“Now, we’re not saying outright that [del]something awful is going to happen to your store[/del]you’re going to Hell if you don’t [del]pay up[/del]worship God…”
That’s clever. Did you come up with that all by yourself?
It’s no surprise that Pope Francis thinks that atheists are wrong, but it is newsworthy that he says atheists are merely ignorant and in fact are generally good people honestly seeking the truth rather than willfully ignorant and evil, which many in his hierarchy clearly still believe. That’s a genuine (if not radical) development in the church and says something positive about the direction Francis wants to move the church. He’s actively trying NOT to use the doctrine of hell as a threat against atheists. He hasn’t actually changed the doctrine, but that’s unsurprising. “Pope still Catholic: film at eleven!”
Point taken, I guess. It’s that his statement used the word “redemption”-how could he not know how the outside world would react? I guess we get to see whether his Church takes his words to heart, or whether they get explained away into nothingness by his aides.
Well, aside from noting that there are a lot of contradictions in scripture, I would note that you have misquoted the statement.
Jesus did not say he was sent only for the lost sheep of Israel, but to the lost sheep of Israel. He could be sent for the whole world while being sent only to the people of Israel. In fact, that is a standard depiction of his ministry, even outside the incident in Matthew 15. (And, after being fairly rude to the Canaanite woman to whom he was talking (apparently to test her faith), he then went on and granted her request, anyway.)
I don’t want to hijack this thread, but can you please refer me to a post where you explain why you believe that the Bible is true about things that humans cannot verify, in spite of your awareness that it contains many contradictions and errors?
I concur with all of the above, except the part about its being unsatisfying - that part I just don’t understand.
After all, if you’re certain there’s nothing after death, then it really doesn’t much matter what one or another of the various Ceiling Cat fan clubs believe will happen to you after you die, does it?
Let’s not forget that Francis is a Jesuit – they tend to be rather non-conformist and a lot more philosophical. So it’s going to be pretty interesting how the Vatican deals with a Jesuit pope. (He’s the first, I believe)
Nope. The only problem comes when some of them take actions that affect me in this world. If they’re willing to leave me alone and respect my freedom, I’m entirely comfortable doing the same for them. Ideally, belief is individual and personal. No one’s beliefs should be used against anyone else.
One of Hugh Hefner’s “Playboy Philosophy” theses was, everyone should be free to seek God in their own way…and everyone should be free to go to the devil in their own way.
Well, I’d have to say that the modern Catholic Church trespasses a little against the secular law in their energetic opposition to abortion and gay marriage. They make rules which they attempt to impose on non-Catholics. So, no, the Pope doesn’t leave the rest of us strictly alone.
Certainly, though, in the context of the thread, his statements about atheists – and the clarifications from other Church officials – do not intrude upon my rights, freedoms, privacy, or interests. I do not believe that the Church is the gatekeeper of Heaven or Hell – and I don’t believe in Heaven or Hell anyway.
It’s been a long time since the Church decreed a crusade against the unbelievers. (But the treatment of the Huguenots was shameful!)
Well, it can certainly be annoying and upsetting to be told that you’re going to hell all the time, even if you don’t believe it. But I meant intellectually unsatisfying, at least inasmuch as one is trying to make sense of religious doctrine. Czarcasm seemed unsatisfied that Catholics could tell him what the Church says about dishonest atheists and what it says about irrational or ignorant atheists, but seemingly refused to say what the Church thought about him, an atheist who was neither dishonest nor irrational nor ignorant. I was being sympathetic, but I can see how it would be very frustrating until you realize that those are the only categories of atheists the church believes in, and not exactly a pleasing revelation when you do.
Since he came to or for the lost sheep of Israel the meaning can be the same, I would like a quote that states that Jesus said he came to save the whole world.
Here is the direct quote Matthew 15 verse 24; But he answered and said I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of Israel. the other verses seem to verify this!
While I agree with this in general, the things those ‘Ceiling Cat fans’ say does have an effect on my life. Those religious leaders have convinced my Mom, my mother-in-law and numerous others in my life that I am personally going to hell because I don’t believe. Those people in my life believe that those leaders actually talk to God and he tells them that I am on the wrong course. That kind of stuff worries some people that I love. I’d rather the various religious leaders of the world butt their noses out of my business and stop making up scary stories to frighten old ladies into compliance.
This. If the church accepts that I am an atheist, but that there are only dishonest and/or irrational and/or ignorant atheists, then it is saying that I must be dishonest and/or irrational and/or ignorant. It is one thing to say that they don’t know what the rules are for my kind of atheist, but it quite another to say that what I claim I am doesn’t exist and therefor I am lying.
In my view, it’s perfectly possible to be an honest and rational atheist. Atheism is in fact the correct default position – extraordinary claims demand extraordinary proof. An atheist who has not experienced such extraordinary proof remains, rationally, an atheist.
Thank you…but the topic of this thread involves the Roman Catholic Church and the influence it has. When you add in the official positions concerning atheists from all the other denominations that believe somewhat the same thing…
