We all know that in humility, peace flourish. Catholic forum only, please. For none Catholics who want to join our forum, please don't be harsh if you want to share your views. Thank you.
He seems to be a good person. At least brave, so far. I hope he doesn't "die" suddenly.
Born into Catholicism and once an aspiring student in the Jesuit order, I do have some knowledge of the Church.
I would question your claim that; " We all know that in humility, peace flourish." Can you show how this is true, using whatever history you would like.
I embrace that one as common sense. This is my broad way of the expression of the fruit of humility if you know what I mean. Thanks for your question.
No, I do not know what you mean? Your statement was stated as a truth. I would like to see that truth.
If a statement is not truthful than common sense has no application and to attempt to brush it aside serves only to discredit your entire position.
In your request for people not to be harsh, are you requesting that they simply agree with your position?
I don't make things complicated. I simply say in broad way about being a good individual under our faith to our Creator.
No, you allude to a truth to support a position that cannot be supported. At best that would be disingenuous.
Is this then the foundation of the Catholic Church, the illusion of a truth to accommodate a fallacious position.
I know the answer to that question, so if you wish to answer choose your words carefully.
Being good under faith? I shudder to think what you would do if it's proved to you that there is no god. After all it is the catholics who went out to love their enemies who created the strappado.
The recent visit of Pope Francis to Sri Lanka and Philippines is a missionary adventure in living our faith as Catholic. These are third world countries but faith is flourishing in the surrounding different religions.
Faith is flourishing precisely because they are third world countries where a good majority are illiterate and in poverty. I guess they selected a pope out of Europe for the very same purpose as there is no future for Christianity in Europe.
Rich people love money and poor people love God. You cannot serve money and God. You have to choose one. Have you studied Christianity and the Bible?
I disagree. Money is very useful to anyone/everyone who loves God! In fact the Bible advises us to procure / earn enough money not only for ourselves but to help the poor! Business is actually a very spiritual pursuit.
That Pope Francis is visiting Sri Lanka and the Philippines where faith is flourishing is wonderful.
Is that why the catholic church is one of the richest business organisation? Both rich and poor love money and it is the rich that give large sums for charity not poor.
I studied Bible more than enough to know that most stories are simple myths, instructive myths none the less.
I have studied Christianity, as a Catholic I had to study it in school and as Sunday catechism. What they didn't tell, I got from history books.
History books are not match to our faith, your faith. Literally, science is not comparable with religion.
Deep inside is the best way to know if Bible is a myth or not.
Faith is the blind trust that the priest who ask for your money has your best interests at heart and knows better. Science is not comparable with religion, science is using the brain while religion is herding. Sheep and sheperd is the best anology for religion, priest is the wise sheperd who leads the sheep, drinks it milk and eat it as and when he pleases, while the foolish sheep is like the religious who merely follow him while scientific is being self reliant like the "street dog".
Not deep inside but common sense and common sense says it can be nothing but myths.
Science and religion should go hand in hand...
They do not, science is about reason and logic while religion is about believing myths as true and reaching nonsensical but easy explanations based on that myths for human experiences.
Science is about progress while religion is about keeping the status quo.
No, religion is about consciousness, when properly understood.
It is not about worshiping so much as it is about focusing on / comprehending reality.
...when properly understood.
Nothing of the sorts, you or any living being with a nervous system is conscious as long as you are alive and not sleeping. It needs to be defined and not understood. Religion is about the illusions and hallucinations either natural or induced along with our inability to comprehend death. It is not about comprehending but about making it more obscure.
But that is an example of the nonsensical explanation I was talking about. Reality is defined not comprehended. And science is about explaining reality rationally.
Religion is focusing on moral with God's blessing.
Bible is not myth. It even exist in history books.
"...In the history of radio communications, the term "detector" was first used for a device that detected the simple presence or absence of a radio signal, since all communications were in Morse code. The term is still in use today to describe a component that extracts a particular signal from all of the electromagnetic waves present. Detection is usually based on the frequency of the carrier wave, as in the familiar frequencies of radio broadcasting, but it may also involve filtering a faint signal from noise, as in radio astronomy, or reconstructing a hidden signal, as in steganography." W
"… is the organization, identification, and interpretation of sensory information in order to represent and understand the environment. All perception involves signals in the nervous system, which in turn result from physical or chemical stimulation of the sense organs. For example, vision involves light striking the retina of the eye, smell is mediated by odor molecules, and hearing involves pressure waves. Perception is not the passive receipt of these signals, but is shaped by learning, memory, expectation, and attention. Perception involves these "top-down" effects as well as the "bottom-up" process of processing sensory input. The "bottom-up" processing transforms low-level information to higher-level information (e.g., extracts shapes for object recognition). The "top-down" processing refers to a person's concept and expectations (knowledge), and selective mechanisms (attention) that influence perception. Perception depends on complex functions of the nervous system, but subjectively seems mostly effortless because this processing happens outside conscious awareness." W
"Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. It has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind. Despite the difficulty in definition, many philosophers believe that there is a broadly shared underlying intuition about what consciousness is. As Max Velmans and Susan Schneider wrote in The Blackwell Companion to Consciousness: "Anything that we are aware of at a given moment forms part of our consciousness, making conscious experience at once the most familiar and most mysterious aspect of our lives." W
From what you wrote
"Consciousness is the quality or state of awareness, or, of being aware of an external object or something within oneself. It has been defined as: sentience, awareness, subjectivity, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind"
There is no detection here, if it fit the definition it is conscious whether you detect it or not.
Detection mechanisms merely enhance your sense for your perception.
"Be still, (meditate,) and know (perceive) that I (Christ Consciousness) am God: I will be exalted among the heathen, (anyone,) I will be exalted in the earth, (everyone.)
So, to perceive, detect, become conscious of God, be still.
"Neither shall they say, See here! or, see there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you."
Bible: American King James Version
Both quotes are meaningless. Each word has a meaning, but as a sentence it is balderdash, the one who wrote it had no idea what he was talking about. He/she is like the naked king. In addition the first quote is merely the boasting of a humongous bighead.
So can you tell what you meant or saw?
by New Understanding 5 years ago
Do you think Pope Francis will bring people back to the Catholic faith?
by Demas W Jasper 3 years ago
Can Pope Francis excite a religious revival in America?
by Kenneth C Agudo 4 years ago
Do you think pope francis must allow priest to get married now?If you are not familiar with this social issue, you might consider checking it out. Do you think priest should get married too without breaking their vow of celibacy? Lately, a group of Italian ladies have sent letters to Pope Francis...
by Maggie Bennett 4 years ago
If you could Ask Pope Francis I anything today what would it be?
by LauraGT 5 years ago
Pope Francis' statement today about gay people: "If a person is gay and seeks God and has good will, who am I to judge them?" is not revolutionary, but certainly strikes a new tone. Even without any official change in church doctrine, do you think this new attitude from the pope...
by Alexander A. Villarasa 4 years ago
In his first formal homily as Pope, Francis, (ever the Jesuit as well as the Argentinian bishop), raised quite a lot of eyebrows when he mentioned the catch-all-phrase "economy of exclusion and inequality ". This seemed to hark back to the 60's when a...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|