Let's have an epic discussion about religion!

[thegreekdog]

Wrong. Answer to why you believe is faith. Answer to why you don't is lack of faith.

One need not believe a God does not exist, to not believe one does. You're answering a different question.

I changed my original answer back in like the fourth post.

[AAFitz]

If you believe in a deity, why do you do so?
If you don't believe in a deity, why don't you?

The answer to both question is faith.

Faith isn't required to answer that question. From your perspective the question that requires faith is 'does god exist?'.

Yeah, that's a fair point. I retract that my answer is an answer to both questions.

I retract my commenting on your original answer that you retracted.

It is a common misconception about atheists though. Many believers seem to simply assume that because someone does not believe in God, that they firmly believe there is not a God, but the difference between not believing in God, and believing there definitely is not one, is rather massive, and in the limbo in which many atheists and religious fight their pointless battles.

[pmchugh]

I think you went further than that, surely a catholic must believe that the pope is particularly holy. In fact that the holiness of the church and the pope are one of the main defining features of Catholicism compared to other christian beliefs.

I do think the pope is particularly holy, but he is still just a guy. He's not a deity.

May I ask what makes the pope particularly Holy? Is it because he dedicates a lot of time to the church and his good deeds etc or is it implicit in him being made Pope?

The former, although many may say both.

Personally I don't think you can claim to be a Catholic unless you say that the Pope, whoever he may be at the time is the most holy person on earth. And unless you think the selection process is divinely guided or the pope is divinely guided this is very unlikely to be true.

In trying to search for more information on papal infallibility I kept coming across Protestant vs Catholic debates. Not that this really matters all that much but it seems to me that identifying as a Catholic brings on a lot of additional baggage rather than just being a Christian (as if that isn't enough) and you don't seem particularly concerned with that. Can I ask why you identify specifically as a Catholic?

[thegreekdog]

I think you went further than that, surely a catholic must believe that the pope is particularly holy. In fact that the holiness of the church and the pope are one of the main defining features of Catholicism compared to other christian beliefs.

I do think the pope is particularly holy, but he is still just a guy. He's not a deity.

May I ask what makes the pope particularly Holy? Is it because he dedicates a lot of time to the church and his good deeds etc or is it implicit in him being made Pope?

The former, although many may say both.

Personally I don't think you can claim to be a Catholic unless you say that the Pope, whoever he may be at the time is the most holy person on earth. And unless you think the selection process is divinely guided or the pope is divinely guided this is very unlikely to be true.

In trying to search for more information on papal infallibility I kept coming across Protestant vs Catholic debates. Not that this really matters all that much but it seems to me that identifying as a Catholic brings on a lot of additional baggage rather than just being a Christian (as if that isn't enough) and you don't seem particularly concerned with that. Can I ask why you identify specifically as a Catholic?

A requirement for being holy is not being a priest (or cardinal or pope).

The Protestant vs. Catholic debates with respect to papal infallibility had to do with papal involvement in matters of state and that the Church did not accept criticism well. If we boil the debate down to its core though, it was about people being able to do what they want (and I mean that from a general perspective, not a religious one).

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

[pmchugh]

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

Why Catholic and not another Christian religion. Although feel free to say why you are religious in the first place if you want.

[thegreekdog]

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

Why Catholic and not another Christian religion. Although feel free to say why you are religious in the first place if you want.

Well, I answered the religious portion in the beginning of the thread.

I've only ever experienced Baptist and Greek Orthodox ceremonies (from the Christian side of things). Baptism is not holy enough for me, if that makes sense (which maybe it doesn't if you're an atheist). I suppose I could do Greek Orthodox, but I'm more used to Catholicism.

[GreecePwns]

I am what some have called a deist, but I haven't done enough (read: any) research on deism to really say if its true or not.

First I will start with whether or not God exists. And I will also say that in this post I separate the existence of God from the subscription to a religion.

There are many different scientific theories floating around explaining how this universe came to be. The big bang theory states (and I'm paraphrasing) that something caused a singular point of infinite mass and zero volume to expand. One thing led to another, and here we are. Whether or not the theory is the correct one, where did that "stuff" come from? Science does not explain this, but this is not a fault of science. It is merely the nature of science to not speculate on unexperimentable things. Well where did that singular point of infinite mass and zero volume come from? Where did the stuff that made the stuff that made that made that point come from? As Hobbes wrote, eventually there needs to be a point where there is one, timeless being outside of our universe that created it and all the rules that govern it. This is my belief until science proves you can make something from nothing.

Now on to religion.

I disregard claims made that a certain book is revealed word of god. Especially since those same books claim that said god is incomprehensible (or provide examples of it at the beginning of every chapter).

I also disregard claims made that this god figure created us in his image. How do we know what god looks like? How do we know its a he (or has gender at all)?

Since this universe operates under rules specifically created by a god figure, there are no "miracles," only biological or physical phenomena that either couldn't or can't currently be explained until further discoveries are made to explain them.

Since this god figure is incomprehensible, we can not derive dogmas from anything related to revelations or miracles, including all form of religion.

And finally, if it weren't obvious enough, we cannot derive religions from other religions.

[AAFitz]

I am what some have called a deist, but I haven't done enough (read: any) research on deism to really say if its true or not.

First I will start with whether or not God exists. And I will also say that in this post I separate the existence of God from the subscription to a religion.

There are many different scientific theories floating around explaining how this universe came to be. The big bang theory states (and I'm paraphrasing) that something caused a singular point of infinite mass and zero volume to expand. One thing led to another, and here we are. Whether or not the theory is the correct one, where did that "stuff" come from? Science does not explain this, but this is not a fault of science. It is merely the nature of science to not speculate on unexperimentable things. Well where did that singular point of infinite mass and zero volume come from? Where did the stuff that made the stuff that made that made that point come from? As Hobbes wrote, eventually there needs to be a point where there is one, timeless being outside of our universe that created it and all the rules that govern it. This is my belief until science proves you can make something from nothing.

Now on to religion.

I disregard claims made that a certain book is revealed word of god. Especially since those same books claim that said god is incomprehensible (or provide examples of it at the beginning of every chapter).

I also disregard claims made that this god figure created us in his image. How do we know what god looks like? How do we know its a he (or has gender at all)?

Since this universe operates under rules specifically created by a god figure, there are no "miracles," only biological or physical phenomena that either couldn't or can't currently be explained until further discoveries are made to explain them.

Since this god figure is incomprehensible, we can not derive dogmas from anything related to revelations or miracles, including all form of religion.

And finally, if it weren't obvious enough, we cannot derive religions from other religions.

This is the exact justification for the belief in RA, and the thunder God. The inability to explain origin, is not a very reasonable basis to assume a deity from a pure rational point of view.

[b.k. barunt]

According to the Bible, God has no "origin". He is referred to as "the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end". God's dwelling is eternity and there is no time in eternity. As far as i know neither Ra or Thor worshippers had any idea that such a realm existed - if they did they didn't bother to mention it, so your analogy there is rather weak. The concept of eternity is hard to grok on with our finite minds, but i wouldn't call it irrational. Evolutionists, who insist on an origin, have no trouble believing that something came out of nothing - i would call this irrational.

[GreecePwns]

This is the exact justification for the belief in RA, and the thunder God. The inability to explain origin, is not a very reasonable basis to assume a deity from a pure rational point of view.

Calling it Ra or Thor and giving it characteristics is an explanation of what we know is inexplicable until further scientific discoveries, which in my view is irrational. But when explaining the origin of the universe and the origin of what came before the universe, eventually you reach a point where something is created from nothing, and until science shows that this can happen within the laws of physics, the rational point of view would be that some thing that exists outside the laws of the universe created it and the rules that govern it.

It is also an assumption to say that the origin of the universe is something created from nothing, because there is no proof of this ever happening in the history of the universe. One must take a further step and look at the possibility of a presence outside of our universe, because that is the only way something can be created from nothing until science proves otherwise.

[pmchugh]

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

Why Catholic and not another Christian religion. Although feel free to say why you are religious in the first place if you want.

Well, I answered the religious portion in the beginning of the thread.

I've only ever experienced Baptist and Greek Orthodox ceremonies (from the Christian side of things). Baptism is not holy enough for me, if that makes sense (which maybe it doesn't if you're an atheist). I suppose I could do Greek Orthodox, but I'm more used to Catholicism.

You are "more used to it"? Sounds like you don't care and/or haven't thought about which sect you belong to. I would say you are not a Catholic, saying you are one is not enough to quantify being one IMO.

[thegreekdog]

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

Why Catholic and not another Christian religion. Although feel free to say why you are religious in the first place if you want.

Well, I answered the religious portion in the beginning of the thread.

I've only ever experienced Baptist and Greek Orthodox ceremonies (from the Christian side of things). Baptism is not holy enough for me, if that makes sense (which maybe it doesn't if you're an atheist). I suppose I could do Greek Orthodox, but I'm more used to Catholicism.

You are "more used to it"? Sounds like you don't care and/or haven't thought about which sect you belong to. I would say you are not a Catholic, saying you are one is not enough to quantify being one IMO.

That's an interesting theory. I'll ask the priest this weekend what qualifies me to be a Catholic and let you know what he says.

Alternatively, you can tell me the answer you wanted me to give and we can have that debate. I'm sure you have some arrow in your quiver to deal with a Catholic saying his or her religion is better than the others. So why don't you bring out your arguments and let's discuss instead of this nonsense.

[pimpdave]

Don't they hand out baptismal papers or something? That would be a document declaring someone a Catholic, right?

[pmchugh]

As to your question - do you mean why Catholic and not another Christian religion or why Catholic and not another religion or why Catholic and not atheist?

Why Catholic and not another Christian religion. Although feel free to say why you are religious in the first place if you want.

Well, I answered the religious portion in the beginning of the thread.

I've only ever experienced Baptist and Greek Orthodox ceremonies (from the Christian side of things). Baptism is not holy enough for me, if that makes sense (which maybe it doesn't if you're an atheist). I suppose I could do Greek Orthodox, but I'm more used to Catholicism.

You are "more used to it"? Sounds like you don't care and/or haven't thought about which sect you belong to. I would say you are not a Catholic, saying you are one is not enough to quantify being one IMO.

That's an interesting theory. I'll ask the priest this weekend what qualifies me to be a Catholic and let you know what he says.

Alternatively, you can tell me the answer you wanted me to give and we can have that debate. I'm sure you have some arrow in your quiver to deal with a Catholic saying his or her religion is better than the others. So why don't you bring out your arguments and let's discuss instead of this nonsense.

Actually that wasn't the point, I was literally interested to know why you believe in Catholicism. It is interesting to me to see how people choose between the different sects of a religion because 99/100 the reasons they give for belief in a God are entirely different from why they follow a particular sect. Experiencing God seems to be a personal issue and most peoples beliefs stem from there, trying to decipher which God, which book and which understanding of that book are entirely different propositions that seem to nearly always be associated with your family or community rather than a personal journey.

Sometimes it brings up a more constructive debate as religious people will not have it said that there is no God, but they will readily admit they do not everything about God.

As for the specific case of Catholicism, I really don't understand. Why associate yourself with centuries of horrific acts on arbitrary terms? I can understand why a person might say that God must have created the universe (i've been there), even if I don't agree with it but I do not understand why you would turn round and say you identify with a particular sect without analysing what that sect says about God in comparison with others.

[thegreekdog]

Actually that wasn't the point, I was literally interested to know why you believe in Catholicism. It is interesting to me to see how people choose between the different sects of a religion because 99/100 the reasons they give for belief in a God are entirely different from why they follow a particular sect. Experiencing God seems to be a personal issue and most peoples beliefs stem from there, trying to decipher which God, which book and which understanding of that book are entirely different propositions that seem to nearly always be associated with your family or community rather than a personal journey.

Sometimes it brings up a more constructive debate as religious people will not have it said that there is no God, but they will readily admit they do not everything about God.

As for the specific case of Catholicism, I really don't understand. Why associate yourself with centuries of horrific acts on arbitrary terms? I can understand why a person might say that God must have created the universe (i've been there), even if I don't agree with it but I do not understand why you would turn round and say you identify with a particular sect without analysing what that sect says about God in comparison with others.

Okay, well apparently you're asking in earnest, so I'll spend some more time answering your questions.

I've looked at the following religions in some depth - Catholicism, Islam, Baptist, Judaism, and Greek Orthodox. I nixed Islam and Judaism for two reasons: (1) I believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and (2) It would kill my mother. So that left me with three. I did not actively choose Catholicism over the other Christian religions (i.e. I was already a practicing Catholic when I examined the other two religions). So, part of my choice was that I was used to Catholicism. Additionally, the Catholic Church is bigger and more effective than the other two religions. Further, the Catholic Church is older (which is not necessarily better). Finally, I felt better going to Catholic mass than services for Baptists or Greek Orthodox... some of that was likely because I was used to Catholicism and/or the different priests/preachers I saw speak.

In sum, my decision was not arbitrary... taking into account the above factors as well as that I was raised Catholic, I don't find those to be arbitrary. As far as the horrific acts of the Catholic Church, I find those to be of a nonreligious nature (i.e. there were not religious factors associated with those acts). And I have examined the latest bad acts (defense of priest abuse of children) which was what caused me to examine Islam as a viable alternative.

[BigBallinStalin]

I knew it, thegreekdog. I knew it...

[pmchugh]

Actually that wasn't the point, I was literally interested to know why you believe in Catholicism. It is interesting to me to see how people choose between the different sects of a religion because 99/100 the reasons they give for belief in a God are entirely different from why they follow a particular sect. Experiencing God seems to be a personal issue and most peoples beliefs stem from there, trying to decipher which God, which book and which understanding of that book are entirely different propositions that seem to nearly always be associated with your family or community rather than a personal journey.

Sometimes it brings up a more constructive debate as religious people will not have it said that there is no God, but they will readily admit they do not everything about God.

As for the specific case of Catholicism, I really don't understand. Why associate yourself with centuries of horrific acts on arbitrary terms? I can understand why a person might say that God must have created the universe (i've been there), even if I don't agree with it but I do not understand why you would turn round and say you identify with a particular sect without analysing what that sect says about God in comparison with others.

Okay, well apparently you're asking in earnest, so I'll spend some more time answering your questions.

I've looked at the following religions in some depth - Catholicism, Islam, Baptist, Judaism, and Greek Orthodox. I nixed Islam and Judaism for two reasons: (1) I believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and (2) It would kill my mother. So that left me with three. I did not actively choose Catholicism over the other Christian religions (i.e. I was already a practicing Catholic when I examined the other two religions). So, part of my choice was that I was used to Catholicism. Additionally, the Catholic Church is bigger and more effective than the other two religions. Further, the Catholic Church is older (which is not necessarily better). Finally, I felt better going to Catholic mass than services for Baptists or Greek Orthodox... some of that was likely because I was used to Catholicism and/or the different priests/preachers I saw speak.

In sum, my decision was not arbitrary... taking into account the above factors as well as that I was raised Catholic, I don't find those to be arbitrary. As far as the horrific acts of the Catholic Church, I find those to be of a nonreligious nature (i.e. there were not religious factors associated with those acts). And I have examined the latest bad acts (defense of priest abuse of children) which was what caused me to examine Islam as a viable alternative.

I am surprised by your honesty. It pretty much sounds like you admit you chose Catholicism due to your community and upbringing. (minus the jesus belief)

[thegreekdog]

Actually that wasn't the point, I was literally interested to know why you believe in Catholicism. It is interesting to me to see how people choose between the different sects of a religion because 99/100 the reasons they give for belief in a God are entirely different from why they follow a particular sect. Experiencing God seems to be a personal issue and most peoples beliefs stem from there, trying to decipher which God, which book and which understanding of that book are entirely different propositions that seem to nearly always be associated with your family or community rather than a personal journey.

Sometimes it brings up a more constructive debate as religious people will not have it said that there is no God, but they will readily admit they do not everything about God.

As for the specific case of Catholicism, I really don't understand. Why associate yourself with centuries of horrific acts on arbitrary terms? I can understand why a person might say that God must have created the universe (i've been there), even if I don't agree with it but I do not understand why you would turn round and say you identify with a particular sect without analysing what that sect says about God in comparison with others.

Okay, well apparently you're asking in earnest, so I'll spend some more time answering your questions.

I've looked at the following religions in some depth - Catholicism, Islam, Baptist, Judaism, and Greek Orthodox. I nixed Islam and Judaism for two reasons: (1) I believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and (2) It would kill my mother. So that left me with three. I did not actively choose Catholicism over the other Christian religions (i.e. I was already a practicing Catholic when I examined the other two religions). So, part of my choice was that I was used to Catholicism. Additionally, the Catholic Church is bigger and more effective than the other two religions. Further, the Catholic Church is older (which is not necessarily better). Finally, I felt better going to Catholic mass than services for Baptists or Greek Orthodox... some of that was likely because I was used to Catholicism and/or the different priests/preachers I saw speak.

In sum, my decision was not arbitrary... taking into account the above factors as well as that I was raised Catholic, I don't find those to be arbitrary. As far as the horrific acts of the Catholic Church, I find those to be of a nonreligious nature (i.e. there were not religious factors associated with those acts). And I have examined the latest bad acts (defense of priest abuse of children) which was what caused me to examine Islam as a viable alternative.

I am surprised by your honesty. It pretty much sounds like you admit you chose Catholicism due to your community and upbringing. (minus the jesus belief)

I think that was part of it, although there were other elements involved (my post above contains those other elements... no need for me to type them again).

[pmchugh]

Age of church- doesn't affect its correctness
Size of church- doesn't affect its correctness
What religion your community/family believes in- doesn't affect its correctness
Being used to Catholic services- doesn't affect its correctness.

And you said yourself the reason why you felt better at Catholic services was probably down to your upbringing.

[BigBallinStalin]

How is TGD's justification wrong or undesirable?

[pmchugh]

How is TGD's justification wrong or undesirable?

Personally I would not want to be shown to be believing in something that has no basis in reasoning, even if that reasoning is self contained. (i.e. I believe in God because I feel his presence etc.)

[BigBallinStalin]

How is TGD's justification wrong or undesirable?

Personally I would not want to be shown to be believing in something that has no basis in reasoning, even if that reasoning is self contained. (i.e. I believe in God because I feel his presence etc.)

From what I've read, he adheres to Catholicism in particular because he intends to maintain good relations with his momma and others. Furthermore, staying connected with one's social network brings many benefits. Converting to a different religion incurs high costs because a new social network needs to be developed, and the old one might be damaged beyond repair.

That seems reasonable to me. To destroy those opportunities in order to be atheist or a Muslim doesn't seem reasonable.

[b.k. barunt]

As far as the horrific acts of the Catholic Church, I find those to be of a nonreligious nature (i.e. there were not religious factors associated with those acts). And I have examined the latest bad acts (defense of priest abuse of children) which was what caused me to examine Islam as a viable alternative.

How can you say that the horrific acts of the church were of a nonreligious nature? No religious factors?? I know you're familiar with the inquisitions - how can you say these were "nonreligious"? The sole purpose of the inquisitions was to torture and kill any who disagreed with Catholic doctrine. How about the various crusades against those who broke away from the church? The Waldensians, the Cathars, the Albigensians, the Anabaptists, etc. all had religious crusades against them which were ordered by the popes. The intent was to torture and kill these people because of their beliefs. How can you say this was nonreligious? You have always been, in my opinion, one of the most rational and logical posters on the forum, so i can't let this pass - i have to call you on it.

I understand your reasons for remaining Catholic, as i married into a French Catholic family in south Louisiana - you don't get any more Catholic than that (unless of course you're Italian). The rites and rituals of the Catholic Church have a deceptively religious aura and a Catholic mass definitely feels more solemn and holy than a Baptist sermon. Do we find God by our feelings? I don't know about you but my feelings have gotten me into a lot of trouble and stoopid mistakes over the years. Our feelings are fickle and can be easily manipulated. It's not about how something feels but about whether it's true or not. Jesus said "Ye shall know them by their fruits" and the fruits of Catholicism are not pretty when you look at the history of it.

If you want to find God try going directly to the source instead of one of the man made institutions. The Bible would be the source for any form of Christianity and the Koran would be the source for Islam. If you trust in a church to steer you in the right direction you're letting someone else do your search for you. Go to the source.

[pmchugh]

How is TGD's justification wrong or undesirable?

Personally I would not want to be shown to be believing in something that has no basis in reasoning, even if that reasoning is self contained. (i.e. I believe in God because I feel his presence etc.)

From what I've read, he adheres to Catholicism in particular because he intends to maintain good relations with his momma and others. Furthermore, staying connecting with one's social network brings many benefits. Converting to a different religion incurs high costs because a new social network needs to be developed, and the old one might be damaged beyond repair.

That seems reasonable to me. To destroy those opportunities in order to be atheist or a Muslim doesn't seem reasonable.

Is that a reason to be a Catholic? Or to pretend you are a Catholic regardless of your actual beliefs?

[thegreekdog]

As far as the horrific acts of the Catholic Church, I find those to be of a nonreligious nature (i.e. there were not religious factors associated with those acts). And I have examined the latest bad acts (defense of priest abuse of children) which was what caused me to examine Islam as a viable alternative.

How can you say that the horrific acts of the church were of a nonreligious nature? No religious factors?? I know you're familiar with the inquisitions - how can you say these were "nonreligious"? The sole purpose of the inquisitions was to torture and kill any who disagreed with Catholic doctrine. How about the various crusades against those who broke away from the church? The Waldensians, the Cathars, the Albigensians, the Anabaptists, etc. all had religious crusades against them which were ordered by the popes. The intent was to torture and kill these people because of their beliefs. How can you say this was nonreligious? You have always been, in my opinion, one of the most rational and logical posters on the forum, so i can't let this pass - i have to call you on it.

I understand your reasons for remaining Catholic, as i married into a French Catholic family in south Louisiana - you don't get any more Catholic than that (unless of course you're Italian). The rites and rituals of the Catholic Church have a deceptively religious aura and a Catholic mass definitely feels more solemn and holy than a Baptist sermon. Do we find God by our feelings? I don't know about you but my feelings have gotten me into a lot of trouble and stoopid mistakes over the years. Our feelings are fickle and can be easily manipulated. It's not about how something feels but about whether it's true or not. Jesus said "Ye shall know them by their fruits" and the fruits of Catholicism are not pretty when you look at the history of it.

If you want to find God try going directly to the source instead of one of the man made institutions. The Bible would be the source for any form of Christianity and the Koran would be the source for Islam. If you trust in a church to steer you in the right direction you're letting someone else do your search for you. Go to the source.

Throughout history there have been many actions and atrocities that have been done in the name of the religion. But if you study these actions and atrocities, you will understand that religion was not the motivating factor, but a tool. Religion was the justification, but it most certainly was not the reason. Now, having typed all that, I will note that I'm not proud of the Catholic Church and some of its activities, but I'm certainly aware that those activities were committed by men for the purpose of advancing their own wealth, stature, and power.

Let's take the Spanish Inquisition as an example. First, but less important, was that there were not a lot of deaths associated with the inquisition. Second, and far more important, were the reasons behind the inquisition. The Spanish Inquisition served the purposes of the King and Queen of Spain... it was carried out by church members but at the direction of the monarchy and was used to consolidated power and wealth. Were there religious elements of the Spanish Inquisition? Sure, the inquisition targeted certain religious groups (Jews and Muslims). But the reason behind the Inquisition was not "let's kill or expel everyone who's not Catholic."

Similarly, the Crusades were ostensibly about conquering the holy lands. But they were also a power grab and a wealth grab. So what was the real motivation? Power and wealth or religion? To the people who led the crusades, it was power and wealth. To the people who voluntarily joined (there were not many) it was religion.

As for the rest of your post (urging me to go to the source), I've heard similar arguments from women I've dated and some of my friends. My personal life has not been adversely affected by my practicing of the Catholic religion. If and when that happens, I'll take another look. Sadly, the Spanish Inquisition is not on my list of reasons not to be a Catholic. Similarly, September 11th was not on my list of reasons not to be a Muslim (when I was considering converting). The closest I've come to converting was the Church's insistence on defending priests accused (rightfully) of child abuse... and that didn't get me there.

Oh, and my mom's Italian.