Laudate_Dominum Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 October 2009 - 12:40 PM' timestamp='1255020008' post='1980899'] Be careful . . . today is St. Pelagia's feast day, and she may not take kindly to that remark. [/quote] Aren't I maybe.. just a bit scholarly?
Archaeology cat Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Paddington' date='08 October 2009 - 04:48 PM' timestamp='1255016912' post='1980858'] Well nevermind then. I'm eating sausage and potatoes. [/quote] I fixed bangers & mash for dinner.
Apotheoun Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='08 October 2009 - 10:45 AM' timestamp='1255020355' post='1980906'] Aren't I maybe.. just a bit scholarly? [/quote] I've seen no evidence in support of that proposition.
Paddington Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Archaeology cat' date='08 October 2009 - 01:48 PM' timestamp='1255020503' post='1980909'] I fixed bangers & mash for dinner. [/quote] Cool! I like saying 'bangers and mash.' Fun stuff right there.
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 October 2009 - 12:49 PM' timestamp='1255020541' post='1980911'] I've seen no evidence in support of that proposition. [/quote] [i]The concept of a Catholic phenomenology is even more absurd than the concept of a Protestant mathematics. Philosophy as science of being is fundamentally distinct in method from any other science. The distinction in method between, say, mathematics and classical philology is not as great as the difference between mathematics and philosophy or between philology and philosophy. The breadth of the difference between philosophy and the positive sciences, to which mathematics and philology belong, cannot at all be estimated quantitatively. In ontology, being is supposed to be grasped and comprehended conceptually by way of the phenomenological method, in connection with which we may observe that, while phenomenology certainly arouses lively interest today, what it seeks and aims at was already vigorously pursued in Western philosophy from the very beginning.[/i]
Apotheoun Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='08 October 2009 - 10:56 AM' timestamp='1255020972' post='1980921'] [i]The concept of a Catholic phenomenology is even more absurd than the concept of a Protestant mathematics. Philosophy as science of being is fundamentally distinct in method from any other science. The distinction in method between, say, mathematics and classical philology is not as great as the difference between mathematics and philosophy or between philology and philosophy. The breadth of the difference between philosophy and the positive sciences, to which mathematics and philology belong, cannot at all be estimated quantitatively. In ontology, being is supposed to be grasped and comprehended conceptually by way of the phenomenological method, in connection with which we may observe that, while phenomenology certainly arouses lively interest today, what it seeks and aims at was already vigorously pursued in Western philosophy from the very beginning.[/i] [/quote] Copying and pasting text from Wikipedia is hardly scholarly.
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 October 2009 - 12:57 PM' timestamp='1255021075' post='1980924'] Copying and pasting text from Wikipedia is hardly scholarly. [/quote] You absolute bastage! How could you be so cruel and unusual?
Apotheoun Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='08 October 2009 - 10:59 AM' timestamp='1255021158' post='1980926'] You absolute bastage! How could you be so cruel and unusual? [/quote] For goodness sake, if it makes you feel better I accept that your source (even though it was a Marxist website quoting Heidegger) was - at least in some sense - "scholarly." So does that make you feel better?
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 October 2009 - 01:03 PM' timestamp='1255021424' post='1980931'] For goodness sake, if it makes you feel better I accept that your source (even though it was a Marxist website quoting Heidegger) was - at least in some sense - "scholarly." So does that make you feel better? [/quote]
Apotheoun Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Laudate_Dominum' date='08 October 2009 - 11:04 AM' timestamp='1255021495' post='1980935'] [/quote] You are certainly easy to please, but then simple minded hippies usually are easy to please.
Laudate_Dominum Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='08 October 2009 - 01:07 PM' timestamp='1255021621' post='1980937'] You are certainly easy to please, but then simple minded SPACE hippies usually are easy to please. [/quote] You are not Herbert!
thessalonian Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Who was he talking about? Pentecostals and health and wealthers probably. I don't know of any Catholic who brags about THEIR deeds because it is God working in and through them. See ephesians 3:20-21 and maybe you'll get it. You can deny romans 2:4-8 and Matt 25 all you want. They are in your bible too. They make it clear that acts of love are what we are judged on. Yes, faith is the underlying motivation and that is why these works are worthy to be judged. The mighty works are the claims of casting out of demons. Matt 25 makes it clear that doing good to your neighbor is what we are judged on. The law of love it is called. Not one single verse that speaks of judgement talks about any kind of measure of what faith we had except in the context of the works that we performed. They again are what we are judged by. You ain't reading your bible right.
Nihil Obstat Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 (edited) [quote name='thessalonian' date='08 October 2009 - 12:42 PM' timestamp='1255023770' post='1980975'] Who was he talking about? Pentecostals and health and wealthers probably. I don't know of any Catholic who brags about THEIR deeds because it is God working in and through them. See ephesians 3:20-21 and maybe you'll get it. You can deny romans 2:4-8 and Matt 25 all you want. They are in your bible too. They make it clear that acts of love are what we are judged on. Yes, faith is the underlying motivation and that is why these works are worthy to be judged. The mighty works are the claims of casting out of demons. Matt 25 makes it clear that doing good to your neighbor is what we are judged on. The law of love it is called. Not one single verse that speaks of judgement talks about any kind of measure of what faith we had except in the context of the works that we performed. They again are what we are judged by. You ain't reading your bible right. [/quote] You just quoted the Bible! ...but- but.... you're CATHOLIC! We're not allowed to read the bible! The bad ol' popes said so. Edited October 8, 2009 by Nihil Obstat
Selah Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Stormy (nyuk nyuk nyuk) 1 Peter 3:15 But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. [b]But do this with gentleness and respect[/b] Matthew 10:16 I am sending you out like sheep among wolves. Therefore be as [b]shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.[/b] Just sayin...if you think we need corrected...try doing what Jesus and St. Peter said to do...ya know? Worked for them, so...might work for you.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now