Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
26-02-2015, 08:32 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 07:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 07:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  In 2013, there were a total of 412,236 priests worldwide.

4% of 412,236 is 16,489 priests. That's a lot of pedophilia. Drinking Beverage

That percent was for all time (IE modern times), not just this year.

Edit: More specifically, 4% between 1950-2002, and that's not even a number of convictions, but just 'accusations'.

That would make the number even larger than 16,489. Thumbsup

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
26-02-2015, 08:38 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:26 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 05:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  No, actually, 'you' were the one that claimed it was disproven, therefore 'you' have to disprove it.

I'm claiming nothing of the sort. I said the statement is meaningless. Devoid of meaning. I don't have to go around proving meaningless things are meaningless, except apparently to Catholics fools.

(26-02-2015 05:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  1) I'm sure that's not true.
2) Even if it is true, you're using an appeal to majority fallacy.

It is not. No. If it is true, find me ONE (not a majority) that says the concept has meaning. Not too good at critical thinking I see. No wonder you're a Catholic.

(26-02-2015 05:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Yeah, no shit. Once again, what's your point?

The POINT, genius, is that it was a validly called council.

(26-02-2015 05:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  It was passed in an illegal way, and it contradicts previous Church teaching. Even if it's not dogmatic, those two things are still a huge problem. Did you even watch even part of the video?

"Pass what *illegally* ? No I didn't watch you video. Nothing contradicts previous teaching. EVERY teaching they ever cooked up "contradicts" something before it.

(26-02-2015 05:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Which is why we have legitimate reasons to reject it instead of just saying "We don't like it."

Which you have utterly FAILED to present of justify. "Legitimate reasons" were had by EVERY heretic. You ARE a heretic.

BTW, I fucking know a LOT more about the church than you ever will. :p

Quote:I'm claiming nothing of the sort. I said the statement is meaningless. Devoid of meaning. I don't have to go around proving meaningless things are meaningless, except apparently to Catholics fools.

How the hell is it meaningless? The substance is different while the accident, IE the outward appearance, isn't. There, there's the meaning, clear as day.

Quote:The POINT, genius, is that it was a validly called council.

So, you're trying to make the point that it was a validly called council, by saying it was attended by bishops that were there before the Council? Great logic, seriously, no flaws there.

Quote:"Pass what *illegally* ?

The Council you idiot.

Quote: No I didn't watch you video.

Well you should, as the Fr. in the video explains 'why' it's not a valid Council.

Quote:Nothing contradicts previous teaching.

The Vatican 2 idea that religious freedom is an inalienable right contradicts the Syllabus of Errors. That's just one example.

Quote:EVERY teaching they ever cooked up "contradicts" something before it.

Nope, sorry.

Quote:Which you have utterly FAILED to present of justify.

Watch the video, you imbecile. The reasons are provided 'in' the video.

Quote:"Legitimate reasons" were had by EVERY heretic.

No they didn't, that's why they were heretics.

Quote:BTW, I fucking know a LOT more about the church than you ever will. :p

What you know is equal to a pile of cow shit.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 08:39 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:06 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 07:57 PM)pablo Wrote:  Of course you don't see the problem, you're part of it. Spreading and maitaining the agenda of amassing more power and money. Faith and god are a front.

Since Ricky Dawkins has become an atheist icon, his net-worth is now 135 million dollars, despite not having written an actual scientific paper in over ten years. Who's the front, again?

He has written a dozen best-selling books. How is that a point of contention?

You seem to desperately grasp at non sequiturs.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 08:40 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:28 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 08:25 PM)pablo Wrote:  You have provided no proof that it's sole concern is what you say it is.

So, what, I have to prove that it's 'not' a conspiracy? That's not how it works.

Not what I said.
You have to prove the church is what you are so sure it is, not what it isn't.
Again, you know you're talking to an atheist right?
Do you have any idea how many times I've been asked to prove a negative?
Why would I do that to you?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 08:44 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:09 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
Quote:Secular context is the ONLY context within which human rights exist. The rights that matter, the rights anyone actually has, are conferred and enforced by man himself, usually by the instrument of government. Anyone can carry on about how certain rights are "god-given" (even T. Jefferson and company made that error in their letter to the king) - but the rights you have are the rights enforced; all the rest is whining.

You don't seem to get it. I don't believe that secular human rights exist. Prove that these 'natural rights' objectively exist, and are what the UN says they are.

Secular human rights exist by agreement among people. How is that not obvious?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Chas's post
26-02-2015, 09:09 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 08:26 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  I'm claiming nothing of the sort. I said the statement is meaningless. Devoid of meaning. I don't have to go around proving meaningless things are meaningless, except apparently to Catholics fools.


It is not. No. If it is true, find me ONE (not a majority) that says the concept has meaning. Not too good at critical thinking I see. No wonder you're a Catholic.


The POINT, genius, is that it was a validly called council.


"Pass what *illegally* ? No I didn't watch you video. Nothing contradicts previous teaching. EVERY teaching they ever cooked up "contradicts" something before it.


Which you have utterly FAILED to present of justify. "Legitimate reasons" were had by EVERY heretic. You ARE a heretic.

BTW, I fucking know a LOT more about the church than you ever will. Tongue

Quote:I'm claiming nothing of the sort. I said the statement is meaningless. Devoid of meaning. I don't have to go around proving meaningless things are meaningless, except apparently to Catholics fools.

How the hell is it meaningless? The substance is different while the accident, IE the outward appearance, isn't. There, there's the meaning, clear as day.

Quote:The POINT, genius, is that it was a validly called council.

So, you're trying to make the point that it was a validly called council, by saying it was attended by bishops that were there before the Council? Great logic, seriously, no flaws there.

Quote:"Pass what *illegally* ?

The Council you idiot.

Quote: No I didn't watch you video.

Well you should, as the Fr. in the video explains 'why' it's not a valid Council.

Quote:Nothing contradicts previous teaching.

The Vatican 2 idea that religious freedom is an inalienable right contradicts the Syllabus of Errors. That's just one example.

Quote:EVERY teaching they ever cooked up "contradicts" something before it.

Nope, sorry.

Quote:Which you have utterly FAILED to present of justify.

Watch the video, you imbecile. The reasons are provided 'in' the video.

Quote:"Legitimate reasons" were had by EVERY heretic.

No they didn't, that's why they were heretics.

Quote:BTW, I fucking know a LOT more about the church than you ever will. Tongue

What you know is equal to a pile of cow shit.

So, if you met the Pope, you would tell him that? Or would you cower like a school girl and just kiss his ring?


But as if to knock me down, reality came around
And without so much as a mere touch, cut me into little pieces

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 09:13 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  How the hell is it meaningless? The substance is different while the accident, IE the outward appearance, isn't. There, there's the meaning, clear as day.

It is utterly meaningless. Of fucking COURSE the substance is different than the "accident". EVERYTHING that exists this is true of. Can you see quarks, you fucking fool ? It's a distinction with no difference. The same thing is true of EVERYTHING. The "substance" of bread is NOT changed. It's STILL the SAME FUCKING ATOMS that made up the bread after the consecration, and they have in no way changed. There is nothing called "substance of bread" that is any different from just bread. Bread is bread. NOTHING has changed and there is NO EVIDENCE anything has changed. You don't even know the meaning of the god damn words you're trying to use.


(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  So, you're trying to make the point that it was a validly called council, by saying it was attended by bishops that were there before the Council? Great logic, seriously, no flaws there.

Yet YOU are utterly UNABLE to tell us what the problem is with that. Fail. Nice try though.

(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  The Council you idiot.

The Council passed the council ?
Are you retarded ?

(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Well you should, as the Fr. in the video explains 'why' it's not a valid Council.

But you are too stupid to explain it yourself. You really are an ignorant fool. "Father says so" so I'm supposed to believe it ? Hahahahahaha.

(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  Nope, sorry.

THAT is how you debate ? LMFAO. Yes. Sorry. Every dogma they cooked up contradicted something they did not hold before. You don't even know when the seven sacraments were instituted ? You think they always existed ?

I'm not watching some fool priest do YOUR work for you.

(26-02-2015 08:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  What you know is equal to a pile of cow shit.

So you say. But you NEED a video to say anything. You really are a sad little imbecile.

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
26-02-2015, 09:14 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 07:38 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  That percent was for all time (IE modern times), not just this year.

Edit: More specifically, 4% between 1950-2002, and that's not even a number of convictions, but just 'accusations'.

That would make the number even larger than 16,489. Thumbsup

Of course, but it's all the priests, worldwide, over a large time period like that. Not to mention, it's still much lower than the general populace, and certainly nearly every other organization of this size. Hell the public school systems have numbers of abuse cases around three times that number in half the time, yet no one bats an eye.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
26-02-2015, 09:16 PM (This post was last modified: 26-02-2015 09:21 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 09:14 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 08:32 PM)Chas Wrote:  That would make the number even larger than 16,489. Thumbsup

Of course, but it's all the priests, worldwide, over a large time period like that. Not to mention, it's still much lower than the general populace, and certainly nearly every other organization of this size. Hell the public school systems have numbers of abuse cases around three times that number in half the time, yet no one bats an eye.

Prove it. Let's see the study. Peer reviewed. It SHOULD be much much much much lower if Jebus meant anything. It's not "lower" and you have no proof it was or is.
You belong to a pedophile organization.

BTW, define the word "substance" and the word "accident".
Then tell me what EXACTLY changes. Then tell me how the "accident" of wood would be the same, but the "substance" of wood not be wood.

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
26-02-2015, 09:16 PM
RE: Catholics vs. TTA......Respectfully.....
(26-02-2015 08:40 PM)pablo Wrote:  
(26-02-2015 08:28 PM)PetrovPolak Wrote:  So, what, I have to prove that it's 'not' a conspiracy? That's not how it works.

Not what I said.
You have to prove the church is what you are so sure it is, not what it isn't.
Again, you know you're talking to an atheist right?
Do you have any idea how many times I've been asked to prove a negative?
Why would I do that to you?

Well, it's not like their mission statement is unclear or anything, and they act in accordance with it, so that's pretty much it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: