Catholicism reverts (again)

[Cybrweez]

Menolly, the Bible doesn't say anything about Mary being divine. And, God forgives our sin through Jesus. Can God forgive sin tho He's never committed one? Yes, b/c He defined sin.

EL, you're preaching the Sermon on the Mount!

[emotional leper]

Menolly, the Bible doesn't say anything about Mary being divine. And, God forgives our sin through Jesus. Can God forgive sin tho He's never committed one? Yes, b/c He defined sin.

EL, you're preaching the Sermon on the Mount!

I never had any problem with anything (that I can remember) Jesus said in the Canon Gospels. I have a problem with everything that came after those, including what most people have done in His Name.

[Cail]

IIRC, the Bible does say that Mary was born without Original Sin (The Immaculate Conception), full of Divine Grace, and lived a life free of sin.

Or that could be Catholic Dogma, I can't remember. URRG, I want my books back!

[SoulBiter]

IIRC, the Bible does say that Mary was born without Original Sin (The Immaculate Conception), full of Divine Grace, and lived a life free of sin.

Or that could be Catholic Dogma, I can't remember. URRG, I want my books back!

Catholic dogma... There was some stretching done to come to the immaculate conception. I looked something up on this and it goes something like this....(Remember I found this on the web which of course doesnt make it fact.)

The Roman Catholic Church argues that the immaculate conception is necessary because without it, Jesus would have been the object of His own grace. The thought goes like this – for Jesus to have been miraculously preserved from sin, which itself would be an act of grace, that would mean God essentially “graced Himself.” The word grace means “unmerited favor.” Grace is giving someone something he or she does not deserve. God performing a miracle in preserving Jesus from sin is not “grace.” In no sense could Jesus possibly be infected with sin. He was perfect and sinless humanity joined with sinless divinity. God cannot be infected or affected by sin, as He is perfectly holy.

[Cail]

OK, that makes perfect sense, but I thought this was addressed in the Bible, though I freely admit that I may be wrong.

But if it is just Catholic Dogma, how do the other Christian faiths reconcile Jesus?

[emotional leper]

OK, that makes perfect sense, but I thought this was addressed in the Bible, though I freely admit that I may be wrong.

But if it is just Catholic Dogma, how do the other Christian faiths reconcile Jesus?

Well, I know Unitarianism reconciles it the same way I reconcile Zaphod Beeblebrox. "He vas just zis really great guy, you know?"

[Avatar]

...there is next to no difference between capacity to commit a sin and the sin itself.

I disagree. In fact, having the capability to commit the "sin" (if you believe in sin) and not doing it is far more "good" than not doing it because of inability.

To imagine and "evil" deed and not commit it is more virtuous than never imagining it at all. The first takes will-power.

--A

[Cybrweez]

Yea, there's nothing in the Bible about Mary and divinity. There is the story about Mary and Jesus' brothers asking for Him when He was teaching in a house, and He said that those there listening and following Him were His brother, sister & mother (Matt 12:46-50).

Jesus was sinless b/c He was not born of a man. The Bible teaches sin came from Adam (yes, the Bible is not anti-woman by blaming it on Eve).

BTW, you notice what Adam did when he got caught? Blamed Eve. Blaming someone else for your mistakes - it started from the beginning.

EDIT: I agree with Av. Its like when someone tells you not to do something, the pull/desire to find out why we can't do it becomes so great, when b4, you didn't even think about it.

[emotional leper]

...there is next to no difference between capacity to commit a sin and the sin itself.

I disagree. In fact, having the capability to commit the "sin" (if you believe in sin) and not doing it is far more "good" than not doing it because of inability.

To imagine and "evil" deed and not commit it is more virtuous than never imagining it at all. The first takes will-power.

--A

The point is, is that in knowing you are capable of commiting the sin, you are capable of understanding what it would be like to do it. Whenever someone says something like, "I just don't understand how Blank can do XYZ," I just stare at them.

I was never talking about an objective good or evil. There are many things I don't consider 'sinful' that other people do. However, on many occasions, I have talked with my friends when they were wracked over something they had done, something I did not have a problem with. And when I came to see it from their point of view, then it did feel wrong, or evil, or dirty. And coming to see it from their point of view, how something I do not deed wrong or sinful or dirty could feel so, and that I, capable of commiting that act, am capable of committing a wrong/evil/sinful act, I feel their sin.

I've completely startled people with statements like, "Oh, no. You're wrong. I completely have it in me to kill a complete and total stranger. Or my parents. Or you. Or that kid over there." The truth is, is I can comprehend and understand that I do have the potential to commit that act.

The difference between a neutral action and a sin, however, is the Mens Rea. Your mind at the time. The reason Adam and Evil were incapable of Sin before eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is because they did not know what good and evil were! If you don't know the act you're commiting is evil, then are you sinning? If you don't know the difference between right and wrong, are you evil?

But once you come to know the difference, and lose your innocence, you come to know sin.

[Cybrweez]

EL, I think Adam and Eve knew one thing about good and evil before eating from the tree, and that is to follow God is good, to disobey, evil. For any other issues, they would have to rely on Him to make clear what is right or wrong. They were dependent on Him for moral guidance. The tree gave them the knowledge of good and evil, which cut that dependence on God and gave man the idea he was God.

[Prebe]

Stupid Eve! If it wasn't for that nosy b*tch we'd be running around bare assed and happy as clams

[Avatar]

If you don't know the act you're commiting is evil, then are you sinning? If you don't know the difference between right and wrong, are you evil?

I agree that the answer to both those is no,but then I don't believe in an absolute morality.

What I thought you were saying was something along (Buddhist?) lines, that thinking an evil thought is karmically equivalent to committing an evil act. (Which I disagree with.)

--A

[emotional leper]

If you don't know the act you're commiting is evil, then are you sinning? If you don't know the difference between right and wrong, are you evil?

I agree that the answer to both those is no,but then I don't believe in an absolute morality.

What I thought you were saying was something along (Buddhist?) lines, that thinking an evil thought is karmically equivalent to committing an evil act. (Which I disagree with.)

--A

No, I wasn't saying that.

I was saying that the feeling one gets from commiting, say, a murder, and the feeling one has when one thinks about commiting a murder, are the same.

Example: I have never legally been responsible for the death of another human being. I have, however, contributed to the death of a human being through my direct actions. Upon hearing of the Death of said person, I nearly puked. Though I hadn't killed them, though I hadn't wanted them to die, if I had not acted in the manner I had, that person would still have been alive. I don't know a better way to describe the feeling of getting that phone call than complete and total disgust with myself, and a level of nausea bordering on puking up your mucousal lining of your esophagus.

I've talked to lots of people about the exact details of what happened. It took a long time (for me, as far as talking about things goes,) before I would tell anyone anything about it. And I remember the first time I was talking to a drinking buddy about it, and my drinking buddy was growing more and more sick and disgusted -- because she could see how she could do the exact same thing. She understood that it was possible for her, too, to take a human life. Not in an abstract way, but in a concrete, this could actually happen, sort of way. And in understanding the nature of the act, she might as well have commited it herself, because the feeling generated was the same as if she had commited the act.

That was what I was trying to say.

[Cybrweez]

Stupid Eve! If it wasn't for that nosy b*tch we'd be running around bare assed and happy as clams

Prebe, I'm thankful for Eve. Imagine, you running around bare assed...

[emotional leper]

Stupid Eve! If it wasn't for that nosy b*tch we'd be running around bare assed and happy as clams

Prebe, I'm thankful for Eve. Imagine, you running around bare assed...

I'm more interested in the happy as clams comment... Have we a Scientologist in our midst?

[Prebe]

If Eve hadn't done what she did, my ass would have been a lot nicer
(and I don't know how you can be happy about the broad who introduced original sin, my ugly butt or not).

[Dromond]

I'm thankful for Pandora, keeping hope, but to each...

[Avatar]

I was saying that the feeling one gets from commiting, say, a murder, and the feeling one has when one thinks about commiting a murder, are the same.

*sigh* I think I gotta disagree again. Never having murdered someone myself, I can't say for sure, but I suspect that a large variety of factors combine in the actual deed that are clearly not present merely in the wish. Fear, for example...do you feel afraid when you think of killing somebody? I don't. And that's just one.

...because she could see how she could do the exact same thing. She understood that it was possible for her, too, to take a human life. Not in an abstract way, but in a concrete, this could actually happen, sort of way. And in understanding the nature of the act, she might as well have commited it herself, because the feeling generated was the same as if she had commited the act.

That was what I was trying to say.

OK, I gotcha. Or at least, what you're trying to say. *shrug* Without details I'm not qualified to opine on your level of responsibility. It's easy to statistically kill people though. Every time you hand somebody a cigarette, you've killed 0.001% of him.

Me, I've of the opinion that every single person is capable of killing in the right circumstances. That doesn't mean everybody knows what it feels like to kill somebody though.

--A

[emotional leper]

I'm thankful for Pandora, keeping hope, but to each...

Hope is evil. The greeks believed in Predetermination.

Avatar: That difference between everyone being capable of commiting the act and not everyone knowing what it's like to do it is the difference between innocence and lack of it.

[Avatar]

So? Isn't that the same as saying that knowing that you're capable of it doesn't mean you know what it feels like?

--A