To all Catholics

Gunshot *music ends*

"We have played the flute to you, and you did not dance; we have sung a dirge, and you did not mourn"
 
Originally posted by okinrus
The Egyptian God Akhetanon was known as the Son of God. Even on egptian legend has the king eating the flesh of gods for occult power.
Click to expand...
Akhenaton (alternatively Akhenaten, Akhnaten, Akhnaton, Ikhnaton, and so on), also known as Amenhotep IV, was Pharaoh of Egypt, shortly before Tutankhamun. He reigned from 1367 BC to 1350 BC during the Eighteenth Dynasty. His chief wife was Nefertiti, who has been made famous by her beautiful statue in the Berlin museum. He succeded his father Amenhotep III, and his mother was Chief Queen Tiy.

A religious revolutionary, he eschewed (but did not abandon) the traditional pantheon of deities, and worshipped the god Aten. In honour of this god, he changed his name from Amenhotep to Akhenaton. He also founded his own capital city at Amarna. The idea of Akhenaton as the pioneer of monotheistic religion was promoted by Sigmund Freud (the founder of psychoanalysis) in his book Moses and Monotheism and thereby entered popular conciousness.

Styles of art that flourished during this short period are markedly different from other Egyptian art, bearing a variety of affectations, from elongated heads to protruding stomachs, exaggerated ugliness and the beauty of Nefertiti.

Akhenaton had six known daughters by Nefertiti, named Meritaten, Meketaten, Ankhesenpaaten, Neferneferuaten Tasherit, Neferneferure, and Setepenre. The third daughter, Ankhesenpaaten, went on to become Tutankhamun's queen.

Source: Wikipedia

See also: "Aten." Encyclopedia Mythica
 
Originally posted by Kant we all...
Catholicism is structured in such a way that humans--i.e., beings of Reason--can assent to it. Simple principle being that all Catholic doctrine is grounded not solely in revelation, but also in reason.
Click to expand...

Give us the reasons behind Catholic beliefs, you don't seem to be using reason to me. What about your responses to Cris' list -- what proof do you have for any of the claims you made regarding a god and Jesus? You are simply using a book of questionable value and the teachings of irrational priests.

The same holds for all of you posting on the last 1+ pages -- none of you have any proof to your claims and you have no reason to belief any of it.

Arguments between irrational people will never be resolved in a rational manner.
 
Are you referring to The Egyptian Book of the Dead?
Click to expand...
No something else but I forgot the name.
Chapter 125 of the book of dead
is supposed to be similar though.


Akhenaton (alternatively Akhenaten, Akhnaten, Akhnaton, Ikhnaton, and so on), also known as Amenhotep IV, was Pharaoh of Egypt, shortly before Tutankhamun. He reigned from 1367 BC to 1350 BC during the Eighteenth Dynasty. His chief wife was Nefertiti, who has been made famous by her beautiful statue in the Berlin museum. He succeded his father Amenhotep III, and his mother was Chief Queen Tiy.
Click to expand...
He also wrote the hymn of Aten which is similar
to psalm 104 I think. Also Jesus almost quotes from
it with "No one knows the Father except the Son..."
 
Originally posted by okinrus
No something else but I forgot the name.
Click to expand...
What about The Code of Hammurabi?

He also wrote the hymn of Aten which is similar to
psalm 104 I think. Also Jesus almost quotes from
it with "No one knows the Father except the Son..."
Click to expand...
Yes they are similar. Jesus almost quotes from
what? The Hymn of Aten or Psalm 104?
 
Simple principle being that all Catholic doctrine is grounded not solely in revelation, but also in reason.
Click to expand...
I have to disagree. what is the reason behind catholics not being able to use contraceptives. no-one really replied to my post right at the start and that even if a guy managed to copulate with a woman every time he had too, he would still be wasting millions of sperm as only one gets through (sometimes even none get thhrough)-in essence, catholics males are unable not too sin. that isn't reasonable. as well, the catholic church being opposed to embryonic research into stem cells- the opposition to using invitro- cells, ones that will be destroyed anyway. but the pope wants these embryo's to be fostered out. that is not reasonable, rather most unreasonable. back in the 16th century catholic priests gave their services in latin because that was reasonable considering the fact that almost no-one knew what the priests were talking about as hardly anyone knew any latin. reasonable. no, i have to disagree that catholic doctrine is grounded in reason, but rather, far from it.
 
First of all, all of the things you have listed have absolutely nothing to do with "doctrine." When we speak of "doctrine," we are speaking of theologico-philosophical principles; e.g., tenets of the faith, justification as to what, where, and why Sacraments are what they are.

The fact, however, that contraceptives are not to be used is simply a matter of logic, is it not? Sexual activity is not just some selfish act where the two agreed parties engage in intercourse for the pleasure of each other's bodies: it produces a sure biological outcome in most cases, and hindering that hinders the very flux of Nature.

Priests said Mass in Latin because that was the language of the Universal Church; no matter where you went, or when you went, you were going to hear the exact same Mass. Probably more understood Latin than you think; and for those who didn't, there are still other ways of following along; e.g., pious in-hand translations such as prayerbooks.

I cannot comment on embryonic research because I know very little about it. But since I am a staunch ideologue of all of what little conservatism is left in the United States of America, it mustn't be right--for what little I know about it--to, as it were, "take life to save life" (as has been said somewhere else...perhaps in a song).
 
Originally posted by Red Devil
Evilpoet you forgot one thing about this pharoah - he was also Tuntankhamun's dad!
Click to expand...
Yes I did and yes he was. Or was he? ;)

"There is textual evidence which shows that he was born a prince, but some uncertainty still persists about his parentage. It is almost certain that he was the son of King Akhenaten (1353-1337 BC). However, until the question of whether there was a joint rule between Akhenaten and his father, King Amenophis III, is resolved, the theoretical possibility that Tutankhamun may have been a son of Amenophis III remains. If Tutankhamun was a son of Akhenaten, the question of his mother is equally intriguing. He is never represented as a child in the company of Akhenaten and Queen Nefertiti (these always show only daughters, no sons), so he may have been born to one of Akhenaten's minor queens, perhaps Queen Kiya."

Source: Tutankhamun: Anatomy of an Excavation
 
Just to be clear...

Are you saying that Jesus is quoting this part of The Hymn of Aten:

Thou are in my heart,
And there is no other that knows thee
Save thy son Nefer-kheperu-Re Wa-en-Re,
For thou hast made him well-versed in thy plans and in thy strength.

in this bible verse?

All things are delivered unto me of my Father: and no man
knoweth the Son, but the Father; neither knoweth any man
the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son
will reveal him.
 
Not a direct quote of course, but the hymn of Aten
but this quote has alot of Jesus' teachings.

"Thou art in my heart".
This was one of Jesus' main teachings. That Jesus and so
also God is within us. That the Father is within the Son
and the Son within the Father.

Another one of Jesus' teaching was that the Father
gave all his possesions to him. I believe Jesus' actual words were something like the Son has inherited the Father's property and like a good Son does everything the Father asks of him.

The strange thing is that Akhenaton was already
like a God. There would be no need to invent these
kind of stories.
 
okinrus,

Thanks for the clarification - much appreciated. Here is something
else that Jesus said: "If a blind person leads a blind person, both
of them will fall into a hole."
 
Kant we all,

The fact, however, that contraceptives are not to be used is simply a matter of logic, is it not?
Click to expand...
True, if one does want a pregnancy, otherwise contraceptives should be used.

Sexual activity is not just some selfish act where the two agreed parties engage in intercourse for the pleasure of each other's bodies:
Click to expand...
Of course it is, that is why sex is pleasurable. Ask any animal. They have no conception of reproduction; they only have sex for pleasure. Early man must have been equally ignorant until he could see the correlation between pleasure and a child 9 months later.

it produces a sure biological outcome in most cases, and hindering that hinders the very flux of Nature.
Click to expand...
And you imply that that is not good and that nature should not be hindered. If so then people should not wash their hands after using the toilet since killing bacteria is hindering nature spread disease. And you should not take anti-biotics when you are sick since clearly nature wants you to die of pneumonia.

You are seriously hindering the very flux of nature by allowing people to survive when they use medication created by man. Are you saying we should stop using these nature hindering weapons?

There is nothing inherently good about nature. It is indifferent and largely indiscriminant in its actions. By using our intelligence we are able to shape and mold nature to our own requirements. Sex has two purposes, sex and reproduction. Our intelligence has allowed us to control and select either at will. This is a good thing.

What is bad is when Catholicsm interferes and causes massive hardship for people who cannot afford children and who in turn cause and increase an already overpopulated world.
 
Evilpoet,

Here is something else that Jesus said: "If a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into a hole."
Click to expand...
I wonder why he would insult blind people. They have other ways of detecting obstacles and pitfalls other than sight, since blindness doesn’t imply stupidity.
 
I wonder why he would insult blind people. They have other ways of detecting obstacles and pitfalls other than sight, since blindness doesn’t imply stupidity.
Click to expand...
"Whoever hates his brother is in darkness; he
walks in darkness and does not know where
he is going because the darkness has blinded his
eyes".

Of course it is, that is why sex is pleasurable. Ask any animal. They have no conception of reproduction; they only have sex for pleasure. Early man must have been equally ignorant until he could see the correlation between pleasure and a child 9 months later.
Click to expand...
This is why Catholics are against contraceptives, but
I'm not trying to take a puritan stance here.
Love of pleasure will take away from love of God.
 
Cris,

Not actual blindness. Blind in this case is, in my opinion, meant
metaphorically. For example: "Love is blind."; "There is none so
blind as they that won’t see."; "Blind leading the blind." - that
sort of thing.
 
Okinrus,

"Whoever hates his brother is in darkness; he walks in darkness and does not know where he is going because the darkness has blinded his eyes".
Click to expand...
The reference works very well for most emotions, love included. When the intellect is interrupted by emotions then clarity of thought is usually the victim.

This is why Catholics are against contraceptives, but I'm not trying to take a puritan stance here.
Click to expand...
That doesn’t make sense. Catholics are against pleasure? Why?

Love of pleasure will take away from love of God.
Click to expand...
There are no mature people that I know who make the mistake of confusing an obsession with enjoyment.

It seems to me that the love of a religious fantasy takes away enjoyment of life.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top