天主教與基督教的分別？

know more about catholic --->
 http://www.evanlife.org.hk/c_index.htm

I was educated in a christian school and I give catholics or christians my minimal respect but over the years I found that their followers have changed so much.
 
 I tend to think there is nothing wrong with the religion. I think their followers have been too creative trying to do all sorts of things or involving in all sorts of things in the name of catholics / christians which they should not be. Their followers want to be god. But they pretend that they are doing all these in the name of god.
 
 Maybe I was too naive. Since history, they had penetrated the remote poor villages and 'save' the villagers from starving and all sorts of diseases. As the world change, they penetrated schools, kindergardens, old age homes, the jail. They are so good in 'attacking' the vulnerable people, the illiterate, and hopeless minority and they brand themselves as doing a good job, a holy job, in the name of god.
 
 Their apetite doesnt stop there. Until now, they are trying to get themselves involve in more things including government, politics and the list goes on. Of course, also under the guise of freedom of speech, democracy and all the big crap words.
 
 In the west, many people are abandoning the religion. The churches are empty and because of growing number of muslims immigrants who were w/o praying facilities, they are taking over the abandoned churches.
 
 I lost my respect to such catholics / christians.
 
 I'm such a simple, low IQ person, but they werent able to convert me despite spending 10 yrs in school with weekly prayers and assemblies, and those easter and christmas festivals. They werent able to brain wash me at all.
 
 Catholics / christians (religion) is a conditional religion. You will be rewarded if you BELIEVE. Otherwise, you are condemn to HE LL.
 
 Now, do you understand?
 
 So, everybody, ........... what the he ll are you doing up there?

.................... The scriptures were written by people who had no knowledge of the world in which they lived. They believed that God existed just above the clouds and that the earth was flat. ................
 
 **********************************
 Thursday, April 12, 2007
 
 Science is our reality
 
 David Eason ("Losing sight of spiritual reality", April 6) oddly refers to "An irrational faith in science." Science is, almost by definition, not irrational: comprehending and acknowledging scientific fact requires no faith. Webster's dictionary defines science as, "the state of knowing: knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding". Faith is not necessary to believe that which is already known, but ignorance is essential to have faith in something that flies in the face of all the evidence.
 
 Science is constantly pushing back the horizons of human knowledge and, in doing so, keeps an open mind about its discoveries. Scientists readily admit that there are gaps in their knowledge, and strive to fill them. Indeed, it is the pursuit of the unknown that pushes science - and humanity - forward.
 
 The scriptures were written by people who had no knowledge of the world in which they lived. They believed that God existed just above the clouds and that the earth was flat. Nobody can condemn these biblical "scholars" for their shortcomings but, in modern times, when science has provided so much enlightenment, it can only be described as completely potty to base one's understanding of the world upon such ignorance.
 
 Mr Eason commented about religions' responsibility for wars and the apparent atheism of militaristic Germany. Hitler was a Roman Catholic who orchestrated the extermination of 6 million Jews, although I accept that he did not necessarily kill in the name of Catholicism.
 
 Returning to reality, spiritual or otherwise, I challenge Mr Eason to scan the international news in this newspaper on any day and find any article in which violent death is reported and the words "Muslim", "Jew" and/or "Christian" do not appear. There won't be many.
 
 Andrew Nesbitt, Sai Kung

***** IGNORANCE ******
 
 is essential to have
 
 FAITH
 
 in something that flies in the face of all the evidence.

探头望一望！！

Quoted from the papers
 
 
 The holy bible
 "................. describes a God that is jealous, misogynistic, infanticidal, genocidal, capricious, intolerant and cruel. ................"
 
 ------------------------------------------
 
 Wednesday, April 18, 2007
 
 Keeping an open mind
 
 David Eason is correct to assert that science must not claim unequivocally that God does not exist ("Science a study of creation", April 16). Real science proceeds with a healthy scepticism, treating the existence of God as a hypothesis to be tested by observation.
 The evidence offered by Mr Eason is the Bible. This book asserts that the world was created in six days and describes a God that is jealous, misogynistic, infanticidal, genocidal, capricious, intolerant and cruel. It represents evidence that it is an invention, revealing the narrow observations and moral attitudes of its human authors. Science awaits better evidence with an open mind.
 
 Julian Grudzien, Jordan

甲乙兩人同時去世，見到上帝。上帝問甲：你是幹甚麼的？
 
 甲：我是駕駛夜更的小巴司機。
 
 上帝翻查了一些檔案後說：唔，那你到天堂吧。
 
 上帝又問乙：你是幹甚麼的？
 
 乙：我是一個牧師。
 
 上帝又翻查了一些檔案，然後道：你下地獄去吧。
 
 乙大聲抱怨道：主啊！我一生都貢獻給教會，每個禮拜日都向信徒講道。
 
 而這個小巴司機，每天都在公路上瘋狂超速駕駛，
 
 我就是因為坐他的車失事撞死的，為何我要下地獄，他卻可以上天堂？你給我一個理由吧
 
 上帝：理由是...你每次講道，聽眾都睡著，沒有一個人祈禱，而他每次開車，沒
 
 有一個敢睡著，都向我祈禱，你說，誰對教會的貢獻更大？！

I totally agree .................
 
 Religions do not cause wars; clerics do.
 
 ===============
 
 Clerics the cause of war
 
 I normally do not comment on religious issues, but David Eason's latest letter "Science a study of creation" (April 16), part of a series of exchanges as silly as Hong Kong politics, compelled me to jump in.
 
 Mr Eason makes an excellent argument that, lacking scientific proof of the non-existence of God, atheism itself is like a religion. He also pointed out that religion is but one of many causes of war and suffering. The whole argument was then deflated by using the Bible as a proof of the existence of God.
 
 The failure of Christianity is in the attempts throughout history by the church to use natural phenomena and logical arguments to justify something that is purely faith based.
 
 The really interesting question is whether the Christians like Mr Eason are simply defending their institution or are they defending God. Religions do not cause wars; clerics do.
 
 Zack Culvert, Wan Chai

宗　教
 
 小甜甜雖然走了，但無可否認，她留下了太多的話題。相信在未來的一大段時間內，人們在茶餘飯後，都會拿她的事情來作話題。
 
 比如，這一天跟幾個朋友吃飯，其中一個就說：「我真不明白，小甜甜到了最後，最相信的竟然是個風水師，為什麼？」
 
 我說，這有什麼不好明白的，一個人，只要他信了一個人，那個人，就是他的宗了。
 
 你可以信耶穌，可以信釋迦牟尼，可以信毛澤東，可以信李洪志，小甜甜，信的就是一個風水師。這個風水師，於是就成了小甜甜的宗教，言聽計從，便如基督徒之信耶穌，佛教徒之信佛祖一樣，沒有什麼「為什麼」的了。
 
 這也像一個病人去看醫生，在跟醫生相處的那一刻，他真心實意信那個醫生，醫生問他什麼，他都不會隱瞞，醫生說什麼，他都信得十足。
 
 在「相信」面前，就沒有什麼道理可說了。為什麼要「相信」，也只有當事人知道，旁觀者總覺得自己清醒得不得了，但又總是搞不懂他為什麼要「相信」那一套。因為，「相信」就是宗教。
 
 我們看到身邊一些朋友突然像轉了性似地「相信」了一些東西，舉動不可思議，言語有悖邏輯，原因很簡單，這個朋友，在那個時刻，信了一種「宗教」。
 
 這「宗教」可以是一個道理，可以是一個人，可以是一句屁話。「宗教」這種東西，是很能鑽空子的，它永遠在找人性中的縫隙，而這些縫隙，是人自己創造的，像創造了一道縫，宗教就見縫插針，進來了。
 
 李純恩

李純恩 go to hell !!

............ Instead, there is an awareness of the harm caused by religious people or of people doing bad things in the name of religion. .....
 
 ...... Yet, religion has become a vehicle for bullies. ....... Then, other people write about them, and their words are hijacked by the bullies, and ultimately the essence of the messages, peace and goodwill, is lost. ......
 
 But Muslims do regularly give us the most dramatic examples of all that is possibly bad in religion. However, 300 years ago, you could have said the same about Catholics.
 
 ========================
 
 Monday, April 30, 2007
 Real issues of religion
 
 This mini forum on religious issues is a bit unusual, but in my view highly courageous and valuable. Thank you, South China Morning Post, for keeping the topic alive.
 
 People globally are increasingly aware of the flaws in religion. This is not to say God does not exist. Instead, there is an awareness of the harm caused by religious people or of people doing bad things in the name of religion.
 
 Far too much of today's religion is rooted in ignorance and has nothing to do with the real issues: what is God; how we conduct ourselves; and why were we given the gift of thought and awareness, for example. This is all about the "bigger picture": we have gifts, responsibilities and purpose.
 
 Yet, religion has become a vehicle for bullies. Every once in a while, it seems, people are given insight. Buddha, Jesus and Mohammed, for example. Then, other people write about them, and their words are hijacked by the bullies, and ultimately the essence of the messages, peace and goodwill, is lost.
 
 The Prophet Mohammed said that the primary job God gave him was to spread the notion of peace; and the primary reason God gave him was that too many people were killing each other. I strongly suspect that today the Prophet would be very upset with his most vitriolic supporters. It is not just Islam. But Muslims do regularly give us the most dramatic examples of all that is possibly bad in religion. However, 300 years ago, you could have said the same about Catholics.
 
 Ongoing dialogue is important. Please keep publishing letters; writers, keep sending your letters. They show that, notwithstanding our differences of opinion, we are mostly good. It also shows us others' mindsets. Understanding is essential for peace.
 
 Gregory Pek, Happy Valley

基督教是正教
 天主教是邪教
 因為基督教沒有神父搞男仔
 基督教又唔會拜偶像

基督教是正教
 天主教是邪教
 你們未信的快些信神吧
 神會打救你們.

基督徒
 
 who the helll do you think you are?
 
 may allah, buddha, jesus & mary condemn you to helll

基督教好多牧師攪女信徒, 連智障都唔放過

Faith is neither reality nor sensibility.
 Faith is definitely blind.
 
 
 Wednesday, May 2, 2007
 Vindictive thinking
 
 Does David Eason, "Unfaithful civilisations doomed to fall" (April 29), really think it Christian to pray for the death of an innocent wishing tree and then rejoice that God has done his bit by answering the prayer?
 
 I am also puzzled that he thinks God might bring down the Ngong Ping 360 cable car as a blow against Buddhist idolatry. His vindictive thinking is quite enough to put fair-minded folk off Christianity.
 
 Paul Serfaty, Mid-Levels
 
 Wednesday, May 2, 2007
 A petty God
 
 David Eason says God answered his prayer to teach idolaters a lesson by causing the Lam Tsuen wishing tree to lose branches two years after the fact.
 
 It seems to me a rather lazy form of answering a prayer - "causing" something to happen which would have been likely to happen anyway, with or without supernatural interference.
 
 Perhaps God should go on a motivational seminar. Maybe it is Mr Eason's opinion that God moves not so much in mysterious ways, but particularly petty ones.
 
 Alethea Dean, Discovery Bay

Sunday, April 29, 2007
 Unfaithful civilisations doomed to fall
 
 The issue for non-believers should not be whether God is real or not, but what it means if he is.
 
 Apart from what may be discerned through physical creation, the only specific knowledge we have concerning God comes through the revelation of scripture.
 
 But armed with this revelation, it soon becomes apparent to the believer that the world operates as though this revelation were true. History moves forward as if directed by a divine mind and in conformity to the biblical emphasis on the conflict facing man of making a god of himself or worshipping the creator.
 
 Take the case of Hong Kong's wishing tree. It is dying, and it's just a matter of time before it finally topples. When it does, what will people conclude? To the materialist, this will be explainable by the harm caused by people throwing offerings into its branches and subsequent infestation by termites. But the believer will see the finger of God.
 
 When in 2003 I saw how worshippers prayed to this tree for protection from Sars, I was so angry they would do this instead of turning to God that I, in turn, prayed against this idolatry. Two years later the main branch fell off, and now I notice several more branches have gone, and the tree is supported by crutches.
 
 This to me is answered prayer, for the tree's death was by no means certain. After the first branch fell off, the government went to great lengths to try to save it - all in vain. But when the tree finally does fall, will the folly of such idolatry be acknowledged in deference to the living God?
 
 Similarly, if tragedy should come to Ngong Ping 360 or one of Hong Kong's towers should slide into the sea, will the idolatry of Buddhism or mammon also be acknowledged?
 
 Given the stubbornness of the human heart, even then, possibly not. But the fact remains that a study of history reveals that it favours the righteous and pronounces against such idolatry. It is no accident, for example, that the most successful civilisations since the time of Christ are those which have had a faith in God.
 
 By rejecting its historic faith, the west stands on the precipice of its own destruction. To those with eyes to see, the Bible, history and the fate of the wishing tree are warnings to this effect.
 
 David Eason, Tai Po

very disappointed.
 prayers were unanswered!
 How could this be?
 where the helll is god
 He must be having a fun time there
 
 -------------------------------
 
 Uneventful trip
 
 Your reader David Eason has made some claims that are both interesting and disturbing regarding believers and non-believers of the Christian faith. ("Unfaithful civilisations doomed to fall," April 29).
 
 I am so glad that his prayers went unanswered while I was enjoying my trip up the Ngong Ping 360 cable car on Saturday.
 
 Wu Shun-ping, Sha Tin

Religion & Faith indeed do not need intelligence or rationality
 
 ----------------------------------
 
 Why do religious cranks keep pontificating about what should be personal matters?
 
 ------------------------------------------
 
 
 
 Thursday, May 3, 2007
 
 Pontificating on private matters
 
 There goes another sanctimonious male telling women what to do with their bodies, "The death of real freedom" (May 1). Paul Kokoski states that women's wombs are the most dangerous places in the world, more so than Iraq or Sudan, because of widespread legalised abortions.
 
 More power to Mexico, I say, for "falling under the spell of this evil", as Mr Kokoski quaintly terms abortion.
 
 That country has obviously seen it must tackle its population problem, despite the outdated strictures of the Catholic Church.
 
 Why do religious cranks keep pontificating about what should be personal matters?
 
 If women went around calling for the forced sterilisation of oversexed males around the world, how would that play out?
 
 Isabel Escoda, Lantau

冇乜分別

今晚有親人離開了,上了天父家,請大家祝福他,為他祈禱,他係'+ggg'

is it necessary to 請大家祝福他 ??
 
 It's all in the mind.
 
 If you think 大家祝福他 , then of course everybody is doing it.
 
 If you think everybody is having sunshine at the beach, yum-cha or ktv, you still could consider that 請大家祝福他
 
 Faith in religion does not need any intelligence mah!!

Sunday, May 6, 2007
 
 Ignorance and blind faith poor partners for life's journey
 
 I was addled by reader David Eason's letter (April 29). Winnowing his mass of statements and analogies entails considerable effort and I hope I did not misinterpret his viewpoint. Overall, he seems to disapprove of idolatry on one hand but extols the virtues of worshipping a Christian God on the other.
 
 There lies the root of my befuddlement because I see no distinct difference between the two. The former is based on ignorance whereas the latter is based on blind faith. But blind faith is considered a form of un-enlightenment, too. Rationality and reasoning are ostensibly absent in both rituals.
 
 His litany of reasons for the failing health of the wishing tree, saying it is emblematic of the omnipotence of God, is so logically and scientifically flawed that it will be truly amazing if there are others who subscribe to this preposterous notion. Tossing aside the indubitably materialist rationale that the tree was dying because damage was caused by things being thrown at it, I doubt even the most faithful devotees will readily embrace the hypothesis that somehow God is having a role in this episode. The association seems too implausible and the possibility is too flaky to imagine. It is indeed sad to see the affinity with God descend into the realms of absurdity.
 
 I respect Mr Eason's religion and his strong adherence to his belief. Nevertheless, projecting an aura of righteousness merely upheld by an ancient document is misguided if not downright baleful. Using an ancient scripture as a guide to personal conduct is palatable insofar as the doctrine is confined only to oneself. Any pugnacious attempt by zealous acolytes to cross the threshold beyond the individual perimeter and force their decree upon others is a recipe for disaster.
 
 Lots of past and present calamitous conflicts in human history bear witness to this type of hubris and intolerance, notwithstanding his outlandish claim that "the most successful civilisations since the time of Christ are those which have had a faith in God". Finally, Mr Eason's opening statement "the issue for non-believers should not be whether God is real or not, but what it means if he is" resembles Pascal's wager and advice on taking a view.
 
 You should live your life and try to make the world a better place for your being in it, whether or not you believe in God. If there is no God, you have lost nothing and will be remembered fondly by those you left behind. If there is a benevolent God, he will judge you on your merits and not just on whether or not you believed in him.
 
 Jack Teh, Clear Water Bay

噏乜呀 ?
 全部用英文.....

what's wrong with english?
 
 is it against the rule here?
 
 There are readers capable of reading english right?
 
 Is there a rule in she.com that all English is strictly prohibited here??