Post: #26

Fucker sure likes changing shit.

Post: #27

(12-09-2017 09:29 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Fucker sure likes changing shit.

Like I've already said in the main pope Francis thread...he isn't even the real pope.
His predecessor Pope Benedict XVI is still alive.
You can't have 2 living popes at the same time.
One of them must be an impostor.

Post: #28

I can read ancient Greek, and the traditional English translation seems just fine.

But don't take my word for it. See the Greek for yourself at the Perseus Project:

Matthew 6:13: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0155

Luke 11:4: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0155

Quote:μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν

The phrase in question ("lead not") in the original Greek is μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς. εἰσενέγκῃς is the verb, and μὴ makes it negative. At Perseus, you can click on each word to access more information about it. Open up the lexicon entries to see definitions. Most of the examples there, however, are from classical literature. But you can always refer to a biblical lexicon. Here are different entries on this verb (whose dictionary form is εἰσφέρω) gathered into one place. See how it is used in various passages:

http://biblehub.com/greek/1533.htm

The verb's tense is aorist and its mood is subjunctive. Here's a site that discusses some of the major uses of the subjunctive mood:

http://ntgreek.org/learn_nt_greek/subj-detail-frame.htm

The verb in question is the main verb of an independent clause. I think it is entirely reasonable to interpret it as a subjunctive of prohibition (or, negative command). As that site explains (click the "Subjunctive of Prohibition" link to load the proper frame),

Quote:It is formed by using the negating adverb (mh) [μὴ] with the aorist subjunctive, typically in the second person.

The verb is in the second person singular.

Hence, "lead not."

The rest seems straightforward enough: ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν. ἡμᾶς is an accusative plural form of the first person pronoun ἐγώ. I take it as the direct object of the verb. Hence, "lead us not." εἰς is a preposition (translated "into") taking the accusative object πειρασμόν, which can be translated as "temptation":

http://biblehub.com/greek/3986.htm

Thus, "Lead us not into temptation."

Post: #29

The original line is confusing - is it suggesting that God intentionally leads us into temptation to screw with us and test us? Because if that's the case, it's pretty important to point out and should be left as it is.

"Do not let us fall into temptation" isn't a bad switch, I guess, but of course I'm wary of anything this pope does.

Post: #30

(12-09-2017 09:35 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  Like I've already said in the main pope Francis thread...he isn't even the real pope.
His predecessor Pope Benedict XVI is still alive.
You can't have 2 living popes at the same time.
One of them must be an impostor.

I don 't think it's true.
First of all mercenary are you a catholic or someone well versed in catholic rules? You sound like a typical American protestant to me with all your conspiracy theories, probably including common American protestant theories how Vatican is Whore of Babylon and such.
Second it would be weird if Catholics had no rules how to elect new pope if the existing pope is too sick for work, comatose, has gone crazy or becomes a Heretic. I am pretty sure they have a procedure how to let the previous Pope go without murdering him.
I agree trough that the way Benedict just left without any serious reason like illness that would not let him do his duties is suspicious. The guy just acted like - "meh too much stress for me" and left. Very weird. But then again what should Catholics do if a Pope just refuses to act on his duties? Murder him? Probably not, they should just elect a new one while the old one is alive.
Maybe they did murder Popes like that in middle ages when death penalty was justified in public opinion and also for Heresy and "Witchcraft" not just violent crimes. With today's sensible society and people being against death penalty even for serial killers this move would not work well.

Post: #31

(12-09-2017 07:27 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  The pope is only head of the catholic church, NOT of all christians.

Protestants and other various other christian denominations have not recognised his authority on anything for many centuries.
In fact, even large numbers of catholics have refused to follow the pope since the decisions of the 2nd vatican council from 1962 to 1965 and set up their own old style traditional churches.


Bottom line:
Unless you are a strict roman catholic, you don't have to follow the pope's orders on anything.

Thankfully, he's NOT the Pope. Benedict is still wearing the Papal white, and residing in Vatican City. He's in error thinking he can take over the contemplative role of the Pope, while Bergoglio takes on the active/secular role, and the result is an Anti Pope wandering around causing trouble - but there you go, no need to go full Sede Vacantist.

Barnhardt goes into detail here.

Post: #32

^can you go into detail about this? I used to be Catholic and as such feel a kinship with my past.

What's the gossip surrounding this guy?

Post: #33

(12-10-2017 02:07 AM)stugatz Wrote:  The original line is confusing - is it suggesting that God intentionally leads us into temptation to screw with us and test us? Because if that's the case, it's pretty important to point out and should be left as it is.

"Do not let us fall into temptation" isn't a bad switch, I guess, but of course I'm wary of anything this pope does.

If the Pope really wanted to repair Christianity, he and all the cardinals would sell all the assets of the church, give them to the poor, and then go be itinerant preachers:


Luke 18

Quote:The Rich and the Kingdom of God

18A certain ruler asked him, “Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?”

19“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone. 20You know the commandments: ‘You shall not commit adultery, you shall not murder, you shall not steal, you shall not give false testimony, honor your father and mother.’a ”

21“All these I have kept since I was a boy,” he said.

22When Jesus heard this, he said to him, “You still lack one thing. Sell everything you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven. Then come, follow me.”

23When he heard this, he became very sad, because he was very wealthy. 24Jesus looked at him and said, “How hard it is for the rich to enter the kingdom of God! 25Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

Luke 9

Quote:Jesus Sends Out the Twelve

1When Jesus had called the Twelve together, he gave them power and authority to drive out all demons and to cure diseases, 2and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal the sick. 3He told them: “Take nothing for the journey—no staff, no bag, no bread, no money, no extra shirt. 4Whatever house you enter, stay there until you leave that town. 5If people do not welcome you, leave their town and shake the dust off your feet as a testimony against them.” 6So they set out and went from village to village, proclaiming the good news and healing people everywhere.

Could you imagine how revitalized the church would be if these bozos walked the walk?

Why is he diddling with the Lord's Prayer? Does he honestly think that if God wanted it phrased differently, he wouldn't have taken care of it a long time ago?



Does he honestly that God will fail to understand this verse unless he tinkers with it?

Guess what pope, God knows what we mean, seeing as how HE INVENTED MEANING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

This verse is simply a humble plea. I am willing to be tested, only please please please don't make it too hard.

As in, Lord, please don't let my wife hire a hot nanny.

Post: #34

(12-10-2017 12:55 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  If the Pope really wanted to repair Christianity, he and all the cardinals would sell all the assets of the church, give them to the poor, and then go be itinerant preachers:

On the Vatican's supposed wealth. Quote:

Quote:First of all, the Catholic Church is the single greatest charitable institution in the History of man. We're the ones who invented soup kitches. And hospitals. And orphanages. We have entire religious orders devoted to serving the poor and sick. Forbes ranks the Catholic Charities USA as being among the top fifteen largest charities in the United States, with our having spent $4.5 billion dollars -- money collected from Christ-loving Catholics -- caring for just the American needy in 2014 alone.1 And that's just the United States. We have missions, hospitals, orphanages, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, etc., all over the planet. For example, according to Rome Reports, here's what the Church does just for Africa. It runs:

1,074 hospitals
5,373 primary care centers
186 leprosy treatment centers
1,279 clinics
753 homes for the elderly and disabled
979 orphanages
1,997 nurseries
1,590 marriage counseling centers
2,947 social education centers

In addition to caring for the needy and sick is the caring for our cultural heritage. The Vatican preserves the great works of art that've been entrusted to the Church, and makes them available to the entire world in its museums. These beautiful works, freely given to or commissioned by the Church, are meant to inspire us! Would the world be better off if these invaluable treasures of the Western world were removed from Vatican museums, auctioned off at Sotheby's, and turned into tchotchke sitting in some Jewish guy's Manhattan penthouse? Really?

Post: #35

Ha! That's like using a press release as your source for a news story.

Let's see their books, and what is spent on what.

Post: #36

(12-10-2017 11:50 AM)The Beast1 Wrote:  ^can you go into detail about this? I used to be Catholic and as such feel a kinship with my past.

What's the gossip surrounding this guy?

The one i heard is that Benedict wanted to crack down on all the homosexuals in the church. He was give a choice, leave freely or be "removed". He chose the former. He didnt want to end up dead after 33 days like john paul the 1st in 1978.

The last pope to resign before that was in 1415....over 600 years ago. And even in that case they did not chose a successor until the resigning pope was dead. There hasnt been 2 popes alive at the same time since the 1200s. For good reason. Only 1 man can be in direct communication God at one time to avoid contradictions and mixed messages.

As soon as Francis got into power on 13 march 2013 (lots of 13s there) he started making faggot friendly talk.

Post: #37

(12-10-2017 12:55 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Why is he diddling with the Lord's Prayer? Does he honestly think that if God wanted it phrased differently, he wouldn't have taken care of it a long time ago?



Does he honestly that God will fail to understand this verse unless he tinkers with it?

Guess what pope, God knows what we mean, seeing as how HE INVENTED MEANING IN THE FIRST PLACE.

Post: #38

For those who want a bit more info here is the wikipedia article on papal reunciation and how rare it truly is.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_renunciation



And here some info on Pope John Paul I, who died mysteriously after only 33 days in power, probably because he was ready to expose the corruption in the vatican bank.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pope_John_...y_theories


If I was a diehard catholic, I would renounce this antipope heretic on the left and only recognise the one on the right of the photo below.

Post: #39

(12-10-2017 01:26 PM)debeguiled Wrote:  Ha! That's like using a press release as your source for a news story.

Let's see their books, and what is spent on what.

The whole "Why doesn't the Catholic Church give to the poor?" is a ridiculous, but sadly common, misconception. They DO give to the poor - they give tremendous amounts to the poor - and this isn't even including all of the unofficial, undocumented giving that individual Catholics perform.

I provide you with an explanation of this and you snort in derision; then you demand the impractical standard that you, personally, get to audit the books of the Church.

Get bent. What we do with our money is none of your business. I don't want a bunch of wags pouring over the books, looking for discrepancies, and lambasting some poor priest because he didn't spend his church's money in the smartest way possible.

You want to know what we do with our money? We build beautiful homes for God, which are open to the public to experience and enjoy. We perform charitable works, organizing hospitals and care centres. We protect tradition with monasteries and convents. HOW we choose to do this - how we organize our books - is none of your flippin' business.

If you want to argue that these beautiful works should be sold, so that we could donate to the poor, you'll find yourself in good company with Judas Iscariot:

Quote:(Matthew 26:6-13; Mark 14:3-9)

1Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead. 2There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him. 3Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 4Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him, 5Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor? 6This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein. 7Then said Jesus, Let her alone: against the day of my burying hath she kept this. 8For the poor always ye have with you; but me ye have not always.

The first time somebody makes this false claim, I'll calmly point them towards an article which corrects their misinformation. If they ignore that, I'm forced to conclude that they're being willfully obstinate; they simply want to attack the Church, facts be damned!

Post: #40

I don't think that's a change at all. In spanish it has always been said like that "...y no nos dejes caer en la tentacion."

Post: #41

I don't mind if you compare me to Judas, but NEVER accuse me of snorting.

Post: #42

(12-10-2017 03:57 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  If I was a diehard catholic, I would renounce this heretic on the left and only recognise the one on the right of the photo below.

The one on the right is a heretic as well.

The right answer is to just say that the Chair is empty and has been for a long while. The Church can continue without a pope, but a pope can't hold heretical beliefs and stay in office. He loses his authority automatically, it's a safeguard given for the faithful so we aren't forced to following the teachings of an antipope. But that's another discussion...

Post: #43

(12-09-2017 09:35 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 09:29 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Fucker sure likes changing shit.

Like I've already said in the main pope Francis thread...he isn't even the real pope.
His predecessor Pope Benedict XVI is still alive.
You can't have 2 living popes at the same time.
One of them must be an impostor.

What the Pope just can't get the bankers box from office depot? He's gotta use that fancy motherfucker?

And look and the moulding. It's gold. The rug, it kicks ass. The Pope has nice stuff.

The 4.5 billion they spend on charity I bet could be doubled if they got a little frugal.

Aloha!

Post: #44

Watch it Kona, or you will be given a time out in the Judas box with me.

Post: #45

(12-10-2017 05:59 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 09:35 PM)Mercenary Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 09:29 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  Fucker sure likes changing shit.

Like I've already said in the main pope Francis thread...he isn't even the real pope.
His predecessor Pope Benedict XVI is still alive.
You can't have 2 living popes at the same time.
One of them must be an impostor.

What the Pope just can't get the bankers box from office depot? He's gotta use that fancy motherfucker?

And look and the moulding. It's gold. The rug, it kicks ass. The Pope has nice stuff.

The 4.5 billion they spend on charity I bet could be doubled if they got a little frugal.

Aloha!

Well, the Pope *is* a Head of State...

Also, some of the Vatican relics have more historical and symbolic value than financial value.

Megachurch billionaires don't quite have either excuse.

Post: #46

There is no good and evil; only God's will; and therefore he does lead us into temptation.

To say that this Pope is highly questionable is an understatement.

The whole goal of atheists after all is to rebuff the idea that God has any influence on the world, and to say that we are the gods, capable of doing whatever we want.

It reek of arrogance and self importance, and so does this attempt by the Pope to change a perfect line.

Post: #47

People who speak about Catholics having to sell their properties, works of art and all fancy stuff are just envious and want the Catholic church to fail anyway.

How are these people different from communists and socialists who hate any person having hard earned good stuff? It's the same thinking as commies coming to power and dismantling historical castles and palaces of bourgeois so that "laborers could get their fair share", destroying art and history. The properties owned by Catholic Church are an amalgamation of centuries of work of classical artists and donations of people who wanted the church to have this good stuff. If you think that some secular private or government company would take better care of these works of art infused with holy meaning you are delusional.

The Catholics must keep their ornate decorations, because they do work psychologically and cause a man's mind to wonder to higher levels.

I have always been disgusted by protestant pastors dressed in wordy suits, indistinguishable from any common businessman, holding service in plain horizontal buildings with basic non-ornate IKEA like furniture. The mind cannot wander vertically there and remains attached to the earth. These protestant megachurches with digital screens and disco balls instead of frescoes and paintings are actually much more materialistic and preach that you must get rich if you are a Christian, making it all about money in the end. And these churches separate from each other at rate of rabbits fucking, there is not much Christian unity there and no protection against heresy and liberal ideas, like female pastors and such.

The Catholic Church must defiantly also keep their lands and assets too. Of course those who want the church to fail would love to see them begging and hold them to an impossible standard. This is so common among people who have no intention to lead a moral life themselves - they look at the people at least making an attempt of morality and claiming that since they are not perfect they must be hypocrites. The only hypocrites here are those who hold others to impossible standards while having no standards for themselves.

No protestant church or any other religion does the same amount of Charity as Catholic's anyway.

I am not a Catholic anymore but I must defend it against such baseless attacks which are just wishful thinking of envious people who don't know what they are talking about.

Post: #48

This "Pope" was sent by the devil. Everything he does is suspect.