The Pope's Health

[Kairos]

Shintoists just make me laugh because its so contrived and new. Kinda like Mormons or or Scientologists.

Shinto is a couple thousand years old. It's older than Buddhism and Christianity.

[Strazos]

And here I am, the Eastern Orthodox guy, wondering how Christianity could ever be concieved as "Western" in the first place :)

I do seem to recall something about Nazareth, Galilee, Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and Egypt in connection with Christianity....

Within the discipline of History, that all falls into "Western Civilization" (or the Near East if you're trying to be real specific). And Jayce, when I say "western organized religions are a crock", I don't mean that some, or even a lot, of the events in the history of said religion didn't happen; I just find most of the believers to be obscnely hypocritical, history as it relates to these religions to be destructive and negative on the whole, and the whole idea behind any of them to be stupid, pointless, and a farce.

If you wanna believe in Christianity (Catholicism, lol), Judaism, or Islam, be my guest. I just personally have no use for them.

PS: No religion is inherently better than any other....It's all simply a matter of opinion. Personally, out of all of the western religions throughout history, I find Greek mythology to be the most interesting; it's a faith that functioned on a much more personal level for the practioners.

PSx2: I just personally find eastern faiths, esp. Buddahism (sp?), Shinto, Taoism, and Confucism to be more agreeable than western ones....and plus, these faiths have not been a direct cause for the death of millions upon millions of people, unlike in the west, where people are still persecuted to this day basically because of a simple difference of opinion. I just think they've done more harm than good throughout history.

[Samwise]

I just think they've done more harm than good throughout history.

Whenever someone says something like that, I feel obligated to point out how many charities and other beneficial nonprofit organizations there are out there that are operated by "Western religion."  

I'm not sure I'd want to speak for every sect of Christianity (those Protestant televangelist leeches are on their own), but for every bad thing we Catholics have done, I bet I can name three good things.  ;)

[Strazos]

Whenever someone says something like that, I feel obligated to point out how many charities and other beneficial nonprofit organizations there are out there that are operated by "Western religion."  

I'm not sure I'd want to speak for every sect of Christianity (those Protestant televangelist leeches are on their own), but for every bad thing we Catholics have done, I bet I can name three good things.  ;)

Oh, I'm well aware of the charity the church has, and I wouldn't take that away from them....

But just take a look at Medieval history; I think it speaks for itself.

[sidereal]

Yes, the monastics, the Knights Templar, and Thomas Aquinas were ruthless.

No one expected the Spanish Inquisition.

[Samwise]

But just take a look at Medieval history; I think it speaks for itself.

Which part?  Catholic monasteries preserving classical texts that would otherwise be completely lost to the ages, like the culture and history of those ancient Greeks whom you seem to like?  ;)  Or the Pope backing Charlemagne, who in turn leveraged his power to promote literacy and turned Europe from a bunch of squabbling warlords into a civilization?

Oh, you meant maybe the Spanish Inquisition, which was started by the secular governments of France and Spain as a means of ferreting out Muslim spies who had been conducting a jihad against Spain for the past 700 years, and was eventually ended only because of its condemnation by the Pope?  Okay, I suppose it might be fair to lay some of the blame for that one at the feet of the Church, but even so, there were what, four thousand deaths as a result of the Inquisition?  How many lives have Catholic charities saved since then?

I don't want to come off as an apologist or a spin doctor here, but I'm just saying... it's easy to write Catholicism off by saying "OMG TEY R TEH EBIL INQUISITORS" and ignoring everything else.  Take any group that's been around for more than a century and they've probably been involved in some tragic fuckup at some point in time.  As historical tragedies go, the Inquisition wasn't even that big - the Spanish Influenza killed about five thousand times as many people as the Spanish Inquisition did.

[Hanzii]

Doing a cost benefit analysis of a single religion is inherently hard.
How do you weigh stuff.
How long should those in charge feel guilty for past sins?
Medieval stuff? The crusades? Do we blame The Children's Crusade on singular zealots or the entire church and the enviroment it created, that made this happen.
How many jews would have lived if the Vatican had spoken up?
Do we blame the church for peadophiles? Priests in Rwanda?
How do you weigh charity work in the Third World against the world of hurt the insistende on not letting people use contraception?
Etc.
But right now government funded non-religious "charity"-work by far outweighs what any  church (or all churches put together) do, so I'm sure we'd get by without.

I still stand by my opinion: bad>good.

[stray]

Do we blame the church for peadophiles?

No, we blame pedophiles for pedophiles.

How do you weigh charity work in the Third World against the world of hurt the insistende on not letting people use contraception?

Not "letting". Don't give me that. People can do what they want. If someone wants to use contraception (and this applies to other restrictions people want to whine about, like abortion and birth control) then they should consider that maybe the Catholic religion isn't for them. It's pretty simple.

Besides, "lack of contraception" is hardly the cause for why the third world is a such a mess. Lol, do you really believe that?

But right now government funded non-religious "charity"-work by far outweighs what any church (or all churches put together) do, so I'm sure we'd get by without.

Even if that's true: So what. Charity work is charity work. Even the smallest amount is good. You can't measure someone's goodness by the size of the checks they're giving. You measure it by the fact that they're even willing to write the check.

[Paelos]

Shintoists just make me laugh because its so contrived and new. Kinda like Mormons or or Scientologists.

Shinto is a couple thousand years old. It's older than Buddhism and Christianity.

I was referring more to the modern Shintoists post-Imperial Japan. The ideas shifted greatly during the WWII period. Granted the ideas of Shinto are rooted in ancient Japanse oral tradition, but it didn't even have a name until Buddhism came to light in Japan around 600 AD. The main writings don't occur until further after that. Basically, before 1868 when the Emporer made Shrine Shinto the state religion and ordered the removal of Buddhist statues and themes, Shintoism and Buddhism were essentially the same.

[Alkiera]

PSx2: I just personally find eastern faiths, esp. Buddahism (sp?), Shinto, Taoism, and Confucism to be more agreeable than western ones....and plus, these faiths have not been a direct cause for the death of millions upon millions of people, unlike in the west, where people are still persecuted to this day basically because of a simple difference of opinion. I just think they've done more harm than good throughout history.

I find some of the precepts of eastern religions frankly baffling... especially the near-universal belief in the inherent goodness of humanity.  You can't even claim being bad is cultural thing, as children are willful and disobedient well before they have had time to absorb language, much less culture.  The idea that all people are inherently kind and generous is generally, in english, called niavete.

Taoism and Confucism are less religions than sets of morals, the vast majority of practitioners practice both, and often Buddhism as well.  The tenets of both suggest you should be a moral person, and just go with the flow.  Their ideas of morality are basically identical to Christianity.

The Buddhist 'Nirvana' is a personally unappealing concept...  Buddhism seems to be largely a focus on death, a search for nihilism.  All suffering is due to a (inherently wrong, in Buddhism) desire to... not suffer.  Being a member of a slave caste is okay, being treated as like crap is okay... it's not really suffering unless you have a desire for something better than being a slave, and treated like crap.  Once you've managed to convince yourself to have no desires, you will no longer suffer, and have achieved enlightenment, whereupon your death you achieve the great reward of... nothingness.  The Taoist 'go with the flow' thing fits in very... naturally.  

Buddhism is the ultimate slacker religion, on a spiritual level.  Aside from that, they also teach the same kinds of behavior/morals that Christianity does.  Don't lie, cheat, steal, kill, commit adultery, or use drugs; do treat people like you wish to be treated.  Most existing religions do... the religions that were big on sacrificing humans and whatnot have all mostly died out, imagine that.

I am a Christian, tho I have made some effort to read up on what other religious groups believe, to see their 'truth'...  And I've found everything else to be lacking in comparison to a relationship with God.  I'll be the first to admit that people have done bad things in the name of Christianity... the crusades, etc.  However, it is a religion practiced by humans, and while Christians strive to be like Christ, who is perfect, we are all imperfect.  Even, to bring this back close to on topic, the Pope.  He's a great guy, I'm sure.  Not infallible.

Alkiera

[Jeff Kelly]

Which part?  Catholic monasteries preserving classical texts that would otherwise be completely lost to the ages, like the culture and history of those ancient Greeks whom you seem to like?  ;)  

I disagree. I once had a lengthy talk about this topic with a very good friend of mine who has studied history and archaeology. He said that for every book the catholic church has saved she has burned ten. Yes they saved quite a lot of the old greek scriptures, but nearly everyting concerning the old european cultures is lost because it was burned and destroyed when the catholic missioned them.

Or the Pope backing Charlemagne, who in turn leveraged his power to promote literacy and turned Europe from a bunch of squabbling warlords into a civilization?

I seriously didn't know who you meant until I looked it up at wikipedia and relazied that it's actually "Karl der Grosse" holy roman emperor.  His succesors weren't that fortunate however Heinrich der IV. was excommunicated for disagreement over wether or not Emperors could appoint Kardinals and Bishops. After that the Church and the european emperors had constant power struggles and fought for supremacy pretty much until the seventeenth century when the church slowly lost power and relevance due to the Age of Enlightenment and the philosophical and scientific advances.

I don't want to come off as an apologist or a spin doctor here, but I'm just saying... it's easy to write Catholicism off by saying "OMG TEY R TEH EBIL INQUISITORS" and ignoring everything else.

The catholic church was also a very loyal supporter of hitler and his cause during WW2.

I am a firm believer in god (If you look at they way our universe works and how many coincidences it takes for something like that to come into being you very much have to), but organized religion sucks very hard, at least when western christianity is concerned. I have never seen so many hypocrites and fuckups in other organizations than I have in organized religion. You only have to look at the KKK which is, at its heart, a christian organisation.

As historical tragedies go, the Inquisition wasn't even that big - the Spanish Influenza killed about five thousand times as many people as the Spanish Inquisition did.

Yeah ten times more people die every day in Africe than died on 9/11 or during the iraq war. That doesn't make the suffering of those people anything less an ordeal. You cannot add up deaths against each other. Every person lost is tragic whether or not there is only one death or 100,000.

Jeff

[CmdrSlack]

WTG.  Take a thread about a good man, and turn it into a pissing contest to see who can bring up more OLD SHIT that the Catholic church did.

That's what it is, OLD SHIT.  Those of you who are Europeans (especially Germans), do you get pissed when people lump all Germans into the category of "former Nazi?"

It's the same thing and until you fuckwits can realize that, shut the fuck up about people's faiths.  It's a deeply personal choice and really not your place to scrutinize, or come off as "I'm an atheist/agnostic/diest and therefore better than you, you silly organized religious person."

And for the record, I was raised Catholic, but was never confirmed, so I'm essentially not really anything.  I have my belief system, which is largely founded in Catholicism, but at the same time, is not.

Fuck all of you who think you're so much better than anyone else based on their religion.

Die in a soul fire.

[sidereal]

Some stuff, almost entirely incorrect

I'm just curious. . when you write this wandering diatribe about religions you don't practice, are we expected to take it as authoritative?  By which I mean, is it all prefaced with an invisible 'in my opinion' or do you believe that you are knowledgeable enough about the practices and philosophies of Eastern religion that you are providing a useful and definitive summary?

[Johny Cee]

But right now government funded non-religious "charity"-work by far outweighs what any  church (or all churches put together) do, so I'm sure we'd get by without.

Horse shit.

Break up government funds into two groups:  domestic (social welfare) and foreign.

The vast majority of foreign directed funds are either little more than bribes to third world regimes,  or are so mismanaged/corrupted as to be   entirely useless (Oil for Food Program, various World Trade Center funds, etc).

Domestically,  these countries are democracies.  Social welfare programs fall into the category of:

  A. A sop to keep the underclasses from rising and overthrowing the rich/influential

  B. Thinly veiled bribes to political constituencies in appreciation for their support (hello Unions!)

And again,  government social policies are managed inefficiently.  Compare performance between US publicly funded schools and private Catholic ones.

Effective charity or socially beneficial giving,  if by definition you eliminated self-interested giving, is almost universally the province of right-wing religious groups or left-wing environmentalist/social justice groups.

[Llava]

Buddhism isn't about being lazy and being complacent in your suffering.  You completely missed the point.

It's about understanding the difference between desires that matter and those that are ultimately materialist masturbation.  It's about recognizing that, when you feed some desires, they're never really sated... they only grow and grow, and make you miserable in the process.  Like heroin,  you need more and more until you're completely destroyed.  Buddhists just happen to believe that "reality" is a form of heroin, and that thinking outside of the material and concentrating on the inner self is the true path to happiness.

I'm not a Buddhist, except maybe in a highly westernized, suburban, white boy, completely without ritual sort of way.  I do have respect for their beliefs, though.  Were I to decide that I really need an organized religion one day, I'd probably go for this.

[Jeff Kelly]

WTG.  Take a thread about a good man, and turn it into a pissing contest to see who can bring up more OLD SHIT that the Catholic church did.

I leave the assesment of whether or not Karel Woytila is/was a good man to historians of future generations. I have my own opinion on the matter.

That's what it is, OLD SHIT.  Those of you who are Europeans (especially Germans), do you get pissed when people lump all Germans into the category of "former Nazi?"

This happens so often that most of us do not really care any longer. However national socialism and all that came with it has become part of our cultural identity just as everything the catholic church has done/been in the last two thousand years became part of its cultural identity. So in order to fully understand what catholicism is you have to take all these good and bad things into account. Without catholicism there would have been no protestantism, the prime reason for Luther, Calvin and Hugenot to split with the Catholic church has been that they felt the need for reformation because the old system had been morally corrupt.

You cannot talk about catholicism without taking into account its history just like talking about islam, judaism or buddhism doesn't make much sense if you don't know their respective historical backgrounds so naturally these things will come up in such a thread.

You are also missing the point because this has largely been a discussion about religion and not about faith. It is absolutely possible to be faithful without resorting to some kind of religious organization. These Organisations are just made up of people who happen to interpret their faith in a certain common way and which have also developed some common practices and traditions.

Wether somebody is a catholic, protestant or orthodox doesn't matter because they all believe in Jesus and that he died to save us from our sins. They share the same faith but differ in how they pratice said beliefs. Religion != Faith and we are discussing the former not the latter.

It's the same thing and until you fuckwits can realize that, shut the fuck up about people's faiths.
It's a deeply personal choice and really not your place to scrutinize, or come off as "I'm an atheist/agnostic/diest and therefore better than you, you silly organized religious person."

You do realize that swearing is considered sinful behaviour by the faith you are trying to defend, do you?

It's startling that you get so agitated over this as to resort to cussing. Nobody has said anything snobbish about peoples' faiths. When somebody says that he cannot get into the buddhist' mindset he isn't talking down on that faith and we were largely discussing religious organisations anyway.

These kinds of topics will creep into a thread about the pope whether you like it or not but quite frankly your reaction to this thread is a bit over the top especially since nearly everybody posting in this thread has adopted one of the Faiths and/or is a member of one the religious communities discussed.

Jeff

[Samwise]

You do realize that swearing is considered sinful behaviour by the faith you are trying to defend, do you?

Your knowledge of the Catholic faith is severely lacking, sir, on many counts.  As is your understanding of the culture of this forum if you're expecting to get positive results by chastising people for using the dreaded "f-word".

Or, as my philosophy teacher used to say, "stfu n00b."

[Arnold]

Why does he even go to a hospital?  He should either heal himself, or come to terms with the fact that god wants him back,

[stray]

...

[Abagadro]

Coming from Utah and attending a Catholic university I was always amused that they would let any swears stay in the movies they showed  (including fuck) except "god damn" or "damn" which was bleeped out of everything.


/this pointless anecdote brought to you by the Number 3 and the letter L.

[Llava]

I am a firm believer in god (If you look at they way our universe works and how many coincidences it takes for something like that to come into being you very much have to)

I just wanted to respond to this with a perspective from someone who has considered all the amazing "coincidences" in our universe and still doesn't believe in a god.

Take two 20-sided dice.  I know you have them, don't worry no girls are looking.  Now, roll both of them.  Chances are that you're not going to get both of them to come up 1.  But the chance does exist, right?  So roll the dice again. And again. And again and again and again until both dice come up 1.

And there you have it, in a nutshell.  Reality is so vast, that the chances of intelligent, self-sustaining life forming might not actually be so astronomical.  But outside of that, we're talking about universes.  Here's where it gets a bit fuzzy.

Who says we're the only universe?  I mean, clearly if you believe in god, you believe that something is just plain beyond our perception.  Is it necessarily a creator? An intelligent, omnipotent being?  What if our universe fits so perfectly because we just happen to be that roll of the dice?  It's sort of like saying that penguins don't exist because you've never seen one.  The truth is, we don't know and probably never will.  So all we have, after all the analysis of great minds over millenia, is our own gut feelings.

My gut feeling says that there's nothing out there watching over me.  Any feeling I've had to the contrary seemed less significant than the feeling you get when walking out of a dark room and you've managed to convince yourself that there's some sort of horrible monster RIGHT BEHIND YOU.  Of course, a lot of people want there to be a creator, a defined purpose.  That's their choice.  Personally, I enjoy the freedom that comes with knowing that I define my world and my life.

Again, I just wanted to respond to that.  I think it was the "you very much have to" that made me feel obligated to put in my rebuttal.

[stray]

Take two 20-sided dice.  I know you have them, don't worry no girls are looking.  Now, roll both of them.  Chances are that you're not going to get both of them to come up 1.

This is all assuming I even believe in chance, right?

[Calantus]

Why did you have to steal my post? Damn you Llava, damn you to hell.


And yeah, it was the "very much have to" thing that got me too.

[Calantus]

Take two 20-sided dice.  I know you have them, don't worry no girls are looking.  Now, roll both of them.  Chances are that you're not going to get both of them to come up 1.

This is all assuming I even believe in chance, right?

If you do not believe in chance you cannot possibly believe that the world was created by random chance. In other, equally shocking news, the belief that God created the world leads to disbelief that the world was created by random chance.

In other words, this argument is completely irrelevant.

[SirBruce]

What if our universe fits so perfectly because we just happen to be that roll of the dice?

This is part of the argument known as The Antropic Principle which is popular but controversial in scientific circles.  It is, paradoxically, what philosophy of religion folks would call a teleological argument, yet it is frequently used to avoid invoking the existance of a God.

Bruce

[stray]

In other words, this argument is completely irrelevant.

Well, I don't want to spoil all the fun. Knock yourselves out.

But seriously though, if athiests devoted as much effort into trying to prove chance as they do in trying disprove God as being the cause of the universe, then we'd be getting somewhere.

[Calantus]

In other words, this argument is completely irrelevant.

Well, I don't want to spoil all the fun. Knock yourselves out.

But seriously though, if athiests devoted as much effort into trying to prove chance as they do in trying disprove God as being the cause of the universe, then we'd be getting somewhere.

I'm not trying to disprove God, because I frankly don't care what you believe. I'm just saying that you can't stand there saying that your beliefs are the reason my beliefs are wrong. My issue was with saying that God MUST exist, which is clearly a biased assertion and thus not one that can be put forth as fact.

EDIT: To be clear, the belief that chance does not exist naturally means that you cannot believe that the world came about by chance. As such, the argument is essentially that your belief negates the belief in the world as a random chance. And as I've said, you can't simply say that a belief has no merits based soley on the fact that you have other beliefs.

[stray]

I'm just saying that you can't stand there saying that your beliefs are the reason my beliefs are wrong.

Take it easy. It was all in jest. The reason I did so is because that's exactly what Llava did. Llava starts off with a premise (chance) that can't be proven any more than God can.

My issue was with saying that God MUST exist, which is clearly a biased assertion and thus not one that can be put forth as fact.

Np with me here. Take that up with Jeff Kelly.

[Calantus]

Np with me here. Take that up with Jeff Kelly.

Well, I was explaining why I said what I said when I... man I hate how these things get complicated all the time. ;)

[Murgos]

Take it easy. It was all in jest. The reason I did so is because that's exactly what Llava did. Llava starts off with a premise (chance) that can't be proven any more than God can.

WTF?

Take those two dice, roll them many thousands of times, count each value as it comes up.  You will find that the more you roll them the more a regular predictable pattern exists.  This has been done so many millions of times now and is so involved in the worlds manufacturing process that to deny it exists is simply covering your eyes, pluggin gyour ears and going nanananananana.

This has been known for several hundreds of years and has been proven a dozen different ways.

Hell, the chance that you might not get a normal distribution of events is even taken into account and predictable.

Of course, you're free to think that the reason the dice come up 1 & 1 every so often is simply gods will,  It is interesting in that case though to note that gods will could be so predictable.  Not to mention easy to associate to everything all over the universe from the smallest particles to the most massive of astronomical phenomina.

[SirBruce]

I think what he meant was not that the concept of chance isn't valid, but that it can't be proven that the universe arose from chance any more than it can be proven that it arose for God.  Heck, even if God himself appeared before you, and said, "Yep, I did it." and did a bunch of impressive magic tricks, even if you believed him, that still wouldn't "prove" he created the universe.

However, there is some progress that can be made on this front.  If the Many-Worlds Interpretation can be proven to be actually correct (and there are obscure ways to test this), or if we can somehow discover the existance of alternate universes that form with completely different sets of physical laws and seemingly "random" values of constants that are different from our own, then the "chance" explanation certainly looks a lot more likely, and it becomes increasingly difficult to explain why a "God" would set up such a complicated arrangement of universes when it would seem just one would suffice.  Then again, philosophers have already had to endure that same type of question with regards to other scientific discoveries, so I doubt there would be any change in fundamental beliefs.

Bruce

[CmdrSlack]

WTG.  Take a thread about a good man, and turn it into a pissing contest to see who can bring up more OLD SHIT that the Catholic church did.

I leave the assesment of whether or not Karel Woytila is/was a good man to historians of future generations. I have my own opinion on the matter.

That's what it is, OLD SHIT.  Those of you who are Europeans (especially Germans), do you get pissed when people lump all Germans into the category of "former Nazi?"

This happens so often that most of us do not really care any longer. However national socialism and all that came with it has become part of our cultural identity just as everything the catholic church has done/been in the last two thousand years became part of its cultural identity. So in order to fully understand what catholicism is you have to take all these good and bad things into account. Without catholicism there would have been no protestantism, the prime reason for Luther, Calvin and Hugenot to split with the Catholic church has been that they felt the need for reformation because the old system had been morally corrupt.

You cannot talk about catholicism without taking into account its history just like talking about islam, judaism or buddhism doesn't make much sense if you don't know their respective historical backgrounds so naturally these things will come up in such a thread.

You are also missing the point because this has largely been a discussion about religion and not about faith. It is absolutely possible to be faithful without resorting to some kind of religious organization. These Organisations are just made up of people who happen to interpret their faith in a certain common way and which have also developed some common practices and traditions.

Wether somebody is a catholic, protestant or orthodox doesn't matter because they all believe in Jesus and that he died to save us from our sins. They share the same faith but differ in how they pratice said beliefs. Religion != Faith and we are discussing the former not the latter.

It's the same thing and until you fuckwits can realize that, shut the fuck up about people's faiths.
It's a deeply personal choice and really not your place to scrutinize, or come off as "I'm an atheist/agnostic/diest and therefore better than you, you silly organized religious person."

You do realize that swearing is considered sinful behaviour by the faith you are trying to defend, do you?

It's startling that you get so agitated over this as to resort to cussing. Nobody has said anything snobbish about peoples' faiths. When somebody says that he cannot get into the buddhist' mindset he isn't talking down on that faith and we were largely discussing religious organisations anyway.

These kinds of topics will creep into a thread about the pope whether you like it or not but quite frankly your reaction to this thread is a bit over the top especially since nearly everybody posting in this thread has adopted one of the Faiths and/or is a member of one the religious communities discussed.

Jeff

Way to miss the point, guy.

I was speaking out against being convinced that your faith is the most right faith to the point that you're willing to call the others "evil" or "bad."  People who claim to believe in Christ are the worst offenders because of Christ's message of forgiveness, love, and (to some extent) tolerance.  I'm not even an "adult" member of the Catholic church, haven't been in years, etc.  To think that I'm defending Catholicism is the typical, knee-jerk response I was speaking against.  Belief in anything that spurs you to be a better person is good.  I could care less what it is you believe in, as long as those beliefs work towards the greater good.  Athiests, agnostics, religious folk, spiritual folk, etc. can all fit this description.

Clearly, you're too ignorant to address the points, which is why you needed to resort to calling me out on using the words "fuckwit" and "fuck."

To that extent, fuck off, you no talent assclown.

[stray]

Of course, you're free to think that the reason the dice come up 1 & 1 every so often is simply gods will.

And of course, you're free to believe you live in a universe of uncaused effects (at least when it's convenient to).

[Jeff Kelly]

Your knowledge of the Catholic faith is severely lacking, sir, on many counts.  As is your understanding of the culture of this forum if you're expecting to get positive results by chastising people for using the dreaded "f-word".

You are jumping to conclusions.

I sincerely didn't want to chastisies him for useing the f-word. I was just pointing out the irony of the situation in what I thought to be a mildly humorous way but maybe one should't attempt to be humorous when discussing religion.  

Which catholic faith? The american variety or the italian, the polish way or the spanish or were you talking about the south american catholicism?

Even considering catholicism there are so many different varieties and different traditions that there is no definitive answer to such questions. In Africa catholicism is practiced differently than in Italy.

I can only refer to the things that I have been taught and swearing and using god's name in jest is considered to be sinning and you would have to confess those things.

And what is the catholic faith anyway I always thought that we were christians and that catholicism was just an implementation of the christian faith just like roman orthodoxy or protestantism is another way of celebreating that faith but maybe the words religion and faith have different meanings in the german language

Or, as my philosophy teacher used to say, "stfu n00b."

This was uncalled for.

Jeff

[Jeff Kelly]

Np with me here. Take that up with Jeff Kelly.

OK this is what you get when you discuss highly controversial issues on an internet forum in a language you do not fully master.

English is not my native language so it may be that I have expressed my thougths arkwardly. All I wanted to say was that I believe that god exists nothing more, nothing less. It is a matter of faith after all.

Maybe it is my time to get the hell out of this thread since I cannot avoid to step on peoples' toes even if it is only unintentionally.

Jeff