(July 11, 2015 at 12:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:54 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: 3.) Heaven will be so wonderful

In the book of the Revelation we are told that the smoke of the torment of those in hell will rise up before the lord forever. How wonderful a place can it be for anyone when everyone there will see god gloating over the torment of someone they knew?  Will the people in Heaven have their compassion and empathy so  removed that all they can think of is "Well, I'm glad I'm here. Fuck mom and too bad for my boss."

I'd rather be my own sin-capable self than to be changed into such a cold zombie.

One solution for this apparent problem is that in heaven, people will have a complete picture of the horror of sin. Consequently, they will understand that those who rejected God - to such a great extent that they DESERVED hell - have been punished justly given the seriousness of the sins that they committed.

Additionally, it is thought that people CHOOSE hell rather than enduring the pain of being in the white-hot presence of a pure and holy God when they themselves are stained with sins. If so, then the people in heaven may simply understand that those in hell are there because they want to be.

I suspect that YOU have a problem with this because you don't think sin is really any big deal. Let me know if that's incorrect.

Yes, you are incorrect from an evangelical Christian point of view. There is no sin one has to commit to go to hell. But this is not the place to get into a discussion about the differences between Catholic and evangelical Christianity.

Most humans have neither the knowledge nor the power to be truly evil and only a psychopath would think that any human deserves eternal torment. so will Heaven be full of psychopaths?

The only thing anyone in Heaven would find horrible is the sight of god sadistically enjoying the torment of their loved ones and everyone in Heaven will know at least one person who didn't make it, not because they were particularly evil, but because no Christian could convince them to accept Jesus before they died. But you mean to tell us that god is going to convince those people that their mother or lover DESERVED hell, whatever the justification? What a god! And you want to convince me that I would flinch away from his purity because of MY sin?

You have more than enough rope to hang yourself so you want to hang god too, which is what you're doing.

(July 11, 2015 at 2:42 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 12:44 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: One solution for this apparent problem is that in heaven, people will have a complete picture of the horror of sin. Consequently, they will understand that those who rejected God - to such a great extent that they DESERVED hell - have been punished justly given the seriousness of the sins that they committed.

Additionally, it is thought that people CHOOSE hell rather than enduring the pain of being in the white-hot presence of a pure and holy God when they themselves are stained with sins. If so, then the people in heaven may simply understand that those in hell are there because they want to be.

I suspect that YOU have a problem with this because you don't think sin is really any big deal. Let me know if that's incorrect.

Yes, you are incorrect from an evangelical Christian point of view.  There is no sin one has to commit to go to hell. But this is not the place to get into a discussion about the differences between Catholic and evangelical Christianity.

Most humans have neither the knowledge nor the power to be truly evil and only a psychopath would think that any human deserves eternal torment. so will Heaven be full of psychopaths?

The only thing anyone in Heaven would find horrible is the sight of god sadistically enjoying the torment of their loved ones and everyone in Heaven will know at least one person who didn't make it, not because they were particularly evil, but because no Christian could convince them to accept Jesus before they died. But you mean to tell us that god is going to convince those people that their mother or lover DESERVED  hell, whatever the justification? What a god! And you want to convince me that I would flinch away from his purity because of MY sin?

You have more than enough rope to hang yourself so you want to hang god too, which is what you're doing.

Why do you assume that God would "sadistically enjoy" the fact that people are in hell?

Your posts and threads are interesting, Rhonda. Some people ask questions because they are looking for genuine answers. You ask questions because you want to make rhetorical points.

But in doing so, you continually reveal that your understanding of God and knowledge scripture and theology to be woefully deficient. It's not that you actually know what you're talking about and have disagreements or different interpretations...you simply have really screwed up ideas that result from real ignorance.

Have you ever actually read any decent books on theology or scripture? Or are you just cobbling all this together based upon your own ideas and those taken from atheist websites and forums?

(July 11, 2015 at 12:57 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Why?
I have two choices: I can give a dollar to a homeless person (a small good) or I can sell all my possessions, give the money to the poor, and join him (a greater good)? How have I done evil by choosing to do the small good rather than the greater good?

No, Jesus spoke of us being rewarded to varying degrees, so one who does the small good will get a smaller reward...but a reward nonetheless.

You were simply wrong on this point.

Because in this life you can choose to be selfish, which is exactly what not giving up all your possessions to feed the poor is. Well it's true, the likes of Benedict XVI and Cardinal Burke have been slagged off mercilessly (although fairly particularly with the later, one should see the bills...) since he pulled back out some of the pageantry that John Paul II, and more recently Francis have had the good sense to do away with.
The fact you are unwilling to engage in the greater good shows you are still tinged by avarice, and no impure thing can stand before God and behold him in the Beatific Vision, these are the actions of an individual bound for Purgatory not Paradise. Why do you think there is such a strong history of monasticism and renunciation in Catholicism and Orthodoxy? The religious are those who are willing to go the whole hog, the laity are those who don't quite believe enough to make the full sacrifice.
Well it is true, if you actually believed what the teaching was about the last being first and the first being last you would have become a hermit and possibly taken holy orders, not shacked up in an American subpurgatory. It is hypocrisy Randy, and I'm sure you know of a few Early Church writers and what Jesus himself allegedly had to say about them!
I'm quite right, if you actually believed this why wouldn't you aim for top prize? You either don't believe or you're a hypocrite, but in any case it shows you're selfish. I'm not calling you out on that, I've no plans to sell my house and donate the profits to feed orphans anytime soon either but I don't have these delusions of grandeur attached to it.

Quote:How so? Everyone in heaven is there because of their love for God and their desire to do His will. There is no shotgun blackmail when we are eager to serve God.

You were simply wrong on this point.

No, you're eager to serve God because you're eager for a reward or you fear his unending wrath. That is not love Randy, that is not mutual respect and self giving, that is either greed or fear, possibly both. You're either a whore or a slave, again possibly both.

I'd be more polite in my terminology, but since you've shown no respect to me throughout I think it's time I stopped showing you any and said exactly what I thought.

Quote:Is this the situation you feel we are currently in? That God is holding a gun to our heads and threatening us with hell if we don't do as he says?

I don't feel we are in that situation at all Randy, I don't believe in it, I feel we are in about as much threat from this malevolent deity with a shotgun as I am of being robbed by Puss in Boots or any other fairytale character you care to name. If I have any emotional response to this it would be mourning the fact that this barbaric hellish nightmare has captured the mind of so many people for so long and that people like you are throwing more wood onto the fire.

Quote:Then let me ask you this: if this is the resentment you feel towards God under the current situation (with God being "silent" as some here claim), imagine how much more resentment you and others would feel if God were to make Himself more known to us AS FOLKS ARE ROUTINELY DEMANDING IN THIS FORUM.

How can I feel resentment towards something that doesn't exist Randy? I resent what people like yourself have done across history, I have no doubt in my mind you are the kind of individual who would gleefully start slaughtering the non believers should Francis ever call a tenth Crusade.

I wouldn't feel any different if the deity you described appeared or not Randy, certainly I would have to admit I was incorrect regarding its existance but my opinion of it would not change one bit. It is a tyranical elderitch nightmarish horror, and whever or not it is real or imaginary is irellevant if your description is correct.

I'm not a coward Randy, I meant exactly what I said. If the White Witch of Narnia appeared right now I'd still think she was a cunt if she was indeed the monster  Lewis depicted her as.

Quote:I love it when atheists finally reach the Christian position by use of their own reasoning and logic.

You'll have to do a lot better than that to make me agree with the Catholic position Randy. I'm open to a good argument, but you've yet to provide one.

Quote:Fair enough. However, when the clock runs out on this earth, you're either with God or you aren't. It was nice of God to tell us of the next chapter and to provide the means (Jesus) by which it may go well once we turn the page.

So much for this objective morality of yours. You do realize threats of eternal damnation and emotional responses such as this are actually singled out in Catholic apologetics books as a faux pas? At least my copy of Austen Ivereigh's How to Defend the Faith without Raising your Voice which I've been reading today would suggest so.

(That's also not a very good book by the way despite the many recommendations it has received from the Catholic Herald and Catholic Answers, just one long appeal to tradition and several facts within such as the divorce rate are simply not true, I've checked.)

Quote:The difference between us is this: YOU choose to focus on the stick; I tend to focus on the carrot.

It is still equally morally abhorrent, you're preforming tricks for a doggie treat, not because you actually like this individual. You are attempting to use this capricious being for your own ends.

(July 11, 2015 at 1:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: And you know this because of your careful study of Catholic theology in an orthodox Catholic degree program?

Randy, I actually do have certification to teach Catholic Theology, I've mentioned to you before that I teach Thomastic Theology on the side along with other modules. It is not my specialist subject, but I've been judged by your Church when I received my CCRS (Catholic Certificate in Religious Studies) no less to be suitably qualified to explain it along with other elements of the Catholic faith to Catholics. It's not a course I would have chosen to do, It was a condition of my employment but if that can let Catholic Teachers teach your most spiritually vulnerable young, surely what I know about your faith must be Orthodox enough if I could prove to your own Church's examiners while I don't agree with them I know my subject and can be entirely objective?

I may not be a Muslim, but I still know who Muhammad was. You may not be an Atheist, but you've deemed yourself amply qualified to call us all whores and degenerates in more flowery language since you've arrived here.

(July 11, 2015 at 1:55 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Oh, but it wasn't Catholics who told me god allows sin so we can have freewill. They were evangelical Christians who believed with relish that Catholics were going to fry when they die, just like the Catholics believed the same of them. If, as Randy says, god does this because he wants us to love him... well, somebody mentioned Stockholm in one of these threads.

Oh the Evangelicals are just as bad on that front, if not worse. I was thinking more about the Episcopalians, the Old Catholic Church, The Church of England, Euro Methodists (American Methodists are really different to the ones we have here). They do believe in hell but they don't seem to be as gleeful about the idea of anyone going there.

ouote='Randy Carson' pid='988286' dateline='1436634740']

(July 11, 2015 at 12:27 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: First of all, you dodged dealing with what I said by directing me to go all the way back from post #1333 to post #127. You guys are so good at this. Remember, You're the evangelist here, not me. When you dodge my points you only prove that you have nothing compelling to say.

Second, if the angels were superior, how can we mere humans expect to do better than they did in resisting evil. They had one shot, you say so did god wait until after Satan rebelled to remove all the bad stuff from Heaven, so it will be a different place when humans get there?

First, there was never any bad stuff in heaven.

Second, the angels were judged based upon their own individual, free-will decisions to rebel against God. God has not given them a second chance (that we know of) because they had full knowledge and chose to rebel anyway.

We are judged in part because of our individual decisions but also in part because of the sin of Adam. However, we have not seen the Beatific Vision and so, God has made a different provision for us. We have the blood, the cross and the name of Jesus to help us resist evil. More importantly, we have confession and forgiveness to restore our relationship with God when we fail.

So, God has already decided to deal with us differently than He dealt with the angels - and this may be due to his recognition that we can't "expect to do better than they did".
[/quote]

Remember your premise is we won't choose bad in Heaven because there won't be any bad for us to choose. But now if there was never any bad in Heaven how could the angels have chosen bad? If they had some other motivation then so will too.

The way the angels will be judged and the way humans will be judged has nothing to do with it. Nobody would be judged if they had not first sinned. If, as you have just said, the angels sinned because they had freewill, then if we will have freewill then we will be just as capable of sinning.

I cannot convince you to argue with anything resembling logic and reasoning, but neither can you convince anyone reading this thread that you have the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

(July 11, 2015 at 3:42 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: I cannot convince you to argue with anything resembling logic and reasoning, but neither can you convince anyone reading this thread that you have the foggiest idea what you're talking about.

DITTO!

(July 11, 2015 at 1:16 pm)ChadWooters Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 11:54 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: In the book of the Revelation we are told that the smoke of the torment of those in hell will rise up before the lord forever.

Rev 14:11 "And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name."

So what? Why are you offended by Divine Judgement and the just condemnation of the wicked?

The better question is why you are not offended by psychotic people who would event a god who justifies the ungodly (Romans 4:5) and punishes those who did nothing more wicked but be born into this world.

If your religion makes you so cold that you could say "So what?" to human suffering, then you are psychotic and anyone who has given serious thought to Christianity and still accepts it is equally psychotic if not borderline.

(July 11, 2015 at 3:35 pm)Metis Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 12:57 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: Why?
I have two choices: I can give a dollar to a homeless person (a small good) or I can sell all my possessions, give the money to the poor, and join him (a greater good)? How have I done evil by choosing to do the small good rather than the greater good?

No, Jesus spoke of us being rewarded to varying degrees, so one who does the small good will get a smaller reward...but a reward nonetheless.

You were simply wrong on this point.

Because in this life you can choose to be selfish, which is exactly what not giving up all your posessions to feed the poor is.

No, we are not called to sell all of our possessions. This is not a requirement that Jesus placed on all beleivers.

Quote:Well it's true, the likes of Benedict XVI and Cardinal Burke have been slagged off mercilessly (although fairly particularly with the later, one should see the bills...) since he pulled back out some of the pageantry that John Paul II, and more recently Francis have had the good sense to do away with.
The fact you are unwilling to engage in the greater good shows you are still tinged by avarice, and no impure thing can stand before God and behold him in the Beatific Vision, these are the actions of an individual bound for Purgatory not Paradise. Why do you think there is such a strong history of monasticism and renunciation in Catholicism and Orthodoxy? The religious are those who are willing to go the whole hog, the laity are those who don't quite believe enough to make the full sacrifice.

Wrong again. And I do grow weary of these loooooooong posts which contain error after error. Where did you say you went to school again? Damn.

Since I was a candidate at a Trappist monastery, I think I can speak a little of the monastic vocation despite the fact that it was not actually my ultimate calling. We are not ALL called to the ascetic life of the cloister, and not embracing the life of Franciscan poverty does not mean that people do not believe. If we were all monastics, there would be no future generations! If I am "tinged by avarice" this imperfection will be dealt with in purgatory but it does not disqualify me from heaven.

Quote:Well it is true, if you actually believed what the teaching was about the last being first and the first being last you would have become a hermit and possibly taken holy orders, not shacked up in an American subpurgatory. It is hypocrisy Randy, and I'm sure you know of a few Early Church writers and what Jesus himself allegedly had to say about them!

The scriptures are clear that not everyone is called to a life of celibacy. If you are ignorant of the verses, I can point them out to you.

Quote:I'm quite right, if you actually believed this why wouldn't you aim for top prize? You either don't believe or you're a hypocrite, but in any case it shows you're selfish. I'm not calling you out on that, I've no plans to sell my house and donate the profits to feed orphans anytime soon either but I don't have these delusions of grandeur attached to it.

Because as the scriptures point out, the celibacy of the monk or the holy orders of the priesthood are vocations - just as marriage is a vocation. God calls some to the former and many more to the latter. It is a mistake to try to grasp the more ascetic vocation when the grace has not been given.

Quote:

Quote:How so? Everyone in heaven is there because of their love for God and their desire to do His will. There is no shotgun blackmail when we are eager to serve God.

You were simply wrong on this point.

No, you're eager to serve God because you're eager for a reward or you fear his unending wrath. That is not love Randy, that is not mutual respect and self giving, that is either greed or fear, possibly both. You're either a whore or a slave, again possibly both.

Well, if I am God's slave then I am so happily. But sure, we begin our lives as baby Christians considering the reward and gain because we do not yet know God or His love. This matures over time, and as I have said elsewhere, there are saints who have written that they would willingly go to hell for eternity if that was what their Beloved asked of them. He won't, of course, but there is that evidence of the mature Christian love that is indifferent to the suffering or reward of which you speak.

Quote:I'd be more polite in my terminology, but since you've shown no respect to me throughout I think it's time I stopped showing you any and said exactly what I thought.

I'm trembling now...

Quote:

Quote:Is this the situation you feel we are currently in? That God is holding a gun to our heads and threatening us with hell if we don't do as he says?

I don't feel we are in that situation at all Randy, I don't believe in it, I feel we are in about as much threat from this malevolent deity with a shotgun as I am of being robbed by Puss in Boots or any other fairytale character you care to name. If I have any emotional response to this it would be mourning the fact that this barbaric hellish nightmare has captured the mind of so many people for so long and that people like you are throwing more wood onto the fire.

It is my greatest desire to throw so much wood onto the fire that the brightness of the blaze would finally pierce into the corners of some truly darkened minds.

Quote:

Quote:Then let me ask you this: if this is the resentment you feel towards God under the current situation (with God being "silent" as some here claim), imagine how much more resentment you and others would feel if God were to make Himself more known to us AS FOLKS ARE ROUTINELY DEMANDING IN THIS FORUM.

How can I feel resentment towards something that doesn't exist Randy? I resent what people like yourself have done across history, I have no doubt in my mind you are the kind of individual who would gleefully start slaughtering the non believers should Francis ever call a ninth Crusade.

I wouldn't feel any different if the deity you described appeared or not Randy, certainly I would have to admit I was incorrect regarding its existance but my opinion of it would not change one bit. It is a tyranical elderitch nightmarish horror, and whever or not it is real or imaginary is irellevant if your description is correct.

Ah, yes. Exactly as I have written elsewhere...even citing Hitchens to the same effect.

If God appeared like a flaming behemoth in the sky, you would not acknowledge Him AS GOD because you simply don't want to. This is how and why people go to hell...BECAUSE THEY WOULD RATHER BE THERE THAN IN GOD'S PRESENCE so great is their hatred for Him. And I would also suggest that for those that feel no "hatred for God", they are driven by a great love for self. So, the end result is the same.

But I'll here from others about how no one hates God, blah, blah, blah.

FOLKS, I GET THAT YOU HAVE DIFFERING VIEWS, OKAY. NOT EVERYONE IS AT THE EXACT SAME SPOT ON THE SPECTRUM OF ATHEISM.

Quote:

Quote:I'm not a coward Randy, I meant exactly what I said. If the White Witch of Narnia appeared right now I'd still think she was a cunt if she was indeed the monster  Lewis depicted her as.

Perhaps reading more of CS Lewis would help.

Quote:

Quote:I love it when atheists finally reach the Christian position by use of their own reasoning and logic.

You'll have to do a lot better than that to make me agree with the Catholic position Randy. I'm open to a good argument, but you've yet to provide one.

At least not one that you recognize for its quality, apparently. I'll keep trying...Bring more wood!

Quote:

Quote:Fair enough. However, when the clock runs out on this earth, you're either with God or you aren't. It was nice of God to tell us of the next chapter and to provide the means (Jesus) by which it may go well once we turn the page.

So much for this objective morality of yours. You do realize threats of eternal damnation and emotional responses such as this are actually singled out in Catholic apologetics books as a faux pas? At least my copy of Austen Ivereigh's How to Defend the Faith without Raising your Voice which I've been reading today would suggest so.

(That's also not a very good book by the way despite the many recommendations it has received from the Catholic Herald and Catholic Answers, just one long appeal to tradition and several facts within such as the divorce rate are simply not true, I've checked.)

I don't own that book, but I do have a fairly respectable library of titles. If you are going to read some Catholic theology/apologetics, I'd be happy to recommend some books.

Quote:

Quote:The difference between us is this: YOU choose to focus on the stick; I tend to focus on the carrot.

It is still equally morally abhorrent, you're preforming tricks for a doggie treat, not because you actually like this individual. You are attempting to use this capricious being for your own ends.

Or both. Could I be doing it for BOTH reasons?

(July 11, 2015 at 1:03 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

Quote:And you know this because of your careful study of Catholic theology in an orthodox Catholic degree program?

Randy, I actually do have certification to teach Catholic Theology, I've mentioned to you before that I teach Thomastic Theology. It is not my specialist subject, but I've been judged by your Church when I received my CCRS (Catholic Certificate in Religious Studies) no less to be suitably qualified to explain it to Catholics.

I recall you mentioned your study with the Protestants and the Orthodox, but I must have missed your mentioning this. I do apologize. And I wish I knew which diocese you are teaching in.

Quote:I may not be a Muslim, but I still know who Muhammad was. You may not be an Atheist, but you've deemed yourself amply qualified to call us all whores and degenerates in more flowery language since you've arrived here.

Do a search on the word "whores" posted by Randy Carson. Let me know what you come up with, okay?

All I found was me quoting YOU here: http://atheistforums.org/thread-33377-po...#pid970638

My search:

http://atheistforums.org/search.php?acti...order=desc

(July 11, 2015 at 2:17 pm)Randy Carson Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 1:55 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: Oh, but it wasn't Catholics who told me god allows sin so we can have freewill. They were evangelical Christians who believed with relish that Catholics were going to fry when they die, just like the Catholics believed the same of them. If, as Randy says, god does this because he wants us to love him... well, somebody mentioned Stockholm in one of these threads.

No, Rhonda. You are wrong. Catholics do not believe Protestants are going to fry when they die. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it this way:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

Yeah they always make it look good on paper, but in de facto I'm not wrong in what I say about what many Catholics think. The Catholic Church is not known for it's tolerance of what it views as heresy especially if the "Apostle construes it as damnable."

(July 11, 2015 at 4:45 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 2:17 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: No, Rhonda. You are wrong. Catholics do not believe Protestants are going to fry when they die. The Catechism of the Catholic Church explains it this way:

817 In fact, "in this one and only Church of God from its very beginnings there arose certain rifts, which the Apostle strongly censures as damnable. But in subsequent centuries much more serious dissensions appeared and large communities became separated from full communion with the Catholic Church - for which, often enough, men of both sides were to blame." The ruptures that wound the unity of Christ's Body - here we must distinguish heresy, apostasy, and schism - do not occur without human sin:

Where there are sins, there are also divisions, schisms, heresies, and disputes. Where there is virtue, however, there also are harmony and unity, from which arise the one heart and one soul of all believers.

818 "However, one cannot charge with the sin of the separation those who at present are born into these communities [that resulted from such separation] and in them are brought up in the faith of Christ, and the Catholic Church accepts them with respect and affection as brothers . . . . All who have been justified by faith in Baptism are incorporated into Christ; they therefore have a right to be called Christians, and with good reason are accepted as brothers in the Lord by the children of the Catholic Church."

819 "Furthermore, many elements of sanctification and of truth" are found outside the visible confines of the Catholic Church: "the written Word of God; the life of grace; faith, hope, and charity, with the other interior gifts of the Holy Spirit, as well as visible elements." Christ's Spirit uses these Churches and ecclesial communities as means of salvation, whose power derives from the fullness of grace and truth that Christ has entrusted to the Catholic Church. All these blessings come from Christ and lead to him, and are in themselves calls to "Catholic unity."

Yeah they always make it look good on paper, but in de facto I'm not wrong in what I say about what many Catholics think. The Catholic Church is not known for it's tolerance of what it views as heresy especially if the "Apostle construes it as damnable."

Oh, okay.

So rather than go with what the Catholic Church has published about its views of other Christians, it would be best to take the word of an atheist posting in an atheist forum on the Internet who is giving us the skinny on what she claims "many Catholics think."

That's about as authentic as it gets around here, I guess.