By Claudio Lavanga and Alastair Jamieson, NBC News
Updated at 8:49 a.m. ET: ROME -- Pope Benedict XVI announced Monday he will step aside as leader of the world's 1.2 billion Roman Catholics on Feb. 28, saying he no longer has the strength to carry out his duties.
Speaking in Latin, the 85-year-old announced his decision during an address at the "Concistory for the canonization of the martyrs of Otranto", a small event held early in the morning.
The decision makes him the first pope to resign since the Middle Ages.
His statement was posted on the Vatican Radio website. Carrying out the duties of being pope required "both strength of mind and body," it said.
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013 … -says?lite
This is unusual,isn't it? I am not catholic, but don't they usually stay until death?
It's been almost 600 years. This guy couldn't go fast enough if you ask me. Bye, careful the door will shut behind you quickly.
I saw this bit of news this morning and thought about you radman, wondered what you would say... How odd that now I know. lol
Why does anyone feel a need to bow down to, genuflect to, another human being?
When you are claiming to worship a spiritual "god," and see humans as "fallen," "sinful," evil beings, why stamp one of these humans with divinity?
I saw some time ago, in a newspaper column presenting simple questions to its readers for comment, the question, "Are you superstitious?"
One woman wrote back: "Oh no, I'm not superstitious. I'm Catholic."
Hahaha... she was also devoid of logic!
They do usually stay until death. Bishops, however, can retire from their duties as early as age 75. The Pope is the bishop of Rome. He feels that his body is not strong enough to carry out his work. The Pope's schedule is sickeningly demanding.
I'm curious as to how long it will take the College of Cardinals to elect a new pope. I'm guessing they've already got someone in mind, given the circumstances. I expect it will be done speedily.
Apparently, this is the first pope to abdicate (that's the term they use for stepping down from that office) in hundreds of years. He has had health issues, and it appears he decided it was best for the Catholic Church for him to step aside so someone in better health could take over. The commentary on the announcement has been interesting - some see it as a sign that others who follow after him will be able to do the same thing with dignity, in the event they are no longer able to physically or otherwise serve in the office to the best of their capacity.
It was interesting when Pope Benedict was selected that so many people didn't know about the 'puff of white smoke' that announces a pope has been chosen.
No, I'm not Catholic - I just follow news events with interest.
Lots of folks don't know about 'white smoke,' Marcy. It's a fascinating procedure, this election of a Pope. The burial of one Pope and preparation for the next is an amazing and beautiful ritual.
Hey, maybe this time we'll get a pope who believes in the equality of the sexes and one that will do right by the victims of pedophilia instead of hiring a bunch of lawyers to protect himself and those who do harm? Maybe!
How's that working for ya so far? ;-o Oh no I didn't.
Sure you did. So does everyone else.
So far, it's worked well enough that the sex scandals are no longer hidden. They've been brought to light. Not a great thing overall, but at least no longer a painful, damaging secret. It has been brought to light - where people might be able to begin a healing process.
A Pope (one of the most conservative in recent history) finally admitted that condom usage may be a part of responsible sexuality.
The Catholic Church is one of the world's largest bureaucracies. It has never done anything quickly.
They will respond to money.
Nothing has changed.
In April 2010 it was reported that former bishop of the Norwegian Catholic Church, Georg Müller, had confessed to the Norwegian Police in early January 2010 that he had sexually abused an underaged altar boy 20 years earlier. The Norwegian Catholic Church was made aware of the incident but did not alert the authorities. Müller was made to step down as a bishop in July 2009.
In June 2010, Belgian police raided the Belgian Catholic Church headquarters in Brussels, seizing a computer and records of a Church commission investigating allegations of child abuse, as part of an investigation into hundreds of claims that had been raised about alleged child sexual abuse committed by Belgian clergy. The claims emerged after Roger Vangheluwe, who had been the Bishop of Bruges, resigned after admitting that he was guilty of sexual molestation. The Vatican protested against the raids.
No argument here.
Like I said. Bureaucracy. All bureaucracies respond to money.
Not an argument I'll be drawn into, because it really isn't winnable, Rad.
We just aren't all that way, and unfortunately, the laity is powerless to effect change.
I think you will be delighted Mo. I fully expect this to be a younger, ecumenical appointment who is very charismatic. Someone who will appeal to Catholics and non-Catholics alike. Someone who can emphasize commonality between religions and even build bridges with atheists. Someone who makes clear he is interested in the unity and well being of all people. He will be very strong on the message that together we can do anything. If these attributes aren't apparent initially, they will come to light soon after he gains power. World leaders who do not initially applaud him, will come around in a few short years and he will become a very respected voice in world affairs in the coming decade. I will be very surprised if the new Papal appointment falls short of any these characteristics.
Oh, I do hope so. Pope John Paul II was a very ecumenically minded minister. I hope someone with a spirit much like his and Pope John XXIII's comes next.
So you think they will try to bury him?
He is being promoted.
OR, is this controversy about to be confirmed?
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/in … 919AAEsRTj
Yeah, as far as nazi sympathizing, pedophile protecting guys go, he's alright.
He is a very nice pedophile sympathizer. He had the right idea, move'm around and pray for them. Oh and if the police get called protect yourself with as many lawyers as possible and diplomatic immunity.
I wasn't aware he had been accused of child molestation. I guess Im not up on my Catholic news.
I don't think he was accused of the molesting anyone, but he worked hard at protecting them. From what I've read most in the Vatican didn't think it was all that damaging to children, there first priority is to protect the reputation of the church.
Heart breaking. I don't think man was meant to be alone, at least it takes some kind of amazing individual to be alone for life. Ppl act out in all kinds of terrible ways when they try to be what God never intended them to be.
He's a Satanist, I'm afraid.
That hand signal is Satanic
Thanks for the laugh.
You ought to study more about body language signals and the difference based on different cultures.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/109399? … ost2328954
Of yes, tell us what it means 'o wise one. Wait, like me guess...the Pope was trying to say, "Rock on!"?
Oh! He was just passing the blessings from satan to Catholics.
Oh, really? And did you know that Helen Keller was an occultist herself? I wonder how she associated that signal with "I love you" when the original meaning is that it represents the horned hand and is a representation of moon gods? Is she trying to say, "I love you, Satan"?
She was a theosophist from the religion Theosophy, a major belief system in the New Age movement, founded by Madame Blavatsky. One of her followers was Adolf Hitler,
She quoted he second edition of Dr. A. Kingsford’s “Perfect Way" an appendix called, "The Secret of Satan" and quoted it believing it to be true:
"It is “Satan who is the god of our planet and the only god,” and this without any allusive metaphor to its wickedness and depravity. For he is one with the Logos, “the first son, eldest of the gods,” in the order"
Oh really? All the world except you are satanists? Irrespective of the origin of the word/symbol it carry only that meaning by that which is understood by the one who see/hear it. "me tumse pyaar kartha hai", is something that is understood by billions of people, but do you? For those who understand it, it is a good thing while those who don't it is just sounds.
The symbol now mostly is understood as a symbol for love. But in America it is generally is associated with "longhorn" foot ball team, while in Italy it is an offensive symbol.
Was the pope telling the Catholics, his followers, that they are all for satan?
"Is she trying to say, "I love you, Satan"?"
For a pervert may be, for the deaf and dumb, the index finger stand for "I", it with thumb will be "L" and the middle and little forms a "U", which is a substitute for 'you' which now is universally used by most people(especially youngsters) who use sms.
If all other god's invented by humans are satan, then without any doubt the god invented by jews are also satanic.
Occult- the counter nonsense to christian religion is just like a religion, riddled with nonsense and Christianity has done the same what it has done to pagan religions, branded everything as satanic, and "satan/devil"(not talking about similar ones created by other religion) is their creation as the villain to fight against and blame for god's failure and unite their followers.
Can you get no good site other than which some idiotic conspiracy theorist suggest nonsense and see connections were there is none?
Not all of the world but there are far more Satanists than people are aware. Many of them don't advertise their Satanism. They could be your GP for all you know. I'm just telling you that Helen Keller was a follower of the occult and so it doesn't surprise me that she used that hand signal to depict "I love you".
It's now a symbol of love? Where'd you come up with this nonsense? For heaven's sake, it is the point of Satanists to associate people with its symbols and attach another meaning to it. I could make my own meaning to an upside cross but it doesn't detract from its real meaning.
No, he was trying to say he is for Satan.
The "satanic salute" goes back many years and according to The Woman's Dictionary of Symbols & Sacred Objects , is an "appeal to the devil" - "In antiquity it must have represented an appeal to the Horned God; then in the Middle Ages, an appeal to the devil. . ." (The Woman's Dictionary of Symbols & Sacred Objects, p. 308)
Black mass at the Church of Satan with Anton LaVey and his daughter:
"Is she trying to say, "I love you, Satan"?"
Where's your source that Helen Keller got that hand signal from the manner you described? She didn't make that hand signal up. It was already in existence for Satanism long before her.
Now if the hand sign with the thumb extended means, "I love you" then what do you think Obama was trying to say here when he tucks the thumb in?
Not too far from the truth.
Blah Blah. Don't like what I am saying? Then move on.
Just google ily sign, it is not your jesus saviour site alone that turns up.
As I told for most American its a football sign and not only Obama but also bush had also shown this and if you show this sign they will interpret that you are a fan and and a satanist will have a hard time figuring out who their fellow satanist is. In italy it means your wife is cheating and showing this gesture can get you arrested and no satanist will dare show it. And a sign has only that meaning that is understood. Showing this sign will not bring even an imp let alone satan.
Em! The religions invented by jews- Jewish and Christianity are also satanic.
What is YOUR source that hellen keller invented it as a sign for I Love you? What is your source that she is a satanist?
And satanist are just like Christians, the difference is only in the nonsense they believe.
No where else I can get this much entertainment so cheaply. The only funny book I got for free was 'three men in a boat". The rest including huckleberry fin, I had to buy.
The sign for I love you is simply all 3 letters represented. I L and Y. Sign language is an entire language condensed into signs with meaning.
It was actually invented by satan as god failed to help deaf people. But claire was telling satan was bad character. Is helping people a bad thing?
I think you left out a few words or something cause that didn't really make sense. lol
Then it was a faint attempt at sarcasm towards Claire. Claire told me hellen Keller(or the ILY sign, but as either was not invented by heller I don't know what she meant) invented the sign language. Then she told me Keller is a satanist. So it then means that god didn't help the deaf people but satan through a satanist was needed.
So either satan is good character or Keller is not a satanist, can't be both.
And she quoted from a nonsense site verbatim.
Three things I know.
1. Keller was not a Satanist.
2. Satan only resides in the minds of those who allow the delusion to take place.
3. Claire is once again wrong.
You talk a bunch of nonsense. I don't know how she could appreciate Madame Blavatsky's works. How did she read Blavatsky's works if she was blind? It's not as if it was translated into Braille or someone read it out to her. Did she make up that hand signal out of ignorance or did she know what she was doing? Ignorant or knowing? If she was a follower of Blavatsky and UNDERSTOOD her works, then she did dabble in Satanism.
All I know for a fact is that the Cornuto hand signal is the signal for moon gods in with-craft. That's the original meaning of it.
Natural sign language existed before Helen Keller came along.
http://www.alldeaf.com/sign-language-or … y-asl.html
I'm not meaning to be condescending but you have a lot to learn.
I know I do, and that's ok if you need to condescend. lol... I know sign language and have communicated with a great many deaf ppl over the years and the I L Y fact is common knowledge... all hidden Helen Keller references aren't known among the community.
Yes, Beth, but I can also make my own meaning to symbols that have a different meaning already. I can come along and say an upside cross means something other than Satanism but it doesn't change the fact it originates in Satanism. It's actually very clever.
I'm not meaning to be sarcastic, BUT wow you know a lot. Nice job schooling someone who can sign about sign language. Perhaps I should get your perspective on my current design job?
Ha ha ha ha... Or he's warding off the evil eye.
What do you think Pope Benedict was trying to say? Funny that he is capable of approving child porn but not capable of being a Satanist...
Personally, I think he is just a weak old man who is trying to lift his hands and can't sustain that motion for long. It's kind of a natural thing. I dont believe one could be the pope and a Satanist... even if you don't believe Catholic views, they still confess Jesus to be the son of God. I would imagine he said many prayers out loud, I have a hard time imagining any of Satans demons confessing submission or love of Christ as Im sure the pope has done. Its just very unlikely.
Acts 16:16-18. A soothsayer possessed by a demonic spirit sings praises to God in front of Paul.
Come on, Beth. A frail old man is not going to pull that hand signal in the first place. Yes, you can be a Pope and a Satanist at the same time.
"Rome, Italy, Mar 3, 2010 / 04:20 pm (CNA).- A renowned exorcist in Rome recently released a book of memoirs in which he declares to know of the existence of Satanic sects in the Vatican where participation reaches all the way to the College of Cardinals. A second demonologist, also residing in Rome, entered the debate this week, clarifying the origins of the information and defending the Vatican's clergy as an "edifying and virtuous" collection of prelates.
In a book of memoirs released in February, the noted Italian exorcist Fr. Gabriele Amorth affirmed that "Yes, also in the Vatican there are members of Satanic sects." When asked if members of the clergy are involved or if this is within the lay community, he responded, "There are priests, monsignors and also cardinals!"
http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/ … n_vatican/
You don't appear to realize that people can claim to be Christian when in fact they are Satanists. Satan appears as an angel of light. He can recite as many prayers as he likes it means nothing. Demons exorcised by Jesus acknowledged Jesus as the son of God. Satan recited scriptures.
The Pope endorses paedophillia but cannot be a Satanist? He also said there is no such thing as good and evil which is, of course, not a Christian thing to say.
Yeah, I know that satan can appear as an angle of light etc, Im just not the conspiracy theorist you are. If that's what you believe, you certainly have that right.
So, if charges come against me for something I abhor and would never do and haven't done, and I get a lawyer to help me because I don't know the legal system and he does, that means I endorse the thing I abhor? Does that make me a Satanist too? Do you ever wonder how many of these Catholic bishops never reported what was happening in their dioceses - if, in fact, it was even reported by the victims until years later? That it might actually be possible that when the scandals broke initially, it was the first that many in the Vatican had ever heard of it?
Is the Pope responsible for the molestation of children by Protestant clergy? By atheist parents? By the guy down the street who's a Hindu? I don't agree with the way the sex scandals have been handled by the Church - but the judgment for that belongs on the heads of the individual bishops, not the Vatican. And the fact that the Vatican is trying to defend itself legally is NOT evidence that it approves of or endorses pedophilia. If anything, and this is deplorable anyway, if you ask me, it's evidence that they're taking advantage of a legal system that they evaded in the first place. Criminal acts should result in criminal prosecution, period. When they don't, there should most certainly be legal consequences.
If your child molested another child, do you think it would be right for their parents to come after you? And, if they did, would you hire an attorney? You're a white woman in South Africa. Do you approve of and endorse racism?
While I agree with much of what you said I do want to clarify one thing. 1962 the vatican sent a 62 page document to all bishops in which the Bishops are instructed to pursue these cases 'in the most secretive way... restrained by a perpetual silence... and everyone... is to observe the strictest secret which is commonly regarded as a secret of the Holy Office... under the penalty of excommunication. And they also call for the victim to take an oath of secrecy at the time of making a complaint to Church officials. It states that the instructions are to 'be diligently stored in the secret archives of the Curia Vatican as strictly confidential. Nor is it to be published nor added to with any commentaries. If your thinking that this was 1962 and things have changed since then you may want to site down because a letter signed by then Cardinal Ratzinger head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith sent to bishops in May 2001 clearly stating the 1962 instruction was in force until then.
This is one of the things that angers me about how this whole things has been handled. Secrecy all over the place. And decent men, IMO, making terrible, terrible decisions. And with their vocations in danger and, many believing, their immortal souls...everyone lives in fear and does this shit thinking it's right.
Make it simple.
Absolve (pardon the pun) the Church of responsibility entirely. Criminal acts, criminal prosecution, removal from public ministry of any kind.
Great idea, except the pope has diplomatic immunity and they have their own laws which they hold above all others. They are an old boys club that will continue abusing those that allow them to until people say enough. They will respond to money. There was a case very close to my home town a while back where many boys were harmed and a huge settlement was finally agreed upon. No monies came from the Vatican it was paid out by selling local property and getting donations. Someone noticed that the bishop that put the package together was aways going on vacation to the same part of the world so they checked his laptop upon his return and found a bunch of child porn.
Are any familiar with a book "Rome Stoops to Conquer" written by Dr. E. Boyd Barrett? Who is Dr. Barrett? A friendly Jesuit priest. What did he say in his book? In the front cover of the book, the jesuit said, "The present great campaign which the Pope is directing in person, the campaign to win America, is the Church's supreme and final effort to regain her ancient preeminence in the world." The Church understands that in order for her to rule the world, she must first control the United States of America. And that is significant for us. On page 3, the Jesuit said, "For him [the Pope] our country is a battlefield on which is being waged the greatest struggle of the Church's history. The conquest of America is the supreme object at which he aims."
On page 4, he said that the pope "is well aware that the Catholic Church can never hope to dominate the civilized world until America kneels, beaten and penitent at her feet...a large proportion of Catholic action is an infiltration into America's po;itical world." Now is that what powerful forces (that so many say don't exist) are working for right? Is that why we see and hear what we see and hear in the news each day? On page 8 he said, (1) "The obtaining of state aid for church schools; (2) the reform of industrial relations in accordance with papal encyclicals [to get money from Protestants and redistribute it ti the masses of poor Catholics (immigration,NAFTA) so that they can give it to the Church] (3) the reestablishment of diplomatic relations with the Vatican; even these items comprise but a part of the church's program. In general that program includes (4) the domination of American thought, manners, and government by the Catholic Church. The Church feels assured that it will outlive opposition and will succeed in the end...But confidence in the inevitability of victory does not dampen its present ardor for immediate action." NAFTA and GAT are bills in harmony with the papal encyclical to take from the Protestants and give to the Catholics in such a tricky way that almost no one would know what was going on. Now about 15 yrs. later, people are learning the hard way that the Congress passed those Jeauit inspired bills in accordance with Vatican goals that the Jesuit priest wrote in his book, Rome Stoops to Conquer- 1935!! You are terribly mistaken if you believe the Vatican is a democracy. The pope calls the shots. Like everything else they do, plenty of smoke screens. Now you know what it took to get those above mentioned bills through congress. Is what happened in harmony with what the Jesuit book revealed concerning Rome's goals of infiltrating the government (not just in the U.S., everywhere)? Who would ever guess that such infiltration is possible? Most "church" members wouldn't believe it for a minute. Hell, most people would not. Jesse Ventura found out, "All roads, lead to Rome."
Well actually, the black pope calls the shots, but that's another issue altogether.
People can hope or wish as they please.
Vatican is a theocracy and pope(Along with some cardinal of the top echelon) is the ruler. America is an oligarchy were big corporate are the rulers and all rulers further their agenda and work for their betterment, not the followers. Any good the "ruled" are getting is mainly coincidental. But what has it got to do with the pope resigning?
What does any of the last page have to do with the pope resigning? There was a mild defense brought up about his not being responsible for the actions of his charges, he is and he failed. Or should I say, swept it under the rug quite successfully. Rad Man and Claire brought up situations that had to do with his and his church's responsibility. I just merely brought out that this is nothing new. What difference does it make, the new guy will be business as usual. Merely mentioning what the business is. Big corporates? They (vatican) influence (putting it mildly) the world. Abraham Lincoln wrote they pushed and backed the south in the civil war (50 yrs Church of Rome, by the former Catholic priest,Charles Chinoquy). Nothing and no nation of consequence (all the rest will fall in line) is untouched. If you believe that some cardinals have anything to do with final say, you are sadly mistaken. The pope takes orders from the black pope (are you familiar with the black pope?). He passes them on. The peons just follow them.
When one king dies another take charge, what is the point?
The Vatican used to influence the world because people used to hear and do what they said. Just as a king the authority comes only from the followers (or military).
Pope obeys black pope? Are you one of the satanic conspiracy nuts? Earlier days the medicis and borgias decided who the pope would be and they ruled for them or was their heads. But whom should the modern day pope obey? One can only be pope if has enough political will in them to manipulate the cardinals, so why should they obey anybody else especially a dead man?
If you mean the 'general', sometimes it is the king who ruled sometimes it is his mother/spouse. As long as it is not a democratically elected one with responsibility towards the populace, what does it matter?
So are you a defender of the conspiracy? Or could it be, you are a star? One has to be a nut case to bring attention to the very real possibility something is awfully wrong?
I find it very difficult to understand what you say. Obviously we are saying very different things.
Nut conspiracies. Many might agree that the 1960's saw a significant change, if not the most significant change in life in America. Woman's lib, free love, civil rights, etc. 1967, there were riots in our major cities (not being, but at the risk of being called racist), whispering in the streets, of what our government was saying and thinking, "The natives are restless, what are we going to do about it?" Now mind you, prior to this, my town, Detroit was considered a paradise. They were coming from all over the world to live here. That's right, if you could'nt make it here (jobs, jobs, jobs, auto industry) it was said you could not make it anywhere. You could walk the streets at night, sleep, and leave your home and leave the doors open and no one would bother you or it. But after those riots, our president (Tricky Dick) I believe became the first president to visit China. In 1968 Martin Luthor King was murdered. Another "nut conspiricy". All those FBI agents tracking his every move and they didn't see or could not prevent this from happening? "Nut conspiracy", they say Nixon in his talks with the Chinese, asked how the British controlled them for many years. The answer they received...heroin, "China White"!! The most powerful poison to ever be unleashed on the streets of America. By the end of 1968 there were "outlets" to serve up this poison on what seemed like every street in all the big cities. They added liquor stores on every corner to insure the mass genocide or at the very least, a zombie like existence, to those unfortunately, weak or blind enough to fall into the deadly trap. Even to the point, where if their own should be caught up... This country has not been the same since and never will be. A "nut conspiracy"? It was successful. Now having said this, having lived through this and the results of that "nut conspiracy", along with the outsourcing and downsizing (where are the jobs?), knowing 100's of 1,000s, are walking the streets at night with no where to sleep and little, if anything to eat (some will say they are freeloaders and deserve this) in America, the richest country on earth and it's not another "nut conspiracy" (few seem to see, or admit too) that is working, is baffling. How our borders are being opened to allow mass immigration to more uneducated people (roman catholic predominately), the North American Foreign Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Our Supreme court now majorally Roman Catholic and congress moving that way quickly, along with the little tidbits of info in my previous posts in this forum and all the things I will not say. It truly baffles me, how someone who lives 10,000 miles away, calls me a nut for researching information that has been brought to my attention, by far more learned people than I and being able see and say, Hmmmmm. All this "nut Conspiracy". Where are the lawsuits? Where are the rebuttals? If you had lived your life here...You have no CLUE of what's going here.
I still do not understand what you are saying.
If it is the down fall of Detroit, it is simple - manufacturing is dead.
You are against immigration? Good, Let me ask you whether your forefathers who came to America from Europe were native Americans?
But were is the conspiracy?
It is the same whether it is Detroit or the whole country.
As technology progressed, we need less and less workers to do the same job.So joblessness is part of the evolution of technology. The Americans first asked for globalisation, why? Because they could sell their products to the third world, could garner markets there by creating jobs in America or at least prevent job losses caused by the market saturation that occurred in America. If there was no globalisation Detroit would have been deserted long before. Now the problem is that manufacturing is developing in the third world countries. Americans cannot make a product in America and sell it in China or India as there are other people there who can manufacture the same product indigenously and cheaply. So to make profit, American companies have to shift to these nations. When they shift they take the jobs along with them. Also some reverse of the "initial globalisation" is bound to take place as products can be manufactured cheaper in these nations and can be exported back to America at less cost. Earlier Americans used to sell their products to other nations and made a profit and now they are selling their products here and making a profit. There is nothing anyone can do about it, for the only solution is to abandon all technology and computers which no one is willing to do.
R.J. Dio – "It's NOT the devil's sign like we're here with the devil. It's an Italian thing I got from my Grandmother called the "Malocchio". It's to ward off the Evil Eye or to give the Evil Eye, depending on which way you do it."
I'm not a fan of this pope, but calling him a Satanist because of a hand signal is ridiculous.
Rad, who'd have thunk you could use a quote from R.J. Dio in defense of the Pope?! I love it, but you know it will only add fuel to Claire's fictional fire.
Hey, I'm just trying to entertain myself here and if anyone else see's the irony then thumbs up to them. I've never been a fan of that particular hand signal but Ronny did have a great voice. I preferred the peace signal that Ozzy used.
I don't think there is any getting through to her anyway. I remember painting this on the back of my jean jacket way back in the day.
That's a cool pic. You weren't accused of being a Satanist, were you?
Frankly, I'm stunned that it took Claire so long to respond to this situation. I was expecting her to be the first on the offense.
I spent a lot of time listening to this music and arguing with those that said they were Satanic.
Have you ever thought about your soul - can it be saved?
Or perhaps you think that when you're dead you just stay in your grave
Is God just a thought within your head or is he a part of you?
Is Christ just a name that you read in a book when you were in school?
When you think about death do you lose your breath or do you keep your cool?
Would you like to see the Pope on the end of a rope - do you think he's a fool?
Well I have seen the truth, yes I've seen the light and I've changed my ways
And I'll be prepared when you're lonely and scared at the end of our days
Could it be you're afraid of what your friends might say
If they knew you believe in God above?
They should realize before they criticize
that God is the only way to love
Is your mind so small that you have to fall
In with the pack wherever they run
Will you still sneer when death is near
And say they may as well worship the sun?
I think it was true it was people like you that crucified Christ
I think it is sad the opinion you had was the only one voiced
Will you be so sure when your day is near, say you don't believe?
You had the chance but you turned it down, now you can't retrieve
Perhaps you'll think before you say that God is dead and gone
Open your eyes, just realize that he's the one
The only one who can save you now from all this sin and hate
Or will you still jeer at all you hear? Yes! I think it's too late."
That's my favorite Black Sabbath song. Horns up! \m/
As for the Pope ... I'm not Catholic so it's pretty much a non-issue for me. However, Benedict's announcement and the mad scramble by the media to find out who the possible candidates would be to replace him, made me think of an old George Carlin routine where he said it would be totally cool to have a Pope named "Corky."
Pope Corky 1, I like it. \m/ make it so number 1.
If there is no way of getting through to me then does this mean this will be the last time you address me?
Is it also fiction that the Pope backs up paedophiles?
So I suppose when Ahmedinejad, Bush, Anton LaVey, Sarah Palin, Clinton, Sarkozy do it then they are warding off the evil eye or giving it?
http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False%20 … _satan.htm
Or how about the old man with an alleged Sandy Hook victim?
I also care about what the ORIGINAL meaning is.
The signal is called Mano Cornuto which means, "horned hand". It is associated with moon goddesses. See the picture I posted of the witch with the snakes. This picture is of the Mano Cornuto amulet of ancient Italic origin:
Here is the Asian version of the moon goddess Kanon:
Moon goddess in Catholic Church
See the crescent moon below like horns.
Do the algebra.
Please view these sources for a better view
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uisbOL55 … re=related
Sighs So what. Today I'm taking the kids shopping to Toys R Us and I'm going to buy a new keyboard for my Mac in PC World. All this satan lives under your bed conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo is a fools errand Claire. Just get on and have a happy life.
Unfortunately, you are wasting your time Claire.
I wonder what he will do now? take up another vocation?
"Nah, I've done the Pope thing now - I'd like to become a dancer"
If the prophecies of Saint Malachy are right the next pope will be "Peter the Roman" whose pontificate will end with the destruction of Rome. The very last pope in the prophecies, too. Anyone take them seriously?
I do... and you are correct in what you say. I'm very glad someone mentioned this fact. I do not know enough about the subject but I'm thinking that there was something in the prophecy about this current pope leaving abruptly,...or suddenly, I think. Know anything about this?
A quick check on wiki says to me this Malachy pope's prophecy is much more than a little interesting. His last and longest motto "Petrus Romanus" is chilling with lines like "In the extreme persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit..." Maybe someone with a lot of knowledge on the prophecies will comment further, Team Wiseman.
Those prophecies are a joke and most likely a complete fraud. A sceptical look at how they attempt to link the popes to the prophecies will help you make the correct determination.
Lol, and one of those at the top of the list for new pope is named Peter Maybe the prophecy concerned the last pope to step down 600 years ago.
OK Rad Man, you certainly could be correct that they're complete hogwash. Nevertheless I may just take a deeper look at these prophecies before too long and if discover anything notable will comment back.
Well he did have an evil look about him.....just like The Emperor in Star Wars....I think he had the dark side on too long.
In my opinion this sort of emotive reaction is one we all need to be wary of . It's dangerous. It can lead to lynch-mob mentality.
What a person looks like is usually totally unreliable in assessing the person's inner strengths/weaknesses. It might be one of the factors which has allowed the authorities to fill up Guantanamo prison.
False judgment is so easy to do and mud sticks so easily, too. It's much more difficult to wipe off and the innocent finds it even more difficult to shake off the effects.
So, although I do not give one cent for the office of Pope, I still feel we need to respect the humanity of that man.
"So, although I do not give one cent for the office of Pope, I still feel we need to respect the humanity of that man."
So well said.
I should also added that none of us knows the truth of "what went on/goes on behind closed doors." I would not condone any corruption, coercion, cruelty, cover-up or conniving, (all the "c"s) which MIGHT be part of Catholicism. The majority of the silent lambs and the rams and the ewes should be shouting to them, "NO! STOP!"
Is it still possible in today's world for good people, with strong moral principles, to stand up and lead us? I would hope so. Such a world would have, and encourage, same-sex marriages, allowing them to nurture children who have been abandoned by heterosexual couples; it would encourage responsibility along with equal rights, for any and every heterosexual couple to bear children of their own regardless of marital status, and severely reduce the need for them to seek abortion for the unwanted child.
"Young mother of 14 years of age, we will help you to mother your child; we will help you continue your schooling which will include lessons in motherhood; we will appoint an "auntie" to help look after your baby while you are at school; we will give the father equal help and guidance in adjusting to his responsibilities, too."
Such a world would bring the greedy, selfish, dishonest hypocrite to task before the community, so that welfare money and charitable donations reach the people for whom they are intended. Is that too perfect a world for us to dream of? Could we expect this from not just Catholic believers, but from any church, any synagog, any mosque? It's something to aim for, surely.
I actually wrote two Hubs about this. It is very rare indeed.
Whoo-hoo? Do (sane) people honestly still care about the Pope?
See? I don't get why ppl say things like that. I mean you just insulted every Catholic who takes their faith to heart... what's the point in that?
Because the papacy is irrelevant in a world where people can actually read? The Pope's entire purpose, other than to have his goons rob the peasantry blind, was to be the guy who reads and interprets the scriptures for the church to follow. This was pretty necessary for believers in an age where 99% of the population was illiterate.
Nowadays, with illiteracy rates hanging around about 1%, there's no need for a Pope anymore. He's just a fossilized piece of illogical tradition clung onto by scared, superstitious people.
I know, I saw the movie Luther too.
Yeah, but Im pretty sure he is the "pastor of his flock". He is their main teacher, he still preaches, studies theology and performs Catholic rituals. Im not Catholic, I do not find him of great use, but to a Catholic, he has great importance. I don't watch football either so I can't tell you who coaches the Ravens, that doesn't make their coach irrelevant, just irrelevant to me.
10. Peter the Roman - This final Pope will likely be Satan, taking the form of a man named Peter who will gain a worldwide allegiance and adoration. He will be the final antichrist which prophecy students have long foretold. If it were possible, even the very elect would be deceived. The 112th prophesy states: "In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Petrus Romanus, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations; after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End."
Sounds a lot like how Bible prophesy ... As I explained my beliefs in one of my hubs a week in prophesy is equal to approx 9,1 to 9.16 of our years ; the 42 months that the beast described in Rev. 13 would be approx 1644 of our years.
Lets just suppose that the next pope lasts 8 years. (2020) ... what happened 1644 years ago?
I am wondering if Benedict's resignation is his way of saying that Popes are human after all, and are not God. If so, I admire his action greatly.
And I heard on the News several things about him previously that I respect also. Although of course I know little about him overall.
I think it's a bad sign and that we will get a very liberal pope next.
From what I've read, Pope Benedict was doing a pretty good job. I'm not Catholic and I don't approve of many of the ways of Catholicism, but Benedict was known for upholding a lot of conservative Biblical views.
I expect his leadership will be sorely missed as time goes on, if the Church doesn't hold tight to the basics of the Bible......
Catholicism does not hold tight to the basics of the bible. Perhaps you are referring to many shared values with Christianity, which you do not want to see them abandon. We would be in agreement there.
That's what everyone thought when Pope Benedict was elected.
That is what the Catholic Church needs if they don't want to keep losing members. Gasp... he might be black even!
I was hysterical over this announcement! In a funny way, Muahaha! Sh*t is sooo hitting the fans...and sooo hittin' the peeps standing in front of those fans!!!
Lovin' the Chaos, Kids! However you See it being served...Eat hearty & "Stay thirsty, my Friends"!
i've had a day or so to soak it all in, and a few things seemed worth noting after reading through this thread,...
then cardinal ratzinger was a near VIOLENT slayer of those invovled in sex abuse scandals. in his position with the congregation for the doctrine of the faith, he was nick named JP2's little german pit-bull,.... most vatican insiders agree that ratzinger wanted very much to bring the ever growing scandal into the public and quite litteraly all but crucify the guilty priests, both those who commited the acts and those who sheltered them.... but it was JP2 that would not allow him full reigne to do so..... you will note that after his election as pope, there was indeed a "lawyering up" of the church, but also a firm hammer from within brought down, and still rining in the ears of the guilty right now. the crimes had to be delt with and finaly began to be, but also the curch had to be defended.
the idea that ratzinger/benedict 16th is a child molester,.. pepeophile,.. nazi or nazi sympathizer,.... grow up,... elvis is dead, the moon landings were real,... and your neighbor has no desire to read your thoughts so take off the tin-foil hat.
all of life has a teaching moment in it if we are willing to look for it,.. and see it,... JP2, for all his faults and triumphs,... in the end,... taught a narsisistic world how to age,.. and how to die,... with dignity.
it seems that benedict 16th may well teach us humility,... by knowing when to admit your limits,.. knowing when to sacrifice your own glory for the greater good,.... i can only imagine how tempting it might be to hold tight to the reigns of such a powerful position,... and how difficult the descision must be to admit what you are no longer capable of,....... in a world that sells the notion of eternal youth through pills and diet etc,... it will be quite refreshing to see if he serves as an example of how to recognize the matural proscess of life,... and rejoice in it.
on a purely theatrical note,.... the resignation of a living pope for the first time in 6 centuries creates a unique conundrum in the future,... how does the current pope handle the death of the past pope???..... the protocal will be written from scratch.
poorly spelled as always -jack
its been two days and no one has commented on my post.... i guess i should have dropped in some satanistic refferences and perhaps an outerspace plot to anal probe the pope and take over his mind via his rectum, thereby controlling the worlds 1.2 billion catholics like an army of rosary slinging assasins to clear the path for the next race of atheistic star children.
oh well,.... woulda shoulda coulda
My previous note about not judging a person by his/her looks, was maybe perverse, because I have never trusted that man since he first was raise to power..... that was ME judging him by his looks.
Funny how the reality of life takes a long time to sink in to my brain.
I am no historian or theologian, but is not the entire history of the Church of Rome, right from very early times, a story that brings doubt and intrigue to mind?
When Im trying to identify a person's motives Claire, I tend to use this verse, "By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?" Mt 7:16. What motions or movements or facial expressions one might take on is sometimes coincidental. If you look for evil in the heart of man, you will find it in every man, for we all are sinners, but that is different than actively worshiping Satan, and a persons life will reflect that more so than a gesture.
Some people make these Satanic hand gesture out of ignorance. That is why I like to expose it so people won't do it. I've realized you can never deviate from the original meaning. For example, when I was fourteen I had an all-seeing eye amulet and used to wear it a lot. It representing my favourite film, "Stargate". I was most annoyed when a friend at school saw me where it and say it was Satanic. However, he was right. Even though I imputing my own meaning to my necklace, the original meaning stays and people will always see it as such.
I don't go around "looking" for evil in every man. However, when it's obvious and relevant I'll say so.
The original meaning of
Artificial:This originally meant ‘full of artistic or technical skill’. Now its meaning has a very different slant.
Nice:This comes from the Latin ‘not to know’. Originally a ‘nice person’ was someone who was ignorant or unaware.
Awful:This meant ‘full of awe’ i.e. something wonderful, delightful, amazing. However, over time it has evolved to mean exactly the opposite.
Brave:This once was used to signify cowardice. Indeed, its old meaning lives on in the word ‘bravado’.
Manufacture:From the Latin meaning ‘to make by hand’ this originally signified things that were created by craftsmen. Now the opposite, made by machines, is its meaning.
Counterfeit:This once meant a perfect copy. Now it means anything but.
So try the original meanings on people and see the response. Any word or symbol or sign has only that meaning by which it is understood. And whatever be the symbols, they are harmless in itself.
What a fascinating insight to language...... thanks for that, we learn something new every day.
It's always good to do a little background check on someone to see what their intentions are when pulling a Satanic hand signal. And trust me, the Pope wasn't saying to the people, "I love you."
There I have to do two background check, one on pope and other on Satanists.
Though I don't like the pope nor agree with what he stand for, he is not a satanist.
Now let's agree he is a satanist and he showed the symbol, but tje people who saw it didn't know it is satanist and will not carry any meaning. Suppose they know the meaning of it, the pope will never show it public.
Suppose you know that showing the jester is jailable offence will you dare show it in public?
Now as I said earlier most people, especially those who know sign language, think its I love you and in italy, spain and Argentina it means you are a cuckold and in America it represent a bull the symbol of longhorn football team. So coomon sense dictate that pope is not showing the symbol as a satanist.
Now regarding satanist, I don't see any difference between any other religion and Satanists. And unlike many other religion they never did any persecutions nor they believe in satan nor god. In fact I just think them as another religion based on the data available and has every right to pursue their religion just like any other.
Even though there are Satanic sects in the Vatican you still sure he is not one?
Why shouldn't he show that hand signal even if the people know? People who point it out get ridiculed and so they can hide things in plain sight.
People have mastered the art of denial. Even when the freakin' obvious is shown in their face they still won't believe it.
If there weren't Satanic sects in the Vatican or if the Pope didn't try and seek immunity against covering up child sex trafficking then maybe you have a point. But no, Satanists love to torture children and, well, the Vatican is known for harming little children.
Most satanists are covert. They are in politics, medicine, education, military, police, etc. They don't do things in the name of Satan in public. So, yes, they cause a lot of misery in those fields. LaVeyan Satanists, named after Anton LaVey, the founder of the Church of State, do not believe in Satan. They believe Satan is their dark carnal nature and the worship of the self. Theist Satanists believe in a literal devil.
People can pursue their own religions provided they don't commit crime at the same time which is what mostly happens.
For one it is wild speculation, second we have no evidence.
If people know it is a satanic signal, that will be the end of the pope. And you yourself agree most people do not know it is satanic symbol. And as I already pointed out, it is only for a minority it is satanic symbol for the majority in the world it is not. Only nonsense sites that say Hellen Keller is satanic sprout such nonsense. The people, who point it out, do it against common sense and hence get ridiculed. I don’t think even the Satanist think it has much power.
Very difficult to shut down common sense.
That again is your speculation and pedophilia has nothing to do with Satanism, nor does pope seeking immunity have anything to do with it. Pedophilia is a disease, and a mental abnormality, while believing in "supernatural" is not considered so, yet.
Most religious idiots are overt and are in all the spheres mentioned by you and cause so many problems because of their nonsensical beliefs, so? People can believe in god or devil, so what is the point? Just because they believed in god, didn’t stop them from perpetuating crimes, did it?
Criminals, irrespective of the religion they follow, do crimes. If religion is the cause of that then not only Satanism but all religions should be banned. It was in the name of Christ that Christians did the inquisition, what difference they have from the Satanists as you say it?
It amazes me what you say about people who are supposedly your brothers and sisters in Christ. Regardless of how I feel about the things you say you believe, I have never accused you of being evil or of being a satanist. Nor have I ever asked whether or not you belong to a specific denomination so I could berate, belittle, and insult its leadership the way you do with others.
I often find myself praying for you because I believe you truly mean well, but your words these days are just plain accusatory, cruel, and hate filled. Most mainline Christians believe in Satan, but few of us believe as you do, and we certainly don't scout him out at every possible opportunity.
Why do you fight so hard? Take God's hand, for Pete's sake, and REST in your faith.
So by pointing out the evils of the leaders in the Catholic Church I'm somehow way out of line? The truth is the truth and I'm sorry you can't accept it. It has nothing to do with being hateful. I'm sure Jesus was very "hateful" when he berated the Pharisees.
Unfortunately you didn't point out the "evils" Claire. Did you exposed the pedophile priests? Did you expose source of the money church is getting and spending for evangelisation? You didn't comment about the money the pope took to recognise mussolini.
The only"evil" you pointed out was some sign by pope which only you and some conspiracy site knew was satanic and some nonsense from a nonsense site about pope's immunity that didn't even know that a German citizen cannot be simply arrested in Italy.
A German citizen cannot simply be arrested in Italy? What on earth are you talking about? If someone commits a crime again in a country they get arrested no matter their nationality.
There is a story about this case in Reuters.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/ … ZI20130215
Is that a conspiracy site?
An international news agency founded in London in 1851 by Paul Julius Reuter (1816–99). The agency pioneered the use of telegraphy.
Nope, not conspiracy site.
"someone commits a crime again in a country "
So what crime did pope commit it Italy?
You being serious? The Pope happens to live in Italy in the Vatican. He is seeking immunity against prosecution for concealing sex crimes in the Vatican and other things. Have you also heard of Interpol? A person may commit a crime in Germany and then go to another country but Interpol nabs them and deports them back to the country where the crime was committed to be tried.
The Vatican is of course situated on the Italian peninsula, but the Vatican is not "in Italy."
Johnny is right. The Vatican is under its own jurisdiction.
Not to mention the fact that Interpol can't simply 'nab and deport'. They have to request extradition. Which is frequently denied. Even among nations with the friendliest of relations.
Yes, it is and that Vatican officials say he will remain a permanent official of Vatican City. However, it is reported that he has asked the Italian president for immunity. I don't know why he would have to ask the president for immunity if he permanently stays in the Vatican unless he wants to live in Italy. If the Pope isn't guilty at all then why even ask for immunity in the first place?
Of course there needs to be an extradition treaty.
Even with a treaty, it isn't necessarily a given that the request will be granted.
But, given that the information you supplied to start the thread hasn't been corroborated, do you still believe it? Of all of the countries in the world, I would think Italy would be the least likely to bring the pope up on charges. Now, if he was planning to move to America I could see the need for concern. We certainly wouldn't allow his former station to sway our desire to bring him to justice; were he guilty.
Anyway, I think John Paul was more complicit and he's a saint now, I think.Which leads me to believe the powers within the Catholic Church don't see any shred of guilt. They'd have to believe the pope guilty of something before they asked for immunity, don't you think?
EDIT. My bad Claire. I thought this was your thread. Never mind. Most of the comment had to do with other thread.
No, Pope John Paul II is not a saint yet. There are those in the Church who have begun a case for his canonization, but that process takes a very long time.
Oh. I had read somewhere a year or two ago that they were already claiming miracles by prayer to him. I guess I assumed he'd been canonized.
Quite possibly they are - lots of miracles are claimed through the intercession of whomever a large group is hoping to see canonized. There is still an official process that must take place before one becomes a saint. Miracles - well, they take a long process of validation before they are accepted by the Church and only then does one progress toward canonization. It's quite the bureaucratic process.
"In response to your complaint, Madam, the Impossible we can accomplish immediately. However, Miracles have to be ordered in advance. Further more, any Miracle requested which borders on any kind of immorality, has to be sent to the basement for approval, before being referred to On High."
Yes, that is true.
What do you mean it hasn't been corroborated? I supplied a source from Reuters and the ITCCS (International Tribunal into Crimes of Church and State).
This is what can be corroborated:
Vatican officials say he must remain in the Vatican to avoid prosecution in connection of sexual abuse cases around the world.
"His continued presence in the Vatican is necessary, otherwise he might be defenseless. He wouldn't have his immunity, his prerogatives, his security, if he is anywhere else," said one Vatican official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/ … ZI20130215
He set up a meeting with Italian President Giorgio Napolitano for February 23.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-02-1 … italy.html
What cannot be corroborated is the claim he is going to ask the Italian prime minister for immunity. I'm not sure why he would need the help of the Italian Prime Minister but the ITCCS has written a letter to him urging him not to help him elude justice. He alleged resigned because he learnt of an arrest warrant for him through a diplomatic note.
We will just have to see if that can be corroborated later.
Well, you know the Catholic Church has suppressed child sex crimes before. They must believe he is guilty if they want him to stay in the Vatican to avoid prosecution.
I read one of the articles. I do stand corrected; although it does corroborate my opinion that the powers that be within the church do not consider the office of pope guilty of any crime in the worldwide sex abuse scandals.
Let's hope they pull a rabbit out of their hat and tap a shocker for pope (ala the Gorbachev moment) and the church turns a radical new leaf, bringing policy and behavior out of the Dark Ages and into the light of compassion and reason.
If they do not believe believe he is guilty then why would they want him to have immunity? If he is innocent he must come to trial and clear his name. Would you trust what the Vatican officials say, though? Hasn't the Vatican covered up sex crimes before?
Claire, the pope doesn't live in Italy, He live in the Vatican City, which is a county unto it own. This is why he has diplomatic immunity.
Sorry to be right again, Claire, but this is a quote from you:
Claire Evans posted 24 hours ago
.......The Pope happens to live in Italy in the Vatican.........
I don't think Jesus would like to see you tell fibs like that.
Oh No! Claire is actually a satanist!
All her claims that she is led by the holy ghost was a lie to mislead the public!!
Is she the false prophet as described in bible, "and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people". Matthew 24:11?
I don't think that prophecy fits claire. It specifically says that they will "deceive many people" and I can't think of a single person that claire has actually deceived. I don't think the "prophecy" gives leeway for A's for effort.
The prophesy failed to take into account the education people can get. Compared to the rest of the prophesies in bible, I think, this is fairly accurate.
What's jerking your chain? You are in a rather bad mood. Your insecurities are showing.
I usually feel insecure when I'm caught red handed while lying.
When you claimed that the sun revolved around the earth were you lying or did you just make a mistake? I think the latter. So why am I lying and not making a mistake?
So was the pope making a mistake by not knowing the history of the symbol or is he satanist?
I didn't say sun revolve around the earth, I said sun's revolution in relation to us . I was telling you how we calculate time, if that is the one you mention.
Nope, he most certainly was not making a mistake.
You wrote this in December:
"Sun revolving around the earth is what we see daily, so that is not a fairy tale ,if somebody can properly explain that it is not sun but earth that is revolving. How stories get prominence? Check any book on cult formation."
Then neither was you making a mistake, you were deliberately lying.
[Was your mistake a typo? No. You thought like that forgot to check your facts.]
Sun revolving around the earth is what we see daily, so that is not a fairy tale ,if somebody can properly explain that it is not sun but earth that is revolving
"not sun but earth" Missed this?
[CLAIRE EVANS WROTE:
sure it was deemed a fairy tale that the earth revolved around the sun. So I'm wondering how shepherd stories eventually led to the composition of the gospels in early Christianity.
riddle wrote: Sun revolving around the earth is what we see daily, so that is not a fairy tale ,if somebody can properly explain that it is not sun but earth that is revolving. How stories get prominence? Check any book on cult formation.]
So do you see earth revolving around the sun or do you understand?
Were you answering without understanding what I was saying?
Yes, you contradicted yourself here. I know you meant earth revolving from the sun but you made a mistake in the first half of your sentence which you then wrote what you meant in the second half.
I didn't contradict myself but explained myself..
You said this "sure it was deemed a fairy tale that the earth revolved around the sun"
I said people see the sun revolving around the earth daily, yet if somebody explained properly the 'earth revolving around the sun' will not seem as a fairy tale.
So I did write and mean that we see sun revolving the earth, in spite of that people can accept that the earth is revolving around the sun, if properly explained, and never wrote sun revolve around the earth (that is your mistaken belief or selective reading, but I am not surprised since that is what you are doing routinely)
But let us agree I made a mistake, it is just a typing mistake, a simple interchanging of words that can happen to any one. But what you said is factually wrong, yet you say it was only a confusion though your claim was Pope was seeking immunity.
You just assume you know the facts. Everything I say is false to you. I know the history of that symbol. That symbol was associated with Satanism long before Helen Keller came on the scene.
I understand now. I'm sorry, sometimes I don't read properly when I'm tired. Me bad. I'd also appreciate it if you toned down on the aggression.
Do you still want to correspond with me now that you've deemed me to be a liar or should we terminate all correspondence?
I was aggressive? Thanks for pointing it out, for I didn't realise so. But I want to tell you I was not angry at the time (at least I don't think so, but I was reading a chapter on anger and its management).
No I don't consider you a liar nor I consider the pope a satanist (though I disagree with everything he stands for).
Historically whatever the symbol means, if the people to whom the meaning is intended, understand it in a different way then that is the meaning of the symbol. As somebody already pointed out, meaning is in the eyes of the beholder.
Again historically that symbol was used even to ward of evil or to mean that one is a cuckold.
It, as you say, may represent baphomet. It might be a pagan god 'devilised' by the church or it might be the vulgarisation of 'Muhammad' for it came into prominence only by the crusades.
And just because christians say a pagan god is satan, will neither make that a fact nor make it a fact that satan exist
Except it wasn't a fib. I didn't remember I wrote that Italy was the home of the Vatican. I'd be pretty stupid to lie because people can look back at my comments just like Johnny did.
Except it wasn't a fib. I didn't remember I wrote that Italy was the home of the Vatican. I'd be pretty stupid to lie because people can look back at my comments just like Johnny did
And excuse my confusion. The Vatican is a country in Rome. It's physically situated in Italy although the Vatican is autonomous. It's the same thing with Lesotho in South Africa. It is not part of the Republic of South Africa but is physically situated in SA.
Okay, I see you are admitting you are confused. That's better.
As if you have never been confused about something in your life before...
It's not really important, we all make mistakes, but we should admit making the mistake so we can move on. You're little fib was made when you denied that you said the pope lives in Italy not when you said the pope lives in Italy. If your ego won't allow you to admit you made an error and prefers that you were confused that's okay, but you may want have a look inside and ask yourself why.
It's not my problem if you don't believe me. I don't need your approval. I don't know why you think I didn't make an error. I thanked Johnny for his clarification when he corrected me. People make errors when they are confused about something. Duh.
With respect to both of you, is it important to dwell on trivialities like this? What is the objective for each of you? Is it to be the winner? Is it to convince everyone else of how "right" you are and how "wrong" the other is?
Do you have any interest in what there is to agree about? What does really matter anyway, at the end of the discussion?
Would not wish to break up your argument if that is what you enjoy, but as another has pointed out, there is a lot more to life than being "right" or "wrong."
You are absolutely right, Johnny. It is extremely trivial but if I felt that if I didn't respond to them calling me a liar then I must be. Knowing Radman and Riddle666 they are going to bring up this confusion forever saying this is proof I'm a Satanist.
Quite frankly, I'm sick of their cyber bullying. When I'm bullied I tend to make mistakes in my comments. In fact, I think it's time to terminate all discussion with those two. They are not doing anything positive to my soul.
I do not consider you a satanist. The reason I have, to say that you are a satanist is as strong as the reason you have, to say the world leaders are satanists.
You made a mistake, you jumped on seeing a news by a site that confirmed your pre existing beliefs without checking facts and the veracity and credibility of the news. But anyone can do that because of our enthusiasm and myself have done that before.
PS: Even if you are a satanist I have nothing against you. For me every religion is the same be it Christianity or Islam or Satanism or Baptists-ism.
Claire, I've never called you a Satanist. I would do that because there is no satan. I was once again called the anti-christ the other day, no big deal and that's no cyber bullying. You seem to give as good as you take so move on.
Claire, I agree, I don't think anything positive is going to come of this. I wanted to come to your aid at first, but you seemed to thrive on it so I got out of the way, but I don't think they are ever going to stop being so aggressive in their pursuit to prove you wrong. I do disagree with you on the conspiracy ideas, but what I believe about your opinions is meaningless, isn't it? We are all works in progress, I wish you the best. I hope you will catch your breath.
I don't thrive on discord. Perhaps I should not feel the urge to defend myself all the time. I do believe in expressing my opinions and facts which obviously is going to cause discord because no one really wants to believe just how evil the world is. Unfortunately, it usually dissolves into pettiness. I think I need to be more selective in choosing which people to address. I will eagerly debate and share my views to people if they take what I say into consideration even if they do not agree. I most certainly find other people's views interesting.
I didn't mean that you thrived on discord, but on debate. You can do whatever you like, Im not judging you... You just seemed weary which makes me feel bad for you, but we all choose our own paths so do as you please.
Thanks, Beth. I wish all those I came across who disagreed with me treated me the way you do. It means you are secure in yourself.
I don't think Jesus would like to see you tell fibs like that.
Yes that would make you look pretty stupid. You'll notice your first statement says the pope happens to live in Italy and then you'll notice in the second post you claimed to never have said that and then you said the very same thing even though each time I've showed you your own posts. Lying is a sin is it not?
I was confused not lying. The Pope lives in the Vatican which is in Rome, Italy, geographically. It is physically situated in Italy. I said that then Johnny said the Vatican isn't part of the country Italy as in not under the control of the Italian government which is right. I remembered he was right. Then you came along and said I was lying or stuff. I denied saying the Pope lived in Italy remembering he lives in the Vatican City but am also right at the same time in that the Vatican is in Rome.
And there's a bit of time between my one comment which Johnny corrected and then the one posted to you.
So...I know that Jesus knew my intention.
Don't you know nothing besides conspiracy theory?
Vatican is a nation, an independent nation with the pope as its head. It might be inside Italy but is an independent one outside Italian jurisdiction.
And interpol cannot arrest anyone especially a country's chief official because some conspiracy theorist want so nor because there are lawsuit against one.
Try to read at least the newspapers for a change then you will hear of political asylum. (Even iceland once gave asylum against the wishes of the most powerful nation on earth)
That's rich coming from you. You thought the sun revolved around the earth.
I also thought that the pope and obama is satanist.
I also thought that vatican is city in italy.
And I also check conspiracy sites regularly to see whether any cartoon priests got erection.
I noticed you didn't tell me what Obama was trying to say when he pulled the Cornuto symbol with the thumb tucked in which has nothing to do with sign language.
He was showing the Republicans and the nation that he is a satanist that they can vote for him
Claire, I can only continue to pray for you.
Do you understand calumny and detraction?
Probably not. I'm quite aware of the evil that has been perpetrated by members of the Catholic Church leadership. I believe with all my heart that every single person responsible for covering up the sexual abuse of children should be held accountable for their actions, or lack of action, as the case may be. Do you have a way to make that happen? I don't. I have to continue to pray for God's mercy and justice for all involved.
I have accepted the truth.
It sadly appears that you have not.
Jesus was never hateful. The difference is that when Jesus spoke about evil or called evil men out on their actions, He was right.
So using that story, were you evil or was the amulet evil?
And to not drag this out, my point is, evil comes down to motive and intent. It was not your intent to present an evil, your motive had a separate meaning.
If someones hands, eyes, face etc falls into a position or gaze without the intent of evil, that person does not become satanic, anymore than you did with the eye amulet.
I went thru a period where I was getting hurt every time I turned around and I was losing trust in ppl, reading ppls actions negatively. A pastor told me something Ive always tried to remember. "Always try to see the best in others." I know you will think that's crazy, that we must be wary etc... but God is in charge. We cannot do His job for Him, our job is to love the least of these and let Him judge as He sees fit. It is quite freeing. Anyway, that's my two cents. <3
Was I evil? No, but I couldn't object if people thought I was because I associated myself with a Satanic symbol. I'm not referring to people who who pull hand gestures out of ignorance. I'm talking about those who do. Let's do a little bit of algebra here. The chief exorcist in the Vatican says there are Satanic sects in the Vatican; the Pope is seeking immunity from prosecution for covering up child sex trafficking and now I'm to believe his Satanic hand signal is innocent?
Where do you think Satan would make his presence most felt? In the Christian church trying to corrupt it to lead people away from Christianity.
But Claire, so what? Were you expecting some evil from an all seeing eye to somehow rub off on you, afflict you with a curse, or send you to hell? Symbols are nothing but monikers to identify with something. They have no power or mystical magic. The amulet was nothing more than a cheap piece of metal shaped by a stamp and die in a Chinese factory.
This was what I was trying to say and you did it more beautifully and clearly with fewer words. Hats off. Wish I could do as well you.
Symbols have plenty of power when you have nefarious intentions.
Symbols have no power unless there is person behind the symbol who can rally people for what it represent. The red flag was a great thing in Soviet Russia, but a sign of contempt now.
Not even that. Symbols have only as much power as the observer is willing to give them.
Symbols can subconsciously affect people. However, in Satanism and witch-craft, symbols have a lot of power. They stand in a center of a pentagram when doing rituals. Symbols can't exactly harm the average person.
Symbols are very important in Freemasonry. Here are some quotes:
According to Occultists Manly P. Hall, the secret power of freemasonry lies in its symbols:
"The philosophic power of Freemasonry lies in its symbols, its priceless heritage form the Mystery schools of antiquity.” (Manly P. Hall, The Secret Teachings of All Ages, p.578, 2003, original edition 1928)."
"The symbols of the wise always become the idols of the ignorant multitude. What the Chiefs of the Order really believed and taught, is indicated to the Adepts by the hints contained in the high Degrees of Free-Masonry, and by the symbols which only the Adepts understand.” (Albert Pike, Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry, Charleston, A.M. 5632, p. 819)"
"Occultists the world over believe that, once a symbol is created, it acquires power of its own, and more power is generated when such symbol(s) are created without the profane [uninitiated] knowing about it. And, the greatest power of all is created in the symbol(s) if the uninitiated NEVER discover that the symbol exists…
“The occultist firmly believes that a symbol or a set of symbols possesses inherent power once they are created. Therefore, occultic doctrine teaches that these Satanic symbols would act as a powerful electric-type grid once they were set in place.” (Masonic Symbols of Power in Their Seat of Power: Washington, D.C., Cutting Edge Ministries website)"
http://leavethecult.com/2012/03/28/the- … f-symbols/
Many people when looking at a symbol will assign a completely different meaning to it. In the media, symbols will appear subliminally but subconsciously people will pick it up without them knowing. Often sexual obscenity will be place in cartoons to adversely sexualize children. The purpose is to make the child more accepting of it.
This is a picture from "The Little Mermaid":
Looks innocent enough but there is an image inside the circle. An erect penis.
Here we have another scene from "The Little Mermaid":
The priest is having an erection.
Here's a video explaining hidden meanings in business logos:
Symbols are only important for people who think so and only for what it represent. Other wise it is some drawing or just human body parts in peculiar way.
Give an example, just show a person who see hollywood films regularly, back of your clenched fist with middle finger raised, then show it to someone who has never been to modern civilization, that will tell you the difference. Or show even the "most potent" symbol to an animal, then you will know its power.
Claire, I am most surprised that you even noticed that! There is earthly hope for you yet! Shall I send an SMS down below to let them know to expect a call from you?
Because she was not looking for it!!
Those pictures are found only in a few sites and blogs mostly from conspiracy nuts and some funny sites that pick up distortions in pictures and magnify it for a laugh.
Remember the Iranian(?) ban on Donald duck because he didn't wear pants?
One usually laugh at such nuts, but there are people who take it seriously like Claire who can see hidden symbols and satanic conspiracy to take over the world..
Distortion in pictures? You've got to be kidding.
Of course you don't like what I'm saying. The thought that I may be right is terrifying to you so it comforts you to say I'm nuts.
Oh! Then please give the names of some respectable sights were that picture is published.
To like what you say, you should say something sensible.
Well, here's one. You need to open it up in Windows Photo Viewer or the like if you can't see it properly on the site:
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/D … tleMermaid
I'll just show you a video clip of the minister scene:
It's not a sensible world we live in.
So a video clip from the film is not reliable? What is your version of reliable?
Claire, you spoke about me being "sick," when I used a bit of tongue-in-cheek humour.
What I see as "sick" in our society is the incessant, exaggerated attention given to matters of sex. What's worse is the implication that anything to do with sex is bad, bad, evil!
Why can't you accept that it's all part of life, put it into perspective and stop the exaggeration? Whenever it's brought up in conversation within the mass media, it's sensationalized; it's made to look wrong, or ugly, or just too damn tempting for people to refuse. It's often implied that it's men who instigate all the badness of sex. Women are portrayed as the victims more often than not. The whole subject is distorted and misrepresented.
In the case of these video clips, they had to be shown several times for anyone to notice those aberrations. Then, because they were considered sexual in nature, the automatic cry went up, "...and this being shown to children!!!!....." Heck, if the children even "got" the message, they would pass it off as just another adult silly. It's we adults who get offended, not the children! What if it was implied that the minister got an erection from thinking about a nice young couple in front of him? Would that be bad? Tell me WHY?
If this is one of your phobias, Claire, you need to look deeper. But then maybe.... you are just enjoying the argument..... so be it.
Claire, I happen to have a little inside information here as I have known a few animators over the years and this is what they do to entertain themselves to help get themselves through the very boring parts of their jobs.
Sometimes designers while designing don't see things that become obvious for others later as they are too deeply involved. Thats why we try to have others look at our work.
There is nothing dark at all, just bored animator and or focused designers.
And it is hardly noticeable. Even in a still picture it has to be circled to be noticeable. So who is going to see it in a movie? So if one want to see it, it has to be specifically looked for and who will look for it unless one want a laugh or one is a paranoid conspiracy theorist who look for conspiracy everywhere?
I don't know how she manage to get those pictures unless from funny sites. The rest are so difficult to get and some are even non english sites, mostly persian (and one can understand why they want to find such pictures) or Spanish.
I hope she stopped telling us that Keller is a satanist.
Riddle666, another example were something I told you goes over your head. Most people don't consciously pick it up but we all do subconsciously.
Yea children will make out satanism and get adhered to it if a phallus is shown for a second in a hardly discernable a background.
Studies have shown that people miss even chimpanzees walking through the screen when the are concentrating deep on the plot and a phallus that cannot be discerned unless told or a priests erection that need a microscope to see (unless of course you are looking to the nether part of the priest only expecting an erection, every time you see a priest) will be seen and children will be influenced.
Well, (by a phallus) they will be influenced to what?
So you are well acquainted with Disney animators?
I'm sorry, but that is an incredibly lame excuse. Do animators tend to be perverts?
You're a sick person. That was pointed out to me. See the circle around it.
"And satanist are just like Christians, the difference is only in the nonsense they believe."
So incredibly offensive and condescending. If you don't believe in God, that is your right, but to blatantly say a Christians deepest beliefs are nonsense is nothing but disrespectful.
Just as I told you you before, neither you believe in God, you only believe those who taught you.
And just because it is somebody's sacred belief doesn't give sense to it.
Offensive is when you say two world leaders, one an elected president, and a deaf and dumb person, who is dead, who is a model for all deaf and dumb persons are Satanists.
You are very presumptuous to assume that at no time in my life could I come to a decision concerning God with my own free will. My mom thought Blazing Saddles was hilarious. In the sixth grade it seemed juvenile to me. My dad devoted all his down time to golf. I tried it several times and found it to be exceedingly boring. They loved Southern Gospel quartets, to this day that music grates on me. I also have my own thoughts on religion, politics and a host of other pressing life questions.
As for everything else you said... Im not sure if English is your first language, but Im having trouble understanding some of your points. Maybe I should go back and read it again.
Oh I see, you're having a go at Claire again. Ok, well that doesn't really have anything to do with me, but thanks for including me.
Your other point about something being sacred... and believing... etc. I didn't say you had to believe, I said you should be respectful of someone elses belief, it has to do with maturity and human dignity and nothing to do with religion. Maybe it was not how you were raised.
When you replied for Claire , I thought you agree with her views that the world leaders are satanists.
Is this showing maturity?
If i tell you the sky is pink and plants are blue, you will say it is nonsense unless I have safety in numbers. If I say there is a "pink dinosaur" in my room which nobody else can see you will say the same. Why should god alone be given exception?
When you say you believe in god, it actually mean "you believe god exists".
When you say you believe in your parents it means you believe that they are telling the truth.
See the difference? You cannot believe god as you believe your parents because no one knows what god said.(He is not a person to speak anyway). All your information regarding god you got from other people and you trust them, and accept that premise. Once a human accept a premise as true, then all his subsequent views are colored by that - called bias. When you adopted a child you felt god is saying in your heart to adopt, while it was just your wish, you attributed it to god. An atheist might be attributing it to intuition, or his wish alone. This has got nothing to do with free will(which is an illusion, by the way), it all depend or our anatomical make up and learning.
Again, you make presumptions and because they make sense to you, you view them as fact. If that is so, the conversation is moot.
I have already addressed my personal experience with God in one of my hubs called "Ive heard the voice of God" or something like that. I doubt you would be interested enough to read it, but if you are, maybe that will give you actual insight to the incorrect conclusions you have drawn about me.
What I said is not about "you", but about you, me ,the whole humanity. Whether you agree it or not, 99% of the humans are similar 99%. We all think similarly and the method we use are all similar.
And I read your hub, confirmation bias. Unless you first keep in mind there is god, no god can talk to you. Unless somebody told you about god you will never know about god (proof is that a hindu child knows only about hindu god while a Christian, Christian and an atheist neither and before two years no kid knows about god unless parents take special care to instruct them). And without knowing you cannot "evade" as you told in your hub. All the voices or thoughts in your mind, though seemingly from outside, is yours only.
He may very well have been raised to respect people, but that isn't the same as respecting their beliefs. Since, beliefs in gods are not mature or dignified, they don't command nor deserve any respect as they are beliefs that trade reason and thinking for faith in myths and superstitions and have caused more harm and conflict in societies than any other ideology.
Im gonna be honest with you here sir. You thought I had you banned or something, accused me of reporting you, of which I did no such thing, and at the time, had no idea even how to do, and you began harassing me every possible way you could. It was a total shock to me cause I had barely spoken to you and b/c I don't enjoy the hostility of strangers as much as I should, I don't believe I will be conversing with you, but I wish you well.
@ the OP...good riddance to him....the protector of the peds!
It's great that we are all experts in every field be it religion or sex. Maybe being authors of our own hubs has somehow encouraged that belief within our own minds. "If I believe it, if I say it... it must be true."
Is there no way to humbly share a point as "opinion?"
by somelikeitscott 8 years ago
According to Pope Benedict XVI today, abortion and same-sex marriage are some of the most "insidious and dangerous" threats facing the world today. Thoughts anyone?
by paarsurrey 8 years ago
News Items:British atheists Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens have asked human rights lawyers to produce a case for charging Pope Benedict with “crimes against humanity”. Dawkins wants to have the Pope arrested during his planned state visit to Britain, The Australian reports....
by schoolgirlforreal 6 years ago
yeah I know this has been talked about. I really think the next pope will be a very liberal one which I think a lot of people will like. Just a feeling. What do you think?
by theirishobserver. 8 years ago
HANS KÜNGPope Benedict has made worse just about everything that is wrong with the Roman Catholic Church and is directly responsible for engineering the global cover-up of child rape perpetrated by priests, according to this open letter to all Catholic bishopsVENERABLE BISHOPS,Joseph Ratzinger,...
by Grace Marguerite Williams 5 years ago
Pope Benedict steadfastly maintained that gay marriage is an "assault" on family values and denigrates the "true" purpose of marriage which is to be between male and female with the purpose of creating families. The pope further assert that gay marriage is...
by Romel Tarroza 6 years ago
Lightning strikes Vatican after Pope Benedict resigns, What does that mean?A lightning strikes St Peter's dome at the Vatican an Hours after Pope Benedict XVI announced that he will resign as leader of the Catholic Church. What do you think is the meaning of that lightning?
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|