Print

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

I like it better than the last one

It's good, but I don't see the need with the discussion thread

It's not going to go anywhere good, just lock it now.

[chaoticag]

Hmm, when was the last time a Pope spoke Ex Cathedra anyway? I understand it was fairly rare that it was done so.

[TD1]

Whadda ya mean by "that Protestant?" I like my traditions, and mass in a Protestant church is not one of them

And yes, the Church decided what went in. And thus, the Church meant it to be concrete- no bits to be added, and none taken away or edited.

Of course, I don't believe it was an accurate process, but presumably at the time they did.

[Magistrum]

My faith is that the bible is only up to the first century congregation records, after that politics started to creep in the congregation and the roman church was born, it was sad but not unexpected,  the culture of the country became part of the religion, so it tainted it.
It may be worth noting that I have the life goal of finding the one true religion, so I might be biased against all of them.

[TD1]

Em, wasn't the original Bible made up of the culture of the time, though.

All the parables, etc. ?

[Magistrum]

Yes, following the line of thought of what I think the bible says, god was present and active during that time, he would go on and mess up reality, but the new testament states that after the death of the last apostle everything would stop and we would be on our own. Therefore the truth is what the ones who saw what god did said. The culture of those who heard what god said and saw his doing.

[Helgoland]

Whadda ya mean by "that Protestant?"

Church-goin'. Maybe we should start a club - 'Union of the Religious Agnostics and Atheists' or something.

but the new testament states that after the death of the last apostle everything would stop and we would be on our own.

Where?

[TD1]

By "My Church" I meant the family Church that I went to for my parents, 'cause they promised under God to bring me up in the Christian Faith. After Confirmation, I never went back.

[Arx]

Well, I was only showing how "Jesus said so" isn't the most convincing argument, but fair enough.

Exactly, it's up to your faith to believe that god made someone write that.

Yep, it all comes down to faith, this being the reason that I don't have faith. 'Cause it's rather relative

Yep. Since you know that, please don't make arguments based on "the Bible is a two-thousand year old document", since they can be aimed at anything and have no real meaning. I mean, there's no evidence beyond the Bible that Jesus ever lived.

[Magistrum]

Where?

1 corinth 13:8.

Edit:

13:13 says something about love replacing the whole seeing future stuff.

Double edit:

Arx: "I mean, there's no evidence beyond the Bible that Jesus ever lived."

Historians are pretty sure there has been a hell of a sweet talker living at the time, in the very least.

[TD1]

Well, I was only showing how "Jesus said so" isn't the most convincing argument, but fair enough.

Exactly, it's up to your faith to believe that god made someone write that.

Yep, it all comes down to faith, this being the reason that I don't have faith. 'Cause it's rather relative

Yep. Since you know that, please don't make arguments based on "the Bible is a two-thousand year old document", since they can be aimed at anything and have no real meaning. I mean, there's no evidence beyond the Bible that Jesus ever lived.

It all comes down to faith, but faith must have a basis to give it any form of standing at all. All we can do is question the basis, as to do otherwise is to question faith, which would just be a waste of energy.

So yes, I'd question the basis for belief in almost anything, and were I to find a convincing answer I would consider it with all my heart.

Because if I don't get faith, there are dozens of religions that tell me I will get some form of punishment, eternal or otherwise.

Edit: Although, the above in no way means I'm searching for a belief. Just that if there is a belief that comes near to certainty in its premises, it would be worth considering.

[Magistrum]

Okay, being too broad don't help much, so I will be specific... 4maskwolf, does your religion endorses, directly or indirectly, in any way possible, waging war?

[4maskwolf]

Okay, being too broad don't help much, so I will be specific... 4maskwolf, does your religion endorses, directly or indirectly, in any way possible, waging war?

Oh wow, a question to me.

Catholicism?

I suppose Just War Theory could be interpereted as endorsing war, but the actual intent of just war theory is to prevent war.  The strictures of just war theory are basically impossible to satisfy for an offensive war, and in theory if every nation followed just war theory there would be no war.  Obviously, that isn't the case, but the answer to your question is it depends on your interpretation.  From my perspective, no.

[Magistrum]

Thanks 4maskwolf, It seems your religion endorses war only under very strict circumstances, what is good. Tough I don't exactly understand what Just War Theory means, could you please explain it further? And as a small bonus, was the WWII a just war?

[4maskwolf]

There are seven parts to the just war criteria:
1. Just Cause: War is permissible only if there is a real and certain danger to innocent life and human rights.
2. Right Intention: The war must be waged because of the just cause, and not using the just cause as an excuse for some ulterior motive.
3. Legitimate Authority: War must be initiated by those who have legitimate authority in the nation and not by private interests.
4. Proportionality: The war must be able to do more good than the harm it causes.
5. Reasonable Hope of Success: Self-explanatory
6. Noncombatant Immunity: Care must be taken to avoid attacks on noncombatants.
7. Last Resort: Also self-explanatory

For the question about WW2, the answer is no from any side of the war and here's why: all sides violated noncombatant immunity.  All major powers in the war launched massive bombing attacks on cities and carpet bombed the entire city rather than focusing their efforts on military targets.  While it was difficult in this time period to target military targets exclusively, the attack on civilian targets was actually part of a wider strategy by both sides to make the other lose their resolve.

Amusingly, you're actually helping me study for my theology midterm, since I have to know just war theory for that 

[Cryxis, Prince of Doom]

I am on board with this 'Just War'