On 19 Jan, 03:17, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > The ritual, symbolic cannibalism of christianity has been a topic of > discussion and debate for 1600 years. Every major philosopher has > touched on it and most christian philosophers do a sizeable study/work > on excusing or justifying it. >
I suppose, on a simple level, it goes back to the concept of "you are what you eat". So, if you eat God... The logic fails as far as I'm concerned, as there is nothing (in my opinion) that is not an extension of God, so, as long as one is eating, they are fulfilling that Eucharistic duty. > On Jan 18, 7:07 pm, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > “…never thought of communion as cannibalism and > > vampire-ism.. …” – Iam > > > It’s fairly common…someone somewhere shared this with > > me.http://pathstoknowledge.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/jesus_supper_zomb... > > > On Jan 18, 8:35 am, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Interesting thought Pat never thought of communion as cannibalism and > > > vampire-ism.. I does suprinse my coming from you as you try to see God in > > > every thing.. Jesus was a very enlightened man and the symbolism of the > > > breaking of bread drinking of the wine would be a recognition of God. The > > > bread being a visual representation of God and in eating this bread we are > > > recognising that God provides all of our substance and with out blood > > > there > > > is no life. I find it a fantastic symbolism. > > > > I probably have messed up what I am trying to say as it is a symbolism > > > that > > > is not easily explained,, People have done a great job of twisting the > > > idea > > > over the centuries.. and no one has done a good job.. > > > Allan > > > > On Mon, Jan 18, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Pat <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > On 16 Jan, 05:37, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I understand that you have not been reading my posts and thoughts long > > > > > enough in this group to understand that I do not subscribe to much of > > > > > the catholic requirements, beliefs, biblical interpretations and many > > > > > other aspects of Catholicism. My statement to you, fid, was that I > > > > > have attended many Catholic churches over the years. You see, the > > > > > fact that I believe differently has not prevented me from being > > > > > accepted into Catholic congregations, having my children receive the > > > > > sacraments even though I was never married in a Catholic church. I > > > > > have never been threatened or slighted in anyway for believing > > > > > differently. This has been my experience. I don't think that > > > > > anyone's generalized ideas about Catholicisms, or Christianity would > > > > > fit my view, which is probably closer to New Thought or the mystical > > > > > traditions that anything else, although my view would stretch those > > > > > boundaries also. Like Pat, and probably several others here, I have > > > > > studied may different philosophies and religions, and formed my own > > > > > particular world view. > > > > > Oooh, I STILL shudder at the thought that my children are being > > > > raised Catholic. I have always been opposed to certain sacraments, > > > > the Eucharist being the most offensive to me. How symbolic > > > > cannibalism and vampirism could EVER be considered 'holy' is beyond > > > > me. Oh yeah...it was a Pauline interpretation. Although I was raised > > > > Methodist, I avoided EVER taking that which was called 'communion' > > > > because I found it, even at age 5, to be a vile thing conceptually. > > > > Considering that partaking of blood, either literally or symbolically, > > > > would have been antithetical to 'good Judaism', I find it impossible > > > > to accept that such a rite was ever intended by Jesus himself. I CAN, > > > > though, see why he might have said something along the lines of: > > > > remember me when you eat and drink (a quote from Jesus Christ > > > > Superstar). From there, it just became totally perverted in such a > > > > way as to entice the Mithra worshippers, who were already doing such a > > > > thing, that Paul was trying to convert. Near the end of my book, I > > > > will be putting in a certain number of 'challenges' to current faiths > > > > in order for them to reconsider certain practices. The Eucharist is, > > > > perhaps, tops on my list. This, of course, will upset many, but, I > > > > feel duty-bound to try to right the wrongs of the past, lest they bite > > > > the innocent/ignorant/uneducated who simply don't know any better. > > > > > > On Jan 15, 7:11 pm, fiddler <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > You are a self described catholic, his comment about your presumed > > > > > > belief is accurate until you modify your description of your > > > > > > religion > > > > > > of choice. > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 3:25 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > You are mistaken about my religious beliefs and lifestyle, but > > > > > > > right > > > > > > > about my mod role. Comments here should be directed at the ideas, > > > > not > > > > > > > the person. I am not digging for confrontation a bit. If you > > > > > > > have a > > > > > > > question about my statements in this thread, I suggest you be more > > > > > > > direct about the statements, and not rely on your assessment of my > > > > > > > character (which appears to be off the mark.) > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 4:29 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > No its not snide at all, Molly but being that you ask I'd have > > > > > > > > to > > > > say > > > > > > > > you have been a bit edgy as of late, possibly the mod role > > > > initiating > > > > > > > > a keener sense of commentary. My comment addresses the > > > > > > > > biblical > > > > > > > > accounts of differentiating gender and marital roles, not hard > > > > > > > > to > > > > > > > > understand, secondly I'm under the impression that you are > > > > > > > > based in > > > > a > > > > > > > > biblical lifestyle, if not then forget it. Christian women > > > > willingly > > > > > > > > defer to their husbands by default, at least those that I know > > > > > > > > who > > > > are > > > > > > > > seriously attentive to biblical teachings. The comment, not > > > > remark, > > > > > > > > wearing the pants in the family is a very common, well known > > > > > > > > phrase > > > > > > > > that indicates who rules the roost. If you are digging for > > > > > > > > confrontation I'll just stay on the other side of the street. > > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 2:30 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > I don't know what you mean. Is your remark snide? > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 2:16 pm, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > I would think that you most of all should already ascribe to > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > doctrines of difference in religiously designated marital > > > > roles, in > > > > > > > > > > the biblical sense. Or do you wear the pants in the family? > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 12:58 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I don't see the importance in defining the difference > > > > > > > > > > > there. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 11:34 am, edward mason > > > > > > > > > > > <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > To have a religion (a product of culture) is to have a > > > > leader to lead > > > > > > > > > > > > to God. Unnatural in a relationship. For those of you > > > > > > > > > > > > who > > > > are married > > > > > > > > > > > > imagine needing a leader there. How will you define a > > > > difference > > > > > > > > > > > > there? > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 12:20 PM, Pat < > > > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 14 Jan, 16:58, Slip Disc <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > >> Makes a lot of sense Pat. ;-] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers, mate! I do try. But it's my "life's work", > > > > > > > > > > > > > as > > > > it were; so I > > > > > > > > > > > > > want it to be as sound as possible. Although, I know > > > > that, even > > > > > > > > > > > > > though I speak the truth, many people will be VERY > > > > > > > > > > > > > upset > > > > by that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > But, that, I'm afraid, goes with the role. ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Jan 14, 7:21 am, Pat > > > > > > > > > > > > >> <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > On 14 Jan, 08:42, Slip Disc <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > The world seems more religious than ever these > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > days. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Across the Middle East, fervent forms of Islam > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > are > > > > growing more > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > popular and more politically active. Muslim > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > nations > > > > that were somewhat > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > secularized 40 years ago - like Lebanon and Iran > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > - > > > > are now teeming > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > with fundamentalism. In Turkey and Egypt, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > increasing > > > > numbers of women > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > are turning to the veil as an overt > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > manifestation of > > > > reinvigorated > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > religious commitment. But it isn't just in the > > > > Muslim world that > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > religion is thriving. From Brazil to El Salvador, > > > > Protestant > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > evangelicalism is spreading with great success, > > > > instilling a spirited, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > holy zeal throughout Latin America. > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Pentecostalism > > > > is proliferating, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > too - vigorously - and not only throughout Latin > > > > America, but in > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Africa and even, to a lesser extent, China. And > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > many > > > > nations of the > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > former Soviet Union, which had atheism imposed > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > upon > > > > them for decades, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > have emerged from the communist era with their > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > faith > > > > not only intact, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > but strong and vibrant. Here in the United > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > States, > > > > religion is > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > definitely alive and well. In terms of church > > > > attendance and belief in > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > God, Jesus, and the Bible, religion in the United > > > > States is stronger > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > and more robust than in most other developed > > > > democracies. > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > In sum, from Nebraska to Nepal, from Georgia to > > > > Guatemala, and from > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > Utah to Uganda, humans all over the globe are > > > > vigorously praising > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > various deities; regularly attending services at > > > > churches, temples, > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > and mosques; persistently > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
