Random News Stories

[Fujikoma]

Well, the "blood of Jesus" is meant to be taken more symbolically than literally, like, communion is following the tradition set during the Last Supper, and not USUALLY an attempt by the ritual's facilitator to turn the congregation into vampires.

That said, this crowd definitely looks a few tires short of a monster truck rally. I think this woman is cool for finding a peaceful and classy way to prove them wrong.

[Cain]

Well, the "blood of Jesus" is meant to be taken more symbolically than literally

I don't want to sound like I'm nitpicking here, but Catholic doctrine says it is literally the blood and literally the flesh of Jesus.

Obviously Catholics aren't a majority in America, but globally speaking, that's the accepted view.

[The Johnny]

Well, the "blood of Jesus" is meant to be taken more symbolically than literally

I don't want to sound like I'm nitpicking here, but Catholic doctrine says it is literally the blood and literally the flesh of Jesus.

Obviously Catholics aren't a majority in America, but globally speaking, that's the accepted view.

It's a religious Schrodinger game for rituals and beliefs, its simultaneously literal and symbolic until one has to defend a posture or make an argument.

[altered]

Not true. The doctrine of transubstantiation is pretty consistent and solid. It is literally and physically his flesh and blood, with only the superficial appearance ("accident") of bread and wine. This has been explained to death by the church, and even before the Catholic Church as we know it it was a commonly discussed topic. Weirdly, it was universally agreed upon before Martin Luther according to the research I've done. Gnostics appear not to have taken part in the sacrament at all, and so had no doctrine on it, and I can't find any other heresies around the sacrament before the Reformation.

There is also "consubstantiation" (the flesh and blood coexists with the bread and wine), and "sacramental union" (ritual identification of the bread and wine with Christ's flesh and blood), which are heresies in Catholicism. I know of no actual denomination that believes in consubstantiation, and the Lutherans (as in Martin Luther) are the only ones I know who follow sacramental union, but both are regardless Catholic heresies.

I've been doing a lot of research lately into early Protestant Christianity (for some reason I'm super obsessed with the Calvinists right now, they're all completely bugfuck in basically the most harmless way) so I happened to have all of this either fresh in my mind or right in front of me.

[The Johnny]

Not true. The doctrine of transubstantiation is pretty consistent and solid. It is literally and physically his flesh and blood, with only the superficial appearance ("accident") of bread and wine. This has been explained to death by the church, and even before the Catholic Church as we know it it was a commonly discussed topic. Weirdly, it was universally agreed upon before Martin Luther according to the research I've done. Gnostics appear not to have taken part in the sacrament at all, and so had no doctrine on it, and I can't find any other heresies around the sacrament before the Reformation.

There is also "consubstantiation" (the flesh and blood coexists with the bread and wine), and "sacramental union" (ritual identification of the bread and wine with Christ's flesh and blood), which are heresies in Catholicism. I know of no actual denomination that believes in consubstantiation, and the Lutherans (as in Martin Luther) are the only ones I know who follow sacramental union, but both are regardless Catholic heresies.

I've been doing a lot of research lately into early Protestant Christianity (for some reason I'm super obsessed with the Calvinists right now, they're all completely bugfuck in basically the most harmless way) so I happened to have all of this either fresh in my mind or right in front of me.

I mean, im not questioning both of yous knowledge and veracity towards doctrine, im speaking about the commoners take on it and the practical/political uses they make of it.

(And not to derail too much but, protestantism is pretty interesting, Max Weber and his "The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism" and all that... not that i remember much about it, but this Caroline Merchant seems to take inspiration from it in her "The Death of Nature", arguing how science, capitalism and religion are so tightly intertwined since around the XVth century.)

[altered]

Oh, I was just infodumping. "Hey, I know this topic! Maybe someone can learn something cool." No interpretation of your words meant, just a response in case someone wanted to know.

I haven't gotten that far along, I'm still looking at pre-Enlightenment groups. But the theology is baffling/mesmerizing anyway. Next level bullshittery. Calvinism, I think, would be really unlikely to have anything to do with what you're mentioning, but I'll keep an eye open as I continue.

[Pergamos]

Well, the "blood of Jesus" is meant to be taken more symbolically than literally, like, communion is following the tradition set during the Last Supper, and not USUALLY an attempt by the ritual's facilitator to turn the congregation into vampires.

That said, this crowd definitely looks a few tires short of a monster truck rally. I think this woman is cool for finding a peaceful and classy way to prove them wrong.

That's a matter of serious dispute among Christians.  Catholics and Orthodox are actually drinking blood, according the the local Catholic priest, who preached about it a lot.

[altered]

I thought you were wrong about the Orthodox Church, so I looked it up. Turns out, you were right.

What I remembered as a debate surrounding the body and blood of Christ was about the exact moment of transubstantiation, not whether it occurred at all or not. Cool. Christianity is fucking wacky and I am growing to love the shit, the Baptists are the boring outliers in a nightmare menagerie of insanity.

[The Johnny]

I thought you were wrong about the Orthodox Church, so I looked it up. Turns out, you were right.

What I remembered as a debate surrounding the body and blood of Christ was about the exact moment of transubstantiation, not whether it occurred at all or not. Cool. Christianity is fucking wacky and I am growing to love the shit, the Baptists are the boring outliers in a nightmare menagerie of insanity.

Bro, youre discordian, who are you to judge 

[altered]

Who says I'm judging? I'm enamored of this shit.

I might make a topic about it, I have a lot of opinions and don't want to pull this any further off topic. But if you want to hear the craziest shit you've heard all week, look up Calvinist doctrine (not the watered down Presbyterian stuff but actually hardcore Calvinism) and the Batenburgers. That's crazy you can't buy, it's handcrafted by the fucking masters.

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

I prefer to promulgate the idea that Jesus is just so much of an alcoholic that his blood is basically the same as wine to begin with

[P3nT4gR4m]

Jesus came back from the dead.
Jesus is a zombie.
Catholics are drinking zombie blood.
The only way to kill a catholic is to completely destroy the brain

[The Wizard Joseph]

Jesus came back from the dead.
Jesus is a zombie.
Catholics are drinking zombie blood.
The only way to kill a catholic is to completely destroy the brain

[Prelate Diogenes Shandor]

It's very simple. Jesus is a drunkard and his blood alcohol content is about 15%. Normally that would kill a person but he already got that out of the way

[Fujikoma]

Look, ok, in my view, the bible IS truth... in the way an elder educates a toddler. That leaves a lot of room for interpretation. The toddler is now grown, to believe in Santa Claus is fucking foolish, well, except there's the whole regiment of Santa's Little Inquisition, which will nail you for heresy if you believe that Santa exists more in the symbolic sense to encourage us to be more generous with eachother.

I got in this discussion in a bar last night with an atheist, and I'm like, "Look, dude, think about the target audience, how do you think society would be different if the angel of the lord just started rambling about dinosaurs and explosions to begin with?"