The most liberal pope since Jesus?

[dontsnitch]

See the veneration of mary. She's extremely important to catholicism, but she's never to be revered over the trinity (the same as saints and angels) because that would be idolatry. They don't believe her to be a semi/subordinate god which would be paganism. The hail mary is to ask her to to pray for us. Again, catholicism is based on communal prayer that includes heaven.

Also, I think part of the issue in your understanding is that not all christians see the bible as the final word but to be at least partially interpreted through other writings. Oral traditions of judaism. Hadiths of islam. The catechism for catholics.

Again, mary is an important person in the history of jesus and the foundation of the church. Either way, catholics still support their views on intercession with biblical quotes. Google-fu would be your friend in this instance.

Last, imo, you're conflating or confusing worship (in its modern sense) with reverence/veneration.

There is a huge difference between a specific hermeneutical framework that leads to different interpretations, and taking liberties outside of the text itself.

I'll ask you what I asked the previous poster: What stops us from believing Joseph Smith to be bringing a true addendum to the scripture based on a revelation from God?
What stops us from believing Muhammad didn't do the same?

 

[Harmonica]

Same reason I train under a BJJ instructor. We both have a lot to learn, but it is better to have help and mentoring in these kind of developmental journeys

Learning an applicable skill is not the same as being spiritual-savvy. The first is transferable to the real world while the second is not, it's irrevocably bound to the inner experience.

 

[UpaLoompa]

OK what is your explanation for the white mist that just happens to magically appear at well known haunting locations, which also happen to lower the temperatures locally, drastically?, apparitions in old pictures, and a lot of weird activity at places where bad things have happened?..what is your explanation for such phenomena?

"It's all bullshit" doesn't quite cut it either.

It's all bullshit.

 

[glennrod]

It's all bullshit.

Yeah, well that doesn't cut it..thanks for..erm, yeah :icon_neut

 

[HOLA]

Yeah, well that doesn't cut it..thanks for..erm, yeah :icon_neut

Lol. Cut what?

He doesn't have to prove anything, you do.

 

[glennrod]

Lol. Cut what?

He doesn't have to prove anything, you do.

No, I don't

I have my beliefs, he has his..it isn't on me to "prove" something like that (thank god).

 

[Jack V Savage]

Believing in demons is crazy, but believing that David Blaine is a demon because you can't understand how he does his tricks is funny. Did you see Jurassic World? What did you think?

 

[dontsnitch]

Believing in demons is crazy, but believing that David Blaine is a demon because you can't understand how he does his tricks is funny.

Watching him hold his breath for 17 minutes was definitely out of this world :icon_chee

Seriously, I hate all that street magic stuff, but this was a great feat, and a great Ted Talk.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

What's funny is everyone of those ghost shows where they go to these "ghost hotbeds," the places that are haunted and have many stories about the. Throughout the years never once produce even a shred of evidence to say they're haunted.

 

[HOLA]

No, I don't

I have my beliefs, he has his..it isn't on me to "prove" something like that (thank god).

You asked for his explanation of certain phenomenom.

He said it was BS.

You said that doesn't cut it, as if he failed to pass the hurdles set forth.

But they aren't ones he has in front of him. They're in front of you. If it isn't on you to prove anything, it certainly is not on someone to explain away what you've failed to provide any evidence for aside from "strange apparitions in the past," or whatever.

 

[glennrod]

You asked for his explanation of certain phenomenom.

He said it was BS.

You said that doesn't cut it, as if he failed to pass the hurdles set forth.

But they aren't ones he has in front of him. They're in front of you. If it isn't on you to prove anything, it certainly is not on someone to explain away what you've failed to provide any evidence for aside from "strange apparitions in the past," or whatever.

I meant for a discussion.. "it's all bullshit" doesn't exactly give me a lot to work with..but fuck it, like I said, I have my beliefs, he has his.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

I meant for a discussion.. "it's all bullshit" doesn't exactly give me a lot to work with..but fuck it, like I said, I have my beliefs, he has his.

Most ghostly places are debunked.

 

[glennrod]

Most ghostly places are debunked.

Most..not all

 

[UpaLoompa]

Most..not all

Ghosts of the gaps.

 

[KONG-D'SNT-TAP]

Most..not all

You seem like the type of person who would see a ghost and shoot at it with a gun.

 

[Bork]

There is a huge difference between a specific hermeneutical framework that leads to different interpretations, and taking liberties outside of the text itself.

I'll ask you what I asked the previous poster: What stops us from believing Joseph Smith to be bringing a true addendum to the scripture based on a revelation from God?
What stops us from believing Muhammad didn't do the same?

I really don't care and this is more or less a red herring. My main point of being in this thread and specifiacally my conversation with you was to clarify catholic doctrine to ppl who seem to not be catholic and/or have a poor knowledge of catholicism. Specifically reverence and intercession.

Anyway, supporting scripture for the bibles aren't based on vision. Anything like that is in the respective bibles and the rest is historocity/interpretation. They fit pretty neatly into "framework." Mormonism is arguably a new religion not an addendum or even a denomination.

OK what is your explanation for the white mist that just happens to magically appear at well known haunting locations, which also happen to lower the temperatures locally, drastically?, apparitions in old pictures, and a lot of weird activity at places where bad things have happened?..what is your explanation for such phenomena?

"It's all bullshit" doesn't quite cut it either.

Double exposure, negative doctoring, long exposure, lens ghosting, flare.

 

[dontsnitch]

I really don't care and this is more or less a red herring. My main point of being in this thread and specifiacally my conversation with you was to clarify catholic doctrine to ppl who seem to not be catholic and/or have a poor knowledge of catholicism. Specifically reverence and intercession.

Anyway, supporting scripture for the bibles aren't based on vision. Anything like that is in the respective bibles and the rest is historocity/interpretation. They fit pretty neatly into "framework." Mormonism is arguably a new religion not an addendum or even a denomination.

I think you should put Christianity in front on Catholicism, not the other way around.

There are plenty of things within the catechism that aren't biblical, so I don't consider Joseph Smith a red herring, but instead it's worth considering why we dismiss his account.

 

[Bork]

I think you should put Christianity in front on Catholicism, not the other way around.

There are plenty of things within the catechism that aren't biblical, so I don't consider Joseph Smith a red herring, but instead it's worth considering why we dismiss his account.

You can easily go to wiki to see why his account is highly questioned. Like I said, I really don't care. My first post in this thread established my take on religion and I'm more or less happy with the trajectory. I couldn't care less about who's right or wrong over the spiritual stuff.

What from the catechism isn't based on defining what's in the bible? It's been a while since I've been in catholic school, but from what i recall, it all traces back to the bible. You can argue that they use historocity to substantiate some things, but the basis is still from the bible. Plus, afaict, this wasn't seen as "bad" until protestantism was formed.

 

[dontsnitch]

You can easily go to wiki to see why his account is highly questioned. Like I said, I really don't care. My first post in this thread established my take on religion and I'm more or less happy with the trajectory. I couldn't care less about who's right or wrong over the spiritual stuff.

What from the catechism isn't based on defining what's in the bible? It's been a while since I've been in catholic school, but from what i recall, it all traces back to the bible. You can argue that they use historocity to substantiate some things, but the basis is still from the bible. Plus, afaict, this wasn't seen as "bad" until protestantism was formed.

No denomination has is all right, that's why it's on us to discern as much as possible, regardless what church we to to.

We don't need to get into the whole catholicism debate, if that is the church you identify with, all the power to you, but I would question things that are taught from the pulpit, or the catechism, if they do not align with scripture. Once we open the door to stray from scripture, it's difficult to refute other doctrines.

 

[Bork]

No denomination has is all right, that's why it's on us to discern as much as possible, regardless what church we to to.

We don't need to get into the whole catholicism debate, if that is the church you identify with, all the power to you, but I would question things that are taught from the pulpit, or the catechism, if they do not align with scripture. Once we open the door to stray from scripture, it's difficult to refute other doctrines.

Personally, for me, I don't think I particularly identify with any religion. I just happened to be raised catholic. That said, I do prefer some religions/denominations over others.

You'd probably like inayat khan. Me, I really only pay attention to religion these days when it comes to politics.

Also, like i said, you're going to have to be specific about what in the catechism you don't believe catholics can't relate to scripture. Catechism is the defining of scripture.