Gratitude, Compulsion, Idiocy or Nobility?

[abaddon]

I base on sense instead on words. I replied one of your post that was both in my & common language but noth other one since is not.

My reply was entirely in english words, all well defined. You asked for three religious claims which were not natural. I, and others, provided plenty of them and now you are running away from that.

How about you take them one at a time. Please explain the natural nature of transubstantiation? Go right ahead.

 

[JayUtah]

My language is that,, what I can understand in words and in sense. Better ask common terms instead of specific terms.

The correct terms were used. Your incompetence with the English language is no one's problem but yours.

 

[Kumar]

The correct terms were used. Your incompetence with the English language is no one's problem but yours.

It is not english words problem, it is understanding those terms problem to which I am not familier. If that poster will explain those terms in brief, I can then try to relate. Repentance, violence, healing, slavery etc. can also be seen in nature, if that mean it.

 

[Kumar]

My reply was entirely in english words, all well defined. You asked for three religious claims which were not natural. I, and others, provided plenty of them and now you are running away from that.

How about you take them one at a time. Please explain the natural nature of transubstantiation? Go right ahead.

Better define these terms in brief since I am not familiar with these. Also look my last reply to Jay..

 

[JayUtah]

...it is understanding those terms problem to which I am not familier.

Still your problem, not anyone else's.

...If that poster will explain those terms in brief, I can then try to relate.

Other posters are not responsible for explaining common English words to you. Look them up and quit stalling.

 

[JayUtah]

Better define these terms in brief since I am not familiar with these. Also look my last reply to Jay..

Jay says to do your own homework and quit trying to weasel out of it. Your inability to look up English words conveniently coincides with your pledge to do something that was patently absurd from the start. I think you just realized how impossible it is to do what you promised you could do, and you're trying to find an excuse not to do it. If anything like a true religion existed, I don't think it would embrace the kind of blatant dishonesty I keep seeing from you.

 

[abaddon]

Better define these terms in brief since I am not familiar with these. Also look my last reply to Jay..

Transubstantiation...the religious belief that the bread and wine used in a religious service are actually physically transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Not metaphorically, or allegorically or anything else.

Explain how that is natural as you claimed you could.

 

[Kumar]

No, you follow ascetic Hinduism.
Your definition of nature comes from your religion, not from the actual natural world.

And that is exactly Jainism. You seem to think your critics are unable to correlate your expressed beliefs with the published tenets of actual religions. You do not practice any sort of "true" or "universal" religion. You're just trying to avoid the impression of sectarianism, but you are failing.



Most of your critics are scientists are otherwise well educated in science. Do not try to foist more nonsense. You don't know what you're talking about.

Whatever that is true religion, Hinduism, Jainism or otherwise or some specifics to these. If I would had any fear about as you wrongly expressed, I would have not even indicated those. I do understand lot.

There is no such thing as "universal religion."

It can be but it should be. Half truth is often a great lie.

 

[JayUtah]

Whatever that is true religion, Hinduism, Jainism or otherwise or some specifics to these. If I would had any fear about as you wrongly expressed, I would have not even indicated those. I do understand lot.

Gibberish. You are obviously preaching and practicing ascetic Hinduism. You don't seem to realize that there is a large enough variety of actual codified religions that we can correlate your expressed beliefs with specific ones.

It can be but it should be. Half truth is often a great lie.

Gibberish. You assert there is a "true" religion that magically has all the virtues of religion but avoids all its vices. You claim to be preaching and practicing this religion, but you are exactly preaching and practicing ascetic Hinduism. Ascetic Hinduism is not "true" religion. it's just yet another sect.

 

[Kumar]

Transubstantiation...the religious belief that the bread and wine used in a religious service are actually physically transformed into the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ. Not metaphorically, or allegorically or anything else.

Explain how that is natural as you claimed you could.

Let me try. Not sure.

A religion can take its main God as its main basis of their body/existence(inheritance). Bread & wine can be transformed into blood & flesh physiologically or naturally. Then, how it is not natural to take?

 

[Kumar]

Jay says to do your own homework and quit trying to weasel out of it. Your inability to look up English words conveniently coincides with your pledge to do something that was patently absurd from the start. I think you just realized how impossible it is to do what you promised you could do, and you're trying to find an excuse not to do it. If anything like a true religion existed, I don't think it would embrace the kind of blatant dishonesty I keep seeing from you.

Why I should do, when other is asking? It is illogical. Anyway I already tried to interpret that in my last post.

 

[JayUtah]

Bread & wine can be transformed into blood & flesh physiologically or naturally.

Transubstantiation is literal. Are you claiming that it is natural for bread to magically transform into human flesh, and for wine to magically transform -- literally -- to human blood?

 

[JayUtah]

Why I should do, when other is asking?

These other people are meeting your challenge. You challenged them to provide examples of religions practices that defy nature. You don't get to shift responsibility onto others when they accept your challenge and you're not competent enough to satisfy it. Stop blaming others for your own failures.

 

[Kumar]

Gibberish. You are obviously preaching and practicing ascetic Hinduism. You don't seem to realize that there is a large enough variety of actual codified religions that we can correlate your expressed beliefs with specific ones.



Gibberish. You assert there is a "true" religion that magically has all the virtues of religion but avoids all its vices. You claim to be preaching and practicing this religion, but you are exactly preaching and practicing ascetic Hinduism. Ascetic Hinduism is not "true" religion. it's just yet another sect.

Simply, nature is scattered at many levels and in many forms. Everyone has opted its different levels and different forms--so all are natural. Not single one seems to be A&F in opting it.

 

[Kumar]

Transubstantiation is literal. Are you claiming that it is natural for bread to magically transform into human flesh, and for wine to magically transform -- literally -- to human blood?

Consider both as food.

 

[abaddon]

Let me try. Not sure.

A religion can take its main God as its main basis of their body/existence(inheritance). Bread & wine can be transformed into blood & flesh physiologically or naturally. Then, how it is not natural to take?

You miss the point. Do you accept that in the catholic mass that wine and bread literally become the flesh and blood of Jesus Christ? Yes or no?

 

[JayUtah]

Simply, nature is scattered at many levels and in many forms.

No, it isn't. The laws of nature are universal. They do not change to conform to your religion.

Everyone has opted its different levels and different forms--so all are natural. Not single one seems to be A&F in opting it.

No, that's not what nature means. The wide variety in religions does not translate into a wide variety of natural laws. Contradictions among religions do not translate into contradictions among natural laws from place to place.

As I said, you are simply trying to define nature in terms of your religion so that you can claim your religion has a natural basis. That's a circular argument.

 

[Kumar]

These other people are meeting your challenge. You challenged them to provide examples of religions practices that defy nature. You don't get to shift responsibility onto others when they accept your challenge and you're not competent enough to satisfy it. Stop blaming others for your own failures.

If I challenge them to take to me to London, but if they take to me to moon, I may not express moon rightly. They need to first tell me about moon.

 

[abaddon]

Consider both as food.

You are in favour of cannibalism?

 

[Kumar]

You are in favour of cannibalism?

What is bread & wine?