Howabout Catholic.org?
They just tried to get me to buy a chintzy mask with a cross on it, and I had a hard time closing their pop-up and getting away.
So what website do you recommend if I want to get the official positions of the Roman Catholic Church?
No, not all religions are “peace and harmony”
And if you’re only familiar with “Abrahamic” you’re missing information on most religions that have ever existed. I invite you to learn more.
Not a good argument, given how much science has been advanced by highly religious people of not only Abrahamic religions but various other ones as well.
Science is not a religion. Science is a tool.
Correct. Jews believe the pork prohibition is something G-d gave to the Jews and not other people - if G-d had specific requests for those other people he communicated them to those people and not to the Jews.
Muslims believe everyone should avoid pork in the sense that they believe everyone should be Muslim, not because they think Allah gave other people different rules but (to the best of my limited knowledge) they don’t expect non-Muslims to obey that prohibition.
-
true, not even all secular things are taxed, exceptions include food (at least in my state - this does vary), non-profits including charities and cultural entities that meet certain qualifications, and so forth.
-
Here in Indiana I have been before a judge twice. Neither time was I asked to swear on a Bible, although both times I was asked to “affirm” that my statements were true and complete so even in a Red state with a lot of highly religious types in it the “swear on a Bible in court” thing is actually NOT a thing
-
December 25 is a holiday due to historical reasons and the majority being the sort of Christian that celebrates that day (folks like the Eastern Orthodox use a different date for that). I’m not entirely thrilled with it being Official Holiday but I think there are bigger battles to fight first.
4-6) The latter three are not restricted to just religious folks - I’ve met plenty of intolerant atheists on those issues. The entire frickin’ USSR was anti-gay and anti-Semitic as well as officially atheist, as one glaring example.
That’s my point. A large number - 70% or so - claim to be Christian. But the number of genuine, actual adherents to the faith is much less than that. This is what is often called “cultural Christianity” - where people may check the box on a survey poll form, but not actually believe in the religion at all. Maybe CINO - Christian in Name Only.
Fair enough.
As long as it doesn’t have a force of law, it doesn’t really bother me what people say or think about my beliefs.
Considering that I think that there are those who hide behind their religion in order to cover for their immorality, it’s fair play.
Most people don’t give it nearly enough thought to come to any of these conclusions. It’s as simple as “God=good, not God=bad”. As much thought is put into that position as there is to the people who think that we become angels when we die. (And I’ve heard that one quite a bit, in person and in popular culture. It certainly is not official church doctrine, but it is absolutely believed by many who pretty much just go through the motions.)
While I am not k9befriender I can affirm that I have met Christians in real life who very much DID believe that atheists were inherently criminal because without Jesus/God in their life there was nothing to stop them from committing horrific acts. (Yeah, that’s what you get when you work someplace full of missionaries-in-training but it’s hard to find people who will watch other people piss into bottles for minimum wage, so that’s what we were stuck with.)
On the other hand, knowing many atheists in my life, most of them seem to have a pretty reasonable moral code out of enlightened self-interest if nothing else (i.e. society isn’t going to tolerate either your existence or continued freedom if you going around killing, raping, and stealing so that right there is a reason to behave).
Let me introduce you to some of the more fringe elements of the Neo-Pagan crowd… Yes, there really are some people like that. I’ve heard that some Catholics do that, but I haven’t spotted that in real life and I often wonder if that’s being conflated with Santeria
What is your criteria for someone to be a Christian in more than in name?
Would they have to follow in Jesus’s footsteps, and
To be a Christian is to be a follower of Christ. There may be those who believe in Christ, but still don’t follow him, as they still have possessions.
Would you call those who do not follow Christ’s teachings to be CINO’s as well? Since you are guarding the gates here, where do you draw the line between someone who just goes through the motions, and someone who actually has dedicated their life to following the teachings of Jesus? Where would you say that you fall on that line?
This one is good:
Where in there can I find out about people becoming or not becoming angels?
You won’t find it in there because somebody just made it up. It isn’t in any compilation of the teaching of the Church because it isn’t the teaching of the Church.
And certainly the Church hasn’t put a list of everything it doesn’t teach in the Catechism. It would make for a rather unwieldy book, for one thing.
Seriously, do you think you’re scoring some kind of point here? People becoming angels isn’t, and never has been, the teaching of the Catholic Church. Lobohan says he/she has met Catholics who believe this. OK. I never have. I never even heard that before today.
That is one hell of a lot of movies, television and radio discussion you seem to have completely avoided contact with.
Yeah, saying or implying that people who die and go to heaven become angels is not uncommon in my experience, though I don’t know how many of the people who talk this way are speaking figuratively and how many actually believe that that’s what angels are.
That could be. I’m not a big movie-goer, I hardly watch television at all, and I don’t know any religious radio programs.
Look, the Church doesn’t tell us that people become angels after death. The nuns who taught me in primary school didn’t tell me that. The Jesuits who taught me in high school and college didn’t tell me that. My parents never told me that. My godparents never told me that.
But you seem heavily invested, for reasons I do not understand, in the idea that this a widespread and perhaps officially endorsed belief among Catholics.
It isn’t.
Currently popular religions deserve exactly as much respect as do the currently unpopular ones once universally practiced by other societies. e.g. ancient Greeks, ancient Romans, the Cherokee, the Mayans, etc.
If you’d listen respectfully while somebody is explaining how Zeus and Agamemnon influence his decision making and intercede in his daily life you should give an equally respectful hearing to somebody asserting the same about Jesus or Mohammed or Xenu.
And if not, not.
The tendency to religion/spirituality, like the tendency to incest, to violence, or to us-vs.-them-ism, is simply one more bug in human nature. It may, like us-vs-them-ism, have had adaptive value back in the great ape becoming hominid tribe member stage of our development as a species and as a society.
Nowadays it’s positively maladaptive on a planet with ~8 billion heavily armed humans who need rational thinking, not emotional instinct to manage our ever-more-complex societies and the toll they take upon our planet.
Many of us are working pretty hard to overcome the various bugs in our natures. But other bugs many of us still seem to luxuriate in. At some cost to everyone around those who do so.
As to the OP’s contention … An anti-racist in the year 1500 was a few hundred years ahead of his time and we’re finally just now getting sorta serious about attacking racism here in the 21st century. And it’s far from obvious today that there won’t be a mighty backlash and 50 years from now we’ll be back around where we were in the 1880s.
I propose that an acute anti-religionist is about 300 years too early right now. Society is beginning to see the problems with widespread religionism, but can’t yet bear to accept the changes necessary to move beyond religonism as the cultural default state of attitude.
Widespread? Who knows. I have seen it a lot, and apparently you haven’t seen or heard of it at all.
Officially endorsed? Nobody is saying this.
Having been familiar with many very silly folk beliefs among religious, or non-religious people of all stripes, I am not against the idea that some Catholics believe that. It is, of course, emphatically against the teachings of the Church but well, some people can go for decades without listening to, well, anything. The Mormons believe something along those lines, but there’s some argument about whether they even qualify as Christian; they are certainly not Orthodox/Catholic.
On the other hand, I am having a difficult time finding any particular Catholic-based media that does explicitly say that people become angels. I could point to a specific movie or two with ambiguous imagery such as Constantine (2005) or Der Himmel über Berlin (1985), plus a variety of artistic works that tend to depict heavenly creatures of all varieties as “peeps with wings”.
That being said, I also can’t judge what things which people claim Catholics have told them. Or for that matter, people may use imprecise language especially when trying to speak to, or comfort emotionally-hurt children, wherein the precision and accuracy of language oft gives way to the importance of offering comfort.
I spent some time trying to find it, but it’s reddit, so good luck, but just last night, I was scrolling along, and saw a picture that had a dead person laying there and a a winged humanoid creature coming up out of his body. The next panel as of a dead bird, and an “armed” bird coming up out of it.
I didn’t really laugh or anything, but that does demonstrate how ingrained such a notion is in our culture.
So I’ve read all this thread (for some reason), and I think the question in the OP can easily be answered with: because we exist (even if you think the core of our belief system doesn’t).
I still don’t know what the solution to ‘put up with’ is, and I agree with those who think the implication could be that you want to get rid of us somehow. Even in strictly secular legal systems, like in France, religious people have to be put up with. So what’s the suggested solution here?
The solution is that the government become strictly secular and religious citizens be allowed to believe whatever they wish.
Churches are corporations and should pay corporate taxes.
I did not say that.