The Eucharist: The Body of Christ? ("Respectful Dialogue" thread)

Our Sunday Visitor (via Catholic Culture) ^ | 1/2005 | Marcellino D'Ambrosio, Ph.D.

[Marysecretary]

I’ll pick.......................JESUS!

[OLD REGGIE]

The best, not perfect, solution I’ve seen is the “ignore” function on some sites. You can click “ignore” and you will no longer see that poster’s posts.

You, personally, are the best "ignore" function. It is sometimes worthwhile to read what that person has to say but to ignore that person in all your responses and to be certain that person is removed from the "add" list when responding to someone else. (Works for me.)

[Quix]

I haven’t noticed a lot of

PERCEPTIVENESS

in that regard.

[Marysecretary]

Ah, it’s the nature of the beast on these threads.

[Petronski]

This is not my problem.

[hosepipe]

[ I agree with pgyanke that the Bible taken by itself is "out of context". To say it in a nice, weaselly Catholic way, "Out of 'the fullness' of context," because I think the Church/Sacred Tradition/Individual Piety/Bible/etc. make one integral package. ]

I AGREE... All you say plus the bible is an intgrated package.. or actually any part therefrom.. The only problem is the Holy SPirit is not really needed there.. The/that package can stand by itself AND DOES.. with MOST..

Without the Holy Spirits help all THAT is worthless.. redundant.. and silly.. Thats the problem as I see it.. Especially with Bible exegesis...

THAT the package replaces the Holy SPirit functionally.. The Holy Spirit NOT being a dunce knows when and where he is NOT needed.. The package is an effective replacement of the Holy Spirit.. (same with/some protestant packages)

The operative lesson I would assume IS.... the Holy Spirit is NOT A MORON...
Choose the "package" or the Holy Spirit.. It was the same with the Jews too.. They, alas, chose the package..

[Marysecretary]

You win the big ceegar!!!! Ding ding ding!!!

[Petronski]

Choose the "package" or the Holy Spirit...

False dichotomy, if you're speaking about Catholicism.

[Marysecretary]

Amen, Texas...

[Mad Dawg]

Charity hopes all things>

Heh heh heh

[Quix]

ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN WORDS.

Shall we take a poll?

[Marysecretary]

He already knows the truth. He’s just trying to get you to see it (LOL).

[Marysecretary]

Only faith and trust in Jesus will bring us to eternity with HIM.

[Marysecretary]

mark, Catholics didn’t write the bible, if that’s what you’re inferring here.

[Marysecretary]

Around here, bof, disagreement means disrespectful. It shouldn’t be that way but it is.

[Quix]

False dichotomy, if you're speaking about Catholicism.

Oh, Dear! IS that RC ecclesastical magicsterical, pontifical, EXCLUSIVE authoritarian arrogance rearing it's head YET AGAIN?

What a surprise. What a surprise!

[Petronski]

You don’t understand the term arrogance.

There is no arrogance in stating that one does not face a choice between the Holy Spirit and Catholicism.

The arrogance is proclaiming that the Holy Spirit is NOT present in Catholic worship.

Physician heal thyself.

[OLD REGGIE]

Once again, you hold to modern traditions of Biblical interpretation and foresake those taught by the Apostles themselves.

Which Apostle(s) taught the Bodily Assumption Of Mary?

[wagglebee]

The very first time I received the gift of tongues, I prayed for over 45 minutes. It was an amazing experience. I don’t do it very often anymore, but it truly was a wonderful gift when I needed it.

Acts Chapter 2 makes it very clear what speaking in tongues IS and what it ISN'T.

It is speaking in a tongue (language) that is UNKNOWN to the speaker but UNDERSTANDABLE to someone who does speak the tongue. So, unless there is someone nearby who CAN UNDERSTAND what the speaker is saying (and Acts 2 clearly shows that this is the purpose of the gift), it is a pretty good bet that the speaker is simply speaking gibberish because they think it means something or is under the influence of Satan.

[Petronski]

Catholics didn’t write the bible...

Patently false, unless you're using a different Bible.