The Depravity of Mankind

Damocles said:
As does Christ when he speaks of giving Peter the keys to heaven. That is set for the second in command. The idea that because there is one higher than Peter that he could not be Pope is plain silly. The Pope never claims to be God himself.
Click to expand...

silly?
 
AssHatZombie said:
That passage refers to jesus, not the pope. Saying so isn't silly.
Click to expand...
No, saying that somebody has no authority because somebody has even more authority is silly. You pretend to be totally uncomprehending, but I suspect you are smarter than that. Once again. It would be much like saying a General has no authority because the President has more authority. It simply isn't logical.
 
Damocles said:
No, saying that somebody has no authority because somebody has even more authority is silly. You pretend to be totally uncomprehending, but I suspect you are smarter than that. Once again. It would be much like saying a General has no authority because the President has more authority. It simply isn't logical.
Click to expand...

No. You're desperately defending the various theocratic institutions around the world, because you know they are part of implementing the new world order. Why are you so deeply committed to this evil?

Voting stock shares the only solution? LOLOLOLOLOL.
It simply isn't about peter.
 
AssHatZombie said:
No. You're desperately defending the various theocratic institutions around the world, because you know they are part of implementing the new world order. Why are you so deeply committed to this evil?

Voting stock shares the only solution? LOLOLOLOLOL.
It simply isn't about peter.
Click to expand...
Once again you misrepresent my position. I said that it could be a solution, not that it is.

And once again, I am asking Brent questions to get him to dig deeper than the standard pat answer. I give verses and reasons, you give silly objections like I am part of some World Order, inanities really. Your objection is based on fear of people who keep their handshakes so secret that anybody can find them on the net. Even in the 1800s there are articles making fun of the "Secrets" of Freemasonry. Even back then their "secrets" were well-known.

Fear can be a way to run your life, but it can't bring much enjoyment.
 
Damocles said:
Once again you misrepresent my position. I said that it could be a solution, not that it is.

And once again, I am asking Brent questions to get him to dig deeper than the standard pat answer. I give verses and reasons, you give silly objections like I am part of some World Order, inanities really. Your objection is based on fear of people who keep their handshakes so secret that anybody can find them on the net. Even in the 1800s there are articles making fun of the "Secrets" of Freemasonry. Even back then their "secrets" were well-known.

Fear can be a way to run your life, but it can't bring much enjoyment.
Click to expand...



Why is a buddhist so interested in the authority of the pope? You're a theocracy-lover.
 
AssHatZombie said:
Why is a buddhist so interested in the authority of the pope? You're a theocracy-lover.
Click to expand...
I've always been interested in the beliefs of others, and defend other's rights to their beliefs. Why would you feel so threatened by such questions?
 
AssHatZombie said:
What question am I threatened by?
Click to expand...
I don't know, you are the one attempting to attack me for a question on Papal authority. So, I would likely say any question of a christian that seems to agree with you. I guarantee he'll come up with a better answer than "Freemasons are Bad" and will actually stick to the subject instead of turning "ad-hominem" and calling me "theocracy-lover", etc.

Terms like that are used constantly to be "stoppers". In the Inquisition time it was "heretic", in the current political climate it is "racist" or "partisan". They have little meaning in actual life. I mean, "theocracy-lover"? When have I ever promoted any takeover of the government by any religion anywhere at all? It is patently ridiculous to make such a statement.
 
Damocles said:
I don't know, you are the one attempting to attack me for a question on Papal authority. So, I would likely say any question of a christian that seems to agree with you. I guarantee he'll come up with a better answer than "Freemasons are Bad" and will actually stick to the subject instead of turning "ad-hominem" and calling me "theocracy-lover", etc.

Terms like that are used constantly to be "stoppers". In the Inquisition time it was "heretic", in the current political climate it is "racist" or "partisan". They have little meaning in actual life. I mean, "theocracy-lover"? When have I ever promoted any takeover of the government by any religion anywhere at all? It is patently ridiculous to make such a statement.
Click to expand...

You mean 'stoppers' like "Freemasons aren't secretive, they just aren't, ok?"
 
AssHatZombie said:
You mean 'stoppers' like "Freemasons aren't secretive, they just aren't, ok?"
Click to expand...
Right. Except I use actual information to support the assertion other than "You Bad, Believe in Pope..."

It is so seriously funny that there is no serious response to it. Everybody on the site knows that I don't believe in the Pope's infallibility, that I am not threatened by somebody "challenging" Papal authority.

I do however have interest based in curiosity of other's beliefs and as such ask questions about them. Often based in the "how can you be sure" or "how do you interpret this verse" areas. Much of it was the Christian-centralized teaching that I received as a child, specifically in the Evangelical arena. Therefore many of my quesitons are often of Catholicism as I had often heard of their "evils" from the preacher as a child.
 
Damocles said:
Right. Except I use actual information to support the assertion other than "You Bad, Believe in Pope..."

It is so seriously funny that there is no serious response to it. Everybody on the site knows that I don't believe in the Pope's infallibility, that I am not threatened by somebody "challenging" Papal authority.

I do however have interest based in curiosity of other's beliefs and as such ask questions about them. Often based in the "how can you be sure" or "how do you interpret this verse" areas. Much of it was the Christian-centralized teaching that I received as a child, specifically in the Evangelical arena. Therefore many of my quesitons are often of Catholicism as I had often heard of their "evils" from the preacher as a child.
Click to expand...


the pro-catholic interpretation is just one of many. Why so testy?
 
AssHatZombie said:
Yes. I wish you to be testy. It is my biggest dream in life that you be testy.
Click to expand...
You wish that everybody would react to your "awesome Truth" as you picture it in your mind. For some reason you picture me getting all defensive over a religion I don't believe in and thereby getting "testy".

The problem is you insist that the real world is following the imaginary, regardless of evidence to the contrary. It wouldn't hurt my feelings if suddenly the Pope was regarded as a guy in a funny hat rather than a leader of one of the largest religious organizations on the planet. I would be astounded over what ever caused it, but I wouldn't be at all upset. I would feel for those who were feeling lost over the sudden downfall of what they held Faith in. I would compassionate their miseries to the best of my ability, but it certainly wouldn't devastate my personal world.
 
Damocles said:
You wish that everybody would react to your "awesome Truth" as you picture it in your mind. For some reason you picture me getting all defensive over a religion I don't believe in and thereby getting "testy".

The problem is you insist that the real world is following the imaginary, regardless of evidence to the contrary. It wouldn't hurt my feelings if suddenly the Pope was regarded as a guy in a funny hat rather than a leader of one of the largest religious organizations on the planet. I would be astounded over what ever caused it, but I wouldn't be at all upset. I would feel for those who were feeling lost over the sudden downfall of what they held Faith in. I would compassionate their miseries to the best of my ability, but it certainly wouldn't devastate my personal world.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you're describing yourself, testy-boy.


See? Testy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top