Pope said other churches are "defective", is he right?

[Master_of_the_Faster]

Originally Posted by jewpinthethird

Pretty much what I was trying to get at. Model your life after the teachings of Jesus. Become your own Christ. We are all equal, regardless of what color our skin is, or what faith we prescribe too. We are all the sons and daughters of God. No human life is more important than another, and all life on Earth should be respected. The Catholic Church, being the totalitarian dictatorship that it was, sought to suppress equality, peace and democracy by making Jesus Christ "the divine Son of God and savior," robbing him of his humanity, as well as setting up a theological bureaucracy so that the masses wouldn't be able to interpret the stories of the Bible on their own, having to instead rely on the Church for their salvation.

People have to realize that religion doesn't govern your individuality unless you let it. So what if there may or may not be any god(s) and people tell you what is "right","wrong",or "normal". The truth is that the only thing relevant to any person is their own life, liberty, and property. How you want to give, take, defend, or do what ever with your own life, liberty, or property shapes how you see what people call "right","wrong",or "normal".

Until there is any proven connection between anyone's life, liberty, and property to praying or customs, I see no reason to pray or believe in these customs created by humans especially without proof of validity.

People believe there is a "hell" and if such a place as hell can truely exist, it wouldn't just make you a sinner to be in such a place, but a person whos individuality clashes with that of a being such as these god(s) that people believe in or atleast with what we know, a person's individuality that would clash with that of some religious person's view. Perhaps you might want to pray, but I'm not stopping you if that's your wish. However, if people are going to force others to pray or violently bigot against others who pray to other things, then you are trying to take away live, liberty, or property that not even a righteous god or being should do. After all, would a god of any decency want you to fight a religious war?

Edit: I remember seeing this quote from wikipedia as shown by slipstrike0159 in the scientology thread:

Originally Posted by slipstrike0159

"Originally Posted by Wikipedia
The Church of Satan draws its name from the mythological and cultural concepts of Satan. Satan stands as the central symbol for many different gods, including Ahriman, Loki, Set, Amon, and Belial, all seen as symbolic of the same ideals and archetype. The Church of Satan claims that every individual can be his or her own god and is responsible for his or her own destiny. (In their usage, "Satan" denotes a symbol and metaphor rather than a literal anthropomorphic deity.) People who follow this belief system are called "Satanists"".

When I read the line that says "every individual can be his or her own god and is responsible for his or her own destiny", this really hints at the fact that people should respect their own life, libery, or property/individuality over anything else (perhaps even over some god if you so choose).

How can a pope even call others defective without having any physical evidence to back up any stated claims? Humans are all said to be imperfect and even though we hate to accept that title as well as want to achieve perfection in the ways that we choose, it's very much true that humans are imperfect right now in some shape or form. I wouldn't be surprised if any popes themselves were "defective" especially if they unnecessarily bigot against other religions (these last statements were only made assuming that this pope frowns upon the other churches or bigots against any other religions with actually calling any of them "defective").

[devonin]

How can a pope even call others defective without having any physical evidence to back up any stated claims?

He didn't call them defective. A statement was interpreted to mean that, and had you read the entire thread to see where the article in question was quoted, you'd have seen that. And he -did- have evidence for the fact that these other religions were missing an integral factor, namely that they didn't follow several of the practices that the "true" church did.

[Philpwnsyou]

Devonin-
"practices that the "true" church did"

Yes, practices that as we have established, are biblically unfounded.

And to Jewpin-

Please quote for me the scripture which states :

"Jesus is in all of us, theres no specific way to follow his teachings, do what you feel is right"

You will not find that scripture or any other scripture even remotely close to it in the Bible, because it does not exist.

There is a clear method to worship God and be an "Ideal" Christian, that is outlined in the Holy Scriptures.

[Grandiagod]

Hmm, what could possibly motivate the Pope, the leader and ultimate authority in Catholicism to declare Catholicism the one true religion?

I mean, it's not like by declaring Catholicism the only true religion he sets himself up as the most spiritually powerful human being on the planet.

I mean, it's not like a return to a few hundred years ago when Catholicism was the most corrupt, morally bankrupt, barbaric sect of Christianity to ever exit. Where people who weren't Catholic were persecuted, tortured, killed, etc. because Catholics believed their religion is the only true one thus they had the ultimate moral authority to do whatever they pleased.

I mean nowdays the Catholic Church is a great morally robust institution. You would never find any outdated inane customs, such as condemning birth control, having to have the church's blessing to dissolve a marriage which often results in a
psychological drag through the mud or denying abortion in the case of rape or incest. I mean, it's not like Catholics think sex is impure thus their priests and bishops have to take a vow of celibacy. And of course they wouldn't try to hide the scandal of thousands of molested and raped children by the morally corrupt priests driven insane by the ridiculous requirements of celibacy.

No, of course not. Catholicism is the one true religion.

Edit for this incredible video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VABSoHYQr6k

Yes it may be a bit fallacious but hey, <3

OOPS I put the wrong vid in there the first time =(

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

haha, hes stupid.

for one, he believes in god.

secondly, he is a meanie.

[Loot You]

The Pope was right. You're either a Catholic or a heathen.

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

Originally Posted by Loot You

The Pope was right. You're either a Catholic or a heathen.

Those are your words... Catholic or Heathen. how bout... Pushover or Critical Thinker. OR, Delusionist or Logical Person. OR, why not Crackpot or Not-Stupidass.

[OrganisM]

This topic's gone the toilet. While I have a lot of problems with religion, I won't discount somebody as stupid, illogical, or as being a pushover and a crackpot simply because they make the conscious decision to believe in a deity.

This topic belongs in Chit Chat - very little discussion is being made on it, and many of the replies in this thread are childish or uninformative. Better to post the article as a matter of curiosity in Chit Chat, rather than trying to milk it for CT, and upon finding very little to debate about, resorting to name-calling.

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

Originally Posted by OrganisM

This topic's gone the toilet. While I have a lot of problems with religion, I won't discount somebody as stupid, illogical, or as being a pushover and a crackpot simply because they make the conscious decision to believe in a deity.

This topic belongs in Chit Chat - very little discussion is being made on it, and many of the replies in this thread are childish or uninformative. Better to post the article as a matter of curiosity in Chit Chat, rather than trying to milk it for CT, and upon finding very little to debate about, resorting to name-calling.

Well I call em as I see em. The people are believing in many things disproved by fact, and they are being lead on by a book written by a bunch of people claiming to be something or other 2000 years ago. We've proven the medical practises and beliefs back then to be false, the bible is next.

[OrganisM]

No, you resort to ad hominem attacks, and as such don't belong in CT.

While I disagree with many of the principles of religion and of course question its foundation, I think the way you're handling it is rather childish. The whole point of Critical Thinking is to debate. When you debate you rebut and can attack the points of others. Attacking your opponent personally is not part of debate. Leave that for The Garbage Bin.

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

Originally Posted by OrganisM

No, you resort to ad hominem attacks, and as such don't belong in CT.

While I disagree with many of the principles of religion and of course question its foundation, I think the way you're handling it is rather childish. The whole point of Critical Thinking is to debate. When you debate you rebut and can attack the points of others. Attacking your opponent personally is not part of debate. Leave that for The Garbage Bin.

Well I feel strongly about the point. Obviously, if someone comes up to you and insists that the sky appears pink without changing their ground, you would view them as stupid (or colourblind). Its the same thing with religion, in my eyes. Its just that stupid.

[OrganisM]

I feel strongly about the topic as well, and I strongly feel that your point is rather shallow.

"You are stating something which to me is obviously incorrect. Therefore, you are stupid."

It's not the same, and you're taking things out of context. I can see the lot of good and bad that religion does, and if you can't, I'm sorry for your lack of life experience.

Let's not perpetuate this. It'll only turn into a mess.

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

Originally Posted by OrganisM

I feel strongly about the topic as well, and I strongly feel that your point is rather shallow.

"You are stating something which to me is obviously incorrect. Therefore, you are stupid."

It's not the same, and you're taking things out of context. I can see the lot of good and bad that religion does, and if you can't, I'm sorry for your lack of life experience.

Let's not perpetuate this. It'll only turn into a mess.

Im a scientist and an athiest. If it isnt fact, it isnt me. So its as plain as the colour of the sky, to me. I can see what religion does... provides false hopes, and causing a messload of conflict in the world.

[OrganisM]

Religion causes a lot of bad, but it does a lot of good in the world. But that's an entirely different subject.

I am agnostic, and I have a great appreciation for science. And I can safely say that your pretentiousness is definitely not characteristic of a scientist.

[Dropkick_Pantacles]

Originally Posted by OrganisM

Religion causes a lot of bad, but it does a lot of good in the world. But that's an entirely different subject.

I am agnostic, and I have a great appreciation for science. And I can safely say that your pretentiousness is definitely not characteristic of a scientist.

not a scientist, just someone intolerant with stupidity. Which is why I can talk to you. Easy to tell your a great thinker and a smart guy.

[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by Philpwnsyou

Devonin-
"practices that the "true" church did"

Yes, practices that as we have established, are biblically unfounded.

Again, you have by no means proved that. I'm not asking for a conversion, here, but even if you don't agree with it, the Catholic interpretation (hardly an interpretation, though) is most definitely biblically founded.

I don't have the time at the moment, but the one point on which you rested your entire argument is shaky at best, and claiming victory in our debate because I've been too busy to respond as of late is almost a logical fallacy in and of itself.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

[devonin]

Originally Posted by DropkickPantacles

Im a scientist

Originally Posted by DropkickPantacles

not a scientist

Riight.

Originally Posted by DropkickPantacles

haha, hes stupid.

for one, he believes in god.

secondly, he is a meanie.

Ad hominem - 5 points. Also, to whom was that directed? Claiming that "anyone who believes in God is stupid" is a fairly ignorant kind of statement to make. I've known plenty of highly intelligent people who also believe in God.

Originally Posted by Dropkick Pantacles

Those are your words... Catholic or Heathen. how bout... Pushover or Critical Thinker. OR, Delusionist or Logical Person. OR, why not Crackpot or Not-Stupidass.

Ad hominem again. -10 for repeat offense. I've known many non-religious pushovers, and delusional people, plenty of logical religious people, and vice versa. These statements contribute nothing.

Originally Posted by Dropkick Pantacles

Obviously, if someone comes up to you and insists that the sky appears pink without changing their ground, you would view them as stupid (or colourblind).

If to them, it genuinely -did- appear to be pink, they would think the exact same of you for claiming it was blue, and for much the same reason. How can you be so sure that you are the correct one?

Welcome to Critical Thinking, please review the stickies with regard to the rules, you might find the ones about personal attacks, and backing up your claims with evidence especially helpful.

[Philpwnsyou]

Originally Posted by GuidoHunter

Again, you have by no means proved that. I'm not asking for a conversion, here, but even if you don't agree with it, the Catholic interpretation (hardly an interpretation, though) is most definitely biblically founded.

I don't have the time at the moment, but the one point on which you rested your entire argument is shaky at best, and claiming victory in our debate because I've been too busy to respond as of late is almost a logical fallacy in and of itself.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com

If what im saying is so shaky, explain to me how "abstain from things strangled, abstain from blood", would not be in use in this instance of transubstantiation?

The Bible is not a Chinese Buffet in which you pick and choose what to acknowledge.
-2 Timothy 3:16

Any interpretation of the Bible, should completely harmonize with the stated facts listed therein. 100% of the time.

ex: "Do not Kill" "Do not commit fornication" "Do not worship idols" "Abstain from blood"

[Philpwnsyou]

Does the lack of a response from anyone indicate that you all can understand the logical line of reasoning im using?
Getting back to my original post on this thread, Catholicism does indeed have un-scriptural practices and in my opinion the Pope should address the internal doctrinal concerns of the catholic church before calling any other church "defective".

[Relambrien]

Originally Posted by Philpwnsyou

Does the lack of a response from anyone indicate that you all can understand the logical line of reasoning im using?

Not necessarily; it just means that anybody who's cared to look at your post hasn't cared to respond to it. Those who would respond to it haven't yet looked at it.