Question re Pope election

Previous Thread Next Thread
Q

Quest4Less

Well-known member
May 25, 2002
1,064
31
48
Not being a very religious person I was wondering...

With all the talk about electing a new Pope and the discussion of the direction the church will take (more liberal or more conservative)... I was wondering.... If one believes in the bible and catholicism (sp?) then isn't it either "A" or "B"... I mean either something is "good" according to the bible or it is "bad" right? How can you suddenly decide that you are going to be religious and follow the bible - except for those parts you don't like?

Isn't it all or nothing?

Just something that makes me go hmmmm
 
Marla

Marla

Active member
Mar 29, 2010
1,563
13
38
61
ajax
Quest4Less said:
Not being a very religious person I was wondering...

With all the talk about electing a new Pope and the discussion of the direction the church will take (more liberal or more conservative)... I was wondering.... If one believes in the bible and catholicism (sp?) then isn't it either "A" or "B"... I mean either something is "good" according to the bible or it is "bad" right? How can you suddenly decide that you are going to be religious and follow the bible - except for those parts you don't like?

Isn't it all or nothing?

Just something that makes me go hmmmm
Click to expand...
I have been watching the goings on and there seems to be a divide between what is allowed and how people actually behave. They still love their pope but many don't live the doctrine.
 
G

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,123
14
38
NE
Sukdeep said:
Christianity is all about picking the parts that we like and don't like.

The bible is supposed to represent the infallible word of God. Yet, the various translations that are now commonly used are comprised of the books that were selected by a group of so-called religious scholars many hundreds of years ago. There are many other books that, for whatever reason, were excluded from the final "collection".

Indeed, a fundamental reason for the many denominations of faith is disagreement over the interpretation of faith. It is far from clear whether an old testament doctrine, such as sacrificing the flesh, is required in a post-Christ era. Similarly, there is dispute over allowing clergy to marry.

It's all about picking what you are comfortable with.
Click to expand...
Not so much picking what you are comfortable with, but more interpreting what is meant by the particular passages, and reading it in the proper context. For instance, one could read Matthew 27:5 and Luke 10:37b and infer that God's will is to hang yourself. But that's just silly.

The only way to truly read the Bible is to study the original Hebrew/Greek that it was written in, and to study it in the context of its overall message.

Again, an example, in the Ten Commandments God tells us not to lie. But the Hebrew word used is not literally "lie", but it has to do with being "faithful to your neighbour". Therefore, the people who were hiding Jews in the second World War who "lied" to the Nazi soldiers about having Jews in their house weren't actually breaking the Commandment.

People who take individual verses out of context and use them to verbally smack down those who believe in God aren't using those verses properly.

</religious rant for the day>
 
R

reg

New member
May 19, 2003
250
0
0
Goober Mcfly said:
Again, an example, in the Ten Commandments God tells us not to lie. But the Hebrew word used is not literally "lie", but it has to do with being "faithful to your neighbour".
Click to expand...
The King James version says "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" - quite specific and though commonly interpreted as 'don't lie' it actually says that you don't tell a falsehood against thy neighbour - in other words, don't fib to get someone into trouble. Nothing about lying to protect someone or for any other purpose.
 
G

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,123
14
38
NE
reg said:
The King James version says "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour" - quite specific and though commonly interpreted as 'don't lie' it actually says that you don't tell a falsehood against thy neighbour - in other words, don't fib to get someone into trouble. Nothing about lying to protect someone or for any other purpose.
Click to expand...
The King James version is a translation of the original Hebrew. Which is exactly my point above.
 
F

Flex

Member
May 8, 2004
229
9
18
The Church is evolving just like the rest of humuanity. The church however is on a completley different timetable than the rest of us, well.., western society anyway. There are many issues facing us here in the modern world that get a lot of media attention that third world countrys could care less about.
The other topic you are broaching on is the question of the pastoral nature of the church. Moderen society needs to be embraced and not pushed away by antiquated doctrine not applicable to the day. The church takes along defining just where that line might be. As an example there was a time you may of heard of called the "Crusades" where it what church practice to torture, kill, main etc.. etc.. if you didn't fall into line. Like others have said interpetation of the scriptures can be taken in many directions depending on what point you want to prove...
The bottom line is we are very lucky to have lived in the time of a Pope like like JP2nd as we were witness to some very signifigant and tangible changes like the... The Olive branch extened to the Jewish community. JP also developed a program to re seed the church as the numbers were definatley on the slide World Youth day was one of the best marketing campaigns ever thought of.
The new Pope has alot to live up to and the church faces some very tough challenges going forward but I don't believe it is quite as cut and dry as you suggest in your question and this is why its takes soooooo looonggg for the church to make any movement in most peoples life time.

my two cets...

Flex
 
F

Fortunato

New member
Apr 27, 2003
215
1
0
Quest4Less said:
Not being a very religious person I was wondering...

With all the talk about electing a new Pope and the discussion of the direction the church will take (more liberal or more conservative)... I was wondering.... If one believes in the bible and catholicism (sp?) then isn't it either "A" or "B"... I mean either something is "good" according to the bible or it is "bad" right? How can you suddenly decide that you are going to be religious and follow the bible - except for those parts you don't like?

Isn't it all or nothing?

Just something that makes me go hmmmm
Click to expand...
No.

First, the Catholic church is more about human politics than it has ever been about "God". That's not a criticism, it's just the truth. If you think that there is some big "gotcha" that they can't ignore (or change their opinion on), look back to things like geocentric theory, creationism, indulgences, the Inquisition, etc. It makes the sort of "reform" talked about today look very, very small.

Second, you have the relative order of importance wrong. For Catholics, the Pope is God's representation on Earth... a "direct, real-time line to God" (for Anglicans, that now would be 'Lizzie, but they seem to feel so to a lesser degree), and that is WAY more important than an old book. While there would undoubtedly be discontent if he varied too much from The Book or traditions, he has "trump". If the Pope says God changed his mind about The Bible... about women's role in the church... about Priests having sex-buddies... then God changed his mind - end of story. You don't even necessarily get to know why. Alternatively... if you don't like the premise that God changes His mind... if the Pope says the Church was wrong in the past (and this happens a lot - even John Paul II did things like strip George of Sainthood, among others), then the Church was wrong.

That's not saying that a new Pope WILL do such things (it is, after all, a political position, and the actual direction will most assuredly reflect the political inclinations of 177 Cardinals, give or take), but he most certainly can. And it wouldn't be inconsistent - at least not with the Catholic dogma, if you believe it.


Best regards,

F.
 
G

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,123
14
38
NE
Cardinal Fang said:
Sorry Goober, but that joke went around inside here already when it came time for the first ballot. Got a smile out of everyone except for German [size=-1]Cardinal Ratzenberger.[/size]
Click to expand...
Pope Cliff Claven the first?
 
G

Goober Mcfly

Retired. -ish
Oct 26, 2001
10,123
14
38
NE
And tell your buddies to stop messing with the faithful's heads in St. Peter's Square.

I can just hear you guys. "Is it noon yet? Yeah? Okay, when you hear the bells, light the fire but DON'T ADD THE BLACKENING AGENT for a couple of minutes...

Hey Cardinal Fang? Who are you Blackberrying?"
 
C

Cardinal Fang

Bazinga Bitches
Feb 14, 2002
6,577
494
83
I'm right here
www.vatican.va
Geraldo.

By the way, on the first ballot I wrote down [font=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]"Cardinal Inquisitus Conflagoratum." The Cardinals from Asia got a big laugh when "Cardinal [/font][font=Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif] Biggus Dickus" was read out.
[/font]
 
N

n_v

Banned
Aug 26, 2001
2,003
0
36
johndavidsson said:
My wife is a Catholic; I'm a Presbyterian. Remember that Christanity started with Catholicism and whenever a group decided to not abide, they formed a new offshoot. Firstly....Church of England ( remember Henry ?? ),. along came, in no particular order, all the other Christian faiths. Baptists,
Lutherans,United, etc.,etc.,.
Click to expand...
Not neccesaarily so. The eatern orthodox churches broke off many centuries before the Church of England.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Ashley Madison
Previous Thread Next Thread
Toronto Escorts
Top Bottom