Fish Eaters Traditional Catholic Forum
May 23, 2013, 11:33:PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: The man still needs help!
 
   Fish Eaters    Forum Index   Forum Rules   Help Calendar Members Chat Room   Who's Chatting   Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
 
Author Topic: he commits a most grievous sin, who seeks only carnal pleasure in it. Hence Onan  (Read 3864 times)
spasiisochrani
Member

Posts: 2,849


« Reply #80 on: November 18, 2008, 06:58:AM »

Quote from: pbmsemwa
Originally Posted by Catholicmilkman
Venerable Anne Catherine is quoted as saying that black skin was the result of sin.

I would also like to get the exact place where she said this!!

If it is true, we need to repent.


The works of Anne Catherine Emmerich are not scripture.  Do they not also contain a detailed description of the vegetation on the moon? 


Nobody needs to "repent" of his skin color.  We are Catholics, not Mormons.  Or Nazis.

Logged
luigi
Guest
« Reply #81 on: November 18, 2008, 11:31:AM »

I posted information regarding the credibility of the revelations attributed to Anne Catherine Emmerich: http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/apologia/vpost?id=3115350
Logged
Catholicmilkman
Guest
« Reply #82 on: November 19, 2008, 12:24:AM »

Quote from: LaRoza
Quote from: Catholicmilkman
Natural selection? Nah, rather God's Plan and Providence.
I don't think God planned on the Fall, and the selection was done naturally as a result, rather than a deliberate separation (well Babel, maybe it was the result of that, but the process was natural)
God is all-knowing. He knew the Fall would happen. God plans and sustains everything at every moment. Anything that happens naturally, it happens because God made it to do that of it's nature.

Quote
Quote
Venerable Anne Catherine is quoted as saying that black skin was the result of sin.
That could be ignorance ;) Skin colour means little. Would albino "black" people be sinless?
Or it just proves that separation (for example, death) is the consequence of original sin. Is there any doubt that the separation of soul from body is the result of sin? Why not in some sense also the separation of human persons? I'm not saying these physical differences are sin, but possibly a consequence.

Quote
Yes, the genetic code is very complex and mostly unknown. It is possible to remove certain things from the code in certain organisms though.
Yes, but in doing so, is it not a different organism? A bio-engineered strawberry with a fish gene, is no longer just a strawberry but also part fish.

Quote
Like a male can not carry an X linked trait without expressing it, whereas females can, so males that don't have that trait, don't have it in them at all.
Yes, the trait (ie the expression). But the genes are still there. If they weren't, then males could not give female offspring at all. But we know that Eve was formed from Adam, hence Adam's body must have hold the information to express such traits, even if it's impossible to express them. That's just my opinion though.
Logged
LaRoza
Guest
« Reply #83 on: November 19, 2008, 12:29:AM »

Quote from: Catholicmilkman
Yes, the trait (ie the expression). But the genes are still there. If they weren't, then males could not give female offspring at all. But we know that Eve was formed from Adam, hence Adam's body must have hold the information to express such traits, even if it's impossible to express them. That's just my opinion though.


No, the genes of such traits cannot be carried by males without expressing them.

The genes of Adam and Eve were perfect, hand made by God and meant to be forever, although God knew the future, it was entirely Man's decision to sin.

After this time, the genes have been shuffled around and changed (degrading) resulting in vastly different physical humans (various disorders and diseases, reduced tolerance for certain things, etc). The current mixes of genes are much different (like taking the bricks out of a grand building and making things of the same bricks, but of lesser quality).

The genes may have degraded and I do not think Adam's genetics were the same as any modern man. Mitochondrial DNA for example is only from the female. The DNA in your mitochondria are from your mother only, who got them from her mother, who got them from her mother, etc. Everyone is like this.

Logged
Catholicmilkman
Guest
« Reply #84 on: November 19, 2008, 12:34:AM »

Quote from: pbmsemwa
Quote from: Catholicmilkman
Venerable Anne Catherine is quoted as saying that black skin was the result of sin.
I would also like to get the exact place where she said this!!
Just because she said it, doesn't not mean it's true. I believe it's likely. I'll have to ask my confirmation sponsor, he has the exact reference.

Quote
If it is true, we need to repent.
I don't think she meant personal actual sin. There was a Jewish conception of physical disease being the consequence of some ancestral sin(s). Our Lord reputiated this idea in one man's case with His Apostles, and said it was for God's glory. I think of phsyical differences between mankind like this: the consequence of the first sin is disease and death but moreso also man's Redemption by Christ to a new, higher and Supernatural dignity. Consequences of evil are not always evil in themselves.
Logged


fridayer
Guest
« Reply #85 on: November 19, 2008, 12:35:AM »

Quote from: ggreg
In the most respectful and sincere way possible - I'd ask this.

Is it any wonder that some traditionalists are really miserable sourpusses if they are prone to think like this about sex with their lifelong spouse.

Life is difficult enough without having to worry about my motivation everytime I fancy a bit of slap and tickle.

At least if I was a Hessidic Jew I'd get to wear crazy clothes and drive a Volvo.
hahahahAHAJKsasjkdghaqwdugqw39d8gh

+1
Logged
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [9]
 
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.8 | SMF © 2006-2008, Simple Machines LLC