Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Catholics are making it up.
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 31 of 507 (768191)
09-09-2015 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by NoNukes
09-09-2015 4:36 AM


FaithNO writes:
Really? You find some surprise that people accept that the Pope is not perfect even with respect to knowing what God wants? Do you expect that people worship the Pope? Popes change but their opinions and beliefs must not?
I don't think you understand Catholicism. The pope is God's representative on earth - quite literally; passed down hand-by-hand from Peter. In some matters he is infallible, in all matters he is authoritative. If the pope can change his mind on doctrine just because times have changed and people don't believe him anymore, the core of that relationship is broken. One day you're going to hell for something, the next you're not. The whole belief system is violated.
Yes, the argument is serious. I want to know why for you the abandonment of the plumb pudding model as completely wrong headed is not worthy of the same ridicule as the abandonment of Limbo? Why is it reasonable not to question the entire scientific edifice when a strongly held idea is discarded.
There is nothing inherently wrong with abandoning an idea that turns out to be wrong regardless of how long it was held or how preciously it was respected. Yes, we should question why a wrong headed belief was held for so long, but the mere fact that things have changed is alone no indictment of the current state.
The entire premise for science is that it's only what we know so far - it's always subject to change when better evidence is found. Religion on the other hand claims to be the 'truth', popes are claimed to be infallible. Well some truths appear not so true and popes are, after all just people. Game over.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by NoNukes, posted 09-09-2015 4:36 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by kbertsche, posted 09-09-2015 8:48 AM Tangle has replied
 Message 54 by NoNukes, posted 09-09-2015 4:16 PM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 32 of 507 (768192)
09-09-2015 5:06 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by Tangle
09-09-2015 3:31 AM


Here we go again. Jesus Christ FULFILLED the Old Testament laws of Israel. Israel was a nation, Christians are not a nation, we are scattered among nations. We do not put adulterers to death for both these reasons. TRY to get it. Good grief this gets tedious.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 3:31 AM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2015 8:33 AM Faith has replied
 Message 42 by jar, posted 09-09-2015 10:40 AM Faith has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 33 of 507 (768193)
09-09-2015 5:18 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by Tangle
09-09-2015 2:45 AM


There are hundreds of dead gods and belief systems. Religions come and go.
Religions don't really just "come and go." We can of course point to Europe where the original pagan religions were supplanted by Christianity over the centuries, and that's the case wherever Christianity has had much impact, but as a matter of course, no, religions do not "come and go." They are territorial. Sometimes the religion of a conquering nation would supplant that of the conquered, but more often all the religions would coexist.
Your brand of fundamentalism is totally out of touch with reality and has been dying since the enlightenment.
My brand of fundamentalism is essentially the religion the Protestant Reformers rescued from Romanism as the original religion of Christ and the apostles, which is completely based on the Bible.
And even if the numbers have dwindled the true believers are genuinely true believers. Those who have left were never that committed. Also, while the numbers have dwindled in the west they have been growing in China and other parts of the world.
Here in the UK church attendance has plumeted. Christianity in Europe is mostly now cultural with individuals picking the bits they like or abandoning it altogether.
Yes, I feel sorry for the UK and Europe. Especially the UK which has a long list of powerful Christian preachers in your history. All given over to the desert of man-made philosophy. A vacuum which Islam is filling too. You might actually like that less than your Christian roots.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 2:45 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 6:12 AM Faith has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 34 of 507 (768195)
09-09-2015 6:12 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by Faith
09-09-2015 5:18 AM


Faith, you just agreed with everything I said.
Religions come and go
Faith writes:
We can of course point to Europe where the original pagan religions were supplanted by Christianity over the centuries
Your kind of fundamentalist religious belief is dying
Faith writes:
And even if the numbers have dwindled the true believers are genuinely true believers.
Church attendance (and religious Christianity) is declining rapidly in Europe
Faith writes:
Yes, I feel sorry for the UK
But don't weep just for the UK and Europe Faith, the USA is going exactly the same way.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/...ss-affiliated-with-religion
It's a developmental thing, as our societies age, we give up our childish beliefs.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 5:18 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 10:19 AM Tangle has not replied

  
MrHambre
Member (Idle past 1392 days)
Posts: 1495
From: Framingham, MA, USA
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 35 of 507 (768196)
09-09-2015 7:02 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by Tangle
09-09-2015 3:16 AM


Re: Blessed are the Magnanimous
Tangle writes:
they invented the entire shebang using the power structures and mores of the time and the only way they can hang on to any semblance of credibility in modern civilisations is to dump the more obvious nonsenses as society becomes more educated and less superstitious.
I don't see the process as being that much different than the way Western democracies have become more inclusive of women, or the way African-Americans were enfranchised in the USA. Just because our cultural construct of representative democracy didn't initially include non-landowners or women doesn't mean we should just jettison the entire project.
And it's not like the 20th century shouldn't have put paid to the magical thinking whereby education perfects the human animal. Technological and scientific progress hasn't created utopia either. Let's not trade one set of nonsenses for another.
quote:
It's unclear what we think religious people should be allowed to do, short of abandoning their made-up beliefs and thinking exactly the way we do.
Which is, of course, the answer.
My issue with religion is the way it perpetuates bigotry, so I can't complain when religious authorities shed the bigoted parts of their dogmas. It seems your issue with the religious worldview ---even one that moves away from archaic prejudices--- is that it isn't your worldview.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 3:16 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 8:14 AM MrHambre has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 36 of 507 (768197)
09-09-2015 8:14 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by MrHambre
09-09-2015 7:02 AM


Re: Blessed are the Magnanimous
MrH writes:
I don't see the process as being that much different than the way Western democracies have become more inclusive of women, or the way African-Americans were enfranchised in the USA.
It's exactly the same process. This is because both systems are manmade, but religions are not supposed to be manmade, they're supposed to be immutable - Godmade. By allowing changes in their core doctrines, the religions are accepting that they are purely parochial and terestrial.
Technological and scientific progress hasn't created utopia either. Let's not trade one set of nonsenses for another.
Where did that come from? The task is to replace religious nonsense with sensible secular models - democracy, criminal justice systems, local governance, humanism - 'do as you would be done by' stuff.
It seems your issue with the religious worldview ---even one that moves away from archaic prejudices--- is that it isn't your worldview.
My problems with the religious world view are too many for this thread but, but you can include beliefs that allow people to victimise others - be it by terrorism or simple discrimination - to the detriment of society as a whole and human personal health and happiness generally.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by MrHambre, posted 09-09-2015 7:02 AM MrHambre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 51 by MrHambre, posted 09-09-2015 12:28 PM Tangle has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 37 of 507 (768198)
09-09-2015 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
09-09-2015 5:06 AM


Faith writes:
Here we go again. Jesus Christ FULFILLED the Old Testament laws of Israel. Israel was a nation, Christians are not a nation, we are scattered among nations. We do not put adulterers to death for both these reasons. TRY to get it. Good grief this gets tedious.
So you think the Biblical admonitions to kill your bad kids, to beat your slaves just right, etc., were instructions to the nation of Israel, not individuals?
"Both these reasons..." Christ fulfilled the old law, and adulterers don't have to be stoned. I assume he didn't liquidate the Ten Commandments, and clearly you don't think that the instruction to see other people as abominations has been lifted. And the eye-for-an-eye death penalty remains imperative, despite the deaths of innocents: somehow the recipients of human justice were grandfathered out of God's new law of mercy and forgiveness...unless she's a county clerk in Kentucky
It's enough to confuse an ex-Baptist farm boy, for sure.
As you peruse Leviticus et al., how do you choose?

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 5:06 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 10:27 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
kbertsche
Member (Idle past 2131 days)
Posts: 1427
From: San Jose, CA, USA
Joined: 05-10-2007


Message 38 of 507 (768199)
09-09-2015 8:48 AM
Reply to: Message 31 by Tangle
09-09-2015 4:59 AM


Tangle writes:
NoNukes writes:
Yes, the argument is serious. I want to know why for you the abandonment of the plumb pudding model as completely wrong headed is not worthy of the same ridicule as the abandonment of Limbo? Why is it reasonable not to question the entire scientific edifice when a strongly held idea is discarded.
There is nothing inherently wrong with abandoning an idea that turns out to be wrong regardless of how long it was held or how preciously it was respected. Yes, we should question why a wrong headed belief was held for so long, but the mere fact that things have changed is alone no indictment of the current state.
The entire premise for science is that it's only what we know so far - it's always subject to change when better evidence is found. Religion on the other hand claims to be the 'truth', popes are claimed to be infallible. Well some truths appear not so true and popes are, after all just people. Game over.
But the whole purpose of religion is to know and relate to a God who cannot be fully known; there is always something new to learn about God. And the three "revealed" religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam work from Scriptures which cannot be fully known; there are always new truths hidden in their depths. Just as science progresses and improves its understanding of nature, so theology progresses and improves its understanding of Scripture.

"Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind." — Albert Einstein
I am very astonished that the scientific picture of the real world around me is very deficient. It gives us a lot of factual information, puts all of our experience in a magnificently consistent order, but it is ghastly silent about all and sundry that is really near to our heart, that really matters to us. It cannot tell us a word about red and blue, bitter and sweet, physical pain and physical delight; it knows nothing of beautiful and ugly, good or bad, God and eternity. Science sometimes pretends to answer questions in these domains, but the answers are very often so silly that we are not inclined to take them seriously. — Erwin Schroedinger

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 4:59 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 9:53 AM kbertsche has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 39 of 507 (768202)
09-09-2015 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by kbertsche
09-09-2015 8:48 AM


KB writes:
But the whole purpose of religion is to know and relate to a God who cannot be fully known; there is always something new to learn about God.
Nothing can be learned about God - no-one has exceptional knowledge or even *any* knowledge of god.
And the three "revealed" religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam work from Scriptures which cannot be fully known; there are always new truths hidden in their depths. Just as science progresses and improves its understanding of nature, so theology progresses and improves its understanding of Scripture.
Revealed religion is not knowledge, it's subjective opinion. The point this thread is making is that religions make stuff up to suit them - as is demonstrated when they change their minds about it. Scripture is not immune to this process, it too is manmade, made up and changed and interpreted to suit.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif.
Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by kbertsche, posted 09-09-2015 8:48 AM kbertsche has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by kbertsche, posted 09-09-2015 12:50 PM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 40 of 507 (768204)
09-09-2015 10:19 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by Tangle
09-09-2015 6:12 AM


yes, America is going the same way. The entire West.
It's a developmental thing, as our societies age, we give up our childish beliefs.
Actually it's not. It's just the work of very clever anti-Christian sophistries.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Tangle, posted 09-09-2015 6:12 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 41 of 507 (768205)
09-09-2015 10:27 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Omnivorous
09-09-2015 8:33 AM


He didn't "liquidate" anything. He fulfilled it all, including the Ten Commandments. If he hadn't we couldn't be saved because none of us has obeyed them completely.
So you think the Biblical admonitions to kill your bad kids, to beat your slaves just right, etc., were instructions to the nation of Israel, not individuals?
Yes.
How does eye for eye cause deaths?
Where are people described as abominations?
Just take my word for it that when I say we are Bible believers that doesn't mean I am required to stone someone to death for adultery. You don't have to understand it, just trust that I know what I'm talking about based on years of Christian teaching.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2015 8:33 AM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by jar, posted 09-09-2015 10:42 AM Faith has replied
 Message 45 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2015 11:17 AM Faith has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 42 of 507 (768206)
09-09-2015 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
09-09-2015 5:06 AM


on Nations
For a small period, Israel was a nation as was Judah. They were never one nation. In addition, "Israel" was also a people including members of Judah and the nation of Israel just like Christianity. Fortunately though Jesus was never a Christian.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 5:06 AM Faith has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 43 of 507 (768207)
09-09-2015 10:42 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Faith
09-09-2015 10:27 AM


on making stuff up.
Faith writes:
You don't have to understand it, just trust that I know what I'm talking about based on years of Christian teaching.
Don't you mean apologists making stuff up?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 10:27 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 10:53 AM jar has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1444 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 44 of 507 (768209)
09-09-2015 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 43 by jar
09-09-2015 10:42 AM


Re: on making stuff up.
You are the champion at making stuff up. You have invented a "Christianity" entirely out of your own prejudices. I'm sure it's a good thing you don't have any followers.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by jar, posted 09-09-2015 10:42 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by jar, posted 09-09-2015 12:20 PM Faith has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3977
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


(2)
Message 45 of 507 (768211)
09-09-2015 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Faith
09-09-2015 10:27 AM


Faith writes:
So you think the Biblical admonitions to kill your bad kids, to beat your slaves just right, etc., were instructions to the nation of Israel, not individuals?
Yes.
I've read those passages, and they seem clearly addressed to parents and slaveowners, not a national authority. But I suppose there may have been special authorizing warrants from the state of Israel that are lost to history.
How does eye for eye cause deaths?
"Eye for eye" is the philosophy of our penal system: that's why we kill some prisoners, including some innocent ones. That's why I, and many other opponents of the death penalty, refer to folks like you as Old Testament Christians. You love your Jesus, but you love your vengeance more.
But isn't it irrelevant whether "eye for eye" causes deaths? Many OT injunctions from God caused deaths. Wasn't the eye-for-eye injunction fulfilled by Christ and replaced with his loving mercy?
Where are people described as abominations?
Okay, you got me there: the act of homosexuality is described as an abomination, not the homosexuals. That's why Christians speak so lovingly of them.
Again, Ms. Davis, since her 2011 conversion, believes holy matrimony cannot be dissolved. Her fourth marriage, in 2008, was before that, so I guess there's some paper cover there. But she didn''t repent of her sinful mockery of marriage and leave that sin behind, and she knowingly issued marriage licenses to divorced people, apparently without any pangs to her religious conscience.
Edited by Omnivorous, : No reason given.
Edited by Omnivorous, : after-->before: sorry for confusion

"If you can keep your head while those around you are losing theirs, you can collect a lot of heads."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 10:27 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Faith, posted 09-09-2015 11:50 AM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024