Yes, the old atheists can be assholes too meme. You know that's not even close to equal to what a religious person does. So fuck off with your false equivalence.

I got married 6 years ago.

Four of my husband's groomsmen were old friends he's had since childhood - one is atheist, one is apathetic, one is Muslim, and one is a protestant pastor. I guess all we were missing was the Jew.

Anyway, those 4 guys are all in the same circle of super close friends we have. Never any problem involving our diverse religious views.

(November 1, 2016 at 12:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I got married 6 years ago.

Four of my husband's groomsmen were old friends he's had since childhood - one is atheist, one is apathetic, one is Muslim, and one is a protestant pastor. I guess all we were missing was the Jew.

Anyway, those 4 guys are all in the same circle of super close friends we have. Never any problem involving our diverse religious views.

Insofar as a Christian or a Muslim shows tolerance and affection for those outside of the faith, though, they're not really expressing the sentiments that the gods of those respective faiths possess towards dissidents, but rather demonstrating that their ideals as decent human beings transcend the dogmas to which they, at the very least, pay lip service.

(November 1, 2016 at 3:30 pm)Mudhammam Wrote:

(November 1, 2016 at 12:21 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I got married 6 years ago.

Four of my husband's groomsmen were old friends he's had since childhood - one is atheist, one is apathetic, one is Muslim, and one is a protestant pastor. I guess all we were missing was the Jew.

Anyway, those 4 guys are all in the same circle of super close friends we have. Never any problem involving our diverse religious views.

Insofar as a Christian or a Muslim shows tolerance and affection for those outside of the faith, though, they're not really expressing the sentiments that the gods of those respective faiths possess towards dissidents, but rather demonstrating that their ideals as decent human beings transcend the dogmas to which they, at the very least, pay lip service.

I can only speak for my own religion, but my tolerance and affection towards those outside of my faith is perfectly in line with the dogmatic teachings of my religion. Not contrary to them:

Quote:1931 Respect for the human person proceeds by way of respect for the principle that "everyone should look upon his neighbor (without any exception) as 'another self,' above all bearing in mind his life and the means necessary for living it with dignity."37 No legislation could by itself do away with the fears, prejudices, and attitudes of pride and selfishness which obstruct the establishment of truly fraternal societies. Such behavior will cease only through the charity that finds in every man a "neighbor," a brother.
1932 The duty of making oneself a neighbor to others and actively serving them becomes even more urgent when it involves the disadvantaged, in whatever area this may be. "As you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me."38
1933 This same duty extends to those who think or act differently from us. The teaching of Christ goes so far as to require the forgiveness of offenses. He extends the commandment of love, which is that of the New Law, to all enemies.39 Liberation in the spirit of the Gospel is incompatible with hatred of one's enemy as a person, but not with hatred of the evil that he does as an enemy.

1936 On coming into the world, man is not equipped with everything he needs for developing his bodily and spiritual life. He needs others. Differences appear tied to age, physical abilities, intellectual or moral aptitudes, the benefits derived from social commerce, and the distribution of wealth.41 The "talents" are not distributed equally.42
1937 These differences belong to God's plan, who wills that each receive what he needs from others, and that those endowed with particular "talents" share the benefits with those who need them. These differences encourage and often oblige persons to practice generosity, kindness, and sharing of goods; they foster the mutual enrichment of cultures:

1939 The principle of solidarity, also articulated in terms of "friendship" or "social charity," is a direct demand of human and Christian brotherhood.45

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/ar...s1c2a3.htm

It would seem that one can be inspired to develop a profound and sincere care for their neighbor... without s/he ultimately possessing an ulterior motive, namely, seeking to win that person's soul over to the kingdom... that is, unless we actually accept Jesus in the other half of his moods, not the picturesque Christ in Sunday school who sits children on his lap while gentle little lambs gather around, but those precious moments spent of his short life wherein he wandered about, raving about the imminent Day of Judgment.

Do they just... pretend that part was lost in time as it should have been? (Your friends, I mean -- clearly the Vatican Church doesn't.)

Quote:Atheism

2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."

2124 The name "atheism" covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man's hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60

2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."

2128 Agnosticism can sometimes include a certain search for God, but it can equally express indifferentism, a flight from the ultimate question of existence, and a sluggish moral conscience. Agnosticism is all too often equivalent to practical atheism.

2134 The first commandment summons man to believe in God, to hope in him, and to love him above all else.

2140 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the first commandment.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/ar...s2c1a1.htm

The First Commandment

2089 "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/ar...s2c1a1.htm

Hell

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

1034 Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna" of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.614 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"615 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"616

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/ar...123a12.htm

(November 1, 2016 at 11:03 pm)Mudhammam Wrote: It would seem that one can be inspired to develop a profound and sincere care for their neighbor... without s/he ultimately possessing an ulterior motive, namely, seeking to win that person's soul over to the kingdom... that is, unless we actually accept Jesus in the other half of his moods, not the picturesque Christ in Sunday school who sits children on his lap while gentle little lambs gather around, but those precious moments spent of his short life wherein he wandered about, raving about the imminent Day of Judgment.

Do they just... pretend that part was lost in time as it should have been?

Quote:Atheism

2123 "Many . . . of our contemporaries either do not at all perceive, or explicitly reject, this intimate and vital bond of man to God. Atheism must therefore be regarded as one of the most serious problems of our time."

2124 The name "atheism" covers many very different phenomena. One common form is the practical materialism which restricts its needs and aspirations to space and time. Atheistic humanism falsely considers man to be "an end to himself, and the sole maker, with supreme control, of his own history."59 Another form of contemporary atheism looks for the liberation of man through economic and social liberation. "It holds that religion, of its very nature, thwarts such emancipation by raising man's hopes in a future life, thus both deceiving him and discouraging him from working for a better form of life on earth."60

2125 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the virtue of religion.61 The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances. "Believers can have more than a little to do with the rise of atheism. To the extent that they are careless about their instruction in the faith, or present its teaching falsely, or even fail in their religious, moral, or social life, they must be said to conceal rather than to reveal the true nature of God and of religion."

2128 Agnosticism can sometimes include a certain search for God, but it can equally express indifferentism, a flight from the ultimate question of existence, and a sluggish moral conscience. Agnosticism is all too often equivalent to practical atheism.

2134 The first commandment summons man to believe in God, to hope in him, and to love him above all else.

2140 Since it rejects or denies the existence of God, atheism is a sin against the first commandment.

The First Commandment

2089 "Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same; apostasy is the total repudiation of the Christian faith; schism is the refusal of submission to the Roman Pontiff or of communion with the members of the Church subject to him."

Hell

1033 We cannot be united with God unless we freely choose to love him. But we cannot love God if we sin gravely against him, against our neighbor or against ourselves: "He who does not love remains in death. Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him."612 Our Lord warns us that we shall be separated from him if we fail to meet the serious needs of the poor and the little ones who are his brethren.613 To die in mortal sin without repenting and accepting God's merciful love means remaining separated from him for ever by our own free choice. This state of definitive self-exclusion from communion with God and the blessed is called "hell."

1034 Jesus often speaks of "Gehenna" of "the unquenchable fire" reserved for those who to the end of their lives refuse to believe and be converted, where both soul and body can be lost.614 Jesus solemnly proclaims that he "will send his angels, and they will gather . . . all evil doers, and throw them into the furnace of fire,"615 and that he will pronounce the condemnation: "Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire!"616

1035 The teaching of the Church affirms the existence of hell and its eternity. Immediately after death the souls of those who die in a state of mortal sin descend into hell, where they suffer the punishments of hell, "eternal fire."617 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separation from God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he longs.

1036 The affirmations of Sacred Scripture and the teachings of the Church on the subject of hell are a call to the responsibility incumbent upon man to make use of his freedom in view of his eternal destiny. They are at the same time an urgent call to conversion: "Enter by the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is easy, that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. For the gate is narrow and the way is hard, that leads to life, and those who find it are few."

We have our moral laws that we believe we should follow. But no where in church teaching will it say we shouldn't be kind and respectful to those who don't (and as I've shown you, it says the opposite), nor should we claim to know or judge the state of soul of another person. So again, showing tolerance and affection to non Catholics is not contrary to my faith. There is no ulterior motive. We are taught to treat others with respect because every person has inherent human dignity.

(November 1, 2016 at 11:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: We have our moral laws that we believe we should follow. But no where in church teaching will it say we shouldn't be kind and respectful to those who don't (and as I've shown you, it says the opposite), nor should we claim to know or judge the state of soul of another person. So again, showing tolerance and affection to non Catholics is not contrary to my faith. There is no ulterior motive. We are taught to treat others with respect because every person has inherent human dignity.

Do you, as a Catholic, believe that there is inherent human dignity in each person *and* that the taint of unrepentant mortal sin -- which includes such benign offenses as unbelief or anything else -- warrants the penalty of eternal suffering for that person should they die? How do you reconcile the two concepts, the inherent human dignity, as you called it, and the torment that they supposedly deserve for being, well, human?

(November 1, 2016 at 11:45 pm)Mudhammam Wrote:

(November 1, 2016 at 11:24 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: We have our moral laws that we believe we should follow. But no where in church teaching will it say we shouldn't be kind and respectful to those who don't (and as I've shown you, it says the opposite), nor should we claim to know or judge the state of soul of another person. So again, showing tolerance and affection to non Catholics is not contrary to my faith. There is no ulterior motive. We are taught to treat others with respect because every person has inherent human dignity.

Do you, as a Catholic, believe that there is inherent human dignity in each person *and* that the taint of unrepentant mortal sin -- which includes such benign offenses as unbelief or anything else -- warrants the penalty of eternal suffering for that person should they die?  How do you reconcile the two concepts, the inherent human dignity, as you called it, and the torment that they supposedly deserve for being, well, human?

A very fair question. 

It may sound extremely simplistic to say "if you are in a state of mortal sin when you die, you go to Hell", and to leave it at that without fully explaining what exactly that means. Truth is it goes much deeper than that. That line does not give justice to the complexity and depth of this issue.  

First the important thing to understand is that for a sin to be "mortal" it needs to meet certain criteria. Circumstances play a huge role, and it's crucial that the person who commits the serious sin, does so with full knowledge and consent of the will. In short, for a serious sin to become a mortal sin, it needs to be a deliberate rejection of God. Those who do not believe that God exist cannot fully reject Him in that same sense, because how can you fully and deliberately reject something you don't believe exists in the first place? That's where we equate God with goodness and love. We believe God IS goodness and love. So if a person rejects those things by choosing to be bad, hateful, hurtful people, they are rejecting God. That schism is what Hell is and it is chosen by the person himself by choosing to reject goodness and love, thus rejecting God, who is those things. 

It is also important to note that while the CCC says rejecting/denying belief in God is a sin, it quickly says "The imputability of this offense can be significantly diminished in virtue of the intentions and the circumstances." We recognize that it can be outside of a person's control if they genuinely just don't think God is real.     

As for more about Hell, I wrote a thread about it here:  http://atheistforums.org/thread-35781.html

Hopefully this helps explain how we reconcile inherent human dignity while also believing there is such a thing as Hell.

In your view, it doesn't seem that one's acceptance or rejection into Heaven has as much to do with what one believes, as that which one does... Do I have that right? So, Catholic heaven just might be filled with more pagans, atheists, heretics, and even blasphemers than it is with Catholics, and the latter, although they professed faith in the Apostles and the Pope, just might predominate in hell, after the intentions and surrounding circumstances of each person are weighed... If that's the case, what was the point of the virgin birth, miracles, death, resurrection, ascension, etc.?

Mudhammam Wrote:Unless English isn't your first language, Agenda, you really have no excuse for failing to understand the work that parentheses do.

Here is your statement sans parentheses:

The whole "if you're militant against religion and the bullshit its missionaries try to spin, then you must be a big meanie who doesn't see these deceived folk as people" is just dishonest trash, I'm ashamed for those, some of whom I have considered to be among the brightest members here, that seem to be falling for it.

I expected that in this case, parentheses (insert silly remark about how "not all X act as proselytizers" or "the Christians I know don't proselytize") were supposed to do the work of providing examples or clarification of the sort of statements you regard as dishonest trash, not providing example of statements that you wouldn't consider dishonest trash. What work were you actually trying to have them (the parentheses) do?

I don't think you can dispute that you called the statement 'The Christians I know don't proselytize' a silly remark (as you did so within the same parentheses). Why don't you think it's dishonest trash as well? Why did you include a statement that you don't consider dishonest trash parenthetically in a statement about what you consider to be dishonest trash in a way that doesn't make it clear that you're contrasting it with the rest of your statement?