Ask a Catholic

[FreeTony]

Do you think you understand why people don't believe in claims about Gods?

Do you get that you are making quite remarkable claims?

[Cyberman]

The people who insist that "God" won't reveal itself because of free will most often tend to be among the same people who insist that "God" is revealing itself all the time, that their magic story is how "God" wants everyone to live, and so on. At some point you have to sit back and realise there is no spoon, there never will be a spoon, and that you have far better things to do than wait for the spoon. Actually living your life being one of them.

[robvalue]

Hmm, well. God only "talks to you" if you believe God is talking to you. Kind of a talkology. I mean a tautology. You could replace God with anything in that sentence.

[Cyberman]

Yes, but only one of the permutations would be considered acceptable.

[Randy Carson]

Of course. The Church was baptizing LOOOOOONG before the scriptures were written. However, they were baptizing based on the commandment they heard from Jesus in the Great Commission:

Matthew 28
19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”

If Jesus commanded the disciples to baptize using a trinitarian forumla in Mt. 28:19, that would be a GOD-given tradition and NOT a tradition of men, wouldn't it?

This is a clear example of the misinterpretation of scripture, the Word of God is of no "private interpretation, you MUST let scripture interpret scripture. It is true that Jesus commanded to baptize in the "NAME" of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Is Father a name?
What about Son? Holy spirit?
Those are not names but titles. I am a brother uncle and son, does that make me three different people (trinity)?

If none of those are names, then what is the NAME of the Father Son and Holy Spirit? It is Jesus Christ.

I have already shown examples of two TYPES of baptism: John's Baptism, and Christian Trinitarian Baptism.

Are you an atheist or a JW?

Now, a word about tradition. I could provide a long list of verses in support of tradition, but this one will suffice:

2 Thessalonians 2:15
15 So then, brothers and sisters, stand firm and hold fast to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by word of mouth or by our letter.

Here, Paul not only commend holding fast to tradition, but he also commends oral teaching in addition to written scripture.

Ok, provide the scripture where any apostle baptized using the trinitarian formula. They clearly baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, according to the scripture you provided, the Catholic church should still be maintaining that tradition.

The New Testament talks about people being baptized "in the name of Jesus," but there are only four such passages (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5). Further, these passages do not use the same designation in each place (some say "Lord Jesus," other say "Jesus Christ"), indicating that they were not technical formulas used in the baptism but simply descriptions by Luke. These four descriptions are not to be considered as a substitute for or contradiction of the divine command of the Lord Jesus Christ to: "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19).

And now, a question for you:

What is the pillar and ground of the faith for the believer in Christ Jesus, huggy?

The Word of God.

No, huggy. It is the Church.

1 Timothy 3:15 (KJV)
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

1 Timothy 3:15 (NIV)
15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

The pillar and ground, foundation and bulwark of the truth is the Church built by Jesus. And to Peter, the rock upon which that Church was built, Jesus conveyed awesome authority:

Matthew 16:18-19 New International Version (NIV)
18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

By the authority granted to it by Jesus Christ and in response to His command, the Catholic Church makes disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

[Cyberman]

For some reason I keep thinking about those old "Land that time forgot" kind of films, with the Harryhausen dinosaurs knocking seven bells out of each other. I really can't think why...

[Alex K]

I have a question!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EebhtzROEB8

Oh wait, that's not a question, either...

[Randy Carson]

There is no incompatibility. God created all those things and gave us the intellect with which to study his creation, etc.

The question was not "science vs religion".... I threw politics in there to give you that hint.
I know that catholics are ok with science and have been keen to adapt to it.

The question delves deeper. The human psyche is a wonderful thing... full of complexities, but also with a lot of similarities between individuals.
Indoctrination works on the grand grand majority. Do you think there would be as many religious people, were it not for indoctrination of the young?
Why does indoctrination work? Because our psyche is so complex, it must learn a lot of things during childhood... and while learning, we implicitly trust our teachers, our caregivers, our mentors... If they convey the message of a divine entity, we incorporate it into our picture of the world.... just like we incorporate the notion that a particular fruit is poisonous, a certain pattern on a frog signals not to touch it, or the orange glow of the setting sun (at least in Portugal, signals nice weather for the next day.

If the information is truthful, or not, is irrelevant. It is considered true by the young brain and it becomes the future adult's faith.
Ever wonder why religionists speak so much about "truth" and so little about reality? It feels like you keep trying to convince others that some BS is true, when there is nothing hinting that way.

Anyway, onwards to more human psychological stuff, this time, touching on politics. Thirst for power. Every single major religion has been close to the ruling class.... which also touches another subject I mentioned, history.
Ever since Mesopotamia, with their pantheon taking center stage on any particular city, through the famous Egyptians where the pharaoh was considered a god among humans, the romans with their empire wide implementation of their preferred pantheon (first, Jupiter&co., then christianity), the arabian caliphate and islam... not to go into Chinese, japanese or even Aztec mythologies.
So, religion seems to be a tool to rule the people, in some societies, the most prominent tool, in others, merely an extra. But it's been there for millennia.
Present-day catholics follow (at least, most) the guidelines of the church, which leads to some friction with a few of the more recent secular developments, such as abortion, gay marriage, contraception, etc. In a way, catholics are being controlled by a central ruling class, their thoughts are being controlled. For the most part, this control is harmless, and that was probably its original intent - keep the people behaving orderly. But we must acknowledge that this control can take darker contours with the "us vs them" mentality that can easily lead a people into war. Such wars are recorded in the OT for jews, god's chosen people (vs the others that were not chosen), the qur'an again with muslims as god's chosen people (vs all the infidels)...

Now, to touch on another of the subjects I mentioned, the high class, as the implementers of the religion, must know that it's just a tactic. Considering all the religions that have been imposed on the people, the individuals responsible for that imposition either were delusional and fervently believed it themselves, or knew all too well that they were fooling the people, even if they convinced themselves that is was for the best (control people's collective behavior and keep them docile, but ready for war, if the rulers so desire).


So, on one side, we have easily impressionable minds, on the other, we have the desire to impress a particular message on all the people. Repeat, rinse, repeat.
The perfect recipe for the outstanding focus that religion has had on human societies.

And, of course, since we know that there have been and still are, lots and lots of religions, and most of them are mutually exclusive, then it stands to reason that, at most, only one is right. However, they all have that requirement of faith, which, as I pointed earlier, is a bit nagging.

So, knowing that religions exist to impose certain thoughts on the people (thus controlling them) and that the likelihood of any religion being right is near nil, how can you (or anyone else, but let's focus on you) honestly claim that your particular religion is true? (there's that word, again)

However, if God WERE to reveal Himself in the fashion in which you suggest, such a revelation would be coercive.

Well, according to the story, Luke is Darth Vader's son.... oh, wrong story, sorry.
According to the story, there are several people who have had such coercive revelations and they all turned out ok...ish... Let's see:
- Abraham - there's a reason they're called abrahamic religions, huh?
- Moses - responsible for Easter holidays
- Satan - responsible for laboring pains and for snakes to crawl on their bellies
- Adam&Eve - Were doing ok, until they ate some fruit spurred on by satan - there's no justice in the world, even when it's god-administered.
- Mohamed - can we count him in?
- Jesus and his entourage - even with direct palpable evidence of miracle working, the guys just kept being amazed at each new feat of magic!


So, based on this track record, what's so wrong about providing every single person on Earth with palpable evidence of the existence of the magic-sky-daddy?
Results:
- no more religions. Only one, and it wouldn't be a religion, as it wouldn't require any faith, nor any preaching, nor any assembling in the temple - god is everywhere, and talks directly to anyone who requests or requires it.
- no more thought control imposed by the religions - it's no longer a "what would jesus do?", but a "hey, jesus, what do you advise I do?"
- If there are no religions, there's no more "us vs them" religious wars.
- We could ask for a way to attain more power from the sources we have available... of course, he could just tell us to keep researching and we'll get there. But it would be nice to have that info. Warp speed, is it really possible or just fiction? We could ask so many wonderful questions and get answers from the architect of the Universe.
- Millions of people would stop devoting their lives to preaching and praying and writing books on ancient writings... They could write books on recent discourses with god itself.
- warlords all over the world would take heed and stop warring and slaving.
- Money, while still important, would probably become less significant, as universal knowledge was at hand and novel and wondrous methods to ward off disease and famine could be reached (if the guy contributes)
- Society, as we know it, would have to change...
- Atheists would disappear, believers would disappear. Everyone would know god as well as everyone knows gravity.


Instead, we have a handful of people with some stories... these individuals' motivations and/or delusions beyond the reach of our scrutiny. Not a very solid base to stand. Hence what I said earlier about the requirement of belief taking all credibility from the institution.


That is a brief view of the big picture that goes through my mind when talking about religion.... this awareness is what makes me scoff at people who want me to "keep an open mind"... my mind has tons of information that go well beyond what I perceive any believer to have in his/her mind.

So, now that you've been presented with a glimpse of the big picture, how can you remain a believer and, on top of that, a catholic? What's the reasoning? What's the emotional charge that keeps you there? Why believe?

IMO, Catholicism's world view appears to me to provide the best explanation of and solution to the circumstances in which we find ourselves. And keep in mind that I am an adult convert. However, I mull over your post and revise and extend my remarks if I have more to say in response.

Now, I have a question for you: Would you agree that IF a creator God exists, then He must be superior to anything in that creation?

[Minimalist]

For some reason I keep thinking about those old "Land that time forgot" kind of films, with the Harryhausen dinosaurs knocking seven bells out of each other. I really can't think why...

Because the script was better than the fucking bible?

[Huggy Bear]

I have already shown examples of two TYPES of baptism: John's Baptism, and Christian Trinitarian Baptism.

And I've shown why John's baptism was no longer valid and those baptized under John's baptism had to be re-baptized.

There is no trinity, Jesus Christ IS the Father, Son and Holy Spirit....

Isaiah 9:6
For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.

John 8:58
Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before Abraham was, I am.

Revelation 22:13
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Not to mention, Peter was a Jew who kept the law. Jews don't believe in a trinity, they believe in one God only!

Are you an atheist or a JW?

Niether

The New Testament talks about people being baptized "in the name of Jesus," but there are only four such passages (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, and 19:5). Further, these passages do not use the same designation in each place (some say "Lord Jesus," other say "Jesus Christ"), indicating that they were not technical formulas used in the baptism but simply descriptions by Luke.

You have yet to provide one scripture where anyone was baptized using the trinitarian formula.

These four descriptions are not to be considered as a substitute for or contradiction of the divine command of the Lord Jesus Christ to: "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matt. 28:19).

They don't contradict. Are you a father? If so, is that your name?

I ask once again, what is the NAME of Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit?

The Word of God.

No, huggy. It is the Church.

1 Timothy 3:15 (KJV)
But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth.

1 Timothy 3:15 (NIV)
15 if I am delayed, you will know how people ought to conduct themselves in God’s household, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and foundation of the truth.

Your original question

What is the pillar and ground of the faith for the believer in Christ Jesus, huggy?

(emphasis mine)
The scripture you quoted is referring to the TRUTH not FAITH(unless you are saying the two are synonymous...), and faith only comes by hearing the Word of God

Romans 10:17
So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

And without faith, it is impossible to please God.

Is not Jesus the Word of God made flesh? Without the Word of God the church doesn't exist

The pillar and ground, foundation and bulwark of the truth is the Church built by Jesus. And to Peter, the rock upon which that Church was built, Jesus conveyed awesome authority:

Matthew 16:18-19 New International Version (NIV)
18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 19 I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

By the authority granted to it by Jesus Christ and in response to His command, the Catholic Church makes disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

(The following is taken from one of my earlier posts (http://atheistforums.org/thread-32888-po...#pid929806) explaining the above scripture)

That scripture isn't in its full context. Jesus isn't talking about building his church on Peter (whom he rebuked later in that same chapter btw) but upon "revelation". If Peter was such a "rock" why did he deny Jesus 3 times?

If you look at the scripture in it's full context, then the meaning is clear.

Matthew 16
17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven (has revealed it).
18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock (speaking of revelation) I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

(*the parts in parentheses are my edits)

Five verses down in the same chapter, Jesus rebukes Peter (well, Satan actually, who was acting through Peter).

Matthew 16
23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Clearly Jesus wasn't speaking of building his church on Peter but upon revelation.

Receiving a revelation Is essentially like having an epiphany, something that was hidden is made suddenly clear. You cannot begin to understand the Bible with out having revelation (hence why it's the foundation of the church).

Matthew 11:25
At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.

An example of revelation would be in Acts 2:38 when Peter commanded the people to be baptized in the "name of Jesus Christ"

Acts 2:38
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Why would Peter contradict Jesus when Jesus clearly stated to baptize in the "name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost"?

Matthew 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Because Peter, having a "revelation" of who Jesus Christ was, Knew that Jesus WAS the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, he was all of it.

Revelation 1:8
I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

The Catholic church does not have this revelation, they literally baptize in the "name of the father, son and holy ghost" of which, none are names but titles, the NAME of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost is Jesus Christ.