Pope is/was a Dictator

Mr.fredy5 wrote:

Yes but alexander could do great prophet skills and even that it does not say any thing about his death so no one knows how he died (big piece missing there)

my point is that past writings should be taken seriusly.

Voice of Reason wrote:

Jesus never condemned rich people he just said that money makes it harder to be a good person. He ate once with a rich man and didn't command him to give away all his property, only to pay back those whom he charged to much.
Also the church (I'm talking about the catholic one) itself is not rich. Neither is the pope, nor most of the clerics. All the income by church taxes and property rights is either used for restauration, Salary or humanitarian projects.
The church is an institution, made up of every single being it hosts.

Since the Pope has the right to manage money at will he defacto posseses it through the IOR thus making the church quite a rich institution.

Voice of Reason wrote:

The Gospels were written between 70-100 AD, Markus being the original one. We believe that none of the authors were apostles, but namesakes documenting the Teaching of the Apostles. Written in Hebrew(for Jews, Markus and John) and ancient Greek (for Pagans, Lukas and Matthew) these four were the most common Gospels used until the 3rd century when a council decided that these four Gospels were the true word of our lord.
Before anyone asks: There is a Gospel of MaryMagdalene, but it was written in the 6th century probably by the cainite sect.

Man was created in the image of God not as God. We just look like him, so to say. God is perfect and pure and by no means just 2000 years can change him.

Honestly, if you take "His Dark Materials" as the book you want to judge our faith on, I would recommend you not to discuss this topic. Or you could ask yourself what faith old Dumbledore followed and critisize that one, I bet it has unicorns in it (With long thick horns). ;-)

I personally don't judge your faith. I simply judge the catholic church which is in my view simply a power-accumulating manipulating and faith exploitating institution which uses its influence in the benefit of the wealthiest and most powerful classes.

anyway the pope is a dictator in the vatican but he is under no means an evil one.

mattabesta wrote:

anyway the pope is a dictator in the vatican but he is under no means an evil one.

Depends on what you consider "evil". The vatican is responsible for covering up mafia financial operations, narcotrafic, weapons traficking, financial and moral support of murderous right-wing dictatorships in Argentina, Chile, Brazil, Philippines, El Salvador and Honduras. If such things are not intrinsic to an "evil" person in your perspective, then, yeah, the Pope is not evil.

I sincerely doubt that you have any evidence to proove the accusations you just made Zealot.
Anyway how can you be a dictator when you are elected to office by your peers in a democratic process. Even though it is of course the Holy Spirit talking through the cardinals who elevates the pope.

We don't need to abolish the Catholic Church, and we don't need to ban the pope either. The pope is usually a major influence over people. Remember John Paul II? He was a great pope, giving hope to millions of people all over the world. We could have the next pope, maybe a socialist one.

Money is a different story. While religious figures DO need money to survive and to restore religious places, like the Vatican, they don't need to keep a lot of excess cash. Place that money in international organizations to help other countries.

They do.

Voice of Reason wrote:

I sincerely doubt that you have any evidence to proove the accusations you just made Zealot.

Well, I base those accusations on serious researches which are based on the evidence themselves. So, while I don't have the evidence, I have material based on the existing evidence. Let aside simpe analysis of Vatican's policies, for example, regarding to international politics. John Paul II, for example, pleaded to Latin American priests not to get involved into political issues. Why? Because several priests in Latin America were supporters of left wing, they were people which were really in contact with the peoples of their nation thus supporting policies that benefited them. However, John Paul II was himself terribly involved in the financing and moral support of Solidarnosti. Not only incongruence but parcialism.

Voice of Reason wrote:

Anyway how can you be a dictator when you are elected to office by your peers in a democratic process. Even though it is of course the Holy Spirit talking through the cardinals who elevates the pope.

I think we can call the Pope some sort of "democratically elected dictator". Why? because while he's chosen democratically within the cardinals, once he's elected his mandate should be followed without question. He can be criticized, but he after all has the last word.

carmen510 wrote:

We don't need to abolish the Catholic Church, and we don't need to ban the pope either. The pope is usually a major influence over people. Remember John Paul II? He was a great pope, giving hope to millions of people all over the world. We could have the next pope, maybe a socialist one.

The Catholic Church sponsors a plethora of crimes: from sexual abuse to murderous dictatorships and mafias.

John Paul II's "contributions" are greatly exagerated and sometimes based on phallacies. He was an avid supporter of Franco, for example. Some official John Paul II's Biographers claim that John Paul II did a lot to save Jews during WWII while he had admitted himself that he did nothing to aid them.

carmen510 wrote:

Money is a different story. While religious figures DO need money to survive and to restore religious places, like the Vatican, they don't need to keep a lot of excess cash. Place that money in international organizations to help other countries.

Yeah every institution needs money to survive within a capitalist framework and such a masisve institution as the Vatican which aside searchesto have some political international influence needs a lot. What do they do with that excess money? They use it for the deffense of priests accused of sexual abuse, they use it to finance movements which can expand their influence, they use it for propaganda, indeed they share a dime or two with charitable organizations, they use it for marketing, for money washing. They need to keep that profitable business running...

Quote :

The Gospels were written between 70-100 AD,

And the aposols where 50 when they joined jesus so they could not have made it hence it is not the word of god.

@Zealot
Still waiting for the evidence of your accusations. I think even in more than one topic. I would also be happy about a book title.
Till then refrain from talking bad language about my church.

@Mr.Fredy5
I don't think they were 50 already. Please read my whole post.
You can keep arguing as long as you want, for christians it is the word of our lord.

Voice of Reason wrote:

@Zealot
Still waiting for the evidence of your accusations. I think even in more than one topic. I would also be happy about a book title.
Till then refrain from talking bad language about my church.

"The Power and Glory" by David Yallop. If you want I can cite the evidence he cites if that makes it easier to you.

"The whore of Babylon" by Fernando Vallejo.

These are so far my two main bibliographic sources.

And is not bad words, it's mere objectivity.

If you say so.
I will look up the books, but I can't fetch them before monday.
Until then, how about a discussion about our Newgrounds connection. Obviously no one got my Penicorn reference.

Voice of Reason wrote:

If you say so.
I will look up the books, but I can't fetch them before monday.
Until then, how about a discussion about our Newgrounds connection. Obviously no one got my Penicorn reference.

Well, that would be more a "Red Square" like discussion.

the pope dosent really have any major power, its like the king and queen here in Denmark and other countries, its just for show mainly, of course the pope does lead alot of people but even they are with reason ( i hope ) and if you use some you will see that bible have many flaws, the best example is in the beginning of the hole thing, Adam and Eve had only to children Kain and Abel, that is to boys, so how did humanity evolve from that with out ether Kain or Abel having sex with their own mom ?

Ryom wrote:

the pope dosent really have any major power, its like the king and queen here in Denmark and other countries, its just for show mainly, of course the pope does lead alot of people but even they are with reason ( i hope ) and if you use some you will see that bible have many flaws, the best example is in the beginning of the hole thing, Adam and Eve had only to children Kain and Abel, that is to boys, so how did humanity evolve from that with out ether Kain or Abel having sex with their own mom ?

Yeah, the Bible has its flaws, though here's not the thread to discuss them.

As for the pope, he does detent absolute power within his state: the Vatican.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Ryom wrote:

the pope dosent really have any major power, its like the king and queen here in Denmark and other countries, its just for show mainly, of course the pope does lead alot of people but even they are with reason ( i hope ) and if you use some you will see that bible have many flaws, the best example is in the beginning of the hole thing, Adam and Eve had only to children Kain and Abel, that is to boys, so how did humanity evolve from that with out ether Kain or Abel having sex with their own mom ?

Yeah, the Bible has its flaws, though here's not the thread to discuss them.

As for the pope, he does detent absolute power within his state: the Vatican.

ye and another dictator put up that dictatorship: mussolini

mattabesta wrote:

ye and another dictator put up that dictatorship: mussolini

The Vatican has always been reigned by the Pope.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

ye and another dictator put up that dictatorship: mussolini

The Vatican has always been reigned by the Pope.

no italy was united in 1870 the pope refused to acnowleged the unifcated italies right to rule in rome. the dispute was solved in 1929.

mattabesta wrote:

no italy was united in 1870 the pope refused to acnowleged the unifcated italies right to rule in rome. the dispute was solved in 1929.

Ehm... the Pope does not rule over Rome he reigns over the Vatican which is a separate country from Italy.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

no italy was united in 1870 the pope refused to acnowleged the unifcated italies right to rule in rome. the dispute was solved in 1929.

Ehm... the Pope does not rule over Rome he reigns over the Vatican which is a separate country from Italy.

I know just admit that I'm right many pepole have before you muhahahaha.


I need to see a docktor this forum is driving me insane.

mattabesta wrote:

I know just admit that I'm right many pepole have before you muhahahaha.


I need to see a docktor this forum is driving me insane.

I doubt seeing a doctor will help....

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

I know just admit that I'm right many pepole have before you muhahahaha.


I need to see a docktor this forum is driving me insane.

I doubt seeing a doctor will help....

Y? not

mattabesta wrote:

Y? not

You're not like a computer programme that is damaged and that needs to be repaired.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

mattabesta wrote:

Y? not

You're not like a computer programme that is damaged and that needs to be repaired.

no but i can be sorted out lots of pepole feel better after it I have my own experienc too prove it.