{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/4/2017 4:12:39 PM
1
The specifics don't matter, because that entire doctrine isn't in the bible anyways. They completely made it up. And for the record, there was nothing special about Jesus's body. It was a fully functional, normal human body that felt pain, bled, got tired, and got hungry. There was nothing divine about his physical body. That was the whole point.
English
-
[quote]The specifics don't matter, because that entire doctrine isn't in the bible anyways. They completely made it up. [/quote] If you're talking about specifics, then the specifics matter. If you are going to try to tear up a doctrine of faith at least low what you're talking about. I ain't even Catholic, but the way people talk about them is just profoundly uneducated. [quote]And for the record, there was nothing special about Jesus's body. It was a fully functional, normal human body that felt pain, bled, got tired, and got hungry. There was nothing divine about his physical body. That was the whole point.[/quote] Oh was it now? I guess the transfiguration of Christ is something that normal that anyone can do. Just go to a mountaintop, right? You know, like they have expressly written in the gospels and not as a part of the Catholic doctrine. I don't care if you don't believe, that's your decision. But if you are going to tell other people what someone else believes, and purposely try to make them sound like stupid assholes, you'd better have it all sorted out.
-
I do know what I'm talking about. And I'm telling you, that Jesus did not have a "special body." It was just like everyone else's.
-
You don't know the Catholic perspective, then. [quote]"We think that God the Word was united to the flesh, each of the two natures remaining what it is. This is why Christ is one, God and man; the same, consubstantial (homoousios) with the father as to the divinity and consubstantial with us as to the humanity." (D.S. 430, N.D.620/8).[/quote]
-
Editado por Lil Durk: 8/4/2017 5:24:51 PM[quote]You don't know the Catholic perspective, then. [quote]"We think that God the Word was united to the flesh, each of the two natures remaining what it is. This is why Christ is one, God and man; the same, consubstantial (homoousios) with the father as to the divinity and consubstantial with us as to the humanity." (D.S. 430, N.D.620/8).[/quote][/quote] I know the Catholic perspective. I just understand that it's wrong. That whole paragraph was summed up by Jesus in one sentence. "Anyone who has seen me, has seen the Father." Right there he told everyone that he was God in the flesh. So that source you cited, "D.S. 430, N.D.620/8" is completely unnecessary. The use of supplemental (and often contradictory) sources, in addition to scripture, is just one of the many ways that Catholicism is way off the mark. Btw, you really should stop making so many assumptions about people. You don't know me or my background and have no idea what I "know."
-
[quote]That whole paragraph was summed up by Jesus in one sentence. "Anyone who has seen me, has seen the Father."[/quote] So you choose to take an piecemeal approach to interpretation of scripture? Yeah, there's a big problem with that way of doing things, and you see it with Christian fundies especially when they start quoting Leviticus and Deuteronomy because they like doing that omitting everything that happens in the Gospels. And the reason I cited the source, is because that's how Catholics operate. If you are going to talk about what Catholics believe, but refuse to adopt a Catholic lens to interpret the world, you are going to come up with something that is not a Catholic interpretation.
-
I know how Catholics operate. [i]That's the problem.[/i] You really don't get it.
-
[quote]I know how Catholics operate. That's the problem. You really don't get it.[/quote] If I replace "Catholic" with "Jew" on your posts, I don't think it'd be far from something Art would say.
-
Editado por Lil Durk: 8/4/2017 5:40:09 PM[quote][quote]I know how Catholics operate. That's the problem. You really don't get it.[/quote] If I replace "Catholic" with "Jew" on your posts, I don't think it'd be far from something Art would say.[/quote] Horrible deflection. Pointing out doctrinal flaws is not remotely comparable to fanatical antisemitism. Please just stop. This is just sad.
-
[quote]doctrinal flaws [/quote] What's flawed about having a doctrine that is open to reform?
-
[quote][quote]doctrinal flaws [/quote] What's flawed about having a doctrine that is open to reform?[/quote] The reform IS the flaw. The bible is all we need to understand God. Catholicism does not teach this, which is the flaw.
-
How you gonna have a Sola Scriptura interpretation of scripture when you know the thing had to be canonized from collections of religious writings centuries ago? Every church and denomination has their own variation on their interpretation of scripture as well as additional tradition, it just so happens that the Catholics have theirs codified. Now I disagree with a lot of things the Catholic Church does. They have some scrupulous parts of their past. But transubstantiation is a complete non-issue as far as I'm concerned.
-
1. Every denomination on Earth is unbiblical. The bible specifically says not to create denominations. 2. Transubstantiation is one in a huge list of things that Catholics have literally just made up. "Tradition" is not a valid answer. If it's not in the bible, and only supported as true because of "Catholic Tradition," then that is exactly what the Bible teaches against. Men just creating stuff for no reason, and claiming it to be true.
-
[quote]1. Every denomination on Earth is unbiblical. The bible specifically says not to create denominations.[/quote] That's a profoundly fundamentalist approach. I suppose you read the ancient biblical greek and Hebrew as well. After all, any translation is of course a bastardization of the revelation of the gospel. So too is any modification of the canonized scriptures. I'm pretty sure those lines are more about not to, 'Takfir' other Christians and declare yourselves the one "True Christians". [Quote]2. Transubstantiation is one in a huge list of things that Catholics have literally just made up. "Tradition" is not a valid answer. If it's not in the bible, and only supported as true because of "Catholic Tradition," then that is exactly what the Bible teaches against. Men just creating stuff for no reason, and claiming it to be true.[/quote] Transubstantiation is a philosophical interpretation of what was meant by Christ in Luke 22. It's a philosophical and metaphysical interpretation of what Christ meant when he declared, "this is my body, given for you". The understanding of the Eucharist being more than just mere bread and wine, of it being metaphysically nourishing to your soul and salvation is not something they made up on the fly. It's just their interpretation of that part of scripture and isn't necessarily untrue.
-
It's just wafers and grape juice. It's symbolic. It doesn't have any special properties. Obviously when he gave them the bread, it wasn't his literal arms and legs. He was using a metaphor. Saying "do this to remember me." The fact that they just tacked on later that it becomes his actual blood and body after you eat it is idiotic.
-
And a dollar bill is just a piece of paper with a pretty picture on it. Give me a -blam!-ing break. You know that objects have metaphysical significance greater than just the object you see in front of you. Cut the crap.
-
What part of "it's a metaphor" do you not understand? Jesus wasn't being literal.
