Only an Inspiration to Mankind? Would not such an individual be wonderful?

[Logical]

Would it be so bad if an individual were only an inspiration to mankind?

That his life provided inspiration, faith, and hope, as well as examples of how to lead a good life?

That through his teachings, leadership, and suffering on earth others found belief, courage and had their suffering tempered?

Would it be so bad?

Should it?
Would it?
Change your life when you found that Jesus was such a man?

Not God, not part of a Holy Trinity but a mere mortal that lived a life so profound that it changed and improved the lives of millions for millenia beyond his death.

What do you think?

[JBucc]

WTF are you babbling about?

[Logical]

WTF are you babbling about? I take it you did not read it, you responded too quickly.

[Adept Havelock]

Not at all. Of course, I've never seen him as more than a particularly wise teacher...or to use the term he is referred to by in Hebrew, a particularly wise Rabbi.

[Logical]

ROFL I see I inspired Bob Dole, I seem to have a new username.

[Brock]

Can't you keep your shite in the correct forum?

[Logical]

Not at all. Of course, I've never seen him as more than a particularly wise teacher...or to use the term he is referred to by in Hebrew, a particularly wise Rabbi.I would expect this answer from you, so by your answer I assume it does not change your life. I believe it should not change the lives of true Christians either, for to be Christ like is a profoundly admirable goal.

[JBucc]

I bet he even had sex with Mary Magdalene and left a bunch of little heaven raisers running around but the church tried to cover it up except some crazy group and whatnot left a bunch of clues for us to figure it all out. That would be a good book someone should write that.

[Logical]

Can't you keep your shite in the correct forum?
BS Brock DC is for politics this is not a political thread in the least.

[Logical]

I bet he even had sex with Mary Magdalene and left a bunch of little heaven raisers running around but the church tried to cover it up except some crazy group and whatnot left a bunch of clues for us to figure it all out. That would be a good book someone should write that.

I read the book months ago, this is not from the book or directly related to that story, only one single line by Tom Hanks that stood out. I am pretty sure that line is not even in the book. This not a direct quote of the line but what the line made me think when I heard it delivered.

[Adept Havelock]

I would expect this answer from you, so by your answer I assume it does not change your life. I believe it should not change the lives of true Christians either, for to be Christ like is a profoundly admirable goal.I would agree wholeheartedly. A goal well worth striving for.

BTW- For over 5,000 years of Halakhic law, a Rabbi (teacher) must be married.

[Logical]

I would agree wholeheartedly. A goal well worth striving for.

BTW- For over 5,000 years of Halakhic law, a Rabbi (teacher) must be married.That is interesting and such a polar oppositite of Catholicism where women are basically specifically shut out of real Church leadership until only very recently.

[58-4ever]

Would it be so bad if an individual were only an inspiration to mankind?

That his life provided inspiration, faith, and hope, as well as examples of how to lead a good life?

That through his teachings, leadership, and suffering on earth others found belief, courage and had their suffering tempered?

Would it be so bad?

Should it?
Would it?
Change your life when you found that Jesus was such a man?

Not God, not part of a Holy Trinity but a mere mortal that lived a life so profound that it changed and improved the lives of millions for millenia beyond his death.

What do you think?

I already think that. So, I guess it wouldn't change my life very much.

[Jenson71]

I'd be willing to sacrifice my life for eternal salvation. But for nothing, except the continuing of good character? It's a much tougher call.

[Logical]

I'd be willing to sacrifice my life for eternal salvation. But for nothing, except the continuing of good character? It's a much tougher call.Why should you sacrifice your life for eternal salvation? Isn't that equivalent to what the Palestinian Suicide Bombers do, do you admire that?

[58-4ever]

Why should you sacrifice your life for eternal salvation? Isn't that equivalent to what the Palestinian Suicide Bombers do, do you admire that?

Of course not, they pray to a completely different God. :rolleyes:

[Taco John]

Of course not, they pray to a completely different God. :rolleyes:


Not really... They believe in Monotheism, we believe in Monotheism. "They" just took a different route, due to a land dispute a few millenia ago, and "we" went in the other direction. God stayed in the same spot, letting us take our divergent paths.

When they pray to the one true God, he hears their prayers, just as when we pray to the one true God. A new God didn't just materialize out of nowhere, simply because we decided to start fighting against eachother over who God favored more.

[Logical]

Not really... They believe in Monotheism, we believe in Monotheism. "They" just took a different route, due to a land dispute a few millenia ago, and "we" went in the other direction. God stayed in the same spot, letting us take our divergent paths.

When they pray to the one true God, he hears their prayers, just as when we pray to the one true God. A new God didn't just materialize out of nowhere, simply because we decided to start fighting against eachother over who God favored more.

Love the new Avy TJ:clap:

[Taco John]

Love the new Avy TJ:clap:



Thanks. I'm having some fun with the movie. I actually just finished the book Friday night. I was a little disappointed in the ending. I didn't like it that the bad guy turned out to be who it turned out to be. It didn't add up to me, especially the fact that he revealed himself as 'the bad guy' when I didn't think he needed to. However, I forgave Dan Brown for it because of the way that he resolved the rest of the story.

[Rausch]

If Jesus was both truly man and truly God I'd expect him to sample the full experience.

THat would mean finding a s/o and being a parent.

Or, I guess opening the door for Davinci Code II: Brokeback Jesus...

[Adept Havelock]

Of course not, they pray to a completely different God. :rolleyes:

Not at all. Judiasm, Christianity, and Islam all recognize the same Godhead, the "God of Abraham", be it known as Yahweh, Jehovah, or Allah.

That's why all three faiths are referred to as "people of the book" by most theologians.

[Jenson71]

Why should you sacrifice your life for eternal salvation? Isn't that equivalent to what the Palestinian Suicide Bombers do, do you admire that?

Nowhere is it written nor have I ever been told, that good Christians kill others in the name of God.

But if someone held a gun to my head, would I be willing to say yes, as the young lady from Columbine did? Tough call.

[Sully]

Ghandi was a dick.

[Over-Head]

...Not God, not part of a Holy Trinity but a mere mortal that lived a life so profound that it changed and improved the lives of millions for millenia beyond his death.....
I believe sir you just gave a very good discription of Pope John Paul II .
While yes the "head" of the RC church, he was non the less a mortal man, who accomplished a great deal for mankind.

[Adept Havelock]

Ghandi was a dick.

Most certainly, to the British.

[Logical]

I believe sir you just gave a very good discription of Pope John Paul II .
While yes the "head" of the RC church, he was non the less a mortal man, who accomplished a great deal for mankind.John Paul II was indeed a fine man.

[Logical]

Nowhere is it written nor have I ever been told, that good Christians kill others in the name of God.

But if someone held a gun to my head, would I be willing to say yes, as the young lady from Columbine did? Tough call.I am not sure I understand your reference are you just saying she was willing to die because she was a Christian or that she died because she was a Christian. I am afraid I am not familiar with what you are referencing?

[Prince22]

I bet he even had sex with Mary Magdalene and left a bunch of little heaven raisers running around but the church tried to cover it up except some crazy group and whatnot left a bunch of clues for us to figure it all out. That would be a good book someone should write that.


Hollywood makes a movie out of a fiction book and you take it as gospel? How nieve you are.

[jspchief]

I'd be willing to sacrifice my life for eternal salvation. But for nothing, except the continuing of good character? It's a much tougher call.That sounds incredibly selfish. It's the epitomy of "what's in it for me?"

[jspchief]

Hollywood makes a movie out of a fiction book and you take it as gospel? How nieve you are.Religion made a multi-billion dollar business out of a fiction book.

Apparently there's a lot of naivete in this world.

[JBucc]

Hollywood makes a movie out of a fiction book and you take it as gospel? How nieve you are.Yes. I beleive everything I read or see. Always. Especially on the internet.

[chagrin]

You mean IF I found that Jesus was such a man, I doubt it would change my mind about how he has changed my life.

I wouldn't be like the, oh I would guess, 75-80% of the people who would go completely nuts, both literally and figuratively. I am very level about the whole thing and am not a "fanatic", so it wouldn't freak me out. We need more people to have that sort of profound effect on us.

[cdcox]

I would expect this answer from you, so by your answer I assume it does not change your life. I believe it should not change the lives of true Christians either, for to be Christ like is a profoundly admirable goal.

Jim, if Jesus were not God it would make all the difference in the world to me. Compare:

Jesus is just a man, not diety: In this example Jesus is primarily a great teacher and a great example of showing love for his fellow man. His example as a man is not very useful to me, no matter how much I admire him. My ideas are not very exciting, so people will not remember them for thousands of years into the future. I don't have a personality that can draw large groups of people toward me, so not many people will hear my teaching. I tend to be more introverted and don't have the capacity to interact on an emotioal/personal level with more than a few people at any given time in my life. My gifts are in a completely different area than Jesus'. My footprint in this world is pretty small, and upon my death will be erased within a few decades by the winds of time. No matter how much I try, I'm not going to be very much like the man Jesus.

Jesus the God-man: Primarily Jesus is my savior from my sinful nature. My sin separates me from God. The Son of the Father took on human flesh to become the man Jesus. His death provided justice for my sin and removed my separation from God. My ability to love my fellow man is supernaturally enabled by the work of the Holy Spirit. My sinful human nature still clings to me, so my acts of love are small, flawed, and imperfect. However, upon my resurecttion won by Jesus, I'll be re-created with a perfect body and have perfect and complete love of God and my fellow man. I will be like Jesus.

In the first case it is a natural goal possible to achieve only by natural human striving, while in the second it is a supernatural goal achieved by a supernatural act of God. Pretty big difference.

[Logical]

You mean IF I found that Jesus was such a man, I doubt it would change my mind about how he has changed my life.

I wouldn't be like the, oh I would guess, 75-80% of the people who would go completely nuts, both literally and figuratively. I am very level about the whole thing and am not a "fanatic", so it wouldn't freak me out. We need more people to have that sort of profound effect on us.

Nice statement, rep

[Logical]

Jim, if Jesus were not God it would make all the difference in the world to me. Compare:

Jesus is just a man, not diety: In this example Jesus is primarily a great teacher and a great example of showing love for his fellow man. His example as a man is not very useful to me, no matter how much I admire him. My ideas are not very exciting, so people will not remember them for thousands of years into the future. I don't have a personality that can draw large groups of people toward me, so not many people will hear my teaching. I tend to be more introverted and don't have the capacity to interact on an emotioal/personal level with more than a few people at any given time in my life. My gifts are in a completely different area than Jesus'. My footprint in this world is pretty small, and upon my death will be erased within a few decades by the winds of time. No matter how much I try, I'm not going to be very much like the man Jesus.

Jesus the God-man: Primarily Jesus is my savior from my sinful nature. My sin separates me from God. The Son of the Father took on human flesh to become the man Jesus. His death provided justice for my sin and removed my separation from God. My ability to love my fellow man is supernaturally enabled by the work of the Holy Spirit. My sinful human nature still clings to me, so my acts of love are small, flawed, and imperfect. However, upon my resurecttion won by Jesus, I'll be re-created with a perfect body and have perfect and complete love of God and my fellow man. I will be like Jesus.

In the first case it is a natural goal possible to achieve only by natural human striving, while in the second it is a supernatural goal achieved by a supernatural act of God. Pretty big difference.

I guess you discount the story of Moses and his effects on the Jewish people then, since he was not a diety.

[cdcox]

I guess you discount the story of Moses and his effects on the Jewish people then, since he was not a diety.

I'm trying to understand your point, but I just can't wrap my head around it.

Orthodox Jewish POV as presented in Exodus: God is the one responsible for the supernatural acts that deliver the Isrealites. Without the supernatural acts of God, what is Moses?

Secular Jewish POV (taking the Exodus account as non-literal): What attributes of Moses would one strive for? Leadership? Striving against oppression? Strip out God and there is very little we know about Moses the man, especially when you take the story as myth.

In general, it seems that the Orthodox Jews invest more thought into Moses than secular Jews. Remove the superantural aspects and there isn't much left to hold your attention beyond that you would give to say, George Washington.

I "invest" a significant amount of time and money into Jesus (worshiping God) each week. If I knew him to be just a man, I wouldn't spend a dime or more than 2 minutes thinking about him in a typical week. There are many great people in history, but they have a limited impact of my everyday conscious thoughts. Jesus is unique in that way for me, and it is entirely tied to his status as diety.

[chagrin]

This reminds me of a pretty cool book I read, "Towing Jehovah" by James Morrow.

It's not "heavy reading" by any means, but it is a shorter story about God dying, his "body" falling to the Earth and the Catholic Church's sttempt to have God's body towed to be housed in a hollowed out Iceberg, where they will experiment on the humongous body.

During the trip, the deckhands and other folks on the boat (I won't say how they get there) discover that the boat is towing God, it is very interesting how they react.

It also goes as far as describing animals and their reaction when they discover their creator has died.

I reccommend it

[Logical]

I'm trying to understand your point, but I just can't wrap my head around it.

Orthodox Jewish POV as presented in Exodus: God is the one responsible for the supernatural acts that deliver the Isrealites. Without the supernatural acts of God, what is Moses?

Secular Jewish POV (taking the Exodus account as non-literal): What attributes of Moses would one strive for? Leadership? Striving against oppression? Strip out God and there is very little we know about Moses the man, especially when you take the story as myth.

In general, it seems that the Orthodox Jews invest more thought into Moses than secular Jews. Remove the superantural aspects and there isn't much left to hold your attention beyond that you would give to say, George Washington.

I "invest" a significant amount of time and money into Jesus (worshiping God) each week. If I knew him to be just a man, I wouldn't spend a dime or more than 2 minutes thinking about him in a typical week. There are many great people in history, but they have a limited impact of my everyday conscious thoughts. Jesus is unique in that way for me, and it is entirely tied to his status as diety.

OK how about Mary (not Magdalene who probably deserves as much attention if not more), she probably has almost as many prayers to her from Catholics as almost any of the trinity. Heck the almost the entire rosary is prayed to Mary with only intermittent prayers to the father and not a single prayer to Jesus.

[cdcox]

OK how about Mary (not Magdalene who probably deserves as much attention if not more), she probably has almost as many prayers to her from Catholics as almost any of the trinity. Heck the almost the entire rosary is prayed to Mary with only intermittent prayers to the father and not a single prayer to Jesus.

Mary gets special status among Catholics due to her connection to Jesus as his mother. She is viewed as having been born without original sin and as having not committed actual sins. She is mother of God. Not quite diety, but close. Strip away Jesus' diety, and Mary becomes ordinary.

[JBucc]

OK how about Mary (not Magdalene who probably deserves as much attention if not more), she probably has almost as many prayers to her from Catholics as almost any of the trinity. Heck the almost the entire rosary is prayed to Mary with only intermittent prayers to the father and not a single prayer to Jesus.If she gave birth to a regular guy instead of the son of God I don't think she'd have that many people praying to her. That would kind of rune the whole "virgin" thing.

[Logical]

I just realized that I as a person raised a Catholic knew not a single prayer devoted solely to praying to Jesus.
There are indeed several as I will list below but I was never taught any of them. How about you?


Act of Consecration to the Sacred Heart of Jesus (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/sacheart.htm)

Act of Spiritual Communion (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/spircom.htm)

Akita Prayer (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/akita.htm)

Anima Christi (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/anima.htm)

Chaplet of the Divine Mercy (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/chaplet.htm)

First Fridays in Honor of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/1st_fri.htm)

The Golden Arrow (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/arrow.htm)

Holy Are Your Ways (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/yourways.htm)

The Jesus Prayer (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/jesus.htm)

Litany in Honor of Jesus, King of All Nations (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/nation.htm)

Litany of Divine Mercy (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/litanydm.htm)

Litany of Our Lord, Jesus Christ, Priest and Victim (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/litanypv.htm)

Litany of the Most Precious Blood (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/litanypb.htm)

Litany of the Sacred Heart of Jesus (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/litanysh.htm)

The Lord is My Shepherd (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/shepherd.htm)

Novena in Honor of Jesus as True King (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/king.htm)

Novena to the Sacred Heart of Jesus (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/sacheartn.htm)

O Saving Victim (O Salutaris Hostia) (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/victim.htm)

Padre Pio's Prayer After Holy Communion (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/pio.htm)

Prayer Before a Crucifix (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/crucifix.htm)

Prayer Before a Crucifix (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/crucifix2.htm)

Prayer of Renewal (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/renewal.htm)

Tantum Ergo (http://www.scborromeo.org/prayers/tantum.htm)

[Clint in Wichita]

Would it be so bad if an individual were only an inspiration to mankind?

That his life provided inspiration, faith, and hope, as well as examples of how to lead a good life?

That through his teachings, leadership, and suffering on earth others found belief, courage and had their suffering tempered?

Would it be so bad?

Should it?
Would it?
Change your life when you found that Jesus was such a man?

Not God, not part of a Holy Trinity but a mere mortal that lived a life so profound that it changed and improved the lives of millions for millenia beyond his death.

What do you think?

You are going to burn in hell for all eternity, you homosexual, anti-American communist!

[Logical]

You are going to burn in hell for all eternity, you homosexual, anti-American communist!:D

I have waited 42 posts for that, too bad it is from someone I know was not serious.

[listopencil]

What do you think?


I was thinking along those lines a few years ago, that if Jesus existed he could very well have been a very enlightened man that was deified by his followers. A person can interpret his quotations in many ways. There are aspects of the Mormon beliefs that rather loosely infer it I'm told. To answer your question-no. It would not change my belief system.

[Jenson71]

That sounds incredibly selfish. It's the epitomy of "what's in it for me?"

Living as Jesus taught is the epitome of living a non-selfish life.

[jidar]

Once there lived a village of creatures along the bottom of a great
crystal river. The current of the river swept silently over them all-young and old, rich and poor, good and evil, the current going its
own way, knowing only its own crystal self. Each creature in its own manner clung tightly to the twigs
and rocks of the river bottom, for clinging was their way of life, and
resisting the current what each had learned from birth. But one creature
said at last, "I trust that the current knows where it is going. I shall
let go, and let it take me where it will. Clinging, I shall die of boredom."
The other creatures laughed and said, "Fool! Let go, and that current
you worship will throw you tumbled and smashed across the rocks, and you will
die quicker than boredom!"
But the one heeded them not, and taking a breath did let go, and at
once was tumbled and smashed by the current across the rocks. Yet, in time,
as the creature refused to cling again, the current lifted him free from the
bottom, and he was bruised and hurt no more.
And the creatures downstream, to whom he was a stranger, cried, "See
a miracle! A creature like ourselves, yet he flies! See the Messiah, come
to save us all!" And the one carried in the current said, "I am no more
Messiah than you. The river delight to lift us free, if only we dare let go.
Our true work is this voyage, this adventure.
But they cried the more, "Saviour!" all the while clinging to the
rocks, making legends of a Saviour.
-- Richard Bach, "Illusions"

[Logical]

Once there lived a village of creatures along the bottom of a great
crystal river. The current of the river swept silently over them all-young and old, rich and poor, good and evil, the current going its
own way, knowing only its own crystal self. Each creature in its own manner clung tightly to the twigs
and rocks of the river bottom, for clinging was their way of life, and
resisting the current what each had learned from birth. But one creature
said at last, "I trust that the current knows where it is going. I shall
let go, and let it take me where it will. Clinging, I shall die of boredom."
The other creatures laughed and said, "Fool! Let go, and that current
you worship will throw you tumbled and smashed across the rocks, and you will
die quicker than boredom!"
But the one heeded them not, and taking a breath did let go, and at
once was tumbled and smashed by the current across the rocks. Yet, in time,
as the creature refused to cling again, the current lifted him free from the
bottom, and he was bruised and hurt no more.
And the creatures downstream, to whom he was a stranger, cried, "See
a miracle! A creature like ourselves, yet he flies! See the Messiah, come
to save us all!" And the one carried in the current said, "I am no more
Messiah than you. The river delight to lift us free, if only we dare let go.
Our true work is this voyage, this adventure.
But they cried the more, "Saviour!" all the while clinging to the
rocks, making legends of a Saviour.
-- Richard Bach, "Illusions"

Nice, in fact rep

[JohnnyV13]

That is interesting and such a polar oppositite of Catholicism where women are basically specifically shut out of real Church leadership until only very recently.


What do you mean, until only recently? Women are STILL shut out of real church leadership.

A woman cannot be a priest, therefore she cannot become part of the college of cardinals, therefore she can never set policy for the church.

According to catholic doctrine, while it is only "discipline" that prevents priests from marrying, it is infallible doctrine that women cannot be priests. The difference is the church can freely choose to change the celibacy policy, but the 2nd would mean breaking so called "infallible doctrine".

The blatant sexism of the catholic church is one of its more disturbing features to my mind.

[Logical]

What do you mean, until only recently? Women are STILL shut out of real church leadership.

A woman cannot be a priest, therefore she cannot become part of the college of cardinals, therefore she can never set policy for the church.

According to catholic doctrine, while it is only "discipline" that prevents priests from marrying, it is infallible doctrine that women cannot be priests. The difference is the church can freely choose to change the celibacy policy, but the 2nd would mean breaking so called "infallible doctrine".

The blatant sexism of the catholic church is one of its more disturbing features to my mind.

Decent point, I just did not want to get in an argument with the Catholics who would say that on a local level women have been given more and more influence in Church decision/activities in the last century.

[JohnnyV13]

John Paul II was indeed a fine man.

I agree, I just think he was a very bad theologian.

Did you realize the catholic church has him on the "fast track" for sainthood?

He was being considered for sainthood almost immediately after his death. That means the vatican was LOOKING for miracles attributed to praying to JP2 pretty much before they had any reports. This smacks of the conservative cardinals that he appointed trying to legitimize JP2's very conservative theology against another "Vatican 2" style upheaval by the "heavenly endorsement" of sainthood.

[JohnnyV13]

Decent point, I just did not want to get in an argument with the Catholics who would say that on a local level women have been given more and more influence in Church decision/activities in the last century.

yeah, that would sorta bury the thread topic

[Logical]

I agree, I just think he was a very bad theologian.

Did you realize the catholic church has him on the "fast track" for sainthood?

He was being considered for sainthood almost immediately after his death. This smacks of the conservative cardinals that he appointed trying to legitimize JP2's very conservative theology against another "Vatican 2" style upheaval by the "heavenly endorsement" of sainthood.


I am not up on Radzlinger (sp?) but I thought he was conservative. Why would they need to worry? Not challenging, but asking.

[BIG_DADDY]

yeah, that would sorta bury the thread topic
Nice nips

[JohnnyV13]

I am not up on Radzlinger (sp?) but I thought he was conservative. Why would they need to worry? Not challenging, but asking.

I think its a long term strategy. Benedict (Ratzinger) is old. He's 79. He will not have a long reign. While JP2 appointed an unprecedented number of cardinals, all of whom are very conservative theologians, Vatican 2 shook the catholic hierarchy to their very core. John the 23 was a compromise choice who, as a cardinal, had very little political power within the college. The college thought they could control him. Had John the 23rd lived longer, he would have made the changes of Vatican 2 that we DO have seem very very small.

For example, under John the 23rd, he comissioned a group to study artificial birth control during vatican 2. This group recommended that the church ALLOW birth control. If you read humanae vitae, (teaching that birth control was wrong and that masturbation was a sin) it was Pope Paul's response to that study and JP2 elevated humane vitae to "infallible doctrine".

In 1979, 400 catholic theologians challenged elevating humane vitae to infallible doctrine and signed a document to the Vatican expressing their displeasure. Cardinal Ratzinger stripped them of their teaching credentials, including his former mentor Hans Klum.

So, while the cardinals are strongly conservative, there are many catholic theologians who are not and have been simply, "keeping their head down" while trying to undermine humanae vitae while still keeping their teaching credentials.

One example is a catholic jesuit priest named Andrew Greeley. Greeley is a sociologist and also writes fiction novels that have sold rather well. Greeley has done many sociological studies about the demographics and beliefs of american catholics. One of his theories is that he disputes the concervative idea that the "vatican 2 disaster" in which donations, vocations and church attendence went down as a result of vatican 2. Greeley contends that humanae vitae was the cause. This is a back door attack on humanae vitae that is "safe" because he doesn't directly challenge an infallible doctrine, he's just "reporting" its sociological consequences. Greeley was also involved in surveys about the sexuality of catholic priests (showing that huge numbers of the american clergy have a homosexual orientation).

BTW....Greeley often is a guest at the church that I sporatically attend. He comes to arizona every spring semester to teach a course called God in Film at the U of A. He is also close friends with the pastor of this church (where i run the chess club for the grade school).

[JohnnyV13]

Nice nips

I have a thing for this chick, she's an actress named Susan Ward who has never really become a star. SHe was in a movie called "The In Crowd" which was a silly teenage movie, but she was great in it as the beautiful psycho hot serial killer chick.

[Logical]

I think its a long term strategy. Benedict (Ratzinger) is old. He's 79. He will not have a long reign. While JP2 appointed an unprecedented number of cardinals, all of whom are very conservative theologians, Vatican 2 shook the catholic hierarchy to their very core. John the 23 was a compromise choice who, as a cardinal, had very little political power within the college. The college thought they could control him. Had John the 23rd lived longer, he would have made the changes of Vatican 2 that we DO have seem very very small.

For example, under John the 23rd, he comissioned a group to study artificial birth control during vatican 2. This group recommended that the church ALLOW birth control. If you read humanae vitae, (teaching that birth control was wrong and that masturbation was a sin) it was Pope Paul's response to that study and JP2 elevated humane vitae to "infallible doctrine".

In 1979, 400 catholic theologians challenged elevating humane vitae to infallible doctrine and signed a document to the Vatican expressing their displeasure. Cardinal Ratzinger stripped them of their teaching credentials, including his former mentor Hans Klum.

So, while the cardinals are strongly conservative, there are many catholic theologians who are not and have been simply, "keeping their head down" while trying to undermine humanae vitae while still keeping their teaching credentials.

One example is a catholic jesuit priest named Andrew Greeley. Greeley is a sociologist and also writes fiction novels that have sold rather well. Greeley has done many sociological studies about the demographics and beliefs of american catholics. One of his theories is that he disputes the concervative idea that the "vatican 2 disaster" in which donations, vocations and church attendence went down as a result of vatican 2. Greeley contends that humanae vitae was the cause. This is a back door attack on humanae vitae that is "safe" because he doesn't directly challenge an infallible doctrine, he's just "reporting" its sociological consequences. Greeley was also involved in surveys about the sexuality of catholic priests (showing that huge numbers of the american clergy have a homosexual orientation).

BTW....Greeley often is a guest at the church that I sporatically attend. He comes to arizona every spring semester to teach a course called God in Film at the U of A. He is also close friends with the pastor of this church (where i run the chess club for the grade school).

Thanks for the answer, that was quite interesting.

[greg63]

Would it be so bad if an individual were only an inspiration to mankind?

That his life provided inspiration, faith, and hope, as well as examples of how to lead a good life?

That through his teachings, leadership, and suffering on earth others found belief, courage and had their suffering tempered?

Would it be so bad?

Should it?
Would it?
Change your life when you found that Jesus was such a man?

Not God, not part of a Holy Trinity but a mere mortal that lived a life so profound that it changed and improved the lives of millions for millenia beyond his death.

What do you think?

It should and it did.

Nice thread! :thumb:

[pak1983]

Yeah great guy, because of him and his beliefs we have all these nutjobs wanting to wage wars for how long? What a great man, an inspiration of death and destruction, WOOOOOOOOOT!!!

[listopencil]

Yeah great guy, because of him and his beliefs we have all these nutjobs wanting to wage wars for how long? What a great man, an inspiration of death and destruction, WOOOOOOOOOT!!!



Wow. That's one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read on ChiefsPlanet.

[pak1983]

Wow. That's one of the most ignorant posts I've ever read on ChiefsPlanet.

wars, religion? no relation? el stupido