Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
I am always shocked by the amount of money people can and/or try to sue for.  If it is too much, I would say he picked the wrong lawyer.  I think its too much.  But, maybe I am wrong.  I have never been cast as the face of evil on mainstream media for two weeks straight.   
I used to think it a complete waste of a man's life to quote baseball statistics and talk about all kinds of scenarios concerning sports.

Not anymore.

Some of you folks need to come up for a little air.
Michael Wilson - I love St. Gregory.  This is a good one.  S. Gregory, however (Hom. 36), says, “What are we to understand by the five yoke of oxen but the five senses? which are rightly called yokes, because they are double in the two sexes.”

The way I see that scripture passage is that all three of those in the scripture passage are means to and end.  And, that end is the building of a clan, or people, or civilization.  And, that is what Christ is condemning when void of him.  And, that is where the term clandestine comes from.  Such an act (as regards marriage) is destined towards the building of a clan, as opposed to just a family.  And, I would say that describes the Rothschilds quite well. The same goes for husbandry and agriculture.  Without Christ there is no avoiding superstition.  Perfect examples would by the old farmers almanac/biodynamic farming, sacred (bohemian) groves, biotech GMOs, cloned cows, artificial insemination, you name it.  And, the worst part about it is that all of these things carry the appearance of being alive.  It is the living dead which Christ condemns in that scripture.  My concern is that without an invalidation of incest, such like the Rothschilds or any other for that matter might take advantage of this clandestine ecclesial discipline, with the ax falling on those who consider themselves the salt of the earth.  Because, it really does not appear to be a matter of faith.  If it is, give reasoning/explain it like St. Peter says.  This all hinges on the church's position, which is to presume validity in non catholic marriages.  Presumption can be a sin.  In a Christendom that harbors Jews, this is a problem.
Traditional Catholic Discussion / Re: What is purity of heart?
« Last post by Josephine87 on Today at 03:55:59 PM »
Thank you, that is so helpful!  Growing up, purity always had a purely sexual connotation in my mind.  I better understand what is meant by it now.
Non-Catholic Discussion Subforum / Re: Why not hedonism?
« Last post by Kreuzritter on Today at 03:47:14 PM »
That leaves us with the missionary religions: Christianity, Islam, and Buddhism.  Buddhism can be excluded from Pascal's Wager because the penalty for not taking up Buddhism is simply rebirth, but since we don't remember our past lives (or at least I can't), this is a penalty without a sting, as rebirth is no different from birth. Some schools of Buddhism, such as the Tibetan form, do posit hells, but these can be dismissed as syncretisms where the Buddhist message was overmingled with the local paganism.

Nope. They can't be dismissed as syncretisms. The Kathavatthu, which forms part of the Pali Canon, discusses hells, and the concept of a hell in India dates at least to the period of the Upanishads. One could just as well point to the absence in the original Vedas of the notion of reincarnation; one could also point to the argument, in line with samsara and anatta, that upon death and the dissolution of the human into components, all which is "reincarnated" is the karma, not the atman.  Some schools of Buddhism deny the atman, which only makes the phenomenon of "reincarnation" even more irrelevant and the concept of "liberation" something of self-contradiction, but the Buddha only argued that nothing in samsaric existence could be rightly called "I" and that what people in general identify as the self can’t be that, not that there is nothing which transcends samsara.

The Buddha was a Hindu, and his preoccupation was liberation.  Samsara alone was enough endless suffering for him.

Hell is just a part of samsara.

You might argue are that there are myriad cult religions to be considered, such as Scientology, Mormonism, Raëlism, &c., but these were all founded recently enough in history that we can see clearly the obvious fabrications by their founders.  Weighing them for probability, they come up far short of the major established monotheisms.

Really? You have African traditional religions, Hermeticism, Zoroastrianism, Taoism, and Hinduism itself. And Gnostic Christianities. They all have notions of reward and punishment and a heavenly or  afterlife, in one form or another.

Anyway, I won't defend Pascal's Wager. I think it's bullcrap that belongs to the age in which men have lost the ability of immediate experience and entered into an era of blind intellectual speculation. The moment we move from the language of myth and living ritual into that of theology, it's happened. It's the very thing Siddharta encountered in the Brahmanism of his age and against which he formulated his teaching. Heck, you take this from the Vedas and replace "Agni" with "Jesus" and "devas/gods" with "divinity" or "elohim/angels" and it sounds positively Hebrew/Catholic.

1.1.1Mantra 1 – Agni (Author: Madhucchandas Vaisvamitra)

1 I glorify Agni, the divine Priest and the messenger of my oblations to God who is the bestower of prosperity.
2 May Agni, the divine Priest who is glorified by both the past and the present sages, increase and strengthen our bond with the Devas.
3 Praying to God though Agni, the Angel Priest, may we the worshippers obtain valiant offspring, and daily increasing prosperity and glory.
4 Agni, the perfect sacrifice which thou encompassest about
Verily goeth to the Gods.
5 May Agni, sapient-minded Priest, truthful, most gloriously great,The God, come hither with the Gods.
6 Whatever blessing, Agni, thou wilt grant unto thy worshipper,That, Angiras, is indeed thy truth.
7 O Lord, the remover of darkness!  We pray to you morning and eveningwith sincere thoughts of reverence.  Through our prayers we come close to you.
8 Ruler of sacrifices, guard of Law eternal, radiant One,Increasing in thine own abode.
9 God!  Be unto us easy of access, as is a father to his son.Be ever present in our midst, giving us happiness.
I believe that St. Malachy Prophecies have already been debunked an proven some of them were written after his death.

I looked into the execution of the man in Iran for simply being gay and found a story from the Jerusalem Post (NOT a pro-Islam propaganda outlet by any means). In it, the journalist stated that the man in question had been accused of kidnapping two 15 year old boys and raping them.

The History Subforum / Re: The Irish Revolution
« Last post by mikemac on Today at 01:54:19 PM »
I think it's an exaggeration to say the Catholic culture of the Celts before the Normans were 'outliers'.  Rome had recognized the Church in Ireland and Scotland from early on.  They had been Catholic for a few centuries before the Anglo-Saxons, the Normans (Norse) and the Vikings converted.  You may want to read a book by Thomas Cahill, titled "How The Irish Saved Civilization: The Untold Story of Ireland's Heroic Role from the Fall of Rome to the Rise of Medieval Europe".  "Cahill argues a case for the Irish people's critical role in preserving Western Civilization from utter destruction by the Huns and the Germanic tribes (Visigoths, Franks, Angles, Saxons, Ostrogoths, etc.). The book retells the story from the collapse of the Roman Empire and the pivotal role played by members of the clergy at the time."

Osway the king of Northumbria, Elfred and Egfrid reeked havoc on the Culdee houses.  In Scotland a controversial reform was inaugurated by Queen Margaret and carried through by her sons Alexander I and David I.  It seems the Benedictines and the Cistercians were covetous of the Culdee houses.

To the contrary, the hostile and distinct minority of the planted Protestants united the Irish Catholics and the Old English (Normans), didn't it?  The Irish eventually got most of their country back.  And me thinks with demographics they will eventually have a united Ireland.  Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland are having more babies.  The Moslem immigration into the West may turn out the same, but not because of demographic reasons.

Edit to add;

Feudalism has recently been outlawed in Scotland.  Now the question that is being asked is "Who owns Scotland?"  Both Feudalism in Scotland as well as the Lyon Court are Norman constructs.  Feudalism in Scotland clearly was not a "wonder of the Medieval period"; it was a way to steal land. 
Non-Catholic Discussion Subforum / Re: Why not hedonism?
« Last post by Kreuzritter on Today at 12:56:56 PM »
But there's a difference between having a generic desire to follow God's rules and actually following God's rules.

The former is easy: granted that you always acknowledge God to be most sovereign, you can never fail to want to follow all of His rules. Just keep your mind always on God's sovereignty in all your actions, and all your actions will be done with the desire to follow all of God's rules.

The latter, however, is oftentimes impossible: it pretty much requires that we have knowledge of God's rules... yet God doesn't give faith to everybody.
And it's impractical (perhaps impossible) to attempt to follow God's rules without knowing what those rules are, since all the religions seem to be contradicting one another, not to mention that it's also possible that none of the religions have knowledge of God's rules.

It's not electing to follow God's "rules" because you intellectually acknowledge him as sovereign, which isn't even a logical necessity of that acknowledgment.  Just ask Lucifer. It's loving God and neighbour out of vital necessity by the divinity dwelling within and ones ever-deepening union with it.

You're always thinking in terms of obedience demanded by authority, lists of rules, and the knowledge of the intellect. This is Satanism, the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, the Law that cannot save.

Nevertheless, God damns people who fail to follow His rules.

God "damns" people who don't have goodness in their heart and refuse to act on the work of the law that is written onto it; because that's what damnation is. This is why there's no such thing as "ingorance" of what is moral, "ignorance" of what the good "demands"; because people know the nature of their actions, and they choose those which are after their heart.

Your views of "Christianity" are utterly diabolically-inspired, a dark hole from which there's no escape while you stubbornly cling to them.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10