| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
SteveG 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20525
|
 Posted: July 17 2015 at 15:03 |
|
^The book known to historians as Luke-Acts is a homogenized and harmonized white wash of early Christianity. 'Real Christianity' does not reside there. For a better look at 'real' Christianity (warts and all), refer to the authentic Pauline letters such as Galatians.
Edited by SteveG - July 17 2015 at 15:28
|
 |
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 15:30 |
 timothy leary wrote:
The "infallible" role models
- Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
- Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
- Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
- Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
- Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
- Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
- Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
- Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
|
A pope is infallible
ONLY IN MATTERS OF FAITH AND CHRISTIAN MORAL DOCTRINE AND WHEN SPEAKING EX CATHEDRA TO EACH AND EVERY CATHOLIC IN THE WORLD
| Papal infallibility is a dogma of the Catholic Church that states that, in virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error "When, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. |
But that's not all, he must speak Ex Cathedra:
According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows:- "the Roman Pontiff"
- "speaks ex cathedra" ("that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority....")
- "he defines"
- "that a doctrine concerning faith or morals"
- "must be held by the whole Church"
For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must be: - A decision of the supreme teaching authority of the Church (pope or College of Bishops)
- Concern a doctrine of faith or morals
- Bind the universal Church
- Be proposed as something to hold firmly and immutably
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Ex_cathedra |
In their personal lives, they are as fallible as everybody else in the whole planet.
If Pope Francis tells you to bet on San Lorenzo de Almagro for the Libertadores Cup (He's a fan of the club), don't recommend you to put money, because the team sucks lately and his opinion is not protected by infallibility.
They can be sinners (And all humans are) and they can commit the same mistakes as us
Why do people speak without knowing?
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 17 2015 at 15:33
|
|
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20525
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 15:35 |
|
If we were together, we could all sing Kumbaya. But we are not. This is a volatile subject at the best of times and always seems to bring out the worst in us, instead of the best. So, it's time for me to pass.
|
|
dr wu23
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20491
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 16:26 |
SteveG wrote:
If we were together, we could all sing Kumbaya. But we are not. This is a volatile subject at the best of times and always seems to bring out the worst in us, instead of the best. So, it's time for me to pass. |
I agree with you Steve,.....'Religion' tends to bring out the worst in people more often than their best.
|
|
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 17:23 |
Didn't wanted to be dragged here, but well, history and Theology fascinate me
AlanB wrote:
Wow, this thread has really taken off hasn't it? I log on in the morning and there are multiple postings to read through, pretty much all concerned with the lyrics of one album. So can I put my two pennyworth in? |
Everybody is free to give an opinion.
AlanB wrote:
I don't see hatred in the lyrics of Sola Scriptura, and certainly not towards the present day Roman Catholic Church. The criticism is levelled against the corrupt medieval church, and against any church today that goes against the Word of God. The language used (harlot, Babylon, dragon etc) is lifted from the Book of Revelation. In fact the whole album is predicated on an interpretation of Revelation chapter 12, where a woman and child are pursued into the desert by a dragon, and this period lasts 1260 days. Exponents of this interpretation claim that the Bishop of Rome held political power over Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire to an edict of Napoleon removing the Pope's political power - this period is said to have lasted from 538 AD to 1798 AD - a period of 1260 years. This is where Sola Scriptura's lyrics are coming from. |
1.- The hatred is evident for anybody who doesn't share his bigot view
2.- There's no excuse for saying that the Church is a whore that all our doctrine is blood.
3.- Exponents of this interpretation are wrong.
It's easy to make interpretations of prophecies of te past, because pro´phesies are vague, and they adapt random successes, and claim that the prophecy was right
For example, the Grand Pyramid Prophesies were IMPECCABLE, when people read the book, really believed the world was ending in 2005
The problem rises the day after the book was released....NO OTHER PROPHESY WAS FULFILLED. It's easy to say a Prophesy fulfilled in the past, when you adapt any random success to a prophesy.
Now, lets talk about the 1,260 days that mysteriously turned into 1,260 years a) The year 538 AD makes no sense. The power of the Church in Europe started in the year 380 AD when the Edict of Thessalonica made the Catholic Church official in Rome and in almost all Europe.
b) 1798 AD makes no sense either, because he Church kept all the control until 1870, when Victor Manuel deprived the Church of each and every meter of territory except the Saint Peter's basilica including the Pontifical States.
c) So, 1870 - 380 = 1490....So the Church had power in Europe for 1,490 years not 1260.
So, everything is wrong
AlanB wrote:
Now, going back further in history, the Christian religion went from being a persecuted sect to the state religion after the conversion of the Emperor Constantine. |
FALSE
1.- Constantine converted in the year 337 when he was baptized before dying. 2.- Constantine made the Catholic Church legal in 313 (Edict of Milan) at that point he was still a pagan. 3.- The Catholic Church was made official by the Thessalonica Edict (380 AD)
By the point the Catholic Church was made legal, they were no longer a small sect, but an organized church with 32 popes
Don't you guys check historical books before you repeat what you are told probably by a pastor with an agenda?
AlanB wrote:
There is an argument made by some that the church incorporated some of the pagan beliefs at that time in order to make the change from a pantheistic belief system to a monotheistic one. The assimilation of the Roman feast of Saturnalia as the Christian festival of Christmas is an obvious one. |
FALSE
a) Saturnalia was celebrated on December 17, not in December 25
| By the beginning of December, writes Columella, the farmer should have finished his autumn planting (De Re Rustica, III.14). Now, with the approach of the winter solstice (December 25 in the Julian calendar), Saturnus, the god of seed and sowing (Latin satus) was honored with a festival. The Saturnalia officially was celebrated on December 17 (XVI Kal. Jan.) and, in Cicero's time, lasted seven days (counting inclusively)—from December 17 to 23. Augustus limited the holiday to three days, so the civil courts would not have to be closed any longer than necessary (Macrobius, Saturnalia, I.10.4), and Caligula extended it to five (Suetonius, Life of Caligula, XVII; Dio, Roman History, LIX.6.4), the fifth day restored by Claudius after it had been abolished at one time (Roman History, LX.25.8). Still, everyone seems to have continued to celebrate for a full week, extended, says Macrobius, by celebration of the Sigillaria on the last day of Saturnalia, so named for the small earthenware figurines (sigillaria) that were sold then (Saturnalia, I.10.24).
http://penelope.uchicago.edu/~grout/encyclopaedia_romana/calendar/saturnalia.html
|
b) The Christmas date exists before the Church was accepted in Rome in 313
Hyppolitus of Rome wrote about deceber 25 i the year 204 AD (109 years before the Church was made legal in Rome)
Although the date of Christ’s birth is not given to us in Scripture, there is documented evidence that December 25 was already of some significance to Christians prior to A.D. 354. One example can be found in the writings of Hyppolytus of Rome, who explains in his Commentary on the book of Daniel (c. A.D. 204) that the Lord’s birth was believed to have occurred on that day:
| For the first advent of our Lord in the flesh, when he was born in Bethlehem, was December 25th, Wednesday, while Augustus was in his forty-second year, but from Adam, five thousand and five hundred years. He suffered in the thirty-third year, March 25th, Friday, the eighteenth year of Tiberius Caesar, while Rufus and Roubellion were Consuls. |
http://www.catholic.com/blog/jon-sorensen/why-december-25 |
c) Since the movie Zeitgeist, people stopped talking about Saturnalia because it was obvious that it was celebrate in December 17, and started to talk about "Sol Invictus" but this was even more wrong,l because the cult of Sol Invictus (December 25), was invented by Aurelian in 274 AD...In other words, 70 years after the first evidence of Christmas on december 25 can be traced.
We know that Christ wasn't necessarily born in December 25th, because we don't know the day, but it was celebrated that day for a mistake in thecounting of the Easter days.
As a fact this error was made official in the VI Century by a monk named Dionysus Exiguus, who was asked by the Pope John I to confirm Christmas day and he repeated the mistake
| Dionysius Exiguus, a monk from Russia who died about 544, was asked by Pope John I to set out the dates for Easter from the years 527 to 626. It seems that the Pope was keen to produce some order in the celebration of Easter. Dionysius decided to begin with what he considered to be the year of Jesus’ birth. He chose the year in which Rome had been founded and determined, from the evidence known to him, that Jesus had been born 753 years later.
He was almost certainly acquainted with a suggestion by Hippolytus (170–236) that the date of Jesus’ birth was December 25, but the trouble was that Hippolytus had not backed up this claim with sound arguments. Dionysius, however, had just the argument: - His contemporaries claimed that God created the earth on March 25.
- It was inconceivable that the son of God could have been in any way imperfect.
- Therefore Jesus must have been conceived on March 25.
- This meant that he must have been born nine months later—December 25
http://www.westarinstitute.org/resources/the-fourth-r/dionysius-exiguus/ |
Isn't history fascinating when you know just a bit?
AlanB wrote:
Another is the replacement of the Roman Gods with saints who can intercede with God on behalf of people on Earth. |
Do you have any evidence of this?
Please, you can't make a statement so emphatic without having any source, which by the way doesn't exist, the concept of Saints is in the Bible 67 times and he singular Saint is one time.
AlanB wrote:
This idea is not in the Bible, in fact the Bible states that there is only one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus. Purgatory is another concept that you won't find in the Bible, but its addition to church doctrine proved a useful money raising tactic in the Middle Ages when people could reduce their time there by buying indulgences. It is this sort of thing that Morse is railing against in Sola Scriptura, and when you understand the basis in Revelation which he is starting from, you can understand why he is using such language. |
FALSE AGAIN
It's in the Bible.
When Luther creted the 5 solas, he noticed that the Bible didn't supported this idea, so he eleated every book or passage that could interfere, as a fact he wanted to eliminate James because he said that faith without acts is dead faith, and his explantion was absolutely anti Semitic
| "We should throw the epistle of James out of this school, for it doesn't amount to much. It contains not a syllable about Christ, except at the beginning. I maintain that some Jew wrote it who probably heard about Christian people but never encountered any. Since he heard that Christians place great weight on faith in Christ, he thought, "Wait a moment! I'll oppose them and urge works alone.'"
Martin Luther LW54,424-425 |
He also eliminated Maccabees I and II which talk about prayers for the death, purgatory an saints, despite that the 7 books deleted by Luther are in the Septuagint.
AlanB wrote:
As an Evangelical Protestant I obviously share Morse's world view, but there is one concern that I have. He includes the doctrine of the Trinity in his list of doctrines which came out of the "false church" of the Middle Ages, and rejects that idea too. This came out in interviews which he did around the time of Sola's release, and it does disturb some Christians who otherwise admire his music and lyrics. |
I couldn't expect less
You support Morse when he attacks the Catholic Church, but when his doctrine collisions with your beliefs, you stop supporting him.
That's called double standard..The enemy of my enemy is my friend, unless he disagrees with me
AlanB wrote:
Finally, regarding Luther's anti-Semitism, Morse is on record as saying that he was made aware of this during the recording of Sola, and actually considered pulling the whole project because of it. I think this is referred to in the liner notes, but as I only have a download I'm not 100% sure of that. |
Not correct either
Morse said that he only discovered Luther's Antisemitism when recording the album, something that is absurd because:
a) He's not an ignorant, he's a cult man who had to know this b) It's impossible to make a research about Luther's life and not know that he was beyond the level of Hitler
Then he never really thought of leaving the project, he said something ambiguous but he refused to even mention it because it could affect Luther's credibility.
Double morality
BTW: I have the quote
When I wrote this album I was unaware of Martin Luther's anti-Jewish statements, and I considered scrapping it, but I feel that the main point is that the way God used him to protest false religion is still a good example of courage and boldness for a Godly cause.
Neal Morse
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 17 2015 at 17:30
|
|
|
|
t d wombat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 14 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 504
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 17:46 |
SteveG wrote:
If we were together, we could all sing Kumbaya. But we are not. This is a volatile subject at the best of times and always seems to bring out the worst in us, instead of the best. So, it's time for me to pass. |
What ? Not even if we get Wakeman to supply the keyboards ? Anywho, I'm with you. If we keep at it we'll all be drowned in a sea of Ivan's red and blue. A shame to some extent cos a knock 'em down and drag 'em brawl on the true origins of the church would be fun. Not to mention that the reformation then led on to Cromwell, probably the most evil b*****d of the lot of them and we havn't even touched on Intelligent Design nor how the Wombats managed to get back to Australia from Mt Ararat post flood. 
Edited by t d wombat - July 17 2015 at 18:26
|
|
Andrew B
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx
|
|
t d wombat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 14 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 504
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 17:51 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
Didn't wanted to be dragged here, but well, history and Theology fascinate me. |
Yes you did. Admit it man, you are loving this. 
|
|
Andrew B
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx
|
|
Angelo
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13240
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 18:06 |
Lowend wrote:
I like Neal Morse. I think he writes good music. I have noticed a few reviews which have been critical of his work due to his preaching. As an agnostic, you'd think that would bother me but it doesn't. I actually admire him for having the courage to put it out there even though I may not share his views. I don't think that should detract from his music. It's just his opinion. I can understand not liking his music but I can't understand not liking it because of the lyrics. My main focus in prog is the compostion and instrumentation. Let the dialog begin ....... |
Well... I actively 'resigned' from the catholic church 2 years ago. Took me four letters to get it confirmed, but I did it in the end. I had my reasons, which are not relevant here, but they did lead me to not listening to Neal Morse - I was away from the preaching, and didn't feel like getting it back. Today, at the Night of the Prog festival, I was blown away by the energy of his music and performance. That made me change my mind - I am going to get at least one of his albums, and I'll just ignore the lyrics (which would be first for me).
|
|
|
|
timothy leary
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 18:59 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
timothy leary wrote:
The "infallible" role models
- Pope Stephen VI (896–897), who had his predecessor Pope Formosus exhumed, tried, de-fingered, briefly reburied, and thrown in the Tiber.[1]
- Pope John XII (955–964), who gave land to a mistress, murdered several people, and was killed by a man who caught him in bed with his wife.
- Pope Benedict IX (1032–1044, 1045, 1047–1048), who "sold" the Papacy
- Pope Boniface VIII (1294–1303), who is lampooned in Dante's Divine Comedy
- Pope Urban VI (1378–1389), who complained that he did not hear enough screaming when Cardinals who had conspired against him were tortured.[2]
- Pope Alexander VI (1492–1503), a Borgia, who was guilty of nepotism and whose unattended corpse swelled until it could barely fit in a coffin.[3]
- Pope Leo X (1513–1521), a spendthrift member of the Medici family who once spent 1/7 of his predecessors' reserves on a single ceremony[4]
- Pope Clement VII (1523–1534), also a Medici, whose power-politicking with France, Spain, and Germany got Rome sacked.
|
A pope is infallible
ONLY IN MATTERS OF FAITH AND CHRISTIAN MORAL DOCTRINE AND WHEN SPEAKING EX CATHEDRA TO EACH AND EVERY CATHOLIC IN THE WORLD
| Papal infallibility is a dogma of the Catholic Church that states that, in virtue of the promise of Jesus to Peter, the Pope is preserved from the possibility of error "When, in the exercise of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, in virtue of his supreme apostolic authority, he defines a doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole Church. |
But that's not all, he must speak Ex Cathedra:
According to the teaching of the First Vatican Council and Catholic tradition, the conditions required for ex cathedra papal teaching are as follows:- "the Roman Pontiff"
- "speaks ex cathedra" ("that is, when in the discharge of his office as shepherd and teacher of all Christians, and by virtue of his supreme apostolic authority....")
- "he defines"
- "that a doctrine concerning faith or morals"
- "must be held by the whole Church"
For a teaching by a pope or ecumenical council to be recognized as infallible, the teaching must be: - A decision of the supreme teaching authority of the Church (pope or College of Bishops)
- Concern a doctrine of faith or morals
- Bind the universal Church
- Be proposed as something to hold firmly and immutably
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_infallibility#Ex_cathedra |
In their personal lives, they are as fallible as everybody else in the whole planet.
If Pope Francis tells you to bet on San Lorenzo de Almagro for the Libertadores Cup (He's a fan of the club), don't recommend you to put money, because the team sucks lately and his opinion is not protected by infallibility.
They can be sinners (And all humans are) and they can commit the same mistakes as us
Why do people speak without knowing
|
What should I be Knowing? I never said these guys were infallible in their personal lives, obviously. Do you seriously think God ever intended to give any of these popes infallibility on Catholic church Doctrine. A yes or no will suffice. I do not need a lecture in red and blue. Just yes or no?
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 19:09 |
YES!!! blue and red font..  Reminds me that I once meant to have.. I  Ivan tattooed on my ass cheek... 
Edited by micky - July 17 2015 at 19:11
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 17 2015 at 20:23 |
timothy leary wrote:
What should I be Knowing? I never said these guys were infallible in their personal lives, obviously. Do you seriously think God ever intended to give any of these popes infallibility on Catholic church Doctrine. A yes or no will suffice. I do not need a lecture in red and blue. Just yes or no? |
Of course, one thing is independent of the other, they may be sinners but I don't believe they have created any dogma or wrote an encyclical document
They can sin in their personal lives, but this doesn't mean they are unable to speak about doctrine with the assistance of God, and none of them change a single paragraph of our doctrine
It's strange, but no anti-pope has changed a word of our beliefs.
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 17 2015 at 20:58
|
|
|
|
t d wombat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 14 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 504
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 01:05 |
|
|
|
Andrew B
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx
|
|
AlanB
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 19 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 1135
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 02:00 |
For the record, Ivan, I never said that I agree with the Revelation 12 interpretation, I just made the point that this is where Neal Morse is coming from, and explains why he uses the language of Revelation in his lyrics. I still don't see any hatred for the MODERN DAY Roman Catholic Church in the lyrics. For the medieval church and its practices, yes, but hatred is a strong word to describe someone who disagrees with some of your church's doctrines. One of the reasons I like the album so much is the powerful lyrics. "In the name of God you must die, all that's not our truth is a lie" could equally apply to groups like ISIS today, and the imagery of deluded people walking into Hell when they've been told they're going to Heaven is a very strong one. Sorry but I think you're over reacting a bit  |
|
Lowend
Forum Newbie
Joined: July 09 2015
Location: Denver,Pa USA
Status: Offline
Points: 38
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 10:11 |
I agree. He is loving this. Theology fascinates him. It has made me agnostic. We're all entitled to our opinions and beliefs or lack there of. Now, having said that, I still admire Neal's courage for putting his opinion out there after seeing the intense backlash this thred has started. I had no idea it would lead to this. I had no idea someone would turn this into a hate dialog. We have too much of that in the world today already and I feel most of it is due to religion. Again, my opinion and nothing more.
|
|
Lost in trance of dances, as rhythm takes another turn
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 11:22 |
Lowend wrote:
¿ I agree. He is loving this. Theology fascinates him. It has made me agnostic. We're all entitled to our opinions and beliefs or lack there of. Now, having said that, I still admire Neal's courage for putting his opinion out there after seeing the intense backlash this thred has started. I had no idea it would lead to this. I had no idea someone would turn this into a hate dialog. We have too much of that in the world today already and I feel most of it is due to religion. Again, my opinion and nothing more. |
I didn't tuned this into a hate dialogue, Neal Morse did it when he called the church of 1,300 million people a harlot, our doctrines bloody and our sains Roman gods
If you can't see that, well I can't do anything, even Protestant pastors (Who are not blinded by fatacism) here notice it.
It should be obvious for everybody, because it's more than evident
|
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 12:06 |
AlanB wrote:
For the record, Ivan, I never said that I agree with the Revelation 12 interpretation, I just made the point that this is where Neal Morse is coming from, and explains why he uses the language of Revelation in his lyrics. I still don't see any hatred for the MODERN DAY Roman Catholic Church in the lyrics. For the medieval church and its practices, yes, but hatred is a strong word to describe someone who disagrees with some of your church's doctrines. |
You don't see it, because you agree with him
| As an Evangelical Protestant I obviously share Morse's world view, |
But this
If you think the whore is only history
Are there those who teach her lies?
Wherever they believe what came out from her
The same spirit is still alive
Is about today's Church
Also this
Not just from the mother but the daughters of the harlot
Everything that comes from her it must be left behind
Her rituals and teaching smells of death and bloody scarlet
Like Martin did before us let the scripture be our guide If I said something like this about your church,you would be caling me a bigot
AlanB wrote:
One of the reasons I like the album so much is the powerful lyrics. "In the name of God you must die, all that's not our truth is a lie" could equally apply to groups like ISIS today, and the imagery of deluded people walking into Hell when they've been told they're going to Heaven is a very strong one. |
But he's not talking about a FUNDAMENTALIST GOVERNMENT, he's talking about a church
AlanB wrote:
Sorry but I think you're over reacting a bit |
Of course, if you agree with him, it's obvious
|
|
|
|
t d wombat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 14 2007
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 504
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 18:31 |
The silly thing is that Ivan is whining about insults being hurled at the church, that somehow Morse is trampling on his beliefs. Big deal. Believers are content to tell me that I'll spend eternity as Satan's bum boy because I don't accept their sky pixie, which seems somewhat harsher than merely accusing the RC church of being corrupt. Religious organisations are nowt more than earthly institutions and tax shelters created by man to propigate a set of beliefs that may or may not have some historical relevence or even truth behind them. They may or may not reflect the views of the original figurehead be that e.g Jesus or Mohammed or Yhwh nay not even the Flying Spaghetti Monster in all his noodley greatness.
That the church (any church) turns around and creates its own versions of events and manages to convince hordes of other folk that they are the way to salvation in no way puts them above criticism. If Morse is wrong then fine, give it to him with all guns blazing but please, enough of the oh woe is me, you are trampling on my beliefs nonsense.
(Yeah I know but yesterday I woke up the meeker me. Today, not so much. )
Edited by t d wombat - July 18 2015 at 18:37
|
|
Andrew B
“Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.” ― Julius Henry Marx
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 19:05 |
t d wombat wrote:
The silly thing is that Ivan is whining about insults being hurled at the church, that somehow Morse is trampling on his beliefs. Big deal. Believers are content to tell me that I'll spend eternity as Satan's bum boy because I don't accept their sky pixie, which seems somewhat harsher than merely accusing the RC church of being corrupt. Religious organisations are nowt more than earthly institutions and tax shelters created by man to propigate a set of beliefs that may or may not have some historical relevence or even truth behind them. They may or may not reflect the views of the original figurehead be that e.g Jesus or Mohammed or Yhwh nay not even the Flying Spaghetti Monster in all his noodley greatness.
|
Just to end
Morse can believe whatever he wants, that's not my problem, but offending with direct insults is not right.
If you're an atheist, good for you, it's a respectable position that I don't share.
If Morse said "All the atheists are sons of a harlot", you would be protesting
The difference between us, is that I would be protesting with you.
t d wombat wrote:
That the church (any church) turns around and creates its own versions of events and manages to convince hordes of other folk that they are the way to salvation in no way puts them above criticism. If Morse is wrong then fine, give it to him with all guns blazing but please, enough of the oh woe is me, you are trampling on my beliefs nonsense. |
FALSE
We Catholics believe that salvation is for everybody, despite their religion
a) Non Catholic Christians
Dogmatic Constitution of the Catholic Church - Lumen Gentium
15. The Church recognizes that in many ways she is linked with those who, being baptized, are honored with the name of Christian, though they do not profess the faith in its entirety or do not preserve unity of communion with the successor of Peter. (14*) For there are many who honor Sacred Scripture, taking it as a norm of belief and a pattern of life, and who show a sincere zeal.
b) Jewish
16. Finally, those who have not yet received the Gospel are related in various ways to the people of God.(18*) In the first place we must recall the people to whom the testament and the promises were given and from whom Christ was born according to the flesh.
c) Moslems
But the plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge the Creator. In the first place amongst these there are the Muslims, who, professing to hold the faith of Abraham, along with us adore the one and merciful God, who on the last day will judge mankind.
d) Non Christians
Nor is God far distant from those who in shadows and images seek the unknown God, for it is He who gives to all men life and breath and all things,(127) and as Saviour wills that all men be saved.(128) Those also can attain to salvation who through no fault of their own do not know the Gospel of Christ or His Church, yet sincerely seek God and moved by grace strive by their deeds to do His will as it is known to them through the dictates of conscience.
e) Atheists
Nor does Divine Providence deny the helps necessary for salvation to those who, without blame on their part, have not yet arrived at an explicit knowledge of God and with His grace strive to live a good life.
Better get informed.
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 18 2015 at 19:14
|
|
|
|
micky
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: October 02 2005
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 46828
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 19:11 |
goddamn right Ivan. Well said... I'm not a Catholic.. I'm not even a member of any church. More of a half assed Hindu. Love the religion.. believe in what it preaches.. just not discplined enough to practice it. Any attack on ANY religion has no place.. in civil society... but especially... but damnit... leave relgion where it belongs..private discussions between friends and willing debators... its place is NOT in music. Especially prog... that is the cardinal sin if you will Morse committed.. just of course made worse by framing in sh*tty music and with Latimeresque kind of awful vocals
|
|
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
|
timothy leary
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319
|
Posted: July 18 2015 at 19:21 |
|
Andy Latimer is a great vocalist
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Neal Morse - An Agnostic's View