Trogos to a Protestant

  • Thread starter Thread starter AlexPetrosPio
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
exnihilo said:
Not believing in the Real Presence is one thing, but to say God cant do it is to completely undermine God’s power.
Click to expand...
Depends…to say that God can’t do what is claimed b/c the claim makes no sense is one thing, but to say that God can’t can’t do something because he lacks the power is another thing. I do argue for the former and not the latter.
 
PRmerger said:
I have done both.
Click to expand...
no, you have done neither. You provided a link to Augustine’s Tractates on the Gospel of John. If you want to discuss Augustine you should at least be able to tell the difference between a Tractate on John and Sermon 227.
Why post a challenge if you’re not going to address it, except if it was a bluff in the first place?
Click to expand...
I started posting the challenge b/c people like you (and now I see N325) love to quote a snippet of Sermon 227 and claim that they know what Augustine believed. The challenge is my easy way of showing that the fellow/gal really doesn’t know what he/she is talking about and (likely) hasn’t even read the Sermon involved.
(Which, incidentally, I knew was a bluff all along, which is why I called it. I am one mean poker player, BTW. :))
Click to expand...
A mean poker player that apparently can’t tell the difference between a card called Sermon 227 and a card called a Tractate on John. BTW where is your explanation on the meaning of the various parts of Sermon 227?..a link to that post please.
 
PRmerger said:
I have already addressed this. Flesh chewing does indeed occur. His Flesh is present. I chew. Therefore, flesh-chewing does indeed occur.
Click to expand...
thank-you, this is exactly the sort of claim that, IMHO, terribly abuses definitions and reason…if you can’t see why I would say that, then I doubt that I could make my point any clearer
How you can identify what happens during an experience that you’re not part of is absurd.
Click to expand...
It’s like you’re looking into the marital bed of a couple and telling them, “You’re not really engaging in a loving union.” How in the heck do* you *know?
Click to expand...
well, if the husband wasn’t actually there and the wife was merely insisting that he was bodily present…then it is a pretty good clue.
 
Radical said:
no, you have done neither. You provided a link to Augustine’s Tractates on the Gospel of John. If you want to discuss Augustine you should at least be able to tell the difference between a Tractate on John and Sermon 227.

I started posting the challenge b/c people like you (and now I see N325) love to quote a snippet of Sermon 227 and claim that they know what Augustine believed. The challenge is my easy way of showing that the fellow/gal really doesn’t know what he/she is talking about and (likely) hasn’t even read the Sermon involved.

A mean poker player that apparently can’t tell the difference between a card called Sermon 227 and a card called a Tractate on John. BTW where is your explanation on the meaning of the various parts of Sermon 227?..a link to that post please.
Click to expand...
I posted the link to Sermon 227 that’s within the Tractate. Please see the link for the sermon.

At any rate, this is all, again, a bluff.

Go to the thread and discuss it, if you can. Or dare to. 😉

(Incidentally, if you don’t like the link, please provide your own. All this discussion about whether it’s the correct link or not is dancing around the discussion. You want to discuss Augustine’s belief in the RP. Let’s discuss. Here’s the thread again.)
 
I started posting the challenge b/c people like you (and now I see N325) love to quote a snippet of Sermon 227 and claim that they know what Augustine believed. The challenge is my easy way of showing that the fellow/gal really doesn’t know what he/she is talking about and (likely) hasn’t even read the Sermon involved.
Click to expand...
Now the above has to the biggest amount of ARROGANCE I have ever read. I do not know what I am talking about? This is rather laughable! I have EVERY work Augustine has written and for you to claim I have no clue is pure IGNORANCE on your part. I have studied Augustine more than ANY Church father and your position is purely a NOVELTY and REVISIONISM…plain and simple!

No matter what you believe and think Augustine would have rebuked your nonsense!
 
Radical said:
Depends…to say that God can’t do what is claimed b/c the claim makes no sense is one thing
Click to expand...
This is it in a nutshell. “I don’t believe God’s Word because it doesn’t make sense to me.”

This is a hard saying. Who can believe it?

Hmmm…where have I heard this before? :hmmm:

One has to wonder at the arrogance of re-designing God’s Word so it makes sense, down to the minutiae, to one’s little mind.
 
PRmerger said:
I posted the link to Sermon 227 that’s within the Tractate. Please see the link for the sermon.

At any rate, this is all, again, a bluff.

Go to the thread and discuss it, if you can. Or dare to. 😉

(Incidentally, if you don’t like the link, please provide your own. All this discussion about whether it’s the correct link or not is dancing around the discussion. You want to discuss Augustine’s belief in the RP. Let’s discuss. Here’s the thread again.)
Click to expand...
Yeah and I am curious to know why Radical cannot rebuke the following words by Augsutine?

I’ll tell you why Radical cannot do it? Radical has to rationalize and once it makes sense,then he will believe it.

“What you **see **is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread **is the body of Christ **and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction” (ibid., 272).

Radical is a dreamer and a revisionist,plain and simple!
 
Radical said:
Depends…to say that God can’t do what is claimed b/c the claim makes no sense is one thing
Click to expand...
One has to wonder if you’ve ever had a discussion with a Muslim about the Trinity. What would you say if he told you he rejects this because it “makes no sense” to him.

Per St. Augustine: If you don’t believe in the Trinity, you will lose your soul. But if you try to understand it, you will lose your mind.
 
Radical said:
Depends…to say that God can’t do what is claimed b/c the claim makes no sense is one thing,
Click to expand...
One has to wonder if you’ve ever had a discussion attempting to provide apologia for the hypostatic union. What would you say if your potential convert says he has to reject this claim because it “makes no sense” to him?
 
Radical said:
Depends…to say that God can’t do what is claimed b/c the claim makes no sense is one thing,
Click to expand...
Radical, you will lose much evangelization power if any non-Christian reads your posts, for you cannot argue any of the central dogmas of Christianity: the Incarnation, Resurrection, Trinity, Hypostatic Union and that Jesus is homousios with the Father…because they “make no sense”.

Just sayin’…🤷
 
Nicea325 said:
Now the above has to the biggest amount of ARROGANCE I have ever read. I do not know what I am talking about? This is rather laughable! I have EVERY work Augustine has written and for you to claim I have no clue is pure IGNORANCE on your part. I have studied Augustine more than ANY Church father and your position is purely a NOVELTY and REVISIONISM…plain and simple!

No matter what you believe and think Augustine would have rebuked your nonsense!
Click to expand...
Arrogance would be claiming that you know more about Augustine than biographers of Augustine such as Wills or Van der Meer…or about Augustine’s understanding of the Eucharist than some one who has researched the matter such as Kilmartin. Arrogance would be dismissing (as revisionism or a novelty) any conclusion that isn’t attractive to you and w/o engaging either the scholar’s argument or the evidence on which it is based.

…but since you are here, and IIRC you possess some post-graduate training and since you have every work Augustine has written (gosh, I thought quite a few had been lost and that we were periodically finding more) …perhaps you could send a PM to PRmerger explaining the difference between Augustine’s Tractates and his Sermons…I am just not getting through to her. Thanks, that would be great if you would.
 
Radical said:
…perhaps you could send a PM to PRmerger explaining the difference between Augustine’s Tractates and his Sermons…I am just not getting through to her. Thanks, that would be great if you would.
Click to expand...
Stop with the sarcasm, Radical.

Sarcasm is the protest of the weak. I rarely use it.

Just come to the thread and let’s discuss, okay?

Here it is again for you: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=570877

If you want the sermon to be posted so badly, please do it. I provided the link as it is copyrighted at the site I used.

It’s really peculiar why you are making such a big deal about the link. In the spirit of Radical’s mantra, I’d like to profess that this “makes no sense”. 😃
 
Nicea325 said:
Yeah and I am curious to know why Radical cannot rebuke the following words by Augsutine?

I’ll tell you why Radical cannot do it? Radical has to rationalize and once it makes sense,then he will believe it.

“What you see is the bread and the chalice; that is what your own eyes report to you. But what your faith obliges you to accept is that the bread **is the body of Christ **and the chalice is the blood of Christ. This has been said very briefly, which may perhaps be sufficient for faith; yet faith does not desire instruction” (ibid., 272).

Radical is a dreamer and a revisionist,plain and simple!
Click to expand...
actually I have dealt with Sermon 272 quite a few times…here are two threads:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7654334

(see post 270)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4170705
 
PRmerger said:
Stop with the sarcasm, Radical.
Click to expand...
I am not being sarcastic…clearly you think that you have posted a link to the sermon…you haven’t. No matter how many times I tell you…you still believe that you have provided the sermon. You won’t believe me, perhaps you will believe Nicea325…this has gotten just too silly for me.
 
Radical said:
actually I have dealt with Sermon 272 quite a few times…here are two threads:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=7654334

(see post 270)

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=4170705
Click to expand...
Okay.

Not sure what all this diversion was about. But thanks for the links. I now cited it on the thread, in response to your challenge. Again.

Here’s the new post I made, citing St. Augustine: forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=8010244&postcount=11

It really **makes no sense **why you required me to do this, esp. in light of the fact that you had these citations yourself–and even quoted them. How peculiar!
 
Radical said:
I am not being sarcastic…clearly you think that you have posted a link to the sermon…you haven’t. No matter how many times I tell you…you still believe that you have provided the sermon. You won’t believe me, perhaps you will believe Nicea325…this has gotten just too silly for me.
Click to expand...
Well, now I have. 😃

New excuse now?

Let’s see…is it because I’m posting on an odd-numbered Sunday in June and you only respond to challenges made on even numbered Saturdays in July? And I’ll just have to wait until then? :eek:
 
I just want to point out to you, Radical, that you failed to even acknowledge the existence of #82. To repeat: Jesus said, “This is My Body.” So who are we to say otherwise?
 
AlexPetrosPio said:
  1. Nature obeys God.
  2. Jesus is God.
  3. Bread and wine are a part of nature that we live in.
  4. Jesus as the God-Man entered into the part of nature that we live in.
  5. Jesus took bread and called it His Body and took wine and called it His Blood.
  6. Nature obeys God.
Jesus said the bread and wine was His Body and Blood. Who are we to disagree?
Click to expand...
OK…so having adopted as valid your 6 points, I come to these verses:

“For whoever does the will of My Father who is in heaven, he is My brother and sister and mother” Matt 12:50

“For whoever does the will of God, he is My brother and sister and mother.” Mark 3:35

Who are we to disagree…We therefore conclude that the substance of Mary and the other members of Christ’s immediate family are miraculously present behind/under the accidents of any disciple’s body (at multiple locations accross the globe for the last 2000 years)…Surely this must be so, b/c Christ used “is” and God would have the ability to make such a thing happen…after all, nature obeys God.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top