 |
|
|
|
|
June 11th, 2013
01:35 PM ET
Pope Francis: `Gay lobby' exists inside VaticanBy Daniel Burke, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor (CNN) - Pope Francis said a “gay lobby” exists inside the Vatican, a surprising disclosure from a pope who has already delivered his share of stunners, and a resurrection of church conflicts that had bedeviled his predecessor's papacy. “In the Curia,” Francis said, referring to Catholicism’s central bureaucracy, “there are holy people. But there is also a stream of corruption.” “The 'gay lobby' is mentioned, and it is true, it is there,” Francis continued. “We need to see what we can do.” READ MORE: The pope said what? Six stunners from Francis Hints that the Holy See contained a network of gay clergy surfaced last year in reports about a series of embarrassing leaks to Italian journalists. The "Vatileaks" scandal factored in Pope Emeritus Benedict XIV's shocking decision to resign earlier this year, according to some church experts, as it impressed upon the 86-year-old pontiff that the modern papacy requires a vigorous and watchful presence. Francis' enigmatic comments came during a meeting Sunday with CLAR, the Latin American and Caribbean Confederation of Religious Men and Women, who head Catholic communities of priests, sisters and monks. The Chilean website Reflection and Liberation, which focuses on Catholic theology, first reported Francis’ remarks. The Catholic blog Rorate Caeli translated the report into English. A Vatican spokesman told CNN, "The Holy See Press Office has no official comment on the private meeting." Gay and lesbian Catholic groups did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests said, "structure, not sexuality, is the real issue." "The church is a monarchy. Monarchs are unaccountable. So many monarchs are corrupt. This is true in both secular and religious institutions," SNAP said in a statement. Other Catholics counseled caution about reading too much into the pope's remarks. "We don't have any explanation of what 'gay lobby' means," said Rocco Palmo, a Vatican watcher who runs Whispers in the Loggia, a website on Catholic news and church politics. "Naturally, some in the church will try to polarize or interpret this, but as the rest of us aren't pope, we still have to get further explanation," Palmo added. Church experts say the Chilean report rings true since the wide-ranging conversation centers on concerns that Francis has made touchstones of his nascent papacy. In contrast to the buttoned-up Benedict, Francis has earned an early reputation for speaking off the cuff, often ditching prepared remarks in favor of more informal conversations. On Friday, Francis nixed his “boring” speech and instead took questions from young Catholic students. Asked by a little girl if he wanted to be pope, Francis laughed and said that only someone who “doesn’t love himself” would want the position. Last month, the pope sparked a worldwide debate by suggesting that atheists might be able to earn a spot in heaven. "He has said some things that would turn Benedict whiter than the papal vestments," Palmo joked. Francis told the Catholic leaders on Sunday to focus on the poor, that the Vatican must be reformed, and joked that whoever wagered on his long-shot election as pope “won a lot, of course.” But his comments on the "gay lobby" are likely to gain the most attention, especially in the West, where Catholic leaders have been mounting a fierce fight against same-sex marriage. After Benedict announced his resignation in February, reports circulated that a “gay lobby” had forced his hand. Cardinals appointed by the former pope to find the source of the leaks investigated high-level Vatican clergy involved in homosexual affairs who might have been vulnerable to blackmail, according to La Repubblica, a leading Italian newspaper. La Repubblica reported that the cardinals found evidence of a “gay lobby” within the Vatican but gave few details about it. "Some high level clergy are exposed to the `external influence' – what we would call blackmail – of lay people to whom they are connected through ties of a `worldly nature,'" La Repubblica wrote. The Vatican blasted the newspaper reports as “unverified, unverifiable and completely false.” Francis is one of the few Catholic leaders to have seen the Vatican report. The so-called Vatileaks scandal led to Benedict's butler, Paolo Gabriele, being convicted on charges last year of leaking private papers from the the pope's private office. He was sentenced to 18 months in prison. 'Gay lobby' behind pope's resignation? Not likely John Allen, CNN’s senior Vatican analyst, has said it would have been odd if the Vatican report had not considered the possibility that "insiders leading a double life," including sexually active clergy, might be vulnerable to pressure to betray the pope. “It seems a stretch, however, to suggest this is the real reason," behind Benedict's resignation, Allen said. In one of his first actions as pope, Francis created a council of eight cardinals, including Cardinal Sean O'Malley of Boston, to offer suggestions on reforming the Vatican. “The reform of the Roman Curia is something that almost all Cardinals asked for in the congregations preceding the Conclave,” Francis said, referring to the meetings that led up to his election in March. “I also asked for it.” But Francis said that he cannot promote the reform himself. “I am very disorganized,” he said, adding, “I have never been good at this.” Instead, the pope said, he is relying on his eight appointed cardinals to move the reforms forward. CNN's Richard Greene contributed to this report.
« Previous entryWith his speech, valedictorian brings God to graduation
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Revelation 17:4
And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:
Amen.
J of P & S of T – probably consumed the same bad weed or spice that caused the "visions".
2 Kings:23-25
Then he went up from there to Bethel; and as he was going up by the way, young lads came out from the city and mocked him and said to him, “Go up, you baldhead; go up, you baldhead!” 24 When he looked behind him and saw them, he cursed them in the name of the LORD. Then two female bears came out of the woods and tore up forty-two lads of their number.
Amen!
Here's another Revelation for ya':
The church is corrupt.
Amen.
any Dr. Seuss book offers more knowledge per page than the entirety of the bible.
Nobody gives a cr ap about your bogus delusions.
Ezekiel 23:20
There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.
get to know your religion, I know Jesus' truth, sadly, you and Bob don't know Corinthians 10:3-5.
then you know jesus was a big supporter of slavery.
Bootyfunk, I keep telling you Booty that you are a slave to satan's lies. Only Jesus' truth will set you free.
zombie jesus just wants to eat our brains! of course, he'd starve if he came across you...
I'd lodge him in my camel toe to keep him safe.
Tom, could you try and be creative when stealing my handle to write your babble.
Booty, would you be more than an hors d’œuvre?
So what are you saying Stenchy? The Wh.ore of Babble-on is a drag queen?
Self righteous because I said we are all sinners? We includes me. You still have not worked out the logical end of atheism. You resort to ad hominem and have no support for anything you are saying.
I hope people can actually see how mature and developed your responses are with regards to the subject at hand because at least others may benefit from this discussion if you refuse to examine your own beliefs. Maybe others will take this more seriously...I mean, we are only talking about the meaning of life here.
if you are condemning others as sinners without even knowing them, yes, you are self-righteous. whether you condemn yourself is irrelevant when you are judging others.
and what do you mean by " You still have not worked out the logical end of atheism."? not sure who you were writing to, but what exactly are you asking for?
Meaning we are only mostly ignoring you and your tripe.
@Robert
What do you think the logical end of athiesm is?
I do not choose to be an athiest, I just don't believe your religion is any more real than any of the others. If you expect me to lose sleep over what the bible says will happen when I die, ask yourself why you haven't lost sleep over what the Koran says will happen to you when you die.
"I mean, we are only talking about the meaning of life here." So by your logic, humans and the universe they find themselves in are so complex that they must have a purpose and a purpose giver. Please if you will, take that logic to it's next step. If humans and the universe are so complex that they require a purpose and a purpose giver then logically that purpose giver is even more complex and thus would by your logic also require a purpose and a purpose giver. And if your super complex God gave himself his purpose, then what would prevent us from doing the same as complex beings?
Robert, you are slime. You say you are a sinner, but that's a lie. Nobody sins. Nobody was ever born a sinner.
There is no such thing as sin, no such thing as your god, and why don't you just go kill babies if you think they are born bad and deserving of eternal torture?
You are one sick fuck and should be put up against a wall and shot.
Don't bother trying to tell me that I am responsible for what other people have done. That's just retarded.
I am not a sinner. I am without any sin at all.
There are no gods to "sin" against. No rules and no morals whatsoever.
YOU are the one telling children they deserve to die and be burned forever just for being BORN.
I would gladly see all christfags die en masse right after all the muslims and jews and anyone else with the sickness of religion driving them insane.
Just think of that. I would like to see you die because you are a liar who abuses children.
YOU are the criminal living a criminal fantasy where all your crimes are ignored because of lies you tell about your fake god.
Stomp,
How is it wrong for me to say any of this if there are no morals? Why should you even care? If there are no rules, then why do you say that I am wrong and why do you care if I live or die? What basis do you have for this?
If you say your own mind, then what makes your thoughts better or more important than anybody else's here? I am guessng that plenty fo people on here don't hope I die.
Religious Morons,
Logic also indicates that there is a first uncaused cause. Especially when one considers that studies of the universe show that it is expanding. Working backwards in time upon that basis, there had to be a beginning.
1. We don't know if the universe "began" or not. At the planck scale, time becomes meaningless, so there is no way for us to know with our current methods of observation and experiment.
2. The universe began an expansion, but we don't know why it expanded.
3. Particles (now existing) the size of the early universe, pop into and out of existence all the time in the quantum foam, so yes, universe-sized particles do come into and drop out of existence continually, in every square millimeter of space, trillions of times every second. "Nothing" seems to generate and destroy particles in our universe more than anything else.
Well, I would be glad to hear of anyone like you dying ASAP, Robert. That's just me and how I view your worth relative to everyone else as a whole.
I am not the one saying babies should be tortured forever just for being born. That's YOU saying that.
I am saying YOU should just die because you are a real threat to all children and you see nothing wrong with being that way.
You are a threat and should be shot. I'm not saying for anyone to shoot you, just that you deserve death more than any baby because of the threat you pose with your child abuse and lies and other insanity.
This is not a moral-value judgement on you, it is a damage and threat assessment on behalf of all children that shows you to be a mortal threat to the health and wellbeing as well as lives of all children.
You hate children. You think they are born evil and deserve to burn forever in hellfire. How does this make you not a threat?
How can you say this makes you moral or good? You are just a crazy liar who is a threat to everyone's safety.
It would be easier to shoot you than have a mental health professional treat you with no guarantee of success because you are a threat NOW and always will be. I will throw that rock at your head and crush it like an eggshell because I am without sin, so stay the fuck away from children you sick piece of crazy trash.
I base my knowledge and opinions on actual facts, not lies that have been proven to be lies.
My values are realistic and effective. Yours are not. So die you piece of filth. I don't need you in my world.
"Working backwards in time upon that basis, there had to be a beginning." That would be true if it were impossible to have existed in some other state, like that of dark matter. So until we know what was there pre-singularity then we can say we don't know, not "there had to be" this or that.
Just because we do not know the origin does not mean that there is a conscious prime mover. If there is a cause for everything, then something would have caused the prime mover to exist, and this cause would have it's own cause and so on to an infinite number of causes of an infinite number of prime movers, with no possible beginning and no root cause. The universe is more complex than we can possibly fathom and our universe, in the grand scheme of things, could be so infinitesimally minute in significance that our lives would have no meaning other than what we give it. Taking a "god" cop out because the alternative where our lives just end forever is too scary is like slapping our humanity in the face. If we as humans have reason, why not use it?
the pope fights the g.ay lobby while promoting the child molester lobby....
Hey, the bible only say's "men who lie with men" will not inherit Gods kingdom, it doesn't say anything about what you can or can't do with a boy... It does however say not to spare the rod when teaching your son...The priests are just following scripture by sharing their rods.
Gaydom in the catholic church? This is nothing new, they like to molest little boys all the time. I guess that's not gay tho because it isn't outlined as wrong in the bible. Until they stop protecting child molesters i only wish one thing for the catholic church, and that's hopefully one day soon, it will cease to exist.
Substandard trolling. I give it a 4/10.
Yeah, that didn't really make me angry enough to respond. Post it again. This time, with feeling.
Luke 14:34
Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?
Amen.
Speaking of seasoning and "Luke"'s, it was probably Paul's secretary that messed up and fed him some poisonous weed that made him hallucinate (scaring him into starting to believe all that garbage).
Tom, stop stalking me with your babble.
"Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?
Amen."
Again HeavenSent demonstrates she doesn't understand the bible and why cherry picking it is so wrong. If you really understood the bible you would know that this goes with Christ's teaching of do to others what you would have them do to you. Persecution is most evidently inconsistent with that fundamental principle of morality and the fact that Christians are the main source of the persecution of gays is wrong.
Mrs. Dash?
Pete, not only do you not comprehend scriptures, you also do not comprehend the definitions of language used. As far as persecuting, you perceive the terminology in today's definitions.
(For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
2 Corinthians 10:4
Amen.
"Pete, not only do you not comprehend scriptures, you also do not comprehend the definitions of language used. As far as persecuting, you perceive the terminology in today's definitions.
(For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)
2 Corinthians 10:4
Amen."
Thanks for making my point. You're an idiot and you don't know scripture at all because you certainly don't know about the meaning of Luke 14:34. LMAO!
@Calhusker Judaism has lasted far longer. As has Budhism, Hinduism, and many others. Just because something has been around for a long time doesn't make it correct.
All traditions of men, not of God.
Lol, HeavenSent, when you stay stuff like that I have to ask if you're putting people on?
testing
The gay agenda has come to fruition. However It is not too late the defeat the sons of Sod0m.
The hom.os will give you butt flu
we must stop straight people from having gay babies
We need to defeat redneck douches like you first.
Well, that was a well thought out comment. Anything else you and your 3rd grade education would like to share with us?
@Jim
I bet you're still mad blacks and women got the right to vote.
Sorry, bubba, gays have been around forever. It may make you feel all yucky, but too bad. As far as the "sons of sodom" comment, pull your babble out of your rectum
Jim is from Alabama. What do you expect?
It used to be crimson, now it's just brown and Tide can't even wash that shit out.
So Jim, what are you going to do when a gay man jumps on your back? Beat him off or let him stay?
Are we feeling a wee bit insecure about our sexuality Jim? Otherwise, why bother trying to convince us how opposed you are to the "gay agenda"?
Exactly what effect do the existence (or the agenda) of homosexuals have on your life?
the crimson in the crimson tide is a mixture of blood, bile and lube.
blow tide!
"Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman." - 1 CORINTHIANS 7:1 (KJV)
"However It is not too late the defeat the sons of Sod0m."
It is helpful to post both passages of Jude, 1:6 and 1:7 together, as they are meant to be read this way.
6 And the angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their proper dwelling—these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgment on the great Day. 7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
Note that the humans are exhibiting the same behaviors as the angels. Note, also, that the sexual immorality and perversion mentioned isn't homosexuality. Scholars who have studied this passage have concluded that the perversion alluded to is actually rape, which was rampant.
Did you know the toothbrush was invented in Alabama?
Anywhere else and it would have been called a Teethbrush.
Nothing here that isn't known already! Now, to clean house.
Another good argument for married priests.
yes ... Gay married priests!
yes...becasue as well all know marriage cures gay.
idiot.
Wow! I wonder if he is safe or if we will read of an unfortunate incident.
Gay people in the church. Thank GOD JESUS is coming back for a church That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.
Forget to take your Lithium, again?
Luke 14:34
Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned?
Amen.
Jesus is dead and not "coming back"
Tom as sam, stop stalking me.
@ sam stone
WIsh I could tell you "I said so" when it occurs, but I won't be able to since I won't be here to do so. Be sure to tell yourself for me...
Salt is gooood... I'm gonna go fetch me some chips!
I only post under this name, Heaven's Slvt
Truth: Jeebus is waiting. Why wait? Do you have tall buildings where you live?
sam, could you get more frustrated? When you tire of being carnal, learn Jesus' spiritual truth.
CARNAL TIME
Wow, Exhorter, so Jesus is STILL coming back, huh?
He said he was just going down to the corner for a pack of cigarettes. But he's been gone for over 2,000 years!
I hate to tell you , but I think he might have bailed on you.
HS: Jesus is waiting. Take your sidearm, and insert it in your mouth. Yes, you will have to take your Jeebus marital aid out first. Now go meet the slavior
Yet what He will come also to do, Exhorter, is to liberate the Gays and Lesbians of His flock from the cruel oppression of the Church. His compassion will free them from the stigma of society throughout so many centuries that has caused so many of them to suffer and even be killed or end their own lives. He will surely judge those who judged them wrongly. Of that you can have no doubt so get ready for that, as in God's eyes ALL are His children and are Created EQUAL == End of story.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that amid the swirling rumors about the RCC, but also in consideration of current scientific theory on homosexuality (see last issue of Quarterly Review of Biology), as well as recent developments around the world regarding gay marriage and more acceptance (i.e., Mormons, Episcopals, many Lutherans, reduced stance by Church of England, etc.), that the RCC realizes that they, more than ever, need to provide transparency, but also would like to be prepared to move in a direction of acceptance. It would make sense that they don't want to say something now that they will regret in the very near future that would sound so diametrically opposite from what soon could be the rest of the world.
“there are holy people. But there is also a stream of corruption.”
How careful not to necessarily associate corruption with the alleged gay lobby
“The 'gay lobby' is mentioned, and it is true, it is there,” Francis continued. “We need to see what we can do.”
Very vague. I'm sure it's no accident.
most of the world. Obviously I wouldn't expect to see the rest of the world agree on such an issue – certainly not in my lifetime.
Um, which article? I glanced over the table of contents, lots of articles on the evolution of feathers, didn't see the alleged article you're referencing.
Check out this issue:
Vol. 87, No. 4, December 2012
In the quote you mentioned about Pope Francis, Doris, that can only mean that he may very well be thinking of becoming more Inclusive of Gays and Lesbians realizing there is a big lobby of them within his abode and that the time has come to let bygones be bygones and move to embrace them as should be done and as Jesus would do when He said to Love One Another. He placed no conditions on that love.
No amount of social evolution and rewritten dogma will ever change the fact that their religion is based on pure legend with zero basis in fact.
Of course there are a lot of highly intelligent people who would disagree with you. Dr. Francis Collins head of NCI, C.S.Lewis, Tolkien who wrote Lord of the Rings, Sir Isaac Newton, Pascal– the famous mathemetician, 30% of all physicists believe and a large number of philosophers. I am with those that have proved it for themselves by reading the Bible and doing actual research into your so-called legends. Better than just deciding that something is no true just because you feel so.
Yep, that's atheism alright. Thank you for sharing!
Except for the Jesus part.
Probably true
I'm just more interested to see how a religion can try and embrace change without violating one of the key tenents that follow almost every religion on the scene today, namely the adherence to ritual and the belief that there's only one specific way to acheive salvation and it's already been outlined.
If the Vatican were to embrace LGBT rights would there be another schism within Catholicism that would create two separate catholic groups? If so, could that even work?
@DGrove
First, though you named a few people that are also believers and are respected for their intelligence, that in no way validates a religious belief. Some of whom you mentioned were more deists rather than christians, and for those who were outspokenly christian, they usually relied more on faith and less on evidence.
I'd be interested to know what sort of research you did specifically to warrent your belief. If you believe there is actual, physical evidence to prove that god exists, that jesus rose from the dead, that natural laws have actually been legitamtely broken, please provide this.
If you want to go the second route, namely that faith can't be proven and that you believe because you want to believe. That's fine. If you are comfortable putting your logic on hold to believe in something illogical, go right ahead and do so, but don't expect someone such as Seyedibar or myself to respect that.
This Church has lasted 2,000 years. No one else can say that. Jesus knew that there would be sinners and saints within. "So you must be careful to do everything they tell you. But do not do what they do, for they do not practice what they preach (Mat 23:3)."
@Chuckles Great Response to DGrove. An appeal to authority is meaningless without some facts, and he has none. Also, in answer to your question about a schism – well, see Martin Luther for the answer. At least, that's how it worked out last time.
@Chuckles
It's "tenets" NOT "tenants".
You must have stupid DNA.
DGrove: You sure seem to have a low standard of proof. Well, believe whatever you want, but the moment you try to convince others, do not be surprised if you are challenged
Well, chark, seeing as that's as far as your reading comprehension lasted, I'd say it's more likely that you are the one with the genetic problem.
"This Church has lasted 2,000 years. No one else can say that." No, but Hinduism is still practiced and has lasted nearly 5,000 years with early Vedic texts attributed to 2900 bc.
@sam
Chuckles should know better. And you? Just a butthurt troll who somehow thinks I was talking about anything else besides the one mistake. Try some reading comprehension of your own, dumbfuck.
@Chark
Arguments are always won by pointing out someones mispellings or incorrect grammar right? We all know that everyone here is only as good as their spelling.
Did you actually have an issue of the point I was making or would you prefer to stick to being the spelling g-man?
Now, now, chark. Dishing it out but not taking it? That's selfish. The least you could offer is a reach-around.
@Chuckles
What makes you think I was arguing or trying to refute anything you were saying?
I guess you really are stupid.
Who says I can't point out someone's mistake and give them shit about it?
Your arguments are usually pretty good. But, really, "tenents"?
You're a big boy now and have been posting here for years. How can you make such a stupid mistake?
Your DNA is just mongrel DNA like everyone else's. You make mistakes just like everyone else.
But "tenents" is ridiculous to see coming from a grown man who claims to be educated. I am just kicking at your DNA too.
Funny how I haven't refuted any of your arguments, hey?
I like kicking at bigots who make spelling mistakes. I make them too. It's all good fun. Lighten up, "jew". lol
@Chark
So you're just being a dou.che just 'cus?
Noted. I'm not exactly sure if you think you are insulting me in a friendly manner or if you're trying to get a rise out of me, either way I think it's pretty clear from your post that you enjoy trying to troll people.
So ..... congrats to that I guess.
'Bitch of the Day' award goes to Chark.
@Chuckles
Yes, I'm just being a douche and trolling for a response from you so I can further evaluate your mental state for my own selfish purposes.
Am I not allowed to do this? Because I find it very informative at times. Yeah, just trollin and trying to get a rise out of ya.
I am disappointed you did not respond more angrily. Well, that's okay. I knew you were smart and didn't have all that much hope that you would rise to my racist-baiting. I enjoy putting people to the test. You passed. This is a good thing for me too, as I view all data as useful. I'll leave you alone now. I have several dozen other people to troll, so I'll be going now.
@sam
Thanks, bro, you make me feel right at home, but why are you hitting yourself?
@Chark
Um..... thanks, I guess?
Thank goodness I am a Humanist. Go Bruins!! 🙂
In their case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelievers, to keep them from seeing the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God. (2 Corinthians 4:4)
Thanks for the random, pointless bible quotes, cal. That totally helps.
A Gay Lobby? Why wouldn't they be allowed to go up to their rooms?
I bet the gay lobby is the most elaborately decorated one. It is not surprising that with the increasing need for coverups, they have a separate lobby for gays to go in and out of incognito.
The Gay Lobby in the Vatican has to go!
Celibate priests and nuns are fine.
Gay Marriage and gay coitus are in conflict in Catholic/Christian/Bible principles.
Pope Francis knows this and will stand up to the gay lobby.
Thank you Pope Francis!
Get ready for dissapointment Douglas.
The Pope has spoken out for athiests, and got rid of the Nazi.
Who can tell where he will go from here?
Douglas...be careful the hom.os will give you butt flu.
It sounds more like they are preparing their followers for a way to start to accept it.
[insert random bible quote]
"[insert random bible quote]" O.K. Sam, here we go with something most apropos!
"And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Either how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself beholdest, not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote that is in thy brother's eye." - LUKE 6:41-42 (KJV)
The Pope said the Vatican needs to be reformed.
Every time i see this it makes me think of all the implications of that statement.
Now he admits to the gay influence.
I really like this Pope. A lot.
I'm not going back, but i have fewer harsh feelings about the organization.
Catholicism is the belief that grocery store bread and wine becomes the actual flesh and blood of a dead Jew from 2,000 years ago because a priest does some hocus pocus over it in church of a Sunday morning.
Atheism is the belief that the above belief is utterly ludicrous.
I couldn't have said it better myself.
Blessed are you when they insult you and persecute you
and utter every kind of evil against you falsely because of me. (Mat 5:11)
Yeah, atheism is the belief that everything came from nothing, that beings with personalities came from stuff with no personality, and that somehow even though people can't agree on right and wrong, we are just able to come up with a determination of such things on our own. This is in spite of the fact that there is no singular basis for what is right and wrong that comes from man himself.
It also means that you believe, in the end, that your life has no meaning or value. You're just the same as that rock over there if there is no God Who created you and gave you more value than the rock. Atheists like to accuse Christians of having "blind faith", but evidence all around us points to the fact that God created everything. It is, in fact, the atheist who has blind faith and plugs up his ears with his fingers and screams all kinds of taunts so as to not face the truth and be accountable before a just, holy, and righteous God.
While the RCC does not hold to many true, Christian doctrines (the bread and wine don't become body and blood, salvation is not by any works of man, Mary was not perfect), that is not the fault of Christianity or the Bible...it is the fault of men. Just the same as there is no perfect man or church...we all sin and all need grace. We are all sinners who deserve to be punished eternally in hell because we are born with sinful hearts.
Robert: you're full of shit. Just thought you'd want to know.
Until the day Jesus says "try living without me".
Sam, all you are doing is exemplifying the behavior I described. Please go and examine the logical end of atheistic beliefs and see where they lead. I'm just asking you to examine what you say you believe and where it leads for your own sake. It would be better to be informed and think things through, don't you think?
Robert, you have an excellent point. Ergo, I will need to adjust my initial assessment:
You're a self righteous prick AND you're full of shit. Thanks for playing.
Robert
You make a lot of a$$ertions, and incorrect a$$umptions about atheists. Atheists simply do not believe in gods. They do not say everything came from nothing...there are more than two options....we simply do not know. There is no evidence whatsoever that goddidit. And where did your god come from if not nothing?
We do not knwo if there was anything before the big bang. There could have been an infinite number of universes before ours, and matter could have always existed in one form or another...we do not know.
You clearly do not understand what an atheist is...do some research and get back to us.
Robert: You have no idea of what you are talking about regarding atheism. But, by all means, continue to bloviate
@ Sam, self righteous because I said we are all sinners? We includes me. You still have not worked out the logical end of atheism. You resort to ad hominem and have no support for anything you are saying.
I hope people can actually see how mature and developed your responses are with regards to the subject at hand because at least others may benefit from this discussion if you refuse to examine your own beliefs. Maybe others will take this more seriously...I mean, we are only talking about the meaning of life here.
Richard,
And how do explain personalities? How about conscience and having any value? And where did everything for the Big Bang ceom from? Einstein hated to acknowledge that the universe was actually growing because that menat it had a beginning. He also saw from the research provided by Hubble, that as you go back in time all of the matter grew infinitely smaller because the spirals of motion get inifinitely tighter and there is eventually a point where there is nothing. Of course, he chose to plug up his ears as well. Sad.
@Robert – you're really mischaracterizing atheism. I'm atheist – I have no belief in any one of the hundreds of gods man has created throughout the centuries, although I find the study of world religions and cultures through the ages to be quite fascinating. I don't think life is meanlingless at all – I think that it's meaning is what you make of it in this life, and if the choice for eternal life was offered to be I would refuse it. I don't "believe" that humanity and how our minds work came from "nothing", but as a scientist I may have a great deal more insight into that process and what we share with other animals. We are not unique. We did not come from nothing. Everything is connected, and it is amazing to look at the neurons firing in a fly and see the same pattern in a human brain, or watch non-human primates exhibit a clear sense of culture, right and wrong, justice, jealousy, vengeance, sadness, etc etc. My world is far more richer for pursuing an understanding of it than it is if I had taken a 2,000 year old outdated text as the final word and absolute truth of all things.
Robert.
Why do you think there is a meaning? You clearly have not examined your own belief. If you look at a belief in your god, have you examined a belief in all of the other gods...men have made thousands of them. You seem to reject them all, so you are 99.99% atheist. we have just gone one more god than you.
If you apply science, and examine the bible against what we do in fact know, you will find Genesis (Adam and Eve, Noahs Ark) and the story of Jonah to be obviously false. Maeniing that the bible is NOT the word of god, but stories of man, meaning that the bible does not represent any god that actually exists. I'm not saying that a god does not exist, but the bible is certainly not a representation of any god.
What fyre said. And your posts just feel seem like you throwing a bunch of pebbles in the atheist direction in the same way you'd scare off an unwanted dog. Why not use an interesting and convincing argument? Do you know any?
@Robert again – you seem truly fascinated by the origin of personalities, and curiousity is something that I applaud. I highly recommend taking a neuro class for some in depth understanding of the topic, as you seem interested. You can even perform some experiments on your own – break down everything that defines a human personality into short, objective terms. Closely observe a group of animals for a few hours a day over the course of a year – even a group of fish will work. It is amazing how much personality and individuality is exhibited even in something with a brain the size of a pinhead. In science, we use this similarity between humans and all life to extrapolate molecules, proteins and pathways that have bearing on what we call "personality" from flies, fish and mice all the way up to primates, including humans. It's really cool stuff, and I'm glad you're interested in it! 🙂
"You still have not worked out the logical end of atheism."
Robert, you haven't managed to work out a single part of it. You're too foolish to take seriously.
Richard,
There is plenty of evidence for a wordwide flood...both historical and scientific. However, all this discussion will cause is arguments over whose view of the facts is correct. You see, scientists have beliefs before going to analyze the science. And you already have your own presuppositions as well.
Also, do rocks or chemicals have personalities? I mean, where did life originate from?
Robert, you could not be more wrong. Not only does the evidence show there was no worldwide flood within the last couple hundred thousand years, but the evidence shows that it is IMPOSSIBLE for there to have been a world wide flood of water. If the world was covered with water at any point in time, it was a world unrecognizable to you and me with no humans. The world was liquid for a while though: liquid rock.
Cpt. Obvious,
Here are a few articles for you to check out...
http://www.icr.org/geological-strata/
http://www.earthage.org/EarthOldorYoung/scientific_evidence_for_a_worldwide_flood.htm
http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/worldwide-flood-evidence
https://www.apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=13&article=1791
Like I said, I am guessing that you'll just line up a list of articles supporting your presuppositions and round and round we go.
No, I won't, Robert. You see, I've been through those websites and your arguments many times before. They are neither convincing nor interesting. I am not interested in convincing you (others may be), I'm interested in discovering a new way of thinking about the most conclusive evidence; I'm not interested in an old way of thinking that assumes it cannot be wrong in any way.
If you have some way to demonstrate your position, let me know.
Robert
There is no indication of a world wide flood. There is indication the there has been local flooding, but never on a world wide scale, and never all at once. That is a lie.
also genetics proves BEYOND A DOUBT that the worlds humans did not come from one set of DNA...impossible, AND the bible does not explain how neandethal DNA is in every human on the planet...a race of people that never existed by the bible?
and you really believe that the world had enough water in it to raise the water level by six inches a minute for 960 hours?
And where did all the water go...it also doesn't address how all of the plants came back, the insects, microbes , bactreria...etc...it doesn't address how all of the creatures of the earth were packed onto a tiny boat, which must have been Doctor WHo's TARDIS.
ridiculous, what is more ridiculous is people BELIEVE it
That these people lived for over 900 years.
"hocus pocus" is in fact a corruption of the Magic Words the priest speaks (in Latin) that is supposed to turn the bread into flesh.