Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Virgin Mary

I posted all about that above and was scalded for it. The links remain, above. Please go luck at them, dummy ;)
You posted nothing. I have rarely met anyone as dishonest. Tellingly, you didn't answer the question about whether lying is a sin in your world.
 
"Other tribes said to be committed to Israel's entire extinction among others."
1. Is there any evidence for this assertion?
2. You have justified genocide, which may make you as bad as. . .
Within the context of the OT? The Amelikites. As it is I haven't 'justified genocide'. Try and go down that road if you think you're a hero. You won't be relevant.
 
From that Bible that people occasionally appeal to, without reading it:

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
 
What do you want me to prove about the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Angels> That she is revered and adored in every major faith system on earth?
That She loves us?
That She intercedes on our behalf?
That she will assist us at the hour of our death, merely by asking Her?
That She is kind and wonderful?
That She loves us as Her children?
That She is the Flower of Creation, the most perfect human ever to live?

That She is the Daughter of the Father? Mother of the Son? Spouse of the Holy Spirit?
That She has inspired more beautiful art than any other subject?
That she has been the cause of innumerable miracles, written & attested to by even nonbelievers?

View attachment 444823
At this point I truly can't decide if you're a thicko or a troll. Or both.
 
Fair enough back at ya, I think it's interesting actually that despite a widespread conception among let's say 'enlightened liberals', that people professing some kind of religion are basically quite stupid, exclusive and intolerant, IME yer average Jew/Christian/Muslim basically believes that everyone, whether in their gang or not, is a child of the creator with a soul and a moral sense, who if they truly do their best to live a righteous, moral life, will not be punished only for not believing.

Fundamentalists of course really do think that disbelievers will be punished, but most people would agree that fundamentalists actually are quite stupid, exclusive and intolerant.

In the case of Catholics (again, can't speak for anyone else) it's not just what average believers believe, it's the explicit position of the Church since the second Vatican Council that non believers who try to live a righteous life won't be punished for not believing.

Fundamentalists who disagree with this are not just stupid, exclusive and intolerant, they are also at odds with Catholic teaching.
 
Last edited:
Well, they weren't for most of the church's existence. But never mind about that now, eh?

Also, can you link to something backing up that assertion about the second Vatican council?

But again, as I ask with no real hope of an answer -- if you don't have to believe in a lot of unprovable and frankly unlikely things in order to be saved, what on earth is the point of it all?
 
What do you want me to prove about the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Angels> That she is revered and adored in every major faith system on earth?
That She loves us?
That She intercedes on our behalf?
That she will assist us at the hour of our death, merely by asking Her?
That She is kind and wonderful?
That She loves us as Her children?
That She is the Flower of Creation, the most perfect human ever to live?

That She is the Daughter of the Father? Mother of the Son? Spouse of the Holy Spirit?
That She has inspired more beautiful art than any other subject?
That she has been the cause of innumerable miracles, written & attested to by even nonbelievers?

View attachment 444823

Look, person, this is just your opinion. Your missionary zeal is misplaced here - none of that post has any basis in reality.
 
In the case of Catholics (again, can't speak for anyone else) it's not just what average believers believe, it's the explicit position of the Church since the second Vatican Council that non believers who try to live a righteous life won't be punished for not believing.
Punished, maybe not I guess it depends on your definition
But it still holds that all are born with original sin and will die with such unless they are baptised, it still teaches that it is the one true church, that it alone is the means of salvation, and that those who die without repenting will go to Hell.
 
I was reared post Vatican 2 .

This may be something you have not seen ouirdeaux It's from Vatican 2. You asked about ecumenical outreach...


Screenshot_20241001_094847_Chrome.jpg

If you have no interest in the spiritual and no belief in God then none of this will be relevant to you. However you have shown an independent knowledge of scripture but you may not have read much about post 1965 Catholicism.
The stated effort is towards peace between all Abrahamic religions. Respect for all belief systems ... the document is clear on that..here's a snippet..
"Buddhism, in its various forms, realizes the radical insufficiency of this changeable world; it teaches a way by which men, in a devout and confident spirit, may be able either to acquire the state of perfect liberation, or attain, by their own efforts or through higher help, supreme illumination. Likewise, other religions found everywhere try to counter the restlessness of the human heart, each in its own manner, by proposing "ways," comprising teachings, rules of life, and sacred rites. The Catholic Church rejects nothing that is true and holy in these religions. She regards with sincere reverence those ways of conduct and of life, those precepts and teachings which, though differing in many aspects from the ones she holds and sets forth, nonetheless often reflect a ray of that Truth which enlightens all men. "

... it does strike me as sincere.
You seem to want to blame all Christians alive today for what happened in the Crusades. When the reality is that the Church has been and is working for ecuminism.

There are radical fundmentalists who are working to destroy that ecuminism. Trying to divide people. It's evident in the middle east.. and in far right parties in europe...and the far right in the US. Modern Christian churches do not condone radicalism or fundamentalism just as the majority of people of Islam do not condone radicalisation. Just as the majority of Jews do not condone Zionism.

I note that you have read the bible. You've studied it. You're obviously seriously interested in it. I would think you've read it more than I have.. It might be of interest to you to examine Vatican 2 documents to see how the Church has developed since biblical times.

I don't particularly like aggro. Definitely not my scene at all. I have too much going on healthwise to get further involved. And your personal attacks on me on this thread were unsettling to say the least.
I am replying to you now because nobody has given you any info on Vatican2 and on the off chance that you may actually want to read some of it?
I'm pretty sure you can find some answers to some of your questions there. I'm posting them not just for you but for the sake of someone in the future who might stumble on this thread and want to know more about the Vatican 2 documents it's no harm posting a link to the relevant one.

My health is not great. I've a lot going on and it's looking like there is another serious issue rearing it's head. I need to conserve what little energy I have. So I respectfully ask that you not come back at me with aggression and accusations of "dishonesty" because I post a Vatican 2 document. Read it as a document... without prejudice.

Peace to all. Take care of yourselves and each other. There is more similarity than difference among us all.
 
Ok. If you know so much about her

What is her favourite colour?
What would she rather have for breakfast?
Does she love or hate Marmite?
What would be her desert island discs?
What colour eyes does she have?
How tall is she?
Has she got any allergies?
How would she like to be addressed? Mary? Blessed Virgin? Madge?

I know everything I need to know, except the examples of trivial bits in your post, about this very real Person
There's nothing trivial about liking or disliking Marmite. The whole issue dwarfs piffling disputes about communion wine and bread. Does the consecrated host have Marmite on it? Or not? That's the important question.
 
What do you want me to prove about the Blessed Virgin Mary, Queen of Angels> That she is revered and adored in every major faith system on earth?
That She loves us?
That She intercedes on our behalf?
That she will assist us at the hour of our death, merely by asking Her?
That She is kind and wonderful?
That She loves us as Her children?
That She is the Flower of Creation, the most perfect human ever to live?

That She is the Daughter of the Father? Mother of the Son? Spouse of the Holy Spirit?
That She has inspired more beautiful art than any other subject?
That she has been the cause of innumerable miracles, written & attested to by even nonbelievers?

View attachment 444823
I think you are trolling.
 
No you don't. You know jack shit. Because even the stories you relentlessly post display a complete ignorance about any actual human personality, or events in a person's life. Their opinions, likes, dislikes, foibles, peculiarities, - all the things which make us specific human individuals - there is none of that. You've fallen in love with a stereotype.
"I'm in love with a stereotype" could be the title of a song from the late 1970s by X-Ray Spex
 
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the wine and the bread consumed in Communion literally changes into the blood and flesh of Jesus.

Many people were tortured, and many killed, in defence of this apparent misunderstanding of a metaphor. The lesson of which, I suppose, is that metaphors are dangerous. They don’t teach you that is school English lessons.

It is generous to call it a “misunderstanding”. Making an outlandish claim is a technique used by dictatorships (in which category I am placing monarchies) to secure subservience. The subjects hear the outrageous claim, and their reason revolts against it, but they are forced to acquiesce in the claim, at threat of violence. They are then psychologically broken, and accept the rule of the dictatorship. Members of out groups will ridicule the claim, and this ridicule will make members of the in group feel closer. The root of the word “religion” after all is “to bind”.

Another outlandish claim, the reaction of others to which acts to bind group more closely, is that blood transfusions are harmful and must never ever take place, which is a doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses church.

The Stalin regime in the former USSR made a number of outlandish claims that served a similar purpose.

The doctrine of transubstantiation in effect says that believers engage in an act of cannibalism every Sunday.
 
In Dante the virtuous pagans are in an afterlife that suits their predilections just denied the light of God because they lived before the chance to hear Jesus, Socrates hanging out talking philosophy for eternity as he wanted. Think that's always been the broad view of mainstream Catholics, that being good but not in Christ is unfortunate but not evil and to be punished.
 
The Roman Catholic Church teaches that the wine and the bread consumed in Communion literally changes into the blood and flesh of Jesus.

Many people were tortured, and many killed, in defence of this apparent misunderstanding of a metaphor. The lesson of which, I suppose, is that metaphors are dangerous. They don’t teach you that is school English lessons.

It is generous to call it a “misunderstanding”. Making an outlandish claim is a technique used by dictatorships (in which category I am placing monarchies) to secure subservience. The subjects hear the outrageous claim, and their reason revolts against it, but they are forced to acquiesce in the claim, at threat of violence. They are then psychologically broken, and accept the rule of the dictatorship. Members of out groups will ridicule the claim, and this ridicule will make members of the in group feel closer. The root of the word “religion” after all is “to bind”.

Another outlandish claim, the reaction of others to which acts to bind group more closely, is that blood transfusions are harmful and must never ever take place, which is a doctrine of the Jehovah’s Witnesses church.

The Stalin regime in the former USSR made a number of outlandish claims that served a similar purpose.

The doctrine of transubstantiation in effect says that believers engage in an act of cannibalism every Sunday.
It is not an outlandish claim.. The dogma rests at the core of Catholicism.. You are correct; it is a point of deep disagreement in many of the Reformed Reformed Reformed Protestant churches

It is interesting to note that Luther fully accepted the doctrine of transubstantiation
 
Back
Top Bottom