I am an atheist thread 4

  • Thread starter Thread starter _A
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
1234,

You misunderstand the term “prayer.” The word pray simply means to ask, but it can also mean to worship or both. Catholics know the difference when it comes to saying prayers that simply mean to “ask” or even “honor” vs. those that mean worship and adoration that is reserved to God.

The Church has very specific terms for honor that apply to people, saints, Mary and God. We use the following Lain terms for accuracy:

–“dulia” is the general honor that would be applied to our parents, and to saints and so forth.

–“hyper dulia” is the honor given to Mary the mother of Jesus.

–“latria” is the adoration and worship reserved for God.

If there are people that are in some way violating these guidelines then there is something wrong with that person’s understandings and they need correction. It is very difficult to make judgments about people without specifically asking them pointed questions. We cannot read the hearts and minds of people.

I hope this helps.
 
These things are simply reminders,
If that is the case, then you won’t mind me using that monstrous thing (for holding the eucharist) as a backscratcher, right? I think it is plain as day that the items themselves are revered, not just what they represent.
Pax3452111:
Anyone that worships and adores anything or puts anything ahead of God is involved in idolatry. This is not what Catholics are doing.
Could you better define ‘putting something ahead of your god’? I still think it smacks of idolatry.
 
Is Jesus Mithra?

Identical Life Experiences
(1)

Mithra was born on December 25th as an offspring of the Sun. Next to the gods Ormuzd and Ahrimanes, Mithra held the highest rank among the gods of ancient Persia. He was represented as a beautiful youth and a Mediator. Reverend J. W. Lake states: “Mithras is spiritual light contending with spiritual darkness, and through his labors the kingdom of darkness shall be lit with heaven’s own light; the Eternal will receive all things back into his favor, the world will be redeemed to God. The impure are to be purified, and the evil made good, through the mediation of Mithras, the reconciler of Ormuzd and Ahriman. Mithras is the Good, his name is Love. In relation to the Eternal he is the source of grace, in relation to man he is the life-giver and mediator” (Plato, Philo, and Paul, p. 15).

(2)

He was considered a great traveling teacher and masters. He had twelve companions as Jesus had twelve disciples. Mithras also performed miracles.

(3)

Mithra was called "the good shepherd,� “the way, the truth and the light,� �redeemer,� �savior,� �Messiah.” He was identified with both the lion and the lamb.

(4)

The International Encyclopedia states: “Mithras seems to have owed his prominence to the belief that he was the source of life, and could also redeem the souls of the dead into the better world … The ceremonies included a sort of baptism to remove sins, anointing, and a sacred meal of bread and water, while a consecrated wine, believed to possess wonderful power, played a prominent part.”

(5)

Chambers Encyclopedia says: “The most important of his many festivals was his birthday, celebrated on the 25th of December, the day subsequently fixed – against all evidence – as the birthday of Christ. The worship of Mithras early found its way into Rome, and the mysteries of Mithras, which fell in the spring equinox, were famous even among the many Roman festivals. The ceremonies observed in the initiation to these mysteries – symbolical of the struggle between Ahriman and Ormuzd (the Good and the Evil) – were of the most extraordinary and to a certain degree even dangerous character. Baptism and the partaking of a mystical liquid, consisting of flour and water, to be drunk with the utterance of sacred formulas, were among the inauguration acts.”

(6)

Prof. Franz Cumont, of the University of Ghent, writes as follows concerning the religion of Mithra and the religion of Christ: “The sectaries of the Persian god, like the Christians’, purified themselves by baptism, received by a species of confirmation the power necessary to combat the spirit of evil; and expected from a Lord’s supper salvation of body and soul. Like the latter, they also held Sunday sacred, and celebrated the birth of the Sun on the 25th of December… They both preached a categorical system of ethics, regarded asceticism as meritorious and counted among their principal virtues abstinence and continence, renunciation and self-control. Their conceptions of the world and of the destiny of man were similar. They both admitted the existence of a Heaven inhabited by beatified ones, situated in the upper regions, and of a Hell, peopled by demons, situated in the bowels of the earth. They both placed a flood at the beginning of history; they both assigned as the source of their condition, a primitive revelation; they both, finally, believed in the immortality of the soul, in a last judgment, and in a resurrection of the dead, consequent upon a final conflagration of the universe” (The Mysteries of Mithras, pp. 190, 191).

(7)

Reverend Charles Biggs stated: "The disciples of Mithra formed an organized church, with a developed hierarchy. They possessed the ideas of Mediation, Atonement, and a Savior, who is human and yet divine, and not only the idea, but a doctrine of the future life. They had a Eucharist, and a Baptism, and other curious analogies might be pointed out between their system and the church of Christ (The Christian Platonists, p. 240).

(8)

In the catacombs at Rome was preserved a relic of the old Mithraic worship. It was a picture of the infant Mithra seated in the lap of his virgin mother, while on their knees before him were Persian Magi adoring him and offering gifts.

(9)

He was buried in a tomb and after three days he rose again. His resurrection was celebrated every year.

(10)

McClintock and Strong wrote: “In modern times Christian writers have been induced to look favorably upon the assertion that some of our ecclesiastical usages (e.g., the institution of the Christmas festival) originated in the cultus of Mithraism. Some writers who refuse to accept the Christian religion as of supernatural origin, have even gone so far as to institute a close comparison with the founder of Christianity; and Dupuis and others, going even beyond this, have not hesitated to pronounce the Gospel simply a branch of Mithraism” (Art. “Mithra”).

(11)

Mithra had his principal festival on what was later to become Easter, at which time he was resurrected. His sacred day was Sunday, “the Lord’s Day.” The Mithra religion had a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper.”

(12)

The Christian Father Manes, founder of the heretical sect known as Manicheans, believed that Christ and Mithra were one. His teaching, according to Mosheim, was as follows: “Christ is that glorious intelligence which the Persians called Mithras … His residence is in the sun” (Ecclesiastical History, 3rd century, Part 2, ch. 5).
“I am a star which goes with thee and shines out of the depths.” - Mithraic saying
“I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright morning star.” - Jesus, (Rev. 22:16)
 
If that is the case, then you won’t mind me using that monstrous thing (for holding the eucharist) as a backscratcher, right? I think it is plain as day that the items themselves are revered, not just what they represent.
Could you better define ‘putting something ahead of your god’? I still think it smacks of idolatry.
No one would accuse the OT Jews of idolatry when they followed the Mosaic and Levitical Laws. The only time that they were self accused via the prophets, judges etc. is when they actually worshipped idols such as the golden calf or pagan gods.

That having been said it is important to note certain things in OT Jewish practices. A glaring example of what you would consider idolatry would be associated with the “Ark of the Covenant.” The Ark itself was not God but a great deal of reverence was shown in regards to the Ark. It was considered to be a sacred thing made holy by God for a special purpose of great religious significance. Uzza was struck dead for touching the Ark which was something forbidden to him and all others that were not Levites. Even the Levites had to wear special garments and followed certain ceremonial procedures when handling the Ark.

None of this was idolatrous. Likewise, the NT Church has rituals and objects associated with worship that are sacred and holy because they are set aside for use in worship. They are thus made holy for that purpose. The monstrance is an object that is set aside/made holy for a sacred purpose associated with the worship of God. To use it as a back scratcher, or for some other purpose than what it was made for, would be irreverant.

I would not use a hammer when a screw driver is the proper tool for taking a watch apart. I would not use a bicycle to climb a tree. Likewise, I would not use water to power the internal combustion engine of my gasoline powered automobile. These are concrete examples of how certain things might be misused against their design and purpose. The consequences of the misuse in these cases is quite concrete and obvious. The misuse of things that are used for spiritual purposes would, by analogy, give you an idea why it would be wrong to use a monstrance as a back scratcher.

I hope this helps.
 
A,

What I mean by idolatry/putting anything ahead of God is as follows:

The first of the ten commandments states:

I am the Lord your God, thou shalt not place strange gods before me.

Likewise, Jesus gives us the summary of the OT law in the two great commandments.

The first is: “The Lord our God, the Lord is one; and you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.”

The second is this: “You shall love your neighbor as yourself. There is no other commandment greater than these.”

Based upon these statements we can deduce the following:

–There is only one God that we are to worship.

–We are not to worship false gods or place any strange gods before the one true God.

–We are to love God in a way that is different from and above the love we have for anything or anyone else.

–The next thing in line on our list of priorities is the love that we are to have for our neighbor which is to be the same as the love we have for ourselves. In other words we do not love ourselves more than we love our fellow man.

We can deduce from this that such things as “the love of money,” which scripture describes as the root of all evil, would be idolatrous. Our love is rooted in relationships. Those relationships are defined by our love of God, neighbor, and ourselves. Things can be important to us and we can have a certain affection for them, but that affection should in no way approach the “love” we have for God and our fellow man.

Unfortunately, human weakness and the influences of the world tend to pull us into self love, love of material things, and the love of money and power. My perspective on all of this is that when we fall into these kinds of things, we tend to put them ahead of God and we are thus falling into a form of idolatry. I cannot place my intellect or personal desires above God. I cannot place my wants and whims ahead of the Creator.

I would respectfully say that, from the believer’s perspective, even atheism would be a form of idolatry in a broad sense. The atheist prefers something other than God. This may be deliberate or through no deliberate fault on the part of the individual. There is much complexity within the human person, and I am in no position to judge what motivates anyone. Likewise, I can appreciate the difficulties that atheists have when it comes to belief.

The good thing about all of this is that people can ask questions and seek answers. An honest search often leads to surprising and unexpected answers. God gives all that we need. If we honestly seek him with an open mind and humble heart, He will reveal Himself to us. This can take a life time or it can be almost immediate. Everyone is different and everyone comes from a different life experience. God is willing to meet us wherever we are. We, for our part, must want to seek Him regardless of what stands in our way.

I hope this helps.
 
No one would accuse the OT Jews of idolatry when they followed the Mosaic and Levitical Laws…
As I said, it is clear that the items are revered.
Things made by man.
Like the bible.
 
Reverence is not idolatry.
By putting the bible ahead of the evidence of the universe, you put a creation of man (the bible) ahead of a creation of your god (according to your belief system).
 
Really? We believe scripture to be the inspired word of God. Likewise, we look at the universe as another source of God’s revealed truth. They are not opposed to one another even though atheists may think so.

Besides neither the universe nor scripture is God. We do not place either of them ahead of God.
 
1234,

You misunderstand the term “prayer.” The word pray simply means to ask, but it can also mean to worship or both. Catholics know the difference when it comes to saying prayers that simply mean to “ask” or even “honor” vs. those that mean worship and adoration that is reserved to God.

The Church has very specific terms for honor that apply to people, saints, Mary and God. We use the following Lain terms for accuracy:

–“dulia” is the general honor that would be applied to our parents, and to saints and so forth.

–“hyper dulia” is the honor given to Mary the mother of Jesus.

–“latria” is the adoration and worship reserved for God.

If there are people that are in some way violating these guidelines then there is something wrong with that person’s understandings and they need correction. It is very difficult to make judgments about people without specifically asking them pointed questions. We cannot read the hearts and minds of people.

I hope this helps.
This sort of theological definition is wasted on the average Catholic. The AC, if you will, prays to whatever will get him/her the desired result. I put it to you that it won’t be a triune god–it will be Mother Mary, as the AC recalls that his/her mother was an easier pushover than Dear Old Dad, and after that some Favorite Saint, St. Anthony, Jude, a patron sanit, or whatever. The AC prays and prays for something and gets it, and that AC will keep praying to that figure until the AC doesn’t get what the AC wants, and then the AC will go to another figure and repeat the process all over agin. This is basic Pavlovian psychology.
 
This sort of theological definition is wasted on the average Catholic. The AC, if you will, prays to whatever will get him/her the desired result. I put it to you that it won’t be a triune god–it will be Mother Mary, as the AC recalls that his/her mother was an easier pushover than Dear Old Dad, and after that some Favorite Saint, St. Anthony, Jude, a patron sanit, or whatever. The AC prays and prays for something and gets it, and that AC will keep praying to that figure until the AC doesn’t get what the AC wants, and then the AC will go to another figure and repeat the process all over agin. This is basic Pavlovian psychology.
I just remembered, I used to see a lot of ads in the paper (in rural Nova Scotia) that begged St. Jude for care or televisions. Many also saying 'thank you St. Jude for prayers answered.

How is that not the same as idolatry (or witchcraft for that matter)?
 
It is not difficult to find people that have warped views of things and then act accordingly. Find a walk in life and you will see the aberrations. I’m sure that even atheists are are not immune to such foibles.
 
It is not difficult to find people that have warped views of things and then act accordingly. Find a walk in life and you will see the aberrations. I’m sure that even atheists are are not immune to such foibles.
This goes back to what I talked about, though. If, for example, people started nailing themselves to crosses to honour the Catholic god, they might be accused of misunderstanding what was taught.
If such things, however do not result in some kind of formal rejection by the church, they are then in danger of appearing to approve.
Just such a thing is happening in the Phillipines this Easter.
(Caution, the pictures on the site are kind of pornographic) Somehow, the message which reached the people is that they should nail themselves to crosses to celebrate a holiday.

I think there is a problem with the message and how it is being received.
 
This topic is a wast of time really. Just two sides acusing the other of excatly the same thing.
Atheist: You’re arrogant for not believing as I do.
Christian: no you’re arrogant for not believing as I do.

Atheist: How you believe in God mystifies me.
Christian: How you can’t believe in God mystifies me

Atheist: Where is your evidence for God?
Christian : where is your evidence for evolution

Atheist: I don’t have concrete evidence. I Just have a theory.
Christian: I don’t have concrete evidence just my faith.

Atheist: I shall do I can to enlighten you of my theory
Christian: I shall do everything to enlighten you of my faith.
Atheist: don’t you think its arrogant to think that you’re right and to go around trying to convert people to you’re way of thinking
Christian: don’t you think its arrogant to think that you’re right and to go around trying to convert people to you’re way of thinking?
And so on and so on. Just face it people ya can’t convice all the people to think as you.
 
This topic is a wast of time really. Just two sides acusing the other of excatly the same thing.
Atheist: You’re arrogant for not believing as I do.
Christian: no you’re arrogant for not believing as I do.

Atheist: How you believe in God mystifies me.
Christian: How you can’t believe in God mystifies me

Atheist: Where is your evidence for God?
Christian : where is your evidence for evolution

Atheist: I don’t have concrete evidence. I Just have a theory.
Christian: I don’t have concrete evidence just my faith.

Atheist: I shall do I can to enlighten you of my theory
Christian: I shall do everything to enlighten you of my faith.
Atheist: don’t you think its arrogant to think that you’re right and to go around trying to convert people to you’re way of thinking
Christian: don’t you think its arrogant to think that you’re right and to go around trying to convert people to you’re way of thinking?
And so on and so on. Just face it people ya can’t convice all the people to think as you.
You are correct with the arguments as you have described them, except for the “no evidence for evolution”. There is so much evidence for evolution that most believers don’t deny it, and not only no evidence for creationism, but innumerable observations in nature which contradict creationism at every turn. The descriptive term “theory” persists because it generally persists throughout science, as in “Einstein’s Theory”, E=mc2, which has been proven, and the “theory” of gravity, ditto.

If you want a much more sophisticated forum in which to debate science, religion and belief, go to:

iidb.infidels.org/vbb/index.php

–the Infidel Internet Discussion Board.

They have formal debates between believers and non-believers, many topics, many threads, strong moderation, and a generally high intellectual tone throughout.
 
–the Infidel Internet Discussion Board.

They have formal debates between believers and non-believers, many topics, many threads, strong moderation, and a generally high intellectual tone throughout.
I got kicked out of II because I asked a few honest questions. I wouldn’t recommend them as a place to go talk openly. I have found this place pretty good (though I admit to censoring being frustrating) but for science in general and evolution in particular, I enjoy www.richarddawkins.net/forum
 
I think that there is an older version of atheism that I am comfortable with when engaged in these discussions, the more archaic one that indicates immoral. I think in some sense that many atheists do believe in God by their actions even if they do not formally recognize God or His hand in their lives.

When I, a Catholic, sin against God, I am an atheist. My actions mean that I do not believe in God, it means that I have not trusted God. If the sin I commit against God is a mortal sin, then I have blasphemed God and have damned myself from Him until I open myself to His restitution via His mercy.

When an atheist does what God decrees as good, their actions do, in my opinion, indicate a belief in God even if they do not recognize their belief in Him. Whether or not this “subliminal faith” will be recognized by God is debatable. But I think He can see it though, specifically the hearts of all people and the specific reasons why they may not “believe”. But I do think that a person confesses their faith more by their actions than their words.
Jeez, Camron. I know that you’re trying to be ‘nice’, but give ethics a chance! There are many good and sound reasons for living a moral life! Also lots of other belief systems, which don’t include Christianity, support a moral life, such as Epicureanism, which I have mentioned before on a few occasions, Buddhism, with this destruction of the ego, and regarding all things as transient, so that one puts others first, Hinduism, with its emphasis on asceticism, which spares the physical world. Secular non-believing Jews are huge philanthropists in the US.

–go to the iidb.org, the Infidel Internet Discussion Board, which I recently discovered, and read the philosophy threads.
 
There are many good and sound reasons for living a moral life!
Would you like to explore them? I’ll play atheist. More specifically, for phooney’s sake, I’ll play strict materialist.

Would you like to start from generalities, or specific hypothetical scenarios? If the former, I’ll ask the most general question, “Why should I live a moral life?”

If the latter, I submit the following. You go to an ATM and discover that the previous customer (not around) left his card in the machine. It is saying “Would you like to do another transaction?” Why should I not withdraw a hundred bucks from the cardholder’s account?

God bless!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top