(November 7, 2017 at 10:15 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote:

(November 7, 2017 at 2:29 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: Atlas: yes, I have Muslim friends. I am well aware that Muslims and many Christian denominations believe I will go to Hell for being Catholic.

I can be of its inhabitants in the afterlife, anybody can, and nobody knows is written for sure to be of its citizens. That's how it is in Islam.
According to Catholic tradition; I assume I want be accepted in heaven too since I don't accept Jesus -peace be upon him- to be the Lord; God.

No, we don't teach that in Catholicism.

---

(November 7, 2017 at 10:49 pm)The Gentleman Bastard Wrote:

(November 7, 2017 at 9:20 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: That's par for the course.

So, do you believe a truly repentant murderer or rapist who asks and receives forgiveness from your gawd gets into heaven? Do you believe that those who do not believe in your gawd don't get it? If you believe both of those things, then you seem to interpret your faith exactly as Khem stated.

I believe the first thing, so long as the rapist's/murder's heart truly changes and he is fully repentant. I don't know that that's possible, but in theory, if it did happen, of course God would forgive.

I don't believe the second thing. Once a person dies and sees God, they then know He exists and have the opportunity to accept or reject Him. Hell is a continuous state of rejecting God.

Whateverist Wrote:So perhaps what you're calling objective morality is what we normals acknowledge as morally permissible or not.

Is killing innocents morally permissible? No? Then why do you fund bombings that kill innocents?... The problem with "what we normals acknowledge as morally permissible or not" is it's bendable because we created it. One minute it's not okay to murder innocent babies, next minute it is, but if you look at objective morality it can't change for our purpose, it's the same from the beginning of time to the end of time because that's what God intended for us so you can't really "bend the rules" because the rules is God's will and we don't get to change God's will, in the other case ("what we normals acknowledge as morally permissible or not") it is not God's will it is OUR will ie, it's humans will and humans are subject to evil, so by effect what we acknowledge as morally permissible can also change and it can also change for the worse.

Edit: Also a answer for Mr.Wizard that asked a question earlier

(November 7, 2017 at 6:40 pm)Khemikal Wrote:

(November 7, 2017 at 6:31 pm)Mathilda Wrote: OK well at least I know what you are getting at now.

Personally I think that this is overthinking it. The discussion is about whether morality is objective or subjective and it's very easy to take it out of scope. These are common place terms, not strict scientific definitions. But as with anything philosophical, disagreement always seems to come when people apply a different scope for the definitions that they use. My yardstick is whether a definition is useful. I am not particularly interested in arguing semantics and fleshing out at what point a concept is no longer useful.

Me thinking about shit is overthinking by reference to the average christer by default.  They want to talk to us about pixies.  Sometimes, I want a more substantive discussion. 

I quite understand· Sometimes one wants a conversation with the adults without the children interrupting about how their favourite superhero will save the day.  

If it helps, I wrote a post on TTA back in 2014 about how subjective and objective were of limited use when talking about morality, but all the theists ignored it. I might stick with this in the future rather than push that it is only subjective.

Quote:Is morality subjective or objective? The question does not make sense.
...
Morality is by definition subjective but we can apply objective methods for determining what is consistent with our morality. But it gets more complicated than that when we ask why we have the feelings and emotions telling us what is good and bad. Because we have evolved them. The problem is that this is now out of scope of the original question. You can no longer apply the words 'subjective' or 'objective' to the process that gave us personal feelings, tastes and opinions.

(November 7, 2017 at 11:22 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(November 7, 2017 at 10:15 pm)AtlasS33 Wrote: I can be of its inhabitants in the afterlife, anybody can, and nobody knows is written for sure to be of its citizens. That's how it is in Islam.
According to Catholic tradition; I assume I want be accepted in heaven too since I don't accept Jesus -peace be upon him- to be the Lord; God.

No, we don't teach that in Catholicism.

Yes; you do:
http://christinprophecy.org/articles/whe...saved-die/

Quote:Those from Hades are going to be judged based on their works, but without the saving work of Jesus Christ — the only work that matters, they will be found wanting. God’s the perfect litmus test, and so no matter how good our works have been, they just cannot add up to God’s standard of perfection. Everyone who tells you that you have to work your way to Heaven is lying to you, because the Bible says otherwise in Ephesians 2:8-9. Jesus’ work on the cross is the only work that matters, and our response in faith.

3) Hell
When they are all found guilty, their next and final destination is a place called Hell. Revelation 20:14-15 explains that awful sentence of condemnation, “Then death and Hades were thrown into the Lake of Fire.” The Lake of Fire is called the Second Death. If anyone’s name was not found written in the books of Life, they will be thrown into the Lake of Fire.

https://www.catholicculture.org/culture/...ecnum=4275

Quote:Looking At The Evidence

Turning to Scripture, we find the doctrine of eternal damnation to be one of the most persistent themes in the New Testament, especially in the teaching of Christ himself. The Old Testament has little about life after death, but even there grim warnings are given of retribution for sin. The book of Daniel predicts: "Many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt."[size=undefined]1[/size]

Our Lord declares: " . . . whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin."[size=undefined]2[/size] He tells us that on the Last Day many will remind him they had done mighty works in his name, but he will say to them: "I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers."[size=undefined]3[/size] He warns his disciples: " . . . fear him who can destroy both body and soul in hell."[size=undefined]4[/size] He declares that it is better " . . . to enter life maimed than with two hands to go to hell, to the unquenchable fire."[size=undefined]5[/size] He adds that in hell ". . . their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched."[size=undefined]6[/size] The parable of the net holding good and bad fish ends with the statement that the angels will separate the evil from the good "and throw them into the furnace of fire; there men will weep and gnash their teeth."[size=undefined]7[/size] The same fate for the wicked is given in the parable of the tares and the wheat.[size=undefined]8[/size]

But it's not cool to say it during preaching to non-christians; so you prefer to not open the topic. Old crusaders and some extremists use it to scare people into the faith.
Sunni and Shiite twelver Muslims do it too.

Give people what they want to hear. That's the rule of the game.

(November 7, 2017 at 10:24 pm)MysticKnight Wrote:

(November 7, 2017 at 10:22 pm)Khemikal Wrote: No...no, wait a minute..Allah didn't do any of that shit.  That was us.

Yes, exactly, just like Pharaoh forced God to destroy him, and evil was from Pharaoh and not God.

It's good you are starting to understand.

I just love the way religiousites want to give their particular flavor of gawd all the credit for creating the universe, but are unwilling to pass over any of the guilt for the evil done in that universe. Who do they believe created it? All of it, not just parts of it. "Oh, but free will" they'll argue. Who, according to them, knowing beforehand exactly what would happen if it gave out free will? Who was it that completely, perfectly understood quantum mechanics and allegedly couldn't give a naked woman enough will power along with her free will to tell a talking snake to piss off?

If gawd created everything, it created Satan and it created evil, either directly or as an indirect result of something else, it created everything that we call evil..

@Atlass
It's pointless to refer to the bible or what jesus says..thats not what a catholic sees as the final authority on the matter.  Non sola scriptura.  You want authority..you go to catechism.

Quote: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."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separationfrom God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he .

Well lookey there, hell is eternal, and eternal fire...no less.  Being in mortal sin at death, like being an atheist...is what get's you tossed in there...and I don't see anything about having been a rapist.  

The repentant rapist goes to heaven.  Myself, and the little girl who dies in mortal sin while being raped...we burn.  Forever.

Amen.

(November 7, 2017 at 10:54 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Elephant in the room, you can derive God from his name in so many ways.

To do so in any way whatsoever would be absurd. Why not just yank god like a prize from a box of Cracker jacks?

(November 7, 2017 at 10:54 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: You can just assess love and it would lead you to God.

How about if I put a tax on peevishness, I'll bet that's as good a way as any to find god, right?

(November 7, 2017 at 10:54 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: You can asses evil and responsibility and it would lead you to God.

You can assess beauty and it would lead you to God.

You can assess value and praise, etc...

When your standard for justification is this low you're just, well ..

---

(November 7, 2017 at 11:47 pm)Khemikal Wrote: @Atlass
It's pointless to refer to the bible or what jesus says..thats not what a catholic sees as the final authority on the matter.  Non sola scriptura.  You want authority..you go to catechism.

Quote: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."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separationfrom God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he .

Well lookey there, hell is eternal, and eternal fire...no less.  Being in mortal sin at death, like being an atheist...is what get's you tossed in there...and I don't see anything about having been a rapist.  

Eternal? That seems overly pessimistic. I don't see how the sin of atheism and all that wouldn't all burn off in a couple of millennia tops. After that, with a shiny clean soul, god would want me at the table where He can admire his image in my shine.

(November 7, 2017 at 11:35 pm)Mathilda Wrote: I quite understand· Sometimes one wants a conversation with the adults without the children interrupting about how their favourite superhero will save the day.  

Hell, he's not even riding in to save the day in this thread.  Just handing out goodies...to some of us, at least, but not always to the people who've suffered.   

Quote:If it helps, I wrote a post on TTA back in 2014 about how subjective and objective were of limited use when talking about morality, but all the theists ignored it. I might stick with this in the future rather than push that it is only subjective.

Quote:Is morality subjective or objective? The question does not make sense.
...
Morality is by definition subjective but we can apply objective methods for determining what is consistent with our morality. But it gets more complicated than that when we ask why we have the feelings and emotions telling us what is good and bad. Because we have evolved them. The problem is that this is now out of scope of the original question. You can no longer apply the words 'subjective' or 'objective' to the process that gave us personal feelings, tastes and opinions.

An objective moral theorist would make -minor- alterations.  That human beings as moral agents are necessarily subjective, and hold many disparate subjective moral opinions, but that this doesn't mean that morality is subjective by definition, meaningfully subjective, or that none of our moral claims could be objective.

(November 7, 2017 at 11:47 pm)Khemikal Wrote: @Atlass
It's pointless to refer to the bible or what jesus says..thats not what a catholic sees as the final authority on the matter.  Non sola scriptura.  You want authority..you go to catechism.

Quote: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."615 The chief punishment of hell is eternal separationfrom God, in whom alone man can possess the life and happiness for which he was created and for which he .

Well lookey there, hell is eternal, and eternal fire...no less.  Being in mortal sin at death, like being an atheist...is what get's you tossed in there...and I don't see anything about having been a rapist.  

The repentant rapist goes to heaven.  Myself, and the little girl who dies in mortal sin while being raped...we burn.  Forever.

Amen.

If the holy book is believed to be "coming from God", then why do I need the pope or the doctrine written by priests and monks? I should read what claimed to be the word of God directly. Why put a mediator between me and heaven?

It's class A dodging of questions; giving the Church full control over peoples' lives

(November 7, 2017 at 11:34 pm)pool the matey Wrote: Is killing innocents morally permissible? No? Then why do you fund bombings that kill innocents?... The problem with "what we normals acknowledge as morally permissible or not" is it's bendable because we created it. One minute it's not okay to murder innocent babies, next minute it is, but if you look at objective morality it can't change for our purpose, it's the same from the beginning of time to the end of time because that's what God intended for us so you can't really "bend the rules" because the rules is God's will and we don't get to change God's will, in the other case ("what we normals acknowledge as morally permissible or not") it is not God's will it is OUR will ie, it's humans will and humans are subject to evil, so by effect what we acknowledge as morally permissible can also change and it can also change for the worse.

Edit: Also a answer for Mr.Wizard that asked a question earlier

The more you tell me about god and his rules and intentions the more you express a subjective moral framework.  It doesn;t matter whether or not he changes his mind...that just makes it an eternally inflexible subjective morality.  

An objective morality, on the other hand..would -have- to change if some previously unknown and relevant fact came to light.

In any case, your god kills innocents with a certain amount of enthusiasm.