Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Pretty much eliminates everyone in the human race except Mother Teresa. I highly doubt there is a person alive that has not done at least one of the things mentioned there. Isn't that the truth. It also eliminates a very high percentage of Catholic clergy, or at least the ones that I knew at the Church I used to attend. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aboz56 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Is it just me or does this thread have the potential to escalate into a problem? Let's hope not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Is it just me or does this thread have the potential to escalate into a problem? Let's hope not. No more than Brando's Israel VS Palestine thread. Seriously, so far it's been okay and no one seems to have gotten in a twist over anything stated. So far we seem to be okay, but that is just my humble opinion... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 and just for the sake of arguement... New American standard version (a cwsox approved translation of the bible) 1 Corinthians 6:4-6 (4)Do not be deceived; (5) neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will (6) inherit the kingdom of God. and you might want to know that is a bullshiot tranlsation I have the original translation, in Greek... the word "homosexual" did not exist until the late 19th century when it was invented the word homosexual appears NO WHERE in the Bible no where not any where Did Paul condemn ritual prostitution? Yes. Did Paul condemn homosexuality? No. The pick and choose method of Biblical quotations is always fun. I can cite passages that condemn fat people and gossips and those disobendient to their parents but everyone picks on what they really hate Your translation there besides being simply wrong has inserted their own political beliefs in the sacred texts and that I find offensive. I don't intensely dislike the New American Standard but they, like the NIV, commit the sin of inserting their own political agendas into the Scriptures. Case in point, here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I should just stop here I think... This is neither the time nor the place to discuss matters of Religion. I'm sorry I brought it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 The pick and choose method of Biblical quotations is always fun. I can cite passages that condemn fat people fat people? Show me that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I should just stop here I think... This is neither the time nor the place to discuss matters of Religion. I'm sorry I brought it up. Why not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LowerCaseRepublican Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I recently read a text, "Affirmations of a Dissenter" by Bishop Joseph Sprague. I especially like his chapter that discusses exactly what CW says, that homosexuality is not specifically mentioned in the original translations of the Bible, it was simply a term used by more modern interpreters. I haven't read it in a while, but I believe the original term was for what would be considered devient sexuality [i.e. incest, rape, beastiality etc.] and not solely homosexuality. And my .02 on gay marriage - If right wing groups, like the Christian Coalition, want to have 'Marriage = One Man + One Woman" then maybe they would like to explain the bigamy of the Bible [case in point: Jacob having 2 wives etc.] It's simply the fact that 'homosexuality' is not a correct translation. And I'm VERY f***ING SURPRISED that Dick Cheney would support an amendment prohibiting gay marriage even though he has a lesbian daughter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zach23 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 fat people? Show me that one. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's Twinkies and HoHos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 and you might want to know that is a bullshiot tranlsation I have the original translation, in Greek... the word "homosexual" did not exist until the late 19th century when it was invented the word homosexual appears NO WHERE in the Bible no where not any where Did Paul condemn ritual prostitution? Yes. Did Paul condemn homosexuality? No. The pick and choose method of Biblical quotations is always fun. I can cite passages that condemn fat people and gossips and those disobendient to their parents but everyone picks on what they really hate Your translation there besides being simply wrong has inserted their own political beliefs in the sacred texts and that I find offensive. I don't intensely dislike the New American Standard but they, like the NIV, commit the sin of inserting their own political agendas into the Scriptures. Case in point, here. Two more things I want to add from a biblical sense. One is Judge not lest ye be judged. The other one I can't quite remember (maybe cw or someone else can help) is something to the affect of, if one has committed any sin, they have committed all sins, and that no one sin is any worse than any others. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's Twinkies and HoHos. LMAO! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 btw...I voted for no amendment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Throw a bag of cash and/or an altar boy in a dark corner and they'll let you do whatever you want. The Catholic Church saying ANYTHING is "wrong".....is wrong. I believe in God, but I don't necessarily believe in the Church anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Throw a bag of cash and/or an altar boy in a dark corner and they'll let you do whatever you want. The Catholic Church saying ANYTHING is "wrong".....is wrong. I believe in God, but I don't necessarily believe in the Church anymore. The modern day "church" is biblically a joke. It wasn't supposed to be like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cwsox Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 a further and last word for me on this subject the Scriptures are to me the source for ther faith and life of the Church and I take them as authoritative the words in the Bible have been twisted and contorted and the message played with by generations - Fanof14, no, you and your fiance are not in danger of condemnation - in fact pulling out a verse here or there and notr looking at the whole of what is has been a sin of the Church. The Scriptures speak very little of personal sexualiity - God is not the Divine Enquirer - what God calls for is jusrtice in relationships and that is the standard. What God talks about repeatedly in the Scriptures is justice, equity for the poor, mercy - indeed the Scriptures are not about personal salvation at all but in living in a covenantal relationship with God - by God's grace. And that relationship in covenant always draws us to seek justice for others. The sweeping culmination of 1 Corinthians is that without love, everything else is naught. And love does not condemn. In fact, as we are reminded in Romans, it is God who justfies - who is it that condemns? No one. That people can think that is in the least upset about the expression of love between two people in not Biblical and in fact unGodly because focusing on that is to ignore the clear repeated message of God that we are called to seek justice in this world, including economic justice, and be peacemakers. That is the repeated message of the Scriptures, not the things that so many obssess on. Why they obssess on what is wrong? Sin - or because control can be had by making people feel guilty about the private day by day thinsg in their lives rather than the church having the guts to confront the institutions and conditions that hold people in bondage. And as the 8th century and later prophets railed against injustice and as John the Baptist and Jesus repeated those calls - so ever have they been ignored. a message board is the place where sound bytes can be cyber delievered but a full examination of the Scriptures is not possible and I am not going to try. I will note that Biblical examples of marriage - name me any that are to be considered any role model for anything. God does not condemn homosexuality. Those churches which celebrate union services or marriages are doing so with profound respect for the Scriputres. That Christians disagree over the interpretation of some things is not new - nor is the blessing of gay marriages. I have said all I am going to say in this forum. Let it go on as it will. As an ordained servant of the Church I affirm that God does not condemn and that God's grace is sufficient. I will affirm that God will have a strong opinion on whether we are called to worry about whether every two people who wish to make a commitment of life long faithfulness is a cause for the Church, as opposed to say, people dying of hunger, those without medical care, the poor, the alien, the oppressed, the structures in society that make these evils. Jesus never came to say, I have come to judge people's sex lives. Jesus did speak of many other things involving injustice and poverty and those in need. That si the role model we are called to follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 There have been pedaphile cops, firemen, coaches, school teachers, etc. People who have been in positions of influence and responsibility. Let us not condem an entire Church because of the actions of a few members. Do you think police forces and schools did not try and minimize the publicity? Do you not think that the parents of some victims also wanted the privacy? If you truly believe that not attending Church because of the pedaphiles; you would also not be on line because of the pedaphiles or visit a Doctor, or watch a movie, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Let us not condem an entire Church because of the actions of a few members. Do you think police forces and schools did not try and minimize the publicity? The problem is that the Catholic Church (and this topic is only a small portion of the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church) wasn't/isn't trying to minimize publicity, they were hindering prosecution and putting the accused where they could potentially abuse again. If there is an accusation, I can understand moving a clergy member, but not to put them where they are working with children and thusly be tempted to repeat their alleged crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted January 12, 2004 Author Share Posted January 12, 2004 The problem is that the Catholic Church (and this topic is only a small portion of the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church) wasn't/isn't trying to minimize publicity, they were hindering prosecution and putting the accused where they could potentially abuse again. If there is an accusation, I can understand moving a clergy member, but not to put them where they are working with children and thusly be tempted to repeat their alleged crime. We keep saying the Church, which is, by definition, everyone including the parishioners. We do not condem all cops because some are corrupt and hinder prosecuting their buddies? So all police departments are hypocrits? There have been pedaphiles in other Churches, yet only the Catholic's get the black eye? What are some of the other hypocrasies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 no doubt that everyone would fail if we put up a list of "bad things" we've done. That's the point. however, it's what you do with yourself after you've realized this idea. Cwsox, I checked it out and it's about 50/50 on the inclusion of the word "homosexual". I can admit that there's room for "political" inclusion of this word. It points to a specific act that church elders, ministers, and religious theologists agree is an act that isn't Godly. regardless, there's no discussion of smack users, dog abusers, or chicken f-ing in the bible, and most people agree that those are activities that people should not participate in. I know that it doesn't sit well with people, alot of things about the bible don't sit well with me. That's not my choice. God is God. I like to listen to your opinions on these topics, because I am trusting that your backgroung is legit. However, I don't share the same emerging Christian views as you do. We're not going to have a productive discussion, because we interpret the bible differently. we should just agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 Throw a bag of cash and/or an altar boy in a dark corner and they'll let you do whatever you want. The Catholic Church saying ANYTHING is "wrong".....is wrong. I believe in God, but I don't necessarily believe in the Church anymore. That's actually a good philosophy. The Church is bankrupt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 What are some of the other hypocrasies? Money issues is one that I can think of off hand. In the parish where I used to worship (and later I found out it wasn't as unique to my parish as I had thought it was), the priest were known to skim off the top of the donations made during the mass. Another part of the money issue is that they loved to cry poor, but somehow always had a newer car and ate steak for dinner (my mother knew the rectory cook, which wasn't a priest by the way). Heck, one of the priest who regularly stopped by our house - we lived across the street from the school, convent, church and rectory - mentioned their dinners from time to time. I don't think all clergy are terrible people, but so many things that need rectifing and so few are stepping up to make the needed changes. My favorite is that if you are divorced, you are not supposed to be allowed to remarry in a Catholic Church. Well, I know someone who walked out on his wife after 30+ years of marriage and managed to get remarried in a Catholic Church (and no, there was no annulment etiher - he paid a handsome fee to the parish). Living across the street, we dealt with the Bingo parking. My dad had arrived home from work late one Monday and parked by the school. He got up to go to work only to find the Church had the car towed (yes, they knew it was his car, he helped the church deliver food baskets and pick up the government issue cheese and butter used in the baskets several times). Another time was when my sister was going into 6th and my brother 5th (mind you I had already graduated there, which meant that the school had a member of the FanOf14 household for about 11 years at that point) and decided that when they reduced the class size to one class for each grade there wasn't enough room for them inspite of the fact we were students in that school for the 11 years and parishoners for 16 years. I understand that this is one experience in one parish, but asking around, I have found out it isn't that unusual either. BTW - when I say 'The Church' in this thread (and usually) I am referring to clergy and higher ups, not the whole ball of wax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sox4lifeinPA Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 a further and last word for me on this subject the Scriptures are to me the source for ther faith and life of the Church and I take them as authoritative the words in the Bible have been twisted and contorted and the message played with by generations - Fanof14, no, you and your fiance are not in danger of condemnation - in fact pulling out a verse here or there and notr looking at the whole of what is has been a sin of the Church. The Scriptures speak very little of personal sexualiity - God is not the Divine Enquirer - what God calls for is jusrtice in relationships and that is the standard. What God talks about repeatedly in the Scriptures is justice, equity for the poor, mercy - indeed the Scriptures are not about personal salvation at all but in living in a covenantal relationship with God - by God's grace. And that relationship in covenant always draws us to seek justice for others. The sweeping culmination of 1 Corinthians is that without love, everything else is naught. And love does not condemn. In fact, as we are reminded in Romans, it is God who justfies - who is it that condemns? No one. That people can think that is in the least upset about the expression of love between two people in not Biblical and in fact unGodly because focusing on that is to ignore the clear repeated message of God that we are called to seek justice in this world, including economic justice, and be peacemakers. That is the repeated message of the Scriptures, not the things that so many obssess on. Why they obssess on what is wrong? Sin - or because control can be had by making people feel guilty about the private day by day thinsg in their lives rather than the church having the guts to confront the institutions and conditions that hold people in bondage. And as the 8th century and later prophets railed against injustice and as John the Baptist and Jesus repeated those calls - so ever have they been ignored. a message board is the place where sound bytes can be cyber delievered but a full examination of the Scriptures is not possible and I am not going to try. I will note that Biblical examples of marriage - name me any that are to be considered any role model for anything. God does not condemn homosexuality. Those churches which celebrate union services or marriages are doing so with profound respect for the Scriputres. That Christians disagree over the interpretation of some things is not new - nor is the blessing of gay marriages. I have said all I am going to say in this forum. Let it go on as it will. As an ordained servant of the Church I affirm that God does not condemn and that God's grace is sufficient. I will affirm that God will have a strong opinion on whether we are called to worry about whether every two people who wish to make a commitment of life long faithfulness is a cause for the Church, as opposed to say, people dying of hunger, those without medical care, the poor, the alien, the oppressed, the structures in society that make these evils. Jesus never came to say, I have come to judge people's sex lives. Jesus did speak of many other things involving injustice and poverty and those in need. That si the role model we are called to follow. I would first conceed that it's not my place to judge unbelievers "for that is God's place" and not mine. Most of what I'm saying and if you read what I've posted so far, is that inside of the church, devoid of government laws, etc, God most certainly has opinions about personal sexuality. I'm just confused about your Theology, *****... You inferred that I was sinning because of my judgements on others. So, by your logic...I can stick my dick in another guys rectum, call myself a Christian and say that it's "love", but I can't call another person on that action because the Bible plainly states that A)we should avoid sexual immorality B)do not associate with "brothers" who participate in sexual immorality because they're going to be judged by God in Holy Wrath?? That's some very bad theology buddy. And it's even worse for those claiming it as Biblically sound. I'm all for loving relationships...but it's clear as day it's wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Critic Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 There have been pedaphile cops, firemen, coaches, school teachers, etc. People who have been in positions of influence and responsibility. Let us not condem an entire Church because of the actions of a few members. Do you think police forces and schools did not try and minimize the publicity? Do you not think that the parents of some victims also wanted the privacy? If you truly believe that not attending Church because of the pedaphiles; you would also not be on line because of the pedaphiles or visit a Doctor, or watch a movie, etc. Another difference is that policemen, teachers, etc., do not hold themselves up as messengers of God. If they are to be held to a higher level of divinity, they are to be held to a higher level of accountability. The Catholic Church did not just try to minimize publicity, they moved the offending priests into new clurgies in different cities or states to try and hide the damage they'd done. It's unforgivable, hypocritical and shameful. and for the record if I knew of a pedophile doctor, dentist, actor, etc. I would do my level best to avoid patronizing that person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1549 Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 I am against gay marriages. I have no problem with a "union" or gay people living together, but I believe that marriages were created for a man and a woman. Now on to the subject of the catholic church. I am catholic and I belong to a great parish. The parishoners are all very loyal, and the priests are very nice. My old parish was pretty much the same way, but it was much larger, and therefore I didn't know the priests as well as the ones at my new parish, but I believe they were just as decent and honest. Unfortunately, not all churches are like the two I have just described. As we all know, priests nation wide have committed horrid offenses and deserve to be punished. With this in mind, I believe it is wrong criticize the catholic faith or to generalize about catholic priests. Afterall, a priest is human, and I do not attend church to praise other humans, I am there to worship God. That is what the Catholic faith, just like any other faith is all about, worshipping God. The atrocities committed by some members of the catholic clergy symbolize the many problems that exist within humans. And it is why it is so important that we realize that God is the real reason for the catholic church. Unless one intends to criticize God, or those that believe in him, one should not criticize the catholic church. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted January 12, 2004 Share Posted January 12, 2004 You know, sometimes is seems easier. Do you want to watch the NFL playoffs or the basketball game? Do you want to rent Die Hard or Caddy Shack? Steak or steak? I would never be asked which shower curtain I like better or to pick tampons up at the store. Winodj, am I missing anything? i prefer tampax, thanx for asking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.