OT: Something worrying

[narf poit chez BOOM]

Jesus debate

First: Catholic Church. I'm not a member. Normally, I don't get involved when someone challenges them. I might favor one or the other, but A) I'm not an activist and B) It's not my job to play judge and/or jury.

Second: Someone trying to prove Jesus didn't exist. Affects me rather strongly; I'm a Christian.

Third: Billions of people are not. Still affects them. Someone is trying to legislate a belief system. We all have them, wether we label them 'God', 'Brahma', 'Zeus' or 'Atheism'. I can't prove God exists to anybody else; an atheist can't prove (s)he doesn't to anybody else. That's not the point. I have a right to spend the rest of my life convinced he does; the atheist has the right to spend the rest of his or her life convinced he doesn't. We each have the right to try to convince anyone who doesn't tell us to 'go away and don't come back'. We each have a legal right to solicite money for our beliefs; if we actually beleive what we say we do, we each have a moral right to solicite money for our beliefs.

Should God ever tell me 'I'm going to be in this park (Naming one) at noon today, tell everybody', I then have a right to prove to everybody God exists. People would also have a right to beleive that I'm crazy - Even after God showed up.

In other words, I have a right to submit proof of my beliefs to anybody and everybody who has not told me to 'Go away and don't come back'. I even have a right to do so with beleifs I (Theoretically) only pretend to hold - A legal right, even though not in my mind a moral one.

Likewise, the atheist has the right to write a scientific paper which proves, attempts to prove or even is a fake that pretends to prove, that Jesus doesn't exist, and to show said paper to me, provided I havn't told said atheist to 'Go away and don't come back'.

In other words, the atheist, or anyone else on the planet, has a right to submit proof, real, imagined or pretended, in support of their beliefs.

And if Luigi Cascioli plastered his beliefs all over every newspaper, television, radio station and even blog in the world that would give him the right to so publish, even if it was every single newspaper, television, radio station and blog in the world, I still would say 'That is his right; however much I abhore what he says, he has a right to say it.'

But what he doesn't have a right to do is to prevent me from believing what I believe, no matter what I believe, without limit.

In conclusion, I'm not asking you to support the Catholic Church. I'm not asking myself to. I'm asking you to support every persons right to believe whatever they want, including the members of the Catholic Church.

I'm not asking for a response, or money, or votes - Just that you think about it.

[Jack Simth]

Whether it's worrysome or not depends greatly on whether or not the end-times prophecies in the Bible are worrysome. The event seems to fit the feel of them....

[Suicide Junkie]

Interesting...

I'm guessing that the court will either decide that the specified laws don't apply to organized religion through a technicality, or that they'll be struck down as overstepping the bounds of the government.

[Renegade 13]

It does not worry me. Italian courts will throw the case out and that will be the end of it, most likely. Even if the case was upheld and proceeded, leading to the illegality of teaching the existence of Jesus, it would not be a portent of ill times to come. It would be bad for Italy and Italians howerver, by supressing free speech. But here, in Canada, I highly doubt it would directly affect me and my daily life, or the daily life of billions of other people around the world.

[ZeroAdunn]

Jesus? Yah, I worked with that guy a few years back, good guy but crazy as all get out.

[Raging Deadstar]

All the time we're hearing about right-wing christians/muslims/insert faith here or fundementalists or extremists. Well, here's proof that Atheists have them too

I think what this guy's doing is wrong and my 'beliefs' are summed up by secular humanism. I do have one faith in the Catholic Church though...

I have faith that the Vaticans Order of Holy Lawyers will triumph

[Strategia_In_Ultima]

OK, now I really have an urge to post "NOOOOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!" but I have something serious to say about the matter too.

OK, first off, I'm a devout (if you could call it that) atheist, I don't believe in God or any supernatural being, if I were to believe in anything it's be science. I don't believe Christ rose from his grave on Easter, but I do believe he existed. As a person, if nothing else.

There is plenty of evidence for that, but I'm not gonna try and put up some coherent sources here - but think about this: if Christ never existed, how did the Catholic Church ever come into being? Suddenly and inexplicably? No. Religions, much less churches, aren't founded without a prophet. They don't just pop into existence. By far the most logical person to be the prophet for the Catholic faith, is Jesus Christ.

(Still, the question remains - how then did the Catholic church become the [ib]Catholic[/b] church, and not the Christian church? Most world faiths are named after their prophets, or the core ("Islam" means peace) of their faith. Where then did the name "Catholic" come from? There's probably a logical explanation for this, but I don't know it.)

There. That's been said. Now on to other business.

NOOOOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition!!!

[El_Phil]

I do like the bit

'The first is "Abuso di Credulita Popolare" (Abuse of Popular Belief) meant to protect people against being swindled or conned'

So true! Anyone else (bar another religion) trying that, they'd be torn apart by police/trading standards.

If someone says something to you which causes you to give them money and it then emerges they were lying you have legal recourse to get that money back. Unless it's a religion in which case it's gone forever, which I do have a problem with.

I think what he's trying to argue is that the collection plate after a church service is nothing more than "obtaining money by deception" as Jesus probably didn't exist or if he did wasn't the son of God.

I like his style and it does makes me laugh.

[Ed Kolis]

Strategia_In_Ultima said:
(Still, the question remains - how then did the Catholic church become the [ib]Catholic[/b] church, and not the Christian church? Most world faiths are named after their prophets, or the core ("Islam" means peace) of their faith. Where then did the name "Catholic" come from? There's probably a logical explanation for this, but I don't know it.)

"Catholic" means "universal"; this is why even the Protestants believe in "one holy catholic and apostolic church"; it's just that the Roman Catholic church (as well as a few other Christian churches) have made that word part of their name.

As for "Islam", I believe a more apt translation is "submission", i.e. "submission to the will of God"; "Muslim" is thus "one who submits" (to God).

[El_Phil]

That explains a random fact I recently found out: The Anglican church in Japan is called the "Japanese Holy Catholic Church" despite, obviously, being nothing to do with any flavour of Catholicism. Now I know why. Cheers Ed!