Theism vs. Atheism ... will it ever be settled? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Author

Message

Topic Search

Topic Options

timothy leary View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:01

Edited by timothy leary - July 22 2010 at 22:30

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:22

CPicard wrote:

Would had wanted to answer before, but I'm in Cuzco, so went to eat some local food, but due to the altitude and extremely cold weather (bellow 0), I was forced to come back to the hotel.

Yes, I wanted to talk about this problem: even if the Pope is the authority of the Catholic Church, it won't prevent some catholics to be bigots and show manifestations of intolerance and rejection.
The acts I was talking about weren't those of the Pope (who has some diplomatic oblications), but also (and maybe above all) those of the followers of the Catholic Church.

Of course, there's intolerance everywhere, as it has been proved here, not only among religious people, but also SOME atheists.

In France, it's well known that some "traditionalist" catholics don't and will never accept the message of tolerance and acceptation preached by the Pope.

Are you talking about the traditionalist Society of Sat Pius X founded by Marcel Lefebvre in Switzerland, Belgium and France?

Mons, Lefebvre, Mons Castro ayer and the four Bishops consecrated suffered excimunication by Apostolic Letter "Ecclesia Dei", written on July 2, 1988, and the priests named by this Bishops by him are in serious risk of following the path because they are suspended "Ad Divinis" (They can't celebrate Mass or administrate certain Sacraments), if they join the schism of Lefebvre (already deceased), they will be excoomunicated.

More can't be done, but it's a strong sanction

In Europe, we also saw some catholic priests advocating racist/xenophobic ideas.

That's wrong, and I'm sure the Vatican will take the necessary measures.

So, a spiritual/religious leader can say words which are to be "engraved" in the ideological and philosophical corpus of his cult/religion/church (and, in this context, words are acts), but not all the members of the cult would act (or talk) according to their leader.

It happens everywhere, but there's also an automatic excomuication for those who act in rebelion against the Pope or the Church, but I don't know how it works exactly.

I hope my post would clarify my "position" about the message of the Catholic Church and its reception by catholic followers.

The vast majority follows the dogma

Iván

Sorry for replying in blue, but I'm bored of writting quote before and after every phrase, I believe we need a quote icon

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 23 2010 at 01:28

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:25

Textbook wrote:

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Textbook wrote:

Ivan: You've solved nothing there. What is "true and holy" and how was that decided? You come back to the exact same problem.

What are you asking for?

A 150,000 pages document mentioning what is true and holy for other religions?

Please Textbook!

Iván

Why even participate in the discussion if this is the kind of answer you're going to give?

Don't get angry, my point is that it's ipossible to quote one by one the holy elements of each religion, this would be a huge task that would take decades.

My intention wasn't to be harsh, I have answered every post with respecyt.

Iván

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:30

I wasn't angry. I was genuinely saying that you that if you're going to bail out with "Hahaha, don't be silly, we can't define holiness" while at the same time arguing that the Catholic church have defined and identified holiness which is what marks them as superior, then the dialogue is a dead end for you.

I rather suspect that the Catholic church's definition of "holiness" is really quite simple and would not take decades to define at all. Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it "Anything that coincides with established Catholic doctrine/policy"?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:30

timothy leary wrote:

I am sure all the original inhabitants of south american heard the catholic church loud and clear as their culture was ruined and their gold stolen, and I am sure you will be able, Ivan, to square that up with the moral code Yeshua brought, that is right, Yeshua, not Jesus........A Jew

Ivan means Juan or John....Yeshua means Jesus....What's the problem?

Yes, Jesus was Jewish, we all know it, as a fact I mentioned it when talking about Jewish faith, which I respect, but don't share.

And for a second time yes the Church made terrible mistakes (The Pope already apologized for them), but don't try to teach me Latin American history please, I won't blame the Church for everything the Spanish Kingdom did until 1821 more or less.

Iván

timothy leary View Drop Down

Forum Senior Member

Joined: December 29 2005
Location: Lilliwaup, Wa.
Status: Offline
Points: 5319

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:31

okay Ivan, my apologies, sincerely

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:31

So if your church has made terrible mistakes, why are you sure that they're not mistaken about other things? How come they are suddenly infallible judges of what is holy? And how was it that those guided by god were mistaken anyway?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:35

Textbook wrote:

I wasn't angry. I was genuinely saying that you that if you're going to bail out with "Hahaha, don't be silly, we can't define holiness" while at the same time arguing that the Catholic church have defined and identified holiness which is what marks them as superior, then the dialogue is a dead end for you.

It wasn't my intention, believe me, when I want to be harsh it's obvious.

Now I don't believe anything holy has to coincide with the Catholic doctrine, The Pope has kissed the Koran in recognizing it as holy.

He has received and had conferences with the Dalai Lama, who I believe has nothing in common with Christian faith.

And yes, we can't define holiness, because it has taken a very long document to define Catholic Church definition of what is holy for us, imagine if the Pope had to mention everything that is holy on each and every religion.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 22 2010 at 22:45

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:37

Well obviously he has to otherwise how will people know what is correct or not?

"Well I could tell you what holiness is but it would take a long time."

So basically you're saying that giving people the information required to save their souls and enter paradise is too much of a bother and they're better off spending their time going to the movies or something.

Edited by Textbook - July 22 2010 at 22:38

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:45

Textbook wrote:

So if your church has made terrible mistakes, why are you sure that they're not mistaken about other things? How come they are suddenly infallible judges of what is holy? And how was it that those guided by god were mistaken anyway?

Never believed spending a night in Cuzco (with all the excellent pubs in the city) answering questions about Catholicism,

But my desire to share my faith without making evangelism, passion for theology (and the cold weather

) are strong.

Now, something has to be explained, the Church and the Pope can make mistakes as any human and human institution, the infallibility only works in mater of faith and when talking "Ex Cathedra", what is done in very few cases.

But the Pope made a general and open statement, of recognizing everything that is holy in every religion, this is good because he never limited it to A, B and C, but leaves that decision to God.

Now, the Pope can define what is holy for us, that's his prerogative and attribution conferred by the Jesus in Matthew 16: 18 - 19

Iván

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:47

So basically he doesn't really know anything, he's just trying to make friends for PR purposes. Thanks. Next.

thellama73 View Drop Down

Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: May 29 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 8368

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:49

Textbook wrote:

So basically he doesn't really know anything, he's just trying to make friends for PR purposes. Thanks. Next.

So basically, you don't really know anything, you're just trying to make enemies for ???? purposes. Wink

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:52

I'm not trying to make enemies at all. I believe that religion is nonsensical and I am arguing that viewpoint. Now that may make me the enemy of religious people but it is certainly not my aim. My aim, Quixotic though it may be, is to have people reconsider the wisdom of their faith.

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:54

Textbook wrote:

Well obviously he has to otherwise how will people know what is correct or not?

I understand your doubts, because you obviously haven't read the Catholic Catechism (neither have I fully, but consult it when I have doubts),

The information required by non Catholics to save their souls according to our dogmas is in a short paragraph on "Lumen Gentium":

Dogmatic Constitution on the Church - Lumen Gentium" (1964)

5. The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church."

You don't need to define what is holy to explain this, is even simpler, they don't need to follow any Catholic law or dogma, only to seek for God and follow the commands of their conscience.

Maybe it's harder for us Catholics.

Textbook wrote:

I'm not trying to make enemies at all. I believe that religion is nonsensical and I am arguing that viewpoint. Now that may make me the enemy of religious people but it is certainly not my aim. My aim, Quixotic though it may be, is to have people reconsider the wisdom of their faith.

I'm not your enemy, but please don't say it's PR only, it's in black and white in our catechism and 100% valid because it's an "Ex Cathedra" document that has absolute value for us.

Seems like you only want to make me fall in contradictions, but I replied honestly and in an open way to all your questions (a marathon), but you keep trying to find excuses to attack us.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 22 2010 at 23:00

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: July 22 2010 at 22:58

Good luck with that. Seriously do you ever, especially on an online forum, expect that to happen?
And not to be an ass, but you have had a bit of a...contentious attitude. If you honestly want to make people reconsider their faith, maybe a dialogue would be best. Sit down with some people one and one, face to face, and talk long about it. This is not the place, and your style and is not the best.

Though you admit it's impractical. Are you doing it for the sake of it? Are you sure deep down you dont want to be contentious? I see no point in doing what you do except for sh*ts and giggles.

Edit: For the record, I also think wanting/trying to make people reconsider their faith is, well disgusting. I believe religion is nonsensical but thats my opinion, I dont just tell it to people, and I certainly dont want to make anyone change their opinion.
I used to think religion causes a lot of problems, but now I think it is people who can't keep it as a private matter! You are part of the problem man.
K, out. Have fun.

Edited by JJLehto - July 22 2010 at 23:02

Textbook

Forum Senior Member

Joined: October 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 3281

Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:00

So is there any point in being specifically catholic?

And I'm sorry if you don't like it, but I do believe this is PR. I believe this statement was made as a concession to modern, inclusive sensibilities, to make the Catholic church look friendly and enticing.

"Follow the commands of their conscience" is a real minefield too, what exactly does that mean? How does it account for people with a very different conscience from yours?

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:03

JJLehto wrote:

Don't get angry my friend, the intentions of some people to discredit everything we believe in are obvious since their first post, but I also enjoy showing those who want to listen that the holes in our faith are much less than anybody will believe.

Iván

The T

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: October 16 2006
Location: FL, USA
Status: Offline
Points: 17493

Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:06

timothy leary wrote:

Edited by The T - July 22 2010 at 23:07

Ivan_Melgar_M View Drop Down

Special Collaborator

Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557

Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:07

Textbook wrote:

So is there any point in being specifically catholic?

"Follow the commands of their conscience" is a real minefield too, what exactly does that mean? How does it account for people with a very different conscience from yours?

This is my last reply to your posts, because I'm tired.

1.- Yes there is a point on being Catholic, I believe the human must search for the truth, and being that we believe the Cetholic Church is the true one as our Creed,. It would be dishonest to take another path if we believe is not the true.

1.- It doesnt say a conscience evaluated by the Catholic Church, it mentions THE CONSCIENCE OF EACH PERSON, remember that the Pope doesn't decie who is saved, God knows if a person is honest to his personal and unique conscience.

And no, it's not PR, because what is spoken "Ex Cahedra" is transcendental for us, because Jesus gave a an extreme power to Peter and for that reason to the Pope:

whatever you bind on earth will bea]'>[a] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will beb]'>[b] loosed in heaven."

And we take this seriously.

Thanks for an interesting debate.

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - July 23 2010 at 01:29

JJLehto

Prog Reviewer

Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Status: Offline
Points: 34550

Posted: July 22 2010 at 23:07

I suppose, I just see belief as a personal thing. I consider atheism a belief and I dont wanna hear it LOL

As I've said, catholic, atheist, satanist, worship the sun, worship joe pesci, just keep it to yourself. I think it should be a personal thing is all.

And I must say Ivan, back in my HS days I would've sided easily with atheists than religious folk, (though I was never atheist). As Ive gotten a bit older, I've noticed I generally enjoy talking about it all with religious folk, over atheists. Im not religious either, but yeah. And people like you, jampa, and Rob have helped confirm that. I've heard some nutballs....but religious people overall seem to be more open minded Smile

Edited by JJLehto - July 22 2010 at 23:08