blatantninja
Resident Redneck Facist
Sad? No. I'd say he actually GETS Christ's message, better than any Pope possibly in history, but definitely from within the last century or two.
Pope Francis describes ‘ideological Christians’ as a ‘serious illness’
- Thread starter Thrasher
- Start date
Sad? No. I'd say he actually GETS Christ's message, better than any Pope possibly in history, but definitely from within the last century or two.
Humanity has risen!
SasqWatch
Sorry, but gets Christ's message how? I'd like to see you actually try to justify dogs going to heaven through the Bible, especially when Christ reminds people that humans are God's chosen people and made in his image.
It's one thing to try to be charitable, it's another for the supposed holiest man on earth to say anything that is socially glamorous out of a desire to be more popular.
Technically the Jews were God's chosen people, until Christ came to fulfill. Then Gentiles were given salvation. Since a Gentile is a non-Jew, dogs would fall under that category
Thanks for the lesson in history. It was something i learned in my younger days so i assumed it was true.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
- Messages
- 4,388
I dont know. I would assume that because God breathed life into man that we are eternal. It doesnt say in any detail as to how animals were created.
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2012
- Messages
- 4,388
A Pope bending over to every publical whim and trying his best to be a popular celebrity has nothing to with "Christ's true message". Modern people are so fickle though. I can absolutely understand why they find him so nice. A Pope with a "real Christian message" would be universally hated and despised by everyone except true Catholics, to the tell truth. Benedict XVI was the only Vatican II pope to SLIGHTLY make a turn for tradition and doctrine and look how he was treated. To this day I suspect he was forced to resign, it was like an open conspiracy of sorts.
Off course, fact is Pope Francis only gets fans. He doesn't get converts. It is very sad.
Off course, fact is Pope Francis only gets fans. He doesn't get converts. It is very sad.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
I think it has a lot to do with the insanity of the modern western man. We are suicidal. As Bishop Williamson once wisely said, "you take away Christianity and the insanity will be such that sticks and stones will rise up against human beings".
Many of the crazed "population control" advocates associated with enviroment protection movements are basically saying that we have to die in order to save the trees and wildlife. And now the average person thinks dogs, cats and other household pets are as worthy as human beings of having the grace of communion with God and eternal life?
Reminds me of "Avatar", the greatest blockbuster in history. It was a movie about a man who decides to become an alien and fight against humans. The villain of the movie was a veteran soldier who was trying to save the planet earth and our future.
The west is so sick and decadent right now that it hurts.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
While the Bible doesn't specifically say animals will go to heaven, it doesn't specifically say they won't either. In fact there's more support that they will receive their glory. Lots of good stuff in Isaiah.
"The wolf and the lamb shall feed together, and the lion shall eat straw like the bullock: and dust shall be the serpent's meat. They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain, saith the LORD."
And while they might not go to "our" heaven, it's a strong possibility they will receive their own form of glory in the afterlife.
It's not a very logical argument though. If you are Catholic, your belief is that the current Pope, is also a Prophet, Seer and Revelator, and therefore is entitled to new revelation from God. Therefore the things he speaks are to be considered scripture.
But if you are not Catholic, then what's the point of arguing with a Catholic if they believe the above?
There's a lot of extremists/loonies out there or whatever you want to call them. But there's obviously a fine line. While animals may be for the benefit of man, that doesn't mean that you abuse what's given you. In fact, it could be argued that animals are MORE worthy, because they fulfill the purpose of their creation according to their knowledge and intelligence. A lot of humans do not.
It really shouldn't matter at all, as this is all just religious theory. If you indeed believe the Christian God, how is knowing if your dog is going to go to heaven, going to help you? Is it really important to your own salvation?
Sorry, but nowadays it is mostly loonies. The eugenics movement has never been stronger, the idea that abortion is morally acceptable is now widespread and we have "intellectuals" openly calling for depopulation through forced sterilization and even murder. That is not to mention the crazed greenies who think the world would be great with all organic, all natural food(even if that meant billions of men, women and children would starve to death).
I'm not sure I get your point. Animals do not go to heaven. Christ suffered at the cross for our salvation, not so that rats, cows and cuckroaches could hang out with the saints and martyrs in the afterlife. The idea is so debauched and preposterous only modern men could come up with it.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
Where do you get your theology from, son? Chick tracts?
It's been a long time since I read something so off the mark, and believe you me, I have seem the wildest ramblings of KKK southern baptists, militant atheists and other run of the mill rabid anti-Catholics.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
Christ died on the cross, but he suffered for sins in the garden of Gethsemane. The whole reason he suffered and died for man, was because they were subject to sin. And anything unclean is not welcome in heaven. Whatever price we had to pay, he paid for us. the Atonement has no bearing on animals because they are without sin, so they are clean. So yes of course he didn't suffer for animals, they didn't need it.
So what are you trying to argue here exactly? That if you're Catholic, you don't believe the Pope is subject to divine revelation?
What? I don't even know what the hell you are talking about. Your knowledge of the role of the Pope within the Church is so off the mark I'm not sure if you even bothered to type "pope" in the wikipedia search function and read a few pages.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
Animals don't have eternal souls, they don't free will, they are not made in the image of God... they don't go to heaven. If your granny was a pious and devout saint you can rest assured she is not in paradise right now fondling dinosaurs, cobra snakes and octopuses.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
Oh dear oh dear.
Catholics…. (You with me so far?) believe in (there's still more, keep up) PAPAL INFALLIBILITY.
If you still aren't with me, please look it up. I'm not going to google it for you.
In other words, if you are Catholic, you believe what the pope says is true. I don't see how this is so hard to understand unless you're trolling.
No. That's not what papal infalibility is. At all. You are being as ignorant as before.
First of all, the doctrine of papal infalibility was only promulgated in the 19th century after the first Vatican council. Second, it says the Pope is only infallible when he makes pronunciations ex-cathedra(meaning, official pronunciations made from the chair of Saint Peter), and also only when he makes declarations about faith and doctrine.
Do you know how many such declarations have been made since infallibility was declared? One: the ascension of the Virgin Mary(The Pope basically declared that Saint Mary ascended into Heaven, which is something Catholics have always believed anyway). Just one in over a century.
Lots of Catholics don't even accept it anyway. It was a modern idea born out of ultra-montanism, which is itself an abandoned movement. Frankly, I doubt any Pope will ever use it again. It is just a failed idea sitting around without use.
Anything the Pope says can and will be put to public scrutiny. Personally I think nearly everything the current regal latino Pope has done and said is utter bullshit. They are not infallible according to the two councils, unless they are sitting on the chair of Saint Peter and talking about faith and doctrine. Everything else they say can be wrong and lately has been wrong.
Now, please do kindly bother reading a bit about the subjects you are willing to dsicuss, okay? I already bothered to school you on this one, but I don't have much free time and you demonstrated to being completely ignorant about Catholicism in a way I hardly ever see.
- Joined
- May 19, 2013
- Messages
- 269
And here lies the problem. Your religious theology here comes from assumed translation of other scriptures. So that's all it is. A theory. There is no specific scripture that says "animals don't go to heaven". Animals have souls if we're using the Bible as a fact reference. Are they eternal souls? Well there's no word on that, but when animals die, I'm going to go out on a limb and say they're not floating out in space somewhere. I never said anywhere they'd be with man in heaven, but the belief that heaven and hell is black and white is erroneous. Paul talked of multiple heavens and degrees of glory. One of these may well be reserved for God's other creations.
In other words you're arguing the particulars of Catholicism that not even Catholics can seem to agree on. How cute.