Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Wolfy]

Really the bible only takes one stance on something like this, and thats that humans are the "kings" of earth and so we would still be "over them" 9 To be fair you could ask if they become like us are they still "animals" in the way of life stock and what not, which the bible of course dont get in to)

It really depends who is in charge of what at the time.

[XXSockXX]

... it is mostly replaced by atheism or non-religiousness (not the same thing).

Please explain, I don't seem to understand this bit. Pardon my ignorance.

I guess he means the drift away from organized religion towards a more individualistic, mix-and-match approach to spirituality.
Occultism, alternative medicine (not technically a religion, but it fulfills the same basic needs, I guess), sects and cults... a worrying development.

By non-religiousness I meant a general lack of interest in religion and spirituality, which seems the most widespread attitude. Atheists and agnostics have put some thought into what they (don't) believe, but many people just don't care if there is a god or not and don't seem to think about it much, even if they still are nominally church members (that might be country specific).
Individualistic approaches and weird stuff like esoterics and alternative medicine I see too sometimes, sects, cults and (serious) occultism less so.
Generally there's a drift away from organized religion, people who have left the church don't tend to join another one, like they maybe would in the US, but stay away from organized religion entirely.

[Strife26]

The pope accepting AI ?

Galileus theory was only authorized (not accepted) in 1741. It was only accepted along with Darwin's theory in 1979 - 1996.

Even if the Vatican said that alien should be defined as creations of god, the Vatican is also mostly conservative (and rarely lead by someone as smart as JP II).

That's a pretty bad generalization of the historical stance of the Vatican.

[PanH]

That's a pretty bad generalization of the historical stance of the Vatican.

Right. Better than criticizing like that, can you give some constructive examples ?

[Strife26]

Long story short, the church's policy at the time could be better described as not letting people claim truth. You could publish whatever the fuck you want, but if you're going to claim something as absolute truth, you could cause a bunch and a half of theological problems, which considering the time frame, could cause all sorts of real-life, stabsomeoneinthefaceandburnhisstuff type problems.

In response, Galileo went and claimed that he was speaking certain truth, as well as some very inflammatory statements towards the Church. (I've heard them summarized as "I'm right, the Church is wrong, and the Pope's a dumbass" before.)

And, just to quote wikipedia directly, because I'm kinda lazy and without my real history books,

The Inquisition's ban on reprinting Galileo's works was lifted in 1718 when permission was granted to publish an edition of his works (excluding the condemned Dialogue) in Florence.[137] In 1741 Pope Benedict XIV authorised the publication of an edition of Galileo's complete scientific works[138] which included a mildly censored version of the Dialogue.[139] In 1758 the general prohibition against works advocating heliocentrism was removed from the Index of prohibited books, although the specific ban on uncensored versions of the Dialogue and Copernicus's De Revolutionibus remained.[140] All traces of official opposition to heliocentrism by the church disappeared in 1835 when these works were finally dropped from the Index.[141]

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The problem there is that Galileo was right, the Church was wrong, and the Pope was sometimes a dumbass.

[Thecard]

The problem there is that Galileo was right, the Church was wrong, and the Pope was sometimes always a dumbass.

FTFY    No, I'm just kidding.

No, seriously though, fuck him.

Sorry to you guys if this offends you, unless you're the pope.  If you are the pope, fuck you.

If you can't tell, I'm not Catholic.

I also think popery is idolatry.

So fuck you, popey.


(... This is what happens when I try to talk about the Catholic church when I'm off meds.
No, no, I'd still say "fuck 'im."  I'd just try to say it nicer or something.)

(Naw, screw it.  I'd say it any day o' the week.  "No king of heaven but Jesus" an' all that.)


P.S.-- I have no idea who the current pope is, nor do I really care to know.  The dude himself isn't my problem, it's the position.

[Max White]

P.S.-- I have no idea who the current pope is, nor do I really care to know.  The dude himself isn't my problem, it's the position.

Benedict the 16th, known for promoting tolerance to other faiths and saying that there are times when it is ok to use a condom.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

P.S.-- I have no idea who the current pope is, nor do I really care to know.  The dude himself isn't my problem, it's the position.

Benedict the 16th, known for promoting tolerance to other faiths and saying that there are times when it is ok to use a condom.

Which they dragged out of him after five years of him maintaining that condoms must never be used ever, and disseminating this information to impoverished, HIV prevalent, and heavily Catholic countries in southern Africa.

[Max White]

The measure of a pope isn't how tolerant he is, it is how much tolerant he is compared to the guy before him.
He is still a homophobic asshat (In the most literal way possible) but the fact that he is a little better than all the others gives me hope that maybe the next one will admit that maybe you don't need to be a devout catholic to be a good person...

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The measure of a pope isn't how tolerant he is, it is how much tolerant he is compared to the guy before him.

Benedict XVI isn't anywhere near as tolerant or progressive as John Paul II. In fact, Benedict is really conservative.

[Max White]

Really? What did John Paul mark 2 do?
He was a little before my time you see. I mean I remember a time when he was alive, but too young to know much about the pope.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

For a Pope, he was alright. There are of course almost no truly liberal Popes, but he was closer than most.

For one thing, he apologized for almost all the atrocities committed by the Catholic Church. Granted, the Catholic Church then went on to commit new atrocities, but at least he tried.

[Thecard]

Yeah, the pope apologized for a lot of things Catholics have done wrong.  That whole "kill all the natives and take their gold for christianity and for Spain!" was bad.

I still think popery is a greater sin.  Any chance he'll apologize for being the pope?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Somehow, I doubt that. You have surprisingly strong feelings on this, I must say.