catholics

[iwishiwascool]

I think youre overlooking the fact that, as an individual, he has influenced and touched millions and millions of people. Regardless of whether you agree with the motives behind the believers, he was a man who inspired, motivated, and did more with his life than any of us every will.

 

I am as far from catholic as you can get but that does not stop me from respecting a man who dedicated his entire existance to something he believed in with every fiber of his being.

[Devils Advocate]

Sorry about that guys, I was absolutely retarded when I posted that.

[Orion]

Originally posted by 151:

Sorry about that guys, I was absolutely retarded when I posted that.

nice to see youre man enough to own up when you say something a little stupid.

 

you have your beliefs, and i respect that.

[OGRE]

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

Yeah, I'm with DJ on this one - I think your statement is incorrect. Maybe you meant to say this:

 

"The theory of evolution by natural selection, which has proven to be very viable as a theory, stands in direction opposition to the theory of Creationism, or the notion that a diety (i.e., God), created the world and everything on it in seven days. Thus, if we are to believe that the evolution of natural selection is the "correct" theory - and there's no reason at this point to think that it's not - then we cannot, by definition, accept the theory of Creationism. However, notably, the theory of evolution by natural section does not disprove the existence of an omnipotent being - it simply refutes the notion that an omnipotent being created the world in seven days."

at least in reference to a day as percieved by man, old school creationism. A day is defined as 1 rotation of the earth, what is the length of a day on mars, or saturn? how long whould a day be if you were an ever-present being? a million years? There are two references in the bible about time in this sence.

[Science Abuse]

Originally posted by Redneck #1:

at least in reference to a day as percieved by man, old school creationism. A day is defined as 1 rotation of the earth, what is the length of a day on mars, or saturn? how long whould a day be if you were an ever-present being? a million years? There are two references in the bible about time in this sence.

The reason the bible is still "studied" is because so much of it is open to interpretation, even rediculous interpretation like Joel just showed us. tongue.gif

I garauntee you that, whenever and whoever made up the Genesis story, they meant a day as 24 hours. smile.gif What would make more sence and be easier to explain would be that God is testing mans faith by putting fossils in the ground and stars in the sky. graemlins/thumb.gif

[Casper]

wow this thread went to shit...

[Science Abuse]

Originally posted by satan:

wow this thread went to shit...

we all know your protestant ass just started this thread to find all the catholics on the board so you can bomb their cars. graemlins/nonono.gif

[RacerZ]

You'll love this. I dub it, "Jesus Rice"

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v303/JCBCPA/DSCF0008.jpg

[Science Abuse]

I doubt you'll find a "god hates fags" sticker on that car. tongue.gif

[Mowgli1647545497]

I apologize to the forum for my outburst.

I don't feel any cumpulsion to apologize to Satan when the opening statement out of the gate was "go to hell, pope. catholics are morons" - but I will endeavor not to jump his shit going forward.

 

So - since this thread started in shit and seems to be moving out of it, I'll see if I can add some constructive comments to it for folks to think on before the next time they may feel compelled to post some blanket anti-catholic or anti-religion hoohaa.

 

Stream of consciousness - here you go:

 

Scientists that say they know there can be no god by looking at the universe aren't very good scientists. Why do I say that? Because of one simple scientific axiom that they all overlook or willingly ignore in their zeal to not be "religious", and that is this: From inside a system, an observer cannot fully describe said system. Whats that mean? Example. If you're in a coffee mug and cannot see out of it - you cannot describe the kitchen the coffee mug is sitting in. The BEST you can do is describe the coffee and the inner surface of the mug. You can't even describe the outside of the mug. All you can do is guess.

 

Someone tells you they can fully describe a system they are embedded in - you tell them they are wrong.

 

 

Next - evil in the name of religion. "So much evil in the world done in the name of religion. So much! The Horror!" I'm not here to defend religion, but this is a stupid statement. Why? More good is done by religions than evil. Sure evil happens by idiots using religion as the reason. Ok. Car crashes kill more people each year than religious zealots. Cars evil? Land and border skirmishes do too. Land evil? Money causes more evil deeds. Money evil? more evil done due to Sex and lust? Sex evil? Lust evil? Next to that, the idea that organized religion is the scourge of mankind is laughable. But hey - the atheists have got it down. Nothing bad was ever done by a group of organized athiests. Oh woops, forgot about the Nazis and WWII...

 

Next - Athieism is a religion.

 

Next - anarchy is the least stable form of government.

 

Next - Catholicism should answer for historical events. Bullshit. Putting aside the fact that asking someone today to answer for something done hundreds of years before by completely different people is absurd - there's a whole issue of WHO actually did what. Is its catholicisms fault that some Roman emperor saw the writing on the wall and hijacked catholicism as a means to keep his power? Its not catholicisms fault - if anything it'd be the Roman empire's fault. (But they got what was coming to them.) Is it catholicism's fault then that the wealthy powers of the middle ages took his cue and further hijacked the religion in the name of maintaining their influence and wealth? No. Along the same line's protestants' religion isn't any less valid even though it got a big start because some king wanted to screw a court chick and wasn't allowed to divorce his ugly wife. Thats not 2005 protestants' fault.

 

On this same topic - I'd like to also say that I'm not paying anyone for slavery, nor am I going to ask for money due to the potato famine, I choose not to sue the Moors for invading Spain, China doesn't get to charge Japan because Kublah Khan's boats sank, psychics shouldn't be hauled off to Russia and shot because of Rasputin, and I'm not going to pay a royalty on St Patrick's day. Thank you.

 

Next - people that are fed up with Catholicism and leave are usually leaving the edifice. They leave typically because they disliked the people in their parishes or their parents or the bullshit they encounter in the community - not the tenants of the religion.

 

Next - people that hate/fear catholics or religious people or such typically are projecting (thats a psychology term) something from somewhere else in their life. I've not seen any catholic or protestant or jew push their religion on someone else. BTW- saying something religious out loud is NOT cohersion. Holding a gun to your head and dragging you into a synagogue is cohersion.

 

Next - protestants post billboards. Thanks, Swaggard.

 

Next - is it catholicisms fault that the bible looks the way it does? Again - thank those wacky Romans. You can thank the emperor for sitting around with his posse of homies and deciding that such-n-such books get in and so-n-so books get tossed. And so we lose wonderful insights into Jesus's humanity, Mary's reality, and a bunch of other insightful stuff. Lost because some middle ages emperors and rulers decide the best way to keep their power is to choose materials sympathetic to them.

 

Catholicism survived in spite of this raping. It is not defined from it. Kudos to catholicism for not rolling over from all these historical abuses.

 

Next - don't use debate tactics on me. I see them the moment they're used for what they are. So if you know what they are - don't use em when you're talking to me - It just pisses me off. It may work on the girl you're trying to impress or the dude you're sitting next to having a beer with. But don't waste my time.

 

Next - people confuse the rituals of catholicism for the religion itself. Again - learn something please. The traditions are there because thats what you get when you have an institution that is thousands of years old. Why do people do the seventh inning stretch in baseball? Because people like to do stuff with other people. But where folks go wrong is in assuming that all these little rituals constitutes the tenants of the religion itself. No. They're just little venues for you to take a moment out of life ot think about god or talk to god. Walking up to the front of the church to get a cracker on your tongue? Ok, I could think about the car or my house payment or that chick's knockers. But I might as well think about god. Likewise - all these rituals are providing you memories, or vignettes, to, again: connect you to god.

 

Confusing ritual for religion is only only 1/4 the analysis - you're not done, homeslice.

 

Next - I'm not really a "practicing" catholic. Its not even big in my life. But I don't spout off on the religion for not being as casual as say modern spirituality. All the little rituals too much of a pain in the ass? Don't do em. I don't. But I also don't knock catholicism for not being as convenient and easy as say lighting an incense candle and humming "oooohm". In other words - being religious or thinking about it "when I feel like it." I'm not stupid enough to out loud knock catholics for putting a little skin in the game and meaning it.

 

But then I'm also not scared of them either. On that note, I'm also not scared of athiests, jews, muslims, mormons, moonies, or spritualists. They do their thing I'll do mine.

 

Next - Catholics don't buy their way into heaven. I don't ever recall being told that. I don't know any catholics that confuse contribution or even participation as being "holy". In fact I remember a whole assload of never ending sermons saying just the opposite. If you meet a catholic that says the rituals are the religion - they don't "get it". Feel free to explain it to them.

 

Next - catholicism doesn't keep up fast enough with science or social change. Again - thats what you get when you have to think on the scale of billions of people and thousands of years. You can't thrash around with every new scientific discovery or social change that occurs. The top level has to wait until something is firmly, firmly, proven - in the case of science, or firmly enscounced in the form of social change before they can absorb that into the tenants of the religion. Thats the problem the pope's face - in their "Day job" they can only mandate policy for the church at a pace in in a path that does the best for as many as it can (around the world) and that doesn't require a change in direction in 10 years.

 

The local chapters can be more in tune with the times and the local society. But thats the point.

 

Next - Cardinal is the highest level in the catholic church heirarchy. "Pope" is an elected logistical position. Thats all. And that heirarchy is a defining structure for those in the church obsy itself. Not the "flock". The pope is no closer to god than me. But if I get a chance to talk to him I can be assured I'm talking to a guy that spends a whole lot more time thinking about it than I do. I also find it useful to talk to a plumber about plumbing, a mechanic about mechanics, a lawyer about contracts... I also argue with them. But I try not to waste too much time asking lawyers about my turbo.

 

Ok, so now I feel like I contributed to this shit piss-ass thread and negated my outburst, so I'll stop here.

 

[ 06. April 2005, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: Mowgli ]

[iwishiwascool]

I heart mowgli.

[Dr. Pomade]

Originally posted by Mowgli:

Next - Catholics don't buy their way into heaven. I don't ever recall being told that. I don't know any catholics that confuse contribution or even participation as being "holy". In fact I remember a whole assload of never ending sermons saying just the opposite.

Actually, a few centuries ago (and perhaps even more recently), several of the higher clergy amongst the Catholic faith (e.g., cardinals, bishops) got into trouble for issuing holy "pardons" to some rich folks (e.g., barons, dukes), which they "earned" through healthy monetary donations to said clergy. Essentially, the scandal was this: the clergy was selling holy pardons to Catholics that were rich enough to buy them, thereby granting them a paid ride into heaven. What made this particular scheme possible is the fundamental basis for Catholicism: that an individual is capable of gaining God's favor, and essentially redemption and passage into heaven, through a life of worship, confession, and what have you. So, yes, at one point, people were essentially buying tickets into heaven - they gave up huge sums of money, and the bishops and cardinals gave them their blessing, and all was well in the Catholics' minds. You can make a case that that is still occuring even today, just in a more subtle form.

 

Protestants, on the other hand, fundamentally believe in predestination. That is, unlike the Catholics, who believe that passage into heaven is earned (or lost) based on what they do in and with their lives, Protestants assert that, at birth, there are some that have been chosen to go to heaven, and some that are not. So, for the Protestants, it really didn't matter what happened in one's lifetime, because it was already decided, i.e., pre-determined, what was to happen to you in the afterlife. Thus, the Protestants couldn't just fill the coffers of some reverend to buy their grace and entrance into heaven - nope, they were either blessed or doomed from the get go, and nothing they did in their lifetimes mattered much.

 

Protestants felt that those who were pre-destined for an afterlife in heaven looked and acted in a certain way - those people went to church regularly, behaved properly, and worked diligently. So, even though Protestants never really knew for certain who was pre-destined and who wasn't, all of them decided to act as though they were. Essentially, the idea was to act in a way as to convince your neighbor and your community that you were, indeed, one of the pre-destined. From all of this we derived the Protestant work ethic, which is still heavily influential in our culture today: the notion that one must always be diligent and conscientious in his or her work.

 

That's what I was getting at with my earlier statement about Catholics being able to buy their way into heaven, and Protestants not. It was half-facitious, and half-not.

[iwishiwascool]

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

Actually, a few centuries ago (and perhaps even more recently), several of the higher clergy amongst the Catholic faith (e.g., cardinals, bishops) got into trouble for issuing holy "pardons" to some rich folks

You speak of "indulgences" aka one of the points which inspired Martin Luther to break off from the whole system circa 1500 something.

 

They dont have those anymore.

[Mowgli1647545497]

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

You can make a case that that is still occuring even today, just in a more subtle form.

You could make that case. Its not. Those in the community of catholicism who think that don't "get it". If there are priests who imply or actually do that - bad apples abusing or taking advantage of "the system". You also get cheaters in CS:Source, Nascar races, ice skating, and government.

 

I can make a case that it was due to a sin against the cosmos that caused the Tibetans to lose their nation to Communist China. But I can make alot of cases that sound good.

 

My point, along the lines of what IwishIwasCool alludes to, is this: history only goes so far in describing modern religions' current incarnation. Its WAY overused. I know where cars came from, but I haven't shoed any donkeys or hitched up any oxcarts in my entire life.

 

Whoa - this is dangerously teetering on becoming a debate or a quorum for dudes to flaunt about their history knowledge in a pissing contest - and I REALLY don't want to land there, as I'd rather have teeth pulled without anethesia, so I'm applying full throttle and doing a touch-n-go and flying off to get laid. Bye. smile.gif

[copperhead]

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

Actually, a few centuries ago (and perhaps even more recently), several of the higher clergy amongst the Catholic faith (e.g., cardinals, bishops) got into trouble for issuing holy "pardons" to some rich folks (e.g., barons, dukes), which they "earned" through healthy monetary donations to said clergy. Essentially, the scandal was this: the clergy was selling holy pardons to Catholics that were rich enough to buy them, thereby granting them a paid ride into heaven. What made this particular scheme possible is the fundamental basis for Catholicism: that an individual is capable of gaining God's favor, and essentially redemption and passage into heaven, through a life of worship, confession, and what have you. So, yes, at one point, people were essentially buying tickets into heaven - they gave up huge sums of money, and the bishops and cardinals gave them their blessing, and all was well in the Catholics' minds. You can make a case that that is still occuring even today, just in a more subtle form.

Isn't that one of the main grievances that Martin Luther had with the Catholic church?

 

Originally posted by Mowgli:

Next - Athieism is a religion.

 

Next - anarchy is the least stable form of government.

I don't understand how Athieism is a religion. I'm not trying to argue with you, I just would like to have this cleared up. It would seem to me that a lack of belief does not constitute a religion. Wikipedia defines Religion as:

 

"A controversial term sometimes used interchangeably with faith, is commonly defined as belief concerning the supernatural, sacred, or divine, and the moral codes, practices and institutions associated with such belief. In its broadest sense some have defined it as the sum total of answers given to explain humankind's relationship with the universe. In the course of the development of religion, it has taken an almost infinite number of forms in various cultures and individuals. However, religion today is dominated by a number of major world religions."

 

So according to that, religion is basically the same as faith. Athieism seems to me to be a lack of faith, therefore the opposite of religion.

 

Anarchy is a lack of government. Stability is not even an issue if there is no government to be stable.

 

More Wikipedia definitions so that you can see where I am coming from:

Anarchy

Atheism

 

Under their definition for atheism, I can kind of understand their second definition, "Strong atheism," as being a religion, but they also say on there that it's not the commonly used definition.

[iwishiwascool]

To say that there is nothing is to have faith in that fact.

 

It is as audacious to say that you know that something absolutely does not exisists as it is for someone else to be confident in a higher power.

 

/Fence riding agnostic.

[Dr. Pomade]

Originally posted by iwishiwascool:

You speak of "indulgences"...They dont have those anymore.

How do you know they don't? Sure, I don't that they do, but I'm also fairly sure that you don't know that they don't, either.

 

Originally posted by Mowgli:

You could make that case. Its not.

Same point, how do you know that it's not occurring? Mind you, I'm differentiating between Catholicism as a basis of faith and those individuals who practice it. From my standpoint, if it involves humans, then it's susceptible to corruption. Call me pessimistic, but I think it's just a fundamental flaw in the human condition. So, I'd bet that Catholics the world over - both followers and clergy alike - are still "buying" their way into heaven. Why? Because the fundamentals of Catholicism remain the same - that good deeds will get you into heaven - and the human condition remains the same - that we are still just as susceptible to corruption as we always have been.

[Mowgli1647545497]

Originally posted by copperhead:

Anarchy is a lack of government. Stability is not even an issue if there is no government to be stable.

Government I'll gladly talk about - thats fun.

 

BTW - iwishiwascool nailed the atheism thing on the head - thats exactly it.

 

So, government... wait. I want to say something about Wikipedia. I have a problem with Wikipedia in that its really a lowest-common-denominator repository of opinions. That is - if someone comes and writes a 100% correct definition of some topic that pisses off alot of people, then someone will come in and overwrite that definition. Eventually everything boils down to the least offensive communally agreeable definition of things - as opposed to the truth. So take wikipedia entries on things with a BIG grain of salt.

 

Anyhow - I think you're confusing the term "form" of government with the body of government. That is, a collection of dudes standing around we call "the government". If you think of government as how people relate to one another, or how they govern themselves, then you'll see what I mean. anarchy as a form of governing. The form where everybody does their own thing, indulges their own desires, no rules.

 

Take an example: the power goes out and POOF - anarchy. "The Government" crumbles and the people do whatever they want. Chaos reigns.

 

Now, around the drinking holes and wells, and gas stations and other valuable things, bullies and gangs start laying claim. Want some water? It'll cost you...

 

Boom. And just like that another form government is starting... one that looks alot like fuedalism.

 

In any gathering of humans complete chaos never lasts long. Order appears within days, hours, minutes, seconds.

 

Anarchy is the least stable form of government.

[Mowgli1647545497]

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

Same point, how do you know that it's not occurring? Mind you, I'm differentiating between Catholicism as a basis of faith and those individuals who practice it. From my standpoint, if it involves humans, then it's susceptible to corruption. Call me pessimistic, but I think it's just a fundamental flaw in the human condition. So, I'd bet that Catholics the world over - both followers and clergy alike - are still "buying" their way into heaven. Why? Because the fundamentals of Catholicism remain the same - that good deeds will get you into heaven - and the human condition remains the same - that we are still just as susceptible to corruption as we always have been.

Well, you just said it yourself - you're mixing the practice and/or what some practicioners of a religion do in with the religion itself. BTW - Catholicism does not say "doing good deeds" will get you into heaven.

 

ACK - stop sucking me back in!!! I'd rather talk about the exhaust you're putting on that LS6 and any gains you measure with it, because I'm seeing some conflicting info on the Corsa system offered for the Caddy.

[Dr. Pomade]

Originally posted by Mowgli:

You're mixing the practice of a religion in with the religion itself. Catholicism does not say "doing good deeds" will get you into heaven.

Originally posted by Dr. Z06:

Mind you, I'm differentiating between Catholicism as a basis of faith and those individuals who practice it...

[Mowgli1647545497]

I editted - missed the edit. I'm notorious for 3 edits before I'm done, so there.

 

So, if some do questionable practicing of something do we smacktalk all practicioners?

 

Some people speed while driving their cars. Should all car drivers go to jail?

[Dr. Pomade]

Originally posted by Mowgli:

ACK - stop sucking me back in!!! I'd rather talk about the exhaust you're putting on that LS6 and any gains you measure with it, because I'm seeing some conflicting info on the Corsa system offered for the Caddy.

Stop saying insightful things and I'll stop replying. graemlins/thumb.gif BTW, I really liked the coffee mug/kitchen metaphor. I still haven't found a hole in that one yet, although, admittedly, I've been trying.

 

As for the exhaust, I'm thinking about a Borla, but also getting told that the Borla with the mods I have in mind (headers, cam, heads) will be too loud. So, I may just stay with the stock Ti exhaust.

[Mowgli1647545497]

For the caddy there's really only the stock, the Corsa, or the B&B. B&B has proven gains but its too loud for me.

[Science Abuse]

Originally posted by iwishiwascool:

You speak of "indulgences" aka one of the points which inspired Martin Luther to break off from the whole system circa 1500 something.

 

They dont have those anymore.

Swaggart picked those up, I beleive.

 

I may read the rest of that when I get home, right now I'm at work, riddled with plague.

[iwishiwascool]

The Televangelist?