Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

...he only needs to do a few things:

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#1  Postby Agrippina » Jan 04, 2014 9:43 am

The demands are these:

1) Immediately identify every priest or Vatican employee who has been moved to protect him from prosecution for sex crimes.
2) Admit that condoms (98% of the time) prevent the spread of HIV/AIDS.
3) Sell off Vatican assets and donate the funds to secular charities such as the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders.

During his first Christmas message, Pope Francis called for people of all faiths to pray for peace throughout the world. He even invited atheists to join with believers in a desire for peace. Invitation accepted!

The overwhelming majority of atheists within the greater atheist/humanist community have a strong desire for peace and justice throughout the world. But we also have more than that. Because we understand that this world is the only world we have; we not only desire peace and justice, but actively work toward those aims. As an atheist, I formally invite the Pope to do more than pray or desire peace, but to actively work toward both peace and justice in a few major ways.


Read the text here.


Image
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#2  Postby DarthHelmet86 » Jan 04, 2014 9:54 am

The new pope knows how to mouth the right words, knows how to look like a nice old man who isn't trying to be the big bad evil mean pope. But he is still the head of a group that hides priests who touch kids, he still has a horrible history in Argentina (my Argentinian friend has lots to say about Mr Pope and none of it is nice), the church still promotes hatred and bigotry the world over. Just because he knows how to mouth the right nice words doesn't make him right or nice.

Good on the writer of this article in calling for more than just words, good on him/her for calling for action from the pope. I highly doubt we will see any action of any sort only more words.
I. This is Not a Game
II. Here and Now, You are Alive
User avatar
DarthHelmet86
RS Donator
 
Posts: 10344
Age: 34
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#3  Postby Agrippina » Jan 04, 2014 10:03 am

So do I, but I thought it would be good to preserve the link so we could see what happens next. A big nothing I suppose.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#4  Postby willhud9 » Jan 04, 2014 7:02 pm

The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19319
Age: 28
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#5  Postby Agrippina » Jan 05, 2014 3:40 am

Why illogical? I've long said that the Vatican was against the tenets of Christianity, "poverty" and "humility." It's disgraceful that the rulers of the Church live in opulence while some of its followers are among the poorest people in the world. He's not suggesting that all the buildings be sold off, just some of them.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#6  Postby jaydot » Jan 19, 2014 5:46 pm

where benny was the vinegar, frankie is the honey. they are both roman catholics, ipso facto hypocrites.
User avatar
jaydot
 
Posts: 1772

Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#7  Postby scott1328 » Jan 19, 2014 5:55 pm

jaydot wrote:where benny was the vinegar, frankie is the honey. they are both roman catholics, ipso facto hypocrites.

It is the sweet poison that kills the most... Ever here of the effects of antifreeze on babies and puppies? You almost never here of them licking up the spilled bleach.
User avatar
scott1328
 
Name: Some call me... Tim
Posts: 8661
Male

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#8  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Jan 19, 2014 6:18 pm

willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30765
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#9  Postby Agrippina » Jan 20, 2014 7:23 am

I've always thought that. I've never understood why a religion based on poverty and building mansions in heaven, and wealthy men not being able to pass through the eye of a needle, needed a whole "state" dedicated to the worship of a man in a white dress.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#10  Postby willhud9 » Jan 20, 2014 7:34 am

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity. It is the largest private donor in the United States. If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19319
Age: 28
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#11  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Jan 20, 2014 7:40 am

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.

That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.

willhud9 wrote:It is the largest private donor in the United States.

Wonderful.

willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.

willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30765
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#12  Postby Agrippina » Jan 20, 2014 8:00 am

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity. It is the largest private donor in the United States. If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

How much and to which charities? Probably Catholic ones, so that the recipients will grow up to be good Catholics and in turn hand over "lots" of money to the Church.

As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

So why not make it into a museum? Get rid of the corruption, and the unnecessary personal wealth and opulence. The cost of the pope's wardrobe would build a school.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#13  Postby willhud9 » Jan 20, 2014 8:05 am

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.
That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.


No but how much until its good enough? Why do you get to decide how much they give? On what meter do you base this on?

willhud9 wrote:It is the largest private donor in the United States.

Wonderful.

willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.


Yeah it would. As it wouldn't have anything left to give. But anyways, it gives a lot of it away. Also why to secular charities? Red Cross has scandals and issues of its own. Why not specify to a specific cause? Like donate exclusively to Aids care?

willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"


Yeah the church has a lot because it invests and saves donations. Wealth does not equal bad, not even from a Christian perspective. Wealth serving wealth or wealth for wealthiness sake is another matter.

Again the demands made by the atheist are illogical and pointless.
Last edited by willhud9 on Jan 20, 2014 8:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19319
Age: 28
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#14  Postby Agrippina » Jan 20, 2014 8:06 am

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.

That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.

willhud9 wrote:It is the largest private donor in the United States.

Wonderful.

willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.

willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"


I would be impressed if the Church collected money from its followers and used it to build schools, finch research, encouraged smaller families, actually did some active correcting of past wrongs, actually admitted that it was criminal in the running of Magdelyn (spell?) laundries, etc etc. If all the clerics worked within their parishes as educators etc., and wore ordinary clothes, or were even prepared to wear hand-me-downs and live in modest cottages. My problem is with the opulence and the stupid rules that encourage poverty in the followers but not in the clerics, and with the abuse of families and children by forcing followers to not practice birth control. My biggest problem is that they expect people to just keep having children even when they can't feed them, and then do very little to support all the children people can't afford to feed
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#15  Postby willhud9 » Jan 20, 2014 8:07 am

Agrippina wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:The 3rd is illogical and pointless. :roll:

But the rest I would have no problem with.

You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity. It is the largest private donor in the United States. If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

How much and to which charities? Probably Catholic ones, so that the recipients will grow up to be good Catholics and in turn hand over "lots" of money to the Church.

As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

So why not make it into a museum? Get rid of the corruption, and the unnecessary personal wealth and opulence. The cost of the pope's wardrobe would build a school.


What corruption? and it is free to access last I checked. Its a church after all. :scratch:
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19319
Age: 28
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#16  Postby Agrippina » Jan 20, 2014 8:13 am

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.
That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.


No but how much until its good enough? Why do you get to decide how much they give? On what meter do you base this on?

willhud9 wrote:It is the largest private donor in the United States.

Wonderful.

willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.


Yeah it would. As it wouldn't have anything left to give. But anyways, it gives a lot of it away. Also why to secular charities? Red Cross has scandals and issues of its own. Why not specify to a specific cause? Like donate exclusively to Aids care?

Why not simply use it to start education programmes for poor families and in those education programmes, teach about birth control and hand out condoms, and other methods of birth control, at no cost.

They're the reason church members have large families, they should be responsible for the education of the children. All church schools should be free schools.

willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"


Yeah the church has a lot because it invests and saves donations. Wealth does not equal bad, not even from a Christian perspective.

It is if it's being hoarded to provide the pope with the lifestyle of an eastern potentate.

Wealth serving wealth or wealth for wealthiness sake is another matter.

That's exactly what their wealth is. They only give enough to charities to stop their followers from asking for money.

Again the demands made by the atheist are illogical and pointless.

No they're not illogical and pointless.

What is wrong with bringing criminals to court? What is wrong with simply admitting that you were wrong about the spread of HIV?AIDS and that the rhythm method of birth control doesn't work, so actively encourage other methods? What is wrong with asking that they revert to the "poverty" rule as supposedly mouthed by the god they worship, as I quote earlier? No one's asking them to give up celibacy or even their religion, all we're asking is that they take responsibility for the poverty they've caused and to redress that wrong.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#17  Postby Agrippina » Jan 20, 2014 8:14 am

willhud9 wrote:
Agrippina wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity. It is the largest private donor in the United States. If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

How much and to which charities? Probably Catholic ones, so that the recipients will grow up to be good Catholics and in turn hand over "lots" of money to the Church.

As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

So why not make it into a museum? Get rid of the corruption, and the unnecessary personal wealth and opulence. The cost of the pope's wardrobe would build a school.


What corruption? and it is free to access last I checked. Its a church after all. :scratch:


Take a look at the history of the Vatican Bank,and the history of Pope John Paul's investigation into that corruption.
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 36689
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#18  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Jan 20, 2014 8:18 am

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.
That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.


No but how much until its good enough?

Red herring.
We were discussing whether it would be pointless or not.

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.


Yeah it would.

Not really, people would still benefit from it.

willhud9 wrote:As it wouldn't have anything left to give.

That doesn't make it pointless, just a one-time deal.

willhud9 wrote:But anyways, it gives a lot of it away.

Yea, you already said that. Doesn't make giving even more away pointless.

willhud9 wrote:Also why to secular charities?

Because they don't discriminate based on religious beliefs.
willhud9 wrote: Red Cross has scandals and issues of its own.

For example?

willhud9 wrote:Why not specify to a specific cause? Like donate exclusively to Aids care?

Because there are more issues than just Aids? You'll have to ask the OP.
I was merely responding to your claim of pointlessness.

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"


Yeah the church has a lot because it invests and saves donations. Wealth does not equal bad,

I did not say it was.

willhud9 wrote:not even from a Christian perspective.

Not bad, no, but against it's own preachings.

willhud9 wrote:Wealth serving wealth or wealth for wealthiness sake is another matter.

Why then does the Church need billions of dollars?

willhud9 wrote:Again the demands made by the atheist are illogical and pointless.

What atheists?
And you haven't established this.
You've thrown in a red herring and some rather illogical arguments.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30765
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#19  Postby Thomas Eshuis » Jan 20, 2014 8:19 am

willhud9 wrote:
Agrippina wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
You might argue about the logic, but it certainly wouldn't be pointless.


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity. It is the largest private donor in the United States. If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

How much and to which charities? Probably Catholic ones, so that the recipients will grow up to be good Catholics and in turn hand over "lots" of money to the Church.

As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

So why not make it into a museum? Get rid of the corruption, and the unnecessary personal wealth and opulence. The cost of the pope's wardrobe would build a school.


What corruption? and it is free to access last I checked. Its a church after all. :scratch:

The Vatican museam is not free.
"Respect for personal beliefs = "I am going to tell you all what I think of YOU, but don't dare retort and tell what you think of ME because...it's my personal belief". Hmm. A bully's charter and no mistake."
User avatar
Thomas Eshuis
 
Name: Thomas Eshuis
Posts: 30765
Age: 30
Male

Country: Netherlands
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Atheist responds to Pope Francis's new year invitation

#20  Postby willhud9 » Jan 20, 2014 8:28 am

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:


Well again as pointed out in other threads. The Church donates a lot to charity.
That doesn't make even larger donations pointless.


No but how much until its good enough?

Red herring.
We were discussing whether it would be pointless or not.


You do know what pointless means right? It means...without a point. Go figure.

What does giving its money away ultimately fix? Nothing. It gives a lot. Giving more doesn't necessarily fix anything any more. There will always be poor people and there will always be disasters and tragedy no matter how much money is tossed at something. So yes. Pointless. It is an arbitrary statement to demand the vatican give more based on nothing substantial.

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:If it got rid of all its wealth it wouldn't have anything to give.

The OP does not say sell of all Vatican assets/wealth. And even if it did, that would still not be pointless.


Yeah it would.

Not really, people would still benefit from it.


People benefit from it now. On what objective measure do you qualify how much more people would benefit? And again how much? That is a major point and not at all a red herring as its not an attempt at misdirection. Fail fallacy use.

willhud9 wrote:As it wouldn't have anything left to give.

That doesn't make it pointless, just a one-time deal.


I think Jesus said something along the lines of, Their will always be poor.

It is a pointless gesture. They give it all away and things seem to get fixed and new problems arise and people demand more money. Cycle of life. Pointless.

willhud9 wrote:But anyways, it gives a lot of it away.

Yea, you already said that. Doesn't make giving even more away pointless.


If it does not really solve anything major yes it is.

willhud9 wrote:Also why to secular charities?

Because they don't discriminate based on religious beliefs.
willhud9 wrote: Red Cross has scandals and issues of its own.

For example?


http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/1029-05.htm

willhud9 wrote:Why not specify to a specific cause? Like donate exclusively to Aids care?

Because there are more issues than just Aids? You'll have to ask the OP.
I was merely responding to your claim of pointlessness.


The OP is a link. Case you didn't notice.

willhud9 wrote:
Thomas Eshuis wrote:
willhud9 wrote:As for the opulence of the Vatican, one can say its obsessive, but remember a lot of it is historical from the renaissance where Patrons were paid to make the artwork in glory for God. If the Vatican were to up and sell it or get rid of it there goes a huge chunk of history.

That still leaves the sizeable ammount of monetary wealth that the Church possesses not to mention increases every year.
As Carlin put it:
"And he (God) needs your money!"


Yeah the church has a lot because it invests and saves donations. Wealth does not equal bad,

I did not say it was.

willhud9 wrote:not even from a Christian perspective.

Not bad, no, but against it's own preachings.

willhud9 wrote:Wealth serving wealth or wealth for wealthiness sake is another matter.

Why then does the Church need billions of dollars?

willhud9 wrote:Again the demands made by the atheist are illogical and pointless.

What atheists?
And you haven't established this.
You've thrown in a red herring and some rather illogical arguments.


And apparently you didn't.

Aggie didn't make the demands. The atheist in the link did. And no wealth does not go against its preachings. Only hyper literalists and fundamentalists interpret it that way alone without actually giving the text some critical evaluation.
Fear is a choice you embrace
Your only truth
Tribal poetry
Witchcraft filling your void
Lust for fantasy
Male necrocracy
Every child worthy of a better tale
User avatar
willhud9
 
Name: William
Posts: 19319
Age: 28
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Next

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest