Vatican: Everyone can use condoms to prevent HIV

[AlphaFrog]

CAN God choose not to know the future?

That's one of those questions that will make you go cross-eyed if you think too much about it.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

CAN God choose not to know the future?

That's one of those questions that will make you go cross-eyed if you think too much about it.

I think what I was remembering is Open Theism.

[Animate]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

CAN God choose not to know the future?

That's one of those questions that will make you go cross-eyed if you think too much about it.

Depends on if you think God knows the future, and if so in how much detail.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by Animate

Depends on if you think God knows the future, and if so in how much detail.

Or if you understand God being outside of time rather than bound by time. If one is outside of time, is there such a thing as past, present or future?

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Or if you understand God being outside of time rather than bound by time. If one is outside of time, is there such a thing as past, present or future?

Plus, there's man's limited understanding of those things, versus God's omnipotence and omnipresence . . . it's one of those "even if we could tell you, how likely is it you'd understand?" things for most versions.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

Plus, there's man's limited understanding of those things, versus God's omnipotence and omnipresence . . . it's one of those "even if we could tell you, how likely is it you'd understand?" things for most versions.

Origen of Alexandria (c 185-254) described Scripture as divine baby talk, saying that God speaks to us like an adult speaks to a baby that understands only the simplest words and concepts.

[starang21]

Originally Posted by Kevin

The Catholic Church in recent years has made it awfully difficult to support the Pope. I'm a life-long Catholic, but have recently been considering the Episcopal Church in the wake of the Pope's involvement with covering up sex abuse and some of the church's views.

the catholic church has made it hard to support the catholic church.

LOL.

i'm still a catholic, but i hit the non-denoms now. i never really got anything out of the homily and would just stare into space. or text.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Low C Sharp

How many people had to die of AIDS before the Vatican came to its senses about condoms? About 25 million, over the course of the last 30 years. It's pretty extraordinary that until now, preventing pregnancy was considered a worse sin than spreading death. This is a source of moral leadership?

I'm sorry, this is what happens when you seek sexual guidance from a geriatric virgin wearing a dress.

Now, to play devil's advocate, if the people with AIDs were following the Catholic Church's teachings it wouldn't have been spread so fast and might never have become an epidemic. It's harder to blame the Pope for causing the problem when it's fairly obvious the relevant individuals are not listening to him anyway. Realistic? No. But at least it's internally consistent.

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

My pastor was talking recently about people who make the arguement thay the Bible couldn't possibly account for all of the scientific and social develoments of the modern world. The problem with that line of thinking is that most Christian religions take the Bible as the divine Word of God, or at the very least the Inspired Word of God. That being the case, can you really argue that God didn't know what kind of shape the world would be in 2010?

Beyond the other things mentioned you could take the stance that the human writers of the Bible, divinely inspired though they may be, could not have comprehended the modern world and thus couldn't have written much about it if at all. Question then would be why aren't there more scriptures being written now and recognized as God's word. Answer to that would be that the basics are covered in the current book so deal.

Gets damned confusing after a while.

ETA: Anyone know of any sort of sites where theological debates happen as a matter of course? I'm looking for some place where someone could attempt to counteract my thought processes and provide me with some different points of view. Almost a "Try to convert me, please" thing but with someone far more educated than our local hobbit. Unless anyone here would like to volunteer...

[Low C Sharp]

Now, to play devil's advocate, if the people with AIDs were following the Catholic Church's teachings it wouldn't have been spread so fast and might never have become an epidemic. It's harder to blame the Pope for causing the problem when it's fairly obvious the relevant individuals are not listening to him anyway.

I'm not blaming the pope for causing the problem, just for fanning its flames -- or at least preventing people from slowing it down. When it comes to AIDS, the relevant individuals include more than just the people on the street spreading infection who don't listen to the pope. The government of Brazil and missionary hospitals in Africa, just to name two highly relevant groups, DO listen to the pope. When he and his predecessor told them not to hand out condoms, they didn't hand out condoms.

If the new policy was right in 2010, my guess is that it was also right in 1982. I have to quote a '60s folk song here: How many deaths will it take till he knows that too many people have died? For the pope, I guess the answer is roughly 25 million (with a lot more to come).
________
PRILOSEC SETTLEMENTS

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Now, to play devil's advocate, if the people with AIDs were following the Catholic Church's teachings it wouldn't have been spread so fast and might never have become an epidemic. It's harder to blame the Pope for causing the problem when it's fairly obvious the relevant individuals are not listening to him anyway. Realistic? No. But at least it's internally consistent.

We all know the Pope didn't cause the problem, it was the CIA.

*adjusts tin foil hat*