Active Users:433 Time:17/09/2025 12:23:33 PM
your problem is you're trying to apply objective logic to religion LadyLorraine Send a noteboard - 11/06/2011 04:13:01 PM
of course holy water isn't a single lick different than the water it was before it was blessed. It's even less different than homeopathic water, which isn't detectably different either (but at least has some ground to stand on compared to holy water, which hasn't had any physical process applied to it at all).

But it's not ABOUT THAT. It is entirely psychological. It's placebo. It's feel-good.

Yes, scientifically and logically, it is just "magic water". Practically speaking, normal water could easily take the place of "holy water". From a nonspiritual realistic standpoint, the whole deal is totally inane. But that's really not the point.

The point is that people's belief that the blessing of the water brings them closer to their deity and increases their inner purity, which gives them a measure of psychological comfort. In their mind, the blessing adds a new physical property that improves the water. It is illogical. It is blind belief and self-deception. If it helps people get through their life, then whatever, who cares. As long as no one is being hurt, why does it matter whether holy water is ACTUALLY any better?

Additionally, if you think back into history, it could be that holy water WAS "better". In earlier centuries, Holy water coming from a clean, running water source would be HEAPS more healthy than many of the usual water sources. I don't really know, but it would not surprise me if the beliefs around holy water did not stem from similar health histories as dietary laws.
Still Empress of the Poofy Purple Pillow Pile Palace!!
Continued Love of my Aussie <3
This message last edited by LadyLorraine on 11/06/2011 at 04:15:14 PM
Reply to message
A question on baptism - 10/06/2011 09:21:44 AM 967 Views
To my knowledge, baptism does not stem from the Resurrection. - 10/06/2011 11:01:17 AM 712 Views
What I meant - 10/06/2011 11:03:08 AM 556 Views
I don't follow. - 10/06/2011 11:08:07 AM 535 Views
Re: I don't follow. - 10/06/2011 11:10:40 AM 626 Views
I don't keep up with RC theology much. - 10/06/2011 11:15:52 AM 561 Views
Re: I don't keep up with RC theology much. - 10/06/2011 11:17:53 AM 522 Views
You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 11:50:53 AM 556 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 11:52:27 AM 498 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 11:55:01 AM 560 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 11:58:36 AM 525 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:16:46 PM 674 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:19:16 PM 527 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:25:08 PM 734 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:26:30 PM 730 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:28:45 PM 536 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:29:43 PM 559 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:33:01 PM 426 Views
Re: You haven't necessarily developed a wrong impression. - 10/06/2011 12:34:36 PM 494 Views
I took a holy dip into the Ganges - 10/06/2011 11:48:26 AM 625 Views
Re: I took a holy dip into the Ganges - 10/06/2011 11:54:17 AM 684 Views
He dances and dips in The Ganges- Very Nice. *NM* - 11/06/2011 02:15:41 AM 234 Views
Three dips - that's the ceremony. - 11/06/2011 02:35:43 AM 488 Views
Early Christians and Jews were obsessed with purity - 10/06/2011 12:56:58 PM 660 Views
Oh, I know about the historical/academic/anthropological reason - 10/06/2011 01:04:43 PM 597 Views
I misunderstood, lets try again - 10/06/2011 01:44:43 PM 681 Views
Huh. *NM* - 10/06/2011 02:06:58 PM 276 Views
A first responce - 10/06/2011 02:09:32 PM 726 Views
Re: A first responce - 10/06/2011 02:15:07 PM 707 Views
Re: A first responce - 10/06/2011 02:19:25 PM 628 Views
Do you want a theological answer or a historical one? - 10/06/2011 03:16:44 PM 697 Views
The theological. I already had a fairly good idea of the historical - 10/06/2011 03:18:51 PM 568 Views
My favorite fact about baptism is that is REQUIRES water... but it can be ANY water - 10/06/2011 04:31:12 PM 653 Views
That is absurd. - 10/06/2011 08:37:13 PM 747 Views
It is absurd - 10/06/2011 08:56:19 PM 565 Views
When your post is eviscerated, resorting to "HURR RELIGION IS DUMB" isn't a winning move. - 10/06/2011 10:00:39 PM 677 Views
Psh.You can dress it up with spiritualism and semantics, but the concept boils down to "magic water" - 11/06/2011 03:56:03 AM 519 Views
The point is that it's a symbol. - 11/06/2011 04:45:19 AM 537 Views
I have no problem with water as a symbol - 11/06/2011 04:59:52 AM 604 Views
You are totally missing the point. - 11/06/2011 02:46:08 PM 690 Views
Which again, is something that sounds nice and spiritual, but doesn't actually make any sense - 11/06/2011 03:46:51 PM 653 Views
your problem is you're trying to apply objective logic to religion - 11/06/2011 04:13:01 PM 925 Views
I'm not, exactly. Religion has internal logic. For example, certain things are "unclean" - 11/06/2011 04:40:33 PM 549 Views
Beliefs about holy water are internally logical. - 11/06/2011 07:36:08 PM 604 Views
Shrug. It was on topic. - 11/06/2011 08:06:16 PM 873 Views
Baptism is almost, if not entirely, symbolic. - 11/06/2011 10:23:02 AM 732 Views
Re: Baptism is almost, if not entirely, symbolic. - 11/06/2011 11:51:22 AM 727 Views
I never thought of it in that way, that is why I like this site *NM* - 12/06/2011 04:26:40 PM 254 Views
Because we are all nuts in our own special ways? *NM* - 12/06/2011 04:36:03 PM 224 Views

Reply to Message