Blackthorne

"In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity."

Virginian | gentleman | theology & history

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

Needless to say, I disagree with much of what you've written. If you want to narrow your response to address what I've written I'm happy to dialogue for a bit. We can expand the discussion thereafter as merited.

Here are my original claims,

-Metabolē does not support transubstantiation specifically.

-Justin's Incarnation comparison is compatible with multiple eucharistic theologies.

-The transubstantiation reading imports medieval Aristotelian categories into the interpretation of Martyr.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

A related question centers on the ostensibly difference in effect on a person who eats the actual body (and blood) of Christ versus those who understand the sacrament (or ordinance) spiritually.

How do we measure the relative efficacy versus what might be expected & what does that tell us.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@BishopJaxi According to survey data, only a minority of self-professed Catholics believe in or practice the sacraments. Matt 23:15 comes to mind.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@JoshuaBarzon On what basis do you claim that Ignatius knew the apostles or learned from them? The evidence for that claim seems very thin though perhaps you're aware of sources that I've not seen.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@FrCyril_D Ignatius was not a disciple of John.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@dave43law As the Left has been saying in America for 4 decades,

"No justice, no peace"

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@CatholicDrip___ @imscoop22 The RCC saw only Italian popes for 455 straight years while it leadership was dominated by Borgia, Medici & Orsini (etc) family bishops.

There was nothing universal about it & it earned the RCC designation.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

You just proved Murray's point.

You're indifferent to what is happening/has happened to Muslims in China, Afghanistan & other places

You're also indifferent to female genital mutilation, acid attacks, wife beatings, child marriage, honor killings, apostasy killings & all the other atrocities that happen to Muslims on an ongoing basis.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@BuckSexton "whether efforts to stamp out racism in policing have swung too far"

Always with the framing that implies that government discrimination is moral/merited as long as it doesn't go "too far".

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

Forget to press send on this one -

Again, the plain reading & standard Greek usage of heos implies that what was not happening before the stated point began happening afterward. This is the default reading requiring no additional justification.

Your reading may be logically sound, but it is still a departure from the default reading.

Matthew had linguistic tools to unambiguously state that Joseph never knew Mary, but he declined to use them. The choice of heos rather than an unambiguous construction is itself a data point — and it points in one direction rather than the other."

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@Buzzsaws1990 @cryptocornpoan @TNTJohn1717 You're hitting me with responses faster than I can respond to your previous points.

But, anyway, I appreciate the civil dialogue & wish you well. I've got to step away from my computer back into real life. (Interpretation: my wife is calling me.)

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@Buzzsaws1990 @cryptocornpoan @TNTJohn1717 Not contradictory to the text is an extremely low bar. The fact that something is not ruled out by the text is categorically different from the text supporting it.

As for the ancient support, I think that requires a separate evaluation.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@Buzzsaws1990 @cryptocornpoan @TNTJohn1717 I agree with this.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

Interpretation implies weighing evidence & arriving at a conclusion the data supports.

Assumption implies adopting a position the data does not compel in order to protect a prior conclusion

I believe assumption fits better because you are assuming a less common meaning specifically because the more common meaning creates a problem for the doctrine you are defending.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@Buzzsaws1990 @cryptocornpoan @TNTJohn1717 Yes, I agree that this one is not an assumption. My mistake.

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

There are two different ways that verse is rendered in different translations, some preferring an apposition rendering - two names for the same person - which supports a 3 women reading & others an asyndeton - two separate people listed without a connecting conjunction - which supports a 4 women reading.

The text itself is ambiguous, which is why I didn't include it in my original 9 assumption comment.

But in the end a choice must be made for the Catholic reading to support Catholic doctrine.

I'd call that an assumption (that I probably agree with).

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

That wouldn't be a problem at all. There's necessarily a lot of heavy lifting when you depart from the natural reading of the text.

Here are 14 from my notes:

John 19:25 lists three women not four & the “sister of his mother” is Mary of Clopas.

Adelphe means sister-in-law not biological sister.

Clopas was the brother of Joseph

Mary of Clopas was mother to James & Joseph at crucifixion (inference across Matthew & John)

That James mentioned in John 19:25 is the same James as Jesus’ brother

That Alphaeus and Clopas are the same person

That Jude of Jude 1 is the same as Judas, Jesus brother (Mark)

That Simon of Mark 6:3 = Simeon son of Clopas in Eusebius

That Adelphos means cousin not biological brother throughout (which contradicts standard Greek usage when anepsios would have provided clarity)

That heos in Matthew 1:25 carries no implication of conjugal relations following the birth. (Mt 1:25)

That the named brothers and sisters of Jesus in Mark 6:3 and Matthew 13:55-56 are not children of Mary. (Mk 6:3, Mt 13:55-56)

That Joseph was previously married and the brothers are children of a prior marriage for which there is no textual support. (Mt 1:18, Lk 1:27)

That Joseph remained celibate throughout the marriage despite no textual indication of this. (Mt 1:24-25)

That "firstborn" in Luke 2:7 carries no implication of subsequent children. (Lk 2:7)

[Blackthorne @GrandMosk]

@freddiesayers @Econoclasts @unherd "whichever political colour it takes"

And what colour has it been taking? Who's been getting arrested for tweets.

The idea that this is a both sides thing is itself a nasty form of censorship.