Atheists:

[lumenorientale]

On a scale of 1-10 (from believer to Atheist), I am a 9. I honor the possibility of there being a God, but I find highly unlikely. It other words, I’m a hardcore Agnostic (or a weak Atheist, whichever you prefer ) So, no, I don’t believe in the entity you call God. I don’t believe in any God from any religion, yet I wouldn’t say there isn’t anything out there; it could be aliens or some other spirit who’s just “there.”

As I’ve said several times: I wouldn’t be so close-minded to say God does not exist, nor would I be so self-centered to really believe that something, somewhere actually gives a care about us.

As far as worship is concerned, I refuse to go back to the Church. It’s not my place and I am not comfortable there anymore. I will attend with my family, but that’s simply done in honor of them. Plus, me giving up meat for Lent is definitely helping out. I’m back to my regular weight: 98 lbs!

Ironically Yours, Blade and Blood

Okay, well, now that you have clarified that…that helps. I have a tendency to “call out” atheists/agnostics because I, too, want honesty from people.

I don’t believe it is self-centered to believe that God cares about His creation. In fact, such a belief has a tendency to cause people to lose ego-centrism and give of themselves to others. It is diseased human nature that leads people to be selfish. Being Christian is about becoming better, striving to rise above that in order to love those around us. Sacrificing our own comfort for the good of others, as Christ did. Now, OF COURSE, we don’t always live up to that call. Being Christian requires me to be honest with myself–hey, did I miss an opportunity to be kind to that person at work, or did I miss the chance to give of myself more? Those questions are what this religion makes us face. We have an example of self giving, self emptying, radical love: Christ. Love is to ignore yourself for the good of others.

Good to hear that you have lost weight this Lent. You must be very petite, for 98 lbs to be your regular weight! They say I’m small, but my normal weight is 115. I’ve lost a few inches about the middle from giving up sodas, meat on most days, and eating simple meals. Take care, God bless, and peace.

 

[racing59]

First: Your whole exegesis about Jesus and the money changes is wrong! “My house is a house of prayer,” not a meat market, which it often was. “YOU HAVE MADE IT INTO A DEN OF THIEVES…>” CHRIST ACTUALLY CALLED A ROBBER, A THIEF! HOW JUDGEMENTAL!

I WONDER WHERE YOU PEOPLE GET THE GALL TO SELF-INTERPRET INSTEAD OF LEARNING A FEW FACTS, OBEYING AND ADHERING TO AUTHORITY INSTEAD OF YOUR OWN INTERPRETATIONS AND EMOTIONAL SPIN ON THINGS!

Yes, this is your interpretation, not the Church’s and certainly not why Christ was angry and He did this twice by the way…

Second: Saint John the Baptist admonished publically and vehemently–but this too is a form of charity, which you have not contemplated. He also ate honeycombs!

Thanks for the prayes as I have, a long time ago, seen many differences!

THERE IS AN OLD SAYING: A DEEP SCOURING IS GOOD FOR TH SOUL. It hurts sometimes to admonish, but it is a Christian duty.

finally: It is your “job” to judge correctly!

mhpierce

**Aparrently you are unfamiliar with Dr. Scott Hahn a leading Catholic Apologist.According to Scott, it was the money changers in the court yard of the gentiles blocking them from worship at the Temple.The Jews did not want the gentiles worshiping at the Temple so they block them. You need to know your history may I suggest you go to Salvation History.com. It is apparent to me you are over passionite about your faith and you will try to justify anything. No sense in trying to talk to you, I’ll pray for you to have iner peace and gentelness. **

 

[Snerticus]

I’ve read some of Phantasm’s posts, and he/she seems more frustrated than anything else–not about his/her life, but with the person they’re arguing with.

You can’t judge the life of anybody by observing their debates or arguments. For all I know, you can be one of the nicest people I could meet; I could be one of the nicest people you could ever meet, but since these discussions are fueled by the desire to argue and debate, it is impossible to know whether they are a happy person or a miserable person unless stated otherwise.

Ironically Yours.

I think posts speak for themselves, and do reveal a lot about the person. Obviously it does not give you a detailed picture, but it does let you know about the person’s general disposition. I agree though, if you look at one argument and try to discern the person by that, it is not a good idea. But if you look generally and see consistent patterns in a variety of topics, then you will get an idea about the person in general. An all around person will concede on some things, but be steadfast in others. A one sided person with no intention of cooperating will only be antagonistic in everything they care to discuss.

Posts do speak volumes about a person.

 

[mhpierce]

**Aparrently you are unfamiliar with Dr. Scott Hahn a leading Catholic Apologist.According to Scott, it was the money changers in the court yard of the gentiles blocking them from worship at the Temple.The Jews did not want the gentiles worshiping at the Temple so they block them. You need to know your history may I suggest you go to Salvation History.com. It is apparent to me you are over passionite about your faith and you will try to justify anything. No sense in trying to talk to you, I’ll pray for you to have iner peace and gentelness. **

***Dr. Scott Hahn is not teaching Scripture the way it is suppose to be taught, ***he is not a Traditional Catholic, and he adheres to the Vatican II lies and doctrines that are heretical. He is essentially a modernist, has no real apostolic authority to teach anything, actually, and I could care less how “leading” he is as I am not a respector of people’s positions.

As with you he is a self-interpreter. All through my formative years and as an Adult Catholic who eschews the NEWChurch people who are only Protestants, I have never heard other than what I told you about this passage of Scripture and Christ’s anger and there it stands as that is the correct Interpretation. The EWTN crowd are liberal, they mix modernism with Orthodoxy. Their heterodoxy is heretical.

You are being brainwashed by these so called “Teachers” and “interpreters.” You should trust me on this. We are living, if you do not know, in the Great Apostasy, and this since anti-pope Paul VI changed the sacraments and went against centuries of Church teaching, his novus Ordo missae, or New Mass is no Mass at all and is a catastrophy, to say the least.

Pleaase do not quote Scott Hahn to me or any other Vatican II Modernists, or “Theologian.” They are heretics, pure and simple. His intrepretations and teachings are more than suspect. He is an admirer of himself and loves his “position,” as many in the New Church do…

I am passionate about my faith and I do not have to justify anything as many Orthodox Catholics say and speak as I do for we adhere to traditions, doctrines and dogmas, and that is all. Many of your generation are confused, and deeply brainwashed by post Vatican II hogwash that is, in essence, blasphemous and deeply antithetical to what the Chuch has always taught for generations, including the “new” spin on ecumanism, which is heretical, for example.

Outside the Church, there is no Salvation for Anyone, and Vatican II Protestants are “outside,” believe me. To be saved, to have Eternal Life, all must conform and join the Catholic Church and believe in all of Her traditions, interpretations, her doctrines and her dogmas…

I know some of the real history of the Church as I have studied it, and continue to do so. I just finished reading a book, titled, ***Church History – A Complete History of the Catholic Church to the Present Day, ***by Rev. John Laux, M. A., Benzinger Brothers, Inc. Printers For the holy Apostolic See, 1945.

Read the anathemas that were published by the Council of Trent which must be obeyed by all Catholics. Those who disobey them are outside the Church. Remember that Catholicism is dogmatic, a term many modernists find abhorrent. These anathemas and condemnations published by the Council of Trent include people such as Scott Hahn who interpret other than the Traditional and that deliberate action, it is sinful, arrogant.

We, at the Franciscan Friary in Rochester, NY, adhere to what was published after the Council of Trent closed and what was put into perpatuity by Pope Saint Pius V, who achieved, through his pontificate, a newly published Catholic Missal and a Catholic Brevery that all are still commanded to use exclusively; after this council and the missals and brevery were written, they were the last word on rubrics and formalism; this Council was formed due to the influence of The Protestant Revolt since 1517 and other heresies that were and are still prevalent. Pius V implememnted all that was prescribed by that Greatest of Councils. which cannot be changed but was, after Vatican Two closed actually. It can be easily proven of course.

And that is why the Church from the top, fell into a Great Apostasy, after Vatican Two, as those at the top of the Second Vatican Council and those who held sway over many, as they were modernists and traitors to the Gospel and The Church of Tradition, went against what was official in the Church, especially the obedieince and the adherence to the way the Mass was to be prayed, a fact determined by the Council of Trent; modernism was condemned by Pope Sain Pius X, a pope of the last century who required all priests and bishops to take an oath against modernism, which was done away with in 1969!

***I think you better study some more history yourself, as you are probably not a Catholic at all, although milllions today consider themselves Catholics but are mere Protestants.

Again, and I am being charitable, you do not know what you are talking about concerning this passage of Scripture and neither does Scott Hahn. Titles and names are nothing in the eyes of God and His Revealed Teachings and what His True Church Teaches… and real councils guided by The Holy Ghost!***

But thank you for your impertenance and the web site!

mhpierce

 

[Snerticus]

The EWTN crowd are liberal, they mix modernism with Orthodoxy. Their heterodoxy is heretical.

That’s pretty funny. I guess liberalism is in the eye of the beholder, as so many things are. Ask a liberal if EWTN is liberal and they’ll probably be spitting mad that you would say such a thing. I personally think EWTN’s stance is a just bit on the conservative side.

 

[Veritas248]

I may be late to the party, but I’m inviting myself in anyway. I just started reading Chesterton’s book Orthodoxy, and he gives some invaluable insights.

"That peril is that the human intellect is free to destroy itself. Just as one generation could prevent the very existence of the next generation, by all entering a monastery or jumping into the sea, so one set of thinkers can in some degree prevent further thinking by teaching the next generation that there is no validity in any human thought. It is idle to talk always of the alternative of reason and faith. Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. If you are merely a sceptic, you must sooner or later ask yourself the question, “Why should anything go right; even observation and deduction? Why should not good logic be as misleading as bad logic? They are both movements in the brain of a bewildered ape?” The young sceptic says, “I have a right to think for myself.” But the old sceptic, the complete sceptic, says, “I have no right to think for myself. I have no right to think at all.” -G.K. Chesterton

I don’t know about the rest of you, but that is not a road I am comfortable in taking. Skepticism seems to be self-destroying, then.

 

[Snerticus]

I may be late to the party, but I’m inviting myself in anyway. I just started reading Chesterton’s book Orthodoxy, and he gives some invaluable insights.

"That peril is that the human intellect is free to destroy itself. Just as one generation could prevent the very existence of the next generation, by all entering a monastery or jumping into the sea, so one set of thinkers can in some degree prevent further thinking by teaching the next generation that there is no validity in any human thought. It is idle to talk always of the alternative of reason and faith. Reason is itself a matter of faith. It is an act of faith to assert that our thoughts have any relation to reality at all. If you are merely a sceptic, you must sooner or later ask yourself the question, “Why should anything go right; even observation and deduction? Why should not good logic be as misleading as bad logic? They are both movements in the brain of a bewildered ape?” The young sceptic says, “I have a right to think for myself.” But the old sceptic, the complete sceptic, says, “I have no right to think for myself. I have no right to think at all.” -G.K. Chesterton

I don’t know about the rest of you, but that is not a road I am comfortable in taking. Skepticism seems to be self-destroying, then.

Chesterton was an awesome debater of his time. I can’t wait to read his works. I suppose Orthodoxy would be a good place to start.

 

[mhpierce]

That’s pretty funny. I guess liberalism is in the eye of the beholder, as so many things are. Ask a liberal if EWTN is liberal and they’ll probably be spitting mad that you would say such a thing. I personally think EWTN’s stance is a just bit on the conservative side.

…Shows you what you really know about liberals, who are disguised at “conservatives…” …And have fooled millions by behaving so!

What EWTN’s produces refuse to admit about the last five popes is not only deeply dishonest and deeply troubling, to say the least, but dangerous. The speakers and priests who work for EWTN fawn all over theses heretical Popes and in reality, too few who watch this stuff seem to care. The whole Network and its adherents and priests and religious are so disoreinted, diabolically, that it is a tragedy. Since when do we “worship” Popes as Catholics?

This is another example of false Traditionalists who are outside the Church and do not know it and do not care actually, for they do not defend the Faith that many of them were raised with… A knowing Catholic would never attend one of their Protestant Services, which is not the Real Unbloody Sacrifice of the Cross…

EWTN makes millions off of “Catholics” who are brainwashed by modenist popes and their lies, for this NEWCHURCH stuff is how they make their living.

EWTN is “liberal” when it comes to Vatican II documents, which contain over two hundred heretical statements, but to them, who cares, Vatican Two was a Council of the Church and so we go along with it–even its false teachings found in its 16 published documents.

Sadly there is a small remnant of real Catholics left in the world today, as almost all the bishops and most priest and Cardinals at that time in 1965, went along with Vatican Two “Stuff” and they dragged millions of souls with them. This was indeed predicted by many Saints too. And read Matthew 24…

Sad, is it not?

mhpierce

 

[OneTrueCathApos]

Judaism, Buddhism, Jainism and Hinduism are older than the Roman Catholic Church.

Is that proof that those faiths are simply amazing or just yours?

But Christ didn’t start Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism or Judaism. Jesus established the Catholic church and it is only from Jesus Christ, not Buddha, etc…you can be saved. If it is not from Christ, it is meaningless. Furthermore, Buddha did not die for our sins, Mohammed did not die for our sins, Hinduism whatever did not die for our sins. Only Jesus Christ died for our sins.

 

[Snerticus]

…Shows you what you really know about liberals, who are disguised at “conservatives…” …And have fooled millions by behaving so!

What EWTN’s produces refuse to admit about the last five popes is not only deeply dishonest and deeply troubling, to say the least, but dangerous. The speakers and priests who work for EWTN fawn all over theses heretical Popes and in reality, too few who watch this stuff seem to care. The whole Network and its adherents and priests and religious are so disoreinted, diabolically, that it is a tragedy. Since when do we “worship” Popes as Catholics?

This is another example of false Traditionalists who are outside the Church and do not know it and do not care actually, for they do not defend the Faith that many of them were raised with… A knowing Catholic would never attend one of their Protestant Services, which is not the Real Unbloody Sacrifice of the Cross…

EWTN makes millions off of “Catholics” who are brainwashed by modenist popes and their lies, for this NEWCHURCH stuff is how they make their living.

EWTN is “liberal” when it comes to Vatican II documents, which contain over two hundred heretical statements, but to them, who cares, Vatican Two was a Council of the Church and so we go along with it–even its false teachings found in its 16 published documents.

Sadly there is a small remnant of real Catholics left in the world today, as almost all the bishops and most priest and Cardinals at that time in 1965, went along with Vatican Two “Stuff” and they dragged millions of souls with them. This was indeed predicted by many Saints too. And read Matthew 24…

Sad, is it not?

mhpierce

Not really considering I don’t agree with your point of view. But to each his own… you’re absolutely free to believe what you choose to.

But what has this to do with atheists anyway?

 

[mhpierce]

Chesterton was an awesome debater of his time. I can’t wait to read his works. I suppose Orthodoxy would be a good place to start.

C. K…Chesterton was not a liberal as his wife is who appears on EWTN as a conservative, but is not one. He would be appauled at the Modern Church today, what goes on in Rome and the Vatican and all over the globe in what were once, many of them, authentic Catholic Churches…

Gilbert Keith Chesterton (29 May 1874 – 14 June 1936) is considered one of the most influential English writers of the 20th century. His prolific and diverse output included journalism, philosophy, poetry, biography, Christian apologetics, fantasy and detective fiction. He is the darling of the EWTN crowd and many “Conservative” Catholics, and word of mouth about his writings since the late 1980’s has given him a new and lucrative status with many in the NEWChurch… He books on Orthodoxy and christianity are all the rage now.

I would love to sit down with his Ghost and show him a few modernist videos–He would run screaming, especially at the clown and other Masses and the ecumenical prayer groups that Popes have sanctioned since Vatican Two ended…

mhpierce

 

[mhpierce]

Not really considering I don’t agree with your point of view. But to each his own… you’re absolutely free to believe what you choose to.

But what has this to do with atheists anyway?

What I have emparted has everything to do with the Truth of what has happened to the Church the last forty years and ***athesists must stay clear of Vatican Two people ***if they have any hope of salvation and want to return to the Real Church of Christ, of which there is only a remnant. It would be another disastor for them and their so-called lack of belief in God and his Revelations…

Otherwise they will be in worse shape than they were as practicing atheists!

Catholics evangelize atheists with Trutrhs, not lies about fake Churches!

mhpierce

 

[Robert_in_SD]

…Shows you what you really know about liberals, who are disguised at “conservatives…” …And have fooled millions by behaving so!

Ah, but you are one of the few who have the “secret” knowledge of the “real” Catholic Church.

mhpierce:

What EWTN’s produces refuse to admit about the last five popes is not only deeply dishonest and deeply troubling, to say the least, but dangerous. The speakers and priests who work for EWTN fawn all over theses heretical Popes and in reality, too few who watch this stuff seem to care. The whole Network and its adherents and priests and religious are so disoreinted, diabolically, that it is a tragedy. Since when do we “worship” Popes as Catholics?

As a regular viewer of EWTN I have yet to see anyone worship a Pope. I think that EWTN is very Catholic and VERY orthodox in its teaching and its practices. I think your position regarding Vatican II is nothing but sour grapes pouting over the loss of the latin mass - a loss that Benedict XVI has been moving to restore out of an attempt at reconciliation. Referring to the last 5 popes as “heretics” is nothing short of petty spite IMO.

mhpierce:

This is another example of false Traditionalists who are outside the Church and do not know it and do not care actually, for they do not defend the Faith that many of them were raised with… A knowing Catholic would never attend one of their Protestant Services, which is not the Real Unbloody Sacrifice of the Cross…

Thus spake “pope” pierce? How in the world can you come to such a ridiculous conclusion as to say that EWTN services are anything but Catholic.

mhpierce:

EWTN makes millions off of “Catholics” who are brainwashed by modenist popes and their lies, for this NEWCHURCH stuff is how they make their living.

Hmm? Last I heard, EWTN was $750K in the red. And are they not a 501(c)(3) organization - which means they cannot make a profit for their shareholders?

mhpierce:

EWTN is “liberal” when it comes to Vatican II documents, which contain over two hundred heretical statements, but to them, who cares, Vatican Two was a Council of the Church and so we go along with it–even its false teachings found in its 16 published documents.

No. They are orthodox when it comes to teaching on the Vatican II documents. It is you who appear to be radically tradititionalist in your rejection of these Church documents.

mhpierce:

Sadly there is a small remnant of real Catholics left in the world today, as almost all the bishops and most priest and Cardinals at that time in 1965, went along with Vatican Two “Stuff” and they dragged millions of souls with them. This was indeed predicted by many Saints too. And read Matthew 24…

Oh, and I’m guessing you are placing yourself among the “elect” with the “secret” knowledge of “real” Catholicism. I think it is you who is wrong on this point.

mhpierce:

Sad, is it not?

Yes. Your position is very sad.

Peace,
-Robert

 

[Snerticus]

What I have emparted has everything to do with the Truth of what has happened to the Church the last forty years and ***athesists must stay clear of Vatican Two people ***if they have any hope of salvation and want to return to the Real church, of which there is only a remnant. It would be another disastor.

Otherwise they will be in worse shape than they were as practicing atheists!

Catholics evangelize atheists with Trutrhs, not lies about fake Churches!

mhpierce

Well, your statement is noted, but it still has nothing to do with the OP’s question. Atheist don’t want anything to do with any religion, that’s the point of the OP, except maybe learn why we believe what we do. Atheists have no interist in salvation, or they would not be atheist. The OP is merely asking why Atheists come to a Catholic forum.

 

[mhpierce]

But Christ didn’t start Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism or Judaism. Jesus established the Catholic church and it is only from Jesus Christ, not Buddha, etc…you can be saved. If it is not from Christ, it is meaningless. Furthermore, Buddha did not die for our sins, Mohammed did not die for our sins, Hinduism whatever did not die for our sins. Only Jesus Christ died for our sins.

Right ON!
mhpierce

 

[Veritas248]

It’s not about the rules or the difficulty of the faith. I was alright with the challenge–even now, I’m still participating in the season of Lent with my family (I decided to give up meat, and I intend to keep that promise; so far, so good ).

The forums showed me how different I was; how accepting I was of diversity, mystery, and the thought of an ultimate Death without an Afterlife. I realized that I had to stop lying to the entity you call God and began to honor the possibility of there being a God, while feeling that His existence is unlikely due to the thoughts and feelings you (among other members of different faiths) have. So many people have different ideas and perspectives of the same being.

But, don’t get me wrong. I didn’t lose faith; I found out that I didn’t need it.

Ironically Yours.

Hello Blade and Blood. Its been a while, hasn’t it?

Chesterton has some harsh words for the kind of belief you are espousing here:

“It is only with one aspect of humility that we are here concerned. Humility was largely meant as a restraint upon the arrogance and infinity of the appetite of man. He was always outstripping his mercies with his own newly invented needs. His very power of enjoyment destroyed half his joys. By asking for pleasure, he lost the chief pleasure; for the chief pleasure is surprise. Hence it became evident that if a man would make his world large, he must be always making himself small. Even the haughty visions, the tall cities, and the toppling pinnacles are the creations of humility. Giants that tread down forests like grass are the creations of humility. Towers that vanish upwards above the loneliest star are the creations of humility. For towers are not tall unless we look up at them; and giants are not giants unless they are larger than we. All this gigantesque imagination, which is, perhaps, the mightiest of the pleasures of man, is at bottom entirely humble. It is impossible without humility to enjoy anything – even pride. But what we suffer from to-day is humility in the wrong place. Modesty has moved from the organ of ambition. Modesty has settled upon the organ of conviction; where it was never meant to be. A man was meant to be doubtful about himself, but undoubting about the truth; this has been exactly reversed. Nowadays the part of a man that a man does assert is exactly the part he ought not to assert himself. The part he doubts is exactly the part he ought not to doubt – the Divine Reason. Huxley preached a humility content to learn from Nature. But the new sceptic is so humble that he doubts if he can even learn. Thus we should be wrong if we had said hastily that there is no humility typical of our time. The truth is that there is a real humility typical of our time; but it so happens that it is practically a more poisonous humility than the wildest prostrations of the ascetic. The old humility was a spur that prevented a man from stopping; not a nail in his boot that prevented him from going on. For the old humility made a man doubtful about his efforts, which might make him work harder. But the new humility makes a man doubtful about his aims, which will make him stop working altogether.” -G.K. Chesterton

Just something to think about.

 

[mhpierce]

Well, your statement is noted, but it still has nothing to do with the OP’s question. Atheist don’t want anything to do with any religion, that’s the point of the OP, except maybe learn why we believe what we do. Atheists have no interist in salvation, or they would not be atheist. The OP is merely asking why Atheists come to a Catholic forum.

***Athesists do not live in a vacuum. They are subjected to and by God’s Revelations, deeply influenced by the media, movies, books, professors and other “religions” and their supposed beliefs and “doctrines” as we all are.

They seek peace of conscience as we all do. That is something that God created, our consciences, which we have a hard time following as Catholics at times, as do atheists…
We all share this longing, to know what is God…***

mhpierce

 

[phantasm]

I don’t know about the rest of you, but that is not a road I am comfortable in taking. Skepticism seems to be self-destroying, then.

A good skeptic is a trustworthy friend. Unless of course, you enjoy the company of ’ yes men’.

 

[phantasm]

Sadly there is a small remnant of real Catholics left in the world today,

Rather, thankfully.

 

[Veritas248]

A good skeptic is a trustworthy friend. Unless of course, you enjoy the company of ’ yes men’.

That depends. Do you mean skepticism for the sake of skepticism, or skepticism for the sake of learning the truth. The former is dangerous. The latter is how one learns.