Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Im the idiot, but youre the buffoon making an assumption of my knowledge on a subject based on nothing and even those we may even AGREE on a subject, still are trying to twist into taking the other side, just for the sake of doing so. 310328[/snapback] As I said, it's not based on nothing. It's based on the fact that you're an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Im the idiot, but youre the one making an assumption of my knowledge on a subject based on nothing and even those we may even AGREE on a subject, still are trying to twist into taking the other side, just for the sake of doing so. 310328[/snapback] The Internet is fun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRC Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Im the idiot, but youre the one making an assumption of my knowledge on a subject based on nothing and even those we may even AGREE on a subject, still are trying to twist into taking the other side, just for the sake of doing so. 310328[/snapback] As I said, it's not based on nothing. It's based on the fact that you're an idiot. 310338[/snapback] Children. Could you take this elsewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gavin in Va Beach Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Children. Could you take this elsewhere? 310369[/snapback] Thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 I guess things you have done as a teenage/20's disqualify you from ever speaking about them again. You would admit that you also will have no MORAL AUTHORITY or even FINANCIAL AUTHORITY when speaking to your child later on? 310149[/snapback] Touche. But I'm not dispensing moral advice to a billion people, either. I can tell my daughter that I have made mistakes and that I'm human. The Pope, now that he is the Pope, that is, is infallible that being that he "never" made a mistake. Think about it. Which is more logical? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Being that I quite possibly know more about the history of Nazi Germany than JSP, I feel comfortable in saying based on previous discussions with him that he knows vastly more on the subject than you. I may disagree with him on some points in this debate...hell, I may even think some of his opinions are idiotic (in a "he should know better" sense, but he is, after all, a stubborn opinionated bastard)...but I respect the body of knowledge on which he bases malformed opinions. And now I'm going to just sit back and admire that artfully crafted backhanded compliment... 310255[/snapback] You filthy bastard. I almost lost my drink reading that. Malformed opinions indeed. At least I'm not a feces-hurling simian! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 20, 2005 Author Share Posted April 20, 2005 And yet, there were people who refused. They were punished horribly, but their moral virtue was intact. One would think that someone heading to seminary would have sought to ensure their moral integrity. The whole point of this conversation is, the guy now heads an organization that is supposed to embody the teachings of Jesus Christ. Think ol' JC would have gone along with being a hitlerjugend? Think not. Hey, if that's who Catholics choose to venerate, that's their problem not mine. 310126[/snapback] There have been many Popes not worth veneration. Veneration is earned. JPII was worthy or it seems he was worthy. Being named Pope is indeed an honor. Becoming venerable is his responsibility. The sun will rise, the sun will set and the Roman Catholic Church will continue. JC, as you so informally call Him, forgave Judas, Peter and the "Good Thief" among others including me and you. JC, because He was man, understands us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 There have been many Popes not worth veneration. Veneration is earned. JPII was worthy or it seems he was worthy. Being named Pope is indeed an honor. Becoming venerable is his responsibility. The sun will rise, the sun will set and the Roman Catholic Church will continue.JC, as you so informally call Him, forgave Judas, Peter and the "Good Thief" among others including me and you. JC, because He was man, understands us. 310452[/snapback] JC was also God, however, if you believe the teachings of your Church. Therefore he was perfect. The Pope is not God. He's a man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 You filthy bastard. I almost lost my drink reading that. Malformed opinions indeed. At least I'm not a feces-hurling simian! 310449[/snapback] Not all sh---slinging simians are literally so... And yes, "malformed". I haven't forgotten your parrotting of Toland's "FDR caused Pearl Harbor" crap years ago... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 20, 2005 Author Share Posted April 20, 2005 Touche. But I'm not dispensing moral advice to a billion people, either. I can tell my daughter that I have made mistakes and that I'm human. The Pope, now that he is the Pope, that is, is infallible that being that he "never" made a mistake. Think about it. Which is more logical? 310443[/snapback] That is untrue. Infallibility only occurs when the Pope after consultation with bishops speaks ex cathedra, from the chair of St. Peter. A Pope has only done so twice (Immaculate Conception and Assumption -both re: Mary) Infallibilty does not cover the grammar, pronunciation or arithmetic of the Pope nor does it protect him from sin nor insure his intellectual purity. Church teaching on Abortion by the way has gone through a number of changes in how& when over the years. If I am not mistaken Aquinas spoke of viability or quickening as the ensoulment. It will really anger some posters to learn that RCC changes its mind as science unveils "truth". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 Not all sh---slinging simians are literally so... And yes, "malformed". I haven't forgotten your parrotting of Toland's "FDR caused Pearl Harbor" crap years ago... 310462[/snapback] I still believe that while he may not have "caused" Pearl Harbor, the evidence exists that he had knowledge of the attak beforehand and that his policies were a root cause of the Japanese attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crap Throwing Monkey Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 It will really anger some posters to learn that RCC changes its mind as science unveils "truth". 310468[/snapback] Of course, it takes them about six hundred years or so...but they do get around to it eventually... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beausox Posted April 20, 2005 Author Share Posted April 20, 2005 JC was also God, however, if you believe the teachings of your Church. Therefore he was perfect. The Pope is not God. He's a man. 310454[/snapback] Ah! There's the rub. If any proof be needed of Jesus' human nature I refer you to the Garden of Gethsemane(sp). The "problem" of Christianity is that Jesus was aware of perfect and imperfect drives from within Himself. "Our" problem is an imperfect nature that somehow knows the good; Jesus was of a perfect nature who . first hand, understood "our" problem. That is why gethsemane is key. Jesus ,IMHO, is saying" hey wait a minute is this stuff they are going to do to me necessary. Hey, i get it . I understand the human struggle. Enough already" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blzrul Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 So who's up on Nostradamus? My kid came home from school yesterday and told me the kids there were saying that Ratzy's ascension to the papcy was predicted, and it was predicted as a predecessor to Armegeddon which is supposed to take place 5-6 years into his papacy. Seriously, I'm asking. I gave up on him after he blew the big CA earthquake thing back in the late 80's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 So who's up on Nostradamus? My kid came home from school yesterday and told me the kids there were saying that Ratzy's ascension to the papcy was predicted, and it was predicted as a predecessor to Armegeddon which is supposed to take place 5-6 years into his papacy. Seriously, I'm asking. I gave up on him after he blew the big CA earthquake thing back in the late 80's. 312125[/snapback] The rumor I heard today was it's not this Pope, but the NEXT one. Apparently Benedict's term will be short and the next Pope will be the Anti-Christ or some such thing. Ah, talk radio. I learn so much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 21, 2005 Share Posted April 21, 2005 So who's up on Nostradamus? My kid came home from school yesterday and told me the kids there were saying that Ratzy's ascension to the papcy was predicted, and it was predicted as a predecessor to Armegeddon which is supposed to take place 5-6 years into his papacy. Seriously, I'm asking. I gave up on him after he blew the big CA earthquake thing back in the late 80's. 312125[/snapback] Yeah and he blew the whole Libya nuking New York City in the 90's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevbeau Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 The rumor I heard today was it's not this Pope, but the NEXT one. Apparently Benedict's term will be short and the next Pope will be the Anti-Christ or some such thing. Ah, talk radio. I learn so much. 312139[/snapback] As predicted by St. Malachy. Supposedly he's been right on the last 110 or so popes and anti-popes. His predictions range from being scarily accurate to being quite vague. Like any prediction, if you search deep enough you can find some sort of connection. Take a look if you have the time http://www.catholic-pages.com/grabbag/malachy.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 As predicted by St. Malachy. Supposedly he's been right on the last 110 or so popes and anti-popes. His predictions range from being scarily accurate to being quite vague. Like any prediction, if you search deep enough you can find some sort of connection. Take a look if you have the time http://www.catholic-pages.com/grabbag/malachy.asp 312184[/snapback] He was wrong. Where did he get it right? According to the prophecy, the next Pope will be the second last Pope Gloria Olivæ ("Glory of the Olives"). Will it be someone from the Mediterranean (Italy, France, Spain)? Or will it be perhaps someone with olive skin (say, from Latin America)? Pope Benedict is neither. Soothsaying, and fortune telling are witchcraft and sins in every Christian religion. Not sure if you are a Christian, but you may want to rethink following a "fortune teller". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Tate Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 Soothsaying, and fortune telling are witchcraft and sins in every Christian religion. That's not what my personal psychic told me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nobody Posted April 22, 2005 Share Posted April 22, 2005 He was wrong. Where did he get it right? Pope Benedict is neither. Soothsaying, and fortune telling are witchcraft and sins in every Christian religion. Not sure if you are a Christian, but you may want to rethink following a "fortune teller". 312191[/snapback] No - Benedict is a "continuation" of JPII since their ideas are the same so he doesn't have to be the pope of olives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts