Orthodox and Catholic Churches reconcile

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Gosh...If the Pope can shake hands with the archipatriperson then perhaps the day isn't far away when I can open my big loving arms to a certain distinguished freethinking ethologist and give him the biggest Kiss..........Not you Shaker, your not my type.

[Shaker]

Not that I'm an ethologist, but thank goodness for that.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Not that I'm an ethologist, but thank goodness for that.

Just heard that Richard Dawkins is unwell after taking a stroke I believe.
Genuinely sorry to hear that.

[Humph Warden Bennett]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-35565085

And I thought the CofE moved slowly.

Interesting that Frank chooses Cyril, rather than Bart, presumably because Cyril is seen as the one who holds the real power.

I cannot see there being any full reunion, for all sorts of reasons, both of faith, and political. There is for example no Orthodox concept of purgatory. Also the various other Orthodox churches are independent of Roosia, they don't have to do what Cyril tells them to, just as they did not have to do what Rome told them to in 1054. Still, as Churchill said, jaw jaw is better than war war.

[ad_orientem]

Explain why not.

Because assigning two sources to the Godhead is essentially the same as saying there is two Gods. It's a major heresy. There is only one source of the Godhead, the Father, from whom the Son is eternally begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds.

Then there is the role of the bishop of Rome as defined by the First Vatican Council, who is a tyrant.

[floo]

Because assigning two sources to the Godhead is essentially the same as saying there is two Gods. It's a major heresy. There is only one source of the Godhead, the Father, from whom the Son is eternally begotten and the Holy Spirit proceeds.

Then there is the role of the bishop of Rome as defined by the First Vatican Council, who is a tyrant.

So your dogma is the 'truth'?

[Shaker]

So your dogma is the 'truth'?

He believes it to be - people generally don't say "I believe X , but X is false."

However, a belief is all it is, of course. And as we know, subject to change at any moment

[floo]

He believes it to be - people generally don't say "I believe X , but X is false."

However, a belief is all it is, of course.

Why can't people acknowledge that however much they believe something to be true, it is only a belief if there is no evidence to back it up?

I firmly believe that the Biblical deity is a human invention. However, I acknowledge there is a very remote chance it could exist!

[Shaker]

Why can't people acknowledge that however much they believe something to be true, it is only a belief if there is no evidence to back it up?

I firmly believe that the Biblical deity is a human invention. However, I acknowledge there is a very remote chance it could exist!

It makes some people very very uneasy, for some reason. To acknowledge that something is a belief is to open door just a crack to the possibiity of being mistaken, and in religion that really doesn't go over at all well, usually. Believers such as Owlswing who freely admit that their beliefs are simply that have not been tremendously well represented in history. Arrogating to yourself the right to censor, persecute, torture and kill others for having different beliefs to your own is to claim infallibility - it's to claim possession of the absolute truth.

[Nearly Sane]

Mmmm we all participate in decisions which are only opinion, i.e. morals where we talk about truths, and in terms of social norms we are forced to act as if we believe things are truths. To be honest, I see a lot of the use or misuse of agnostic language to be a sort of learned sop to avoid a burden of proof.


On an intellectual level, I accept the possibilities of many things I have no belief in, but in a day to day approach, and use of language, I approach them as truths.

[OH MY WORLD!]

Oh Rhi, as a moderator you should not attempt to stir things up between posters. Of course an Orthodox, a Roman Catholic, and a Baptist, agree that each has been led astray and we also can agree on the main and most vital areas of the Gospel.

[Brownie]

Why can't people acknowledge that however much they believe something to be true, it is only a belief if there is no evidence to back it up?

That is something with which I concur and would go further because sometimes evidence can be disproved or different evidence produced (it's not always worth getting into a tizz about it).  However there will always be some who are intransigent in their beliefs and we might as well save our breath.

[OH MY WORLD!]

Floo,
That is a hilarious question coming from you. With your talent for porky pies and all.

British pork is the best!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W0X37TOqjGA

[Red Giant]

Don't they have Easter in June?  Doesn't the chocolate get all melty?

[Leonard James]

That is something with which I concur and would go further because sometimes evidence can be disproved or different evidence produced (it's not always worth getting into a tizz about it).  However there will always be some who are intransigent in their beliefs and we might as well save our breath.

Unfortunately those are the ones that need our help and are difficult to ignore.