cajela

I don't know about spitfire, but one of the things I like about the Catholic church in Australia is the way they keep getting in trouble with the pope for not being obedient enough. And most catholics I know hate the current archbishop here. And disagree with church policy on many things - contraception, condoms etc. Go Aussies!

Chili

Go Aussies go is OK by me but be prepared to accept the consequences of disobedience when things go wrong. It is one thing to be convicted as sinner but quite another to be diagnosed with HIV. The big difference here is that to stand convicted as sinner is equal to being born to eternal life (the cross of eternal salvation is for sinners only) while just the opposite is true when we are diagnosed with AIDS.

To recommend the use of condoms is not part of the game because we must survive the sin to stand convicted of sin. Now I would imagine that the Pope would be more 'condom friendly' if we would wrap them in 5 lbs boxes with a clear 'explosive sign' on all sides and a coffin on top of the box with a sign that says "open here." On second thought, the manufacturer might be wise to do this on his own before he is held responsible as a contributor to the spread of AIDS.

BadBadBad

What do you mean "so-called religion of peace?" Are you saying there is a real deal religion of peace?

Welcome to IIDB.

So your fight with atheists is only with the dishonest ones?

BadBadBad

Why is it so complicated?

What cogent reasons have you been given to believe?

Did God happen by accident?

BadBadBad

Who is a Christian?

Good question!

Hmmm. So there are criteria to judge these claims? Hmmm.

Ah but if I claim to be Orthodox, then I'm in huh?

Mainstream. So just go with the crowd, be a church person, and your in?

No, I see. You have to hold your beliefs in line with the majority, or you're out.


That sounds a bit egotistical for someone that claims to be a Christian. Did you ever read what it says in Matthew 6 about the hypocrites? Every sect of Christianity owes it's whole Christian frame of reference to the Catholic church? Of course Jesus the Son of God Almighty wouldn't have had anything to do with it. No kidding. You may be on to something here.

Now back to those cogent reasons. How about offering some cogent reasons for believing any of this nonsense?

Jobar

Welcome to II, spitfire. (Cool name, I always like that plane.)

So tell us, are you one of those Catholics who deny the validity of the second Vatican Council? ('Traditional Catholics' is the term, I think; we used to have a regular poster, Albert Cipriani, who was one. Sadly, he got himself banned for bad manners.)

Also, your remark concerning evolution makes me think you may not see quite eye to eye with the church hierarchy on this. We atheists are much less apt to jump on theistic evolutionists than we are on creationists, the young-Earthers in particular.

That said, most of us here find the idea of being saved from a 'sin' committed by probably-nonexistent ancestors; against a god even less likely to exist, by the 'sacrifice' of the god's son (who is, in some inexplicable way, also the god)- all that seems to us utter rubbish, and nonsensical. Although we are very glad to admit that Christians are normally better behaved than are Muslims, we can't say much about the rationality or clarity of your theology.

Spitfire

I can imagine a lot. What kind of apologetics would you consider to be less contemptible, however? Saying that I consider what I believe to be totally ridiculous yet I believe it anyway because it makes me feel so warm and fuzzy inside? Is that what you would rather hear? You won't hear it from me but I don't imagine you would find that much less contemptible.

Like I said before, I do not consider it to be misinformation! I don't believe that anyone is right even when they are wrong, and you are trying to get me to either say that I do or confess that my church has made a mistake and I don't care. And yes, I would, if I believed that yes my church were making a mistake but here I do not believe it has. I've given my reasons why and, if you find them contemptible, there's not much I can do about that, is there? I have never insinuated that you might be morally corrupt if you believe that the church should tell people that all they have to do is start using condoms and then they have nothing to worry about. I don't agree, but I don't boil with unimaginable contempt either, because I understand that you see the situation in a totally different light than I do.

Spitfire

I am not an Aussie! :grin:

Though, you being Australian yourself, I'm guessing you didn't mean to imply that as Austrians and Australians are naturally far less likely to get themselves mixed up with each other than people from other countries.

Spitfire

I'm saying that one isn't.

Thank you.

Dishonest would be the ones who claim to be religious but are only doing so to manipulate others or otherwise imagine that just saying they are religious is enough to actually make them religious. Practical atheism rather than explicit, in other words. Though what I really meant to say is that I am far more worried about other religions than I am about atheism.

Because it cannot be quickly summarized without cutting too many corners.

There is something rather than nothing, there is a universe rather than no universe, one thing is always the result of another, behind causality must be therefore some kind of meta-causality. If I had what any of you considered to be a "cogent" reason to believe it wouldn't be anything you hadn't heard before, would it? And all of you, being as logical as you all are, would therefore have to believe it and have believed it already, wouldn't you?

If majority ruled when it comes to truth, then I would believe that being Catholic means a baptism, a nice marriage, a funeral, and not much else.

For quite a long time we were not just a church of Jesus, the Son of God Almighty, we were the Church.

Sorry I can't answer more of your questions in more detail right now but I hope what I have said clears things up a little bit on where I stand even if you don't agree. I know you don't. I don't care if you do.

Spitfire

I'm not named after the plane, but I am familiar with it of course! And I think Claudius Dornier's "Pfeil" and the Lockheed P-38 were probably the coolest planes ever, historically important though the Spitfire may have been.

I don't deny the validity of the Second Vatican Council but I think there has been a lot of confusion over it and think the people who want to bring back the Latin Mass as the standard Mass of the Church do make some good points. Some of them are a little crazy, yes, but some of the really liberal Catholics are crazy too as far as I'm concerned.

If I expected peopel to approve of my theology there are better places I could be than here, that's for sure.

Got to run now, be back later.