1. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    05 Apr '05 00:05
    ...organisation dies.

    But enough about the pope, how are you all?
  2. Standard memberwib
    Stay outta my biznez
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    9020
    05 Apr '05 01:32
    Originally posted by howardgee
    ...organisation dies.

    But enough about the pope, how are you all?
    I'm fine Howard, certainly better than the Pope. How's life for you?

    You know I don't think the Pope was a bad person. He seemed like a very loving, caring man who stood by his beliefs. My problem of course is with his beliefs. They're backwards. But that's a whole other topic.

    I'll just say that I respected the man, but disagreed with almost everything he believed in.



  3. NY
    Joined
    29 Mar '05
    Moves
    1085
    05 Apr '05 02:43
    Many people are "better than the poe" right now.. but we are stil no less and no more a part of the all.. now that i got that outa the way.. i can finish my beer and go back to work.. oh. er.. i mean .. ahh screw it...
  4. Cosmos
    Joined
    21 Jan '04
    Moves
    11184
    05 Apr '05 03:57
    Originally posted by wib
    I'm fine Howard, certainly better than the Pope. How's life for you?

    You know I don't think the Pope was a bad person. He seemed like a very loving, caring man who stood by his beliefs. My problem of course is with his beliefs. They're backwards. But that's a whole other topic.

    I'll just say that I respected the man, but disagreed with almost everything he believed in.



    Life is great at the moment thanks wib.

    I concur almost entirely with your e-mail.

    However, if you are the head of a sexist, homophobic organisation and espouse their views, doesn't that make you a sexist, homophobic person?
    You say he seemed like a very loving, caring man, but how much did he love homosexuals (not biblically of course!)?
  5. Standard memberBowmann
    Non-Subscriber
    RHP IQ
    Joined
    17 Mar '05
    Moves
    1345
    05 Apr '05 18:09
    Originally posted by xxxenophobe
    Many people are "better than the poe" right now...
    A lot of people would disagree with you there. Have you read "The Fall of the House of Usher"? Or "The Raven"? Very popular, and critically acclaimed.
  6. Standard memberPhlabibit
    Mystic Meg
    tinyurl.com/3sbbwd4
    Joined
    27 Mar '03
    Moves
    17242
    05 Apr '05 18:13
    Originally posted by Bowmann
    A lot of people would disagree with you there. Have you read "The Fall of the House of Usher"? Or "The Raven"? Very popular, and critically acclaimed.
    Cue canned laughter...
  7. Standard memberwib
    Stay outta my biznez
    Joined
    04 Apr '04
    Moves
    9020
    05 Apr '05 20:201 edit
    Originally posted by howardgee
    Life is great at the moment thanks wib.

    I concur almost entirely with your e-mail.

    However, if you are the head of a sexist, homophobic organisation and espouse their views, doesn't that make you a sexist, homophobic person?
    You ...[text shortened]... but how much did he love homosexuals (not biblically of course!)?
    I understand perfectly where you're coming from Howard. Believe me.

    You ask if somone is the head of a sexist, homophobic organisation doesn't that make them a sexist, homophobic person. Yes, indeed it does. But they had to be IGNORANT before they could become homophobic. They just haven't opened their minds yet. They haven't gotten their noses out of the bible long enough to see that all people, regardless of their sexual orientation or sex, are equal.

    A perfect example of that is my mother. When my brother finally admitted to her that he was gay she freaked out. Just went right off the deep end. Now my mom is a good, and very religious, Southern Baptist woman, and having a son admit that he's gay is a very traumatic event. But in time she realized she had a choice to make; stick to her ignorant beliefs or open her mind and let her son back into her life. At that point, after the huge falling out, my mother turned her back on my brother. So it took a long time to heal those riffs.

    Slowly but surely they began to talk again and eventually my mother made the right decisions. But she wasn't homophobic because she's a mean or hateful person, she was just ignorant of homosexuality.

    Anyway, I hope that made sense and actually made a point.

    And I'm glad to hear you're doing well Howard!

  8. Standard memberchancremechanic
    Islamofascists Suck!
    Account suspended
    Joined
    17 Feb '02
    Moves
    32132
    06 Apr '05 01:325 edits
    Originally posted by howardgee
    Life is great at the moment thanks wib.

    I concur almost entirely with your e-mail.

    However, if you are the head of a sexist, homophobic organisation and espouse their views, doesn't that make you a sexist, homophobic person?
    You ...[text shortened]... but how much did he love homosexuals (not biblically of course!)?
    What exactly do you think the Pope should have done for homosexuals? Have a Gay Pride cook-out at the Vatican pic-nic grounds? Condoned their lifestyle when the Bible expressly forbids such a lifestyle? He "loved" the sinners: homosexuals, heterosexuals, prostitutes, criminals, and others without embracing the sins that these people committed (according to the Bible and the Pope's beliefs)...what you were asking him to do is go against his beliefs in order to placate a group that, according to his beliefs, is living in sin....would YOU condone the actions of people having sex with dogs if it went against your beliefs? One CAN love a sinner, regardless if he/she is gay or straight, without accepting their behavior, and that is what the Pope did. That is what I do: love the sinner, hate the sin! I am no prude either. The Pope had the spiritual BAWLZ to stick to his beliefs when so many are compromising their beliefs in order to not offend others.....who may be the offenders in the first place...
  9. Standard memberMaustrauser
    Lord Chook
    Stringybark
    Joined
    16 Nov '03
    Moves
    88863
    06 Apr '05 04:18
    Originally posted by chancremechanic
    What exactly do you think the Pope should have done for homosexuals? )...what you were asking him to do is go against his beliefs in order to placate a group that, according to his beliefs, is living in sin....

    But the Pope was happy to ignore the Bible when he wanted to. Do you think he condones taking women as slaves and raping them (Deut 21:13)

    Or that you can have two or more wives? (Deut 21:15)

    Or that if a man dies the man's wife must have sex his brother (Deut 25:5)

    Of course not. The Pope like all Christians picks and chooses which bits in the Bible to follow. Why should he follow the prohibition on homosexuality but not insist that sister-in-laws have sex with brother-in-laws.

    Let's have a bit of consistency in your interpretation please!
  10. London
    Joined
    02 Mar '04
    Moves
    36083
    06 Apr '05 08:53
    Originally posted by Maustrauser

    But the Pope was happy to ignore the Bible when he wanted to. Do you think he condones taking women as slaves and raping them (Deut 21:13)

    Or that you can have two or more wives? (Deut 21:15)

    Or that if a man dies the man's wife must have sex his brother (Deut 25:5)

    Of course not. The Pope like all Christians picks and chooses which bits in ...[text shortened]... ave sex with brother-in-laws.

    Let's have a bit of consistency in your interpretation please!
    The RCC (not just the Pope!) has very different hermeneutics from a Bible literalist. Besides, the Church derives its doctrines as much from Sacred Tradition as it does from Scripture.

    The book of Deuteronomy, in particular, is singled out by Jesus as containing concessions to the Israelites because of the "hardness of [their] hearts" (Mt 19:8). This alone should suffice to show that the literal precepts of Deutoronomy were intended for a specific people at a specific time in history. Further, many of the rules in Deutoronomy also serve a symbolic purpose in showing Man's relationship with God and the process of salvation (Jesus as Agnus Dei comes to mind).

    That aside, your response had nothing to do with CM's post. CM never claimed that the Pope was only sticking to the Bible - something you ranted about.
  11. Subscriberinvigorate
    Only 1 F in Uckfield
    Buxted UK
    Joined
    27 Feb '02
    Moves
    211758
    06 Apr '05 10:53
    Originally posted by wib
    I'm fine Howard, certainly better than the Pope. How's life for you?

    You know I don't think the Pope was a bad person. He seemed like a very loving, caring man who stood by his beliefs. My problem of course is with his beliefs. They're backwards. But that's a whole other topic.

    I'll just say that I respected the man, but disagreed with almost everything he believed in.



    I agree with nearly everything you say Wib, apart from "certainly better than the Pope"

    Have you see the TV Pictures, here is a clean shaven Santa Claus, lieing down with a secret smile on his face loving the adulation of millions of morbid tourists.

    Lets face it the Pope wasn't allowed many illicit pleasures in life, so I think we should let him have some fun now he is dead!

  12. Standard memberAlcra
    Lazy Sod
    Everywhere
    Joined
    12 Oct '04
    Moves
    8623
    06 Apr '05 15:221 edit
    OK, now that he is dead, and (excuse me why I step out of character) presumably in heaven , the BIIIGGGG question is:

    Can he finally have sex?

    EDIT: I mean of course with a woman, not little choir boys.
  13. Standard memberchancremechanic
    Islamofascists Suck!
    Account suspended
    Joined
    17 Feb '02
    Moves
    32132
    06 Apr '05 20:59
    Originally posted by Maustrauser

    But the Pope was happy to ignore the Bible when he wanted to. Do you think he condones taking women as slaves and raping them (Deut 21:13)

    Or that you can have two or more wives? (Deut 21:15)

    Or that if a man dies the man's wife must have sex his brother (Deut 25:5)

    Of course not. The Pope like all Christians picks and chooses which bits in ...[text shortened]... ave sex with brother-in-laws.

    Let's have a bit of consistency in your interpretation please!
    If I'm not mistaken, Christianity is based on the New Testament. When Christ died, the Old Testament, although still used in Bible teaching today, was negated and Christian doctrine is now based on the New Testament. Is that consistant enough for you? 😉 I'm not Catholic, so I may be wrong, but correct me if I am...
  14. Standard memberchancremechanic
    Islamofascists Suck!
    Account suspended
    Joined
    17 Feb '02
    Moves
    32132
    06 Apr '05 21:01
    Originally posted by lucifershammer
    The RCC (not just the Pope!) has very different hermeneutics from a Bible literalist. Besides, the Church derives its doctrines as much from Sacred Tradition as it does from Scripture.

    The book of Deuteronomy, in particular, is singled out by Jesus as containing concessions to the Israelites because of the "hardness of [their] hearts" (Mt 19:8). ...[text shortened]... ost. CM never claimed that the Pope was only sticking to the Bible - something you ranted about.
    Thank you....🙂
  15. Standard memberColetti
    W.P. Extraordinaire
    State of Franklin
    Joined
    13 Aug '03
    Moves
    21735
    06 Apr '05 21:06
    Originally posted by chancremechanic
    If I'm not mistaken, Christianity is based on the New Testament. When Christ died, the Old Testament, although still used in Bible teaching today, was negated and Christian doctrine is now based on the New Testament. Is that consistant enough for you? 😉 I'm not Catholic, so I may be wrong, but correct me if I am...
    That's not an uncommon view.

    But I don't think the NT makes sense without the OT. If not for the requirements set forth in the OT regard sin and redemption, Christ's death would not have had a logical purpose.

    But clearly radical changes occurs the NT. Animal scarifices are out, all foods are clean, etc.
Back to Top