Pope Francis: Atheists can also go to heaven!

[shadowhive]

Or in this case the life raft is purely imaginary.

And saying that said life raft is only reserved for memebers of an exclusive club anyone else can drown.

And while I see many applauding this idea, even Christians, it is in my view a red herring, like saying that, I have got a nice place reserved for you in the life raft that is already full.

I didn't realise that heaven was limited capacity.

Edited May 25, 2013 by shadowhive

[White Crane Feather]

And people wonder why Christianity is declining. When the head of the largest denomination within Christianity declares you don't actually need to be Christian to be saved then for the average Joe on the street is there any purpose in going to church? Church stops becoming about God and at best can be seen as a community club where people can meet other people. Why sit through a sermon when you can get the same flaccid insight from sitting in a coffee shop drinking a latte.

It's quite ironic, but the more liberal and tolerant a church becomes, the less likely people are going to attend, and the more likely members are going to leave. In my opinion this is what Pope Francis has done, and far from being a toll of future understanding, it may very well serve as the death knell for Catholicism. I'm glad I'm not Catholic.

That's not to say I don't care about atheists and who goes to what church. I'll love and respect you regardless of what religious or non-religious position you have. But I can't and won't accept that you don't need Jesus to be saved.

I think you are wrong about this. Church has never been about god, it has always been about people. God does not need people to go to church. I attend catholic mass even though im not catholic. I drop dollars in the offering. A church that accepts me as a non Christian and caters to my spirituality and not confining me is going to get my attendance. Church is and always has been a business from the perspective of the church. I think its a brilliant move. Eliminating intolerance and Christian arrogance that the world is so very tired of will ensure the catholic churches survival. A religion is subject to selection just as much as any organism. The religion with the propensity to adapt will come out on top.

[White Crane Feather]

Im not Christian, but I feel like I live a moral life with mistakes of course.

Why is it to late to repent and accept Christ after your die.

It would not be that hard for Jesus, after I die, to say..."Hey you were wrong. I actually was god incarnate. You lived a pretty good life except for this, this, and this. How do you feel about that?"

Seeker: "I hate that I did those things God, and im sorry that I could not believe that your earthly body was actually god. Please forgive me, I know better now."

I don't see why a just god would let a less moral Christian continue on while a more moral non Christian is doomed. That's not justice that is elitism.

I think a truly spiritual person would be open to this possibility. It sounds like there is a pope that I can relate to.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Seeker79

[shadowhive]

"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." - Revelations 21:8

The Bible says otherwise. For me when it comes to religion you either believe 100% of it or none of it. Don't see how you can pick and choose what you want to and don't want to believe. That's why I don't consider myself religious (even though I lean on the idea of a God existing) but do consider myself spiritual. Religious doctrine and rules dictating to me would give me too many headaches.

To be honest it's clinging onto parts like that that are part of the problem, not part of the solution and I think rejection of parts like that is the best thing to do, or even necessary for religion to survive. Everyone in a religion picks and chooses what to believe, as some parts become outdated and are obviously flawed (especially in socities where multiple religions have to co-exist). Only an absolute idiot would blindly follow a religion 100% and not put any thought to it.

[Clarakore]

I can see what he might be trying to do. We do live in a world where all different people, religious and non, live side by side. Religious groups have, far too often sadly, tried to create division between other groups instead of unity which is a recipe for disaster and results in all kinds of problems.

The sad thing is, looking at most of the christians here, they'd rather cling to 'traditions' that keep the divisions going. That to me, is rather disappointing, but it seems to be something religions like to do.

One of the key issues of any religion is the claim that 'it's the only way to heaven' and that has, historically, caused a great deal of damage to humanity as a whole. It's disappointing to see so many that would rather keep a hold to that belief and all it entails, a belief which does us zero good in the here and now.

In the real world (aka the only world that all of us agree exists and where we all must live) doing good deeds regardless of who you are is what matters. Sometimes that seems lost on people, especially those that seem to believe their religion is 'the only way' because doing good matters less than there religion.

Sadly, it is true, some sacrifice the well being of others now in the present for some future promise they only reserve for themselves and consider that Godly.

They might not even believed in trying to help the world because of views that peace cannot be found on Earth but only Heaven, so why bother being peaceful?

They might even think that accepting others will allow others to go to Hell so they try to convert them or simply reject them without accepting them as equals if they fail in their converting attempt.

The belief that there is only one path allows for suffering to happen in the here and now.

=====================================================================

The article presented by Star of the Sea, "Did Pope Francis Say That Atheists Can Get to Heaven by Good Works?", was written by Jimmy Akin, a lay person. It is not the definitive word on what the Pope meant.

It is also not like the whole Catholic church is in agreement with itself. Traditionalist have not been satisfied since Vatican II.

VATICAN CITY (AP) — Pope Francis has won over many hearts and minds with his simple style and focus on serving the world's poorest, but he has devastated traditionalist Catholics who adored his predecessor, Benedict XVI, for restoring much of the traditional pomp to the papacy.

Francis' decision to disregard church law and wash the feet of two girls — a Serbian Muslim and an Italian Catholic — during a Holy Thursday ritual has become something of the final straw, evidence that Francis has little or no interest in one of the key priorities of Benedict's papacy: reviving the pre-Vatican II traditions of the Catholic Church.

One of the most-read traditionalist blogs, "Rorate Caeli," reacted to the foot-washing ceremony by declaring the death of Benedict's eight-year project to correct what he considered the botched interpretations of the Second Vatican Council's modernizing reforms.

"The official end of the reform of the reform — by example," ''Rorate Caeli" lamented in its report on Francis' Holy Thursday ritual.

*snip*

"If someone is washing the feet of any females ... he is in violation of the Holy Thursday rubrics," Peters wrote in a 2006 article that he reposted earlier this month on his blog.

In the face of the pope doing that very thing, Peters and many conservative and traditionalist commentators have found themselves trying to put the best face on a situation they clearly don't like yet can't do much about lest they be openly voicing dissent with the pope.

Pope's foot-wash a final straw for traditionalists

We can even see how the discontented with the Catholic church also blame "liberalization" for the empty pews. The pews are empty because of a changing world.

Traditionalist Catholics who were attached to the old rite blame many of the ills afflicting the Catholic Church today — a drop in priestly vocations, empty pews in Europe and beyond — on the liturgical abuses that they say have proliferated with the celebration of the new form of Mass.

Pope's foot-wash a final straw for traditionalists

Benedict tried his hardest to get them back in the fold but then Francis became pope so all bets are off now if they will ever be content. They surely will not like the new message from the Church.

In a bid to reach out to them, Benedict in 2007 relaxed restrictions on celebrating the old Latin Mass. The move was aimed also at reconciling with a group of schismatic traditionalists, the Society of St. Pius X, who split from Rome precisely over the Vatican II reforms, in particular its call for Mass in the vernacular and outreach to other religions, especially Judaism and Islam.

Benedict took extraordinary measures to bring the society back under Rome's wing during his pontificate, but negotiations stalled.

The society has understandably reacted coolly to Francis' election, reminding the pope that his namesake, St. Francis of Assisi, was told by Christ to go and "rebuild my church." For the society, that means rebuilding it in its own, pre-Vatican II vision.

Pope's foot-wash a final straw for traditionalists

Edited May 25, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[shadowhive]

I agree with you but how can somebody say they are Christian but don't agree with all of the Bible? It is supposed to be the word of God.

It's much better to just lose religion all together and just form your own ideas. Just be a good person. What will be in death, will be.

Pretty much every christian doesn't believe in the bible 100%. After all there's many transgressions listed in the bible where the punishment is stoning to death. How many christians agree those actions today?

I agree, it would be better to lose religion all together but sadly it's so firmly entrenched and so many people seem to buy into the insanity of it we have to make do with stuff like this.

[shadowhive]

Sadly, it is true, some sacrifice the well being of others now in the present for some future promise they only reserve for themselves and consider that Godly.

They might not even believed in trying to help the world because of views that peace cannot be found on Earth but only Heaven, so why bother being peaceful?

They might even think that accepting others will allow others to go to Hell so they try to convert them or simply reject them without accepting them as equals if they fail in their converting attempt.

The belief that there is only one path allows for suffering to happen in the here and now.

It is indeed sad. The promise of something that may happen seems to blind people to the realities of the people and world around them. It;'s sad, but it's what religious belief has done to them and eligions should start taking responsibility for that.

That's true as well, unforunately. Not only that, but by calling all non-believers as inferior it's just asking for trouble.Religion is one of the big barriers to lasting peace.

Yeah, converting seems to be more important than accepting people even worse when the conversion is 'done out of love'.

Very true. But look at all the people here defending the one path approach. It's almost as if they prefer the suffering.

They'd rather heaven be an exclusive members only club and the rest of humanity get destroyed and I think that world view says it all.

Edited May 25, 2013 by shadowhive

[Clarakore]

"But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars - their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death." - Revelations 21:8

The Bible says otherwise. For me when it comes to religion you either believe 100% of it or none of it. Don't see how you can pick and choose what you want to and don't want to believe. That's why I don't consider myself religious (even though I lean on the idea of a God existing) but do consider myself spiritual. Religious doctrine and rules dictating to me would give me too many headaches.

I cannot like this but even if there was a dislike button I could not dislike it either. An honest perception. It is also not based on the actual beliefs, the second greatest commandment is to love your neighbor, it is based on men who claimed Christianity but rejected their neighbors, did horrible things, and many still do!

One can only trust that in time when all churches better follow the second greatest commandment that the opinion as those above will adapt and reflect out behavior then as it rightfully reflects our behavior now. We deserve it and every Christian who claims to hurt no one but says nothing to those who, that says nothing about the belief that only one path goes to heaven, deserves that reputation, for they contribute to the suffering of mankind.

It is not just the religious, men of all stripes have done horrible things, some in the name of political systems alone, some out of jealousy for a lover, some out of greed for the dollar, but in the end many within mankind are seeking better ways and collectively we are progressing.

That religion, which upholds tradition and always lags behind change, will be the last to see the light that the rest of the world is seeing is no surprise. If the light is from God ironically they will be the last to get it while non-believers are being shined upon even now. While those of others paths are bathing in it.

Some say the light is from God others from science...well we can believe both if we choose to, respect both, but only if all men behave humanely. The Abrahamic religions are far behind in that race but in time will catch up. It is not a race with first place winners but a marathon where everyone who crosses the line is a winner. Some want to bomb our marathon but many are determined to see us all through. I myself used to deny Catholics, atheists, and homosexuals as being my equals before...it was what I was taught as a child :/

To be honest it's clinging onto parts like that that are part of the problem, not part of the solution and I think rejection of parts like that is the best thing to do, or even necessary for religion to survive. Everyone in a religion picks and chooses what to believe, as some parts become outdated and are obviously flawed (especially in socities where multiple religions have to co-exist). Only an absolute idiot would blindly follow a religion 100% and not put any thought to it.

Someone in the middle ages once wrote that there are two books, a book of faith, and a book of nature. If humans look into the world and see what is written in the book of nature (science) does not align with what is written in the book of faith, then it is not the book of nature that is wrong but our interpretation of the book of faith. Believers then need to go back in and find a more accurate interpretation. Believers should have faith that God also reveals Itself through science, through the laws of the nature. Some still deny evolution. Believers can embrace science and believe God was behind evolution, many believers already do believe it or not, because to deny science is denying God.

You are also right in that some focus too much on the wrong parts while ignoring the truly hopeful parts.

Matthew 10:12-15 is a good example.

As you enter the house, greet it. And if the house is worthy, let your peace come upon it, but if it is not worthy, let your peace return to you.

The first part above is key, it mentions greeting and giving your peace to others. If they do not accept it then the believer should have the peace return to them. Being in a sense of peace, having it return to you, would indicate something other than condemning another to hell even in your mind, it would mean something else besides crusades, or passing laws in an effort to control your body. After all church and state should remain separate even Jesus said give to Caesar what is Caesar's and give to God what is God's. Politics is Caesar's.

And if anyone will not receive you or listen to your words, shake off the dust from your feet when you leave that house or town. Truly, I say to you, it will be more bearable on the day of judgment for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah than for that town.

Many ignore the first part and focus on this. Even biblical scholars now days understand that Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing to do with homosexuality or sexuality (they are not necessarily the same just as heterosexuality is not strictly about sexual relations) and everything to do with a city that was brutish to whoever would visit it. A city that preyed on the outsider and only accepted the insider...hmm that sounds a lot like those who want to cling to the old ways even now wanting their churches to be, "exclusive members only club and the rest of humanity get destroyed."

The Pope doesn't need to say it for me to know it: homosexuals and everyone else within the LBGTQ spectrum are my brothers and sisters.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Leave Britney alone!

[Star of the Sea]

Deleted double post.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Star of the Sea

[+Sherapy]

PA as usual Pope Francis' homily has been taken out of context. The following link explains exactly what the Pope was saying which basically is; 'if we all do good whether you're Christian or not we will meet in a place of peace on earth'.

Was Pope Francis Even Talking About Heaven?

If so, you wouldn't know it from the transcript of what he said.

Let’s back up a bit. Remember, Pope Francis was just talking about the duty to do good:

“And we all have a duty to do good. And this commandment for everyone to do good, I think, is a beautiful path towards peace.”

So if everyone does good, we have a path toward peace. That’s the goal.

“If we, each doing our own part, if we do good to others, if we meet there, doing good, and we go slowly, gently, little by little, we will make that culture of encounter: we need that so much. We must meet one another doing good.

Note the parallelism between the phrases. Pope Francis is talking about a path “toward peace” and wants us to “meet there” by doing our part and doing good so that we build “that culture of encounter” and “meet one another doing good.”

He’s not talking about heaven at all.

He’s talking about earth.

http://jimmyakin.com...good-works.html

Edit to add: It would be prudent to read the whole article that I linked to get a complete understanding of what Pope Francis was actually saying and in what context.

This is exactly what is happening for me, I have been experiencing this on a personal level amongst my Christian friends, we are meeting each other at the place of the good works we do, the goodness we are as people, regardless of the path. I have had personal experiences when my son was in the hospital in a coma, many faiths prayed for him and were welcomed by us. I personally have always wanted to live in a world as the one we are seeking to cultivate with each other. because it works to create peace. I say way to go Pope Frances! As Gandhi said "Be the change you wish to see."

@Pa, you are in error when you think that any church/person is in jeopardy by doing exactly what it is that the Jesus story was seeking to teach. My mother feels as you do and all it accomplishes for her is separation, separation from her daughter who is an awesome person, who if she could set aside her "rightness" would be so pleased she was my mother. My sadness extends to her because I see what she is missing out on, yet I do not give up on her, as she simply doesn't see she is the problem. I still think it is possible that her heart will open to tolerance and love as her faith is trying to help her do. She is Catholic so I know the message they are trying to impart, she is just not hearing it, yet. I think she is in the right place though and wish her the best.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Sherapy

[Star of the Sea]

'Leave Britney alone'

Posting the usual hyperbole from a correspondent who isn't Roman Catholic tsk tsk! Here is what Roman Catholics think about Nicole Winfield of the Associated Press... seriously!

http://wdtprs.com/blog/2012/10/another-hurtful-article-by-nicole-winfield-of-ap-about-the-sspx/

Don't try and tell me about my faith and Church 'Leave Britney alone'. Also Jimmy Akin is highly respected within the RCC. He is a Senior Apologist at Catholic Answers, a member on the Catholic Answers Speakers Bureau, a weekly guest on the global radio program, Catholic Answers LIVE, a contributing editor for Catholic Answers Magazine... better credentials than a non-Catholic 'trying to tell your Grandmother how to suck eggs' lol!

http://www.catholic....iles/jimmy-akin

Edit to add missing link apologies.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Star of the Sea

[Jor-el]

And saying that said life raft is only reserved for memebers of an exclusive club anyone else can drown.

I didn't realise that heaven was limited capacity.

Yeah well, Some people might think numbers are important, but God doesn't work like that. There is a reason why only 8 people were reported as having survived the Great flood and uncounted millions died in it.

[+Sherapy]

I for one do not agree with the allegation that atheists will be going to heaven, Pope or no Pope, the idea is not backed by the bible in any way.

While as human beings we can find points of common interest and good for the community, that is not what salvation is about or even how salvation comes about.

Salvation is not achieved by good works and charity, no matter how well intentioned.

And while I see many applauding this idea, even Christians, it is in my view a red herring, like saying that, I have got a nice place reserved for you in the life raft that is already full.

IMO,The pope is not speaking of going to heaven or not, what he is speaking of is coming together regardless of faith, to work together towards a common goal of peace, to look to our similarities be defined by that, tolerance begins there.

As an Atheist I am not now going to convert to anything regardless of who says what, my interests/focus are in what I do now, the person I am now and how that contributes by the example I set.

You may be surprised to hear how many times I have heard from Christians how christian I am and tripping out because I consciously chose to walk my own path.

Jor el it does matter, in fact a lot. It is also inspiring!

Edited May 25, 2013 by Sherapy

[+Sherapy]

Yeah well, Some people might think numbers are important, but God doesn't work like that. There is a reason why only 8 people were reported as having survived the Great flood and uncounted millions died in it.

Perhaps one day you will open your self to other perspectives, for whatever it is worth there is a lot to be said for having conversations and communions, sharing in others journeys without needing to have them think as you or having to be right.. IMO active listening can

lead to an opportunity for real intimacy to blossom.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Sherapy

[shadowhive]

Yeah well, Some people might think numbers are important, but God doesn't work like that. There is a reason why only 8 people were reported as having survived the Great flood and uncounted millions died in it.

In human terms saving the most people in any situation is the perferred method. I can't imagine why anyone would worship something that would rather let the maximum people die and/or suffer.

To use your life raft example, people would try and get the most people that can be saved on it. You're trying to say not only would god not do that but that he'd actively throw people overboard and/or drown them rather than save their lives. what sort of message does that send?

Killing uncounted millions in such a callous way (even though it's just a story wih no evidence) shows the callous nature of your god and is one example of why I would never follow such a beast.

Edited May 25, 2013 by shadowhive

[Rlyeh]

Yeah well, Some people might think numbers are important, but God doesn't work like that. There is a reason why only 8 people were reported as having survived the Great flood and uncounted millions died in it.

Because the author of the myth said so.

[Jor-el]

The pope is not speaking of going to heaven or not, what he is speaking of is coming together regardless of faith, to work together towards a common goal of peace, to look to our similarities be defined by that, tolerance begins there.

As an Atheist I am not now going to convert to anything regardless of who says what, my interests/focus are in what I do now, the person I am now and how that contributes by the example I set.

You may be surprised to hear how many times I have heard from Christians how christian I am and tripping out because I consciously chose to walk my own path.

Jor el it does matter, in fact a lot. It is also inspiring!

As I said, we can all work together for the common good irrespective of faith or lack of it. With that idea I agree and whole heartedly agree with. As human beings we can and should all work together and build bridges of understanding and love within our communities.

But the OP was about something else, and it is in that perspective that I am answering.

[+Sherapy]

As I said, we can all work together for the common good irrespective of faith or lack of it. With that idea I agree and whole heartedly agree with. As human beings we can and should all work together and build bridges of understanding and love within our communities.

But the OP was about something else, and it is in that perspective that I am answering.

It is wonderful to hear you are a part of cultivating tolerance, we need you too and I for one am glad you are on board.

It is my understanding (see Star of the Seas links) that the Pope was speaking of heaven in the "heaven"(bridges) we create now with each other.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Sherapy

[Jor-el]

In human terms saving the most people in any situation is the perferred method. I can't imagine why anyone would worship something that would rather let the maximum people die and/or suffer.

To use your life raft example, people would try and get the most people that can be saved on it. You're trying to say not only would god not do that but that he'd actively throw people overboard and/or drown them rather than save their lives. what sort of message does that send?

Killing uncounted millions in such a callous way (even though it's just a story wih no evidence) shows the callous nature of your god and is one example of why I would never follow such a beast.

The message is straight forward, You reap what you sow, or as someone put it, Karma's a b****.

Yeah I know you won't like that answer, it is not in the spirit of community understanding or the common welfare of mankind or however you choose to spin it, but the way I see it, most humans have the capacity of choice, and their actions, whatever they may be all have consequences and it isn't as if people are not aware of this little fact.

You can call the flood a story with no evidence, there is more than enough of that though, but there are a number of threads on this forum about that and it isn't part of the thread subject, but I would remind you that the term callous as you put it is your term, in your perspective, even when you know that this is one mudball among billions of others and we are truly no better than ants in a small anthill.

And sometimes even ants can become a plague.

[Jor-el]

It is wonderful to hear you are a part of cultivating tolerance, we need you too and I for one am glad you are on board.

It is my understanding (see Star of the Seas links) that the Pope was speaking of heaven in the "heaven"(bridges) we create now with each other.

Yes that was clarified by Star although it doesn't cover the term "redeemed"....

Using the Popes own words...

"The Lord created us in His image and likeness, and we are the image of the Lord, and He does good and all of us have this commandment at heart: do good and do not do evil. All of us. ‘But, Father, this is not Catholic! He cannot do good.’ Yes, he can... "The Lord has redeemed all of us, all of us, with the Blood of Christ: all of us, not just Catholics. Everyone! ‘Father, the atheists?’ Even the atheists. Everyone!".. We must meet one another doing good. ‘But I don’t believe, Father, I am an atheist!’ But do good: we will meet one another there.”

A problematic turn of phrase that expressly contradicts the bible and Jesus own words.

Yes we can love and be tolerant with each other, believers with unbelievers and atheists and atheists with believers and believers of one religion with others of other religions, but that doesn't mean those others are saved by the blood of Christ, salvation is not by love and good works, it is by belief and faith.

[shadowhive]

The message is straight forward, You reap what you sow, or as someone put it, Karma's a b****.

Yeah I know you won't like that answer, it is not in the spirit of community understanding or the common welfare of mankind or however you choose to spin it, but the way I see it, most humans have the capacity of choice, and their actions, whatever they may be all have consequences and it isn't as if people are not aware of this little fact.

You can call the flood a story with no evidence, there is more than enough of that though, but there are a number of threads on this forum about that and it isn't part of the thread subject, but I would remind you that the term callous as you put it is your term, in your perspective, even when you know that this is one mudball among billions of others and we are truly no better than ants in a small anthill.

And sometimes even ants can become a plague.

No. A lot of biblical stoies seem perfectly ok with millions dying, regardless of actions. Included in those millions are children which hadn't even done anything. So yeah, they don't sound deserving of death for actions that aren't there own, but god never seems to care all that much. He's more 'murder millions first, don't care about it later'.

It's not in the spirit of anything positive. It's in the spirit of continuing to make divisions with the rest of humanity, which is just going to continue making problems.

You're right, this is one planet among billions. Which is why I'll never understand the logic of beliving in a god that seems to have an unhealthy murderous obsession with us.

Callous is a word I'd use for anyone that would kill millions. Not only that, but I'd use it against people like you who would justify and excuse mass murder of that kind of scale.

Looking back on history religious people have been and acted in the manner of a plague and it's through the kind of belief and atitude you display that religion has acted in that manner in the past and continues to do so today.

[Rlyeh]

You can call the flood a story with no evidence, there is more than enough of that though, but there are a number of threads on this forum about that and it isn't part of the thread subject, but I would remind you that the term callous as you put it is your term, in your perspective, even when you know that this is one mudball among billions of others and we are truly no better than ants in a small anthill.

They don't quite support this myth of only 8 people surviving do they?

[+Sherapy]

The message is straight forward, You reap what you sow, or as someone put it, Karma's a b****.

Yeah I know you won't like that answer, it is not in the spirit of community understanding or the common welfare of mankind or however you choose to spin it, but the way I see it, most humans have the capacity of choice, and their actions, whatever they may be all have consequences and it isn't as if people are not aware of this little fact.

You can call the flood a story with no evidence, there is more than enough of that though, but there are a number of threads on this forum about that and it isn't part of the thread subject, but I would remind you that the term callous as you put it is your term, in your perspective, even when you know that this is one mudball among billions of others and we are truly no better than ants in a small anthill.

And sometimes even ants can become a plague.

Good point Jor el, the message is not in the spirit of unity or the common welfare of man, it is spun in a way to induce fear so one will obey or else.

My question is what value do you glean from that?

[Star of the Sea]

This is exactly what is happening for me, I have been experiencing this on a personal level amongst my Christian friends, we are meeting each other at the place of the good works we do, the goodness we are as people, regardless of the path. I have had personal experiences when my son was in the hospital in a coma, many faiths prayed for him and were welcomed by us. I personally have always wanted to live in a world as the one we are seeking to cultivate with each other. because it works to create peace. I say way to go Pope Frances! As Gandhi said "Be the change you wish to see."

@Pa, you are in error when you think that any church/person is in jeopardy by doing exactly what it is that the Jesus story was seeking to teach. My mother feels as you do and all it accomplishes for her is separation, separation from her daughter who is an awesome person, who if she could set aside her "rightness" would be so pleased she was my mother. My sadness extends to her because I see what she is missing out on, yet I do not give up on her, as she simply doesn't see she is the problem. I still think it is possible that her heart will open to tolerance and love as her faith is trying to help her do. She is Catholic so I know the message they are trying to impart, she is just not hearing it, yet. I think she is in the right place though and wish her the best.

Hi Sheri!

It's good to hear that you have had positive encounters with Christians. Pope Francis is trying to bridge the divide and bring peace and harmony. There are many 'truths' in so many religions. I see him as a breath of fresh air.. so far so good

Edit to add: Sheri I wanted to add whether you have faith or not, Pope Francis recognises us all.

Edited May 25, 2013 by Star of the Sea

[shadowhive]

Someone in the middle ages once wrote that there are two books, a book of faith, and a book of nature. If humans look into the world and see what is written in the book of nature (science) does not align with what is written in the book of faith, then it is not the book of nature that is wrong but our interpretation of the book of faith. Believers then need to go back in and find a more accurate interpretation. Believers should have faith that God also reveals Itself through science, through the laws of the nature. Some still deny evolution. Believers can embrace science and believe God was behind evolution, many believers already do believe it or not, because to deny science is denying God.

I didn't realise there was a reply so almost missed this oops.

I think that is a good sort of attitude to have. We need to act on what we know about the world and humanity today, not what was believed and known when the bible was written. Otherwise you may as well disregard every advance made since then because it's not biblical.

You are also right in that some focus too much on the wrong parts while ignoring the truly hopeful parts.

Sadly true. People seem more concerned using the bible for hatred or fear, power and control and this has been the way for centuries.

As for the rest, I agree wholeheartedly that the church needs to wake up and deal with the realities of the human condition, rather than ignoring them and hiding behind the uninformed opinions of those that knew nothing whatsoever about the subject.