Traditional Auto-de-fe
The heretics weren’t burned till after the ceremony
Jewish leaders and community groups criticised Pope Benedict XVI strongly yesterday after the head of the Roman Catholic Church formally removed restrictions on celebrating an old form of the Latin mass which includes prayers calling for the Jews to ‘be delivered from their darkness’ and converted to Catholicism.
The older rite’s prayers calling on God to ‘lift the veil from the eyes’ of the Jews and to end ‘the blindness of that people so that they may acknowledge the light of your truth, which is Christ’ – used just once a year during the Good Friday service – have sparked outrage.
The Pope also sparked bewilderment when he made no mention of anti-Semitism, or the fact that the Nazis killed millions of people because they were Jewish, in a speech last year at Auschwitz. He also failed to acknowledge that there might be some degree of collective responsibility of the German people.
I could care less how any organized superstition cares to manage their ideology. But, when their politics pander to elitism and ethnic hatred, that must be recognized and opposed. Within and without.
Yes, Mr. Fusion, it is a good try.
Jägermeister, I was not equating all atheist with Communist. You were. I merely stated that there has been atheist who have killed to refute Peter’s naïve view of atheism.
It is my opinion that humanity is violent by nature and no matter what ideology or religion it always ends with death.
59 – It’s not that the Jews of 2000 years ago rejected him. Christianity was completely Jewish when it started. Recent archaeological unearthings of Herod’s temple have shown that the scene where a group of Jews shouted Let his blood be upon us, and our children, allow for no more than 100-150 people. This took place in a city which had swelled to several hundred thousand people as the time for the Passover took place. These are the ones who just days earlier proclaimed Hosannah, blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord, as they placed palm leaves down as he rode into town. (the origin of Palm Sunday) Only a very small portion of the first century Jews actually rejected Jesus, and those who did were no doubt part of the establishment who were already under the control of Rome and Herod. Unfortunately, the Jews have gotten a bum rap for the crucifixion of Jesus. Granted, they held a mock trial, which was completely against Jewish law of the time, but they were unable to deliver death sentences, which is why they were forced to carry their plight to the Pontious Pilate. The Jews didn’t kill Jesus; the Romans did.
That being said; Judiasm does make a lot more sense than Christianity does. Unfortunately, Christianity has drifted away from its Hebraic roots, and when viewed alongside Jewish thought, it helps to make both systems more understandable.
33,
80% of the problems in the middle east, are caused by 1 THING…
Education, and the repression of knowledge. Even of there OWN Belief.
They dont want ANYONE to read the book, EXCEPT those that are educated? Then they wont Educate Anyone enough to read the writings of Mohamud(sp) except the rich.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh3oIo6pvLM
Enjoy.
Uga bogga bogga.. gods and aliens and the supernatural oh my!!!!!
62, you have some good points…
It just that NO ONE teaches OTHER beliefs…
And understanding.
Even the Jewish religion lets most, debate the Koran.
#62 ‘This took place in a city which had swelled to several hundred thousand people as the time for the Passover took place.’
I always saw this as the best evidence yet for time travel being practical.
In regard
to a previous poster whose notion of anarchism seem to not reach further than using it as the casual buzzword for “chaos” – (thomas i think it was?)
anarchism is just another way of organizing yourself and your community. It is democracy with checks and balances to prevent the rise of authoritarianism that threaten to undo democracy. The parliamentary system of liberal and capitalist markets have proven their track record in this regard … same goes for the “mixed system” of social democrat governments here in the nordic countries.
Please at least consider the notion that the millions of anarchists who organized large parts of Spain (1930s), Manchuria (1940s), Russia (1917-1921) in the more successful campaigns of the last century actually were capable of deciding for themselves what kind of society they wanted. Same goes for the anarchist inspiring principles which is at the forefront of today’s globalization movement.
If you feel that the word anarchism doesn’t match these tendencies and practices, perhaps you could think of them in some of the other terms anarchists tend to use to describe themselves; libertarian for example.
#68
> anarchism is just another way of organizing yourself and your community
I’m not sure what definition of anarchy you are using but clearly it is not the one the rest of us use. To wit:
Or
The moment any community puts down any rule or law or guideline (or any cohesive principle for that matter, including that they have no principles) they are by definition no longer in anarchy. What do think “organizing” entails? By the way, democracies are most definitively not anarchies; they are rule by popular vote.
Furthermore, if you have a group of anarchists that are organized by a common purpose to end governments, then they themselves are not in anarchy!
> Please at least consider the notion that the millions of
> anarchists who organized large parts of Spain (1930s),
> Manchuria (1940s), Russia (1917-1921)
First, the statement “anarchists who organized” is a contradiction in terms. Second, I question your examples and cannot discuss further without more information about their specifics. However, if by Russia you are implying the Bolshevik revolution, then you are most definitely mistaken. They were absolutely organized by a common set of principles with both declared and implied guidelines on behavior which would preclude them from being anarchists by any reasonable definition of the term.
Exactly so, Thomas. People, get it straight; the largest possible organization of anarchists has a membership of ONE.
The ideal of philosophical anarchists is a society without law or government, made up of completely autonomous individuals who do what is right and socially necessary from their own realization of their responsibilities and rights, without any need to be coerced into doing the right thing by threat of punishment.
#62 It’s not that the Jews of 2000 years ago rejected him. Christianity was completely Jewish when it started.
And
#62 Only a very small portion of the first century Jews actually rejected Jesus,
It was my understanding that quite a few Jews believed in Jesus, right up until he was publicly executed…
Being tortured and executed by the Romans was not the course of action most Jews believed the long-prophecised Messiah would take when he finally arrived on earth.
I expect that Jews also had/have a hard time making room for three gods – the “Holy Trinity” – after a centuries-long relationship with their one God.
And if most jews did believe in Jesus, as you claim, why was Saul on his way to stamp-out the small group of Jewish deviants [do Jews use the word “heretic”?] when he had his conversion?
Man, the pope just doesn’t know how to do the whole racist thing. When I want to have my ethnic hatred pandered to, I come here to read JD and Co. having a go at the Mexicans.
I’ll interpret the comments at the end of the post as, I don’t hate Catholics, but this is something to be opposed because I disapprove.
Atheism is a form of religion; religion is the dogma that surrounds the principal beliefs of group, and concerns itself with a ‘godhead” (a focal point to which life is mainly concerned with), and not necessarily a “God”.
Anarchy is a catch-22 isn’t it, although it is the absence of “government”, however, it is itself a from of individual government.
I’m personally disagree with anyone or anything that places one person or certain people above others.
Calling the Pope a Nazi is not right, although he, as with most of his predecessors is a fascist by design. And for those that will refute this on the basis of a “country” is not involved then just think of “Heaven” or the “New Jerusalem” as such in this case.
See, and you guys thought the Pope was a nasty guy….Au Contraire, mon ami…..he’s showing his mercy by asking Ctholics to end the scourge of *blindness* amoung the worlds Jewery….not THATS a nice man. 🙂
75. “Atheism is a form of religion”
The prefix “a” means without. A theist is someone with a belief in god. thus, an atheist is someone without a belief in god. A rock is an atheist, it is without a belief in god. Toddlers are atheists, they are without a belief in god. You cannot base a dogma on a lack of a belief.
75—-Since you can’t understand the concept by defintion, maybe you can understand it by analogy. No 35 said it best “Atheism is a religion like not collecting stamps is a hobby.” Same with Government. You have to use the same defintion while discussing a word/concept, otherwise you wind up posting just like you did.
From your nonsense, I take it you are a deist? Please don’t respond to this last point. I just love pointing out how lame their thinking is.
#75
> Atheism is a form of religion; religion is the dogma that
> surrounds the principal beliefs of group, and concerns
> itself with a ‘godhead” (a focal point to which life is
> mainly concerned with), and not necessarily a “God”.
No. As SN (#76) mentioned, atheism, by its very definition, means one that lacks a theistic belief. Thus, an atheist is one that is not a theist. It is not a religion by any known definition of the word. To claim otherwise is to claim that any lack of belief is a religion (“the religion of those that do not believe Elvis is a god”, “the religion of those that do not believe in Santa Claus”, “the religion of those that do not believe the Easter Bunny exists”, “the religion of those that do not believe that the lint in my pocket is a god”…).
> Anarchy is a catch-22 isn’t it, although it is the absence
> of “government”, however, it is itself a from of individual
> government.
It appears you do not understand the terms you are using. Anarchy is not a form of government because by definition “government” implies many or at least more than one. It is nonsensical to consider the concept of “individual government” just as it is nonsensical to consider an “Individual society.” The terms imply more than one individual. Therefore, since real anarchy cannot exist outside of an individual, it cannot imply a form of government by any reasonable definition of the term.
This is a lame pope, who doesn’t understand his role in the world. If the church survives him it will be busy undoing his works.
Apparently this blog has to have at least one idiotic antireligious post a day for its jihad. In today’s episode, atheist gets mad because Jews are mad that the Pope is Catholic and they misunderstand liturgy. The Good Friday sermon is one of forgiveness and hope that Jews will join them one day, which to the racially-conscious Jews is taken perversely as as a demographic threat.
The Auschwitz complaint is BS too–he spoke quite a bit about anti-Semitism at Auschwitz. I find the collective responsibility complaint rather self-serving–Jews claim (falsely) that Christians hold them racially responsible for crucifying Jesus, yet complain when the Pope fails to hold Germans racially responsible for the Holocaust as though lacking such racial hatred is a form of anti-Semitism.
Man, as a practicing Jew myself, reading many of the posts scares the crap out of me. It amazes me how much anti-semitism there is out here – and from people who probably don’t think they are and probably consider themselves “good Christians”.
Jews aren’t “in the dark” – we have a beautfiul religion and tradition twice as old as yours (and Bhudism – for those of you who think of “Eastern Religion” as more venerable was “Western”. We love our faith as much as you love yours.
Jews are poeple just like people everywhere. Some are prideful – some aren’t. To think that only “Pride” stands between us and converting to Christianity is one of the most ignorant things I’ve heard in the 45 years of my life.
#76,77,78 – Atheism is not the lack of “belief” but the lack of “belief” in a “God”; the term I used is “godhead”, look it up. It would be nice if people would read what I type and not just show their ignorance.
#77 – “From your nonsense, I take it you are a deist? Please don’t respond to this last point. I just love pointing out how lame their thinking is.”
No, your comment is lame, and again shows your ignorance.
#78 – I apologize, I mistyped, I intended ‘governing’, not ‘government’.
#81 – I agree with you.
#82
It makes absolutely no difference whether you use the term “god”, “godhead”, “supreme being”, “Xenu”, “Flying Spaghetti Monster”, “Super Guy/Gal”, “life force”, “Thor”, “Zeus”, “uber-spirit” or any other variant. It is clear you still do not fundamentally grasp the nature of an atheist. Atheists (as opposed to anti-theists) simply state any and all of the above concepts lack evidence for credence. That’s it. For same reason we do not label a religion of those that do *not* believe in Thor, so too atheism is not a religion. It is the absence of religion or supernatural belief.
Your mistake is common. Most theists are unable to get their head around the concept of not believing in any supernatural being, force, or spirit. As someone once said, “We’re all atheists. I just believe in one less god than you.”
RE: #78
The difference between “governing” and “government” when deciding whether anarchy is a form of “government” is crucial is it not?
#83 – This thread has gone so off topic that now we are looking at what “religion” means, I see “religion” as more a general concept, and we disagree, let’s leave it at that and move on with our lives. Peace.
For the record, I am not a theist.