Total posts: 11
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
Meh, you're just jealous of my awesome username. I'd delete this thread since everybody is getting so bent out of shape, but this site doesn't let you delete anything. Adios amigos
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Come on now. Nobody tells the entire truth on those pages. Surely SOMEBODY knows your religion, life goal, income etc. Yet when I checked yours it simply says "unknown". I'd imagine it hard to get a paycheck if nobody knows your income. Are you pro-bono?
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
You know it's funny, because, one might look at the mean spirited nature of your comment, and one might look at this thread which has actually produced a decent amount of dialog between people with opposing views, and, if one had to take a guess as to who the troll is, one might come away with a slightly different conclusion than you're reaching. If you have something of value to add, add it. Otherwise, don't waste my time.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Interesting. In particular how do you feel about the miracle of Lanciano? I'd be curious to hear your take.
Created:
-->
@Swagnarok
@Bones
I can't say any one particular argument convinced or even keeps me convinced. Cumulatively though I would say all the arguments put together are enough to satisfy someone looking for that kind of thing. I think God can be sought both rationally with the mind and experientially with the heart.
What attracted me was the historicity of the Catholic Church. Whether one agrees with the Church or not, it's incredibly old. That type of antiquity is lacking in so many expressions of Christianity today.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
That's totally fine, but don't feel like you have to keep silent. If you have objections I'm more than happy to discuss them.
Created:
-->
@Shila
The Pope declaring Jesus’s life a failure and the cross a failure of God was saying the quiet part out loud.
If you'd like to dispute or discuss the context and explanation I put forward (which is obvious from the context of the quote itself) then I'd be more than happy to do so. If you're simply going to double down and keep repeating your erroneous assessment of what the holy father said, without even acknowledging any context or nuance, than I'm not interested.
Created:
-->
@Shila
Why did the Pope declare the cross a failure of God?
When you word it like that, with no context, it would sound blasphemous. When you actually posted the quote, it makes sense.
Put yourself in the shoes of one of the apostles. Christ told them repeatedly what was going to happen to Him and they didn't get it. Now imagine, you're following this Man for three years, you see Him perform miracle after miracle, you've sacrificed everything, given up everything, and then, next thing you know, you see Him die the death of slaves and criminals.
At that point in time, the cross looked like a profound failure. In the words of N.T Wright, if your Messiah got crucified you went out and got yourself a new Messiah.
Hindsight is always 20/20, and we know the story doesn't end there. But from the disciples point of view? The one who you thought would be the redeemer of Israel, the promised, long awaited Messiah, is now dead on a cross at the hands of the Romans. I couldn't think of something that, at that moment, looked more like a failure.
Obviously, we know that it doesn't end there. And obviously the Pope knows that as well.
The Pope wasn't saying Christ's sacrifice failed to redeem us or something. I think you're reading into it.
All that being said, the Pope is free to say whatever he'd like outside of his official teaching magisterium. Its not infallible
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Quite the opposite. I was raised anti Catholic, and my family is mostly devout Protestant.
Created:
-->
@oromagi
Very good questions. I'll start in order:
Do you ever feel awkward about the insistence regarding transubstantiation
Honestly no. For multiple reasons. Number one being that the real presence of Christ in the Eucharist is not a historical view. It is THE historical view. Denials of RP were found among the gnostics. Outside of them, it doesn't resurface until Beringarius of Tours in the, I believe 11 or 12 century.
No it is not bread symbolizing the flesh of Christ, it is Christ's flesh magically polymorphed and it just tastes suspiciously bread-like.No it is not wine symbolizing the blood of Christ, it is Christ's blood magically teleported in, never mind the hints of blackberry and oaky tannins
I think here is truly where the test of our faith lies. If you believe in Church's teaching regarding the Divinity of Christ, then you can construct a parallel argument to parody the Eucharist. For example:
He's not just a prophet, no, He's actually God. Despite looking like us, despite eating, sleeping, joking around, despite the fact we know his Mother, despite the fact He's a carpenter, we can't just say He's a holy man. We have to say He's God.
One could have, in Christ's day and even to this day, held to some level of incredulity regarding the Incarnation, which, admittedly, sounds implausible. But our faith demands, despite what we haven't seen, and despite what those who knew Him saw, that, we understand He's truly God the Son.
In the same way, I would argue, that, despite what our senses perceive, despite the appearances of the elements (what the Church calls accidens) we know what they truly are substantially.
God could have come down guns blazing, instead He took on flesh and entered our world in a manger.
Likewise God could have set up a Eucharist where the breads accidens not just it's substance changes along with it. Instead, it seems to me God is far more subtle than that. I think that's the true test of our faith.
Also, as a side note, how do you feel about Eucharistic miracles?
Created:
Newly confirmed Catholic. Would love any questions from anyone.
Created: