The Power of Christ Compels You!Follow

To die.


Link is possibly NSFW as the photo appears to show the priest in question half way through trying to swallow a long-haired Orang Utan whole.

Edited, Feb 19th 2007 6:36pm by Nobby

In many ways, being in a Romanian convent and being in a Romanian jailcell are pretty much the same thing.

I still don't really get the Power of Jesus Christ compelled himself to die, though.

HOLY ****, that's gonna be me in another week if I don't get a sharp object in my hand soon.

Why do you guys hate Romania?

What makes it even better is that the priest hadn't finished the training school from the church, yet was put as a priest anyway.... And one of the nuns got eighty years, while the rest got off with a nice under-15 sentence.

Edited, Feb 20th 2007 11:47am by Deadgye

There was no confusion on the part of the BBC. They said that Orthodox Church excommunicated him and "has promised reform." The Catholic Church, they noted, reformed their practices in 1999.

PS. Btw, I think that the split occurred earlier in some parts of the Orthodox Church. My understanding is that the Eastern Orthodox Church was established around 300-400.

Edited, Feb 20th 2007 12:33pm by Annabella

Only since about the 1100's

Kinda.

It's substantially more complex than that, actually. Not being a pedantic ****, though, I won't bother to elucidate.

Wow, Rasputin's reincarnate.

Too lazy, huh?

No RoI.

Which sorta denigrates the assertion that christians can get the different "denominations" of atheism right.

If you can truly describe it as such, the clearest "denominations" of atheism I've heard defined are "weak atheism" and "strong atheism".

Weak atheism = "I do not believe there is a god" = describes what the person DOES NOT believe but the person has not defined what they DO believe.

Strong atheism = "I believe there is no god" = describes the person's beliefs, arguably making it the more religious of the two.

Of course then you can throw agnosticism into the mix. Agnostic coming from the latin a- meaning "without" and gnosis meaning "knowledge". So by pure literal standards an agnostic would say "I don't know for certain if there is or is not a god", so they acknowledge their ignorance, but do not define their beliefs, putting them on par with "weak" atheists. However, by that definition one could be an agnostic atheist (an atheist who admits they might be wrong) or an agnostic christian (a christian who admits they might also be wrong). But then there are the historical denomination "The Agnostics" whose basic tenet was that the nature of god is unknowable, but in that very definition a belief in some unknowable form of a god is implicitly stated.

Point being, to state that there are "denominations" of atheism is pretty flawed, as atheists are pretty unorganized as religions go, lack any defined heirarchy, dogma, or clear principles. Atheism is an exclusive, not inclusive, term so you you would really just have to ask the individual atheist you are dealing with what they think about any given subject.

But you really probably aren't going to find many atheists tying people to wooden planks and killing them in an attempt to drive demons out of them, so the whole issue is moot.

But is he referring to the numerous Ecumenical Councils that occurred in Early Christianity?

I always thought that it was also around the nature of Jesus and Council of Chalcedon that caused another rift with many churches only willing to accept the doctrine from the first three councils. As a result,the Oriental Orthodox Church was created. Aren't those churches called Coptic at this point? Also the Council of Epheseus (sp) a few decades prior I think almost created a great schism.

PS. I know that the councils were several centuries before. That was my question about the qualifier.



Edited, Feb 21st 2007 4:09pm by Annabella