Can people choose to be spriritual and live a loving life?

[PRmerger]

That’s an old apologetics tactic - disparage any other belief as mere “feelings”, while asserting that Catholicism is the “truth”. Can you prove that your “deposit of faith” is in fact the true, authentic word of God, or do you just feel that it’s true?

You also demonstrate the “appeal to authority” fallacy which is rampant in Catholic apologetics, at least as practiced on this forum. The general form is “the teaching hasn’t changed for 2,000 years, the saints believed it, martyrs died for it, Aquinas and Augustine affirmed it, Benedict wrote about it…therefore it is true”. All of that simply proves that the teaching has been consistently believed, not that it’s true.

Reading and learning (including the Catechism) is what convinced me that many of Catholicism’s claims are not true, or are at least questionable.

I will address your points after you answer this question, Ted, which was asked of you earlier:

How do you know what parts of Scripture are in error?

Please remember that arbitrary criteria do not present your rationale in a good light.

 

[TedDC]

I will address your points after you answer this question, Ted, which was asked of you earlier:

How do you know what parts of Scripture are in error?

Please remember that arbitrary criteria do not present your rationale in a good light.

I do not know which parts of Scripture are true or false, nor do I claim to know. I simply do not believe Scripture is free of error because I’ve seen no evidence that it is free from error.

 

[PRmerger]

I do not know which parts of Scripture are true or false, nor do I claim to know. I simply do not believe Scripture is free of error because I’ve seen no evidence that it is free from error.

Fair enough.

I wonder, then, when you talk about God, saying for example, he is One god, how do you know this?

 

[PRmerger]

That’s an old apologetics tactic - disparage any other belief as mere “feelings”, while asserting that Catholicism is the “truth”.

If there is another source for your beliefs, I’d be happy to address. Clearly, it is not through Scripture and the Church, so I assume it’s “feelings”.

Can you prove that your “deposit of faith” is in fact the true, authentic word of God, or do you just feel that it’s true?

On the first level we argue to the reliability of the Bible insofar as it is history. From that we conclude that an infallible Church was founded. And then we take the word of that infallible Church that the Bible is inspired. This is not a circular argument because the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired) is not simply a restatement of its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable), and its initial finding (the Bible is historically reliable) is in no way based on the final conclusion (the Bible is inspired). What we have demonstrated is that without the existence of the Church, we could never know whether the Bible is inspired." source

Reading and learning (including the Catechism) is what convinced me that many of Catholicism’s claims are not true, or are at least questionable.

That’s fine.

How well do you know this faith? Just wondering if, from your studies, (and not using Fr. Google now), where in the Mass is Scripture?

 

[TedDC]

Fair enough.

I wonder, then, when you talk about God, saying for example, he is One god, how do you know this?

I don’t. I’m not even sure that our concepts of number, gender, etc. are even relevnt when speaking of divinity.

 

[CMatt25]

I would be careful, though, about how you talk about Catholicism here, Ted. Contempt for Catholicism is a violation of forum rules. I would hate to see you banned as it is clear that you were poorly catechized in the faith that you left and have much to learn.

Yes it is as is lack of politeness, personally attacking, or Catholics being uncharitable to other beliefs and practices.

 

[PRmerger]

Yes it is as is lack of politeness, personally attacking, or Catholics being uncharitable to other beliefs and practices.

 

[PRmerger]

I don’t. I’m not even sure that our concepts of number, gender, etc. are even relevnt when speaking of divinity.

Fair enough.

Then, it seems that you are quite nescient about any of God’s attributes, and I appreciate your honesty here.

Yet you have come to a religious forum to discuss God, it seems? How can you discuss? What can you contribute if your concept of the divine is so nebulous?

 

[PRmerger]

That’s not what GaryTaylor told me in a previous post

It would be helpful if you cited Gary’s post in which he said Catholics were “guaranteed” salvation. I’d like to see the word “guarantee” used, please.

 

[CMatt25]

With all due respect, Matt, this still is a non-answer. I believe I have even pointedly asked you in a PM this question and you responded to me, “Hmmm…that’s a good question. I will ponder this and get back to you.” (paraphrasing). But you have yet to respond.

I must conclude, then, that you, like a multitude of others, do NOT have any moral belief to which you’ve assented that disagrees with your own version of how things should be.

This is creating a god in your own image. My god is full of “Likes!” vs “I don’t really like it, but if God declared it, I will conform.”

If you don’t have any such beliefs, then you have created a god that fits your own ideas. rather than conforming your beliefs to that which has been revealed.

PR, I hope it is ok with you that I respond to all of your posts to me in one.

I am usually very efficient at responding to PMs but It has been such a long time since we PM’d, I don’t even have any correspondence between us in my box. I did have to delete some and it is still 95% full. Perhaps it was during one of my “hiatuses” and I overlooked it upon my return. Or perhaps I was going to give you the same answer as on the open forum, which you call a “non answer”. I honestly don’t recall.

You want me and “the multitudes” you speak of to have moral beliefs which we believe God has declared and yet be in disagreement with them? There are things which make me uncomfortable. If I believe we shalt not kill (Douay-Rheims), then I may have some discomfort over the events of last Sun. Yet if on the other hand I believe we should have taken out an unarmed OBL and others, then I might still also be uncomfortable about that.

Regarding your comment about Rence, I sorta stopped following at the point of Serap offering daisies to you both to agree to disagree. And you not wanting to do that due to that not being your reason here. And even before that pt, I confess I was merely skimming your conversation with her. So I can’t comment. Other than if you wanted me to put Rence among faithful Catholics, I have no problem doing so. I agree with Serap. You and Rence may have to simply agree to disagree on the role of conscience.

And Fred Phelps I’m not even sure I had heard of before you brought him up. I have Philippians 2:12 and Matt 7:3 to work on for myself than to be so concerned about Fred Phelps at the moment.

God bless you PR and peace.

 

[CMatt25]

Fair enough.

Then, it seems that you are quite nescient about any of God’s attributes, and I appreciate your honesty here.

Yet you have come to a religious forum to discuss God, it seems? How can you discuss? What can you contribute if your concept of the divine is so nebulous?

PR, I hope you and Ted will forgive me for interjecting here. But didn’t he say he saw love in more of God’s people that not?

 

[PRmerger]

PR, I hope you and Ted will forgive me for interjecting here. But didn’t he say he saw love in more of God’s people that not?

Yes, he did.

Though I am not sure why you point this out.

Firstly, how does he know that we are God’s people? Who says that? Where does that belief come from?

Secondly, is he saying that love is an attribute of God? If so, how does he know this?

 

[PRmerger]

You want me and “the multitudes” you speak of to have moral beliefs which we believe God has declared and yet be in disagreement with them? There are things which make me uncomfortable. If I believe we shalt not kill (Douay-Rheims), then I may have some discomfort over the events of last Sun. Yet if on the other hand I believe we should have taken out an unarmed OBL and others, then I might still also be uncomfortable about that.

I am sorry (again!), but I am not understanding you.

You are saying that God said, “Thou shalt not kill”, but you wish he hadn’t said that??? If God hadn’t said that, then you would be ok with killing?

 

[PRmerger]

And Fred Phelps I’m not even sure I had heard of before you brought him up. I have Philippians 2:12 and Matt 7:3 to work on for myself than to be so concerned about Fred Phelps at the moment.

God bless you PR and peace.

This really disturbs me, Matt. Someone spews hateful invectives–this is especially egregious because he does so in God’s name–and your paradigm is that you must “work on” yourself at the moment? (Incidentally, are these 2 Scripture verses you cited some of those you view the Catholic Church got right and are inerrant, or are they not theopneustos?)

I absolutely will not allow a man to vituperate another–especially when he uses Scripture to construct his hate–and I WILL STAND UP AND PROCLAIM: This man is WRONG.

 

[CMatt25]

Yes, he did.

Though I am not sure why you point this out.

Firstly, how does he know that we are God’s people? Who says that? Where does that belief come from?

Secondly, is he saying that love is an attribute of God? If so, how does he know this?

I point this out because you questioned him on how he can come to a forum to discuss God and he had already answered. He said, “I do believe He is a God of love, because the good in the people He created seems to outweigh the bad.”

Ted can speak for himself as to how he comes to believe these other things you inquire about. But I might submit to you PR, love and the Golden Rule are not exclusive to Catholics or even the Christian Scriptures for that matter. Wasn’t there even a hit single decades ago, “Love is in the Air”?

 

[CMatt25]

I am sorry (again!), but I am not understanding you.

You are saying that God said, “Thou shalt not kill”, but you wish he hadn’t said that??? If God hadn’t said that, then you would be ok with killing?

No I’m fine with Him saying that. What I meant was I can squirm when the Church sanctions instances of killing. For instance not totally rejecting the death penalty. Or folks “celebrating” the killings occuring last Sun. But at the same time I can squirm the other way. If I believe the events of last Sunday were justified, I can still squirm because of what God said. I thought you wanted me to squirm.

 

[CMatt25]

This really disturbs me, Matt. Someone spews hateful invectives–this is especially egregious because he does so in God’s name–and your paradigm is that you must “work on” yourself at the moment? (Incidentally, are these 2 Scripture verses you cited some of those you view the Catholic Church got right and are inerrant, or are they not theopneustos?)

I absolutely will not allow a man to vituperate another–especially when he uses Scripture to construct his hate–and I WILL STAND UP AND PROCLAIM: This man is WRONG.

I have to be honest with you PR. I have not given this Phelps person any attention. But you say he hates homosexuals. Or he says God hates homosexuals. I’d honestly have to go back to see what you said about him. So yes I too believe he is wrong. But he will have to answer to God about it in due time I suppose. Not to either you or I. I don’t know about you but I just meant I’m sure I have my own specks to deal with.

 

[meltzerboy]

A difficulty with being merely “spiritual” is that it puts the person first, not God. Being spiritual chiefly consists of fitting God into a scheme of one’s own choosing. But if God is God, that just can’t work. God is the creator; we are the creatures; it is God, not the creature, who must take precedence in the scheme of things.

And that is how trying to be “loving” can run into difficulties in such a spiritual scheme. What is the test for what is, and what is not, consistent with being loving, and what is the basis of the test? Human nature being what it is, people who set themselves up as arbiters of what is and isn’t loving tend to be a wee bit biased in favour of their own best interests.

The whole concept of God can get warped in these spiritual schemes, and many spiritual schemes degenerate into a rather vague monism.

Blessings,

Gerry

Yes, it is possible that the whole concept of G-d can get warped in these “spiritual schemes.” But the concept of G-d can get warped in many religious schemes as well. Witness history! To answer the OP question, I think that spiritually minded people who believe in G-d but do not follow any specific organized religion are able to lead good and moral lives. Next question, please.

 

[PRmerger]

I point this out because you questioned him on how he can come to a forum to discuss God and he had already answered. He said, “I do believe He is a God of love, because the good in the people He created seems to outweigh the bad.”

Which is as arbitrary as saying “God must be Chinese because the number of Chinese outweighs the number of non-Chinese.”

But I might submit to you PR, love and the Golden Rule are not exclusive to Catholics or even the Christian Scriptures for that matter. Wasn’t there even a hit single decades ago, “Love is in the Air”?

Ah, but I submit to you, Matt, that the concept that* God *is love can only be proclaimed because God revealed this. Through the Scriptures and the Church.

Thus, the only way anyone can claim that an attribute of God is that he is love is because of the Catholic Church.

 

[PRmerger]

No I’m fine with Him saying that. What I meant was I can squirm when the Church sanctions instances of killing. For instance not totally rejecting the death penalty. Or folks “celebrating” the killings occuring last Sun. But at the same time I can squirm the other way. If I believe the events of last Sunday were justified, I can still squirm because of what God said. I thought you wanted me to squirm.

Well, then, you still have not provided me with a response. What belief do you have that you say, “Were it not for God’s revelation, I would believe…”

I have quite a few. If God had not revealed that divorce and remarriage is wrong I would love to tell my friends “Go for it! Be happy in your 2nd marriage!”.

Were it not for what God had revealed, I would use artificial birth control.

Were it not for what God had revealed, I would sleep in on Holy Days of Obligation.

You can see that I have conformed my beliefs to what God has revealed. I have not succumbed to the whisper of that serpent in the Garden millenia ago who said, “Did God really say…?”

You?