13
14

ChristianityI went to Catholic schools from preschool to college.. now I have 0 feeling toward religion or religious thought (self.DebateReligion)

obviousbicycle1 が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]ssiankyanti-theist 4ポイント5ポイント  (9子コメント)

No, Catholic doctrine has never changed even once

You are liyng or deeply deceived. Two of the most prominent examples are usury and slavery. They changed the doctrines about those things to 180°.

[–]luke-jrCatholic (admits Francis & co are frauds) -3ポイント-2ポイント  (8子コメント)

No, usury is still immoral and slavery is still moral or immoral in the same conditions as it always was.

[–]ssiankyanti-theist 1ポイント2ポイント  (7子コメント)

So, are you lying, deceived or a troll? Initially it was no interest for loans, they changed to "no exorbitant" interest but never defined what exorbitant means.

Initially they condoned slavery, then they condemned it.

Attitude for Jews, religious liberties, separation of church and state. There are a lot of doctrine Changes.

[–]luke-jrCatholic (admits Francis & co are frauds) -1ポイント0ポイント  (6子コメント)

So, are you lying, deceived or a troll?

None of the above. How about you?

Initially it was no interest for loans, they changed to "no exorbitant" interest but never defined what exorbitant means.

Usury didn't change. Money did. Modern money is inflationary, so it loses value without interest.

Initially they condoned slavery, then they condemned it.

The condoned slavery is still moral (unless prohibited by law, in which case it's the sin of disobedience). The condemned slavery was always immoral and always condemned. You'll notice Christians have tried to reform abusive slavery since the beginning (and even abolish it altogether; notice St. Paul advises releasing slaves in Scripture).

Attitude for Jews, religious liberties, separation of church and state. There are a lot of doctrine Changes.

Attitudes aren't doctrine.

Religious liberty is applicable only to Catholicism; separation of Church and State is condemned heresy. Neither of those have changed.

[–]cysysyc 2ポイント3ポイント  (0子コメント)

Usury didn't change. Money did. Modern money is inflationary, so it loses value without interest.

This is complete bull! Historically money has always been inflationary. There was inflation in ancient Greece and Rome due to debasement and other factors.

[–]skeletonxfSecular Humanist ☮ Pacifist 0ポイント1ポイント  (4子コメント)

Usury didn't change. Money did. Modern money is inflationary, so it loses value without interest.

Then the 'correct' change would be to make loan interest to the extent of money devaluation only. This is not what people charge for interest, they charge more.

[–]luke-jrCatholic (admits Francis & co are frauds) 0ポイント1ポイント  (3子コメント)

What makes you think these people you mention are acting morally? When I give loans, I never ask for more (usually I don't ask for any interest).

[–]skeletonxfSecular Humanist ☮ Pacifist 0ポイント1ポイント  (2子コメント)

Oh I don't think they are acting morally in some cases, but my point is I don't see the Catholic Church complaining about above money devaluation interest yet if usary in this form is still considered immoral by them I'd expect them to have written about it.

[–]luke-jrCatholic (admits Francis & co are frauds) 0ポイント1ポイント  (1子コメント)

"Still considered" implies there is a possibility of change. Catholics know there isn't, so the older writings are more than sufficient.

[–]skeletonxfSecular Humanist ☮ Pacifist 0ポイント1ポイント  (0子コメント)

That sounds extremely ad hoc considering how the Catholic Church quite happily writes about things over many centuries without any changes happening to their viewpoint. A huge change in financial system would warrant someone in the Church to write something to clarify surely?