Sign in or 

Discussion Spotlight
|
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GeneDouglas | Women in the Catholic Priesthood | 1 | Dec 6 2009, 6:33 PM EST by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jun 3 2008, 8:49 AM EDT
Watch
The Catholic Church has threatened to excommunicate any woman who enters the priesthood, and anybody who participates in ordaining that person. The rationale given is that Jesus wanted male priests, because he chose exclusively male apostles. The Gospel of Mary Magdalene suggests that he may have had a 13th apostle.
See: M Index -- Mary Magdalene
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| Anonymous | I cannot believe such a valuable site is neglected! | 0 | Aug 27 2009, 8:11 AM EDT by Anonymous | ||||
|
|
Thread started: Aug 27 2009, 8:11 AM EDT
Watch
While I am not UU, I have a great respect for the ideals, and I believe a site like this would be a great resource. Get that word out! Thanks, Christine
|
||||||
| GeneDouglas | Accident Theory of Atonement | 0 | Jul 6 2009, 8:59 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jul 6 2009, 8:59 PM EDT
Watch
That Jesus didn't really mean to be crucified. When he said, "My Father, why has thou forsaken me?" he indicated his surprise. However, having been placed in that situation, he made the best of it all the same.
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Hedonism | 9 | Sep 24 2008, 7:57 AM EDT by Anonymous | ||||
|
Thread started: Aug 7 2007, 11:21 PM EDT
Watch
The items on hedonism offer some food for thought. The statement that the purpose of our actions is the seeking of pleasure seems to have an element of truth about it. Of course, we can find exceptions, such that the statement must become more complicated.
For example, we know that short-term forgoing of pleasure can lead to greater pleasure, such as saving our money for a later and larger purpose, for example. And a moment's displeasure can lead to greater pleasure, so we go to the doctor or dentist, even if the experience will be unpleasant at the time. And there is the fact that if every person looked only after his own pleasure, the community would suffer. With fewer benefits from the community, we would suffer as individuals. So we pay our taxes, help other people, and possibly somebody will help us when we need it, and we will drive on good streets and our children will attend good schools. Ayn Rand, in her "objectivism," advocated a rather extreme hedonism, in which she said that if one had to choose between a career or taking care of his aged mother, he should choose the career. If this were the case with most people, we would all suffer from the decisions of others, and overall pleasure in life would be reduced. Further, we are created to feel such things as sympathy, love, shame and guilt. Neglecting our loved ones would produce negative feelings, such that our selfish choices would actually add to our misery, unless we happen to be sociopaths. The person who sacrifices to care for their children experiences less displeasure in life than had he chosen not to do so. His inner sense of decency would otherwise nag at him and ruin the selfish pleasure he was trying to grab for himself. All these factors must be considered when suggesting that the purpose of our activity is the finding of pleasure. Then the statement has a greater ring of truth about it.
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Age of the Universe | 0 | Sep 22 2008, 7:01 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Sep 22 2008, 7:01 PM EDT
Watch
In the book, "The Bible According to Mark Twain," Clemens says in a letter to his fiancee, "...according to Genesis, the stars were made when the world was, yet this writer mentions the ... fact that there are stars ... whose light requires 50,000 years to ... come to our earth. ...might we not ... meet and greet the first lagging rays of stars that started on their weary visit to us a million years ago?"
Of course, there is much to be considered here. If the young earth creationists say the world is 6,000 years old, and the universe was made when the world was, then if some stars are a million light years away, how is it we can see their light if we have been here only 6,000 years? We can assume the y.e.c.'s would rationalize the same way they have with the dinosaurs -- that they're not so old as we say. Or that the stars are not really so far away. But we can do our measurements, and they can reject them, and then we are all just back where we started again. |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Catholic Bible | 2 | Sep 22 2008, 6:52 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jan 19 2008, 5:04 PM EST
Watch
The entry on the Catholic Bible by Cathtruth.com says that Catholics don't interpret the Bible, because they wrote it, with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. They only explain it. Only protestants must interpret the Bible, attempting to determine the real intentions of the authors, because they didn't write it themselves.
There are some logical problems with this. One is the fact that when the first manuscripts of the Bible were written, an organized Catholic church didn't exist. Another being that the original writers are long since dead, and modern Catholics are new guys, just like modern Protestants. None living today were around at the time. The writer of that statement seems to be guilty of arrogance, or at least exaggerated smugness. Of course there's another element. Since the original writing, there has been the task of selecting which writings to include, which was a human endeavor. There is no claim or evidence for supernatural guidance by the people making those decisions. There is also evidence of changes in the manuscripts since the first copies were written. I doubt the Catholic church wants to take credit for that.
2
out of
2 found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Do you?
Keyword tags:
Adam and Eve
Biblical Chronology
Biblical Criticism
Calvinism
Canaanite
Capital Punishment
catholic
catholic encyclopedia
Certainty
Certitude
Christian Theology
Christmas
church and state
church discipline
compatibilism
congragationalism
Conscience
conservapedia
Constantine I
contraception
Copernicus
cosmogony
cosmology
creation
Creationism
crucifixion
crusades
cult
Garden of Eden
Higher Criticism
index
Jewish Encyclopedia
Labarum
Nicene Creed
Orthodox Wiki
Servetus
textual criticism
true cross
(edit keyword tags)
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Vietnam War -- Here? | 0 | Aug 10 2008, 3:22 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Aug 10 2008, 3:22 PM EDT
Watch
We might wonder why a reference to the VN war would be mentioned here. But there were serious issues of right and wrong, and those issues return again and again. After all, we fought the War of 1812 because we wanted to conquer Canada, and we fought the Mexican war because we wanted to take the SW U.S. from Mexico. We encouraged Texans to fight their revolution because we wanted territory from Mexico. We fought the Spanish American war because we wanted to take Cuba, Puerto Rico and the Phillipines from Spain.
And we fought in Viet Nam to prevent an election. Now we're fighting in Iraq for reasons that keep changing. But in the end the oil companies hope to come out ahead in the deal. Using an excuse to start a war is not new. It has happened again and again. We would hope that in America, an educated public would not fall for that. But it has, and with remarkable ease. Viet Nam was supposed to have an election, a year after the treaty in Geneva. But at U.S. instigation, Diem held a plebescite to depose the emperor. More than 90% of the people voted "yes," including more people in Saigon than the population there, and with similar results around the country. Again, with U.S. instigation, the new South VN government refused to have the election promised in the treaty, because they knew who would win. Ho Chi Minh was a hero to the Viet people, and would win any election hands down. So we sacrificed 50,000 American lives in Viet Nam to prevent the Vietnamese from holding an election. The number of Viet deaths on both sides was much greater, as was the number of U.S.maimed and wounded. Is it possible we can learn anything from this? Is it possible we can learn enough to prevent its happening again? |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Viewing all threads, or all of a thread. | 1 | Aug 6 2008, 5:16 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Aug 6 2008, 4:34 PM EDT
Watch
To see all threads, go to the bottom and click the link for that.
To see all of a thread, don't click on "last reply," or it will just give you the very last one. Instead, just click on the title to the thread, and the whole thing will appear befor your eyes.
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
Adam and Eve
Biblical Chronology
Biblical Criticism
Calvinism
Canaanite
Capital Punishment
catholic
catholic encyclopedia
Certainty
Certitude
Christian Theology
Christmas
church and state
church discipline
compatibilism
congragationalism
Conscience
conservapedia
Constantine I
contraception
Copernicus
cosmogony
cosmology
creation
Creationism
crucifixion
crusades
cult
Garden of Eden
Higher Criticism
index
Jewish Encyclopedia
Labarum
Nicene Creed
Orthodox Wiki
Servetus
textual criticism
true cross
(edit keyword tags)
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Creation -- In the beginning... | 5 | Aug 6 2008, 5:13 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Oct 1 2007, 5:45 PM EDT
Watch
In the beginning there was darkness in the void, and God said, "Let there be light." And there was light.
And God said, "Oh, man, this is great! For a trillion centuries I've been sitting here in the dark. Haven't been able to see my hand in front of my face. Now, no more bumping into things. Wonderful!" And God saw that when it was light all the time, he couldn't get any sleep, so he said, "Let it be dark half the time. Say, about 12 hours at a time." And the sun went out, and God said, "Oh, yeah. That's good. I've gotta get some shuteye." And the next day God said, "Jeez, there's nothing but water around here. I wanted to make some creatures that look like me, but so far, all I've got is fish. Let us raise the ocean floor so there's something to walk on. Oh, that's good. A little muddy, but it'll dry out." And God said, "What am I going to call it? Terra, maybe. No, I'll call it mundo. Oh, I know. I'll call it Earth! Yes, I always preferred Elizabethan English. It'll be called Earth." "Oh, here it's getting dark again. I may be God, but it takes me all day to do this much. Time to turn in." In the morning, God got up, finished his morning constitution, and got back to work. "I'm going to need a roof over all this stuff. I'll make this solid blue canopy, and call it sky. But you can't see it in the dark. I'll punch some holes in it, and call them stars. You can't see them in the daytime, but when the light shines through the holes, they'll be pretty in the dark. Oh, yeah. That's good." And God said, "Oh, man. I'm getting sleepy again. I'll get back to this in the morning." And God said, "Hey, we're running out of letters. Later." (Continued as a reply.)
Show Last Reply
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Noah's Ark -- Historical? | 0 | Jul 13 2008, 8:22 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jul 13 2008, 8:22 PM EDT
Watch
The Catholic Encyclopedia uses the proliferation of flood legends around the world as evidence of the reality of the Noah's Ark story. However, the same story says that everybody except the passengers of the ark died. So how did people all around the world survive to tell those stories?
Or are they saying that Noah's Ark passengers were the ancestors of all people, including Chinese, North and South American Indians, Australian Aboriginese, and Africans? One statement is that "Earth" really meant "land." So not everybody in the world was involved. In that case, why do they cite flood stories all over the world as evidence of the literal truth of the Noah story? The Bible states that Noah grew grapes after the flood. However, if the land were submerged for a year, would that not have killed all of the plants in the world, too? The story says that a dove came back with the branch of an olive tree, with its leaves. Supposing that meant a twig, how would the dove have had the strength to pull the twig from the tree? |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Samson: Catholic Encyclopedia | 0 | Jul 10 2008, 8:26 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jul 10 2008, 8:26 PM EDT
Watch
The link above to the Catholic Encyclopedia, under Samson shows an article suggesting that the Catholic church does not take the Samson story as true. Instead, it takes the story to be Jewish legend, passed down from ancient times.
How many other stories are so fantastic that even the largest Christian church could not take it as literally true? The Garden of Eden? Noah? Jonah and the fish? The Tower of Babel? And if the stories are not true, why do we teach them to children as true? Or even include them in modern day Bibles? Meanwhile, I'm sure they believe in the literal interpretation of Jesus walkin on water, changing water into wine, raising the dead and so on, though those stories were likely made up a century after the Crucifixion, by people who had never met Jesus, but who inserted them into the hand-copied scriptures to increase their impressiveness to the unwashed masses.
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
atonement
azazel
church and state
Faustus Socinus
Heresy
Michael Servetus
sabbath and sunday
sacrifice
sacrilege
Satan
satanism
scapegoat
scholastics
science and the church
science and the churgh
scouting for all
secular
secular clergy
SECULARISM
Self Defense
self ownership
semites
sensory deprivation
separation of church and state
Servetus
silence
sin
Skepticism
slavery
slavery and Christianity
social contract
socialism
Socianism
Socinus
sociology of religion
Son of God
Soul
souls
Spirit
spiritual abuse
spirituality
Supernatural
superstition
Sykes-Picot Agreement
Synoptic problem
Syria
systematic theology
(edit keyword tags)
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Intelligent Design: Legal Flap in Texas | 0 | Jul 3 2008, 5:35 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jul 3 2008, 5:35 PM EDT
Watch
At first blush, it may seem reasonable that a state agency remain neutral on the subject of evolution vs intelligent design as an explanation for life on earth. However, this is a question of science.
If somebody were to assert, with all of his friends, that there is no law of gravity, and that what appears to be gravity is really a magic trick by the god Baal, should an education department remain neutral? The Baalists have their opinion, and scientists have their opinion and both opinions are equal to one another, and deserve equal treatment. One does this with politics. One does that with religion. But science doesn't work that way. If we want to settle a question of science, one does it with science. If he wants to teach something else, he should do that in his church, not through government. Deciding on a scientific issue is not like deciding to be a Baptist or a Methodist, a Republican or a Democrat, and we should not allow it to become like that. So an elected official wants to satisfy a segment of his constituency, and tells the agency to hunker down and keep a low profile. Problem is, the department doesn't belong to him. He is merely entrusted with its operation, in a legal and constitutional manner. Catering to religious extremists is not a legal nor constitutional part of his duties. |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Pat Robertson Endorses Giuliani | 0 | Jun 19 2008, 10:18 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jun 19 2008, 10:18 PM EDT
Watch
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,308997,00.html
Pat Robertson endorses Rudy Giuliani, who favors abortion and moved his mistress into Gracie Mansion before he was divorced by his second wife.
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
Christian right
determinism
human rights
protestant reformation
race
randomness
rationalism
rationality
reality
Reason
Red Sea
refdesk.com
Reference
reincarnation
relativism
relativity of knowledge
RELICS
Religion and science
Religious Epistemology
Religious Right
Resurrection
right
rights
Rights of Man
roman catholic
Rosicrucions
Rule of Faith
(edit keyword tags)
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Mary Magdelene -- Negates Catholic Female Priest Argument? | 0 | Jun 3 2008, 8:11 AM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: Jun 3 2008, 8:11 AM EDT
Watch
The Catholic Church has said that Jesus did not want women to be priests, as evidenced by the fact that all of his apostles were male, indicating His belief that all priests must also be male. However, there are writings suggesting that Mary Magdalene was a 13th apostle. Would that negate that argument?
See: W Index -- Women
out of
found this valuable.
Do you find this valuable?
Keyword tags:
absolutism
Bible manuscripts
hobbs
Hume
index
Macabees
magic
mark
masoretic text
materialist dialectic
Mesopotamia
Messiah
metaphysics
metropolitan church
military commissions act
miracles
modalism
modernism
mohammed
monarchism
monophysitism
Monotheism
moral
moral dilemmas
moral objectivism
moral philosophy
moral relativism
Moral Skepticism
moral universalism
morality
Morality and Religion
Muhammed
Muslim
mysticism
(edit keyword tags)
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | She was probably depressed | 0 | May 30 2008, 7:17 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 30 2008, 7:17 PM EDT
Watch
It's this writer's opinion that she suffered from depression. If she had taken Prozac, her faith would probably have improved. What's amazing is that she could carry on with a saintly work all those years, despite her inner torment.
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Why the topic of rights on a page of a religious document? | 0 | May 26 2008, 10:53 AM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 26 2008, 10:53 AM EDT
Watch
It may seem odd that a comment on warrentless wiretapping, or government or politics might appear on a religious website. However, this involves issues of right and wrong. Violation of the rights of citizens, in the name of practically anything, poses serious dangers, and the potential of serious wrongs being done is great. In other words, issues of good and evil are in the purview of religion, and persons concerned with such matters should be concerned with wrong being done by government, as well as by individuals.
The wording of the above satire is intended to remind us that totalitarian governments have used these techniques, and though the original excuse was to protect the country from communists or foreign enemies, they were also used for petty political purposes as well, and resulted in governments keeping the general citizenry under their thumb. |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Antisemitism of Nixon and Billy Graham | 0 | May 22 2008, 10:19 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 22 2008, 10:19 PM EDT
Watch
http://www.rense.com/general20/billy.htm
http://www.fpp.co.uk/online/02/02/Graham_Nixon.html See also: Graham, Billy in G-Index |
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | When Billy Graham planned to kill 1,000,000 people. | 0 | May 22 2008, 9:46 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 22 2008, 9:46 PM EDT
Watch
http://www.counterpunch.org/alexgraham.html
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Billy Graham -- Antisemetic conversation with Nixon | 0 | May 22 2008, 9:37 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 22 2008, 9:37 PM EDT
Watch
http://www.rense.com/general20/billy.htm
|
|||||||
| GeneDouglas | Audiotape -- Hagee: Hitler was fulfilling God's will. | 0 | May 22 2008, 9:31 PM EDT by GeneDouglas | ||||
|
Thread started: May 22 2008, 9:31 PM EDT
Watch
Hagee: Hitler was doing God's will. http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=56857§ionid=3510203
Audio: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/mccain-backer-hagee-said_n_102892.html |
|||||||