| Un-frackin-believable. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 17 2009, 06:02 PM (2,127 Views) | |
| Nevski | Mar 23 2009, 01:51 PM Post #21 |
|
Whatever. |
![]() |
|
| Yhitzak | Mar 24 2009, 06:45 AM Post #22 |
|
That's a pretty lame response. I'm definitely open to reading some sort of explanation of how or why this guy is a holy man. Please explain why you feel inclined to defend his statement. I get the idea of "behaving rightly toward the body," but the situation in Africa is pretty freaking extreme; obviously, there is little respect for other people's bodies in the first place. I honestly fail to see how this statement by the Pope was anything other than patently uneducated, but I like I said, I'm willing to read an explanation. |
![]() |
|
| The Punisher | Mar 24 2009, 08:06 AM Post #23 |
![]()
|
Cult 1: formal religious veneration : WORSHIP 2: a system of religious beliefs and ritual ; also : its body of adherents 3: a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious ; also : its body of adherents 4: a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults> 5 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book) ; especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion Cultist Leader 1: something that leads: as a: a primary or terminal shoot of a plant b: TENDON , SINEW cplural : dots or hyphens (as in an index) used to lead the eye horizontally : ELLIPSIS 2 dchiefly British : a newspaper editorial e (1): something for guiding fish into a trap (2): a short length of material for attaching the end of a fishing line to a lure or hook f: LOSS LEADER g: something that ranks first h: a blank section at the beginning or end of a reel of film or recorded tape 2: a person who leads: as a: GUIDE , CONDUCTOR b (1): a person who directs a military force or unit (2): a person who has commanding authority or influence c (1): the principal officer of a British political party (2): a party member chosen to manage party activities in a legislative body (3): such a party member presiding over the whole legislative body when the party constitutes a majority d (1): CONDUCTOR c (2): a first or principal performer of a group 3: a horse placed in advance of the other horses of a team Where am I wrong Nevski? Edited by The Punisher, Mar 24 2009, 08:06 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Nevski | Mar 25 2009, 09:11 AM Post #24 |
|
First of all, TP, you're wrong in relying on a spate of dictionary definitions alone. You have to examine the nature and history of the Church of Rome, compare that with what experts on cults say, and then see if which, if any of the definitions fit. Rome is one of the historic "sees", and it's bishop of of the 5 great "patriarchs", of the Christian church. The significance of Rome is not only mentioned in seminal form in the New Testament, but the earliest Church Fathers also mentioned the importance of the city. There are extant lists of apostolic succession going back to Peter himself. Rome has a "cult" (of worship), or a "liturgy", that developed from the earliest liturgies of the Church, which in turn are based on the liturgies of the Jewish "cult." There is nothing "cultic", in the sociological or theological senses, about the Church of Rome. It stands squarely in the orthodox tradition of Christianity. You as a Protestant (or whatever you are) may happen to disagree with aspects of Rome's theology and practice, but that doesn't make it a cult. It just means one or both of you are wrong. |
![]() |
|
| Nevski | Mar 25 2009, 09:25 AM Post #25 |
|
It seemed to me the only appropriate response, given the fact that the bishop of Rome is clearly not a "cultist". As to the question of whether or not he is a holy man, even a cursory review of Ratzinger's life and work will answer that question. As to whether or not his specific recommendations to the Africans are "holy" ones, well, that's a matter of debate between those who are orthodox Christians and those who think sexual libertinism is just peachy. The pope's message will ring true to those who either are already orthodox Christians or who are in the process of becoming such; it will be thought folly by those who have bought into the mindset of the sexual libertinism. In Africa more than other places, this has become literally a life or death issue. They can either listen to the pope about the importance of behavibg rightly toward the body or to the libertines' message of "salvation by condom." Their choice. |
![]() |
|
| The Punisher | Mar 25 2009, 11:55 AM Post #26 |
![]()
|
I disagree Nevski... Let's look at what the “Good Book” says and compare it to what the “Church” has changed… If I’m incorrect please enlighten me. Exodus 20:2–17, Exodus 34:11–27 and Deuteronomy 5:6–21 Division of the Ten Commandments by religion/denomination Commandment Jewish (Talmudic)**** Anglican, Reformed, and other Christian Orthodox Catholic, Lutheran** I am the Lord your God 1 preface 1 1 You shall have no other gods before me 2 1 You shall not make for yourself an idol 2 2 You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God 3 3 3 2 Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy 4 4 4 3 Honor your father and mother 5 5 5 4 You shall not murder* 6 6 6 5 You shall not commit adultery 7 7 7 6 You shall not steal*** 8 8 8 7 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor 9 9 9 8 You shall not covet your neighbor's wife 10 10 10 9 You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor 10 Notes:*The Roman Catholic Church uses the translation 'kill' (less specific) instead of 'murder'.[3] **Some Lutheran churches use a slightly different division of the Ninth and Tenth Commandments (9. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house; 10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his workers, or his cattle, or anything that is your neighbor’s).[4] ***Sources within Judaism assert that this is a reference to kidnapping, whereas Leviticus 19:11 is the Biblical reference banning the stealing of property. This understanding is based on the Talmudical hermeneutic known as דבר הלמד מעניינו/davar ha-lamed me-inyano, (lit. Something proved by the context), by which this must refer to a capital offense just as the previous two commandments refer to capital offenses.[5] ****The "Talmudic Division" is the breakdown held by modern Judaism, and dates to at least the Third Century. The "Philonic Division", which dates to the first century, is found in the writings of Philo and Josephus. They ended the first commandment after verse 3 and list the second commandment as verses 4-6, similar to most Protestants (non-Lutheran) and the Eastern Orthodox Church. .[6] 1) I am the Lord your God. (Yet Catholics pray to Mary, and all those Saints {WTH? There are more than 10,000 Roman Catholic saints and beatified people). 2)You shall have no other gods before me (Same as above) 2A) You shall not make for yourself an idol (The crucifix, statues of Mary and said Saints) 3)You shall not make wrongful use of the name of your God (The Pope proclaims that his words are GOD’S words) 4)Remember the Sabbath and keep it holy (As long as you go to confusion (which it’s in the “Good Book”, and church on Sunday, you can do want ya want Sunday after church) 5)Honor your father and mother (Can’t complain, except the Catholics call Priests “Fathers” and Nuns “Mothers”, Why do ya think they do that?, I’m assuming that father/mother would mean your parents) 6)You shall not murder* (I understand why they would change the word “Kill” to murder, OK with that. They’re was that little Crusade thing, going on) 7)You shall not commit adultery (Sounds good to me) 8)You shall not steal*** (Now I have a problem with this the Catholic Church has stolen lands, minds, hearts, & souls) 9)You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor (REALLY, let’s see the Spanish Inquisition, (“And after all Nobody expects a Spanish Inquisition.” SORRY, couldn’t help it!), The witch trials, on & on…) 10)You shall not covet your neighbor's wife 10A) You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor (I’ll leave that alone for now… After all the Catholic Church coveted their own city, and guess what…) Show me where the “Good Book” says we have to put water and make the sign of the cross on my forehead, “blessed” by a sinful man? Show me where in the “Good Book” where it says that I have to genuflect, before I can sit down in “HIS” house. BTW, MY GOD doesn’t require rites, ceremonies, communion, rituals, confession, pittance, incense, uniforms… MY GOD asks ONLY that I believe and have faith in HIM, and that I love HIM, and HIS one and only son was given to humanity to cleanse us of ALL our sins. http://www.realtime.net/~wdoud/topics/legalism.html Religion is any system in which man by his own efforts tries to earn the approval of God. Legalism is a religious system that teaches that a person can do something to earn or merit salvation or blessing from God. Romans 4:4,5 states the case succinctly, "Now to him that works is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt; but to him that works not, but believes on Him that justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness." And Romans 11:6 is clear, "And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no longer grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work." Obedience to God's Word is not legalism. Remember the definition. Everything you do has the potential for reward in heaven, under the right circumstances. But the legalist thinks that the good works he does for God will not only keep him in fellowship and walking with the Lord but will also make him more spiritual and a great Christian. http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-Christian-legalism.html What does the Bible say about legalism? How can a Christian avoid falling into the trap of legalism? Somebody said "Religion is control, Faith is Freedom." I AGREE! |
![]() |
|
| The Punisher | Mar 25 2009, 01:17 PM Post #27 |
![]()
|
BTW, I would label myself (if that's your thing) "A NON-LEGALISTIC CHRISTAIN" "God's plan is a Grace plan. God the Father does the work, man receives the benefit. God receives the glory for His own works; man receives no glory. The greatest distortion to Grace is religious legalism." |
![]() |
|
| Nevski | Mar 25 2009, 01:46 PM Post #28 |
|
I don't know. You sound sort of like a cultist to me. ;) (I'll try to answer your rambling, exegetically and theologically uninformed missive above when I have time.) |
![]() |
|
| The Punisher | Mar 26 2009, 05:22 AM Post #29 |
![]()
|
I was brought up in the cult, so I know what I talk of... I don't care what anybody believes. I do care when "sinful men" take the words of GOD and warp them t o their advantage. That's what the Popes (of past and present) have done. That makes most religions "man-made" NOT Godly. Show me where GOD demands, the rituals that the Catholics have invented to show & prove that they have faith. Ponder this (paraphrase) when Jesus returns it is said that He will judge all alive and dead. Correct? If that is so then hitler, stalin, khan, Richard the Lion-hearted, Adam & Eve, Judas, and a crib-death baby, all those trillions of souls, “WAITING” are all sitting around “somewhere” playing cards waiting for Christ return. It doesn’t make sense. I would NEVER pretend to know what God’s thinking… The Popes do… Show me where in the Bible it says that if you pray “enough” (what’s enough? Ask a Pope), a soul can leave purgatory, and go into limbo to play cards with the rest… SO, there’s 2 places souls wait, per Catholics, WTH? IT'S BULL :poop, and if you think that your ACTIONS will GURANTEE you a "spot" in Heaven THINK AGAIN. He will judge and decide who goes where… As I said God, just asks that I believe and have faith, which I do. BTW, you don't need to answer, am don't except you to, that's cool. I just would like you and others to FRICK'IN THINK about what I've said... Edited by The Punisher, Mar 26 2009, 05:24 AM.
|
![]() |
|
| Yhitzak | Mar 26 2009, 07:30 AM Post #30 |
|
First off, your explanation of a cult does not exactly contradict TP's provided definitions; it is more a matter of perspective than of fact. We could debate the cult status of any given religion 'til we're all bloody in the fingers and not come to any conclusions because, like I said, it's more a matter of perspective than of fact. Ask five different sociologists what they think of cults and religion and you're going to get five different answers. Ratzinger's is a history rife with scandal and controversy. Not unlike *most* holy persons, but this one has been rather popularly labled as a Nazi (Google the name Joseph Ratzinger and take a look at the decidedly polarized results that appear). Call me closed-minded, but I fail to see how a Nazi is holy by any standards, let alone the standards of any majority. The way you've phrased this leads me to believe that you think that people are only orthodox Christians OR libertines, like those ideas are somehow mutually exclusive. Libertinage is a sexual extreme. Orthodoxy is a religious extreme. I will give it to you that this Pope is *grossly* fucking extreme, and so are those people who really like him. But are you even reading what you're posting? "They can either listen to the pope about the importance of behaving rightly toward the body or to the libertines' message of 'salvation by condom.'" Please explain to me how encouraging condom use in a region plagued with rape is giving in to the ideology of "libertines." And, by the way, I cannot find a single reference to rape by the Pope during that condemnation of condom use. His references to abuses of powers, high levels of poverty, and rampant violence were not enough to indicate that he was or is aware of the rape problem. If that's what he was referring to, well... he sure fooled me. Heh. I wish I were half as smart as you seem to think you are, Nevski. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · General Discussion · Next Topic » |







12:54 PM Jul 11