Should the Catholic Church be abolished?

[Eglaecia]

Literally just google "Matthew 16:18 NRSV" then. Or maybe learn Latin? It isn't that hard of a language.

You've learned Latin, I presume?

And no, if I posted something in Arabic, you wouldn't go and learn the language just to get my post.

I can read and understand it yes.

"And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[b] will not overcome it."

Doesn't sound to me like the church is the body of Christ. Rather, the faith of God will withstand Hell itself.

Yeah chief this is a horrible take.

I have an understanding that the Catholic church is rife with corruption and has historically been rife with it for ages :^)

That's a long way of saying "no".

Sure. The problem is that there's cases (such as the Catholic church) where the organization has gone too far. Say a community organizes their own religious beliefs voluntarily - that's fine. But when you have something that's grown into a festering monster full of corruption and scandalous behavior that strives to dictate the lives of millions (or, in this case, over a billion people)? Then it's a problem.

Why is it a problem? Assuming your allegations of corruption are true, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.

Yet it's quite dubious for the Catholic Church to claim that Peter was the first Pope and that they have been the one true church since Jesus left Earth when their entire theology wasn't even decided upon until the Council of Nicea centuries later.

No, no it really isn't. Apostolic succession was practised before the Council of Nicea.

The legitimacy of the Catholic church itself isn't vouched for by God.

Matthew 16:18-20

... Then abolish the church. Christianity can survive without it.

Or someone could make a new Catholic Church

That wouldn't make it the Church. I really don't think you atheists understand the importance of the institution? This run away mindset of "just leave and make your own" really doesn't surprise me considering atheism has it's roots in Protestantism.

The legitimacy of the Church is vouched for by God Himself, you simply can't "do away" with it and still call yourself a Christian.

Jesus naming Peter as his successor does not prove that the Catholic Church are Peter's successor.

Jesus named Peter, Prince of the Apostles, as the Pope, not as his successor. Going by apostolic succession, Francis, the current Pope and successor to Prince of the Apostles and head of the RCC, is the successor to Peter. Therefore the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church is the successor to Peter.

[The South Falls]

It's holy week. God created all music equal.

Then explain country music.

Checkmate, theist.

Well... what about Johnny Cash?

[Torrocca]

Sure. The problem is that there's cases (such as the Catholic church) where the organization has gone too far. Say a community organizes their own religious beliefs voluntarily - that's fine. But when you have something that's grown into a festering monster full of corruption and scandalous behavior that strives to dictate the lives of millions (or, in this case, over a billion people)? Then it's a problem.

Why is it a problem? Assuming your allegations of corruption are true, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.

>Corruption being true doesn't make it a bad thing!!1!

lel

[Ifreann]

Why is it a problem? Assuming your allegations of corruption are true, that doesn't necessarily make it bad.

>Corruption being true doesn't make it a bad thing!!1!

lel

Maybe it was a good thing for the Church to keep all those child molesters working with children instead of turning them over to the police. Because...um...God moves in mysterious ways?

[El-Amin Caliphate]

just wait for the muslims, soon they will take your lands, they have faith and strong values and live in large numbers in your dying societies, it's God punishment for all of you, death to capitalism, liberty, and democracy.

Wat

Judaism is the ORIGINAL Abrahamic religion.

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

A quick google search comes up with stories of Imams physically, sexually, and emotionally abusing kids. (This does not mean all Muslims do.)

They need go get lashed.

Sure.

I never said we ought to ban religion, though. Just do away with organized, institutionalized religion. Let people believe as they wish.

Most major religions don't work like that.

This is the most ignorant thing I've read in ages. Do you have any understanding of Catholic theology at all?

I have an understanding that the Catholic church is rife with corruption and has historically been rife with it for ages :^)

Just say "no". There's nothing wrong with admitting that you don't know about something.

Moreover, both the parishes I've been to were heavily involved in charitable work, and one of the priests also being a social worker in his spare time.

Same here. My masjid feeds the needy, give da'wah programs, and we're currently expanding our masjid to get bigger

How about a good old fashioned lynching?

Holy Week in Spain:

That looks too much like the KKK

[Neutraligon]

They should all also be in jail.

Yes. Does it not fall under conspiracy and/or aiding and abetting after the fact?

I believe so, yes.

[Jolthig]

No. Absolutely not. Sure the Catholic Church have done many grevious things throughout history, but abolishing it won't change the hearts of Catholics. Your OP is full of fallacies and bad arguments such as your citation of Scandinavia to prove the Church should be abolished. And because of a few individuals, the entire Church should be banned. This doesn't mean that the Church isn't corrupt; I'm not saying this, but only for the freedom of religion.

While yes, I too believe the Bible contradicts itself a lot, you provided no evidence in your OP to demonstrate why the Church should be abolished. You're putting together two different topics into one.

You have a terrible OP.

[Katganistan]

How about a good old fashioned lynching?

Holy Week in Spain:

How unfortunate that my joke about pointy hoods and mitres was altogether too close to the mark.

[Neutraligon]

Holy Week in Spain:

How unfortunate that my joke about pointy hoods and mitres was altogether too close to the mark.

I've been to holy week in a smaller Spanish city...it is...odd.

[Katganistan]

Judaism is the ORIGINAL Abrahamic religion.

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

[Neutraligon]

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

When did Zoroastrianism begin? 5th century BCE in reccord but Wiki says it possibly has roots back in the second millennium BCE, and Judaism was heavily influenced by it.

[Dogmeat]

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

When did Zoroastrianism begin?

Well their calendar starts an absurdly long time ago, but what I've read from Iranologist Mary Boyce on the subject indicates that (like Judaism) Zoroastrianism likely evolved out of an older Polytheistic tradition over time. The lack of written records makes the timeline pretty vague, but it was probably established in some recognizable from by 800 BCE, and possibly earlier.

More a Zarathustran religion than an Abrahamic one though.

[Neutraligon]

When did Zoroastrianism begin?

Well their calendar starts an absurdly long time ago, but what I've read from Iranologist Mary Boyce on the subject indicates that (like Judaism) Zoroastrianism likely evolved out of an older Polytheistic tradition over time. The lack of written records makes the timeline pretty vague, but it was probably established in some recognizable from by 800 BCE, and possibly earlier.

More a Zarathustran religion than an Abrahamic one though.

One that heavily influenced Judaism though.

[El-Amin Caliphate]

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34641486#p34641486

[Dogmeat]

Well their calendar starts an absurdly long time ago, but what I've read from Iranologist Mary Boyce on the subject indicates that (like Judaism) Zoroastrianism likely evolved out of an older Polytheistic tradition over time. The lack of written records makes the timeline pretty vague, but it was probably established in some recognizable from by 800 BCE, and possibly earlier.

More a Zarathustran religion than an Abrahamic one though.

One that heavily influenced Judaism though.

I think we can safely say that the angels and the dualism are Zoroastrian imports. Not sure about the rest.

[Dogmeat]

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

viewtopic.php?f=20&t=441628&p=34641486#p34641486

Don't be silly, Adam let a woman nag him into eating food so horrible that it ruined everything forever.

He was clearly a Norwegian Lutheran.

[Australian rePublic]

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

What? Mohammed wasn't even born till more than 500 years after Jesus

[Cosmopolitan borovan]

Yes catholic church should be banned. Religion doesn't do anything good. it's just hypocracy and when you go try to follow it the bible is just a baloney made up and doesn't help humans be good. Where is the evidence that people will end up realizing their selves and be higher. There are and people propaganding giving bibles and creating missionaries. They try to go out and help people but fail to help themselves. it is a bunch of dumb bullshit.

[United Muscovite Nations]

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

[Jolthig]

Ibrahim (Abraham [AS]) disagrees.

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

[Elysian Kentarchy]

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

If I am correct in understanding Kat is stating that regardless of Father Abraham's actions and life Christianity and Islam did not have a formalized style of rites, institutions, etc. until millennia after his life. So while Christianity and Islam (rightfully) claims the link back to Abraham they were not formal established religions until the time of Christ and Mohammad which was well after the time Abraham lived and thus making Judaism the original Abrahamic religion and Christianity and Islam coming later and claiming the link. Just my guess.

[Big Gunz Interweb]

It would be tragedy if many law-abiding and truly nice Catholic priests and advocates would suffer because of the (extremely bad) actions of a few (well, not a few, many, but you know a small % of all Catholic believers) people. This is the same with immigration and the whole very sad things we are seeing in Europe (and I guess the US) - should we punish an enitre group of people because of the actions of a few people who identify from that group? I have been trying lately to follow this saying: don't let the actions of a few determine the way I feel about an entire group -- I have failed along the way at adopting this mindset but I am getting there

[Australian rePublic]

Judaism begins in ~1812 BCE.
Christianity begins in 1CE
Islam begins in the Arabian peninsula 7CE.

So notwithstanding what we believe, clearly there is an historical timeline for when each of these religions came into being.

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

Jesus (Issa) is a prophet only in Islam. In Christianity, Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah. In Judaism, Jesus is either a false messiah, a Jewish teacher, or one of the thousands of insignificant Jews killed by the Romans

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

If I am correct in understanding Kat is stating that regardless of Father Abraham's actions and life Christianity and Islam did not have a formalized style of rites, institutions, etc. until millennia after his life. So while Christianity and Islam (rightfully) claims the link back to Abraham they were not formal established religions until the time of Christ and Mohammad which was well after the time Abraham lived and thus making Judaism the original Abrahamic religion and Christianity and Islam coming later and claiming the link. Just my guess.

No. God promised Abram (renamed Abraham), that he would be God's chosen person, and that His decendabts would be God's chosen people. The decendants of Abraham are the Hebrews and the Isralites (they're two different groups, which I shall address) (though, I think that the Hebrews don't think that Isralites are decendant from Abram. I don't know). The decendants of Abraham were sent into slavery in Egypt, until God freed them. Later the children of Abraham got into a dispute over how to properly worship God and split into the Jews (Hebrews) and Samaritians (Isralites). The Jews were awaiting for a Messiah. Some people believe that Jesus of Nazareth was the Jewish Messiah, the Christos. Those who believe that Jesus Christ was the Jewish Messiah became Jews, who were split into two groups:
Jews who believe that Jesus was the Messiah- these people became Christians
Jews who don't believe that Jesus was the Messiah- these people remained Jews

So Christians are just Jews who think that Jesus is the Messiah

As for Islam. Muslims believe that Jesus was a prophet, in the manner that Abraham, and Moses and Elijah were prophets. After Jesus, however, there was another prophet- Mohammed

Judaism and Samaratanism both believe that they are decendant

[Torrocca]

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

Jesus (Issa) is a prophet only in Islam. In Christianity, Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah*. In Judaism, Jesus is either a false messiah, a Jewish teacher, or one of the thousands of insignificant Jews killed by the Romans

*In some sects/interpretations of Christianity.

[Jolthig]

Not sure what the point of your argument is Kat.

But according to all three of these Abrahamic faiths, Abraham (as) is one of the Great Forefathers of the progeny of their prophets: Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad.

If I am correct in understanding Kat is stating that regardless of Father Abraham's actions and life Christianity and Islam did not have a formalized style of rites, institutions, etc. until millennia after his life. So while Christianity and Islam (rightfully) claims the link back to Abraham they were not formal established religions until the time of Christ and Mohammad which was well after the time Abraham lived and thus making Judaism the original Abrahamic religion and Christianity and Islam coming later and claiming the link. Just my guess.

All rites of Islam has been dated back to the time of Muhammad according to the Quran and hadith, though yes Muslims have debated on what rite is correct. Such as the case of Sunnis vs. Shias; etc.

And okay. Though still though, Abraham was a prophet of his own according to the Bible and Quran. But the father of Israel and Arabia according to both books.