Can John Edwards speak to the dead?

[MichaelTDoyle]

There is some truth in Islam. There was some truth even in Pagan religions. Where the religions agree with the Word of God then they will have that degree of truth.

God loves all people and He calls to all people to do good and avoid evil. Religous experience is not limited to Catholics, either good or bad experiences. The Truth of the Catholic religion, this is founded by Jesus Christ, the only Son of God, and this is the fullness of the Truth and the means to graces.

If you believe you could only worship a God of Love, then Christ matches that requirement; if faith prompts you to believe in the extraordinary fact that in weakness we are made strong, in emptiness we are fulfilled, Christ Jesus is the only answer. Once you want that, then the logical choice is the Church He founded. If you believe in Christ’s divinity then it absolutely makes no sense to belong to any other Church–its tantamount to implying He did not know what He was doing when He founded the Church.

Those are my impressions of why Catholic and not X.
Hope that helps.

peace

 

[Sparetherod]

MichaelTDoyle:

There is truth in Islam. There was some truth even in Pagan religions. Where the religions agree with the Word of God then they will have that degree of truth.

God loves all people and He calls to all people to do good and avoid evil. Religous experience is not limited to Muslems, either good or bad experiences. The Truth of the Islamic religion, this is founded by Mohammed, the prophet of God, and this is the fullness of the Truth and the means to graces.

If you believe you could only worship a God of Love, then Allah matches that requirement; if faith prompts you to believe in the extraordinary fact that in weakness we are made strong, in emptiness we are fulfilled, Allah is the only answer. Once you want that, then the logical choice is the Church He founded. If you believe in Allah’s divinity then it absolutely makes no sense to belong to any other Church–its tantamount to implying He did not know what He was doing when He founded the Church.

Those are my impressions of why Islam and not X.
Hope that helps.

peace

Changed a few names in your post. Does it make it any more or less convincing. There are many willing to kill for these changes. That makes it all less convincing for me.

 

[Sparetherod]

One thing I often get from believers is the idea that without God there is no motivation for morality. Our basic morality is ingrained in us as social beings, and is a necessary adaptation from evolution. All humans instinctually know what is acceptable and fair in our behaviors, though we can consciously override it. We all are empathetic creatures. Guilt is not a fear of God’s anger but an evolved behavior modifier. Here is something I wrote on another forum awhile back. What do you think?

Just some thoughts on guilt from an evolutionary standpoint. We come from a long line of animals that evolved a very sophisticated social structure that is tied to the way our brains are structured and process personal interactions. One of the things that our brains do very well is keep track of and evaluate our personal interactions from a standpoint of fairness. We are dependent on others for our survival. This makes us highly attuned to signs from others that signal not just antagonism but even the slightest disrespect, which might lead to them taking advantage of us. We are also highly cognizant of situations where we have overstepped the line of fairness with others. This creates an uncomfortable feeling we call guilt. It is basically a survival defense… punishing us for even thinking about doing something that might jeopardize future cooperation from others. It’s not cultural on the basic level, any more than anger is. The two go hand in hand to protect us… our brains are wired for them.

Now think about how our cultures have corrupted the survival value of these emotions. We get angry at all sorts of minor societal aggravations where most of the time the anger never serves to keep these things from happening…or we are tortured with useless guilt over something like eating meat on Fridays ( anybody remember that one) or worse yet grow up with feelings of worthlessness ( guilt that we didn"t meet expectations) instilled by some power figure in our lives.

Think of all the people who must be dealing with both …anger over feelings that they’re getting taken by everyone, and guilt that they somehow don’t measure up. Sound familiar? Well, maybe on a bad day…

The human mind must have an almost unlimited capacity for anger and guilt…interesting to think that it developed in an animal with such simple real needs. And only to deal with each other.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

Sparetherod:

Changed a few names in your post. Does it make it any more or less convincing. There are many willing to kill for these changes. That makes it all less convincing for me.

There actually is content in what I am writing. A specific religion is more than just semantics. The weakness to strength is found in the Cross. Nowhere else, is God Himself evidenced by Kenosis.

I can only assume based on your replies that you are taking this as a joke or are unwilling for some reason to seriously consider the content of Christianity. I hope you reconsider and attempt to listen to the content of what people are writing to help you, rather than make absurd parallels devoid of critical thought.

You cannot compare evolutionary philosophy to religions unless you seriously understand the actual reasoning behind those religions; even then, without living the life of faith existentially, your comparison will be incomplete, because Catholicism is the Way. You cannot understand it from the outside; it is a state of being among other things. You have to give Christianity a chance if you truly want to know what it is about. If you do not know what it is about, how can you compare it validly?

Your posts reveal a complete ignorance, startlingly complete ignorance, of what Christianity actually is. I seriously urge you to stop playing games with something so fundamental to your life as your world view and read the CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) You can buy one at any Catholic bookshop.

Read it for content. Please! God bless you (I mean it) in your search.

 

[Sparetherod]

Michael,

My last response to you was deleted, so I’ll take that as a warning from…somebody. The fact that some claim that Allah is the Truth doesn’t seem to be so blasphemous that it should be removed…but I’m getting the picture.

I can only assume based on your replies that you are taking this as a joke or are unwilling for some reason to seriously consider the content of Christianity. I hope you reconsider and attempt to listen to the content of what people are writing to help you, rather than make absurd parallels devoid of critical thought

I assure you, I’m not taking this as a joke. I’m familiar with christianity, and Catholicism in particular…I was a Catholic…and it took years to free myself from the magical thinking. I’ve never been happier now that I can see life for what it is, and ALL human beings for what we really are. And you should not see our conversation as designed to “help” me see the light, and bring me back into the world of God and angels. I know it is natural for you to believe that I am somehow lacking something…but I will not one day start believing in Zeus or leprechauns, either. It’s not as if someone has disproved their existance, as far as I know. I do not see where this leaves me “devoid of critical thought”, though I do sense your frustration.

You cannot compare evolutionary philosophy to religions unless you seriously understand the actual reasoning behind those religions;

Evolutionary psychology and sociology are expanding fields of study with many interesting publications. I am not comparing them to religion…they study the phenomenon OF religion and “the actual reasoning behind those religions” as a cultural adaptation.

You cannot understand it from the outside; it is a state of being among other things. You have to give Christianity a chance if you truly want to know what it is about. If you do not know what it is about, how can you compare it validly?

I was inside, remember? From inside I might think that Pat Robertson’s statement that Sharon’s stroke was God’s punishment for dividing Israel, made sense. Where do you stand on that? Millions of christians are thinking, hmm…that’s possible. That is full blown nonsense…but as a poster above said, “with my religion, everything is possible”. And you think I’m devoid of critical thought!!

Your posts reveal a complete ignorance, startlingly complete ignorance, of what Christianity actually is. I seriously urge you to stop playing games with something so fundamental to your life as your world view and read the CCC (Catechism of the Catholic Church) You can buy one at any Catholic bookshop.

On the contrary, I know the history, the Bible, and the dogma better than most Catholics, as a believer and nonbeliever. I’m not looking for a way back. I’m solely interested in promoting an agenda of critical thought, science, and technology that might get us a President who doesn’t think dinosaurs played with Adam and Eve. Because all things are not possible, even with religion.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

I am skeptical that you ever knew what Catholicism was about. The authentic teachings and disciplines and faith is totally irrelevant to what you describe religion as.

God allows freewill however; I urge you to reconsider the idea that you already understand Catholicism, that you lived it. It seems you have lived a childish version of religion where God is the bogeyman. I invite you again to read and contemplate the CCC.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

Sparetherod:

Michael,

My last response to you was deleted, so I’ll take that as a warning from…somebody. The fact that some claim that Allah is the Truth doesn’t seem to be so blasphemous that it should be removed…but I’m getting the picture.

It was no lack of charity on the CAF boards’ part (just to help make a more charitable picture) I requested my quote be deleted since I never wrote those words I did not want my name associated with those words., e.g. People do searches on Google and bits pop up. The content of the words, though, is utterly changed so I did not want my name on them. Since religions are homogenous effects of evolution to you, I can understand why my objection might seem puzzling, unless you ascribe to me religuous bigotry. I wanted to be clear it was the content not religous bigotry that motivated my request to delet the quote.

 

[Sparetherod]

I am skeptical that you ever knew what Catholicism was about.

Why did I know you were going to say that?

God allows freewill however; I urge you to reconsider the idea that you already understand Catholicism, that you lived it. It seems you have lived a childish version of religion where God is the bogeyman.

I do enjoy the human ability to reason. I’m afraid the adult version of religion is just as scary. I would fear and hate a god who killed two hundred thousand people in that tsunami for some “higher purpose”, as much as I hate those on earth who kill in his name. As it is, I know the earth’s plate movements have no such intentions.

I hear the Church is giving up the idea of limbo, but they can’t really decide where all the babies go. Let me know if you hear. We want to be adult about this.

 

[Sparetherod]

I wanted to be clear it was the content not religous bigotry that motivated my request to delet the quote.

Thanks, I’ll take you at your word.

 

[Sparetherod]

For those interested in the Faith vs Reason discussion there is an interesting 20 min video by an author who shares my concerns about the future of religious intolerance.

Go to samharris.org and click on Appearances and then the TV tab. Watch the Idea City 05 presentation from Toronto. Let me know what you think.

 

[jman507]

Sparetherod:

One thing I often get from believers is the idea that without God there is no motivation for morality. Our basic morality is ingrained in us as social beings, and is a necessary adaptation from evolution. All humans instinctually know what is acceptable and fair in our behaviors, though we can consciously override it. We all are empathetic creatures. Guilt is not a fear of God’s anger but an evolved behavior modifier. Here is something I wrote on another forum awhile back. What do you think?

Just some thoughts on guilt from an evolutionary standpoint. We come from a long line of animals that evolved a very sophisticated social structure that is tied to the way our brains are structured and process personal interactions. One of the things that our brains do very well is keep track of and evaluate our personal interactions from a standpoint of fairness. We are dependent on others for our survival. This makes us highly attuned to signs from others that signal not just antagonism but even the slightest disrespect, which might lead to them taking advantage of us. We are also highly cognizant of situations where we have overstepped the line of fairness with others. This creates an uncomfortable feeling we call guilt. It is basically a survival defense… punishing us for even thinking about doing something that might jeopardize future cooperation from others. It’s not cultural on the basic level, any more than anger is. The two go hand in hand to protect us… our brains are wired for them.

Now think about how our cultures have corrupted the survival value of these emotions. We get angry at all sorts of minor societal aggravations where most of the time the anger never serves to keep these things from happening…or we are tortured with useless guilt over something like eating meat on Fridays ( anybody remember that one) or worse yet grow up with feelings of worthlessness ( guilt that we didn"t meet expectations) instilled by some power figure in our lives.

Think of all the people who must be dealing with both …anger over feelings that they’re getting taken by everyone, and guilt that they somehow don’t measure up. Sound familiar? Well, maybe on a bad day…

The human mind must have an almost unlimited capacity for anger and guilt…interesting to think that it developed in an animal with such simple real needs. And only to deal with each other.

Ok you do a good job of explaining how this happens, but how do you explain why all this matters? Why do we need to survive? Could I just look at this explination and say I want to be free of these physical limitations and truely be free by ending my life? Would that ultimatly be any differnet than if I kept on living?

 

[Sparetherod]

Ok you do a good job of explaining how this happens, but how do you explain why all this matters? Why do we need to survive?

It doesn’t really matter to nature. The dinosaurs, I’m sure, acted like they wanted to survive…but they didn’t. Nature doesn’t “care”. All creatures who have survived until now are the lucky remnants of DNA mutations and survivors of natural pressures and catastrophies. Genetic replicators, genes, are the actual survivors…and they code for millions of body types and behaviors. They survive and don’t care how, if it works. I’m sure my genes are no “happier” than the genes of a bacterium. Nor do they “want” to survive, they just do…it’s all biochemistry. If we had not evolved survival instincts and social behaviors, we wouldn’t have made it either. Thinking humans attribute this instinct to survive as “wanting” to survive. But do you think a bacteria really “wants” to survive? Look at it this way…if there was suddenly a genetic mutation that coded for faulty serotonin receptors in our brains, we would have many more deaths from suicide and our species would be decimated until the mutation was not common. The fact that most of us exhibit “normal” behaviors that are compatible with life and getting along with others is a manifestation of the power of natural selection for the genes that we have. All kinds of good and bad mutations still occur and are just a sign that nature has no real purpose. If the avian flu virus mutates and kills millions of us, will nature be “sad”? We tend to be anthropomorphic in our views, " it’s all about us". From a gene’s standpoint, where would you rather be? In us or in a bacterium? There’s a lot more of them, which makes them a lot more successful. We may be more intelligent but that’s only one way to survive.

Why do we need to survive? Could I just look at this explination and say I want to be free of these physical limitations and truely be free by ending my life? Would that ultimatly be any differnet than if I kept on living?

We don’t need to survive, we just do, as I explained above. You could end your life or at some point it will end on it’s own. As long as it happens after your reproductive years, natural selection is not active. If it happens to shorten your childbearing possibilities, then your genes would be less likely to spread in the next generations. If all genes for depression caused premature death in the teen years, we would quickly see no more depression except in the case of spontaneous mutations which will continue to happen. Unfortunately, even normal minds from normal genes can be convinced to fly planes into buildings when they are “infected” by irrational ideas. Reasoning is a powerful survival tool for us…some just do it badly.

This whole process and how connected we are with nature is what leaves me in awe…the fact that we are not all that special. Oh, and I do want to live and enjoy it while I have the chance, and to understand it as much as possible.

 

[MichaelTDoyle]

Sparetherod:

Why did I know you were going to say that?

I do enjoy the human ability to reason. I’m afraid the adult version of religion is just as scary. I would fear and hate a god who killed two hundred thousand people in that tsunami for some “higher purpose”, as much as I hate those on earth who kill in his name. As it is, I know the earth’s plate movements have no such intentions.

I hear the Church is giving up the idea of limbo, but they can’t really decide where all the babies go. Let me know if you hear. We want to be adult about this.

The adult version of religion is the same as any version: God is Love and He sent His only Son to reconcile us to Him.

You have flipped it around in despair and now demand that God reconcile Himself to us. Unfortunatley neither you nor I have the intellectual capacity to take in and evaluate an infinite God or His complete universe. Through Love andf humilty though I believe we make progress in understanding the nature of Love, reality, that should bind us to one another as the saintrs exemplify.

I pray God will open all our hearts to better perceive Him.

Peace

 

[Sparetherod]

Michael,

The adult version of religion is the same as any version: God is Love and He sent His only Son to reconcile us to Him.

You have flipped it around in despair and now demand that God reconcile Himself to us. Unfortunatley neither you nor I have the intellectual capacity to take in and evaluate an infinite God or His complete universe. Through Love andf humilty though I believe we make progress in understanding the nature of Love, reality, that should bind us to one another as the saintrs exemplify.

You told me before that I only had the children’s version of religion…now you say they’re the same. You say God is Love…uh, thanks, that explains why he killed off the dinosaurs 65 million years ago. Don’t you get it? That doesn’t mean anything. I’ll agree that I’m “in despair” if you will agree you are “insane”. Now, from now on, I won’t impune your state of mind if you’ll do the same.

Anybody got any thoughts on Pat Robertson’s decree on Israel’s prime minister?

 

[jman507]

Sparetherod:

We don’t need to survive, we just do, as I explained above. You could end your life or at some point it will end on it’s own. As long as it happens after your reproductive years, natural selection is not active. If it happens to shorten your childbearing possibilities, then your genes would be less likely to spread in the next generations. If all genes for depression caused premature death in the teen years, we would quickly see no more depression except in the case of spontaneous mutations which will continue to happen. Unfortunately, even normal minds from normal genes can be convinced to fly planes into buildings when they are “infected” by irrational ideas. Reasoning is a powerful survival tool for us…some just do it badly.

This whole process and how connected we are with nature is what leaves me in awe…the fact that we are not all that special. Oh, and I do want to live and enjoy it while I have the chance, and to understand it as much as possible.

So it doesn’t matter if we live. Then I guess you could also say it doesn’t matter if we live irrationally. Bad science is neither better or worse than good science.

I don’t exactly see if there is any differance between using nuclear energy to build and use a bomb to blow up people & using nuclear energy to help supply people with energy. When it comes to enjoyment I like Skittles and beers, but what I like about the Catholic view of science is that it should be used as a tool for the good and charity of man and his stewardship in the world. All I can see from your view is that science could be viewed as something enjoyable and tied to our instincts to survive, but once we die won’t matter cause there is nothing after that.

 

[cocot]

Sparetherod:

One thing I often get from believers is the idea that without God there is no motivation for morality. Our basic morality is ingrained in us as social beings, and is a necessary adaptation from evolution. All humans instinctually know what is acceptable and fair in our behaviors, though we can consciously override it. We all are empathetic creatures. Guilt is not a fear of God’s anger but an evolved behavior modifier.

Where is the morality of the rest of the evolved social creatures that was needed for their adaptation?

And how do you prove this “ingrained” morality that has evolved?

 

[Sparetherod]

So it doesn’t matter if we live. Then I guess you could also say it doesn’t matter if we live irrationally.

It does not matter to nature. Do you think it matters to a flu virus if we live? It DOES matter to us…humans. And it does matter to us that our fellow humans act rationally. Otherwise, they put us and themselves in danger…inquisitions, racism, jihads, etc.

Bad science is neither better or worse than good science.

Science is a way of finding out the truth. Science is neither good nor bad. It’s what we do with knowledge that counts…and useful knowledge in the hands of rational people is likely to be a “good” thing. But there are no absolutes…fluorocarbons, for example. Hopefully, science will also help to right our mistakes.

I don’t exactly see if there is any differance between using nuclear energy to build and use a bomb to blow up people & using nuclear energy to help supply people with energy.

I suspect you do see the difference…all people do. You’re just asking yourself, “why shouldn’t I blow up people if there’s no divine rule against it and nature doesn’t care?” It’s because rational people see the consequences of our actions in the here and now. Humans have instinctual moral codes and they are genetic and tied to our emotional responses, otherwise we wouldn’t have made it to the stage of culture where we now give our religions and gods credit for it. No human alive can overcome an aversion to harming another for no reason, without feeling guilt.
This is true even if you never heard of the Ten Commandments. This had great survival value as we evolved in small groups where infractions could mean starvation if the group didn’t cooperate with us.

what I like about the Catholic view of science is that it should be used as a tool for the good and charity of man and his stewardship in the world.

This is a rational, humanistic view…not just the Catholic view. Many atheistic Nobel Prize winners also take this view…to their credit.

All I can see from your view is that science could be viewed as something enjoyable and tied to our instincts to survive,

Science is astonishingly rewarding, especially when on the trail of new knowledge…and very necessary for our existence at this point of population in the world.

but once we die won’t matter cause there is nothing after that.

My feeling is that it’s important to me to live a life that matters now, because I care about my fellow humans and friends and family, now. What happens after that, I have a good idea, but no one knows for sure. Spend your time worrying about it, and that is time wasted.

 

[tdandh26]

I am so warried of this ignorant rant of evolution. Your telling me that im crazy for believing in God, and yet you try to tell me, with no real evidence, that a some tiny particle from the big bang, spontaniously lived, (enter frankenstein). Then you say well from these few spontanious life forms eventually a male a female version of fish appeared. Then somehow that wasnt good enough for them so they sorta jumped on land and “hey ma look I can breath air, uh where did H2O come from” ah a random act along with the billions and billions of other random coincidences.

Man yall need to rethink logic, take this one.
From the instant your born, you are moving constantly towards death. What is the point of any advancement on your part, because your life is really nothing more than an evil ,if I may use the term, joke. How will you react on that day or hour when death bears down on you with its absolute unknowns, will you then ponder “What If”?

 

[Sparetherod]

Where is the morality of the rest of the evolved social creatures that was needed for their adaptation?

And how do you prove this “ingrained” morality that has evolved?

Thank you cocot and jman for the discussion. I was a little tired of the God is Love stuff.

Our human experience of the issues of morality is complicated and deepened by our powers of reasoning and language. Think about it, you can be made to feel disgusted just by hearing a story about some cruelty…torture chambers, etc. Other social beings can only react to perceived threats or injustices “in person”, so to speak. The “codes” of behavior are unique to each species. The more intelligent the species, the more complicated the interactions, and the more emotional the responses. With the great apes these responses are almost human at times, which is what we would expect since they share a good 97% of their DNA with us. There has been a lot written on the moral behavior of these animals, but no matter, you already know how they act when food is stolen, or a mate is threatened, etc. They act a lot like we do, and seem to feel guilt, anger, or betrayal much like us…but they can’t really talk about it…or write it down, so they have behavioral cues that surfice to get the messages across. But who knows if a chimp feels a little guilty, before it steals a banana? That little feeling in his gut that says “this might be risky and get me in trouble” is at least a primitive moral compass. As animals become less intelligent the behaviors are more instinctual. Our ancestors, as language developed, could simply make it clear what would be acceptable or not, without chasing someone up a tree, though it still happens, I hear.The whole field of evolutionary psychology is devoted to the development of emotions and behavior and the brain structures that are related. And brain structure means genes…it’s all genetic.

Within the confines of their social structure you might say animals follow the golden rule or they risk injury…and they risk it for a few of the same reasons we do …food, sex, or territory.

We get a little whacky with our moral codes though, when you consider it should have real survival value. I remember feeling guilty when I forgot not to eat meat on fridays. Why should that ever be worth feeling guilty about? Well, following artificial rituals and rules is the human way of showing our willingness to cooperate with the group…if we’re seen as trustworthy, it’s a benefit to us. Hence, “you better be in church on sunday”. Have lots of kids? Also, sign of cooperation. “Don’t lust in your heart.”
Well, I have no earthly Idea how that could be of concern to anybody but a priest.

I enjoyed this, thanks.

 

[JMJ_Theresa]

SparetheRod, I studied Anthropology as an undergraduate. And, I remember being fascinated by psychological/sociological evolution. On the surface, it seems reasonable. Perhaps it is even true to some extent for most people.

However, God sanctifies us as we grow closer to Him, so we rise above our natures. How can you explain the Saints? These are men and women of Heroic virtue. I’m am specifically thinking of St.Maximillan Kolbe who gave his life for another man in a Concentration Camp. How about Mother Teresa of Calcutta? Bl. Miguel Pro? St. Katherine Drexel? I could go on and on. Perhaps, you could read some saint biographies and compare these men and women to the Christians who you obviously have disdain for.

I’m sorry if you had a legalistic training in Catholic morality. There are many levels to morality and virtue development. The sin of eating meat on Lenten Fridays is obviously not equal to the sin of killing another person. However, the gravity of either is determined on the intention, knowledge, and consent of the sinner. I think perhaps your view of Catholic morality teaching is a little simplistic. I am sure that many Catholics are confused. It is important to study and grow and form your conscience. That is one reason why I say that Catholicism is the most beautiful Christian religion–continual spiritual growth is tied to intellectual growth. God is merciful and He alone knows the state of someone’s intellect. Did the person eat meat on that Friday because he didn’t have any other choice? Did the person eat meat because he didn’t want to offend his hostess? Did the person choose to eat meat as a public display of his disdain for the virtue of obedience and the Church? Perhaps the person was never properly instructed on the value of doing penance?

You see how the degree of complicity is cannot be determined by us? That is one reason why Catholics say Love the sinner, hate the sin. We cannot judge the state of the heart of the sinner.

As far as suffering in the world, God views suffering different that man. Also, physical death is not necessarily bad in this fallen world. It is spiritual death that we must fear most. Also, suffering is a call to men to come to the aid of our brothers in Christ. That said, God never sends suffering. You must understand the nature of original sin to understand suffering. The first sin rent in two the plan that God had for us.

I recommend A Case for Faith by Lee Stroebel which has an excellent article by Peter Kreeft on suffering.

I think you have a simplisic view of Catholic theology. You do not know enough to know what you do not know.