The properties of God.

[jkiernan56]

Your post is, as is customary, irrelevant and off-topic. Kindly go away and start your own irrelevant thread.

I have submitted many posts directly on topic. I’m sorry you can’t deal with an expository of the underlying basis of your question - which is PANTHEISM. God cannot be reduced to a science project as you so clearly purport. All of knowledge is not contained in the universe - nor is all reality. God did not come into existence at the time of creation. If God did not have the property of LOVE, it would not exist. I would say you are the one who is really irrelevant. By the way - did you realize this is a Catholic web site? Why don’t you go find a site where you can find people who agree with your Pantheistic ideas. It is nonsense that starts with a false premise. And if you understand logic, you would realize any conclusion based on a false premise will also be false. Garbage in = Garbage out. Pantheism is garbage. Was that direct and relevant enough for you?

 

[marybridget123]

nn

Sorry, MB123, but that whole thread is just proof of post #197 above, and in fact reflects the attitude not only of conspiracy theorists, one of which I am not, but of people who have their head in the sand about history relative to the church. Don’t forget, please, that I was where you are in my defense of the church until discovering both experientially and scholastically that it’s story was inaccurate. Eusebius himself admitted that he omitted from his history all that would discredit the church and enhanced what would exalt it. I suggest that such a practice continues to this day amongst christianists of all stripes. I have proved an ability to admit new evidence and change. Clearly that is not a common trait on these fora.

As for not providing references, one of the chief complaints about “conspiracy theorists,” in post #61 above, I supplied 1"holy" with a short but extensive beginning bibliography of Catholic and other references which were summarily ignored. Need I tell you where 1holy is whistling?

Conspiracy theroists? I think you might be off base here. Refreshing your orientation:

I am not Catholic because of what men do, or don’t do, or scandalously do to children…burn libraries, define science in terms of religion, slaughter Muslims, kill Protestants (IRA’s militant counterpart to Senn Fein), confer with the Third Reicht, etc.

I am Catholic now and forever, burying my head in the Seven Sacraments ONLY available through the Holy Catholic Church. If it wasn’t for the Holy Sacraments, don’t you think a politically more tastey, less socially defined group would be easier to join-like a bridge club or something? And i think 1holycatholic has done well in posting. (S)he at least deserves your silence if being offensive is your only alternative. best regards, marybridget123

 

[Detales]

1holy:

There is a lot of rubbish in the Bible as well. It doesn’t mean one agrees with it. The supplied bibliography was simply indicative of books included in my research. Where did I say that I agreed with all of them or everything in them? I did research, as it seems you haven’t except to accept other people’s opinions that some of the material I referred to was rubbish. Or have you come to this conclusion by actually looking at and reading those sources? I’d like to know. And I don’t completely agree with Hisop, or not even nearly, in some regards. But that wouldn’t stop me from reading his work to form my own opinion.

As for you thinking that I would use a book by Sheen or Ripley to undermine the church’s teaching, what do you take me for? If this is an example of the conclusions you leap to, no wonder you are in your (un)present state of incomprehension. I say again, I have been a staunch, well catechized, devoted, and proselytizing Roman Catholic. I learned and I changed. Is that challenging to you? You have not put up one decent argument for your stand other than faith and name calling. Shame and discredit on you.

---

 

[marybridget123]

August 23, 2009

Good morning, Greylorn,

I see you have been busy replying to posts, but not to mine. Did you miss post 167?
Did I miss your reply?

Blessings,
granny

All human life is sacred.

Hello Granny, I am standing in the gap (so to speak) for a Greylord response. Here goes:

'WOMAN, YOU SUCK…YOUR POST SUCKS…YOUR WORDING SUCKS…AND IF I WERE YOUR PC I WOULD CRASH MYSELF JUST TO NOT SUCK THIS BAD…"
(whew…)

Ok, Granny…I hope you appreciate my efforts on behalf of Greylord, as this took some real catholic philosophy to think up. And he has standards as we all know!! lol Granny-----keep postin’ girl!! love, marybridget123

 

[Detales]

Gotta say it, Marybridget123, that is about the best Greylorn immitaiton I’ve ever come acroos! Kudos!

 

[jkiernan56]

Gotta say it, Marybridget123, that is about the best Greylorn immitaiton I’ve ever come acroos! Kudos!

He told me to go away and be irrevelant somewhere else - and here he is making insults about people who adhere to Dogma as if it were a bad thing - now I take that personally almost like he had attacked my own Mother - no one says something bad about my Mother and gets away with it.

 

[1holycatholic]

There is a lot of rubbish in the Bible as well.

No, there is not.

As for you thinking that I would use a book by Sheen or Ripley to undermine the church’s teaching, what do you take me for? If this is an example of the conclusions you leap to, no wonder you are in your (un)present state of incomprehension. I say again, I have been a staunch, well catechized, devoted, and proselytizing Roman Catholic. I learned and I changed. Is that challenging to you? You have not put up one decent argument for your stand other than faith and name calling. Shame and discredit on you.

You’re right in that I don’t share your fondness for Gnosticism/Buddhism backed up by hand waving and a smokescreen of vague innuendo and conspiracy theories about the Catholic Church.

What I think of you isn’t important. Your own words identify you as a dissenting Catholic.

Repent, and seek forgiveness in the Sacrament of Reconciliation.