 |
|
|
|
 Pope Francis and Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI meet at the Mater Ecclesiae monastery at the Vatican last December.
February 19th, 2014
11:35 AM ET
The Pope Francis 'book' of insultsOpinion by Laurence England, special to CNN (CNN) - In the year since Francis was elected Pope, the media have told us a certain story about this man “from the ends of the Earth,” as he once described himself. Francis, we are told, is warm and friendly, gentle and compassionate. He embraces the poor, the disfigured, the outcast. These attributes pose a sharp contrast, we are informed, to his mean-spirited, judgmental and arrogant predecessor, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, who was known for his fancy vestments and aloof, academic attitude. If Francis has the common touch, the story goes, Benedict was firmly out of touch, perched on an ivory tower far inside the Vatican. To many Catholics this media-driven contrast between the two Popes is laughable. Benedict may have been unpopular with the world and many of its opinion-makers, but those who loved him as the Holy Father, who listened to what he said and read what he wrote, knew a far different man than is cruelly caricatured in the media. We welcomed Benedict's theology and liturgical vision; and the hallmark of his papacy was a deep humility rooted in prayer. He was ever the gentleman. Even his criticisms of trends in modern society that run contrary to the church’s teachings on life, marriage and the family were delivered in courteous language. And when Benedict did say something likely to be deemed offensive, he was often extremely careful about the way in which he said it. In fact, he was much more careful not to offend than his successor on the throne of St. Peter. Each Pope has his own teaching style, and it is obvious that with Francis, adherence to protocol and upholding custom is not his way. His strength is communicating parts of the Catholic faith in a simple, direct and visible way. But bluntness is a double-edged sword, and some of his speeches and sermons have offended some of the papacy's biggest supporters. This, of course, counters the image of Francis as the “gentle, pastoral shepherd.” In sifting through media reports, I was shocked by how often the Pope criticized Christians and by the severity of his insults. I felt inspired by conversations with members of the clergy to compile a compendium of papal invective, calling it, tongue firmly in cheek, “The Pope Francis Little Book of Insults.” It is not a real book, of course. (This should have been obvious by the fact that I offered a 20% discount to anyone who directed one of the Pope’s insults at a bookstore cashier.) Rather, it's an online litany of the surprising and sometimes slashing one-liners in Francis' verbal arsenal. Indeed, here's some of the names the Pope has actually called people: "pickled pepper-faced Christians," "closed, sad, trapped Christians," "defeated Christians," “liquid Christians,” "creed-reciting, parrot Christians," and, finally, those "watered-down faith, weak-hoped Christians." Catholics who focus on church traditions are "museum mummies," the Pope says. Nuns who fail to inspire faith in the church are "old maids," and the Vatican hierarchy has at times been "the leprosy of the papacy," in Francis' words. Indeed, men of the cloth face the brunt of Francis' fulminations. He has called some of them “vain” butterflies, “smarmy” idolators and “priest-tycoons.” He’s described some seminarians as potential “little monsters.” The Pope didn't say these things just to insult people, of course. Rather, he was often making a larger point about the kind of church he wants to lead: open, merciful and unafraid. MORE ON CNN: Pope Francis: No more business as usual But at the same time, some Catholics have felt alienated by Francis’s criticisms, as if they are under attack. In blasting the status quo, it can sometimes seem as if the Pope is slighting the most faithful members of the church. To be honest, reaction to my satirical “Pope Francis Little Book of Insults” has varied. Some readers are so amused that they want to see the book really published so they can buy a copy. Others are outraged that I could dream up something so “disloyal” to the Pope. (I am hopeful that our Holy Father has a healthy sense of humor.) I am also hopeful that, over time, Catholics will become accustomed to this pontiff’s style of teaching, even if it contradicts the shallow media image of “Francis the Friendly Pope,” as one well-known website calls him. Speaking of media, Pope Francis hasn’t left journalists out of the fun. In a recent address, he called them “fomenters of coprophagia!” If you don’t know what it means, look it up. But whatever you do, don’t complain and be like “Mr. and Mrs. Whiner.” After all, as Pope Francis says, nobody likes a “sourpuss.” Laurence England lives in Brighton, England, and writes the blog That The Bones You Have Crushed May Thrill. The views expressed in this column belong to England.
Next entry »Funeral held for snake-handling pastor
« Previous entrySatanists: Accused Craigslist killer not one of us
|
  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.  |
|
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_F9nIps46w
–
Fellow Humans,
I was asked why God is morality? Why theres a need for morality? And my expanation may not have been clear because i kept being asked the same question. Some say parents or our laws makes us more moral, our ancestors, textutal references.
Simpliest explanation. Based on our daily lives, no bible no beliefs.
When we are born and our parents, laws, rules, ancestors, textual references instill in us that killing or stealing is permissible then we would kill and it is perfectly moral. I had friends and acquintaces like that.
This is why God is morality, the perfect being. Some would argue then that God is imperfect. God is who we want it to be. There is no proof God exist. May be true. But my thinking is if i am going to believe in a God, a perfect being, my main qualification is Rigtheousness. Morality.
Peace
so "god" is whatever you imagine him to be. Sounds just like all the other thousands of gods. Imaginary.
Iga,
Precisely but the one true God the one and only. Rigtheous. Moral. It is for humans to determine who this God is.
Peace, Morality is common in social animals – it's what allows them to be social. Morals did not come from religion – religion just included it in its teachings. Besides that there is no evidence of a god, let alone your god.
Santa,
Humans are social animals. Heres another example, in a social club if the club say we should not accept blacks, is it moral?
You have to habe a basis and the basis imaginary or otherwise would set the guidelines. And that guidelines should be rigtheous. Moral.
Peace
Santa, killing goes on all the time in the animal kingdom. On the atheistic evolution model, we're just evolved animals so I can't see how this is morally wrong on your view.
Truth,
Killing is wrong period.
Peace
This website is interesting, it has all sorts of mania in one place for easy access. Disclaimer I am not stating any of this is fact, it's just interesting.
http://eden-saga.com/en/maya-mythology-legend-ancient-world-s-memory-13-crystal-skulls.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_F9nIps46w
`,
I notice that the Belief Blog is located on the "Living" page a couple of rows down from "Style & Decor".
I guess that's about right. Although in this age of information, with so many important things to cover, I don't see why it couldn't be just one of those small links just about the copyright information. But you know, I don't see a "Hobbies" block on the Living page, so maybe they should make one and just add Belief as a little link inside the Hobbies page.
above the copyright information.
I've always wondered why bookstores don't include Religion in the Fiction section. No worker bee has offered much more than "Umma Umma" when asked.
I think religion is a unique blend that deserves a section all its own. Otherwise no one would know where it belongs – myth and fantasy, hate literature, conspiracy theories, auto-erotic self-denial and abuse, household hints etc.
I think fiction covers all/most of the categories you listed.
The website I linked above has it all in one spot, probably house hold hints too. Just in case that is missing I'll add one..you can use vinegar to clean your windows.
Atheism is the weakest religion on earth. It won't stand the test of time.
Fin,
We should guide them. Let them know the teachings of God.
Peace
It's wrong to believe that atheists don't already know the story of your religion.–polls show atheists know more about it than those who claim to believe it.
James,
Some may know the story of Jesus and God but the teachings are not fully understood. I not saying i am the best qualified to explain the teachings coz i am not a theologian nor a scientist but Gods teachings is simple. What is right, good, moral.
Peace
Peace, Morals are common in social animals – they did not come from religion, just adopted by religion.
peace?
Ironic name since much of what you sy is exactly the same type of garbage that starts fights and wars.
You cannot "teach" anything of "god" until you can show that there is a god or gods, and then that it is YOUR god.
I know your story, and know it was made by men, written down by men, and no sign of any gods.
You cannot "teach" me that which you do not know yourself.
You can explain your belief, and why you believe, but do not think for one second that you are teaching anything.
Iga,
How hard is it to teach what is right vs wrong? Good vs evil?
You can do it too.
Lets start there and in the end if you feel like believing in God it is your choice. I can no more objectively prove God exist but faith.
Peace
peace?
You keep throwing god in the mix...still no sign of any gods.
Men are social animals. They had humanity, set certain things as moral and immoral, like stealing, murder etc...
They then wrote their humanity into your religions.
Religion or belief in gods came long after man had established himself as a social animal.
Iga,
Precisely, social animals capable of moral and immoral acts.
What we aspire to govern is whats moral. Right?
Peace
Peaceadvocate – "...but the teachings are not fully understood"
You are wrong, the teachings are understood, just not believed. Why is it that you aren't Hindu, or Muslim, or Buddhist? Is it because you don't fully understand what they teach, or is it because you do understand but don't believe? Why is it any different for those who don't believe your religion?
James,
How could you believe in something you dont umderstand? You cant.
I do not understand some of the teachings or traditions in buddism, islam, hinduism, protestants, catholic, christianity, etc because i do not believe them. Some of these teachings and traditions are made by humans. Could be flawed.
I think for myself and determine what is right, what is moral. And hope im right.
Peace
Peaceadvocate – "How could you believe in something you dont umderstand? You cant. I do not understand some of the teachings or traditions in buddism, islam, hinduism, protestants, catholic, christianity, etc because i do not believe them."
I'm really not understanding your point. Understanding someone's position on something does not require you to believe it's true or correct. Likewise, not believing someone's position does not automatically mean you don't understand it.
James,
Good arguement. I stand corrected.
I was thinking in the point of view of a believer and forgot to think of the point of view of a non believer.
Peace
The only thing atheism has in common with a religion is that all the supposed followers of the religion are different. Just look at all of the Christian denominations. It seems thier only unified front is hating atheists more than the other religion that actually commits acts of terror against them.
Each atheist creates their own rules, beliefs, and dogma so.....
Sooooo....... does each Christian denomination.
So atheists aren't better than everyone else. It's the biggest scam in history😜
Atheism has no rules, beliefs, and dogma so how is it a scam? It is the absence of belief in any gods generally for lack of evidence. The creation myths are all incorrect, so there is no foundation for a personal god.
Lunch,
I agree followers of anything are all different. Human nature. Our differences at birth, some say these differences are inequalities but he hope is to make those inqualities work together, co-exist for a better future.
The commonality is not to hate but to feel compassion. Teaching of God.
Religious denominations established by humans are both divisive and destructive. God did not say call urself catholics, christians, jews, muslims, buddist, etc. All God ask for is to believe. God accepts all race, gender, ethinicity, etc who believes.
Peace
Given that religion is a man made construct, that there are no proven gods and that children must be indoctrinated from a young age, usually without their consent, to get them to believe religious crap, it is quite likely that atheism predates theism, so in fact it has stood the test of time. And given that believers are losing market share (religion is only growing in third world countries with high birth rates), it is theism that is in decline and atheism that is on the increase.
Too bad for you that your imaginary buddy can't make a guest appearance on Earth to help you reverse your declining fortunes. In the unlikely case that your alleged but not proven god does exist, perhaps it is too embarrassed by the RCC pedophile priest scandal and religion's treatment of minorities to make an appearance.
Atheism is man made kiddo. Dumb troll.
Please explain any factual errors in my response above.
Hota,
Valid point. Religion in non proven God indoctrinated to children, fundamentally, is wrong.
As we mature and develop our intellectual and moral capacities, we determine if the religion, the God is valid or not.
It already has stood the test of time. There have always been a few skeptics. Which god exactly are you talking about exactly ?
No matter which one you dredge up, it's set of believers is vastly less than the history of humans.
For thousands of years, EXACTLY like YOU, humans have stomped their impotent WRONG little feet, and said THEIR deity was the true one. See a pattern there ? Probably not ... as YOU stomp YOUR feet too.
Atheists do the same kiddo. Always claiming to be right.
Atheists do not believe that there is evidence for any gods so what exactly do you mean? All creation myths have been proved incorrect, so there is no foundation for personal gods.
Atheists don't claim to be right. We follow the data, actual evidence. You dipsh!ts believe childhood myths, pure crap with no evidence to back any aspect of your bullsh!t claims.
And BTW, the absence of belief is no belief in absence. Idiot.
Akira,
“Let me rephrase it this way. If Hitler thought what he was doing was morally good, was he wrong according to your view and if so, why?”
On the atheist’s view, Hitler wasn’t wrong when he thought what he was doing was morally good. You may have an opinion about what makes something morally good but it becomes a game of “Says who?” Without objective morality their is no good and evil. Just everyone’s opinions and personal tastes. Even Richard Dawkins has said “The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.” Doesn’t it bother you that on the atheist view, Hitler didn’t really do anything morally wrong?
I have never heard an atheist say Hitler was right, that the holocaust was a good thing. I've seen lots of believers attempt to put words into others' mouths though. Why do they do that?
Hotairace,
I will pose the question to you. Was Hitler wrong when he thought what he was doing was morally good. If so, why was he wrong?
Don't you people read prior posts?!?
Hitler was wrong because, and he should have known this as a catholic, murder is wrong.
Murder is wrong because it harms another person specifically and society in general.
Rational people figured this out ages before The Babble" – no gods required.
But do go on with your silly word games, games only intended to prop up your alleged but never proven god.
Hotairace,
Thank you for responding. I appreciate the conversation.
"Hitler was wrong because, and he should have known this as a catholic, murder is wrong.
Murder is wrong because it harms another person specifically and society in general."
On the atheistic view, why is murder wrong? Who says it's morally wrong? On the atheistic evolution model, we are all just evolved animals and killing goes on all the time in the animal kingdom. On the atheistic view, why is it wrong to harm another person in society? You say murder is wrong, Hitler said it was right. On you view, why does your view supersede Hitlers? At the end of the day on atheism, the universe doesn't care.
Reasonable people working within agreed to structures can quite easily come up with reasonable laws and reasonable punishments for breaking those laws, without a single bit of input from or need for any god. There will always be a few who get into positions power, often fueled by irrational religious beliefs, that operate outside agreed to norms. Society has a pretty good track record of dealing with them eventually, particularly if they are not being sheltered by some church. No matter how long it takes society to remove these evil doers, it gets done more quickly than if we wait for an alleged but unproven god to intervene.
Atheism doesn't care. The universe doesn't care. Religion doesn't care. None of these things are capable of caring. People care. You don't care about reality. You only care about propping up your silly beliefs.
Did I miss anything?
@hotairace
Yes, you missed pointing out how incredibly stupid it is to try to use a Hitler analagy to acuse atheists of not have any morals.
My apologies. You are correct. I will try to be more complete in the future however I am somewhat concerned that if we hit believers with everything, every time, we will never hear from them. You might have noticed that as incomplete as an atheist's response might be, a believer response is rarely much more than, "lala, lala, lala, please don't challenge my infantile beliefs."
Hotairace and iga,
Please see below.
1. Hotairace,
You say that people care. But what if someone doesn't care? What if they murder? Are they morally wrong in doing so? If so, why? What makes them morally wrong and you right if you disagree with this action?
2. Is it majority opinion that determines what is morally right and wrong? If the society of Nazi Germany determined that it was morally good to murder the Jewish people, then on your view, would they have been correct in their moral view? If not, why?
3. I'm certainly not saying that atheists cannot act morally. This seems to be a common misunderstanding by atheists. I'm saying that atheists have nothing to ground morality in. If a Nazi soldier wanted to say that the Holocaust was morally good, on atheism, why would he/she be wrong?
4. Iga appeals to the animal kingdom but in the animal kingdom, killing goes on all of the time. Male sharks forcibly have se.x with female sharks. Why are these activities morally wrong amongst humans if we are just animals ourselves? These things go on all the time in the animal kingdom.
5. Ultimately, there is no morality on atheism. Even atheist Richard Dawkins has said, ""The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference." On atheism, I can't see how he's wrong. It's personal opinion or personal taste. What you define as morally good may be defined as morally evil by someone else. Who's right? What makes your opinion any more right than Hitler's or Stalin's?
6. The Christian view provides a foundation for affirming objective morality to where we as Christians can truly say that the Holocaust was morally evil regardless of anyone's opinion. Objective morality is not an option on atheism. It's a game of "Says who?"
"I have never heard an atheist say Hitler was right, that the holocaust was a good thing. I’ve seen lots of believers attempt to put words into others’ mouths though. Why do they do that?"
I didn't say that atheists say Hitler was right and that the Holocaust was morally good. I said that on the atheist view, it can't be said that Hitler was wrong when he thought what he was doing was morally good because morality on the atheist view is personal opinion. As Richard Dawkins said as quoted above, there is "no evil and no good". Doesn’t it bother you that on the atheist view, Hitler didn’t really do anything morally wrong?
There you go again, putting words into someone else's mouth. Who are you to tell anyone what they can or cannot think or say?
You can certainly think what you want but atheism provides no objective morality that atheists (not all but some / There are some who have embraced this) want to affirm.
Atheism may not but society, without the assistance of any alleged but never proven god, does a pretty good job of describing behavioral norms, that most people follow, for their benefit and society's, at least until some religious nut straps on some explosives or puts a few 'planes into buildings.
TF1
"but atheism provides no objective morality"
Of course not. It is simply not believing in gods. We still have our humanity.
Our humanity provides morality, and was written into your religions. Men existed before your religion. Men worked together, built communities and cultures. They lived together as social animals, as humans, with humanity.
You think morals come from god. We can see morality in all social animals, and we are no different in that respect. Atheists know that society and other people have set consequences for breaches of social etiquette and morality.
Believers think that their morality comes from "god" but we have the same social animal morality.
Why would a believer in christianity want to question someones morality when to be a christian in the first place, you must make an immoral step of allowing another to take your just punishment?
Hotairace and iga,
Please see below.
1. Hotairace,
You say that people care. But what if someone doesn't care? What if they murder? Are they morally wrong in doing so? If so, why? What makes them morally wrong and you right if you disagree with this action?
2. Is it majority opinion that determines what is morally right and wrong? If the society of Nazi Germany determined that it was morally good to murder the Jewish people, then on your view, would they have been correct in their moral view? If not, why?
3. I'm certainly not saying that atheists cannot act morally. This seems to be a common misunderstanding by atheists. I'm saying that atheists have nothing to ground morality in. If a Nazi soldier wanted to say that the Holocaust was morally good, on atheism, why would he/she be wrong?
4. Iga appeals to the animal kingdom but in the animal kingdom, killing goes on all of the time. Male sharks forcibly have se.x with female sharks. Why are these activities morally wrong amongst humans if we are just animals ourselves? These things go on all the time in the animal kingdom.
5. Ultimately, there is no morality on atheism. Even atheist Richard Dawkins has said, ""The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference." On atheism, I can't see how he's wrong. It's personal opinion or personal taste. What you define as morally good may be defined as morally evil by someone else. Who's right? What makes your opinion any more right than Hitler's or Stalin's?
6. The Christian view provides a foundation for affirming objective morality to where we as Christians can truly say that the Holocaust was morally evil regardless of anyone's opinion. Objective morality is not an option on atheism. It's a game of "Says who?"
It is not necessary to try to understand Hitler's psyche.
He committed many heavy crimes, and that can be stated independent from the condition of his psyche.
The most commandments were given under the rule of Moses but at least one commandment was yet given to Noah who lived long before Moses: "Thou shalt not shed blood of innocent people (analogous)". This is one of the oldest commandments which God ever gave us. God gave it again during the rule of Moses.
Hitler broke that commandment by killing the Jews (of course, he was responsible for the death of many other people too).
Hitler is or was guilty because he broke the commandment: "Thou shalt not kill".
Of course, Hitler was mad in a way but not so mad that he did not know what he was doing. There is no excuse for his crimes.
"God" never gave anyone anything. Any commandment written into any law system was written by humans, and taken from an already existent human culture. Maybe Ranier will go to school some day. Religion never gave culture anything. Culture GAVE religion everything.
Survival of the fittest(evolution) supports murder, war etc. Atheists claim to be more "moral" for no reason. They are liars. I guess they do it to feel superior but just delude themselves. Atheists are fools and liars.
It does not. Survival of the GROUP, requires the formulation of MORALITY. It's where it came from. I see you never took Anthropology. 101. Are you in like Grade school ?
TF,
I have never, ever heard any atheist, ever, state what you just did. Ever.
Doesn't it bother you to bear false witness against a whole group of people?
You don't know "the atheist view". It's been my experience that the ONLY thing atheists share in common is a lack of belief in any gods.
You seem to know a lot about what atheists think. You hang around a lot of atheists ? Why is it you know so much about atheists, and think you know how they think ? Or are you just making up this stuff ?
It doesn't matter, whether a kind pope sits on the papal throne or an impolite one, the papal office is corrupt in itself independent from the person holding it.
Only one example: The CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) which is always acknowledged by the current pope considers Islam as a legitimate religion, and Islamic believers as people which will inherit the soul's health one day even if they remain Muslims up to the end of their life.
This is such an outrageous betrayal of Christianity that I am at a loss of words to describe that.
The Koran clearly says that Jesus was only a man. The Islam denies the divine sonship of Jesus Christ. Therefore the Islam is anti-Christian, and no Muslim believer will ever inherit the Kingdom of God save he converts to Christianity.
The popes are responsible for the soul's death of millions of Muslims because the popes keep the fiction they could remain Muslims, and there would be no need to convert to Christianity in order to get saved.
I believe that Jesus Christ will kill the pope personally when he returns from the heavens together with all his saints.
http://confessingchurch.wordpress.com
Current calamity:
Mainline churches (for example the RCC) are full of philistinism at least in Germany. Possibly, a member of such a church never gets informed about the gospel of Jesus Christ there (that is sad reality). It could happen that a member of a mainline church gets informed about the gospel for the first time in his life through a Free Church. Maybe he will rejoice when he is told the gospel. Yet, nearly all Free Churches (at least in Germany) practise rebaptism – they don't acknowledge the infant baptism of the mainline churches. Yet, a church which rebaptizes, doesn't belong to the real Christian Church. All members of rebaptizing Free Churches will get lost (sounds harsh but is true).
Therefore many naive people jump out of the frying pan into the fire. Joining a Free Church doesn't mean progress but regress. Free Churches desecrate infant baptism, and therefore their members fail to follow Jesus because they lack the releasing power which they could get through infant baptsim and Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection.
The devil has laid a big snare.
Both the popes and the leaders of the Free Churches are servants of the devil, seduce naive people, and lead them to eternal damnation.
What about the Catholics?
I feel for them like I feel for the Muslims. They both are poor people having been seduced by spiritual criminals (the popes, Muhammad and the Caliphs).
If the pope would be a true Christian bishop, he would tell the Catholics that they are connected with the releasing power of Jesus death and resurrection through their infant baptism. But he tells them they had to practise a lot of religious exercises in order to get saved: Praying a rosary, keeping certain feast-days, making certain pilgrimages, participation in Holy Eucharist, etc.
Yet, Christ doesn't want that we keep certain religious rituals. Christ wants that we live a life of love and righteousness through the releasing power of his death and resurrection. We really should take care of our fellow human beings independent from their belief, color, nationality, etc.
Go to any Catholic congregation, and look, if they love their fellow human beings outside the church. I predict you will find only nasty philistinism.
Rainer Braendlein, don't obfuscate the primary prenuptials with rasberries. Crayons are the new raisins. Often, the pertinent cat presents fabled necessities in the parking chamfer. Realize your net precedent. Triangulate! Save the best for the alligators. Ever the bastille notches the orchestra but Wendy is not green and horses will capitulate. Filter out the log from the turnstile and cry prevalently.
So there brown stare. Don't be scared of your outer chicken. Feed your inner walnut and resolve. Subject your lemon to the ingenious door in the presence of snow and animals. Aisle 7 is for the monetary cheese whiz. Faced with the kitchen, you may wish to prolong the sailboat in the cliff. Otherwise, rabbits may descend on your left nostril. Think about how you can stripe the sea.
Regale the storm to those who (6) would thump the parrot with the armband. Corner the market on vestiges of the apparent closure but seek not the evidential circumstance. Therein you can find indignant mountains of pigs and apples. Descend eloquently as you debate the ceiling of your warning fulcrum. Vacate the corncob profusely and and don’t dote on the pancreas.
Next up, control your wood. Have at the cat with your watch on the fore. Aft! Smarties (12)! Rome wasn’t kevetched in an autumn nightie. (42) See yourself for the turntable on the escalator. Really peruse the garage spider definitely again again with brown. Now we have an apparent congestion, so be it here. Just a moment is not a pod of beef for the ink well nor can it be (4) said that Karen was there in the millpond.
Garbage out just like the candle in the kitty so. Go, go, go until the vacuum meets the upward vacation. Sell the yellow. Then trim the bus before the ten cheese please Louise. Segregate from the koan and stew the ship vigorously. When in salad, do as the prehistoric duck at the ski jump.
And remember, never pass up an opportunity to watch an elephant paint Mozart.
Christianity with its mumbo jumbo theology is an insult to our intelligence.
I think thats what the Romans said as well.
We are a lot smarter these days. Atonement theology, original sin, virgin births and people rising from the dead no longer make any sense.
Star dust we are and star dust we shall return !!!!
Reality,
A lot smarter. During my youth when the sky becomes gray their may be rain so i am asked by parents to bring an umbrella. Now that im older, or shall we say smarter, when the sky becomes gray i still try to bring an umbrella. Unless i became too smart to stop the rain.
Whats the point of being smarter if the purpose is to stop something we cant stop. And if we do what would be the effects? Drought. Use an umbrella.
Rational thinking will continue to put a dark cloud over all religious beliefs.
Do atheists believe evil exists? If they do, that would require them to believe that sin exists. So a person that murders 20 people is not evil? Atheists are sick and twisted people. Seek help.
People can do evil things (harmful to self or others). "Evil" is just not a separate presence or ent'ity that wanders around the world.
I could just as easily say to you:
Believers think that murdering everyone on Earth (save 8) at one time, and torturing people with horrendous suffering every day is not only good, but is the highest good. Sick and twisted people who should seek help...
Given that you pose questions and then go on to answer them yourself from your twisted , delusional perspective, I don't think you actually want answers, but in the interest of educating you:
Certain acts are evil.
Evil is not an ent!ty or force.
Sin is a christian cult (perhaps others too!) concept that applies only to that cult's members.
Anything else I can help you with? Sorry, but I can't help you with providing evidence for your god 'cause so far I haven't come across any.
"Do atheists believe evil exists?"
This is an incomplete question in my view.
Exists where? Exists when? Exists in the minds of .....? Can be perceived as existing on its own?
I don't usually call out a question as stupid, but I've seen enough of this poster's comments to unsurprised (and unimpressed) by this one.
.... comments to be unsurprised (and unimpressed) by this one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_F9nIps46w
`
They didn't teach music at your school? what a shame. Well you can always go to the public library to learn more.
Joe is not 2 'y's.
given that god will send you to hell for eternal anguish unless you obey his every whim and praise him at every available opportunity, you christians sound just like abused spouses.
he/she really does love me.
he/she doesn't mean to hurt me, it's my fault that he/she hurts me.
if I could only stop doing the things he/she tells me are bad, then he/she wouldn't have to hurt me.
he/she really is a loving person
what an unhealthy relationship you Christians have, and what an unhealthy relationship you drag your children into!
Dyslexic,
Answer a few questions for me if you would.
1. How many lies would you say you've told in your life?
2. Have you ever stolen anything regardless of its value?
3. Have you ever used God's name as a curse word? (called blasphemy)
4.have you ever looked at a woman/man lustfully?(if so, Jesus said you have committed adultery with that person in your heart.)
If you're like me, you are a self professed lying, stealing, blaspheming adulterer at heart or some form thereof. A holy God must punish wickedness, otherwise He wouldn't be just. Given your confession, will you be guilty or innocent? If you're like me and everyone else on this board, you are guilty. However, God provided a way for salvation through the blood of His innocent Son who took the punishment on the cross, that we might be declared innocent. Think of it like this. You're in a court room. you're guilty as you've professed. Someone walks in and pays your fine for you. Now the judge can legally dismiss your case and let you go. This is the gospel message. What you must do is repent (turn from your sins) and follow Jesus as Lord. This following is enabled by God when He gives you new desires and a heart that wants to please God instead of the flesh.
Pedaling with any one or even all of those things does not, implicitly or explicitly, require a god, or even suggest that one might exist. Next!
Dealing with. . .
Who said the above is an argument for God's existence? I wanted to show Dyslexic his, mine and everyone's true standing before God.
truthfollower,
"True standing before" who or what?
You stated a god must punish wicked behavior. You are assuming some god exists. I'm just saying your assertion is wrong and does not mean any god exists. Are you arguing that gods may not exist? Or would you prefer we just gloss over your unproven assumptions?
1. I am generally very truthful but as I am very old, my answer is "too many to count"
2. proud to say, no. never.
3. often, proudly and with an amusing sense of irony
4. yes
There is no magic man in the sky monitoring me every moment to convict me of actual crimes or thought crimes unless I kiss his ass frequently and give money to his henchmen. I monitor myself at the level that I wish to be a good and honest and productive member of the human race.
Your belief of this is on a par with finding money under your pillow in place of a tooth and thinking the magical tooth fairy has rewarded you. Grow up.
Your belief that morals come from your god is a fallacy, as most of the moral code in the bible is blatantly copied from earlier civilizations and their god or gods. Wake up.
Dyslexic,
The problem is that you have a distorted view if who God is. You present almost like a godfather type view of God where as long as you pay your dues, you're good to go. The truth is that the Christian God wants to have a relationship with people and without the shedding of Jesus's blood, a holy God could not have this intimate relationship with sinful man. This shows the love of God that while we were rebels against God, He sent His Son to die for us. When a person is truly born again, God gives them a new heart and desires. They yearn for the things of God .
@follower
it's utter mind-numbing nonsense that someone could die and somehow absorb every bad thought and bad deed that everyone had ever done or would ever do. Believing in a daddy figure in the sky is crazy enough but believing that this crucified bronze age zealot died for your sins just because a bunch of his followers took his body and claimed a miracle ... well .. is that really what your mind tells you is even possible?
So, if I am to try to follow god's lead, if I want to have a relationship within someone, especially a sinner (a ho.oker?), I have to kill someone (one of my children) first? This isn't making any sense. .
Dyslexic,
" just because a bunch of his followers took his body and claimed a miracle …"
What evidence are you using to arrive at the above conclusion? Also, according to your view, do you think people would willingly be persecuted, some verifiably killed for something the knew to be a lie? What is your view concerning Paul and his conversion and subsequent life?
Hotairace,
"So, if I am to try to follow god’s lead, if I want to have a relationship within someone, especially a sinner (a ho.oker?), I have to kill someone (one of my children) first? This isn’t making any sense. ."
You're first assuming you are like God and and morally perfect and holy. Please see my first response above and answer questions 1-4. A morally perfect Being cannot dwell with sin. This is why Adam and Eve had to be expelled from the garden and why Jesus had to pay the cost of sin on the cross.
let me clue you in on something @follower. Given what the bible tells us, your god isn't "morally perfect and holy"
or maybe the bible is wrong about all the morally bankrupt stuff he did?
Dyslexic, please provide an example or two of what you are referring to.
Whether or not I, or anyone, has done any of the above is not germane to the bottom-line question: does your cult's god exist? I don't think so and you, nor any other believer, has presented any actual (physical, verifiable, factual. independent, objective) evidence to support your claims. Yes, believers and you have spewed many words but you have not presented any evidence. Why do you believe the crap you do without any evidence? Are you pretending to know things you do not know?
Secondarily to the unanswered question of your god's existence, IFF your god exists, why do you believe his voodoo applies to everyone? With the thousands of alleged gods out there, what makes you (you personally or monotheists in general) believe it is the one true god?
What evidence are you using to arrive at the above conclusion? Also, according to your view, do you think people would willingly be persecuted, some verifiably killed for something the knew to be a lie? What is your view concerning Paul and his conversion and subsequent life? These are things that have to be accounted for.
but thanks for asking. 🙂
The Universe is eternal. God(s) only last a couple of thousand years at best. ~LET
🙂
That's my new favorite © self-quote. Feel free to use it... 🙂
you are an artist!
Luci,
This is better.
God created nothing.
But nothing created the universe.
Therefore, God created the universe.
Peace 🙂
Dx,
Try this it is illogically logical
God created nothing.
But nothing created the universe.
Therefore, God created the universe.
I think it deserves three 🙂 🙂 🙂
Peace
pathetic.
Disrespectful.
Dx,
Think for ourselves dont imitate, innovate 🙂
I know you like it 🙂
Peace
Sol,
Same Illogical logic you posted.
God created nothing.
And nothing created the universe.
Therefore, God created the universe.
Peace 🙂
You need a better definition of God.
Doink
Hell on Earth 2006 (10.11)
Satan's minion: Satan, we have a problem.
Satan: What?
Satan's minion: One of the guests has turned up in a Crocodile Hunter costume, and it's really offending some of the other guests!
Satan: Oh jeez. [walks across the party to a guest in a Crocodile Hunter outfit with a stingray hanging off his chest] Erm, er, dude, the whole Crocodile Hunter thing, it's just a little soon, you know. I mean, he only died a few weeks ago. It's just not cool, gotta leave.
Steve Irwin: But it's me Satan, Steve Irwin! I am the Crocodile Hunter!
Satan: Oh. Oh but then dude, no costume. Sorry you're gonna have to go!
Steve Irwin: [being dragged away] Wait! I thought we were friends!
Satan: Oh hey Sinatra!
Satan: Then, at midnight for dessert, I was thinking we could bring out a giant chocolate fondue fountain.
Hotel owner: Oh yeah. P. Diddy had his birthday here a couple of years back and he had one of those.
Satan: Oh, screw that then. I don't want a fondue fountain if P. Diddy had one.
Satan's minion: Does it matter?
Satan: Yes, it matters! I don't want to do it if Diddy did it.
Satan's minion: How about a donut machine?
Satan: [to hotel owner] Did Diddy do it?
Hotel owner: Diddy did do it.
Satan: A full ice cream bar!
Hotel owner: Diddy did it.
Satan: Dammit, what didn't Diddy do?!
It doesn't matter, whether a kind pope sits on the papal throne or an impolite one, the papal office is corrupt in itself independent from the person holding it.
Only one example: The CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) which is always acknowledged by the current pope considers Islam as a legitimate religion, and Islamic believers as people which will inherit the soul's health one day even if they remain Muslims up to the end of their life.
This is such an outrageous betrayal of Christianity that I am at a loss of words to describe that.
The Koran clearly says that Jesus was only a man. The Islam denies the divine sonship of Jesus Christ. Therefore the Islam is anti-Christian, and no Muslim believer will ever inherit the Kingdom of God save he converts to Christianity.
The popes are responsible for the soul's death of millions of Muslims because the popes keep the fiction they could remain Muslims, and there would be no need to convert to Christianity in order to get saved.
I believe that Jesus Christ will kill the pope personally when he returns from the heavens together with all his saints.
http://confessingchurch.wordpress.com
Current calamity:
Mainline churches (for example the RCC) are full of philistinism at least in Germany. Possibly, a member of such a church never gets informed about the gospel of Jesus Christ there (that is sad reality). It could happen that a member of a mainline church gets informed about the gospel for the first time in his life through a Free Church. Maybe he will rejoice when he is told the gospel. Yet, nearly all Free Churches (at least in Germany) practise rebaptism – they don't acknowledge the infant baptism of the mainline churches. Yet, a church which rebaptizes, doesn't belong to the real Christian Church. All members of rebaptizing Free Churches will get lost (sounds harsh but is true).
Therefore many naive people jump out of the frying pan into the fire. Joining a Free Church doesn't mean progress but regress. Free Churches desecrate infant baptism, and therefore their members fail to follow Jesus because they lack the releasing power which they could get through infant baptsim and Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection.
The devil has laid a big snare.
Both the popes and the leaders of the Free Churches are servants of the devil, seduce naive people, and lead them to eternal damnation.
Once C. S. Lewis wrote a book called "Surprised by joy." At Judgement Day not a few people will be "surprised by wrath" (of Jesus).
Mire stolen advertising and religious bigotry. Yay.
Rainer Braendlein, don't obfuscate the primary prenuptials with rasberries. Often, the pertinent cat presents fabled necessities in the parking chamfer. Realize your net precedent. Triangulate! Save the best for the alligators. Ever the bastille notches the orchestra but Wendy is not green and horses will capitulate. Filter out the log from the turnstile and cry prevalently.
So there brown stare. Feed your inner walnut and resolve. Subject your lemon to the ingenious door in the presence of snow and animals. Aisle 7 is for the monetary cheese whiz. Faced with the kitchen, you may wish to prolong the sailboat in the cliff. Otherwise, rabbits may descend on your left nostril. Think about how you can stripe the sea.
Regale the storm to those who (6) would thump the parrot with the armband. Corner the market on vestiges of the apparent closure but seek not the evidential circumstance. Therein you can find indignant mountains of pigs and apples. Descend eloquently as you debate the ceiling of your warning fulcrum. Vacate the corncob profusely and and don’t dote on the pancreas.
Next up, control your wood. Have at the cat with your watch on the fore. Aft! Smarties (12)! Rome wasn’t kevetched in an autumn nightie. (42) See yourself for the turntable on the escalator. Really peruse the garage spider definitely again again with brown. Now we have an apparent congestion, so be it here. Just a moment is not a pod of beef for the ink well nor can it be (4) said that Karen was there in the millpond.
Garbage out just like the candle in the kitty so. Go, go, go until the vacuum meets the upward vacation. Sell the yellow. Then trim the bus before the ten cheese please Louise. Segregate from the koan and stew the ship vigorously.
And remember, never pass up an opportunity to watch an elephant paint Mozart.
Jill just rocks. Go Jill!
"never pass up an opportunity to watch an elephant paint Mozart"
Up, Gunta, Up! ~ Jim Jeffries
thefinisher1" Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Yes or No?
If no, then would you then admit you have "faith" that the tooth fairy does not exist?
Provable science, logic and facts have never lead me astray.
Show me scientific evidence of your God. Just one shred of evidence, that's all I ask.
The tooth fairy has NO effect on your life like God seems to have. You bring the tooth fairy up because you want to insult. The person you you really insult is yourself.
Do you have a poster of Kirk Cameron and his crocoduck up on your wall? That proves it all, doesn't it?! You must LOVE young Kirky. 😉
Then choose any imaginary enti/ty.
C'mon down! Pick a god – any god!
Brand name salvation at discount prices!
But two gods and the third half price!
Angus, Belenos, Brigid, dana, Lugh, Dagda, Epona, Aphrodite, Apollo, Ares, Artemis, Atehna, Demeter, Dionysus, Eris, Eos, Gaia, Hades, Hekate, Helios, Hephaestus, Hera, hermes, Hestia, Pan, Poseidon, Selene, Uranus, Zeus, Mathilde, Elves, Eostre, Frigg, Hretha, Saxnot, Shef, Thuno, Tir, Weyland, Woden, Alfar, Balder, Beyla, Bil, Bragi, Byggvir, Dagr, Disir, Eir, Forseti, Freya, Freyr, Frigga, Heimdall, Hel, Hoenir, Idunn, Jord, Lofn, Loki, Mon, Njord, Norns, Nott, Odin, Ran, saga, Sif, Siofn, Skadi, Snotra, Sol, Syn, Ull, Thor, Tyr, Var, Vali, Vidar, Vor, Black Shuck, Herne, Jack in the Green, Holda, Nehalennia, Nerthus, endovelicus, Ataegina, Runesocesius, Apollo, Bacchus, Ceres, Cupid, Diana, Janus, Juno, Jupiter, Maia, Mars, Mercury, Minerva, Neptune, Pluto, Plutus, Proserpina, Venus, Vesta, Vulcan, Attis, Cybele, El-Gabal, Isis, Mithras, Sol Invictus, Endovelicus, Anubis, Aten, Atum, Bast, Bes, Geb, Hapi, Hathor, Heget, Horus, Imhotep, Isis, Khepry, Khnum, Maahes, Ma’at, Menhit, Mont, Naunet, Neith, Nephthys, Nut, Osiris, Ptah, ra, Sekhmnet, Sobek, Set, Tefnut, Thoth, An, Anshar, Anu, Apsu, Ashur, Damkina, Ea, Enki, Enlil, Ereshkigal, Nunurta, Hadad, Inanna, Ishtar, Kingu, Kishar, Marduk, Mummu, Nabu, Nammu, Nanna, Nergal, Ninhursag, Ninlil, Nintu, Shamash, Sin, Tiamat, Utu, Mitra, Amaterasu, Susanoo, Tsukiyomi, Inari, Tengu, Izanami, Izanagi, Daikoku, Ebisu, Benzaiten, Bishamonten, Fu.kurokuju, Jurojin, Hotei, Quetzalcoatl, Tlaloc, Inti, Kon, Mama Cocha, Mama Quilla, Manco Capac, Pachacamac, Viracoc.ha, or Zaramama....
Eeenie, meenie, miney..... Quetzlcoatl
All those gods you listed you don't care much for like you do with God. The idea of God is something atheists are generally attached to but when it comes to a god like Thor, you only use it to insult and nothing more. God is what atheists demand most proof for. So it shows atheism is weak.
YAY for me!
Finisher, why would "Thor" insult you?
We draw the comparison because what you call "evidence" is not the sort of evidence you would accept for any other god claim. Yet you expect we should accept this "evidence" for your particular god.
The tooth fairy used to give me money when I lost my teeth, god never gave me anything. So far I see more evidence for the tooth fairy being real than I do for the Christian god.
And there is the crux finished, "seems" to have..." That is not evidence. What you have is observations and then "attribute it to 'goddidit." Asinine.
I see the tooth fairy just as I see your god – non existent. I bring the TF up to prove a point. And since you fail to answer a simple question about your faith, I see that you have no rational reply to the question.
Does it take "faith" for me NOT to believe in the tooth fairy? I have the exact same proof of them both existing – nothing.
If you find no evidence of the the tooth fairy, then by your definition (not mine), you have faith that the tooth fairy does not exist. I'm just going by your rules, sorry.
It takes faith to be an atheist. Your entire belief system is based on YOUR interperation of the world around you including information. Get off your throne troll. You are nobody.
thefinisher1: Can you just finish something that you started?
Do you believe in the tooth fairy? Yes or No?
A troll is someone who posts but fails to make any valid point or show any justification for their posts. You have yet to supply anything to validate your claims. And your make believe friends in the sky don't like it when you call people names. Haven't you read your book enough to get that?
Provide a verse that states heaven is located in the clouds. Oh wait. No such verse exists! Your stupidity is showing. Might want to reconsider your position😜
What about all the paintings. many in christian cult clubhouses, showing a white haired, bearded grandfatherly dude sitting in fluffy clouds? Are they just "artistic impressions" or are they based on christian beliefs?
The bible never explains the image of God. Nice try troll. Gonna have to troll I mean try harder than that.
You are correct, it takes faith to be an atheist.... and as Mr. boston correctly said the other day, humans are very good at selecting the things they perceive to justify their beliefs. And to this point, the atheist is no exception.
Provide us with your interpretation of actual evidence for any supernatural claim in The Babble. I'm betting you don't have any but if you do, it should be a trivial exercise for you to make a compelling presentation.
Finisher never answers questions. That's his schtick; his gimmick.
Don't try and have an actual conversation with him; all he does is turn it around into questioning YOU, and then expresses faux outrage when he feels you're not answering him.
You may be familiar with his work as "L" and his "Atheism is a religion", et al, sock-puppets.
Don't bother answering. His sole purpose here is not to converse, but to insult.
I have no evidence for Thor, so I don't believe in Thor.
I have no evidence for God, so I don't believe God exists.
Atheists don't make a big stink about not believing in Thor because there aren't many nut cases trying to make laws based on the myth of Thor.
Common sense, do you believe in objective morality? Do you believe that the Holocaust was morally evil regardless of anyone's opinion?
Common sense, do you believe in objective morality?
And here comes another version of the Wolfie Two Step!
Objective Morality has some problems. An example: Murder is a bad thing, but killing someone who is about to kill a bunch of others is not as bad as letting that person kill many others. So most people would probably say that that particular killing was justified.
But I find it hard to come up with any rational justification for raping someone. So is that a singular objective moral? With enough imagination, I'm pretty sure someone could come up with a rationalization.
All we need is one thing to be objectively moral and objective morality exists. Do you believe that the Holocaust is objectively morally evil?
Let's play this out. . .
You will get at least one atheist to say that objective morality exists (probably according to a fuzzy definition of objective morality). You will then ask where objective morality comes from. After a bit of back and forth, you will declare that objective morality can only come from your alleged but never proven god.
How about you just cut to the end and start providing evidence for your never proven god?
truthfollower01: It would be silly for someone who believes in the Bible (which I obviously don't) to talk about objective morality. The Bible has over 600 commandments, many of which would be seen as hideous if applied today. Things like: "It is alright to beat your slave/servant if they don't die within a day or two."
Generally speaking, the holocaust was a very bad thing and it is hard to rationalize. But some could say (to prove a point) But the holocaust killed many thieves and some murders, so therefore SOMETHING good came of it. Sure it is a shaky if not ridiculous argument. But someone is probably living today because the holocaust ended up killing someone who was going to murder someone else later. An other statement that could be made: "I am alive today because of my work on building Auschwitz. If it wasn't for that work, I would not have been fed and would have starved to death."
So, the problem again with objective morality is "who is the action good for?" From who's point of view?
Because the universe is such a complex interaction of cause and effect, it is hard not to subjectively rationalize a "wrong" in some means.
Truthfollower:
"All we need is one thing to be objectively moral and objective morality exists."
And what would that one thing be?
And all it takes to put an end to the idea of objective morality is for one person to think that something is moral, and another person to think it is immoral. Thus it is pretty clear that there is no objective morality.
Akira, If Hitler thought what he was doing was morally good, was he wrong according to your view and if so, why?
I cannot for the life of me figure out where this line of thought is going.
Truthfollower:
“All we need is one thing to be objectively moral and objective morality exists.”
And what would that one thing be?
Akita, do you think the senseless kidnapping, torturing and murder of a child is objectively morally wrong?
Truthfollower:
“All we need is one thing to be objectively moral and objective morality exists.”
And what would that one thing be?
Hotairace,
"How about you just cut to the end and start providing evidence for your never proven god?"
The existence of objective morality is evidence for God's existence.
In what way?
How do you make that leap?
If we all agree hurting people for no reason is bad, your god exists???
It's a Wolfieism, it must be true!
Alias, what if someone doesn't agree? Why are they wrong and you right based on atheism?
I find the debate style of "answering" questions with more questions to be particularly unrewarding to read or engage in.
Disingenuous at best.
Your question of the holocaust raises a few points.
To me there is no "evil". Evil is best described by one or more of the following: Ignorance (through willful or innocent lack of information), deep psychological problems within the "evil doer", or just a momentary loss of reasoning or rationality. I see no reason to believe that some mean spirited sky fairy is leading people to do bad things. There are plenty of defects in the human organism to "explain" away evil.
I can see no reason to defend the holocaust, it was the senseless murder of people based on a massive propaganda machine with lies. Was Hitler "evil"? He was deranged (a psychological problem.). He surrounded himself with people of the same derangement and ignorance (willful in this case.) The interesting thing about the success of the holocaust was that so many "decent" people blindly followed this plan. Blind faith in something that was non-rational. To me, similar to a religious belief. Good people lead astray with a mob mentality (momentary loss of rational behavior).
This is one reason why I am against the current religious fervor in the US. It leads to mob think, it leads to irrational thoughts and actions and it is often very misguided.
Let me rephrase it this way. If Hitler thought what he was doing was morally good, was he wrong according to your view and if so, why?
As long as the questions are going to be nonsensical, is yellow a flavor?
What does it taste like?
I don't care what HITLER thought. Hitler was a sick, sick man. Get to your POINT, TF.
Akira,
"Let me rephrase it this way. If Hitler thought what he was doing was morally good, was he wrong according to your view and if so, why?"
On the atheist's view, Hitler wasn't wrong when he thought what he was doing was morally good. You may have an opinion about what makes something morally good but it becomes a game of "Says who?" Without objective morality their is no good and evil. Just everyone's opinions and personal tastes. Even Richard Dawkins has said "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference." Doesn't it bother you that on the atheist view, Hitler didn't really do anything morally wrong?
This topic is boring...
Stan: Oh my God. They killed Chef.
Kyle: You bastards! YOU BASTARDS!
Mr. Connolly: Pity. He would've made an excellent child molester.
Cartman: Maybe– maybe he's still OK. [the others look at him] No, really, the say the last thing you do before you die is crap your p-[Chef's body voids its bowels] Oh, never mind.
Luce,
Crucify Him for standing up to illegimate authority! I guess you would choose Barabas too. Some people do this for entertainment which I think you are familiar with. One needing attention.
Peace
I bet that made sense to you as you were typing it...
Luce,
More like exposing village entertainers.
Cartman: I just... I really need the support of my best friend right now.
Jimmy: Who's your best friend?
Cartman: You are, Jimmy! We've always been best friends! We know everything about each other!
Jimmy: What's my last name?
Cartman: [pause] Goddammit.
Lucy,
Now a skit. Whats next? Very entertaining. S3x, violence and rock n roll very tempting for humans.
Peace 🙂
More passive aggression from Pee.
Ak,
Cmon, you can do better than that.
Peace
Dismissed as nonsense. Passive-agressiveness is a call for help.
The reply matched the post. Forgive me.
It doesn't matter, whether a kind pope sits on the papal throne or an impolite one, the papal office is corrupt in itself independent from the person holding it.
Only one example: The CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) which is always acknowledged by the current pope considers Islam as a legitimate religion, and Islamic believers as people which will inherit the soul's health one day even if they remain Muslims up to the end of their life.
This is such an outrageous betrayal of Christianity that I am at a loss of words to describe that.
The Koran clearly says that Jesus was only a man. The Islam denies the divine sonship of Jesus Christ. Therefore the Islam is anti-Christian, and no Muslim believer will ever inherit the Kingdom of God save he converts to Christianity.
The popes are responsible for the soul's death of millions of Muslims because the popes keep the fiction they could remain Muslims, and there would be no need to convert to Christianity in order to get saved.
I believe that Jesus Christ will kill the pope personally when he returns from the heavens together with all his saints.
http://confessingchurch.wordpress.com
Current calamity:
Mainline churches (for example the RCC) are full of philistinism at least in Germany. Possibly, a member of such a church never gets informed about the gospel of Jesus Christ there (that is sad reality). It could happen that a member of a mainline church gets informed about the gospel for the first time in his life through a Free Church. Maybe he will rejoice when he is told the gospel. Yet, nearly all Free Churches (at least in Germany) practise rebaptism – they don't acknowledge the infant baptism of the mainline churches. Yet, a church which rebaptizes, doesn't belong to the real Christian Church. All members of rebaptizing Free Churches will get lost (sounds harsh but is true).
Therefore many naive people jump out of the frying pan into the fire. Joining a Free Church doesn't mean progress but regress. Free Churches desecrate infant baptism, and therefore their members fail to follow Jesus because they lack the releasing power which they could get through infant baptsim and Jesus' sacrifice and resurrection.
The devil has laid a big snare.
Both the popes and the leaders of the Free Churches are servants of the devil, seduce naive people, and lead them to eternal damnation.
@rainer
Last century, L Ron Hubbard wrote a book, as foolish as it is, making all sorts of outrageous and outlandish claims, backed up by zero evidence, and he has millions of followers.
200 years ago, Joseph Smith wrote a book, as foolish as it is, making all sorts of outrageous and outlandish claims, backed up by zero evidence, and he has tens of millions of followers.
A few thousand years ago, unnamed desert dwelling goat herders wrote a book, making all sorts of outrageous and outlandish claims, backed up by zero evidence, and they have hundreds of millions of followers.
Do you see that the only thing that makes your christian religion more popular than any other of these obvious scams is the amount of time it has had for your deluded cult members to breed and indoctrinate their children.
So have a good think about how preposterous scientology and mormonism sound to you, and know that christianity is just the same thing with a bigger head start.
Asinine.
'Finished' said: "Asinine." Yes, you are. At least you admit it.
Jude 1: 14-15 "And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, 15 To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him."
Jude 1: 16-19 These are murmurers, complainers, walking after their own lusts; and their mouth speaketh great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration because of advantage. 17 But, beloved, remember ye the words which were spoken before of the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ; 18 How that they told you there should be mockers in the last time, who should walk after their own ungodly lusts. 19 These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
it would be a pretty basic strategy for the snake oil salesmen who wrote the bible to try and cover themselves by putting in lines like "do not believe he who says this book is false for they are servants of the devil" and "he who questions god is wrong sayeth the lord" and "any man who doubts the word of god as written in this book is a fool and will be punished in the afterlife" and so on, and so on, and so on ...
it's so obvious and transparent!
so why do Christians keep quoting lines like this from their book when atheists make logical, factual arguments showing the bible's errors and inconsistencies?!?!
"the bible is right because it is the word of god and it is the word of god because it says so in the bible"
Comedy Gold!!! LOLOLOL
Rainer,
You are generalizing. Like saying kill all germans during ww2. What about germans who oposed the war? Kill em too?
Peace
I only believe that, if Jesus would return right now, he would at first kill the pope because the pope is the worst sinner on earth speaking hard speeches against God (for example that he accepts the anti-Christian Islam as legitimate religion).
if Joseph Smith came back, who would he go after?
If L. Ron Hubbard came back, who would he go after?
So the so-called Prince of Peace would commit murder upon his return?
Thanks for yet another reason not to join the dead jew zombie cannibal vampire death cult aka christianity.
Jesus has a right to kill his creatures not pleasing him. He doesn't have to justify his acting. He is the highest judge. He is not a man but God, the Most High.
I hope your next door neighbor never upsets you Rainer. You'll have your imaginary jesus hurt him too when he returns.
just like the little bullied kid, wanting some imaginary tough guy to somehow magically befriend him and punish the bully.
oh the flights of fancy of the infantile mind.
Please note that I did not say that I would kill the pope. That would be a crime, of course.
I only refer to a passage of the Revelation where it is said that Jesus will kill the Prophet of the Beast when he returns.
My next-door neighbours are still alive; they have nothing to fear from me, on the contrary, I pray for them. Yet, indeed, at Judgement Day they could be surprised by Jesus' behaviour, if they have not yet repented until that day of wrath.
Rain, all you do is come here and slam all of the faiths that differ from your own chosen flavor.
You wishing death on the Pope is heinous, and shows your rampant hate and bigotry against others.
Revelation notwithstanding, Jesus doesn't kill, Rainer. He saves. If He came down here right now, I would reckon that the Pope would not be the first to face judgement, or the fifth, or even the millionth.
Grow up and stop hiding behind you Bible to justify your despising others.
You need to do a little repenting of your own. Your words belie your supposed piety.
I don't wish death on the pope. I would welcome, if he would repent, and live. However, he would be the first pope converting to Christianity.
Sad conclusion: The probability that the pope will not convert is about 100%, and therefore he will receive very harsh punishment by Jesus at Judgement Day for all the lies he has spread, for all his hard speeches against the true God.
The Pope has no need to "convert to Christianity " because he is already a Christian. Because he isn't a bigot and tolerates other faiths, you have decided that he 'a "No True Scotsman".
And believing that Jesus would immediately kill the Pope is tacitly wishing it.
You despise all other faiths except whatever one you're shilling with your advertising theft, and you have shown yourself to be anything but Christ-like. In other words, you have turned into the exact thing you despise about the other religions.
You are not the arbiter of Christianity. Thank God. Because when it comes to proselytizing, you preach straight up hate for other faiths.
Frederic the Great, King of Pruzzia, was right when he said that freedom is the idol of the anglo-saxon people. You should not tolerate too much spiritual criminals like the pope. Also spiritual crimes cause a lot of severe damage. Don't you feel for the victims of the pope?
The pope is no Christian but the forerunner of the Anti-Christ in the West (Mohammed and the Caliphs are the forerunners of the Anti-Christ in the East).
I don't despise people of different belief but only the false belief itself. I love everybody independent from his or her belief. Only heretics I treat a little harsher.
The only saving faith is genuine Christianity according to the doctrines of Jesus and the Apostles.
Rainer,
Who is? You? Me? We listen to the message and determine for ourselves if its rigth or wrong. Religion established by humans are both divisive and destructive. All God wish is for us to believe. Not fight.
Peace
If God is all-powerful, then what he wishes is done–now. No arguments needed. No divisiveness. No apologetics required. Therefore he obviously does not wish the pope to die now, does not object to what the pope or anyone else is saying, does not object to anything that anyone believes, or what anyone is doing. Please think carefully of the implications of "all-powerful". Just a wish–just the desire–and it's done. If God does not like someone–he could smite them down with the slightest glimmer of a thought.
Furthermore–and please think about this–is God is all-knowing, he knows what would persuade me and everyone else of his existence. He knows what would persuade everyone holding an incorrect belief. He knows what would persuade anyone worshiping the wrong god. Being all-powerful, he could correct everyone, set everyone straight. Not with force, but just ordinary persuasion. He could provide evidence to every single person on Earth–with just the glimmer of a thought. Supposedly being all-good, he would certainly not punish anyone or burn anyone in Hell for all eternity for their incorrect belief, which he declined to correct when he could easily have done so.
Therefore an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-good God who cares about what people do and what they believe does not exist.
Hota,
Thats what mean when i said we humans have the tendency of justifying anything to be right.
Its not Gods teaching. Gods teaching is not to fight. Its to spread the word not force it.
I hope this does not discourage you from considering the possibility of believing in this God.
Peace
If atheism is indeed more "logical" and all religions are wrong, where is the proof that there is no God? Why do atheists suspect us to stop believing based off of THEIR opinions? We should take their word that God doesn't exist? Who are they really trying to fool? Themselves or others? I think themselves. They have to keep stating "your religion is false" or "god doesn't exist" repeatedly throughout their life proving they have faith. Atheists are too egoistic to admit they have faith. If they do, their ego gets bruised. Awww.
thefinisher1: Because proof is the duty of the claimant. You claim there is a God, you prove it. Our side is simply: "Show us some tangible evidence." As an atheist, I would gladly change my mind is there was one shred of evidence for a God. But regardless of countless telescopes, we find no big guy in the sky, no heaven, no hell. (Other than the hell man makes for himself on earth.) It doesn't take an ego to not believe in something with no evidence. I do not fool myself into not believing in God, I use my many years of science, technical and liberal arts education and find no rational reason to believe in a ancient story full of obvious inaccuracy. Faith is defined in the belief of something that defies rational explanation. Belief in God requires faith. Not seeing evidence for God requires observation, technical knowledge and rational thought.
I can no better prove that God does not exist as I can prove that the Easter Bunny doesn't exist. Something can only be proved via a positive. You can claim that there is gold in a mountain. If you find gold that is proof that gold is in the mountain. If you keep looking for it but don't find any, that does not prove the gold isn't there, but is starts to suggest very strongly that the mountain may not contain the gold.
Claiming there is no God is still a claim as you want people to stop believing. Thus atheism is faith-based.
But he didn't claim there is no god. You are not reading for comprehension. You are reading and seeing what you want to see, just as you do when you read The Babble.
Stating a fact troll.
thefinishedone is either a monumental idiot or an exceptional troll ... I haven't quite figured it out yet.
I'm a troll because I question your fundie ways of atheism? Doggy, your atheism is very weak.
You never answer anyone's questions, and you don't actually ask questions; you insult. What kind of person on the net displays that kind of behavior?
We all have the same proof of God. The difference lies in what we choose to believe based on said proof.
If there is no God, why then does Jesus exist?
You may claim disbelief of Jesus Christ as the Son of God... but it's just that, your claim of disbelief.
Jesus Christ doesn't go away because there are atheists.
Jesus Christ is the greatest proof (upon all the evidence you have surrounding you) that God exists.
there is minimal proof that a man named jesus existed.
there is ZERO proof that any of his so called miracles or the resurrection ever happened.
keep living your dream newman. (no wonder Seinfeld doesn't like you!)
MrDog: "there is ZERO proof that any of his so called miracles or the resurrection ever happened."
You would be laughed out of any court if this was what you brought to the table.
People are convicted on the testimony of just 1 single eyewitness, yet here you expect to be taken seriously by discounting the witness of over 500 eyewitnesses.
You'll have to give this topic more thought friend, than just the old tagline "there is ZERO evidence". Obviously you've said it long enough that you believe it, but that doesn't change the truth.
Truth is eternal friend. (Even facts may change- yes, it's true... but the truth is everlasting)
if it was taken to court the prosecution would point out that these supposed eyewitnesses are characters in a story written over a century after the supposed events actually happened. As such, the case of the miracles would get the "never happened" verdict.
hey, seeing as the writer was making this up a century later, I don't know why he didn't write that it was 5,000 witnesses? Or maybe 5,000 witnesses and a unicorn and a talking snake and a burning bush all saw it happen.
grow up!
new-man: You have no idea what a rational, logical though is do you?
As others have said, there is scant evidence that Jesus actually existed. The Bible can not in any way be defended as an accurate representation of historical events. (That does not mean that everything in the Bible is a total fabrication.) But when the story was passed down for many generations before someone had the sense to write it down, it makes the whole deal rather suspect. Stories passed on verbally get more outrageous as they get farther from the source. Imagine if you told a story today and then had it passed down verbally for 100 years. What do you think that story would sound like.
I don't "claim" there is no God. I see absolutely no evidence that there is a God, so I see no reason to "believe" or "have faith that there is a God".
You probably don't believe in the tooth fairy. Does that mean you have "Faith" that there is no tooth fairy, or that you don't see any reason to believe that one exists at all.
Once again, faith is the belief in something that has no rational explanation. At this point in time, science, technology, history and other tangible studies consistently show no evidence for a God. I don't need any faith to not believe since all tangible studies show a rational conclusion that God does not exist. Everything we see, hear, feel, taste and touch can be explained without invoking a magic sky fairy.
You think they show it but that's YOUR interperation of all the information. You fool yourself.
Thefinisher1: Again you start something and don't follow through to complete anything.
"I know you are but what am I?" is not a rational argument. Please, despite your high regard for your own thoughts, don't go out and join a debate team or try to practice law anytime soon. You'll be eaten alive.
He didn't say there is no god, he just said that he won't believe your claims that there is a god until someone provides some evidence.
And that's why atheists have a hard time accepting HUMANS CANT prove God exists. Atheists have been denying it for thousands of years. Thousands of years of denial seems like a waste of time. Admit you have faith and move on.
thefinisher1: No, you need to admit that you haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. You are the one with faith. We lack faith. Lacking faith is not the same as faith.
Off is not a TV channel.
Black is not a flavor.
Cold is not a color.
There is no faith in not believing something.
Answer the question: Do you believe in the tooth fairy?
Ummm. . .
Atheists do accept that humans cannot prove there are any gods. That is why many are atheists.
It is believers who insist in believing in something for which there is no evidence.
Which position is more logical?
thefinisher1: Thousands of years of not believing in a god (far many more years than your version of a god even was invented), and atheists are still waiting for something tangible to come along that points to the existence of a god. We have NOT been seeing any god for far longer than man invented the "God" brand of god.
So by numerical standards that you brought up, we've been NOT believing since way before you guys.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_F9nIps46w
1