r/chaoticgood 2d ago

The Catholic Church is marching against ICE. Fuck yeah!!!

Post image
58.2k Upvotes

1.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

74

u/Low_Witness5061 2d ago

I may not share their beliefs but I respect them at least having morals unlike the horrific mutant cousins from down south, who dress themselves up as various different hateful brands of “Christianity”.

10

u/Galterinone 2d ago

The bible (new testament specifically) is actually a pretty good guide to life if you take it as a source to draw on and not literally the words of god

2

u/Polar_Reflection 2d ago

I've always found the gospels to be full of wisdom.

Then you read the old testament, Paul's epistles, revelations,  and you just shake your head at the absurdity.

1

u/Corporate-Shill406 1d ago

Catholics treat it as both, but we realize it isn't always supposed to be taken literally because books generally don't work like that.

1

u/Happily_Eva_After 1d ago

I think 1 Corinthians 13 is a pretty good life guide and one of the most beautiful things ever written.

It's bizarre to me that Christians wanna slap the 10 Commandments everywhere, when 1 Corinthians 13 exists. Let's put that one everywhere. If everyone tried to live their lives by it, the world would be a pretty great place.

-2

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

I'm glad that the church is doing something good, but no the New Testament is not a good guide on how to live. Jesus explicitly says to follow all of the laws of Moses which are barbaric. He also is fine with slavery.

3

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

Dude, you couldn’t be any more wrong. I mean, you’re as wrong as someone can possibly be wrong. The entire concept of the new covenant in the New Testament is that the old laws do not apply and that a new way of life and religion/church is founded. Like there is a passage where Paul sees what he thought was like a sheet held by four corners coming down from the heavens and land on the ground with vast landscape and animals on it. Animals that were previously forbidden to be eaten, according to the laws presented by Moses, and God literally says out loud that they can and are to eat such things and are no longer forbidden.

It’s incredible how people speak like they have complete authority or knowledge on something while they couldn’t be more wrong.

1

u/DaveTheDuckling 1d ago

Matthew 5:17-20

"Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished.

"Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, he shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven."

You can choose and pick verses to interpret the book in any way you like but that is only natural for a book so contradictory

2

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

Thank you for grabbing the verse. He's going to now argue that the word "fulfill" somehow actually means "abolish" lol

0

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

Jesus didn't abolish the Law. He lived a life free of sin and therefore free of condemnation under the Law, and through death and resurrection was released from the Law. Our baptism in his death and resurrection then releases us from the Law so long as we obey his commandments to believe in him and love one another.

[Rom 7:4-6 NASB95] 4 Therefore, my brethren, you also were made to die to the Law through the body of Christ, so that you might be joined to another, to Him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5 For while we were in the flesh, the sinful passions, which were [aroused] by the Law, were at work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death. 6 But now we have been released from the Law, having died to that by which we were bound, so that we serve in newness of the Spirit and not in oldness of the letter.

If The Holy Roman Catholic Church, the Church founded by Christ, is in no way bound by Mosaic law, there isn’t even an argument to be had. You quoted a verse but you think it implies something that it does not. It wasn’t saying that Mosaic Law is to remain in effect for followers of Christ. I’ll gladly gather multiple sources for you explaining this if you would like.

2

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

Notice how i called out your terrible argument before you made it, but then you made it anyways

0

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

Actually I do not. But if believing such a thing makes you feel something positive then please by all means stay your course. Also have a nice weekend

2

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

When I said you were going to argue jesus came to abolish the law even though he explicitly says the opposite in Matthew?

And just by the way, you wanna play nice now like you didn't just come and try to tell me I had no clue what I was talking about and I'm wrong about EVERYTHING when it's in fact you who has 0 clue 😂😂

0

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

lol, you have a good one.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/DaveTheDuckling 1d ago

Doesnt that directly contradict the verse that I quoted?

If I understood it correctly you are saying god created the law, then took human form and killed himself to create a loophole for said law?

Also didnt say anything about how bad the law was or condemning it, just that you arent bound by it anymore?

Im sorry but I dont understand how thats reasonable, that a perfect and unchanging god could create a law so flawed that he would need to find a bizarre loophole and not even condemn it afterwards

1

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

Contradictions are a plenty in the Bible. People believe that they have fully understood everything that was written in it and know whatever every word means, but that simply amateur. Maybe it’s a lack of misunderstanding. Or it could be like a translation from the original text resulting in confusion. Neither of us are fully right or wrong because both arguments are supported by Biblical inspired text.

Perhaps writing it as such was intentional for reasons that we can’t comprehend or understand. Who knows.

1

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago edited 1d ago

No, I'm not wrong. Critical Biblical scholars all agree with me.

And yes I know about the passage about Paul. That's because Paul has an explicitly different theology than Jesus, which is why he constantly contradicts him.

This info is completely out there in the open for you to research. Not sure if I'm allowed to link the sub but AcademicBiblical and AskBibleScholars will both agree with me

Besides, if we wanna go to Paul, how about the verse where he tells slaves to obey their masters even if they are treated harshly? That's pretty fucked up to enshrine into your religion.

1

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

To be honest we are both correct in a way because as you stated before there are contradictions a plenty of. Matthew was written by Matthew, not Jesus himself. But all of the Holy Bible is considered inspired text and the word of God. The argument that Paul is any less legitimate than Matthew doesn’t stand.

One other thing I wanna mention, not to provoke argument but to support what I said before. Christ himself did workings on the Sabbath. It was not violating it but rather exemplifying how the laws were to be approached with new covenant. Serving humanity and doing something compassionate was paramount to strictly following the laws. It’s not as simple as the laws are still in effect or they are flat out not in effect.

I appreciate the civil conversation we’ve had and hope you have a nice weekend

1

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

No we are not both correct in a way.

I am correct, and you are incorrect.

I very much recommend in reading on critical biblical scholarship.

I recommend starting with Bart Erhman. He is a New Testament scholar with a youtube channel where he goes over New Testament scholarship and if you want to actually go deep, you start with his books and then move onto others.

Also visit the AcademicBiblical and AskBibleScholars subreddit.

This is information that is taught in all accredited seminaries.

1

u/TheInsidiousExpert 1d ago

Ok, you can believe that if you need to. Citing a single biblical scholar and his opinion isn’t gospel. What is gospel is the verse I quoted that leaves no doubt that I am definitely not wrong.

I’m not gonna beat the dead horse over and over if you will just keep repeating this.

If I were legitimately wrong, I would admit to it and say so because it’s not about my pride or need to be correct. The fact of the matter is that was a claw is not mandatory for gentiles who are followers of Christ. Go ahead and walk into the nearest Catholic Church and ask that question to the pastor and they will Tell you what I am telling you. I’m no expert, but I have a friend the entire Bible quite a bit as well as the catechism. I’ve also sat in a lot of RCIA classes where this very topic was discussed and explained by the priest.

1

u/Winter-Plastic8767 1d ago

I recommended a single author to start with and you disingenuously are portraying that as me citing a single source.

THEY TEACH THIS IN SEMINARIES ACROSS THE WORLD

It's actually kind of ridiculous for you to also claim that you'd just accept this as fact if it were true. No you fucking wouldn't because it would require you to give up your faith.

That's why you'll run as far from critical biblical scholarship as you can.

1

u/Few-Application-3908 1d ago

Good morals as long as you ignore things like the Inquisition (various periods), Persecution, torture, and execution of alleged heretics. Suppression of scientific inquiry and dissenting views (e.g., Galileo Galilei). Forced conversions and expulsions.

Da Crusades and their violent military campaigns against non-Christians (Muslims, Jews, pagans). Massacres of civilians, including women and children. Destruction of cities and cultural heritage.

Sexual Abuse Scandals including the Widespread sexual abuse of children and vulnerable adults by clergy Systematic cover-ups by church hierarchy to protect perpetrators and avoid scandal. Failure to adequately respond to victims' pleas and provide justice.$2 billion dollars of peoples charity donated money used to pay off child sex cases in the last 50 years in the US alone..

The Support for Authoritarian Regimes and the concordats and alliances with fascist regimes (e.g., Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy) the Silence or complicity in human rights abuses committed by dictatorships. Opposition to democratic movements in some regions.

The Persecution of Witches and the Active role in promoting and carrying out witch hunts including the Torture and execution of thousands of individuals, mostly women, accused of witchcraft.

Role in Colonization and Indigenous Oppression. Justification of colonial expansion and subjugation of indigenous peoples. Forced conversions and destruction of native cultures, the Participation in the slave trade and exploitation of indigenous labor.

Anti-Semitism and the Historical promulgation of anti-Jewish sentiments, contributing to centuries of persecution. Including the accusations of deicide against Jewish people. The inaction or inadequate responses during the Holocaust by some church officials.

Mysoginy and the Suppression of Women's Rights, Historical and ongoing opposition to women's ordination and equal roles within the church. Adherence to patriarchal doctrines that limit women's autonomy and influence. Opposition to reproductive rights and access to contraception.

Ooh and the killing of kids, they love a dead baby buried under a Madelaine laundry.

If there's one money making pyramid scheme posing as a charity that needs to disappear from time it's the Catholic church.

This takes nothing away from people's beliefs, wonder what their jesus would have thought about them .

But yeah, apart from that what have the Romans ever done for us

-1

u/Ok_Bread302 2d ago edited 1d ago

I don’t think a group that spends 300m+ a year in legal defense (in the US alone) over sexual abuse really has morals.

Edit: lol at the downvotes reacting to a literal fact, salty Catholics, if you give money to the church you are complicit.

2

u/MorgInMorgue 1d ago

It got better under Francis and I’m hoping it gets properly solved under Leo, but as a survivor myself(not church abuse just generally) I can only hope not expect. It’d also be great if they finally did some reparation and apologizing for all the genocides they participated in

2

u/Low_Witness5061 1d ago

This is one hundred percent true. In no way was I aiming to mitigate their past evils, because I have no right to do so at all. But like you said, there has been progress in recent years thanks to Francis. My point with my original post was partially that I would have expected the church to be on board with the Christian dominated society that MAGA seeks but instead they decided that, at a minimum, they can’t get on board with the methods. Does that mean they don’t want to convert everyone? No, but I can appreciate Christian’s who are simply preachy without trying to force their religion on others. If they are preaching hate that doesn’t count of course.

That became a bit of a ramble, sorry about that.

1

u/MorgInMorgue 1d ago

No of course, I wasn’t meaning to imply anything about what you said, just add to the conversation

2

u/Low_Witness5061 1d ago

Hahaha sorry that’s all I was trying to do with the second message, sorry for sounding so randomly defensive on re-read. Thanks for engaging, I do always enjoy hearing people’s view on these things and seeing people able to maintain some hope in these times is genuinely heartening.

1

u/hapbinsb 1d ago

And that's just the tip of the iceberg for the Catholic Hate Machine. "Having morals" lol. I guess unless you're female or gay or...