Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Video

* Sorry, I'm not sure how to just put the video up on the post.

Does anyone else have a problem with this?

Made me laugh at first but it's actually kinda pitiful to me.

Why....because he has more charisma and greater oratory skills than you?

Oh, the claws are out.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Why....because he has more charisma and greater oratory skills than you?

Because the 10 year old can't comprehend what he is saying.

Originally posted by chithappens
Because the 10 year old can't comprehend what he is saying.

According to who?

Just because you struggled to spell your own name at that age...doesn't mean he is not more than capable of delivering a fairly basic sermon.

Originally posted by chithappens
Because the 10 year old can't comprehend what he is saying.

Neither can some 20 year olds.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Neither can some 20 year olds.

According to "80 Faiths Around the World" from the BBC he writes his own stuff...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
According to who?

Just because you struggled to spell your own name at that age...doesn't mean he is not more than capable of delivering a fairly basic sermon.

#1, cut out the insults. That is not even addressing my point.

#2, I highly doubt this 10 year old heaven sent instrument has read the Bible.

#3, the "sermon" is just a bunch of rhetoric with no examples from text that simply says "believe in God."

Originally posted by chithappens
#1, cut out the insults. That is not even addressing my point.

#2, I highly doubt this 10 year old heaven sent instrument has read the Bible.

#3, the "sermon" is just a bunch of rhetoric with no examples from text that simply says "believe in God."

#1 + #2 + #3 = brainwashing at it's highest level.

Holy shit Decatur? That is like 30 minutes from me. I should go there and steal his tithes and offerings money.

Originally posted by chithappens
#1, cut out the insults. That is not even addressing my point.

#2, I highly doubt this 10 year old heaven sent instrument has read the Bible.

#3, the "sermon" is just a bunch of rhetoric with no examples from text that simply says "believe in God."

Nah, you have a shit point...it is doing no harm and let us be honest, the kid will really benefit from this.

Neither have many people who give sermons.

Like most black-church sermons.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
#1 + #2 + #3 = brainwashing at it's highest level.

How has he been brainwashed more than any other child?

Well, you can enforce a very specific set of ideas to your children, or you could allow them to make up their own mind in many areas, using less strong psychological implications....this kid, probably exposed to the first school of thought.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

Like most black-church sermons.


How many black church sermons have you attended? The three churches I was a part of when I used to go all the time actually quoted scriptures and stuff and didn't just use rhetoric and "God is good, I fear God, praise the lord, etc."

At least we don't have to worry 'bout this one molesting us!

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
...How has he been brainwashed more than any other Fundamentalist Christian child?

I fixed that for you.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, you can enforce a very specific set of ideas to your children, or you could allow them to make up their own mind in many areas, using less strong psychological implications....this kid, probably exposed to the first school of thought.

Of course raising a child to think for him/herself is brainwashing all the same. The parents are just washing their hands of responsibility for it.

Here is a young kid reading the Qur'an. And its equally amazing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wz5Mr-0-aEA

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav


Like most black-church sermons.




Yeah please explain this cause you are apparently an expert.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Of course raising a child to think for him/herself is brainwashing all the same. The parents are just washing their hands of responsibility for it. No, I'd say it is a different.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Well, you can enforce a very specific set of ideas to your children, or you could allow them to make up their own mind in many areas, using less strong psychological implications....this kid, probably exposed to the first school of thought.

Ah I see, where is the evidence that people actually make up their own mind? We are all simply subscribing to prepackaged ideals mostly.

Originally posted by Wei Phoenix
How many black church sermons have you attended? The three churches I was a part of when I used to go all the time actually quoted scriptures and stuff and didn't just use rhetoric and "God is good, I fear God, praise the lord, etc."
Many actually... to be honest I was not impressed with the quality...although it was later explained to me that most of the congregation were so well versed in the Bible they didn't need explicit references to illustrate points, as they would know what the preacher was talking about.

It should also be noted this boy is not giving a sermon really in this clip- I have seen him give some though and he does point people to read their bibles.

Originally posted by chithappens
Yeah please explain this cause you are apparently an expert.
You however do not seem to know anything about the subject at hand. You have just been programmed to see what this boy is doing as wrong and conclude he is brainwashed.

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, I'd say it is a different.

Okay, but you'd still be wrong.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
According to who?

Just because you struggled to spell your own name at that age...doesn't mean he is not more than capable of delivering a fairly basic sermon.

I've reported you. If you disagree with someone, you could go about it better instead of delving into a debate via trolling.

Originally posted by Forum Ninja
I've reported you. If you disagree with someone, you could go about it better instead of delving into a debate via trolling.

Chit has a learning disorder that made it difficult for him to learn how to write, he has gotten confused about when most people learn how to write in the past.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav



You however do not seem to know anything about the subject at hand. You have just been programmed to see what this boy is doing as wrong and conclude he is brainwashed.

What the **** is it with you? Did I do something that you don't like? All your responses to my posts are just attacks.

No child is fit to be a preacher. No child can give advice to the congregation. A child prodigy in an objective field such as mathematics is one thing, but this is not even similar.

You have no clue what angle I am approaching this from and yet you continue to come @ me with bullshit.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Chit has a learning disorder that made it difficult for him to learn how to write, he has gotten confused about when most people learn how to write in the past.

This does not justify Grand Moff Gav's actions in this thread.

I mean, if someone does have a learning disorder, does trolling and patronization assist them in any way?

I have nothing against Gav personally (I can't anyways. I don't even know him.) I simply do not like how he reacted in this thread.

Originally posted by chithappens
No child is fit to be a preacher. No child can give advice to the congregation.

Why?

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Why?

For the same reason I wouldn't ask an obese man how to run track. A child hasn't gone through trails of life, so to speak.

And **** you anyway. I don't appreciate your inappropriate jokes. Even if I had a mental disorder, it wouldn't be cool for you to make fun of it to say I made a point you don't agree with.

Originally posted by chithappens
For the same reason I wouldn't ask an obese man how to run track. A child hasn't gone through trails of life, so to speak.

Fair enough. But then again most people that listen to preachers believe in God so they have no reason to think he couldn't have gotten life experience from God.

Originally posted by chithappens
And **** you anyway. I don't appreciate your inappropriate jokes. Even if I had a mental disorder, it wouldn't be cool for you to make fun of it to say I made a point you don't agree with.

Just messing with the new guy.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Fair enough. But then again most people that listen to preachers believe in God so they have no reason to think he couldn't have gotten life experience from God.




In application, it is not right to be that sort of pressure on a kid.

Originally posted by chithappens
In application, it is not right to be that sort of pressure on a kid.

But (again assuming one believes the Bible) God has put that sort of pressure on his own kid.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Okay, but you'd still be wrong. Nah

The boy is ten and because the thing he is doing is religious you all assume he is brainwashed. Like any 10 year old if he stops enjoying it he will stop doing it.

Fact is he will probably benefit from this quite a bit...so even though I find it really weird. Why don't you lot get off his back...he's only little.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
The boy is ten and because the thing he is doing is religious you all assume he is brainwashed. Like any 10 year old if he stops enjoying it he will stop doing it.

Fact is he will probably benefit from this quite a bit...so even though I find it really weird. Why don't you lot get off his back...he's only little.

Yes, he will benefit. He will get his own TV show and millions of dollars from little old ladies.

Originally posted by chithappens

No child is fit to be a preacher. No child can give advice to the congregation. A child prodigy in an objective field such as mathematics is one thing, but this is not even similar.



Why is it different?...The bible is just like any other text. If someone has studied it and knows how it is interpreted according to a particular sect of religion then there is no reason they can't become an expert on the subject regardless of age just as they can with mathematics or physics. If there is child prodigies in those fields then there is no reason to believe there won't be in relation to understanding of religion.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Why....because he has more charisma and greater oratory skills than you? No, because he's been taught to be a freak.

Originally posted by Deja~vu
No, because he's been taught to be a freak.
Idiotic statement.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Fair enough. But then again most people that listen to preachers believe in God so they have no reason to think he couldn't have gotten life experience from God.



Just messing with the new guy.

You are of course assuming that God exists. And why would God (if he exists choose a 10yr boy to be his voice? Why not a world leader who has the ears of the world?

And how the hell can a 10yr old boy get life experience from God???

Typical brain washed "God did it!!" response.

Maybe the voices in the kids head are just that, voices in his head not a deity.

This wouldn't of happened in the US would it? Strange how God always wants to talk to people there.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
You are of course assuming that God exists. And why would God (if he exists choose a 10yr boy to be his voice? Why not a world leader who has the ears of the world?

And how the hell can a 10yr old boy get life experience from God???

Typical brain washed "God did it!!" response.

Maybe the voices in the kids head are just that, voices in his head not a deity.

This wouldn't of happened in the US would it? Strange how God always wants to talk to people there.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You just called Sym Brainwashed!

I think that they would lack the life experience to teach the word of god, they maybe able to recite passages but what they mean and to relate that to life is something else.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I think that they would lack the life experience to teach the word of god, they maybe able to recite passages but what they mean and to relate that to life is something else.

I know that I'm still young and still learning and what I knew just a few years ago has changed, things that I thought were important are now just trivial things to me.

The boy has probably been indoctrinated and force feed scripture from birth to produce this Mega-church wet dream.

I'm sure if an impartial investigator actually sat the boy down and asked him to explain the drivel coming from his mouth I think you will quite quickly find that its all just rehearsed empty words.

Oh and Sym, I didn't call you brainwashed. Not sure where Moff got that from (Luke 13:12? I made that up please don't quote it to me I just don't care, I was making about you reading into things that aren't there)

Originally posted by MilitantDog
You are of course assuming that God exists. And why would God (if he exists choose a 10yr boy to be his voice? Why not a world leader who has the ears of the world?

Maybe God likes messing with people. Maybe he thinks choosing a child will make more of a point. Assuming God exists.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
And how the hell can a 10yr old boy get life experience from God???

You're kidding right? Think about that for a second.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
Maybe the voices in the kids head are just that, voices in his head not a deity.

Possibly. They could be his own thoughts too. Either way he seems to be coping pretty well.

So, which is the problem? That a 10 year old kid might be doing something their parent's want them to do (which is a ludicrous complaint to make) or that the 10 year old wont have enough experience (which is a completely aesthetic point anyways)?

Like seriously, look at organized sports. Kids are put into these at all ages by parents. Lots of times they enjoy it, but it is often not their direct-human-freewill. Gretzky's parents had him on a rink when he was like 6, day after day. You tellin' me Wayne doesn't enjoy a good game of hockey?

And if you don't think a kid has anything useful to say about God (aside from being ignorant) you could just not listen to them...

I only skimmed the pages, am I missing something?

Originally posted by inimalist
So, which is the problem? ...

The idea that this kid is there because god made him special, that is the problem.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
The idea that this kid is there because god made him special, that is the problem.

what is the problem with that?

Originally posted by inimalist
what is the problem with that?

It's delusional.

lol

so is santa or, well, 99% of anything we tell children

"no, mommy and daddy aren't fighting, we are just..... disagreeing"

Originally posted by inimalist
lol

so is santa or, well, 99% of anything we tell children

"no, mommy and daddy aren't fighting, we are just..... disagreeing"

Shut your mouth.

Originally posted by inimalist
So, which is the problem? That a 10 year old kid might be doing something their parent's want them to do (which is a ludicrous complaint to make) or that the 10 year old wont have enough experience (which is a completely aesthetic point anyways)?

Like seriously, look at organized sports. Kids are put into these at all ages by parents. Lots of times they enjoy it, but it is often not their direct-human-freewill. Gretzky's parents had him on a rink when he was like 6, day after day. You tellin' me Wayne doesn't enjoy a good game of hockey?

And if you don't think a kid has anything useful to say about God (aside from being ignorant) you could just not listen to them...

I only skimmed the pages, am I missing something? I don't think that it is the problem that they are doing what their parents want but that they are teaching the word of god without knowing what it really means. Playing sports that their parents want them to do is not the same, they are not telling people how to live their lives through god's teachings.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I don't think that it is the problem that they are doing what their parents want but that they are teaching the word of god without knowing what it really means. Playing sports that their parents want them to do is not the same, they are not telling people how to live their lives through god's teachings.

so you would argue that one is not allowed to pass their spiritual beliefs to their children?

would you also say this goes for political beliefs? beliefs about what constitutes truth? about morality?

EDIT: most industrial nations have a policy of sending 10 year old to physical institutions where government mandated material is forcibly taught to them with threat of reprimand and is tested and evaluated according to government standard. How is this any better?

Originally posted by inimalist
so you would argue that one is not allowed to pass their spiritual beliefs to their children?

would you also say this goes for political beliefs? beliefs about what constitutes truth? about morality?

EDIT: most industrial nations have a policy of sending 10 year old to physical institutions where government mandated material is forcibly taught to them with threat of reprimand and is tested and evaluated according to government standard. How is this any better? I do not argue that you should not pass your beliefs onto your children but that your child should not be preaching when they do not understand what it is that they are saying.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I do not argue that you should not pass your beliefs onto your children but that your child should not be preaching when they do not understand what it is that they are saying.

How do you know he does not understand what he is saying?

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I do not argue that you should not pass your beliefs onto your children but that your child should not be preaching when they do not understand what it is that they are saying.

I watched most of the video... I don't think he is talking about any complicated scripture....

I think you might be making the fallacious jump from this video to the idea that the child must not be sincere.

Is a 10 year old not allowed to be passionate about religion? when I was 10 I KNEW I wanted to be an archeologist. :shrug:

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
How do you know he does not understand what he is saying? I do not know for sure but most children do not comprehend things like this, they are easily swayed to believe what their parents tell them. This is much the same as with me and my father which does not believe in evolution as I do now to be the creation of god.

I watched a video I do not know if it is this one where there was 3 kids preaching, one was a white kid preaching hell and damnation, a black kid doing faith healing and a mexican girl that people think she is a saint.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I watched a video I do not know if it is this one where there was 3 kids preaching, one was a white kid preaching hell and damnation, a black kid doing faith healing and a mexican girl that people think she is a saint.

the video in this thread is nothing like that

the child is talking about God empowering even the youngest and weakest

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
How do you know he does not understand what he is saying?

I've seen parrots repeating what humans have said back to them "parrot fashion". This does not equate to understanding by the parrot.

This child has had bible rubbish drilled into him probably from birth to the point where he is just regurgitating it. It would be impossible for a child of that age to fully understand and comprehend the meaning, context and consequences of the things he is saying.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
I've seen parrots repeating what humans have said back to them "parrot fashion". This does not equate to understanding by the parrot.

This child has had bible rubbish drilled into him probably from birth to the point where he is just regurgitating it. It would be impossible for a child of that age to fully understand and comprehend the meaning, context and consequences of the things he is saying.

I just dropped it cause no one is thinking about how this actually works in application.

Originally posted by inimalist
the video in this thread is nothing like that

the child is talking about God empowering even the youngest and weakest Well it may not be the same video but these are still child preachers, this kid may be different than the ones that I saw but it still applies.

Originally posted by MilitantDog
I've seen parrots repeating what humans have said back to them "parrot fashion". This does not equate to understanding by the parrot.

This child has had bible rubbish drilled into him probably from birth to the point where he is just regurgitating it. It would be impossible for a child of that age to fully understand and comprehend the meaning, context and consequences of the things he is saying.

I'm sorry, but you have no basis for this aside from anti-religious rhetoric.

What meanings, what consequences? You guys keep saying this, yet the only examples that have been thrown out are from other videos of child preachers.

There is nothing from the available evidence that shows this child is in any way being forced, nor that they don't understand the incredibly simple message they are saying.

This ISN'T political church propaganda. Its a kid talking about a kids story.

Originally posted by chithappens
I just dropped it cause no one is thinking about how this actually works in application.

how does it actually work in application?

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
Well it may not be the same video but these are still child preachers, this kid may be different than the ones that I saw but it still applies.

what still applies? Like, specifically, what part of the video do you think the kid doesn't understand?

And the idea that all child preaching is wrong is rather silly. Nothing can be generalized like that.

So, when I was 9, in grade 5, my school forced all the students to do public speaking.

My subject was Goalies, while another student talked about dreams. Hypothetically, at 9 I shouldn't know anything about goalies, and certainly this other child wouldn't have known anything about dreams.

oh wait, I forgot, when religion does something everyone gets pissed, until the government does it and we call it a different name.

Seriously, half the people in this thread would be making a way better point if they at least acknowledged that there is nothing special about the way religion socializes children. Anyone this against having kids speak in church better as **** not have them in a government school.

Originally posted by inimalist
what still applies? Like, specifically, what part of the video do you think the kid doesn't understand?

And the idea that all child preaching is wrong is rather silly. Nothing can be generalized like that. I haven't looked at this video, if he is talking about how he feels that is different than preaching in my opinion. Getting up in front of your class and talking about a subject is different than telling the word of God and how to live by his teaching, the bible requires a level of understanding to convey his teachings. If I got up in front of my class and talked about my religion that is one thing but getting up in front of my class and telling them that they are sinners for not following his word is something else for even I know that I do not fully understand all that is in the bible. Doing the public speaking is not really about the subject that you choose but to get up in front of a group of people and to talk about any subject, you could have picked video games or what ever. The difference is that this is the holy word of God.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I haven't looked at this video,

wicked

I didn't read the rest of your post

Originally posted by inimalist
wicked

I didn't read the rest of your post Why not? This is about a children preaching their religion, it does not matter if it is this video or the 3 that I talked about.

So I looke at this video and it is the same kid that I saw on the news doing the faith healing.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
Why not? This is about a children preaching their religion, it does not matter if it is this video or the 3 that I talked about.

this entire thread is about discussing the content of a video. You did not watch the video, thus, there is not much you are going to be able to discuss.

Secondly, you came into a thread about religion and voiced a knowingly ignorant opinion. You clearly have a bone to pick with anything religious, as you pass sweeping judgment with no evidence, and thus I have no interest in being preached at.

If you are looking for an overarching discussion about the concept of child preachers in general, I'm not the person you will have it with, as I understand the world to be more nuanced than saying "all of this is bad".

The way that I read this was talking about children preaching and not just this one kid, if I miss read that I'm sorry. I did watch this video and it is the same kid that I saw with the other 3 and this one was doing faith healing, this video shows a tamed version of his preaching talking about how he feels about the word. I never said that it was all bad.

Seems to me he understands what he's saying as well as most ten-year-olds would understand something they're excited about. Is there family/community influence? Of course. Just like the rest of us. Can he help others with spiritual/life problems? Depends on the person looking for advice/help. Is it okay he may believe that everyone who doesn't follow his path is doomed to hell? No more/less than when an adult thinks it, though my hope is always that the truly religious (and not religionistic) can see past their own faith maps.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
The way that I read this was talking about children preaching and not just this one kid, if I miss read that I'm sorry. I did watch this video and it is the same kid that I saw with the other 3 and this one was doing faith healing, this video shows a tamed version of his preaching talking about how he feels about the word. I never said that it was all bad.

can you post that video?

I would agree, that is less cool

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
The way that I read this was talking about children preaching and not just this one kid, if I miss read that I'm sorry. I did watch this video and it is the same kid that I saw with the other 3 and this one was doing faith healing, this video shows a tamed version of his preaching talking about how he feels about the word. I never said that it was all bad. I think I've seen that video he is talking about on the Today show or something and it was kinda nuts, there was some white kid shouting hell and damnation on the street corner and his dad behind him. I couldn't care less if some kid wants to preach and people want to listen to them, it's more or a gimmick but I have to admit the kid is pretty good better than some adults I've seen.

Originally posted by inimalist
can you post that video?

I would agree, that is less cool This is the one that I saw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDT3FCJ3RcE

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
This is the one that I saw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDT3FCJ3RcE I like how they have to bend down to get "healed"

Originally posted by inimalist


Seriously, half the people in this thread would be making a way better point if they at least acknowledged that there is nothing special about the way religion socializes children. Anyone this against having kids speak in church better as **** not have them in a government school.

I never brought it up because I didn't think it really needed to be said.

My point has not been that teaching a child "the word" is wrong, but that ordaining a child as a minister is incredibly irresponsible.

Originally posted by chithappens
I never brought it up because I didn't think it really needed to be said.

My point has not been that teaching a child "the word" is wrong, but that ordaining a child as a minister is incredibly irresponsible. Why?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Why? This is because a child doesn't fully understand the word of God and is trying to teach the meaning of his teachings to others.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
This is because a child doesn't fully understand the word of God and is trying to teach the meaning of his teachings to others. So, I have seen adults not even understand the Bible and try and shove it down peoples faces so what makes the kid any different? Hell just on this forum alone I have seen people of the same faith argue about what this means and what that means.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So, I have seen adults not even understand the Bible and try and shove it down peoples faces so what makes the kid any different? Hell just on this forum alone I have seen people of the same faith argue about what this means and what that means. We should all know in our hearts and mind what God wants from us, I am sad that people disagree about his word but I also understand that people see what they want to see in his teachings.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
We should all know in our hearts and mind what God wants from us, I am sad that people disagree about his word but I also understand that people see what they want to see in his teachings. So how are us "non-believers" supposed to follow his "teaching" if you guys can't even agree?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So how are us "non-believers" supposed to follow his "teaching" if you guys can't even agree? You should ask God himself, open yourself up to his love and he will ansswer you.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
You should ask God himself, open yourself up to his love and he will ansswer you. Oh please don't give me that, I get enough of that from JIA. I could go into my whole story but I did and he gave me the big'ol middle finger.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Oh please don't give me that, I get enough of that from JIA. I could go into my whole story but I did and he gave me the big'ol middle finger. I'm so sorry that you feel that way, I will pray for you and I wish you the best. Maybe someday I can give you an answer to your question but for now I will just have to pray for you.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
This is because a child doesn't fully understand the word of God and is trying to teach the meaning of his teachings to others.

You can't make that judgement. As i've already stated, there are child prodigies in all fields of teaching...Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry...whatever. So why can't there be in Religious teachings?...There is nothing to say this child doesn't have a fuller understanding of Christianity than 99% of the people in the world.

Originally posted by jaden101
You can't make that judgement. As i've already stated, there are child prodigies in all fields of teaching...Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry...whatever. So why can't there be in Religious teachings?...There is nothing to say this child doesn't have a fuller understanding of Christianity than 99% of the people in the world. I guess you are right and I'm speaking from my personal experiance and understanding of his word. I know that my view has changed over the past few years and it is hard for me to think that other kids could be.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I guess you are right and I'm speaking from my personal experiance and understanding of his word. I know that my view has changed over the past few years and it is hard for me to think that other kids could be.

Just out of interest do you believe in Transubstantiation and do you genuflect/kneel during the Liturgy of the Eucharist?

Originally posted by jaden101
You can't make that judgement. As i've already stated, there are child prodigies in all fields of teaching...Mathematics, Physics, Chemistry...whatever. So why can't there be in Religious teachings?...There is nothing to say this child doesn't have a fuller understanding of Christianity than 99% of the people in the world.

Has the child had sex or known what i means to lust?

Has the child ever had to really work for anything or struggle in a way that causes him to question what he believes?

Has the child been tempted by the outside world while having to live on his own and actually been able to resist?

Stuff like this is important to a full understanding and being able to be a teacher to other members of the congregation.

Scientific and mathematical prodigies are a subject I mentioned first a long time ago in this topic and, obviously, it doesn't apply the same way for a variety of reasons.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Just out of interest do you believe in Transubstantiation and do you genuflect/kneel during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? No one in our church kneels during communion and no I do not believe that is actually the blood and body.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
No one in our church kneels during communion and no I do not believe that is actually the blood and body.

So you are not a Roman Catholic...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
So you are not a Roman Catholic... I'm not sure what you mean, I thought Catholic and Roman Catholic were the same thing.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I'm not sure what you mean, I thought Catholic and Roman Catholic were the same thing.

One cannot be practising Catholic/Roman Catholic if one does not believe in Transubstantiation.

So yes, while the Church claims a billion faithful it really probably has only a very small number (few million) who are actually in full communion with the Church and therefore Jesus Christ.

You of course are not to blame for this, it is probably the result of bad teaching, personally I wonder what the Jesuits are doing in the States...

Could I perhaps persaude you to believe in transubstantiation so that you can return to full communion with Christ?

Do you believe in, like, literal transubstantiation moff?

Originally posted by inimalist
Do you believe in, like, literal transubstantiation moff?

Ofcourse I do!

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Ofcourse I do! So the wine is literally the blood of Christ and the wafers are his flesh?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So the wine is literally the blood of Christ and the wafers are his flesh?

Asked and answered.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Asked and answered. I'm sorry but I don't get it, do you think it transforms into blood when you drink it or that while it is in the cup that it is blood? If you believe it is the blood then it turn into blood but if you don't then it just stays wine? I thought that it is supposed to represent the blood and body not actually be the blood and body.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I'm sorry but I don't get it, do you think it transforms into blood when you drink it or that while it is in the cup that it is blood? If you believe it is the blood then it turn into blood but if you don't then it just stays wine? I thought that it is supposed to represent the blood and body not actually be the blood and body.

In some Protestant Communities they do not believe in Transubstantiation and so it is just a memorial to the Last Supper therefore, purely symbolic.

Roman Catholics are required to believe that the Blessed Sacraments take on the substance of Jesus' body and blood. That is they become fully his body and blood. However, the accidents (aka appearances) remain bread and wine. So while it looks, feels and appears to be bread and wine to the senses it is actually the blood and body of Christ.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In some Protestant Communities they do not believe in Transubstantiation and so it is just a memorial to the Last Supper therefore, purely symbolic.

Roman Catholics are required to believe that the Blessed Sacraments take on the substance of Jesus' body and blood. That is they become fully his body and blood. However, the accidents (aka appearances) remain bread and wine. So while it looks, feels and appears to be bread and wine to the senses it is actually the blood and body of Christ. What is with the accidents part? I'm just trying to understand this because I've never heard of this before, I've gone to some of my wife's masses during the holidays and always understood this just to be symbolic, its hard for me to fathom that even though all your scenes and science tells you that it is wine and bread that it is really blood and flesh.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In some Protestant Communities they do not believe in Transubstantiation and so it is just a memorial to the Last Supper therefore, purely symbolic.

Roman Catholics are required to believe that the Blessed Sacraments take on the substance of Jesus' body and blood. That is they become fully his body and blood. However, the accidents (aka appearances) remain bread and wine. So while it looks, feels and appears to be bread and wine to the senses it is actually the blood and body of Christ.

Symbolic Cannibalism.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Symbolic Cannibalism.

No, literal cannibalism with symbolic overtures towards oneness.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, literal cannibalism with symbolic overtures towards oneness.

Regardless of how they believe, literal cannibalism would have to consist of real human flesh.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Regardless of how they believe, literal cannibalism would have to consist of real human flesh.

I was referring to how Gav technically views it.

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I was referring to how Gav technically views it.

I know. He is delusional.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In some Protestant Communities they do not believe in Transubstantiation and so it is just a memorial to the Last Supper therefore, purely symbolic.

Roman Catholics are required to believe that the Blessed Sacraments take on the substance of Jesus' body and blood. That is they become fully his body and blood. However, the accidents (aka appearances) remain bread and wine. So while it looks, feels and appears to be bread and wine to the senses it is actually the blood and body of Christ.

interesting actually

I was most interested in that last part, as I didn't think you would believe you have literal, as in chemically composed, human flesh in the stomach. errr, that didn't sound right, but I think you know what I mean. ie, we wouldn't cut someone open and find flesh and blood.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
What is with the accidents part? I'm just trying to understand this because I've never heard of this before, I've gone to some of my wife's masses during the holidays and always understood this just to be symbolic, its hard for me to fathom that even though all your scenes and science tells you that it is wine and bread that it is really blood and flesh.

It remains in a "physical" sense bread/wine. However, it has actually ceased to be those things and has become the actual blood and body of Christ.
I guess you could say it is a physical versus spiritual thing but really that's not the most accurate answer.

It appears, smells, tastes like bread but it is the body.

I am surprised you've never heard of this before...it is the absolute fundamental practice in Roman Catholicism...


Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
No, literal cannibalism with symbolic overtures towards oneness.
I guess it is.

Originally posted by inimalist
interesting actually

I was most interested in that last part, as I didn't think you would believe you have literal, as in chemically composed, human flesh in the stomach. errr, that didn't sound right, but I think you know what I mean. ie, we wouldn't cut someone open and find flesh and blood.
It would appear like bread in their stomach yeah- if you examine it, it appears like bread. However it's substance has changed into the Body/Blood of Christ.

However, that is not to say it is both bread/wine and the body/blood of Christ (What Luther termed Consubstantiation). It is totally the body/blood, it just does not have the physical attributes of flesh/blood.

Jesus was God, but if you examined him you would never find evidence of that in his body- he didn't have a give away ultra high mediclorian count for example. Though in his case he was both totally man and totally human it still serves as an example of how one can have a substance that does not correspond with their accident.

I should point out that in the Roman Catholic Church this is not up for debate, it is infallible Church Doctrine. The Council of Trent imposed automatic excommunication on anyone who taught/believed that Transubstantiation was not true. Of course, it can be difficult to get your head around, took me some time. However, for Catholics who are unsure it is generally asked that they "increase" the bounds of their faith and accept it- in time (through meditation and prayer) coming to understand it.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I know. He is delusional.
Good contribution.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
...Good contribution.

I can't be held to the standard of someone who eats a piece of bread and believes it tuns into flesh.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I can't be held to the standard of someone who eats a piece of bread and believes it tuns into flesh.
Ok...I guess that makes you smarter than St. Thomas Aquinas then...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Ok...I guess that makes you smarter than St. Thomas Aquinas then...

You are confused. Delusions have nothing to do with smarts.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
It remains in a "physical" sense bread/wine. However, it has actually ceased to be those things and has become the actual blood and body of Christ.
I guess you could say it is a physical versus spiritual thing but really that's not the most accurate answer.

It appears, smells, tastes like bread but it is the body.

I am surprised you've never heard of this before...it is the absolute fundamental practice in Roman Catholicism... They symbolic nature of it yes but never that it "turns" into the blood and flesh of Christ. So what would you think of an Atheist that took part in this ritual?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
They symbolic nature of it yes but never that it "turns" into the blood and flesh of Christ. So what would you think of an Atheist that took part in this ritual?

Yeah, it still surprises me that you never heard of this- though I think something like 80% of U.S. Catholics do not believe in Transubstantiation- again I wonder what the Jesuits in your country are doing...

Umm, non-Roman Catholics are not permitted to receive the Eucharist. They can go to the Mass though and take part in the ritual, just not receive the body/blood.

Though, it is better for the Atheist to eat the Eucharist than what these guys do.

I would not get upset with the Atheist for taking the Eucharist if they were sincere about it but if it was some sort of malevolent motive I would certainly be annoyed.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Yeah, it still surprises me that you never heard of this- though I think something like 80% of U.S. Catholics do not believe in Transubstantiation- again I wonder what the Jesuits in your country are doing...

Umm, non-Roman Catholics are not permitted to receive the Eucharist. They can go to the Mass though and take part in the ritual, just not receive the body/blood.

Though, it is better for the Atheist to eat the Eucharist than what these guys do.

I would not get upset with the Atheist for taking the Eucharist if they were sincere about it but if it was some sort of malevolent motive I would certainly be annoyed. What is the religious view on this? I wasn't going to piss on it or anything, just playing the role as to not upset my in-laws which do not know that I'm Atheist.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
What is the religious view on this? I wasn't going to piss on it or anything, just playing the role as to not upset my in-laws which do not know that I'm Atheist.

If they are strict, and find out you are taking the Eucharist illicitly (i.e. not a Catholic) then they should rightly ask you to desist.

However, they might not believe in Transubstantiation and so won't care...

However, I do and I would ask you not to take communion.

Some people might get very upset, which I think is permissible considering, however the real factor is how you would respond to their concerns.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
If they are strict, and find out you are taking the Eucharist illicitly (i.e. not a Catholic) then they should rightly ask you to desist.

However, they might not believe in Transubstantiation and so won't care...

However, I do and I would ask you not to take communion.

Some people might get very upset, which I think is permissible considering, however the real factor is how you would respond to their concerns. I will respect their wishes just as I wish they would respect mine, after all that is why I'm going to their church in the first place. They only know me as being "non-religious" but not an Atheist which they would have real issues with which bothers me because I have to hide it to keep fighting out of the family but I will keep up the charade until they push me to my limit. I don't go to their church often, normally only once a few years during Christmas and I only did the Eucharist once the first time, even I thought that is a bit of disrespect to them but didn't want to make a scene at that time. Now I just sit back while they do their thing and they seem to be OK with it.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I will respect their wishes just as I wish they would respect mine, after all that is why I'm going to their church in the first place. They only know me as being "non-religious" but not an Atheist which they would have real issues with which bothers me because I have to hide it to keep fighting out of the family but I will keep up the charade until they push me to my limit. I don't go to their church often, normally only once a few years during Christmas and I only did the Eucharist once the first time, even I thought that is a bit of disrespect to them but didn't want to make a scene at that time. Now I just sit back while they do their thing and they seem to be OK with it.

Chances are they hope it will rub off on you...

This Eucharist thing certainly confuses me... You are saying that in all conceivable attributes it is bread but that it in fact is not even bread in the slightest, but actually the body of christ. If something is bread, then it is bread. Bread is something defined by it's physical attributes, therefore if something has the physical attributes of bread then it is defined as bread. This idea goes against the very definition of "bread".

Originally posted by King Kandy
This Eucharist thing certainly confuses me... You are saying that in all conceivable attributes it is bread but that it in fact is not even bread in the slightest, but actually the body of christ. If something is bread, then it is bread. Bread is something defined by it's physical attributes, therefore if something has the physical attributes of bread then it is defined as bread. This idea goes against the very definition of "bread".

In Roman Catholic theology we call it a miracle.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In Roman Catholic theology we call it a miracle. So miracles happen every Sunday? This seems a little weird to me, in the face of all evidence, science and even your own scenes it is wine and bread but you must believe that it turns into blood and wine? I could see the spirit of his blood and flesh but not the actually oxygen carrying blood.

Originally posted by chithappens
Video



Does anyone else have a problem with this?



Goddamn right I do, its ****ed up.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So miracles happen every Sunday? This seems a little weird to me, in the face of all evidence, science and even your own scenes it is wine and bread but you must believe that it turns into blood and wine? I could see the spirit of his blood and flesh but not the actually oxygen carrying blood.
The Eucharistic miracle happens millions of times every day.

It really isn't that hard to believe...scientific evidence of your body would never reveal a soul. However, I still believe you have one.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
This is the one that I saw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDT3FCJ3RcE

sort of back on topic

I see your point, and I think it is fair to say that 4 years old is way different than 10, though I still don't see any problems in theory

case by case, I would say the son of the man who got visually upset when the interviewer said she had not been baptised might not have as much say as the black kid did (we get no real information on how he got into it ) but, the real question then becomes, are we upset that the 4 year old is preaching these things, or do we just not like the fact that they are being taught these things in the first place.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
The Eucharistic miracle happens millions of times every day.

It really isn't that hard to believe...scientific evidence of your body would never reveal a soul. However, I still believe you have one. You still believe that there is a soul even though there is no evidence of it just as the Eucharistic, both of these are hard to believe if you do not have the faith. There is not evidence, nothing to prove of its existence.Originally posted by inimalist
sort of back on topic

I see your point, and I think it is fair to say that 4 years old is way different than 10, though I still don't see any problems in theory

case by case, I would say the son of the man who got visually upset when the interviewer said she had not been baptised might not have as much say as the black kid did (we get no real information on how he got into it ) but, the real question then becomes, are we upset that the 4 year old is preaching these things, or do we just not like the fact that they are being taught these things in the first place. If you think that the 4 year old is touched by god then why would it make a difference if he was 10?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
If you think that the 4 year old is touched by god then why would it make a difference if he was 10?

none

my only concern would be in the coercion of the child, though, as I have tried to point out, religion is certainly not the only or most salient thing that children have no choices over.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
You still believe that there is a soul even though there is no evidence of it just as the Eucharistic, both of these are hard to believe if you do not have the faith. There is not evidence, nothing to prove of its existence.

Well, that is faith for you.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
One cannot be practising Catholic/Roman Catholic if one does not believe in Transubstantiation.

So yes, while the Church claims a billion faithful it really probably has only a very small number (few million) who are actually in full communion with the Church and therefore Jesus Christ.

You of course are not to blame for this, it is probably the result of bad teaching, personally I wonder what the Jesuits are doing in the States...

Could I perhaps persaude you to believe in transubstantiation so that you can return to full communion with Christ? I don't know if you could, part of me wants to but the other part doesn't. I think that it is more of the spirit that we take in and not the actual blood and body of him. I feel the connection to God but I believe the bible to be teaching of his word as best man can understand.

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I don't know if you could, part of me wants to but the other part doesn't. I think that it is more of the spirit that we take in and not the actual blood and body of him. I feel the connection to God but I believe the bible to be teaching of his word as best man can understand.

In the Bible Jesus tells people that they must eat his body and drink his blood.

Also, what I think is important to remember is that the Bible is a product of the Church, the Church is not a product of it. Therefore any authority the Bible has stems from the Church. As Saint Augustine said "Indeed, I would not believe the gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so."

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In the Bible Jesus tells people that they must eat his body and drink his blood.

Also, what I think is important to remember is that the Bible is a product of the Church, the Church is not a product of it. Therefore any authority the Bible has stems from the Church. As Saint Augustine said "Indeed, I would not believe the gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so." But the church created the Bible, so are you saying that if the Bible is incorrect then the Church as to be? The Church debated and went through all of the scriptures and "approved" all of them to be in the cannon so how could the Bible not be an authority?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
But the church created the Bible, so are you saying that if the Bible is incorrect then the Church as to be? The Church debated and went through all of the scriptures and "approved" all of them to be in the cannon so how could the Bible not be an authority?

That is not what I said, what I said is the Bible's authority comes from the Church.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
That is not what I said, what I said is the Bible's authority comes from the Church. Though the Church created the Bible.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
Though the Church created the Bible.



That's what I said...kinda self-explanatory to me.

The Church said, this is our Canon of Scripture which contains the some teachings of Jesus Christ.

It is not and was never thought to be a complete record of Christ's life or his teachings.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav


That's what I said...kinda self-explanatory to me.

The Church said, this is our Canon of Scripture which contains the some teachings of Jesus Christ.

It is not and was never thought to be a complete record of Christ's life or his teachings. So the Bible is not the word of God? I think you are missing the point, if the Church created the Bible and the Church is supposed to be in touch with God and the Bible is supposed to be the word of God how can the Bible or the Church be wrong?

Edit: So if this is some of his theaching are these teachings wrong?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In the Bible Jesus tells people that they must eat his body and drink his blood.

Also, what I think is important to remember is that the Bible is a product of the Church, the Church is not a product of it. Therefore any authority the Bible has stems from the Church. As Saint Augustine said "Indeed, I would not believe the gospel myself if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to do so." I have lost some of my faith with the church as of late, hearing the stories of things in the news of stuff that is not God like and following of his words. I know that it is only a few bad people but when the church does not do something I think that it is wrong.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So the Bible is not the word of God? I think you are missing the point, if the Church created the Bible and the Church is supposed to be in touch with God and the Bible is supposed to be the word of God how can the Bible or the Church be wrong?

Edit: So if this is some of his theaching are these teachings wrong?

aah I see.

The people who wrote parts of the Bible are believed to have been Divinely Inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit. As such the Bible contains Divine Revelation. However it is not believed that the Bible contains all revealed truths.

So, the Bible is a product to aid the Church in it's ministry,you might notice that there have been additions to the Canon over time, so the perceptions of Canon can and has changed.

Is the Bible the word of God? Not in the sense that it is believed to be without error and be dictated by God- how Muslims view the Koran.

Why would my saying that the Bible contains "some of his teachings" lead you to think that this means they are wrong? I really do not see the logical flow there...

Originally posted by .:OU812:.
I have lost some of my faith with the church as of late, hearing the stories of things in the news of stuff that is not God like and following of his words. I know that it is only a few bad people but when the church does not do something I think that it is wrong.

Members of the Church can do bad things but this does not mean that the Church has lost it's authority to teach. Peter denied Jesus three times but he never lost his apostleship.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
aah I see.

The people who wrote parts of the Bible are believed to have been Divinely Inspired and guided by the Holy Spirit. As such the Bible contains Divine Revelation. However it is not believed that the Bible contains all revealed truths.

So, the Bible is a product to aid the Church in it's ministry,you might notice that there have been additions to the Canon over time, so the perceptions of Canon can and has changed.

Is the Bible the word of God? Not in the sense that it is believed to be without error and be dictated by God- how Muslims view the Koran. OK, learn something new every day.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
In Roman Catholic theology we call it a miracle.
I don't even understand how you would define the difference between "body" and "bread" if they are the same in every attribute. How are the two different? They have to change in some way to become transformed but you say no change has occurred.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
OK, learn something new every day.

Your views?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Your views? As in how I feel about the Church running things? Well personally I have more issues with the Church than the bible, well with most organized religions in general. I see so much corruption in the Church that it is hard for me to think of them as holy and not even as of late but throughout history. People in the Church has used the idea of it to gain power and wealth throughout its long history, it would take a "miracle" for it to change at least in my view.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
As in how I feel about the Church running things? Well personally I have more issues with the Church than the bible, well with most organized religions in general. I see so much corruption in the Church that it is hard for me to think of them as holy and not even as of late but throughout history. People in the Church has used the idea of it to gain power and wealth throughout its long history, it would take a "miracle" for it to change at least in my view.

Well, I tend to agree- there has been a vast amount of Corruption and the like in the Church...but then again, human beings are flawed and it is always going to happen in any setting...

The fact that there are more sinners than saints in the Church does not mean that the Church has lost God's grace though...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Well, I tend to agree- there has been a vast amount of Corruption and the like in the Church...but then again, human beings are flawed and it is always going to happen in any setting...

Stuff like child molestation isnt corruption thats pure evil.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

The fact that there are more sinners than saints in the Church does not mean that the Church has lost God's grace though...

Maybe not but it certainly shows theres something wrong with it.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Well, I tend to agree- there has been a vast amount of Corruption and the like in the Church...but then again, human beings are flawed and it is always going to happen in any setting...

The fact that there are more sinners than saints in the Church does not mean that the Church has lost God's grace though... It also shows that they haven't had it either. If things like this can happen and humans are flawed, then the Pope can be flawed since it is man that elects him.

Originally posted by Da Pittman
It also shows that they haven't had it either. If things like this can happen and humans are flawed, then the Pope can be flawed since it is man that elects him.

Whats your point by the way?

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Whats your point by the way? Gav says that the Pope is infallible therefore the Church is the authority of Gods will and design and not the Bible, however the Church is run by man and not divine as we can see through the things that it has done. Both the Bible and the Church contradict, corrupted and created by man and are far from divine.

Yes that is true, but even though the Church makes errors God continues to uphold her teachings and gives her authority.

Priests who molested Children in the Church are a tiny minority and proportionally the Church has as many as any other institution i.e. the US Education service.

Yes it was and is a horrible thing but God does not abandon the Church.

The thing with the Pope is that he is not infallible due to anything within him but because God has given his promise to uphold the Pope's doctrinal teaching.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Yes that is true, but even though the Church makes errors God continues to uphold her teachings and gives her authority.

Priests who molested Children in the Church are a tiny minority and proportionally the Church has as many as any other institution i.e. the US Education service.

Yes it was and is a horrible thing but God does not abandon the Church.

The thing with the Pope is that he is not infallible due to anything within him but because God has given his promise to uphold the Pope's doctrinal teaching. So what ever the Pope says God will do, even if God thinks it is wrong? The Church can judge and declare holy wars and God is OK with this? How is the Church run by man only given some of the teachings of Jesus Christ supposed to understand and comprehend God and carry out his will on Earth?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
So what ever the Pope says God will do, even if God thinks it is wrong? The Church can judge and declare holy wars and God is OK with this? How is the Church run by man only given some of the teachings of Jesus Christ supposed to understand and comprehend God and carry out his will on Earth?

All of Jesus' teachings have been revealed to the Church, some are contained in the Scripture others came through the Church.

Let us take the example of Pope Urban II. He launched the first crusade (a just war IMO) and told Christians that if they killed a Muslim they would not have to do any time in purgatory. Now, the Pope made this promise and so God will have upheld it- even though he may not have liked it. He could not punish the people for doing what the authority he left told them. Any culpability for the War would lie with the Pope/

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

Priests who molested Children in the Church are a tiny minority and proportionally the Church has as many as any other institution i.e. the US Education service.

You sure about that? According to an Irish Priest it was quite common from what I could remember, also there are many cases in South America as well.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

Yes it was and is a horrible thing but God does not abandon the Church.


Yeah well you had better sort that out.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

The thing with the Pope is that he is not infallible due to anything within him but because God has given his promise to uphold the Pope's doctrinal teaching.

.....elaborate...I think you might have done this in a later post.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Let us take the example of Pope Urban II. He launched the first crusade (a just war IMO)

Why is that?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

and told Christians that if they killed a Muslim they would not have to do any time in purgatory. Now, the Pope made this promise and so God will have upheld it- even though he may not have liked it. He could not punish the people for doing what the authority he left told them. Any culpability for the War would lie with the Pope/


Not sure what to say bout this, this is so wrong on so many levels.

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
All of Jesus' teachings have been revealed to the Church, some are contained in the Scripture others came through the Church.

Let us take the example of Pope Urban II. He launched the first crusade (a just war IMO) and told Christians that if they killed a Muslim they would not have to do any time in purgatory. Now, the Pope made this promise and so God will have upheld it- even though he may not have liked it. He could not punish the people for doing what the authority he left told them. Any culpability for the War would lie with the Pope/ I just don't get this at all why would God let man who is flawed by his own law dictate what he has to do? Even when he made it clear even in the 10 commandments, thou shall not kill? Which I understand that the Roman Catholics changed from murder in their translation. Why would an all knowing God let the small minded man say what God should do?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
I just don't get this at all why would God let man who is flawed by his own law dictate what he has to do? Even when he made it clear even in the 10 commandments, thou shall not kill? Which I understand that the Roman Catholics changed from murder in their translation. Why would an all knowing God let the small minded man say what God should do?

Furthermore you cant even prove that God wants you to do anything.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Furthermore you cant even prove that God wants you to do anything. What’s to prevent the Pope from getting a metal illness that affects his judgment and tells everyone that gays can get married? Who is to say that the Pope is wrong?

Originally posted by Da Pittman
What’s to prevent the Pope from getting a metal illness that affects his judgment and tells everyone that gays can get married? Who is to say that the Pope is wrong?

Well yeah I agree...im just saying the argument that pope is infallable due to God is nonsensical because you cant even prove God exists.

The Pope does not tell God what to do. He does things which God gives his backing too, if the Pope did something which God felt was totally against his will then the Pope would surely die or better yet, would never become Pope. No Pope has ever departed from the Faith...it is inconceivable that one would.

Why would God trust a man to do this job? Because though we are imperfect we are the only things that can do the job...

The Crusade was justified because it was a response to a plea from help from a beleaguered Constantinople who had suffered from Islamic attacks.

Originally posted by Phantom Zone
Well yeah I agree...im just saying the argument that pope is infallable due to God is nonsensical because you cant even prove God exists.

Kinda irrelevant thing to say though when someone believes that God does exist...

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
The Pope does not tell God what to do. He does things which God gives his backing too, if the Pope did something which God felt was totally against his will then the Pope would surely die or better yet, would never become Pope. No Pope has ever departed from the Faith...it is inconceivable that one would.

Why would God trust a man to do this job? Because though we are imperfect we are the only things that can do the job...

How do you know Gods talking to him or guides him?

Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav

The Crusade was justified because it was a response to a plea from help from a beleaguered Constantinople who had suffered from Islamic attacks.

Guess you could be right.


Originally posted by Grand-Moff-Gav
Kinda irrelevant thing to say though when someone believes that God does exist...

Depends really but if somebody believes in God and his views are going to affect me personally I want some decent proof that God exists and speaks to him or the Pope.