Author Topic: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis (Read 78349 times)

Ladislaus · « **Reply #210 on:** July 12, 2023, 11:01:12 AM »

Quote from: Always on July 12, 2023, 01:31:55 AM

I can understand your wanting to come to his defense having read some of the very friendly chit chat between you two CathInfo Hero Members, but you're over your head on this one. You are out and out wrong. I know the meaning of calumny quite well and have for a very long time.

At least he was apparently willing to call it a day and finally go to , but you like a good buddy just had to jump in and get your two cents in. The daily CathInfo record setter for having the last word! Just please don't expect me to engage with you anymore on this. Hope you agree that the issue is not worth an iota more of either of our time and that if you do quote my post here you quote it in full.

It has nothing to do with my being "buddies" with gladius. You just don't understand the of the term calumny. While the link he posted was meant as an insult, insults are not calumnies, and it was obvious that he was being tongue-in-cheek with the link. If I call someone ugly, or effeminate, that's an insult, and can be an offense against charity, but it's not a calumny. Basically they're expressions (somewhat subjective) of what one individual thinks of another.

Ladislaus · « **Reply #211 on:** July 12, 2023, 11:32:17 AM »

If someone has an open mind, this here is all you need to demonstrate that the earth is not a globe the size mainstream science claim it is. If you're remotely honest, you'll admit that there's zero chance that this could be caused by "refraction".

Jaynek · « **Reply #212 on:** July 12, 2023, 04:48:36 PM »

Quote from: Tradman on July 12, 2023, 09:30:41 AM

Augustine tells us that scripture describes a flat earth.

No he does not. He referred to the earth as aquosa et globosa moles, that is, "a watery and spherical mass"

From his work De Genesi ad Litteram "On the Literal Meaning of Genesis":

cuм enim totam terram adhuc aqua tegeret, nihil impediebat ut aquosa et globosa moles ex una parte faceret diem lucis praesentia, ex alia noctem lucis absentia, quae in eam partem succederet a tempore vespertino, ex qua lux in aliam declinaret.

"Although water still covered all the earth, nothing was preventing the watery and spherical mass from having day on one side by the presence of light, and on the other side, night by the absence of light, that in the evening, darkness would pass to that side from which light would be turning to the other."

Quote from: Tradman on July 12, 2023, 09:30:41 AM

We can see in Augustine expresses doubt that the sun even works on a globe.

25. "But if that primordial light had been poured round the mass of the earth on all sides to cover it all, whether it was stationary (geocentric globe) or circling round (heliocentric globe), there would have been no part in which it could let night into follow it, because it would not itself have withdrawn from anywhere to make room for it."

You are misunderstanding this passage. In this passage, St. Augustine is answering the question "How did evening and morning follow each other in the first three days?" This needs an explanation because the sun was not created until the fourth day and yet light was separated from darkness and there were days starting from the first day.

He is not doubting the globe but assuming its existence in order to answer the question. The primordial light (the sort of light that existed before the creation of the sun) could not have gone all the way around the earth because this would not allow for night. He is not talking about the globe being stationary or moving, but about the primordial light being stationary or moving as it encircled the spherical earth. Either way, there could be no night.

He then considers the possibility of the primordial light only shining on one side of the earth at a time, creating day and night as it circled around. This could work because the earth was a watery globe. This, therefore, is his solution to the question he posed.

Quote from: Tradman on July 12, 2023, 09:30:41 AM

Augustine questions the globe further and finishes with: "Who would say such a thing, when he can see the fields of the sea, spread out level on all sides."

Again, in context it is very clear that he is not questioning the globe earth model. This statement comes from an answer to the question: "As the water under heaven had first covered the whole earth, where did it recede to for the dry land to appear?"

St. Augustine says: "They [the waters covering the earth] were not, surely, collected into a pile as happens on the threshing floor when the harvest that has been threshed is winnowed and then swept into a heap, and so lays bare the place it had been spread over and covered." This is what he refers to when he asks "Who would ever say such a thing?" St. Augustine is making the obviously true observation that nobody would say such a thing of water because it always appears level. He is not commenting on the shape of the earth.

Quote from: Tradman on July 12, 2023, 09:30:41 AM

Globe promoters will fight tooth and nail to insist earth is a globe, but when confronted with information and facts, they either refuse to read or deal with it, or, they tell us it doesn't really matter. Or, that we have to all wait until we're dead to find out the truth. Or that God doesn't tell us anything about it. This lack of desire to get to the truth says it all. I have yet to find a globe earther that has not tried this and other maneuvers to avoid dealing with the truth when their argument falls apart.

Nothing that you have said about St. Augustine's views is actually supported when one reads the quotes you cited in context. There was nothing true in your entire post.

Anyone who wishes to read On the Literal Meaning of Genesis may do so here:https://isidore.co/CalibreLibrary/Augustine,%20St_/On%20Genesis%20(5059)/On%20Genesis%20-%20Augustine,%20St_.pdf (It starts on page 160) Read it for yourselves and do not rely on quotes that distort its meaning. It is not an exhortation to read Genesis in a literal way. On the contrary, it is at points critical of literal interpretations.

Marulus Fidelis · « **Reply #213 on:** July 12, 2023, 06:04:45 PM »

Quote from: Jaynek on July 12, 2023, 04:48:36 PM

Anyone who wishes to read On the Literal Meaning of Genesis may do so here:https://isidore.co/CalibreLibrary/Augustine,%20St_/On%20Genesis%20(5059)/On%20Genesis%20-%20Augustine,%20St_.pdf (It starts on page 160) Read it for yourselves and do not rely on quotes that distort its meaning. It is not an exhortation to read Genesis in a literal way. On the contrary, it is at points critical of literal interpretations.

Thanks for warning us you don't believe in Genesis. We Catholics know Augustine took Genesis literally and that's why he called his book like that.

Jaynek · « **Reply #214 on:** July 12, 2023, 06:33:30 PM »

Quote from: Marulus Fidelis on July 12, 2023, 06:04:45 PM

Thanks for warning us you don't believe in Genesis. We Catholics know Augustine took Genesis literally and that's why he called his book like that.

I understand Genesis pretty much the same way that St. Augustine did. Few people have been as influential on the Catholic understanding of Scripture as he has been.

Read what he actually wrote instead of instead of deciding that you already know what it says. I already posted the link.

CathInfo.com

Author Topic: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis (Read 78349 times)

Ladislaus

Re: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis

Ladislaus

Re: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis

Jaynek

Re: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis

Marulus Fidelis

Re: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis

Jaynek

Re: New Geocentrism Book by Robert Sungenis