yes.

No lol, that's from a real episode of Scooby Doo Mystery Incorporated

I remember that episode

I liked that bit the armour on the dudes looked cool

http://www.kolumbus.fi/aquilon/revolution.pdf Skip to page 29 and read this

@cqc there is no response. The fathers are in vast disagreement

There is no way to reconcile Jerome and Bede or Augustine and Chrysostom

Among many other conflicts

The three things on which the fathers agree universally are real presence, baptismal regeneration, and apostasy

And if you're honest with scriptures and don't try to shove it into a system, I believe you will indeed come to the same conclusions

Idk denom this guy is, but if he's Lutheran, then your only out is to debate Nicaea II

For Reformed, hit them with the above three things I mentioned

Same for Wesleyans, Remonstrants, and Anglicans

Moravians will be in the same boat as Lutherans, affirming the first 6 councils, Baptismal Regeneration, Real Presence, and apostasy

But tbh, RCC doesn't follow 6th council because they don't affirm energy-essence

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-RzGAsytfQ This is an important video

@Quarantine_Zone >And if you're honest with scriptures and don't try to shove it into a system, I believe you will indeed come to the same conclusions

We both know this isn't true

And please, considering you glorify a fat apostate who married a nun, refrain from trying to judge who follows councils

What do you mean? I was speaking entirely of things upon which we agree

People don't come to the same conclusions

We agree in real presence, baptismal regeneration, and apostasy

And you'd be hard pressed to find a single father that disagrees

Tertullian is the only one you could take to believe in "spiritual presence" in communion, but even that is questionable

I don't see how that is related at all to what I ahve said

I am only speaking of reading the fathers honestly

And none more

aaah ok

The fathers agree on those three points.

Lest you twist them horribly

And the energy-essence distinction is affirmed at the sixth council

Again, I'm just trying to be honest with the fathers here

The council is very clear on this matter. The doctrine is affirmed on two separate occasions at the council

Can you quote what part of the council is supposed to be somehow rejected by cahtolics?

Yeah. Gimme a sec

"We have also examined the synodal letter of Sophronius of holy memory, some time Patriarch of the Holy City of Christ our God, Jerusalem, and have found it in accordance with the true faith and with the Apostolic teachings, and with those of the holy approved Fathers. Therefore we have received it as orthodox and as salutary to the holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, and have decreed that it is right that his name be inserted in the diptychs of the Holy Churches."

Session XIII - Extracts from the Acts

And what is the relevant content of the letter?

The whole letter pretty much, but I'll give some highlights. Gimme another sec

Just for reference:

Oof, couldn't upload PDF

Here's a link: