Ask a Catholic

[nihilistcat]

It seems we're both surprised.  Most christians react as if their eyes would melt just looking at such books.  And likewise, I would not hesitate to read the 'The God-less delusion'.  If I find it for a good price on ebay, I may pick it up.  It will rest in the religion section of my library.  

It is refreshing to speak with somebody who isn't scared of the other side's texts.    Though on the whole, the reactions seem to be as above.  Can you tell us why most christians refuse to take such a logical approach?

Because, sadly, some Christians are guilty of all the things you accuse them of. They're judgmental, ignorant of the strong apologetics that they need to interact with atheists, and threatened by the "new atheism" which has an "in-your-face" aspect that turns a lot of people off.

You think its offensive that the 10 Commandments are posted in a courthouse or a classroom. We think it's offensive that a judge requires it to be removed (after xx number of years). You object to Nativity scenes and prayer before football games. We object to having our traditions taken away from us. You think it's unfair that you're being discriminated against but Christians don't want a court to order them to bake a cake or deliver flowers to a gay wedding because they consider gay marriage to be an offense to God. 

So, I know who Dawkins and Hitchens are. And while I've not read their books (I'm buried as it is) I've watched some online debates and listened to their arguments directly from their own mouths. 

I'm an amateur apologist...which might have all the crowd appeal of being a rock hound or an amateur astronomer when chatting at a cocktail party. But it's what I think God has called me to do, so I try to do the best I can, and reading good articles and books is essential.

BTW-I've only recently turned my attention to atheism after a decade or so of "Catholic" apologetics. "Christian" apologetics requires an entirely different approach and set of arguments, and the last three weeks here have been enormously educational. I'm learning and making course corrections quickly, and I hope to be able to provide you and your fellow forum mates a better challenge as I do.

So, perhaps The God Delusion would be a good read...I'll consider that after I've watched a couple of his debates on YouTube.

Thanks!

Just want to point out the diversity in atheist thinking on these issues. Ten commandments in courthouses (meh, yeah should be unconstitutional, but definitely not a topic that keeps me awake at night). Nativity scenes in the town square (the few towns in this country that even have town squares anymore), ummm, yeah not sure why I should spend that much energy giving a shit about that either (unless it's an ugly and unappealing nativity scene). Dawkins and Hitchens, loved em until they became neocons. 

Religious arguments ... just could never work on me

[Wyrd of Gawd]

---

1.  Hostile isn't necessarily the right word.  People here are just sick of the same old stuff, over and over ad nauseam.  Especially when those claims have no actual proof or evidence of any kind.

---

Then why do they bother to respond to the posts at all? There are plenty of other sub-forums for them to haunt. When I am sick of cheeseburgers, I don't go to McDonald's.

No, they aren't "sick of the same old stuff"...they are anti-Christian, and they want to vent because they are angry at God, the Catholic Church and Christianity, in general. This is evident because in the "Why Be Good?" thread, everyone is falling all over themselves trying to explain how good they are to others and so forth...except to the only Christian currently active in the thread.

The hypocrisy is obvious.

Didn't Jesus say that his followers would be persecuted and suffer?  That's the deal you have to abide by if you want to be one of his groupies.  So stop expecting sweet rose petals and song birds.  

Matthew 5:11 = https://www.biblegateway.com/verse/en/Matthew%205:11

Remember, people who are killed for their faith get a white robe and a place under the altar.  Revelation 6:9-11  Isn't that wonderful?

[Brakeman]

Why doesn't jesus, who loves you, want to talk to you with conversational words as he did to others in the bible? Where in the bible does it explain that god won't talk to people in conversation anymore, but will begin to only converse with muted feelings and emotions, and images on toast?

[Salacious B. Crumb]

I understand it took you awhile to respond; you answered people for a while in this thread, and it is quite time consuming, and you also have other threads you have conversations in as well, so no big deal there.

 Yes. I know so.

It really isn’t right to say, “Yes. I know so.” with regards to prayer working, and then not give examples. If you know so, then shouldn’t be ashamed of your prayer stories. Your stories wouldn’t be able to be ridiculed or explained away if “you knew so”. If there was an answered prayer, that couldn’t possibly happen without a god, the least we could say is that we don’t believe you, but likely would offer rational explanations if it was something that could be explained away. So, if your stories aren’t strong, you’re right, many people would probably make fun of you or try to offer a rational explanation. Rational explanations are something you should definitely consider. Maybe say, “I believe so”, not “I know so”.

I am going to assume that you do not believe in God and the Bible is just a work of fiction. I understand that.

I’m glad you can understand that, many christians can’t, even provided with very good reason.

However, would you be willing to concede that Catholics believe that God does exists and that the Church and the Bible are authoritative? That's logical, right?

I can concede to that is what the catholic faith accepts, but that doesn’t make it very logical. Do you realize that the catholic faith contradicts the bible in multiple ways (and the bible contradicts itself)? The bible says that jesus is the only mediator in 1 Tim 2:5. Catholics believe that mary and many other saints are mediators. I don’t think this is a requirement, but it shouldn’t be optional, when it clearly says in the bible that jesus is the only mediator. Which would mean, the rosary, and the countless other chaplets and prayers to saints, would be heresy. Catholic doctrine teaches mary was a perpetual virgin, in Mat 1:25, it says, mary remained a virgin UNTIL she gave birth to jesus. The bible says to only call your father in heaven, father. Not call priests father. I would agree that it’s minor, but I don’t understand why the church would contradict that. There are others, including, this next section.

So, the Bible (and the Church) teaches that the apostles were given authority by Jesus to forgive sin .

John 20:22-23
When he had said this, he breathed on them and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained.”

I can actually see where you’re coming from, especially in context, with the verse before that saying, “My father has sent me, so I send you”, but I don’t see how this relates to a priest, bishop, pope, etc. needing to be a mediator between man and god, in order to be forgiven of sin. This is completely made up by the catholic church. Jesus doesn’t tell his apostles to bless their successors, so that they too, can forgive other sins. I can’t interpret it the way you do, because of Jam 5:16 says to confess our sins to one another, pray for each other, and forgive one another that we shall be healed. This is a clear instruction in the bible, that can’t be left up to  interpretation. So, there is a contradiction here, if you interpret it the way you do. I also don’t think this makes sense, because there are many people around the world that can’t get in contact with a catholic priest. That would mean that these people couldn’t be forgiven.. correct? And, if your response is that they don't know, so god understands, then why would jesus suggest it, knowing that his message would not reach everyone on this planet? This is another reason why this interpretation falls apart. You can confess your wrongdoings to one another, and confess your wrongdoings to god, without a priest. I would say, jesus is saying to forgive one another, if you don’t, then your father in heaven won’t forgive you. This is something that is more relatable to people, in general, in my opinion.

Now, how could the apostles forgive sins unless they knew of them? And how could they know of them unless they were confessed?

There are many other verses from the OT and the NT which support the sacrament of reconciliation.

I gave you one that contradicts that. If you give me others, then that would mean even more contradictions. This is just one reason why the bible doesn’t make sense. You can’t throw out verses in it that agree with a point that you are trying to make, and ignore the others. That’s called cherry-picking, which is dishonest.

What I would suggest instead is that you ask, ask again, or continue to ask that God reveal Himself to you. He's been waiting for all eternity to do so.

I’ve done this.. and absolutely nothing. This is another reason to not believe in an omnibenevolent, omnipotent god. When god reveals himself to me, with others to witness, and confirm I’m not hallucinating, then I’ll believe. God knows this and other ways to convince me, yet doesn’t, do you think he doesn’t want me to believe in him? I am still open to the possibility of some sort of higher power out there, but I find it highly unlikely. But, I’m open-minded. That open-mindedness led me to realizing that for the very few reasons I gave you, plus many more logical ones, that the religion you adhere to (and that I used to adhere to) doesn’t make any sense.

[downbeatplumb]

No, they aren't "sick of the same old stuff"...they are anti-Christian, and they want to vent because they are angry at God, the Catholic Church and Christianity, in general. This is evident because in the "Why Be Good?" thread, everyone is falling all over themselves trying to explain how good they are to others and so forth...except to the only Christian currently active in the thread.

The hypocrisy is obvious.

If you are angry at god then you, by definition, are not an atheist, as to be angry at something the minimum requirement is belief in that thing.

Now we can be angry at Christianity, it is an invasive and rather ugly power in the world, forcing it's age old prejudices and stupid beliefs on others around the world as it has for centuries and now that people can vent against it without legal torture cry "persecution" when it's crimes are pointed out. 

[Alex K]

No, they aren't "sick of the same old stuff"...they are anti-Christian, and they want to vent because they are angry at God,

Not sure if trolling or an idiot.

[robvalue]

I don't know how much more clear I can make this.

If god is real, and he wants to communicate with me, he can come talk to me. He needn't even make an appointment. I assume he knows where I am, right? And I assume he is capable of communicating with me, like he did in the old days with people?

I don't deny the existence of beings which actually interact with me regularly. But I do doubt ones for which I've not seen a scrap of evidence that they even exist, let alone have any interest in me.

If he is real but won't talk to me, for whatever reason, that is his problem. If he no longer talks to people like he used to, then too bad. If he considers himself above me and I'm not worthy to be talked to, then he can fuck off. I'm really cool you know. If he wants me to convince myself he's already talking to me before he talks to me, then it makes on difference whether he is real or not. I may just as well convince myself my table is talking to me.

I don't give a monkeys if he exists or not, until such time he actually bothers to communicate with me in a civilized manner or demonstrates he is anything other than an imaginary construct.

"Angry at god" has to be the most ridiculous strawman going, and an admission that you really can't, or won't, understand our position at all. We talk about god as if he was real because we're demonstrating the conclusions that belief in such a god leads to. It's a form of reductio ad absurdum. It doesn't mean we actually think he is real. You can discuss fictional characters like superman, right? Or do you think they are real when you talk about them? We're forced to talk about the proposition because most people in the world believe it, however ridiculous it may seem to us.

Are you angry at Santa Claus?

[Longhorn]

No, they aren't "sick of the same old stuff"...they are anti-Christian, and they want to vent because they are angry at God,

I'm not angry at god, I'm angry at theists who think I'm angry at their god

[Homeless Nutter]

We're not angry. We're disappointed.

[Nope]

It seems we're both surprised.  Most christians react as if their eyes would melt just looking at such books.  And likewise, I would not hesitate to read the 'The God-less delusion'.  If I find it for a good price on ebay, I may pick it up.  It will rest in the religion section of my library.  

It is refreshing to speak with somebody who isn't scared of the other side's texts.    Though on the whole, the reactions seem to be as above.  Can you tell us why most christians refuse to take such a logical approach?

You think its offensive that the 10 Commandments are posted in a courthouse or a classroom. We think it's offensive that a judge requires it to be removed (after xx number of years). You object to Nativity scenes and prayer before football games. We object to having our traditions taken away from us. You think it's unfair that you're being discriminated against but Christians don't want a court to order them to bake a cake or deliver flowers to a gay wedding because they consider gay marriage to be an offense to God. 

The traditions that you speak of can be practiced on your own property. No one is taking that from you. 

Public schools are run by the government. The constitution states that the government can't favor one religion over the other so it tries to be neutral. School officials can't lead students in prayer but the children are not forbidden from praying on their own.

If you voluntarily own a business then you have to follow regulations. You can't discriminate as to who you serve but you don't have to include an offensive message on the cake. So, the baker couldn't refuse a cake to an interracial couple or a gay couple but they don't have to put anything that they find offensive on the cake.

The problem isn't that Christians are being treated unfairly but that they want special treatment because of their religion.