• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

What kind of worship does God expect from us?

No it's not. Even the Bible itself disagrees. 1 Timothy 3:15: "if I am delayed, you may know how one ought to behave in the household of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and bulwark of the truth."

Back to substance and accidents, you didn't answer the question. Why did Aristotle define the concepts? What paradox did it refute?

Here's a nice primer on why you need a division between accident and substance to explain change:
Aristotle on Change

And another good source:
http://www.aquinasonline.com/Topics/change.html

Look, I try to provide as much grace as I can to posters who are honestly and carefully trying to present their beliefs, but if you read through the BCP I supplied you will see that the character of our Eucharistic service is decidedly Eastern in thought and in many ways taken from the Patristic period, and therefore wholly authentic, if not Roman Catholic. It is designed to be in harmony with both early Church practices and scripture.

Furthermore, I do not "challenge Church authority" because I am a duly ordained minister of the Church Catholic, complete with three lines of succession that date back to the ancient Church.
 
Faith is irrational?

Absolutely not, which is why the concept of transsubstantiation brings together faith in the Real Presence and the ability to rationally explain it.
 
Look, I try to provide as much grace as I can to posters who are honestly and carefully trying to present their beliefs, but if you read through the BCP I supplied you will see that the character of our Eucharistic service is decidedly Eastern in thought and in many ways taken from the Patristic period, and therefore wholly authentic, if not Roman Catholic. It is designed to be in harmony with both early Church practices and scripture.

Furthermore, I do not "challenge Church authority" because I am a duly ordained minister of the Church Catholic, complete with three lines of succession that date back to the ancient Church.

So are you not going to tell me what problem you have with transsubstantiation and why you reject it?
 
So are you not going to tell me what problem you have with transsubstantiation and why you reject it?

I already have, several times. What do you want from me?
 
I already have, several times. What do you want from me?

I want a specific answer. On what basis do you reject transsubstantiation? Because the word is not mentioned in the Bible? So far you've only given vague responses.
 
I want a specific answer. On what basis do you reject transsubstantiation? Because the word is not mentioned in the Bible? So far you've only given vague responses.

I think we are done here. I have given my reasons both explicitly and implicitly.
 
I think we are done here. I have given my reasons both explicitly and implicitly.

The only words have been "repugnant to scripture", yet you cite no verses or make any argument to substantiate that claim.
 
Back
Top Bottom