<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>AgnosticWeb.com - Popes and Bishops</title>
<link>https://agnosticweb.com/</link>
<description>An Agnostic&#039;s Brief Guide to the Universe</description>
<language>en</language>
<item>
<title>Popes and Bishops (reply)</title>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<blockquote><blockquote><p>&amp;#13;&amp;#10;&gt; dhw: When you read about these things, is it any wonder that Dawkins &amp; Co have a field day at the expense of religion? It would be funny if it didn&amp;apos;t all have such serious implications. And we haven&amp;apos;t even got onto Muslim fundamentalism.-The way to answer Dawkins is to totally avoid religion because of the problems religions constantly create for themselves. Debate Dawkins at the level of science. He is weak there.</p>
</blockquote></blockquote>]]></content:encoded>
<link>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=11500</link>
<guid>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=11500</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 23:35:27 +0000</pubDate>
<category>Religion</category><dc:creator>David Turell</dc:creator>
</item>
<item>
<title>Popes and Bishops</title>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An article in <em>The Guardian </em>has the headline: &amp;quot;<strong>Donkey at manger not gospel truth, says pope</strong>&amp;quot;. In his third book on the life of Jesus, he apparently &amp;quot;<em>puts paid to some myths surrounding the newly born Jesus&amp;apos;s spell in a stable with Mary and Joseph.</em>&amp;quot;-&amp;quot;<em>In the Gospels there is no mention of animals</em>,&amp;quot; the pope states. However he goes on to argue that Catholics should see Mary&amp;apos;s virgin birth, as well as Jesus&amp;apos;s resurrection, as &amp;quot;<em>cornerstones of faith</em>&amp;quot;.-How does Joseph Ratzinger know all this? (Indeed, how did the gospel writers know all this, since they weren&amp;apos;t even around at the time?) I don&amp;apos;t suppose the gospels mention that Jesus peed or defecated, so does that mean he didn&amp;apos;t? What sort of stable would it have been if there were no animals kept there? But we should forget about such improbabilities as animals being in a stable, and simply believe in the virgin birth and the resurrection because...well, don&amp;apos;t ask why. If you&amp;apos;re a Catholic, you must believe what Herr Ratzinger tells you.-This week the Anglican Church has refused to allow the ordination of women as bishops. In fairness, the bishops themselves are overwhelmingly in favour of women joining them. It&amp;apos;s the laity that have said no. In any other sphere of life, this institution would be had up before the courts for blatant discrimination.-When you read about these things, is it any wonder that Dawkins &amp; Co have a field day at the expense of religion? It would be funny if it didn&amp;apos;t all have such serious implications. And we haven&amp;apos;t even got onto Muslim fundamentalism.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
<link>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=11498</link>
<guid>https://agnosticweb.com/index.php?id=11498</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:30:53 +0000</pubDate>
<category>Religion</category><dc:creator>dhw</dc:creator>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
