Roman Catholic Sacrament Last Rights Extreme Unction Priest

[haldir]

<iframe width="640" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/UQ_rxSQwR8Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[Arkan]

Hadir the anti-Catholic strikes again. It seems your religion is anti-Catholicism not Christianity.

[Arkan]

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/1669/mysteriescoronatio.png

[Arkan]

http://img600.imageshack.us/img600/8608/hostelevation.jpg

[Arkan]

http://img191.imageshack.us/img191/74/jesusitrustinyou265.jpg

[Arkan]

http://img259.imageshack.us/img259/4997/jpegcu.jpg

[Arkan]

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/1584/mass3.jpg

[Arkan]

http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/6647/mass41.jpg

[my-rifle]

This is serious, I was under demonic attack last night.

Hadlir really said this. He's a serious nut-job, and he probably has a collection of heads in his freezer.

[motorhead]

were those demons wearing plaid skirts?
<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/afIVLB4Ss2g" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[motorhead]

Hadlir really said this. He's a serious nut-job, and he probably has a collection of heads in his freezer.
dead animals, probably in jars so he can talk to them.

[motorhead]

http://i668.photobucket.com/albums/vv41/666DemonicWolf/Baphomet-2-1.jpg

[Mandaree36]

Hadlir really said this. He's a serious nut-job, and he probably has a collection of heads in his freezer.



LMAO

Made my sides hurt...

[IanMor]

Arkan, Thank you for defending the faith with those pictures.

I am so F tired of haldir the hobbit and his burning Catholics at the stake.

Here's the deal Haldir, Catholic communicants do more in my community to relieve the sick, aid the impoverished, educate our young and hold our politicians to moral principles than ALL THE OTHER SECTS OF "CRISTIANITY" COMBINED.

If the protestant bomb throwers on this website would put thier pants on, shave their neck-beards and volunteer at the Salvation Army, or serve the poor in thier community, I might respect your "zeal squeal". But you dont. You come here with purposefully inflamatory statements, grounded on nothing but your turrettes syndrome and paranoid delusions, bolstered with the evangelism of Alex Jones.

I will remind you.. not that it will do any good. The MEN on this forum have made their spirtual minds up. On this website you have athiests, pagans, Catholics and Protestants of every sect, Jews (at least in the past. I don't know how they could put up with the shit shoveled here about them). Your lead poisoned insanity-inaneity is NOT going to change 1 single mind here. Furthermore, you also have Free Masons here. Guess what? Not a single F-ing one of them, no matter how advanced in their degree work, has John The Baptist's head in the basement. Not 1 of them is in a cabal to rule the world. You are grasping to explain things in the world that do not make sense to you, so you spook at every boogie man you can find under your bed.... Hanging with the alligators you are certain are there.

Haldir, your fucking insane. If by some WILD possibility you are not insane, you certainly are brain washed, or chemically dependant. You need help.

I can not express vociferously enough how much I hate your existance on this board. You embody the evil you profess to be against. You would burn everyone at the stake and condemn to Hell all that do not see the world through your astigmatic, perverted lens. You are a mad man. You are a zealot, nay, a Pharasee of your own church of the mind.

[my-rifle]

I am so F tired of haldir the hobbit and his burning Catholics at the stake.

Here's the deal Haldir, Catholic communicants do more in my community to relieve the sick, aid the impoverished, educate our young and hold our politicians to moral principles than ALL THE OTHER SECTS OF "CRISTIANITY" COMBINED.

Now don't knock Protestants. There are only two or three on this board knocking Catholics. Their posts speak for themselves.

Haldir, your fucking insane. If by some WILD possibility you are not insane, you certainly are brain washed, or chemically dependant. You need help.


Yes, you're right. Hadlir is fucking insane. But hey! Look at it this way. If we didn't have knuckleheads like him on the board, maybe you and I would be the crazy ones?

[IanMor]

I'm sorry, My-rifle. I certainly didn't intend to impugne Protestants as a whole. I was raised a Protestant, so I have nothing against them. Unless they are insane. But insanity is an exclusive issue to a person's faith of acceptance.

[albino]

What's wrong with neck-beards?
:D

[bubbazan68]

please show me where it says mary is a co-redemer with Christ like is taught by the holy roman church.

also why does the holy roman church teach the Virgin birth "that mary was with out sin"
can you show me where that is in the bible??

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm
In the Constitution Ineffabilis Deus of 8 December, 1854, Pius IX pronounced and defined that the Blessed Virgin Mary "in the first instance of her conception, by a singular privilege and grace granted by God, in view of the merits of Jesus Christ, the Saviour of the human race, was preserved exempt from all stain of original sin."



and please dont use (Genesis 3:15). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically.

or
Luke 1:28
the term kecharitomene (full of grace) serves only as an illustration, not as a proof of the dogma.

[bubbazan68]

also can you show me where in the bibile the priest has the power to put Christ BACK on the cross to perform the mass?

[Hairy Cat]

There are a couple of issues with arguing against the Catholic Church. There are two claims that really should be addressed separately.

First is the claim that the Catholic Church is the original Church and can trace it's roots back Christ. If so this claim is accurate, then it gives the Church a lot of authority to claim that what it is doing is correct.

The second issue that comes up is one of doctrine. This is important, but we need to figure out the root of our doctrines, where they veer off from one another and in some cases if the difference is merely assumed and not really different. We often use the same words but are using slightly different meanings.

On the first issue, is there a reason to doubt the claim that the Catholic Church is the “one holy catholic and apostolic church”? If you’re saying there is such a reason to doubt that, I’d like to hear it (read it). I think the doctrinal issues are important, but if the first claim of the Catholic Church is proven false, than the issues of divergent beliefs will be a lot easier to make claims for.

[bubbazan68]

First is the claim that the Catholic Church is the original Church and can trace it's roots back Christ. If so this claim is accurate, then it gives the Church a lot of authority to claim that what it is doing is correct.

.
if one was able to trace ones roots back, does not mean you or they are "correct" or "biblicle" in what you or they do.

that would be based on how well you follow what was put down in the history book that has not changed for well ofer 4,000 years

[IanMor]

my greater point is this;
Most folks here have a belief structure that is based largely upon the Bible. Or more specificly, Christ. Even those here who do not have a Christ based belief system still share a lot of common values. Instead of building on those values, an knitting friendships that COULD be very crucial to the survival of our nation in the very near future, we spend our time tearing each other down. We divide on faith, we divide on politics (which to some degree is neccesary) we divde on what organization you belong to, we even divide on screws vs. rivits.

Instead of bashing our heads against the same brick walls and uniting against the common enemy, we condemn each other and blame the practitioners of differant faiths for the sins of the hierarchy. It is pointless.

Think of the volunteer fire fighters. They come from the community in which they live. They band together for the purpose of fighting a common enemy, Fire. They dont care what the ethnicity, creed or history of thier comrade. They just want to know they can count on him to do his job, and be there to cover 6. We do not have this comonality of purpose here.

I don't expect my words will change your ideas 1 iota. I am acting much like the evangelizing looneys that I rail against here. But I hope you think about what is happening. And why. I am not convinced Haldir is as cuckoo for coocoa puffs as he comes across. In fact, I suspect he even may be here with the expressed purpose of dividing us. It makes more sense to think that that to believe he is an entirely nonfunctioning religious hermit with no TV and demons taunting him.

Anyways, that's my $.02 worth of publicly posted electrons on the matter.

[my-rifle]

please show me where it says mary is a co-redemer with Christ like is taught by the holy roman church.

also why does the holy roman church teach the Virgin birth "that mary was with out sin"
can you show me where that is in the bible??

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07674d.htm


and please dont use (Genesis 3:15). The translation "she" of the Vulgate is interpretative; it originated after the fourth century, and cannot be defended critically.

or
Luke 1:28
the term kecharitomene (full of grace) serves only as an illustration, not as a proof of the dogma.

Bubba, we all know you disagree with Catholic dogma or you'd be Catholic. Why pick on Catholics though? Why not Judaism? You obviously disagree with their faith. Or Mormons? For that matter why not the various sects of protestantism to which you do not belong?

It looks kinda like you're in the boat with hadlir. You just have a hard-on for Catholics.

[Hairy Cat]

if one was able to trace ones roots back, does not mean you or they are "correct" or "biblicle" in what you or they do.

that would be based on how well you follow what was put down in the history book that has not changed for well ofer 4,000 years

2 Timothy 2:2
New International Version (NIV)
And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.

The question of apostolic succession or tracing ones roots speaks to the concern of the original intent, original teachings and original interpretation. Anyone playing “telephone” in grade school can attest to the importance of getting the message as close to the source as possible. The question of what did the Apostles believe and teach is very important. They were there and so when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it.


Side note:
I understand the hesitation that a couple of you are putting forth about Catholic bashing. I'm clearly not interested in it either. I too, believe that Catholics and Evangelicals share more than we disagree about. Right now, Bubba and I are engaging in a discussion of ideas. That's cool. It should be this way. We should be able to use our reason and discuss these things to help ensure that we are thinking rightly about the topic at hand. If it gets personal, then we have an issue. I hope it doesn't get to that. For my part, I'm not interested in personal attacks.

[20nickels]

my greater point is this;
Most folks here have a belief structure that is based largely upon the Bible. Or more specificly, Christ. Even those here who do not have a Christ based belief system still share a lot of common values. Instead of building on those values, an knitting friendships that COULD be very crucial to the survival of our nation in the very near future, we spend our time tearing each other down. We divide on faith, we divide on politics (which to some degree is neccesary) we divde on what organization you belong to, we even divide on screws vs. rivits.

Instead of bashing our heads against the same brick walls and uniting against the common enemy, we condemn each other and blame the practitioners of differant faiths for the sins of the hierarchy. It is pointless.

Think of the volunteer fire fighters. They come from the community in which they live. They band together for the purpose of fighting a common enemy, Fire. They dont care what the ethnicity, creed or history of thier comrade. They just want to know they can count on him to do his job, and be there to cover 6. We do not have this comonality of purpose here.

I don't expect my words will change your ideas 1 iota. I am acting much like the evangelizing looneys that I rail against here. But I hope you think about what is happening. And why. I am not convinced Haldir is as cuckoo for coocoa puffs as he comes across. In fact, I suspect he even may be here with the expressed purpose of dividing us. It makes more sense to think that that to believe he is an entirely nonfunctioning religious hermit with no TV and demons taunting him.

Anyways, that's my $.02 worth of publicly posted electrons on the matter.

Well said, the firefighter thing.

I think Haldir has brought some of us together by making a circle and kicking him. :laugh_sma There are very few who actually agree with him and I don't like them anyway.

[IanMor]

Side note:
I understand the hesitation that a couple of you are putting forth about Catholic bashing. I'm clearly not interested in it either. I too, believe that Catholics and Evangelicals share more than we disagree about. Right now, Bubba and I are engaging in a discussion of ideas. That's cool. It should be this way. We should be able to use our reason and discuss these things to help ensure that we are thinking rightly about the topic at hand. If it gets personal, then we have an issue. I hope it doesn't get to that. For my part, I'm not interested in personal attacks.

You are ENTIRELY the man. Thank you. Reason and logic win the hearts and minds more that ranting. At the end of the discussion, if we have to agree to disagree, at least we still respect each other.

[Ding]

We should be able to use our reason and discuss these things to help ensure that we are thinking rightly about the topic at hand.Reason and logic win the hearts and minds more that ranting. At the end of the discussion, if we have to agree to disagree, at least we still respect each other.

And so it has come to this.:tongue_sm

[bubbazan68]

this is a thread where Arkan posted pictures to support? teh catholic teaching of HOLY MASS.
that is non biblicle that a priest has the power to put Jesus BACK on the cross.
Jesus was on the cross once and it was Finished.

if this was a Jewish faith issue i would talk about that as well, protestantism to
but that is not what was addressed here in this thread


unlike hadlir i do believe that catholics can be saved but it is odd though that as far as the HOLY Roman church states and believes
if you are NOT catholic you are NOT saved.


Bubba, we all know you disagree with Catholic dogma or you'd be Catholic. Why pick on Catholics though? Why not Judaism? You obviously disagree with their faith. Or Mormons? For that matter why not the various sects of protestantism to which you do not belong?

It looks kinda like you're in the boat with hadlir. You just have a hard-on for Catholics.

[JohnFreeman]

"And so it has come to this"

It shouldn't have to take this long , but there's a handful of zealots who take pride in bashing other people's religion, acting like they're divinely inspired, or the only people on the f'ing planet who have religious beliefs.

Oh, and ...get out more.

John

[JohnFreeman]

"is non biblicle that a priest has the power to put Jesus BACK on the cross."

Which of course doesn't happen as you'd know if you'd have ever set foot in a Catholic church, or participated in a mass.

Instead your ranting just makes you look foolish.

[JohnFreeman]

"I think Haldir has brought some of us together by making a circle and kicking him. There are very few who actually agree with him and I don't like them anyway. "

His rants only serve to try and divide Christianity. If that's his goal, he's failing.

[bubbazan68]

1st things 1st

(2 Peter 2:1-3)
1 But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will also be false teachers among you, who will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing swift destruction upon themselves. 2 Many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of the truth will be maligned; 3 and in their greed they will exploit you with false words; their judgment from long ago is not idle, and their destruction is not asleep.

so already in the first century false teachers had come up.

so as far as "original intent, original teachings and original interpretation."
we can se that was a 1st century problem already.

but you bring up an interesting point that i would like you to explain,
so we can see what the true teaching is VS a false teaching.


" when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it. "


what was the last supper?
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and how is it taught today compaired to the origanal teaching.



2 Timothy 2:2
New International Version (NIV)
And the things you have heard me say in the presence of many witnesses entrust to reliable people who will also be qualified to teach others.

The question of apostolic succession or tracing ones roots speaks to the concern of the original intent, original teachings and original interpretation. Anyone playing “telephone” in grade school can attest to the importance of getting the message as close to the source as possible. The question of what did the Apostles believe and teach is very important. They were there and so when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it.


Side note:
I understand the hesitation that a couple of you are putting forth about Catholic bashing. I'm clearly not interested in it either. I too, believe that Catholics and Evangelicals share more than we disagree about. Right now, Bubba and I are engaging in a discussion of ideas. That's cool. It should be this way. We should be able to use our reason and discuss these things to help ensure that we are thinking rightly about the topic at hand. If it gets personal, then we have an issue. I hope it doesn't get to that. For my part, I'm not interested in personal attacks.

[bubbazan68]

You are ENTIRELY the man. Thank you. Reason and logic win the hearts and minds more that ranting. At the end of the discussion, if we have to agree to disagree, at least we still respect each other.

a agree +1000

[bubbazan68]

"is non biblicle that a priest has the power to put Jesus BACK on the cross."

Which of course doesn't happen as you'd know if you'd have ever set foot in a Catholic church, or participated in a mass.

Instead your ranting just makes you look foolish.

sorry John but that is the teaching of the HOLY roman church.
find an old Douay–Rheims catholic Bible it is in there.
and that is also what the head priest at the local catholic church teache's

edit to say i have even had debate's with catholic priest in catholic church's so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
you should not Judge least ye be Judged

[my-rifle]

sorry John but that is the teaching of the HOLY roman church.
find an old Douay–Rheims catholic Bible it is in there.
and that is also what the head priest at the local catholic church teache's

edit to say i have even had debate's with catholic priest in catholic church's so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
you should not Judge least ye be Judged

It's NOT the teaching of the church. If you weren't raised Catholic, then you really aren't familiar enough with Catholic doctrine to have an opinion on this. Being able to find a reference to something on the internet doesn't mean you know the truth.

[JohnFreeman]

edit to say i have even had debate's with catholic priest in catholic church's so,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,


A parish priest would NOT debate theology with you. Instead he would tell you that all are welcome and would invite you to come participate with the parish community.

I know that's not as exciting as the rants found on the internet, but it's a fact.

John

[bubbazan68]

It's NOT the teaching of the church. If you weren't raised Catholic, then you really aren't familiar enough with Catholic doctrine to have an opinion on this. Being able to find a reference to something on the internet doesn't mean you know the truth.

you want to doubt me go for it then please answer this

so we can see what the true teaching is VS a false teaching.


" when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it. "


what was the last supper?
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and how is it taught today compaired to the origanal teaching.

[bubbazan68]

well that shows you that you dont know all priest then.
because we did debate theology in fact it was a catholic outreach to show how catholics and christians teach the same things, when in fact we dont on a few foundational matters
like the sacrifice of Christ Once and for all on the cross.

A parish priest would NOT debate theology with you. Instead he would tell you that all are welcome and would invite you to come participate with the parish community.

I know that's not as exciting as the rants found on the internet, but it's a fact.

John

[my-rifle]

well that shows you that you dont know all priest then.
because we did debate theology in fact it was a catholic outreach to show how catholics and christians teach the same things, when in fact we dont on a few foundational matters
like the sacrifice of Christ Once and for all on the cross.

If you talked to a priest who said that then he was mistaken. That is not Catholic dogma.

[bubbazan68]

If you talked to a priest who said that then he was mistaken. That is not Catholic dogma.

sorry are you a priest??

got an answer for me yet??

[Petro]

Yawn.

[my-rifle]

There are plenty of priests who are misinformed about arcane dogma like the bizarre "putting Jesus back on the cross" thing you came up with. The fact that someone is a priest does not make him a scholar. The one you describe sounds frankly like you made him up.

[JohnFreeman]

"The one you describe sounds frankly like you made him up."

Exactly.

Take a look at the Nicene Creed. That's what Catholics believe. It's also what 99% of the worlds Christians believe. If you choose to focus on the 1% divisions you can find on Google (or make up) that's a great way to divide Christians and make us appear weaker to our enemies.

[bubbazan68]

so without telling me what the dogma is you both say i am making this up ???? thats funny ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and yet have either of you answered

so we can see what the true teaching is VS a false teaching.


" when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it. "


what was the last supper?
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and how is it taught today compaired to the origanal teaching.



made up lmfao,,,,,,,,,,,

[Ding]

http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s215/M-70AB2/obamagod2.gif

[my-rifle]

so without telling me what the dogma is you both say i am making this up ???? thats funny ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, and yet have either of you answered

so we can see what the true teaching is VS a false teaching.

OK, pay attention. Catholic dogma says a priest cannot put Jesus on the cross. That is official Catholic dogma. Do you understand?

[motorhead]

damn ian, another well written slapdown! if you ever tire of jewelery you should consider writing, you're really quite good at it.

+666

[bubbazan68]

http://archives.nd.edu/findaids/ead/html/OBR.htm


Born 20 January 1893 in Peoria, Illinois, John A. O'Brien attended St. Patrick School, the Spalding Institute, Holy Cross College (Worcester, Massachusetts), and St. Viator's College (Bourbonnais, Illinois). Bishop Edmund M. Dunne ordained him as a priest of the Diocese of Peoria and he celebrated his first Mass 18 June 1916. He served as chaplain for the Catholic students at the University of Illinois and earned a Ph.D. in psychology there. He started the Newman Foundation at the University of Illinois. He began his career as an author of Catholic books by organizing symposia (Catholics and Scholarship and The White Harvest) and writing about Evolution and Religion. In 1938 he published a book about Catholicism called The Faith of Millions which became a best seller (200,000 copies by 1945),

In his book “The Faith of Millions “ that was given Nihil obstat and imprimatur
By the catholic church he states

When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim.
Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows his head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.
Of what sublime dignity is the office of the Christian priest who is thus privileged to act as the ambassador and the vice-gerent of Christ on earth! He continues the essential ministry of Christ: he teaches the faithful with the authority of Christ, he pardons the penitent sinner with the power of Christ, he offers up again the same sacrifice of adoration and atonement which Christ offered on Calvary. No wonder that the name which spiritual writers are especially fond of applying to the priest is that of alter Christus. For the priest is and should be another Christ. (O’Brien, The Faith of Millions, 255-256)


This will also be found in older Douay-Rheims Catholic Bible
No oddly enough Nihil obstat (Latin for "nothing hinders" or "nothing stands in the way") the phrase is used more particularly to mean an "attestation by a church censor that a book contains nothing damaging to faith or morals". The Censor Librorum delegated by a bishop of the Catholic Church reviews the text in question, but the nihil obstat is not a certification that those granting it agree with the contents, opinions or statements expressed in the work; instead, it merely confirms "that it contains nothing contrary to faith or morals

Now if it “contains nothing contrary to faith or morals” then explain how “the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! “

(Now before you say it is not in the dogma)


Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor,
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/2000/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20001021_riparatrici_en.html

"the unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son of God continues to be crucified".


The only issue again is that he also calls for

the Roman Catholic tradition the concepts of atonement and redemption are often seen as being inherently related. And atonement is often balanced with specific Acts of Reparation which relate the sufferings and death of Christ to the forgiveness of sins.
Moreover, in Miserentissimus Redemptor the Pontiff called acts of reparation a duty for Roman Catholics:
"We are holden to the duty of reparation and expiation by a certain more valid title of justice and of love." ... "Moreover this duty of expiation is laid upon the whole race of men"

[bubbazan68]

OK, pay attention. Catholic dogma says a priest cannot put Jesus on the cross. That is official Catholic dogma. Do you understand?

really now Catholic Dogma says that a priest cannot put Jesus on the cross.

show me where it says that??
or are you making stuff up like you accuse me of??

[bubbazan68]

what i find funny is no one will answer this even though they say they know Dogma

" when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it. "


what was the last supper?
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and how is it taught today compaired to the origanal teaching.

[bubbazan68]

now in regard to Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor,
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/letters/2000/documents/hf_jp-ii_let_20001021_riparatrici_en.html

"the unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son of God continues to be crucified".


The only issue again is that he also calls for

the Roman Catholic tradition the concepts of atonement and redemption are often seen as being inherently related. And atonement is often balanced with specific Acts of Reparation which relate the sufferings and death of Christ to the forgiveness of sins.
Moreover, in Miserentissimus Redemptor the Pontiff called acts of reparation a duty for Roman Catholics:
"We are holden to the duty of reparation and expiation by a certain more valid title of justice and of love." ... "Moreover this duty of expiation is laid upon the whole race of men"


"But this man (Jesus Christ), because HE CONTINUETH EVER, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also TO SAVE THEM TO THE UTTERMOST that come unto God by him, seeing HE EVER LIVETH to make intercession for them:WHO NEEDETH NOT DAILY, as those high priests, TO OFFER UP SACRIFICE, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once , when he offered up himself." (Hebrews 7:24-27)

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: NOR YET THAT HE SHOULD OFFER HIMSELF OFTEN, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others; For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: BUT NOW ONCE in the end of the world hath he appeared to PUT AWAY SIN BY THE SACRIFICE OF HIMSELF." (Hebrews 9:24-26)

"So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many." (Hebrews 9:28)

"By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. a nd every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins : But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God ;" (Hebrews 10:10-12)

that means ONCE and FOREVER the pope is violating scripture

[my-rifle]

now in regard to Pope Pius XI in his encyclical Miserentissimus Redemptor,
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/jo...atrici_en.html
Quote:
"the unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son of God continues to be crucified".

The Catholic church on occasion uses metaphors. You really don't understand that?

[20nickels]

http://archives.nd.edu/findaids/ead/html/OBR.htm

When the priest announces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim.

I've been to several Catholic masses and I've never seen Yahweh or his siblings. I know... duh, he's invisible. So this guy is wrong or all the preists are doing it wrong, not saying the right words or not even trying to do as you suggest. So how can they be guilty of anything? Yes, I did feel a bit silly typing that.

[Hairy Cat]

1 Corinthians 10:14-21
14 So, my dear friends, run away from the worship of idols. 15 I am speaking to you as to reasonable people; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 We give thanks for the cup of blessing,[a] which is a sharing in the blood of Christ. And the bread that we break is a sharing in the body of Christ.17 Because there is one loaf of bread, we who are many are one body, because we all share that one loaf.
18 Think about the Israelites: Do not those who eat the sacrifices share in the altar?19 I do not mean that the food sacrificed to an idol is important. I do not mean that an idol is anything at all.20 But I say that what is sacrificed to idols is offered to demons, not to God. And I do not want you to share anything with demons.21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons also. You cannot share in the Lord's table and the table of demons

-1 Cor. 10:16-17
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ? Because there is one bread, we who are many are one body, for we all partake of the one bread."

Suffice it to say that there are enough biblical references to suggest that there was a teaching in place on what “do this in remembrance of me…” meant and that it was early in the Church. Of course there are other references in the Bible, but we don’t need to beat a dead horse. There was a teaching in place.

There are a number of other references to the teaching. I thought about the quotes from the Didache, Pope Clement I, St. Ignatius, etc. I can get back to those and they are important. But the discussion is truly, at this moment, one of history. In that, I think it is quite relevant to bring in the non-believers and what they said about the beliefs of the Christians. Now, being non-believers, they don’t state the position of the Church fully or accurately, but they do use some of the same language. It is their misunderstanding of the Eucharist that led to the concern over cannibalism.

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/christian-cannibals.asp

This link is one of many sources where Romans discussed the idea that Christians eat the flesh of someone. It’s also probably one of the reasons they were persecuted… especially in that the Romans’ attitude was generally one of indifference to the religious practices of others.

So I think we can state that there was an early teaching, that the teaching used very literal interpretations about the Eucharist, that these teachings were wide spread and that they made their way into the early understanding of Christianity. After all, looking back St. Ignatius was the successor to St. Peter and as a boy heard the preachings of St. John himself. Below is a quote from St. Ignatius.

"Consider how contrary to the mind of God are the heterodox in regard to the grace of God which has come to us. They have no regard for charity, none for the widow, the orphan, the oppressed, none for the man in prison, the hungry or the thirsty. They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer, because they do not admit that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, the flesh which suffered for our sins and which the Father, in His graciousness, raised from the dead."


Please forgive my not getting back to this sooner. There is NO way to do this kind of writing on a smart phone. Anyways, bubba, please look at what I put out there and in the mean time I'll look over everything I missed. I think also that we should keep focused on one or two items at a time and not get so far off track. From my cursory reading of what I missed it looks like we are about to splinter off in to at least a couple dozen directions. That won't help anyone.

[IanMor]

damn ian, another well written slapdown! if you ever tire of jewelery you should consider writing, you're really quite good at it.

+666
Thanks, Bro. I try.

[my-rifle]

Bubbazan68, I think I know what you need:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105339/Laura-Maggi-Le-Cafe-Busty-barmaid-serves-drinks-skimpy-outfits.html?ICO=most_read_module

[Hairy Cat]

Bubbazan68, I think I know what you need:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105339/Laura-Maggi-Le-Cafe-Busty-barmaid-serves-drinks-skimpy-outfits.html?ICO=most_read_module

Yea... Um... I need a coffee shop like that close by. :sidegrin_

[JohnFreeman]

what i find funny is no one will answer this even though they say they know

Mostly because it has no bearing on the discussion.

Answer me this:

What is the cube root of 27?

What is the largest prime number you can think of?

Sin**2 + Cos**2 = what?


See how much fun this can be?

John

[JohnFreeman]

and how is it taught today compaired (sic) to the origanal (sic) teaching.


Do you own research.

Go to mass and find out. It's really easy to do. No Ninja Jesuits will jump out and steal your soul either.

John

PS: I think it's probably also a truism that those who profess belief the loudest and longest are those with he most doubt.

[JohnFreeman]

Yea... Um... I need a coffee shop like that close by. :sidegrin_

You can sure get a good cuppa there...

[20nickels]

Regarding the linked coffe bar;
Bagnolo's mayor has banned her husband from going to the bar??? What kind of beta male worm lets his wife make public statements about where the fuck he can or cannot go? My wife would go with me and not be the least bit insecure about it.

[bubbazan68]

The Catholic church on occasion uses metaphors. You really don't understand that?

well since you are not the pope pr a priest?
then you dont know how he meant it now do you??

[bubbazan68]

I've been to several Catholic masses and I've never seen Yahweh or his siblings. I know... duh, he's invisible. So this guy is wrong or all the preists are doing it wrong, not saying the right words or not even trying to do as you suggest. So how can they be guilty of anything? Yes, I did feel a bit silly typing that.

they will still be guility of teaching the preist is in the place of Christ
when the bible is clear that we ALL can have one on one with Christ
we no longer have a high preist as the catholics put down but we have jesus who is our high preist.

[bubbazan68]

again with the making fun of,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

the bearing is the teaching of the catholic church
if you dont know or cant find the dogma i can give you the link to teh vatican sight if you need it

Mostly because it has no bearing on the discussion.

Answer me this:

What is the cube root of 27?

What is the largest prime number you can think of?

Sin**2 + Cos**2 = what?


See how much fun this can be?

John

[my-rifle]

they will still be guility of teaching the preist is in the place of Christ
when the bible is clear that we ALL can have one on one with Christ
we no longer have a high preist as the catholics put down but we have jesus who is our high preist.

Meh. One man's boil is another man's tomato.

[JohnFreeman]

well since you are not the pope pr a priest?
then you dont know how he meant it now do you??

Hate to tell you , but the Bible contains a rather large amount of metaphorical messages.

Like in almost every chapter.

[JohnFreeman]

"if you dont know or cant find the dogma i can give you the link to teh vatican sight if you need it"

Please don't waste the time. We both know the craziness you posted isn't on the Vatican "sight".

If you're worried about being made fun of, maybe you should consider not trashing other folks religious beliefs and acting like you're a white Louis Farrakhan.

Respect. Try showing it, and you'll likely get some in return.

John

[bobbers]

you want to doubt me go for it then please answer this

so we can see what the true teaching is VS a false teaching.


" when Jesus said “This is my body given for you; do this in remembrance of me.” (Luke 22:19), it is important to know how they took that. It is important to know what they taught about it. It matters a great deal what the THIS is in “Do this…”. If they took that a certain way, and taught about it a certain way, then we should be able to conclude that the way in which they taught about it is the way that Christ meant it. "


what was the last supper?
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and how is it taught today compaired to the origanal teaching.

Unfortunately, Sherman and Peabody took the damned Wayback Machine out again and I have no idea when they'll be back. Rest assured that once I have access I'll dial up 34 AD, hang out for a couple of years and get back to ya, that way we'll all have a clue as to the 'original teaching'. Guess I'll have to see if Rosetta Stone has a quick course in Aramaic while I'm waiting...

[JohnFreeman]

Especially since the Old Testament was ONLY documented via oral tradition for centuries. At best it's an assemblage of ancient stories passed from generation to generation before finally being committed to written form.

[bubbazan68]

Hate to tell you , but the Bible contains a rather large amount of metaphorical messages.

Like in almost every chapter.

name them and show us how it is used

[bubbazan68]

show me where i am "trashing other folks religious beliefs "


"if you dont know or cant find the dogma i can give you the link to teh vatican sight if you need it"

Please don't waste the time. We both know the craziness you posted isn't on the Vatican "sight".

If you're worried about being made fun of, maybe you should consider not trashing other folks religious beliefs and acting like you're a white Louis Farrakhan.

Respect. Try showing it, and you'll likely get some in return.

John

[bubbazan68]

funny because it is all documented.
what it was
how was it taught?
what was it they were to do in "remembrance"?
and about the only people who do it right are mesianic Jews


Unfortunately, Sherman and Peabody took the damned Wayback Machine out again and I have no idea when they'll be back. Rest assured that once I have access I'll dial up 34 AD, hang out for a couple of years and get back to ya, that way we'll all have a clue as to the 'original teaching'. Guess I'll have to see if Rosetta Stone has a quick course in Aramaic while I'm waiting...

[bubbazan68]

Especially since the Old Testament was ONLY documented via oral tradition for centuries. At best it's an assemblage of ancient stories passed from generation to generation before finally being committed to written form.

and

Hate to tell you , but the Bible contains a rather large amount of metaphorical messages.

Like in almost every chapter.


then how do you know any of waht you are tought is true?
are you saved by grace? by works?
are you even saved at all?
are you a catholic?

on and on and on your words not mine, if you believe what you have said than
as far as you really know you can be saved by just saying "Jesus come into my heart"
and all that extra stuff the catholic church teach's is false you dont know, based on your statements................

[bubbazan68]

cat let me know if you want to keep talking about all this, since it seems i cant even tell the truth without getting told i made stuff up or that i am some how trashing other folks religious beliefs because i am asking questions. even though no one will tell me what the dogma really is :)

[JohnFreeman]

name them and show us how it is used


Bye....

[Hairy Cat]

cat let me know if you want to keep talking about all this, since it seems i cant even tell the truth without getting told i made stuff up or that i am some how trashing other folks religious beliefs because i am asking questions. even though no one will tell me what the dogma really is :)

We can continue this in PM form. leave this thread alone. I'll do the same and we can discuss this without interference. Sound cool? That's probably more appropriet given how quickly I'll be able to respond in the next few weeks.

[my-rifle]

Ahhh ... peace and quiet. I feel like I just took a huge dump.

[bubbazan68]

Bye....

when asked to put up or back up his claim, John Freeman was heard to say "Bye"

[Wendigo]

Will all of this lead up to Bubba starting his own dogma free religion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVwCYJj4THQ

[lsmurphy]

I'm still looking for Easter in the Bible, maybe one of you Catholics can show me chapter and verse?

[Hairy Cat]

I'm still looking for Easter in the Bible, maybe one of you Catholics can show me chapter and verse?

I'm looking for sola scriptura in the bible. Can you point that out? I find more references to the idea that there are things written and unwritten. That there are teachings that are passed from those who knew Jesus to those learning about Him. I'm also thinking about how it was the Church that was responsible for collecting the books of Holy Scripture and that it was the Church that was responsible to sort out the texts with no authority and that likely contained error from those texts that were deemed to be divinely inspired. It was the Church that was given authority to do this and the authority to teach. Most everything that was written took some time to get written. Even Paul alludes to the idea that Christ might be returning in his lifetime.

Point is this: Let's not make a good discussion unnecessarily contentious. I know that there are lots of people coming to the discussion with very different backgrounds and viewpoints. Let's not set up straw-men or badger a 1,000 different points and muddy the waters so much. I was hoping to take this point by point with bubba because it seemed like the back and forth we were having was actually fruitful at least in terms of demonstrating where each of us was coming from.

[my-rifle]

when asked to put up or back up his claim, John Freeman was heard to say "Bye"

That's becaus eno matter how much you're smacked in the face with overwhelming evidence you just keep digging for nits to back up you're crazy theories. The rest of us are just bored talking to you.

[Hairy Cat]

That's becaus eno matter how much you're smacked in the face with overwhelming evidence you just keep digging for nits to back up you're crazy theories. The rest of us are just bored talking to you.

That's not entirely true. I'll talk. I do think a PM conversation would be better though. Too many people jumping in and taking things in too many directions. Besides, he's asked some questions and I'm happy to get him the answers that satisfy me. I might even go further to try to satisfy his quest to learn they "why" behind some Catholic practices and doctrines. As a side note: there is a difference between a practice (called discipline and a doctrine).

PM me, bubba.

[20nickels]

they will still be guility of teaching the preist is in the place of Christ
when the bible is clear that we ALL can have one on one with Christ
we no longer have a high preist as the catholics put down but we have jesus who is our high preist.

How does one have an audience with Jesus of Nazereth? I'm not being a smartass, I really want to know. The standard answers I get are the answer would be wasted on you or you just wouldn't get it.
BTW, this question is open to anybody not necessarily directed to Bubba.

[bubbazan68]

Will all of this lead up to Bubba starting his own dogma free religion?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVwCYJj4THQ

not looking for dogma free ,,,,,,,, just one that follows the bible in context

[bubbazan68]

That's becaus eno matter how much you're smacked in the face with overwhelming evidence you just keep digging for nits to back up you're crazy theories. The rest of us are just bored talking to you.

you have givin NO evidence as of yet

[bubbazan68]

How does one have an audience with Jesus of Nazereth? I'm not being a smartass, I really want to know. The standard answers I get are the answer would be wasted on you or you just wouldn't get it.
BTW, this question is open to anybody not necessarily directed to Bubba.


answwer is just go to him using your idea of metaphorical meaning
by way of prayer we can go one on one with the Lord
WE are the preist that go into the holy of holy's


HEBREWS 4:14 Therefore, since we have a great high priest who has passed through the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our confession. 15 For we do not have a high priest who cannot sympathize with our weaknesses, but One who has been tempted in all things as we are, yet without sin. 16 Therefore let us draw near with confidence to the throne of grace, so that we may receive mercy and find grace to help in time of need.


hebrews 10: 11Every priest stands daily ministering and offering time after time the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins; 12but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, SAT DOWN AT THE RIGHT HAND OF GOD, 13waiting from that time onward UNTIL HIS ENEMIES BE MADE A FOOTSTOOL FOR HIS FEET. 14For by one offering He has perfected for all time those who are sanctified. 15And the Holy Spirit also testifies to us; for after saying,

16“THIS IS THE COVENANT THAT I WILL MAKE WITH THEM
AFTER THOSE DAYS, SAYS THE LORD:
I WILL PUT MY LAWS UPON THEIR HEART,
AND ON THEIR MIND I WILL WRITE THEM,”
He then says,

17“AND THEIR SINS AND THEIR LAWLESS DEEDS
I WILL REMEMBER NO MORE.”

18Now where there is forgiveness of these things, there is no longer any offering for sin.

A New and Living Way

19Therefore, brethren, since we have confidence to enter the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20by a new and living way which He inaugurated for us through the veil, that is, His flesh, 21and since we have a great priest over the house of God, 22let us draw near with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled clean from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water. 23Let us hold fast the confession of our hope without wavering, for He who promised is faithful; 24and let us consider how to stimulate one another to love and good deeds, 25not forsaking our own assembling together, as is the habit of some, but encouraging one another; and all the more as you see the day drawing near.

Christ or Judgment

26For if we go on sinning willfully after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins, 27but a terrifying expectation of judgment and THE FURY OF A FIRE WHICH WILL CONSUME THE ADVERSARIES. 28Anyone who has set aside the Law of Moses dies without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. 29How much severer punishment do you think he will deserve who has trampled under foot the Son of God, and has regarded as unclean the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has insulted the Spirit of grace? 30For we know Him who said, “VENGEANCE IS MINE, I WILL REPAY.” And again, “THE LORD WILL JUDGE HIS PEOPLE.” 31It is a terrifying thing to fall into the hands of the living God.

[bubbazan68]

I'm looking for sola scriptura in the bible. Can you point that out? I find more references to the idea that there are things written and unwritten. That there are teachings that are passed from those who knew Jesus to those learning about Him. I'm also thinking about how it was the Church that was responsible for collecting the books of Holy Scripture and that it was the Church that was responsible to sort out the texts with no authority and that likely contained error from those texts that were deemed to be divinely inspired. It was the Church that was given authority to do this and the authority to teach. Most everything that was written took some time to get written. Even Paul alludes to the idea that Christ might be returning in his lifetime.

Point is this: Let's not make a good discussion unnecessarily contentious. I know that there are lots of people coming to the discussion with very different backgrounds and viewpoints. Let's not set up straw-men or badger a 1,000 different points and muddy the waters so much. I was hoping to take this point by point with bubba because it seemed like the back and forth we were having was actually fruitful at least in terms of demonstrating where each of us was coming from.

the only issue i have with this , is while sola scriptura is not in the bible,
it was the Catholic church taht has some dogma that even it does not give the certitude of devine faith and yet still teache's the dogma, and also included books taht are not part of the cannon of scripture.

[20nickels]

answwer is just go to him using your idea of metaphorical meaning
by way of prayer we can go one on one with the Lord
WE are the preist that go into the holy of holy's


Which prayer works best for you? I am most familiar with Catholic prayers from my youth (unmolested) but I know you are not Catholic.

[bubbazan68]

Which prayer works best for you? I am most familiar with Catholic prayers from my youth (unmolested) but I know you are not Catholic.

well first off since i was baptised catholic as a youth, i have not at this time been anathaemad or excomunicated,,,,,,,,,,,,at least teh last time i asked a preist i am still catholic? just misguided lol
if you have recived Jesus as your personal saviour then ANY prayer works
and the Lords prayer is great to start with, because it makes us look at us and humbles us

[20nickels]

well first off since i was baptised catholic as a youth, i have not at this time been anathaemad or excomunicated,,,,,,,,,,,,at least teh last time i asked a preist i am still catholic? just misguided lol
if you have recived Jesus as your personal saviour then ANY prayer works
and the Lords prayer is great to start with, because it makes us look at us and humbles us

I batted about getting excommunicated for many yrs but when it comes down to it it just a formality. You either let ideas into your head or you don't, It's ultimately your decision.
That has not worked for me in the past, accepting Jesus, and not from a lack of trying. Keep in mind this was many years ago. Young people are impressionable and easily molded. When you come from 100's of yrs of family Catholicism it's not easy to be the one to break away. I'm just prefacing my point so you know where I've been. So why should I bother now? Especially when the idea or even the plausibility of an ancient dead Mediteranian deity being omnipresent in our daily lives seems extremely far fetched. This is where I bow out, I've been on my knees there was nothing there but I respect yours and others beliefs as long as I, my family, and our tax dollars are left to our own. It seems we are heretics Bubba.
Just to add, The heretic never existed as it does today due to the US Constitution. It is the greatest civil rights document in history and has changed the world (heads explode).

[my-rifle]

you have givin NO evidence as of yet

Just none that you accept. Everyone else does just not you. When you look around you and the one to you left is sane, and the one to your right is sane you're the crazy one.

[my-rifle]

I batted about getting excommunicated for many yrs but when it comes down to it it just a formality. You either let ideas into your head or you don't, It's ultimately your decision.
That has not worked for me in the past, accepting Jesus, and not from a lack of trying. Keep in mind this was many years ago. Young people are impressionable and easily molded. When you come from 100's of yrs of family Catholicism it's not easy to be the one to break away. I'm just prefacing my point so you know where I've been. So why should I bother now? Especially when the idea or even the plausibility of an ancient dead Mediteranian deity being omnipresent in our daily lives seems extremely far fetched. This is where I bow out, I've been on my knees there was nothing there but I respect yours and others beliefs as long as I, my family, and our tax dollars are left to our own. It seems we are heretics Bubba.
Just to add, The heretic never existed as it does today due to the US Constitution. It is the greatest civil rights document in history and has changed the world (heads explode).

My brother tried for years to get excommunicated, but when he found out they don't give you a plaque for it he gave up.

I'm 100% atheist with no reasonable doubt in my mind. I'm also a theologian, because it's damned interesting.

A Catholic joke:

The Holy Spirit, God the Father, and the Virgin Mary were planning their next vacation. The Holy Spirit says, "Let's go to Bethlehem." God says, "We go there every year. Let's go someplace different this year. How about Lourdes?" The Virgin Mary pipes up, "That sounds great! I've never been there."

[bubbazan68]

i dont think you would have asked to begin with if you did not want to believe in somthing,
believe me after being catholic as a child then leaving it to worship nothing,
the last plae you would ever find me is in a church or even in a thread talking about Jesus.
but here i am and i go to church because i started looking at what the bible said and NOT what "the church" says. do all church's have bad stuff in them? yup some less then others.
are some worse then others? yup some are down right un biblicle.
but how can we learn if we dont read? how can one learn without a teacher?
i go to church listin and read and does what the pastor or priest say line up with the bible,
for the most part yes, but in some ,,,,,, not even close, and i dont stay long in those church's.

if those who believe in Jesus are right then we have an eternity to share, love and laugh.
if those who do not believe in any kind of god are right,
well then you better get what you can while you are hear on earth because you come from nothing and will go to nothing, and nothing you do hear realy matters at all.




I batted about getting excommunicated for many yrs but when it comes down to it it just a formality. You either let ideas into your head or you don't, It's ultimately your decision.
That has not worked for me in the past, accepting Jesus, and not from a lack of trying. Keep in mind this was many years ago. Young people are impressionable and easily molded. When you come from 100's of yrs of family Catholicism it's not easy to be the one to break away. I'm just prefacing my point so you know where I've been. So why should I bother now? Especially when the idea or even the plausibility of an ancient dead Mediteranian deity being omnipresent in our daily lives seems extremely far fetched. This is where I bow out, I've been on my knees there was nothing there but I respect yours and others beliefs as long as I, my family, and our tax dollars are left to our own. It seems we are heretics Bubba.
Just to add, The heretic never existed as it does today due to the US Constitution. It is the greatest civil rights document in history and has changed the world (heads explode).

[bubbazan68]

Just none that you accept. Everyone else does just not you. When you look around you and the one to you left is sane, and the one to your right is sane you're the crazy one.

nope i looked back,,,,,,,,,,

Originally Posted by my-rifle
That's becaus eno matter how much you're smacked in the face with overwhelming evidence you just keep digging for nits to back up you're crazy theories. The rest of us are just bored talking to you.



hariy cat is the only one who has given ANY evidence. you have given NONE zip
0
nadda zilch

you say that is not what the catholic church says or is not in the dogma yet you will not tell me what they teach or what IS in the dogma,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

[bubbazan68]

I'm 100% atheist with no reasonable doubt in my mind. I'm also a theologian, because it's damned interesting.



really?? for real?????
ok put up or shut up time

explain the trinity.

[20nickels]

My brother tried for years to get excommunicated, but when he found out they don't give you a plaque for it he gave up.

I'm 100% atheist with no reasonable doubt in my mind. I'm also a theologian, because it's damned interesting.
"
High fives.
I identify heavily with atheists. In fact I often own the title because it's than explaining to people my next post.

[my-rifle]

really?? for real?????
ok put up or shut up time

explain the trinity.

To YOUR satisfaction? Not likely.

[20nickels]

I asked because I am a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is my religion and it has no agenda. Respectfully, I found nothing I have not previously rejected.
i dont think you would have asked to begin with if you did not want to believe in somthing,
believe me after being catholic as a child then leaving it to worship nothing,
the last plae you would ever find me is in a church or even in a thread talking about Jesus.
but here i am and i go to church because i started looking at what the bible said and NOT what "the church" says. do all church's have bad stuff in them? yup some less then others.
are some worse then others? yup some are down right un biblicle.
but how can we learn if we dont read? how can one learn without a teacher?
i go to church listin and read and does what the pastor or priest say line up with the bible,
for the most part yes, but in some ,,,,,, not even close, and i dont stay long in those church's.

if those who believe in Jesus are right then we have an eternity to share, love and laugh.
if those who do not believe in any kind of god are right,
well then you better get what you can while you are hear on earth because you come from nothing and will go to nothing, and nothing you do hear realy matters at all.
That's not true at all. I am relevent to many, not including my kids. And I get to sleep in on Sundays. I can understand being scared that nothing will happen when you die, man has struggled with this for his existence. I however am not.

[Hairy Cat]

the only issue i have with this , is while sola scriptura is not in the bible,
it was the Catholic church taht has some dogma that even it does not give the certitude of devine faith and yet still teache's the dogma, and also included books taht are not part of the cannon of scripture.

Going back to my first set of arguments.

1.) The Catholic Church argues that it is the original Church established by the apostles.

2.) All issues concerned with doctrine.

As stated before, we really can't get into the second class of issues if we haven't cleared up the first. I've given some food-for-thought in my post 54 in this same thread. I know this thread has moved pretty quickly and I haven't had the time to watch it closely to be part of every off-shoot argument. I don't think that would be fruitful anyways. I am looking forward to your thoughts on what I put down in 54. On the note of sola scriptura and what the Catholic Church teaches, I think it is well worth noting that Christ didn't air-drop Bibles from the sky after the Ascension. (1 Timothy 3:15……if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.)
I put this verse in as one of many examples where the early Church talks about how the authority is with the Church. Of course, this makes a lot of sense given that the bible would not be consolidated for a long time to come. This also, then is THE springboard for discussing who decided what goes into and what does NOT go into the Bible. Clearly it was the Church. There weren’t, at this time, multiple denominations. There was but one Church and it had the marks of the Church as professed in the Nicene Creed (one, holy, catholic and apostolic). It alone had the authority to discern sacred scripture from false teaching. The Bible was compiled by the Church in the early councils.

We can go on more with this history and epistemology of the Bible, but it still doesn’t address that the Catholic Church was the original one, holy, catholic (meaning universal) and apostolic church.

[bubbazan68]

To YOUR satisfaction? Not likely.

ask a simple Q? and get blown off. my-rifle's MO

[bubbazan68]

I asked because I am a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is my religion and it has no agenda. .

then you can admit that truth is very subjective so therfore while it may not have
an agenda, it can be what you want it to be, unless you believe in absolutes.

[Hairy Cat]

Wow I missed a lot. LOL. I've been busy with work. Speaking of which, I gotsta get back at it.

[bubbazan68]

aleady sent you a pm that had to do with post 54

but if you want to take it back to the forum instead of pm let me know

Going back to my first set of arguments.

1.) The Catholic Church argues that it is the original Church established by the apostles.

2.) All issues concerned with doctrine.

As stated before, we really can't get into the second class of issues if we haven't cleared up the first. I've given some food-for-thought in my post 54 in this same thread. I know this thread has moved pretty quickly and I haven't had the time to watch it closely to be part of every off-shoot argument. I don't think that would be fruitful anyways. I am looking forward to your thoughts on what I put down in 54. On the note of sola scriptura and what the Catholic Church teaches, I think it is well worth noting that Christ didn't air-drop Bibles from the sky after the Ascension. (1 Timothy 3:15……if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.)
I put this verse in as one of many examples where the early Church talks about how the authority is with the Church. Of course, this makes a lot of sense given that the bible would not be consolidated for a long time to come. This also, then is THE springboard for discussing who decided what goes into and what does NOT go into the Bible. Clearly it was the Church. There weren’t, at this time, multiple denominations. There was but one Church and it had the marks of the Church as professed in the Nicene Creed (one, holy, catholic and apostolic). It alone had the authority to discern sacred scripture from false teaching. The Bible was compiled by the Church in the early councils.

We can go on more with this history and epistemology of the Bible, but it still doesn’t address that the Catholic Church was the original one, holy, catholic (meaning universal) and apostolic church.

[Hairy Cat]

aleady sent you a pm that had to do with post 54

but if you want to take it back to the forum instead of pm let me know

PM... leave the jungle.

[20nickels]

then you can admit that truth is very subjective so therfore while it may not have
an agenda, it can be what you want it to be, unless you believe in absolutes.

Oh yes, perception is everything. To be clear I am not selling anything except the occasional doubt but the burden of proof is not upon me because I'm not making claims that I have all the answers. Humble and I didn't even need a prayer :) (morality police heads explode).

[bubbazan68]

Oh yes, perception is everything. To be clear I am not selling anything except the occasional doubt but the burden of proof is not upon me because I'm not making claims that I have all the answers. Humble and I didn't even need a prayer :) (morality police heads explode).

so you only offer the conjecture with no real answer to what it is you only offer the conjecture about.
if you offer doubt then the burden is on you to show why it should be doubted, if you dont do this then you have no truth only conjecture, and conjecture that is not proved is not truth only a belief, and belief with out truth is why you are an athiest to begin with is it not?

[20nickels]

so you only offer the conjecture with no real answer to what it is you only offer the conjecture about.
if you offer doubt then the burden is on you to show why it should be doubted, if you dont do this then you have no truth only conjecture, and conjecture that is not proved is not truth only a belief, and belief with out truth is why you are an athiest to begin with is it not?

Well, yes. That is what the whole conversation is between you, I and the rest of us I suspect but I skim the others posts.. conjecture. Opinion. Batting words around. It's roulette, you are betting on red and I on black unless... God talks back to you when you say the Lord's prayer. Does this occur?

[20nickels]

Does anyone else think it's weird that religion got lumped into the news section? News Religion and Politics sounds like Santorum's wet dream. :tongue_sm

[bubbazan68]

Well, yes. That is what the whole conversation is between you, I and the rest of us I suspect but I skim the others posts.. conjecture. Opinion. Batting words around. It's roulette, you are betting on red and I on black unless... God talks back to you when you say the Lord's prayer. Does this occur?

then you just contradicted your other statment

I asked because I am a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is my religion and it has no agenda. .

[bubbazan68]

Does anyone else think it's weird that religion got lumped into the news section? News Religion and Politics sounds like Santorum's wet dream. :tongue_sm

it is because Jen wanted it moved to where we all know we can arguee, instead of the Gen section were just fluff and buff is. works for me :)

[20nickels]

then you just contradicted your other statment

If we are going to delve into the whole what is "truth" or the definition of "fact" or what constitutes a theory I'm done here. Hit the lights on yer way out. Just sayin'.
Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.

Opinions;
20nickels looked at the data and it is his opinion Yahwey does not exist.

Bubba looked at the data provided and it is his opinion Yahwey not only exists but is the one true god.

Is there anything here that you do not agree with Bubba?

[bubbazan68]

see subjetive truth with an agenda,,,,,,
when we start to delve into what truth is 20nickles wants to leave even
though Truth, no matter what it looks like is his religion.
to quote "Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.'
so a conjecture not based on fact because you do not know me or my lifeand we have never talked about that subject, and yet you post it as being factual.


If we are going to delve into the whole what is "truth" or the definition of "fact" or what constitutes a theory I'm done here. Hit the lights on yer way out. Just sayin'.
Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.

Opinions;
20nickels looked at the data and it is his opinion Yahwey does not exist.

Bubba looked at the data provided and it is his opinion Yahwey not only exists but is the one true god.

Is there anything here that you do not agree with Bubba?

[bubbazan68]

To clarify,,,,,,
When you say

Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.

To be a known truth, Would be for us both to state a fact.
You stated a fact about you so that “is” now a known truth.
You then state a fact about me that I have not stated, therefore you are making an assumption based on what you think of me regardless of actual truth in factual statement being made and or denied.
And that would be conjecture not based on empirical evidence or fact .



Opinions;
20nickels looked at the data and it is his opinion Yahwey does not exist.

Bubba looked at the data provided and it is his opinion Yahwey not only exists but is the one true god.

Is there anything here that you do not agree with Bubba?

Nope sounds good to me

[20nickels]

I was posting @ the same time as you and you answered in post #114 so regard or disregard at your leisure.
to quote "Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.'
so a conjecture not based on fact because you do not know me or my lifeand we have never talked about that subject, and yet you post it as being factual.

Answer required----Have you seen smelled or conversed with deities?---

I'm not being abrasive, just thorough. I can't reasonably allow you to dodge the question any longer it is the crux of our conversation. If you can prove divinities existence it is a life changer for me but please forgive my skepticism.

[20nickels]

To clarify,,,,,,
When you say
Originally Posted by 20nickels
Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
Bubba has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.

To be a known truth, Would be for us both to state a fact.
You stated a fact about you so that “is” now a known truth.
You then state a fact about me that I have not stated, therefore you are making an assumption based on what you think of me regardless of actual truth in factual statement being made and or denied.
And that would be conjecture not based on empirical evidence or fact .

I think I'm pretty safe on that one. :wink_smal Are we taking bets?

[bubbazan68]

Answer required----Have you seen smelled or conversed with deities?---



no an answer is NOT required as i was not the one who made the statment that was not based of fact but on conjecture, as i stated in post #114

[bubbazan68]

Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
20nickels is a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is his religion and it has no agenda.


Opinions;
bubbazan “truth is very subjective so therefore while it may not have
an agenda, it can be what you want it to be, unless you believe in absolutes.”

Known truths;
20nickels
Oh yes, perception is everything. To be clear I am not selling anything except the occasional doubt but the burden of proof is not upon me because I'm not making claims that I have all the answers.

bubbazan (But you are making a claim) see below,,,,,,,,,,,


Known truths;
To make a claim (to assert or maintain as a fact: I.E. She claimed that he was telling the truth.) you have to have evidence or facts to prove what you claim.

Opinions; and claim
20nickels “the plausibility of an ancient dead Mediterranean deity being omnipresent in our daily lives seems extremely far fetched.”


And that brings us back to

Known truths;
20nickels is a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is his religion and it has no agenda.

the freedom to speculate is essential but to discredit thousands of years of history, to say
That something is far fetched is ludicrous.
Just hundreds of years ago any one who talked about cars or planes or computers or even other worlds would have been look at as a mad man, yet we now know this to be true that these things are around and other worlds do exist.
So if truth no mater what it looks like is your religion why would you put so much effort into making claims for truth that are not based in or on truth, when e have a document that has not changed for thousands of years that you chose not to believe ?

[20nickels]

Known truths;
20nickels has not seen, smelled or conversed with any deities.
20nickels is a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is his religion and it has no agenda.


Opinions;
bubbazan “truth is very subjective so therefore while it may not have
an agenda, it can be what you want it to be, unless you believe in absolutes.”

Known truths;
20nickels
Oh yes, perception is everything. To be clear I am not selling anything except the occasional doubt but the burden of proof is not upon me because I'm not making claims that I have all the answers.

bubbazan (But you are making a claim) see below,,,,,,,,,,,


Known truths;
To make a claim (to assert or maintain as a fact: I.E. She claimed that he was telling the truth.) you have to have evidence or facts to prove what you claim.

Opinions; and claim
20nickels “the plausibility of an ancient dead Mediterranean deity being omnipresent in our daily lives seems extremely far fetched.”


And that brings us back to

Known truths;
20nickels is a student of the truth. Truth, no matter what it looks like is his religion and it has no agenda.
?

I'm sorry I can't help ypu more with this.

[20nickels]

the freedom to speculate is essential but to discredit thousands of years of history, to say
That something is far fetched is ludicrous.
Just hundreds of years ago any one who talked about cars or planes or computers or even other worlds would have been look at as a mad man, yet we now know this to be true that these things are around and other worlds do exist.
So if truth no mater what it looks like is your religion why would you put so much effort into making claims for truth that are not based in or on truth, when e have a document that has not changed for thousands of years that you chose not to believe ?

The Holy Bible? Allow me get to the point. Do you take the Bible as a literal translation or not?

[my-rifle]

no an answer is NOT required as i was not the one who made the statment that was not based of fact but on conjecture, as i stated in post #114

Demand answers of everyone else. Avoid answering yourself. I'm seeing a pattern here.

[my-rifle]

Which prayer works best for you? I am most familiar with Catholic prayers from my youth (unmolested) but I know you are not Catholic.

I'm pretty sure that what Bubba is talking about is what Catholics call "a state of grace". Of course with him you can never be sure. He tends to not define his points until they're useful to him. Catholic dogma says you cannot command or even influence God's decision to grant a state of grace. Prayer cannot influence God. Living a good life will not influence God. It is ENTIRELY up to God to determine whether to grant it, and if so how it will appear to the recipient. After all according to Catholic dogma God is omnipotent, and He cannot be summoned and commanded at the will of man. His will cannot be comprehended. He can only be loved.

[Wendigo]

I'm pretty sure that what Bubba is talking about is what Catholics call "a state of grace". Of course with him you can never be sure. He tends to not define his points until they're useful to him. Catholic dogma says you cannot command or even influence God's decision to grant a state of grace. Prayer cannot influence God. Living a good life will not influence God. It is ENTIRELY up to God to determine whether to grant it, and if so how it will appear to the recipient. After all according to Catholic dogma God is omnipotent, and He cannot be summoned and commanded at the will of man. His will cannot be comprehended. He can only be loved.

I have always wondered, is it said anywhere that god commands our love and worship? The dilemma being that if god created us and gave us a brain and the freewill to use it, why would he then tell us to fall to our knees and worship? It just would not sound like the workings of an all powerful divine being to me.

[Wendigo]

Opinions;
bubbazan “truth is very subjective so therefore while it may not have
an agenda, it can be what you want it to be, unless you believe in absolutes.”

So anything asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

[my-rifle]

I have always wondered, is it said anywhere that god commands our love and worship? The dilemma being that if god created us and gave us a brain and the freewill to use it, why would he then tell us to fall to our knees and worship? It just would not sound like the workings of an all powerful divine being to me.

From the *Catholic* instruction I've received it's my understanding that because God can only be loved and not influenced in any way, the entire purpose of prayer is to contemplate and enjoy the thought of God. Nothing more. What God does is strictly the will of God.

Now this is only Catholic doctrine. I can't speak to any of the other faiths. Catholicism does not root all of its doctrines and dogmas directly in the New Testament. Some of it is derived from the New Testament via theological and philosophical methods. Thomas Aquinas ideas about the soul springs to mind.

[bubbazan68]

Demand answers of everyone else. Avoid answering yourself. I'm seeing a pattern here.

then you dont know how to read, because i have.
you are picking one out of how many?????? when you answer none, yet you will not speak what the church does teach

[bubbazan68]

The Holy Bible? Allow me get to the point. Do you take the Bible as a literal translation or not?

it is very easy to see that the bible is both literal and Allegory.
but to impose that by way of Allegory your aim is to diminish or make light of the
point would not be factual or the truth.

[bubbazan68]

I'm pretty sure that what Bubba is talking about is what Catholics call "a state of grace". Of course with him you can never be sure. He tends to not define his points until they're useful to him. Catholic dogma says you cannot command or even influence God's decision to grant a state of grace. Prayer cannot influence God. Living a good life will not influence God. It is ENTIRELY up to God to determine whether to grant it, and if so how it will appear to the recipient. After all according to Catholic dogma God is omnipotent, and He cannot be summoned and commanded at the will of man. His will cannot be comprehended. He can only be loved.

2 problems with this

ONE
grace is unmerited favor, none of us can do anything to get Gods free gift in the first place
yet if we believe in him and receive the holy spirit we get his grace and we are redeemed
We are saved he has already separated us from our sin forever.

TWO
Jesus says prayer can influence God “you don’t have because you ask with wrong motives” etc
Grace in its entirety was manifest at the cross, all we need do is accept it, as Jesus said,
“As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. “
That means any one not just some.

Also if he can not be summoned and commanded then how can the priest change the bread and water into whine? Is it the priest’s power or is it that he is telling Christ what to do?

[bubbazan68]

I have always wondered, is it said anywhere that god commands our love and worship? The dilemma being that if god created us and gave us a brain and the freewill to use it, why would he then tell us to fall to our knees and worship? It just would not sound like the workings of an all powerful divine being to me.

do you not tell your children to obey you??
God and Jesus both stated the "you will lofe the lord your God"
now if you are a father do you not want your kids to obey AND love you to?
or do you just let them do what ever they please?

[bubbazan68]

So anything asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

since you only quoted that one part i will say that to answer you ,,,,,,,,,,
it depends on if you believe in absoluts or not

[bubbazan68]

From the *Catholic* instruction I've received it's my understanding that because God can only be loved and not influenced in any way, the entire purpose of prayer is to contemplate and enjoy the thought of God. Nothing more. What God does is strictly the will of God.

Now this is only Catholic doctrine. I can't speak to any of the other faiths. Catholicism does not root all of its doctrines and dogmas directly in the New Testament. Some of it is derived from the New Testament via theological and philosophical methods. Thomas Aquinas ideas about the soul springs to mind.

odd because the bible does say he hears and will give

Matthew 6: 6 But you, when you pray, go into your inner room, close your door and pray to your Father who is in secret, and your Father who sees what is done in secret will reward you.

7 “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. 8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.

and 7 hmmmmm how many our fathers or mary's mother of god so i can atone for my sin????

James 4:1 What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? 2You lust and do not have; so you commit murder. You are envious and cannot obtain; so you fight and quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask. 3You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it on your pleasures.

[20nickels]

it is very easy to see that the bible is both literal and Allegory.
but to impose that by way of Allegory your aim is to diminish or make light of the
point would not be factual or the truth.

:huh_small What point? I just asked If you were introducing the Bible as exhibit A into this conversation and if so how do you interpret it? If it seems I'm being short with you I am (not mean), I'm typing between working. It really does boil down to the famous question; Do you believe the whale swallowed Jonah? I suspect no but I cannot answer for you.

You have satisified all my questions and I thank you for that. I would be happy to still converse with you through the end of the day because we may differ on religion but we still have much in common. The search for truth is a noble endeavor, perhaps the most noble.

[bubbazan68]

Do you believe the whale swallowed Jonah? I suspect no but I cannot answer for you.

.

i have no reason to doubt that Jonah was swallowed by a "big fish"
whales are today classified as mammals and not fish, but no such distinction was made that long ago so,,,,,,,,,,,,

[Arkan]

o

7 “And when you are praying, do not use meaningless repetition as the Gentiles do, for they suppose that they will be heard for their many words. 8 So do not be like them; for your Father knows what you need before you ask Him.

You don't understand the scripture you quoted .

MT 26:44
"And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words." Jesus prayer repetition?



Rev 4:8
"And the four beasts had each of them six wings about [him]; and [they were] full of eyes within: and they rest not day and night, saying, Holy, holy, holy, Lord God Almighty, which was, and is, and is to come."

Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty. Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty. Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God Almighty!!!!!!!!!!!

[bubbazan68]

You don't understand the scripture you quoted .

MT 26:44
"And he left them, and went away again, and prayed the third time, saying the same words." Jesus prayer repetition?



what i quoted was "do not use meaningless repetition"
Jesus did not use "meaningless repetition"
42 He went away again a second time and prayed, saying, “My Father, if this cannot pass away unless I drink it, Your will be done.” 43 Again He came and found them sleeping, for their eyes were heavy. 44 And He left them again, and went away and prayed a third time, saying the same thing once more.

so i do understand it BUT how is it that a priest can tell you your sins are forgiven
now "go do this many our father or this many hail mary's to atone for the sin that was forgiven"
Jesus is the atonment, NOT what you do

[maxhush]

I dunno, but doesn't "extreme unction" sound like something oozy that even antibiotics won't cure?

[motorhead]

catholic "last rites". one of the 7 sacraments. cartholicism contains much ritual and symbolism. much of it, i think, stems from a time when the average man could not read their native language, much less the latin and greek that religious texts were written in. possibly also to discourage pagan ritualism. many pagan holidays were co-opted for the same reason. perhaps outdated today, definitely misunderstood by most.

[20nickels]

i have no reason to doubt that Jonah was swallowed by a "big fish"
whales are today classified as mammals and not fish, but no such distinction was made that long ago so,,,,,,,,,,,,

Splitting hairs. I almost made reference to "fish" so there was no verbal clutter. So if there be no doubt then that would put you in the literal bible translation category.

[20nickels]

catholic "last rites". one of the 7 sacraments. cartholicism contains much ritual and symbolism. much of it, i think, stems from a time when the average man could not read their native language, much less the latin and greek that religious texts were written in. possibly also to discourage pagan ritualism. many pagan holidays were co-opted for the same reason. perhaps outdated today, definitely misunderstood by most.

The symbols and rituals also have another important role. Repetition (ex; rosary prayers) and training help mass participants to "remember". The sights/symbols, sounds/bells, smells/incense are all triggers. This is not unlike learning a new job or task. Repetition and training is how we learn. Try sitting down at a Catholic mass when everyone hits their knees, all eyes are on you. I've seen people that aren't even Catholic hit their knees when everyone else does presumably because they didn't want to rock the boat.:huh_small
BTW, This isn't Catholic bashing. This is just saying what they do. If saying what they do is embarrassing then maybe they shouldn't do it.

[IanMor]

I believe.

I also believe our God the Father is a merciful god. Therefore when I appear before him he will understand the clouded eyes that are the condition of mortal man. If he does not understand then I will ask him "then why are you so hard to find?"

The criminal on the cross with Christ that day asked Jesus to remember him before his father. Jesus told the man "surely you will be in paradise with me this day" (or words to that effect, I dont have a Bible with me right now).

I am counting on that same grace. If you are too, I'll see you there.

[bubbazan68]

Splitting hairs. I almost made reference to "fish" so there was no verbal clutter. So if there be no doubt then that would put you in the literal bible translation category.

it is very easy to see that the bible is both literal and Allegory.
but to impose that by way of Allegory your aim is to diminish or make light of the
point would not be factual or the truth.

so there is no mistake,,,,
I bubbazan believe the bible is both literal and Allegory.
but I do not impose that by way of Allegory i can diminish or make light of the
point that is being ilistrated.

I.E. if you take your thumb like you are going to hitch hike and take said thumb and run it under your chin from ear to ear, like a threat the mobsters used to use,
it means you are going to get killed your throat slashed beheaded etc etc
it does not mean you will get a slap on the wrist.

some people who believe the bible is an Allegory will go to many an extream to show how what the meaning behind the ilistration is has nothing to do with the ilistration it's self.

[bubbazan68]

I believe.

I also believe our God the Father is a merciful god. Therefore when I appear before him he will understand the clouded eyes that are the condition of mortal man. If he does not understand then I will ask him "then why are you so hard to find?"

The criminal on the cross with Christ that day asked Jesus to remember him before his father. Jesus told the man "surely you will be in paradise with me this day" (or words to that effect, I dont have a Bible with me right now).

I am counting on that same grace. If you are too, I'll see you there.

ahhhhhhhhhhmen brother can't wait to meet you there.
and remember that when we do get there that he will open our eyes to all his glory
and our eyes will be clouded no more

[bobbers]

:huh_small What point? I just asked If you were introducing the Bible as exhibit A into this conversation and if so how do you interpret it? If it seems I'm being short with you I am (not mean), I'm typing between working. It really does boil down to the famous question; Do you believe the whale swallowed Jonah? I suspect no but I cannot answer for you.

You have satisified all my questions and I thank you for that. I would be happy to still converse with you through the end of the day because we may differ on religion but we still have much in common. The search for truth is a noble endeavor, perhaps the most noble.

And the search for the "truth", noble though it is, and something we all, I think, strive for in one way or another, is ultimately doomed to failure. Given that we were not present at the moments we speculate about, given that even if we were our perceptions would have differed, makes the "truth" an ultimately unobtainable goal. I think, in the end, we all reach our own "truth" and hopefully it's one that allows us to organize our perceptions, and one that offers us the hope and purpose we wish for and want to believe is inherent in our very existence. Otherwise it's all pretty random, isn't it?

[20nickels]

Otherwise it's all pretty random, isn't it?
Yes it is. Chaotic even.
the Man Show - Die Like a Man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ss0QXGXtEEQ

[Arkan]

catholic "last rites". one of the 7 sacraments. cartholicism contains much ritual and symbolism. much of it, i think, stems from a time when the average man could not read their native language, much less the latin and greek that religious texts were written in. possibly also to discourage pagan ritualism. many pagan holidays were co-opted for the same reason. perhaps outdated today, definitely misunderstood by most.

Much of the ritual and symbolism comes from the Hebrew religion.

[my-rifle]

i have no reason to doubt that Jonah was swallowed by a "big fish"
whales are today classified as mammals and not fish, but no such distinction was made that long ago so,,,,,,,,,,,,

So you believe a whale would swallow a man, and you further believe that the man could survive the experience? Is that correct? I just want to be clear about this.

[TheGreek!]

So you believe a whale would swallow a man, and you further believe that the man could survive the experience? Is that correct? I just want to be clear about this.

If he's wearing one of those hard shell ultra deep water diving suits w/a rebreather system he might be able to survive it if the suit can handle the whale's stomach acid... :laugh_sma

[my-rifle]

If he's wearing one of those hard shell ultra deep water diving suits w/a rebreather system he might be able to survive it if the suit can handle the whale's stomach acid... :laugh_sma

OK, OK I hadn't thought of that. So it was possible ...

[bubbazan68]

So you believe a whale would swallow a man, and you further believe that the man could survive the experience? Is that correct? I just want to be clear about this.

the fish Coelacanths was thought to be extinct for over 65,000,000 years
yet in 1938 they found a picture of one, and again From 1988 to 1994,
some 60 fish individuals where found on each dive when the found out where they were.
a fish unchanged for at least 65,000,000 years
so could a "big fish" have lived and swallowd a man and the man live, is not out of the relm
of posabilitys.
a Whale Shark has a mouth that is big enough to swallow a human

[motorhead]

Much of the ritual and symbolism comes from the Hebrew religion.
and from rome. the church spread along the routes of the empire. rome gets a bad rap these days. truth is, western civilization in general formed along roman ideals.

[my-rifle]

the fish Coelacanths was thought to be extinct for over 65,000,000 years
yet in 1938 they found a picture of one, and again From 1988 to 1994,
some 60 fish individuals where found on each dive when the found out where they were.
a fish unchanged for at least 65,000,000 years
so could a "big fish" have lived and swallowd a man and the man live, is not out of the relm
of posabilitys.
a Whale Shark has a mouth that is big enough to swallow a human

And survive? No, if you're going to go with big mouth you may as well stay with whales. It just doesn't work. What we have here is an ancient rumor that is, well how can I say this - a lie.

[bubbazan68]

And survive? No, if you're going to go with big mouth you may as well stay with whales. It just doesn't work. What we have here is an ancient rumor that is, well how can I say this - a lie.

prove it is a lie.
While a whale could certainly swallow a person, there is no current way of knowing if they could survive.

[bubbazan68]

The average every-day whale or dolphin has three stomach CHAMBERS. Not "stomachs", "stomach CHAMBERS". The first chamber, called the forestomach, is the only stomach chamber you'll end up living in. It's a mechanical stomach, sort of an "extension" of the esophagus. The whales and dolphins are able to use this stomach to store food for later. Then, when the time comes, they use the stomach to crush the food in a form of "chewing their food". Sometimes they barf up the food to lure in more food, a.k.a. sea gulls.

[my-rifle]

The average every-day whale or dolphin has three stomach CHAMBERS. Not "stomachs", "stomach CHAMBERS". The first chamber, called the forestomach, is the only stomach chamber you'll end up living in. It's a mechanical stomach, sort of an "extension" of the esophagus. The whales and dolphins are able to use this stomach to store food for later. Then, when the time comes, they use the stomach to crush the food in a form of "chewing their food". Sometimes they barf up the food to lure in more food, a.k.a. sea gulls.

And of course it's full of fresh air and fresh water for the swallowed person to breathe and drink.

You are reaching.

[Wendigo]

do you not tell your children to obey you??
God and Jesus both stated the "you will lofe the lord your God"
now if you are a father do you not want your kids to obey AND love you to?
or do you just let them do what ever they please?

It just seems that it would be petty for a divine being to command so. It sounds more like the workings of man imo.
As far as children it is too soon to tell, I do have a dog though.:small_gri

[bubbazan68]

And of course it's full of fresh air and fresh water for the swallowed person to breathe and drink.

You are reaching.

in 1900 a person who said we could have jet engines by 1945
would be far reaching to does that mean it can't happen?

[bubbazan68]

It just seems that it would be petty for a divine being to command so. It sounds more like the workings of man imo.
As far as children it is too soon to tell, I do have a dog though.:small_gri

why would a divine being call 12, shall we say less then perfect, to be his main men?

[my-rifle]

in 1900 a person who said we could have jet engines by 1945
would be far reaching to does that mean it can't happen?

So by that logic the Bible could be nothing more than an ancient comic book that some politicians used for their cynical ends to control the populations of the world - and NOT in fact the word of God.

No, in fact you're talking about technology developing, not man's or whale's anatomical abilities.

[bubbazan68]

So by that logic the Bible could be nothing more than an ancient comic book that some politicians used for their cynical ends to control the populations of the world - and NOT in fact the word of God.

No, in fact you're talking about technology developing, not man's or whale's anatomical abilities.

so you do NOT believe in evolution then?
Fossil Sheds Light On Evolution Of Whales’ Mouths
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/2097590/fossil_sheds_light_on_evolution_of_whales_mouths/

or that a whale that big could have be around ????

or any fish that big?

The longest blue whale ever recorded was a 108-foot adult female caught during whaling efforts in Antarctica! In modern times, blue whales in the Southern Hemisphere reach lengths of 90-100 feet , but their Northern Hemisphere counterparts are smaller, on average 75 to 80 feet (23 to 24.5 m).



also the Megalodon is a huge shark taht we still have not a total picture of because it has no real bones

so to say it can not be real again is to deny waht we have found in the fossil record

[bubbazan68]

So by that logic the Bible could be nothing more than an ancient comic book that some politicians used for their cynical ends to control the populations of the world - and NOT in fact the word of God.

No, in fact you're talking about technology developing, not man's or whale's anatomical abilities.

and so again to you,
you only offer the conjecture with no real answer to what it is you only offer the conjecture about.
if you offer doubt then the burden is on you to show why it should be doubted, if you dont do this then you have no truth only conjecture, and conjecture that is not proved is not truth only a belief.

[my-rifle]

so you do NOT believe in evolution then?
Fossil Sheds Light On Evolution Of Whales’ Mouths
http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/2097590/fossil_sheds_light_on_evolution_of_whales_mouths/

or that a whale that big could have be around ????

or any fish that big?

The longest blue whale ever recorded was a 108-foot adult female caught during whaling efforts in Antarctica! In modern times, blue whales in the Southern Hemisphere reach lengths of 90-100 feet , but their Northern Hemisphere counterparts are smaller, on average 75 to 80 feet (23 to 24.5 m).



also the Megalodon is a huge shark taht we still have not a total picture of because it has no real bones

so to say it can not be real again is to deny waht we have found in the fossil record

Perhaps you missed the word, "prehistoric" in the description of the fossil. Or maybe you believe this creature from 25 million years ago existed alongside modern man? So you're left again reaching, reaching ... please, any straw to keep your argument afloat?

[my-rifle]

and so again to you,
you only offer the conjecture with no real answer to what it is you only offer the conjecture about.
if you offer doubt then the burden is on you to show why it should be doubted, if you dont do this then you have no truth only conjecture, and conjecture that is not proved is not truth only a belief.

You are postulating a suggestion that is by all practical reasoning beyond belief. No sir. You still haven't come up with a hypothesis that could show how a man could exist inside a whale.

[Petro]

You are postulating a suggestion that is by all practical reasoning beyond belief. No sir. You still haven't come up with a hypothesis that could show how a man could exist inside a whale.
How long was this said person supposedly able to survive?
4 minutes? A day? A Week?

[my-rifle]

How long was this said person supposedly able to survive?
4 minutes? A day? A Week?

Even in a best-case scenario - 4 minutes a man could not survive "in the belly of a fish".

Now if God were to intervene, well anything would be possible.

[bubbazan68]

Perhaps you missed the word, "prehistoric" in the description of the fossil. Or maybe you believe this creature from 25 million years ago existed alongside modern man? So you're left again reaching, reaching ... please, any straw to keep your argument afloat?

alredy posted the the fish Coelacanths was thought to be extinct for over 65,000,000 years
yet in 1938 they found a picture of one, and again From 1988 to 1994

so you can not say a prehistoric fish was not around at the time of jonah.
so i am not reaching, you are denying with no evidence.

[bubbazan68]

You are postulating a suggestion that is by all practical reasoning beyond belief. No sir. You still haven't come up with a hypothesis that could show how a man could exist inside a whale.

have have given many, you have given none as to how it is a lie

[bubbazan68]

Even in a best-case scenario - 4 minutes a man could not survive "in the belly of a fish".

Now if God were to intervene, well anything would be possible.

again the answer as to HOW it COULD happen

The average every-day whale or dolphin has three stomach CHAMBERS. Not "stomachs", "stomach CHAMBERS". The first chamber, called the forestomach, is the only stomach chamber you'll end up living in. It's a mechanical stomach, sort of an "extension" of the esophagus. The whales and dolphins are able to use this stomach to store food for later. Then, when the time comes, they use the stomach to crush the food in a form of "chewing their food". Sometimes they barf up the food to lure in more food, a.k.a. sea gulls.

[my-rifle]

again the answer as to HOW it COULD happen

Divine intervention. That's the only way. You're a very, very, silly person.

[bubbazan68]

Divine intervention. That's the only way. You're a very, very, silly person.

give you plenty of facts to show how it is posable, you give nothing to show how it's a lie.


silly silly boy