Vatican updates list of mortal sins

Remember that those who believe have a different approach:

You see: If god exists, Pascal's wager...But since there's no scientific proof of god's existence...

Believers see: Since god exists, Pascal's wager... But since we give the benefit of doubt, think about WHAT IF...
 
yakuruto said:
Remember that those who believe have a different approach:

You see: If god exists, Pascal's wager...But since there's no scientific proof of god's existence...

Believers see: Since god exists, Pascal's wager... But since we give the benefit of doubt, think about WHAT IF...
Click to expand...

But there is no way they can know THEY'RE God exists. If your a christian and Allah is real you're ****ed eh?
 
didn't bother reading the thread but i don't see why this is going on a lot of pages... obviously proves catholics are brainwashed.

i think its a sin to be that ****ing stupid. all catholics are going to "hell".
 
noisebleed said:
didn't bother reading the thread but i don't see why this is going on a lot of pages... obviously proves catholics are brainwashed.

i think its a sin to be that ****ing stupid. all catholics are going to "hell".
Click to expand...

Ha ha ha ha, if you take your time and read the thread you would feel rather dumb after realizing that most catholics posting in this thread are actually saying the Vatican is not infallible and most of us are against some or many of their points :cheese:
 
lame-o said:
It means that those who DO believe have a better chance of gaining something, and those that DON'T have no chance of anything good. It's not supposed to be a guide for choosing whether you believe or don't believe. So yes, it DOES show that the odds of profit are better for those who believe. What are you, a rebel of logic or something?
Click to expand...

What if there turns out to be a god who only lets atheists past the pearly gates? What if religion on earth is a test devised by God that only atheists can pass?
 
PvtRyan said:
What if there turns out to be a god who only lets atheists past the pearly gates? What if religion on earth is a test devised by God that only atheists can pass?
Click to expand...

This.

Pascal's Wager ignores the infinite kinds of gods that can exist. If you were to take it seriously, every theist would still have a high statistical probability of damnation no better or worse than an atheist's because you are still more than likely to end up worshipping the wrong god. There could be a deity that rewards skepticism and doubt and punishes faith. In fact, the one or more gods that could hypothetically be governing the universe may not even be known to mankind, and every religion inhabiting the planet is false.
 
jverne said:
it doesn't bother you the that the pope (or other religious madman) just makes up his mind on something and declares that sacred law?
who the **** is he to be acting on gods behalf?
he's applying old laws to modern trends...that is just wrong in so many ways. he's doing that on his personal opinion, he's manipulating scripture to make it seem compatible. HE IS APPLYING
Click to expand...
He isn't declaring things sacred law you biased bullshitter, he's saying that it doesn't CONTRADICT sacred law. Any religious person with half a brain could tell you that all the pope is doing is making that statement officially to members of the church.
He isn't manipulating scripture at all, the Catholics believed that Genesis was a parable even before scientists came up with the Big Bang theory.
They did believe in creation of man by god, but that's by default because nobody had some up with a scientific alternative.

jverne said:
what about the bad parts of the bible that tell about stoning and killing?
are those just not compatible anymore?
Click to expand...
They haven't been compatible since Jesus told people to turn the other cheek, and let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

jverne said:
seriously man grow up. there was no pope around 300 AD. then they just started to make things up and add new stuff to the religion, like celibacy.
Click to expand...
I never defended the position of the Pope in general, I'm defending him on the issue of the Church's position to Science which you and others are completely willfully misinterpreting because you HATE religion so much.

jverne said:
of course there is nothing wrong for these things to exist, it's when people act upon them, that is wrong. then people start dying, money gets robbed and progress is slowed. thats what matters!
Click to expand...
What about nationalists and patriots?
Nationalism is responseable for AT LEAST as many deaths as religion, but people on this board never bash it. Hell, there are a bunch of atheists on this board who seems very nationalistic yet always bring up this argument about religion being the root of all evil.

Hypocrites.
 
Eejit, when the world becomes a firestorm of nationalist violence and urgency, you may have a valid point.
But it's not. So why keep bringing it up? I can't remember the last time I read or saw a news report that convinced me that nationalism is currently a big deal currently in the world.

WHY DON'T YOU CRITICIZE COMMUNISM MORE, HUH? :arms:

Go ahead and open up your own topic if you think it warrants such extensive discussion. I'm serious. In the meantime, you can stop accusing people of being hypocrites just because they don't express their dislike of other things as much or according to your personal "fairness" quota.
 
Nationality is probably the single biggest divider of people in the whole of history. It makes religion look like cupcakes.
 
Absinthe said:
Eejit, when the world becomes a firestorm of nationalist violence and urgency, you may have a valid point.
But it's not. So why keep bringing it up? I can't remember the last time I read or saw a news report that convinced me that nationalism is currently a big deal currently in the world.
Click to expand...
Oh really? More people have died in the last century due to nationalism, than 80 million as a direct result of the violence of two wars, millions more due to starvation and disease the wars resulted in.
Today we have, Nother Korea vs South Korea, China vs Taiwan, ETA seperatists, LTTE seperatists, Chechen seperatists, Iraq, Afghanistan...
There's far more nationalistic tensions and fighting in the world today than religious. Well then, I guess I have a valid point...

It's always a good thing to point out hypocrisy. People may not even realise that they're guilty of it.



Indeed Gray Fox, yet some of these oh-so-noble humanist atheists who take any opportunity to bash religion ignore it... because they themselves are nationalists perhaps? No, no, it's far better if they can consider themselves some kind of super-human logical philanthropist, righting the worlds wrongs by mocking religious fundamentalists.
 
Yeah I don't want to be a dick, since your the underdog in this debate and all but I'm a "fundamentalist" religion bashing atheist dickhead myself.
 
Let me clarify. It's not that nationalism isn't a big deal, but it is not a prominent topic in a lot of discourse, in the media or otherwise. At the very least, it is not common for such conflicts to be identified as results of nationalism, but almost always the elements that make up a nation's identity. "Nationalism" itself is a term rarely used. Quite simply, many people are not informed or made aware of the impact nationalism has, let alone what it actually consists of. Religion is so prominent that it's essentially become a hot topic issue that most people can understand and feel they can comment on. Religious elements, particularly in the Middle East, are very often intertwined with conflicts of nationalism, so I don't know how you can brush them off so easily...

You're operating on this absurd train of thought where if you don't criticize things equally, you're hypocritical. Or you're infatuated with some other great evil. This is unreasonable.

Maybe I don't criticize nationalism as much as I do religion because it's simply not something I care or know about as much? Because it has less personal resonance to me? There are many things I dislike in this world, but I don't dedicate my time to equally criticize all of them because there are many of them that I don't feel I'm qualified enough to adequately comment on. A lot of people are like this. Just because I criticize Christianity doesn't mean I favor Islam, only that I know less about it. I could argue long and hard about social issues like gay marriage and church/state separation, but I know precious little about how most economies work, so I refrain from giving my uneducated and probably flawed input on national finances. I admittedly and ashamedly draw comparisons to Hitler and Nazi Germany when I find it suitable, but that doesn't mean I'm giving Pol Pot a free ride.

Of course, this is unfathomable in your frame of mind. Silence is more likely to be a tell-tale sign of a nationalist sympathizer than the merely uninformed, unaware, or uninterested. While I assume we unspeakingly agree that the religious criticism around here reaches excess a fair amount of the time, your assumptions on the atheists' characters on this board and their intentions aren't exactly sound or rational.
 
Nationalism generally doesn't come out of nothing though. There's gotta be something (usually an arbitrary thing) that separates two people from each other, a difference. Religion is such a separatist force, as is politics, or politics stemming from religion. No one claims that religion directly causes all wars, but it often is an underlying, separating force, creating an "us vs them" where there isn't one.
 
I don't find the argument of ignorance particularly plausible with the amount of attention Iraq and Afghanistan have gotten on the news, let alone all the seperatist movements I listed.

Almost every thread where some religious group or individual does something bad ends up being about how horrible religion is in general, yet I haven't seen a single thread about the current wars in the middle east where anyone brought up nationalism.

Edit: Also I've noticed some people actively defending nationalism while also being religion bashers.
 
Why precisely would we start talking about nationalism in a thread about the catholic church anyway?
 
Well people brought up the "religion causes all warz and death amagadz" argument, I felt it necessary to counter it.
 
Fair enough because that is a pretty stupid argument.

But surely it's not the argument most people here use. The thing people seem to have a problem with is that religion requires faith, so the argument is not necessarily against the doctrines of the religion itself - although those can and should be looked at like any other idea - but also against the religion as an absurd and brittle crystalisation of some original logical error (ie that something is true 'because it is').

Personally I would say that at a root level, nationalism shares a lot with religion - belief without evidence is necessary, the world is divided into the 'sacred' and the 'profane', and doctrine becomes dogma. It is only that religious structures tend to be the more discernable and more enduring examples of that kind of thought.
 
Eejit said:
Well people brought up the "religion causes all warz and death amagadz" argument, I felt it necessary to counter it.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I've rarely seen this argument touted on this forum. Unless I'm blinded by some personal bias, most members who are critical of religion have never claimed it to be the root of all evil. I understand how easy it can be to develop that impression, but that's all it is.
 
Sulkdodds said:
But surely it's not the argument most people here use. The thing people seem to have a problem with is that religion requires faith, so the argument is not necessarily against the doctrines of the religion itself - although those can and should be looked at like any other idea - but also against the religion as an absurd and brittle crystalisation of some original logical error (ie that something is true 'because it is').
Click to expand...

Absinthe said:
Honestly, I've rarely seen this argument touted on this forum. Unless I'm blinded by some personal bias, most members who are critical of religion have never claimed it to be the root of all evil. I understand how easy it can be to develop that impression, but that's all it is.
Click to expand...
To both of you: it's not the most commonly used argument, but it is frequently brought up in addition to the faith one. I've seen it quite a few times in several different threads.

Atomic_Piggy said:
Nationialism is bullshit.

Did I do good?
Click to expand...
There's a good piggy! Here, have an irradiated truffle.
 
Eejit said:
He isn't declaring things sacred law you biased bullshitter, he's saying that it doesn't CONTRADICT sacred law. Any religious person with half a brain could tell you that all the pope is doing is making that statement officially to members of the church.
He isn't manipulating scripture at all, the Catholics believed that Genesis was a parable even before scientists came up with the Big Bang theory.
They did believe in creation of man by god, but that's by default because nobody had some up with a scientific alternative.


They haven't been compatible since Jesus told people to turn the other cheek, and let he who is without sin cast the first stone.


I never defended the position of the Pope in general, I'm defending him on the issue of the Church's position to Science which you and others are completely willfully misinterpreting because you HATE religion so much.


What about nationalists and patriots?
Nationalism is responseable for AT LEAST as many deaths as religion, but people on this board never bash it. Hell, there are a bunch of atheists on this board who seems very nationalistic yet always bring up this argument about religion being the root of all evil.

Hypocrites.
Click to expand...


1. aha...is not declaring...so why exactly did he said pollution is a sin? why wasn't pollution a sin before it was so mainstream?

the problem here is mostly because the bible is so laughably vague, anybody can make anything out of it.
why oh why couldn't god make it more clear and detailed? hmmm...maybe because it was not written by god?

2. aha ok, right...what about witch burning, that was a popular trend back then and also somehow got approval by god. gee...wonder why aren't we still burning witches?

3.ok fine, defend whatever stupid ideology you want, but don't complain being ridiculed for it.

4.i think i already answered that question. but yea nationalism is quite stupid, but it really is a more human, non transcendental ideology. which is not so with religion. like already mentioned. religion separates on pure nothing. nationalism usually doesn't.
after all nationalism only became fashionable after the french revolution.
religion often works with the pretension of being good. nationalism is not so black and white.
 
jverne said:
... yea nationalism is quite stupid, but it really is a more human, non transcendental ideology. which is not so with religion.
Click to expand...

Being a "more human" ideology probably makes it easier for you to identify yourself with it, or at least to see it more benevolently than religion, but doesn't make it better.

jverne said:
like already mentioned. religion separates on pure nothing. nationalism usually doesn't.
after all nationalism only became fashionable after the french revolution.
religion often works with the pretension of being good. nationalism is not so black and white.
Click to expand...

Nationalism may be a newer ideology, but newer is not always better. In fact nationalism may have been created to counter other ideologies like religion because some people were more comfy that way. To each his own.

Oh, and nationalism can be "that black and white", just take a look on US government attitude "if you're not with us, you're against us". The Cold War and the current blockade on Cuba are not religion based. If the Cold War did not scale to an all-out confrontation was, in part, because of the firepower on both sides and all the damage that could have been sustained by winner and defeated alike. And with Cuba, well, an open invasion would gain US even more enemies and their economy would be severely affected.
 
yakuruto said:
Being a "more human" ideology probably makes it easier for you to identify yourself with it, or at least to see it more benevolently than religion, but doesn't make it better.



Nationalism may be a newer ideology, but newer is not always better. In fact nationalism may have been created to counter other ideologies like religion because some people were more comfy that way. To each his own.

Oh, and nationalism can be "that black and white", just take a look on US government attitude "if you're not with us, you're against us". The Cold War and the current blockade on Cuba are not religion based. If the Cold War did not scale to an all-out confrontation was, in part, because of the firepower on both sides and all the damage that could have been sustained by winner and defeated alike. And with Cuba, well, an open invasion would gain US even more enemies and their economy would be severely affected.
Click to expand...

ok...so? it's a crappy ideology, we get that.
for PRACTICAL reasons we can compare it to religion.
you don't really have an argument since i partially agree with you.

oh yeah...i'm not nationalistic, hell i barely know my country's hymn.
 
Funny how genetic manipulation is now a mortal sin since it has been practiced for thousands of years through selective breeding. Compare a bulldog to a wolf. If that's not genetic manipulation I don't know what is. is.
 
Hate is fun. And religion is very easy to hate, that's why it gets bashed so much here.

Nobody here to my memory has called religion the root of all evil. However, there's no reason not to bash religion, because although there are plenty of theists here who are perfectly rational and decent, their religions are not. It's strange how people always say that people who hate gays because the Bible tells them to are interpreting it wrong, and that those bits were meant to have a "metaphorical" meaning. How do you know this? Wouldn't God have been a bit more explicit if he had something else in mind? I've also heard it said that the Bible meant something different under different "socio-economic conditions" and the like, and that just doesn't make any sense at all. I know that Jesus's teachings contradict a lot of the Old Testament, but didn't Jesus say somewhere else that the Old Testament is just as relevant as it always was?
 
Godron said:
Hate is fun. And religion is very easy to hate, that's why it gets bashed so much here.

Nobody here to my memory has called religion the root of all evil. However, there's no reason not to bash religion, because although there are plenty of theists here who are perfectly rational and decent, their religions are not. It's strange how people always say that people who hate gays because the Bible tells them to are interpreting it wrong, and that those bits were meant to have a "metaphorical" meaning. How do you know this? Wouldn't God have been a bit more explicit if he had something else in mind? I've also heard it said that the Bible meant something different under different "socio-economic conditions" and the like, and that just doesn't make any sense at all. I know that Jesus's teachings contradict a lot of the Old Testament, but didn't Jesus say somewhere else that the Old Testament is just as relevant as it always was?
Click to expand...

the answer is not so difficult. religion is a totally made up thing by humans and believing in it, is childish
 
jverne said:
the answer is not so difficult. religion is a totally made up thing by humans and believing in it, is childish
Click to expand...

Or maybe it's human :O Begone anti-humans who don't think they're a part of what they are criticizing.
 
jverne said:
the answer is not so difficult. religion is a totally made up thing by humans and believing in it, is childish
Click to expand...

That doesn't answer the question at all. You're making atheists look bad. Stop it.
 
Hmm, I wasn't arguing jverne, I was just making my point, expressing my opinion and have no intention at all to make you think the same way I do or convincing you of anything.

Godron, it's ok, if someone labels all atheists for what one of them says then he/she is not any better.
 
rofl dude church isn't science. they dont believe in science. it's bascially like the opposite of sceince or somethin

they believe in god or something. liek god made life on this planet. but evolution scientists think animals formed from small stuff in the water or something lol yeah sounds stupid at first but there's appraently evidence like a billion year old monkey bones and stuff. they bascially look like humans if we were apes. so that's the evolution and i studied it by doign a search in google here's waht i found:

"We also share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesn't make us half bananas, either from the waist up or the waist down."

pretty interesting huh. what do you guys think, maybe we'd look more like monkeys if evolution didn't exist?
 
MaSter0fDarKneZz said:
rofl dude church isn't science. they dont believe in science. it's bascially like the opposite of sceince or somethin

they believe in god or something. liek god made life on this planet. but evolution scientists think animals formed from small stuff in the water or something lol yeah sounds stupid at first but there's appraently evidence like a billion year old monkey bones and stuff. they bascially look like humans if we were apes. so that's the evolution and i studied it by doign a search in google here's waht i found:

"We also share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesn't make us half bananas, either from the waist up or the waist down."

pretty interesting huh. what do you guys think, maybe we'd look more like monkeys if evolution didn't exist?
Click to expand...
Seriously, dude, I ****ing love you.
 
MaSter0fDarKneZz said:
rofl dude church isn't science. they dont believe in science. it's bascially like the opposite of sceince or somethin

they believe in god or something. liek god made life on this planet. but evolution scientists think animals formed from small stuff in the water or something lol yeah sounds stupid at first but there's appraently evidence like a billion year old monkey bones and stuff. they bascially look like humans if we were apes. so that's the evolution and i studied it by doign a search in google here's waht i found:

"We also share about 50% of our DNA with bananas and that doesn't make us half bananas, either from the waist up or the waist down."

pretty interesting huh. what do you guys think, maybe we'd look more like monkeys if evolution didn't exist?
Click to expand...


First off... AHAHAHAHAHAH your post is 100% awesome.

And to answer your question, no, if evolution didnt exist we would'nt look more like monkeys, we simply wouldnt exist. And neither would monkeys.
 
Eejit said:
It's always a good thing to point out hypocrisy. People may not even realise that they're guilty of it.
Click to expand...

What hypocrisy? Bashing religion over nationalism isn't hypocritical at all. For one bashing religion is more fun and entertaining.

/confused.

Eejit said:
Well people brought up the "religion causes all warz and death amagadz" argument, I felt it necessary to counter it.
Click to expand...

People who argue that are retarded for one and not worth your time. Obviously religion isn't the cause for all wars and death. However religion has caused a fair bit of ruckus in the past and now.
 
Godron said:
That doesn't answer the question at all. You're making atheists look bad. Stop it.
Click to expand...

yes...and you are obviously making more sense, how?

ok i agree, it's not that simple, but it's a good starting point.

oh yea, i make atheists look bad? well, i normally argument my claims, i couldn't say the same for you.
 
jverne said:
1. aha...is not declaring...so why exactly did he said pollution is a sin? why wasn't pollution a sin before it was so mainstream?
Click to expand...

Another example of your selective reading/understanding. As I said two or three times previously in this thread, it was a sin. The pope just clarified that it is a sin, I believe it falls under the headings of Pride, Sloth and Greed.

jverne said:
the problem here is mostly because the bible is so laughably vague, anybody can make anything out of it.
why oh why couldn't god make it more clear and detailed? hmmm...maybe because it was not written by god?
Click to expand...

First off, I'm an agnostic so don't start getting your patnies in a twist. But that's a retarded argument. Assume for the sake of argument that there is a God and he did talk to the ancient Jews, sent his son Jesus etc.
Would he really have explained the Big Bang in detail to people with such a basic knowledge of maths, physics and astronomy?

jverne said:
2. aha ok, right...what about witch burning, that was a popular trend back then and also somehow got approval by god. gee...wonder why aren't we still burning witches?
Click to expand...
They realised that it was wrong perhaps? You know, not actually falling under the headings of love thy neighbour etc?

jverne said:
3.ok fine, defend whatever stupid ideology you want, but don't complain being ridiculed for it.
Click to expand...
I'm only defending it from the ridiculous. ^^

jverne said:
4.i think i already answered that question. but yea nationalism is quite stupid, but it really is a more human, non transcendental ideology. which is not so with religion. like already mentioned. religion separates on pure nothing. nationalism usually doesn't.
after all nationalism only became fashionable after the french revolution.
religion often works with the pretension of being good. nationalism is not so black and white.
Click to expand...
What difference does that make? In the end it's still one of the most destructive ideologies ever invented by mankind, even moreso than the religion you have such fun trying to bash (but fail to do so in an effective or logical manner).
 
I wasn't aware that god was allowing man to scribble in their own definitions of sin. That's very progressive of him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top