God gave us Reason, not Religion

  • Thread starter Thread starter AgnosTheist
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Its not really mutually exclusive. Religion is not always unreasonable, though on many cases it has beliefs that can be quite irrational. I’m sure everyone would agree that each one of us possess the gift of reasoning. But since everyone disagrees on which religion is true, then its safe to say that God didnt really give a religion to everyone. So God only gave us a talent for figuring things out, not a system of instructions that already figured things out. Religion is merely a personal point of view. Not a fact for everyone. 🙂
musing But perhaps God did give a religion to everyone, and we just choose to interpret it differently? (‘we’ here meaning people of all faiths, not that Catholics choose to interpret it differently…)

We disagree mightily over what the true faith is, but I think that reflects more on humans than on God, yes? hemming and hawing I don’t know, I think I’m trying to say that, like most things, God DID give us religion, but different humans chose to accentuate some parts, disregard others, and maybe make up their own explanations for things that perhaps didn’t need explaining (and decided some things were Just That Way without using that lovely faculty of reason you mentioned).

reads through what I just wrote Oh, for heaven’s sake - did I make ANY intelligent statement there? I’m sorry - it’s been a long week, and I should probably just read and not comment tonight… let alone attempt any sort of intelligent debate. :rolleyes:

Thank you for the points you’ve brought up, though - they’re interesting, and make me examine my thoughts on the matter a bit more closely.

Even if I’m doing a lousy job of articulating those thoughts tonight. 🤷
 
The assumption that there is a “true” religion amongst the plethora of religions in the world is faulty. It could equally be true that God has not given us a true religion yet…

Saying that we are not sure of the Truth does not mean that the Truth does not exist.

By saying that it means that each person defines Truth for themselves which must logically be false because because an idea can be only be absolutely true or absolutely false.

Its like saying that I call something black, but someone else calls it white. Which is true?
Either it is the absence of color or it is not. It makes no difference what we call it.

Catholicism many not be the correct way G-d intended us to follow him, G-d may not even exist. But one has to be true. G-d exists or he doesn’t. Catholicism is correct or it isn’t. We do not define the Truth we can only describe it.

Peace in Christ
~Collin
 
Saying that we are not sure of the Truth does not mean that the Truth does not exist.
Agreed. I didn’t say that there is not a “truth”; I merely pointed out that it is completely plausible that none of the current religions equates to the “truth”.
By saying that it means that each person defines Truth for themselves which must logically be false because because an idea can be only be absolutely true or absolutely false.
I never claimed that “truth” is created or defined by humans. Stating the binary ontological nature of “truth” does nothing to establish the veracity or falsehood of any faith tradition or establish anyone religion as “more rational” than another.

Reason would lead us to conclude that we can never determine which religion is the “true religion” and thus we should tolerate all religions as long as they are tolerant of ours and as long as they are not harmful to people. Claiming the “superiority” of one’s faith tradition over another is not tolerance but arrogance; an unfounded, unprovable and irrational arrogance…
 
I agree that we should be tolerant and loving toward all other religions.

But there is a difference between tolerance and acceptance.

Believing that the religion you have chosen is the Truth is a matter of faith (although the most logical is Catholicism:D ). But believing that yours is superior and above all others is not intolerant or hateful.

I expect Muslims to believe that their religion is more correct then mine, and Jews to believe that Judaism is the Truth.

As long as you are not hateful toward others there is nothing wrong with thinking your ideas are right.

If you don’t think that your ideas about Truth are absolutely correct why adhere to them?

Peace in Christ
~Collin
 
I have to say this, it’s pretty personal. . . but I’m pretty humble about what my poor, little reason can do.

It makes mistakes. It creates “facts” from flawed empirical “observations”; it advances complex and confused notions about how things work, about intentions and about causation and effects. It gets beguiled by sexy interpretive theories.

I say this as a guy who was in Mensa, who graduated Phi Beta Kappa. My reasoning ability is only modest at best.
 
You are right G-d did give us logic with which to discern Truth but he also gave us the free will to choose it.
and what ‘truth’ were the ancient Aztecs supposed to discern? Mankind has been around for more than 200,000 years. Your religion isnt even 1% of that.
your logic is faulty.

to say that because all men have not chosen the same religion means that G-d has not given us a true religion is false logic.
maybe G-d gave you a set of instructions. but what about those countless people throughout the ages who died without even hearing about what you recieved? what about me? i did not get any instructions. so is it really ‘us’, or is it just your obscure ancestors who SUPPOSEDLY got a religion from G-d?
 
I have to say this, it’s pretty personal. . . but I’m pretty humble about what my poor, little reason can do.

It makes mistakes. It creates “facts” from flawed empirical “observations”; it advances complex and confused notions about how things work, about intentions and about causation and effects. It gets beguiled by sexy interpretive theories.

I say this as a guy who was in Mensa, who graduated Phi Beta Kappa. My reasoning ability is only modest at best.
Yeah I agree that even a Mensa genius like you could screw up with your reasonings. So what do you propose, smart guy? 😃
 
You didn’t get any instructions, AT? You really didn’t? You never had any person treat you kindly? Never experienced a family life? Never had a teacher in any subject who helped develop that 'reason?" Never loved another person? Never ‘heard’ of Christ, or of any ‘ethos’ (I don’t believe that you were born in say Papua New Guinea, somehow found a laptop and taught yourself to surf the Net)? Never managed to get through a school, or to function in even the smallest village?

Because if you did ANY of the above, you HAD instructions in God, in His creation, and in His will. Even if none of these people (like your favorite Aztecs, or the pagan Greeks, or even our friends the cave people) had ever heard the word “God”, “Jesus”, or “religion”, they KNEW that there was something ‘more’ (God), that there was a ‘right’ way of living (and if you study history especially before Christianity you will see that the similarities of a ‘good life’ far outnumber any culturally specific differences, again especially noting that while people may not have been the best at FOLLOWING the ‘rules’ they still knew OF the rules), and so they knew as much of God in the ‘natural’ way as anyone.

And now you particularly have more knowledge of Christ (if you would READ it, and attempt to follow it) than many in history who somehow managed to be quite thorough and excellent Christians, even SAINTS, without being literate, relatively free from hunger and physical attack, with abundant leisure, relative freedom from disease, etc.

If you didn’t ‘get any instructions’ may I suggest that either:

You didn’t choose to listen because they weren’t presented in a way you yourself thought ‘reasonable’ or because they expressed a ‘truth’ you did not want to hear–so you conveniently ignored them.

You did not recognize them then. (But be aware especially since coming here that you have really no excuse for not recognizing them NOW).
 
You didn’t get any instructions, AT? You really didn’t? You never had any person treat you kindly? Never experienced a family life? Never had a teacher in any subject who helped develop that 'reason?" Never loved another person?
I was referring to divine instructions.
Never ‘heard’ of Christ
I surely never heard that from God.
Because if you did ANY of the above, you HAD instructions in God, in His creation, and in His will.
Human instructions. If God doesnt like the way I live, I wanna hear it from him not from you.
they KNEW that there was something ‘more’
Oh I definitely agree. But that is merely the gift of reasoning, not the gift of instruction. The Aztecs had to figure things out for themselves. Correct? Err, youre not a Mormon are you? 🤷
 
God gave us reason, intellect, a will, body, soul, a life. It is reasonable to see, touch, smell, hear, the creations of God.It is reasonable to think of all that sourrounds us and acknowledge the fruits and gifts of living a life on earth. What elevates mans reasoning to the understanding and revelation of how, why, where, when, did all this creation come into being? If your one who appreciates what is given to him (life, breath, etc.), a reasonable person would look to give thanks and honor for these free gifts, thus enter Religion of the ancients. Religion is the answer to a reasonable mind that seeks answers to his unknown. Religion is an avenue for a reasonable mind to communicate to the Creator. A reasonable mind that does not seek out his creator, becomes prideful, selfish with limited reason of his humanity.

Seek and you will find, knock and the door will be opened
peace.
 
AgnosTheist, have you ever read any Aquinas?

He starts from the premise that almost everything about God and Christianity can be derived from reason. If fact, the only three things he believes must be taken on faith are the Incarnation, the Resurrection and the Trinity.

God Bless
Someone reasoned out the Real Presence in the Eucharist?
 
Its not really mutually exclusive. Religion is not always unreasonable, though on many cases it has beliefs that can be quite irrational.
The “further” a religion is from the Church (Catholic), the further it is from reasonableness and rationality. I think we can agree with that…! 🙂
I’m sure everyone would agree that each one of us possess the gift of reasoning.
We each possess our own methods and bases of reasoning, but those methods and bases make each person’s “reasoning” an idividual thing.
But since everyone disagrees on which religion is true, then its safe to say that God didnt really give a religion to everyone.
Religion, as you understand it, is the same thing as reasoning. It is the accumulated methods and bases of dealing with the question of God.

You make “reasoning” into ONE THING, while it is in actuality many things, and make “religion” into many things, where it is actually many things, then complain that your false idea of the superiority of a SINGLE “gift” is superior to a MANIFOLD “gift”…!

…for no other reason than that God, whom you don’t believe in anyway, would have given everyone the, illusory, SINGLE THING but would not have give them a MANIFOLD thing.

That’s an interesting viewpoint! 🙂
So God only gave us a talent for figuring things out, not a system of instructions that already figured things out. Religion is merely a personal point of view. Not a fact for everyone. 🙂
Coming from someone who has no idea of what religion IS, this is a meaningless statement, other than as a statement of opinion that religion has no value, as it has no truth in it, only “conjecture”.

Firstly, religion is not about “having it all figured out”. It is about the consequences of a very small set of revealed truths.

Secondly, you glorify reason as something that it isn’t (singular) and pose this mischaracterization as a replacement for a thing that is composed largely OF true reason.

Reason is applied within religion everywhere, including in accepting the dogmas of the Church for the excellent reason that that information is directly revealed by God Himself.

You pose a battle where none exists.

This is done through a simple hatred of the concept that any fact is in fact a fact, and not a hypothesis.

If there are no true facts, only “approximations”, then I can do as I please, and to do as I please is what I wanted to justify in the first place, so all is well with the world, as I am the god of this world, inasmuch as I fight and win with the other gods for my “comforts”.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.
 
Amongst all the plethora of religions in existence the True religion already exists! That is why The Christ came and walked among men. There is no more to come, otherwise, we legitimize Mohammed, Buddha, Luther, Calvin, Smith, White, et al., and anyone else who will pop up in the future.

We hold (Catholicism) that revelation was completed with the arrival of The Messiah. It is only a matter of reasoning to figure out if, in fact, Jesus Christ was that Messiah.

The only thing the entire universe awaits now is The Second Coming. He was quite clear about that. There are no more prophets, for there is no more heralding to be done, or need for them.

Our ‘touchy feely’ emotions about being inclusive and tolerant is based on the understanding that God created everyone in His image and we all are therefore His children. This also is what Catholicism taught, and Christianity holds.

The Aztecs, like all other civilisations before them and before Christ arrived, all ‘searched’ for God. But being so far removed from the time of ‘the Fall’ of Adam, the spiritual nature of humanity was almost in total darkness, hence the human scarifices to the sun, the elements, etc, because they were the most powerful things they knew, and “reason” dictates, that must be God. But The Light, was dawning from the East, (geographically) as a sunrise, for The Church had begun its spreading of the gospel from that direction. Before the church, The Jews already had ‘The Light’ and the promise of what was to come.
I was referring to divine instructions.

I surely never heard that from God.

Human instructions. If God doesnt like the way I live, I wanna hear it from him not from you.
QUOTE]
IMHO one should be careful what one asks for.

It is understood that God does not make mistakes! Therefore, having created everything in the universe, your answers, should already be in existence. Look around; in all you meet; all you may learn; the universe studies; all data your intellect requires to ‘reason.’

Since He does not make mistakes, it is HIGHLY unlikely that He will reappear and say, "Ooops. The answers were hidden under the rainbows. Sorry about that! My bad! "

Many want God to ‘reappear’ and give definitive answers to satisfy them. But all religions and their leaders say that they have the definitive answers! Out of all of them, one claimed to be God! Now, if that is true, (for arguments sake) then your definitive answers already exists. It is a matter of reasoning out where He left the instruction manual!

Currently, I hold that it is The Catholic Church. It is the only church that can PHYSICALLY trace itself back to Christ. In spite of what multitudes think and say, it is also the only church that ADHERES to Scriptures, unreservedly! It is also the one church that does not change with time or because of the times. Etc. etc. etc.

If you want personal answers, and you don’t want to listen to anyone, research the evidence and reason will not let you down, as long as your conclusion is truth. All ‘truths’ belong to God for He is the ultimate Truth! Scientific, forensic, mathematical, physical calculations, spiritual, theological even ‘home truths’…as long as it is the truth, it will point to its origin; Yahweh.

:cool:*
 
If you don’t think that your ideas about Truth are absolutely correct why adhere to them?
I do happen to believe that my idea about “truth” is absolutely correct :D; namely there is a truth but we are absolutely incapable of grasping anything but a shadow or whisp of that truth. We can pretend all we want that our religious texts are divinely inspired and divinely given and that our religious organization is the one intended by the Almighty. That doesn’t change the fact that we can in no way prove it through the use of reason.

While we need faith to grow spiritually, we should use our reason (acknowledging our epistemelogical shortcomings in matters of religion) to temper the lunacy that seems to flow from the combination of religious fervor and that innate human desire to prove that “our way” is right. This desire seems to flow from our own existential insecurity and our inability to know “the truth” with certainty.

“Adhering” to religious beliefs, IMHO, should be less important than submission to God; which is in essence a submission to the fact of our ultimate dependence on God and an acknowledgement of our finitude and weakness. The way we live our life is far more important than the creeds we profess during that life.
 
The assumption that there is a “true” religion amongst the plethora of religions in the world is faulty. It could equally be true that God has not given us a true religion yet…
Your assumption that we are making an “assumption” is faulty. God has revealed Himself to us and told us. It is no assumption, it is fact.
There is no way to prove that one’s religion is the “true” religion
There is no way to prove something to someone who doesn’t want to believe. There are still people who don’t believe that Americans stepped on the moon. There are still people who don’t believe that whales aren’t fish. There are still people who don’t believe that dinosaurs once roamed the earth.

But the truth is true whether you believe it or not.
though that has not and will not stop people from killing each other over the priority claim…
Nor will it stop nonbelievers from killing believers over their priority claim. In fact, nonbelievers are the worst offenders. Believers obey the limits imposed by their Creator. Nonbelievers do not acknowledge those limits.
Boy isn’t that convenient…I wonder who or what organization gets to decide who a really “spiritual person” is…:rolleyes:
The Church, the Pillar and Foundation of Truth which teaches the Spiritual Truths of Jesus Christ.

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
Agreed. I didn’t say that there is not a “truth”; I merely pointed out that it is completely plausible that none of the current religions equates to the “truth”.
I see it differently. Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life and if the Catholic Church is not teaching the Truth which Jesus Christ taught, there is no truth.
I never claimed that “truth” is created or defined by humans.
OK
Stating the binary ontological
oooo big word What does it mean? The double nature of truth. There is no double nature of truth. Truth is absolute. Truth is simply true. Whether you believe it or not.
nature of “truth” does nothing to establish the veracity or falsehood of any faith tradition or establish anyone religion as “more rational” than another.
In other words, since you have failed to find the Truth, you reject the idea that anyone else can find the Truth.
  1. That is false logic.
  2. That is false doctrine. It isn’t up to you whether you find the Truth. It is up to God. If you have faith in God, He will reward you. If you believe a lie, you receive a lie to embrace.
Luke 10
22 All things are delivered to me by my Father; and no one knoweth who the Son is, but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and to whom the Son will reveal him.

John 14

6 Jesus saith to him: I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father, but by me.

John 6

37 All that the Father giveth to me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me, I will not cast out.

John 6

45 It is written in the prophets: And they shall all be taught of God. Every one that hath heard of the Father, and hath learned, cometh to me.

Hebrews 11

6 But without faith it is impossible to please God. For he that cometh to God, must believe that he is, and is a rewarder to them that seek him.
Reason would lead us to conclude that we can never determine which religion is the “true religion”
Wrong. Reason would lead us to conclude that a loving God would reveal the True Religion.
and thus we should tolerate all religions as long as they are tolerant of ours
We should tolerate all religions because God respects man’s free will. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t inform them where the Truth is.
and as long as they are not harmful to people. Claiming the “superiority” of one’s faith tradition over another is not tolerance but arrogance; an unfounded, unprovable and irrational arrogance…
Not so. It is mercy, humility and love to show people where to go to unite themselves with the Greatest Good they will ever know.

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
I do happen to believe that my idea about “truth” is absolutely correct :D; namely there is a truth but we are absolutely incapable of grasping anything but a shadow or whisp of that truth.
That is true of non-revealed knowledge. That is partially true of revealed knowledge in that while revealed knowledge is absolutely true, any “part” of it may be better understood as further development of revelation comes to bear on it.

The Jews knew God as God because that was revealed to them. That is absolutely true.

They didn’t know that Jesus was to be, and was, God, because that development of revelation had not been revealed to them,… until it was,… even though “The Son” had always been God, just as “The Holy Spirit” had always been God.
We can pretend all we want that our religious texts are divinely inspired and divinely given and that our religious organization is the one intended by the Almighty. That doesn’t change the fact that we can in no way prove it through the use of reason.
Let’s be honest. You simply deny that revelation is a valid form of acquiring knowledge, don’t you?

If you do, then Christianity, and any “revealed religion”, is utter nonsense excepting it’s “apparently ethically nice” manifestations, which are only “nice accidentals resulting from a mental delusion”.
While we need faith to grow spiritually, we should use our reason (acknowledging our epistemelogical shortcomings in matters of religion) to temper the lunacy that seems to flow from the combination of religious fervor and that innate human desire to prove that “our way” is right. This desire seems to flow from our own existential insecurity and our inability to know “the truth” with certainty.
What you want is a non-revelation-based ethical system, a philosophy, that serves the function of “the good parts of religion” while not being dependent on this “irrational” stuff.

Good luck with that, as such an “enterprise” (human creation) will always result in the enslaving of that portion of humanity that it tries to “help”.
“Adhering” to religious beliefs, IMHO, should be less important than submission to God; which is in essence a submission to the fact of our ultimate dependence on God and an acknowledgement of our finitude and weakness. The way we live our life is far more important than the creeds we profess during that life.
When ethics become more important than revelation, ethics are bent to man’s will, which will always return to the institution of slavery.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.
 
That is true of non-revealed knowledge. That is partially true of revealed knowledge in that while revealed knowledge is absolutely true, any “part” of it may be better understood as further development of revelation comes to bear on it.
I agree with you here. “Truth” is absolutely true. I only question the degree to which we can claim to possess that truth and make pronouncements upon it.
  • The Jews knew God as God because that was revealed to them. That is absolutely true.
They didn’t know that Jesus was to be, and was, God, because that development of revelation had not been revealed to them,… until it was,… even though “The Son” had always been God, just as “The Holy Spirit” had always been God.*
Jews say that Jesus was not the Messiah because he did not fulfill the messianic prophecies as was revealed to the in the Old Testament. Their texts that “revealed” God to them gave specific criteria that Jesus did not fulfill in their eyes.
Let’s be honest. You simply deny that revelation is a valid form of acquiring knowledge, don’t you?
Not at all! I simply recognized that about every world religion says that they have “revealed knowledge” and that not everyone of them can be right at the same time! There is no way to prove that any of us are right in the content of our “revealed knowledge” and therefore we need to recognize and establish some sort of standard that allows us to live peaceably. As I have said before, I think the 2 great commandments that Jesus highlighted give us this standard. I trust that God will sort out the rest.
If you do, then Christianity, and any “revealed religion”, is utter nonsense excepting it’s “apparently ethically nice” manifestations, which are only “nice accidentals resulting from a mental delusion”.
You have nicely summed up what any “revealed religion” could potentially be-I however am incapable of proving it one way or the other. That is the problem we face! How do we know? Everyone accepts a different standard!
  • What you want is a non-revelation-based ethical system, a philosophy, that serves the function of “the good parts of religion” while not being dependent on this “irrational” stuff.*
Not necessarily for reasons stated above. We can no more prove the existence of an absolute “good” or “evil” than we can God. Everyone will have their own subjective opinion. This DOES NOT that “the good” or “the evil” doesn’t exist in an absolute sense. The inability to prove the existence of these values doesn’t automatically mean that they don’t exist and does not mean that relativism should reign. We simply have to acknolwedge our epistemelogical short comings.
Good luck with that, as such an “enterprise” (human creation) will always result in the enslaving of that portion of humanity that it tries to “help”.
One could easily say this of organized religion. You assume that it is not a human creation. Some would argue that what you have described is easily pointed to in the history of organized religion.
 
*I see it differently. Jesus Christ is the Way, the Truth and the Life and if the Catholic Church is not teaching the Truth which Jesus Christ taught, there is no truth. *
That is one way of “seeing” it. Yet you assume that there is no truth if the church is wrong. Can you possibly think of even a single instance where the church might have deviated from the truth as Jesus knew it? Given your statement that is a scary thought. I can point to many. I don’t want to get started…
oooo big word What does it mean? The double nature of truth. There is no double nature of truth. Truth is absolute. Truth is simply true. Whether you believe it or not.
Sorry about that. Writing “binary ontological nature” is easier than writing a whole sentence which says “truth is by nature true or false, it is not relative nor is there and in between”. It sounds like you and I agree on this.
  • In other words, since you have failed to find the Truth, you reject the idea that anyone else can find the Truth.
  1. That is false logic.
  2. That is false doctrine. It isn’t up to you whether you find the Truth. It is up to God. If you have faith in God, He will reward you. If you believe a lie, you receive a lie to embrace.*
You assume that I haven’t found the truth! Perhaps I possess it in spades!!! lol!! I really don’t, unless the ultimate truth is that we as humans can never completely possess that truth. You are right that it is faulty logic to hold that truth doesn’t exist because one individual couldn’t find it. However, that is not what I said.

I am not concerned with doctrine. I do have faith in God that God will sort it all out. I think all the little details of doctrine and religion are ultimately human creations and count for very little except to those in power or who are concerned with authority. If we are Christian, Muslim Jewish or whatever, if we follow the 2 great commandments as highlighted by Jesus we will be fine.
Wrong. Reason would lead us to conclude that a loving God would reveal the True Religion.
Reason doesn’t allow us to conclude that IF there is a God, that God is necessarily benevolent (loving)!!! Reason can’t even get us that far in religious matters. Heck, drawing on experience, we are almost forced to conclude the opposite. My belief in a loving God is pure faith and pure hope!!!
We should tolerate all religions because God respects man’s free will. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t inform them where the Truth is.
Why not honestly state that you are informing them of where you BELIEVE the truth to lie since you can’t prove you are right? That would be more genuine and honest and might even engender more respect for you position and belief system!
God bless.
 
That is one way of “seeing” it. Yet you assume that there is no truth if the church is wrong. Can you possibly think of even a single instance where the church might have deviated from the truth as Jesus knew it? Given your statement that is a scary thought. I can point to many. I don’t want to get started…
Please do. Start a thread if you like. The Church is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth and all Her Teachings are absolutely true.
Sorry about that. Writing “binary ontological nature” is easier than writing a whole sentence which says "truth is by nature true or false, it is not relative nor is there and in between
That’s what I thought you meant. But that is wrong. Truth is always true. Truth is never false.
It sounds like you and I agree on this.
Not if you believe that there is a binary ontological nature to truth.
You assume that I haven’t found the truth!
I know you don’t. Because you question the Catholic Church. Therefore, you haven’t recognized the truth that is before your eyes.
Perhaps I possess it in spades!!! lol!! I really don’t, unless the ultimate truth is that we as humans can never completely possess that truth. You are right that it is faulty logic to hold that truth doesn’t exist because one individual couldn’t find it. However, that is not what I said.
That may not be what you meant. But that is what you said:

You said:
  • Code:
                             Reason would lead us to conclude that we can never determine which religion is the "true religion"*
I am not concerned with doctrine.
Again, you are wrong. Everyone who believes in God, without exception, is concerned with doctrine. What you mean is that you are only concerned with the doctrines that you care about.
I do have faith in God that God will sort it all out
Agreed.
think all the little details of doctrine and religion are ultimately human creations and count for very little except to those in power or who are concerned with authority.
Sounds as though you have no faith in people. But if you had faith in God you would have faith in the people whom God put in authority over your soul.
If we are Christian, Muslim Jewish or whatever, if we follow the 2 great commandments as highlighted by Jesus we will be fine.
Making your own doctrines huh? What do you call this one? Don’t worry be happy? Or Margaritaville?
Reason doesn’t allow us to conclude that IF there is a God, that God is necessarily benevolent (loving
You have faith in a God whom you don’t know exists? Even the demons believe that God exists. And they are certain. So what kind of faith in God do you have IF you don’t know He exists.
Reason can’t even get us that far in religious matters.
Yes reason can, actually. And many have proven God’s existence by reason only. But there are some who don’t accept the proofs.
Heck, drawing on experience, we are almost forced to conclude the opposite. My belief in a loving God is pure faith and pure hope!!!
Your belief in an IF statement you mean.
Why not honestly state that you are informing them of where you BELIEVE the truth to lie since you can’t prove you are right?
I can prove it and have many times. And many people have accepted my proof and understood. But many people have refused to understand. The old adage is true. For some no proof is necessary, for others no proof is enough. In the end, God calls us.
That would be more genuine and honest and might even engender more respect for you position and belief system!
God bless.
Catholicisim is the most respected belief system in the world. But it doesn’t matter if only a small minority believe it. The truth is not dependent on an opinion poll.

Sincerely,

De Maria
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top