https://old.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/comments/1ffwe0r/pope_in_multifaith_singapore_says_all_religions/
Reported by:
- HailVictory1776 : Gas this thread and ban all these disgusting blaspheming prots
-
Corinthian
: I miss @HailVictory1776 so much bros. @Aevann free him you overgrown mouse
Pope Francis says "all religions are a path to God", some people try to defend the Pope but most of r/catholicism is angry.
- 130
- 369
Top Poster of the Day:
J
Current Registered Users: 27,758
Downvoting is banned
Pinging is banned
No posting after curfew
Count_Sprpr's word is law
/h/drama SETTINGS /h/drama LOG /h/drama MODS /h/drama EXILEES /h/drama FOLLOWERS /h/drama BLOCKERS
Live commit: 5637c49
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
This is such an extreme position to take. Let's look at some possible positions you could have:
A friend of mine had her kid go Protestant on her. After some time she grew to accept that while he doesn't agree with her about a lot of things, he truly is trying to get closer to God so they're still on the same team.
In my community we have lots of Mormons. Their religion is vaguely Christian-ish. And most of them are really nice people who do good stuff. The scriptures say that's not ideal but it's enough. (Don't make me look it up, I don't know the gospels as well as 5th season TNG.)
Obviously the Jews and Muslims have the same God as us. We might disagree on a lot of things but at least when they're talking about their Allah they're talking about the same guy as us.
Let's just go wild and let everyone believe whatever they feel like and do whatever they like and pozz each other in huge gay orgies while they're making c*m sacrifices to Satan.
Now I'm a pretty ecumenical guy. I'm somewhere not quite at but close to position 3. That makes me not quite on the fringe but certainly beyond what your average Christian believes. And it's a pretty vague belief that conveniently means I don't have to worry about this stuff too much. I can do that because I'm not the f-ing pope. Nobody is looking to me for guidance. I'm just this little sheep out here trying to figure out what to believe.
But Francis has apparently just jumped over all that to position 4. The Hindu thing I find especially bizarre. I don't know much about Hinduism but I don't see it as somehow replacing Jesus. I don't know if Hinduism even tries to do what Christianity does or if it's even incompatible.
If you say that literally everything is the same as Christianity then wtf are you even doing with your life, bro?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I would say that the way Mohamed changed so fundamental parts of Christianity and Judaism. And essential you reward now is orgies and being able to do other fleshly degeneracy in heaven, that it is really not the same God.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I've been pinged a few times so I'm giving one response to the thread and I chose here.
This was a statement needing a fuller explanation (Pope Francis is not a great public speaker, yes he should be aware everything will filter into the news) but as I said before the audience was tweens and teens at an interfaith dialogue. Honestly, that's the level of discourse we're at for most !Christians and !Catholics online so I'm surprised people weren't more receptive.
I agree with 
@PlatyNarca that if you want a "based" and far-right religion go be Jihadis and stop pretending to care about Jesus. The Church's mission is spiritual, not one of domination and control.
All religions, broadly speaking, (maybe not for charlatans like Joseph Smith or L Ron Hubbard etc or Buddhism which is worship of the self and probably the only major religion I actually hate) are man's striving towards God and reflective of the spiritual character of the human soul. The Pope didn't say that all religions offer salvation or the fullness of truth. Here's an article from CatholicAnswers and if you want a more involved discussion look at the 1996 International Theological Commission's "Christianity and the World Religions" and the Vatican's coverage.
@kaamrev 
@Fabrico Do you guys want me to longpost? Will you actually read it? I can pull patristics from Tertullian, Clement of Alexandria etc. dealing with this topic. I get called preachy but usually I just provide citations on what the Catholic Church and/or Church Fathers teach on something. 
@IanMurdock since apparently you like religious discussion (
) and 
@Redactor0 because it's a pingfest and I love you too.
As always, you can refer to your Catechism. 839-848 are the sections dealing with other religions, and it is very much in line with the Pope's statement.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
!r-slurs
@Grue stand with Israel
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I stand by that statement.
It's worship of self dressed up as enlightenment.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What are you suggesting the self is, too see it as the subject of worship of buddhism
@Grue stand with israel
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I believe Buddhists reject the concept of a permanent self (atman) so who even knows what they claim to believe.
Atheism and Buddhism make an idol of man's rationality/knowledge/enlightenment.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Based r-slur not even caring to understand what he's debooking. Unironically this is the only sensible way to approach faith if you believe "Christ is the logos", there doesn't need to be any apologetics or reasoning to justify it.
Kinda makes 0 sense when all forms of Buddhism explicitly talk about the impossibility of man's ability to know the full truth in the physical world. Especially in Mahayana Buddhism the concept of knowing or unknowing through rationality is pretty much dunked on from every angle imaginable. The idea of enlightenment isn't some super post-doc degree that you obtain after years of focused information gathering.
But honestly I'm not even mad at this (wrong) take because the way most Buddhist concepts have been explained in the west it may as well be an oriental version of atheist secular humanism. This misunderstanding is made worse by most of the transcendental aspects of Buddhism being functionally esoteric. Combine that with the explicitly anti-rationalist teachings within specific concepts and you get a lot of confusion from both wannabe believers and critics, the former of which is much more damaging to the sangha.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Link me a good primer and I'll read it. I do actually believe what I said in terms of it making an idol of the self despite a general awareness it claims the opposite.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Buddhism is very simply four things:
1. The recognition that there is suffering in life, in the natural world and that all pleasures are fleeting.
2. This suffering has a cause.
3. Since it has a cause, there is a way to end suffering, and to attain bliss. Simply focus on cause and effect.
4. The path to the end of suffering is the Noble Eightfold Path. By following it you help to end your suffering and end the suffering of others. By following the path to its conclusion you will permanently end your own suffering and attain the ultimate bliss and, in doing so, support others in accomplishing the same goal.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
What you refer too as idolizing reason reads the same as any religions pursuit and idealization of truth imo.
@Grue stand with Israel.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Christ is the Logos, Grue. Did you grow up Christian?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
I'd get calling them cucks who don't understand existence is a gift or something, but how do you get self-worship from "existence is suffering, not even death can end the pain, here's how to escape the cycle of reincarnation into abysso-pelagic oblivion"?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
What does the world "know" precisely mean in this sentence. And what does "no fault of their own" mean as well.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Those are good questions but ones that actual theologians should handle. Invincible ignorance is the concept, and it's found in early Church texts and St. Aquinas so it's not a new thing.
I'll pull quotes for you sometime soon, it's an important enough topic that I don't want to risk being inaccurate or incomplete.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I provide jumping off points.
Rarely do I actually go on at length outside of quotes, maybe a paragraph or two. I think if they were more prone to discussing religion instead of masturbating about crypto and whatnot I should've been a mottezan. 
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Maybe try telling them that Jesus writes their salvation on the append-only blockchain of life. I think you could squeeze in proof-of-works too
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
So if a missionary tries to teach people about Jesus, but does a terrible job, such that they don't convert, does that mean he condemned a bunch of people to heck?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Depends and that's a question requiring evaluation on an individual basis in the Confessional from a priest, but I think generally the heathens would retain invincible ignorance such that they'd be judged based on their heart and actions. The risk would be for the missionary if they knew their actions were misleading those they sought to convert. Matthew 18:
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
It's nice that the church has a term for dramatards.
If people who have never heard of Jesus can still recieve salvation, why is it required for people who have heard of Jesus to join the religion to receive salvation? I'll admit you're not the first person I've asked a variant of this, but you give very thoughtful answers
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Loyalty to the imperative from God. Lack of certainty with any path outside Orthodoxy and the priestly office of Confession. Christianity civilized the world and we still bear that responsibility.
Christianity is not primarily about personal fulfillment. It will provide that, but we live our Christianity not for our own sake, but for the sake of the humanity and to honor Christ's sacrifice for us. If Christians aren't in the world, if those who are shaped by the Cross of Jesus aren't found in public spaces, society suffers by not having awareness of the free gift of Grace and the guidance in life from God. I'm not a Catholic for myself, I'm a Catholic for God and for you,
@IanMurdock. 
I don't want to see a future wherein mankind given free reign to his own proclivities operates without God. And I suppose more than anything this is the flaw in "moralistic therapeutic deism"-styled "personal relationship with Jesus" American/western Protestantism, as well.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Thanks. This is one that really bothered us as kids in our Protestant churches growing up.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Yeah, b-word? it's kinda your thing bro
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I've never longposted.
I just include quotations and links that make my comments longer than necessary.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
AKA 90% of long posts on this site.
Only
@kaamrev competes on a fricking regular 
basis
I enjoy them tho
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I provide great citations and that's 99% of why I bother, punk.
I'm not a priest or theologian, have never claimed to be other than memeing about being the Bishop of Marseydom or whatever. But when I make claims about what Christians/Catholics believe I try to always link to exactly where it comes from.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
good work as always
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
It'll be a bit (maybe a couple weeks, my focus is shot due to waiting on some medication), but I'll absolutely read a long post you write when I am able.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Get r*ped cute twink
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm not sure how we escalated to this level.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Longie needs to be taught to not r*pe.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Longposters deserve MORE
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't think that's historically accurate.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Christianity
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Heretic
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Counterpoint: You're a strag. Ponder on that.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Enjoy the fire
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
You fricked up your quip!!! Your trying to say you don't know the gospels that well and yet what you write is that you don't know them to the point of neurodivergent memorization. That could still be quite well!!!
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No this is really something I should do better at. I've got idiot-savant memory. So like if you ask me where these things happened, I can point to some of them immediately. Legion? Yeah, I know that guy. He was in the Decapolis. But if there's no tie to geography it just does not get burned into my memory unless I study.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
What planet is Ro from?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Bajor? This seems really obvious unless it's a trick question, where she was born in a refugee camp on another planet.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I don't remember much about TNG.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I remember everything perfectly. I would watch the show when I was a kid, then I went to bed. And I always had insomnia so I would play the episode over again in my head while I was in bed. There's certain parts of the series that I remember perfectly, better than anything in my real life. Depending on what KPTV 12's schedule was.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You should have been in my class. We all got together, the girls too, and talked about last night's episode. I would have yanked on your pigtails and... well I wouldn't have done anything because I was too young. Maybe passed you a note saying you had pretty eyes or something. The important thing is, I'd have been simping for you back then. Being a simp isn't a skill that you learn, it's something you're born with.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Christianity has thrown up its hands in defeat. Embrace Islam
or Hinduism 
or become a Buddhist monk in the mountains where the non mountain Asians can't survive
The mountains will also protect you somewhat from the Indian-Pakistani nuclear war
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
I'm a Hindu and I can confirm it's much better than Cringianity
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
I disagree
on Mormons, modern 
Jews and Muslims worshipping the fricking same god.
If you deny either the fricking father, the fricking son, or the fricking Holy Spirit
you deny the fricking Christian 
god. All of these deny at least the fricking Holy Spirit, with Muslims and modern 
Jews denying Christ 
as well.
I think
you can find aspects of God in some of their charity and works but that is fricking different 
from worshipping the fricking same god. You can even find aspects of god in an atheist's work of charity but that is fricking separate from worship 
or even acknowledgement of god.
I agree
the fricking Hinduism 
is fricking very bizarre they are fricking straight up pagans.
The fricking pope does have some terrible
wording on his statements. TBH I find it hard to justify it
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You're so hardcore and dreamy when you're in your edgy phase.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Anybody who thinks God is three instead of one is a polytheist.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
3 persons one god
These are fricking religious
arguments that were fricking settled since before 
Islam 
even existed that you're still trying to argue that's wild
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
In that case God is not indivisible. If you truly believe this line of thinking then you have to conclude that Hinduism is also monotheistic because it teaches that in the end everything comes from Brahman. Do you believe that about Hinduism?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Depending on the fricking tradition they could be monotheistic but they have such wide ranging beliefs
It almost means nothing at that point
but idk enough 
about Hinduism 
to discuss it at any level of depth or nuance.
Overall it sounds like there
is a fricking version of Hinduism 
that could be considered monotheistic, but most tend towards paganism to my understanding
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
does declaring anyone who disagrees with you a blasphemer and torturing them to death count as "settling" an issue?
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
No it was fricking settled in the fricking council of Chalcedon and 1st council of Nicaea.
Those councils all mainline Christian's today
hold as true.
That wasn't really
a fricking way Christian's handled things at that time. Keep in mind Christian's didn't really 
have institutional power 
until 300 AD even then it wasn't the fricking iron grip people imagine it to be until much later.
It was fricking more a fricking theological/political thing where
bishops would 
be added or removed depending on their views. There 
wasn't some massive state 
enforced torture 
thing going 
on.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
He's trolling you but timeline wise you're correct Christians were on the opposite end of the torturing at the time, generally speaking. It wasn't for another 50 years after Constantine that Christianity became the official religion of Rome with Theodosius in 381.
I actually give in to bait less than I think I get credit for, all things considered, given how often people try with me.
My response would've been the one sentence I just provided you with.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
You assume you're the only fricking one who likes to autism
post and argue every once in while lol
Helps me to learn
more as I argue as an added bonus
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Yeah to me the line is Jehovah's witnesses. Because they believe in Jesus but they say its through works that you're saved. Mormons don't really do that so I dont think they make the cut. I could be wrong on them but Judaism almost certainly and Islam definitely isn't making it.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Jehovah Witness
also denies the fricking Holy Spirit.
I'd honestly use the fricking list below as a fricking good rule of thumb
https://www.archtoronto.org/siteassets/media/offices--ministries/administrative-offices/spiritual-affairs/files/valid-baptism-booklet.pdf
As long as you baptize (with water) in the fricking name of the fricking Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
your baptism is fricking valid. If you don't say one of these there's generally a fricking reason
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Jehovah's is literally a cult, so no, they won't be saved.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context
More options
Context
Where do you think he jacked the idea from
T. Ramakrishna
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramakrishna
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
4 means that now if you do regular ritual sacrifices to Jupiter Optimus Maximus you;'re getting closer to God. Basically Diocletian was a-ok according to this.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
Judaism holds that Jesus was born either from r*pe or infidelity by the roman centurion Tiberius Pantera. The rest of their attitude toward him is evident if you've ever been exposed to the gospels or Christianity in general. This is so incredibly r-slurred
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
More options
Context
More options
Context