NationStates Jolt Archive

Since Myrth will now allow the Ask a threads again, I have decided to remake this one. This is the link to the unbanning of the Ask A threads
http://forums2.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=362441
I will answer any questions on the Catholic faith. Any question.
So Ask AWAY!

What is the Catholic position regarding the jews? Are they saved?
How about the protestants?

What about intolerant, bigoted, prejudiced facists? Does God love even them?

Despite the fact that my mother was Roman Catholic and my father Lutheran, I have a poor knowledge of the Catholic religion, so please pardon my ignorance.

Obviously those who willingly turn themselves against God damn themselves to hell. But what happens to those who never came to know religion? Babies, people in parts of the world that Catholicism isn't prevalent, etc. Do they go to Hell, Heaven, or some third place which isn't either...?

Despite the fact that my mother was Roman Catholic and my father Lutheran, I have a poor knowledge of the Catholic religion, so please pardon my ignorance.

Obviously those who willingly turn themselves against God damn themselves to hell. But what happens to those who never came to know religion? Babies, people in parts of the world that Catholicism isn't prevalent, etc. Do they go to Hell, Heaven, or some third place which isn't either...?
Let us ask Saint Francis Xavier:
"Before their baptism, certain Japanese were greatly troubled by a hateful scruple: that God did not appear merciful, because He had never made Himself known to the Japanese people before, expecially that those who had not worshipped God were doomed to everlasting Hell. They grieve over the fate of their departed children, parents, and relatives; so they ask if there is any way to free them by prayer from the eternal misery. And I am obliged to answer: there is absolutely none."

is tenete traditiones really a nutbag?


oh, and is it true that the vatican has both accepted the heliocentric system (since 1471) and stopped concedmning galileo galieli(1992)?

is it also true that the pope has accepted evolution guided by god, and that the jews are indeed not responsable for the death of jesus who was indeed, a jew himself?

is tenete traditiones really a nutbag?


oh, and is it true that the vatican has both accepted the heliocentric system (since 1471) and stopped concedmning galileo galieli(1992)?

is it also true that the pope has accepted evolution guided by god, and that the jews are indeed not responsable for the death of jesus who was indeed, a jew himself?
No, that is all false.

No, that is all false.

No, it's not.

I didn't think this was a "Ask Tenete Traditiones" thread.

Obviously those who willingly turn themselves against God damn themselves to hell. But what happens to those who never came to know religion? Babies, people in parts of the world that Catholicism isn't prevalent, etc. Do they go to Hell, Heaven, or some third place which isn't either...?
They experience what is called invincible ignorance. If they have lived a good life, and tried not to do evil just to do it, etc. they are not condemned. However, they are not eligible for the full benefits of being Catholic.

What about intolerant, bigoted, prejudiced facists? Does God love even them?Everyone.

No, that is all false.

then why is it that every catholic source says so?

The Pontiff said that you can believe in evolution guided by God or in literal 6 days. I believe in literal. The Catholic church has accepted the heliocentirc system.
All not catholic go to hell.
God loves EVERYONE.
Babies will go to limbo, if not baptized. This is not hell. It is not heaven.
It is not doctrine though, you can believe that God brings babies up to him, because he is merciful. I believe the latter.

tenate Traditones, please let me answer the questions.

in view of this:

All not catholic go to hell.
God loves EVERYONE.

my question is, why should i want the love of that kind of God?

Your thread claims to "Ask a Catholic." So far you have not given any Catholic answers, just your own opinions.

The Church has never accepted the heretic heliocentric system.
Also perhaps you may not have heard of the great Catholic dogma:
extra ecclesiam nulla salus

This thread says "ask a Catholic", not "ask Cherry Ridge his opinions on what he thinks Christian doctrine should be."

This thread says "ask a Catholic", not "ask Cherry Ridge his opinions on what he thinks Christian doctrine should be."
Make your own thread.

You shouldn't - as that is not Catholic doctrine. See my above post. There are 'Catholic' extremists, as there are for everything.

Make your own thread.
Alright I will.

Your thread claims to "Ask a Catholic." So far you have not given any Catholic answers, just your own opinions.

The Church has never accepted the heretic heliocentric system.
Also perhaps you may not have heard of the great Catholic dogma:
extra ecclesiam nulla salus

This thread says "ask a Catholic", not "ask Cherry Ridge his opinions on what he thinks Christian doctrine should be."
it says "ask a catholic." Cherry Ridge is a Catholic. he was the one to start the thread, and since the thread title is singular that means that a single Catholic is being asked. unless somebody chooses to address you personally, i think that means that he is the Catholic, not you.

but i would suggest he let you answer questions too, since different Catholics may have different opinions. if people want to really understand Catholicism then they can't very well stick to just one person's vantage point of it.

The Church has never accepted the heretic heliocentric system.


they accepted it in 1741!

where is your soucrce that says the church has never accepted it.

and cherry ridge seems to be a better christian than you. mr. "i judge and hate everyone who isn't catholic, even the catholics who dont' adhere to my pre-18th century dogma"

Alright I will.

will you call it "ask an insane catholic"?

if you were to become a nun, what order would you join?

if you are male, make that "monk"

What exactly is the relationship between the pope and God?

What exactly is the relationship between the pope and God?
The pope is the Vicar of Christ on earth. Jesus appointed Peter as the first pope and every pope can trace the apolistic liniage back to Peter.

Answer to the If i were to become a monk question.
A Franciscan. If i were to become a priest, Jesuit or diocesan.

What should catholic politicians do in regards to the pope's wishes?

Is jesus inconsistent then since the popes have contradicted themselves throughout the ages? (earth being flat, earth being center of universe, crusades, halocaust apology... etc)

Edit: And what exactly is a Vicar?

i think that Catholic pliticians should listen to the pope.
If i were the pro choice "catholic" politicians bishops, they would be excommunicated.
No, Jesus is not inconsistent.
Vicar is the successor.
It really means sucessor of Peter.
The vicar of christ means that he christs representative on earth.

bump

bump

All not catholic go to hell.
God loves EVERYONE.

Bull. Once again, we act as if Catholics are the only people allowed into heaven. Who decided that, the Catholic church! Does the Bible say you have to be Catholic to get into heaven??? NO!!!

Bull. Once again, we act as if Catholics are the only people allowed into heaven. Who decided that, the Catholic church! Does the Bible say you have to be Catholic to get into heaven??? NO!!!
He gave Peter the authority to make decisions binding on heaven and earth. This also means his successors, the Popes. Popes have made this. And it is binding on heaven on earth.

He gave Peter the authority to make decisions binding on heaven and earth. This also means his successors, the Popes. Popes have made this. And it is binding on heaven on earth.

And Peter never said he was Catholic, even if he was the first "pope", the church was not an organized institution at the time.

So, everyone out there listen up!!! Despite what CR, the heaven gestapo, says, you don't have to be Catholic to get into heaven, just accept Jesus as your savior and follow the Bible. Just be a good Christian.

And Peter never said he was Catholic, even if he was the first "pope", the church was not an organized institution at the time.

So, everyone out there listen up!!! Despite what CR, the heaven gestapo, says, you don't have to be Catholic to get into heaven, just accept Jesus as your savior and follow the Bible. Just be a good Christian.
Crossman is a Christian-PAGAN.
You need to have faith PLUS good works.

Crossman is a Christian-PAGAN.
You need to have faith PLUS good works.

Yes I am. And that doesn't make me any less of a Christian, I still worship the Lord Almighty and Jesus Christ. I just have mixed beliefs. So what are you saying, my beliefs aren't as good as yours so I can't get into heaven?

Also CR, I believe that "hollier-than-thou" Christians such as yourself give our religion a bad image. Christianity teaches tolerance and accepting people, not telling people if you aren't what I am you'll go to hell. Jesus never forced people to follow him, he gave them a choice. He never said "Follow me or you'll burn in Hell for eternity!!!!"

If you're such a good Christian CR, why don't you try some of that tolerance and acceptance, though since you are only 12, I don't expect you to be capable of that.

Sorry Crossman, but you can't worship Christ AND demons (your pagan Gods) and still get to heaven.
One of the commandments
"I the Lord am your God, and you shall have no other Gods before me"

Jesus died for the sins of all mankind, not just his followers.

Sorry Crossman, but you can't worship Christ AND demons (your pagan Gods) and still get to heaven.
One of the commandments
"I the Lord am your God, and you shall have no other Gods before me"

I do not worship deamons, thank you very much. Nor do I worship any gods other than the Lord Almighty and his son Jesus Christ.

Crossman, pagans worship demons.
YOU MUST ACCEPT that he died for you.

I do not worship deamons, thank you very much. Nor do I worship any gods other than the Lord Almighty and his son Jesus Christ.
You still hold belief in other Gods. These "gods" are demons.

Do not act as if you know my beliefs, and don't you dare criticize them without attempting to understand them.

You still hold belief in other Gods. These "gods" are demons.

What other gods do I believe in? You know? Absolutely none. I believe in God, and no others. Pagans do not have to believe in multiple Gods. Boy, you no nothing of pagans than what you are fed by the church. Why don't you do some non-Catholic reading and find out the truth.

Don't tell me what my beliefs are until you understand them, which you are no where near doing.

Catholicism IS the truth.

Catholicism IS the truth.

Thats fine if you believe that. Its what you've been bred to think. Maybe when you are older you'll be more open to actually listening to or trying to understand other people's beliefs. Maybe, but I doubt it.

Crossman, pagans worship demons.
YOU MUST ACCEPT that he died for you.

No, not all do. I don't. Neither do any other pagans I associate with. I already have accepted himas my savior thank you very much.

It's interesting how the younger you are, the more vehemently held is your opinion... Don't let this thread turn into a flamefest. :)

I'll try to answer your questions, if you have some.

It's interesting how the younger you are, the more vehemently held is your opinion...

Oh, indeed. He is a perfect example of that.

What does age have to do with anything? I ave met some brilliant 5 year-olds who understand the world better than I can ever hope to and are more tolerant than I can imagine. Conversely, there are some very bitter elderly people out there who hate everyone and understand nothing. Crossman, you're right you don't have to be Catholic to enter heaven. Believers and non-believers alike can enter into the Beatific vision, but obvioulsy this means that it's not just about accepting Jesus Christ as you Lord and Savior. He died for all of us on Calvary, to redeem our sins. In the Bible, there is several mentions of sin that kills the soul- what the Church teaches to be mortal sin, and even if you've accpeted Christ, you're still eternally damned unless you confess to someone acting in persona christi- a priest. Also, how do you respond to John 6? He says you must eat his flesh to have eternal life and I can think of only one Church that honors this wish. And before I get jumped on for not having outside views. I am facsinated by relgion the more I studied, the more I found there to be one true Church instituted by Christ himself. Also, my parents were very luke-warm, so it's not by way of them.However as a human being, everyone has the God-given gift of free will and is free to believe what he or she wants, but by knowing the Truth, I can't help but share it. If you have questions, feel free to ask me.
Christ's Peace!

Thank you WM. Yes, I know i said accept Christ to get to heaven, but I sort of jumped over myself on that one. That's a requirement for Christians, but yeah I agree that non-believers can get into heaven.

why do priests like to give you light slaps on the cheek

Heh heh, my CATHOLIC grandmother told me that for non-catholics, when you enter heaven you have to be quiet so that the room full of Catholics don't find out that they aren't the only ones there.

why do priests like to give you light slaps on the cheekProbably just his personality. Being friendly?

Heh heh, my CATHOLIC grandmother told me that for non-catholics, when you enter heaven you have to be quiet so that the room full of Catholics don't find out that they aren't the only ones there.
That is an old joke.
and this counts as a BUMP

why do priests like to give you light slaps on the cheek
Just their personality. Not all do that.

why dose this thread have less replys then the other if its older

The other caused controversy, thats why. Most of it is argument.
The author of that thread is a secavandist, meaning he believe that their is no true pope right now. I recognize Pope John PaulII as pope, he recoginzes no pope.

All not catholic go to hell.

Not necessarily, according to Vatican II.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm

http://www.beliefnet.com/story/131/story_13115_2.html

Catholicism
Among the many changes instituted in Catholicism as part of the monumental Second Vatican Council in the 1960s was the declaration Nostra Aetate ("In Our Time"), which formally rejects the charge of deicide, "decries hatred, persecution, displays of anti-Semitism directed against Jews at any time and by any one," and calls for "mutual respect and knowledge" between Catholics and Jews.

Most relevant (at least as one example):

http://news.adventist.org/data/2002/07/1029862668/index.html.en

Roman Catholic leaders in the United States declared last week that they will no longer target Jews for conversion to Catholicism. According to a document released jointly by the Catholics and a major U.S. Jewish organization, the Old Testament covenant between God and the Jewish people is "eternally valid." The Bishops conclude in their portion of the statement that there is no need for Jews to embrace Christianity in order to receive salvation.

Thanks QahJon.
Any more questions?

is tenete traditiones really a nutbag?


oh, and is it true that the vatican has both accepted the heliocentric system (since 1471) and stopped concedmning galileo galieli(1992)?

is it also true that the pope has accepted evolution guided by god, and that the jews are indeed not responsable for the death of jesus who was indeed, a jew himself?

I've been brought up Catholic:
I heard the Catholic Church only recently accepted the heliocentric system (80's). I've seen with my own eyes the vatican's release that they now accept the theory of evolution as "more than a hypothesis." (For more information on that, check the vatican website, they also have beautifully placed all of the art works they own for view on the site).

And yes, Vatican II (which was the latest large meeting of all Catholic leaders to express the direction of the faith) finally liberated the Jewish people of the blame for the death of Jesus.

If you seen Passion of the Christ, you may have found out Mel Gibson is part of a radical group that rejects Vatican II.

Your thread claims to "Ask a Catholic." So far you have not given any Catholic answers, just your own opinions.

The Church has never accepted the heretic heliocentric system.
Also perhaps you may not have heard of the great Catholic dogma:
extra ecclesiam nulla salus

This thread says "ask a Catholic", not "ask Cherry Ridge his opinions on what he thinks Christian doctrine should be."

Apperently you have no inkling of catholocism if you refer to the vatican's actions as "Catholic answers." Knowing a phrase in Latin does not make you an authority on Catholocism.

The Passionw as a good movie, but yes, sadly Gibson is part of a radical group.
The pope said you can believe in evolution GUIDED BY GOD.
The pope also said that you can believe in the 6 days theory if you want. Ibelieve in the 6 days theory.

Apperently you have no inkling of catholocism if you refer to the vatican's actions as "Catholic answers." Knowing a phrase in Latin does not make you an authority on Catholocism.
He believes that there is no pope at this time. He believe that it is Sede Vacante.
A secavandist. Therefore he is not really a Catholic.

Bull. Once again, we act as if Catholics are the only people allowed into heaven. Who decided that, the Catholic church! Does the Bible say you have to be Catholic to get into heaven??? NO!!!

All non-Catholic who live a good life go to Purgatory for a while. Then heaven. But you have to realize that purgatory is quite a happening place. All the philosophers go there. :)

bump for more questions

Bump

bump

BUMP
c'mon, ask questions

BUMP
c'mon, ask questions
What color is your "Eucharistic table?"

You mean the cloth?
My ALTAR cloth is green in ordinary time, violet during lent and advent, white during easter and christmas are the most common. Then there is black for good friday, and red for feasts of martyrs.

bump for more questions

BUMP for more questions

Why don't you let the thread die?

Because I don't want to.

Why don't you let the thread die?

That's the smartest thing I've heard today.

Are you aware of the massive amount of atrocities committed by your religion in established history and in its so called 'Holy' Book?
http://www.evilbible.com/Ritual_Human_Sacrifice.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Rape.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Murder.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Slavery.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Jesus_Lied.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Biblical%20Contradictions.htm
http://www.evilbible.com/Evil%20Bible%20Quotes.htm
http://www.freewebs.com/see_the_truth/Human%20Sacrifice%20and%20the%20Bible.html
http://www.freewebs.com/see_the_truth/sinning%5Fnazarene.html
http://www.freewebs.com/see_the_truth/TenCommandments.html

I would be enlightened as to how they were so good and benevolent towards all of Jehova's creations?

On the human sacrifice, rape and murder- jesus came and changed that, ask a Jewish person about that ebcuase they do not have the new testament only the old


on slavery-slavery was the norm back them, does it make it right, NO, but don't be outraged becuase Pagans (the Romans) had slaves, protestants ahd slaves and many other religions do

on Jesus lies- THAT IS A LIE about throwing mountains into the sea is a parable or story told by jesus, as a symbol of how powerful faith is the rest are just as easily explained but I am not typing it all

on contricdictions- one example from it- On how he was satisfied and then not, means that first creaton was good, then turned bad


on evil quotes- before jesus, God punished sinners on earth, now when they die, they can go to hell

on "evil jesus"- he was perfect, JEsus never sinned, he was teaching the true way

on Commandments- Commandments are for hte PEOPLE

And jesus is God, the trinity is the Father, SOn, Holy Spirit, 3 beings in one like a clover, 3 leaves on one stem

Also what religion are YOU

On the human sacrifice, rape and murder- jesus came and changed that, ask a Jewish person about that ebcuase they do not have the new testament only the old
Alright, that I will give you. Despite Jesus himself being a sacrifice if the "he died for your sins" is to be believed. Also by that you are saying that the Old Testament, a work of God was lies and was wrong.
on slavery-slavery was the norm back them, does it make it right, NO, but don't be outraged becuase Pagans (the Romans) had slaves, protestants ahd slaves and many other religions do
Yes slaves were the norm, but they didn't have Gods claiming to be completely benevolent, yet engage in slavery.
on Jesus lies- THAT IS A LIE about throwing mountains into the sea is a parable or story told by jesus, as a symbol of how powerful faith is the rest are just as easily explained but I am not typing it all
So he was hyperbolising? Even then he thus implies that faith cannot move mountains, thus there are things faith cannot accomplish, that Jehova does not always listen to your faith, or is not omnipotent.
on contricdictions- one example from it- On how he was satisfied and then not, means that first creaton was good, then turned bad
That one was easily countered, what about some of the others.
on evil quotes- before jesus, God punished sinners on earth, now when they die, they can go to hell
So now instead of enduring pain until death, they can endure pain until the end of time? That's benevolent.
on "evil jesus"- he was perfect, JEsus never sinned, he was teaching the true way
How can you say he didn't sin when the evidence is right there? He was sinfiul, yet that is supposedly 'the true way' when if you do it like he did you are condemned to eternity in 'hell'.
on Commandments- Commandments are for hte PEOPLE
So we have to follow his laws but he doesn't need to? That's called being a hypocrite.
And jesus is God, the trinity is the Father, SOn, Holy Spirit, 3 beings in one like a clover, 3 leaves on one stem
So then you are saying that Jesus was God and the Holy Spirit, not the Son of God?
Also what religion are YOU
Ancient Egyptian/Sumerian Pagan, or if you find that a little long, a Spiritual Satanist.

Also what religion are YOU

It doesn't matter what religion anyone is. According to you, if they don't share your beliefs they're wrong and going to Hell, or purgatory. Since only your idea of Catholics can go to heaven.

So then you are saying that Jesus was God and the Holy Spirit, not the Son of God?

Indeed. I believe in the Trinity. But that is a good point. Don't forget though, Cherry Ridge takes every word of the Bible literally.

It doesn't matter what religion anyone is. According to you, if they don't share your beliefs they're wrong and going to Hell, or purgatory. Since only your idea of Catholics can go to heaven.
Even Catholics go to Purgatory. That's where all who are on their way to Heaven get cleansed of the stain of sin, since nothing that is imperfect can enter Heaven.
And non-Catholics can certainly enter Heaven. Read the Vatican document Lumen Gensium.

i have a few questions. whats with the whole priest thing? i was talking to one of my friends and he said they acted as mediators between the church and God. doesnt the bible say that Christ is the only mediator? and where does the authority of the pope come from? i.e., why is he considered infailible? its not in the bible at all.not meaning to be rude, but did u guys just make that up or something? anyways thats it for now. i hope u actually answer this

i have a few questions. whats with the whole priest thing? i was talking to one of my friends and he said they acted as mediators between the church and God. doesnt the bible say that Christ is the only mediator? and where does the authority of the pope come from? i.e., why is he considered infailible? its not in the bible at all.not meaning to be rude, but did u guys just make that up or something? anyways thats it for now. i hope u actually answer this
Priests go back to ancient Judaic times, and Christ too has priests. He commanded His apostles: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age." (Matt 28:19-20) Note that a Jewish priest is called "rabbi," Aramaic for teacher. Christ sent the Apostles as His priests to teach because they knew of Christ and what He taught. Christ also sent the Holy Spirit down onto the Apostles, and gave them His authority to forgive sins: And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Recieve the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." (John 20:22-23) Catholic priests can trace their priesthood back to the Apostles, and thus a priest has a connection to God through the sacrament of Holy Orders that others may not have.
As for the pope, he is the Successor of Peter, whom Christ chose as the foundation of his Church: Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevails against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt 16:17-19) Here Christ gives Peter a special precedence over the rest of the Apostles, making him their leader and thus the leader of the Church on earth. The line of popes from Peter goes unbroken all the way up to today's Pope John Paul II.
Hope this helps. :)

It doesn't matter what religion anyone is. According to you, if they don't share your beliefs they're wrong and going to Hell, or purgatory. Since only your idea of Catholics can go to heaven.

Crossman: express your opinions less personally and vitriolically, please. Cherry Ridge is expressing what s/he understands to be Catholic doctrine. Attacking him/her for personal beliefs is not making your argument any stronger.

Indeed. I believe in the Trinity. But that is a good point. Don't forget though, Cherry Ridge takes every word of the Bible literally.
I'm full of good points, or so people tell me. That's also what I'm counting on.

Cherry Ridge, a maori the other day on hearing I was Catholic, then went on I

believe in a motive to just purely aggrevate me, about his assertion that

the Pope was in fact really, the representative of Satan on Earth.

Then he asked me about if I knew what the popes hat signified, because it

had three different sections to it, one representing Earth. the other two,

heaven and Hell.

I was however to aggrevated by him this time, and he walked away without

finishing.

Do you have any knowlege of this claim?

Cherry Ridge, a maori the other day on hearing I was Catholic, then went on I
believe in a motive to just purely aggrevate me, about his assertion that
the Pope was in fact really, the representative of Satan on Earth.
Then he asked me about if I knew what the popes hat signified, because it
had three different sections to it, one representing Earth. the other two,
heaven and Hell.
I was however to aggrevated by him this time, and he walked away without
finishing.
Do you have any knowlege of this claim?
Even if it resembles that, his garb is still stolen.
The Cincture is a parallel to the Witch's Cord or Girdle
The Alb is a Ceremonial Robe
The Bishop's Miter is a copy of the Ancient Egyptian Crowns of the Gods and the Pharaohs
The Crosier represents the sorcerer's blasting rod and bears a strong resemblance to the Ancient Egyptian Crook

http://www.angelfire.com/empire/serpentis666/Vestments.gif

On the human sacrifice, rape and murder- jesus came and changed that, ask a Jewish person about that ebcuase they do not have the new testament only the old

Well first, I always find it interesting that Christians want to claim the spiritual legitimacy of the Jews as being "God's people", but when it comes to the various crap that "God's people" did- under GOD'S command- in the OT, it's always, "Oh, that's not us, it's THOSE folks..."

Second, if you think rape and murder went out with the arrival of Christianity, you might want to pick up a history textbook.

Lastly, as pertaining Judaism and sacrifice (there's no human sacrifice in Judaism, BTW):

http://www.jewfaq.org/qorbanot.htm

Do Jews offer sacrifices today?

No. To my knowledge, no Jews today offer any kind of animal sacrifice or offerings, nor have Jews offered sacrifices since the second century C.E. I have occasionally heard rumors that there are Orthodox rabbis in Israel who practice the techniques of ritual sacrifice, so that the knowledge will not be lost, but I do not know if these stories are reliable, and even if they are, this is not quite the same thing as offering a sacrifice.

When did Jews stop offering sacrifices, and why?

For the most part, the practice of sacrifice stopped in the year 70 C.E., when the Roman army destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem, the place where sacrifices were offered. The practice was briefly resumed during the Jewish War of 132-135 C.E., but was ended permanently after that war was lost. There were also a few communities that continued sacrifices for a while after that time.

We stopped offering sacrifices because we do not have a proper place to offer them. The Torah specifically commands us not to offer sacrifices wherever we feel like it; we are only permitted to offer sacrifices in the place that G-d has chosen for that purpose. Deut. 12:13-14. It would be a sin to offer sacrifices in any other place, akin to stealing candles and wine to observe Shabbat.

The last place appointed by G-d for this purpose was the Temple in Jerusalem, but the Temple has been destroyed and a mosque has been erected in the place where it stood. Until G-d provides us with another place, we cannot offer sacrifices. There was at one time an opinion that in the absence of an assigned place, we could offer sacrifices anywhere. Based on that opinion, certain communities made their own sacrificial places. However, the majority ultimately ruled against this practice, and all sacrifice ceased.

Orthodox Jews believe that when the messiah comes, a place will be provided for sacrificial purposes.

...How do Jews obtain forgiveness without sacrifices?

Forgiveness is obtained through repentance, prayer and good deeds.

In Jewish practice, prayer has taken the place of sacrifices. In accordance with the words of Hosea, we render instead of bullocks the offering of our lips (Hosea 14:3) (please note: the KJV translates this somewhat differently). While dedicating the Temple, King Solomon also indicated that prayer can be used to obtain forgiveness (I Kings 8:46-50). Our prayer services are in many ways designed to parallel the sacrificial practices. For example, we have an extra service on shabbat, to parallel the extra shabbat offering. For more information about this, see Jewish Liturgy.

It is important to note that in Judaism, sacrifice was never the exclusive means of obtaining forgiveness, was not in and of itself sufficient to obtain forgiveness, and in certain circumstances was not even effective to obtain forgiveness. This will be discussed further below.

But isn't a blood sacrifice required in order to obtain forgiveness?

No. Although animal sacrifice is one means of obtaining forgiveness, there are non-animal offerings as well, and there are other means for obtaining forgiveness that do not involve sacrifices at all.

The passage that people ordinarily cite for the notion that blood is required is Leviticus 17:11: "For the soul of the flesh is in the blood and I have assigned it for you upon the altar to provide atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that atones for the soul." But the passage that this verse comes from is not about atonement; it is about dietary laws, and the passage says only that blood is used to obtain atonement; not that blood is the only means for obtaining atonement. Leviticus 17:10-12 could be paraphrased as "Don't eat blood, because blood is used in atonement rituals; therefore, don't eat blood."

Were sacrifices a symbol of the savior to come?

Not according to Judaism. That is a Christian teaching that has no basis in Jewish thought. Jews don't believe in a savior, and don't believe that sacrifice has anything to do with a savior or messiah.

Quite the contrary, some would say that the original institution of sacrifice had more to do with the Judaism's past than with its future. Rambam suggested that the entire sacrificial cult in Judaism was ordained as an accommodation of man's primitive desires.

Sacrifice is an ancient and universal human expression of religion. Sacrifice existed among the Hebrews long before the giving of the Torah. When the laws of sacrifice were laid down in the Torah, the pre-existence of a system of sacrificial offering was understood, and sacrificial terminology was used without any explanation. The Torah, rather than creating the institution of sacrifice, carefully circumscribes and limits the practice, permitting it only in certain places, at certain times, in certain manners, by certain people, and for certain purposes. Rambam suggests that these limitations are designed to wean a primitive people away from the debased rites of their idolatrous neighbors.

on evil quotes- before jesus, God punished sinners on earth, now when they die, they can go to hell

Um... yay? :confused: Are you saying before Jesus, there was no Hell?

Why do Catholics start so many wars?

Why do Catholics start so many wars?

Name the wars.

Name the wars.

Well, the issue of "starting" is a little tricky, but I can think of some off the top of my head:

- Crusades

- Wars of Religion in France (started by an edict issued by the Church against the Huguenots, followed by the Vassy Massacre). http://www.lepg.org/wars.htm

- Reconquista of Spain

- Lastly, this isn't exactly a war per se, but the whole Pope-backed Spanish rape of the Americas.

Well They haven't got special names but:

1. Religious conflicts in Ireland,
2. The invention of the "Holy" Christian Crusades, by "Saint" Augustine
3. Catholics in Switzerland helped the German Nazis with finances stolen from exterminated Jews.
4. South American Catholics harbored (And probably still do) World War II Nazis
5. The popes of even modern times ordered nationals and races killed, wherever there was seen to be people who weren't convertible to their insane version of "universal" - that is, "universal" bowing down to their pope. This has happened in Latin America quite recently, racist-style (more "holiness"), in Haiti, and..*cough Vietnam*

Oh, so much hate! Cherry Ridge, you're a braver Catholic than I.

Why do Catholics start so many wars?

because they're human.

I'd like to hear a catholic's personal perspective on Greek orthodoxy and the past their church shares with it.
If you can, please touch on the belief that the "what you hold true on earth..." and other such items used by catholics to support peter's unique position as 'pope' were not actually directed at Peter, that Peter never indicated the possession of such responsibility, and that the supposed direct descendancy of all popes to Peter cannot be adequately proven due to happenings early on in the church's history.

I'd also like to hear their personal feelings on the concept of venerating religious institutions not mentioned in original christian documents, specifically those within catholocism that could arguably be seen as key aspects of the sect that separates it from other denominations.

thanks :D

because they're human.
I'm human, don't see me hangin anyone. Or burning anyone.

I'm human, don't see me hangin anyone. Or burning anyone.

I'm human and Catholic. Same here.

Julius Caesar was technically a Pagan - he sure as hell wasn't Christian. He's responsible for a lot of death. Muslims and Christians have been at each other's throats since the first day they met. Neither side has moral superiority. The point of my post was that the world's problems are not the fault of Catholics. Of course, a Catholic who claims to be better than anyone else is a bad Catholic. That includes the ones who hang or burn people.

I'm human and Catholic. Same here.

Julius Caesar was technically a Pagan - he sure as hell wasn't Christian. He's responsible for a lot of death. Muslims and Christians have been at each other's throats since the first day they met. Neither side has moral superiority. The point of my post was that the world's problems are not the fault of Catholics. Of course, a Catholic who claims to be better than anyone else is a bad Catholic. That includes the ones who hang or burn people.

Yeah, the point of my short list certainly wasn't to imply that Catholics are worse than anyone else. Merely that their history has its share of blots, not unlike most religious movements (not that there haven't been bloody secular movements, too).

I too would place the problems squarely on the shoulders of human beings. The issue isn't religion vs. secularism, or Catholic vs. Muslim. Humans are profoundly imperfect creatures, with great capabilities for cruelty and hatred.

Yeah, the point of my short list certainly wasn't to imply that Catholics are worse than anyone else. Merely that their history has its share of blots, not unlike most religious movements (not that there haven't been bloody secular movements, too).

I too would place the problems squarely on the shoulders of human beings. The issue isn't religion vs. secularism, or Catholic vs. Muslim. Humans are profoundly imperfect creatures, with great capabilities for cruelty and hatred.

Cool. It's always good to finish a topic well. Thanks. As a general aside, I actually do hold the Church responsible for a number of crimes. Personally, I think the faith of Catholicism would be better if the Church was significantly smaller, both in numbers and power. #1 trap for Catholics: arrogance.

Yeah, the point of my short list certainly wasn't to imply that Catholics are worse than anyone else. Merely that their history has its share of blots, not unlike most religious movements (not that there haven't been bloody secular movements, too).

I too would place the problems squarely on the shoulders of human beings. The issue isn't religion vs. secularism, or Catholic vs. Muslim. Humans are profoundly imperfect creatures, with great capabilities for cruelty and hatred.

And they like to create daity's to reassure them that there acts of horror will be somehow fogiven if they get on there knee's. But to a non-anti-religious point, people seem to like pinning wars on religion as a cover-up for other reasons, I only pin them on religions when that religion has accept it. I only listed stuff that Catholics have said "In the name of God" to.

And they like to create daity's to reassure them that there acts of horror will be somehow fogiven if they get on there knee's. But to a non-anti-religious point, people seem to like pinning wars on religion as a cover-up for other reasons, I only pin them on religions when that religion has accept it. I only listed stuff that Catholics have said "In the name of God" to.

I'm willing to bet that those "In the name of God" instances can be traced back to individuals rather than the Church as a whole. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any wars or massacres or oppression that's somehow necessary to the faith.

I realize that the inquisition was nothing more than the world's first anti-feminist movement. The holocost was something the Church should've opposed. *insert other examples here*

I'm going to stand by my statement from before: Catholics are humans. Humans find it quite easy to say "in the name of God", and they don't need God's backing to do so. I continue to fail to see this universal human flaw as a weakness of Catholicism.

Your thread claims to "Ask a Catholic." So far you have not given any Catholic answers, just your own opinions.

The Church has never accepted the heretic heliocentric system.
Also perhaps you may not have heard of the great Catholic dogma:
extra ecclesiam nulla salus

This thread says "ask a Catholic", not "ask Cherry Ridge his opinions on what he thinks Christian doctrine should be."
Actually Chery Ridge speaks the truth, His Holiness accepred heliocentric system with ex cathedra authority.
You on the otherhand speak from Pre-Vatican Council herasy so appauling that it shoul warrent excommunication!

I'm willing to bet that those "In the name of God" instances can be traced back to individuals rather than the Church as a whole. Off the top of my head, I can't think of any wars or massacres or oppression that's somehow necessary to the faith.

I realize that the inquisition was nothing more than the world's first anti-feminist movement. The holocost was something the Church should've opposed. *insert other examples here*

I'm going to stand by my statement from before: Catholics are humans. Humans find it quite easy to say "in the name of God", and they don't need God's backing to do so. I continue to fail to see this universal human flaw as a weakness of Catholicism.

It's a weakness only presenting itself upon the acceptance of religion...well accept for Buddhism.

Well They haven't got special names but:

1. Religious conflicts in Ireland,
2. The invention of the "Holy" Christian Crusades, by "Saint" Augustine
3. Catholics in Switzerland helped the German Nazis with finances stolen from exterminated Jews.
4. South American Catholics harbored (And probably still do) World War II Nazis
5. The popes of even modern times ordered nationals and races killed, wherever there was seen to be people who weren't convertible to their insane version of "universal" - that is, "universal" bowing down to their pope. This has happened in Latin America quite recently, racist-style (more "holiness"), in Haiti, and..*cough Vietnam*

1. Sorry but do you know who William of Orange is?

Hint he wasnt a Catholic.

2. The Muslims have as much to blame for the Crusades, you dont seem to

remember them putting the entire middle east and Northern Africa, to the

threat of convert or perish, very well.

3. Proof?

4. Proof?

5. Your talking rubbish here.

Do you have the same problems with modern day Islam, or is it only the

Catholics you have it in for.

Bigot.

It's a weakness only presenting itself upon the acceptance of religion...well accept for Buddhism.

I'm sorry, that went right over my head. Would you mind expanding that thought a bit more?

1. Sorry but do you know who William of Orange is?

Hint he wasnt a Catholic.

2. The Muslims have as much to blame for the Crusades, you dont seem to

remember them putting the entire middle east and Northern Africa, to the

threat of convert or perish, very well.

3. Proof?

4. Proof?

5. Your talking rubbish here.

Do you have the same problems with modern day Islam, or is it only the

Catholics you have it in for.

Bigot.

Only the religion that forced me out of it's church. Oh wait....

So your letting the catholics off because someone else was "Just as equally to blame" thats so childish, "Oh he did it too mummy!"

Oh and too your "Proof?" give me Proof it didn't happen ;) Bigot? OOh I best NEVER reply to anything or pose any type of question. By modern I didn't mean currrent darlin.

Prick.

Only the religion that forced me out of it's church. Oh wait....

So your letting the catholics off because someone else was "Just as equally to blame" thats so childish, "Oh he did it too mummy!"

Oh and too your "Proof?" give me Proof it didn't happen ;) Bigot? OOh I best NEVER reply to anything or pose any type of question. By modern I didn't mean currrent darlin.

Prick.

If you feel comfortable sharing, why did the church kick you out?

Only the religion that forced me out of it's church. Oh wait....

So your letting the catholics off because someone else was "Just as equally to blame" thats so childish, "Oh he did it too mummy!"

Oh and too your "Proof?" give me Proof it didn't happen ;) Bigot? OOh I best NEVER reply to anything or pose any type of question. By modern I didn't mean currrent darlin.

Prick.

Do you know who William of Orange is?

Do you know ... anything?

How am I letting the Catholics off you idiot?

How childish are you to compare warfare to children fighting?

Also the onus is on you, if you know what that means, to come up with proof

first, as you made the accusation.

If you dont want to be called a bigot, then I suggest you dont go out on a

Catholic bash, as thats all your really doing, so bravely too.

You didnt mean current, well what about the 1500 years of Islamic jihads

before hand, I guess you just conveniently forgot them.

Hi, I've been watching this thread, and as somone who has *really* close Catholic friends I would offer some observations:

-> Belief, common to all Western Christians (the Syrian Church alters one clause about the nature of the Holy Sprit)

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty, //all Christians say this
maker of heaven and earth, //desn't say how, the fact is the important bit
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, //again, the same one
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father, //begotton - of the same type,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father. //somehow, dunno, why should I understand?
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation //For **US**?!
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, //nothing about her not getting laid after
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried. //really, if that's what the ninth Legion thought, he really was dead, what happened really was a miracle
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures; //yes, the jews predicted it
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end. //Woohoo!

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son. //"and the son" not believed by some Orthodox Christians.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. //Because he is rather cool
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. //note the small "c" on catholic
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. //But I wish they'd heated the baptistry.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, //Wow! This is the nub of it!
and the life of the world to come.

On that last line that I would like to point out that I have no idea about Sheol (shadowy world of death), Gehenna (the BBQ), Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, Limbo; but I am sure that those who accept Jesus Christ's ability to save have a place for them to be ressurected to in God's Kingdom which has no end. This may well be what we call Heaven.

Note on the Heresy of Good Works.....
Acceptance of Jesus ->Forgiveness of Sins -> Filling with Holy Sprit -> Good works
That order, and no other. Even the Roman Church accepts this, although sometimes it looks to some people like it doesn't, or certain Roman Catholics don't.

A note about Slavery - It was abolished by Christians such as William Wilberforce and John Wesley. When it came to the Gas Chambers of Auswitchz Saint Maximillian Kolbe gave his life so that a family could keep it's father. For every example of Christians being Evil that you give me I can give you a non- Christians being similar.

Fianlly my thoughts on Priests....The main difference I see between Roman, Syrian, Coptic, Greek, Russian and some Anglican Churches and the churches that came from the Reformation is that the Latter accept the concept of "the priesthood of all believers". From this I feel stem most of the differences.

eg. For Easterners Apistolic succession means Priests, whilst for Protestants it means anyone who believes, so that there is no reason why we can't have out own leaders who were not ordained by Priests distribute the mass. Transubstation, although being a generally Catholic interpretation of the scripture (which I don't care about its the meaning for me, not what the bread becomes or doesn't) is also believed in by some prots.

This debate might find this helpful http://www.vatican.va/
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html


So a big hello to my brother's and sisters in Christ

in view of this:

my question is, why should i want the love of that kind of God?
The god you worship now gives you all you want666?Health, Wealth, Peace of mind. Why are you here fool?

Do you know who William of Orange is?

Do you know ... anything?

How am I letting the Catholics off you idiot?

How childish are you to compare warfare to children fighting?

Also the onus is on you, if you know what that means, to come up with proof

first, as you made the accusation.

If you dont want to be called a bigot, then I suggest you dont go out on a

Catholic bash, as thats all your really doing, so bravely too.

You didnt mean current, well what about the 1500 years of Islamic jihads

before hand, I guess you just conveniently forgot them.

Same thing again, shift the argument. Just keep shifting it matey. Funny that your the one throwing insults everywhere. Get over it honey. No reason to get your nickers in a knot. Honestly, I don't care whether there were a million years of Islamic Jihads, catholics, christians, athiests and politicians all should take responsibility. I wasn't conveiniently forgetting everything. If I wanted to point out every religious war this site would probably overload darlin. So give it a rest, responsibility falls in the hands of many.

Hi, I've been watching this thread, and as somone who has *really* close Catholic friends I would offer some observations:

-> Belief, common to all Western Christians (the Syrian Church alters one clause about the nature of the Holy Sprit)

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty, //all Christians say this
maker of heaven and earth, //desn't say how, the fact is the important bit
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ, //again, the same one
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father, //begotton - of the same type,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father. //somehow, dunno, why should I understand?
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation //For **US**?!
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary, //nothing about her not getting laid after
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried. //really, if that's what the ninth Legion thought, he really was dead, what happened really was a miracle
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures; //yes, the jews predicted it
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end. //Woohoo!

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son. //"and the son" not believed by some Orthodox Christians.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified. //Because he is rather cool
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church. //note the small "c" on catholic
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins. //But I wish they'd heated the baptistry.
We look for the resurrection of the dead, //Wow! This is the nub of it!
and the life of the world to come.

On that last line that I would like to point out that I have no idea about Sheol (shadowy world of death), Gehenna (the BBQ), Heaven, Hell, Purgatory, Limbo; but I am sure that those who accept Jesus Christ's ability to save have a place for them to be ressurected to in God's Kingdom which has no end. This may well be what we call Heaven.

Note on the Heresy of Good Works.....
Acceptance of Jesus ->Forgiveness of Sins -> Filling with Holy Sprit -> Good works
That order, and no other. Even the Roman Church accepts this, although sometimes it looks to some people like it doesn't, or certain Roman Catholics don't.

A note about Slavery - It was abolished by Christians such as William Wilberforce and John Wesley. When it came to the Gas Chambers of Auswitchz Saint Maximillian Kolbe gave his life so that a family could keep it's father. For every example of Christians being Evil that you give me I can give you a non- Christians being similar.

Fianlly my thoughts on Priests....The main difference I see between Roman, Syrian, Coptic, Greek, Russian and some Anglican Churches and the churches that came from the Reformation is that the Latter accept the concept of "the priesthood of all believers". From this I feel stem most of the differences.

eg. For Easterners Apistolic succession means Priests, whilst for Protestants it means anyone who believes, so that there is no reason why we can't have out own leaders who were not ordained by Priests distribute the mass. Transubstation, although being a generally Catholic interpretation of the scripture (which I don't care about its the meaning for me, not what the bread becomes or doesn't) is also believed in by some prots.

This debate might find this helpful http://www.vatican.va/
http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_decree_19641121_unitatis-redintegratio_en.html


So a big hello to my brother's and sisters in Christ

Ok, I'll give this a try, but I'm sure I'll be flamed soon after, so consider this my disclaimer: I don't know everything.

I'm going to skip your breakdown of the creed. Mainly because that's a lot of ground to cover. Sorry.

As for the afterlife bit, there's a lot of disagreement around. For the record, I'm a Christian Mystic. So, even though I'm Catholic, I don't necessarily think exactly like the Church. The important thing is what exactly heaven is. Heaven is where you get to meet God. Where you become one with God. There's no realistic way to describe it any further. It isn't just paradise, or a place to chill after you die. Hell, by contrast, is the complete absence of God. Most Christians would probably agree that hell isn't just fire and brimstone. I'm confident that out of 100 Christians, you'd get 100 examples of what hell's probably like. I, for one, no longer believe in hell. I belive in Purgatory, which is temporary hell. I do not believe that God would send any soul to everlasting torment. I have an atheist to thank for that. Hell doesn't make sense to me, so I looked at it again. Send me a telegram if you want more information about that; it's kind of off the subject. Limbo no longer exists for Catholics - even the Church decided it was dumb. It was where you went if you died before you were baptized.

Acceptance of Jesus ->Forgiveness of Sins -> Filling with Holy Sprit -> Good works

I dunno about this. I haven't heard of it before. The way I understood it, everyone has the Holy Spirit within them. I guess that flowchart could be correct, but I'm not really sure.

Transubstation is only Catholic as far as I'm aware. Please post any Protestant Sects that do that, please. Transubstation is a major factor in the difference between Catholicism and Protestantism. Transubstation is mystical - if not magical - and is soemthing the Protestant sects were quick to change. Only about 10% of Catholics really believe in transubstation, so I find it hard to believe that Protestant sects have held on to that tradition.

I know I've only answered about half of your post, but this is all I've got for now.

[QUOTE=Glinde Nessroe]Same thing again, shift the argument. Just keep shifting it matey.

Whos shifting?

You still cant answer the first question I asked.

Yep keep dodging it.



Funny that your the one throwing insults everywhere.

Pfft.. look at some of your own.

Get over it honey. No reason to get your nickers in a knot. Honestly, I don't care whether there were a million years of Islamic Jihads, catholics, christians, athiests and politicians all should take responsibility.

lol sweettalker.


I wasn't conveiniently forgetting everything. If I wanted to point out every religious war this site would probably overload darlin.


I doupt you would know about two religous wars.


So give it a rest, responsibility falls in the hands of many.


yeah deep.... care too elaborate on that?

Cherry Ridge, a maori the other day on hearing I was Catholic, then went on I

believe in a motive to just purely aggrevate me, about his assertion that

the Pope was in fact really, the representative of Satan on Earth.

Then he asked me about if I knew what the popes hat signified, because it

had three different sections to it, one representing Earth. the other two,

heaven and Hell.

I was however to aggrevated by him this time, and he walked away without

finishing.

Do you have any knowlege of this claim?
I direct you here http://www.brainyencyclopedia.com/encyclopedia/p/pa/papal_tiara.html#Mea ning of the Triple Tiara

Crossman: express your opinions less personally and vitriolically, please. Cherry Ridge is expressing what s/he understands to be Catholic doctrine. Attacking him/her for personal beliefs is not making your argument any stronger.

Very well. No disrepect, but I suggest you also pay attention to his attacks on my beliefs.

Well They haven't got special names but:

1. Religious conflicts in Ireland,
2. The invention of the "Holy" Christian Crusades, by "Saint" Augustine
3. Catholics in Switzerland helped the German Nazis with finances stolen from exterminated Jews.
4. South American Catholics harbored (And probably still do) World War II Nazis
5. The popes of even modern times ordered nationals and races killed, wherever there was seen to be people who weren't convertible to their insane version of "universal" - that is, "universal" bowing down to their pope. This has happened in Latin America quite recently, racist-style (more "holiness"), in Haiti, and..*cough Vietnam*

It is my opineon that in Ireland, they are freedome fighters forcing the BROTHIS invaders out
Crusades- because the Muslims were killoing Christian pilgrims to the holy land
3-The Ppe helped HIDE jews from the NAZIs he didnt HELP them
4. people of all religion do
5-that is ridiculous

I hereby declare Arcadian Mists as an official question answerer for this thread.

It is my opineon that in Ireland, they are freedome fighters forcing the BROTHIS invaders out

That's just stupid. The "British" Protestants in Northern Ireland have been there for over 300 years and aren't going to be leaving anytime soon. Freedom fighters, my ass. The legitimate leaders of the respective sides have finally figured out that violence doesn't work, and have thankfully started working on a peace process- except when American fuckwits try and fund splinter group bastards so they can feel proud of themselves for helping "freedom fighters" blow people up.

Crusades- because the Muslims were killoing Christian pilgrims to the holy land

Actually I believe the issue was less to do with killing the pilgrims and more to do with the Church bristling over Muslim control over the area. I'm a little hazy on details though. Even if pilgrims were being killed, it hardly justifies invading the whole area, much less however-many Crusades were fought in an attempt to do so (not to mention all the innocent bystanders- such as the Jews- who were slaughtered).

3-The Ppe helped HIDE jews from the NAZIs he didnt HELP them

Bullshit. In general, he did nothing to help them- although that's not the same as outright aiding Nazis.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/anti-semitism/pius.html

The International Catholic-Jewish Historical Commission (ICJHC), a group comprised of three Jewish and three Catholic scholars, was appointed in 1999 by the Holy See's Commission for Religious Relations with the Jews. In October of 2000, the group of scholars finished their review of the Vatican's archives, and submitted their preliminary findings to the Comission's then-President, Cardinal Edward I Cassidy. Their report, entitled "The Vatican and the Holocaust," laid to rest several of the conventional defenses of Pope Pius XII.

The often-espoused view that the Pontiff was unaware of the seriousness of the situation of European Jewry during the war was definitively found to be inaccurate. Numerous documents demonstrated that the Pope was well-informed about the full extent of the Nazi's anti-Semitic practices. A letter from Konrad von Preysing, Bishop of Berlin, that proved that the Pope was aware of the situation as early as January of 1941, particularly caught the attention of the commission. In that letter, Preysing confirms that "Your Holiness is certainly informed about the situation of the Jews in Germany and the neighboring countries. I wish to mention that I have been asked both from the Catholic and Protestant side if the Holy See could not do something on this subject...in favor of these unfortunates." The letter, which was a direct appeal to the Pope himself, without intermediaries, provoked no response. In 1942, an even more compelling eyewitness account of the mass-murder of Jews in Lwow was sent to the Pope by an archbishop; this, too, garnered no response.

The commission also revealed several documents that cast a negative light on the claim that the Vatican did all it could to facilitate emigration of the Jews out of Europe. Internal notes meant only for Vatican representatives revealed the opposition of Vatican officials to Jewish emigration from Europe to Palestine. "The Holy See has never approved of the project of making Palestine a Jewish home...[because] Palestine is by now holier for Catholics than for Jews." Some Catholic higher-ups violated this position of the Vatican by helping Jews to immigrate when they were able to; most did not.

Similarly, the attempts of Jews to escape from Europe to South America were sometimes thwarted by the Vatican. Vatican representatives in Bolivia and Chile wrote to the pontiff regarding the "invasive" and "cynically exploitative" character of the Jewish immigrants, who were already engaged in "dishonest dealings, violence, immorality, and even disrespect for religion." The commission concluded that these accounts probably biased Pius against aiding more Jews in immigrating away from Nazi Europe.

The claim that the Vatican needed to remain neutral in the war has also been refuted in recent months. In January of 2001, a document recently declassified by the U.S. National Archives was discovered by the World Jewish Congress. The document was a report in which Monsignor Giovanni Battista Montini, Pope Pius XII's secretary of state, detailed and denounced several abuses committed by the Soviet Army against German inhabitants of the Soviet Union. The report was widely viewed as demonstrating that the Vatican had no compunctions about speaking out against atrocities, even when doing so would violate neutrality.

The preliminary report released by the IJCHC also asked the Vatican for access to non-published archival documents to more fully investigate the Pope's role in the Holocaust. This request was refused by the Vatican, which allowed them access only to documents from before 1923. As a result, the Commission suspended its study in July 2001, without issuing a final report. Dr. Michael Marrus, one of the three Jewish panelists and a professor of history at the University of Toronto, expained that the commission "ran up against a brick wall.... It would have been really halpful to have had support from the Holy See on this issue."(29)

In 2004, news was disclosed of a diary kept by James McDonald, the League of Nations high commissioner for refugees coming from Germany. In 1933, McDonald raised the treatment of the Jews with then Cardinal Pacelli, who was the Vatican secretary of state. McDonald was specifically interested in helping a group of Jewish refugees in the Saar region, a territory claimed by France and Germany that was turned over to the Germans in 1935. The Pope's defenders cite his intercession on these Jews' behalf as evidence of his sympathy for Jews persecuted by the Nazis. According to McDonald, however, when he disccused the matter with Pacelli, “The response was noncommittal, but left me with the definite impression that no vigorous cooperation could be expected.”(30) Pacelli did intercede in January 1935 to help the Jews, but only after McDonald agreed that American Jews would use their influence in Washington to protect church properties that were being threatened by the Mexican government.(31)

Conclusion

The Pope's reaction to the Holocaust was complex and inconsistent. At times, he tried to help the Jews and was successful. But these successes only highlight the amount of influence he might have had, if he not chosen to remain silent on so many other occasions. No one knows for sure the motives behind Pius XII's actions, or lack thereof, since the Vatican archives have only been fully opened to select researchers. Historians offer many reasons why Pope Pius XII was not a stronger public advocate for the Jews: A fear of Nazi reprisals, a feeling that public speech would have no effect and might harm the Jews, the idea that private intervention could accomplish more, the anxiety that acting against the German government could provoke a schism among German Catholics, the church's traditional role of being politically neutral and the fear of the growth of communism were the Nazis to be defeated.(32) Whatever his motivation, it is hard to escape the conclusion that the Pope, like so many others in positions of power and influence, could have done more to save the Jews.

When we are talking about subjects that are not core to the christian faith such as specifics about heaven and hell or purgatory or people who never hear about Jesus or even the jews it's impossible to know. If the Bible is the soul basis for everything in the christian churches in todays world then there are some unanswerable questions.

All we know about heaven is that a believer in Christ (one who has faith, because even the devil knows and believes), born again christian or whatever else you want to call it goes to heaven when they die.

As far as purgatory is concerned there is nothing to support it in the Bible anywhere. So the real reason you can't get a straight answer from everyone about that is because it was made up.

Hell is talked about briefly in the Bible and it suggests fire and brimstone heavily, but we can know for sure that it is the absolute absence of God and utter torment. Many non-christians say that they don't really care to be away from God because he is not in their lives to begin with. God is all around us everyday. God is the basis for any morals in our cultures around the world. Without God there are no morals and no wrongs or rights. There is also no evidence in the Bible to suggest hell is not eternal.

Again I'm basing my thoughts and conclusions on the Bible because Catholics, Baptists, Assembly of God, Lutherans, (christian religions) all say that it is thier soul basis for their beliefs.

Purgatory as I understand it is a place that is a "limbo" state which you get prayed out of or you do good things or you just wait your turn to get out of? I don't know. So babies are supposed to go there when they die, right?

Well if everyone is so indignant about God being able to send someone to hell forever how could you believe that God would send a baby there if he wasn't baptized by the catholic church the moment it pops out. There is an age of accountability discussed in the Bible at which the person has come of age to understand the truth and make the choice to believe or not. Babies are definitely under whatever that age is, so baptism to wash away the original sin or whatever it is supposed to do, is completely unecessary. The decision to believe in Jesus is taught in the Bible to be a decision that you do not inheret and a decision that is not made for you. It is a personal decision only you can make.

Anyway, back sorta on topic, if hell is not eternal there is no reason for christians to even be here because everyone is going to get to heaven eventually whether they become christian here or not anyway. Right? Plus, God does not send you to hell but your decisions do. I'm not going to debate that so just go get a copy of The Case for Faith.

In the first or second chapter of Romans the Bible says that the truth is known to everyone instinctively . Even with this it is impossible for us to tell beyond any doubt what happens to the jews or people that heve never heard the name of Jesus. But that is not something that should affect what we believe on the core issues of God and Jesus.

There are also some things that our minds are not big enough to comprehend. Such as God creating us in His image but giving us a free will. He also knows the end of time and therefore knows which decision we will make. God is God for a reason and we are not large enough to comprhend these things.

On one last note, if the Bible was fallable (not completely true) there is no reason to have any beliefs whatsoever but since it is infallable there are many things that we can know for sure and count on absolutely. For you all of you that the word absolute makes you cringe I'm not sorry. The Bible does teach absolutes and teaches clearly that everyone that does not believe in the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ will go to hell when they die forever. There is no limbo and there is not a second chance discussed anywhere in the Bible. We are not to tell God that there will be a second chance but He can make one if He wants to. (Just remember that God created us and is all powerful.) He just has not said anything about it and therefore we cannot count on there being one, in case you are indecisive and want further proof... That is a huge risk to take for an eternity in torment. Also, we need to remember that all people are imperfect. That includes christians who can believe things that are wrong and also sin frequently. The only True understanding comes through prayer and Bible reading which is a daily struggle.

I'm writing this really late after many hours of engineering homework so if there are any needs for clarification I will try to check back and address those.

I hereby declare Arcadian Mists as an official question answerer for this thread.

Awesome! Can I smite people?

As far as purgatory is concerned there is nothing to support it in the Bible anywhere. So the real reason you can't get a straight answer from everyone about that is because it was made up.

It wasn't necessarily made up. There's a lot of stuff about Catholicism that comes from other sources. For example, I'm a Carmelite monk. Supposedly, Mother Mary came down to Mt. Carmel (hence the name of the monestary) and bestowed upon the faithful there an important message which I'm not going to bother getting into. There is no proof of this, in fact, and that's led the order into headed competitions with other monistic orders. That happens all the time - two seperate groups of Christians will occasionally come to the came conclusion or be given the same message. As neither has hard evidence of the fact, tension insues.

My personal advice: don't be Catholic if you want proof or evidence. There are better ways to that kind of enlightenment.


Hell is talked about briefly in the Bible and it suggests fire and brimstone heavily, but we can know for sure that it is the absolute absence of God and utter torment. Many non-christians say that they don't really care to be away from God because he is not in their lives to begin with. God is all around us everyday. God is the basis for any morals in our cultures around the world. Without God there are no morals and no wrongs or rights. There is also no evidence in the Bible to suggest hell is not eternal.

Like my earlier post, there are other sources besides the Bible. The Five First Saturdays is one way to sort of get people out of hell.

"You have seen hell where the souls of poor sinners go. To save them, God wishes to establish in the world devotion to my Immaculate Heart. If what I say to you is done, many souls will be saved and there will be peace. The war is going to end; but if people do not cease offending God, a worse one will break out during the pontificate of Pius XI. When you see a night illumined by an unknown light, know that this is the great sign given you by God that he is about to punish the world for its crimes, by means of war, famine, and persecutions of the Church and of the Holy Father."

http://www.theotokos.org.uk/pages/fatima/firstsat.html



Purgatory as I understand it is a place that is a "limbo" state which you get prayed out of or you do good things or you just wait your turn to get out of? I don't know. So babies are supposed to go there when they die, right?

Well if everyone is so indignant about God being able to send someone to hell forever how could you believe that God would send a baby there if he wasn't baptized by the catholic church the moment it pops out. There is an age of accountability discussed in the Bible at which the person has come of age to understand the truth and make the choice to believe or not. Babies are definitely under whatever that age is, so baptism to wash away the original sin or whatever it is supposed to do, is completely unecessary. The decision to believe in Jesus is taught in the Bible to be a decision that you do not inheret and a decision that is not made for you. It is a personal decision only you can make.

Purgatory is not the same as limbo. Purgatory's where you go if you're not good enough for heaven but not evil enough to go to hell. The whole baby thing's been undone. Everyone pretty much agrees that it's a bad idea. I think it began way back when most children didn't live past the age of three or so. Obviously it's very tramatic for parents to lose many of their children this way. It made their passing a bit easier if they thought of the baby as simply a shell, or just a body without a soul. Such a thing would go into limbo. Again, I'm not sure. I just think the people of that age thought of ub-baptized babies as some of us (modern-day people) think of fetuses. Aborting an unborn baby is fine or at least acceptable to some people. In the same respect, I imagine some people lessened their pain by thinking of very young babies as incomplete humans.

Just in case it wasn't obvious, DON'T HOLD ME TO THAT!


Anyway, back sorta on topic, if hell is not eternal there is no reason for christians to even be here because everyone is going to get to heaven eventually whether they become christian here or not anyway. Right? Plus, God does not send you to hell but your decisions do. I'm not going to debate that so just go get a copy of The Case for Faith.

That's going to take way too long to explain. Send me a telegram if you'd like. I'll happily write you an e-mail about the whole thing.

I forgot that I totally skipped over what to believe in Jesus for. I'm sorry about that. Jesus came from heaven where he was with God and took on a human form. He suffered through the indecencies we suffer through. He was tempted by the things we are tempted by everyday (but He absolutely did not give in at any point). He basically lived as a human for 33 years without sin until he was crucified. When He was crucified He took on the burden of all of our sins of the past, present and future. He died on that cross, was buried, went to hell for our sins and rose again on the third day triumphant over even hell and death. (death on a cross is not our ultimate punishment so for Him to take pur place He had to actually go to hell for us) Another thing that only God can fully understand. When we believe in Him we are saying that we believe all of what I said above and we are asking for God's forgivness because we all are to blame for Christ's death on the cross whether we cried to release Barabas or not. Christ died for all our sins and that was His purpose when he came to earth. (For this reason the Jews are not to blame for crucifying Christ any more than we are) When we get away from this central doctrine of the entire Bible too far, we run the risk of confusion and division which has sadly reached a point that it is almost impossible to get the major christian denominations to agree and focus thier efforts together to "Go ye therefore unto all the world making disciples of all nations and baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" Matthew 28:19 which is a christians only purpose in life.

While I like the sentiment expressed in the in the last post by Mongeeses (especially the bit about the jews not being to blame for his death... of course, if HE planned it there's no reason to punish his tools), I'm not particularly fond of the last statement. Why? Because I'm an enthnically jewish athiest/agnostic (you can be both at the same time... they are totally different. An athiest doesn't believe in god, while an agnostic refuses to categorically say if He exists or not. Is there a god? I don't know. Do I think there's a God? Not at all) and by violent allergy to religion has been caused, in part, by some rather unpleasent attempts to convert me.

I'm not saying they pulled out the rack and thumbscrews, but really... who sits a ten year old child down and tells him that if he doesn't do as you say, he'll burn for all eternity. My neighbors... that's who.

I don't think everyone is being entirely fair to the Catholics. All of the charges of violence and attrocities being laid at their door apply equally to most religions. And when you come down to it, most religious wars aren't about religion at all. They are about economics. The crusades were't actually an attempt to kick the muslims out of the holy land, they were a ploy to get rid of a whole bunch of poor younger sons of minor nobles, and to enrich their parent countries. If they were about religion, then how can you explain away the pilliaging of italy and Greece by Crusader armies WHEN THE INHABITANTS WERE CHRISTIAN THEMSELVES? The Children's Crusade was simply a ploy to aquire a large number of young slaves quickly. Every religious war can be traced back to money.... religion just makes a terrific excuse for fighting.

Heb 9:27 And Just as it is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment...

Mt. 12:32 And whoever says a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven; but whoever speaks against the "Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

Not to be forgiven in this age or the age to come---What can be forgien in heaven? In hell? Not likely. Yet Jesus is implying that some sort of post-death forgiveness can occur for some sins. Because He takes care to point out that it WON'T happen for the sin of Speaking against the Holy Spirit.

Rev. 21:27 But nothing unclean shall enter it, nor any one who practices abomination or falsehood, but only those who are written in teh Lamb's book of life.

Mt. 5:25-26 Amke friends quickly with your accuser, while you are going with him to court, lest your accuser hand you over to the judge, and the juidge to the guard, and you to be put in prison; turly, I say to you, YOU WILL NEVER GET OUT UNTILL YOU HAVE PAYED THE LAST PENNY (empahsis mine)

Lk. 12:58-59 As you go with your accuser before the magistrate, make an effort to settle with him on the way, lest he drag you to the judge, and the judge hand you over to the officer, and the officer put you in prison. I tell you, you will never get out till you have paid the very last copper. (Emphasis mine)

Lk 16:19-31 "There was a rich man, who was clothed in purple and fine linen and who feasted sumptuously every day. And at his gate lay a poor man named Lazarus, full of sores, who desired to be fed with what fell from teh rich man's table; moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. The poor man died and was carried by the angels to Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died and was buried; and in Hades, being in torment, he lifted up his eyes, and saw Abraham far off and Lazarus in his bosm. And he called out, 'Father Abraham, have mercy upon me, and send Lazarus to dip the end of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am in anguish in this flame.' but Abraham said, 'Son, remember that you in your lifetime received your good things, and Lazarus in like manner evil things; but now he is comforted here, and you are in anguish. And besides all this, between you and us a great chasm has been fixed, in order that those who would pass from here to you may not be able, and none may cross from there to us.' and he said, 'Then I beg you, father, to send him to my father's house, for I have five brothers, so that he may warn them, lest they also come into this place of torment.' but abraham said, 'They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.' and he said, 'No, father Abraham; but if some one goes to them from the dead, they will repent.' He said to him, 'If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be convinced if some one should rise from the dead.'"

God is love. When in hell one is completely excluded from God. In Hell, one can feel no love for anyone, not even one's self. The rich man is clearly not in heaven, but he just as clearly feels compassion for his brothers, and is concerned for their well being, so he is clearly not in hell. He must be in some third place... Incidentally, this is the only parable in whcih Christ gives one of the persons in the story a name--Lazarus. For this reason, many Christian commentators think this is not a parable, but a description of an historical event known to Christ.

Also The Church never taught Limbo---The Pope never declared this statement, nor did the magesterium. Some wayward bishop or priest may have (and some definately did) but that does not change the fact that it is NOT nor has it EVER BEEN a teaching of the Catholic Church.

What is the Church's belief on babies who die before they are baptized? A definative "We Don't know, but we entrust them to God's Mercy"

Arcadian Mysts: Could I please have your name, First, Last, or Taken name, it doesn't matter. But I would like to refer to a religious as Brother ________.

Mongooses: Catholics do not believe that the bible is the sole basis of our beliefs. The Church is built like a three legged stool: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Sacred Magesterium. We would rather sit stabily rather than perch precariously on one leg.

Without the Sacred Magesterium there would be no bible. After all, they are the ones who compiled it.

-Pio Magnus

Mongooses: Catholics do not believe that the bible is the sole basis of our beliefs. The Church is built like a three legged stool: Sacred Scripture, Sacred Tradition, and Sacred Magesterium. We would rather sit stabily rather than perch precariously on one leg.

Without the Sacred Magesterium there would be no bible. After all, they are the ones who compiled it.

-Pio Magnus

This point is well worth noting, even though I do feel that the buck stops with the bible we must realise the role of what in my tradition is called "Wesley's quadrilateral". The four aspects are Scripture, Tradition, Reason and Experience. All four can be corrupted, and so we must be wary of all, most of all safeguarding ourselves with prayer. For me the test seems to be consistency with the Scripture. If this is a mistake I will just have to rely on the Grace of Yahweh which most traditions seem to agree on.

e.g. Tradition and Reason looked at which bits of the Scripture are consistent (and they are), but scripture informs us about the meanings of Reasoning and Experience. I feel that they do not all have equally strong roles to play. My reason is only human, but the Bible is the end product of 1900 years of learned debate, Tradition is worth questioning, but is often (but not always) there for good reasons. My experiences are exiting limited, like glimpses of the Atlantic, but I will need a map (scripture) to get to New York. Reason has clearly come up with many ideas that plainly run contrary to Christianity, but when one checks it with, and uses it on scripture, experience and tradition it is very powerful.

N.B. When the IRA was first started it had Protestant members. The divide in Northern Irelan is like most other conflicts in the world today about the aftermath of imperialism, in this case English. As an Englishman - I'm Sorry.

Arcadian Mysts: Could I please have your name, First, Last, or Taken name, it doesn't matter. But I would like to refer to a religious as Brother ________.

-Pio Magnus

Um, sure. You may refer to me as John, my Catholic name, or Justin, my birth name. Either's fine. So why're you doing this? I don't really see the need to recognize me in this way. It seems egotistic on my part to allow it.

Bump

Priests go back to ancient Judaic times, and Christ too has priests. He commanded His apostles: "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, until the end of the age." (Matt 28:19-20) Note that a Jewish priest is called "rabbi," Aramaic for teacher. Christ sent the Apostles as His priests to teach because they knew of Christ and what He taught. Christ also sent the Holy Spirit down onto the Apostles, and gave them His authority to forgive sins: And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Recieve the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you forgive are forgiven them, and whose sins you retain are retained." (John 20:22-23) Catholic priests can trace their priesthood back to the Apostles, and thus a priest has a connection to God through the sacrament of Holy Orders that others may not have.
As for the pope, he is the Successor of Peter, whom Christ chose as the foundation of his Church: Jesus said to him in reply, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah. For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father. And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of the netherworld shall not prevails against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt 16:17-19) Here Christ gives Peter a special precedence over the rest of the Apostles, making him their leader and thus the leader of the Church on earth. The line of popes from Peter goes unbroken all the way up to today's Pope John Paul II.
Hope this helps. :)

For starters, Christ didnt send his Apostles out to become priests. he sent them out as teachers, yes, with heavenly-given power, yes, but not as priests. and even if the apostles had the power to forgive sins and heal people, what makes you think that (even if the priest could trace their priesthood back) God choses to grant those ordained as priests the same power? and u still never answered my question about priests acting in a mediating role b/w God and the church. as for the pope, what in the bible tells you that peter was infallible? nothing. just because christ will build his church on him doesnt mean that he is infallible. i dont believe that any human can attain such perfection on earth, except Christ. and you say that the line of popes has been unbroken, then why have there been multiple popes at one time during history? and y have some popes been dead wrong about some things if the entire line is infallible? one new question, about pergatory. (i dont know if thats spelled right) i have a real problem with that aspect of catholic belief. a, where is it found in the bible? b, doesnt the idea that we have to be "refined" further after death negate Christs sacrifice? i believe that Christs sacrifice was perfect, it makes us "white as snow". nothing we can do through works can change that. and, what about the passage where christ tells the sinner on the cross that today you will be with me in paradise? was his pergatory just really short (lol). anyways, thats it. thatnks for answering.

1) Baptisting for what ? Do you think new born babies have sins ? No. They are no different than the angels...they do not born with a single sin. And even if that is the case, you can not clean sins with water :)
2) So what ? What should you do to get rid of your sins ? Confessing ? No. Nobody has the authority and right to forgive your sins, except God. Nobody. Not Pope, not your friend, not a religious leader..nobody. Only God.
3) Heaven is not registered by people. Nobody can guarantee that one day you will go to heaven. Only God decides that. We do not know even Pope himself could be accepted to heaven. Even he himself does not know that. Nobody has the authority and right to talk in the name of God.

God gave us, the human beings the ability to "think". This is more important than any prophet's speech. Think and remove chains in your mind. Don't care what others say, just follow your own way. The road will return to yourself. To the God in your heart.

"Leave it to the Catholics to destroy all of exsistance" :rolleyes: Dogma=best movie ever.

1) Baptisting for what ? Do you think new born babies have sins ? No. They are no different than the angels...they do not born with a single sin. And even if that is the case, you can not clean sins with water :)
2) So what ? What should you do to get rid of your sins ? Confessing ? No. Nobody has the authority and right to forgive your sins, except God. Nobody. Not Pope, not your friend, not a religious leader..nobody. Only God.
3) Heaven is not registered by people. Nobody can guarantee that one day you will go to heaven. Only God decides that. We do not know even Pope himself could be accepted to heaven. Even he himself does not know that. Nobody has the authority and right to talk in the name of God.

God gave us, the human beings the ability to "think". This is more important than any prophet's speech. Think and remove chains in your mind. Don't care what others say, just follow your own way. The road will return to yourself. To the God in your heart.

That's a really neat way to look at it. I applaude you.

"Leave it to the Catholics to destroy all of exsistance" :rolleyes: Dogma=best movie ever.
Dogma rules :D

Um, sure. You may refer to me as John, my Catholic name, or Justin, my birth name. Either's fine. So why're you doing this? I don't really see the need to recognize me in this way. It seems egotistic on my part to allow it.

Answer me this:

Just out of curiosity, what is the purpose of your confiramtion name? (I do take it thats what you meant by Catholic name.) In the Presbyterian Church, when we are confirmed, we just are. End of story. We don't get another name. So, whats the deal with that. As I've said before, nearly my entire family and several friends are Catholic, but I never really thought to ask until now.

Answer me this:

Just out of curiosity, what is the purpose of your confiramtion name? (I do take it thats what you meant by Catholic name.) In the Presbyterian Church, when we are confirmed, we just are. End of story. We don't get another name. So, whats the deal with that. As I've said before, nearly my entire family and several friends are Catholic, but I never really thought to ask until now.
It is just done. No real reason, but it is traditional. But you are meant to think of a saint that you respect and would like to try and emulate, I think it is there to remind you of what you should be like and to keep you on the straight and narrow. However never having done any research into it I cannot say.

However I riled a few people up when I decided to drop my Confirmation name, Daniel. More symbolic then anything, but it was the most useful part of the whole thing.

Answer me this:

Just out of curiosity, what is the purpose of your confiramtion name? (I do take it thats what you meant by Catholic name.) In the Presbyterian Church, when we are confirmed, we just are. End of story. We don't get another name. So, whats the deal with that. As I've said before, nearly my entire family and several friends are Catholic, but I never really thought to ask until now.
Conceptionalists is wrong. You picck a saints name. Then, for the rest of your life you prayto, ask help from, and try to live like that saint to the best of your ability.

1) Baptisting for what ? Do you think new born babies have sins ? No. They are no different than the angels...they do not born with a single sin. And even if that is the case, you can not clean sins with water :)
2) So what ? What should you do to get rid of your sins ? Confessing ? No. Nobody has the authority and right to forgive your sins, except God. Nobody. Not Pope, not your friend, not a religious leader..nobody. Only God.
3) Heaven is not registered by people. Nobody can guarantee that one day you will go to heaven. Only God decides that. We do not know even Pope himself could be accepted to heaven. Even he himself does not know that. Nobody has the authority and right to talk in the name of God.

God gave us, the human beings the ability to "think". This is more important than any prophet's speech. Think and remove chains in your mind. Don't care what others say, just follow your own way. The road will return to yourself. To the God in your heart.
Jesus told Peter that what ever he bound on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever he looesd on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
This goes for his successors (the popes)
Baptising to get rid of original sin.
Confession is God absolving you through the priest.

Conceptionalists is wrong. You picck a saints name. Then, for the rest of your life you prayto, ask help from, and try to live like that saint to the best of your ability.
Well, I knida got one of the aspects.

Although I can never remember being rncouraged (or even told) to pray to Daniel, or ask help from him.

Jesus told Peter that what ever he bound on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatever he looesd on earth shall be loosed in heaven.
This goes for his successors (the popes)
Baptising to get rid of original sin.
Confession is God absolving you through the priest.

So, why can't you just get rid of the middleman and confess directly to God? That's the part I've never understood. Are we not allowed to talk to God? Why do you have to use a priest?

Well, I knida got one of the aspects.

Although I can never remember being rncouraged (or even told) to pray to Daniel, or ask help from him.

Eh, well both of your views make sense.

CR, you don't have to jump on him and say that he's wrong. Just say he left some stuff out. Stop with the "I'm right, you're all wrong" bit. Instead of saying veryone else is wrong, just say your side.

No, that is all false.
You're an idiot. I don't have time to completely deconstruct your faith but please see me another time for that. Everything in that statement was true but the part about the pope accepting guided evolution. Ever heard of Vatican II? That one absolved the Jews of responsibility for the death of Jesus.

Ooh ooh, I'd like to ask a question: how do you justify a belief in a merciful god after the atrocites perpetrated in his name from the crusades to the slaughter of the Native Americans to the holocaust? Also, respond to this quote:
"We are all atheists, some of us just worship fewer gods than others. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
-Stephen F. Roberts
Justify your faith in contrast to evolution without resorting to A) illogical arguments or B) "It's all part of God's plan" arguments.
Explain to me, using logic, why I should take your blind faith in a merciful God over science and you will earn my respect.

All non roman catholics go to hell? I thought we got rid of that one, except for Mel Gibson. Oh and, how about not worrying about the whole thing - if God is merciful, then it'll all work out okay (words to live by :-))

Ooh ooh, I'd like to ask a question: how do you justify a belief in a merciful god after the atrocites perpetrated in his name from the crusades to the slaughter of the Native Americans to the holocaust?

Why should Catholics justify something not perpertrated by Catholics?

However, in the Historical sense, the Church has been a great temporal power, which meant it didn't really focus on spirituality as much as it should.

Also, to tar people living now with the actions of those that have lived, is ridiculous. As we are individuals independent of the past (to a certain extent).
Also, respond to this quote:
"We are all atheists, some of us just worship fewer gods than others. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
-Stephen F. Roberts

It is nice.

Justify your faith in contrast to evolution without resorting to A) illogical arguments or B) "It's all part of God's plan" arguments.
Explain to me, using logic, why I should take your blind faith in a merciful God over science and you will earn my respect.

The Catholic church doesn't hold creationism above evolution. This is "ask a catholic" not "ask a Christian Fundementalist"

"Explain to me, using logic, why I should take your blind faith in a merciful God over science and you will earn my respect."

You shouldn't be forced to. If you choose to, that is all very well.

PS. YOu do realise that a great many scientists are also priests. From molecular biology to astrophysics?

Catholicism is not, in itself, against science, as on the whole, it doesn't teach a strict literal reading of the Bible

I don't think everyone is being entirely fair to the Catholics. All of the charges of violence and attrocities being laid at their door apply equally to most religions. And when you come down to it, most religious wars aren't about religion at all. They are about economics. The crusades were't actually an attempt to kick the muslims out of the holy land, they were a ploy to get rid of a whole bunch of poor younger sons of minor nobles, and to enrich their parent countries. If they were about religion, then how can you explain away the pilliaging of italy and Greece by Crusader armies WHEN THE INHABITANTS WERE CHRISTIAN THEMSELVES? The Children's Crusade was simply a ploy to aquire a large number of young slaves quickly. Every religious war can be traced back to money.... religion just makes a terrific excuse for fighting.
Well, as I am also an ethnically Jewish atheist, I hate to deconstruct your statements. But your passage here is slightly skewed. It is precisely because Christianity was used as an excuse for the Holocaust, for the crusades, for Manifest Destiny and the subjugation of the Native Americans, for the utter destruction of the Arawak people of Haiti, for the enslavement and destruction of the South American people by the European imperialists and so much more that being Christian is amoral. Simply put, saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is going to hell makes you a horrible person. I don't believe you're going to a hell, I merely think that when you die you will be very disappointed. Christianity is a religion of pity, one which contradicts logic and the laws of Natural Selection. By doing this, Christianity leads to the extinction of Man and the destruction of human dignity. Instead of elevating Man to the status of the godhead, thus allowing humans to strive to become Nietzsche's Superman, Christianity lowers Man by burdening him with this notion of original sin and by preaching pity. Read the Antichrist by Nietzsche.

What about intolerant, bigoted, prejudiced facists? Does God love even them?


Of course, God loves Catholics.

Catholicism is not, in itself, against science, as on the whole, it doesn't teach a strict literal reading of the Bible

Please tell that to CR.

Of course, God loves Catholics.

LOL, thats mean... LOL

What do you think about the Bible saying that practising gays should be stoned to death?

What do you think about the Bible saying that practising gays should be stoned to death?
Interesting, in a historical context. But, as far as I know, there is no Catholic Pressure Group to reinstate this.

Why should Catholics justify something not perpertrated by Catholics?

However, in the Historical sense, the Church has been a great temporal power, which meant it didn't really focus on spirituality as much as it should.

Also, to tar people living now with the actions of those that have lived, is ridiculous. As we are individuals independent of the past (to a certain extent).
It is nice.
The Catholic church doesn't hold creationism above evolution. This is "ask a catholic" not "ask a Christian Fundementalist"

"Explain to me, using logic, why I should take your blind faith in a merciful God over science and you will earn my respect."

You shouldn't be forced to. If you choose to, that is all very well.

PS. YOu do realise that a great many scientists are also priests. From molecular biology to astrophysics?

Catholicism is not, in itself, against science, as on the whole, it doesn't teach a strict literal reading of the Bible
Ok, first off, if you cannot justify your beliefs to me, you don't deserve to have them. Second of all, you talk about how Catholics today shouldn't be tarred for crimes in the past. That is not my point. My argument was that there can be no merciful god because of these atrocities perpetrated in his name. How can you support such a god who allows these things to happen? How can you be a part of a religion which condones these? Next you claim that the Catholics don't hold creationism over evolution. This is blatantly false. Frankly, I'm glad that you don't actually believe in anything christian but you shouldn't claim that you do. Next you say that I shouldn't be forced to agree with you. Yeah, I think so too. But I wanted you to tell me why I should agree with you using logic, because I knew you couldn't do it. And the reason for that is because there is no logical reason for it. Next, guess what? I know some scientists are Christians. I realise this. But their lives are performative contradictions. I honestly don't know how they do it. They must either be in denial, be very very intelligent or very very stupid. You cannot combine science and religion. You cannot have it both ways. And you are not a Christian it seems.

All non roman catholics go to hell? I thought we got rid of that one, except for Mel Gibson. Oh and, how about not worrying about the whole thing - if God is merciful, then it'll all work out okay (words to live by :-))
Look, I just proved that God is not merciful. So then by your own logic we are screwed and there is no point in worshipping him, mm?

Also, I'd just like to say that science and religion are completely separate. They are polar opposites. Attempts to combine them invariably fail. The thing about religion is that it's purpose is to explain that which cannot be explained by science. Unfortunately, religion has overstepped it's boundaries. Now things that can be explained by science are being criticized by religious people who consider such statements "heretical". If you want to present an organized, logical argument to me on how science and religion can be combined well, please do and open it up for discussion. But don't say that the church doesn't oppose science.

catholics believe that God loves everyone but it is their choice to love him back, jews and protestants are saved.

Well, as I am also an ethnically Jewish atheist, I hate to deconstruct your statements. But your passage here is slightly skewed. It is precisely because Christianity was used as an excuse for the Holocaust, for the crusades, for Manifest Destiny and the subjugation of the Native Americans, for the utter destruction of the Arawak people of Haiti, for the enslavement and destruction of the South American people by the European imperialists and so much more that being Christian is amoral. Simply put, saying that everyone who doesn't agree with you is going to hell makes you a horrible person. I don't believe you're going to a hell, I merely think that when you die you will be very disappointed. Christianity is a religion of pity, one which contradicts logic and the laws of Natural Selection. By doing this, Christianity leads to the extinction of Man and the destruction of human dignity. Instead of elevating Man to the status of the godhead, thus allowing humans to strive to become Nietzsche's Superman, Christianity lowers Man by burdening him with this notion of original sin and by preaching pity. Read the Antichrist by Nietzsche.

I'm working through Nietzsche... and he's seriously flawed... but that's another topic entirely.

I don't think that simply because you believe in something that has been used as an excuse for horrible atrocities that it makes you a bad person. Democracy and capitalism are the roots of many of the problems in Zimbabwe and the Philippines today. Mugabe, a democratically elected leader, uses 'rule of the majority' to justify horrible excesses against white Zimbabweans. I think democracy is one of the best political systems developed. Does that make me a bad person? The Nazis used Social Darwinism, a fanatical version of the Theory of Evolution to justify the Holocaust. I still think that Darwin is right (mostly). Now, a Catholic who follows the true ethics epoused in the bible is going to be a pretty decent person, and it's unfair to blame the good ones for bad interpritations of the bible, just as it's unfair to blame all muslims for the actions of fundimentalists, or it's unfair to judge all jews for the castration of the cainanites in the old testimate.

I agree that Catholisism... Christianity in all forms, actually, is illogical, is based on false precepts (only a small fraction of the gospel's considered for the bible were used... they PICKED ones that concurred with each other), and has been used as a tool for opression and destruction. Which makes christians misguided... not evil.

What do you think about the Bible saying that practising gays should be stoned to death?

I think it cancels out that whole love everyone deal now doesn't it?

Ok, first off, if you cannot justify your beliefs to me, you don't deserve to have them.

Maybe you missed the part where I said I had dropped my Confirmation name. I thought you could figure out that I was no longer Catholic.

Second of all, you talk about how Catholics today shouldn't be tarred for crimes in the past. That is not my point. My argument was that there can be no merciful god because of these atrocities perpetrated in his name.

So if somebody assasinates in the name of Ghandi then Ghandi is no longer merciful?

They were only perpertrated in his name because it provided a useful tool in motivating the masses and giving justification to warmongering. It proves nothing other then some people are bastards.

How can you support such a god who allows these things to happen?

I don't.

How can you be a part of a religion which condones these?

I'm not.

Next you claim that the Catholics don't hold creationism over evolution. This is blatantly false.

Howso?

I went a conservative Catholic school, where I was taught the theory of evolution, and there was no pressure from the priest to drop this in favour of creationism


Frankly, I'm glad that you don't actually believe in anything christian but you shouldn't claim that you do.

Never did. Don't believe me? Look for anywhere I said "I believe."

Next you say that I shouldn't be forced to agree with you. Yeah, I think so too.

That warms the cockles of my heart.

But I wanted you to tell me why I should agree with you using logic, because I knew you couldn't do it.

What, try and convert someone to a cause I don't believe in?

Why should I?

And the reason for that is because there is no logical reason for it. Next, guess what? I know some scientists are Christians.

I said priest, with regard to Catholic priests. Not laiety [sp].

I realise this. But their lives are performative contradictions. I honestly don't know how they do it. They must either be in denial, be very very intelligent or very very stupid.

A Jesuit priest I know holds a Phd in Astrophysics, I would with the former.

You cannot combine science and religion. You cannot have it both ways.

Where in the Catechisms or Catholic dogma does it say this. Or do you have a logical reason for it?

And you are not a Christian it seems.
Never said I was. In fact I has said various times on these boards I am an agnostic [as it is the most logical stance] who was born and raised Catholic.

You got any explanation for otherkins? (People that seem not to have a human soul)

You got any explanation for otherkins? (People that seem not to have a human soul)

Hmmm....

I got nothin'

I'm working through Nietzsche... and he's seriously flawed... but that's another topic entirely.

I don't think that simply because you believe in something that has been used as an excuse for horrible atrocities that it makes you a bad person. Democracy and capitalism are the roots of many of the problems in Zimbabwe and the Philippines today. Mugabe, a democratically elected leader, uses 'rule of the majority' to justify horrible excesses against white Zimbabweans. I think democracy is one of the best political systems developed. Does that make me a bad person? The Nazis used Social Darwinism, a fanatical version of the Theory of Evolution to justify the Holocaust. I still think that Darwin is right (mostly). Now, a Catholic who follows the true ethics epoused in the bible is going to be a pretty decent person, and it's unfair to blame the good ones for bad interpritations of the bible, just as it's unfair to blame all muslims for the actions of fundimentalists, or it's unfair to judge all jews for the castration of the cainanites in the old testimate.

I agree that Catholisism... Christianity in all forms, actually, is illogical, is based on false precepts (only a small fraction of the gospel's considered for the bible were used... they PICKED ones that concurred with each other), and has been used as a tool for opression and destruction. Which makes christians misguided... not evil.
You know, while I disagree with you on some points, you are the only person yet to make concise, logical arguments that have merit, and I respect you for that. Now, I agree that Nietzsche is flawed on some points, but in some he is lucid and profound. His critique of Christianity in particuar is brilliant. The Nazis used some Social Darwinism but also used Catholicism as a justification for the Final Solution. In fact, Hitler had the blessing of the pope and Catholic officials helped smuggle high ranking SS officers to Brazil after the war, including the notorious Adolf Eichmann and others. Your democracy point doesn't really make any sense. Mugabe is a monster, but being democratically elected doesn't have anything to do with that. His supporters are thus monsters as well. So you think a Christian who literally follows the bible will be a good person, eh? So you condone homophobia, slavery, racism, militarism, ethnocentrism, imperialism, stoning children for swearing and all the other things in the bible that were considered fine then but are not now? And you mistake me. I don't blame Christians for the holocaust. I merely state that there can be no merciful god if he allowed this.

Hmmm....

I got nothin'

see... thats why I don't believe in any god...

Maybe you missed the part where I said I had dropped my Confirmation name. I thought you could figure out that I was no longer Catholic.
So if somebody assasinates in the name of Ghandi then Ghandi is no longer merciful?
They were only perpertrated in his name because it provided a useful tool in motivating the masses and giving justification to warmongering. It proves nothing other then some people are bastards.
I don't.
I'm not.
Howso?
I went a conservative Catholic school, where I was taught the theory of evolution, and there was no pressure from the priest to drop this in favour of creationism
Never did. Don't believe me? Look for anywhere I said "I believe."
That warms the cockles of my heart.
What, try and convert someone to a cause I don't believe in?
Why should I?

I said priest, with regard to Catholic priests. Not laiety [sp].

A Jesuit priest I know holds a Phd in Astrophysics, I would with the former

Where in the Catechisms or Catholic dogma does it say this. Or do you have a logical reason for it?


Never said I was. In fact I has said various times on these boards I am an agnostic [as it is the most logical stance] who was born and raised Catholic.
Wait...I must have made a mistake. I thought you were the "Ask a Catholic guy". Yeah, sorry. If you're not catholic, why are you arguing with me? I'm going to answer your arguments though. An all-powerful god would be able to stop the holocaust. Ghandi couldn't do anything about an assassination in his name, unless he rips off his shirt and becomes Super-Ghandi. You must have gone to a very unusual school...most catholics these days take a very dim view of modern science. Take the Vatican "allowing" women to work, 80 years after the times. It's that sort of thing. Haven't you read about people trying to get evolution banned from schools? That's like trying to get Shakespeare or Chauncer or Dostoyevski banned from schools.

Crossman is not a Catholic either. He is Christian-Pagan-wicca but his denomination is Presbyterian church USA. (Thats all I know)

Who says science and religion don't mix?
Many priests have PHds and other degrees in different things that have to do with science. A Jesuit priest I know taught high school physics for over 20 years in a CATHOLIC high school.
Also, Castel Gandolfo (the popes summer residence) has the Vatican obersvatory.

I'm going to answer your arguments though. An all-powerful god would be able to stop the holocaust.Interesting thing, free will. It means God doesn't interfere with what we choose to do.

see... thats why I don't believe in any god...

Choose what you like. Unlike some people, I understand that other people are entitled to their own beliefs.

Crossman is not a Catholic either. He is Christian-Pagan-wicca but his denomination is Presbyterian church USA. (Thats all I know)

Who says science and religion don't mix?
Many priests have PHds and other degrees in different things that have to do with science. A Jesuit priest I know taught high school physics for over 20 years in a CATHOLIC high school.
Also, Castel Gandolfo (the popes summer residence) has the Vatican obersvatory.

I never said I was Catholic. What does it matter?

And I am a Presbyterian/Wiccan (pagan isn't in there because wiccan is).

What does it matter? Does it make my beliefs any less than yours? Why is it that you seem to like pointing out what I am? Do you think everyone else is as bigotted as you?

I never said I was Catholic. What does it matter?

And I am a Presbyterian/Wiccan (pagan isn't in there because wiccan is).

What does it matter? Does it make my beliefs any less than yours? Why is it that you seem to like pointing out what I am? Do you think everyone else is as bigotted as you?
I pointed it out because you are posting answers such as "I think it cancels out the love everybody deal" thing. Please stop answering questions. If you want a thread make a "Ask a Christian-Wicca" or something like that.

What is the Catholic opinion on the US 2004 election?
As a catholic I still don't know.

What is the Catholic opinion on the US 2004 election?
As a catholic I still don't know.
The church can't official endorse canidates without getting in trouble with its tax status.
What the bishops say is vote pro-life.

I pointed it out because you are posting answers such as "I think it cancels out the love everybody deal" thing. Please stop answering questions. If you want a thread make a "Ask a Christian-Wicca" or something like that.

I'm not answering questions. I'm giving my opinion on the subject. Now, quit harassing me and answer your questions.

I'm not answering questions. I'm giving my opinion on the subject. Now, quit harassing me and answer your questions.
Would everyone please repost all there questions in one post please so it is easier for me to read them without having to keep going back and forth.

i dont care what the church says about it. i just want to know what catholics think about it. the church can kiss my ***.

i dont care what the church says about it. i just want to know what catholics think about it. the church can kiss my ***.
No you can kiss the churches @$$.
I support Bush.

I've a couple questions.
I was raised Christian, though not a catholic and I've read the bible more then once...however, don't ask me to quote the specific scriptures...I'm too lazy to go cross-rerefrencing :)


One: Didn't Jesus state that the old laws were done away with, and the only way through God is through him? To me that explains why Christians can ignore Gods earlier laws, like circumsision (sp?) and the eating of pork, blood products and such. If that is true though, then why do Catholics (or any other christians) refer to the Old Testament as still viable laws pased down from God?

Two: How is it that Christians still go to war when the bible states that we should, "beat our swords into plowshares" And, "make war no more"?

Three: How do some Christians defend hating Jews, when their Christ was a Jew himself?

Four: Is it just me, or did Judas get treated unfairly. I seem to recall that Jesus already seemed to know who was going to betray him. That Judas had a spirit enter him, and when he "came to" and realised what happened...he was so upset he took his own life. I might have to actually look up the passages for this one...this one really made me lose any respect I had for a loving god.

Ooh ooh, I'd like to ask a question: how do you justify a belief in a merciful god after the atrocites perpetrated in his name from the crusades to the slaughter of the Native Americans to the holocaust? Also, respond to this quote:
"We are all atheists, some of us just worship fewer gods than others. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."
-Stephen F. Roberts
Justify your faith in contrast to evolution without resorting to A) illogical arguments or B) "It's all part of God's plan" arguments.
Explain to me, using logic, why I should take your blind faith in a merciful God over science and you will earn my respect.

first of all, im not a catholic, just so u know, but ill still stick my two cents in. starters, just because people do things in God's name doesnt mean it has God's approval. the salem witch trials were justified as doing God's will, but i bet the devil was laughing his ass off. ill have to think about that quote for a while longer.
evolution. wow. thats a big question, and this isnt necessarily the view of my church, but rather just stuff ive though about a lot. i believe that there is too much evidence (scientific) to dismiss, so im not what some would call a strict creationist (but i am still a def. creationist) i believe that God created the universe, the earth, and humans. but i also believe that God continues to shape his creation using stuff like natural selection etc. also, i believe that is possible that Satan was wreking havok in the garden before the fall, this may account for some scientific evidence. note, there is no biblical evidence for this, its just something i consider a possiblity. another big problem science has with evolution is the correlation between scientific evidence, and the fact that the bible states that God created the universe in 6 days. im not at all sure that this was a literal 6 days of our time. possibly, this streched over a period of millions of years, which would correspond to evidence. but i dont know. i guess that was kinda the its all part of God's plan argument, but maybe it will help.
the only actual logic to believe in God that i can think is from a guy named Pascal. Its called Pascals wager. basically, it says that the risk of not believing on God is too great too take (hell) , and the reward would be so good if it was true (heaven), and that it doesnt cost anything to believe in God. but i dont expect that to convert anyone. the only thing i can really say is that in order for any of the Christian religion to actually made sense to me, i had to meet God. not physicaly, but spiritually. i had to come to the realization that there is a God, he had had a son, and through the son's sacrifice i am saved. basically, i was too sinfull to come to God, he had to come to me and show me who he is.

Three: How do some Christians defend hating Jews, when their Christ was a Jew himself?

Don't forget that he was hailed as "King of the Jews"

Let me prefact this by saying I'm Jewish, not Catholic, and hence, this post might be irrelevant to your question (i.e., if you want a specifically Catholic answer).

One: Didn't Jesus state that the old laws were done away with, and the only way through God is through him? To me that explains why Christians can ignore Gods earlier laws, like circumsision (sp?) and the eating of pork, blood products and such. If that is true though, then why do Catholics (or any other christians) refer to the Old Testament as still viable laws pased down from God?

(Adapted from a much-longer essay.)

My understanding is that it was the Apostles, not Jesus himself, who said the laws were done away with.

From my POV, the real problem in speaking about JESUS' (not his followers') attitude towards the law lies in the Sermon on the Mount. In Matthew 5:17, Jesus says, “Do not think that I have come to abolish the law or the prophets; I have come not to abolish but to fulfill.”

It seems the question should be- did he abolish the law?

In the Sermon, Jesus repeatedly compares himself and his disciples to the Hebrew Prophets. This is interesting because one of the Prophets' main distinguishing characteristic was that many of them preached that ritual commandments such as sacrifice were less important than following the Torah’s ethical guidelines.

What's interesting is Jesus now starts in engaging in a type of rabbinical behavior, that is, creating a sort of "legal reform" of Jewish law:

You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not murder’; and ‘whoever murders shall be liable to judgment.’ But I say to you that if you are angry with a brother or sister, you will be liable to judgment; and if you insult a brother or sister, you will be liable to the council; and if you say, ‘You fool,’ you will be liable to the hell of fire… You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart…It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery. (Matt 5: 21- 30)

This continues for the next two chapters, with Jesus addressing a number of topics, including swearing oaths, fasting, dietary restrictions, prayer, alms-giving, and loving one’s enemy.

We should be aware of two things in evaluating the sermon.

1- All of the things Jesus mentions are not ABOLISHMENTS of the law, but rather, superogetory laws- that is, laws that go FURTHER than they actually have to.

Some examples:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Matt 5: 27-28)

"…you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord.’ But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem… Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one." (Matt 5: 33- 37)

In both cases, Jesus does not invalidate the original prohibition, but rather re-encapsulates it within a larger group of newly prohibited actions. What's so interesting is that this is an activity rabbis (originally, Pharisees) have been doing for thousands of years- called, in the Jewish tradition, “erecting a fence around the Torah”- creating new laws to ensure no one would break the actual laws. (Example: no work on the Sabbath. A fence-law is that one shouldn't even touch something that could be USED for work.)

But what's really interesting as far as Jesus' relation to the Jewish laws is in the second point:

2- The laws Jesus doesn't mention.

While Jesus’ own fences may not constitute abolishment of the Torah’s commandments, there is the additional problem of whether they encompass all of the commandments. This does not seem to be the case. For instance, the issue of kosher food, which takes up an entire chapter of Leviticus, and which gives ten explicit commandments regarding what food can and cannot be eaten. Nowhere in his sermon does Jesus address these laws. Similarly, he does not speak of the many laws detailing various conduct and rituals pertaining to the Temple, the Priesthood, or the sacrifices, as described in Exodus, Numbers and Leviticus. Taxes, agricultural and business practices, judicial procedures, laws detailing treatment of slaves, forbidden sexual relations, ritual impurity, Sabbath prohibitions, all of these topics are part of the “Law” of the Torah, and none are even mentioned in Jesus’ Sermon.

This leads us to the major question: Does the fact that Jesus omits these laws indicate that he does not think they should continue to be followed? Or, rather, that he believes that they should, and takes them as a “given”? Jesus' own behavior as described in the Gospels seems inconsistent on this point.

On the one hand, one could view the Sermon from the perspective that its purpose to clarify specific laws and “build fences” around them, not imply that they are the only laws that should be followed. However, in other places in the Gospels, he and his apostles repeatedly break various Jewish laws, particularly in relation to observing the Sabbath.

A combination of vagueness and contradictory statements/actions makes the issue of how Jesus conceives of the “unmentioned laws” ultimately unclear. In my opinion, it therefore cannot be determined if Jesus abolishes the laws (and therefore, law) or not.

From my POV, the rest of Matthew- and indeed, the New Testament as a whole, is so contradictory and fragmentary in nature that it makes it next to impossible to declare that Jesus has “one” coherent attitude towards the law as a whole, much less specific commandments. It seems that on this matter, Jesus is too ambiguous for us to nail down his real position. In fact, that may have been his intent.

Thank you Qahjoh, that was very insightful. It's most interesting to a Jewish person's view on Jesus. I am part Jewish myself through bloodlines, so it is especially interesting to hear some of ways of the Rabi's.


However, I am going to go dust off my bible and find the passage, because I could swear that Jesus actually disavowed the 'old ways' :)

Oh, and does anyone have a response or mayhaps a correction on my understanding of the events pertaining to Judas?

Don't forget that he was hailed as "King of the Jews"

I do believe that it was the Romans who termed him such, as a way to further add to the list of charges against him.

Oh, and a minor correction. In my above post I said Jesus touches on dietary restrictions, then later contradicted myself when saying he doesn't mention kosher food.

In fact, Jesus is once again, ambiguous.

Matt 6:25- 32

Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
26 Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
27 Which of you by taking thought can add one cubit unto his stature?
28 And why take ye thought for raiment? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they toil not, neither do they spin:
29 And yet I say unto you, That even Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.
30 Wherefore, if God so clothe the grass of the field, which to day is, and to morrow is cast into the oven, shall he not much more clothe you, O ye of little faith?
31 Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
32 (For after all these things do the Gentiles seek: ) for your heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things.

So first, there's the issue of whether he's just talking about basic sustenance here, or if he specifically means the kosher laws. It seems unclear. Also the fact that he says that these things are things the Gentiles seek- implying Jews don't. Which once again makes me suspect he's not talking about the kosher laws, since all Jews thought these were important.

So I just realized that I made an error in this essay when I wrote it several months ago. Oops. :)

Sorry for any possible confusion.

You know, while I disagree with you on some points, you are the only person yet to make concise, logical arguments that have merit, and I respect you for that. Now, I agree that Nietzsche is flawed on some points, but in some he is lucid and profound. His critique of Christianity in particuar is brilliant. The Nazis used some Social Darwinism but also used Catholicism as a justification for the Final Solution. In fact, Hitler had the blessing of the pope and Catholic officials helped smuggle high ranking SS officers to Brazil after the war, including the notorious Adolf Eichmann and others. Your democracy point doesn't really make any sense. Mugabe is a monster, but being democratically elected doesn't have anything to do with that. His supporters are thus monsters as well. So you think a Christian who literally follows the bible will be a good person, eh? So you condone homophobia, slavery, racism, militarism, ethnocentrism, imperialism, stoning children for swearing and all the other things in the bible that were considered fine then but are not now? And you mistake me. I don't blame Christians for the holocaust. I merely state that there can be no merciful god if he allowed this.

I have no argument with you over Nietzche... appart from the fact that the Nazis used his Superman arguments to justify the Holocaust as well... proving that any good idea can become horribly perverted... which was what my Democracy analogy was meant to show.

I never said 'literally follows the bible' anywhere in my post. I said that anyone follows the basic ethics epoused in it will be a good person. Those being 'Love thy neighbor' and 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you'. Admitedly, in many of the individual stories the characters don't follow those ideals, but the general concensus is that the underlying message of the bible is one of love, and that can't be bad.

I don't think there's a merciful god either... but the Holocaust is only the smallest of my reasons. Assuming Genesis is even remotely true (something I'm not conceding at all... I believe staunchly in evelution), God created the Earth and the human race. Now, God is apparently allknowing and all powerful... which means that he knew what every one of us would do with our lives even before he made the world. Which means that when he made it, he predetermined the course of our lives, negating free will and removing any accountability on our part. Since he chose this path, he is directly responcible for all suffering that has ever happened and will ever happen, and any punishment or rewards that he hands out (heaven and hell respectively) will be at his own caprise, since none of us have any responcibility for our actions.

No you can kiss the churches @$$.
I support Bush.

So by asking a question of catholic belief in a candidate, you automatically retort with the violence inherent in the system - striking the note further with an indirect defense of your support for the current President?

Sounds fishy to me.

As a Catholic, why did you react in this way?

So by asking a question of catholic belief in a candidate, you automatically retort with the violence inherent in the system - striking the note further with an indirect defense of your support for the current President?

Sounds fishy to me.

As a Catholic, why did you react in this way?
acn you lease clarify.

bump

Cherry, halfway through the mass, during one of the euologies, everyone with

their right hand touches their head, nose and mouth in a strange way, what

is it their doing?

Are they making the sign of the cross in miniture detail or something?

I'm Catholic and cherry ridge if your such a devout catholic then you would have tolerance and respect for someone else's views. I cant believe you would tell someone else that they are pagan just because they are not catholic. Also if only Catholics got into heaven well there would be allot of people in purgatory and hell. I believe I would like to go where my friends and family are since not all of them are Catholics..... I don't think God is so closed minded as to say" well if your not part of this religion then your all going to hell unless you become Catholic". Its people like you that sometimes makes me wonder why I'm still Catholic then I have to remember its the principles of the religion that I like and learning about the religion and faith not the the people who represent it and construe the faith.

Cherry Ridge I believe it would be in your best interest especially if your are going to try to teach people something about the Catholic faith to go here and make sure you know what you are talking about before you give somebody a misconstruen Idea.



http://www.catholic.net/linksframe.phtml?link=http://www.catholicanswers.org

Cherry, halfway through the mass, during one of the euologies, everyone with

their right hand touches their head, nose and mouth in a strange way, what

is it their doing?

Are they making the sign of the cross in miniture detail or something?

It's before the gospel, i think, and they touch head, mouth and chest. They are saying to themself
"god be in my mind so i may think of him, god be in my mouth so i may speak of him, god be in my heart so i may love him"

You may get the impression they're going head, nose, mouth because people are lazy and not moving their hand far enough to touch the right parts.

I do believe that it was the Romans who termed him such, as a way to further add to the list of charges against him.

Pontius Pilate himself made the charge sheet read "king of the jews", and it is implied because he felt guilty for allowing jesus to be crucified. The jewish authorities apparently complained that pilate should have made the charge sheet read "he *said* he was the king of the jews" (which would have been treason against Rome) but Pilate famously answered "i have written what i have written".

The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!

Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8- the Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High

Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv

[QUOTE=Mongeeses]soul basis [QUOTE=Mongeeses]

I love this confusion of synonyms...

[QUOTE=Mongeeses]There are also some things that our minds are not big enough to comprehend. Such as God creating us in His image but giving us a free will. He also knows the end of time and therefore knows which decision we will make. [QUOTE=Mongeeses]

This paragraph touches on a point of theological confusion for me. God supposedly created humans with inherent free will, yet He knows what decisions we will make, implying that our decisions are predetermined. Yet if our decisions are predetermined, how can we have free will? This ties in nicely with the alleged guilt of Judas.

My second question deals with Jesus. Was he mortal or immortal? If He was mortal, then He could not be God, as God is immortal. If, on the other hand, He is immortal, then how could He have died on the cross?

My third question is this: I believe Catholic doctrine says that God is separate from His creation, i.e. we are not God. Yet God is also infinite. If God is infinite, how can I be separate from God as that would imply that He ends where I begin?

On a historical note...Catholic clergy have started wars solely for religious reasons:http://xenophongroup.com/montjoie/albigens.htm

The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!

Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8- the Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High

Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv







So there is ice in hell !

The Dante's Inferno Test has banished you to the Seventh Level of Hell!

Here is how you matched up against all the levels:
Level | Score
Purgatory | Very Low
Level 1 - Limbo | Very Low
Level 2 | High
Level 3 | Very High
Level 4 | High
Level 5 | Very High
Level 6 - The City of Dis | Very High
Level 7 | Very High
Level 8- the Malebolge | Very High
Level 9 - Cocytus | Very High

Level descriptions: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-information.html
Take the test: http://www.4degreez.com/misc/dante-inferno-test.mv
That is NOT IN ANYWAY recognozed by the Church.

It's before the gospel, i think, and they touch head, mouth and chest. They are saying to themself
"god be in my mind so i may think of him, god be in my mouth so i may speak of him, god be in my heart so i may love him"

You may get the impression they're going head, nose, mouth because people are lazy and not moving their hand far enough to touch the right parts.


Cheers,

I did the test too, and made it to purgatory.