Religion and Ethics Forum
Religion and Ethics Discussion => Christian Topic => Topic started by: Owlswing on December 07, 2017, 11:23:00 PM
-
The Pope is trying to change the Lord's Prayer saying it makes it look like God is "leading us into temptation".
It's taken how long for the Church to wake up to this and I, personally, have been subjected to chorus of denial from the Christians on this forum telling me how wrong I am for saying exactly the same thing!
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/889365/Pope-Francis-Jesus-Lords-Prayer-Bible-God-Catholic-scripture-religion-christianity
-
...... and I, personally, have been subjected to chorus of denial from the Christians on this forum telling me how wrong I am for saying exactly the same thing.
I hadn't notice you say the translation of the Lord's Prayer us a bad one. When did you say that?
-
I hadn't notice you say the translation of the Lord's Prayer us a bad one. When did you say that?
I didn't! That was Sassy et al.
What I said was that the Bible said that God intended to lead people into temptation; why, otherwise, would they need to ask him not to.
-
I didn't! That was Sassy et al.
What I said was that the Bible said that God intended to lead people into temptation; why, otherwise, would they need to ask him not to.
Further to the above - Sassy, in particular, and others have argued that the quoted passage is a mis-translation going back to the year Dot almost.
My argument was, and is, that the translation error has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that millions upon millions of Christian kids, from the first day they are sent to Sunday School or church, are taught the Lord's Prayer including the line asking God not to "lead us not into temptation".
The matter of a possible translation error would not be discussed at any level of schooling before, as far as I am aware, a University degree course in Divinity or Theology, a bit late to change the perception of all those Christian kids who will never get within a hundred miles of such a course.
-
So not exactly the same thing then, but similar theme. Do you have a link to the discussion as sounds an interesting one?
-
So not exactly the same thing then, but similar theme. Do you have a link to the discussion as sounds an interesting one?
I haven't it was one of those interminable things where every objec tion to the accepted version was dismissed 'cos "You (me) don't know your (my) bible!"
-
I haven't it was one of those interminable things where every objec tion to the accepted version was dismissed 'cos "You (me) don't know your (my) bible!"
Ah ok, shame.
-
Ah ok, shame.
Give me ten minutes and I'll try and look through my posts history to try and find something.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/lead-us-not-into-mistranslation-pope-wants-lords-prayer-changed
Love the unintended hilarity of the last line of this.
-
I'm not wholly convinced it's unintended.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/08/lead-us-not-into-mistranslation-pope-wants-lords-prayer-changed
Love the unintended hilarity of the last line of this.
Agree witb Shaker that it might well be intended. I got thrown a bit because the quote 'A Father doesn't do tgst' triggetrd off Luck Be a Lady in my head.
-
Agree witb Shaker that it might well be intended. I got thrown a bit because the quote 'A Father doesn't do tgst' triggetrd off Luck Be a Lady in my head.
:D
-
"Leadu us not into temptation" might me poetical, but it isn't accurate. Probably the best translation from the Koine would be something like "Do not bring us to the test" or "Preserve us from hard testing". Jacobean English, eh?
-
"Leadu us not into temptation" might me poetical, but it isn't accurate. Probably the best translation from the Koine would be something like "Do not bring us to the test" or "Preserve us from hard testing". Jacobean English, eh?
Still not a very cuddly, loving daddy thing though, is it?
-
Dunno, Rhi: "Do not bring us to the test, but remove us from evil" seems OK to me.
-
Seems to have the same implication - these tests (temptations) are set up by the god being prayed to.
ie. an echo of Floo's "if there is a biblical god it must be evil"
-
Dunno, Rhi: "Do not bring us to the test, but remove us from evil" seems OK to me.
This is getting into Job territory, surely - please don't do horrible things that will test my faith?
-
This is getting into Job territory, surely - please don't do horrible things that will test my faith?
'Although you might choose to be a bastard, please, pretty please, three times with sprinkles, don't be a bastard.'
-
'Although you might choose to be a bastard, please, pretty please, three times with sprinkles, don't be a bastard.'
It's all part of God's perfect plan, NS....
-
It's all part of God's perfect plan, NS....
Prayer is just a weird idea if you have an omni god.
-
Prayer is just a weird idea if you have an omni god.
Maybe not if you have an omni god who likes to pick and choose who gets the answers that they want. A god with NPD.
It's a weird idea if you have a loving god though, certainly.
-
Maybe not if you have an omni god who likes to pick and choose who gets the answers that they want. A god with NPD.
It's a weird idea if you have a loving god though, certainly.
But if it's omni, it choose to make you pray, and knew you would and will then do the thing it was always going to do.
With a loving god, it has many problems.
-
But if it's omni, it choose to make you pray, and knew you would and will then do the thing it was always going to do.
With a loving god, it has many problems.
Nooo, because I have free will...oh hang on...
-
This is getting into Job territory, surely - please don't do horrible things that will test my faith?
Why should it be 'faith' which is tested?
I see no mention of faith in this passage....
-
"Lead us not into temptation" might be poetical, but it isn't accurate. Probably the best translation from the Koine would be something like "Do not bring us to the test" or "Preserve us from hard testing". Jacobean English, eh?
MAEGHT
This is almost word for word what I was talking about and is also almost pure Sassy trying to wriggle out of the current version!
It is interesting to note that it is a bloody long time since Jacobean English was used in this country!
-
Dunno, Rhi: "Do not bring us to the test, but remove us from evil" seems OK to me.
If the Bible, as Christians claim, is the revealed word of God why doesn't it say that instead of "lead us not into temptation"?.
And don't give that load of old rubbish about translation - if the Christian God is all powerful he could have stopped the mistranslation ever being published - if he can't even keep his own Book of Rules/Hisdtory updated properly he's not much good in my view.
-
Well, I haven't used the Jacobean version since I was at school - and then the idea was to see who could say it fast enough. We don't use it in my local church - we use a version in modern English or sometimes Scots.
-
If the Bible, as Christians claim, is the revealed word of God why doesn't it say that instead of "lead us not into temptation"?.
And don't give that load of old rubbish about translation - if the Christian God is all powerful he could have stopped the mistranslation ever being published -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicked_Bible
-
If this is gonna become a thread about the various translations of Scripture into English, with politics thrown in to make it spicey, or why translations have to be made to keep up with linguistic variations caused by the ravages of time, it's going to be a turgid thread.
-
If this is gonna become a thread about the various translations of Scripture into English, with politics thrown in to make it spicey, or why translations have to be made to keep up with linguistic variations caused by the ravages of time, it's going to be a turgid thread.
And, as I have altready posted here, repetition of a thread going back yonks that was, as usual with this kind of discussion, totally worthless, like hitting your head against a wall of Christian intransigence.
-
There are many translations. I like this one (except the American spelling of 'honour'):-
The Lord's Prayer
Contemporary English Version
Our Father in heaven,
help us to honor your name.
Come and set up your kingdom,
so that everyone on earth
will obey you,
as you are obeyed in heaven.
Give us our food for today.
Forgive us for doing wrong,
as we forgive others.
Keep us from being tempted
and protect us from evil.
-
I like a few of the modern versions, Robbie - the NLT comes to mind, as does "The Message" paraphrase. Mind you, there's a bit I don't think we're getting right in English. The Koine is "epiousios" - it sort of translates as "imminant future"....and the line "give us this day our daily bread" should read something like "Give us our tomorrow bread today" - in other words, the "daily bread" is spiritual growth, not wholemeal seeded!
-
Bloody Hell!
We are back again to the fact that if you go back far enough and look at as many translations into as many languages as have been produced in the last 2,000 years, including the profusion of versions freom the good ol' U S of A over the last 50 years, you can find a version to fit just about whatever scenario you want.
All in all a total waste of time as the Christians are never, ever, in a month of Sundays and a year of Blue Moons, going to allow anyone else to win the argument even if they have to win by boring everyone else to death!
-
"Leadu us not into temptation" might me poetical, but it isn't accurate. Probably the best translation from the Koine would be something like "Do not bring us to the test" or "Preserve us from hard testing". Jacobean English, eh?
The NRSV has "And do not bring us to the time of trial, but rescue us from the evil one"
I think the Pope has a point.
-
If the Bible, as Christians claim, is the revealed word of God why doesn't it say that instead of "lead us not into temptation"?.
It does in good translations.
And don't give that load of old rubbish about translation - if the Christian God is all powerful he could have stopped the mistranslation ever being published - if he can't even keep his own Book of Rules/Hisdtory updated properly he's not much good in my view.
Yes, he could if he were all powerful. What does that tell you about God?
-
It does in good translations.
I was introduced to the Bible when I was five years old - the KJV - and as far as I can remember that was the only version in use in every C of E church in the country and the only one available to buy anywhere in the country.
The KJV (being what it says on the box) is over 400 years old, which means that Christians have been asking their God "not to lead [them] into temptation" for at least that long and it has taken that long for God's representative on Earth to get the e-mail from his Boss telling him to get his finger out and do something about this rather awkward bit of truth about how he, God, works hidden in some way - maybe by telling everybody that some human messed up the passage that says (enter phrase exonerating God from leading his flock into temptation) of your choice)!
Yes, he could if he were all powerful. What does that tell you about God?
Well, funnily enough that's another point that the Christians here have been dodging answering for as long as I have been here and, presumably, since the Beeb closed down, because they were dodging answering it on there too.
-
I was introduced to the Bible when I was five years old - the KJV - and as far as I can remember that was the only version in use in every C of E church in the country and the only one available to buy anywhere in the country.
The KJV (being what it says on the box) is over 400 years old, which means that Christians have been asking their God "not to lead [them] into temptation" for at least that long and it has taken that long for God's representative on Earth to get the e-mail from his Boss telling him to get his finger out and do something about this rather awkward bit of truth about how he, God, works hidden in some way - maybe by telling everybody that some human messed up the passage that says (enter phrase exonerating God from leading his flock into temptation) of your choice)!
Well, funnily enough that's another point that the Christians here have been dodging answering for as long as I have been here and, presumably, since the Beeb closed down, because they were dodging answering it on there too.
As has been pointed out above, we don't all use this translation, and we are not all Anglicans, nor RC's.
What concerns me the most here is that you have outed yourself as an Express reader :o
-
As a matter of interest, most RCs I know have used the GNB or the Jerusalem Bible for decades. There's no set translation in the CofS. Most denominations use the NIV,GNB....or when they're feeling Scottish, the Lorimer New Testament in Scots or the Glasgow Bible. The only time I can recall the KJV being ued in the last thirty or so years was at a funeral, when the next of kin wanted the 23rd Psalm read from that translation. I did a bit of digging yesterday: my own local kirk abandoned the KJV in the early '60's.
-
What concerns me the most here is that you have outed yourself as an Express reader :o
How so?
The only papers that I have read in the last ten or more years have been Metro, usually for the Nemi cartoon, City A M and the Standard for the Soduko and the crossword.
-
As a matter of interest, most RCs I know have used the GNB or the Jerusalem Bible for decades. There's no set translation in the CofS. Most denominations use the NIV,GNB....or when they're feeling Scottish, the Lorimer New Testament in Scots or the Glasgow Bible. The only time I can recall the KJV being ued in the last thirty or so years was at a funeral, when the next of kin wanted the 23rd Psalm read from that translation. I did a bit of digging yesterday: my own local kirk abandoned the KJV in the early '60's.
Like I said - the Christians, of ALL stripes, will say just about anything the prevent their religion and its God being criticised in any way - another thread that is going to flounder on the rocks of "the Christian God can do no wrong and the Bible is the unadulterated truth.
-
Like I said - the Christians, of ALL stripes, will say just about anything the prevent their religion and its God being criticised in any way - another thread that is going to flounder on the rocks of "the Christian God can do no wrong and the Bible is the unadulterated truth.
This reads as if you are accusing Anchorman of lying, 'saying just about anything' in his reply. It doesn't read like that to me but rather that you owe him an apology.
-
Bloody Hell!
We are back again to the fact that if you go back far enough and look at as many translations into as many languages as have been produced in the last 2,000 years, including the profusion of versions freom the good ol' U S of A over the last 50 years, you can find a version to fit just about whatever scenario you want.
All in all a total waste of time as the Christians are never, ever, in a month of Sundays and a year of Blue Moons, going to allow anyone else to win the argument even if they have to win by boring everyone else to death!
Oh sorry you're bored, Owlswing,
I'm not trying to win an argument nor am I arguing. Don't think Anchor is either.
-
Like I said - the Christians, of ALL stripes, will say just about anything the prevent their religion and its God being criticised in any way - another thread that is going to flounder on the rocks of "the Christian God can do no wrong and the Bible is the unadulterated truth.
"Unadulterated truth"? ....
I'm not a KJV-only-er, nor, as you should know, a YEC.
However, the Bible is, s the Kirk puts it in its' usual theology speak "The supreme standard for faith and life".
Is there a perfect tanslation?
If there is, I've never found it yet.
I use a varirty of versions, depending on the situation, potential hearers, etc.
If I'm engaging on personal study, I usually have several versions from several thought strands before me - NIV, NLT and the Message.
-
Like I said - the Christians, of ALL stripes, will say just about anything the prevent their religion and its God being criticised in any way - another thread that is going to flounder on the rocks of "the Christian God can do no wrong and the Bible is the unadulterated truth.
Don't predict how the thread will go! It seems you would prefer Christians to say nothing on a subject that interests them Owlswing. The Pope isn't doing anything controversial with the Lord's Prayer really, there have been many different translations used at different times, they have the same basic meaning but are easier to understand in less archaic language. None of that matters to non-Christians except academically.
-
This reads as if you are accusing Anchorman of lying, 'saying just about anything' in his reply. It doesn't read like that to me but rather that you owe him an apology.
Don't put words into my mouth.
No way am I accusing him or anyone else of lying.
What I am saying is that the Lord's Prayer as it was worded when I was taught it stated "lead us not into temptation" in a prayer addressed to "Our Father who art in Heaven" who was identifaied as God.
I can see no reason not to take that as meaning that thoSe praying are asking their God not to lead them into temptation.
Matthew 6:9-13 King James Version (KJV)
9 After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10 Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11 Give us this day our daily bread.
12 And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13 And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen
All these lines are addressed to "Our Father which art in heaven" - God!
This being the case in this prayer the persdon praying is asking his/her "Father which art in heaven" NOT to lead him/her into temptation.
All other translations - the KJV being created for the subjects in England and Scotland of said King James so they could understrand what was being said/what they were saying rather than understanding not a word in a language, Latin. that none but the clergy understood - therefore are totally and utterly and completely irrelevant to my question - Why would the God of the Christians lead his followers into temptation and they need to pray that he not do so?
Now the Pope has decided that the wording is misleading - an enormous understatement in my view.
-
"Unadulterated truth"? ....
I'm not a KJV-only-er, nor, as you should know, a YEC.
However, the Bible is, s the Kirk puts it in its' usual theology speak "The supreme standard for faith and life".
Is there a perfect tanslation?
If there is, I've never found it yet.
I use a varirty of versions, depending on the situation, potential hearers, etc.
If I'm engaging on personal study, I usually have several versions from several thought strands before me - NIV, NLT and the Message.
That is the whole point, Anchor!¬
YOU use!
How many other Christians do the same? I am not sure my memory serves me right but are you not a lay preacher, meaning you are likely to have rather more interest in such details as other translations of the Bible than the (proverbial) (Christian) man-in-the-street?
-
Don't predict how the thread will go! It seems you would prefer Christians to say nothing on a subject that interests them Owlswing. The Pope isn't doing anything controversial with the Lord's Prayer really, there have been many different translations used at different times, they have the same basic meaning but are easier to understand in less archaic language. None of that matters to non-Christians except academically.
Oh, Robbie, I am so sorry to have offended!
Try going back over the threads under the Christian Topic and see just how many go on for 10 or more pages of argument which consist of Christians quoting great swathes of the Bible to refute arguments about what God/Jesus said and/or did.
Even more try reading the ones where the argument comes down the question 'Does the God of the Christians exist? - if so what proof exists to substantiate this claim'.
I think you will find that my prediction is not far off the mark.
-
That is the whole point, Anchor!¬
YOU use!
How many other Christians do the same? I am not sure my memory serves me right but are you not a lay preacher, meaning you are likely to have rather more interest in such details as other translations of the Bible than the (proverbial) (Christian) man-in-the-street?
I've always had an interest in various versions, Owlswing, since I came across a Mofat Translation - long before I was Christian (in fact, while I was atheist.)
I've always encouraged folk to find the version they can feel comfortable with, as long as that version is accepted by mainstream Christians, and has been scrutinized by a team of linguistic experts, all of whose credentials are known.
As a historian, I was fascin ated to learn that the kjv ws influenced by James VI - himself heavily indoctrinated by the 'divine right of kings' notion, and certain words and phrases were 'tweaked' to promote his ideas.
I suppose that's why the Kirk had to be forced by law in Charls II's time, to give up the Geneva Bible in favour of the KJV.
Most modern translations - especially those endorsed by Biblica - go through a rigorous review process, their translators examined for bias, before hitting the shelves.
That doesn't mean they're all the same - the Koine, Aramaic and Hebrew core MSS may be the same, but the translators' approach to the shifting sands of the English language evolves as the language itself changes.
-
I've always had an interest in various versions, Owlswing, since I came across a Mofat Translation - long before I was Christian (in fact, while I was atheist.)
I've always encouraged folk to find the version they can feel comfortable with, as long as that version is accepted by mainstream Christians, and has been scrutinized by a team of linguistic experts, all of whose credentials are known.
As a historian, I was fascin ated to learn that the kjv ws influenced by James VI - himself heavily indoctrinated by the 'divine right of kings' notion, and certain words and phrases were 'tweaked' to promote his ideas.
I suppose that's why the Kirk had to be forced by law in Charls II's time, to give up the Geneva Bible in favour of the KJV.
Most modern translations - especially those endorsed by Biblica - go through a rigorous review process, their translators examined for bias, before hitting the shelves.
That doesn't mean they're all the same - the Koine, Aramaic and Hebrew core MSS may be the same, but the translators' approach to the shifting sands of the English language evolves as the language itself changes.
Please, I am not arguing that any other version is wriong, right or totally indiferent.
The Church of England, which i attended until I was fifteen, and also where I was, upon the insistance of my in-laws, married to my first wife, and the Bapitist Church I attended, again at the inistance of the in-laws, the C of E wouldn't take me as I was divorced, for my second mattiege, use the KJV.
I have no idea which version of the Christian bible is used at any Church of the C of E these days, but the presumption is that it is still the KJV which contains the line under discussion.
My argument is that this line has been taught to hundreds of thousands of chuildren of C of E parents, a line which asks their God not to lead them into temptation.
If their God is all powerfull, sees and hears all, why has ne ho changed this line if it does not mean what it says?
If he is NOT all-powerful, all seeing and all hearing why are all these hundreds of thousands of kids taught that he is, thus producing posters like Sassy, Hope, Alan Burns, Spud etc who are hell-bent on convincing all of us who do not believe in this all-powerful, all-seeing, all hearing God that we are to burn in Hell for all eternity for our apostacy?
-
The Pope is trying to change the Lord's Prayer saying it makes it look like God is "leading us into temptation".
It's taken how long for the Church to wake up to this and I, personally, have been subjected to chorus of denial from the Christians on this forum telling me how wrong I am for saying exactly the same thing!
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/889365/Pope-Francis-Jesus-Lords-Prayer-Bible-God-Catholic-scripture-religion-christianity
The Pope is trying to change the Lord's Prayer, so what? Sounds like a really big deal?
ippy
-
He's not changing it ippy, just wants to embrace modern language. It will still have the same meaning but worded in a way that is easier for people to understand.
I always took the "lead us not into temptation" to mean 'help keep me out of difficult situations where I might get in trouble' :D. Too many words of course.
I've not heard anyone say, "Out Father which art in Heaven..." for donkeys' years. I suppose some still do.
-
One of the interesting bits regarding this 'prayer' - which wasn't meant to be a prayer, but a model for prayer, is that the full version....the one with "and the Kingdom, the power and the Glory are Yours...." first appears, not in the NT as we know it today, but in the Didache, a book contemporary with the later Johanine letters and Revelation.
-
He's not changing it ippy, just wants to embrace modern language. It will still have the same meaning but worded in a way that is easier for people to understand.
I always took the "lead us not into temptation" to mean 'help keep me out of difficult situations where I might get in trouble' :D. Too many words of course.
I've not heard anyone say, "Out Father which art in Heaven..." for donkeys' years. I suppose some still do.
Well, whatever he's doing with it, it's rather pointless in in the first place anyway, therefor, 'so what'?
When you add to that, the R C church including the pope is morally bankrupt as well, it'even more of a 'so what'?
Waste of time comes to mind too..
Regards ippy
-
Well, whatever he's doing with it, it's rather pointless in in the first place anyway, therefor, 'so what'?
When you add to that, the R C church including the pope is morally bankrupt as well, it'even more of a 'so what'?
Waste of time comes to mind too..
Regards ippy
Estimated number of RC's in the world 1,000,000,000
Estimated number Ippy's in the world 1.000000000
-
Estimated number of RC's in the world 1,000,000,000
Estimated number Ippy's in the world 1.000000000
And it's the argumentum ad populum in numbers
-
And it's the argumentum ad populum in numbers
I think it fair to say that more people take notice of Frank than take notice of Ippy.
-
I think it fair to say that more people take notice of Frank than take notice of Ippy.
more people take note of David Icke than anyone on this forum AFAIK.
-
Estimated number of RC's in the world 1,000,000,000
Estimated number Ippy's in the world 1.000000000
It's hardly my fault that their's so many gullible people about H W, anyway how does the amount of people taken in by this nonsense, make this form of nonsense any more credible than any other form of nonsense?
The moral bankruptcy of the Roman Catholic church has removed any of the large volumes of respect that organisation would like to think it still has, it's become laughable when it's leaders make these pronouncements, it's enormous loss of authority is due to its abysmal historical record.
Regards ippy
-
I think it fair to say that more people take notice of Frank than take notice of Ippy.
George Carlin (IIRC): "I have exactly as much power and authority as the Pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it."
-
The "RC Church" (as some of you call it), has more credibility now than ever before with Francis. It is having a renaissance! (Me saying this as a non-Catholic, hee hee, but I have never had any prejudice or thought the scandals were about the church, only bad members. TBH the scandals have done it good in some ways.).
-
The "RC Church" (as some of you call it), has more credibility now than ever before with Francis. It is having a renaissance! (Me saying this as a non-Catholic, hee hee, but I have never had any prejudice or thought the scandals were about the church, only bad members. TBH the scandals have done it good in some ways.).
Nice to know that the sexual assault of children and the subsequent cover up by the church hierarchy have been of some benefit. Those fucked and ignored will presumably be rejoicing.
-
Harsh. And right.
-
Nice to know that the sexual assault of children and the subsequent cover up by the church hierarchy have been of some benefit. Those fucked and ignored will presumably be rejoicing.
Honestly!
You have to bring everything down to the lowest & most obvious, worse than floo.
What I said had nothing to do with that - & I don't ignore it, nor sexual abuse perpetrated by members of other churches or organisations.
However I don't condemn an entire organisation because of some bad apples.
I'm outta this thread.
-
Honestly!
You have to bring everything down to the lowest & most obvious, worse than floo.
What I said had nothing to do with that - & I don't ignore it, nor sexual abuse perpetrated by members of other churches or organisations.
However I don't condemn an entire organisation because of some bad apples.
I'm outta this thread.
Except as pointed out the hierarchy covered it up. If you think that is some sort of good then take as much offence as you like.
And in what way was your comment nothing to do with the sexual assault of children and the subsequent cover up?
-
The "RC Church" (as some of you call it), has more credibility now than ever before with Francis. It is having a renaissance! (Me saying this as a non-Catholic, hee hee, but I have never had any prejudice or thought the scandals were about the church, only bad members. TBH the scandals have done it good in some ways.).
About bloody time, it has needed it for centuries!
Quite apart from anything else in its attitude to women.
-
Except as pointed out the hierarchy covered it up. If you think that is some sort of good then take as much offence as you like.
And in what way was your comment nothing to do with the sexual assault of children and the subsequent cover up?
Agreed
-
Honestly!
You have to bring everything down to the lowest & most obvious, worse than floo.
What I said had nothing to do with that - & I don't ignore it, nor sexual abuse perpetrated by members of other churches or organisations.
However I don't condemn an entire organisation because of some bad apples.
I'm outta this thread.
Rob, what exactly is so redeeming about this R C organisation's policy of telling their African members that condoms don't help in the fight to prevent aids spreading? And this is only one of its crimes.
Just as a small aside Rob, why try to protect this religious organisation? The one that has about the longest list of abominable behaviour to it's name it's possible for this type of organisation to have?
Regards ippy
-
Honestly!
You have to bring everything down to the lowest & most obvious, worse than floo.
What I said had nothing to do with that - & I don't ignore it, nor sexual abuse perpetrated by members of other churches or organisations.
However I don't condemn an entire organisation because of some bad apples.
I'm outta this thread.
. . . and you have the gall to yell at me for getting angry!
POT - - - Kettle - - - BLACK!
-
. . . and you have the gall to yell at me for getting angry!
POT - - - Kettle - - - BLACK!
Rob's got it so wrong and has chickened out Owl.
Regards ippy
-
George Carlin (IIRC): "I have exactly as much power and authority as the Pope. I just don't have as many people who believe it."
The Pope has vastly more power than George Carlin ever did. He is the leader of an organisation that has a billion people in it.
-
The Pope has vastly more power than George Carlin ever did. He is the leader of an organisation that has a billion people in it.
Whoosh ::)
-
Gosh I'm sorry. Not in the least angry or offended I assure you, despite rather sharp 'off top of head' response, say what you like to me.
I just don't automatically think of 'sexual abuse cases' when I hear anything about the Catholic church is all & seems some do. There's more to the church than that and I believe Pope Francis, from what I've read it, is trying hard to rectify past wrongs and modernise the church.
I could be wrong! I'm not a Catholic, have a few longstanding Catholic friends and was involved a few years ago with a couple of clergy in a local charity, but we don't talk about such things, most people don't in their everyday lives.
If I've caused offence it wasn't meant.
Back to 'Lord's Prayer'.
-
Gosh I'm sorry. Not in the least angry or offended I assure you, despite rather sharp 'off top of head' response, say what you like to me.
I just don't automatically think of 'sexual abuse cases' when I hear anything about the Catholic church is all & seems some do. There's more to the church than that and I believe Pope Francis, from what I've read it, is trying hard to rectify past wrongs and modernise the church.
I could be wrong! I'm not a Catholic, have a few longstanding Catholic friends and was involved a few years ago with a couple of clergy in a local charity, but we don't talk about such things, most people don't in their everyday lives.
If I've caused offence it wasn't meant.
Back to 'Lord's Prayer'.
Bugger the "Lord's Prayer" - that has just about been talked out in the usual way.
As to the sexual abuse by Catholic priests an old joke goes:
Question: What is the difference between a Catholic priest and acne?
Answer: Acne waits until you are a teenager before it comes on your face.
Be that as it may, in most cases it is not the fact of sexual abuse of children by priests and nuns that causes the greaterr indignation.
It is the way in which the perpetrators are shifted around the globe and hidden in obscure Vatican departments in order to prevent criminal proceedings being taking against them in the countries where the crimes were commited., thus making the Vatican and its officials, up to and including the Pope, complicit in those crimes.
-
Gosh I'm sorry. Not in the least angry or offended I assure you, despite rather sharp 'off top of head' response, say what you like to me.
I just don't automatically think of 'sexual abuse cases' when I hear anything about the Catholic church is all & seems some do. There's more to the church than that and I believe Pope Francis, from what I've read it, is trying hard to rectify past wrongs and modernise the church.
I could be wrong! I'm not a Catholic, have a few longstanding Catholic friends and was involved a few years ago with a couple of clergy in a local charity, but we don't talk about such things, most people don't in their everyday lives.
If I've caused offence it wasn't meant.
Back to 'Lord's Prayer'.
I didn't think I was on a derail when I mentioned the pope's utterance, with the R C's record where the pope's are responsible, why should anyone take any notice of him, (and it can only be a him), or whatever he says in connection with or about his rotten empire?
They even started with indulgences and how corrupt is that, just for starters?
He needs to be told to go forth and multiply as loudly as is possible and take his rotten empire with him, whatever he says.
Regards ippy
-
I didn't think I was on a derail when I mentioned the pope's utterance, with the R C's record where the pope's are responsible, why should anyone take any notice of him, (and it can only be a him), or whatever he says in connection with or about his rotten empire?
They even started with indulgences and how corrupt is that, just for starters?
He needs to be told to go forth and multiply as loudly as is possible and take his rotten empire with him, whatever he says.
Regards ippy
Why so partisan?
As far as I am concerned it has to be all or nothing as far as the Big-3 are concerned.
-
Why so partisan?
As far as I am concerned it has to be all or nothing as far as the Big-3 are concerned.
Surely that's either applied to all beliefs or none?
-
Surely that's either applied to all beliefs or none?
Why?
I am Pagan - I do not tell any other Pagan how they should approach the way in which they follow their Pagan path nor do I expect any other Pagan to tell me how to approach my path (if you don't believe me, ask Riannon) - hence why I am not Gardnerian or Alexandrian.
-
Why?
I am Pagan - I do not tell any other Pagan how they should approach the way in which they follow their Pagan path nor do I expect any other Pagan to tell me how to approach my path (if you don't believe me, ask Riannon) - hence why I am not Gardnerian or Alexandrian.
Because if you apply the idea that something is all true or not, then you apply it consistently?
-
What is the Big-3?
-
Because if you apply the idea that something is all true or not, then you apply it consistently?
To put it bluntly I don't give a tuppenny whether what the Big £ believe and preach is true or false - it is their insistance upon telling their followers exactly how they should think, exactly how they must relate to their deity and therr clergy and, of course, the rule by fear.
I know all three do not hit all these points but it is they all hit some of them.
-
What is the Big-3?
Christianity, Islam and Judaism
-
Thanks Owlswing. Never heard the Abrahamic religions referred to as that before. (I did google and came up with basketball.)
Going back to ippy, no-one does have to take any notice of the Pope or his utterances if they don't want to, I rarely think about him, but this thread was about him updating the Lord's prayer so not surprising he is mentioned on it.
-
Going back to ippy, no-one does have to take any notice of the Pope or his utterances if they don't want to
This is what royally screws over JeremyP's #69 and was the whole point of the Carlin quote. That the Pope has power and authority is a matter of belief and not objective fact. He does if you believe he does, but not until and unless. If you don't, he doesn't. That a large number of people think that the Pope has power and authority, therefore the Pope has power and authority is about as nifty an example of the ad populum/ad numeram fallacy as I can recall. This was the thrust of the Carlin quote.
-
Quite.
Also the Pope's authority is only relevant to Catholics but, as I understand it, he's only considered to be 'infallible' if he makes a dogmatic pronouncement & no pope has done that for a very long time. What he talks about is just his opinion.
Interesting!
-
Thanks Owlswing. Never heard the Abrahamic religions referred to as that before. (I did google and came up with basketball.)
Going back to ippy, no-one does have to take any notice of the Pope or his utterances if they don't want to, I rarely think about him, but this thread was about him updating the Lord's prayer so not surprising he is mentioned on it.
This post of yours Rob gives me the impression that you still don't get it?
Regards ippy
-
Further to the above - Sassy, in particular, and others have argued that the quoted passage is a mis-translation going back to the year Dot almost.
No mistranslations... People simply getting it wrong because they try and make something say, more than it does.
Human slant is not mistranslation.... they believe what others tell them instead of listening to God.
My argument was, and is, that the translation error has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that millions upon millions of Christian kids, from the first day they are sent to Sunday School or church, are taught the Lord's Prayer including the line asking God not to "lead us not into temptation".
Christ taught the disciples how to pray. God not interested in long speeches and already knows our needs.
I am sure Christ and his life explains a lot of the Lords Prayer.
The matter of a possible translation error would not be discussed at any level of schooling before, as far as I am aware, a University degree course in Divinity or Theology, a bit late to change the perception of all those Christian kids who will never get within a hundred miles of such a course.
A man made course any better than the bible? Surely you are educated enough to know why that cancels itself out?
-
No mistranslations... People simply getting it wrong because they try and make something say, more than it does.
Human slant is not mistranslation.... they believe what others tell them instead of listening to God.
Christ taught the disciples how to pray. God not interested in long speeches and already knows our needs.
I am sure Christ and his life explains a lot of the Lords Prayer.
A man made course any better than the bible? Surely you are educated enough to know why that cancels itself out?
A very long=winded way of saying nothing relevant. As expected.
-
A very long=winded way of saying nothing relevant. As expected.
It took you all those words to say NOTHING OF USE...
Why should you change the habit of your life-time? ::)
-
It took you all those words to say NOTHING OF USE...
Why should you change the habit of your life-time? ::)
Well if that is true, at least he only used one sentence....rather than several paragraphs, many quotes from the KJV, over use of caps-lock and an overbearing sentiment of self rightiousness and never, ever, ever being wrong! :P :P
-
No mistranslations... People simply getting it wrong because they try and make something say, more than it does.
Human slant is not mistranslation.... they believe what others tell them instead of listening to God.
Christ taught the disciples how to pray. God not interested in long speeches and already knows our needs.
I am sure Christ and his life explains a lot of the Lords Prayer.
A man made course any better than the bible? Surely you are educated enough to know why that cancels itself out?
Hi there Sass, see you're still going strong on the unsupported assertions.
Why can't you see that there's no way you can possibly know the things you insist on asserting and try to convey it as though you've acquired this knowledge first hand?
You're being daft Sass.
Regards ippy
-
Why so partisan?
As far as I am concerned it has to be all or nothing as far as the Big-3 are concerned.
The pope was brought into the thread so I referred to the pope in reply.
As it happens I don't go with any of the superstition based beliefs whatever they might be, whatever they refer to themselves as.
Regards Owl, ippy
-
Well if that is true, at least he only used one sentence....rather than several paragraphs, many quotes from the KJV, over use of caps-lock and an overbearing sentiment of self rightiousness and never, ever, ever being wrong! :P :P
You don't understand debate?
Well if that is the case why are you here? Oh! Yes to jump in feet first in something that does not concern you.
You have no ability to be fair. You see the other person made the first improper and unfair remark.
Why is it, as an atheist you cannot be honest or judge fairly. Could that be the reason you remain an atheist, because you don't like truth or fairness. Fairness and truth and not personality contests would have had you saying he deserved it.
Guess your scared of TRUTH. Your personal attacks reveal more about your inability to be fair than anything you say.
Grow up! Some of us, already have.
-
Hi there Sass, see you're still going strong on the unsupported assertions.
Why can't you see that there's no way you can possibly know the things you insist on asserting and try to convey it as though you've acquired this knowledge first hand?
You're being daft Sass.
Regards ippy
Why can't you admit you have more unanswered questions than answered questions.
We have to wait till Christ comes back before we will know all the answers.
-
Good luck with that one ::)
-
You don't understand debate?
I think I do.
Well if that is the case why are you here?
Oh! Yes to jump in feet first in something that does not concern you.
Irrelevant, see above.
If you understood forums, which it looks like you don't, then you would know why people interject with comment.
You have no ability to be fair.
You see the other person made the first improper and unfair remark.
Yes I do.
If you took the time to read my post, instead of jumping in feet first because you think I am an atheist any you automatically go into your standard anti-atheist mode, you would see that I acknowledged that possibility.
Why is it, as an atheist you cannot be honest or judge fairly. Could that be the reason you remain an atheist, because you don't like truth or fairness. Fairness and truth and not personality contests would have had you saying he deserved it.
There you go! Just as I said!
Please tell me where and when I have stated that I am an atheist.
Guess your scared of TRUTH.
No. But maybe you are?
Your personal attacks reveal more about your inability to be fair than anything you say.
Right back at you , with jam on!
Grow up! Some of us, already have.
Not from what I'm seeing.
-
This post of yours Rob gives me the impression that you still don't get it?
Regards ippy
Possible. I get that the thread concerns the Pope updating some language - which has already been done many times. Also that youngsters were taught the prayer in question parrot fashion in days gone by and some were confused about the 'temptation' bit. The thread then went on about the Abrahamic religions, or some parts of them, telling people what was right and not right, etc. We know all about that!
Then it was discussed that none of it matters to non-believers anyway.
I liked what Sassy said about God already knowing our needs & the language used by us to express them is not relevant. Again none of that is significant to non-believers.
I can't think of anything else to say in this thread now but what I did think about last night, being as it originally was about the Pope and language, I'd ask a Catholic friend if she considered it all that significant (or even knows about it). I believe we only have one Catholic poster on here who seems to stick to one thread.
-
Why can't you admit you have more unanswered questions than answered questions.
We have to wait till Christ comes back before we will know all the answers.
Of course I've got unanswered questions Sass, what has that got to do with the mailing of mine I'm assuming is the one you're responding to?
As for where you say: 'We have to wait till Christ comes back before we will know all the answers', it's not even a certainty the this Jesus you're always on about was ever here in the first place which in turn would enable him to come back if he indeed ever did exist in the first place.
Suppose I was to start a series of quotes that this talking unicorn had made about life in general and was to try telling you about the things this unicorn had said to me; what would you want to know about my relationship with this unicorn, especially if I was to say he has gone now and would be back one day to question all of us, including you Sass, about how we had lead our lives bearing in mind we couldn't lie to him because he was all seeing and all knowing?
Really what would you be thinking if I was to tell you all of the above?
Can you see the parallels Sass?
And you expect people to believe, in effect, the bible proves the bible?
Regards ippy
-
Possible. I get that the thread concerns the Pope updating some language - which has already been done many times. Also that youngsters were taught the prayer in question parrot fashion in days gone by and some were confused about the 'temptation' bit. The thread then went on about the Abrahamic religions, or some parts of them, telling people what was right and not right, etc. We know all about that!
Then it was discussed that none of it matters to non-believers anyway.
I liked what Sassy said about God already knowing our needs & the language used by us to express them is not relevant. Again none of that is significant to non-believers.
I can't think of anything else to say in this thread now but what I did think about last night, being as it originally was about the Pope and language, I'd ask a Catholic friend if she considered it all that significant (or even knows about it). I believe we only have one Catholic poster on here who seems to stick to one thread.
Why should anyone take any notice of anyone that has even sold out the very little credibility they once might of had, no matter whatever it was he was talking about?
Regards ippy
-
No 'should' about it as far as I'm concerned, ippy. I dunno what the fuss is about, admit to knowing nothing about the proposed updates in translation until I saw this thread & it doesn't affect me personally. However it's not surprising that it is discussed on the Christian Topic.
-
No 'should' about it as far as I'm concerned, ippy. I dunno what the fuss is about, admit to knowing nothing about the proposed updates in translation until I saw this thread & it doesn't affect me personally. However it's not surprising that it is discussed on the Christian Topic.
With his past record of judgements, why would it matter whatever he said about anything why should we listen to him at all?
-
I have no idea and neither do I care but whoever started this thread obviously thought it would be of interest to some people on here. The thread is now a few pages long so he was probably right!
-
Why should anyone take any notice of anyone that has even sold out the very little credibility they once might of had, no matter whatever it was he was talking about?
Regards ippy
Erm...how has Frank "sold out the very little credibility they once might of had " (sic)
-
Who is Frank anyway & what is 'of had'?
Second thoughts, don't bother to answer that.
-
OK, I twig "Frank" is the Pope, I didn't realise he used that diminutive.
-
OK, I twig "Frank" is the Pope, I didn't realise he used that diminutive.
I will lay bets, and I don't do it that often, that he doesn't.
-
If I knew him, I'd ask him! He might use, 'Franco', he comes from Argentina, but his 'real' first name is 'Jorge', George to us (see, I looked him up courtesy of you starting this thread). I like 'George' better than 'Franco'.
Erm...how has Frank "sold out the very little credibility they once might of had " (sic)
I put the above quote in from Humph because you may not have seen his post.
-
Erm...how has Frank "sold out the very little credibility they once might of had " (sic)
As if you didn't know H W.
Regards ippy.
-
I don't know! Please tell us. He seems like an alright bloke, for a pope.
-
I don't know! Please tell us. He seems like an alright bloke, for a pope.
That, on balance, isn't the most resounding seal of approval, is it now :D
-
Wasn't meant to be, I only know what I've read & that's recent. I'm not going to start a 'George fan club' :D.
I've he has upset some 'conservative' Catholics with some liberal views that appear to contradict traditional teachings but doubt that would bother any on this forum.
Maybe the fact that there is a pope at all is the problem on here. My view is that it's Catholic business, not mine.
It's my intention to ask a liberal Catholic friend a bit about him, I'll see her before Christmas hopefully. We've known eachother since childhood and never really talked about religion as such but she won't mind me throwing the pope into the conversation.
-
Wasn't meant to be, I only know what I've read & that's recent. I'm not going to start a 'George fan club' :D.
I've he has upset some 'conservative' Catholics with some liberal views that appear to contradict traditional teachings but doubt that would bother any on this forum.
Maybe the fact that there is a pope at all is the problem on here. My view is that it's Catholic business, not mine.
It's my intention to ask a liberal Catholic friend a bit about him, I'll see her before Christmas hopefully. We've known eachother since childhood and never really talked about religion as such but she won't mind me throwing the pope into the conversation.
Rob, if you really want to know about the catholic church, you could try YouTube, a debate titled 'Is the Catholic Church a Force for Good In the World', four people in the debate an archbishop John Onaiyekan, Ann Widdecombe, Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens, it's a really good fair debate.
The present pope has taken on the responsibilities of the R C's past record on board by default and not doing anything significant that I've heard of that would in any way make amends for its horrendous misdeeds.
I was there at that debate and can hardly believe it was seven years back.
Regards ippy
-
Thanks Ips!
-
As if you didn't know H W.
Regards ippy.
I am not RC, so I don't know.
-
I am not RC, so I don't know.
Even more so, as if you didn't know.
Have a look at the YouTube stuff I've supplied to Rob, I just don't believe anyone that seems to be so conversant with so much information about other religion based detritus, can even hint that they're unaware of R C misdeeds.
Regards ippy
-
Even more so, as if you didn't know.
Have a look at the YouTube stuff I've supplied to Rob, I just don't believe anyone that seems to be so conversant with so much information about other religion based detritus, can even hint that they're unaware of R C misdeeds.
Regards ippy
Ippy, is this about perverted and/or sadistic priests, is this about heretics being burned, or is this about angels on pinheads?
-
Ippy, is this about perverted and/or sadistic priests, is this about heretics being burned, or is this about angels on pinheads?
Best go into that YouTube debate, the speakers are far more articulate than I am and no it's a really in depth dismantling of the whole of R C's rotten empire, It's a good listen too, well I think so, from either side of the fence.
Regards ippy
-
So you are relying on a debate from years ago including professional nasty the late Christopher Hitchens, professional lachrymose Stephen Fry, against pantomime baddie Widders, and token ethnic minority Archbishop John, in front of a partisan crowd?
Ceaucescu would have been aquitted had he faced a fair trial. He did not, neither did Widders, or Archbishop John.
-
So you are relying on a debate from years ago including professional nasty the late Christopher Hitchens
I do miss him.
-
I do miss him.
So do I, I remember him as a "solid" man, with hair & beard. His final media appearance, bald, beardless, and his suit hanging off him, was indeed poignant.
-
I am not RC, so I don't know.
Just out of interest, to which brand of Christianity do you belong?
-
He's told you a million times he's Orthodox!
-
So you are relying on a debate from years ago including professional nasty the late Christopher Hitchens, professional lachrymose Stephen Fry, against pantomime baddie Widders, and token ethnic minority Archbishop John, in front of a partisan crowd?
Ceaucescu would have been aquitted had he faced a fair trial. He did not, neither did Widders, or Archbishop John.
I watched that debate. The Widdicombe/Archbish combination got their arses handed to them. The partisan crowd thing doesn't wash because the vote was taken before and after the debate and had been found to move substantially in the direction of the atheists.
Your complaints are just sour grapes because your side were fucking useless even accounting for the fact that they were defending the indefensible.
-
He's told you a million times he's Orthodox!
Don't exaggerate! ::) I had forgotten he is an orthodox!!
-
So you are relying on a debate from years ago including professional nasty the late Christopher Hitchens, professional lachrymose Stephen Fry, against pantomime baddie Widders, and token ethnic minority Archbishop John, in front of a partisan crowd?
Ceaucescu would have been acquitted had he faced a fair trial. He did not, neither did Widders, or Archbishop John.
If on listening to that debate if you still think I'm wrong to take my pov that's fine by me, Stephen Fry isn't that much of a boogeyman.
It wasn't that partisan a whole group of the audience walked out at one point during the debate, the way the debate was going I would guess they were a catholic group, although I don't actually know.
Yes you do get some professional debaters that could convince you that an actual, stood in front of you tin of black paint, is in fact white paint, I'll go with you on that.
Regards ippy
-
Don't exaggerate! ::) I had forgotten he is an orthodox!!
Sorry, shouldn't have said it like that.
-
I watched that debate. The Widdicombe/Archbish combination got their arses handed to them. The partisan crowd thing doesn't wash because the vote was taken before and after the debate and had been found to move substantially in the direction of the atheists.
Your complaints are just sour grapes because your side were fucking useless even accounting for the fact that they were defending the indefensible.
Jeremy, as has been mentioned above, I am Orthodox, not RC. I don't think that the RC has been a force for good, although for different reasons. As far as I am concerned, RC v Atheists is like Man U v MK Dons, I want them both to lose.
-
Except they didn't ;)
-
Jeremy, as has been mentioned above, I am Orthodox, not RC. I don't think that the RC has been a force for good, although for different reasons. As far as I am concerned, RC v Atheists is like Man U v MK Dons, I want them both to lose.
What is so good about your particular brand of faith?
-
What is so good about your particular brand of faith?
The exact same things that all the others say about their brand, I'd imagine.
-
What is so good about your particular brand of faith?
It is the church that Jesus himself founded.
-
... just like all the others ::)
-
It is the church that Jesus himself founded.
No he didn't, he was a Jew.
-
He was born into the race originally intended to be priests giving advice to others.
(we are getting off topic now!)
-
He was born into the race originally intended to be priests giving advice to others.
(we are getting off topic now!)
It wouldn't be R&E if a thread didn't go off topic! ;D
-
It is the church that Jesus himself founded.
Got any evidence for that H W?
Regards ippy
-
Best go into that YouTube debate, the speakers are far more articulate than I am and no it's a really in depth dismantling of the whole of R C's rotten empire, It's a good listen too, well I think so, from either side of the fence.
Regards ippy
This is a brilliant debate and the looks on the faces of the archbishop and Anne Widdicombe when the final votes were announced were worth watching - talk about priceless!
-
I watched that debate. The Widdicombe/Archbish combination got their arses handed to them. The partisan crowd thing doesn't wash because the vote was taken before and after the debate and had been found to move substantially in the direction of the atheists.
Your complaints are just sour grapes because your side were fucking useless even accounting for the fact that they were defending the indefensible.
Agreed - in spades!
The drop in the "For" vote from "Before" to "After" was far greater than I expected and, from the looks on the faces of all four speakers, far greater than they expected either.
-
It is the church that Jesus himself founded.
OH NO!
An Ad_O clone!
-
OH NO!
An Ad_O clone!
Ad_O was saying this when he belonged one of the different Heinz 57 (make that 30,000 or so) varieties of Christianity.
You will be staggered to discover that he's playing the self-same tune now* that he belongs to the (this week) even righter and more truly true than truthfully trueness trueitude one of the different Heinz 57 (make that 30,000 or so) varieties of Christianity.
... aaaaaaaand there's the history of monotheism individually hand gift-wrapped for you.
*Rhetorical flourish: when he's allowed off the naughty step.
-
This is a brilliant debate and the looks on the faces of the archbishop and Anne Widdicombe when the final votes were announced were worth watching - talk about priceless!
Yes Owl, there was such a buoyant atmosphere at the end of the evening when we were all leaving, one of those few balmy nights no jacket needed, you should have seen the look on the protesters faces, their protest was to walk out, they certainly didn't look very happy, there must have been about forty of them scrambling out en-block.
I wish I had somewhere near Stephen Fry's public speaking ability, good for him being able to strike back at some of the grief he has probably had to deal with in his time.
They both Stephen and Chris struck a massive blow for reason and managed to put superstitious beliefs into their place.
Regards ippy
-
Just responding to Robbie's request for RC input on this topic.
I have immense faith in God's ability to guide His church through the appointed authority given through Jesus to Peter and his successors. And I am very aware that the successors to Peter have occasionally gone astray through what appears to be self centred corruption, but I feel certain that God has brought His church back on the right lines through the power of the Holy Spirit, and I see no reason to doubt the current authority of His church because of past mistakes. And I also concede that the Orthodox wing of the Christian church has equal claim to the line of authority given through Jesus following the great schism of 1054.
My own faith was considerably enhanced by joining the Charismatic Renewal movement within the RC church, but in our local parish I get on very well with the more traditional members of our church. I am sure there are roles for both flavours in the RC church.
The evil forces in this world do seem to delight in encouraging splits within our Christian churches, by making our differences assume far greater importance than our commonalities. So I do hope and pray we can move forward toward much greater unity than in the past.
-
Just responding to Robbie's request for RC input on this topic.
I have immense faith in God's ability to guide His church through the appointed authority given through Jesus to Peter and his successors. And I am very aware that the successors to Peter have occasionally gone astray through what appears to be self centred corruption, but I feel certain that God has brought His church back on the right lines through the power of the Holy Spirit, and I see no reason to doubt the current authority of His church because of past mistakes. And I also concede that the Orthodox wing of the Christian church has equal claim to the line of authority given through Jesus following the great schism of 1054.
My own faith was considerably enhanced by joining the Charismatic Renewal movement within the RC church, but in our local parish I get on very well with the more traditional members of our church. I am sure there are roles for both flavours in the RC church.
The evil forces in this world do seem to delight in encouraging splits within our Christian churches, by making our differences assume far greater importance than our commonalities. So I do hope and pray we can move forward toward much greater unity than in the past.
Barmy.
Necessarily the very kindest of regards, ippy
-
Thank you so much for responding to my request, Alan, your heartfelt post is much appreciated.
You said:- '...I do hope and pray we can move forward toward much greater unity than in the past.'
Yes, I agree we have more in common than what divides.
-
Thank you so much for responding to my request, Alan, your heartfelt post is much appreciated.
You said:- '...I do hope and pray we can move forward toward much greater unity than in the past.'
Yes, I agree we have more in common than what divides.
I can't say I've got that much in common with Alan as I suspect most, so called, atheists here, I'm non-religious, I have religioso extremists in my own family, just like Alan, fortunately they're in Australia, I've given up with them the emails had become sermons rather than sensible family exchanges plus they knew about the battles we have had with various religious groups because we're non-religious people and they were still managing to keep on updating us with whatever was current with their religion based practices.
I'm afraid this bloke Alan is much of the same extremist ilk as those awful relations of mine where it's impossible to converse with them about the everyday normal occurrences in life without doctor god coming into to the conversation at every opportunity, in spite of my requests to the former asking them to refrain, requests such as you leave the subject alone so will we, doesn't work, we have so little in common with them, just the opposite of your feelings about this subject.
I'm sorry Rob these religosos all seem to come out of the same mold and they will always be seen by myself and I dare say as a bunch of, word not allowed by the forum, I'm sure you'll know the word.
I very much doubt that anything will be altering in this problem area of theirs, it wouldn't be so bad if there some small indicator of any kind that there is any substance worthy of note in any of these superstition based, BELIEFS, it unfortunately for them this remains at zero to date.
I'm sure there will always be some of the quieter types of believer but the Alan's and the others like him such as my antipodean relatives, their's no way of getting through to them, I' doubt there ever will be any way either, still at least, thank goodness, religious belief is on the decline here in the U K, maybe that'll see a decline in the amount of dogmatic Alans overall in the future.
Kind regards ippy
-
Talking of religious extremists, we had a card and newsletter from one, who is sadly a relative. Their young children, ages 3-9, are so brainwashed it is cruel, the kid's lives are one long round of Bible studies and prayers! :o
-
Religion is like circumcision, to which it's so often tied for the very same reason: leave kids alone and let them make up their own minds as adults and most of them won't be interested.
-
Religion is like circumcision, to which it's so often tied for the very same reason: leave kids alone and let them make up their own minds as adults and most of them won't be interested.
We let our children decide for themselves, they decided Christianity has something to offer them, but thank goodness they are moderates and not Biblical literalists.
-
Talking of religious extremists, we had a card and newsletter from one, who is sadly a relative. Their young children, ages 3-9, are so brainwashed it is cruel, the kid's lives are one long round of Bible studies and prayers! :o
Yes Floo that Aussie branch of my family have completely indoctrinated their children into the fold and they're all as bad as A B, it's so sad, it's a nephew of mine, he was such a lovely little'un over here before he went over to Oz.
It makes me want to puke, he's been doing missionary work with his wife in Papua New Guinea, They put a film of themselves on YouTube they reminded me of the 'The Fameous Five', they started to tell me about it one time when they were over here, I had to walk out, it's not as though they don't now how I feel about this nonsense of theirs.
I assume it's you Floo, I'm a one finger typist and your new handle has a lot more letters in it, apart from that it's not that bad, would LR be OK for short?
Kind regards ippy
-
Yes Floo that Aussie branch of my family have completely indoctrinated their children into the fold and they're all as bad as A B, it's so sad, it's a nephew of mine, he was such a lovely little'un over here before he went over to Oz.
It makes me want to puke, he's been doing missionary work with his wife in Papua New Guinea, The put a film of themselves on YouTube they reminded me of the 'The Fameous Five', they started to tell me about it one time when they were over here, I had to walk out, it's not as though they don't now how I feel about this nonsense of theirs.
I assume it's you Floo, I'm a one finger typist and your new handle has a lot more letters in it, apart from that it's not that bad, would LR be OK for short?
Kind regards ippy
I was floo, but got fed up with the moniker, I did explain my change of name on another thread. Little roses was the nickname given to me by my late father. LR will do for short.
-
I was floo, but got fed up with the moniker, I did explain my change of name on another thread. Little roses was the nickname given to me by my late father. LR will do for short.
To be fair, you said what you were changing to but not what you were changing from :)