Life after death?

[GrandizerII]

Don't wee see the majority of catholics moving away from the "traditional position" as expressed by the only authority in the matter Il papa? Hell, then man in the hat is moving away from the traditional position. Perhaps, a bit like american politics, the base is moving away (in one direction) from earlier definitions in such a way as to necessitate a redefining of the terms - as they apply to catholicism?

I give "old school hardliners" massive shit on these forums -in part because- I know that their own fellows cringe when they speak.

Whatever the Pope says would be the traditional position, I think.

I'm noticing you're trying to get me into an argument on semantics whether here or in another thread. I don't see the point. Do you?

[The Grand Nudger]

I'm merely suggesting that others may not think that the header "the traditional position" contains the same stuff that you think it does. That's all. Purp may consider him/herself a very conservative catholic. There have always been different currents within catholicism. It's not the monolithic block that some believers (and some non-believers) would suggest.

The idea of papal infallibility, for example, is a little over a hundred years old as accepted dogmatically (by some). Would that make papal infallibility "traditional" to a thousand year old organization - give or take a few hundred years, of course?

[GrandizerII]

I'm merely suggesting that others may not think that the header "the traditional position" contains the same stuff that you think it does. That's all. Purp may consider him/herself a very conservative catholic. There have always been different currents within catholicism. It's not the monolithic block that some believers (and some non-believers) would suggest.

The idea of papal infallibility, for example, is a little over a hundred years old as accepted dogmatically (by some). Would that make papal infallibility "traditional" to a thousand year old organization - give or take a few hundred years, of course?

More power to Purplundy if they believe they're conservative. Unless Purplundy finds it offensive that I labeled him/her as liberal, I don't think it matters really.

In another thread, I said how people will interpret same words differently. And that's all there is here.

[Purplundy]

For purple

Put very simply, God really wants to share himself with us.

That's drawing an awfully human blanket over the divine and it's motivations.

That's why I really didn't want to say it like that.
God is an entity that works towards proliferating itself and uses people as a way of doing such.

---

So what do you believe? I'm not asking for the perfect interpretation. I'm asking for your personal interpretation of the passage of concern.

I said that I don't know because we have no proof.
The New Testament writer who told the story assigned afterlives to Old Testament prophets because that's what Jesus had taught him to believe in. It's like Hitler's Arian Jesus. The first people to write about these characters would have disagreed, but either Matthew, Mark, Luke or John is pissing on their graves because they believe that they have a better understanding of God because of Jesus, who they believe is God.
The story was probably written down to show that the old prophets who lived by the Torah accepted Jesus as a better manifestation of God, according to the writer.

[The Grand Nudger]

"an entity that works towards proliferating itself and uses people as a way of doing such"

Sounds ominous and sinister. I like it. I think I'd try to avoid it though. That description fits flesh eating bacteria just as well.

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

True that. But my general gestalt of the catholic/protestant split is over the question of who is licensed to interpret scripture, with catholics preferring to leave it in the hands of experts.

It's an honest position, I'd say. "This shit is confusing, I'm not qualified to comment officially (but I am qualified to opine)" - sort of thing.

---

I want to mention here, if anyone is having an anuerism over seeing me actually defend a religious institution - that I have always felt that religion could be -done- in such a way as to leave me with no objections beyond the theoretical. Don't worry, I'm still ready to stab a fucking priest for the good of all mankind.

Sounds like someone is developing a messiah complex.

[Purplundy]

And, by the way, I'm a guy, and I'm mostly liberal.
And, to an extent, the Catholic Church is. Not that it's official doctrine has changed much, but the current pope isn't exactly ranting about condoms and gay people. I think he's more left-wing than he lets on, mostly because he's afraid of the bible-thumping old dudes the Church is largely made of.
And, of course, Francis isn't ALWAYS the best role model. He leans both ways.
But the church with the funny hats and the giant rule book is actually pretty open with it's theology. It accepts evolution, doesn't believe that hell is a torture chamber, and doesn't assume that non-Christians go there. Considering that these seem to be the three biggest bones many atheists have to pick with Christianity, I think you can see why I might not rub against you guys so much.

[The Grand Nudger]

Hehehe, your catholicism rubs me to the core. My seething contempt for your faith is only lessened by the unfortunate accident of you having been born a fellow human being. I wish carrots were catholics, because then I could have me a good ole time with the bastards.

I'm kidding, obviously, about all of that except the seething contempt...and the rubbing.

[Jenny A]

But the church with the funny hats and the giant rule book is actually pretty open with it's theology. It accepts evolution, doesn't believe that hell is a torture chamber, and doesn't assume that non-Christians go there. Considering that these seem to be the three biggest bones many atheists have to pick with Christianity, I think you can see why I might not rub against you guys so much.

Nice, but I didn't decide whether to believe based on how nice god is. The question is there any evidence he exists?

But thank you for not questioning evolution anymore.

[Purplundy]

What is God?