Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Josh

Vatican Priest Reginald Foster Interviewed By Bill Maher In Religulous

Recommended Posts

TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1812976' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:00 AM']To get back on topic,[/quote]

:rolleyes:

[quote]my friend watched this movie some time ago (she is more agnostic than anything I think but raised Catholic) and said it really made her think. Not really in a good way, mind you.[/quote]

Just that little segment shows how silly it is.

St. Peter's is a palace?

The Pope lives there?

Hell doesn't exist?

Catholicism has changed its teachings?

And Bill Maher was, in an interview, saying how this was suppose to be comedy. I was watching Dr. Scott Hahn the other day on Bookmark (ewtn) and he was saying how the atheists of today (the four whatevers) use this witt and this harsh mockery to try to make Christianity looks lame and stupid. :ohno: From that segment of the film though, Maher isn't using facts to prove the ridiculousness of Christianity. He is using mockery to prove it. Edited by TotusTuusMaria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hassan
[quote name='HisChildForever' post='1812976' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:00 AM']To get back on topic, my friend watched this movie some time ago (she is more agnostic than anything I think but raised Catholic) and said it really made her think. Not really in a good way, mind you.[/quote]


In what way can one think that is not good?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh
This movie was pretty stupid. It did have funny parts and it was supposed to be a comedy according to Bill Marher. He is no doubt an idiot and didnt really pick on no one his own size.

The two parts of movie I enjoyed though were the two interviews with the catholic priest. The one being the vatican astrologer who basically said a fundamentalist view of the bible is a disease and talked about aliens and evolution. I also found the part with Father Foster very interesting to. Maher got owned by him to although Foster did seem to show Bill more love then he deserved. Edited by Delivery Boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Hassan' post='1812984' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:04 AM']In what way can one think that is not good?[/quote]

when the person ends up thinking thoughts that are not good.

thinking isn't always a good thing.

people think about women in bad ways.

people think about hurting other people.

people think about leaving the Church.

thinking isn't always good, hassan dear. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh
[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1812983' date='Mar 21 2009, 01:04 AM']:rolleyes:



Just that little segment shows how silly it is.

St. Peter's is a palace?

The Pope lives there?

Hell doesn't exist?

Catholicism has changed its teachings?[/quote]

Although a vatican priest was saying this. Bill Marher didnt make it up. So the priest is to blame.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hassan
[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1812990' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:07 AM']when the person ends up thinking thoughts that are not good.

thinking isn't always a good thing.

people think about women in bad ways.

people think about hurting other people.

people think about leaving the Church.

thinking isn't always good, hassan dear. ;)[/quote]


That would come up here :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1812992' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:09 AM']Although a vatican priest was saying this. Bill Marher didnt make it up. So the priest is to blame.[/quote]

Bill is the one who called it a palace.

Bill is the one who asked how the priest felt about the Pope living there.

Bill asked the questions and pointed the interview in the way it did. Yes, the priest was to blame for not responding with corrections to Bill's questions/claims, but Bill was going right along with it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hassan
[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1812989' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:07 AM']This movie was pretty stupid. It did have funny parts and it was supposed to be a comedy according to Bill Marher. He is no doubt an idiot and didnt really pick on no one his own size.

The two parts of movie I enjoyed though were the two interviews with the catholic priest. The one being the vatican astrologer who basically said a fundamentalist view of the bible is a disease and talked about aliens and evolution. I also found the part with Father Foster very interesting to. Maher got owned by him to although Foster did seem to who Bill more love then he deserved.[/quote]


That just finished.

I thought the Priest was funny

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Hassan' post='1812982' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:03 AM']Rahner yes, the ontological one no.

I'm also reading "The Act of Being" but that is about a Shia philosophers philosophy of revelation :unsure:[/quote]

:rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Hassan' post='1812993' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:09 AM']That would come up here :rolleyes:[/quote]

what is that suppose to mean?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Josh
[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1812994' date='Mar 21 2009, 01:11 AM']Bill is the one who called it a palace.

Bill is the one who asked how the priest felt about the Pope living there.

Bill asked the questions and pointed the interview in the way it did. Yes, the priest was to blame for not responding with corrections to Bill's questions/claims, but Bill was going right along with it.[/quote]


O no doubt Bill is a antichrist. But I find Father Foster just as troubling or more trobuling. Because it's hard for me to just write off what he says.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1812998' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:12 AM']O no doubt Bill is a antichrist. But I find Father Foster just as troubling or more trobuling. Because it's hard for me to just write off what he says.[/quote]

Why is it hard?

He is not infallible. Just because he is a priest and just because he did at one time hold a job in the Vatican does not make everything he says right or worth listening too. He has it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hassan
[quote name='TotusTuusMaria' post='1812997' date='Mar 21 2009, 01:12 AM']what is that suppose to mean?[/quote]


I mean I'd assume she meant intelectual questions, I asked what sort of thinking about that would be wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
TotusTuusMaria
[quote name='Hassan' post='1813001' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:17 AM']I mean I'd assume she meant intelectual questions, I asked what sort of thinking about that would be wrong[/quote]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kafka
[quote name='Hassan' post='1812936' date='Mar 21 2009, 01:36 AM']I'm reading "The Foundations of the Christian Religion" by Karl Rahner and "Rethinking the Ontological Argument: A Nonclassical Theistic Response" by Daniel Dombrowski.

Once again Sultan Hassan not only meets but exceeds all expectations :yes:[/quote]
you are reading it already? Wow. How far are you?



[quote name='Delivery Boy' post='1812998' date='Mar 21 2009, 02:12 AM']O no doubt Bill is a antichrist. But I find Father Foster just as troubling or more trobuling. Because it's hard for me to just write off what he says.[/quote]
Why and what exactly is troubling you about him? He is just a priest. He could have gone astray from the truth even if he lives in Vatican City.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×