Replies
-
No, I have not. This question doesn't impact my faith one way or the other, and I choose to accept the dates given by the interpretation aids commissioned and distributed by the American Catholic bishops.
-
You're probably right that what made so many scholars change their minds between the ~1910 Catholic Encyclopedia and the ~1990 New American Bible was not new evidence but a new method for evaluating the evidence. My mistake. How many of the "30 scholars (with doctorates in New Testament or Christian Scriptures from…
-
The best Catholic scholarship comes to a different conclusion: And:
-
We cross posted. Obviously the new evidence is whatever made the editors of the New American Bible cite the later range of dates in the Introductions to Mark and Matthew. You have studied this question in enough depth to know what that evidence is. You are of course free to choose to reject the new evidence.
-
The Catholic Encyclopedia is 100 years old. It's an outdated source for this sort of question. I for one have never claimed that the interpretative aids in the New American Bible, commissioned by the American Catholic Bishops and posted on their website, are infallible teachings of the Church or part of the Deposit of…
-
There is so much unanimity of belief that Christians have been excommunicating each other, declaring each other heretics, and burning each other at the stake since at least 325 AD.
-
God has so clearly told us what to do that ever since Jesus died, the religion he supposed founded has been dividing into countless different factions.
-
That Cardinal was misstating the Catholic Church's teaching on this topic. Or perhaps the teaching has (dare I say) changed. Here's what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says now:
-
Sorry to hear about your friend B, Bahet. May his family and friends find the peace he couldn't.
-
So much for your position that you don't pick and choose which teachings of the Catholic Church to believe. Like everyone, you do pick and choose, based on how authoritative you find the teaching. The American Catholic bishops have approved a translation of the Bible that includes that introduction to Mark and yet you…
-
I see you were actually debating the date of Mark, not Matthew. Here's what the Catholic bishops say about that:
-
This is from the website of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. It's part of the introduction to Matthew from the Catholic-approved "New American Bible." Even your own Church teaches the date m_a_b is defending.
-
I never put together that David from Roseanne was the same actor as Leonard from the Big Bank Theory!
-
-
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/02/in-2011-only-15-senators-backed-same-sex-marriage-now-49-do/?wprss=rss_ezra-klein
-
The part about suicide was especially interesting, I thought.
-
On the main forums, a discussion of marriage equality is pretty clearly in violation of the community guidelines. (See link at the bottom of every message board page.)
-
Overruling DOMA based on states rights would do exactly what you fear, Evan: Allow states to bar same-sex marriage as well as permit same-sex marriage. Unless the court does something unexpected on the Prop 8 case and finds that denying marriage equality violates federal equal protection. Sure, I'd like a whole loaf, but…
-
The Deputy Solicitor General arguing against DOMA is named Sri Srinivasan. So arguing for federal recognition of same sex marriage was Mister Mister Mister-nivasan. Hey soul sister, ain't that a good omen?
-
As distasteful as you find it, Evan, it looks like the states rights argument is going to be what pushes federal recognition of same sex marriages over the finish line. All the sources I'm reading say Kennedy's questions today make it clear that is his main concern with DOMA.
-
Yesterday at this time, all the news sources were saying they have no idea what the Supreme Court will decide about Prop 8. This morning, all the news sources are saying DOMA is toast, with Kennedy likely to vote against it as a usurpation of the rights of the states to define marriage and Ginsburg, Breyer, Kagan, and…
-
Me too.
-
Today was the hearing on the California Prop 8 case. The DOMA cases are tomorrow. I haven't heard what the dress code is for that! One quote from the Prop 8 argument, which encapsulates for me why the outcome is hard to predict: Kennedy is the swing vote and he feels torn between the unknown results of changing an ancient…
-
You were a tourist, not a resident alien. Presumably, if you retire there and renounce your US citizenship, you will have to be a resident alien and buy into the socialized medical system . . . whether you intend to use it or not.
-
Or . . . out of the Obamacare mandate frying pan and into the Caja Costarricense de Seguro Social mandate fire.
-
From Brunner's link: Looks like you will have to pay for socialized medicine if you retire to Costa Rica, even if you plan to only use private medicine.
-
As always, our leaders follow the votes!
-
It's hard to imagine any Democratic candidate for president going back to the carefully calibrated and totally incoherent messages of Kerry in 2004 or Obama in 2008: "I'm for full LGBT equality . . . except the m-word."
-
I'm not following your question, Thomas. Are you saying that when you were 50 lbs heavier, you didn't consider yourself overweight but at your present weight you do? If you didn't consider yourself overweight, what was your motivation for losing the 50 lbs? Or have I misunderstood you completely?
