Pope Francis - Man of Mystery

Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
2,766
Likes
4,635
#42
The hebrew words are ADONAI ie THE LORD/GOD and ADONI ie master, ruler etc. What was used in Psalm 110 for Jesus specifically was adoni.
How do you explain the apostle Thomas saying this, as he was a Jew:
John 20:26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.


Whole passage: John 20:19-31

If Jesus was a mere prophet He would have rebuked Thomas for blasphemy and for worshipping Jesus. https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-worshipped.html
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,175
Likes
2,378
#43
How do you explain the apostle Thomas saying this, as he was a Jew:
John 20:26 And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27 Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29 Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.


Whole passage: John 20:19-31

If Jesus was a mere prophet He would have rebuked Thomas for blasphemy and for worshipping Jesus. https://www.gotquestions.org/Jesus-worshipped.html
Well...
If only you were aware of the teachings of Jesus in the first place.

1) Jesus said make your eye single. This literally meant to be open to the presence of God in all things or to see the One in all. God is immanent everywhere.

2) when the apostle asked Jesus to show them God, Jesus referred to what was in him Inc the miracles as proof of God. But you Christians misinterpreted this to literally means Jesus himself is God. Rather than to realise in consistency with the concept of Gods Immanence...that God was immanent via the logos that was incarnated in Jesus.

3) to the pure all things are pure. Again this is consistent with what Jesus said about the single eye.
So with this in mind ...seeing God in Jesus again as you have quoted does not make Jesus God.
I can see God in the sky..in plants..in trees...in animals...in people...in the ground...in the air....in myself...
Yet none of these things are God. God is Immanent in all things.

4) so Jesus wouldn't rebuke Thomas if he was aware of the inner perspective of Thomas. Just like Jesus would not rebuke me if I see God in him.

In the state of 'absorption' (as Sufis call it) of God awareness...people say such things.
It is an enlightened perspective that must not be taken literally.

Moses heard God in the burning bush. Doesn't make the bush, God.

5) see whatever you think...my viewpoint remains consistent with the entire Bible and entire new testament. It means even the most mystical parts of it Inc John 1:1 can easily be explained by me. At least in my mind there is a valid explanation.

Your perspective however leaves holes. As I pointed out many times before....Jesus said he doesn't know the last hour..yet you say he is fully God in the flesh.
He said the son can do nothing himself except it's the Father doing it through him.

Throughout the epistles we see them refer to Jesus seperate from God.
I can quote so many instances
Ie "God the Father....and our lord Jesus Christ" and that is alongside the other arguments we've presented many times before.
But remember to me the Son/logos is universal
Can you try to comprehend how big that is knowing how small our planet is in comparison to just the milkyway galaxy? And how small that is compared to entire physical universe?
Not even a drop in the ocean. And yet all that has come from the logos...and the logos still cannot even know the last hour or do any miracle on its own merits except by the Father?

We often say "my God" when we are shocked. How do you know that isn't what Thomas actually meant? Ie we do not know his perspective but we know Jesus rebuked someone when he merely called Jesus "good".
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
2,766
Likes
4,635
#44
Aspiring Soul I am most certainly aware of Jesus' teachings. I have read the bible for myself and I know you are blatantly quoting passages out of context to *keep your Islamic beliefs intact*.

Anyone who reads the passage with unbiased eyes can see that the apostle Thomas is responding in belief to Jesus - that Jesus has returned from the dead and that Thomas is calling Jesus God. FACT.

Whether a reader believes that bible text to be actually true is a completely different matter.

Here is a entry from a Christian apologist who was dealing with a Muslim (just like yourself) trying to explain away Thomas' exclamation. https://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zawadi_thomas2.htm
 





Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,029
Likes
3,520
#45
Psalm 110:1
The interlinear renders it Yahweh, yes-- Young's Literal as such:

A Psalm of David. The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord: 'Sit at My right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.'


Regarding 'my Lord'...

GILL'S EXPOSITION
PSALM 110:1

The Lord said unto my Lord,.... The Targum is,

"the Lord said in his Word.''

Galatinus (q) says the true Targum of Jonathan has it,

"the Lord said to his Word;''

and produces an authority for it.

These are the words of Jehovah the Father to his Son the Messiah; the "Adon", or Lord, spoken of in Isaiah 6:1, the one Lord Jesus, and only Potentate; the Lord of all, the Lord of David, and of every believer; not by right of creation only, as of all mankind; but by redemption, having bought them; and by right of marriage, having espoused them; and by their own consent, they owning him to be their Lord
. The words said to him by Jehovah, as follow, were said in his mind, in his eternal purpose and decree; which he, lying in his bosom, was privy, when he foreordained him to be the Redeemer; and in the council and covenant of peace, when he promised him this glory as the reward of his sufferings; and in the prophecies of the Old Testament, which speak as of the sufferings of Christ, so of the glory that should follow; and when the fact was done, when, after his death, resurrection, ascension, and entrance into heaven, he was placed, as follows:

Sit thou at my right hand; of power and majesty; expressive of the honour done to Christ, and the glory put on him in the human nature, such as angels nor any creature ever had, Hebrews 1:13, it being always accounted honourable to sit at the right hand of great personages, 1 Kings 2:19, and also of rule, and power, and authority; being upon the same throne with his Father, exercising the same government over angels and men; "sitting" is explained by "reigning" in 1 Corinthians 15:25.

It also denotes having done his work, and to satisfaction; and therefore is set down, being entered into his rest, and having ceased from his work and labour, enjoying the presence of his divine Father; in which is fulness of joy, and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore: and it also signifies the continuance of regal honour and power; he sits and continues a King as well as a Priest for ever.
Until I make thine enemies thy footstool; Christ has his enemies; all the enemies of his people are his; some are overcome already by him, as sin, Satan, and the world; and the Jews, his enemies, who would not have him to reign over them, have been destroyed: but as yet all things are not put under his feet, which will be; as antichrist, and the kings of the earth that are with him, who will be overcome by him; the beast and false prophet will be taken and cast into the lake of fire; where also the old serpent, the devil, after he has been bound and loosed, wall be cast likewise; and when the last enemy, death, shall be destroyed; till that time comes, Christ reigns and will reign, and afterwards too, even to all eternity. The allusion is to the custom of conquerors treading upon the necks of the conquered; see Joshua 10:24.
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,175
Likes
2,378
#46
Aspiring Soul I am most certainly aware of Jesus' teachings. I have read the bible for myself and I know you are blatantly quoting passages out of context to *keep your Islamic beliefs intact*.

Anyone who reads the passage with unbiased eyes can see that the apostle Thomas is responding in belief to Jesus - that Jesus has returned from the dead and that Thomas is calling Jesus God. FACT.

Whether a reader believes that bible text to be actually true is a completely different matter.

Here is a entry from a Christian apologist who was dealing with a Muslim (just like yourself) trying to explain away Thomas' exclamation. https://www.answering-islam.org/Responses/Osama/zawadi_thomas2.htm
Since you cannot read Thomas's mind you can't say it's a fact. Nor can you read the mind of Jesus. You do not know what inner perspective they were speaking from which is precisely why I've opened you up to those themes.
Hence "to the pure all things are pure"
My perspective doesn't need islamic scripture I can base this entirely on the Bible.
My view is also more consistent than yours.
If Jesus doesn't know the last hour or cannot do anything by himself then how can you claim he is literally fully God in the flesh?
Fact is your beliefs are full of holes.
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,175
Likes
2,378
#47
Psalm 110:1
The interlinear renders it Yahweh, yes-- Young's Literal as such:

A Psalm of David. The affirmation of Jehovah to my Lord: 'Sit at My right hand, Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.'


Regarding 'my Lord'...

GILL'S EXPOSITION
PSALM 110:1

The Lord said unto my Lord,.... The Targum is,

"the Lord said in his Word.''

Galatinus (q) says the true Targum of Jonathan has it,

"the Lord said to his Word;''

and produces an authority for it.

These are the words of Jehovah the Father to his Son the Messiah; the "Adon", or Lord, spoken of in Isaiah 6:1, the one Lord Jesus, and only Potentate; the Lord of all, the Lord of David, and of every believer; not by right of creation only, as of all mankind; but by redemption, having bought them; and by right of marriage, having espoused them; and by their own consent, they owning him to be their Lord
. The words said to him by Jehovah, as follow, were said in his mind, in his eternal purpose and decree; which he, lying in his bosom, was privy, when he foreordained him to be the Redeemer; and in the council and covenant of peace, when he promised him this glory as the reward of his sufferings; and in the prophecies of the Old Testament, which speak as of the sufferings of Christ, so of the glory that should follow; and when the fact was done, when, after his death, resurrection, ascension, and entrance into heaven, he was placed, as follows:

Sit thou at my right hand; of power and majesty; expressive of the honour done to Christ, and the glory put on him in the human nature, such as angels nor any creature ever had, Hebrews 1:13, it being always accounted honourable to sit at the right hand of great personages, 1 Kings 2:19, and also of rule, and power, and authority; being upon the same throne with his Father, exercising the same government over angels and men; "sitting" is explained by "reigning" in 1 Corinthians 15:25.

It also denotes having done his work, and to satisfaction; and therefore is set down, being entered into his rest, and having ceased from his work and labour, enjoying the presence of his divine Father; in which is fulness of joy, and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore: and it also signifies the continuance of regal honour and power; he sits and continues a King as well as a Priest for ever.
Until I make thine enemies thy footstool; Christ has his enemies; all the enemies of his people are his; some are overcome already by him, as sin, Satan, and the world; and the Jews, his enemies, who would not have him to reign over them, have been destroyed: but as yet all things are not put under his feet, which will be; as antichrist, and the kings of the earth that are with him, who will be overcome by him; the beast and false prophet will be taken and cast into the lake of fire; where also the old serpent, the devil, after he has been bound and loosed, wall be cast likewise; and when the last enemy, death, shall be destroyed; till that time comes, Christ reigns and will reign, and afterwards too, even to all eternity. The allusion is to the custom of conquerors treading upon the necks of the conquered; see Joshua 10:24.

So now youre changing the word in Psalm 110 entirely? I don't care who said what.. that is not what the text says.

In Isaiah 6:1 it is God ie LORD/ADONAI being spoken of who sits on the throne and yet you have quoted some material that asserts it is Jesus.

Jesus sits at the right hand of God. But it is God on the throne (symbolic language of course it is never literal).

What exactly are you playing at?
 





Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,029
Likes
3,520
#48
So now youre changing the word in Psalm 110 entirely? I don't care who said what.. that is not what the text says.

In Isaiah 6:1 it is God ie LORD/ADONAI being spoken of who sits on the throne and yet you have quoted some material that asserts it is Jesus.

Jesus sits at the right hand of God. But it is God on the throne (symbolic language of course it is never literal).

What exactly are you playing at?
I didn't change a thing.
I used the same source you did, and cited Gill's Exposition on the verse (which is linked,), as well as the interlinear.

This is from the commentary below Isaiah 6:1...

We cannot determine from the phrase used whether the vision was seen before or after Uzziah's death. I saw also; rather, then it was that I saw (comp. Exodus 16:6). The Lord. Not "Jehovah," as in vers. 3 and 5, but "Adonay," for greater reverence. Sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up. The imagery is, of course, taken from the practice of earthly kings...



It does seem to say the opposite.. but the speaker should be taken into consideration, of course.
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,175
Likes
2,378
#49
I didn't change a thing.
I used the same source you did, and cited Gill's Exposition on the verse (which is linked,), as well as the interlinear.

This is from the commentary below Isaiah 6:1...

We cannot determine from the phrase used whether the vision was seen before or after Uzziah's death. I saw also; rather, then it was that I saw (comp. Exodus 16:6). The Lord. Not "Jehovah," as in vers. 3 and 5, but "Adonay," for greater reverence. Sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up. The imagery is, of course, taken from the practice of earthly kings...


It does seem to say the opposite.. but the speaker should be taken into consideration, of course.

I don't know if you understood what I said earlier so I might just be wasting my time with this but again let me explain.

THE LORD=ADONAI=GOD
When it says Yahweh then Jews don't say the name of God instead they replace that with Adonai typically.
That doesn't mean the word Adonai is not used on it's own merit.
In either of these cases Adonai refers to GOD.

In the case of Psalm 110, the word used for the messiah was 'adoni'. So it is translated or read as ADONAI (ie God) says to Adoni (my lord) 'sit at my right hand' etc.

in the same link
http://biblehub.com/psalms/110-1.htm
My Lord.--Heb., adoni, an address of honour to those more noble than the speaker, or superior in rank: to a father, Genesis 31:35; to a brother, Numbers 12:11; a royal consort, 1Kings 1:17-18; to a prince, 1Kings 3:17; with addition of the royal title, "my Lord, O king," 2Samuel 14:19.


My argument is that Jesus referred to Psalm 110 as proof of his title ie 'lord' ie ADONI (as above). Therefore it is theologically dishonest for christians to later alter words and letters so that 'lord' becomes THE LORD as if to imply he is God. Even if you do believe this due to other aspects of your belief, the term 'lord' should always be without capitals as it was in Psalm 110 ie 'my lord'.
But it also serves as another evidence that Jesus as adoni is not Adonai. christians have often said that Jesus was a servant in the flesh and God in spirit for example and even this is a contradition of the claim that Jesus was fully God in the flesh.


I know this stuff is difficult for you guys to take but none of this is based on islam btw. I'm perfectly capable of understanding the NT on it's own merit without the use of islamic scripture.

No matter how 'hard' you remain on this issue just remember my version of truth is better rounded and it is based on understanding not a single other christian out there has given you. No i am not saying this out of a bloated sense of importance. It is just my understanding.

John 1:1 as i said many many many times was a balance of the Logical truth AND the mystical truth

The WORD WAS WITH God
The WORD IS God

If you could understand how God is both Trancendent and Immanent then you could understand this.
Then you could think of God's Immanence and you could directly experience His presence all around you. Then you could ask yourself 'is God in the air, in the wall, sky, floor?' etc. The logical answer to that is obviously no. YET the mystical reality is yes He is.
Rather than see a contradiction you can easily see how both are true from different perspectives..and that is in accordance with the way our brain is divided ie left and right hemisphere.

Once you have grasped this you could appreciate that the jewish nation in the time of Jesus was spiritually lost (due to the many false shepherds in that time) and hence they were lacking the mystical/spiritual aspect of religion and hence lacking God in their hearts. Hence 'uncircumcised in their heart'.
So Jesus came and made mystical statements in order to challenge thier perception. Many understood but many failed. Those who were failed were the extreme logical minded literalist types ie the sadducee sect.

So christianity was perfect in it's time and balanced.

it is only later ie in the roman era of christianity that this spiritual/mystical presence was lost and they got bogged down into theological disagreements and each time they added to the original belief until you had the trinitatrian doctrine laid out in literal terms.
YET i have also shared info on this forum pertaining to the IMMANENCE of the Trinity so ironically the doctrine deep down affirms the truth YET the christians are unwilling to accept that but instead demand that Jesus is literally, logically fully God and do not treat it as a mystical statement referring to the Immanence of God.

Also as above, if most christians on here are protestant and reject catholicism, then why are they so keen to believe in the trinity when that is also from the same culture ie rome? I have also devled deeper on this topic by highlighting the absurd practices existing in the time of King Henry the 8th and the Tudor era in general alongside Martin Luther.


Finally just try to understand the point i'm making. Jesus was the Logos/Word made flesh, i have no issue with that. HOWEVER the Logos is the underlying principle holding the entire universe/all things in creation together ie it is in everything. Think about how vast the physical universe is and how it's existed for 14billion years. IF the logos is indeed 'fully God' in the most literal sense, then by extention the entire universe is, since the universe is the Word in manifestation which preceded the Word made flesh ie Jesus the messiah.

For from him and through him and for him are all things.

I have also from time to time talked about Philo, the jewish philosopher who first introduced the Logos to Jewish thought.
Therefore the ideas pertaining to logos should be explored ie.

Stoic philosophy began with Zeno of Citium c. 300 BC, in which the logos was the active reason pervading and animating the Universe
think this one through.

They called the logos providence, nature, god, and the soul of the universe, which is composed of many seminal logoi that are contained in the universal logos.

Philo of Alexandria, a 1st-century-ad Jewish philosopher, taught that the logos was the intermediary between God and the cosmos, being both the agent of creation and the agent through which the human mind can apprehend and comprehend God.


next time you think of 'The Word/Logos/son' will you think only of Jesus or will you consider the living presence of the Logos everywhere and inside you? ie the macrocosm and microcosm and then consider the fact that the Father reveals Himself through the Logos hence God is Immanent everywhere and inside you too.
How could being aware of this, change you?


Matthew 6
For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also. 22The eye is the lamp of the body. If your vision is clear, your whole body will be full of light. 23But if your vision is poor, your whole body will be full of darkness.

Luke 11:35
Be careful, then, that the light within you is not darkness.
 





Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,029
Likes
3,520
#50
This...

IF the logos is indeed 'fully God' in the most literal sense, then by extention the entire universe is, since the universe is the Word in manifestation which preceded the Word made flesh ie Jesus the messiah.

... is not the same as this, below--

For from him and through him and for him are all things.

And this kind of confirms--

They called the logos providence, nature, god, and the soul of the universe, which is composed of many seminal logoi that are contained in the universal logos.

That smells like the snare of worshipping the created thing, rather than the Creator, and tbh, I believe it is. I dont believe that is the logical extension of creating something-- inhabiting that thing, I mean. No offense, I just don't agree.
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
2,766
Likes
4,635
#51
This...

IF the logos is indeed 'fully God' in the most literal sense, then by extention the entire universe is, since the universe is the Word in manifestation which preceded the Word made flesh ie Jesus the messiah.

... is not the same as this, below--

For from him and through him and for him are all things.

And this kind of confirms--

They called the logos providence, nature, god, and the soul of the universe, which is composed of many seminal logoi that are contained in the universal logos.

That smells like the snare of worshipping the created thing, rather than the Creator, and tbh, I believe it is. I dont believe that is the logical extension of creating something-- inhabiting that thing, I mean. No offense, I just don't agree.
From memory Aspiring Soul is a Sufi Muslim. ( Please correct me if I am wrong AS!)
A lot of what he said last year I remember seeing other Muslims attacking anyway.

The above entry sounds a lot more like a blend of mysticism, Gnosticism and Islam to me.
 





Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,029
Likes
3,520
#52
From memory Aspiring Soul is a Sufi Muslim. ( Please correct me if I am wrong AS!)
A lot of what he said last year I remember seeing other Muslims attacking anyway.

The above entry sounds a lot more like a blend of mysticism, Gnosticism and Islam to me.
Oh, it is. I'm not sure what your point is, though. What do you think Mysticism is?
 





Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
2,175
Likes
2,378
#54
From memory Aspiring Soul is a Sufi Muslim. ( Please correct me if I am wrong AS!)
A lot of what he said last year I remember seeing other Muslims attacking anyway.

The above entry sounds a lot more like a blend of mysticism, Gnosticism and Islam to me.
What I'm saying is Islam...
The quote about the balance between fiqh/law and tasawuff/spirituality is from imam Malik who was not a Sufi but an imam of fiqh.

Gnosticism is based in this idea of a demiurge but ultimately it is a poor version of Hindus Maya concept.

@elsbet what I quoted is from Greek mythology but it doesn't mean theologically we are supposed to agree with their views entirely. How Philo incorporated those ideas into a jewish framework was fundamental. The most important matter is to make sure you keep the balance of God's Trancendence and Immanence and Philo did.


Sometimes soon I'd like you to sit outdoors in silence and just experience life for its own sake. As you do this start thinking of God's power in everything around you. For example you can think of His Mercy in the air we breathe and His protection under the sky...you can get creative with this however you like it is subjective and personal.

You'll realise God is present everywhere yet He is above all things.
He is Trancendent and He is Immanent.
But what allows God's Immanence is what stands between the universe and God....ie the logos which is the consciousness of all things.

And also when you do open yourself to God...you will obv find God is in you too. Ie like Psalm 44:3
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
5,674
Likes
8,478
#55
In his book The Faith of Millions, John O’Brien, a Catholic priest, explains the procedure of the mass.

When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.​

#notacatholic
 





Joined
Jun 4, 2017
Messages
3,029
Likes
3,520
#56
In his book The Faith of Millions, John O’Brien, a Catholic priest, explains the procedure of the mass.

When the priest pronounces the tremendous words of consecration, he reaches up into the heavens, brings Christ down from His throne, and places Him upon our altar to be offered up again as the Victim for the sins of man. It is a power greater than that of monarchs and emperors: it is greater than that of saints and angels, greater than that of Seraphim and Cherubim. Indeed it is greater even than the power of the Virgin Mary. While the Blessed Virgin was the human agency by which Christ became incarnate a single time, the priest brings Christ down from heaven, and renders Him present on our altar as the eternal Victim for the sins of man—not once but a thousand times! The priest speaks and lo! Christ, the eternal and omnipotent God, bows His head in humble obedience to the priest’s command.​

#notacatholic
Pardon my French, but that is an everloving load of bullshit.

#horrified
#disgusted
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
5,674
Likes
8,478
#57
Vatican advisor: Pope ‘breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants’
by Staff Reporter

posted Tuesday, 14 Aug 2018


(Getty Images)

Fr Thomas Rosica said the Church is now 'ruled by an individual rather than by... its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture'

Under Pope Francis, the Church is now “openly ruled by an individual rather than by the authority of Scripture alone or even its own dictates of tradition plus Scripture,” a Vatican advisor has said.

Fr Thomas Rosica wrote that Pope Francis “breaks Catholic traditions whenever he wants” because he is “free from disordered attachments”.

Fr Rosica, a Canadian priest and media advisor to the Vatican, was writing on the website of Salt & Light Catholic Media Foundation, of which he is CEO.

The article, written two weeks ago, was republished by the news agency Zenit. After Fr Rosica’s statements came to attention on social media, Zenit removed the controversial statement and replaced it with “[…]”.

Fr Rosica said that, as a Jesuit, Pope Francis is guided by the principle of “discernment” which at times results in “freeing him from the confinement of doing something in a certain way because it was ever thus”.

The article, which was published on the Feast of St Ignatius of Loyola, the founder of the Jesuits, said that Pope Francis has brought “Jesuit intellectualism” to the papacy.

Fr Rosica’s words came days before the Vatican announced Pope Francis had changed the Catechism to state the death penalty is now “inadmissible”.

The alteration caused much debate as to what the term meant, and whether it contradicted traditional Church teaching, which holds that the death penalty is not intrinsically evil.

http://www.catholicherald.co.uk/new...breaks-catholic-traditions-whenever-he-wants/
 





Joined
May 14, 2017
Messages
488
Likes
1,042
#59
Ah, for a moment, I feel like I’m in the old VC forums. All the Catholic bashing… It makes me nostalgic. Where’s Let’s Glow when you need him?

Anyway, nothing Pope Francis has said or done actually does outside of Catholic doctrine, especially post-Vatican II doctrine. Some more conservative members of the Church don’t like that he’s talking more about social issues and less about abortion and LGBT stuff… But by this time, the world is well aware of the Catholic Church’s views on those issue, while the Church’s views on economic equality and social justice as something that even a lot of Catholics are ignorant of.

As for the whole death penalty bit, the mindset around his more official commendation was been around a lot longer. We no longer live in a world where even the most deranged murderer can be a threat once he's put in prison. According to the Catholic teachings, the death penalty is only acceptable as a means to protect the public at large from evil... And usually, the death penalty does not do that.
 





Joined
Mar 15, 2017
Messages
5,674
Likes
8,478
#60
Ah, for a moment, I feel like I’m in the old VC forums. All the Catholic bashing… It makes me nostalgic. Where’s Let’s Glow when you need him?

Anyway, nothing Pope Francis has said or done actually does outside of Catholic doctrine, especially post-Vatican II doctrine. Some more conservative members of the Church don’t like that he’s talking more about social issues and less about abortion and LGBT stuff… But by this time, the world is well aware of the Catholic Church’s views on those issue, while the Church’s views on economic equality and social justice as something that even a lot of Catholics are ignorant of.

As for the whole death penalty bit, the mindset around his more official commendation was been around a lot longer. We no longer live in a world where even the most deranged murderer can be a threat once he's put in prison. According to the Catholic teachings, the death penalty is only acceptable as a means to protect the public at large from evil... And usually, the death penalty does not do that.
Ok, what do you make of the Pope's message here? Do you think he sounds "inclusive" or perhaps something more?


Along the same lines I found the following information significant...


So I'm keeping my eye on these guys too ;-)

https://vigilantcitizenforums.com/t...or-a-prototype-for-a-one-world-religion.3866/
 





Last edited: