New Pope [Archive] - The Jewel Kilcher Forum

MrCC

04-21-2005, 06:13 AM

If this thread gets ugly I'm bailing out. It's against my better judgement to try argue religion and politics in the Jewel forum. I've seen the blood bath happen before and I'm not wanting to get slammed for my views. Besides most people can never seem to be swayed from their long held beleifs they are by reading anything in a little 'ol Jewel Forum like this - so what's the point. And please forgive me for not using his proper name, I mean no disrespect, I'm just a bad spellir.

So anyway enough with the disclaimer now about the pope...

He seems like a nice enough guy. I think we know little about him, but it you think any pope is going to change long taught church doctrine then you're looking in the wrong place. I doubt there will ever be any leader in the catholic church that will all of a sudden decide to accept women as priests. Whatever your views on if it shoudl or if it should not it just isn't going to happen.

Most of the people who criticize any particular church for it's teachings are not even a member of that church. If you want to be a Catholic then be a Catholic and accept the teachings of your church. If you don't beleive in the teachings of your church then maybe you should find another church. If you're not even Catholic then why should you care what Catholics do in their own church? If your church teaches that there is a divinely decreed right and wrong then you don't ask a member of another religion to vote to decide what's right and wrong in your church.

So where am I going with that train of thought? Basically this. If the new pope changes no major church docrines then he is a good Catholic and a therefore a good pope from a Catholic perspective. Certainly, Charisma and Charm also indicate a good pope in that they sway world opinion to give a more positive view of the Catholic church.

Concerning the suggestion that the new pope's will try to leave his "mark" on the church. Any religious leader that does that is not a good religious leader. Being a religious leader is not about power and prestige. It is about serving others and being humble.

Little Bird

04-21-2005, 07:35 AM

I have no real opinion of him yet. Although, I am disappointed that we still haven't gotten a pope with more liberal views on Homosexuality, contraception and Women Priests. I feel Catholicism has to move with the times and meet the needs of the people and already statements of his thoughts on these subjects have been made clear. They are pretty much the same as John Paul II's.

Other than that, he seems like a gentle man. They chose an older Pope as they didn't want another long reign like JPII. But at 78, he looks in great health!

bluediamond

04-21-2005, 08:35 AM

I dont know much about popes n stuff so i might be sounding dim here...why is mr ratzenberger, or whatever the german blokes called, why is he called benidict ?

i just dont understand :wacko:

:lalala:
Dave

Little Bird

04-21-2005, 09:16 AM

It's Ratzinger and one of the things you sacrafice when you become Pope is your own name. The very first task to do as a Pope is to pick your own new name. He can choose a Latinized form of his Christian name, a saint's name or the name of an earlier pope.

Hope that satisfied your curiosity.

Intrepid Prez

04-21-2005, 10:25 AM

I am disappointed that we still haven't gotten a pope with more liberal views on Homosexuality

It's not the Pope's job to support "liberal views on Homosexuality"...
it's the Pope's job to support Biblical Scripture.

And the Bible is perfectly clear about the act of homosexuality.

I feel Catholicism has to move with the times

If "the times" show the human race to be abandoning Christian moral standards...
then it's the Pope's job to lead his people back to God's original teachings.

Easy... Justin

__________________________________________________ ____________________________

kjm030584

04-21-2005, 12:57 PM

Intrepid Prez Posted on Apr 21 2005, 10:25 AM

QUOTE
I am disappointed that we still haven't gotten a pope with more liberal views on Homosexuality

It's not the Pope's job to support "liberal views on Homosexuality"...
it's the Pope's job to support Biblical Scripture.

And the Bible is perfectly clear about the act of homosexuality.
I don't think it's perfectly clear. Foggy at best. But you're forgetting that it's just a friggin' book! People take it way to serious. I think the Bible teaches stories about how we should live, like fables, not something we need to take seriously enough to start wars over. It's like LOTR, or HP fans who take it way too seriosly; only, i'd rather find myself sitting next to them than somebody who thinks some of the things in the Bible are true.

LonelyLullaby

04-21-2005, 01:14 PM

Yeah,I generally love anybody from Germany (EXCEPT HITLER), But i'm looking at what this guy stands for and how impressionable our demented Bushy-boy is and I'm worrying. I pretty much don't want a right-wing, conservative nut job to take away the right of abortion or deny homosexuals the right to get married. I think a lot of people don't realize that when they have that kind of public power how they can inspire hate. The majority of the republican party in the US is hate-based and Catholic so what does that tell you?

That it goes against everything Christianity is about ;) It's kind of funny how a religion that teaches peace and kindness inspires hate, either way regardless of who the pope would be the views of the Church on things like abortion and homosexuality wouldn't change. It would be nice if we had a younger pope, who is instead of pushing people away from the Church with his conservative views and strict regime brought people together with an up-to-date view of the world, the church needs to bring more people in, and I don't think this will help much, it doesn't speak much to the younger generation. But either way- I guess the whole point of having a pope like this was also that he will conserve the old views of the church and there's no chance of anything changing- as far as I'm concerned, the faster the church loses people and power the better, and with the modern world changing every day and advancing of the science while the church holds on to its old views, we are not far from this. I don't know who is the pope as a man but to be honest I don't believe in any of this. Who is to say that he is a better person that anybody else or that people should respect him? Do you know what those priests and cardinals do behind the closed doors? Remember the sex scandals about priests abusing kids? Remember that the previous pope didn't want this to get out so he tried to hush it out? God (if there is God) didn't appoint these people to their positions- other people did. So why should we look at them as closer to god or what right does he have to really "give blessings" or "forgive sins"? All he does is represents the Church, but to me.. that doesn't mean anything
Good luck to him on his term though, lets see what happens. Maybe instead of pushing other religions away he can continue to live in peace with others and inspire hope in people who believe and need all of this, lets see

MrCC

04-21-2005, 05:22 PM

According to a new report by the Josephson Institute of Ethics, cheating, stealing and lying by high school students have continued their alarming, decade-long upward spiral. A survey of 12,000 high school students showed that students admitting they cheated on an exam at least once in the past year jumped from 61% in 1992 to 74% in 2002; the number who stole something from a store within the past 12 months rose from 31% to 38%, while the percentage who say they lied to their teachers and parents also increased substantially.Source (http://josephsoninstitute.org/Survey2002/survey2002-pressrelease.htm)

If churches are to "stay with the times" should they embrace the idea that cheating is good, just because it's popular? If your religion beleives that moral values are determined by God, then they are fixed, immovable, and unchanging. Dishonesty is dishonesty and human opinion cannot change wrong to right, as much no matter how many people might want to change it. If the new pope embraces popular opinion about moral values then he would hurt the Catholic church. Obviously tolerance of other beleifs is important, but tolerating sin is much different than embracing it.

In any case I hope he does a good job and lives a long time.

Little Bird

04-21-2005, 08:00 PM

Well I mean move with the times, but within reason of course.

I am catholic as most Irish people are so I know what it is like to live and grow up not just in a very catholic family but a very church driven society. A lot of what I remember about the church growing up was fear. Catholicism instill fear in people and I don't believe that is the way forward any more. It needs to progress with the world like everything else but it still lives quite firmly in the dark ages.

Forget homosexuality and contraception then, why refuse women to become priests. It is as if we are second class citizens and are not worthy of the cloth. If anything, with the lack of priests being ordained, you'd think they would jump at the chance to get more people on board regardless of their sex. It has worked for Protestants. And with only a few SMALL differences, both religions are same. The Catholic Church should be taking on the same progressions that have done well for Protestants and that is more along the line of what I have meant.

michaelsjewel

04-21-2005, 09:37 PM

as for the pope...i'm not really religious for many reasons as my eyes and emotions can tell me to venture elsewhere - good for them ellecting a new pope - :rolleyes: - hopefully this one doesn't turn out to be a child mollester :o

as for the bible being truth - the bible was written by man - lots of stories or fables as u might call them have been written in there - and besides....the books is very hypocritical if there even is a word - it's supposed to make u a better person - but knowing from experience the people that are so religious - they are usually more cruel to others because they judge themselves (and i hope their attitude sends them to hell) - and for the bible dissing people (gays...etc) - that's man made - you don't just go....or become gay - i know from experience - u just are usually born that way - so tell me if god created all things - he also created disease - starvation - world poverty - everything good and BAD....right? and don't just blame it on the devil - since there isn't such a thing! :lol:

u aren't going to make anyone believe what u want anyhow - so why do i bother - i'm just sick of seeing all the bad things get away with its doings - i really look harshly on the fact that he can allow millions of people to starve to death over in africa from starvation and disease.... tell me....what sins did they commit to deserve that torture?

and i also despise those saying that 9/11 (sept. 11th attacks on wtc and pentagon) - that god would protect us - um.... hello...u forgetting the diff. of religion is what caused the attacks in the first place! (they hate our gutts just b/c we practice a diff. religion and us being a super power as they call us makes them angry! - plus we support israel - another religion they hate)

as far as i'm concerned...israel had the jews there first - even though muslims took it over for 1000 years doesn't make it rightfully theirs - the jews were they way before they were and they ruled it originally - it's rightfully theirs and they have the right to have it given back to them after ww2 - for crying out loud - that islamic world has most of the middle-east - israel is such a small plot of land - quit fighting over land for god sake and get along instead of acting like spoiled rotten and ignorant children -

i could go on forever -- but i won't - i'm just sick of this world and their lies - my belief is "i believe in humanity - not religion" ...i believe that if u live a good life and are a decent person - you won't go to hell - as for heaven and hell - i think the movie bedazzled gave the best quote ever .... "you don't have to go too far to find heaven and hell... they are right here on earth....it's what u make of it and what u believe and what u do ...and u that makes that decision" HERE HERE - i love that quote and believe every bit of it!

kjm030584

04-21-2005, 09:42 PM

there's this movie here, I just saw it a couple months ago and i want to watch it a few more times before i get really behind it. But Saved i think has my very outlook on religion. It shows how a beautiful faith can make a person so ugly. I strongly recommend it to anybody, no matter what religion, it's one of those movies that can really bring people together.

MrCC

04-22-2005, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by little_bird@Apr 21 2005, 01:00 PM
Well I mean move with the times, but within reason of course.

I am catholic as most Irish people are so I know what it is like to live and grow up not just in a very catholic family but a very church driven society. A lot of what I remember about the church growing up was fear. Catholicism instill fear in people and I don't believe that is the way forward any more. It needs to progress with the world like everything else but it still lives quite firmly in the dark ages.

Forget homosexuality and contraception then, why refuse women to become priests. It is as if we are second class citizens and are not worthy of the cloth. If anything, with the lack of priests being ordained, you'd think they would jump at the chance to get more people on board regardless of their sex. It has worked for Protestants. And with only a few SMALL differences, both religions are same. The Catholic Church should be taking on the same progressions that have done well for Protestants and that is more along the line of what I have meant.
I think that it's something that God would need to decide. If he wants it to happen then it will and no one should do it unless he says so. I also think that if women were meant to be priests then Jesus would have made some women part of his 12 disciples. And you can't say it's because of their culture in ancient times would not accept them. If you beleive Jesus is a God then he can move mountains and he could certainly have orgained a few women if he thought it was the right thing to do. I beleive men and women are equals who serve different roles in the world. A priest who considers himself better than a woman has got problems. Priesthood is about serving others. I think many women think that women not being able to be priests is somehow an insult. I don't think that God meant it that way. I beleive God lives every person who ever lived or ever will live. That does not mean that we all live through the same experiences. We all have different roles in life. Women have a very important part in the world, but it just does not include being a priest in the Catholic church. There are many experiences in my life that I think I would like to do, but I know I never will be able to. I take what comes and I am happy with my life. For example I will never be a mother no matter how hard I might try. ;)

You are very right that women are often treated as second class citizens in the world. Not just be Catholics, but by almost every culture on earth. Women are beaten and worse by many men in the world. Women are often treated horribly, but I just consider crimes against women to be in a different class than what IMHO is a small issue of if women should be priests. The problem with the treatment of women is not so much a religious issue as it is a culture issue. Who cares if a man beleives in Jesus if gets drunk and beats up his wife up every night? There is no church that I am aware of that teaches that beating of women is correct, yet it has been a problem throughout history. If is not by following religion that these things happen it is by NOT following religion. If we follow religious teachings we would adore our wives, daughters, and sisters and never cause them harm.

In any case, I don't think any pope will ever ordain women to the priesthood. If it happens, let me know. I would just be very surprised. That's all I'm saying about that.

:lovejkf:

ShawnShamrock

04-22-2005, 01:42 AM

^_^ Look what i started
I mgihtj as well watch the religon battle on the jewel board

georger

04-22-2005, 04:09 AM

Look up information on the following popes over the last 2000 years:

Anacletus
Benedict IX
Benedict XII
Celastine II
Clement VI
Innocent III
Innocent VIII
Julius II
Julius III
John XII
John XIII
Leo I
Paul II
Paul III
Sergius III

These popes, had they lived today, might be spending time with some of the most hardened murderers and rapists in prisons today.

There has been, and may continue to be, very little to place any kind of trust in people who raise themselves (or become raised) to any such position. This I'm speaking as an ex-catholic.

And all should be concerned.....this fellow may seek to march violently and gloriously backwards in time in the name of "righteousness". Canada's First Nations people alone have suffered so much at the hands of the church and this new pope may not recognize that fact.

Intrepid Prez

04-22-2005, 05:58 AM

I don't think it's perfectly clear. Foggy at best. kjm030584

There's nothing foggy about this...

Leviticus 18:22 (About Homosexuality)
'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'

Some versions of the Bible use the word: "abhorrent"

Like I said, perfectly clear.

But you're forgetting that it's just a friggin' book!

Nope... I ain't forgeting anything.

To you, the Bible is "just a friggin' book"... suit yourself.
But to others it's the inspired word of God Himself.

Most Christians respect your wishes to accept or reject that book.
So, offer them the same... respect their wishes to live by God's Word
which they believe is found within that book.

Easy... Justin

__________________________________________________ __________________________

michaelsjewel

04-22-2005, 06:35 AM

older versions were.... "do not lie with a man in a women's bed"

it's weird how bibles have changed over time - to make it seem worse than it really is - goes to show who really wrote the book! -

MrCC

04-22-2005, 06:44 AM

There's nothing foggy about this...

Leviticus 18:22 (About Homosexuality)
'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'

Some versions of the Bible use the word: "abhorrent"

Like I said, perfectly clear.

Nope... I ain't forgeting anything.

To you, the Bible is "just a friggin' book"... suit yourself.
But to others it's the inspired word of God Himself.

Most Christians respect your wishes to accept or reject that book.
So, offer them the same... respect their wishes to live by God's Word
which they believe is found within that book.

Easy... Justin

You tell 'em Reverend! Well put if you're looking to start a holy war. ;) I like that you're not afraid to tell us what you think while I'm busy trying to be a diplomat.

I'm telling you. read my prophecy in my first post. This thread is likely to get ugly before the week's out. Religion in a forum is a powder keg issue. You either beleive in it or you don't. You get the non-religious people arguing that the Bible is just a book of old fiction and the others who say it's the word of God. One says proove God exists and the other says proove he doesn't. Neither side usually accepts the other's arguments because one side sees faith as proof and the one who lacks faith sees religious people as deceived.

I know what I beleive and no one could convince me to accept what I know to be wrong. Still I respect others right to believe whatever they want. Free will is a God given right.

I'm sure this all relates to the Pope somehow. I'm trying to make sure that it does. Long live the new pope...

Intrepid Prez

04-22-2005, 07:25 AM

I'm busy trying to be a diplomat. MIKE

Christ didn't ask His followers to be diplomats...
to "hide their lamp under a bush". In fact it's perfectly
clear what God thinks of "luke-warm" followers.

Revelation 3:16

"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
I will spew thee out of my mouth."

and..

"By your fruit (not diplomacy) will you be known" (Jesus)

Diplomacy doesn't enter into it. I'm sure Christ could have thought of
a more comfortable (or more diplomatic) way of spreading God's word...
without suffering the consequences of being nailed to a cross.

Easy... Justin

LonelyLullaby

04-22-2005, 01:12 PM

If churches are to "stay with the times" should they embrace the idea that cheating is good, just because it's popular? If your religion believes that moral values are determined by God, then they are fixed, immovable, and unchanging. Dishonesty is dishonesty and human opinion cannot change wrong to right, as much no matter how many people might want to change it. If the new pope embraces popular opinion about moral values then he would hurt the Catholic church. Obviously tolerance of other beleifs is important, but tolerating sin is much different than embracing it.

In any case I hope he does a good job and lives a long

I agree with you that the Church won't change its views, and I guess the whole point of choosing this pope was this. Apart from other things his conservativeness; but I don't really mean things like a human opinion, I meant the advances of science- living in our days and educated in our times and not encouraging the spread of HIV in Africa by speaking out against sending condoms over there- you don't have to support certain things, but you also don't have to insist on the opposite to help people. I think if the pope was younger people would relate to him more altogether, because it comes with the territory that he understand more the new and advanced world of today, not just know all of the history of yesterday instead ;) You know? He doesn't have to embrace new values, he just has to understand more the demands of today
Except for this I agree with everything that Mike said except that Israel is not a religion ;) and Muslims have a lot of history connected with the land as well, Jerusalem is the center of religions, no one wants to lose the city

here has been, and may continue to be, very little to place any kind of trust in people who raise themselves (or become raised) to any such position

Exactly. Some things we are just better off not knowing. But he is just a man- a representative of the Church, he is nothing holly

georger

04-22-2005, 01:30 PM

That's right. He is just a man. He still eats, has to go to the bathroom just like any other man. And he will die like any other man.

As an ex-catholic I find it a disgusting display of superstition and ignorance the kind of worship given to another human being, as if they were some kind of god.

And what good could the Vatican do with the wealth it's supporters have lavished on it?

The money from the Vatican's world wide real estate holdings could probably erase third world hunger, and if they wanted to, they could sell off their gold inventories and help relieve poverty.

But that will never happen. The Vatican is all about maintaining an image, an icon for people to put their faith and hope in, as much as it is about raking in tons of money.

There's no money in actually following the selfless examples of Jesus. It's not part of the business plan.

LonelyLullaby

04-22-2005, 01:54 PM

Okay since no one took care of deleting the post I might as well retype what I have yesterday. I just pretty much agreed with everything you said Georger

There's no money in actually following the selfless examples of Jesus. It's not part of the business plan

It's true, the Church is a business, just like everything else
A hospital is a business as well; and the Church is incredibly corrupted. People seem to do that with a lot of things that start out better ;) The church is supposed to be the interpreter of bible to the people, instead we just have their interpretation that will make people think and act like the Church would like- instilling fear in people, pushing their theories, and getting their own way. Anything that brings money and more people to follow the leaders of the Church. And it's always been that way

MrCC

04-22-2005, 04:03 PM

Originally posted by Intrepid Prez@Apr 22 2005, 12:25 AM

Christ didn't ask His followers to be diplomats...
to "hide their lamp under a bush". In fact it's perfectly
clear what God thinks of "luke-warm" followers.

Revelation 3:16

"So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot,
I will spew thee out of my mouth."

and..

"By your fruit (not diplomacy) will you be known" (Jesus)

Diplomacy doesn't enter into it. I'm sure Christ could have thought of
a more comfortable (or more diplomatic) way of spreading God's word...
without suffering the consequences of being nailed to a cross.

Easy... Justin
Hey, Justin. I'm impressed. I like what you've said in your posts. I left out a few words in my diplomat sentence. It should read "...while i'm TOO BUSY WASTING TIME trying to be a diplomat. You've quoted some great scriptures. Thanks.

MrCC

04-22-2005, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by georger@Apr 22 2005, 06:30 AM
That's right. He is just a man. He still eats, has to go to the bathroom just like any other man. And he will die like any other man.

As an ex-catholic I find it a disgusting display of superstition and ignorance the kind of worship given to another human being, as if they were some kind of god.

And what good could the Vatican do with the wealth it's supporters have lavished on it?

The money from the Vatican's world wide real estate holdings could probably erase third world hunger, and if they wanted to, they could sell off their gold inventories and help relieve poverty.

But that will never happen. The Vatican is all about maintaining an image, an icon for people to put their faith and hope in, as much as it is about raking in tons of money.

There's no money in actually following the selfless examples of Jesus. It's not part of the business plan.
The wealth of the Catholic Church is often criticised. The truth is that the Catholic Church's holdings are tied up in antiquities. I've always thought that the Catholic should sell off some of these items in order to help people in third world countries. If they sold off just a small percentage of their art, manuscripts, and decorative arts this would do much to stop starvation. Many of the things they own are essentially priceless, but what is better for mankind? Keeping many of these items on display in Churches for all to enjoy or selling them to private investors to be locked in vaults. I think selling part would be a great gesture, but I don't know that they DON't do this already.

I'm not saying that Catholics don't help - they are one of the world's largest contributors to humanitarian aid. I think we could all do a little more than we are, and they are no exception. I really don't want to criticise the Catholics for doing too little, because I myself am guilty of the same. I could help more people if I tried a little harder. "Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me." Well I lack this. In fact a man who gives up his life to become a Catholic priest in any ways is doing his best to give up all their possesions and follow Christ. A Pope more so than any. What would it be like to live out your days with the whole Catholic world looking to you for guidance and watching your every move? In my selfish perspective being a leader that is chosen until death is an awesome responsibility and as much of a curse as blessing because you give up your will for the good of the people you lead.

I also feel that the Pope is a man. He is probably a really great man, but he is still just a man. The Catholic Church has a tendency to deify many people by making them "saints". A pope is kind of a saint in that he is reverenced as something more than a man while on this earth. Still I believe that we all have great potential and will one day live again with God as his family. Jesus Christ reverenced the Father and none else. I think we should reverence Jesus Christ and God the Father and not necessarily any earthly man. If others wish to do so, thats up to them, but for me I prefer to only worship God.

On another note. I don't even remember mentioning Israel, but I lump the Jews and the Muslims together as brothers. They are jealous brothers who covet what the other has and because of years of fighting they no longer love each other as brothers. They are both decended from Abraham, but their paths have diverged. They share many common scriptures, yet they are unable to set aside their differences long enough to live in peace with each other. I beleive firmly that the day will come when they will live in peace, but I fear that there will be much bloodshed before that day comes. As Christians they are also both our brothers. We share these scriptures too. We are decended from Abraham who covenented with the Lord and was promissed that his seed would rule the earth. Until Christians, Jews, and Muslims recognise and love each other once again we will all suffer.

LonelyLullaby

04-23-2005, 01:04 PM

Mike I meant that I entirely agree with Michael's post, I'm sorry I will call you differently from now on. Mike and Mike doesn't work ;) But I agree with this part of yours as well. It's really ridiculous that how to believe in God (even with the idea of the same God) is what divides people. I guess it's just the nature of men- we have to find differences in absolutely everything

MrCC

04-23-2005, 06:38 PM

No big deal. Just the curse of the common name again. I was wondering if it was me, but decided to share my opinion anyway.

Little Bird

04-23-2005, 10:32 PM

I say we all become Buddhist...like me :D

Well abandoning Catholicism and moving to the teachings of the Buddha as my spiritual following has been my savour at least. I'm just kidding when I say we should all become Buddhist but I have found that Buddhism as a lifestyle is far more realistic than following Catholicism, yet doesn't disrupt my current living that Tibetan Buddhism (the religion) would.

When you look at the leader of the Catholic Church and how he lives, in comparison to the Dalai Lama, you'll see there is repect but a key difference is, there is no worship of a man. I love that the Dalai Lama thinks he is no better a person than you or I and calls himself 'just a happy monk'. It is that kind of, well I can't say leadership because that's not what he is but it's that kind of attitude in his position that I admire.

kjm030584

04-24-2005, 11:25 PM

seems there's a lot of similarities between wicca and buddhism.

kjm030584

04-24-2005, 11:41 PM

MrCC
Posted: Apr 22 2005, 06:44 AM
Report Post

QUOTE

There's nothing foggy about this...

Leviticus 18:22 (About Homosexuality)
'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'

Some versions of the Bible use the word: "abhorrent"

Like I said, perfectly clear.

I think no matter how devoted to Christ's you are, you need to be a little more skeptical when you read the Bible. When King James had it translated into English, along with all the mistranslations he included things he thought should be in there. Here's one example:
"Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live." (Exodus 22:18)
"A sorceress shall be put to death." (Exodus 22:18) (King James Bible)
SEE I have a bible too.

They were put into the Bible by a guy from the 1500s in England when the witch burnings were going on there. Those lines were responsible for thousands of women's deaths. James I was known to fear witches/witch-craft, who's to say that the part in Leviticus wasn't thoughtlessly thrown in there by him too.

And if you want to be safe by the Bible's standards stay away from red meat, don't wear clothing that's half linen and half wool, and if you dog humps your female friends/relative's leg kill the dog and whoever it humped. These are other rules from Leviticus.

georger

04-25-2005, 12:42 AM

Well abandoning Catholicism and moving to the teachings of the Buddha as my spiritual following has been my savour at least. I'm just kidding when I say we should all become Buddhist but I have found that Buddhism as a lifestyle is far more realistic than following Catholicism, yet doesn't disrupt my current living that Tibetan Buddhism (the religion) would....

You are not the first person I've known who has found this path for the exact same reasons you've mentioned.

Little Bird

04-25-2005, 07:40 AM

Originally posted by kjm030584@Apr 24 2005, 11:25 PM
seems there's a lot of similarities between wicca and buddhism.
There are but Wicca focuses a lot on healing and to put it crudely, 'casting spells' though I hate calling it that. I can't think of another way to put it. I have a few Wiccan friends so the similarities between the 2 beliefs are clear.

In a lot of ways, there are no 'rules' in Buddhism. Catholicism is full of them and they were created centuries ago when it suited the period then. Thos same 'rules' apply today in a world that is completely different. I just feel the church need to recognise that and it is the duty of the Pope to do this.

That is what I was trying to highlight when I raised the subject of Buddhism.

I just want to add one more thing, I have often dreaded the subject of religion taking place here and on any other board. They often get out of hand and lead to an out and out flame war. It's a nightmare for moderators and admins and often hard to deal with without offending someone. I just have to say that I am so proud that we are all able to have a civil and open conversation about this without losing the head and causing offence. Bravo everyone. Really pleased that we can all be so mature about it. Thank you!

LonelyLullaby

04-25-2005, 01:07 PM

In a lot of ways, there are no 'rules' in Buddhism. Catholicism is full of them and they were created centuries ago when it suited the period then. Those same 'rules' apply today in a world that is completely different. I just feel the church need to recognize that and it is the duty of the Pope to do this.

I don't think that the Church will ever change its views, but the Pope does have a lot of authority, and his opinion and standards influence how the Church and many people around the world will act. Like every judge who reads the law but has his own final say in each case, it's the same thing with the Pope and when it's someone so conservative and lets say "old school" that's a problem

georger

04-25-2005, 01:35 PM

I don't think that the Church will ever change its views, but the Pope does have a lot of authority, and his opinion and standards influence how the Church and many people around the world will act. Like every judge who reads the law but has his own final say in each case, it's the same thing with the Pope and when it's someone so conservative and lets say "old school" that's a problem

You're right. But where does the pope get his authority and power from?

Ask: If all catholic churches were emptied and would remain empty forever, what power would the pope have?

Answer: None. There is no power if people will not hear him.

The power and authority of the pope is entirely contingent on those who offer their attention and money to him. And that's what it's all about today - maintaining an illusion of old power and wealth.

MrCC

04-25-2005, 06:05 PM

Here's an article I just noticed today:

Benedict Says He Prayed Not to Be Elected

Mon Apr 25,10:56 AM ET

By DANIELA PETROFF, Associated Press Writer

VATICAN CITY - Pope Benedict XVI said Monday he had viewed the idea of being elected pope as a "guillotine," and he prayed to God during the recent conclave to be spared selection but "evidently this time He didn't listen to me."

For the first time since his election, Benedict shed light on his feelings inside the conclave during an audience with fellow Germans.

Speaking in his native tongue, Benedict told the audience that at one point during the conclave, when it became clear he was garnering many votes, a fellow cardinal slipped him a note reminding him what he had preached before the conclave about Christ calling Peter to follow him even where he did not want to go.

Benedict, 78, said he had hoped to spend his last years living quietly and peacefully.

"As the trend in the ballots slowly made me realize that ? in a manner of speaking the guillotine would fall on me ? I started to feel quite dizzy," a smiling Benedict said, clearly joking. "I thought that I had done my life's work and could now hope to live out my days in peace. I told the Lord with deep conviction, 'Don't do this to me.'"

He recalled saying to God in his prayers: "You have younger, better, more enthusiastic and energetic candidates."

"Evidently, this time He didn't listen to me," Benedict said.

(continues)

Source: Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050425/ap_on_re_eu/pope_reflections_2)

LonelyLullaby

04-26-2005, 01:02 PM

Georger you caught my post yesterday :) I'm sorry that I didn't reply right away when I saw yours- by the time I came back to the board I was a bit tired- but damn this board and its deleting system ;) Either way I agree with this too, but the point is that while we have a pope and while the system is what it is (until this will change it will be a while) it would be nice if we had a pope who is less conservative in his personal beliefs. There are a lot of people listening to him today, it would make a big difference
And Mike I understand about the article, but I guess it's the fault of the cardinals that he got chosen, although I understand that this was probably the intention- I guess how conservative our new pope is was part of the equation. I just hope that he is a good man who can help people, a lot of people need this belief system

georger

04-26-2005, 01:23 PM

It's true, the Church is a business, just like everything else
A hospital is a business as well; and the Church is incredibly corrupted.

Almost everything we are able to do in life is a matter of deciding either yes or no.

In this I mean the activities that bring resources and funds to us.

Somehow saying it is for "business" somehow seems to excuse some of the very worst forms of apathy, arrogance and ignorance people perpetrate, even though in their private lives they would never tolerate what is perpetrated in the name of "business".

That, my friends, is hypocrisy and apathy at it's worst.

If people would treat business personally, most of the injustices in the world against poor people would vanish.

It's really just karma or following the golden rule - Do to others as you would have done unto you.

Or what comes around goes around.

LonelyLullaby

04-27-2005, 12:50 PM

I agree with this but I'm just merely stating a fact. I don't excuse it or compliment the Church ;) It's just what it is at this point

kjm030584

04-27-2005, 09:58 PM

"lowsy rotten karmic retribution!"

can't believe i just wasted my 200th post on this... :wacko:

Intrepid Prez

04-28-2005, 02:44 AM

And if you want to be safe by the Bible's standards stay away from red meat, don't wear clothing that's half linen and half wool, and if you dog humps your female friends/relative's leg kill the dog and whoever it humped. These are other rules from Leviticus:? kjm030584

St Paul speaks perfectly clearly on the matter too.
And... he has nothing at all to say about dogs humping your female friends.

This time the keyword is VILE.
While the 'New American Bilble' prefer the words: DEGRADING and PERVERSITY

King James Version
Romans 1:26-27:

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their
women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in
their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly,
and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

New American Bilble
Romans 1:26-27:

26 Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females
exchanged natural relations for unnatural,

27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned
with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus
received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

Whatever translation... it's still perfectly clear.

Easy... Justin

...

kjm030584

04-28-2005, 02:56 AM

I'm sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough. I was just thinking since the bible was changed in the past to suit the needs of the times, it could be changed once more to suit the times of the day.

Besides now we know that homosexuality comes from early childhood development. A child's sexuality is determined by the time their 3, that's what I learned in psychology. ;)

MrCC

04-28-2005, 04:56 AM

Did I miss reading the Drudge report? Is the new pope gay?

As far as psychology. I've got much more faith in the Bible than I have in the so-called "science" of psychology. Psychologists pretend to know a lot, when they know next to nothing about anything.

If this thread turns into a debate on gay-ness then my prophecy in post #2 has finally come to pass.

Intrepid Prez

04-28-2005, 06:29 AM

the bible was changed in the past to suit the needs of the times: kjm030584

Not quite, kjm030584, the Bible has been changed and re-translated many times...
but not to "suit the needs of the times".

Mainly the Bible has been changed for internal political reasons.
The 'MESSAGE' has pretty much remained the same over the centuries.

If some Words of God are translated to mean 'abhorrent', 'detestable', 'vile',
'degrading', or 'perversity' etc... the meaning is quite clear.

The Pope, no matter how much he'd like to "suit the needs of the times",
cannot simply say that God really meant: 'acceptable'.

The word 'homosexuality' cannot be found in the bible, nor the word 'gay'
(using it's modern context). The Bible does however mention Sodom and Gomorrah,
from which the meaning of homosexuality is represented: Sodomy.

Easy... Justin

...