double tap

Despite what many think we are not all that "evolved" as a superior being. Our history shows what we are capable of, and it is up to us to move beyond that. Act as nature intended  yet pass on your information.

"Am I Evillllllllllllll............Yes I Ammmmmmmm, Am I evilllllll, I am mannnn, Yes I Ammm!"
Metallica

Quoted: Quoted: We catholics have not 'made up' rules. ever allowed full entrance to Heaven. Wrong. We believe in the resurrection of the dead. At this time, all will see the face of God, save for the those who burn in hell. Which do not include murdered people. That is simply not what your Church doctrine says.  It says clearly that non baptized infants will be deprived of Beatific Vision.  In your doctrine Beatific Vision is one of the rewards of Heaven.  Your doctrine states clearly the following concerning unbaptized children: The doctrine of the Church supposes no sensible or afflictive punishment in the next world for children who die with nothing but original sin on their souls, but only the privation of the sight of God These unbaptized children ARE LESSER BEINGS in the eyes of the Roman Catholic Church, by your own doctrines definitions.  They are not punished, they die with nothing but Original Sin on their souls, but they are denied this idea of Beatific Vision because they simply did not live long enough to be baptized, or had parents that did not baptize them.

You don't have to argue anything. You don't have the info to argue. No one is a lesser being in the church's eyes. this is YOUR assumption.
I gave you a link. I told you about the resurrection of the dead, and what we believe pertaining to it. Even in the link it states.

for example that the souls of unbaptized children will be united to glorious bodies at the Resurrection, and that the renovated earth of which St. Peter speaks (II Peter 3:13) will be their happy dwelling place for eternity.

The renovated earth St. Peter talks about is heaven on Earth. Paradise as it was in the beginning. All will see the face of God then. Because you do not know what the 'renovated earth' refers to, You have assumed all the rest.

As far as church doctrine AFTER Vatican II,...here it is.
http://www.catholicireland.net/pages/index.php?nd=16&art=39

Historical development The teaching office of the Church has never taken any official position on the question of limbo. Unofficially, limbo may have enjoyed a certain favour for a time, especially when the only alternative to it seemed to be that unbaptised infants were sent to hell. But, as I have said, Christians have always had a certain difficulty believing that. It is true that Saint Augustine, to be consistent with the teaching about baptism being necessary for salvation, did think it. But he went on to say at once that the suffering of such infants was of the very mildest kind. Medieval theologians lessened this suffering still further, arguing that it meant the loss of the beatific vision, but not of natural happiness. The tendency of theologians since the sixteenth century and up to modern times has been to point out other extra-sacramental ways which can compensate for the lack of baptism. A Theological Argument What I have written about Christians no longer holding that good people are damned simply because they have never had the opportunity of receiving baptism was first brought to my attention in a homily by Cardinal Ratzinger, the Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in Rome. In that homily Ratzinger showed himself to be sympathetic to the view that good people can be saved, even if they have not been explicitly baptised. In later writings he developed a theological argument in support of this view. He argued that, just as Jesus lived for us, and was the one for the many, so too do Christians, joined to Jesus, live for others, and become the few for the many. This few, joined to Jesus as part of his Body the Church, is given a share in Jesus' work of saving the many. There is thus no salvation without baptism; but the baptism of one person can 'stand in' for another, just as the baptism of Jesus (his dying and rising) 'stood in' for us all. Christianity is a connected religion: they are saved who are connected to the Body of Christ. I have attempted to show that an ingeniously loving God finds ingeniously loving ways to confer baptism and its effects on those who, through no fault of their own, are not in a position to receive the sacrament explicitly.

There are both houses of thought in the church today. Either is acceptable. Traditional [pre-Vatican II] or more modern [post Vatican II], either way, eventually all will see the face of God. And no innocent child that is murdered will ever go to hell.

Here is Fr. Fagin on limbo, and why it is no longer taught.
www.americamagazine.org/gettext.cfm?articleTypeID=1&textID=1647&issueID=365

Quoted: "Am I Evillllllllllllll............Yes I Ammmmmmmm, Am I evilllllll, I am mannnn, Yes I Ammm!" Metallica

Nope , sorry DiamondHead. Metallica ripped it off like everything else.

sorry for the hijack

Quoted: You just bit the forbidden apple, and you want more.  I'm running out of apples!

Where was it said that they ate an apple? I dont think it specified any particular fruit.

Sorry, kind of nitpicky.

Regardless of any opinions or feelings, God has warned us where we stand (or have fallen).

Mr 10:18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God.

Ec 7:20 For [there is] not a just man upon earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not.

Isa 64:6 But we are all as an unclean [thing], and all our righteousnesses [are] as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Eph 2:3 Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

Joh 8:44 Ye are of [your] father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

Ro 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but [how] to perform that which is good I find not.

Salvation from sin is not found in a religion, nor does it come from a church.

Being a member of a Baptist church will not save a man, nor will the sacraments of the Catholic church.  The social good works of the Protestant church will not save....

Jesus is not the Baptist church, the Catholic church, or ANY church.

Salvation is IN HIM and no where else.

John 3: 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?
10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?
11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.
12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you [of] heavenly things?
13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, [even] the Son of man which is in heaven.
14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil

Quoted: Quoted: Awesome post, DF You just bit the forbidden apple, and you want more.  I'm running out of apples! Where was it said that they ate an apple? I dont think it specified any particular fruit. Sorry, kind of nitpicky.

Hey! I'm WORKIN here! Jeez

OK...as far as the original question in this thread <gives VA Gunnut a nod> , lemme dust off my Catholic upbringing...PLEASE, keep in mind what I remember may no longer be prevalent today.

We are born with original sin according to Catholic theocracy. That original sin was born in the Garden of Eden when Eve took the forbidden fruit  (happy Wildoar?? ) and ate it in the hopes of being, well, more God-like (the serpent promised her not material goods, but a more omnipotent status in the world should she taste that fruit.) She offered it to Adam who also ate it (providing only the WEAKEST objection) thereby 1. establishing that man was born GOOD but who has the CHOICE to do and be EVIL.
Now, my belief is that until that point...until temptation and succoming to the wiles of the serpent, A & E were children who knew only good in the world...a flawed existence if you aske me, but I digress.
God said that their children would be born with sin to pay for their sin of disobeying him. Now, here's where the theocracy gets weird: that sin (according to Catholic doctrine years ago) could only be cleared once baptised. If the baby dies before baprism, off to Limbo....Keep in mind that the Catholics used to also require a woman who recently gave birth to CONFESS her sin of the flesh (not the man mind you, just the woman---I'm going WAAAAAAAYYYYYY back here). Both theories have been abandoned because even the Catholic Church knows when it's fighting a losing battle (people don't believe the doctrine, they go somewhere else, taking their $ with them)
<sigh>
Personally I think that original apple bite <sticks tongue out at Wildboar> was necessary or we'd all be Stepford Adam and Eves. Without the bad, good cannot exist...God's plan ALL ALONG was for man to have free will and to make choices that either were right or wrong. If he intended man to live like A & E started, damn tree would NOT have been in the Garden (remember, he was the landscaper) so.....
I believe we are born with the propensity for both good and evil. I believe we all do good and bad in this life to keep the each and other into perspective.
There can be no light without the dark...and that's as profound as I am gonna get today....

FWIW: I am NOT a practicing Catholic...in fact am practicing nothing: like Rodent, I don't believe in organized religion (no flaming...I won't entertain it) I merely throwthat out there so that if "real" Catholics find flaws or if non-catholics wish to Inquisition me...well...go ahead...I'm going shopping.

I firmly believe (among other things) in the total depravity of man - so "B - Evil"

The world is good. Prosperity is good. Life is good, and we should live it with joy and enthusiasm.

We are free to shape our lives to the extent allowed by our skill, courage, and might. There is no predestination, no fatalism, no limitations imposed by the will of any external deity.

We do not need salvation. All we need is the freedom to face our destiny with courage and honor.

We are connected to all our ancestors. They are a part of us. We in turn will be a part of our descendants.

We are also linked to all our living kin - to our families and to every man and woman rooted in the tribes of Europe. They are our "greater family."

We are connected to Nature and subject to its laws. The Holy Powers often express themselves in Nature's beauty and might.

We believe that morality does not depend on commandments, but rather arises from the dignity and honor of the noble-minded man and woman.

We do not fear the Holy Powers, or consider ourselves their slaves. On the contrary, we share community and fellowship with the Divine. The Holy Powers encourage us to grow and advance to higher levels.

We honor the Holy Powers under the names given them by our Germanic/Norse ancestors.

We practice Asatru by honoring the turning of the seasons…the ancestors…the Divine…and ourselves - in everyday life.


www.runestone.org/flash/home.html

Nuff Said.

Quoted: If the baby dies before baprism, off to Limbo....Keep in mind that the Catholics used to also require a woman who recently gave birth to CONFESS her sin of the flesh (not the man mind you, just the woman---I'm going WAAAAAAAYYYYYY back here). Both theories have been abandoned because even the Catholic Church knows when it's fighting a losing battle (people don't believe the doctrine, they go somewhere else, taking their $ with them) FWIW: I am NOT a practicing Catholic...in fact am practicing nothing: like Rodent, I don't believe in organized religion (no flaming...I won't entertain it) I merely throwthat out there so that if "real" Catholics find flaws or if non-catholics wish to Inquisition me...well...go ahead...I'm going shopping.

2 things.  

First, it's the Catholics that do the Inquisitioning, not the other way around.

Second, Limbus Infantum is most certainly NOT abandonded by the Roman Catholic
Church, either in practice or on written doctrine.  It is very much alive and believed.

Quoted: 2 things.   First, it's the Catholics that do the Inquisitioning, not the other way around. Second, Limbus Infantum is most certainly NOT abandonded by the Roman Catholic Church, either in practice or on written doctrine.  It is very much alive and believed.

Well then I stand corrected...
Now hows about a ride in that 'thingy' car of yours?

Quoted: Quoted: 2 things.   First, it's the Catholics that do the Inquisitioning, not the other way around. Second, Limbus Infantum is most certainly NOT abandonded by the Roman Catholic Church, either in practice or on written doctrine.  It is very much alive and believed. Well then I stand corrected... Now hows about a ride in that 'thingy' car of yours?

All discussions of "thingy" have to cease before anyone is riding anything

Quoted: All discussions of "thingy" have to cease before anyone is riding anything

killjoy.............................

Quoted: Quoted: All discussions of "thingy" have to cease before anyone is riding anything killjoy.............................

OK, all PUBLIC discusisons of the thingy have to stop.

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: All discussions of "thingy" have to cease before anyone is riding anything killjoy............................. OK, all PUBLIC discusisons of the thingy have to stop.

so private discussions of the thingy are welcome...ok...IMbound

Quoted:

Which is why you are wrong .

Since all people are born with original sin then we are born evil.

Now ofcourse we can be good, but taht first requires baptism to bring us into Christ.

Sgat1r5

_____________________________________________________________

Hey there, Chief, what's this "...all people are born with original sin then we are born evil." stuff?

Speak for yourself and the terrors lurking under your bed.

For mature adults, don't espuuse you're fears upon us.


Jewish Ed

Mankind as a whole has great potential for good things, however it also has an evil streak. I would say more good than evil. There will always be that gray area between where good/evil may not be that defined. Some situations call for an evil act or three to result in a outcome that sides with good. War is a good example of this gray area. Yes, I would say more good than evil for mankind.

Quoted: Quoted: You just bit the forbidden apple, and you want more.  I'm running out of apples! Where was it said that they ate an apple? I dont think it specified any particular fruit. Sorry, kind of nitpicky.

i haven't read any other posts, so i hope i'm the first to answer.

in the bible it's forbidden fruit.

in John Milton's Paradis Lost, it's an apple ( not biblical, but a good read nonetheless) and that's where the idea of an apple as the forbidden fruit comes from.

How about neither. We're just animals. Are there any other animals on this planet that could rationally be considered "evil"?
A shark that bites a person in half isn't "evil"; it's hungry.
A dog that pisses on your favorite carpet isn't "evil"; it's just stupid.
A person that shoots another person for a pair of sneakers isn't "evil"; he/she's just barefoot.

No, seriously. If you're asking from a "God" point of view... and we're all God's creations, why would God create evil. Seems to go against everything he represents.

If you're going from a sociological/anthropological point of view... I'd say that "evil" is kind of a ethereal concept. However I believe that certain behavioral traits are passed down genetically. If one of those traits is, say, a volatile temper, and it's not understood or "treated" then it could grow into what may be perceived as evil when the person lashed out because they don't learn to control their "problem".

Quoted: How about neither. We're just animals. Are there any other animals on this planet that could rationally be considered "evil"?

spiders.

eta: fireants and mosquitos.

Quoted: No, seriously. If you're asking from a "God" point of view... and we're all God's creations, why would God create evil. Seems to go against everything he represents.

God created man without evil.  He gave man freewil.  man used that freewill to become evil

Quoted: Quoted: No, seriously. If you're asking from a "God" point of view... and we're all God's creations, why would God create evil. Seems to go against everything he represents. God created man without evil.  He gave man freewil.  man used that freewill to become evil

Which means God indirectly created evil. If its freewill then whatever you decide to do is your decision... how can you put a label of "good" or "evil" on it... it's simply an action.

You kill a mosquito that is on your arm. That is a life that you ended. Are you evil?

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: No, seriously. If you're asking from a "God" point of view... and we're all God's creations, why would God create evil. Seems to go against everything he represents. God created man without evil.  He gave man freewil.  man used that freewill to become evil Which means God indirectly created evil. If its freewill then whatever you decide to do is your decision... how can you put a label of "good" or "evil" on it... it's simply an action. You kill a mosquito that is on your arm. That is a life that you ended. Are you evil?

No...the b*tch had it coming..............

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: No, seriously. If you're asking from a "God" point of view... and we're all God's creations, why would God create evil. Seems to go against everything he represents. God created man without evil.  He gave man freewil.  man used that freewill to become evil Which means God indirectly created evil.

that's like saying gun dealers indirectly support murders by selling them firearms.
the responsibility is up to the buyer to use the gun with care.

If its freewill then whatever you decide to do is your decision... how can you put a label of "good" or "evil" on it... it's simply an action.

easy.

let me give an example:
helping a homeless veteran get back on his feet = good.
molesting children = evil

You kill a mosquito that is on your arm. That is a life that you ended. Are you evil?

ending life is not evil.

Quoted: You are an off shoot of the Catholic Chruch, still welcome when you are ready to advance to the next level. SGatr15

I respect you alot Sarge, but have to differ on ths one.... I used to think the same thing when I was a Catholic.

I believe the Catholic church is the offshoot of the orgininal church body and that the prot reformation was the advancment back to the original form.

Quoted: Quoted: You are an off shoot of the Catholic Chruch, still welcome when you are ready to advance to the next level. SGatr15 I respect you alot Sarge, but have to differ on ths one.... I used to think the same thing when I was a Catholic. I believe the Catholic church is the offshoot of the orgininal church body and that the prot reformation was the advancment back to the original form.

Well I'm glad I'm not the only one.  

I believe the same, that along the way the Roman Catholic Church was lost, and in some of the doctrinal things that still exist and are practiced, I believe still is lost.

The things brought about in the Prot Ref were not "radical" ideas and in very many cases had been the teachings of the Church until greedy and power hungry Pontiffs changed things.

Roman Catholics usually revert to the "well you only did this so you could get a divorce" argument, which has nothing to do with things.   That may very well be what the Church of England was all about, but the Protestant Reformation had begun a long time before that.  One Anglican spin off in England that makes an exception for divorce does not define Protestantism.

I studied Roman Catholicism, I wasn't raised in it and a "Catholic" by default.  I truly tried to believe that it was the Mother Church because of what I saw some Anglican churches doing. After reading the Catechism and doctrinal works, I found that I could not in good faith be part of a church with some,
to me, truly repugnant beliefs.   That word "repugnant" you will see used in several Protestant church doctrines regarding things we've discussed here lately, like Limbus Infantum and Transubstantiation.

I could not after reading the Church's own writings believe that this was the original Church.

Plenary Indulgences, Idols, Relics... I could go on for hours with things that do not rightfully
belong.

You guys that were born Roman Catholic, and maybe even attended Catholic school, have you ever truly
looked at your Church's dorctines from the viewpoint of a neutral party?  I can't imagine you would
read that stuff with an open mind and still come to believe it all.  

Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Which means God indirectly created evil.

that's like saying gun dealers indirectly support murders by selling them firearms.
the responsibility is up to the buyer to use the gun with care.

Uhhhhhy yeeeeaaaahhh. That's so many levels beyond apples and oranges I don't even know how to word it. I'm talking about divine creation from the all powerful Lord Almighty... you're talking about... wtf are you talking about? I understand the attempt at an analogy but I'm not quite making the connection.