(May 31, 2015 at 10:00 pm)Ashground Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 9:44 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Overwhelmingly.

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/05/...h-control/




No one listens to those cassock-wearing morons anymore.

Thank you for the link! I had no idea it was so high.

It's probably worse now.  That link is 3 years old.  Every time they molest an altar boy fewer and fewer pay them any mind!

(May 31, 2015 at 10:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 6:34 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Honest question: what is the etymology of "Catholic"? Does it have anything to do with worshiping Cathol?

Acts 9:31 (Greek)

ἡ μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ᾽ ὁλης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχεν ειρηνην οικοδομουμενη και πορευομενη τω φοβω του κυριου, και τη παρακλησει του ἁγιου πνευματος επληθυνοντο.
 
Act 9:31 (Transliteration)
aye men oon ekklaysiaye kath olays tays ioodayeas kaye galilayeas kaye samarayas aycon ayraynayn oikodomoomenaye kaye poryoomenaye tow fobow too kurioo kaye tay paraklaysay too agioo pnyoomatos eplaythunonto (http://www.russ.org/gtb/luke.html#a9)

Acts 9:31 (English)
So the Church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.


From this text, we can see the Greek word “kath olays” which is rendered “Catholic” in modern English and the word “ekklaysiaye” which becomes “ecclesia” in English and is commonly translated as “church”.
 
εκκλησια καθ᾽ ὁλης = ekklaysiaye kath olays = “the church throughout all” = Catholic Church.

---

(May 31, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Ashground Wrote: A (Practicing Catholic) friend of my family said she and her husband decided to start using contraception after the birth of their third child. When I  asked, "Isn't the Vatican against that?",  she said, "Yes but they don't have to live with the consequences, I do". I've found this with most religious people I know, they are much more sensible than their 'rules' would suggest. I just wanted to know is this common?

Sadly, this is true.

And, for the record, my wife and I were misinformed about ABC when we were first married, but we switched to NFP once we learned that contraception is intrinsically evil. Since many forms of birth control are actually abortifacients, this is a really grave situation. 

God may have mercy due to their ignorance...but many are not so ignorant. They just do what they want regardless of the consequences.

It's really a marvel of life that you can function every day without your brain bluescreening from all the crazy.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 5:23 pm)JuliaL Wrote: Written as one who has bitten on the whole revelatory package.

Could be. But I wouldn't want to wager my eternity on any of your options. However, I do have another thread that is more relevant to this currently underway.

But you have wagered your eternity on the truth of the model you've accepted Mr. Pascal.
Personally, I can't see any eternity I'd want to hang around for.  You suggest there is something really really good in store for (yourself) believers, but you can't say what it is.  That's a pretty suspect bet.  We call it a pig in a poke around here.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 5:23 pm)JuliaL Wrote: Exactly, BEYOND only specifies incomprehensibility not utility.  I don't think you understand the concept of ineffibility or infinity.  Tell me again why God can't lie?

Because lying is an imperfection, and God is a perfect being.

Says who?  You're buying the whole farm again.
Is lying an imperfection or perfection if God does it?  
    Do you contend there is a framework of perfection to which God must conform? You've got a call from Euthyphro on line 3.
If the Nazis are at the door asking if Anne Frank is in the attic?  God couldn't say, "no?"  He's that constrained?

(May 31, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 5:23 pm)JuliaL Wrote: Nope, not gonna bite. 

And it works on people who obviously don't even want to hear the explanations for things they have convinced themselves cannot be explained.

You're a bigger dupe than me, because at least I'm willing to listen to YOUR explanations. You want nothing to do with mine.

The reasons I'm not very interested in your explanations are that;

1. They depend on their exceptionally shaky premises for soundness.  I don't want to argue about first century "eyewitness" reports of miracles when we can't definitively figure out who shot Kennedy.  
   
2. The repetition of unfalsifiable assertions becomes tiresome after a time.
   
3. Others have fully refuted your arguments elsewhere unless they belong in 2. above.
   
4. I've seen your text walls.  Everything I've waded through depends on the 2000 year old eyewitnesses. (See 1. above)
   
   Of course you think I'm a dupe.  I disagree with some of your cherished fantasy life.
   

(May 31, 2015 at 9:47 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 5:23 pm)JuliaL Wrote: Truth is a property of propositions.  A proposition is true in direct proportion to the degree that proposition accurately predicts future events.

Jesus said, "I am the Truth" then predicted his own death and resurrection with what turned out to be 100% accuracy.

So did I.

(May 31, 2015 at 8:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 4:25 pm)Salacious B. Crumb Wrote: What were Jesus's last words on the cross?

Then you agree that all four gospels testify that Jesus was crucified and died upon the cross? Gee, that doesn't square with what the other members of this forum are claiming to be true.

But if you place all of the gospels side by side, you will see that it is most likely that they were, "Father, into your hands I commend my spirit."

Gotta love the dishonesty.. I think I'm done wasting my time here.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 18, 2015 at 5:24 am)pocaracas Wrote: My turn, yet?

So.. catholic, ex-protestant... I'm guessing, US born and raised, huh?

What's it like being a catholic in the US?
No old timey churches like we have here in Portugal:

I remember we exchanged a few photos.

Indeed we did.... and that was all you addressed, at the time...

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:It has always been my impression that the heads of the church are fully aware that they run the institution without any "outside" help... that is... no god intervenes. How else can we explain those nice things that happened a few centuries ago, like the Avignon Papacy, the crusades... and Galileo?

I didn't feel the need to comment on an impression that is based on a faulty assumption.

You don't like faulty assumptions?
Oh... I wonder why you are a "believer", then...

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:Since I'm going to delve into history, how about we consider the very real possibility of fabrication of the concept of Jesus? PErhaps as an amalgamation of other pre-existing deities and some other real people. I'm not even going into other gods (egyptians, greek or romans, or assyrians) who were claimed to be born of virgins, died and resurrected and other tri-parted heads of pantheons.... I'm going into my favorite simple and evidenced Teacher of Righteousness:


The story does sound familiar, does it not? The troubling bit is that it pre-dates Jesus by over 100 years. It could have been revived some time before the Council of Nicaea and found its way into some text that would later be considered a gospel.

Atheist Tim O'Neill address the problems with the mythicist view in a devastating two-part article entitled "An Atheist Historian Examines the Evidence for Jesus". Part one covers this, but you'll want to read the whole thing, I'm sure.

This is not the "mysticist view". It seems you have some reading comprehension failure there... Maybe you just skimmed through the text... .yeah, I'll go with that.
This is a figure described in the Habakkuk Pesher, one of the dead sea scrolls, "written sometime in the later half of the 1st century BC". If this is when the guy get's written about, then the events (if true) happened prior to that.
At the very least, the story is of such a man who gathers a following, confronts the established religious authority, who waste no time getting him crucified... And then he resurrects, 3 days later.

So we have two potential situations here:
- The historical Jesus is a copycat of this teacher... but I see too many extraordinary details for someone to successfully copy. Both resurrect 3 days after being crucified?
- This teacher IS the historical Jesus and year one on the catholic calendar is misplaced by, at least, 50 years. Of course, this would render some of the canonical gospels as wrong on a few key details - namely, the roman leaders of the region where things happen, both the birth (which is already wrong by a few years) and the crucifixion.

Why must I spell everything out?

That Tim O'Neil never even addresses any content from the dead sea scrolls. It's like they don't exist as a source of problems for christianity.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:According to Bart Ehrman, prior to this council, there were several flavors of christianity, gnostics, trinitarians, non-trinitarians, orthodox, etc, etc.... After the council, there were catholics and orthodox... all others were persecuted. As a persecuted minority, some fled away from the Turkey/Israel/Syria area, further south, into north Africa and the arabian peninsula. There, a few centuries later, a tribal leader, knowledgeable about Moses and with this authority figure on his back, rose up and conquered other tribes. About 70 years after this guy's death, the caliphate he allegedly initiated was too big and its leaders instituted a caliphate-wide religion with schools dedicated to teaching the principles of this religion... and a book: the qur'an.
It seems unlikely that this tribal leader had direct contact with an angel who told him to conquer all the neighbors and spread the message of "believe in me, or else...", so it stands to reason that the Qur'an popped up after the flash conquest took place, as the guy gained some acclaim as a military genius, or something.... and his descendents took advantage of that awe people gained for the man and added some extra bits to the tale.
Thus Islam was born.
Taking hints from Judaism (prophet figure in Moses) and from roman-catholicism (implementation of a state-wide religion).
So, my point is catholics are responsible for islam. Thanks a lot!! -.-'

And this wasn't worth commenting upon.

"Know thy place in the comings and goings of men"... Your religion isn't the be-all and end-all of human history concerning the afterlife and the divine.
It is good to know how the gears turn... perhaps your version was just an extra cog thrown in to the huge machinery that had been built for millennia... and not the last cog at that.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:Shall we go further back in history? What, no christ figure back then? awww... you poor fellow...

And since you have not Christ now, does that make you even more pathetic than me?  

I was just showing some of the earlier cogs. An attempt to show you how your own cult could have come by... by human manipulation, just like all other cults before that.

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:You had Moses and Abraham.... the though part is that there was a world before them... Did I mention the Assyrians? How about the Egyptians? And the chinese?
There were civilizations... great civilizations... prior to Abraham. There were religions. There were polytheist religions, shamanism, animism...
The complexity of religions seems to have evolved with time.... climaxing in the single god that takes care of everything... and does nothing - the creator god whose plan you cannot mess with, that set everything in motion prior to the big bang and whatever you do now, won't cause any change in that motion.... the deist god.
And all (perhaps except the very first - animism?) are man-made concepts that build upon the previous.

Why believe?
To me, the requirement of belief in the existence of a god only signals that the religious institution lacks a solid base... hence, it lacks credibility.

Uh...yeah. It is true that ancient religions search for God in the shadows whereas more recently God has sent His Son to be the light of the world...but I'm not sure what you're really aiming at.

So tell me, do you know that to be a fact, or are you trusting what people have been telling each other for the past ~2000 years?
Is there any way you can confirm that a "God has sent His Son to be the light of the world"?

Trusting people is just believing in them.... belief in people's stories leads to belief in those stories which leads to your faith. This is an exploit found in human brains, typically the younger generations believe most things that adults tell them... if they're not immediately falsifiable, like "I got your nose".
Can you be sure your brain wasn't exploited somehow to be accepting of a tale people have been telling each other for millennia?

(May 31, 2015 at 9:42 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:TL,DR?
0- HAHA, the US has no cool churches!
1- church leaders must know that god is frightfully absent from this world.
2- Jesus as an amalgamation of other fictional or real figures.
3- Thanks a lot for Islam, catholics! Fuck you!
4- Religions evolve... it's almost like they're man-made concepts.
5- the requirement of belief removes all credibility to any religious institution.

I suggest that you think about these things when you're a bit older.

I suggest you think about them all and more as you try to find how humanity got where it is now and how geographically distinct beliefs, technology and social behaviors are.

(May 31, 2015 at 10:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(May 31, 2015 at 6:34 pm)pocaracas Wrote: Honest question: what is the etymology of "Catholic"? Does it have anything to do with worshiping Cathol?

Acts 9:31 (Greek)

ἡ μεν ουν εκκλησια καθ᾽ ὁλης της ιουδαιας και γαλιλαιας και σαμαρειας ειχεν ειρηνην οικοδομουμενη και πορευομενη τω φοβω του κυριου, και τη παρακλησει του ἁγιου πνευματος επληθυνοντο.
 
Act 9:31 (Transliteration)
aye men oon ekklaysiaye kath olays tays ioodayeas kaye galilayeas kaye samarayas aycon ayraynayn oikodomoomenaye kaye poryoomenaye tow fobow too kurioo kaye tay paraklaysay too agioo pnyoomatos eplaythunonto ()

Acts 9:31 (English)
So the Church throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria had peace and was built up; and walking in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit it was multiplied.


From this text, we can see the Greek word “kath olays” which is rendered “Catholic” in modern English and the word “ekklaysiaye” which becomes “ecclesia” in English and is commonly translated as “church”.
 
εκκλησια καθ᾽ ὁλης = ekklaysiaye kath olays = “the church throughout all” = Catholic Church.

No offense, but I liked stimbo's answer better. Although, they are both equivalent.

(May 31, 2015 at 10:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

---

(May 31, 2015 at 8:56 pm)Ashground Wrote: A (Practicing Catholic) friend of my family said she and her husband decided to start using contraception after the birth of their third child. When I  asked, "Isn't the Vatican against that?",  she said, "Yes but they don't have to live with the consequences, I do". I've found this with most religious people I know, they are much more sensible than their 'rules' would suggest. I just wanted to know is this common?

Sadly, this is true.

And, for the record, my wife and I were misinformed about ABC when we were first married, but we switched to NFP once we learned that contraception is intrinsically evil. Since many forms of birth control are actually abortifacients, this is a really grave situation. 

God may have mercy due to their ignorance...but many are not so ignorant. They just do what they want regardless of the consequences.

I used NFP... and am now the proud father of 2 failures of that method. (My first kid wasn't included in this experiment).

(May 31, 2015 at 4:25 pm)Salacious B. Crumb Wrote:

(May 30, 2015 at 1:07 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: This is incorrect. I will be happy to address each and every instance you wish to discuss.

What were Jesus's last words on the cross?

"Why aren't you fuckers writing any of this down? You'll never remember it properly! This is important!"

"AAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHH GET ME OFF THIS FUCKING THING YOU BASTARDS THIS REALLY REALLY FUCKING HURTS GET ME DOWN GETMEDOWNGETMEDOWNGETMEDOWN OWIEOWIEOWIE ........!"

'Duuuuuuude, I can see Bethlehem from here!'

"Hey what? No! Look, you're supposed to use the trick nails, not those ones...argh! I'm Jesus, remember? Fine. I won't need to paint on the stigmata I guess."

Is this game worth its own thread I wonder? Sorry for the derail.