former Catholic,
Where do you get off huh! Bitter that you arenāt Catholic anymore
I think my post was charitable and, beyond that, correct.
And so you know.
It is off thinking. And it is new age thinking. This is for you, not for the nice person whom I originally posted for.
I seem to have touched a nerve, and I donāt understand why. You are building the issue up, creating straw men and using all sorts of dodgy rhetoric.
I am not being audacious, or anything like that. Here is a fact for you:
HUMAN BEINGS CAN NEVER BECOME ANGELS.
That would be like saying oh gee, when I die I hope I turn into a dolphin in heaven cos they are my favourite animal. Not happening.
Angels and Humans are seperate and different beings.
And yes, it is āoffā to regard the dead as angels. One hundred percent off. I didnāt say it was evil or wrong. I just said it wasnāt correct.
And to go to your third paragraph, which is full of assumptions and bad arguing.
Becoming like an angel and being an angel. Really? You donāt see the only thing that seperates those two statements is time? āBecomingā? You are wrong. We are never in the process of becoming like an angel, because we can never be an angel. And nor do we suddenly start feeling more powerful in heaven and go āWOW I feel like Gabriel now AWESOME!ā.
I never accused anyone of secularism or new age-ism. I merely stated that that kind of thinking leads to those things, or is an off-shoot of those practises. I didnāt say āNEW AGER ALERTā. She is Catholic, how can she be anything but Catholic?
As for commanding her to pep talk her guardian angel. Really? I commanded her? As Moses did to part the Red Sea? No my friend. Come off it.
And then, in your last few sentences you claim that the transplant survivor has been kept alive by praying to her donor. No no my friend, again, wrong. This donor has not kept anybody alive. Only God can do those things. It might be through the intercession of the donor, but nothing else. Anyway, it is wrong to speculate where this donor might be. He/She might be in purgatory, or in heaven. And it is wrong to treat the donor as an angel. Not evil, just wrong.
If I was being āreprehensibleā towards the survivor, I do apologise. But I stated that I was trying to be charitable, and I believe I was. You on the other hand, not so much.
Here is a link for you, read it an absorb it:
ibelieveinangels.com/Questions-About-Angels/do-humans-become-angels-when-they-die.html
And now to your first post, and content of your last one.
You seem yourself to be confusing new age things with epiphenominal things and supernatural occurances. You seem to be not concerned with the human angel distinction but that when you get someone elses organs we automatically connect with them and are connected with their consciousness and can imbibe their memories etc etc.
Boy oh boy, you are wrong. Show me the medical proof that you are correct. As a philosophymajor specialising in mind body theories I KNOW you are not correct, but maybe some real medical evidence can make me think more about it.
Transplants can never all of a sudden connect you to another person. Any more than if you eat a KFC bucket you suddenly feel the need to cluck and eat seed.
Now, I am not a pure naturalist and there is supernatural that over and above the natural because this is what God represents. However, the things you talk about are to my mind incredibly strange and unfounded.
How the body gets along with organs is purely physical. It isnāt supernatural. And if it cannot be entirely explained by science, yes God might have a hand, but that isnāt anything to do with the connecting of two consciousnessā and the spirits recognition of each other or whatever. That is New Age thinking to the extreme!
Now, if I wasnāt writing exams I might have made my post better and totally annhilated your position and youāre rude treatment of my post. But alas, the books call.