments with people who were reducing the Godhead to the frivolous because one did not want to be found in a situation where God was being treated in an irreverant fashion. In this thread, pro has repeatedly manipulated people into the position where in the name of “saving Pro from himself”, God is reduced to a frivolous state. For what it is worth, that is only my opinion. But see, the title of the thread itself is a manipulation. Pro is not looking for assistance with his faith. Pro is looking to justify blasphemy against the Church and God and looking to find supporters. How deep any faithful Catholic wants to delve is up to them- it is important of course for each catholic to put his own immortal soul first.

Check Point 2: tequilamac, if you feel that I should not debate this further, or if you feel that I have offended you or any other fellow Catholic by engaging in this debate, then I will accept your discernment and not proceed further.

However, I will note that we might be the only people who are actually going to show pro how the Trinity is not contradictory in the way that he has defined it.

I’ve gone right back to the basics are far as logic is concerned in order to carefully display to pro the error in his thinking. I would like to proceed with this because I feel confident that God has enabled me to do this without causing any damage or confusion to anyone’s faith in the process.

I certainly don’t feel that I’ve said anything that would cause people to doubt the Trinity. But I’ve given plenty of reasons why pro is not using his own logic when he examines the claims of Christian thought in regards to the Trinity.

Nonetheless, if you feel that this is wrong, then I will not proceed.

So my simple question is:

May I proceed with this debate-- yes or no?

 

[amoxoxoma]

I vote YES. You are doing a great service, patiently, and with respect, for both pro_u and for our God.

 

[tequilamac]

Check Point 1: Clear.

Check Point 2: tequilamac, if you feel that I should not debate this further, or if you feel that I have offended you or any other fellow Catholic by engaging in this debate, then I will accept your discernment and not proceed further.

However, I will note that we might be the only people who are actually going to show pro how the Trinity is not contradictory in the way that he has defined it.

I’ve gone right back to the basics are far as logic is concerned in order to carefully display to pro the error in his thinking. I would like to proceed with this because I feel confident that God has enabled me to do this without causing any damage or confusion to anyone’s faith in the process.

I certainly don’t feel that I’ve said anything that would cause people to doubt the Trinity. But I’ve given plenty of reasons why pro is not using his own logic when he examines the claims of Christian thought in regards to the Trinity.

Nonetheless, if you feel that this is wrong, then I will not proceed.

So my simple question is:

May I proceed with this debate-- yes or no?

I really believe it is up to you whether you continue the debate or not. I have every right to state that Pro is wasting your time with it without being put in the position of deciding whether you should debate or not. These days many people really do not care one way or the other whether the Trinity is relegated to the status of mere logic or syllogism so this debate is quite in keeping with the times. I’m a dinosaur. I believe when the average catholic begins to debate the Real Presence with someone who is flatly rejecting the Real Presence that person will end up eventually unwittingly sponsoring a forum for blasphemy.

Bottom line- if pro was catholic and left the church and is now claiming the church to be in error, then he is rejecting the Real Presence which at the least is anger and at the most is blasphemy.

If I stood on a street corner near and you and began yelling the Lord’s name along with many swear words in order to provoke, would you keep argueing with me to try and get me to stop? Especially if the more you argued the more I swore? Just curious.

Do not use my answers to decide whether to debate or not. I am not in the permission realm. I am simply voicing my opinion.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I really believe it is up to you whether you continue the debate or not. I have every right to state that Pro is wasting your time with it without being put in the position of deciding whether you should debate or not. These days many people really do not care one way or the other whether the Trinity is relegated to the status of mere logic or syllogism so this debate is quite in keeping with the times. I’m a dinosaur. I believe when the average catholic begins to debate the Real Presence with someone who is flatly rejecting the Real Presence that person will end up eventually unwittingly sponsoring a forum for blasphemy.

Bottom line- if pro was catholic and left the church and is now claiming the church to be in error, then he is rejecting the Real Presence which at the least is anger and at the most is blasphemy.

If I stood on a street corner near and you and began yelling the Lord’s name along with many swear words in order to provoke, would you keep argueing with me to try and get me to stop? Especially if the more you argued the more I swore? Just curious.

Do not use my answers to decide whether to debate or not. I am not in the permission realm. I am simply voicing my opinion.

May I proceed with this debate-- yes or no?

 

[eleonardo]

I have to agree. I think it’s pointless debating about logic, as I have stated in an earlier post. Do you honestly think that if, and I know it wont ever happen with pro, you prove to him there’s logic in the Trinity, or that it’s not contradictory, he’ll become Catholic?
I seriously doubt it. I really appreciate your patience, but unless you enjoy debating, you shouldn’t “waste” your time on him.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I have to agree. I think it’s pointless debating about logic, as I have stated in an earlier post. Do you honestly think that if, and I know it wont ever happen with pro, you prove to him there’s logic in the Trinity, or that it’s not contradictory, he’ll become Catholic?
I seriously doubt it. I really appreciate your patience, but unless you enjoy debating, you shouldn’t “waste” your time on him.

Yes. Actually, I do think that pro can be convinced of the logic of the Trinity.

But, you know what…fine…I’m going to leave it be.

This is really sad that it comes down to the possibility of blaspheming the Lord when explaining these the ideas, or that it’s considered in any way a waste of time to explain our beliefs to others who are a) seriously not understading something and are b) asking questions and are c) in the very real danger of hell.

sigh

 

[inJESUS]

Mr. Ex Nihilo,

i do not believe Pro was Christian. But in case am wrong, it is very clear Pro does NOT want to understand; that’s why he turns round the bush and try to find any reason for rejecting it. I personally don’t find a problem if you want to go on with the discussion; you are not blaspheming or anything. And thank you for this discussion, it is very informative to those who want to see. If Pro does find illogical things in Christian belief but nothing illogical in Muhammad’s, than this speaks for itself

 

[tequilamac]

Yes. Actually, I do think that pro can be convinced of the logic of the Trinity.

But, you know what…fine…I’m going to leave it be.

This is really sad that it comes down to the possibility of blaspheming the Lord when explaining these the ideas, or that it’s considered in any way a waste of time to explain our beliefs to others who are a) seriously not understading something and are b) asking questions and are c) in the very real danger of hell.

sigh

Ridiculous. You fail to see that not only does Pro already know, was already catechised, was already receiving communion, but then rejected it all. This is the premise upon which he began this thread. And somehow you think that re-explaining that which he already knows will help him. On the other hand if you reject the notion that pro was ever catholic- you are accusing him of deliberately lying and of deceiving you in which it is a waste of everyone’s time to talk with him if that is the way he wants to go. But fall for that if you want. But consider this:

Judas has a role to play as well. Many people I suppose would have liked to argue the logic of the Trinity with Judas all day as well. The Jews are famous for their theological arguing. But God had another plan in mind and it was quite fortunate for us that He did.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Ridiculous. You fail to see that not only does Pro already know, was already catechised, was already receiving communion, but then rejected it all. This is the premise upon which he began this thread. And somehow you think that re-explaining that which he already knows will help him. On the other hand if you reject the notion that pro was ever catholic- you are accusing him of deliberately lying and of deceiving you in which it is a waste of everyone’s time to talk with him if that is the way he wants to go. But fall for that if you want. But consider this:

Judas has a role to play as well. Many people I suppose would have liked to argue the logic of the Trinity with Judas all day as well. The Jews are famous for their theological arguing. But God had another plan in mind and it was quite fortunate for us that He did.

Like I said before, I’m just going to drop this one. I think pro is now causing division between Catholics. And for the sake of Catholic unity, I’m going to step out quietly before I offend one of my brothers in Christ.

God bless you richly in Christ tequilamac. I’ve meant no offense toward you.

 

[inJESUS]

Mr Ex, you can step back with pride…we all enjoyed your posts…as our brother said, there are people who reject, and reject to understand because they want to convince themselves they are correct God bless you brother In Christ

 

[pro_universal]

Like I said before, I’m just going to drop this one. I think pro is now causing division between Catholics. And for the sake of Catholic unity, I’m going to step out quietly before I offend one of my brothers in Christ.

God bless you richly in Christ tequilamac. I’ve meant no offense toward you.

The funny part is that you’re making this like it’s some new decision.

You actually dropped it several weeks ago, when you said “do you want me to show you with logic? I’ll do it if you want!” and then proceeded to do nothing of the sort.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

The funny part is that you’re making this like it’s some new decision.

You actually dropped it several weeks ago, when you said “do you want me to show you with logic? I’ll do it if you want!” and then proceeded to do nothing of the sort.

No. That’s either a lie or else a serious misunderstanding pro.

But good luck with your search anyway.

 

[pro_universal]

No. That’s either a lie or else a serious misunderstanding pro.

But good luck with your search anyway.

It’s a fact Mr. Ex,

Here’s what you said in post #383:

If you want me to proceed to show you the negation via translating and applying the rules of inference, I will do so if you so desire.

But no such material ever appeared. You dropped this whole question long ago.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

It’s a fact Mr. Ex,

Here’s what you said in post #383:

But no such material ever appeared. You dropped this whole question long ago.

Now you’re just provoking me pro.

I never dropped this whole question period. And I’ve been addressing it and preparing you to understand where I was coming from on this matter since that time.

So it is not a fact that I dropped this whole question long ago.

Now stop doing that.

You do understand that I was really trying to help you right?

 

[pro_universal]

Now you’re just provoking me pro.

I never dropped this whole question period. And I’ve been addressing it and preparing you to understand where I was coming from on this matter since that time.

No you haven’t. There was not even a meager attempt at anything remotely approaching what you promised in 383.

You do understand that I was really trying to help you right?

I don’t think so. I think you were more interested in flexing the muscles of the “holy mongoose.”

 

[BumpSetSpike]

Oh my goodness…

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

No you haven’t. There was not even a meager attempt at anything remotely approaching what you promised in 383.

I don’t think so. I think you were more interested in flexing the muscles of the “holy mongoose.”

You can think what you want to think.

What do you want me to do here?

If I reply, then I might anger my own Catholic brothers.

If I don’t reply, then you can claim that I’ve never known what I’m talking about and never intended to do this in the first place.

Which is more important?

Maybe you can leave the Church based on what other Catholics say. I’m not doing that-- and it does mean a lot to me what my felllow brothers in Christ think.

So if I can work towards that unity from within the Church, I’ll do so. And unless others who were frustrated for whatever reason with my responses speak up and say it’s ok to proceed, I’m not responding to you pro.

Do you understand this?

 

[pro_universal]

Oh my goodness…

Good point. I can’t believe I posted this long.

I should’ve known any serious discussion was over when I started seeing pictures of mongooses.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Good point. I can’t believe I posted this long.

I should’ve known any serious discussion was over when I started seeing pictures of mongooses.

Look pro. I am sorry if I’ve hurt your feelings in anyway. It wasn’t my intention. I’ve done my best to respect Islam in the process too.

But I did intend to debate with you concenring the logic of the Trinity. And I was actually discussing the logic of the Trinity with you.

So why are you still bringing this up?

I mean, there’s nothing really stopping you from thinking what you want to think, right?

So why don’t you just proceed to think what you want to think and leave it be?

 

[inJESUS]

Yes Mr, Ex, when it comes to Trinity, Pro puts all his effort to disprove it…but when it comes to Islam and Jesus put his resemblance on someone else and was not crucified, Pro finds it highly logical …or Allah’s question : “how can Allah have a son if he has no wife” a very logical question as well did you get the whole picture Mr. Ex? it’s what Isaiah said : woe to you who see evil good and good evil.

All my respect to your efforts Mr Ex :tiphat: and let the dead burry their dead.