ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.Traditional Catholics

89 9764
KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
487 posts
280

http://fisheaters.com/traditionalcatholicism.html

This has basically everything you need to know about the true religion.

http://www.traditionalcatholicpriest.com/2013/02/27/traditional-popes-vs-new-popes/

And this is exactly what i was talking about the popes.

  • 89 Replies
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,470 posts
21,890

404 error.

Though that sums up everything about Catholicism, all other branches of Christianity, and all religions we have today.

KnightDeclan
offline
KnightDeclan
487 posts
280

Check out the second link. Highlight it and right-click and press got to.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,787 posts
300
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,297 posts
1,945

Are we supposed to be discussing traditional Catholics, or what? I don't get what's going on here.

Minotaur55
offline
Minotaur55
1,401 posts
810

Though that sums up everything about Catholicism, all other branches of Christianity, and all religions we have today.


Indeed.

Are we supposed to be discussing traditional Catholics, or what? I don't get what's going on here.


I believe it is an attempt to prove a not so obvious point.

Personally, I do not have faith in religious structures. I believe that true knowledge of the world we live in is to obtained by living life, as appose to being told what it is in a book and having multiple interpretations as to what it may or may not mean.

I also think that the KJV Bible is not the true bible, if it were a true interpretation of everything that exists it is not to be translated. It is a proven fact that certain things can be lost in translation, so most of the bibles details are proven to have been lost. And I don't see a purpose to believe in a puzzle. But that is for another discussion.
UnleashedUponMankind
offline
UnleashedUponMankind
11,174 posts
20,870

has basically everything you need to know about the true religion.


Thats your opinion... sure some others will share this sight with you, but im pretty sure some other have another sight, their own religion... and they called it also the "true religion".
And some others are against any form of religion and they also claim they are right.

All in all this whole "true religon"-thing is dangerous... wars based on different points of view and some wars was fought in the name of "god/the one and only true religion"... and some still fight.

Next time maybe forget the "true"... and only call it "religion", thats less offensive.
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,297 posts
1,945

I believe that true knowledge of the world we live in is to obtained by living life, as appose to being told what it is in a book


Books are extremely beneficial when trying to understand the world around us. As one person, you cannot have every other person's viewpoint, nor can you experience their lives, nor can you simply be them. Books, movies, music and other artistic aspects of communication are fabulous for gaining knowledge regarding life. I believe it's kind of thin to think otherwise.

For example, this year I had to write an essay on existentialism. Existentialism is the idea that there is no God and everyone functions according to how their brain works. Emotion, free will, conscious development and similar ideas don't exist. We only think they exist because we're meant to. I understand that much, but the essay was about how existentialists behave. I'm no existentialist, so I read a great book, The Stranger, that explored the existentialist mind through the life of a guy named Meursault (or something like that). The book really helped me understand the lives of existentialists, and I have no doubt that books can help me understand life in other areas.

multiple interpretations as to what it may or may not mean.


But multiple interpretations help us think! There is very little in life that's simple enough to have one interpretation for. If we don't have multiple interpretations of life or its aspects, we will be very stupid.
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,297 posts
1,945

I understand that much


I understood*
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,787 posts
300

has basically everything you need to know about the true religion.


What makes it any more true than any other religion?

But multiple interpretations help us think! There is very little in life that's simple enough to have one interpretation for. If we don't have multiple interpretations of life or its aspects, we will be very stupid.


If you site three scientists down on a single issue each with a different interpretation, you will eventually get a single interpretation of the data.

If you site three priests down on a single issue each with a different interpretation, you will eventually get three different interpretations of the data.
Salvidian
offline
Salvidian
4,297 posts
1,945

If you site three scientists down on a single issue each with a different interpretation, you will eventually get a single interpretation of the data.

If you site three priests down on a single issue each with a different interpretation, you will eventually get three different interpretations of the data.


I wasn't comparing religion and science methodology; I was talking about interpretations of how things work. Regarding EVERYTHING, how can we explain something with definitive certainty? There isn't much. We don't know everything there is to know about gravity, evolution, and a bunch of other stuff.
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,684 posts
3,430

Regarding EVERYTHING, how can we explain something with definitive certainty?


We don't; saying a particular principle is 100% right defeats Science's own purpose of skepticism.

We can, however, gather enough recorded, demonstrable, and scrutinized data to at least have 99+% certainty that said principle is the truth.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,234 posts
1,245

Let's try to focus on Traditional Catholicism and popes, shall we? I believe we can get a lot out of this thread if we try to remain specific.

What teachings differ today than what was once taught? When did Traditional Catholicism start? What are some of the things today's popes have wrong? What are some of the things these popes do that are wrong?

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,787 posts
300

I was talking about interpretations of how things work.


So was I. When something is factually true we tend to converge rather than diverge on the point. This is because that point is independent of our personal interpretations.

What teachings differ today than what was once taught?


Off the top of my head, the Earth being flat, the acceptance of evolution (which as far as I can tell is a more recent thing in the last few years and may still be debatable depending on who you speak with.), giving women more freedom in the church, slavery...

When did Traditional Catholicism start?


Let's see, the earliest known use of the term "Catholic church" was around 107CE (AD if you prefer) This is about around the same time the last of the four gospels would have been written. We do however need to go further back than that. The earliest use of the term Christan comes from around 44CE However the earliest use of the term Christianity comes around the same time as the use of the term Catholic. Both stemming from the same source "Ignatius of Antioch". The first branching of a major Christian denomination was in 431CE with another a couple decades later in 451.
However the first great schism between the Eastern Orthodox and Catholicism came in the 11th century around 1054. This was the result of major political and cultural factors that built up over the years. (I would imagine not unlike the divergence between KD's version of Catholicism and the current church.)
The second schism was the Protestant Reformation happening in the 16th starting around 1517 thanks to martin Luther as well as several others. This turned into a war ending around the mid 18th century. if I remember correctly the protestant church saw the Catholic church as being too political and not following the word of God, but what they themselves were coming up with. (again doesn't sound that far off to what KD is saying about the current church.)
We can probably figure there were changes in the church that sparked each of these divisions. So that would mean not even Traditional Catholicism is really all that traditional since it would have all these centuries of change behind it leading up to Pope Pius XII (1876-1985, Pope since 1939).

What are some of the things these popes do that are wrong?


Other than be a Sith Lord?
http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y163/MageGrayWolf/atheistjokes/PopePalpatine.png

Before I end this I would like to address one thing from those links.

"When one is young, one tends to be arrogant and proud. One thinks they know it all and that what is new is always better."

The opposite can also be fallacious that one thinks that what is old is always better. Which is often the case when dealing with traditional views.
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,470 posts
21,890

I have always wondered why other Christian denominations pipe the erroneous belief that Catholics are not Christians. Ignorant mugs.

Nerdsoft
offline
Nerdsoft
1,294 posts
380

You might compare this to a few people viciously trying to shut up a pop star as he tries to sing a song about gay rights, as if some betrayal has happened. Get real. He doesn't have to want gays to marry, just for gays to buy his song. The same goes with the Church.
Perhaps the cardinals have had a change of heart. Perhaps they're just spouting this garbage to avoid getting lynched by progress. But history has taught that organisations don't survive and flourish by trying to impede ideals that will flourish either way.
I doubt that there's real change afoot. I just think that you can't suppress thought forever. And thought is reflected in actions. There will come a time where anyone who thinks two men or women marrying is wrong will be just laughed at. And I await that day.

Showing 1-15 of 89