Mary

Originally posted by Conrau K
I am not sure what you mean, either.

yes strange tho i agree with im not sure with your meaning

Originally posted by Conrau K
No; it is illegal to buy an indulgence. And generally, to receive an indulgence requires that the Catholic satisfy certain obligations, such as visiting shrines or reciting certain prayers. The Catholic must already have received confession, as well.

John Paul II also gave indulgences.

EDIT: WYD is an acronym for World Youth Day which begins next week.

no, i meant in the luther days. today we are slightly smarter and the popes are not inbred bastards from the wealthy noble families of Europe

Originally posted by Conrau K
It is not my place give a theological justification of the immaculate conception. Whether it is a legitimate doctrine, it is still different to the doctrine of the virgin birth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaculate_Conception

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virgin_Birth

EDIT: I see you have already gone to the wikipedia article.

The doctrine of immaculate conception is not of Biblical origin then. I think that applies to quite alot of what the Catholics do and believe ... its just not in the Bible.... its mostly stuff made up by God knows who. Certainly not Christ or Paul.

Originally posted by Conrau K
God is supposed to be omnipotent, right?

God is omnipotent yes. So I can say Paul was 20 feet tall. There is not Biblical justification for makking such a claim. How and why do Catholics think Mary was exempt from original sin. Does it add to your faith? What? Whats the reason for fabricating stuff?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
jesus was conceived without to abominable and yucky act of two persons getting it on. from this comes the catholic main rule "if it feels good, stop" 😀....

Yep .. some religious people have a problem with sex. Its the reason why in most Bibles (KJV) the translators put page headings for Songs of Solomon as "Christ Love for the Church". Songs of Solomon is really about Solomon having fun with his hundreds of wives.

Originally posted by Rajk999
The doctrine of immaculate conception is not of Biblical origin then. I think that applies to quite alot of what the Catholics do and believe ... its just not in the Bible.... its mostly stuff made up by God knows who. Certainly not Christ or Paul.

it has something to do with how christ told peter who told the popes that whatever the popes say is inspired by god so it is true. the problem is only peter received the holy spirit. i am unsure about paul and i certainly doubt the popes are anything beyond ordinary priests

Originally posted by Badwater
No. If you are referring to Mary Magdelene, it's still no - she was not a prostitute.

Yes she was.

Originally posted by shavixmir
Yes she was.

common misconception. there is a prostitute washing jesus' feet then int he next chapter mary magdalene appears. however it doesn't say nowhere she is the same prostitute or even that she is a prostitute. if you really think she was, post the bible verse

Originally posted by shavixmir
Yes she was.

Perhaps, but it's not recorded if she was. She was healed of demons, though. I don't think they meant the clap.

Originally posted by Rajk999
Yep .. some religious people have a problem with sex. Its the reason why in most Bibles (KJV) the translators put page headings for Songs of Solomon as "Christ Love for the Church". Songs of Solomon is really about Solomon having fun with his hundreds of wives.

Agreed.

And the use (in the Greek Septuagint) of agape for “love” in the midst of all the wonderfully erotic imagery and metaphor ought to lay to rest once and for all artificial attempts to separate eros from agape—including God’s agape. The latter includes the former (the reverse may not always be true, but sometimes they are nevertheless used almost synonymously in other Greek works, and in the early church as well—as the Greek Orthodox always point out).

And eros is not strictly sexual—in the original sense, the passion that a musician feels while playing music is “erotic”. Eros is not just sexual desire per se: that’s epithumia. Agape is a passionate caring and concern for the other. The lovers in the Song of Songs are both passionate and—well, loving. While agape, too, is not strictly sexual or physical, it can be; depends on context.

Agape with no trace of eros is indistinguishable from philia—and the distinction is very clear in John 21:15-17.

A Christian who tries to “over-spiritualize” things runs the risk of losing the “body” of the message of incarnation. Sometimes it’s not just sex that some religious people have trouble with: it’s physicality as well (some forms in Hinduism, for example, seem to tend toward that error). Jesus came out of a religious tradition (Judaism) that by and large always recognized the physical dimension of the spiritual. And the erotic as well.

Originally posted by Conrau K
Do you think a whore is necessarily a prostitute?

Aren't those two words synonymous?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
jesus was conceived without to abominable and yucky act of two persons getting it on. from this comes the catholic main rule "if it feels good, stop" 😀

jesus had the original sin like everyone else unless there would be a loophole in the bible. god might have said in genesis that the son of man would be carrying his sin(adam's sin not god's). since jesus had no man father he didn't have it. would like someone to post the bible verse though

Ha! Lots of the kids in inner city L.A. must be without original sin.

Originally posted by Conrau K
I already have explained. The doctrine of the immaculate conception states that God spared Mary from original sin at the time of her conception; the doctrine of the virgin birth states that Mary conceived Jesus by the Holy Spirit and not by sex.

"God spared Mary of original sin".

So original sin is something God decides whether or not we have which has nothing to do with the person with or without it.. God is such a prick.

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
Aren't those two words synonymous?

You mean the all knowing ATY dont know the differrence ?

Psalm 165 :3 The fool saith in his heart the whore and the prostitute are one and the same.

Originally posted by Rajk999
You mean the all knowing ATY dont know the differrence ?

Psalm 165 :3 The fool saith in his heart the whore and the prostitute are one and the same.

The Bible's not a dictionary. It's thousands of years old, written in an ancient language (Hebrew right?) and translated numerous times by numerous people. It also claims pi = 3. It's not a good place to go for facts.

You enjoy calling me stupid, don't you?

And there's no Psalm 165...