(June 18, 2015 at 1:31 am)Neimenovic Wrote:

(June 18, 2015 at 1:14 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: I am really sorry you've had such a bad experience and I'm really sorry the Church has failed you.

Don't apologize for others. It hasn't 'failed' me. It hurt my brain.

I know people say that to me a lot here, and I appreciate it. But I feel like as Christians we need to take responsibility for our failures. Yes, it was technically "others" but we are all part of the same group together and I feel like we need to take responsibility for the times we fell short.

(June 18, 2015 at 1:56 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(June 18, 2015 at 1:31 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Don't apologize for others. It hasn't 'failed' me. It hurt my brain.

I know people say that to me a lot here, and I appreciate it. But I feel like as Christians we need to take responsibility for our failures. Yes, it was technically "others" but we are all part of the same group together and I feel like we need to take responsibility for the times we fell short.

I hate to post and run, but I really need to go to bed.  But before I do, I'd like to know how you square your sentiment that we need to take responsibility for our failures with the notion of vicarious redemption.  Please take a look at the Christopher Hitchens quote in Rhythm's signature.  If you think Hitchens is wrong to express repugnance at the idea of vicarious redemption, how does that relate to any sense of moral responsibility?  Yes, I know that Christians think of Christ's alleged sacrifice as an act of God's love and grace.  But to think the act itself makes any sense, it seems to me that the believer must also think that without it we are deserving of damnation.  Doesn't responsibility pretty much go out the window with such a viewpoint?  (And please -- no Pauline nonsense about the Law functioning only to demonstrate our hopelessly fallen nature.)

(June 18, 2015 at 1:56 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(June 18, 2015 at 1:31 am)Neimenovic Wrote: Don't apologize for others. It hasn't 'failed' me. It hurt my brain.

I know people say that to me a lot here, and I appreciate it. But I feel like as Christians we need to take responsibility for our failures.

Failures?

It wasn't a failure. It was a success. Now I'm brainwashed and sexually repressed, exactly what they wanted.

Quote:Yes, it was technically "others" but we are all part of the same group together and I feel like we need to take responsibility for the times we fell short.

I don't believe in group responsibility. I don't blame anyone but the people factually responsible.

Certainly atheism is nothing like a religion, but many atheists start off as religionists. So it isn't really surprising that they sometimes carry over some habits of mind, at least while they work their way through and out of religion.

I'm curious what your impression is of those you've met here. Some here were never religious, most left one. Some had a difficult transition - abandonment by parents, family and sometimes friends. Others endured less difficult indoctrination and thus have had an easier time leaving. I had a pretty easy time. I wish for all atheists to arrive at a point where it is the nothing we all say it is. But for some the betrayal and stress was just greater. Some religions must be harder to exit too, like Jehovah's Witnesses which pointedly shun those who leave.

Part of the function of a site like this is to support those working their way out. So if some still carry their atheism with missionary zeal, they deserve our understanding and support, not derision. We don't exist to present a unified face to theists.

Neimenovic: "It wasn't a failure. It was a success. Now I'm brainwashed and sexually repressed, exactly what they wanted."


Well, you are Bosnian . . .    

(June 18, 2015 at 1:19 am)robvalue Wrote: Thanks so much everyone! We're having a lovely meal today at one of our favourite places

Here's my thoughts, for what they are worth! I would wager every atheist here would agree with me on at least the first point.

1) You are too good for Catholicism.

2) Your stated reason for belief that Jesus really was God is the success of the church and all its history. If you're interested, this is argument from incredulity fallacy: you can't imagine any other way for all this to happen other than Jesus really being God. The truth doesn't depend on our ability to imagine it. There is a very simple and much more likely alternative: people continued to think Jesus really was God throughout the church's history. As I'm sure you'll agree even now no one can prove there is a god or that Jesus was God, so the belief alone is enough to keep all of Christianity going. So it's no surprise that this could have always been the case, when proof was similarly impossible. If people really believed it, what difference would it have made if it was actually true or not?

3) A question I asked earlier: how would you feel if you were gay? Would you still love a God who insisted you repress who you are, even when gay sex hurts no one else? Not long ago a teenager killed herself because she couldn't handle how much God was disapproving of her just for being the way she was. Your gut reaction to gay sex being "off" is not surprising, since you're not gay All of sexual attraction is bizarre when viewed objectively. It only makes sense biologically, and to the individuals. Not wanting to do it yourself isn't a reason to stop others wanting to do it, that's sensible morality, so why would God stick his oar in and say otherwise?

1. Haha, thank you for the half compliment, but Catholicism has contributed deeply to who I am as a person.

2. I understand what you are saying. I agree. There is no physical proof that I can point to or show anyone. Proof that God is real or that Jesus is God does not exist. I have particular reasons why it makes more sense to me that there is a God verses that there isn't, but at the end of the day, you are correct, there is no proof that I can show anyone.

3. I would have a very very hard time accepting the Church's teachings on sexual morality if I was gay. I most certainly wouldn't want to. Of course, I'd like to say that I would follow church teaching and remain celibate, but in all honesty that would probably not be the case. I love the closeness of being in a relationship and the family life. If I was gay it would be very very difficult for me to adhere to Church teaching on it. I feel greatly for people who are gay, and I do believe God has great mercy for them.

Mercy...mercy.......for what....what have they done that merits mercy...what, the fuck?

I think point 3 proves my point 1 You are above it, and it's only by chance that you're not in the same boat as all the other catholic gays feeling self loathing and despair with whom you can fully sympathise.

I don't know how you can think that particular part of the doctrine is in any way moral, merciful or fair. If you're interested, it is mainly based upon one tiny verse lodged in the middle of the old testament, which you have discarded! But I'll leave the issue now

Point 1 wasn't a half compliment, but a whole one. I don't believe Catholicism is responsible for who you are at all, religion has a knack of taking credit away from where it is due. I think you would have been just as good without it.

Edited to remove some pompous presumptuous ramblings which should have stayed in my head. Apologies.

(June 17, 2015 at 2:52 pm)Godschild Wrote:

(June 17, 2015 at 2:13 am)Kitan Wrote: Bitch, please.

I asked a simple question and your answer is to rave, you must have an agenda with me I'm not aware of.

GC

You ignored my answer to your question, perhaps because you've put me on ignore, perhaps because you don't have a cogent reply.

But your simple question has gotten its simple answer. Perhaps even you can understand it.

Ok, I'll cut to the chase. Take away the bible and where would you find your god?