Thomas Aquinas passage refuting transubstantiation

It’s no different from asserting that a body can be in multiple locations at once, which is what transubstantiation asserts. Science fiction has no problem depicting this, and no one thinks it absurd.

 

It was illogical for anyone to rise from the dead after being in the tomb for several days. God did it anyway.

 

It’s only illogical if you redefine object to mean “not a person”, otherwise you set yourself up for problems with Christology, about Christ being fully man and fully God.

 

But then you do have to ask, “who’s a baptist?” It’s a huge tent.

 

Please give examples if you want.
I’ve seen this same talking line from orthodox…

yup, found it right here: https://www.oca.org/questions/roman...er-to-the-roman-catholic-church-than-to-the-p

No offense but it just looks like a desperate attempt from them to differentiate themselves from Catholics to make us an alien religion.
I don’t know why they have this thing of defining their own doctrines saying “we believe X or don’t believe X like/unlike Roman Catholics.”
Especially that OCA website. It’ll be talking about something normal and then all of a sudden go on a diatribe about Catholics when nobody asked…

I guess maybe their church is so unknown in the west the only way to get converts is to make themselves seem different and special ? Idk..
They certainly have a tendency to believe everything western is wrong though. Their obfuscation of original vs ancestral sin comes to mind. Also the fact they pin everything they disagree with the west on Augustine. They don’t let the poor man have a break lol

But I’d love to hear about an example of how similar we are to baptists vs the orthodox….
Although I fear it will just be orthodox talking points, even if you’re Anglican now

 

Not locally present but sacramentally and substantially

 

This doesn’t go against reason and logic so no it’s not illogical …
Also why are you so against the Eucharist being Christ instead of Christ +bread or +wine?

 

The offer was genuine, but I’ll be happy to rescind it if you keep talking to me like that. I have a very low tolerance for people who want to talk theology but aren’t willing to do the work it takes to discuss it properly. Aquinas was the same way.

I’m no Orthodox apologist, but frankly I know far more about the subject than you do, and I didn’t learn about it at Google University or Wikipedia College, but from thorough catechesis and years of practice. If you want to learn something, it requires an open mind first. Show you’re serious or ask someone else.

 

dO yOU hAvE oNiON dOMeS anD mOsAICs? HA! lItErAL bAptIsTs!

 

Idk what google university is
I looked into orthodoxy before I converted as well. It’s just the impression I got from them. If you don’t want to tell me that’s fine. None of my comments were directed at you, they were directed at the orthodox. I only said I already probably knew what it was going to be because I’ve heard it a million times.
Also the comparison that baptists are closer to Catholics… I don’t know how you can pull that one off
But you don’t have to tell me if you don’t want.
Idk why people think I have a closed mind on here.
I didn’t want to become a papist, frankly.
But I became convinced through what I read. Does that make me close minded?
I also like eastern tradition a lot. I have 2 orthodox prayer books, and read a lot about eastern Catholicism.
But eastern tradition wasn’t always anti west

 

I dispute that claim on several grounds.

• God is before logic, not the subject of it
• Divine logic may well be unable to be constrained within human logic
• Human logic has, unlike God, proven itself to be absolutely flawed.

In fact it is entirely illogical to conclude that God must conform to our logical constraints.

Where is grace? Where is mystery? Where is the ineffable?

 

That’s because you’ve never been Orthodox. Once you switch perspectives it’s really not that difficult to see why they might look similar to an outsider. If you put on red-tinted glasses, everything else looks red. Religious viewpoints are no different. Catholicism and Protestantism look like two sides of the same coin to a devout Orthodox Christian. It’s a result of their perspective; they aren’t making it up to score polemical points.

 

@Invictus Just for my curiosity, could you throw out a handful of examples as to why the Baptists and Romans are closer to one another than they are to the Orthodox?

 

Yeah but a baptist ?
Also different religion?
I don’t see that tbh…
The only thing the orthodox have in America is not being catholic… hence the OCA
But the eastern and western approach to doctrine aren’t irreconcilable
Eastern Catholic Churches seem pretty orthodox to me and they’re in communion with Rome

 

Catholics believe in the pope

 

Baptists and Catholics are highly individualistic when it comes to personal piety; Orthodox are the opposite.
Baptists and Catholics use stained glass; Orthodox do not.
Baptists and Catholics use musical instruments in worship; Orthodox do not.
Baptists and Catholics read the Scriptures publicly in a normal voice; Orthodox never do this (they’re always chanted), and there are all kinds of reasons for this.
Baptists and Catholics use the faculty of imagination in prayer; this is forbidden in Orthodoxy. This is a major difference.
Baptists and Catholics believe the liturgy/order of public worship is something the Church can modify at will; Orthodox believe the Liturgy (with a capital L) came from God and cannot be altered or abolished.
I could go on and on, from the most superficial detail to the most profound. They may not all seem significant on their own, but they add up. Actually, the fact that many Western Christians would see some of these as unimportant is itself evidence of the difference in perspective I’m attempting to illustrate.

 

Well I was expecting doctrinal differences … aside from the liturgy part (never heard the chrysostom 2 hour Byzantine liturgy came from God from an orthodox person but I might be wrong, they do differ in their beliefs) and the imaginative prayer, none of this is a church diving issue.
Of course the novus Ordo does kinda look like a Protestant service a lot of times so if that’s what you mean then yeah you’re right

 

Can God create a rock so heavy he can’t lift it?
Can God sin?
Can God go against his own will?
Can God contradict himself?
Can God make a square circle?

 

Not to sound too Byzantine, but scholasticism like that hastened the Reformation

 

Actually I heard this from William lane craig. He’s a baptist and apologist, as well as a Christian philosopher. I wouldn’t say anything that has to do with logic is scholastic. Craig helped meld evolution and genesis together for me well.
Logic was given to us by God, after all