196
Pope Leo speaks out against cardinal ordering blessings for gay couples
(www.newsweek.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2026
196 points (97.1% liked)
World News
56326 readers
2482 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
OOPS
Exodus 21:20 “If a man strikes his servant or his maid with a rod, and he dies under his hand, the man shall surely be punished.
Exodus 21:21 Notwithstanding, if his servant gets up after a day or two, he shall not be punished, for the servant is his property.
if the servant is "beat to death", the man will be punished
and as Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament, it mostly doesnt apply to us anymore
Bats don't belong on that list.
As for talking donkeys, you can't bring obvious fiction or superstition into the real world by proclaiming "MIRACLE". That's now how reality works.
And "hey the slave didn't die so by all means carry on owning another human being as property" is not the moral flex you think it is.
You haven't proven the bible is accurate or moral. You've only proven that you are brainwashed by your religion into justifying atrocities and need to work on bettering yourself.
Finally, why are you explaining your holy book? A book that supposedly contains the infallible word of a god should not need mere mortals to explain it. God should have hired a holy ghost writer.
Direct Hebrew translation.
It wasnt listing birds nor fowls it was telling you that you shall not eat fowls NOR those things
There are a bunch of modern documented miracles, the Lord works in mysterious ways
As I said, most of that does not apply to us anymore as Christ fulfilled it
Define "accurate" or "moral"
Infallible ≠ Simple
Bonus 6. I'm tired of you.
Matt 5:17
Matthew 5:17 Do not think that I have come to loosen the law or the prophets. I have not come to loosen, but to fulfill.
He has not come to loosen the laws but to fulfill them
This statement is told because the Pharisees were claiming that he was teaching people to ignore the law of Moses
By fulfill, he means completely live a sinless life that no Israelite had managed, becoming the first and last to do so.
This is also why the sacrificial system was abolished too, because Jesus' sacrifice was enough to the Lord for eternity.
There you go trying to explain and rationalise the divine words of your infallible god. So why even include the Old Testament? If Jesus “fulfilled” it like an Amazon order, it’s over. Stop using it to judge people. No more Leviticus, Exodus, Deuteronomy, Judges, Proverbs…
Christians hate being reminded that the Old Testament is just Torah fanfiction, so you should be happy to lose that stuff.
Is that not the church's whole thing? You'd think they would be better at it.
You haven't provided proof, only claims. It doesn't make me uncomfortable, juat disappointed that some people are so credulous.
Shroud of Turin 500+ Witness accounts letters from ROMAN OFFICIALS to Caesar
Dude. The shroud of Turin was a known fake in the 1300s when it was made. The church decided to adopt it anyway because it was a great money maker with tourists, even though according to your other reply they don’t mix money and faith. I do love that you lead with the most thoroughly debunked religious fraud in Christian history as your strongest evidence though. That genuinely gave me a laugh.
Witnesses are notoriously unreliable and easily swayed. And you never said witnesses of what. Just vague “miracles” of the trust-me-bro variety? Which Roman officials? Were the letters corroborated by contemporary evidence and writings from reliable scholars?
Magic does not exist. Ghosts and the Easter Bunny are fake too, sorry to ruin that for you.
we didnt have High Res Photography in the 0s
There exist no videos nor photos of Cleopatra, nor Julias Caesar
And proof for tbe Shroud of Turin being fake
To establish the existence of a person without any assumptions, one source from one author (either a supporter or opponent) is needed; for Jesus there are at least 12 independent sources from five authors from supporters and two independent sources from two authors from non-supporters, within a century of the crucifixion.[11] Since historical sources on other named individuals from first century Galilee were written by either supporters or enemies, these sources on Jesus cannot be dismissed, and the existence of at least 14 sources from at least seven authors means there is much more evidence available for Jesus than for any other notable person from 1st century Galilee.[11] Some scholars estimate that there are about 30 independent sources written by 25 authors who attest to Jesus overall.[12] It is notable that some independent sources did not survive, but are broadly referenced directly in the surviving sources themselves (e.g. Luke) or inferred from modern source analysis.[13]
I could but I don't care enough.
That's literally what a miracle is. You're using circular reasoning here. "Miracles that defy natural explanation did not happen because they defy natural explanation, and nothing can defy natural explanation because we have never seen it happen, therefore miracles cannot and did not happen"
You are typing the words yourself and not getting it. That is definitely some sort of talent.
If there is a claim that something supernatural happened, it better have rock solid evidence to support it. Calling something a miracle because you want it to be true does not make it true. Proving it does. And the only proof of any "miracle" in the bible is - guess what? - cited using the bible. That's what circular reasoning is.
If you make a claim with no objective, testable, flasifiable proof, all you have is a claim. And until you provide robust proof, I will dismiss your claim.
Actually, no. It's not. If I was saying "This miracle happened which is why the Bible is true, the proof it happened is because the Bible says so and it did because it's true" then yes, that would be circular reasoning.
To develop this further because I enjoy infodumping on my special interests, you can divide the Bible into two natures: theological and historical. You start with the historical It is worth mentioning that the Bible is a collection of human writings, which we have divided into 66. (Some were written as the same work but were divided up, like Luke and Acts or the Penteuch, but that's another topic)
So, my thought process is simple. I believe that parts of the New Testament was written first-hand by people who knew Jesus of Nazareth. The pattern of the writings show whoever wrote it was historically familiar with their surroundings. It was generally undisputed who wrote these at the time. They line up enough to be giving a consistent narrative, but not enough to be copying each other in the case of John vs the Synoptics (The synoptics did borrow from each other quite a bit). This is the crux of the matter- Is the New Testament reliable? If you put it under scrutiny and come to the conclusion simply that it is written by people who knew Jesus of Nazareth and that they genuinely believed in what they were saying (considering they got absolutely destroyed by the romans for this belief and didn't stand to benefit as well), then what follows is that Jesus literally rose from the dead, must have really been God and whatever He and the Holy Spirit taught is true. Then, what follows is that whatever Jesus taught is in fact true, so eg, we should love our neighbours. Then since He quoted the Old Testament and also appointed disciples and spoke of the Holy Spirit, it's worth concluding that these writings are also true.
So if the Historical nature of the Bible is true, then Jesus' divinity is true. If Jesus' divinity is true, then the theological nature is true. But the Bible cannot be used to prove the Bible. When I was younger, my skeptical mind was disappointed by a tract proposing the question "Is the Bible True" ans concluding 'yes' because a bible verse says it is. Sure, St Paul who was witnessed receiving a vision of Jesus and being blinded can attest that He is writing with the Holy Spirit as He has the credentials, and Jesus can attest the Holy Spirit was in the Old Testament because He is God and thus has the credentials, but it cannot be used to ascertain whether or not the Bible is historically true.
With this standard, good luck trying to prove that most of history happened.
Another issue with this standard- Miracles are miraculous because they aren't really testable - if holding a flame up to a stick of dry wood causes it to catch fire, that's not a miracle, that's just considered science. Your standard is deliberately designed in such a way so that you'd never believe a miracle.