Pope to debate evolution with former students

[Arthur Durnan]

So now Jesus Christ is back again PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, on the Roman altars even tho He declared "This do ye UNTIL I COME!" So if He's now back PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, why the unnecessary continuance? A Memorial Feast implies absence, not presence. If He's present PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, how might it be "In Memory Of"?! Excellent query. And, too, of course, if the bread & fruit of the vine turn into the ACTUAL Body & Blood of Jesus Christ - and the Roman priest DROPS a portion, wouldn't Jesus Christ be wounded somewhat again? And if a mouse scurried by and snapped up that ACTUAL PIECE of His Body, wouldn't that be DESECRATING the ACTUAL BODY of Christ? Oh, what an unmitigated farrago of fables and fancies cometh out of "the sacrifice of a Roman Mass"! Is the purpose whimsical or inscrutable?

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Fiosh]

So now Jesus Christ is back again PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, on the Roman altars even tho He declared "This do ye UNTIL I COME!" So if He's now back PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, why the unnecessary continuance? A Memorial Feast implies absence, not presence. If He's present PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, how might it be "In Memory Of"?! Excellent query. And, too, of course, if the bread & fruit of the vine turn into the ACTUAL Body & Blood of Jesus Christ - and the Roman priest DROPS a portion, wouldn't Jesus Christ be wounded somewhat again? And if a mouse scurried by and snapped up that ACTUAL PIECE of His Body, wouldn't that be DESECRATING the ACTUAL BODY of Christ? Oh, what an unmitigated farrago of fables and fancies cometh out of "the sacrifice of a Roman Mass"! Is the purpose whimsical or inscrutable?

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

Definitely, inscrutable. Jesus said, "This is my body". I don't pretend to totally understand it.

He said it. I believe it. It's that simple.

Love you, Arthur!

F

[Fiosh]

So now Jesus Christ is back again PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, on the Roman altars even tho He declared "This do ye UNTIL I COME!" So if He's now back PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, why the unnecessary continuance? A Memorial Feast implies absence, not presence. If He's present PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, how might it be "In Memory Of"?! Excellent query. And, too, of course, if the bread & fruit of the vine turn into the ACTUAL Body & Blood of Jesus Christ - and the Roman priest DROPS a portion, wouldn't Jesus Christ be wounded somewhat again? And if a mouse scurried by and snapped up that ACTUAL PIECE of His Body, wouldn't that be DESECRATING the ACTUAL BODY of Christ? Oh, what an unmitigated farrago of fables and fancies cometh out of "the sacrifice of a Roman Mass"! Is the purpose whimsical or inscrutable?

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

The concecrated Host is the real body, blood and divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. So, yes, He is physically present. He, Himself says, "Behold, I am with you always, even until the end of the age". Yet, He also says, " ...until I come".

You believe He is with you spiritually. Evenso, He says to you, "....until I come".

Obviously Jesus refers to when He will come in glory.

The Host can be desecrated, and in doing so, the body of Christ is desecrated. Yes. But not by a mouse.

Desecration, by definition, involves intent. If I were to intentionally step on a consecrated Host, I would be as guilty of a grave sin against Christ. If given the choice, I would rather be killed than step on the Body of Christ.

No, Arthur, nothing whimsical here. I'm dead serious.

Peace,

Fiosh

[Fiosh]

Yes, Horizon we are always in the presences of the lord, however during mass you are actually in the physical presence of the Lord. Just like you were at Calvary. But don't think I am saying that we Crucify Jesus over and over again. Calvary is represented in Sacramental way. Christ's blood was shed only once, but is continually offered to the Father. Through the Catholic Mass Christ's saving act is made actually present day by day, until the end of the world. You might also want to attend a Mass that is said in English. You might get more out of it.

Doesn

[Guest willing servant]

Catholic teaching accepts evolution as a scientific theory and does not read the Biblical story of creation literally. But it disagrees with what it calls "evolutionism," the view that the story of life has no role for God as its prime author.

Interestingly enough I am a science teacher. While evidence for micro evolution exists (proof is overwhelming , (evolution within species over a long time) macro evolution is far from ever being proved (the ascent of man from a single cell). There are too many questions at the base of the evolutionary ladder ". For example - How did the first strand of DNA reproduce without cell mechanics? How did the first cell exist without a reproducible DNA to make the required proteins? Darwinism is a theory which cannot continue to explain the ascent of mankind logically.

Despite teaching in a public school I had a student who I know to be christian, ask me If true where does that leave God? I told him very quickly, If ever proved to be true this does not dismiss divine guidance as the overiding source. Particularly in what scientists claim to be a random situation (which would overide the probability of spontaneous cell generation).

A wise man once said "religion without science is blind, science without religion is pointless". I enjoy science as it allows me to explore the world god has created. I have always presented evolution as a theory.

Recently Intelligent design theory has fuelled an ongoing debate. This is certainly worth looking into as it examines questions which frustrates scientists the most. Be careful when using this theory in ministering to people though. It is a long extended debate. One who is not fully aware of the issues in it may just as easily become a poor witness for christ.

Stick with the beautiful simplicity of Gods enduring love for us, his sacrifice and patience.

[Arthur Durnan]

Perhaps not since the fall of the Second Temple has there been such a debacle as the Church of Rome's continual farrago of outright fables & fancies & pertinent contradictions pertaining to the simple & scriptural Memorial Supper of the Lord & Savior Jesus Christ. It can make a pig's ear out of practically anything. It's those potting plants to be sure. "Congrats", Vatican!

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Fiosh]

Fiosh

Jesus is God. All things are possible with God. This argument is irrelevant.

"I shall not drink again of the fruit of the vine until the day when I drink it new in the kingdom of God" (Mk 14:25; Mt 26:29).

Did Jesus partake of the cup? Why does Jesus refer to the cup as the

[Fiosh]

So now Jesus Christ is back again PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, on the Roman altars even tho He declared "This do ye UNTIL I COME!" So if He's now back PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, why the unnecessary continuance? A Memorial Feast implies absence, not presence. If He's present PHYSICALLY, LITERALLY, ie, IN PERSON, how might it be "In Memory Of"?! Excellent query. And, too, of course, if the bread & fruit of the vine turn into the ACTUAL Body & Blood of Jesus Christ - and the Roman priest DROPS a portion, wouldn't Jesus Christ be wounded somewhat again? And if a mouse scurried by and snapped up that ACTUAL PIECE of His Body, wouldn't that be DESECRATING the ACTUAL BODY of Christ? Oh, what an unmitigated farrago of fables and fancies cometh out of "the sacrifice of a Roman Mass"! Is the purpose whimsical or inscrutable?

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

The concecrated Host is the real body, blood and divinity of Our Lord Jesus Christ. So, yes, He is physically present. He, Himself says, "Behold, I am with you always, even until the end of the age". Yet, He also says, " ...until I come".

You believe He is with you spiritually. Evenso, He says to you, "....until I come".

Obviously Jesus refers to when He will come in glory.

The Host can be desecrated, and in doing so, the body of Christ is desecrated. Yes. But not by a mouse.

Desecration, by definition, involves intent. If I were to intentionally step on a consecrated Host, I would be as guilty of a grave sin against Christ. If given the choice, I would rather be killed than step on the Body of Christ.

No, Arthur, nothing whimsical here. I'm dead serious.

Peace,

Fiosh

Fiosh - do you worship the consecrated bread and wine?

The consecrated bread and wine IS Jesus, really Present, in His body, soul and divinity. Yes, I worship Jesus.

I Cor 11: 27-29

Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

f

[Arthur Durnan]

Yup, the potting plants around "Vatican City" are responsible for the Roman church's flatfooted, grotesque absurdity of "transubstantiation" in its "mass." In a Persian proverb it's written that when the king says it's midnight at noontime, the wise underling murmurs afresh, "Behold the stars!' Bottom line: God is not a "piece of bread"! Nor can any piece of bread, whether General Bakeries, Weston Bakeries, President's Choice, or the inimitable Dempsters Bread ever become Almighty God. Though a million or so Roman "popes" mutter a million Latin words over a piece of bread, it will never become the Sovereign Lord of the universe. It'll still be nothing but a piece of bread. No, Jehovah God is not any piece of bread. He never will be......except, of course, on Roman altars! Like a pig's foot.

I read of a man who had plucked out one of his own eyes. His explanation was scurrilously simple. "If your eye offend thee, pluck it out!" (Mark 9:46,47). That poor man inflicted such tragic hurt on himself because he deludely took literally figurative words which God meant to be taken only in a spiritual sense. Yes, of course, you'll agree he was deluded thru & thru. But what of Rome & its arrant nonsense foisted upon multitudes that a man can change a morsel of bread into the ACTUAL BODY, FLESH, BLOOD, SOUL & DIVINITY of the Blessed Lord Jesus Christ - whom you then calmly proceed to eat? The Roman doctrine of "transubstantiation" in the sacrifice of its "mass" truly has, in our most emphatic opinion, to rank with randy tidbits about who is bedhopping with whom.

And then the Roman "Vatican" has the audacity to point to the Holy Bible for its explanation - like the man who plucked out his eye. It quotes Jesus Christ: "Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you have no life in you" (John 6:53,54). And just as the man who plucked out his own eye, Rome too takes literally figurative words which Amighty God meant to be taken only in a SPIRITUAL sense - AS THE LORD HIMSELF PLAINLY TELLS YOU IN THE VERY PASSAGE TO WHICH ROME REFERS.....John 6:63,64 "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profits nothing: the words that I speak unto you, THEY ARE SPIRIT, AND THEY ARE LIFE!" Why continue to display such a shocking moral obtuseness about what is indubitably figurative & spiritual? In greatest seriousness & in the light of its horrific "transubstantiation" tenet, why wouldn't a sober Rome now enquire of itself, Who is crazy now?

Think of the fantasy again: claiming that a piece of Hovis, or Weston Bakeries BREAD is GOD -and then LUNCHING upon Him! O, Sovereign Lord of Glory, please deliver these folk from their revolting undertaker's burlesque show; this cannibal's nightmare; this witch doctor's delight; this grotesque, this lunatic, this incredibly blasphemous mummery called the Roman "mass." Yea, and "This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone that doeth evil hates the light, neither comes to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. But he that doeth the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God" (Jesus Christ in John 3:16-21). AMEN & AMEN! Come, walk in HIS light alone and not that of any "Mandrake" who would claim that the actual wheat of the field becomes El Shaddai, the Creator-God Who is enough.

http://arthurdurnan.freeyellow.com

[Fiosh]

Matthew 26: 26-28

And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and broke it, and gave it to the disciples, and said, Take, eat; this is my body.

And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

*************************************************************

Arthur, explain to me what you think Jesus means.

Explain to me why He tells us to repeat this ritual in memory of Him.

And, explain to me what significance there is in eating the bread and pretending it symbolizes Jesus body.

Then explain why it is important to pretend the wine symbolizes Jesus' blood, and drink it.

Lastly, explain why to go thru this ritual "unworthily(we) will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord." (I Cor 11:27)

This is not rhetorical. I really want to hear what you(and the others) have to say.

It's much easier to sling mud, than to paint a picture.

Thanks,

Fiosh

PS. I'm leaving for a trip tomorrow and won't have access to a computer for a while.