Forgot to add, here's a simplified timeline of Biblical canon http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/a/canon.html
The Bible was at least originally partly in Hebrew, the language of Christ. Of course, I'm no theologian, but the Latin wouldn't be accurate at all without a source. Cheers!
Thanks for the link. Dude. Jesus spoke Aramaic. The New Testament was written in Koine Greek.
“..the real message of Jesus would be more like this:
My message is very simple.
All of mankind who ever livedare eligible to choose God’s grace,because it is freely given by Godand can never be earned or deserved.
This, btw, lines up with orthodox doctrine in the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox Churches, and the Anglican Communion. I suspect that most of the mainline Protestant Churches would agree as well…”—
To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God’s merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self- exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called “hell.”
So God cannot save us after we are dead? Our “choice” in life is final. God or nothing?
How does that even remotely make sense?
While I rejoice in your teachings of mystery and love, UndercoverNun, I’m not convinced “the Church” in any of its guises should be considered as any arbiters of truth.
"The gravest of offenses" does not mean the offenses are any more equivalent as one would classify murder, rape, and incest as felonies; they do not automatically equal the same value.
Attempted ordination of women results in automatic excommunication simply because we are not allowed to do so. If Jesus did not ordain any women, and his Apostles followed this in choosing successors to the present-day, then who are we to go against that?
As for the punishment of abusers and rapists of children, there is no limit but to "the gravity of his crime," including excommunication.
The secrecy of diocesan tribunals did not obstruct justice, but sought to preserve the "innocent until proven guilty" of both the accuser and accused. I know Wikipedia's not always the best, but for more sources, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimen_sollicitationis
You're welcome. Good morning here on the U.S. East Coast.
Thanjks for the response. Again I think you are splitting hairs - all I said was that “child abuse” and the “ordination of women” were put in the same category of graveness of sin. That’s what’s happened.
As for Jesus… He was a first century Jew. He was culturally bound by a whole whack of rules that seem barbaric now. According to the Bible he gave conflicting views as to whether “the law” of his time was to apply to his followers… But then everything we know about Jesus was written by people who never met him in a language he almost certainly didn’t speak, so pretending we can know pretty much anything about “jesus” and what he supposedly said is, frankly, silly.
By the “secrecy of diocesan tribunals”, I presume you are referring to moving child-abusing priests around from parish to parish and often avoiding civil authorities entirely.
Wow. Apologising for these guys would really make my head hurt…
Friend, I am not going to read “in its entirety” a 20 page letter on Canon Law. How about I stick with the Catholic Herald. It’s reasonable to summarise the new rules issued by the Vatican as placing child abuse in as grave a category of sin as ordinating women priests.
It is a common tactic for people to portray the worst members of the Catholic Church as being representative of the Church as a whole; I “pretend” nothing, but I defend and promote the truth of innocence and actual, proper response to child abuse instead of a bitter war of words which solves nothing in the situation.
I don’t know about anyone else, but I’m concerned with the leaders of the Catholic Church, who systematically and institutionally covered up for child abuse for decades (at the very, very least) and then when they had a chance to condemn and correct their past behaviour, couldn’t stop themselves from hefting a kick at the idea of women priests in a way that has managed to offend and annoy millions of Catholics, never mind me or anyone else.
Thank you for your clarifications. Appreciated!
My pleasure and thanks for the links and interesting posts :)
Here’s today’s pompous, self-rightoeus, self-appointend spokesperson for tehbebejeebus pancakesnosyrup:
I think that you can not deny or fault the Bible until you read it in full and understand it. Various interpretations of scripture are your answer choices. You have not studied the material that has the correct answer so you guess at what you think the correct interpretation is. You can go on guessing, but in my opinion you are just gambling your life away.
Did you get that? Out of all of the billions of people alive today, one of the very few who has “studied the material” to give a “correct answer” to what the Bible says is our very own tumblr-tastic pancakesnosyrup. How lucky we are to have her wisdom.
Memo to pancakesnosyrup: You haven’t studied the Bible. You don’t speak ancient hebrew or new testament greek. You aren’t a geologist or a historian or a scientist so you can’t tell us how accurate or otherwise the bible is on these topics.
You are just another young women spouting off on Tumblr about how great your religion is and how terrible it must be for everyone else because jeebus loves you more than them.
Back in Jesus’s day they would have stoned people like you to death for having the temerity to pretend to speak for god while not being male.
Stop pretending that the Bible is a magical perfect guide to life. It’s just a book, for heaven’s sake.
I'm browsing the Web for my nonprofit internship and I came across this site:
Religious causes get more money than health. Please tell me that bothers you as much as it bothers me.
Thanks for your message :)
I see from your link the Costal Georgia Foundation spent its charitable money as follows in 2009:
…I guess I get the argument that religious organisations can be important in building communities and social cohesion… But yeah, totally, I am exasperated as to quite why arts, education, health and everything else on the list should take the back seat to more churhes in Georgia… Because it’s all churches, right? I mean, how many mosques and synagogues and gudwaras and mandirs do you think got money? I can take a wild guess…
“Bible scholars agree that the first gospels were written decades after the life of Jesus. Decades. And, of course, we don’t have the original manuscript. We have copies of copies of copies of ancient Greek manuscripts, which have thousands — literally thousands — of discrepancies between them, many of which show signs of later interpolation, which is to say that people added passages that then became part of the canon. There are whole books, like the Book of Revelation, which for hundreds of years were not included, because they were deemed false gospel… Generations of Christians lived and died being guided by gospel that is now deemed both incomplete and mistaken.”—Sam Harris (via cocknbull)
“In America, we love capitalism because it allows the individual to best satisfy his material needs and desires. We love freedom because it permits him to express himself and pursue happiness fully. And we love democracy because it forms a government best fit to the will of the individuals it represents. But notice that there is only one worldview which is truly compatible with these key American values: individual relativism. Whatever else you might say about him, the one thing that a person in a traditional culture would never even consider it might be possible to do is fashion his own personal moral or religious code. So the real question for Americans is not whether babies are precious, marriage is for life, or Jesus is the real Savior. The real question is whether a society which has already embraced capitalism, freedom, and democracy can even answer such questions. We don’t yet know for sure, but the evidence at this particular moment in history isn’t encouraging.”—
Holly Ordway describes her conversion to Christianity from atheism as a formerly committed naturalist.
“Nonetheless, “My naturalistic worldview was inadequate to explain the nature of reality in a coherent way: it could not explain the origin of the universe, nor could it explain morality,” Ordway says.
ORLY? So what if we can’t explain the Universe. “God did it” is not an explanation. Most scientists do not believe in a personal God, so pretending science supports your religion is, frankly, a lie. As for morality… omg wtf? How do you think any society, whether it is ants or humans, survives without rules? If you can’t see the benefits of a social code, then seriously you must be a feckin’ idiot.
On the other hand, she came to acknowledge, “the theistic worldview was both consistent and powerfully explanatory: it offered a convincing, rationally consistent, and logical explanation for everything that the naturalistic worldview explained plus all the things that the naturalistic worldview couldn’t.”
Rationally consistant? Bwahahahahaha. God created mankind so we would love him knowing in advance most of us would burn eternally in hell for not having the right religion?
That is a better explanation than “i do not know what caused the universe or happens to us after death”? Seriously?
With the care, direction and support of the Runyans, Ordway also came to realize the pride that was at root of her atheism, she writes. “At the heart of atheism is an appealing premise: ‘My will be done, not Yours.’ If atheism is true, and there is no God, then everything really is all about me, and what I want, and what I can get,” she recently blogged. “No wonder it strikes such a chord in our self-obsessed culture.””
Absolute errant, offensive, bigoted, ignorant nonsense. Absolutely everything we achieve in our lives whether it is the love of our parents, the respect of our peers, the homes we live in, the jobs we do, the relationships we have, everything, depends on other people. It depends on all of us.
What Holly Ordway describes as hating - “everything really is all about me, and what I want, and what I can get” - is rampant consumerism, and the causes of that have feck all to do with atheism, and everything to do with capitalism and new age modernist self-centrered spirituality embraced very happily by American Christian Conservatism.
Jeez louise. Evangelical Christians don’t half talk some amount of rubbish to support their absurd beliefs :<
“How dare you insinuate that since I’m an atheist, I’m not happy, that my life isn’t “fulfilled” unless I join your cult and I have a “relationship” with a >2,000 year old Jew.
How dare you say I know nothing of what I criticize, despite the fact that I was Roman Catholic for well over a good half of my life, and had to go to a private school dedicated to little more than Christianity.
How dare you call me “incomplete” and “hellbound” one moment, and at the next, start talking about how much Jesus “loves” me.
Fuck you, and fuck your incredibly egotistic views.”—
Staggering, isn’t it? My life is empty so I need an imaginary friend - hey look! look everyone! come and have my imaginary friend! he’s totally great! He loves you! (Oh, and by the way, if you don’t love him back he’ll BURN YOU ETERNALLY IN HELL).
“…Jim Wallace’s approach to the Gospel of Mark is an interesting one. Jim is a cold case homicide detective and has specialized skill in forensic document analysis. He applied these skills to the Gospel of Mark to evaluate the source of the testimony. His conclusion is that Mark is not only dated very early, it’s likely Peter’s testimony recorded by Mark. Here’s his evidence.”
There’s little that riles me more than lying assholes-for-god like Jim Wallace pretending to the deluded that they have “fairly” examined the “evidence” for Christianity. Jumpin’ jehosephat, the only people they speak to are Fundamentalist Christians who hold that - by definition - no evidence can contradict christianity. How stupid is that.
Here’s a clue for you, davidgliu… You can read what New Testament experts say about the real evidence yourself without having your thoughts filtered by the likes of Jim Wallace.
Here’s another thing for you to chew over. The Gospel of Mark was written by someone who never met Jesus, in a language that Jesus didn’t speak. So everything you think you know Jesus said is a second-hand re-telling at the very, very best. To pretend you can know with any certainty the words of Jesus is, frankly, ridiculous.
More amusingly, the Gospel of Mark tells the story of the life of Jesus almost directly in line with narrative cycles in the Books of Kings, which was certainly known to the Gospel’s author. Now what do you think is more likely? That Jesus “miraculously” led a life exactly in the same manner as the ancient kings of israel? Or that the author of the Gospel of Mark feckin’ made as much of the the story of Jesus’s life up as he needed to make it fit…
What do you think is more likely? What do you think a “cold case homicide detective” would say? A real one. Not one who refused to believe any other explanation than the one he was taught in Church…
Interesting article about the lengths people will go to avoid cognitive dissonance. It is not about religion per se, but it certainly applies to things like seven day creationism. Certainly can apply to just about anyone though. It turns out if facts prove your idea is wrong (or at least would to a purely rational person) people just invent increasingly elaborate mechanisms to explain the evidence and not face the possibility that they are wrong. Since who likes being wrong?
It’s not just creationism. Try pointing out to “Bible believing” Christians that their “all-loving” “God” created people knowing in advance almost all of them would be tortured eternally for having the “wrong religion”. Watch their heads spin on their shoulders. Doesn’t stop them believing tho.
Seriously, people, is the notion of a psycho God really better than no God at all!?
Former Tory MP Ann Widdecombe has attacked a judge’s decision to allow two gay asylum seekers the right to stay in the UK.
Writing in the Daily Express, Ms Widdecombe argued that the decision was “absurd” and that the pair should not have been allowed asylum because neither were facing immediate risk of death or imprisonment.
She wrote that the men, from Iran and Cameroon, “seem to have wanted to come here merely so that they can be overt about their lifestyles”.
I really despise this horrible fucking shitty twat-faced woman.
What a miserable old bitch.
And to think before I had an iota of respect for her. Not any more.
where do you find all these "facts" and tidbits about christianity? not trying to start anything, i'm just genuinely curious!
Great question… I’ve been reading and blogging about christianity and creationism for a long, long time. I have lots of regular blogs and sources I follow, and I’m always finding new ones. I post as much to challenge my own opinions and beliefs as those of others, so go ahead and start anything you like.
Thanks to everyone else who’s sent me messages recently. It’s always great to find thoughtful, interesting people to bounce off. You know who you are :)
Faith is all very well, but I’m sure the blessed undercover nun will agree with me when I posit that none of us * know * what is out there, so Ido wish people would stop using their beliefs as excuses for persecuting and discriminating and hating and bashing and claiming exclusive access to the “truth”…
New rules the Vatican is expected to issue soon on penalties for priests who sexually abuse children will also put the ordaining of women in the same category of the most serious crimes under church law.
Church sources told Catholic News Service that the new “norms,” as the policies are called, will include the “attempted ordination of women” among the list of most serious crimes, or what are known as “delicta graviora.” …
Word that the Vatican will also use this opportunity to codify the attempted ordination of a woman as among the “delicta graviora” is a surprise, however, and is not likely to please either victims advocates — who have been pushing for much more stringent and universal church policies against abusers — or those who favor a greater role for women in the church.
“Quite frankly, it is an outrage to pair the two, a complete injustice to connect the aspirations of some women among the baptized to ordained ministry with what are some of the worst crimes that can be committed against the least of Christ’s members,” U.S. Catholic editor Bryan Cones wrote at the monthly magazine’s web site in a blast that appears to echo the views of many.
“This decision boggles the mind: The faithful have been justly demanding for nearly a decade clear guidelines for dealing with the sexual abuse of children, along with just punishments for both offenders and bishops who have abetted these crimes. What we have gotten is half of what we have been asking for (still no sanctions for bishops), along with a completely unconnected and unnecessary condemnation of the ordination of women.” …
Undercover Nun weeps for the children of God who have been abused by those in spiritual authority over them.
And Undercover Nun weeps for faithful, committed Christian women everywhere who are denied the ability to exercise their God-given vocations because of the lack of a penis.
This Pope must go… Or the Catholic church is doomed…
…a mature Christian realizes that it is impossible for us to comprehend the will of a God who is big enough to create galaxies and universes and quarks and photons and viruses and butterflies and laws of physics that we still don’t understand. Good stuff and bad stuff just… happen, and our job is to respond to them with the radical and profligate love that God showers on us.
Undercover Nun believes that Christianity is simple, never simplistic, and only rarely easy. Christianity is full of paradox, cognitive dissonance, and dynamic tension, but should never be a faith of double standards.
“In a world so obviously indifferent to our pain or pleasure, Christians must embrace an incredible double standard to believe a God of the universe is perfectly good. They must say that many good things happen because they understand God’s ways and he wanted those things to happen, but they must also say that all bad things happen for reasons we can’t know because we don’t understand God’s ways. This does not impress me.”—Common Sense Atheism » Bobby Pruitt on the Problem of Evil
Did you read the title of the post, where I said FELLOWatheists/agnostics? I’m an atheist, and I’ve had a few conversations with other non-believers that have been very anti-religion, and not in a just questioning way. When someone proclaims “I hate Christians,” I take issue with that. Questioning religion is something I do on the daily here, but I’m really not okay with hate being spread against religious people just because some people disagree with religion.
I cannot recall having come across anyone who says they “hate christians”.
I totally agree doing so is wrong.
While I’m totally with you in the sentiment of your post, I rather suspect that much of the time religious people just aren’t used to having their beliefs questioned…
Enough already. Hating someone because of their religion is no different than others hating you because of your lack of faith.
I know I’m probably going to get a “religion is the root of all evil!” response. Fuck that. INTOLERANCE is what’s wrong with the world. Have some respect for your fellow human beings and stop being a jerk.
Who is “hating” believers I wonder? Can caraobrien or anyone who reblogged this quote one instance of any agnostics or atheists “hating” believers?
Yeah, intolerance is the problem, I totally agree. Intolerance like this:
"Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me.’" (John 14:6)
Love the believer… But don’t pretend the belief isn’t open to question.
If you are upset about your religion being associated with intolerant assholes then, please, disassociate yourself from intolerant assholes.
“No work of art is more important than the Christian’s own life, and every Christian is cared upon to be an artist in this sense. He may have no gift of writing, no gift of composing or singing, but each man has the gift of creativity in terms of the way he lives his life. In this sense, the Christian’s life is to be an art work. The Christian’s life is to be a thing of beauty in the midst of a lost and despairing world.”—