Disappointed in our bishop

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As such, from the time of the early Church, the practice of seven fixed prayer times have been taught; in Apostolic Tradition, Hippolytus instructed Christians to pray seven times a day "on rising, at the lighting of the evening lamp, at bedtime, at midnight" and "the third, sixth and ninth hours of the day, being hours associated with Christ's Passion."
Liturgy of the Hours - Wikipedia

You realize that this is only for clergy, right?

 

[metis]

What are you on about?

I have no clue what you're asking.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I hope I am because I have some lovely Catholic friends, and I attend mass once a year with them.

Wild, since it sounds like you have some anti-Catholic misconceptions that wouldn't be out of place at an Orange Order meeting.

But last week I was reading about praying the rosary. Jesus gave us that sample 'Lord's Prayer' and warned about 'vain repititions.' So here we have vain repitition upon vain repitition - industrial scale.

Funny, since I would say that the Lord's Prayer is "vain repitition upon vain repitition."

If any other church does it then the same goes for them. God is no respector of persons.

So why are you singling out the Catholic Church specifically?

What catholics do? No, what religion does.

Wait - are you saying you don't consider yourself religious?

 

[metis]

But last week I was reading about praying the rosary. Jesus gave us that sample 'Lord's Prayer' and warned about 'vain repititions.' So here we have vain repitition upon vain repitition - industrial scale.

The rosary is used as one would use a "mantra" in the eastern religions, thus one says the rosary but focuses on some aspects of what is says or possible applications or some sort of spin-off. Personally, I don't say it because I don't have that kind of patience, thus preferring to use "walking meditation".

 

[Daemon Sophic]

Things Jesus never said.

He never said to be nice to everyone. Caring sometimes requires being anything but nice. Was Jesus nice to everyone? I don't think we can say tossing tables and chasing people and animals with a whip is " nice". Or calling hypocrite snakes and vipers, is that nice?

"Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who have sinned against us."
Sound familiar? Sound familiar as Jesus directly telling his followers that this is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT message in all his teachings?
It should if you want to be a Christian. Regardless of what you or others call yourselves. You are NOT CHRISTIAN if you stray from this central guiding principle.
His (almost never quoted) statement at the end of the Lord's Prayer is
"But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins".

Bottom line @Wildswanderer (and all who 'claim' to be Christian). = Be NICE, or Be Nought.

That is the unifying and singular defining principle of Christianity. Its one saving grace that actually makes it a useful religion and philosophy. Everything else in the whole of scriptures is just fluff and window dressing. It is what transformed Christianity from a minor middle Eastern cult to one of the largest religions in history. And to a real Christian, it IS the word of God.


You don't get to say. You don't get to dictate on this. Nor do I. Nor does that misguided so-called bishop.

 

[Sheldon]

Funny, since I would say that the Lord's Prayer is "vain repitition upon vain repitition."

Indeed, and his claims begs the question, who decides how much repetition represents vanity? Surely the bible which is infallible puts a very specific number on this?

That was sarcasm, in case that wasn't clear.

 

[Wildswanderer]

"Forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who have sinned against us."
Sound familiar? Sound familiar as Jesus directly telling his followers that this is THE SINGLE MOST IMPORTANT message in all his teachings?
It should if you want to be a Christian. Regardless of what you or others call yourselves. You are NOT CHRISTIAN if you stray from this central guiding principle.
His (almost never quoted) statement at the end of the Lord's Prayer is
"But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins".

Bottom line @Wildswanderer (and all who 'claim' to be Christian). = Be NICE, or Be Nought.

That is the unifying and singular defining principle of Christianity. Its one saving grace that actually makes it a useful religion and philosophy. Everything else in the whole of scriptures is just fluff and window dressing. It is what transformed Christianity from a minor middle Eastern cult to one of the largest religions in history. And to a real Christian, it IS the word of God.


You don't get to say. You don't get to dictate on this. Nor do I. Nor does that misguided so-called bishop.

Being nice and forgiving people aren't the same at all.
Forgiving people doesn't mean excusing their sin.
Jesus forgave a woman who committed adultery then he told her to go and don't sin anymore. That's not nice, it's right.

 

[Sheldon]

Being nice and forgiving people aren't the same at all.
Forgiving people doesn't mean excusing their sin.
Jesus forgave a woman who committed adultery then he told her to go and don't sin anymore. That's not nice, it's right.

I always thought he said go and sin some more? It's all hearsay of course, as we have no idea what he may or may not have said, but I prefer my version, it makes a lot more sense.

 

[pearl]

You realize that this is only for clergy, right?

No, not only for clergy. From the Didache; "do not pray as the hypocrites, but as the Lord directed in his Gospel" then it adds the wording of the Our Father, with the doxological ending " for Thine is the power...." and ends with 'Three times in the day pray thus." The Christian prays at the third, the sixth, and the ninth hour. From the prophet Daniel; Three times a day he would open his chamber window towards Jerusalem eastwords, doing reverence on bended knee and praising his God. Dan 6:11.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

I have no clue what you're asking.

The nonsense you are spewing.

The Catholic Church needs to allow the flags of movements and organizations they disagree with on a fundamental level to fly above their churches because of "freedom of expression"?

What is "freedom of expression" and why do you believe it supersedes a Catholic Bishop's authority to dictate what flags can and cannot be flown over a Catholic church?

 

[PruePhillip]

Wild, since it sounds like you have some anti-Catholic misconceptions that wouldn't be out of place at an Orange Order meeting.


Funny, since I would say that the Lord's Prayer is "vain repitition upon vain repitition."


So why are you singling out the Catholic Church specifically?


Wait - are you saying you don't consider yourself religious?

There's religion, and there's religion.
Religious people killed off all but one of the Ministry of Jesus, and John the Baptist.
And it was done in the name of religion. But it was a form of worship Jesus did not recognize - lacking the spirit of God.

 

[PruePhillip]

I meant specifically about praying five times a day facing Jerusalem.

So you could do that. But it isn't suggested or mandated in the bible. That's just adding to the bible.

 

[Sheldon]

There's religion, and there's religion. Religious people killed off all but one of the Ministry of Jesus, and John the Baptist. And it was done in the name of religion. But it was a form of worship Jesus did not recognize - lacking the spirit of God.

No true Scotsman fallacy.

 

[PruePhillip]

No true Scotsman fallacy.

In this case you would be wrong. Scotsman fallacies don't apply to what the bible calls the spirit. Jesus said 'You don't know what manner of spirit you are of' when the disciples wanted fire to come down from heaven and destroy the Samaritans. This same spirit was the one Jesus showed in loving his enemies.
When you see religious groups wanting to harm someone you should know they are in breach of the spirit shown in the Gospels.

 

[metis]

The nonsense you are spewing.

That's IYO, which I can't take seriously because it's wrong headed, imo. Universities are expected to be more open minded, and this generally includes Catholic universities, especially those that are Jesuit.

What is "freedom of expression" and why do you believe it supersedes a Catholic Bishop's authority to dictate what flags can and cannot be flown over a Catholic church?

I did not say the bishop couldn't do that but whether he should do that.

 

[Sheldon]

In this case you would be wrong. Scotsman fallacies don't apply to what the bible calls the spirit.

You can of course ignore being irrational, but you can't ringfence claims, beliefs and arguments from logic, that's risible.

 

[Sheldon]

When you see religious groups wanting to harm someone you should know they are in breach of the spirit shown in the Gospels.

Take it up with them, your claim that Christians don't commit violent crimes like murder and rape is simply false though.

 

[Muffled]

What exactly is an abomination?

Something so bad it would cause God to reduce 3 cities to sand.

 

[Muffled]

Well there you go, as I said is anyone really surprised at religious bigotry from the Catholic church anymore, Again then, as it's worth repeating, it's an odd set of moral sensibilities that sees sex between consenting adults as an abomination, but protects priests guilty of endemic child abuse. Such people have no moral compass.

I agree with you!
This actually benefits new religions that don't have be chained to the past, since the old ones, at least the old ones that don't want to adapt to the new times, will tend toward dying a lone death thus giving room to new religions. Imagine not having to debate over what a man thousands of years ago meant by a given phrase or word.

I believe the prophecy is that we win in the end.

 

[Fallen Prophet]

Except that's not what I did, is it, read the fallacy again.

No - you did - you intimated that my agreeing with this Bishop reminded you of "crowds applauding parading Nazis at the Nuremberg rallies".

Why do you believe you didn't employ that fallacy?

It was relevant in the context of the post I was responding to.

No - it wasn't.

Both this Bishop and the RF member I was responding to believe that their positions are supported by what the Bible claims the Lord Jesus Christ said and did.

No one has seen evolution take place in real time - should I bring that fact in a discussion about the theory of evolution in an attempt to shut down all discussion?

Your observation was not only irrelevant - but it was also obnoxious and unoriginal.

No, and yes to the second part.

Yes - what you said was equally asinine.

You're using a false equivalence to pretend religious bigotry and homophobia is comparable to scientific facts like species evolution.

No - I'm not - like at all.

What I "compared" were two equally stupid people.

One stupid person would enter a discussion about the Bible and what it claims the Lord Jesus Christ said and did and make an asinine claim like, "No one today saw those events two thousand years ago - so no one can make any claims about what Jesus did - all you have are old records claiming he said stuff."

And another equally stupid person would enter a discussion about the theory of evolution and make an equally asinine claim like, "Evolution is just a theory - and no one has seen evolution take place in real time - all you have are a bunch of old bones."

I compared two stupid people - that is all I did.

An introspective entry from your diary?

I don't keep a diary - I'm a grown man.

Do you keep a diary?

Is that why most of your posts sound like they came from a preteen girl?

Yes, it was. See I can use hand waving as well.

You realize that this was just the first line in a comment about how what you said was not a refutation.

Hardly "hand waving".

So what?

What you said didn't refute anything I said.

Who said it did - straw man fallacy...

You claimed that your mentioning that the Bible did not talk about "gravity or relativity or evolution" somehow was a "refutation of [my] claim".

Yet the only claim I made was that the Bible did not mention any "spirit of inclusiveness".

Obviously - making a list of other things not mentioned in the Bible does not refute my initial claim - so then what "claim" had you "refuted"?

Nothing makes sense other than you were trying to "refute" the idea that the Bible should be a source of reliable information and morality.

Which is why you listed things that you believe the Bible endorsed - not to refute any claim I made - but to refute the Bible.

Oh like buses, two straw man fallacies at once, and yes I can reference whatever I feel is apropos.

That was more a comment on the original RF member I was talking to.

You know - the one who claims to believe in the Bible?

The conversation you poked your nose into?

I was claiming that that RF member was trying to judge this Bishop based on what was written in the Bible - but they mentioned a concept not mentioned in the Bible to do so.

that's how debate works.

People usually supply supporting evidence for their arguments in debates - and they stay on topic.

Though it's not exactly surprising you think beliefs can be ringfenced from criticisms outside of those beliefs, t'was ever thus.

This never happened.

Yes it does.

No - it didn't.

You listing other things the Bible does not mention does not refute my claim that the Bible does not mention any "spirit of inclusiveness".

What you were trying to do was refute the Bible itself.

Have you not read it? Slavery (as one example) is endorsed explicitly in Exodus 21, you can Google the rest I am sure.

"Go Google it" - not much of a debate.

Why not quote all the verses from the Bible that you believe back up your claims and explain why you believe they are immoral or wrong?

And do try not to employ any fallacies - like presentism - in your analysis.

Read those verses in their proper historical context - no "cookie cutter" examples.

It's your bible after all, so it's pretty shocking you're ignorant of this.

I have never written a bible and I never claimed to be ignorant of anything.