Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-03-2015, 08:32 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Quote:It is currently in effect.

Yeah, because there's literally no way to repeal any part of it, at any time. You also seemed to have ignored the fact that Afghanistan didn't even have a government at the time. How did they agree to it, exactly?

Quote: The government is not legitimate - it is a dictatorship.

A dictatorship is still a legitimate form of government.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:35 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Quote: Interesting use of the example of ancient pagan traditions of believing that blood sacrifice will appease an imaginary deity. You should review your own traditions and beliefs, I hold no empathy for the likes of either cases of simple minded barbarism.
And I hold no empathy towards either yours, or the Aztec's, immorality.

Quote: It has little to nothing to do with misogyny, sure. However the example is a non sequitur in this context. You keep conflating these physical/mental/biological inequalities with the idea that some people deserve more rights to basic human dignity than others, even though just a few posts back you agreed that they are not the same, and that your own scripture calls for us to respect everyone's right to dignity. You kinda suck at critical thinking.

That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the understanding of basic human dignities as described in the Declaration of Human Rights is wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:36 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 07:25 PM)Machias Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 03:43 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  There's numerous reasons why many of the people that agreed to this weren't legitimate representatives of their countries. Hell, Afghanistan didn't even 'have' a legitimate government at the time, how the hell could they have agreed to it? Not to mention that agreement doesn't necessarily carry on throughout all of time either.



Well, considering that North Korea is still a defined territory, yes, it is a legitimate country.

I have a fenced lot. How about I put you within that fence and have armed guards prevent you from leaving? Oh, I might occasionally give you food.

Sound legitimate?

You'd legitimately have a legal citizen of your mock country. Whether or not they want to be there is irrelevant.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:38 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 07:41 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 01:51 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  "Have some empathy" towards their practice of sacrificing their first-born to the sun god.

What's so bad about that ? Your fucking god required HIS own son to die, before he could/would say, "OK, I forgive you". Sacrificing first-borns is what your damn cult is all about, and what you people say you celebrate every single day, you hypocrite cocksucker. Wink

Well, it's not like I never expected someone like you to literally have empathy towards Aztec human sacrifice. It really wasn't that surprising.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:39 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 08:36 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 07:25 PM)Machias Wrote:  I have a fenced lot. How about I put you within that fence and have armed guards prevent you from leaving? Oh, I might occasionally give you food.

Sound legitimate?

You'd legitimately have a legal citizen of your mock country. Whether or not they want to be there is irrelevant.

You don't know the difference between "actual" and "legitimate". You really do suck at English, (too).

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:39 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 07:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 11:38 AM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  Meh, technicality. Mary is the highest non divine human. There is that better. And yes I buy that shit. Its damn good shit!

It's damn preposterous ancient bullshit, and there is not a shred of evidence it has any veracity, or real meaning today. Your cult (of scripture and tradition) cooked up the new "dogmas" about Mary that were never recognized before. You can't even define what the word "divine" means today, and how and why that CHANGED over the millennia from what it used to mean to what it currently means, and why and how that happened. YOu can't have two "natures". It's one or the other. Two is meaningless.

You know that "Beating you to a bloody pulp" thing is still open.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:45 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 08:39 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 07:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It's damn preposterous ancient bullshit, and there is not a shred of evidence it has any veracity, or real meaning today. Your cult (of scripture and tradition) cooked up the new "dogmas" about Mary that were never recognized before. You can't even define what the word "divine" means today, and how and why that CHANGED over the millennia from what it used to mean to what it currently means, and why and how that happened. YOu can't have two "natures". It's one or the other. Two is meaningless.

You know that "Beating you to a bloody pulp" thing is still open.

Ooooh, should I be afraid of you ? Did you take up beating people for Lent ?
Like you could, old man. More threats, I see. Instead of refuting things, all you can do is fling poo. You're such a paper tiger. Now tell Mary you're sorry, and say 3 Hail Marys.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 08:57 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 08:35 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  And I hold no empathy towards either yours, or the Aztec's, immorality.

Wow, that whole point flew right over your head. Your cult's bloody history and the superstitions that it's based on is right in line with the Aztec's. Same shit, different pile. And you know nothing of my "morality". I'd be willing to bet it's a hell of a lot more christlike than yours, judging from your posts here. It's probably more "christlike" than christ himself is portrayed in the gospels as compared to the concept that christians hold of him today.

(17-03-2015 08:35 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that the understanding of basic human dignities as described in the Declaration of Human Rights is wrong.

Then I'd be interested to hear exactly how you define human dignity.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:08 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 07:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 11:38 AM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  Meh, technicality. Mary is the highest non divine human. There is that better. And yes I buy that shit. Its damn good shit!

It's damn preposterous ancient bullshit, and there is not a shred of evidence it has any veracity, or real meaning today. Your cult (of scripture and tradition) cooked up the new "dogmas" about Mary that were never recognized before. You can't even define what the word "divine" means today, and how and why that CHANGED over the millennia from what it used to mean to what it currently means, and why and how that happened. YOu can't have two "natures". It's one or the other. Two is meaningless.

Well it depends what you mean by recognized before. While not officially declared, I did find a reference to Mary's sinnless nature in a 5th century letter from the emperor to the pope, so there is precedence. In terms of the word "divine" it comes from the latin word "divus" meaning godlike. As such, I believe that it means that one who is divine is God like. Given the context, I think the only one who has a god like nature is God. In terms of the metaphysics of the homousios, I must admit that I am not particularly well versed in Christology, but I believe that it falls under the concept of "mysteries" as such it cannot be fully understood. I'm well aware of the difficulty of this concept, virtually all early heresies were Christological.

I'm homophobic in the same way that I'm arachnophobic. I'm not scared of gay people but I'm going to scream if I find one in my bath.

I'm. Also homophobic in the same way I'm arachnophobic. I'm scared of spiders but I'd still fuck'em.
- my friend Marc
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-03-2015, 10:38 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(17-03-2015 10:08 PM)TarzanSmith Wrote:  
(17-03-2015 07:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  It's damn preposterous ancient bullshit, and there is not a shred of evidence it has any veracity, or real meaning today. Your cult (of scripture and tradition) cooked up the new "dogmas" about Mary that were never recognized before. You can't even define what the word "divine" means today, and how and why that CHANGED over the millennia from what it used to mean to what it currently means, and why and how that happened. YOu can't have two "natures". It's one or the other. Two is meaningless.

Well it depends what you mean by recognized before. While not officially declared, I did find a reference to Mary's sinnless nature in a 5th century letter from the emperor to the pope, so there is precedence. In terms of the word "divine" it comes from the latin word "divus" meaning godlike. As such, I believe that it means that one who is divine is God like. Given the context, I think the only one who has a god like nature is God. In terms of the metaphysics of the homousios, I must admit that I am not particularly well versed in Christology, but I believe that it falls under the concept of "mysteries" as such it cannot be fully understood. I'm well aware of the difficulty of this concept, virtually all early heresies were Christological.

The POINT is that the Church, in general, did not even think about, or accept the later revisionist dogmatic inventions about Mary, until they were pronounced much much later. Certainly the early church (Paul for example) never ever entertained any notion about her even. They cooked it all up later. In Hebrew culture, there were many many divine (the Latin word was not the origin of the CONCEPT), beings in the heavenly host. Being a god, was NOT what qualified one as being divine. So you have another vast cultural SHIFT in meaning and definition. Eventually it canme to mean what it does today, but even in the days of the 1st Century, it did NOT mean what it does today. When Saul has the Witch of Endor conjure the shade of Samuel, he asks her what she sees, (as only witches were thought to be able to see a shade),
and she says "I see a divine being". All it meant was "other that normal human". It did NOT mean "of the nature of Yahweh".

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: