Christian Discussion: Habemus papam- Leo XIV

[Untecna]

Yes they do.

No they don't. An actor performing Henry V, isn't lying to the audience, because the audience is in on it. They know that's Kenneth Branagh, not King Henry V cast forward through time.

Lying is categorized by deceit. You're just staking out absurd positions because you're wrong and don't want to admit it.

The people labeling themselves as "fascist forum patrol" are taking on absurd positions and are wrong?

[Tarsonis]

No they don't. An actor performing Henry V, isn't lying to the audience, because the audience is in on it. They know that's Kenneth Branagh, not King Henry V cast forward through time.

Lying is categorized by deceit. You're just staking out absurd positions because you're wrong and don't want to admit it.

The people labeling themselves as "fascist forum patrol" are taking on absurd positions and are wrong?

$10 bucks they come back with "it's just for RP" because they don't understand irony

[Kerosene Cucumbers]

Can God lie if He so pleases?

It's a yes or no question. God can do whatever he wants, no? Is God sovereign, yes or no?

Mine was a Socratic question. Can God go against His holy nature?

[Luminesa]

Remember folks, it's not stagnant wages, rising cost of living, rising inflation, the third recession in 20 years, a world wide pandemic, lack of affordable housing, lack of access to medical care, eroding civil rights, an increasingly hostile and divided populace, an unaddressed mental health crisis, and half a hundred other things, that are causing people to have less kids.

It's condoms.

It's actually because life is too good. When people are stuck in survival situations, they start having more children. Even during the Great Depression or times of famine people would still have children.

But since the 19th century, our living conditions have gotten progressively better, so the urge to produce more offspring has waned, because our lives are comfortable. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.
In fact, civil rights and the growing financial independence of women is likely also a major factor.

They would have more children because the child mortality rate pre-modern medicine was so insanely high, and because they needed to have some heirs to live into adulthood. In a healthy, stable society, people are able to space-out how many kids they have, because they don’t have to worry as much about their babies dying before they turn 5.

And even in a country that is, by GDP metrics, one of the wealthiest in the world, we still have states that suffer with quite a lot of infant mortality. Mississippi, the poorest state in the union (or maybe second, behind New Mexico) is FULL of maternal/neo-natal care deserts. Effectively, if you don’t live in one of the larger cities or the Gulf Coast, you may have to drive hours to get any sort of care for you and your baby. And then there are the complications of pregnancy, combined with Mississippi’s majority-minority populace suffering higher-than-average rates of obesity, hypertension, diabetes, poverty, depression, generational fear of doctors (especially white ones), and maternal death. Similar goes for Louisiana, my home state, which has the highest rate of maternal death of black women in the country.

Even as a pro-life individual who is considerably adherent to the Catholic faith, one has to understand that better maternal/neo-natal care goes a long way to making life truly “good”, especially for families. And my guy, right now it is “not good” in a lot of places. Oversimplifying and believing you’re going to save the Western world by impregnating some girl does nothing good to change the equation. If you do not educate yourself and let yourself hear the woman’s perspective of what she needs-better care for her and for her family-you will only repeat the generational trauma that has brought us here in the first place.

[Nea Skotia]

It's actually because life is too good. When people are stuck in survival situations, they start having more children. Even during the Great Depression or times of famine people would still have children.

But since the 19th century, our living conditions have gotten progressively better, so the urge to produce more offspring has waned, because our lives are comfortable. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.
In fact, civil rights and the growing financial independence of women is likely also a major factor.

They would have more children because the child mortality rate pre-modern medicine was so insanely high, and because they needed to have some heirs to live into adulthood. In a healthy, stable society, people are able to space-out how many kids they have, because they don’t have to worry as much about their babies dying before they turn 5.

And even in a country that is, by GDP metrics, one of the wealthiest in the world, we still have states that suffer with quite a lot of infant mortality. Mississippi, the poorest state in the union (or maybe second, behind New Mexico) is FULL of maternal/neo-natal care deserts. Effectively, if you don’t live in one of the larger cities or the Gulf Coast, you may have to drive hours to get any sort of care for you and your baby. And then there are the complications of pregnancy, combined with Mississippi’s majority-minority populace suffering higher-than-average rates of obesity, hypertension, diabetes, poverty, depression, generational fear of doctors (especially white ones), and maternal death. Similar goes for Louisiana, my home state, which has the highest rate of maternal death of black women in the country.

Even as a pro-life individual who is considerably adherent to the Catholic faith, one has to understand that better maternal/neo-natal care goes a long way to making life truly “good”, especially for families. And my guy, right now it is “not good” in a lot of places. Oversimplifying and believing you’re going to save the Western world by impregnating some girl does nothing good to change the equation. If you do not educate yourself and let yourself hear the woman’s perspective of what she needs-better care for her and for her family-you will only repeat the generational trauma that has brought us here in the first place.

Bad Lumi. You're making too much sense. That's not allowed.

[Tarsonis]

It's a yes or no question. God can do whatever he wants, no? Is God sovereign, yes or no?

Mine was a Socratic question. Can God go against His holy nature?

No I'm not letting you move the goalposts. By you refusal to answer the question, I'm left to conclude that you don't believe in the Sovereignty of God.

[Tarsonis]

Yes, except actually no. It's not the reason people *choose* not to have children, but it is very much a reason that many people *don't* have children. There is a difference.
If there's no contraception a lot more births are going to happen. Source: immediate and precipitous decline in fertility literally everywhere mass contraception arrives.

Source: Trust me bro.

Why solve the problems leading to people having less kids, when you can just force people to have kids?

[The Anti-Delegate]

You can't be omni-benevolent or the embodiment of goodness and still have free will

[The United Baltic Kingdoms]

You can't be omni-benevolent or the embodiment of goodness and still have free will

For anyone wonder they said they would be the only person to go to heaven if Jesus came back so, take this person with a grain of salt.

Then we live under the bigotry of Liberalism, a state that accepts what shouldn't and isn't natural. Also saying that you can do Jesus job, God to many is wild.

The rapture
I'm the only one going up and jeezy boy will be like whaaaattt

[The BlAAtschApen]

Source: Trust me bro.

Why solve the problems leading to people having less kids, when you can just force people to have kids?

I always quite like the ChristenUnie approach in the Netherlands. For context, they're a protestant, slightly left of center(economically speaking) party. They're against abortion (obviously), but are in favour of supporting pregnant women by giving them preference on getting a home, or being able to continue their education. They are also in favour of putting contraception methods in the basic health insurance (the pill). And more counseling and sex education.

Now, granted, my stance on abortion is different from theirs{I won't go into that further here, it's not the thread}, but I cannot fault them on supporting the whole process from before conception, during pregnancy and after birth.

[The Anti-Delegate]

You can't be omni-benevolent or the embodiment of goodness and still have free will

For anyone wonder they said they would be the only person to go to heaven if Jesus came back so, take this person with a grain of salt.

The rapture
I'm the only one going up and jeezy boy will be like whaaaattt

I'm starting to wonder if literacy is dead
Yall can't even detect the most obvious jokes in history

Anyways, you didn't make a counterpoint there bud

[The United Baltic Kingdoms]

For anyone wonder they said they would be the only person to go to heaven if Jesus came back so, take this person with a grain of salt.

I'm starting to wonder if literacy is dead
Yall can't even detect the most obvious jokes in history

Anyways, you didn't make a counterpoint there bud

Well majority of the conversations we have had and you saying, are just claims that are either blasphemous and ignorant or come off as bigotry.

[The Anti-Delegate]

I'm starting to wonder if literacy is dead
Yall can't even detect the most obvious jokes in history

Anyways, you didn't make a counterpoint there bud

Well majority of the conversations we have had and you saying, are just claims that are either blasphemous and ignorant or come off as bigotry.

Is this your first day on the internet

[The United Baltic Kingdoms]

Well majority of the conversations we have had and you saying, are just claims that are either blasphemous and ignorant or come off as bigotry.

Is this your first day on the internet

Very much, I'm just saying that's what I view from what your posts are. You post really blant blasphemous ideas to me, your posting in a religion thread so expect your morals and things that involve religion to be called out because God is everything. Your jokes aren't funny to me, but I gotta go for now.

[Luminesa]

Why solve the problems leading to people having less kids, when you can just force people to have kids?

I always quite like the ChristenUnie approach in the Netherlands. For context, they're a protestant, slightly left of center(economically speaking) party. They're against abortion (obviously), but are in favour of supporting pregnant women by giving them preference on getting a home, or being able to continue their education. They are also in favour of putting contraception methods in the basic health insurance (the pill). And more counseling and sex education.

Now, granted, my stance on abortion is different from theirs{I won't go into that further here, it's not the thread}, but I cannot fault them on supporting the whole process from before conception, during pregnancy and after birth.

I definitely like the idea of getting pregnant women a home and an education. Feels exceptionally pro-life to me.

[Pasong Tirad]

I always quite like the ChristenUnie approach in the Netherlands. For context, they're a protestant, slightly left of center(economically speaking) party. They're against abortion (obviously), but are in favour of supporting pregnant women by giving them preference on getting a home, or being able to continue their education. They are also in favour of putting contraception methods in the basic health insurance (the pill). And more counseling and sex education.

Now, granted, my stance on abortion is different from theirs{I won't go into that further here, it's not the thread}, but I cannot fault them on supporting the whole process from before conception, during pregnancy and after birth.

I definitely like the idea of getting pregnant women a home and an education. Feels exceptionally pro-life to me.

Okay, Stalin.

[Holmkerk]

It's actually because life is too good. When people are stuck in survival situations, they start having more children. Even during the Great Depression or times of famine people would still have children.

But since the 19th century, our living conditions have gotten progressively better, so the urge to produce more offspring has waned, because our lives are comfortable. This makes sense from an evolutionary perspective.
In fact, civil rights and the growing financial independence of women is likely also a major factor.

They would have more children because the child mortality rate pre-modern medicine was so insanely high, and because they needed to have some heirs to live into adulthood. In a healthy, stable society, people are able to space-out how many kids they have, because they don’t have to worry as much about their babies dying before they turn 5.

And even in a country that is, by GDP metrics, one of the wealthiest in the world, we still have states that suffer with quite a lot of infant mortality. Mississippi, the poorest state in the union (or maybe second, behind New Mexico) is FULL of maternal/neo-natal care deserts. Effectively, if you don’t live in one of the larger cities or the Gulf Coast, you may have to drive hours to get any sort of care for you and your baby. And then there are the complications of pregnancy, combined with Mississippi’s majority-minority populace suffering higher-than-average rates of obesity, hypertension, diabetes, poverty, depression, generational fear of doctors (especially white ones), and maternal death. Similar goes for Louisiana, my home state, which has the highest rate of maternal death of black women in the country.

Even as a pro-life individual who is considerably adherent to the Catholic faith, one has to understand that better maternal/neo-natal care goes a long way to making life truly “good”, especially for families. And my guy, right now it is “not good” in a lot of places. Oversimplifying and believing you’re going to save the Western world by impregnating some girl does nothing good to change the equation. If you do not educate yourself and let yourself hear the woman’s perspective of what she needs-better care for her and for her family-you will only repeat the generational trauma that has brought us here in the first place.

I acknowledge that improving maternal care and medical assistance is very important, especially these days were healthcare in the West is at risk. But from a demographic perspective improving these will not have a major impact on the issue at hand.

And I also acknowledge that there are many people suffering nowadays, even in rich countries, but their suffering remains much lesser than the ones our ancestors went through. And even if reduced infantile mortality is objectively good thing, as well as the raising of living standards, the demographic problem of low fertility rates, that is a secondary effect of this, remains a serious issue. We have an larger and larger older population that relies on a smaller and smaller working population to survive, and their is also a huge risk of our civilization getting fragilized by not being able to renew its population

I'm simply to recognize this issue and raise awareness, and it is clear that simply "impregnating a woman" on an individual level will not solve the issue. And I'm pretty sure I didn't claim anything of the sort, either.

[Kerosene Cucumbers]

Mine was a Socratic question. Can God go against His holy nature?

No I'm not letting you move the goalposts. By you refusal to answer the question, I'm left to conclude that you don't believe in the Sovereignty of God.

God is sovereign. God can do whatever He wants. But just because He can do whatever doesn't mean He will do whatever. Can God go against his promise to Abraham? Yes He is capable of doing so, but will He?

[Tarsonis]

No I'm not letting you move the goalposts. By you refusal to answer the question, I'm left to conclude that you don't believe in the Sovereignty of God.

God is sovereign. God can do whatever He wants. But just because He can do whatever doesn't mean He will do whatever. Can God go against his promise to Abraham? Yes He is capable of doing so, but will He?

See was that so hard?

No He won't violate the covenant, He could, but He won't. You're correct there. But we must always allow that He could.

But this is also why the Catholic Church teaches that God will not abandon the Jews, and will rectify that situation in the manner of His choosing, because God will not abandon His covenants, diminished as they might be.

Same as the Church teaches of the extraordinary means of salvation, because even though God taught us of that ordinary means of salvation, it does not make Him a liar, for Him to make exception to His own rule. Lying implies deceit, and there is no deceit in the Gospel. It's not a lie for God to tell us "nobody comes to the Father except through me" and then on His own say, "the Sentilese people are cool cause xyz reasons." Rather that is fully in keeping with His Sovereignty, His Faithfulness, and His Mercy.

[Nea Skotia]

I always quite like the ChristenUnie approach in the Netherlands. For context, they're a protestant, slightly left of center(economically speaking) party. They're against abortion (obviously), but are in favour of supporting pregnant women by giving them preference on getting a home, or being able to continue their education. They are also in favour of putting contraception methods in the basic health insurance (the pill). And more counseling and sex education.

Now, granted, my stance on abortion is different from theirs{I won't go into that further here, it's not the thread}, but I cannot fault them on supporting the whole process from before conception, during pregnancy and after birth.

I definitely like the idea of getting pregnant women a home and an education. Feels exceptionally pro-life to me.

Not to mention pro-family to make sure the next generation can start off on a better footing than the last one.

[Welskerland]

Are all Christians technically Noahides?

[Kerosene Cucumbers]

Are all Christians technically Noahides?

No we played hide and go seek plenty times as children.

[Benuty]

Children are essential for perpetuating society and the Church, so it is normal to see them as assets that we have a duty to produce.

Perhaps, but I find that it adds fuel to the fire of anti-natalist talking points when we reduce a person down to what they bring to the table.

[Benuty]

Are all Christians technically Noahides?

If you want the Orthodox Jewish answer it ranges from no (Idolatry) to its complicated (Shituf). There is a reason ecumenism has been easier between non-Orthodox Jewish traditions (such as Reform) as many in the Orthodox fold consider Churches a place of idolatry. Suffice to say given the complicated history between Judaism and Christianity its sadly not going to be any easier anytime soon. Ultimately the primary issue here is the Trinity as it doesn't fit with modern Jewish conceptions of Godhood (or the Islamic concepts of it either).

[New-Minneapolis]

Are all Christians technically Noahides?

If you want the Orthodox Jewish answer it ranges from no (Idolatry) to its complicated (Shituf). There is a reason ecumenism has been easier between non-Orthodox Jewish traditions (such as Reform) as many in the Orthodox fold consider Churches a place of idolatry. Suffice to say given the complicated history between Judaism and Christianity its sadly not going to be any easier anytime soon. Ultimately the primary issue here is the Trinity as it doesn't fit with modern Jewish conceptions of Godhood (or the Islamic concepts of it either).

I’m a ex-Christian that is very seriously considering converting to Judaism when my grandmother passes away. She is 89 with congestive heart failure and rheumatoid arthritis, with the latter being quite severe.

She basically the only person that isn’t delusional that gives a shit about me and a true sense of support.

I would consider some Christians “Noahides”…..and from what I’ve seen, many Gen Z Christians don’t want to be associated with Zionism and supersessionism absolutely dominates young Christians.