• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Censorship?

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
16,289
8,630
51
The Wild West
✟832,447.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
The bible does not teach soul sleep. It teaches that the body plus the breath or spirit given by God equals a living soul. At death, these separate, and there is no longer a living soul. The condition is referred to as sleep by scripture and our Lord, because there are no thoughts or awareness in death. This is another topic altogether though. Soul sleep is just a name someone made up, which is attributed to those who believe in the sleep of death scripture declares so many times over.

On the contrary, soul sleep is a novel interpretation which was unknown in the early church and which is contradicted by the words of our Lord to the Good Thief on the Cross.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David Lamb
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
510
100
64
Campobello
✟31,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
On the contrary, soul sleep is a novel interpretation which was unknown in the early church and which is contradicted by the words of our Lord to the Good Thief on the Cross.
Soul sleep is not found anywhere in scripture. I don't know who believed it if anyone ever did. Rather again I think it was a name someone made up and sarcastically applied to those who believe in the sleep of the dead. Wikipedia suggests it was John Calvin. Scripture itself refers to the dead as sleeping many times over. When someone dies, the soul dies, as all the living are living souls. There is no soul sleep. There are living souls, and souls which have died and are therefore no more. The Bible never speaks of soul sleep or immortal souls, these are extra biblical terms. It speaks of living souls, and souls dying. The dead are referred to as asleep, because the sleeping eventually wake up, which is what the resurrection is all about.

Dan 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. 2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Luk 8:51 And when he came into the house, he suffered no man to go in, save Peter, and James, and John, and the father and the mother of the maiden. 52 And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said,
Weep not; she is not dead, but sleepeth. 53 And they laughed him to scorn, knowing that she was dead. 54 And he put them all out, and took her by the hand, and called, saying, Maid, arise. 55 And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway: and he commanded to give her meat.

Jhn 11:11 These things said he: and after that he saith unto them,
Our friend Lazarus sleepeth; but I go, that I may awake him out of sleep. 12 Then said his disciples, Lord, if he sleep, he shall do well. 13 Howbeit Jesus spake of his death: but they thought that he had spoken of taking of rest in sleep.
14 Then said Jesus unto them plainly,
Lazarus is dead.

1Co 15:51 Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, 52 In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. 53 For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54 So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. 55 O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?

1Th 4:13 But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. 14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: 17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. 18 Wherefore comfort one another with these words.


As far as the thief on the cross goes, a misplaced comma makes a big difference. If it is before the word today it means both Christ and the thief would be in paradise that day, if after, it would simply be a promise that the thief would be in paradise with Jesus when all the rest of us are as well. The problem with it meaning that Christ and the thief would be in paradise the day of their crucifixions is that our Lord did not go to paradise that day. As other scriptures testify.

Jhn 20:16 Jesus saith unto her, Mary. She turned herself, and saith unto him, Rabboni; which is to say, Master.
17 Jesus saith unto her,
Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. 18 Mary Magdalene came and told the disciples that she had seen the Lord, and that he had spoken these things unto her.

Mat 12:39 But he answered and said unto them,
An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: 40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Perhaps, if we wish to continue this discussion, I will start another topic on the history of the term or belief in soul sleep. For however long that might last, as well as this topic, since so many topics get censored and locked down on these boards.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
510
100
64
Campobello
✟31,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
Ethics in Internet

Quotes below from link above, emphasis in quotes is mine.

Excerpts from -
PONTIFICAL COUNCIL FOR SOCIAL COMMUNICATIONS
ETHICS IN INTERNET

3. As with other media, the person and the community of persons are central to ethical evaluation of the Internet. In regard to the message communicated, the process of communicating, and structural and systemic issues in communication, “the fundamental ethical principle is this: The human person and the human community are the end and measure of the use of the media of social communication; communication should be by persons to persons for the integral development of persons”.

The common good—“the sum total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more easily”—provides a second basic principle for ethical evaluation of social communications. It should be understood inclusively, as the whole of those worthy purposes to which a community's members commit themselves together and which the community exists to realize and sustain. The good of individuals depends upon the common good of their communities.

The virtue disposing people to protect and promote the common good is solidarity. It is not a feeling of “vague compassion or shallow distress” at other people's troubles, but “a firm and persevering determination to commit oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of each individual, because we are all really responsible for all”. Especially today solidarity has a clear, strong international dimension; it is correct to speak of, and obligatory to work for, the international common good.

5. One major consequence of the deregulation of recent years has been a shift of power from national states to transnational corporations. It is important that these corporations be encouraged and helped to use their power for the good of humanity; and this points to a need for more communication and dialogue between them and concerned bodies like the Church.

Use of the new information technology and the Internet needs to be informed and guided by a resolute commitment to the practice of solidarity in the service of the common good, within and among nations. This technology can be a means for solving human problems, promoting the integral development of persons, creating a world governed by justice and peace and love. Now, even more than when the Pastoral Instruction on the Means of Social Communications Communio et Progressio made the point more than thirty years ago, media have the ability to make every person everywhere “a partner in the business of the human race”.​

6. The spread of the internet also raises a number of other ethical questions about matters like privacy, the security and confidentiality of data, copyright and intellectual property law, pornography, hate sites, the dissemination of rumor and character assassination under the guise of news, and much else. We shall speak briefly about some of these things below, while recognizing that they call for continued analysis and discussion by all concerned parties. Fundamentally, though, we do not view the Internet only as a source of problems; we see it as a source of benefits to the human race. But the benefits can be fully realized if the problems are solved.

It is important to note that since the time of this Papal document, the Popes have had private meetings with the owners, heads, or CEO's of all the major social media platforms. Many of which we have all witnessed exercising a great deal of censorship on their platforms. These of course only represent the censorship the public at large has noticed and therefore brought forward to be addressed.

Here we have an address from the Vatican intending to define the parameters and or narratives of communication on the internet. Which it had apparently already addressed regarding the media, and has continued to address to date regarding social media as well. Basically a call to regulate that which it has considered to deregulated. These regulations should be implemented in line with the principles of what the Vatican describes as the common good. So, who determines or defines what the common good is? Adolf Hitler’s twenty fifth point of his 25 Points of the Nazi Party was - Common Good Before Individual Good. Adolf and the Nazi’s are pretty much gone for now, so whose common good are we talking about exactly? Obviously, we are talking about the common good as defined by the Vatican and Popes. Who is the Vatican to be calling for these regulations by nations on a global scale?

It most certainly is not the voice of the people of the various nations via the representatives they have elected to convey and implement their political desires. The Vatican stands among and as another international globalist institution of unelected officials, who wish to impose their politics upon the various nations of this world with or without the consent of the people of these nations. Just like all the other international globalist institutions of unelected officials, desiring to do the same. The Vatican itself has stated and supports the implementation of the rule of certain of these international globalist institutions over all nations. All of which is to specifically bypass the will of the peoples of nations in favor of the rule of unelected elitist international globalist officials in cahoots with each other. Of which the Vatican itself is a major if not the most significant players. Being herself a monarchal leftover from the dark or middle ages, this is the form of authoritative government she most fully supports and has most often supported throughout her lengthy history. To create such a system on a global scale, would be to recreate the conditions under which the Vatican ruled with the kings of this earth for over a thousand years. Just a global version of the dark ages with the Vatican and unelected officials of international organizations ruling together over all. Rather than the dark ages version of the Vatican and unelected kings, queens, and royalty ruling together predominantly over all European nations.

Authoritative government and censorship walk hand in hand. We have already and do continue to witness attempts by globalist and or left leaning entities to censor speech that does not support and or contradicts their narratives. The most recent and appalling examples being demonstrated during the Covid-19 plandemic. As we continue to examine the topic of censorship, I intend to reveal the direct connection between the so called common good, and the same. The following post will be an article from the days of Hitler himself addressing the dangers of a supposed common good. After which we will continue to address the present Papal document under examination, followed by many other Papal documents defining “The common good”, and its connection to authoritarian government and censorship.
 
Upvote 0

Amo2

Well-Known Member
Feb 3, 2024
510
100
64
Campobello
✟31,004.00
Country
United States
Faith
SDA
Marital Status
Married
The Only Path To Tomorrow
Ayn Rand

Readers Digest, January 1944, pp. 88-90

The greatest threat to mankind and civilization is the spread of the totalitarian philosophy. Its best ally is not the devotion of its followers but the confusion of its enemies. To fight it, we must understand it.

Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group — whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called ``the common good.´´

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing ``the common good.´´ Napoleon ``served the common good´´ of France. Hitler is ``serving the common good´´ of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by ``altruists´´ who justify themselves by-the common good.

No tyrant has ever lasted long by force of arms alone. Men have been enslaved primarily by spiritual weapons. And the greatest of these is the collectivist doctrine that the supremacy of the state over the individual constitutes the common good. No dictator could rise if men held as a sacred faith the conviction that they have inalienable rights of which they cannot be deprived for any cause whatsoever, by any man whatsoever, neither by evildoer nor supposed benefactor.

This is the basic tenet of individualism, as opposed to collectivism. Individualism holds that man is an independent entity with an inalienable right to the pursuit of his own happiness in a society where men deal with one another as equals.

The American system is founded on individualism. If it is to survive, we must understand the principles of individualism and hold them as our standard in any public question, in every issue we face. We must have a positive credo, a clear consistent faith.

We must learn to reject as total evil the conception that the common good is served by the abolition of individual rights. General happiness cannot be created out of general suffering and self-immolation. The only happy society is one of happy individuals. One cannot have a healthy forest made up of rotten trees.

The power of society must always be limited by the basic, inalienable rights of the individual.

The right of liberty means man's right to individual action, individual choice, individual initiative and individual property. Without the right to private property no independent action is possible.

The right to the pursuit of happiness means man's right to live for himself, to choose what constitutes his own, private, personal happiness and to work for its achievement. Each individual is the sole and final judge in this choice. A man's happiness cannot be prescribed to him by another man or by any number of other men.

These rights are the unconditional, personal, private, individual possession of every man, granted to him by the fact of his birth and requiring no other sanction. Such was the conception of the founders of our country, who placed individual rights above any and all collective claims. Society can only be a traffic policeman in the intercourse of men with one another.

From the beginning of history, two antagonists have stood face to face, two opposite types of men: the Active and the Passive. The Active Man is the producer, the creator, the originator, the individualist. His basic need is independence — in order to think and work. He neither needs nor seeks power over other men — nor can he be made to work under any form of compulsion. Every type of good work — from laying bricks to writing a symphony — is done by the Active Man. Degrees of human ability vary, but the basic principle remains the same: the degree of a man's independence and initiative determines his talent as a worker and his worth as a man.

The Passive Man is found on every level of society, in mansions and in slums, and his identification mark is his dread of independence. He is a parasite who expects to be taken care of by others, who wishes to be given directives, to obey, to submit, to be regulated, to be told. He welcomes collectivism, which eliminates any chance that he might have to think or act on his own initiative.

When a society is based on the needs of the Passive Man it destroys the Active; but when the Active is destroyed, the Passive can no longer be cared for. When a society is based on the needs of the Active Man, he carries the Passive ones along on his energy and raises them as he rises, as the whole society rises. This has been the pattern of all human progress.

Some humanitarians demand a collective state because of their pity for the incompetent or Passive Man. For his sake they wish to harness the Active. But the Active Man cannot function in harness. And once he is destroyed, the destruction of the Passive Man follows automatically. So if pity is the humanitarians' first consideration, then in the name of pity, if nothing else, they should leave the Active Man free to function, in order to help the Passive. There is no other way to help him in the long run.

The history of mankind is the history of the struggle between the Active Man and the Passive, between the individual and the collective. The countries which have produced the happiest men, the highest standards of living and the greatest cultural advances have been the countries where the power of the collective — of the government, of the state — was limited and the individual was given freedom of independent action. As examples: The rise of Rome, with its conception of law based on a citizen's rights, over the collectivist barbarism of its time. The rise of England, with a system of government based on the Magna Carta, over collectivist, totalitarian Spain. The rise of the United States to a degree of achievement unequaled in history — by grace of the individual freedom and independence which our Constitution gave each citizen against the collective.

While men are still pondering upon the causes of the rise and fall of civilizations, every page of history cries to us that there is but one source of progress: Individual Man in independent action. Collectivism is the ancient principle of savagery. A savage's whole existence is ruled by the leaders of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men.

We are now facing a choice: to go forward or to go back.

Collectivism is not the ``New Order of Tomorrow.´´ It is the order of a very dark yesterday. But there is a New Order of Tomorrow. It belongs to Individual Man — the only creator of any tomorrows humanity has ever been granted. (Readers Digest, January 1944, pp. 88-90)

While the author of the above article was certainly not a Christian by any means, the truth embodied in the above article should not be denied by anyone who is. As it will be found in later chapters examining Protestant thought in relation to government and the founding of this nation, her thoughts concerning individualism were certainly not original or new. Though without question her views came from a different perspective, their motive was much the same as that of the Reformers, a reaction and observation in relation to experiential knowledge of abusive government. Hers at the hands of Communistic collectivism, and theirs at the hands for the most part of heavily Roman Catholic imbibed Feudalism. As the above author mentioned Hitler as one proposing the establishment of the common good, the above article itself being written in 1944, the following is his twenty fifth point, of the 25 Points of the Nazi Party.

COMMON GOOD BEFORE INDIVIDUAL GOOD

25. In order to carry out this program we demand: the creation of a strong central authority in the State, the unconditional authority by the political central parliament of the whole State and all its organizations.

The formation of professional committees and of committees representing the several estates of the realm, to ensure that the laws promulgated by the central authority shall be carried out by the federal states.

The leaders of the party undertake to promote the execution of the foregoing points at all costs, if necessary at the sacrifice of their own lives.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,906
6,214
Minnesota
✟345,982.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
As the above author mentioned Hitler as one proposing the establishment of the common good, the above article itself being written in 1944, the following is his twenty fifth point, of the 25 Points of the Nazi Party.
You pick up on the Catholic statement using the words "common good" and then associate the Nazis with the Catholic Church by pointing out that they both used the term "common good." Why not mention that President John Adams said "Government is instituted for the common good" and that many U.S. presidents since then have used the phrase "common good." Why not associate the Vatican with the United States, why the Nazis? The Nazis suppression of the truth, censorship, and their racism was, of all religions, most prominently opposed by the Catholic Church. The Christmas speech condemning Nazism made by Pope Pius XII on Christmas day of 1942 became known as the "shot heard round the world." The Nazi knew their major opponents to their quest for control and domination of the world. Of the 2720 total clerics held at Dachau concentration camp, 2579 of them were Catholic.

 
Upvote 0

The Liturgist

Traditional Liturgical Christian
Site Supporter
Nov 26, 2019
16,289
8,630
51
The Wild West
✟832,447.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Generic Orthodox Christian
Marital Status
Celibate
Ethics in Internet

Quotes below from link above, emphasis in quotes is mine.



It is important to note that since the time of this Papal document, the Popes have had private meetings with the owners, heads, or CEO's of all the major social media platforms. Many of which we have all witnessed exercising a great deal of censorship on their platforms. These of course only represent the censorship the public at large has noticed and therefore brought forward to be addressed.

Here we have an address from the Vatican intending to define the parameters and or narratives of communication on the internet. Which it had apparently already addressed regarding the media, and has continued to address to date regarding social media as well. Basically a call to regulate that which it has considered to deregulated. These regulations should be implemented in line with the principles of what the Vatican describes as the common good. So, who determines or defines what the common good is? Adolf Hitler’s twenty fifth point of his 25 Points of the Nazi Party was - Common Good Before Individual Good. Adolf and the Nazi’s are pretty much gone for now, so whose common good are we talking about exactly? Obviously, we are talking about the common good as defined by the Vatican and Popes. Who is the Vatican to be calling for these regulations by nations on a global scale?

It most certainly is not the voice of the people of the various nations via the representatives they have elected to convey and implement their political desires. The Vatican stands among and as another international globalist institution of unelected officials, who wish to impose their politics upon the various nations of this world with or without the consent of the people of these nations. Just like all the other international globalist institutions of unelected officials, desiring to do the same. The Vatican itself has stated and supports the implementation of the rule of certain of these international globalist institutions over all nations. All of which is to specifically bypass the will of the peoples of nations in favor of the rule of unelected elitist international globalist officials in cahoots with each other. Of which the Vatican itself is a major if not the most significant players. Being herself a monarchal leftover from the dark or middle ages, this is the form of authoritative government she most fully supports and has most often supported throughout her lengthy history. To create such a system on a global scale, would be to recreate the conditions under which the Vatican ruled with the kings of this earth for over a thousand years. Just a global version of the dark ages with the Vatican and unelected officials of international organizations ruling together over all. Rather than the dark ages version of the Vatican and unelected kings, queens, and royalty ruling together predominantly over all European nations.

Authoritative government and censorship walk hand in hand. We have already and do continue to witness attempts by globalist and or left leaning entities to censor speech that does not support and or contradicts their narratives. The most recent and appalling examples being demonstrated during the Covid-19 plandemic. As we continue to examine the topic of censorship, I intend to reveal the direct connection between the so called common good, and the same. The following post will be an article from the days of Hitler himself addressing the dangers of a supposed common good. After which we will continue to address the present Papal document under examination, followed by many other Papal documents defining “The common good”, and its connection to authoritarian government and censorship.

Are you seriously blaming the Roman Catholic Church for the censorship of certain left-leaning tech firms?

I would point out you have no evidence - not even circumstantial evidence, that the Roman church has conspired with these firms. The fact that the Pope has met with their leaders is immaterial - the Pope meets with a number of people, and different Popes have had different agendas. For example Pope Leo XIV is concerned about the dehumanizing uses of AI, as am I.

Obviously since chatGPT is about to allow users to generate erotica, which the RCC is opposed to, the Pope does not have much influence over the tech industry titans.

I really feel like this accusation, and your accusation of 120 million Roman Catholic caused fatalities in the Middle Ages, are off base in the extreme, and would like to know where you found them. Whoever is responsible for initially propagating these allegations should either bring forth real evidence or apologize to Roman Catholics everywhere, such as my pious Roman Catholic friends @chevyontheriver @Michie @Valletta @boughtwithaprice @RileyG and @Xeno.of.athens
 
Upvote 0