I am an atheist thread 4

[phooney]

Congrats on that post, N.E

 

[_A]

I’m confused. I have told you on a number of occasions what the Catholic church teaches on this matter. You have agreed that it is reasonable. So reasonable, in fact, that you made repeated unsupported accusations of dishonesty. So you know what the church’s teaching is, and you’re fine with it. So what’s the point?

I was trying a different tack – since you’re so hung up on the simplistic literal interpretation, I wanted to stick with the straightforward reading of the text. This does not support your point about “forcing yourself to believe.”

So what is the answer? Do I end up in hell just because I don’t believe? Can an atheist be a good catholic? Can a non-catholic expect heaven, or hell when they die?
I don’t remember agreeing that the church’s teachings were reasonable about hell, why not refresh my memory?It’s been a long haul, NE.

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

So what is the answer? Do I end up in hell just because I don’t believe? Can an atheist be a good catholic? Can a non-catholic expect heaven, or hell when they die?
I don’t remember agreeing that the church’s teachings were reasonable about hell, why not refresh my memory?It’s been a long haul, NE.

Sure. I guess, looking back, we didn’t talk so much about how one winds up in hell, as we did about the conditions that one might expect in hell.

So, who goes to hell? Those who die in a state of mortal sin. Period.

Are you in such a state? Beats me. There are three criteria for a sin to be mortal:

1. The sin must be grave. This is a little bit ambiguous. Presumably stealing a dollar is not grave, but stealing a million is. I don’t know anything about your life, but it is fairly likely that you have committed a sin that the church would regard as objectively grave.
2. Full knowledge.
3. Deliberate consent.
   Rather than belabor those two, I’ll just quote the Catechism (para 1859 for those following along at home): "It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. "

Now, I have almost no idea where atheists fit into this. If you don’t believe in God, is it even possible to have full knowledge of the sinful character of any given act? For what it’s worth, **I **would think not.

Remember that for a sin to be mortal, you have to be completely aware (and, presumably, believe) that committing it will lead to your damnation, AND you have to make a deliberate choice to do it. In my opinion, the three conditions above can be equivalently summed up as “Would I rather commit this sin than go to heaven?” If the answer to that question is yes, then God will respect my wishes.

As for your beliefs in particular. Denying God is a serious sin, objectively speaking. But are you “denying” God, if you don’t believe in God? Again, **I ** think not. I believe in God, down to my bones. If I were to decide that this whole religion thing is too hard, and I were to work to convince myself that atheism is true, I think my soul would be in very serious jeopardy.

Paragraph 1859 goes on to say this: “Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.” I have no idea if either of those apply to you. IF they do, IF you really do believe that God is out there, and that He is offended by your actions… could be trouble.

God bless.

 

[_A]

Sure. I guess, looking back, we didn’t talk so much about how one winds up in hell, as we did about the conditions that one might expect in hell.

So, who goes to hell? Those who die in a state of mortal sin. Period.

Pretty ambiguous to me, though I think that denying the holy spirit is an unforgiveable sin…Do I ‘deny’ by being unconvinced? I understand most of what is offered, and think it is baloney, so I think I don’t ‘deny’ an imaginary ghost…I would think a supreme being would be more clear.

Are you in such a state? Beats me. There are three criteria for a sin to be mortal:

1. The sin must be grave. This is a little bit ambiguous.

You ain’t kidding!

Presumably stealing a dollar is not grave, but stealing a million is. I don’t know anything about your life, but it is fairly likely that you have committed a sin that the church would regard as objectively grave.

I have helped a young woman arrange, and attend the abortion of a fetus in her body, on more than one occasion. That likely qualifies as something that the church would regard as ‘grave’.

1. Full knowledge.

I think I have a good understanding of what the catholics and christians are offering, but still decline…is that hell-worthy?

1. Deliberate consent.
   Rather than belabor those two, I’ll just quote the Catechism (para 1859 for those following along at home): "It presupposes knowledge of the sinful character of the act, of its opposition to God’s law. It also implies a consent sufficiently deliberate to be a personal choice. "

Since I don’t have reason to think there is a god, I am a long way from knowing what his laws are.

Now, I have almost no idea where atheists fit into this. If you don’t believe in God, is it even possible to have full knowledge of the sinful character of any given act? For what it’s worth, **I **would think not.

So since I don’t believe in ‘sin’, I could not be tossed into hell? I have known some mentally disturbed individuals who have no sense of right and wrong…how about them (though I guess it is just the same thing from your perspective, isn’t it?)

Remember that for a sin to be mortal, you have to be completely aware (and, presumably, believe) that committing it will lead to your damnation, AND you have to make a deliberate choice to do it.

So there is **no **possibility of hell for me, according to this. OK, I guess I am with you so far…

In my opinion, the three conditions above can be equivalently summed up as “Would I rather commit this sin than go to heaven?” If the answer to that question is yes, then God will respect my wishes.

Hang on, you just tossed in ‘heaven’, which doesn’t mean anything yet. What is heaven (the word means something about the skies above…?) and why should I want it?
I know I am being slow here, but honestly, I have never heard any description of heaven which would make anyone want to go there…

As for your beliefs in particular. Denying God is a serious sin, objectively speaking. But are you “denying” God, if you don’t believe in God? Again, **I ** think not. I believe in God, down to my bones. If I were to decide that this whole religion thing is too hard, and I were to work to convince myself that atheism is true, I think my soul would be in very serious jeopardy.

I think that if you (you personally) were able to convince yourself that atheism was more correct than your current beliefs, it would be because the evidence demonstrated it so well, you could not honestly hold another belief (which is the position I am in). In short, I don’t think you have to worry, either way.

Paragraph 1859 goes on to say this: “Feigned ignorance and hardness of heart do not diminish, but rather increase, the voluntary character of a sin.” I have no idea if either of those apply to you. IF they do, IF you really do believe that God is out there, and that He is offended by your actions… could be trouble.

God bless.

If I found out today that the whole thing was true, I would still refuse to worship such a beast.
There are too many things which make him someone I would be ashamed to know (indiscriminate killing of those who oppose him is a good one to start with).

I always understood that if you aren’t good enough to go to heaven, you go to hell. If that is true, then aren’t all the people who follow the wrong faith, or the right faith in the wrong way in danger of hell?
If not, why choose any faith over another? I mean, if they all get the job done, why do the catholic one (the clothes are too expensive, for one thing )

 

[justinthemartyr]

Pretty ambiguous to me, though I think that denying the holy spirit is an unforgiveable sin…Do I ‘deny’ by being unconvinced? I understand most of what is offered, and think it is baloney, so I think I don’t ‘deny’ an imaginary ghost…I would think a supreme being would be more clear.You ain’t kidding!I have helped a young woman arrange, and attend the abortion of a fetus in her body, on more than one occasion. That likely qualifies as something that the church would regard as ‘grave’. I think I have a good understanding of what the catholics and christians are offering, but still decline…is that hell-worthy?Since I don’t have reason to think there is a god, I am a long way from knowing what his laws are.So since I don’t believe in ‘sin’, I could not be tossed into hell? I have known some mentally disturbed individuals who have no sense of right and wrong…how about them (though I guess it is just the same thing from your perspective, isn’t it?)So there is **no **possibility of hell for me, according to this. OK, I guess I am with you so far…Hang on, you just tossed in ‘heaven’, which doesn’t mean anything yet. What is heaven (the word means something about the skies above…?) and why should I want it?
I know I am being slow here, but honestly, I have never heard any description of heaven which would make anyone want to go there…I think that if you (you personally) were able to convince yourself that atheism was more correct than your current beliefs, it would be because the evidence demonstrated it so well, you could not honestly hold another belief (which is the position I am in). In short, I don’t think you have to worry, either way.If I found out today that the whole thing was true, I would still refuse to worship such a beast.
There are too many things which make him someone I would be ashamed to know (indiscriminate killing of those who oppose him is a good one to start with).

I always understood that if you aren’t good enough to go to heaven, you go to hell. If that is true, then aren’t all the people who follow the wrong faith, or the right faith in the wrong way in danger of hell?
If not, why choose any faith over another? I mean, if they all get the job done, why do the catholic one (the clothes are too expensive, for one thing )

You state you are a long way from knowing what God’s laws are?

gravity, you hold to it.

It takes a man and woman to conceive a child, no exceptions, you hold to it.

Mathematical absolutes, you hold to them. (1+1=2 etc)

the list goes on and on, and you have to hold to them, there are no exceptions.

 

[phooney]

“It takes a man and woman to conceive a child, no exceptions, you hold to it.”

Organisms that reproduce asexually would disagree with you.

 

[Minnie31]

It takes a man and woman to conceive a child, no exceptions, you hold to it.

I’m sure some catholics would argue that unless you are Mary

 

[_A]

You state you are a long way from knowing what God’s laws are?

gravity, you hold to it.

It takes a man and woman to conceive a child, no exceptions, you hold to it.

Mathematical absolutes, you hold to them. (1+1=2 etc)

the list goes on and on, and you have to hold to them, there are no exceptions.

Claiming your god invented these rules would make him seem quite super. If I hadn’t already read all the fallacies and mistakes that are in the bible, I might be impressed. As it is, I know that you are just trying to make him sound good.
Remember when talking about mathematical absolutes, your god got ‘pi’ quite wrong a couple of times in the bible (kings, I think), and as far as the man and woman, no exceptions, do you remember hearing of a sheep names ‘Dolly’?
Would an exception of this rule make you stop believing in your imaginary god?

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

I absolutely can’t believe that people bring up this stupid ‘pi’ thing. What a joke!

The bible doesn’t even get it wrong. It was correct, to one significant digit, which apparently was deemed to be sufficient, since it couldn’t possibly matter less.
First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23
d = 10 cubits
C = 30 cubits
10 * pi, *to one significant digit *= 30

It’s ridiculous! Especially since pi is a NON-REPEATING decimal number, so even if the circumference had been given as 31.415926535897932384626433832795 cubits, people could still claim with equal truth that this figure is not sufficiently precise.

 

[_A]

I absolutely can’t believe that people bring up this stupid ‘pi’ thing. What a joke!

The bible doesn’t even get it wrong. It was correct, to one significant digit, which apparently was deemed to be sufficient, since it couldn’t possibly matter less.
First Kings, chapter 7, verses 23
d = 10 cubits
C = 30 cubits
10 * pi, *to one significant digit *= 30

It’s ridiculous! Especially since pi is a NON-REPEATING decimal number, so even if the circumference had been given as 31.415926535897932384626433832795 cubits, people could still claim with equal truth that this figure is not sufficiently precise.

It doesn’t make it right…it is right enough for humans at the time, but wouldn’t a god be able to get a more accurate answer?
That isn’t the only error in the bible…I just included it because it is one of many. The bible is riddled with such nonsense. From talking snakes to water levels that rise impossibly fast, the bible reads like bad fiction.
The universe is a better bible.

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

It doesn’t make it right…it is right enough for humans at the time, but wouldn’t a god be able to get a more accurate answer?
That isn’t the only error in the bible…I just included it because it is one of many. The bible is riddled with such nonsense. From talking snakes to water levels that rise impossibly fast, the bible reads like bad fiction.
The universe is a better bible.

How many significant figures should God have included, in your opinion?
More importantly, why should I care about your opinion on how many significant figures God should have included? Why is your opinion on this matter of any relevance?

 

[_A]

…why should I care about your opinion on how many significant figures God should have included?

I guess you shouldn’t it is your delusion.

If you want me to start understanding and perhaps even respecting these beliefs, you might want to explain them. For hundreds of years the churches have been able to burn anyone who asked awkward questions, and kept their power that way.
Things are different now. People can’t be burned as witches or heretics.

Why is your opinion on this matter of any relevance?

I guess it isn’t. You can go talk to other catholics if you prefer. They won’t be as stubborn as I am, surely.
They probably have easier questions, too.

 

[NaturalEnquirer]

In other words, you’ve got nothing. Thanks for clarifying.

By the way, you should probably report yourself to the moderators for calling me delusional.

 

[_A]

In other words, you’ve got nothing. Thanks for clarifying.

By the way, you should probably report yourself to the moderators for calling me delusional.

In other words, it was wrong about pi. It was wrong about the whole global flood (what NONSENSE!), it was wrong about Adam and Eve and the origins of man.
All this, and you still think it is good enough?

The universe is a better bible.

 

[Pax]

Because anything in the bible *might * be true, or might be false. There are many lies in it (such as the lie that the earth is resting on four pillars).
The natural world, and the scientific study of it is much more honest than the bible.
Why not discard the book of lies in favour of study of the universe ?(which, if your god created it, seems to be a better bible than the one I have found laughably inaccurate)

Please be so kind as to point out the chapter and verse where the “lie about the four pillars” can be found.

Thank you.

 

[Pax]

In other words, it was wrong about pi. It was wrong about the whole global flood (what NONSENSE!), it was wrong about Adam and Eve and the origins of man.
All this, and you still think it is good enough?

The universe is a better bible.

Much of your misunderstanding in these areas was handled on the first thread. To refer to scripture as nonsense is an absurdity. Your understanding of scripture is poor and your desire to learn has yet to be demonstrated. Please refrain from this kind of sarcasm…it is beneath you.

 

[_A]

Much of your misunderstanding in these areas was handled on the first thread. To refer to scripture as nonsense is an absurdity. Your understanding of scripture is poor and your desire to learn has yet to be demonstrated. Please refrain from this kind of sarcasm…it is beneath you.

The thing is that it is often wrong, Pax, and the only way to make it sound right is to say ‘he didn’t really mean women should not speak in church’ or ‘the whole world referred to in the flood was not the whole world, but just a small piece’. If you make enough explanations (apologetics?) the Lord of the Rings could be as true.

The universe is a better bible. Doesn’t have the lies.

 

[_A]

Please be so kind as to point out the chapter and verse where the “lie about the four pillars” can be found.

Thank you.

1 Samuel 85. It doesn’t count them, but says that the earth rests upon them. NASA does not agree.
Lie **is **too strong a word - let’s use ‘fiction’ instead.

 

[phooney]

Subjective metaphor

 

[_A]

Subjective metaphor