Always love how Christians can justify anything for their religion … no matter what it does.
I love legend of the Judas sects … believers that honour the memory of the traitor Judas Iscariot … their belief is based on the idea that in order for the good to complete their earthly work, they need to fight and defeat ‘the bad’ … and in order for that to happen, someone has to play the part of ‘the bad’ … so followers of Judas sects believe that ‘the bad’ has to exist in order for ‘the good’ to complete their work. ‘The bad’ sacrifice themselves to eternal damnation in order give ‘the good’ the chance to get into heaven.
All done under the watchful eye of an eternal all powerful being that can control time, matter and substance and has already predetermined everything and everyone in the universe.
If Jesus was the son of God (and God Himself) and He was sent to the Earth to fullfil the law and He was going to be betrayed and executed then Judas was doing God’s plan, and he was a very impotent part of the plan.
God knew Judas would betray Jesus and knew it was important that he did because without the betrayal there is no resurrection.
Point being Judas wasn’t the bad, at no point he was the bad guy and he was so confused, broken by what he did that he killed himself. A merciful God would have him be in Heaven because he fulfilled his mission not knowing that it was his mission and suffering immensely for it.
Just FYI, I’m an atheist who’s against organized religion. This pope was still much better than most, in that he tried to help poor people at least, and he was accepting of most other people, even if he didn’t necessarily agree with them.
A leader like him mitigates harm that would be done under someone else. It doesn’t mean I like him. I just prefer him (or someone like him) to other options. It isn’t an excuse. It’s just the best option, not that any of us get a choice. Not even Catholic followers do.
What did he do exactly to help the poor that other popes didn’t?
He didn’t do anything that other didn’t. As a Catholic with connections in the Church I can tell you there are more gays in the Church (priests) that I have met outside of it so they are very tolerant of it, the problem is some of them do have sex (between them too)
So this isn’t a christian thing, it’s reality. Bad exists, usually called suffering. It is called a universal truth in buddhist tradition, and in Christian tradition Jesus was born conceptually from the suffering.
It is the suffering that makes one kind enough to want to cease all suffering, not just their own. It is why the rich cannot enter heaven, they proliferate through the suffering of others while reducing their own solely.
So suffering is the natural existance of things, but humans themselves want to conceive something without it. Rather than plainly embracing the suffering. In embracing, you can choose for what you suffer, why you suffer, and what can truly torment you.
Then again, most people see the story of human suffering as solely this one or the other. Most religions are just artistic interpretation of uncontrollable forces and conceptual enitities rather than literal.
Every ancient god is seen as this but for some reason, onlookers believe it is literal about christianity. Even when Jesus himself denounced being child of god, but child of man. It is the state of civilization, the conciousness of humanity, that creates such things.
If you name your children Jesus, if you speak of a second coming, if you preach about love and compassion. I will be reborn, through the same means korean and hindu mysticism ascends humans into avatars.
Always love how Christians can justify anything for their religion … no matter what it does.
I love legend of the Judas sects … believers that honour the memory of the traitor Judas Iscariot … their belief is based on the idea that in order for the good to complete their earthly work, they need to fight and defeat ‘the bad’ … and in order for that to happen, someone has to play the part of ‘the bad’ … so followers of Judas sects believe that ‘the bad’ has to exist in order for ‘the good’ to complete their work. ‘The bad’ sacrifice themselves to eternal damnation in order give ‘the good’ the chance to get into heaven.
All done under the watchful eye of an eternal all powerful being that can control time, matter and substance and has already predetermined everything and everyone in the universe.
If Jesus was the son of God (and God Himself) and He was sent to the Earth to fullfil the law and He was going to be betrayed and executed then Judas was doing God’s plan, and he was a very impotent part of the plan.
God knew Judas would betray Jesus and knew it was important that he did because without the betrayal there is no resurrection.
Point being Judas wasn’t the bad, at no point he was the bad guy and he was so confused, broken by what he did that he killed himself. A merciful God would have him be in Heaven because he fulfilled his mission not knowing that it was his mission and suffering immensely for it.
Just FYI, I’m an atheist who’s against organized religion. This pope was still much better than most, in that he tried to help poor people at least, and he was accepting of most other people, even if he didn’t necessarily agree with them.
A leader like him mitigates harm that would be done under someone else. It doesn’t mean I like him. I just prefer him (or someone like him) to other options. It isn’t an excuse. It’s just the best option, not that any of us get a choice. Not even Catholic followers do.
What did he do exactly to help the poor that other popes didn’t?
He didn’t do anything that other didn’t. As a Catholic with connections in the Church I can tell you there are more gays in the Church (priests) that I have met outside of it so they are very tolerant of it, the problem is some of them do have sex (between them too)
Pope Francisco was a pope of words not actions.
So this isn’t a christian thing, it’s reality. Bad exists, usually called suffering. It is called a universal truth in buddhist tradition, and in Christian tradition Jesus was born conceptually from the suffering.
It is the suffering that makes one kind enough to want to cease all suffering, not just their own. It is why the rich cannot enter heaven, they proliferate through the suffering of others while reducing their own solely.
So suffering is the natural existance of things, but humans themselves want to conceive something without it. Rather than plainly embracing the suffering. In embracing, you can choose for what you suffer, why you suffer, and what can truly torment you.
Then again, most people see the story of human suffering as solely this one or the other. Most religions are just artistic interpretation of uncontrollable forces and conceptual enitities rather than literal.
Every ancient god is seen as this but for some reason, onlookers believe it is literal about christianity. Even when Jesus himself denounced being child of god, but child of man. It is the state of civilization, the conciousness of humanity, that creates such things.
If you name your children Jesus, if you speak of a second coming, if you preach about love and compassion. I will be reborn, through the same means korean and hindu mysticism ascends humans into avatars.