Absolutism – certain truths are absolute, non-negotiable
Relativism – truth is relative, what may be right to one person or culture may not be right for another
Inculturation – absolute truth can look different when translated into different cultures
Pluralism – coexistence of systems making mutually exclusive claims
Principled dialogue – respectful dialogue with others without downplaying differences
Non-religious: Agnostic, Atheist, Skeptic, Spiritual, Cultural Christian, Deist, Free-thinker, Not religious, Post-Christian, recovering Christian, Questioning, Secular, Nones (as in none of the above)
Degrees of commitment: Apathetic, Moderate, Devout, Extremist, Lax
Progressive/conservative: Conservative/liberal, Orthodox (besides eastern)
Categories other than specific denominations: Born-again, Evangelical, Mainline Protestant
In the textbook it states that catholicism teaches that faith and reason can never contradict. Why is that?
If faith and reason can't contradict then why can't they cross paths? it says that there is one ultimate truth and all paths lead there, but why can't these paths be joined?
Typically when you stray off the path bad things can happen, but in another regard, science had to stray off the path in order to achieve some of the things we have today.
Is it bad for a religion to change its teachings?
Why assume that everything that everything in the faith is true until reason specifically contradicts some part of it? Maybe the whole thing is flawed?
What kind of cases are impossible to draw a clear line between the catholic spirituality and new age spirituality?
Apocalypse as not about the end of the world (revelation/unveiling, persistence through catastrophe, critique of empire/colonialism, ancient Rome, agenda for a new world)
Our Lady of Guadalupe