R
Ronald_E
Guest
All, I have a question. What was your exposure to religion when you were a child?
- Status
S
sambos671
Guest
What makes the Nazi of WWII less right than the Allies? Species survival is not dependent on morals. Dogs have no morals though they do have pack mentality. They bite each other they steal from each other the dominant member leads the pack unless it is surplanted by another more aggressive, stronge, agile, or crafty than the other. Our morality makes no sence based on natural evolution. Accordingly, Nazi may be considered right or not having done anything wrong other than loosing the war. What is your thoughts on this?
C
CatsAndDogs
Guest
So, you’re not interested in how we see:
- Birth control is at best violence to spousal relationships, and at worst murder?
- That the Consecrated Host is really (in reality) Jesus?
- That the self-infliction of hell is necessary for justice to exist?
- That the Holy Trinity is simply a truth which has been given to us by God Himself?
- That our Mother Mary’s chastity was the result of her wisdom and holiness?
- That God gives us free will as an absolute gift which He will not violate while himself possessing the ability of omnipotence, one aspect of which is omniscience?
- That there is an absolute “ground-level” basis for the orderliness of the universe, which can only be from God?
Now, that assumes that you’re here for some reason other than simply to mock Catholics. Are you in fact here for some other reason?
:shamrock2:
A
Allnamesused
Guest
I would say that both the allies and axis powers committed their fair share of atrocities, but the history books clearly suggest that Germans committed far more than any other individual nation. The whole evolution point you make is a bit of a red herring, but I’ll answer your question. Among multi-celled organisms on this planet, humanity has achieved supremacy. This supremacy is the direct result of the intellectual capabilities that our brain provides us, which is in turn the direct result of eons of evolution. The more complicated and capable the brain of a species is, the more complicated and extravagant it’s desires become. Lower species seek only to consume, reproduce and survive, that’s all they know and that’s all the care about. The more complicated the brain, the more complicated the desires. A dog will seek to consume and reproduce, but will also seek to develop emotional bonds with others; sometimes they are very deep bonds. Dogs will also seek to be entertained. Humans whose brains are far more developed than a dog’s will also seek these things, but will also have other intellectual pursuits when given the chance. Humans will attempt to answer the questions that a dog could never even conceive of. Maslow does a pretty good job of describing what drives the average human (individual and society) and under what circumstances a human will elevate what he perceives he has need of. Morality, IMO, are the decisions that best put humanity in a position where it can pursue those needs, whether real or perceived. Whether morality affects our survivability as a species or not is somewhat irrelevant (unless of course it’s all that keeps us from destroying ourselves), but rather it’s a consequence of our development as a species. Morality is the consensus as to what will and will not make our existence here on earth as close to pleasant as possible. We know that we don’t like to be killed, so we make rules against it; we know that we don’t like to be tortured so we make rules against it; we know that we don’t like to be enslaved so we make rules against it. Sometimes we selfishly protect only whose who share our characteristics (e.g. race, religion, gender, economic status, nationality) and sometimes we make the enlightened decision to protect everyone equally. Sadly, sometimes we have no say in the matter (dictatorships and occasionally in constitution based law systems). Of course, some people may not care about protecting others but will at the same time understand that living within the bounds of the moral consensus is their best chance of living a happy and fulfilling life.
Now, some people will say that a secular based moral consensus is not consistent with anything other than the current perceptions and attitudes of society, and to an extent that is true. But at the same time, somethings will never change. Humans typically do not like being killed, tortured, disrespected, robbed…etc.; and to that extent it will possess a certain degree of consistency.
Ideally we would all be able to live our lives according to how we each see fit; and, if the theist’s notion that we all have an innate knowledge of right and wrong given to us by god were true, this might be a possibility. Clearly this is not the case. Frequently while in the pursuit of one’s desires an individuals actions (whether intentional or not) may come to interfere with another’s ability to live their life in peace. A moral consensus must be developed in such situations to determine who’s “rights” would take precedence. Also, there are times when a consensus must be developed when it becomes clear that a behavior which once seemed acceptable turns out to have consequences that were not originally anticipated. For example, violent video games and movies. Originally, many people thought that what goes on in the privacy of one’s home is nobody else’s business; but what if it turns out that allowing children to watch and/or play violent games and movies makes them more prone towards violence when they grow up? In such a situation, a consensus could develop that such media should be strictly limited or banned all together. The same thing could also happen (and has) even if in reality these forms of media had no real effect on a person’s disposition towards violence at all. Sometimes a moral consensus is based on nothing more than perception.
Ultimately, there are countless things that effect a communities morality; primary among these factors is where the community as a whole sits within Maslow’s hierarchy. I have never said that there is no God, and likely will never say such a thing; however, I do believe without a doubt that there would exist a moral system in this world regardless as to whether one exists or not.
S
sambos671
Guest
So according to your hypothesis the more evolved or developed a life form is by necessity of intellect it is more moral? The a being more advanced than us is by necessity more moral? I disagree. Though we don’t have anything which to prove out the statement (mores the pity). The fact is morality is irrelevant to evolution and human development. The best mode of survival for the human out side of morality or a higher purpose is Orwellian government. Yet liberty seems to be the inate state or desire of man.
I never indicated that you don’t believe in God. This thread was for the purpose of asking athiest questions. So I am. I’m curious.
A
Allnamesused
Guest
Essentially I’m saying that the more evolved a species’ intellect is, the greater the desire of each member of the species to exist in an orderly and peaceful environment…and the greater it’s intellect the more likely it is to figure out how to accomplish this. Morality is the means towards that end; it is naught but our understanding of how we wish to live and how best to achieve that goal. Morality has nothing to do with intrinsic goods and evils. Our intellect is the result of our evolution and our morality is the result of our intellect. If somewhere in this universe there is a species with a greater intellect than our own (not too hard to imagine) then it may have developed a better understanding of how to exist in peace and harmony (again ultimately benefiting everyone in said species); and thus one could argue that they were morally superior to ourselves. Whether that species exists or not…who knows.
As far as your reference to an Orwellian government being best suited to meet our survivability, you might be correct…China certainly seems to think so. Of course we don’t consciously make decisions based on whether or not it fits the Darwinian definition of survivability. We make decisions based upon our flawed understanding of how they will benefit us and our loved ones. I would not claim that we were perfect. Evolution is always a work in progress, and never could it be said that a species has completed it’s evolution. It is just a series of beneficial accidents that currently can be neither predicted or controlled.
Note, I am not necessarily equating intellect with superiority. While humans are dominate among multi-celled lifeforms on this planet (IMO) true dominion over this planet probably belongs to various bacteria, who posses neither an intellect nor morality (no offense bacteria).
A
Allnamesused
Guest
Listen. I like catholics…I actually know one, a guy named Steve…perhaps you know him. I’m not going to re debate Catholic theology, I’m not going to convince you and you’re not going to convince me. So why am I here “mocking” Catholics? I’m not mocking you, it’s just that I’m through with sitting ideally by while people continue to go on assuming that the existence god is a given and that there’s is the only proper way to consider him. I just want folks to seriously give consideration to the alternative. Most religious folks live with their head buried in their particular religious book. Since they insist on view the world with their bible (or Koran or Book of Mormon) colored glasses, I’m going to bring the world to them. I’m particularly harsh with protestant and Muslims who I have absolutely zero respect for. I do actually respect Catholics. You guys at least try to insert logic and reason into your arguments. Everyone else just spits out scriptural verse after verse as if it’s truth was indisputable and there was no reason to consider anything else.
B
bbarrick8383
Guest
Your going to bring the world to them? As if they do not control their own world or environment. I have sat back the last 10 years and submitted questions to myself of Gods existence after being raised in a strict Protestant religion in a small town environment.
I can tell you after spending many years on the east coast, you will not find many people with half the morals of small town folk in the Mid-West who, yes, spend a lot of their time in Protestant Churches. I have learned the errors of my ways as a Protestant, and wish to learn as much as I can about Catholicism. But, these Protestant people here live the simple life with their heads in their Bibles, happy and hard working with high morals.
Maybe you should sit idly by, do and say nothing and let those who put faith in God and believe in the natural way of things be. Everyone would be better off that way.
R
Ronald_E
Guest
I belong to the catholic faith. I am not a catholic. I agree that many sit and read scripture and work hard and state that they are happy while the rest of the world goes on with war, genocide and general suffering. We will give our support to local causes or give support to world charities that support the poor and feel good about it and think that we are good Christians. I returned to my Catholic faith in '05 after being away 40 years. I returned due to experiences that could only be described as miraculous or mystical and not because of any effort on my part. I saw a mystical reality to the faith that I had never seen before which then created a picture of self and others as united in a quantum entanglement of either love or fear.
I began to see that God is Love and that this love is the souce of all creation. This Love is not divisive, rather, this Love unites.
I have been extremely disappointed in most of the catholics I hear on catholic radio who are representing my faith. I hear a hardness in their message and a lack of a mystical vision based on Love. They talk about the relativism of the secular world but do not see that they are living our faith in a relativistic manner.
They will rage about abortion but will go on pilgrimages, vacations, or pursue the routines of their everyday lives and think that they are living the faith faithfully. They will say that we are not to be conformed to the way of this world but will debate theology or pursue political power as a means of participating in what they describe as ‘spiritual warfare’.
As catholics we show the world what our faith is by our actions and then our words. If we do not love our neighbors and give up everything for our faith then we are living our faith in a relativistic manner.
Those who have the mystic’s view are then dismissed to the fringes and are overpowered by the loud screaming of the extroverts who have the truth of the faith but not the heart of the faith. John Paul II was more mystic than theologian. That is why he drew so many to him.
I was drawn into my catholic faith through the mystical power of God’s Love and not through theology. The emphasis of theology as truth hardens the heart and prevents a deepening of understanding of the mystical power of God’s Love as it works in everyone.
If we as Catholics do not view everything in our faith through the lens of God is Love then we will divide and harm the innocents who do not know this. We will live our lives and our faith in a materialistic and relativistic way that prevents the Light of God’s Love from being seen by others outside our faith.
We will miss the mystical life that is the heart of our faith and this is what really saddens me.
S
sambos671
Guest
There is no evidence of this in the natural order. I can buy that the more advanced a species is the more complicated its desires or takes on desires become but that does not equate to an orderly and peaceful environment. Like I’ve mentioned before rational thought would indicate that an orderly and peaceful environment is probably best established by totalitarian rule. Humans operate though out of a need for liberty. You would think that our rational ability would move us in this direction but no the “enlightened thinkers” move towards liberty.
Still in order to have a peaceful environment can be accomplished by violence and total subjection of all else. Morality is irrelevant and an inefficient way of accomplishing these goals (which I doubt man has).
S
sambos671
Guest
I don’t think the bacteria are offended. They are probably greatful for your presense since they eat and breed best in an animal lifeform it seems.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
Ron, how do you see and define love? As it pertains to us, our relationship with God and with others, what is love? How do we express love towards others and towards God?
R
Ronald_E
Guest
Thanks for asking JMJ. It just hit me writing your initials. They define love. I will explain more later. Your initials describe it perfectly.
J
JMJ_coder
Guest
I agree, the Holy Family is an ideal icon of love.
Thanks, I await your answer.
R
Ronald_E
Guest
JMJ, it is so long to explain but so easy for me to see. It took me 58 years to be at the point I am now. It took God an instant to give me the Grace to begin to understand His Love.I agree, the Holy Family is an ideal icon of love.
I had a recurring dream around Christmas of '04. I was in a city where the light had a brown tint and it was right before dark. The streets were narrow and the people had dead eyes.
I awakened and opened my eyes looking at the ceiling. I felt distressed but not upset. I returned to sleep and the dream started again. This never happened before. I awakened again looking up at the ceiling. It took me a few minutes to feel sleepy again. I figured I would analyze it in the morning. I returned to sleep and the dream continued for a third time.
I awakened again and instead of looking up at the ceiling I was looking at a bright luminous light that filled my vision. It was a circular shape. I then heard a voice neither male nor female say, “I love you.” I cried and did not return to sleep for a while. I told my wife in the morning.
I returned to our faith Easter of '05 after 40 years away. Ever since then my focus has been looking at all scripture through the truth that God is Love.
Since God is absolute Love anything that falls short of love cannot be a part of the Kingdom of Heaven here on earth.
I will continue later. God Bless You JMJ. Thank you for your loving response to my potentially conflictual statement that you initially responded to.
I began with Eph 5:25 and 1Cor 13.
B
benedictus2
Guest
Hi Ron,
I have been reading and re-reading your post and I am not quite sure where I stand with what you’ve written.
I agree that God is love. That is without question. But Theology as truth needs to be emphasized as well because without sound doctrine, erroneous practice could follow. Euthanasia, adultery, abortion and a host of other evils have been done all in the name of love.
Before, abortion for me though wrong was not an issue to feel strongly about until I read up more on the subject and realized with sadness the silent holocaust that it is.
Truth and Love are not mutually exclusive. They both have to come together for a truly Christian life. As I did more reading, the more I realized that truth matters.
On the first quote that I highlighted “they are are happy while the rest of the world goes on with wars…”. Perhaps some are like that but I think most are not. I think each of us try to live our lives the best way we can. And all that some of us can do is probably give to charities. I do not think we can judge them at all.
I have a friend who has since become an atheist from seeing all the suffering in the world. So people who are able to hope inspite of all the doom and gloom can actually be beacons of light. They perhaps believe in their hearts Jesus’s promise to Julian of Norwich (another mystic) that: All will be well, all manner of things will be well."
I myself could not make sense of the apparent senselessness of the suffering in the world today until I read a wonderful little book called “Why Does God Permit Evil” by Dom Brunno Webb. It is a wonderful hope-filled book which I think is a must reading especially during these times.
You are blessed indeed to have this wonderful mystical experience. But some are not given the gift to see this mystical reality that God has given you, so their responses will be different to yours. But I don’t think they are any less loving. We have to remember too that while we are all members of Christs’s Body, we are different parts so accomplish different tasks. Also, we are all pilgrims who will fumble and stumble our way to our Heavenly home.
At a seminar, I told a group the experience I had which made me realize God’s tender love for me. I said that if there is anything I wish I could help people to see is how much God loves them. One of the wise elderly women in our group said to me: “But you cannot make them see that without the experience that God has given you.”
I have read of conversion stories where it is the intellect that God has stirred. And this is when Theology as truth is helpful. I am not sure if you have read Scott Hahn. His and his wife’s journey into the faith came mostly from studying Theology.
I close with this quote from Pope Benedict(of whom I am a big fan!) :** “Love without truth is blind and truth without love is empty. Without truth, love is mere sentimentality and, without love, truth is sterile.”**
Y
yellowbicycle
Guest
R
Ronald_E
Guest
Hi Ben2, Thank you for your kind and thoughtful response. When I think of infanticide I just go crazy because I can see how it could be stopped through our sacrifice and opening ourselves to sacrificial suffering that would unite us to the unborn children in a spiritual way.
I can see Mary with Jesus in her womb journeying to see Elizabeth alone on a dangerous road. I see Jesus sending our the 72 with nothing except what they had on their backs and trust in Him. I see His 3 years of open communication with everyone by journeying to their towns. I see Him leaving the safety and comfort of His home and family to ask us to become part of His family. And then I see Him give up everything for us.
I wrote Pope Benedict a letter in Sept of '06 asking him to lead us on a pilgrimage to Darfur to care for the widows and the orphans. I wanted to join him and receive Communion from him their. I could see that our faith has the means to make this happen and be an action of ultimate faith and the reality that God is Love. It would unite in sacrificial love.
I received a letter in return telling me that he also is concerned for their suffering and asked if I had read his first encyclical letter “God is Love”.
My wife just sat down beside me and turned on the radio. Here is what I am listening to right now, “Winter, spring, summer or fall all you have to do is call and I’ll be there. You’ve got a friend.”
All of the different gifts in the Body of Christ are being used fragmentally and are doing holy works but are not united in the struggle to stop abortion.
I can see very clearly how we can unite and show others the truth of our faith first in the action of God’s Love and then with the words to explain why. This is how Our Lord and His Holy Family started and lived.
There is so much more I could clarify.
God Bless You Ben2
A
Allnamesused
Guest
In my opinion, comparisons between human behavior and the behavior of other known species are largely flawed because of our intellectual capacity in comparison to the others. Our present level of intellect gives us the ability to strive towards the reality we feel will best suit our needs, but it is not necessarily sufficient to accomplish this. Our efforts are still limited by many things, not the least of which are the limits of our intellect. Superstitions (religion, faith) and emotions (hatred, racism, love, fear) still control many of our decisions and cloud our perceptions of reality. Environment (both political and physical), and access to resources (food,water, fuel) also play a significant role in our abilities to become self realized.
Obviously a man who is locked in a cell may be less concerned about his right to vote than his physical freedom. That same man may willing to re-enter that same cell if it means he’ll have access to food and water; if otherwise he he did not. What we value is not intrinsic but rather subjective. But since we all have things in common, we will all have a certain number of similar values. Again, most of us a fear of death, no sane person like pain. Those realities are going to influence the behavior of all of us.
Ultimately, every aspect of human behavior and morality (even empathy) can be explain in purely physiological and psychological terms. Of course this does not mean that there is not a God, but absolutely and undeniably morality (a we define it)would exist even with out one. I’ll ask you to compare crime rates against the percentages of Christians in an individual nation. Nations with low percentages of Christians tend to also have lower rates of crime (particularly violent crime rates). Again, not necessarily a denial of your faith, but certainly puts into question just how tied morality and faith in Christ really are.
S
SunfromtheWest
Guest
as an athiest… how do you know whats wrong and whats right.
how do you know that killing a people is wrong? where do you base your morals? there are no morals in science.
therefore it must be that your morals have to come from somewhere else ( such as religion)
how do you know that killing a people is wrong? where do you base your morals? there are no morals in science.
therefore it must be that your morals have to come from somewhere else ( such as religion)
- Status