Robert Sungenis noob question

  • Thread starter Thread starter ni8_shadow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

ni8_shadow

Guest
I just bought his NBSA book as well as MANY of his mp3’s on his site. I love the info and arguments he presents in his debates (especially against Dr. W) and books. I wanted more so I typed his name in to wiki for some more sources and then I get a whole load of “controversey” this and that 🤷 :confused: .

I check back here and type in his name and I get MANY MANY links and sometimes they just mention his name so they all are not that useful to me.

What I want to know is that is that has he “fallen” from the Apologists Pantheon? I put him up there with Madrid, Staples etc. but the recent articles I find do not shed a nice light on the guy.
 
Robert Sungenis is one of the best debaters and Catholic apologists out there, yet he has fallen from grace as he does explore issues that are contraversial and has made some enemies in his outspokeness.

He criticized Jewish beliefs and some statements about it, I think he did make some careless statements about the Jews which were eagerly used to dismiss him.

He does talk about other things that make people uncomfortable such as Geocentrism, and since people don’t really like to be challenged they prefer to dismiss him.

He has written some great books, yet since he is not part of the mainstream, automatically some people ignore him. There is plenty of useful material on his website, it is quite useful.

Test everything, hold on to what is good,
Scylla
 
Yeah I just found an “article” on the Jewish statements.

Does the Church teach their covenant is still valid?
 
I thought Jesus established a new and everlasting covenant? :confused:
 
If I understand correctly, Sungenis is saying that the Old Testament Covenant is not valid for the Jews anymore, BUT that some U.S. Bishops say it is and they have put that in a new Catechism for the U.S. or something like that.

Sungenis sent a letter to Rome to make them aware (sounds like the old days, sending letters) and Rome has sent him back a letter stating “We will consider it.” Whatever that means.🤷

I thought the New Covenant did replace the old, otherwise why would we have to follow it if we could follow the old one just the same?
 
Sungenis has been turned down for imprimaturs by his bishop and hasn’t gotten one since his Not By Faith Alone.

And it’s totally off base to say “he did make some careless statements about the Jews which were eagerly used to dismiss him” as one person did.

That’s just not accurate. It’s a lot worse than that.

His bishop even got to the point where he threatened to denounce him publicly. And he said he was not going to allow Sungenis to use the name “Catholic.” If you notice, the name of his apostolate doesn’t have “Catholic” in it anymore. Obviously, not a coincidence.

I know it’s not exactly Encylopedia Brittanica, but there’s a pretty good history over at Wikipedia with links as documentation.

The last piece he wrote was a disgrace where he slandered his bishop based on the flimsiest of evidence. That’s the second time he’s done that.

This same lousy story’s been going on for a long time.

CA FORUM ON SUNGENIS

And take a closer look at that letter he got from the Vatican. It’s just little postcard. Looks like a form letter with a couple of sentences and a stamped signature.

You could probably write and tell them the end of the world was happening in a year unless they all did a rain dance and get the same thing from them.
 
Sungenis may have some odd ideas, but he is an absolute scholar on NT Greek and has done better than anyone in putting Dr. James White in his place.

While I ignore Sungenis’ stuff on geocentrism and Judaism, his CASB commentaries are SUPERB.

:cool:
 
I saw him debate John Lane the sedevacantest and he really grilled this guy. I was one of like 20 non-sedevacntest Catholics there. They were pissed, Sungenis really cornered Lane a few times, and Lane started making it personal, which was no good… but anyways.

I definetly think he is one of the best apologists out there, he can go toe to toe with anyone in a debate, but he is a bit of firebrand sometimes, not that he sounds angry, but his words are harse, and sometimes careless.

Even is Geocentrism stuff is worth taking a look at. I have read snipits, it seems alright, and I would be willing to give it a real chance but I dont have time to read around 1000 pages on something that isnt my highest priority to know.
 
Yeah his apologetics stuff rocks:thumbsup: . Seems like he can examine every word and turn against his opponents!

Haven’t looked at the Geo stuff since it isn’t that high on my list as well.

Although the Judaism stuff seems off, I enjoyed his book Not by Scripture Alone as well as his debates. I hope he gets back to writing more apologetics books and debating.
 
He did some very good work back a few years ago. I still recommend Not By Faith Alone and Not By Scripture Alone.

But I don’t agree on his CASB. He doesn’t have an imprimatur on any of them so far. He was rejected by his bishop. In this day and age, that’s saying something. And I can’t brush off that his bishop was on the verge of denouncing him or that he had to take the word Catholic off his apostolate. From what I’ve seen, his bishop’s got a good conservative rep, he’s not a liberal.

And I don’t know enough about Greek to know whether he’s really a great Greek scholar or not. Lately, he’s had a penchant for sounding like he knows what he’s talking about when he doesn’t and it’s gotten him into trouble. So I don’t exactly trust him in the way I used to.

It would be good if he finally left all of the extreme stuff alone and got back to fundamentals. We could all use that again.
 
Went to his site just now and saw this link.usccb.org/dpp/StatementonBeingReligiousInterreligiously.pdf

I am totally new to this type of thing as I currently focus on leanring how to defend the Church. But had no idea there was this theological/ideological struggle between “liberal” and “conservative” Bishops?!:eek:

Has or will this come up in dialouges with Protestants? “Hey you claim the Church has unity but look at this and that!”
 
Not a big deal. The process is just a little messy. We’re human. The bishops are human. But God still protects the process and the faith.

It’s just not this pristine thing where everyone lines up like robots.

Things may shift a little left or right, but never so far as to break the rope that ties us to the Rock of the truth.

Protestants don’t have that mechanism. They just split off when they disagree with each other. There’s no ultimate authority on earth for them. And they can talk about the Bible all they want, it just can’t interpret itself and say, “okay boys, this is it…discussion’s over.”
 
He is unmatched in his analysis and faithful to the teachings of the Church. Not By Faith Alone is one of the best Catholic resources available. I am half-way through Gallileo was Wrong. After only that far, I will never look at the night sky the same.

While I respect and utilize the answers posted by the apologists on this forum, they are usually simplistic. Dr. Sungenis’ responses evidence a breadth of knowledge and understanding of Church teaching far beyond his fellow apologists.

Also, he will take all issues head-on, including threats to the truth profered by our own ranks. Apologists from this organization, including Ms. Moss, either ignore or mislead the faithful on the supercessionism/abrogation/replacement theology issue. This has been going on for years and is in direct conflict to the teaching of the Church. JPII clearly said “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.” Somehow Ms. Moss feels more knowledgable and instructs to reject “replacement theology” for the sake of ecumenism. While I do not question that she has good intentions, her mistakes lead to denial of the unicity of salvation through Christ.
 
“supercessionism/abrogation/replacement theology issue” 🤷
Guess I need some studying time!!

He is very good at apologetics…very aggressive tactics…love his audio files (although some have pretty bad sound quality, like the primer on sola scriptura).

It just worries me that the Church also has INTERNAL conflicts. I suppose I should not be surprised as the “Gates of Hell” will try their best to bring the Church down.
 
dribynhoj said:
Also, he will take all issues head-on, including threats to the truth profered by our own ranks.
Click to expand...
I agree he tackles a lot of difficult topics. But I don’t agree he always tackles head on. He’s got a history of clipping penalties when Jews are the topic.

The Origin of the Schoeman Forgery Revealed, Sungenis up to Old Tricks
dribynhoj said:
Apologists from this organization, including Ms. Moss, either ignore or mislead the faithful on the supercessionism/abrogation/replacement theology issue. This has been going on for years and is in direct conflict to the teaching of the Church. JPII clearly said “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.” Somehow Ms. Moss feels more knowledgable and instructs to reject “replacement theology” for the sake of ecumenism. While I do not question that she has good intentions, her mistakes lead to denial of the unicity of salvation through Christ.
Click to expand...
That’s a pretty serious accusation. It sounds like one Mr. Sungenis would make. At least you gave Ms. Moss the benefit of the doubt in her intentions.

So, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you must have looked into her beliefs in detail and are sure about exactly what she believes and teaches. And you must be absolutely sure about what the “Church” teaches before accusing someone like that, too. That’s a great deal more than a couple of quotes to plough through.
 
I have* Not by Scripture Alone *and Not by Faith Alone, and they are definitely solid.

Unfortunately, Mr. Sungenis, in the last few years, has descended into the most vile and virulent anti-Semitism. His palpable hatred of the Jews, which seems to encompass more and more of his writing, is in direct conflict with the Church’s teaching on the Jews.

He cites approvingly the work of neo-Nazi types who are Holocaust deniers and believers in worldwide Jewish conspiracies. And I fear it is fair to characterize Sungenis himself as a Holocaust denier and believer of these Jewish conspiracies. He claims to be unsure if *The Protocols of the Elders of Zion *is a fiction, a view that no serious person has, and only the most hardcore Jew-hater would entertain.

Pray for Mr. Sungenis and others who hold these views, especially those who claim these as proper Catholic views.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top