• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Time to Give Up Catholicism ?

bit_pattern said:
Lulwut?

I love how a participant on a drug site is making moral judgements about the use of a drug being inherently "wrong". What's your DOC?
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying it was wrong, but I was posing a question, since Jesus didn't speak on crack does that mean he tacitly approved of it? My DOC is Christs love the most powerful drug out there, the one thing that no man can take from me the one thing you have with you your whole life, even if all your possessions burned and you become disfigured Jesus with you always.
 
If I'm religious I can't fuck men
Click to expand...

Yeah it's forced celibacy. Which is more for the growth of the "Christian City's" rather than Love. You can technically be celibate AND love another man. However what the church does is GUESS that you're not going to be celibate which is dogmatically wrong and patently stupid.
 
Xorkoth said:
But Jesus was a man. I believe that the whole "Jesus and god are the same entity" is something added later, not that it was something Jesus said or believed. Of course I can't know this, so maybe it's not worth discussing, but my belief is that Jesus was an enlightened human whose intention was to inform people that we are all a part of god and that we can have heaven on earth if only we'd all treat each other with unconditional love. I don't believe he was trying to say that he was perfect and no one else can be that perfect, as is commonly conveyed today, nor that he wanted anyone to worship him or start an organized religion. I think he was trying to say, look, I'm a human like you, and I can live this way, so can you. We can have an awesome world. Since none of the NT was written by Jesus, we really can't know, but we do know that what we have in there was written after his death by other people who had their own agendas and belief structures, much of it actually MUCH later after his death. You can't necessarily trust the words as being 100% accurate as to what Jesus was actually all about or even what he actually said. People have always used religion to justify their own desires, and to control the masses, and that was certainly happening as it was being adopted by Rome to keep their own power over the people.

Also, I realize it talks all about slavery in the OT. I don't consider the OT when I consider Jesus' words as I have explained elsewhere. Did Jesus ever say that slavery was okay? I realize he addresses slavery, as it was a very real and common thing at the time. You've got to address the issues of the day.

Anyway, I can't prove any of this but it's what I feel to be true. None of us can prove anything about Jesus, we can't even know for sure he really existed.
Click to expand...

You should start a separate thread on this :)

The modern concept of the Trinity is something that I find very strange and confusing. Given scripture, I honestly don't know where we got the idea that God was one entity that has three states of being, but rather, I see God as a collectivist entity consisting of three different entities. Instead of God being the Father the son, and the holy ghost, I see the three of them together being "God".
 
rickolasnice said:
Jesus spoke about slavery and did not condemn it.. what does this imply?
Click to expand...
There were only very few occasions in which Jesus spoke of slavery in the flesh, and given the other things he taught and spoke of, I think it's safe to assume he didn't condone it.

Edit: After running through Strong's concordance, I realized that almost every verse speaking of slavery in the flesh - was written by Paul or Timothy; both of whom I discredit entirely.

In Mark 10, Jesus says that anyone who wishes to be great among the followers of Christ will be a minister. "Minister" is the closest translation of the Greek word - "diakonos"; A "diakonos" is a servant/teacher in the church. Before saying this, he says that anyone who wishes to be great among the Gentiles will become a master.

From this, I infer that that anyone who followed his teachings - would become a servant, not a master. If he said that anyone who followed him - would would become the opposite of a slave owner, I'm going to assume that he didn't condone slavery.
 
Last edited:
Xorkoth said:
But Jesus was a man. I believe that the whole "Jesus and god are the same entity" is something added later, not that it was something Jesus said or believed. Of course I can't know this, so maybe it's not worth discussing, but my belief is that Jesus was an enlightened human whose intention was to inform people that we are all a part of god and that we can have heaven on earth if only we'd all treat each other with unconditional love. I don't believe he was trying to say that he was perfect and no one else can be that perfect, as is commonly conveyed today, nor that he wanted anyone to worship him or start an organized religion. I think he was trying to say, look, I'm a human like you, and I can live this way, so can you. We can have an awesome world. Since none of the NT was written by Jesus, we really can't know, but we do know that what we have in there was written after his death by other people who had their own agendas and belief structures, much of it actually MUCH later after his death. You can't necessarily trust the words as being 100% accurate as to what Jesus was actually all about or even what he actually said. People have always used religion to justify their own desires, and to control the masses, and that was certainly happening as it was being adopted by Rome to keep their own power over the people.
Click to expand...

I agree that the divinity of jesus was most likely added later, but- as with nearly everything biblical- I can't really know this. For all intents and purposes, the biblical jesus and the historical one are largely inseperable thanks to the historical manipulation of the worlds most powerful religion. So jesus himself may not have considered himself to be god, but the Christian religion does; and, what's more, they consider jesus to actually BE the god of the old testament made flesh. This is more then just implicit approval of that violent/jealous/murderous/human-all-too-human god, it is a ringing endorsement. Whatever jesus was trying to do, I don't believe he did very effectively, because 2000 years later we are still not sure of what it was! :D
 
It's the Roman Catholic church, one of the most historically corrupt, evil, and greedy organizations there has been throughout history, and yet it continues to thrive.

This pope is just like the others, and he may claim to be for LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and trans) people's rights, now claims to be for science, and against the whole ped0 sex abuse stuff that's sick; but their #1 goal besides making lots of money and staying powerful, is attracting new people or keeping old members so they can get even more money that they don't need.

-=SS=- is correct. In Italy the Vatican still has a lot of political power, and as someone who has visited there, not on a religious pilgrimage as I'm not Roman Catholic or was not raised that way, they have lots of ancient artifacts, gold, jewelry, priceless artwork, and old literature; but the Vatican claims "Oh, this stuff is just a technically a 'gift' and not really wealth at all, and hey just ignore the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation, we're the largest charity!"

The vatican is the world's biggest closet, if the priests, bishops, and popes are not gay then they are into the sick ped0 stuff that's been going on for centuries, and that they still let happen and give offenders a slap on the wrist instead of putting them in prison.

I have friends and relatives who are Roman Catholic but they're what hardcore Roman Catholics call "cafeteria Catholics" in that they pick and choose what they agree with and don't like with the Roman Catholic church. The hardcore Roman Catholics I've encountered have told me how in their opinion these people are not really Roman Catholic. Or my friends and relatives just go to mass a few times a year during holidays like Christmas, Easter, Ash Wednesday, and don't go to confession, or give away money.
 
Last edited:
I agree. The only reason this pope is supposedly giving the okay to the LGBT community is to appeal to society. They need to keep luering people in.

Also I firmly believe eve if they would get rid of the whole priests not being able to have sex or get married shit, the pedo shit would stop. I have always believed that plays a big part of it.
 
8942_848449858508409_2248666007984251077_n.jpg


8) ..
 
I sometimes wish I was gay, just so that I would be able to french kiss some dude in the presence of some child molestering catholic priest(s). That would be awesome!

Warning:Heavy profiling may occur
 
Dystopia35 said:
I agree. The only reason this pope is supposedly giving the okay to the LGBT community is to appeal to society. They need to keep luering people in.

Also I firmly believe eve if they would get rid of the whole priests not being able to have sex or get married shit, the pedo shit would stop. I have always believed that plays a big part of it.
Click to expand...

Yes that could be it, the whole Roman Catholic church saying how priests, monks, and nuns can't ever get married-despite how a lot have children, or some stop being a priest/monk/nun so they can get married is a problem. Child sex abusers went to the Roman Catholic church in droves because they knew they would not get punished if/when they were caught.

You do hear about child sex abusers in all religions and spiritualities but it's not that major of a problem in the ones that are not the Roman Catholic church which let that stuff go on for centuries, and still lets it go on.
 
PriestTheyCalledHim said:
Yes that could be it, the whole Roman Catholic church saying how priests, monks, and nuns can't ever get married-despite how a lot have children, or some stop being a priest/monk/nun so they can get married is a problem. Child sex abusers went to the Roman Catholic church in droves because they knew they would not get punished if/when they were caught.

You do hear about child sex abusers in all religions and spiritualities but it's not that major of a problem in the ones that are not the Roman Catholic church which let that stuff go on for centuries, and still lets it go on.
Click to expand...



From the hadith of Bukhari, volume 5, #234
"Narrated Aisha: The prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six. We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Harith Kharzraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's messenger came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age."
​
Bukhari vol. 7, #65:
"Narrated Aisha that the prophet wrote the marriage contract with her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: "I have been informed that Aisha remained with the prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death).""
​
 
It is ignorant to make conclusive statements about all religions based on Christianity.

But, hey, it's an easy target.

It was the norm for a while in Ancient Greece for men to have sexual relationships with boys.

Therefore, what, ancient societies are wrong?

Slavery was socially acceptable, when the OT was written. The Bible was written by men, incapable - as we are - of seeing beyond our time. Deuteronomy is full of antiquated laws and references to things that we now find abhorrent. So are all historical documents.

It is legal in some parts of Japan, currently, for a man to marry a 12 year old girl.

Is Japan wrong?
 
Last edited:
LosBlancos said:
Leviticus 20:13 "'If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.

Leviticus 18:22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.

Gensis 19:1-11 described the story of Sodom and Gommorah which oddly enough sound like San Francisco and New York today where all manner of homosexual acts (sodomy) occur and subsequently the cities are destroyed

Corinthians 6:9-11, 1 Timothy 1:8-10, Jude 7, Romans 1:18-32, ect.

There is no altering these words to say that the Scriptures agree with homosexuality. Not just the gays "private lives", go to the "Pride" Parade (ironically Pride is one of the 7 deadly sins) you will see men walking around in thongs, assless chaps, putting on scenes akin to a low-budget pornography on display for all to see.

Imagine your children seeing displays like this on a regular basis because they are living in a progressive liberal society. They may begin to think becoming a homosexual is okay. What if they have some troubles dating girls, they might turn to the warm orfices of a man's anus or mouth as an alternative because politicians have told them it's okay, because leftists have distorted to teachings of the Bible to such an extent that some would believe that sodomizers will be admitted entrance to the kingdom of God.

We have shifted the notion of the traditional family very far from what it once was, we are moving from man and woman to man and man or woman and woman is acceptable and I have no doubts if the radical left had their way that soon necrophiliacs, zoophiles and pedophiles will be marching for their right to "love" soon enough.

Any other Catholics thinking about jumping ship? Thinking of perhaps starting to attend an Eastern-Orthodox church. What do you think?
Click to expand...

The church does not condone homo-sexual acts. I think this is where people are getting confused. Sexual acts can only be performed between a man and a woman through holy Matrimony. Sexual acts as a homosexual is like having pre-marital sex, which is a mortal sin. What the pope is saying is that, if science concludes that people can be "born gay", then it is not up to us to discourage them from practicing Catholicism. In other words, people can be gay and be attracted to men, if that is what they like, but acting under those conditions is in no way acceptable. Does what I'm saying make any sense to you?
 
methamaniac said:
So many reasons to reject Dogma of Catholicism. I will give most obvious.
The Pope says he holds the place of God on earth.
Another would be they want you to confess your sins and be FORGIVEN by a man- a priest-Not God. They want you to call this man "father".
I have purposely called a catholic priest son.
Click to expand...
The Pope holds the place of Peter, not God. He represents the apostle Peter as the first pope of the Church. He is more of an intermediary between us, the children, and God the father. As do priests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top