|
Post by geode on Feb 1, 2019 8:58:14 GMT
Nicolaus Copernicus is noted right at the start as a great Catholic scientist. I do not take exception with his being a great scientist who contributed much to the understanding of our solar system but the Catholic Church thought differently, at least for quite a while. Galileo was considered a heretic for accepting the Coperinican Theory and placed under house arrest. Why was this not mentioned? I did in my rsp...and I noted that maybe the reason the RCC is being a bit more progressive is that they learned a tough lesson. Good on them! It took them a while to learn it. Formally it took 359 years to reverse themselves. Finally, what took you so long?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Feb 1, 2019 6:10:13 GMT
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 31, 2019 19:15:19 GMT
The whole shooting match...
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 31, 2019 15:50:13 GMT
I love noir but despite several viewings, this spoof is only mildly amusing at best to me. The B&W looks great and the scenes and actors from classic films look great but the plot is just too silly for me I guess.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 31, 2019 7:22:16 GMT
"....because in general... liberals are most opposed to Jesus Christ where as conservatives tend to be more inline with His teaching when it comes to moral political views, especially in key moral areas like abortion etc. because like I always say, once a political party fails to get that one right, which is a basic life issue and NOT a "choice", they will be backwards in many other moral areas and that's what's happening...."
I don't remember what Jesus taught about abortion. Perhaps you can cite the scriptures where He talked about this? I also do not remember Jesus talking about politics except rendering unto Caesar what is his....
It has been debated whether Jesus was more liberal or conservative. His thoughts on helping poor people seem to not be the "let them fend for themselves" sort of talk that often comes from conservatives of today.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 31, 2019 7:01:14 GMT
Now, let's not get hung up on definitions. You are welcome to have your own definition of spirituality. Most people define it differently anyway. So my main question is for people who identify with the feeling of being spiritual - Is the feeling of spirituality close to the feeling of happiness? I am not saying that those two words are synonyms but merely asking if in general when you feel spiritual do you also feel happy or is there a very big distinction between them? Say you are capable of feeling spiritual without being happy? I understand that different people may have different answers to my question. I have seen people on the internet claiming that they can feel spirituality even in pain and sorrow. But I wonder if that's a common thing. I never feel spiritual. I can feel happy at times though I don't feel happy nowadays like I used to in my childhood. But I have never had any feeling of spirituality and thus I can't even imagine how does it feel like when you feel spiritual?
I find for myself that spirituality and happiness are at least partly connected. When I am feeling the most spiritually connected I am the happiest. I find more contentment when feeling spiritual. But I think one can be less than happy even when feeling, or at lesst acting in aa spiritual way. The story of Job in the Bible sort of shows this to be the case. In some religious groups, including the one I grew up in, people are taught to feel guilty when they do not act in according to what they have been told to do or even think. This causes unhappinesses. As such this may be a demonstration of where religion is actually seperate from true spirituality. To me spirituality leads to finding a oneness with my fellow man and to pursue their betterment as well as my own. In my opinion this also leads to being closer to God. However, one can be very spiritual without belief in any gods.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 31, 2019 6:43:47 GMT
Why do Christians worship a God who tortures those that don't kiss his ass? Whatever happened to live-and-let-live?
Can't I just buy an indulgence?
And what about the 3 billion people on this earth who have never even heard of Jesus? Are they doomed to burn for all eternity just because they have never been told about Jesus?
The problem would not just be people presently living on Earth that have never heard about Jesus or been taught about him. What about all those in the past who never had such an opportunity? Communication was nearly non-existent across continents for most of human history. And what about all those who died before Jesus was even born?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 30, 2019 9:20:48 GMT
Orgasmo Death Wish Cannibal Holocaust These are vastly different from each other.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 30, 2019 9:17:59 GMT
See the brighter side, it's not the old days anymore where you face inquisition for not believing (of course that's still happening in some part of the Islamic world). One can leave the religions they don't like in most parts of the world. Slowly and steadily Christianity is changing or drying. At least some sects such as Unitarian Universalists have less shocking teachings and are trying to make their religion somewhat suitable for the majority of secular people. There are no Christians burning witches anymore (unless in some obsolete and rare cases in places where governments are not very strong). The thing is that religion is going to go through a change. Of course, Islam is a concern but Christianity is dying fast in the white world. They somewhat retain their power in the non-white world but I am assuming more economic development in Africa and Asia and South America will also lead to Christianity and eventually Islam dying in other parts of the world too. As a Christian I would prefer that Christianity morphs more into following what Jesus taught about having love for others and helping mankind in general rather than dying out. But unfortunately this often is not what we witness happening.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 29, 2019 8:48:32 GMT
The upside of the Right's stranglehold on religion in the U.S. is that so many younger people can't help but see their hypocrisy, and naturally turn away. The #1 cause of the wave of young people losing their religion (in my opinion) is the Religious Right. I think this is at least one of the causes.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 29, 2019 8:42:59 GMT
The past few years I have seen reports that fewer and fewer Americans identify as being religious. This apparently is most prounced among Millennials. Why do people see less need for religion in their lives? Even people in the oldest demographic in the survey cited below are less religious than these older people were years ago. It is interesting to see how dramatic the difference is by political affiliation. "There’s a sorting in religion and politics: Republicans are becoming considerably more religious than Democrats. Overall, only 30% of Democrats say that being engaged in a religious community is essential for a fulfilling life, while 58% of Republicans do. (The exception to this is African American Democrats, who resemble Republicans in being deeply religious.)" The latest article I have seen: Decline in importance of religion?One problem I have with this article: It's too imprecise. Like when comparing the religiosity of Democrats and Republicans: Are they saying that religiosity in Republicans is increasing, or are they saying that the gap between Democrats and Republicans is increasing, but religiosity is also declining with Republicans? Another thing: 35% is still a minority. About a third of the population. And what religions do people adhere to who are not "Nones"? Progressive religions, or fundamentalist scourges like some forms of Christianity, Islam or Judaism? The article doesn't say, but I'd rather have 20% "Nones" and 80% of adherents to tolerant religions, than 40% "Nones" and 60% adherents to Wahabitism or Evangelicalism. captainbryce mentioned education. But maybe even some educated people want religions that give simple answers. Orientation instead of freedom of choice. Which would be a good basis for fundamentalism. Hopefully I am wrong on this one. I think a lack of precision comes from the splits by religious sect and political party being a secondary focus of the original study being reported upon here. That study is far more concerned with "family" issues such as how many feel raising a child is affordable.
|
|
|
So...
Jan 28, 2019 6:23:02 GMT
Post by geode on Jan 28, 2019 6:23:02 GMT
That is an excellent question? I wonder if anybody will offer an excellent answer. I'm gonna put 'Postal' down as a cult movie. Not a massive following compared to other cult films but it ticks all the boxes. So that is one cult movie. But how many others are bona fide cult movies?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 28, 2019 6:19:00 GMT
Nicolaus Copernicus is noted right at the start as a great Catholic scientist. I do not take exception with his being a great scientist who contributed much to the understanding of our solar system but the Catholic Church thought differently, at least for quite a while. Galileo was considered a heretic for accepting the Coperinican Theory and placed under house arrest. Why was this not mentioned?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 28, 2019 5:59:52 GMT
The past few years I have seen reports that fewer and fewer Americans identify as being religious. This apparently is most prounced among Millennials. Why do people see less need for religion in their lives? Even people in the oldest demographic in the survey cited below are less religious than these older people were years ago. It is interesting to see how dramatic the difference is by political affiliation. "There’s a sorting in religion and politics: Republicans are becoming considerably more religious than Democrats. Overall, only 30% of Democrats say that being engaged in a religious community is essential for a fulfilling life, while 58% of Republicans do. (The exception to this is African American Democrats, who resemble Republicans in being deeply religious.)" The latest article I have seen: Decline in importance of religion?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 23, 2019 15:36:36 GMT
Is the movie better than the book? I think the book was only one of a group of about three that I never finished. I started reading it in 1980 and only made it about half way. Never read the book but apparently its quite a hard book to adapat so teh movie is most likely a bit different and it's be subjective whether someone likes one better than the other. I avoided the movie because of the preachy depressing nature of the book. I will stick to "Watership Down" ...both the book and movie if I want to experience some Richard Adams.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 22, 2019 8:00:08 GMT
It has purple rain at one point?
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 21, 2019 21:28:38 GMT
Is the movie better than the book? I think the book was only one of a group of about three that I never finished. I started reading it in 1980 and only made it about half way.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 20, 2019 9:25:12 GMT
Not as a Catholic, but in the Mormon equivalent of the Eucharist....yes.
Mormons call it "The Sacrament" and it is conducted by young men who have been ordained to the Mormon priesthood. Deacons are usually 12-14 years of age and "pass the Sacrament" which means they carry the equivalent of The Host in trays to the congregation after it has been blessed by two priests, typically 16 to 21 years of age. The table that acts as an altar is prepared by "Teachers" usually 14-16 years old.
I acted in all these functions at those ages. The prayers over the bread and water have to be word for word correct. I blew one of them twice, very embarrassing especially when I did a bit of a nervous laugh the second time.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 19, 2019 6:54:13 GMT
My two cents. Doubt is good. Nothing is sure, therefore doubting is the rational thing to do. It's also something that facilitates progress. Scientific theories often get created because current explanations are doubted. If a religion tries to prohibit or punish doubt, it deserves to die out. As mentioned in the OP, when you went through periods of doubt, your beliefs you have afterwards are strengthened. In my opinion religions that prohibit doubt or questions do so because they know, deep down, that they are false. Thank you for addressing a point made in the article I linked. I think this was the main takeaway, that unlike the case the Mormon leader was making, having doubts can lead to humans advancing and improving. Doubt can lead to spiritual growth.
|
|
|
Post by geode on Jan 18, 2019 12:10:13 GMT
IMO people leaving the churches might not be such a bad thing, as long as they don't leave God. This is what happened to me.
|
|