2 hours ago : Ratzinger new Pope, conclave chose

[Friedemann]

but was an active fighter in the military in an anti-aircraft and anti-tank divisions.? If former Nazi Party members aren't even permitted to legally enter the United States, I don't understand how or why one would be permitted to be the head of one of the most powerful organizations in the world.

don't mess up things here. The fact that he was a serviceman and received basic infantry training (that's what he did, according to CNN. And by the way, he deserted from it as soon as he could) does not make him a Nazi party member. How could he be when he was 15 years of age?

leave history to the historians

[Mal Brossard]

I associate myself more closely with the Mahayana Buddhists rather than Theravada.  But once again, I will admit to being possibly the world's most half-assed Buddhist.

"don't mess up things here. The fact that he was a serviceman and received basic infantry training (that's what he did, according to CNN. And by the way, he deserted from it as soon as he could) does not make him a Nazi party member. How could he be when he was 15 years of age?"

Immigration Form I-94W denies entry (not just citizenship, but outright ENTRY) to anyone who has been "involved in espionage or sabotage; or in terrorist activities; or genocide; or between 1933 and 1945 were you involved, in any way, in persecutions associated with Nazi Germany or its allies?"  The fact is, he was given military training by the Nazis and fought in their military.  It doesn't matter that he deserted, he was still a member of the military, and therefore gave support to the Nazi regime.  If he and his family were so against the Nazis, they could have and should have just left the country.  Plain and simple.

[Jessica]

I associate myself more closely with the Mahayana Buddhists rather than Theravada.  But
Immigration Form I-94W denies entry (not just citizenship, but outright ENTRY) to anyone who has been "involved in espionage or sabotage; or in terrorist activities; or genocide; or between 1933 and 1945 were you involved, in any way, in persecutions associated with Nazi Germany or its allies?"  The fact is, he was given military training by the Nazis and fought in their military.  It doesn't matter that he deserted, he was still a member of the military, and therefore gave support to the Nazi regime.  If he and his family were so against the Nazis, they could have and should have just left the country.  Plain and simple.

Thanks for citing the law hun...i wouldn't have done this but you have ! 

[Friedemann]

Immigration Form I-94W

I wasn't talking about immigration issues --- but since you mentioned it: I don't think that being a soldier makes him guilty of "espionage, sabotage... terrorist activities, genocide or... persecutions." Did you dig up that form just to prove me wrong? I'm flattered.

my original point was that he wasn't a member of the Nazi party, and he wasn't.

[jgfnsr]

And who is anyone to tell me of the "consequences," if we don't know what the consequences are, or if there will be any?

First you have to come to the realization that there actually are those who do know consequences exist and what they are.

Failing that, life itself - and that which comes after - will teach you.

[*Izzy*]

Wasn't this supposed to be about Pope Benny 16th

  Izzy?

[Jamie]

The new pope is a complete and utter fascist, I absolutely dispise the conservative asshole. It's people like him that make me feel ashamed to have been raised a Catholic.

[SLCPUNK]

And believe it or not, I understand most religions more than you might think.

If you did, you would not speak down onto other religions then,you would carry more respect for other's beliefs and spirituality.

? It's not so much about whether "we are right, you are wrong" as is what is truth and how much of it a religion can offer.?

I'm sorry, but did you just read what you wrote? Do you not define truth as what is right? What is correct?

I tend to think there is a certain amount of good in all, along with some truth.? But some have more than others, and one above all.?

Just because you make judgement calls, do not point the finger back out at others and say "we all do it". That is a logical fallacy and not accepted in any serious debate. You are placing blame out to others to avoid your statement. You are making a "judgement call" again, and defining what you believe in as the ultimate truth. Which was what I disagreed with in the first place. You are certainly not doing anything but repeating behavior and backing up your previous statement with more of the same.

But that's where I know I'll lose most of you anti-organized religion types.? The misuse of fundamentalism by some has forever blinded you to the fact that absolute truth can and does exist.

Not really. History and people have taught me that organized religion does not work. The way you present yourself in this thread has also taught me it does not work.

Aaaahh...that's just it.? Their "awareness" for right now might be all well and good, but without divine revelation it can't extend beyond mortal knowledge.? And for the record, Christians never believed in reincarnation.? Not before the early Church fell into apostasy anyway.? ?

1. I did not say that awareness did "extend beyond mortal knowledge".

2. You ignored the fact that Buddists believe there is more to life than what we see now.

3. Early Christians most certainly believed in reincarnation.

[SLCPUNK]

And who is anyone to tell me of the "consequences," if we don't know what the consequences are, or if there will be any?

First you have to come to the realization that there actually are those who do know consequences exist and what they are.

Failing that, life itself - and that which comes after - will teach you.

Define failing life? What do you mean by "failing life"? What YOU define as quality life?

[SLCPUNK]

Ironic that a non-Catholic like myself should have to defend the church.

All you "progressive-secularists" make me laugh.  What?  You think that just because the world's mainstream is going a certain way that a church's doctrine should follow?

Sorry, doesn't work like that.

"The church that changes with the times will be a widow in each succeeding age." - Samual Callan
 

It may be ironic to you, but not correct.

Over the centuries the Catholic Church has accepted that the earth is not flat, that the sun does not revolve around the earth, that witches and heretics need not be burned, and most recently, that evolution is most likely true.

So it appears that the church in fact does "change with the times".

Guess maybe you should have let a Catholic (who actually understood what they were talking about) defend the Catholics.....


******

There is a book you should read named "Living Buddha, Living Christ."

What a great example of two religions coming together without judgement (always fear based) or feelings that one is the ultimate truth (shown to fail through mankind). Rather the author takes two paths of spirituality and explores what they both have in common.

Thick Nhat Hahn (probably butchered the spelling) wrote the book.

Would be a great book for you to read "Axl's Rant"....

[Mal Brossard]

In response to eMe, by making little effort to avoid military service to a country committing atrocities, he is most certainly guilty of at least aiding in the persecutions.

As for AXL'S-- once again, how are you to know for certain what the consequences will be of my actions?  How am I to know what they will be?  Who is anyone to know what is unknown?  Are there consequences to actions?  Yes, and they can be positive or negative.  How do we know your god won't greet the atheists at the pearly gates and say "Alright atheists, you're in.  You all prove I did something right by giving you that free will thing."  How do you know what is going to happen in an afterlife that may not even exist?  How do we know a god exists?

If you can find me someone who can tell me for certain, guaranteed, 100% correctly what will happen in the supposed afterlife, then I have a nice piece of Arizona beachfront property to sell you.

[jgfnsr]

Early Christians most certainly believed in reincarnation.

While you and I will just have to agree to disagree on a lot of things, SLCPUNK, your above statement is just simply not correct.

Now I don't know if you and Jessica have been swappin' books back and forth on revisionist ideas regarding Christianity (I'm aware she's big on that stuff), but the fact remains that the early Christians - and by early I mean from the death of Christ to around A.D. 100 or so - did not believe in reincarnation whatsoever.

While it is indeed true that there were a number of apostasies from the Church after the first century, as well as the eventual apostasy of the Church itself, reincarnation has always been completely foreign and incompatible to Christianity.

In case you didn't hear, Christians believe Jesus Christ was resurrected, not reincarnated.

While reincarnation is the occupation of a new body by the soul, whether of the same species or a lower form, resurrection is the same body and spirit being brought back together in immortality, never to be seperated again.

 

[jgfnsr]

And who is anyone to tell me of the "consequences," if we don't know what the consequences are, or if there will be any?

First you have to come to the realization that there actually are those who do know consequences exist and what they are.

Failing that, life itself - and that which comes after - will teach you.

Define failing life? What do you mean by "failing life"? What YOU define as quality life?

You misread what I wrote.  I didn't say "failing life."  I said "failing that, (coming to the realization that there indeed are those who know consequences exist and what they are) life iteself - and that which comes after - will teach you."

[jgfnsr]

There is a book you should read named "Living Buddha, Living Christ."

What a great example of two religions coming together without judgement (always fear based) or feelings that one is the ultimate truth (shown to fail through mankind). Rather the author takes two paths of spirituality and explores what they both have in common.

Thick Nhat Hahn (probably butchered the spelling) wrote the book.

Would be a great book for you to read "Axl's Rant"....

In all honesty I probably would find a book like that interesting.? In the end truth is truth.? And if something is true, it remains true, wherever it may come from.

In reality there have been many "non-Christians" (Buddha, Ghandi, etc.) who have lived far more Christ-like lives than I ever will.? And whatever truth these great teachers of mankind possess and have to offer to the world is of value.

The only exception I would have is to a possible path a book like this might take, in that while contrasting and comparing, Christ is left but only a teacher Himself.? The common-held belief that Jesus was a great moral teacher, but nothing beyond, is probably the greatest spiritual tragedy today.

The world has had many great teachers, philosophers, preachers, etc.? But only Jesus Christ was born of an immortal Father and a mortal mother, making Him the perfect Advocate between God and man, in order to atone for the sins of the world.

I think a man named St. Augustine summed it up best -

"I have read in Plato and Cicero sayings that are very wise and very beautiful; but I have never read in either of them 'Come unto Me all ye who are weary and heavy ladened and I will give you rest.'"

[jgfnsr]

As for AXL'S-- once again, how are you to know for certain what the consequences will be of my actions?? How am I to know what they will be?? Who is anyone to know what is unknown?? Are there consequences to actions?? Yes, and they can be positive or negative.? How do we know your god won't greet the atheists at the pearly gates and say "Alright atheists, you're in.? You all prove I did something right by giving you that free will thing."? How do you know what is going to happen in an afterlife that may not even exist?? How do we know a god exists?

If you can find me someone who can tell me for certain, guaranteed, 100% correctly what will happen in the supposed afterlife, then I have a nice piece of Arizona beachfront property to sell you.

Too many in this world make the albeit human mistake of assuming just because the answers to where we came from, why we are here, and where we are going are "unknown" to them; it must be that nobody has those answers.

You shouldn't make that same mistake Duffman.

[Friedemann]

he is most certainly guilty of at least aiding in the persecutions.

if your argumentation was correct then every Iraqi would be guilty of aiding in mass murder because they didn't leave the country during Saddam's rule

if you don't believe me maybe you know a lawyer you can ask

if you don't like him that's perfectly fine with me but you don't have to raise ridiculous allegations that everybody who's ever read a 5th grade history textbook could identify as such

[Mal Brossard]

eMe-- you're taking what I said out of context.  He was given MILITARY TRAINING to be in a violent organization supporting the persecutions of Jews.  It's the same as if someone joined the Iraqi military under Saddam, then fled it.  It's different than someone just living their life under the regime-- not supporting it, but not overtly opposing it either.  The fact is he was a member of their military, period.  Being in their military is giving them support.

AXL'S-- as stated before, find someone living today who can tell us for certain where we're going-- someone who has seen it for himself.  Until you can find that person, forget it.  You have as much of an idea as anyone else-- just theory with nothing but legend, story, and hearsay to back it up.

[Friedemann]

so what? The fact that he was a German serviceman still doesn't make him a war criminal, it doesn't even make him a supporter. In your opinion being a regular enemy soldier might be sufficient to label him a supporter but obviously Allied authorities in Germany didn't think so --- they explicitly decided that German soldiers were not to be indiscriminately tried for anything (since you seem to be into forms, I guess you can easily look it up).

American judges back then clearly showed common sense by not trying a teenager (who's not even of legal age) for "supporting" the Nazi regime.

And look at Iraq: how many former soldiers (high-ranking personnel included) have been put back into their old positions by Coalition authorities without even being looked at

by the way: my original example about the Iraqis not fleeing their country was referring to you previous statement saying that staying in Germany would already him a supporter. If he and his family were so against the Nazis, they could have and should have just left the country. were your words, and that's once again inconsistent with your most recent post

[SLCPUNK]

Early Christians most certainly believed in reincarnation.

While you and I will just have to agree to disagree on a lot of things, SLCPUNK, your above statement is just simply not correct.

Now I don't know if you and Jessica have been swappin' books back and forth on revisionist ideas regarding Christianity (I'm aware she's big on that stuff), but the fact remains that the early Christians - and by early I mean from the death of Christ to around A.D. 100 or so - did not believe in reincarnation whatsoever.

While it is indeed true that there were a number of apostasies from the Church after the first century, as well as the eventual apostasy of the Church itself, reincarnation has always been completely foreign and incompatible to Christianity.

In case you didn't hear, Christians believe Jesus Christ was resurrected, not reincarnated.

While reincarnation is the occupation of a new body by the soul, whether of the same species or a lower form, resurrection is the same body and spirit being brought back together in immortality, never to be seperated again.

 

You sure backed out of that one!!!   

I said early Christians believed in reincarnation, then you said no...then when you realized I was right you threw out a slim timeline to save your sorry ass.

Emperor Justinian used his authority to stop the belief in reincarnation. This was around 540 AD.

?If anyone asserts the fabulous preexistence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema. (The Anathemas against Origen), attached to the decrees of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, A.D. 545, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d ser., 14: 318).?

The rest was hot air meant to distract the reader away from your lack of knowledge and being wrong.

Like I said...let the Catholics defend the Catholics.

Or ask yourself, before spewing out crap, what Jesus would do?

[jgfnsr]

You sure backed out of that one!!!? ?

I said early Christians believed in reincarnation, then you said no...then when you realized I was right you threw out a slim timeline to save your sorry ass.

Emperor Justinian used his authority to stop the belief in reincarnation. This was around 540 AD.

?If anyone asserts the fabulous preexistence of souls, and shall assert the monstrous restoration which follows from it: let him be anathema. (The Anathemas against Origen), attached to the decrees of the Fifth Ecumenical Council, A.D. 545, in Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2d ser., 14: 318).?

The rest was hot air meant to distract the reader away from your lack of knowledge and being wrong.

Like I said...let the Catholics defend the Catholics.

Or ask yourself, before spewing out crap, what Jesus would do?

While I don't think I "backed out" of anything,? I will say we may be going at this whole thing from different angles SLCPUNK.

You are talking about certain beliefs individual Christians may have held too.? That has been as varied in former times as it is today.

I'm talking about the doctrine of Christianity in which reincarnation has never had a place.? Ever.

While some professing Christians - and eventually the Church itself - drifted into apostasy and took on various pagan beliefs, the gospel of Jesus Christ has always been the same.? However the sad fact is the gospel was lost to the world for a number of centuries.

Incidentally, the great apostasy of the Church had happend long before the Fifth Ecumenical and Nicene Councils.