Author Topic: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc. (Read 16455 times)

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #75 on:** August 23, 2017, 12:29:45 PM »

Quote from: DZ PLEASE on August 23, 2017, 12:29:15 PM

Bet there's plenty of "rantin' room" on the doors of Wittenburg for all these feces theses…

Well stated.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #76 on:** August 23, 2017, 01:01:27 PM »

If one consults Latin dictionaries (which one really has no business doing, considering that they aren't infallible, nor do they engage doctrine or morals), one finds that the common translation of the word "mox" is soon, but not "soon" the way that you would say to a child, "we'll be there soon." It isn't an ambiguous soon, it's a determinant next place or condition. To say that one descends immediately to Hell where "mox" is the word for immediate is to say that the very next place or condition experienced by the soul is Hell. The idea that the soul slumbers or is otherwise delayed (besides whatever "delay" is imposed by the judgment itself) is a condemned proposition. It's not a Catholic view.
.
At any rate, these pious stories either are or aren't sufficient proofs for the BoD denier. Even Seven has already said that they aren't, so why he insists on defending them is beyond me. Glutton for punishment, maybe.
.

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #77 on:** August 23, 2017, 01:46:56 PM »

Quote

What's not Catholic about a person dying and arriving at the Particular Judgment and the Lord judging that there's need to be raised from the dead to be Baptized. Besides, there is no "time" in eternity, whether it's soon or immediately the idea is the same. Death then Judgment.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #78 on:** August 23, 2017, 03:57:28 PM »

Quote from: Neil Obstat on August 17, 2017, 06:52:11 PM

Quote from: Ladislaus on August 17, 2017, 04:32:14 PM
Quote
Quote

Quote
...I have no issues with someone believing in BoD provided that they do not simultaneously undermine EENS, promote heretical ecclesiology, advocate Pelagianism, and deny the necessity of the Sacraments (even mockingly deriding them in language identical to that of the Protestants). So far only two BoDers on CI (Arvinger and Nishant) have met these criteria.
[size={defaultattr}][font={defaultattr}]Oh, yes, I forgot Matto. My apologies to him. He also believes in a Catholic version of the BoD hypothesis.[/font][/size]
.
It seems rather commonplace for BoB/BoD to go hand-in-hand with sedevacantism. I don't know any of the latter who are not also adherents of the former. Your post seems to support that too: as far as I could tell, Arvinger, Nishant and Matto are not sedes.
.

.
It's revealing that no sedes have responded to this.
.
I suppose then it's correct, that BoD (especially) and sedevacantism go hand-in-hand.
.
Correct?
.

DZ PLEASE · « **Reply #79 on:** August 23, 2017, 04:08:16 PM »

Quote from: An even Seven on August 23, 2017, 01:32:17 PM

I never said that people should not consult other sources besides Magisterial ones. I only say that when the two are in contradiction, the Magisterial decides the matter. It's quite different from subordinating Magisterial statements to the teachings of Theologians under the guise of "a deeper understanding". BTW, I got that word "mox" from the encyclical online as part of it. I know little about Latin. Whether it means immediately or soon in the modern sense does not matter.What's not Catholic about a person dying and arriving at the Particular Judgment and the Lord judging that there's need to be raised from the dead to be Baptized. Besides, there is no "time" in eternity, whether it's soon or immediately the idea is the same. Death then Judgment.
.I said that there is no reason why they can't be evidence for the necessity of water Baptism. That there is no conflict between Dogma and these stories as you would like to pretend there is. There is, however, conflict between the stories of unbaptized 'martyrs' and Dogma. That's what this all comes down to really. One side uses their stories to show that Baptism is not necessary and the other side uses these stories to show the necessity of Baptism. Unbaptized 'martyrs' is against Dogma as Benedictus Deus shows.
Also, in your mind, are you punishing me by your 'brilliant' replies? All I see is grasping.

Wasn't this whole goat rodeo prompted in response to BoD peeps insisting on using pious stories as "proof", and not asproof contra BoD at all? Distinction fail and punishing the victim/rewaRding the perp?

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc. (Read 16455 times)

Lover of Truth

Re: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc.

Mithrandylan

Re: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc.

Lover of Truth

Re: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc.

Neil Obstat

Re: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc.

DZ PLEASE

Re: People needing baptism, raised from the dead, etc.