How Can We Claim Our Faith as Exclusive?

[Fa_Chan]

Jesuits - wear black robes, carry Bibles, teach and help people. GIs - wear camouflage, carry guns, shoot people. Sorry, your “Jesuits = GIs” theory doesn’t seem to hold up.

I didn’t say or imply that Jesuits = GI’s and you avoided the other points I made. The point being that the Vietnamese needed no outside influence, whether it was Jesuits or GI’s and did not benefit from their involvement in their lives. They were fine without either. The Buddhists in Vietnam were treated terribly personally and their religion was laughed at and considered inferior by these outside forces.

Others have made ridiculous assertions about Asian languages needing “updating” somehow, which I find equally ridiculous and untrue factually. The Western world would do well to learn from these countries about medicine and filial piety along with respect for nature.

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[KarenNC]

Oops! you were doing pretty well for a little while until you flatly contradictced your earlier claim that those nasty Jesuits cut the Vietnamese off from their history.

Never said that Jesuits were nasty, just that even the best intentioned interference in a culture can have negative side effects, especially when one goes in convinced of one’s inherent superiority. My primary point in all this was to contradict the argument that the Vietnamese (and other cultures) were not blank slates with no way of transmitting their culture or history before the Jesuits came as JonathanKinsman and Eliasaph99 implied.

**True, I shouldn’t have mentioned the case of different languages for the Catholics because I was really talking about transliteration (different ways of writing the SAME language) not translation. Btw very few Christian clergy study Latin, Greek or Aramaic. **

Most Christian seminaries in the US with which I am familiar require at least a basic knowledge of the biblical languages for graduation. I presume that Catholic seminaries, like other Christian seminaries, do so. I do realize that not all who style themselves Christian ministers attend seminary.

Even transliteration gets to be interesting, especially when dealing with tonal languages or those that do not include vowels.

You seem intelligent enough to give us the gist of the argument in 25 words or so.

Polytheism can satisfy the classical arguments for theism without the special pleading required for monotheism. (15 words)

**Your personal beliefs are duly noted but are beside the point, **

Why is my conception of my Gods less to the point than your conception of Them?

** which is that the Jews, Christians and Moslems teach and believe that God is omnipotent, etc. and is far from your conception of God whicch is based on literally interpreting certain artistic conventions. (AND they each teach that “their” God is the same God as the God “of” the other monotheist religions.) **

I don’t deny that Jews, Christians and Moslems teach this. I simply said that I don’t see compelling evidence that they are all correct, either in that there is only one God or that the one God they worship is identical to the one the others worship.

I invite you to describe for me my conception of the Christian God and the basis for it, since you are so assured you know it better than I from one statement. Did you read the phrase “any more than?”

**Polytheist religions believe nothing like this. **

True. Polytheistic religions do not believe there is one God who is omnipotent, omniscient, etc.

 

[Petergee]

I didn’t say or imply that Jesuits = GI’s and you avoided the other points I made. The point being that the Vietnamese needed no outside influence, whether it was Jesuits or GI’s and did not benefit from their involvement in their lives. They were fine without either.

Your ultra-isolationism has failed utterly everyhwere it has been tried. Every country needs outside influences.

The Buddhists in Vietnam were treated terribly personally and their religion was laughed at and considered inferior by these outside forces.

Hey, if you REALLY want to experience patronising ridicule, you should try being a Catholic.

Others have made ridiculous assertions about Asian languages needing “updating” somehow, which I find equally ridiculous and untrue factually. The Western world would do well to learn from these countries about medicine and filial piety along with respect for nature.

The now-long-secularised Western world would do even better to learn from the Church which gave birth to it about medicine and filial piety along with respect for nature.

 

[Petergee]

Oops! you were doing pretty well for a little while until you flatly contradictced your earlier claim that those nasty Jesuits cut the Vietnamese off from their history.

Never said that Jesuits were nasty, just that even the best intentioned interference in a culture can have negative side effects, especially when one goes in convinced of one’s inherent superiority. My primary point in all this was to contradict the argument that the Vietnamese (and other cultures) were not blank slates with no way of transmitting their culture or history before the Jesuits came as JonathanKinsman and Eliasaph99 implied.

No, you didn’t use the word nasty, that was my own sarcasm. But if you’re going to be nitpicky about my wording, you shouldn’t accuse anyone of saying that the Vietnamese and other cultures were “blank slates”. No-one said that.

You seem intelligent enough to give us the gist of the argument in 25 words or so.

Polytheism can satisfy the classical arguments for theism without the special pleading required for monotheism. (15 words)

Maybe in a few more words you could do something more than just restating the bald assertion.

**Your personal beliefs are duly noted but are beside the point, **

Why is my conception of my Gods less to the point than your conception of Them?

My mistake apparently, I thought that you were asserting that the existence and nature of the polytheist “gods”, as conceived by the major polytheist religions, can be made subject to the same rational basis as the existence and nature of God as conceived by the major monotheist religions. But apparently you think it all depends on irrational personal feelings.

 

[mmortal03]

The longer I study the Bible, the more it becomes evident to me that this is no ordinary book. The Bible is an intricate masterpiece and stands on its own. God owes an explanation to no one.
There is [one] mediator between God and man, and that is the Christ Jesus. So only one mediator excludes; Muhammed, Buddah, Joseph Smith, The Watchtower and Tract Society etc.
Liberalism is partially to blame for the false notion that there are few if any absolutes. Mathematics is full of absolutes. Imagine the student telling his teacher that he was narrow minded, and didn’t like the fact that he would accept only one answer to 2x2=4.

I’m not following why you brought Mathematics into the picture here. How does it relate to Catholicism?

 

[mmortal03]

Who is to say that Christ did not also (in some mysterious way) inspire peoples in India, China, Africa, and Native America?

From what I have read on this issue, the Church says that it is possible that they can still go to heaven, and that he would be their vehicle, even if they had never heard of him…but it would be up to him to decide, so it would be “through him”.

Just putting that out there, not agreeing or disagreeing with it.

 

[Petergee]

I’m not following why you brought Mathematics into the picture here. How does it relate to Catholicism?

I think his point is that mathematics is a simply illustrated example of how, if we wish to make progress in understanding any field of thought, we must first admit that there **is **such a thing as truth, and that some beliefs are true and that it logically follows that all contradictory beliefs must be false. Anyone who tried to pretend that “there is no such thing as truth” would be unable to achieve anything.

But when it comes to religion and the supernatural, it is common for lazy people to assert, without any foundation, “there’s no such thing as truth”. That, they hope, saves them the trouble of having to think about such issues. Thinking about these issues and finding even part of the truth about them, might make these people realise that they must logically do things they find difficult or unpleasant, and refrain from some things they find pleasant! Oh horror!

 

[mmortal03]

Are you kidding? Imperialism and colonization destroyed civilizations that those committing the sins had no business messing with. Oh sure, it was all done in the name of God, to justify it on religious grounds, but it was outrightly wrong none the less.

Everyman takes a historical truth, and then claims that “it was outrightly wrong.”

On what grounds is he making the claim that the colonialists actions were “outrightly wrong”? Wouldn’t that imply that a universal standard of right and wrong exist?

That statement was not presented as an opinion. It was stated as a universal moral fact.

Where do we find these universal moral facts?

Good question. I personally have found Mere Christianity lacking in its convincingness on this issue that it is a higher power from whom we get these “universal” moral facts (I would assume that it contains the argument similar to what you are referring to here).

There are certain simple things that we as humans basically agree upon as to what is right and wrong, but as the scenarios and situations get more complex, the less we all agree upon the same path and choices. It is logical to think that we base our ideas on what is right or wrong based on what works best to keep our space and position in society (or something along those lines related to survival) based on all the (name removed by moderator)ut of our experiences we have had throughout our life as to determining what “works”.

Here is something that I found on slashdot about this applying game theory to morals:

by rabiddeity
(randomwisdom.com/)
Or it could be that the logical individual does the “right” thing because of a variation of the prisoner’s dilemma. A normal prisoner’s dilemma has only two players, but in our variation we’ll say we have as many players as are in the society. Each player has two options per “turn”: Behave (play nice, don’t steal, don’t murder), or Betray (kill, rape, pillage, et cetera).

In the classical prisoners’ dilemma, if both parties betray, both parties lose a lot, and if neither party betrays then both parties lose to a lesser extent. In the real world, if everyone steals and murders and whatnot, everyone loses. But if everyone cooperates then nobody really loses. Of course, if only one person betrays, that person can win a bit at the expense of everyone else. But most societies catch on to betrayers pretty quick, and dispose of them. The optimal solution for the society as a whole is one in which everyone behaves, and societies with a large number of betrayers fall behind and stay behind, I’d imagine (witness most of Africa, where bands of militias steal from others within the society).

In short, most people behave for two reasons. The first is because it would suck to live in a world where everyone misbehaved. The second is that the penalty for being caught is usually more than the potential gains from betraying. (As a side note, different cultures define “misbehavior” in different ways and have different rules for how much a betrayer loses when caught, which is why you get your hand cut off for stealing in certain countries and a slap on the wrist in others.)

 

[KarenNC]

Maybe in a few more words you could do something more than just restating the bald assertion.
My mistake apparently, I thought that you were asserting that the existence and nature of the polytheist “gods”, as conceived by the major polytheist religions, can be made subject to the same rational basis as the existence and nature of God as conceived by the major monotheist religions. But apparently you think it all depends on irrational personal feelings.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124238 will take you to an extended discussion, if you perservere past the snarky comments and call for online exorcism.

 

[Fa_Chan]

Your ultra-isolationism has failed utterly everyhwere it has been tried. Every country needs outside influences. Hey, if you REALLY want to experience patronising ridicule, you should try being a Catholic.
The now-long-secularised Western world would do even better to learn from the Church which gave birth to it about medicine and filial piety along with respect for nature.

If those influences were from other Asian countries that would be fine. I don’t subscribe to an isolationist foreign policy, just a non-colonialist policy. Chinese medicine was around before Western medicine. And, filial piety is nowhere stronger than in Asia. Again, you missed all points. The Western superiority complex is apparent in your writings.

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[Petergee]

If those influences were from other Asian countries that would be fine. I don’t subscribe to an isolationist foreign policy, just a non-colonialist policy.

You didn’t say “no colonialism”, you said “no outside influence”. Though apparently now influence from other Asian countries is OK.

Chinese medicine was around before Western medicine.

You seem to think this somehow makes it superior today! I guess we should go to Iraq to get the best beer, because it was first made there.

And, filial piety is nowhere stronger than in Asia. Again, you missed all points. The Western superiority complex is apparent in your writings.

I got all your points loud and clear, apart from the ones you backtracked on after I questioned them. You seem to have a mighty strong “Asian superiority complex” going on here. And far from thinking “Westernism” is superior, I criticised it.

And Catholic countries in general have the stongest filial piety known to man. Btw you do know that the Catholic Church was founded in Asia by Asians, and that the majority of Christians lived in Asia until the invasions by the Moslem (and to a lesser degree Mongol etc) armies and the subsequent persecutions?

 

[Petergee]

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=124238 will take you to an extended discussion, if you perservere past the snarky comments and call for online exorcism.

I ploughed wearily through the first page, but there is nothing resembling a logical argument for the existence of multiple “gods” analagous to the rational basis for belief in God. Maybe you can direct me to such a post if it exists. The protagonist’s historically ludicrous assertion that polytheistic paganism disappeared from Europe because of “fire and the sword”, (rather than the historical fact that it didn’t stand to reason when confronted with Christianity), is not a promising start.

 

[Fa_Chan]

You didn’t say “no colonialism”, you said “no outside influence”. Though apparently now influence from other Asian countries is OK.You seem to think this somehow makes it superior today! I guess we should go to Iraq to get the best beer, because it was first made there. I got all your points loud and clear, apart from the ones you backtracked on after I questioned them. You seem to have a mighty strong “Asian superiority complex” going on here. And far from thinking “Westernism” is superior, I criticised it.

Actually, here is what I said, and I quote:

The point being that the Vietnamese needed no outside influence, whether it was Jesuits or GI’s

I specifically mentioned two distinct groups. You should have read on. So, I haven’t backtracked at all.

I personally think Chinese medicine is superior, because it is a much older practice and because it works without the side-effects of Western drugs prescribed by doctors paid off by the drug companies. So, yes, I certainly do

You made a ridiculous assertion earlier that the Chinese government was thinking about introducing the Roman alphabet because it was of so much benefit. When I pointed out that this was not the case and it was because of their suppression of their people you sure were quiet. Want to back-track yourself?

I’ll let you know if I backtrack. I admit it when I do it.

And Catholic countries in general have the stongest filial piety known to man. Btw you do know that the Catholic Church was founded in Asia by Asians, and that the majority of Christians lived in Asia until the invasions by the Moslem (and to a lesser degree Mongol etc) armies and the subsequent persecutions?

Wow, I didn’t know Jerusalem, Antioch and the like were in Asian countries Somehow, I assumed that North Africa has some of the earliest Catholics. I did a few minutes of research about Christianity, especially in China (which is a great example of Asia as a whole) and found that Nestorianism is said to have been introduced in the 7th century. There’s no documentation that the Chinese were evanglized before then. Islam came around 650 AD to China. So, how could the Moslems drive out a Christian population in a country when there weren’t any Catholics living there? Do tell. Filial piety has been a Chinese trait way before Confucius in 550 BC wrote about it. Unless your Catholicism is dated before then, I would have to say that filial piety is and always has been dominated by the Chinese culture and your assertion is baseless and pretty humorous.

I have a complex when people glory about something Western and put Eastern culture as secondary, backwards or in need of help by the West. I read that through all your posts to date. Even though you say that you have criticized Westernism I haven’t seen it. You continue to point out how great Jesuits and the Catholic Church are in the realm of introducing alphabets and helping people and blah, blah, blah.

Wherever Westerners have gone into Asian countries they have assumed the indigenous people were stupid, backwards and poor saps who needed desperate help. I don’t think cultures like China that had such great scholars and thinkers as Mencius and Confucius needed any help from the West.

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[Fa_Chan]

Actually, here is what I said, and I quote:

I specifically mentioned two distinct groups. You should have read on. So, I haven’t backtracked at all.

I personally think Chinese medicine is superior, because it is a much older practice and because it works without the side-effects of Western drugs prescribed by doctors paid off by the drug companies. So, yes, I certainly do

You made a ridiculous assertion earlier that the Chinese government was thinking about introducing the Roman alphabet because it was of so much benefit. When I pointed out that this was not the case and it was because of their suppression of their people you sure were quiet. Want to back-track yourself?

I’ll let you know if I backtrack. I admit it when I do it.

Wow, I didn’t know Jerusalem, Antioch and the like were in Asian countries Somehow, I assumed that North Africa has some of the earliest Catholics. I did a few minutes of research about Christianity, especially in China (which is a great example of Asia as a whole) and found that Nestorianism is said to have been introduced in the 7th century. There’s no documentation that the Chinese were evanglized before then. Islam came around 650 AD to China. So, how could the Moslems drive out a Christian population in a country when there weren’t any Catholics living there? Do tell. Filial piety has been a Chinese trait way before Confucius in 550 BC wrote about it. Unless your Catholicism is dated before then, I would have to say that filial piety is and always has been dominated by the Chinese culture and your assertion is baseless and pretty humorous.

I have a complex when people glory about something Western and put Eastern culture as secondary, backwards or in need of help by the West. I read that through all your posts to date. Even though you say that you have criticized Westernism I haven’t seen it. You continue to point out how great Jesuits and the Catholic Church are in the realm of introducing alphabets and helping people and blah, blah, blah.

Wherever Westerners have gone into Asian countries they have assumed the indigenous people were stupid, backwards and poor saps who needed desperate help. I don’t think cultures like China that had such great scholars and thinkers as Mencius and Confucius needed any help from the West.

Peace…

Fa Chan

I ran out of time to edit this post, so I’m adding additional comments relevant to what we were speaking of. Here goes:
One of China’s classic books, called the Classic of Filial Piety, is dated at 400 BC and was supposed to have recorded Confucius teaching his disciples about it. So, again, I don’t think Catholicism was around back then. And, given that this was a cultural phenomenon 400 years before the incarnation of Christ, it’s safe to say that the Catholic countries have no stake or claim to having the strongest filial piety in the world. You should re-think that and perhaps strike it from the record

Given that we have totally hijacked this thread, I would recommend that if you wish to debate this further (which would be futile) another thread should be started.

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[Petergee]

Actually, here is what I said, and I quote:

I specifically mentioned two distinct groups. You should have read on.

And my immediate response was to tell you not to equate GIs with Jesuits, to which you responded. I’m amazed that you now manage to twist yourself up so much that you can assert that I never even noticed you mentioned GIs and Jesuits.

So, I haven’t backtracked at all.

You sure have. You said no outside influence. You didn’t say “by outside influence I mean only GIs and Jesuits”. nd ytour definition of “outside influence” has jumped about from “anything outside Vietnam” to “anything outside Asia” to who knows what. It’s making me dizzy keeping up with your backtracking and goalpost-shiftiing.

I personally think Chinese medicine is superior, because it is a much older practice

Astrology is much older than Christianity. I guess therefore it must be “much better”.

and because it works without the side-effects of Western drugs

Anything which works has side-effects. The only treatments with no side-effects are those which have no effects. You’re way out of your depth here my friend.

prescribed by doctors paid off by the drug companies. So, yes, I certainly do

Yet another absurd isolationist conspiracy theory. How do you keep 'em coming?

You made a ridiculous assertion earlier that the Chinese government was thinking about introducing the Roman alphabet because it was of so much benefit.

For “assertion” read “widely known and reported fact”. Just because you don’y like it happening doesn’t mean we all have to join you with our heads in the sand pretending it’s not happening.

When I pointed out that this was not the case and it was because of their suppression of their people you sure were quiet.

I do my best, but if I refuted EVERY individual crazy assertion you made we’d be here all night.

Want to back-track yourself?

No thanks, I myself thoroughly research the facts before posting rather than presentng out wild sweeping generalizations and xenophobic cliches as “facts”.

I’ll let you know if I backtrack. I admit it when I do it.

I’m waiting.

Wow, I didn’t know Jerusalem, Antioch and the like were in Asian countries Somehow, I assumed that North Africa has some of the earliest Catholics.

Amazing what you can learn with a few minutes reading isn’t it? Congratulations.

I did a few minutes of research about Christianity, especially in China (which is a great example of Asia as a whole) and found that Nestorianism is said to have been introduced in the 7th century. There’s no documentation that the Chinese were evanglized before then. Islam came around 650 AD to China. So, how could the Moslems drive out a Christian population in a country when there weren’t any Catholics living there? Do tell.

You may assert China is “a great example of Asia” (I disagree). But how do you than make the bizarre leap to “China = Asia”?

Filial piety has been a Chinese trait way before Confucius in 550 BC wrote about it. Unless your Catholicism is dated before then, I would have to say that filial piety is and always has been dominated by the Chinese culture and your assertion is baseless and pretty humorous.

I’m beginning to think your entire posts are satire. You cannot be serious surely. Somehow I don’t think Confucious invented filial piety. Ever hear of a bloke called Moses who told us more than a thousand years before confucious that God’s first commandment re our fellow men is that we must honour our father and our mother? Filial piety was around long before chinese culture was ever heard of. btw starnge how you’ve jumped from Vietnam to China.

I have a complex when people glory about something Western and put Eastern culture as secondary, backwards or in need of help by the West. I read that through all your posts to date. Even though you say that you have criticized Westernism I haven’t seen it. You continue to point out how great Jesuits and the Catholic Church are in the realm of introducing alphabets and helping people and blah, blah, blah.

Wherever Westerners have gone into Asian countries they have assumed the indigenous people were stupid, backwards and poor saps who needed desperate help. I don’t think cultures like China that had such great scholars and thinkers as Mencius and Confucius needed any help from the West.

Peace…

Fa Chan

We all need help from each other. Your repulsive xenophobia does Asian culture no credit. As I said earlier, it was precisely because the Jesuits were the strongest foe of colonialism that the European powers manoevred to have them suppressed (only temporarily, thank God, and thankfully for the oppressed colonized countries.)

Do a bit more simple research and you’ll discover further “amazing” facts such as that most Christians and most Catholics are non-Western and non-white.

 

[Petergee]

I ran out of time to edit this post, so I’m adding additional comments relevant to what we were speaking of. Here goes:
One of China’s classic books, called the Classic of Filial Piety, is dated at 400 BC and was supposed to have recorded Confucius teaching his disciples about it. So, again, I don’t think Catholicism was around back then. And, given that this was a cultural phenomenon 400 years before the incarnation of Christ, it’s safe to say that the Catholic countries have no stake or claim to having the strongest filial piety in the world. You should re-think that and perhaps strike it from the record

Maybe you could try telling, say, an Italian Catholic that his filial piety is not as strong as a Chinese because Confucios lived before the Catholic church was founded. Then see what he “strikes” from your record.

 

[Fa_Chan]

And my immediate response was to tell you not to equate GIs with Jesuits, to which you responded. I’m amazed that you now manage to twist yourself up so much that you can assert that I never even noticed you mentioned GIs and Jesuits.

You noticed yet still assert that I said all outside influences. Did you even read my quote? Evidently not.

You sure have. You said no outside influence.

Wrong, read the quote again.

You didn’t say “by outside influence I mean only GIs and Jesuits”. nd ytour definition of “outside influence” has jumped about from “anything outside Vietnam” to “anything outside Asia” to who knows what. It’s making me dizzy keeping up with your backtracking and goalpost-shiftiing.

Read above

Astrology is much older than Christianity. I guess therefore it must be “much better”.

Red herring

Anything which works has side-effects. The only treatments with no side-effects are those which have no effects. You’re way out of your depth here my friend. Yet another absurd isolationist conspiracy theory. How do you keep 'em coming?

Oh really? Hmm…well, I’ve yet to see acupuncture and acupressure (both methods used by Western doctors in increasing fashion) have side effects. How can this be an isolationish conspiracy theory (boy, you love those words)? How do you keep denying?

For “assertion” read “widely known and reported fact”. Just because you don’y like it happening doesn’t mean we all have to join you with our heads in the sand pretending it’s not happening.

Okay, provide the evidence for your assertion then. You claim their intentions are to somehow progress their country by looking into instituting the Roman alphabet. Knowing the Chinese leadership and how they have managed to treat their people and their actions, it’s a safe bet that their intentions are not good and it’s a tactic meant to eradicate the rich cultural heritage of their people, just like they have done with the Tibetan people they ruthlessly “annexed”. Read the “widely known and reported facts” instead of offering rebuttals with no evidence to your claims.

I do my best, but if I refuted EVERY individual crazy assertion you made we’d be here all night.No thanks, I myself thoroughly research the facts before posting rather than presentng out wild sweeping generalizations and xenophobic cliches as “facts”.

I’ve seen no refutations. Only you telling me I’m wrong. Start providing facts and I’ll go along with you. I’ve shown facts. You’ve provided none.

I’m waiting.

You’ll have to keep waiting till you show me where I have.

Amazing what you can learn with a few minutes reading isn’t it? Congratulations.

Yes it is. You should try it. If I can find information in a few examples that shows you don’t know what you are talking about, then maybe you don’t know as much as you think

You may assert China is “a great example of Asia” (I disagree).

Since it’s the largest country in Asia in land mass and has over 1 BILLION Asians, I would think it’s a pretty good example My goodness, open your eyes.

But how do you than make the bizarre leap to “China = Asia”?

Again, you put words in my mouth and misquote me. For goodness sake, read the text man. I said China is a great example of Asia. I didn’t say China=Asia. Very rude.

I’m beginning to think your entire posts are satire. You cannot be serious surely.

I’m beginning to think you are writing a fiction book and are a legend in your own mind.

Somehow I don’t think Confucious invented filial piety.

again, you didn’t read my text. I never said he did. You are purposely inventing these things to draw away attention to your own lack of facts and coherent arguments.

Ever hear of a bloke called Moses who told us more than a thousand years before confucious that God’s first commandment re our fellow men is that we must honour our father and our mother? Filial piety was around long before chinese culture was ever heard of.

That’s all you have? Moses’s one line of text to supplant the VOLUMES of Chinese text and a complete book attributed to Confucius on the subject? Somehow they don’t seem to compare. Moses didn’t invent filial piety. Sorry.

btw starnge how you’ve jumped from Vietnam to China.

Jumped? We were talking about different topics. Or weren’t you listening?

We all need help from each other. Your repulsive xenophobia does Asian culture no credit. As I said earlier, it was precisely because the Jesuits were the strongest foe of colonialism that the European powers manoevred to have them suppressed (only temporarily, thank God, and thankfully for the oppressed colonized countries.)

LOL, repulsvie xenophobia? Yes, we all need help from one another, which doesn’t include forcing Western ideology into an Eastern culture.

cont…

 

[Fa_Chan]

cont…

Do a bit more simple research and you’ll discover further “amazing” facts such as that most Christians and most Catholics are non-Western and non-white.

I would suggest you do your own. Now, you are changing your tune. First you say (and I quote, something you don’t do):

PeterGee:

Btw you do know that the Catholic Church was founded in Asia by Asians, and that the majority of Christians lived in Asia until the invasions by the Moslem (and to a lesser degree Mongol etc) armies and the subsequent persecutions?

Now, you simply say that most Catholics are non-Western and non-white. That could be because of the African element in Catholicism. And, the last figures I checked showed only 4-6 percent of the population of the LARGEST country in Asia (that would be China for the geographically challenged). Japan (again, East Asia for the geographically challenged) has a tiny population of Christians, though Christians have been there since the 13th century and even though Japan has the heaviest influence right now of the Western culture.

After I showed you the FACTS about the introduction of Islam and Christianity you now back-track to this silly statement. You specifically said the Catholic church was founded in Asia (not true) and then have the audacity to suggest this was the case till the Moslems invaded (again, historically untrue). Your Church is headquarted in Italy, which is a European country last time I checked. Though there were churches in Asia Minor (Turkey) and North Africa you have to look at a recent world map from this century to see which countries are Asian.

You really should give this up.

Peace…

Fa Chan

 

[Fa_Chan]

Maybe you could try telling, say, an Italian Catholic that his filial piety is not as strong as a Chinese because Confucios lived before the Catholic church was founded. Then see what he “strikes” from your record.

It’s not as strong because it’s not near the level of practice that is used in China, regardless of whether he’s an Italian Catholic or Italian Protestant or an Italian whatever. It’s not just that Confucius lived before the Church was founded. It’s also because there was an entire volume written on the subject. Confucian philosophy only furthered the practice and gave it a higher degree of prominence.

I’m not afraid of what gets striken from my record. I’m a heathen, non-Catholic that’s been repeatedly threatened with hell-fire, damnation and banishment. What else can they do to me? Your level of faith is poor and unlike most Catholics I’ve met. Threats are for losers.

Fa Chan

 

[KarenNC]

I ploughed wearily through the first page, but there is nothing resembling a logical argument for the existence of multiple “gods” analagous to the rational basis for belief in God. Maybe you can direct me to such a post if it exists.

I warned you it would be a slog. There is actually a lot of good info in the thread about Neopagan apologetics, but it is long and one has to sift out the chaff (as with any thread on this forum).

Try that thread, post #178 as a starting point for discussion of the book. I don’t have a summary of the book at any specific place on the forums.

Before we go much further, are you interested in an actual discussion or simply continuing to sneer, which is the way your posts are coming across? I am glad to discuss, but other posters on this forum have worn out my patience with the latter and I really have neither time nor interest for that. If you actually want to go into this in detail in a reasonable, civil way, here are the arguments discussed, both for and against theism. Pick one and we can start from there

1. the ontological argument–that the monotheistic God is not only real, but logically necessary, He doesn’t simply happen to exist but cannot not exist
2. the cosmological argument–the existence of a God is the only explanation for the existence of the universe at all
3. the argument from design (either from order or from purpose)
4. the moral argument–the existence of moral laws require a divine lawgiver
5. the cumulative argument–that all of the above have problems, but together they show that the existence of a god is more likely than not
6. the argument from meaninglessness–that God cannot be both the unchanging ground of being and a person
7. the existence of evil
8. the argument from unbelief
9. the argument from religious experience (the post I referenced refers to that specifically)