When your religious leaders are wrong - Catholics?

[darin]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/04/28/un-chief-praises-pope-for-framing-climate-change-as-moral-imperative-says/

Regarding the Papal position on climate change - how would a devout catholic reconcile reality with the Church's view?

[Noir]

I imagine its just ignored, like abstaining from eating meats on a Friday, or not working the Sabbath day, Catholics (as with all other religious sects) can ignore the thoughts of the church/leaders and still be sure in themselves that they are great Catholics.

[darin]

I think you're wrong. I'm talking about committed catholics - especially because of the degree of absolute-rightness carried by the Pope for the Church. I guess I haven't faced disagreements with reality and biblical christianity. Should somebody tell the Pope he's wrong?

[revelarts]

I've read from several scientist that the bulk of the scientist in the "Pontifical Academy of Sciences" are in fact full on atheist.
And the climate change agenda are a part of the mainstream science dogma of the moment. So with atheist the current popular scientific paradigm is REALITY... until it's not.

[Kathianne]

I think you're wrong. I'm talking about committed catholics - especially because of the degree of absolute-rightness carried by the Pope for the Church. I guess I haven't faced disagreements with reality and biblical christianity. Should somebody tell the Pope he's wrong?

There is not a whit of what the Pope says on climate change that has anything to do with the principle of papal infallibility.

[tailfins]

There is not a whit of what the Pope says on climate change that has anything to do with the principle of papal infallibility.

Papal infallability!?!?! I guess that's why Papist, not Christian is the proper term for Catholics. I will have to study up on that topic next time someone asks me why Catholics aren't Christians. Nice ammo: Thanks!

[Kathianne]

Papal infallability!?!?! I guess that's why Papist, not Christian is the proper term for Catholics. I will have to study up on that topic next time someone asks me why Catholics aren't Christians. Nice ammo: Thanks!

You truly are not too informed. :laugh:

[fj1200]

Regarding the Papal position on climate change - how would a devout catholic reconcile reality with the Church's view?

Should the church have a position on the environment?

[jimnyc]

Should the church have a position on the environment?

I don't go to my mechanic for faith related issues, I'm surely not going to the vatican to learn about the global warming lies that they got suckered into believing.

[fj1200]

I don't go to my mechanic for faith related issues, I'm surely not going to the vatican to learn about the global warming lies that they got suckered into believing.

So stewardship of the environment is not a church/faith issue?

[darin]

There is not a whit of what the Pope says on climate change that has anything to do with the principle of papal infallibility.

Maybe we agree on what Papal Infality is -


When, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church."

Does that not still apply to the Catholic church? If it DOES - and the Pope says "Climate Change" is a MORAL issue - I think it's pretty clear how it relates.

Maybe instead of issuing blanket statement I'm wrong, maybe spend a second and describe why you think I'm wrong.


Should the church have a position on the environment?

"the Church" or a member of the church? (shrug)

Every christian church encourages people to love the environment/ the gift of the creator. At issue: The leader of the largest christian church declares a position probably based on wrong information.

[darin]

So stewardship of the environment is not a church/faith issue?

Dude, you're way too smart to fall into that logical fallacy. We're NOT talking "Stewardship of the Environment" and the Church's position- we're talking the Church seemingly supporting blatant lying about the enviroment. Dont change the subject.

[fj1200]

"the Church" or a member of the church? (shrug)

Every christian church encourages people to love the environment/ the gift of the creator. At issue: The leader of the largest christian church declares a position probably based on wrong information.

The church. We are stewards of God's resources beyond the environment/gift, i.e. money. Why is stewardship over the gift not a church/faith position?

And you're backtracking. "probably" wrong.

[jimnyc]

So stewardship of the environment is not a church/faith issue?

Not for me it's not, unless of course I truly thought it was an issue. Of course I do believe that ALL of humanity should respect the environment and take care of her - but I don't generally take scientific advice from within my faith. That's me though, I don't pretend to speak for others.

Another example - I think our faith also steers right and wrong in other avenues, which ultimately lead to laws. But I don't look to the vatican for the enforcement of laws, I look to the police and courts to do so.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

So stewardship of the environment is not a church/faith issue?

No it is not and should not be..
The church is in charge of faith, worship, delivering the message about Salvation and guidance on how a Christian should live daily life in this sinful world. .
Leave so-called, saving the planet fraud to that false messiah--you know the maggot infesting our White House NOW!--Tyr

[fj1200]

Dude, you're way too smart to fall into that logical fallacy. We're NOT talking "Stewardship of the Environment" and the Church's position- we're talking the Church seemingly supporting blatant lying about the enviroment. Dont change the subject.

I'm not changing the subject. The subject is man's effect on the environment. We can discuss whether global warming is real but the underlying question is different.

[tailfins]

Should the church have a position on the environment?

I don't know why you refer to "The Church". I can tell you that Fundamental Baptists oppose environmentalism because it's a form a Pagan Earth worship. I REALLY like the bumper sticker: The Earth is NOT my Mother, but it's Creator is my Father.

[fj1200]

Not for me it's not, unless of course I truly thought it was an issue. Of course I do believe that ALL of humanity should respect the environment and take care of her - but I don't generally take scientific advice from within my faith. That's me though, I don't pretend to speak for others.

Another example - I think our faith also steers right and wrong in other avenues, which ultimately lead to laws. But I don't look to the vatican for the enforcement of laws, I look to the police and courts to do so.

Then you agree it's a stewardship issue. Whether you believe the same thing as the Pope on this issue or not.

On your other example. Faith says many things are right or wrong but no one looks to the church for enforcement. As an extension, the Pope isn't requiring you to say 10 Hail Marys and buy 100 carbon offsets. :)


No it is not and should not be..
The church is in charge of faith, worship, delivering the message about Salvation and guidance on how a Christian should live daily life in this sinful world.

No. Stewardship is definitely a church issue.

http://www.openbible.info/topics/stewardship

[fj1200]

I don't know why you refer to "The Church". I can tell you that Fundamental Baptists oppose environmentalism because it's a form a Pagan Earth worship. I REALLY like the bumper sticker: The Earth is NOT my Mother, but it's Creator is my Father.

I refer to the church because it is the subject here. I can't speak to Fundamental Baptists but the Baptist church I go to doesn't worship the earth. Do Fundamental Baptists practice stewardship over God's gifts or do they reject that as Money worship.

[Kathianne]

The Pope however is free to speak to any issues he feels compelled to.

HOWEVER, these issues have zero to do with his infallibility. That is a whole different issue.

[darin]

The church. We are stewards of God's resources beyond the environment/gift, i.e. money. Why is stewardship over the gift not a church/faith position?

And you're backtracking. "probably" wrong.

This thread is about the leader of the largest Christian Church making comments about "Climate Change" that seem based on wrong information, lies, and all that. This is NOT about "Should religious people care about the environment?" - which is the UNrelated question to the topic.


Topic A "How do you feel, catholics, that the Pope made some comments about climate change, but he's wrong?" is under discussion.
Topic B "Should people be good stewards of the Planet" is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.


Logical Fallacy, my friend.


The Pope however is free to speak to any issues he feels compelled to.

HOWEVER, these issues have zero to do with his infallibility. That is a whole different issue.

Whe a pope speaks to moral issues, he does so under his infallibility. He said, essentially, "Climate change is a moral issue".

(shrug).

[jimnyc]

Then you agree it's a stewardship issue. Whether you believe the same thing as the Pope on this issue or not.

I probably agree with his favorite ice cream flavor too, but I won't take cooking or eating advice from the church either. Granted the love for things I believe emanated from my faith, my love for the environment isn't something the church leads for me. The church SHOULD have a love for all things in humanity, and I guess they should ask people to take care of things. But they should be careful as it may be confused with agreeing with the science of things, in which they have no business stewarding in that direction.


On your other example. Faith says many things are right or wrong but no one looks to the church for enforcement. As an extension, the Pope isn't requiring you to say 10 Hail Marys and buy 100 carbon offsets. :)

True, true, but I sure hope I don't hear that I should avoid flying or creating carbon stuff from them either. Saying "love" is all they need to say.

[tailfins]

I refer to the church because it is the subject here. I can't speak to Fundamental Baptists but the Baptist church I go to doesn't worship the earth. Do Fundamental Baptists practice stewardship over God's gifts or do they reject that as Money worship.

Genesis 1:28

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

The Earth and it's contents were created to serve mankind, not the other way around.

[fj1200]

This thread is about the leader of the largest Christian Church making comments about "Climate Change" that seem based on wrong information, lies, and all that. This is NOT about "Should religious people care about the environment?" - which is the UNrelated question to the topic.


Topic A "How do you feel, catholics, that the Pope made some comments about climate change, but he's wrong?" is under discussion.
Topic B "Should people be good stewards of the Planet" is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.


Logical Fallacy, my friend.

Wrong. Topic A and Topic B are completely related and possibly the same. You're making thread about you having a different opinion than the Pope on this issue. If the Pope is correct then the question is stewardship. Topic A is a poll question. Topic B is the heart of the matter.

[fj1200]

Genesis 1:28

The Earth and it's contents were created to serve mankind, not the other way around.

Did I disagree?

[Kathianne]

This thread is about the leader of the largest Christian Church making comments about "Climate Change" that seem based on wrong information, lies, and all that. This is NOT about "Should religious people care about the environment?" - which is the UNrelated question to the topic.


Topic A "How do you feel, catholics, that the Pope made some comments about climate change, but he's wrong?" is under discussion.
Topic B "Should people be good stewards of the Planet" is introduced under the guise of being relevant to topic A (when topic B is actually not relevant to topic A).
Topic A is abandoned.


Logical Fallacy, my friend.



Whe a pope speaks to moral issues, he does so under his infallibility. He said, essentially, "Climate change is a moral issue".

(shrug).

Hardly. (shrug)

Despite the quality of your posts overall, you or anyone here, (myself included), are not the arbiters of Catholic teachings or definitions.

Your use of the word, MORALS is of a differing definition than used in Canon Law. You're using a broad meaning, which is 'general recognized' while that used by Canon Law is specific.

Thus moral reasoning was 'behind' the ban on Friday meat abstinence, yet would be done away with. Had zero to do with 'infallibility.'

I understand that you are of the mind that The Church is pagan, while your 'faith' which you have redefined over the years is correct.

For me, I'll just go with Christ. I feel no compulsion to put down your path to salvation.

[fj1200]

I probably agree with his favorite ice cream flavor too, but I won't take cooking or eating advice from the church either. Granted the love for things I believe emanated from my faith, my love for the environment isn't something the church leads for me. The church SHOULD have a love for all things in humanity, and I guess they should ask people to take care of things. But they should be careful as it may be confused with agreeing with the science of things, in which they have no business stewarding in that direction.

True, true, but I sure hope I don't hear that I should avoid flying or creating carbon stuff from them either. Saying "love" is all they need to say.

I agree I guess. They should be careful but in some respects they do need to lead. Nevertheless we can agree on stewardship and the need to question church leaders as sometimes they lead astray.

[Kathianne]

I agree I guess. They should be careful but in some respects they do need to lead. Nevertheless we can agree on stewardship and the need to question church leaders as sometimes they lead astray.

On that I agree. There have been very bad popes, LOL! Men.

[tailfins]

This thread is about the leader of the largest Christian Church making comments about "Climate Change" that seem based on wrong information, lies, and all that. This is NOT about "Should religious people care about the environment?" - which is the UNrelated question to the topic.

Your point is well taken. I just have an aversion letting my mind be polluted with an apostate religion whether it be Catholicism or Islam. That's why I also squirm when people fixate on Islam, even in opposition.


Philippians 4:8King James Version (KJV)

8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

[Kathianne]

I adore Protestants that believe they, not Christ, are the the source of truth. :laugh2:

[fj1200]

On that I agree. There have been very bad popes, LOL! Men.

:laugh: Don't be sounding like the feminist theologian at church. :eek: There is nothing more annoying than listening to a feminist theologian whine about Paul, men, and growing up Southern Baptist.

[tailfins]

:laugh: Don't be sounding like the feminist theologian at church. :eek: There is nothing more annoying than listening to a feminist theologian whine about Paul, men, and growing up Southern Baptist.

So your liberalism comes from attending a liberal church denomination. :poke: If you were a member of a KJV only church, you wouldn't worry about crossing paths with feminist "theologians". Or if you can overlook their "peace doctrine", there are plenty of good Mennonite churches where women cover their head in submission to their husband and to God.

http://images.fineartamerica.com/images-medium-large/mennonite-chorus-union-square-station-nyc-5-21-11-4-female-sing-robert-ullmann.jpg

[fj1200]

So your liberalism comes from attending a liberal church denomination. :poke: If you were a member of a KJV only church, you wouldn't worry about crossing paths with feminist "theologians". Or if you can overlook their "peace doctrine", there are plenty of good Mennonite churches where women cover their head in submission to their husband and to God.

My conservatism comes from knowing what an actual liberal looks like. ;)

As far as KJV I'm pretty sure Jesus never uttered the words thee, thou, and therefore. :poke: Anyway, there has been no shortage of seminary students, current and former, coming through my Sunday School class. Those that know Greek and even an occasional Old Testament scholar.

EDIT:

Though I must ask, what DOESN'T constitute a "liberal church denomination" in your book? :scared:

[Kathianne]

My conservatism comes from knowing what an actual liberal looks like. ;)

As far as KJV I'm pretty sure Jesus never uttered the words thee, thou, and therefore. :poke: Anyway, there has been no shortage of seminary students, current and former, coming through my Sunday School class. Those that know Greek and even an occasional Old Testament scholar.

EDIT:

Though I must ask, what DOESN'T constitute a "liberal church denomination" in your book? :scared:

You're not enough 'protesting.' LOL! Ye too shall be damned, by the god of TF.

[tailfins]

My conservatism comes from knowing what an actual liberal looks like. ;)

As far as KJV I'm pretty sure Jesus never uttered the words thee, thou, and therefore. :poke: Anyway, there has been no shortage of seminary students, current and former, coming through my Sunday School class. Those that know Greek and even an occasional Old Testament scholar.

EDIT:

Though I must ask, what DOESN'T constitute a "liberal church denomination" in your book? :scared:

Baptist Bible Fellowship, nearly all KJV-Only independent Baptist Churches, German Baptist, the Plymouth Brethren, the more conservative Mennonite churches, a FEW very conservative Calvinist Presbyterian churches.

[darin]

Hardly. (shrug)

Despite the quality of your posts overall, you or anyone here, (myself included), are not the arbiters of Catholic teachings or definitions.

Your use of the word, MORALS is of a differing definition than used in Canon Law. You're using a broad meaning, which is 'general recognized' while that used by Canon Law is specific.

Thus moral reasoning was 'behind' the ban on Friday meat abstinence, yet would be done away with. Had zero to do with 'infallibility.'

I understand that you are of the mind that The Church is pagan, while your 'faith' which you have redefined over the years is correct.

For me, I'll just go with Christ. I feel no compulsion to put down your path to salvation.

You're all over the map here. It's The Pope's use of the word "moral" - not mine.

CATHOLICS teach when the Pope teaches regarding MORAL issues, his teachings are infallible. The POPE said "Climate Change" is a MORAL ISSUE. I'm asking - does that mean faithful catholics should follow his teaching? Can the church tell the Pope he's wrong?

[Kathianne]

You're all over the map here. It's The Pope's use of the word "moral" - not mine.

CATHOLICS teach when the Pope teaches regarding MORAL issues, his teachings are infallible. The POPE said "Climate Change" is a MORAL ISSUE. I'm asking - does that mean faithful catholics should follow his teaching? Can the church tell the Pope he's wrong?

No, I'm not 'all over the map here.' I've already led to the teachings, you are defining wrong. You are entitled to your opinions, not facts.

[darin]

No, I'm not 'all over the map here.' I've already led to the teachings, you are defining wrong. You are entitled to your opinions, not facts.

No. You are all over the map. And you're wrong. Just say you don't know. Don't try to bully me into just going away.

When the Pope is wrong, what do catholics do? What should Catholics do when their Pope supports what is tantamount to fascism - by a stretch, I know - but facists who wish to subdue liberty and steal money?

[Kathianne]

No. You are all over the map. And you're wrong. Just say you don't know. Don't try to bully me into just going away.

When the Pope is wrong, what do catholics do? What should Catholics do when their Pope supports what is tantamount to fascism - by a stretch, I know - but facists who wish to subdue liberty and steal money?

Cool, you're now being transparent, wish Obama would do the same.

Me? Bully? Impossible. We both know you're not going anywhere.

As I said, you don't have your right to misstating facts. IF you wish to make yourself a voice on the RCC, at least research what you are addressing. Anti-Catholic sites don't make the list.

[Kathianne]

I get testy with those that speak with 'authority' they do not possess. Yes, even snarky.

Am I surprised that this pope is fundamentally what I would call 'liberal' and 'socialistic' would come out for 'man-made' climate change? No.

However, wouldn't matter if he says such as pope or as a member of US Government, he'd still be on the wrong side, science-wise, IMO!

http://ncronline.org/blogs/faith-and-justice/encyclical-environment-stimulates-hope-among-academics-and-activists


Encyclical on environment stimulates hope among academics and activists




Thomas Reese (http://ncronline.org/authors/thomas-reese) | Apr. 24, 2015

The encyclical on the environment from Pope Francis is stimulating a great deal of discussion and hope in academia and the environmental movement. The encyclical is expected in June or July.

The pope wants to make the environment one of the signature issues of his papacy. As he explained to reporters (http://ncronline.org/blogs/eco-catholic/popes-eco-quotes-why-name-francis) three days after his election, one of the reasons he took the name Francis was because St. Francis of Assisi is "the man who loves and protects creation." He went on to say, "These days we do not have a very good relationship with creation, do we?"

Conservationists are hoping that the encyclical's attitude toward animals, especially wildlife, will reflect the spirit of St. Francis of Assisi, according to Lonnie Ellis, associate director of Catholic Climate Covenant (http://catholicclimatecovenant.org/).

The encyclical is widely expected to give support to those who attribute climate change to human activity since the pope has already said he accepts this scientific conclusion. Although popes are clearly not infallible when it comes to science, Francis is the first pope to have a modern scientific training: He was educated as a chemist and worked as one in Argentina before he entered the seminary.

...

[tailfins]

No. You are all over the map. And you're wrong. Just say you don't know. Don't try to bully me into just going away.

When the Pope is wrong, what do catholics do? What should Catholics do when their Pope supports what is tantamount to fascism - by a stretch, I know - but facists who wish to subdue liberty and steal money?

It's funny you should mention that:

http://www.catholicarrogance.org/+Artwork/Catholic_liberalism/Hitler&Nuncio.jpg

[Kathianne]

It's funny you should mention that:

http://www.catholicarrogance.org/+Artwork/Catholic_liberalism/Hitler&Nuncio.jpg
Feel better?

[Abbey Marie]

Then you agree it's a stewardship issue. Whether you believe the same thing as the Pope on this issue or not.

On your other example. Faith says many things are right or wrong but no one looks to the church for enforcement. As an extension, the Pope isn't requiring you to say 10 Hail Marys and buy 100 carbon offsets. :)



No. Stewardship is definitely a church issue.

http://www.openbible.info/topics/stewardship


None of those verses support the Catholic church taking a stand on something like global warming.

However, this also-included verse, ironically, is an excellent example of why Christians should not preach on environmental topics. Just substitute "the Earth" or "the environment", in place of money.

Matthew 6:24 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A24&version=ESV) ESV

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."

[Abbey Marie]

I get testy with those that speak with 'authority' they do not possess. Yes, even snarky.

Am I surprised that this pope is fundamentally what I would call 'liberal' and 'socialistic' would come out for 'man-made' climate change? No.

However, wouldn't matter if he says such as pope or as a member of US Government, he'd still be on the wrong side, science-wise, IMO!

http://ncronline.org/blogs/faith-and-justice/encyclical-environment-stimulates-hope-among-academics-and-activists

Does the bolded concern you, Kath? With all respect, I am afraid that it does me.

[tailfins]

None of those verses support the Catholic church taking a stand on something like global warming.

However, this also-included verse, ironically, is an excellent example of why Christians should not preach on environmental topics. Just substitute "the Earth" or "the environment", in place of money.

Matthew 6:24 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A24&version=ESV) ESV

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."






Does this apply to those that preach Environmentalism is a modern version of Paganism?


However, the leaders of the environmental movement have something else in mind. They are seeking converts to the worship of Gaia, i.e. Mother Earth, with the hopes of uniting the world in a common set of beliefs. Because if they can achieve this, they feel they are one step closer to the formation of their Socialist World Government.


It seems we can’t go anywhere without hearing a reference to “going green”, or that we must save “mother earth”. All day long we are bombarded with it on TV, in our workplace, in our public schools, and even in many of our Christian churches. People are getting so involved with it that they have practically made a new religion out of it. But it isn’t really a new religion, it is nothing more than paganism recycled and repackaged.
No pun intended.

http://christianovercomers.com/blog/2011/05/30/pagan-roots-of-environmentalism/


Romans 1:21-25King James Version (KJV)

21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

[fj1200]

None of those verses support the Catholic church taking a stand on something like global warming.

However, this also-included verse, ironically, is an excellent example of why Christians should not preach on environmental topics. Just substitute "the Earth" or "the environment", in place of money.

I'll argue that they support stewardship which was my point and which has been the subject of many sermons. Why do you say they shouldn't preach on environmental topics when they preach on many other "worldly" topics?


Does this apply to those that preach Environmentalism is a modern version of Paganism?

A Christian shouldn't preach environmentalism as you're defining it. Stewardship is different though.

[Abbey Marie]

I'll argue that they support stewardship which was my point and which has been the subject of many sermons. Why do you say they shouldn't preach on environmental topics when they preach on many other "worldly" topics?



A Christian shouldn't preach environmentalism as you're defining it. Stewardship is different though.

Which worldly topics do you think are preached about?

I don't see a difference, in the current climate (pun intended).

[darin]

Then you agree it's a stewardship issue. Whether you believe the same thing as the Pope on this issue or not.

On your other example. Faith says many things are right or wrong but no one looks to the church for enforcement. As an extension, the Pope isn't requiring you to say 10 Hail Marys and buy 100 carbon offsets. :)



No. Stewardship is definitely a church issue.

http://www.openbible.info/topics/stewardship

Dude. Climate Change has NOTHING to do with stewardship of the enviroment because we do not manage climate change. C'mon man.

[Kathianne]

Does the bolded concern you, Kath? With all respect, I am afraid that it does me.

I can't imagine why you'd concern yourself with a pagan leader, unless he comes after YOU!

This is like listening to dems tell you who to vote for. Gibberish.

[Kathianne]

None of those verses support the Catholic church taking a stand on something like global warming.

However, this also-included verse, ironically, is an excellent example of why Christians should not preach on environmental topics. Just substitute "the Earth" or "the environment", in place of money.

Matthew 6:24 (https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+6%3A24&version=ESV) ESV

“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money."






Interesting on the two masters, part of justifcation for celibacy.

I'm probably done here, you all can rest on your glories. I'm sure you know that God has already moved over to let you all have his throne.

[revelarts]

Interesting on the two masters, part of justifcation for celibacy.

I'm probably done here, you all can rest on your glories. I'm sure you know that God has already moved over to let you all have his throne.
kathianne,
I'm not going to debate the points of Catholicism brought up here.
but you've made the above kind of comments a few times in the thread and elsewhere.

you've made a few points about Catholicism based on what you've read and what you know of catholic doctrines and no one here's accused you of now being mother of god Mary manifesting on earth to correct us all.

So why throw the idea of others' opinion on religious issues in that light? (i know you had bad experiences as a child with pushy protestants but your all grown up now.)

you've also said earlier that people have a right to their opinions but not the facts.
OK here you have clear point.
you've presented the facts of catholic doctrine from the sources that are considered authoritative. OK Cool.

no need to make snarky comments about Protestant's or anyone who doesn't agree with you as now "sitting on God's throne".
I know it's frustrating but, people ...Christian people... can sincerely disagree here without being snarky I hope.

Let the Scripture or doctrine, or papal decree stand for what it is and adhere to whatever you want to.
God will in fact finally sort us all out. We all best be as honest as we can with the facts available, not just with what we like.

[fj1200]

Dude. Climate Change has NOTHING to do with stewardship of the enviroment because we do not manage climate change. C'mon man.

The underlying premise is the anthropogenic nature of it all. Don't be afraid of the question dude. :)

[fj1200]

Which worldly topics do you think are preached about?

I don't see a difference, in the current climate (pun intended).

Poverty, race, the Super Bowl... Do you believe managing wealth is stewardship of God's gifts?

*j/k on that last one. ;)

[tailfins]

kathianne,
I'm not going to debate the points of Catholicism brought up here.
but you've made the above kind of comments a few times in the thread and elsewhere.

you've made a few points about Catholicism based on what you've read and what you know of catholic doctrines and no one here's accused you of now being mother of god Mary manifesting on earth to correct us all.

So why throw the idea of others' opinion on religious issues in that light? (i know you had bad experiences as a child with pushy protestants but your all grown up now.)

you've also said earlier that people have a right to their opinions but not the facts.
OK here you have clear point.
you've presented the facts of catholic doctrine from the sources that are considered authoritative. OK Cool.

no need to make snarky comments about Protestant's or anyone who doesn't agree with you as now "sitting on God's throne".
I know it's frustrating but, people ...Christian people... can sincerely disagree here without being snarky I hope.

Let the Scripture or doctrine, or papal decree stand for what it is and adhere to whatever you want to.
God will in fact finally sort us all out. We all best be as honest as we can with the facts available, not just with what we like.

Rev, if you don't discourage such things, she comes across looking weaker. Let her trip on her own shoelaces.

[Kathianne]

kathianne,
I'm not going to debate the points of Catholicism brought up here.
but you've made the above kind of comments a few times in the thread and elsewhere.

you've made a few points about Catholicism based on what you've read and what you know of catholic doctrines and no one here's accused you of now being mother of god Mary manifesting on earth to correct us all.

So why throw the idea of others' opinion on religious issues in that light? (i know you had bad experiences as a child with pushy protestants but your all grown up now.)

you've also said earlier that people have a right to their opinions but not the facts.
OK here you have clear point.
you've presented the facts of catholic doctrine from the sources that are considered authoritative. OK Cool.

no need to make snarky comments about Protestant's or anyone who doesn't agree with you as now "sitting on God's throne".
I know it's frustrating but, people ...Christian people... can sincerely disagree here without being snarky I hope.

Let the Scripture or doctrine, or papal decree stand for what it is and adhere to whatever you want to.
God will in fact finally sort us all out. We all best be as honest as we can with the facts available, not just with what we like.

Rev, you're not that kind of self-important, self declared godlike/all knowing Protestant, like most religious people I know. The bolded part of your answer is representative of that. I respect your positions and from what I know, the way you lead your life. BTW, I wasn't speaking of 'all Protestants,' nope. "I'm sure you know that God has already moved over to let you all have his throne." Just the few here in particular that seem to feel convinced that they, not God speaks to us. They don't even know they are doing it. One could argue I'm trying to save them from themselves.

I find those that tear down others paths, especially flaming them to respond, worthy of having their egotistical selves brought out. I find especially interesting that those that are so judgemental fail to see the hypocrisy in their hate for others while preaching salvation, especially with the implication that they are following Jesus.

Then that's just me.

[Abbey Marie]

Interesting on the two masters, part of justifcation for celibacy.

I'm probably done here, you all can rest on your glories. I'm sure you know that God has already moved over to let you all have his throne.


I think that was uncalled-for. I asked a simple, respectful, question, and am pretty sure I have never put down the Catholic religion.

I guess if you want to see me a hypocritical Catholic-bashing Christian, that's your prerogative. Unfounded.

[Abbey Marie]

Poverty, race, the Super Bowl... Do you believe managing wealth is stewardship of God's gifts?

*j/k on that last one. ;)

I'm sure you are right, in your experience, about preaching topics. In the churches I have gone to in the last 25 years, we tend to go through the Bible verse by verse, in expository fashion. Social issues are rarely touched upon. The idea is to focus on the Lord and His Word, and everything else tends to fall into place.

[Abbey Marie]

I can't imagine why you'd concern yourself with a pagan leader, unless he comes after YOU!

This is like listening to dems tell you who to vote for. Gibberish.

Wow.

[fj1200]

I'm sure you are right, in your experience, about preaching topics. In the churches I have gone to in the last 25 years, we tend to go through the Bible verse by verse, in expository fashion. Social issues are rarely touched upon. The idea is to focus on the Lord and His Word, and everything else tends to fall into place.

How do you advance the Kingdom of God without expanding what the bible teaches into the modern world and everyday life? How can a group of whites and a group of blacks both be Christian, both reading the same bible, and be on opposite lines of the race issue in the 60's Southern states?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

How do you advance the Kingdom of God without expanding what the bible teaches into the modern world and everyday life? How can a group of whites and a group of blacks both be Christian, both reading the same bible, and be on opposite lines of the race issue in the 60's Southern states?

If I may.. you are equating human action with that of religious "perfection in Christ". The problem is , being a Christian does not automatically make a person become perfect in action on earth. As Christians are human and pre-destined to the same weaknesses which they must still fight!
Saying goes, "perfect in Christ by way of Salvation", not perfect in this world which we are taught to not embrace because it dark, evil and ruled by Lucifer.
Hope that helps, not sure of any of your religious knowledge or your faith.
See amigo, no criticism, just being helpful.. -Tyr

[fj1200]

If I may.. you are equating human action with that of religious "perfection in Christ". The problem is , being a Christian does not automatically make a person become perfect in action on earth. As Christians are human and pre-destined to the same weaknesses which they must still fight!
Saying goes, "perfect in Christ by way of Salvation", not perfect in this world which we are taught to not embrace because it dark, evil and ruled by Lucifer.
Hope that helps, not sure of any of your religious knowledge or your faith.
See amigo, no criticism, just being helpful.. -Tyr

No I'm not. Where have I stated such? And I honestly have no idea how you're relating your comments to what I've posted in this thread?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

No I'm not. Where have I stated such? And I honestly have no idea how you're relating your comments to what I've posted in this thread?
Sorry, perhaps I should have quoted only this part of your previous comment.


How can a group of whites and a group of blacks both be Christian, both reading the same bible, and be on opposite lines of the race issue in the 60's Southern states?

As that was primarily what I was attempting to answer. -Tyr

[Abbey Marie]

How do you advance the Kingdom of God without expanding what the bible teaches into the modern world and everyday life? How can a group of whites and a group of blacks both be Christian, both reading the same bible, and be on opposite lines of the race issue in the 60's Southern states?

Reading and truly understanding are often two very different things. Which is why having expository verse-by-verse teaching is so important.

[tailfins]

I think that was uncalled-for. I asked a simple, respectful, question, and am pretty sure I have never put down the Catholic religion.

I guess if you want to see me a hypocritical Catholic-bashing Christian, that's your prerogative. Unfounded.

She could move your comment to the cage, but in this case: Red trumps green.

[darin]

The underlying premise is the anthropogenic nature of it all. Don't be afraid of the question dude. :)

The slippery slope is - should the pope state "Stewardship of the Easter Bunny is a moral issue!"?

Fictional things are never moral issues. He wasn't speaking to how the climate changes over eons, he was referring to "Man-made" climate change. Which is wronger than a football bat. He should know it.

[fj1200]

Sorry, perhaps I should have quoted only this part of your previous comment.

?

As that was primarily what I was attempting to answer. -Tyr

OK. But your comments do not match to my post. I never posted that man was perfect in Christ, I acknowledge that we are far from it but that doesn't mean we aren't constantly striving to advance the Kingdom of God.


Reading and truly understanding are often two very different things. Which is why having expository verse-by-verse teaching is so important.

OK. But that doesn't really address my point IMO.


The slippery slope is - should the pope state "Stewardship of the Easter Bunny is a moral issue!"?

Fictional things are never moral issues. He wasn't speaking to how the climate changes over eons, he was referring to "Man-made" climate change. Which is wronger than a football bat. He should know it.

I know what he was referring to but you are stating your opinion. If you want to disagree with the Pope's opinion that's your prerogative but that's a different question than the one I raised.

Fallacy alert:

Besides, there is no Easter Bunny and one can't be a steward over a fictional character. :slap:

[jimnyc]

She could move your comment to the cage, but in this case: Red trumps green.

It doesn't go like that. A disagreement as such doesn't mean one trumps the other. As a LESSON to others, they disagreed with one another, then they talked it out in private. They are cool with one another and neither one trumps the other. Either one can move things and either one can move things back. They took door C and went above that.

So stop trying to fan the flames, it won't work, bastard. :)

[tailfins]

So stop trying to fan the flames, it won't work, bastard. :)

It was just too tempting of a target to pass up. It's all good anyway. Most of us don't have time or money invested in the forum, so there's minimal risk. However, the chance to play to the crowd and see which approaches look best to the crowd is an interesting exercise.

[jimnyc]

It was just too tempting of a target to pass up. It's all good anyway. Most of us don't have time or money invested in the forum, so there's minimal risk. However, the chance to play to the crowd and see which approaches look best to the crowd is an interesting exercise.

Time and money, no. Friends, yes. That's not cool the way you explain it. Being funny and failing is one thing - but purposely trying to fuck with them, staff or not, why would you do that? I can understand if you have a disagreement and mess with someone a little. Or you mess a little with someone you consider a 'friend'. But why go out of your way to try and drive a wedge of sorts, by thinking it's some sort of weird exercise?

I'm not saying this because they are staff members, but because they are friends. This isn't an issue that I'm speaking to you as a mod or anything, I just think you can be an instigating weirdo sometimes. :confused:

[tailfins]

I'm not saying this because they are staff members, but because they are friends. This isn't an issue that I'm speaking to you as a mod or anything, I just think you can be an instigating weirdo sometimes. :confused:

Hmmmm, I guess I need to work on being an instigating weirdo without people noticing I'm an instigating weirdo. Besides that, you're better off with Jerome or your Chihuahua than any friends you make online; the dogs won't stab you in the back.

https://1000awesomethings.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/sweet-smelling-gasoline.jpg

[jimnyc]

Hmmmm, I guess I need to work on being an instigating weirdo without people noticing I'm an instigating weirdo.

https://1000awesomethings.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/sweet-smelling-gasoline.jpg

I suppose you could do that, I suppose you could play with fire. But remember what happens to sneaky people when they play with fire...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_I0wf5fVRPqU/SUQD1IH352I/AAAAAAAAATY/hqd_0PNK8Ec/s400/burned+hand.jpg

[tailfins]

I suppose you could do that, I suppose you could play with fire. But remember what happens to sneaky people when they play with fire...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_I0wf5fVRPqU/SUQD1IH352I/AAAAAAAAATY/hqd_0PNK8Ec/s400/burned+hand.jpg

Which goes back to having no skin in the game. That's the best time to play with fire.

[jimnyc]

Which goes back to having no skin in the game. That's the best time to play with fire.

Whatever floats your boat. Now get in it and go sail away.

[tailfins]

Whatever floats your boat. Now get in it and go sail away.

I'm actually busy reading that book posted in the reviews section. You should click on the pdf link provided. It's an outstanding book on how to not get screwed over.

[DragonStryk72]

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/04/28/un-chief-praises-pope-for-framing-climate-change-as-moral-imperative-says/

Regarding the Papal position on climate change - how would a devout catholic reconcile reality with the Church's view?

Well... he's not wrong. I mean, really, Climate change exists, both naturally, and by what the 7+ billion people on the planet have created. Further, as Christians, we are taught that we were granted over dominion. Now, here's the thing, the Bible does teach, in various ways, that with rulership comes responsibility. Dominion over the planet imparts responsibility for the planet.

The big problem with the climate change debate is that those who are trying to prevent climate change go too far. A certain amount of climate change is a necessity, in order for our planet to continue to grow, but they do not in any way attempt to take this part into account. They've simply pulled a Demolition Man, "Anything not good, is bad".

[darin]

Besides, there is no Easter Bunny and one can't be a steward over a fictional character. :slap:

Likewise, "man made climate change" - to which the Pope was addressing is fictional, thus can have no stewardship. Of if you dont like the bunny analogy - it's like the Pope saysing "Stewardship of the planet Jupiter is a Moral issue".

It's foolish.

[fj1200]

Likewise, "man made climate change" - to which the Pope was addressing is fictional, thus can have no stewardship. Of if you dont like the bunny analogy - it's like the Pope saysing "Stewardship of the planet Jupiter is a Moral issue".

It's foolish.

That's a fine opinion, can't say I really disagree. And Jupiter isn't fictional but our stewardship over it is up until we can have an effect upon it and the Jupiterians who live there.

[darin]

So - based on the leaks, the Pope has been blinded by the agenda of "Climate Change". :(