Religion: Christianity & relationship with God.

If you still think that, then I guess I see some thing you thought was a contradiction when you thought it was a different contradiction. I'm saying that the Pope doesn't have divine powers. I'm saying that God has divine powers that grants the Pope his powers. Which once again, the Pope's powers are not divine.

What does the Vatican hate? Masons? Or people of this country? Either way, it shouldn't be like that. Catholics aren't supposed to hate anybody.

True. But it can just as easily not be interpreted at all. Don't ask why I say this, I just am for some reason.

Not everything has proof or need it. I mentioned this somewhere before, but there are some things we'll never know.

Just out of curiosity, did you read any more of that link? They had different interpretations for it.

Funny how you say it's wrong in defense of a group that came after Catholics. And, because I'm curious, why do you think the Pope is a joke?

The Pope is the leader of the church. And the Bishop of Rome is another title for the Pope.

 

But you just said that the Pope has no divine power, yet God gives him some type of power. If it is not divine, then what is it? Explain.

Masons. The founding Fathers, thus we can conclude this country as well, but they'd never say that outloud. And they do hate different types of people, whether they are right in their hatred or wrong all matters to one's own opinion, but they do hate Geys, Muslims, Mormons, Masons, Blacks, and Science. Thats a short list.

All of that is pretty common knowledge....

....thats a really dumb statement. IT IS INTERPRETED, COUNTLESS WAYS! DUH!?
Again, common knowledge plays a lot in all of this.
How can you say its not interpreted at all when you know yourself theres at least one interpretation in the world that you are 100% sure exists, and thats YOUR INTERPRETATION! Dont use those foolish remarks in this debate please, its kind of annoying.

Yes, yes it does. Some things we will never know, but thats not for us to decide for eachother. Lots of things, to be true, need proof. If you dont have proof or a logical theory, then no one will ever take you seriously.

Catholics came after Protestants, thats why America was found by the Pilgrams. Queen Elizabeth was hated by Spain because she was pro protestants. French Catholics came after the Knights of Templar around the 1500-1600's, and then after the Masons around the same time followed up till today. But because everything is so liberal now-a-days, they dont kill eachother over it anymore.....or do they?

As for the Pope being a joke, well, I dont believe in the Pope, and I think he's a shrivaled up old man thats power hungry until his last breath, and doesnt give a shit for people like you and me, or anyone, even other Catholics. All he wants is to have his cake and eat it to. He cares about no one. He has no power. He is one of the most sinful creatures on this planet.

 

It's power over the church. There's nothing divine about it. It's similar to the power to rule over a country.

I know that the Vatican doesn't hate science, and I doubt that the Vatican hates blacks. So many people, even people from the Vatican, have shown that science and religion (Mainly on the topic of evolution) don't have to clash.

I know it's a dumb statement. But I never said that it's not interpreted. I was saying that as easy as it is to interpret the Bible, it can not be interpreted just as easily. Nothing more.

True.

No, Catholics didn't come after Protestants. Protestants were formed during the Reformation. Martin Luther founded the Lutheran church. He broke away from the Catholic church because he didn't believe in some things they did, which I agree with him on some of those things. This is taught in History. Catholic first, Protestant second. And Pilgrims were Puritans (Being a group of Protestants) for the most part. Some Pilgrims were Catholic, but definantly not all.

You surely can't say that about all Popes. What about Pope John Paul II? He wasn't power hungry. He helped Poland break free of Soviet Russia. And the Pope being sinful, well that kinda goes against him having the role of Pope and leading the church. But then again, I'm guessing you consider somethings to be sinful that others don't consider to be sinful.

 

But that is authority, and authority is given by humans.

they do. A lot of that is common knowledge. You can try to sugarcoat it all, but for thousands of years this has been like this. History repeats itself. Things aren't going to change.

....that makes no sense.

I meant it like they "chased them down", not historically.

whats wrong is wrong, whats sinful is sinful. Everyone knows what is right and wrong in their hearts. OPinions differ, but we all still understand things. Tats what makes us all human.

 

Can you please explain? I don't understand what you mean.

Not always true. There are people in this world who aren't like that. To them, something may be good that we consider sinful. Such as having sex with some random person or before you're married. I myself consider that wrong, but I guarentee there are other people who think it's all right.

And as I asked before, do you consider every Pope to be the same sinful shrivled up old man? Or only some of them?

 

I mean that Catholics hunted Protestants like prey, burning witches and killing non-believers.

their opinion on the sin is that its "okay", but in their hearts they do not feel it is. They know it isn't, they know they are breaking the law, and due to our sinful nature they find that stimulating. They like the risk, its fun to them.

I can't call everyone of them a shriveled up old man, everyone deserves a chance, and I'll be honest, I dont know every Pope that ever lived and I cant give you a real expert opinion on every single Pope, but from what I've heard through out history, and the way I see other people treat him, he is evil to me. My opinins are more so based off of other reflections of him, and what I've read and heard of in history books and history channel shows.

 

Oh.

Don't you think there is at least one person who feel it's okay in every possible aspect? As an example: In my English Honors class, we're reading East of Eden. In it, there is this character, Cathy. Saying she's a whore is a nice way of putting it. She's pretty much pure evil and enjoys it. She doesn't seem to have a conscience at all. In her heart, she feels what she does is okay.

That seems reasonable.

 

they are just used to the sin. It has grown on them.
but "once upon a time", they knew everyday what they were doing was wrong. Heck, they still know, its just their mind is gone.
You know what they say,"The mind is easier to loose than the heart."
Your mind deceives you in what you feel and believe. Feelings are love, soul, emotion. You will never loose that.
So they'd still feel like what they were doing was wrong, even if they say or act like they dont care about what they are doing.

 

Perhaps.

But in that book I mentioned, she's not like that. Cathy has been evil her whole life, ever since she was a little girl. It's actually kinda creepy how bad she is.

 

its an author emphasising that man is sinful, nothing more.
thats a book, not real life.

 

Actually, he's kinda retelling the story of Cain and Abel.

But point is, it brings up a good point. Is man naturally imbued with morals? Or were we given them from a previous generation? Can we prove either is true?

 

its a mixure of both really. Its neither 100% one way or another.
We already have a naturaly imbued moral background, but our environment shapes and molds that into what we grow up with.

 

I've actually been thinking about it. I think it's a possibility that the morals that are in us were given to us from a previous generation. If you think about, something had to give us the morals. Because I doubt that the first people had them. Either God gave them to us, or we came up with them and went over them so much that it became part of us.

 

they were god given, then their environment shaped them.

 

About the Pope:

Well, it certainly is a much more complicated point than I feel it should be…

I should preface this with the fact that I disagree with the Catholic church in general, feeling that in many ways it has fulfilled this: “For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, as it is written” (Romans 2:24). For example, the whole molesting issue that I absolutely despise. I feel that so many people turn from the faith because of the Catholic church’s conduct, and I’m pretty much FURIOUS about the entire situation. It reminds me of this Scripture: “Pursue peace with all [people], and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord” (Hebrews 12:14).

I’m quite passionate about this, and I truly do apologize if I have offended you Desert Warrior…but the people that I love with every single bit of my heart to the point that I wouldn’t hesitate to die—even to be separated from the Lord (which thing in itself makes me cringe. I cannot think about that…)—for their sakes, if they would be with Him…have turned away because of the things they see going on with the Catholic Church. I love them. I hate that such disgusting immorality/a severe lack of holiness (and I also ask forgiveness if I speak in an unwell manner) because these things have happened. And obviously I hate it because God’s name is spoken against! Ugh.

Anyway. The entire argument about the Pope reminds me of two particular passages of Scripture. The first is about Paul before the Jerusalem Council (the Jews were accusing him):

“Then Paul, looking earnestly at the council, said, ‘Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this day.’ And the high priest Ananias commanded those who stood by him to strike him on the mouth. Then Paul said to him, ‘God will strike you, you whitewashed wall! For you sit to judge me according to the law, and do you command me to be struck contrary to the law?’ And those who stood by said, ‘Do you revile God's high priest?’” (Acts 23:1-4). It is obvious, then, that if the Pope has been given authority by God, His people are not to revile that one (Pope=high priest in Catholic context). (Although I admittedly do not think this means that we are not to speak to that one if their conduct is unwell and needs to be improved.) And if that wasn’t clear enough—

Then Paul said, “I did not know, brethren, that he was the high priest; for it is written, ‘You shall not speak evil of a ruler of your people’” (Acts 23:5). (The reference is found in Exodus 22:28: "You shall not revile God, nor curse a ruler of your people.”)

The second passage that is reminiscent:

Romans 13: “Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil. Therefore you must be subject, not only because of wrath but also for conscience' sake” (1-6).

While I admittedly do disagree about many things that I have heard about the Pope (and read. However, I don’t claim to know even half of the things that I should know about this topic), I do not revile him simply because it is displeasing in God’s sight.

About morality:

Being made in God’s image we are imbued with morals. It’s called conscience—a faculty of the spirit. …you know, I know that I spoke about morality somewhere on this forum…I’ll have to find it and see if I have anything to add to them that would actually be useful for your question.

I agree that people can grow up in environments where there is moral laxity and thus exhibit the same moral laxity as those around them. However, I disagree that even in the face of moral laxity morals are unknown. It’s pretty clear throughout the ages that man is well aware of the existence of good and evil—though how anyone could ever come to this conclusion without God is truly illogical because without God, good doesn’t exist, and neither does evil; so then the question becomes, how did people even come to recognize those things in the first place…if they didn’t exist?—and that despite distance and culture, morals exist everywhere. The fact that many people don’t live out the standard doesn’t eliminate morality’s existence; it merely illustrates man’s fallen state.

 

....... Just wanna throw this out there, I'm an Atheist. I blame Louisiana Baptists for half of it.

 

Yes, and even in a un-moral homes we learn morals. We learn how NOT to act.

 

Hell and Heaven. It is all the same. Well in my religion. I am going to Nirvana.

 

Hmm... I just want to throw this out there - for who might not know all that much - but Muslims are not bad. It's just the extremist groups that do the bombings and whatnot. Also, They actually have one of the most peaceful doctrines I have ever seen in my life.