(January 31, 2017 at 5:37 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: If you don't mind, I'd like to jump in on this one. Sin is its own punishment. People are already being punished in this way everyday, not just in the distant future. The issue is whether or not you choose to be delivered from the power of sin over the whole of your life, both now and in the hereafter.

If sin is its own punishment then what does that mean in practice? Christians maintain that lustful thoughts are a sin, and yet, you can have a lustful fantasy, and be totally unaffected afterwards with no perceptible punishment in this life. In spite of this Christians (Catholics in particular) maintain that this sin is a grave matter and can in itself condemn you to an eternity in Hell. So you get a token imperceptible punishment in this life, but unimaginable suffering as punishment in the next!? I don't see how this conception of punishment for sin is substantially that much different from belief in bad luck.

As the old superstition goes, you'll get seven years of bad luck for breaking a mirror, but what does that mean in practice? Well nothing, but if you believe that sort of thing any bad thing that happens to you can be attributed to you breaking the mirror. In the case of sin acting as its own punishment in this life, any misfortune that befalls you (internal or external) can be attributed to "breaking the mirror" by committing any sin from A-Z.

And just to return to my original point, even if we grant what you're saying here, I don't see how it changes my core concern. Not being convinced by the gospel is considered by Christians to be an act of injustice on my part. I have wronged God by my disbelief, I have failed in some crucial moral duty. Now you can frame it however you like, claiming that I'm punished by my disbelief in this life by not opening myself up to the supposed benefits of the gospel, but ultimately, it still holds true according to Christians, that on my judgement day, God will reckon my unbelief as a sin, an act of injustice against him, and see fit to have me suffer in eternity for it.

(January 31, 2017 at 5:17 pm)Faith No More Wrote: Well, how do you think Yahweh started?  If you think that theists didn't originally imagine him as a bearded superhero in the sky whipping lightning bolts just like Zeus, you're sadly mistaken.  It's only with scientific advances that they suddenly re-imagined him as an immaterial entity outside of space and time.  Don't be fooled by theists like Chad's attempts at revising the intentions of the original writers.

No I actually do believe that's how Yahweh got started. The OT is a mixed bag to me, it was written much later than the events it alleges to chronicle, but I believe it at times does capture the attitudes and beliefs of the ancient Hebrews as leftovers from oral tradition. For example, I think it's clear that the ancient Hebrews believed in many gods, but that Yahweh was THEIR god. Moreover I think they also believed that Yahweh was very much like how other religions viewed their gods, like a superhero. Overtime though these beliefs went away; monotheism was adopted and the idea of god became more abstract, less anthropomorphic. I just don't like getting bogged down in the god debate on topics like this because even if we just assumed a god exists, it does nothing to detract from the specific criticisms I'm making about Christianity as a religion. Using arguments about god's existence in general are often employed as the first line of defense by the religious when it comes to responding to criticisms specific to their religions as a way to take the heat off of their particular doctrines and make the debate more general.

(January 31, 2017 at 12:54 pm)SteveII Wrote: Because salvation (or lack thereof) is not a moral issue. It is a legal issue (judgement, payment for sin, substitution, penalty, etc. are all key words).

If it's not a moral issue, then does that mean there is no sin in refusing to believe? If so, how do you reconcile this with the NT wherein Jesus tells his disciples to shake the dust from their feet when faced with unbelievers who don't embrace their message? If they had done no wrong, why would Jesus tell his followers to perform this gesture of condemnation, in addition to telling them that their punishment on Judgement Day will be worse than what Sodom and Gomorrah received by God's hand?

(January 31, 2017 at 5:37 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: Buzzzzz. Sorry, FNM, no cigar for you! YHVH is the acronym for the way God identified himself to Moses, not by name but by His divine nature - "I am that I am". Sounds pretty consistent with a Being Whose Existence is identical to His Essence. Doesn't get more original than Exodus 3:14.

Oh, is that how he came down and wrestled with Jacob? With his essence?

(January 29, 2017 at 5:10 pm)Redoubtable Wrote: There's a lot of debate nowadays between Christians and skeptics over whether faith is a good or rational basis for belief and it seems that generally speaking Christians today (more so than in the past) are so timid to the point of just wanting to have the foundation of faith tolerated as a basis for belief and not mocked.

To me the peculiar thing about this is that up until very recently Christianity was saturated in an arrogance that still exists, but is not nearly articulated as much as it used to be, and this arrogance is basically that it is not only reasonable to have faith in their religion, but that we have a moral obligation to have faith in their religion.

It would be one thing to say: "I know we can't really prove the truth of our religion and that it requires faith, but if you simply aren't convinced of Christianity, it won't be held against you, no harm no foul". In reality however the Christian message is essentially this: "You owe us your belief, you owe it to us to have faith in our religion in all of its aspects and obey it in every respect it demands obedience in; if you fail to fulfill this moral obligation you will suffer unimaginable horrors for all eternity."

Christians still believe this today but often try to camouflage this fundamental arrogance in Christianity by appealing to pluralistic ideals, saying you don't have to believe if you don't want to and can believe or disbelieve what you like (leaving out the part that God is apparently so offended by this unbelief that you will be tormented for eternity).

Coming to this realization was one of the biggest moments in my de-conversion process as I actually started getting quite angry at the thought that I was being needlessly controlled by a Church that impressed upon me from childhood the idea that I owed them everything. The onus was on me to give the Church my faith, and my obedience in all things they demanded, and to surrender my future and all it would entail, even to the extent of surrendering my own future children by handing them over to the rites and indoctrination of the Church, repeating the process over again in a new generation. 

Ultimately, when one is trapped in such a web of religious arrogance, it is a revolutionary act simply to say: no, the onus is not on me to have faith in what you say and I don't owe you my belief. The onus is on you to provide reasons for belief that justify the extraordinary claims and demands your religion places on people.

You were a Catholic, and being "demanded to worship"? That is very far-fetched! I've been a Catholic most of my life, and the Catholic religions is one of the most tolerant and docile faiths to belong to!

Unless of course you are talking about the 50's or early 60's? As a matter of fact..... many Christian religions are pretty much over the "fire and brimstone" preaching of the past! Its very, very "Love" orientated these days! And the different Christian faiths are bringing in tons of young people who don't respond well to the "gloom and doom" scenario.

I think you should at least check out a few of the Christian faith services these days to get a better understanding of what's going on before spreading anymore of this misinformation!

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: You were a Catholic, and being "demanded to worship"? That is very far-fetched!

No.. it's not far-fetched at all. The Catholic Church demands that everyone become Catholic, meaning that everyone has a moral obligation to become Catholic and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. You can't force anyone to actually believe, but the demand to believe is still there. This is Catholicism 101, saying that no one has an obligation to become a Catholic is literal heresy in the eyes of the Church.

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: I've been a Catholic most of my life, and the Catholic religions is one of the most tolerant and docile faiths to belong to!

It is mostly docile and superficially tolerant today, now that is has had most of its former political power taken away from it, but that's not how things always were.

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: I think you should at least check out a few of the Christian faith services these days to get a better understanding of what's going on before spreading anymore of this misinformation!

Nothing I said was misinformation. If you're going to accuse me of spreading misinformation, point out where you think I'm misinformed.

(February 1, 2017 at 5:43 pm)Redoubtable Wrote:

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: You were a Catholic, and being "demanded to worship"? That is very far-fetched!

No.. it's not far-fetched at all. The Catholic Church demands that everyone become Catholic, meaning that everyone has a moral obligation to become Catholic and believe all that the Catholic Church teaches. You can't force anyone to actually believe, but the demand to believe is still there. This is Catholicism 101, saying that no one has an obligation to become a Catholic is literal heresy in the eyes of the Church.

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: I've been a Catholic most of my life, and the Catholic religions is one of the most tolerant and docile faiths to belong to!

It is mostly docile and superficially tolerant today, now that is has had most of its former political power taken away from it, but that's not how things always were.

(February 1, 2017 at 4:59 pm)ronedee Wrote: I think you should at least check out a few of the Christian faith services these days to get a better understanding of what's going on before spreading anymore of this misinformation!

Nothing I said was misinformation. If you're going to accuse me of spreading misinformation, point out where you think I'm misinformed.

Pretty much your whole presentation is bullshit. I'm very active in the Catholic church, and have not witnessed your claims, even once.
And I've been north, south, east & west. The Catholic church is the McDonald's of the religious world. They are all the same. And unless you
are there now, you are shooting blind. So don't tell me what is going on! I'M THERE!

Also I have many friends and dealings with protestants, members and their services. They now have a youth movement that is enormous! We Catholics wish we could draw the numbers they are getting! Its a different world out there, and everything has changed. Again, you have absolutely no dealings with these religions, and are disseminating false information. 

The burden of proof is on you. You are making the accusations. Stick to bashing TV Evangelicals..... its an easy target!

Well, guys... everyone's experience is going to be different. People here are talking about what happened to them in the past. I think it's pretty ridiculous to just dismiss them as liars. I'm not suggesting anyone should believe them without question, but it doesn't make it untrue if it's different to your experiences.

If such things don't go on anymore, or go on less, then that is progress and we should be happy

I've heard from lots of people who have had horrible experiences in religion. That doesn't automatically make religion bad, but neither is it reasonable to assume these are all just made-up stories. Religions comprise of humans, and humans sometimes do horrible things.

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: Pretty much your whole presentation is bullshit. I'm very active in the Catholic church, and have not witnessed your claims, even once.

I'm really starting to doubt you know anything about the doctrines of your Church. You're just presenting anecdotal evidence of your own personal experience which has absolutely no bearing on what the actual doctrines of the Church are. I can tell you're offended, claiming I'm BSing, but if you would just do a little bit of research you would see how clearly wrong you are about what the Catholic Church teaches on this issue.

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: The burden of proof is on you. You are making the accusations. Stick to bashing TV Evangelicals..... its an easy target!

Yeah, it is, and providing evidence that the Catholic Church demands we believe in it is a piece of cake. Pay attention especially to that last quote from Vatican II because it unequivocally states that men have a moral duty to become Catholic, that God demands we become Catholic. That's exactly what I've been saying the entire time and yet you incomprehensibly dispute this.

Pope Boniface VIII in Unam Sanctum:

"We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. One is she of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her' (Canticle of Canticles 6:8); which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism' (Ephesians 4:5). Certainly Noah had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect to one cubit having one ruler and guide, namely Noah, outside of which we read all living things were destroyed… We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

Ecumenical Council of Florence's Cantate Domino:

"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."

Vatican II's Lumen Gentium: "They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it."

Vatican II's Dignitatis Humanae: "Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ."

Case closed. That last quote especially, it clearly states that men have a moral duty to become Catholic, ie they are demanded by God to join the Catholic Church. This proves my point exactly, so rather than claim I'm BSing, I suggest you read up on the teachings of your Church.

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: Again, you have absolutely no dealings with these religions, and are disseminating false information.

Again I'll challenge you, if I'm a disseminating false information tell me what is false. You have not once challenged a single claim I've made. You just claim what I'm saying isn't true without providing any rebuttal on any specific thing I've said.

(February 2, 2017 at 8:47 am)Redoubtable Wrote:

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: Pretty much your whole presentation is bullshit. I'm very active in the Catholic church, and have not witnessed your claims, even once.

I'm really starting to doubt you know anything about the doctrines of your Church. You're just presenting anecdotal evidence of your own personal experience which has absolutely no bearing on what the actual doctrines of the Church are. I can tell you're offended, claiming  I'm BSing, but if you would just do a little bit of research you would see how clearly wrong you are about what the Catholic Church teaches on this issue.

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: The burden of proof is on you. You are making the accusations. Stick to bashing TV Evangelicals..... its an easy target!

Yeah, it is, and providing evidence that the Catholic Church demands we believe in it is a piece of cake. Pay attention especially to that last quote from Vatican II because it unequivocally states that men have a moral duty to become Catholic, that God demands we become Catholic. That's exactly what I've been saying the entire time and yet you incomprehensibly dispute this.

Pope Boniface VIII in Unam Sanctum:

"We are compelled in virtue of our faith to believe and maintain that there is only one holy Catholic Church, and that one is apostolic. This we firmly believe and profess without qualification. Outside this Church there is no salvation and no remission of sins, the Spouse in the Canticle proclaiming: 'One is my dove, my perfect one. One is she of her mother, the chosen of her that bore her' (Canticle of Canticles 6:8); which represents the one mystical body whose head is Christ, of Christ indeed, as God. And in this, 'one Lord, one faith, one baptism' (Ephesians 4:5). Certainly Noah had one ark at the time of the flood, prefiguring one Church which perfect to one cubit having one ruler and guide, namely Noah, outside of which we read all living things were destroyed… We declare, say, define, and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff."

Ecumenical Council of Florence's Cantate Domino:

"The most Holy Roman Church firmly believes, professes and preaches that none of those existing outside the Catholic Church, not only pagans, but also Jews and heretics and schismatics, can have a share in life eternal; but that they will go into the "eternal fire which was prepared for the devil and his angels" (Matthew 25:41), unless before death they are joined with Her; and that so important is the unity of this ecclesiastical body that only those remaining within this unity can profit by the sacraments of the Church unto salvation, and they alone can receive an eternal recompense for their fasts, their almsgivings, their other works of Christian piety and the duties of a Christian soldier. No one, let his almsgiving be as great as it may, no one, even if he pour out his blood for the Name of Christ, can be saved, unless he remain within the bosom and the unity of the Catholic Church."

Vatican II's Lumen Gentium: "They could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it, or to remain in it."

Vatican II's Dignitatis Humanae: "Religious freedom, in turn, which men demand as necessary to fulfill their duty to worship God, has to do with immunity from coercion in civil society. Therefore it leaves untouched traditional Catholic doctrine on the moral duty of men and societies toward the true religion and toward the one Church of Christ."

Case closed. That last quote especially, it clearly states that men have a moral duty to become Catholic, ie they are demanded by God to join the Catholic Church. This proves my point exactly, so rather than claim I'm BSing, I suggest you read up on the teachings of your Church.

(February 2, 2017 at 3:04 am)ronedee Wrote: Again, you have absolutely no dealings with these religions, and are disseminating false information.

Again I'll challenge you, if I'm a disseminating false information tell me what is false. You have not once challenged a single claim I've made. You just claim what I'm saying isn't true without providing any rebuttal on any specific thing I've said.

Rules , Laws and Doctrine aside............. No one in the RCC is holding a gun to anyone's head. The doors have no locks, and swing both ways. And with the advent of Pope Francis, the RCC has never been more liberal. There are more and MORE diverse members these days as ever before and that's FACT!

Give it up pal. You are just digging the hole deeper. I suggest you take a look for yourself, instead of 2nd, 3rd and 5th hand. There's plenty of seats.

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote: Rules , Laws and Doctrine aside.............

So basically the entire religion aside? You've really got to be joking.

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote:  No one in the RCC is holding a gun to anyone's head. The doors have no locks, and swing both ways.

And no one ever said they were... All I said was that the RCC demands belief, and this is true. The Church teaches as I have demonstrated that everyone has a moral obligation to become Catholic, this is a demand placed on a person. This is what the entire thread has been about, no one took "demands belief" to mean they have a gun to your head. This is a ludicrous straw man argument.

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote: Give it up pal. You are just digging the hole deeper. I suggest you take a look for yourself, instead of 2nd, 3rd and 5th hand. There's plenty of seats.

Yes, I keep digging deeper.... at least deeper when it comes to assisting you in digging your own grave on this argument, because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

You have demonstrated you don't know what your church teaches or don't seem to care with your waving off of doctrine, you say I'm stating falsehoods when nothing I said has been disproved by you, and then you offer up a straw man argument for good measure. For your own sake I highly suggest you take a break and learn a bit more about your religion.

(February 2, 2017 at 5:03 pm)Redoubtable Wrote:

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote: Rules , Laws and Doctrine aside.............

So basically the entire religion aside? You've really got to be joking.

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote:  No one in the RCC is holding a gun to anyone's head. The doors have no locks, and swing both ways.

And no one ever said they were... All I said was that the RCC demands belief, and this is true. The Church teaches as I have demonstrated that everyone has a moral obligation to become Catholic, this is a demand placed on a person. This is what the entire thread has been about, no one took "demands belief" to mean they have a gun to your head. This is a ludicrous straw man argument.

(February 2, 2017 at 10:54 am)ronedee Wrote: Give it up pal. You are just digging the hole deeper. I suggest you take a look for yourself, instead of 2nd, 3rd and 5th hand. There's plenty of seats.

Yes, I keep digging deeper.... at least deeper when it comes to assisting you in digging your own grave on this argument, because you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

You have demonstrated you don't know what your church teaches or don't seem to care with your waving off of doctrine, you say I'm stating falsehoods when nothing I said has been disproved by you, and then you offer up a straw man argument for good measure. For your own sake I highly suggest you take a break and learn a bit more about your religion.

Blah blah blaaaaah! Too late to save face pal. I know the RCC doctrine better than most here. I live it! No where does it demand anything from anyone. I tire of your exercise in futility.