Look. I’m an apatheist. I don’t really care. It’s one kind of BS or another to me.
But on one hand, you have a someone who has decades of experience and study in the traditions, text, and history of their religion, and on the other hand, you have an asshole who fucked a couch and is a useful puppet for Peter Thiel and a bunch of other billionaire sociopath fucksticks.
Pretty easy to figure out who I’d respectfully disagree with and who I’d just call a goddamned idiot.
It’s a threat. I don’t know what he’s threatening, hell Vance might not even know what he’s threatening. But that’s just how this administration operates: threats, demands and bribes.
I am an agnostic myself, but one thing I can say for sure, that every time one wants me to say that their religion/beliefs are supreme, the more willing I am to
convertswitch to atheism. Also all organized religions are bullshit.I’m a theist agnostic. I believe in some sort of higher power, whether an individual, multiple, or even just spiritual energy. I firmly believe that organized religion as a whole is bad for humans. It removes the ability to question and think critically of things. You’re supposed to believe this. You’re taught to believe that. You’re not choosing to believe in something, you’re being told to.
Atheist agnostic I suppose. I grew up catholic tho, got confirmed in high school and everything lol. I hated the idea that “you’re nothing without God” and “you need God in your life” attitude that they use. Like bro that’s literally abusive behavior what are you doing?
I have a question for you tho. What are your thoughts about humans eventually being able to “measure god”? I’m thinking about radiation, electricity, radio waves. Things that were always there but we just didn’t know what they were. Like if you went near radiation before it was “discovered”, you still got sick, you just didn’t know why.
But we studied those things and now we understand them better. What if “god” as it’s known, or “spiritual experiences” or whatever, are something we can actually devise a way to measure or study? We just don’t understand it yet.
I’m curious to hear from an agnostic theist about this specifically lol. Just the idea that we could “measure god” somehow. A thiest would say god can’t be measured and an atheist would say there is no god so it doesn’t matter.
Hey! I grew up Catholic too! Left the church when I was 8, found agnosticism when I was around 19.
Honestly? I don’t think there is a way to “measure god”, or “gods” or whatever higher power. As a theist, it exists beyond existence. It’s something that exists between lives. I believe in reincarnation at least in a spiritual form, so you meet <Insert Higher Power Being Here> between lives. I believe that if a “higher power” actually exists, it exists beyond any living creatures’ ability to study it. You can feel it, it can exist as a presence but you can never know it’s there. You cannot study it or know what/where/who/how many it is.
It’s why I fell so hard for agnosticism. The idea that there might be something and there might not be, and we have no way as creatures to ever know that. So it’s up to us individually to identity within ourselves how we feel. You fall under the atheist side and I fall under the theist side. I’ve always felt if there was a way to prove a god exists, that’d be neat and I’d totally believe it. But we don’t and I still believe one exists. You’re the opposite where you don’t believe one exists, but are still open to the idea that one could. We share the same world view from different sides of the coin.
I’ve always seen agnosticism as the “scientific” approach to faith. I don’t need to know that there is a god or gods. I just believe there is, but if science ever proved once or the other I’d side on that research. Same with you on the opposite spectrum. But I’m not going to let others… Whether it be preachers or neighbours, or a fucking book dictate what I should believe. I believe what I choose to.
And as someone who loves knowledge and science and space and all that shit, the more and more we learn about the universe, the more and more “proof” there probably isn’t any measurable “God” for us here on Earth. Which goes back to be belief of an inter-spiritual deity/deities between the lives our spirits live.
Like… Our moon radiates detectable energy. It’s gravitational pull creates the tides here on Earth, a hunk of rock rotating around our planet. Radio waves in space can be traced back to stars exploding light years away. It’s not God making them, it’s the universe around us just existing.
That makes sense from a theist perspective lol, that any “god” is inherently beyond our understanding/ comprehension. I think everyone should at least lean agnostic, cuz how can you say for sure either way?
Personal faith is way better than any organized religion since it forces you to think about these heavy questions instead of just accepting what you’re told.
I really like that idea tho, it’s not God it’s just the universe existing.
What’s he gonna do? Fuck the popes couch?
The Vatican should be taking threat very seriously. He did kill the last Pope
If you’re not a Catholic, you might not understand how fucked up it is for Vance to stand there and call the Pope wrong about theology.
By definition, the Pope is right about religion. If he changes his mind tomorrow, he was right then and he is right now.
The equivalent would be if I became a Buddhist and then told the current Dalai Lama he was doing it wrong. Or maybe if I became a Hindu and then insisted that, actually, cheeseburgers are fuckin’ awesome.
No joke, Vance is like two more dumbass statements away from being excommunicated.
Arguably, there would be decent historic precedent for excommunicating Vance RIGHT NOW.
I was shocked this didn’t happen.
two too many
Kegbreath quoted the pulp fiction Bible verse today.
The old pope died of cringe when he met Vance so I’d consider this a threat.
Yeah Leo is 18 years younger than Franky was when Vance visited. He’ll probably be fine.
When Vance tells a Pope to be careful, that Pope should be careful. You know, considering Vance’s established track record with Popes…
Wait what did I miss
The day (or the day after, can’t remember) he visited the previous pope, the pope died.
Died of cringe
Queen Elizabeth was immortal right? Everyone knows that. But when Lizz Truss became prime minister, the queen was like “oh blimey, I believe it best that I take my departure from this unfortunate circumstance forthwith” which is translated to peasant English “screw this shit I’m outta here”. JD Vance is like a toddler Truss so if I were the pope, I’d kill myself too. I mean, you believe in God and an after life, you are the person standing between your imaginary world and reality for whoever believes in that shit. But after meeting this bozo you can’t believe in a god anymore, all hope is lost, fuck this world, it has no future. “Hoc nihil est; abeo.”
Riiiiggghht, “cringe.” That’s what it was…
He killed the last one lmao
Vance had a visit with the last pope at the Vatican, right before he died. At the time, Francis was trying to get him to acknowledge biblical teachings to love your neighbour (and I think that ICE was the antithesis of this), and not the vaguely dystopian stuff Vance was pushing about only only offering respect/kindness/compassion to the people closest to you.
Its quite poetic actually. The popes last action was to make one of the most evil men alive turn away from evil. And then the pope dies the next day.
I mean, … it’s not like he was successful.
He was quite successful with his dying. He did it on the first try, unlike his boss.
Very true, failed to turn Vance away from evil though.
The utter fucking nerve of these assholes.
I’m not even a christian anymore, Catholic or otherwise. In fact I’ve long since gone full on athiest.
But even I’M offended by this new level of horseshit by the Trump clown-show.
Right? I really dislike the catholic church and am an atheist myself, but these morons make the pope look like a reasonable statesman by comparison.
Curious how the framing makes something unreasonable become reasonable. Moving the conversation towards the unreasonable.
It doesn’t really; it’s hyperbole by comparison. The distance from my home to the moon is vast and unwalkable, but if you compared it to the distance between the earth and the center of the galaxy, someone might say it looks like a short walk in comparison.
It obviously still is not possible, but it’s a way to stress how big the comparison is.
I think it would still apply to your scenario in the sense that if the public was genuinly talking about galactical travel, then traveling to the moon would seem like small potatoes in comparison.
However, there are better examples to get the message accross.
The message is:
framing makes something unreasonable become reasonable
Concider the following:
-
The war on drugs caused mass incarceration of blacks and hippies. The term makes us think that the mass incarceration is justified.
-
Pro life is a term used by conservatives who are against abortions causing the birth of unwanted children. Pro life makes us think that the birth of unwanted children is a matter of saving lives.
-
Reducing footprint is a campaign by exxon mobile to focus on pollution from consumers instead of producers. Fossil fuel companies gains more free passes, making the unreasonable pass more often.
-
Framing critics of Knesset regime as antisemites makes us dismiss the content of their criticism, making the unreasonable Knesset become reasonable.
-
By framing billionaires as intelligent, hard working and jobs creator, we make confiscation of societal goods sound reasonable.
-
I am with you. I don’t believe in what the Pope stands for but also recognize that he is not only the head of state of a foreign government, but the mouthpiece of a significant part of human tradition. This really is like the “fake news” arguments from Trump’s first campaign, i.e., “I don’t agree with what they say so I will attack them personally.”
Theology might just be overly-specific literary study, but I can at least acknowledge when someone is a world-class expert on it.
Oh yes, world renowned theologian James David Vance foremost expert on theol…wait theology is when you fuck couches right?
i thought his name was jance dance vance
What’s wrong Jance Dance? You barely janked the jouch?
from now on, it is 🤣
Don’t you think he got enough of that in high school
Eta: I love that only a small number of people got the original reference or response
That isn’t his birth name, it’s his third name so far.
James Donald Bowman just doesn’t sing like James David Vance
No.
He didn’t change his name to Vance until after high school, so probably not.
Just Dance* Vance, actually
I wish he would just dance and keep his mouth shut.
Last Chance to Jance Dance (Perhaps)
*Bowman.
Isn’t the Pope supposed to be the guy for Catholics, appointed to directly hear God’s voice on Earth, and spread it to the masses? And if that’s the case, aren’t all these faux-Christians disagreeing with him - like Vance - disagreeing with the very God they purport to worship?
Catholics can disagree with the pope on secular matters, the problem here is that the pope is quoting the catechism almost verbatim, and convert-boy is throwing a tantrum because he joined the church based on aesthetics and not any kind of conviction.
A bunch of Protestants think the Pope is the Antichrist, but apparently Vance identifies as Catholic, so yeah, he’s defying God. Catholic doctrine also holds that the Pope is infallible when ruling on theology.
The latter is not universal. Several popes have explicitly stated that they are indeed fallible (which would render total infallibility self-contradictory). Also, infallibility is generally limited in certain ways that I won’t bother researching in enough depth to put into a concise description. But the pope can’t just make up some random shit and have it automatically considered to be the word of God.
Of course, pointing out that someone violates the basic tenets of Catholicism while naming those specific tenets is well within “the pope is right” territory.
Pretty sure the infallibility part is only when he speaks “ex cathedra” which is a pretty narrow and specific time, but I’m not a Catholic.
A quick Google says the last time that was done was in 1950.
And that’s why francis had to clarify that he wasn’t speaking infallibly when he said he hoped hell was empty
I appreciate the nuanced info. It’s pretty tough to find when discussing religion on platforms like this. It helps logical people trapped by corrupted religious beliefs realize that its okay, even encouraged, to keep their core beliefs intact while still being able to condemn those within their religion that work to corrupt the church.
If all you see is church/religion bad, then they’ll just dismiss you and move on. And the corrupt version of Christianity or Islam or Judaism or what have you will continue growing
The man converted to catholicism then within a few years was beefing with two popes in a row on basic catholicism.
That is what we in the business call a poser.
It just popped into my head that Vance’s tie should have poser in block letters going from top to bottom and trump should have loser on his.
Wonder if this could be a browser extension
😂
Literally any Catholic who criticizes the Pope is a hypocrite because the Pope is meant to be God’s representative/mouthpiece on Earth.
The pope doesn’t claim infallability on everything, only specific statements ex cathedra.
Meant by who? The pope?
According to doctrine.
Where did doctrine that come from? I’m not sure where you’re getting it. Kinda sounds made the fuck up
You can absolutely criticize the pope as a Catholic. What you can’t do is attempt to supercede him on matters of faith
Which, you know, we’ve got people doing that already, no need to make shit up
The American Catholic leadership are hardcore conservative, with a few exceptions, and working at cross purposes with Christ’s mission on earth.
In my experience American catholics in general tend to be the ones who vote hard right, while saying “I think politics is tearing us apart” and “oh, I don’t discuss politics” “I’m not racist, but…”. They want the same thing the far righ wants they just don’t want to get their hands dirty.
It’s not a church to these people. It’s a country club.
JD literally woke up one morning and decided to debate theology with the fucking Vicar of Christ.
INNNNN THIS CORNER, wearing all white and a skull cap, he’s the Vicar of Christ, the Bishop of Rome, the SUCCESSOR to the Price of the Apostles, iiiiiiiIIIITS POPE LEO THE FOURTEENTH!!
And in THIS CORNER, wearing a tailored suit and red tie, Couch fucker, white trash cosplayer and world’s worst negotiator, John Dilbert Vaaaaaaance!
LMAO - also is his name really John Dilbert?
Had to look it up myself
James David Vance (born James Donald Bowman
Looks like he had him a gender-affirming name change.
This would be fantastic. We can even honor Leo’s Chicago roots by playing Alan Parsons Project during his intro.
Pretty sure they would ring him up as the Undefeated Champion, The one, The only, Pope Killing, Couching Fucking Monster Jack Daniels… (What that’s not what it means?)…John Dilbert
I can respect debate but that’s not what happened here. This is a blasphemous tantrum. “I’m not wrong, God is.”
You don’t get to join a cult then bitch you aren’t in charge.
Sometimes I think that if there was an anti-Christ, they wouldn’t be aware that they were the anti-Christ. If that’s the case, JD Vance would be the perfect candidate.
I think it’s a plan to keep their names mentioned in media, free advertising of sorts…
Maybe you don’t want to tie your name to this news cycle
Look, they already decided they knew science better than scientists, they knew war better than military generals, they knew economy better than economists.
Why did aynone think they would stop at theology?
Fake it till you make it.
Narrator: They did not make it
