Message boards :
Politics :
Catholic criticism.
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2
Author | Message |
---|---|
musicplayer Send message Joined: 17 May 10 Posts: 2430 Credit: 926,046 RAC: 0 |
I happened to read the OP's post. Perhaps we are missing the intended meaning of the initial post? Religion, as it is being carried out by the Church, is based on belief and faith and not necessarily the original story about the life and death of Jesus Christ. Despite that, religion also is having its darker sides, or aspects, as well. So, by means of preaching, is doing such a thing supposed to be "applied theology", meaning teaching for the masses for us to possibly be able to learn something? If you are celebrating Christmas, there should be a Christmas gospel for this as well. Possibly a better word for this, but this was the word being suggested to me by means of translate.google.com Definitely some people get tired by not only being whispered a couple of words in the ear, but possibly being able to hear them out loud as well. But in the end, this is not what the Church is all about either. It is not always deaf silence, but it is not necessarily the opposite thing either. So, looking up the word "dogma" in the Wikipedia, it says that this is "a principle or set of principles laid down by an authority as incontrovertibly true". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dogma Are we supposed to believe that everything which is dealing with the subject of religion is always true, regardless of any possible belief you might be having yourself? In the Catholic Church, confessions are sometimes being made in front of a priest in order to receive possible forgiveness for sins which have been carried out. In return for carrying out such a confession, you may be receiving forgiveness in return, but not necessarily an absolution. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolution We may be lead to believe that the Church is a place for naive people. One thing is carrying out a sin, the other one is the possibility or likelihood of receiving forgiveness or absolution if you in fact happen to be able to regret any such sins having being carried out and express regret or even remorse for any such act. When being crucified, Jesus Christ probably encountered the Devil before he eventually died or passed away. In fact we are supposed to be knowing his thoughts here, but the exact wording I do not have. He might have said something like "Father (or God), why have you left me"? Or perhaps "... why did you leave me?" Already having been mentioned, but we are also made to believe what is happening next as well. Again, I am no expert on this subject. This is only my personal opinion on these things. |
bobby Send message Joined: 22 Mar 02 Posts: 2866 Credit: 17,789,109 RAC: 3 |
Do you hate every thing? Could one add: Leftists are (fill-in the negatives) Rightists are (fill-in the negatives) etc? I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ... |
Wiggo Send message Joined: 24 Jan 00 Posts: 34744 Credit: 261,360,520 RAC: 489 |
Well, I can see that Clyde is still blundering his way through these political threads. :-( But then again a couple of others here are also doing the same thing (just from the opposite direction) and another still shows that he doesn't have a clue where he is in this forum (but that also doesn't surprise me). *shakes head* Cheers. |
musicplayer Send message Joined: 17 May 10 Posts: 2430 Credit: 926,046 RAC: 0 |
Are you perhaps referring to me, Wiggo? If I happen to be posting to a thread, I do not necessarily have to be biased or being inclined towards one particular opinion when it comes to a given subject. At least not all the time. If I happen to dig into a subject, I would be making an assumption in regards to a specific thing against another based on the given approach or attitude towards or against this subject. As far as I know, the Vatican is now managing an observatory, possibly two, in order to carry out science and be able to get or obtain knowledge. As I have already been saying, the Church is about proclamation much of the time. A priest is not necessarily supposed to be having a particular or specific knowledge, but rather is supposed to carry the message of that of Jesus. Jesus is supposed to have been healing ill or sick people suffering from illnesses. Because of the way religion is carried out by means of preaching and other related ceremonies, we are not able to make a difference from what rather could be viewed as being miracles or the supernatural. Again Tarot cards and the like are not supposed to be science, while Black Holes are supposed to be such a thing. A particular or specific religious ceremony being carried out by the Church is the communion. Are you ever supposed to be giving a thought at what religion is all about? Religion on its own is not supposed to be about a given approach when it comes to our understanding of nature. Much of our time we are either looking at the sky or examining the properties of elementary particles in order to be able to gain new knowledge of our whereabouts. Regardless of whether or not we should be believing in miracles or not, such things as miracles are not supposed to be about science at all. Is churchgoing and the religious ceremonies being associated with doing such a thing today only about singing, vorshipping and proclamation, or is it about the possible notion of good versus the evil? Apparenly God is known by means of his name, while the Devil may be also nicknamed something even worse. I guess if you happen to be a non-believer, at least you may be able to say that you once may have been experiencing or at least having a bad day. In the same way as people either being Protestant or Catholic when it comes to traditional belief or upbringing, both these parts of the church are supposed to belong to or being part of Christianity. In the same way, a Muslim is supposed to be adhering to the Koran as being his Bible when it comes to the subject of religion. Many places which could be either temples, pyramids or stone collections, like Stonehenge are likely to have been used for the purpose or sake of carrying out religious ceremonies. Rather than believing in Jesus Christ, or Christianity, for that matter, people have been vorshipping a God because of either fear, lack of knowledge or a possible belief that something larger, possibly an entity, could bring an end to problems and open up a way to a better life. So, the two different ways of looking at religion is apparently by means of viewing it as either Heaven or Hell. In contrast, scientists are rather being concerned about either the particles belonging to microcosmos, or the large objects being found in space, because having a knowledge about these objects are supposed to be explaining our world in a better way. When doing such a thing, we are not supposed to be seeing miracles, or even the presence of God, because such things are not supposed to be about or related to science at all. When it comes to Heaven, we may perhaps be thinking of Angels in the sky. When it comes to the Devil, it rather is about the screaming crows in a dull evening, or perhaps it may be about the renunciation you may happen to know once was being carried out. The laws we think may exist which relate to possible randomness or coincidence in nature are not supposed to be related to the subject of religion, because these laws are being associated with physical laws and therefore become properties which are being related to science. Oppositely, the notion of religious belief, is once again about preaching and vorshipping, as well as it may also be about the notion we may be having about God versus the Devil. So for now, the conclusion is still lacking here. |
musicplayer Send message Joined: 17 May 10 Posts: 2430 Credit: 926,046 RAC: 0 |
Or perhaps it could be said in this way as well. The court system of Justice is supposed to be the way our society is supposed to be upholding the laws. Not forgetting the police here as well. But these laws are what we are supposed them to be, based on either rational, logical thinking, or perhaps a common sense about the way these things are supposed to be carried out or working. When it comes to the properties of objects belonging to nature, including space, however, we may be able to discover that certain objects are supposed to be adhering to the laws of physics in a way we think or believe the laws of physics are supposed to be all about. Gravity is best being explained by the laws of gravity by Isaac Newton. Still Albert Einstein are better about this when it comes to explain the notion of time and the way the properties of gravity, matter, energy and even time is supposed to be interacting with each other. Also Quantum Theory, dark matter and dark energy are phenomena related to the subject of physics which are sought to be explained or understood. Certain physical phenomena and their properties, or at least known particles, are best best being explained by means of perhaps being related to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, while the physical properties that are trying to explain particles or other objects related to chaos, disorder, unpredictability and so on are best being understood by the relevant laws or equations which are related to each one of these elements of physics. If for some reason one type of object is supposed to be related to or adhering to one given set of physical properties, but not necessarily another given set, where do we know where a certain thing is supposed to be right or wrong? Are we always supposed to believe in the "laws" of physics as they are being stated or given? Should we always take equations and constants for granted and assume these elements to always be "true"? For now the physical laws of nature are being explained by means of either being equations or constants. Or they are perhaps being done so by means of the discovery of new elementary particles. Therefore, these elements, or at least their presence are making up the laws we happen to know about when it comes to the properties of nature. For now we are supposed to always believe in these things, because the way we should believe in how certain things are supposed to be should be based on the laws of nature which we are supposed to be taking for granted. Both chaos and perfect symmetry might well be explained by means of equations and constants, but for now we do not see the creation of God in all of this, even though we are supposed to believe in God if we happen to be believers. |
Dave(The Admiral)Nelson Send message Joined: 4 Jun 99 Posts: 415 Credit: 22,293,483 RAC: 1 |
You are laughing at us, but the joke is on you because I know you are laughing at us. Dave Nelson |
musicplayer Send message Joined: 17 May 10 Posts: 2430 Credit: 926,046 RAC: 0 |
Anyway Dave(The Admiral)Nelson. I already have said it, but what is supposed to be science? Factoring of numbers, perhaps? Probably not. Listening to music, or maybe understanding sound? Probably not either. Curiosity perhaps and a wish for having knowledge when it comes to certain things being of interest. Some people believe in the UFO phenomenon. Others may believe in the possible existence of other intelligences by means of the possible detection of an intelligent signal coming from space. Such a thing is not been spoken of or discussed all the time, but it is still hiding in the background. |
Bob DeWoody Send message Joined: 9 May 10 Posts: 3387 Credit: 4,182,900 RAC: 10 |
Certainly not people, most of them haven't been sufficiently trained to use them, and when they have received minimum safety instructions never practice with them. They don't control them very well and allow others access to them. Possibly every army veteran who went through rifle training. There are a lot of them out there. Bob DeWoody My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events. |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19013 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
Certainly not people, most of them haven't been sufficiently trained to use them, and when they have received minimum safety instructions never practice with them. They don't control them very well and allow others access to them. Less than 8% of the US population has ever served in the military. And less than 0.5% are actively serving. Of these probably no more than 20%, that's less than 0.1% of the total population, are front line troops. The rest are support personnel, comms specialists, cooks, drivers, storekeepers etc. The UK Army in the 60's said that for every soldier on the front line there needed to be at least nine support personnel. So my reckoning says even if you include all the ex military I would still say less than 10% of the total US population can handle weapons correctly an accurately. |
William Rothamel Send message Joined: 25 Oct 06 Posts: 3756 Credit: 1,999,735 RAC: 4 |
The number is quite a bit higher. All military undergoes small-arms training here in the United States (over 20 million veterans alive today). A good portion of the population hunts (13.7 million in the US) or goes to a shooting range for sport. Also to obtain a carry permit--many handgun owners are required to go through a training course at a shooting range (11.1 million). Admittedly some of these are in more than one set. My point is that there are a lot of people in the States that can handle a firearm. |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19013 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
1. 20 + 13.7 + 11.1 = 44.8 Million. You do need to take account if Williams comment "Admittedly some of these are in more than one set." You just cannot add the figures together, a vet could also hunt and go to the range, so that is one person NOT three. |
W-K 666 Send message Joined: 18 May 99 Posts: 19013 Credit: 40,757,560 RAC: 67 |
The number is quite a bit higher. All military undergoes small-arms training here in the United States (over 20 million veterans alive today). A good portion of the population hunts (13.7 million in the US) or goes to a shooting range for sport. Also to obtain a carry permit--many handgun owners are required to go through a training course at a shooting range (11.1 million). Admittedly some of these are in more than one set. The 22 million vets is as I said "less than 8% of the population." and mil small arms training is more about firing rifles and machine guns than pistols, the main thing mil training will good for is safety because that is drilled in time after time after time, not something that happens to civilians once they have done their very basic course. I've seen specs (MI & VA), some time ago admittedly, for the mandatory training course for those applying for a carry license. It does not lead me in any way to think that most of those people unless they do other training or club shooting etc. could hit a barn door at twenty paces when placed under stress. And hunting is usually carried out with rifles, not something one would carry in the street or use in the confined spaces of a dwelling. One of the reasons the UK Army moved rapidly from the old long SLR to the shorter SA80 after the Falklands, was because the SLR was found to be useless in the rocks on Tumbledown. One Sergeant used a 80mm anti-tank weapon to blow away an Argentinian because his men couldn't use the SLR in the enclosed area. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30608 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Training, armed, but ambush is ambush. http://abc7.com/news/downey-police-officer-shot-to-death-at-station-parking-lot/1091106/ DOWNEY, Calif. (KABC) -- Oh, and attempting robberies in the parking lot of a police station requires a special kind of intelligence. |
Wiggo Send message Joined: 24 Jan 00 Posts: 34744 Credit: 261,360,520 RAC: 489 |
Training, armed, but ambush is ambush. Who's to say that a couple of crooked cops about to be exposed didn't do it? Cheers. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30608 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
That would come out, that always does. You also obviously didn't click on the link and read the story that, three suspects in custody and at least one is talking. Likely trying to save his life. California has capital punishment for murder during a robbery.Training, armed, but ambush is ambush. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.