Pope- Indigenous americans were silently longing for Christianity...

[lider_r]

Pope ends Brazil trip with fierce speech

Benedict laments lax morals and urges bishops to do better in building up the church. His last Mass attracts only 150,000.
By Tracy Wilkinson, Times Staff Writer
May 14, 2007


APARECIDA, BRAZIL — Pope Benedict XVI ended his first pilgrimage to the Americas much as he began it: with a searing attack on diverse forces, from Marxism and capitalism to birth control, that he believes threaten society and the Roman Catholic faith.

And in comment likely to generate controversy in Latin America, the pope said the New World's indigenous population, "silently longing" for Christianity, had welcomed the teachings that "came to make their cultures fruitful, purifying them." Many indigenous rights groups say the conquest ushered in a period of disease, mass murder, enslavement and the shattering of native cultures.

Turnout at his final Mass, held at Brazil's most popular religious shrine, was notably low, underscoring the very problem the pope came here to address: a Catholic Church in decline.

Wrapping up five days in the world's most populous Catholic country, the pope inaugurated a major conference of bishops from Latin America and the Caribbean, telling them they had to do a better job of grooming Catholics and building up the church.

"One can detect a certain weakening of Christian life in society overall and of participation in the life of the Catholic Church," he said.

The pope lauded "progress toward democracy" in the region but expressed concern about "authoritarian forms of government and regimes wedded to certain ideologies that we thought had been superseded."

The Latin American media widely saw the remark as a jab at leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has frequently clashed with the church hierarchy and called Christ "the greatest socialist in history."

The pope came to this region to shore up a deeply divided church that is losing multitudes of followers to Protestant denominations, secularism and apathy. The trip also was seen as a test for a pope often considered Eurocentric and aloof to the more populous bases of his far-flung church.

On that score, he did not appear to have made much headway. Only about 150,000 people came to this rural town between Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro for Benedict's final Mass. The open-air celebration took place at the sanctuary of Our Lady of Aparecida, a shrine to a black Virgin Mary who is Brazil's patron saint.

The pope told the crowd that only faith in God and the church could give them hope: "Not a political ideology, not a social movement, not an economic system."

Flags from various Latin American countries dotted the crowd, which was boisterous but a fraction of what organizers had predicted. Nuns in dark habits held aloft icons of the Madonna, and families wore matching T-shirts blazoned with pictures of saints. And this being Brazil, there were plenty of bare midriffs, low-cut tank tops and spandex pants.

During Benedict's five days in Brazil, many watching him saw and heard not so much an embracing and accessible pontiff as the man he was before becoming pope: the dogmatic Joseph Ratzinger, a professorial theologian dedicated to guarding and purifying the faith. He stuck studiously to the fundamental message of his papacy, that unwavering love of God must form the basis of any endeavor.

It may be something of an irony that he came to a country with a reputation for hedonism to rail against ***, drugs and lax morals. Or maybe that was the point.

His exhortations to protect family life and return to the church will resonate with numerous Latin Americans who are dismayed at the erosion of tradition in the heavily Roman Catholic continent.

But for many here, Benedict remained a distant pope, his instructions unrealistic.

"We are not used to him yet," said Ana Cortes, 42, from Monte Patria, Chile, who came to see the pope and preserved fond memories of Benedict's charismatic predecessor, John Paul II.

"We see him as far away still," said Cortes, a mother of two who was wrapped in a large Chilean flag. "But I think in time his words will reach us."

"I don't think many people are listening to him," said her friend, Nilse Barraza, 47.

Augusto Dellava, 17, who came to the Mass from Montevideo, Uruguay, said good Christians should be able to relate to the pope. "He talks a lot about youths. We are the future of the church," he said. "He demands a lot from us. It's not easy, but it's worth it."

The 80-year-old pope did not focus much on poverty during this trip, nor did he orchestrate any of the grand gestures that endeared John Paul to his followers. When John Paul visited Brazil in 1980, he gave his gold cardinal's ring to the residents of a Rio de Janeiro slum he visited. Benedict did not go to a slum nor did he meet with poor people, save for the briefest of encounters outside the Sao Paulo cathedral.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope14may14,1,370546.story?page=1 (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-pope14may14,1,370546.story?page=1)




I think the murder victims and slaves of the Christian conquest might disagree with the Pope's comments. This guy is turning out to be a loon.

[Freedom-Fries]

This pope can be a bit loony but I think there's a lot of truth to what he has said because the people like Nahua, Totonaco, or Otomi were living under the horrible Aztec Empire of central. The native people of Mexico and other S.American states had to endure famine, be-headings, human sacrifice, blood rituals. Other examples are people having ropes pulled through thier tongues and *****, some were burnt alive. Other people were drowned for the Gods and the native people were getting their hearts being torn out to please the Aztec Gods.

When the Spaniards or Europeans came, many Natives would choose to support the new Holy Spanish Empire because it was the lesser of two evils, and many natives even rose up and helped the Spanish destroy the Empires of Mesoamerica

[Kippari]

Until the smallpox came and put them to their christian graves. The rest were mostly enslaved to ranchos as inferior beings. Happy ending, eh?

[Warlord]

Until the smallpox came and put them to their christian graves. The rest were mostly enslaved to ranchos as inferior beings. Happy ending, eh?

Just like the Greeks invading other lands or the Mongol hoards or the Persians or the Romans etc....

Every nation that conquers another will of course do what it wants to do. Enslave if you will. That doesn't make it right in todays standard but it was the norm then. Tell me of an aggressor who have done right to the nation/people they've subjugated?

[Kojo]

Until the smallpox came and put them to their christian graves. The rest were mostly enslaved to ranchos as inferior beings. Happy ending, eh?


Yeh these guys were absolutely thrilled with the idea of having new masters I bet! rofl They heared so much about christianity in their thousands of years of history, and finally they came on their boats HOOORAAY, what a glorious day that was. The christians finally arrived to take their gold and bring glorious new diseases noone even heared off, let alone could cure. Well worth the waiting!

[Kojo]

Just like the Greeks invading other lands or the Mongol hoards or the Persians or the Romans etc....

Every nation that conquers another will of course do what it wants to do. Enslave if you will. That doesn't make it right in todays standard but it was the norm then. Tell me of an aggressor who have done right to the nation/people they've subjugated?


That's not the point here now is it. Yeh most countries have a part in history where they invaded some country and ****ed over the guys living there. Everyone knows now that stuff was absolutely horrendous, except for the pope who apparently thinks the native americans were longing for such a thing to happen...

[oldsoak]

I'm not sure if HH ( His Holiness ) is right. The AmerIndians were not know of other belief systems outside their own prior to the arrival of the west, and after conversion incorporated a lot of local pagan beliefs into their version of Catholicism. That Christianity was a less bloody religion is true ( although its practitioners leave a lot to be desired ), and its replacement of beleifs invovling human sacrifice was a step up for the AmerIndians. They might have longed for peaceful and stable times, but i'm not sure Chritistanity was what they had in mind.

[Playtime]

Coming from a Pope that has not done what he should in being honest and open about the child raping priests in his protection. He has a "slight" disconnect with reality.

[AROUETLJ]

Having your heart torn out by an Inca priest, or being killed by a Spanish musket. What's the difference?

[foxtrot023]

Having your heart torn out by an Inca priest, or being killed by a Spanish/portuguese/french/english/dutch musket. What's the difference?

fixed it for ya

[foxtrot023]

When the Spaniards or Europeans came,

Spaniards are europeans. But you are correct, the conquest of Mexico could not have been done without native help

[oldsoak]

Having your heart torn out by an Inca priest, or being killed by a Spanish musket. What's the difference?

There is one - Aztec religion demanded regular human sacrifice, hence their repeated wars to provide prisoners for this - Christianity does not.

[Hollis]

Until the smallpox came and put them to their christian graves. The rest were mostly enslaved to ranchos as inferior beings. Happy ending, eh?


That is one of the big modern myths (Smallpox being deliberately given). Do some research on Infectious diseases and when Humans started to figured it out.

A hint it way after that persiod.

Another Hint infections/sanitation and the understanding started during the American Civil War, when Southern Doctors, who had to result to using Boiled Horse hair to sew up peopled, realize there were less infection when boiled horse hair was used than the normal suture.

[Hollis]

Coming from a Pope that has not done what he should in being honest and open about the child raping priests in his protection. He has a "slight" disconnect with reality.


That is pure flame bait, (I am not a Catholic), but why don't you find out how many Priests there are in the world. Last article I read, there was appoximately 1 Billion Catholics.

Your flame bait is worse than calling all Muslims Terrorists, There are about as many Muslims as Catholics. Exceptions do not make the group. I cold have used any other religious groups, but the Muslim are about equal in number to the Catholics. As we know the perponderance of Muslims are NOT terrorists. The same is with Catholic Priest the perponderance are fine people.

[toowoozy]

There is one - Aztec religion demanded regular human sacrifice, hence their repeated wars to provide prisoners for this - Christianity does not.

Yes but of course during that time if you went against the faith (any judeo christian) or said the world was round, then you were executed for heresy.

[foxtrot023]

Yes but of course during that time if you went against the faith (any judeo christian) or said the world was round, then you were executed for heresy.

while true, if you compare numbers, you will see that the difference it astoundish. When the Spaniards took over Technochtian, they counted over 100,000 skulls of said sacrifices

[oldsoak]

I think were missingthe point - Christianity does not require the burning of heretics, whereas some AmerInidian religions required human sacrifice. That Church officials took it upon themselves to enforce panalties no demanded by christianity is a problem with the church.

[Hollis]

Yes but of course during that time if you went against the faith (any judeo christian) or said the world was round, then you were executed for heresy.


I think you brought up the best point, in that you clarified it by saying, "During that Time".

I think that is the most important factor in looking back. I would not want to have lived in that period of time. Brutality was almost the hallmark of the times. It was almost or was a oxymoron to say Europe was Civilized during that period of time. It was more civilize in comparison to the times that preceded it.

Often when people look back they are/can be historically centric, seeing that times from the customes and mores of today.

[Kippari]

Yeh these guys were absolutely thrilled with the idea of having new masters I bet! rofl They heared so much about christianity in their thousands of years of history, and finally they came on their boats HOOORAAY, what a glorious day that was. The christians finally arrived to take their gold and bring glorious new diseases noone even heared off, let alone could cure. Well worth the waiting!

Hahaha, I can almost see the tear in tribal chief's eye when he's kissing the metal boot of clergyman, who just burned her wife for not turning into christianity.

Hollis. I never said that the small pox were brought on native americans deliberately. You have to face it tho, it was an extremely brutal campaign by conquistadores greedy for gold and silver of the native american kingdoms, rather than just bringing the christianity to infidels.

The Catholic church from 12th to 17th century was as brutal as todays wahhabists. I guess the wahhabists are like todays catholics in 500 years.

[Hollis]

Hollis. I never said that the small pox were brought on native americans deliberately. You have to face it tho, it was an extremely brutal campaign by conquistadores greedy for gold and silver of the native american kingdoms, rather than just bringing the christianity to infidels.

The Catholic church from 12th to 17th century was as brutal as todays wahhabists. I guess the wahhabists are like todays catholics in 500 years.


Most affirmative there......... I would rather lived on another planet back then. There was no safe place.

[foxtrot023]

Hahaha, I can almost see the tear in tribal chief's eye when he's kissing the metal boot of clergyman, who just burned her wife for not turning into christianity.

Hollis. I never said that the small pox were brought on native americans deliberately. You have to face it tho, it was an extremely brutal campaign by conquistadores greedy for gold and silver of the native american kingdoms, rather than just bringing the christianity to infidels.

The Catholic church from 12th to 17th century was as brutal as todays wahhabists. I guess the wahhabists are like todays catholics in 500 years.

Kippari,

Conquistadores were greedy, but not only the conquistadores, same with the deseases, which were brought by all european explorers, not a specific set (mind you, it was not something done on purpose). The follow up wave did bring Christianity, bear in mind that the mindset at the time was to spread Christianity, and the Catholic church was very keen on doing so.

[Kaapeli]

I think were missingthe point - Christianity does not require the burning of heretics, whereas some AmerInidian religions required human sacrifice. That Church officials took it upon themselves to enforce panalties no demanded by christianity is a problem with the church.

The Old Testament is filled with genocides, murder, rape and wars supposedly ordered by the Christian/Jewish God. These two religions could just as well be interpreted to demand such actions if one wanted to.

Anyway the Aztecs and the Incas were just some of the many indigineous civilizations. There were hundreds more that didn't practice human sacrifice.

[oldsoak]

The Old Testament is filled with genocides, murder, rape and wars supposedly ordered by the Christian/Jewish God. These two religions could just as well be interpreted to demand such actions if one wanted to.

Anyway the Aztecs and the Incas were just some of the many indigineous civilizations. There were hundreds more that didn't practice human sacrifice.

We're not discussing the old testament as a history, we're discussing the religious requirements of Christianity vs AmerIndian religions. Christianity, I can assure you, doesnt require the burning of heretics or human sacrifice. The Inquisition turned to the old testament to justify their acts, not the new. The Toltecs and Mayans were other Amerindian civilisations that required human sacrifice as did the pre Inca civilisations like the Chimu or Mochica.

[Bandeirante]

And most of the Brazilians Indians in the Litoral were Cannibals. Cities were not conquered but founded by the Portuguese and Tupi Indians in a political and military alliance. Some Indians did cooperate and they are a big part of the Brazilian genetic composition. The Indians also killed each other and as in Europe Christianity became the biggest religion peacefully or violently, just like anywhere in the world because religion is always associated with war, everywhere.

[foxtrot023]

We're not discussing the old testament as a history, we're discussing the religious requirements of Christianity vs AmerIndian religions. Christianity, I can assure you, doesnt require the burning of heretics or human sacrifice. The Inquisition turned to the old testament to justify their acts, not the new. The Toltecs and Mayans were other Amerindian civilisations that required human sacrifice as did the pre Inca civilisations like the Chimu or Mochica.

as a matter of fact, the different civilizations in the central Mexico valley would go to wars (called flower wars) whose sole purpose was to get prisoners for sacrifices. According to their religion, the blood was their gods food.

Read this

The practice of human sacrifice (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice) was widespread in the Mesoamerican and in the South American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_America) cultures during the Inca Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inca_Empire).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture#_note-4)[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture#_note-5) Like all other known pre-Columbian civilizations of Mesoamerica the Aztecs practiced human sacrifices. The extant sources describe how the Aztecs sacrificed human victims on each of their eighteen festivities, one festivity for each of their 20-day months.[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture#_note-6) It is unknown if the Aztecs engaged in human sacrifice before they reached the Anahuac (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anahuac) valley and started absorbing other cultural influences. The first human sacrifice reported in the sources was the sacrifice and skinning of the daughter of the king Cóxcox of Culhuacán, this story is a part of the legend of the foundation of Tenochtitlan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenochtitlan).[8] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture#_note-7) Several ethnohistorical sources state that under the guidance of Tlacaelel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tlacaelel) the importance of human sacrifice in Aztec history was given extra emphasis
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Aztec_culture

[Hollis]

"The Old Testament is filled with genocides, murder, rape and wars supposedly or..." As quoted by Kaapeli

Genocide(S), the only people was the Amalek that is ONE GROUP.

Murder.... WHen

Rape When

Wars....still going on

As Oldsoak stated; "We're not discussing the old testament as a history, we're discussing the religious requirements of Christianity vs AmerIndian religions."

How about staying on topic, and Also maybe learn what you talking qbout off topic.

[Kaapeli]

"The Old Testament is filled with genocides, murder, rape and wars supposedly or..." As quoted by Kaapeli

Genocide(S), the only people was the Amalek that is ONE GROUP.

Murder.... WHen

Rape When

Wars....still going on

As Oldsoak stated; "We're not discussing the old testament as a history, we're discussing the religious requirements of Christianity vs AmerIndian religions."

How about staying on topic, and Also maybe learn what you talking qbout off topic.

Judges 21:10-24
Numbers 31:7-18
Deuteronomy 20:10-14
Judges 5:30
Zechariah 14:1-2

[oldsoak]

- very good, :roll:
now tell me where in the new testament does it say that rape and murder or human sacrifice are required of Christians.

[lider_r]

- very good, :roll:
now tell me where in the new testament does it say that rape and murder or human sacrifice are required of Christians.

"Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)


also i think the most important thing to remember is that the new testament points out that the laws of the old testament cannot be overturned or ignored:

“...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

[ozumn]

Just like the Greeks invading other lands or the Mongol hoards or the Persians or the Romans etc....

Every nation that conquers another will of course do what it wants to do. Enslave if you will. That doesn't make it right in todays standard but it was the norm then. Tell me of an aggressor who have done right to the nation/people they've subjugated?

Vikings!!!!

[oldsoak]

"Whoever curses father or mother shall die" (Mark 7:10 NAB)

He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death.” (Matthew 15:4-7)


also i think the most important thing to remember is that the new testament points out that the laws of the old testament cannot be overturned or ignored:

“...the scripture cannot be broken.” --Jesus Christ, John 10:35

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17 NAB)

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

- context, context. Look at the context. Does Jesus have the alduteress stoned as required by the law ?

[lider_r]

its not possible to put 'murdering your children because they cursed you' into a context that would make such an action justifiable.

[Playtime]

That is pure flame bait, (I am not a Catholic), but why don't you find out how many Priests there are in the world. Last article I read, there was appoximately 1 Billion Catholics.

Your flame bait is worse than calling all Muslims Terrorists, There are about as many Muslims as Catholics. Exceptions do not make the group. I cold have used any other religious groups, but the Muslim are about equal in number to the Catholics. As we know the perponderance of Muslims are NOT terrorists. The same is with Catholic Priest the perponderance are fine people.

Why drag muslims in? And I never said Catholics per se were evil... just the Pope (and his establishment) is not up to the high moral standards he claim to deliver/represent. The Vatican/Pope did everything in their power to cover up for the ****** predators, sacrificing little childrens welfare along the way for decades. BBC Panorama did a damning investigative piece on it, dont know if u seen it.

[IronFinn]

This pope can be a bit loony but I think there's a lot of truth to what he has said because the people like Nahua, Totonaco, or Otomi were living under the horrible Aztec Empire of central. The native people of Mexico and other S.American states had to endure famine, be-headings, human sacrifice, blood rituals. Other examples are people having ropes pulled through thier tongues and *****, some were burnt alive. Other people were drowned for the Gods and the native people were getting their hearts being torn out to please the Aztec Gods.

When the Spaniards or Europeans came, many Natives would choose to support the new Holy Spanish Empire because it was the lesser of two evils, and many natives even rose up and helped the Spanish destroy the Empires of Mesoamerica

What I have read from the conquistadors and the aftermatch of the campaing is that after killing/raping/looting/forced chirstianity/destroyed heritage a good bunch of the natives were sold or taken to gold and silver mines, farms etc. to work as slaves under horrific conditions and they died like flies. Conquistadors were nice to natives only as long as they could use them agains the inkas and aztecs. After that they were useless for them. Divide et impera or something like that.

[Kippari]

its not possible to put 'murdering your children because they cursed you' into a context that would make such an action justifiable.

Yes it is but you would have to put it into a historical context. Back then there were no school systems or anything we now hold civilized. Religion was a tool to keep people in check. The society didn't want any renegade youngsters running about, because it would ultimately hurt the society's order. Now, I'm a christian (although I go to church only if there's a party like wedding or funeral), but holding the bible a historical compilation of true stories is somewhat, well, stupid. No offense to anybody. Ofcourse people thought that it was for real and some still do.
The explorers and conquerors introduced the America to continental European warfare and the policies of reconquista. The Pope is not evil or anything, but he tends to say things that do not belong to this century.

[lider_r]

if you want children to learn good manners you dont have to pass laws threatening to kill them when they speak back to their parents

It wasn't acceptable to have those kind of ideas floating about 2000 years ago, nor is it acceptable to have books which still describe those ideas in our day and age.

The bible has always, and will always, be a text riddled with brutality that doesnt really fit in with a civilised society, which is why modern day christians cherry pick the non-violent parts of the bible and dismiss and make excuses for the violent parts.

[Kaapeli]

- very good, :roll:
now tell me where in the new testament does it say that rape and murder or human sacrifice are required of Christians.

Read the bible passages I gave you. There the Christian/Jewish God is claimed to have ordered his followers to kill and rape among other things ("go and ravage their women and kill everyone else" etc.). Did he or did he not require his followers to do such things or does the bible simply lie about those things happening?

[no-way-jose]

Humm, first, Incas did not offer human sacrifices. Other cultures in S. America did. For instances the "chavin" did it.
Second, when the spaniards arrive to S. America, the inca empire was in the middle of a civil war. Other tribes that were conquered by the Incas were looking for somebody to lead them against incas.

Did the spaniards were thieves? Yes, the stole gold and other treasuries from the incas. Are there any proofs of that? Yes! read the "cronistas" or bookeepers (all of them spaniards) they keep track of every single melting and extraction of gold.
Were the incas thieves? I guess there were some of them but if they get were caught, thats it he gets kill, end of the story. A conquistador (we called invasor) steal and becames a knight.:-(
There were bad and good people in both sides.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

Humm, first, Incas did not offer human sacrifices. Other cultures in S. America did. For instances the "chavin" did it.

Yes they did, just not on the scale of other South/Central American cultures.

They took their human sacrifices (usually young girls) up on top of mountains and killed them there, and left them there to mummify. We sometimes find the mummies today.

[foxtrot023]

Humm, first, Incas did not offer human sacrifices. Other cultures in S. America did. For instances the "chavin" did it.
Second, when the spaniards arrive to S. America, the inca empire was in the middle of a civil war. Other tribes that were conquered by the Incas were looking for somebody to lead them against incas.

Did the spaniards were thieves? Yes, the stole gold and other treasuries from the incas. Are there any proofs of that? Yes! read the "cronistas" or bookeepers (all of them spaniards) they keep track of every single melting and extraction of gold.
Were the incas thieves? I guess there were some of them but if they get were caught, thats it he gets kill, end of the story. A conquistador (we called invasor) steal and becames a knight.:-(
There were bad and good people in both sides.

Rather than say Spaniards were thieves, say Conquistadores were looters. They did not stole, they took it by force (I know it might be splitting hairs, but it is true nontheless). You must remember that by far, many conquistadores were inmates given a chance- Rot in jail or go to the new world. It is also a reason why they were not many Spaniards in the americas, unlike say the US, were whole families migrated.

[Hollis]

Why drag muslims in? And I never said Catholics per se were evil... just the Pope (and his establishment) is not up to the high moral standards he claim to deliver/represent. The Vatican/Pope did everything in their power to cover up for the ****** predators, sacrificing little childrens welfare along the way for decades. BBC Panorama did a damning investigative piece on it, dont know if u seen it.


Playtime, why did you not read all my post, the only reason was both groups have about equal number of members........ That was the only reason.

There is a expression, "... the exception to the rule." That means, the "exception" does not make the rule.

When you have a billion people a very tiny % or small % of people who have abhorrent behavior does not indicate anything of the perponderance of the rest. You can blame it on the Bell Shape curve.

NEXT TRY reading the WHOLE post. OK, the explaination was there.

Your Post was Flame bait.

[Hollis]

- context, context. Look at the context. Does Jesus have the alduteress stoned as required by the law ?


I don't know about these people, they have no clue of Context. I guess when it conflicts their opinion, who cares about context, fact, or accuracy.

[Roanoke]

Fantastic. Lider found evilbible and suddenly he thinks he's the expert.


its not possible to put 'murdering your children because they cursed you' into a context that would make such an action justifiable.Just curious, if God really is God and He is the final decider on things, what and who are you to judge what he does? With what moral authority do you say that killing an outright and repeatedly disobedient and unruly child is wrong? What divine insight makes your opinion more valid than what we read in the Bible?

Of course, Jesus fulfilled the law, so a lot of things in the Old Testament have passed away. I'm sure you've heard of the word "grace" used in religious context.

/e

Sorry for continuing the off-topic discussion. I just don't like them having the last word.

[Playtime]

Playtime, why did you not read all my post, the only reason was both groups have about equal number of members........ That was the only reason.

There is a expression, "... the exception to the rule." That means, the "exception" does not make the rule.

When you have a billion people a very tiny % or small % of people who have abhorrent behavior does not indicate anything of the perponderance of the rest. You can blame it on the Bell Shape curve.

NEXT TRY reading the WHOLE post. OK, the explaination was there.

Your Post was Flame bait.

Perhaps we arent looking at the same thing. Let me repeat, the failures of the pope/Vatican DOES NOT equal the rest of catholics. You seem to equate any criticism of the pope/vatican as a blanket condemnation of ALL catholics and I do not. Try to understand that and read the WHOLE post.

In case you havent seen the BBC Panorama piece. What the vatican did.
1) Young victims and families were repeatedly sworn to secrecy to protect the priests.
2) Known predators were rotated to different communities time and again, same results followed.
3) Police investigators described the vatican establishment as "mafia like" in their code of silence and stone walling.
4) Known offenders were given sanctuary in the vatican, effectively putting them beyond law enforcement reach.
5) As the scandals unfolded, the vat issued direct orders that all *** crimes were to be reported ONLY to the vatican, NOT to local law enforcement. The current pope was instrumental in implementing this policy. (he wasnt the pope yet at that time)
6) Priest who dug too deep to expose such matters were forced out. They went on camera for BBC.

Happen anywhere else... and I am sure those responsible would be hung out to dry... including the leaders. But.... the vat is "special", so there you go.

What does it prove?? This pope is even willing to sacrifice children to protect his establishment, of course he would say anything to justify the actions of the catholic church in south america.

[lider_r]

Fantastic. Lider found evilbible and suddenly he thinks he's the expert.

you dont have to be an expert to realise calls to violence when you read them. Just like you don't have to be an expert to make excuses for them.


Just curious, if God really is God and He is the final decider on things, what and who are you to judge what he does? With what moral authority do you say that killing an outright and repeatedly disobedient and unruly child is wrong?

Your assuming that i even believe in the christian god, as opposed to realising from an early age that the only person responsible for the direction of my life, to a certain extent, is me. Even if you think an invisible God is the ultimate authority on all things moral, then what right does a believer have to tell a non-believer how to live their lives?

Its not God who decides what is morally correct, its the people who read 'god's book' and decided which passages are good and which ones arent

Are you saying that it is within moral boundries to kill a child for being disobedient?


What divine insight makes your opinion more valid than what we read in the Bible?

Reason, logic,compassion and a sense of what is fair - as opposed to blind faith and dogmas.

If you think that the bible is on the right side of the moral argument then you hold views that contravene the laws of western civilisized countries.


Of course, Jesus fulfilled the law, so a lot of things in the Old Testament have passed away. I'm sure you've heard of the word "grace" used in religious context.

Witchburnings and the persecution of homo******s and non-believers didnt stop until Christian 'morality' clashed with free thought and secular ethics.


Sorry for continuing the off-topic discussion. I just don't like them having the last word

who is 'them'?

[Hollis]

Playtime are you OK, your way out there.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

Witchburnings and the persecution of homo******s and non-believers didnt stop until Christian 'morality' clashed with free thought and secular ethics.

Europe's pre-Christian habits died hard.

[IraGlacialis]

- very good, :roll:
now tell me where in the new testament does it say that rape and murder or human sacrifice are required of Christians.
Read the bible passages I gave you. There the Christian/Jewish God is claimed to have ordered his followers to kill and rape among other things ("go and ravage their women and kill everyone else" etc.). Did he or did he not require his followers to do such things or does the bible simply lie about those things happening?
All of the Bible passages that you mentioned were from the Old Testament, was mainly rendered obsolete by Jesus.

For example:
You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Matthew 5:38-39

They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.
Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
This they said, tempting him, and they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.
So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He who is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone.
John 8:4-7

BTW, what relevence does this even have to the original topic? Oh wait, never mind...

[lider_r]

All of the Bible passages that you mentioned were from the Old Testament, was mainly rendered obsolete by Jesus.


Thats not strictly true, there are plenty of passages in the NT that tell followers not to ignore the laws of the OT:

All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness... (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB)

Did not Moses give you the law, and yet none of you keepeth the law(John7:19)

Know this first of all, that there is no prophecy of scripture that is a matter of personal interpretation, for no prophecy ever came through human will; but rather human beings moved by the holy Spirit spoke under the influence of God. (2 Peter 20-21 NAB)

There are other passages which reinforce the laws put down in the old testament regarding working on the sabbath, homo******ity etc..