RE: Atheism & the Death Penalty.
January 25, 2016 at 7:54 am
(This post was last modified: January 25, 2016 at 7:54 am by Jehanne.)
(January 25, 2016 at 1:42 am)RaphielDrake Wrote:(January 23, 2016 at 3:53 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: So what exactly is the difference between the 1st edition's teaching and the 2nd, other than the fact that they used a different word that doesn't even change the message? They both say that the DP is only ok if it is the only means to keep a society safe, otherwise the right thing is to take the route that does not kill the person.
With that being said, yes, the teachings do evolve over the course of 2,000 years. The official, doctrinal teachings don't change completely but they evolve and get added on as we come to a better understanding of things. However, on this particular issue, I see no "evolution" between the 1st and 2nd edition's stance. And I still don't understand why you objected to my initial post about this in the first place.
I find it curious that you don't seem to think changing the word of Gods disciples and through extension God is extremely relevant. After all, even if the change is only slight it can cause an entire divergence of interpretation. Given the nature of the text I would of thought the creator of everything would want it made very clear what he wants and choose his words very carefully as he would be more knowledgeable than a master linguist and thus more conscious of the potential pitfalls. Thats not even taking omnipotence into account.
Did he make a mistake the first time? Is there predictive text in heaven? If so I totally get it.
Let me preempt Catholic Lady:
Quote:Pope Pius IX, First Vatican Council, Sess. 3, Chap. 2 on Revelation, 1870: “… We, renewing the same decree, declare this to be its intention: that, in matters of faith and morals pertaining to the instruction of Christian Doctrine, that must be considered as the true sense of Sacred Scripture which Holy Mother Church has held and holds, whose office it is to judge concerning the true understanding and interpretation of the Sacred Scriptures; and, for that reason, no one is permitted to interpret Sacred Scripture itself contrary to this sense, or even contrary to the unanimous consent of the Fathers.”