Name 3 reasons you are not Catholic (yet).

[Benedictus]

Tell me what initiated your (heartrending) process of deconversion.

I started wonder if God was just my imaginary friend. I would pray a lot, but he never “spoke” to me. Sure, there was a sense of peace in prayer, but I’m not sure that was any different than what I’d get if I turned off the tv and dimmed the lights and listened to myself breath for 20 minutes.

I began to wonder why God is hiding. The best answers I found were in St. Augustine’s Confessions and Pope John Paul’s Crossing the Threshold of Hope; however, it seems to me that both are really non-answers.

Then I began to wonder why God doesn’t answer prayers. Although I rarely prayed for anything specific, praying to God seemed to have the same effect as praying to a bowling pin. Sometimes you get what you pray for and sometimes you don’t. If you do get what you asked for, there’s no way of knowing if it was just a coincidence. Sometimes you learn to accept that certain things are going to happen or are inevitable (e.g., a sick person’s death).

Then I began to think more about the arguments for and against God’s existence, evidence (or lack thereof) of God’s existence, and so on. The arguments for God’s existence are weak at best and open to endless debate. The evidence for his existence is virtually non-existent.

And that’s how I ended up where I am today. I may be Catholic in a cultural sense, but I’m afraid I really don’t believe anymore. I may be best described as agnostic now.

 

[ribozyme]

I started wonder if God was just my imaginary friend. I would pray a lot, but he never “spoke” to me. Sure, there was a sense of peace in prayer, but I’m not sure that was any different than what I’d get if I turned off the tv and dimmed the lights and listened to myself breath for 20 minutes.

I began to wonder why God is hiding. The best answers I found were in St. Augustine’s Confessions and Pope John Paul’s Crossing the Threshold of Hope; however, it seems to me that both are really non-answers.

Then I began to wonder why God doesn’t answer prayers. Although I rarely prayed for anything specific, praying to God seemed to have the same effect as praying to a bowling pin. Sometimes you get what you pray for and sometimes you don’t. If you do get what you asked for, there’s no way of knowing if it was just a coincidence. Sometimes you learn to accept that certain things are going to happen or are inevitable (e.g., a sick person’s death).

Then I began to think more about the arguments for and against God’s existence, evidence (or lack thereof) of God’s existence, and so on. The arguments for God’s existence are weak at best and open to endless debate. The evidence for his existence is virtually non-existent.

And that’s how I ended up where I am today. I may be Catholic in a cultural sense, but I’m afraid I really don’t believe anymore. I may be best described as agnostic now.

I wouldn’t call you a sincere Catholic now…

However, we have to accept some things in life and the existence or non-existence of God is nothing that we can change.

I am discontented with certain aspects of human nature, but Richard Lynn has given me the optimism that future technology rectify this. For example, read his wikipedia entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn

 

[Contarini]

I wouldn’t call you a sincere Catholic now…

However, we have to accept some things in life and the existence or non-existence of God is nothing that we can change.

I am discontented with certain aspects of human nature, but Richard Lynn has given me the optimism that future technology rectify this. For example, read his wikipedia entry: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Lynn

I’m sorry that I fail to give more substantive critiques of your posts, but I’m always just left shaking my head that anyone can believe what you seem to believe.

It’s like seeing someone eat sand.

How can you actually live that way?

You put your hope in technology? It’s nothing but an overgrown toy.

Of course, you no doubt feel the same way about what I believe. Real communication would seem pretty much impossible.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

EXACTLY the point ! You defend Mary so much! “Mother of Our Lord”, “Mother of God”, “Do you even pray the Hail Mary”.

Honoring Mary is just basic Christianity. Either you take the Incarnation seriously or you don’t.

Counting Scripture verses is a very silly way to do theology. No, this is not a put-down of Scripture in any way, but of a quantative approach to Scripture.

“All generations will call me blessed.” That’s all the sanction Marian devotion needs.

Edwin

 

[Goth_Catholic]

EXACTLY the point ! You defend Mary so much! “Mother of Our Lord”, “Mother of God”, “Do you even pray the Hail Mary”.

The words that Jesus used in His prayers didn’t even include Mary. Note what you call the “Lord’s Prayer”. No Mary. How about our Lord’s Prayer in John 17? Nope. Not there, either.

Yet, it’s the catholic religion and denomination that not only makes statues of Mary but carries it around in public celebrations and protests (as in Latin America). It’s the catholic religion and denomination that would also carry paintings of Mary. it’s the catholic religion and denomination that would wear scapulars and pray roseries because Mary said so.
it’s also the catholic religion and denomination who’s Pope John Paul II gave honor to when he survived an assasain’s bullet. It was him who had written on his outfits an honor to Mary. It was him who had on his desk a decree (order) saying that Mary is a co-Mediatrix to Jesus (pope almost bowing to the wantings of MILLIONS of people, not the Will of God).
It was a pope who said that Mary did not die.

It’s even at the top of this very web page, the way you look at Jesus and Mary: Jesus is a helpless human baby and has to be taken care of completely by Mary.

You, personally, may not wear a scapular or pray a rosary (how many times is Mary referred to?), but countless millions are treating her as some kind of goddess.

Don’t talk about some Protestant denominations going off the deep end. Trust me, I don’t belong to them. The RCC is off, too. That’s why I don’t belong to them, either.

We defend Mary because she is our spirtiual mother and our most holy queen. The same way we would defend our own mothers.

It is the Catholic religion that Jesus himself started. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, the occupent of the throne of st. Peter who Christ said unto “Feed my lambs”, he can do ONLY God’s will. And if God’s will is that Mary be our Co-Mediatrix, SO BE IT. God is one being in three divine persons, and the one who brought God into the world as flesh is Queen. Mary is daughter, mother, and host (Probably not the right word there) to God, therefore she has obtained graces beyond imagination To have given birth to God is not a task any mere woman could do. Does the bible not say “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”? Well Mary was pure in heart, and soul to carry God. “Blessed art thou among women” Anoughter quote “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.” God knew that Mary would bare his son, so he made her free of sin. God has the power to do so, and Jesus has the power to crown his mother. “A woman clothed in sun with the moon at her feet and upon her head a crown of twelve stars”

O holy Mary, mother of God
queen of heaven and earth
I humbley beseech you
from the bottom of my heart
Aid me in my need
There are none that can withstand your power.

 

[Verisimilitude]

Tell me what initiated your (heartrending) process of deconversion.

You’ll get used to inconvenient truths such as the notion that no loving God exists (a recent one in my case is the existence of race differences in intelligence).

If you are 17 I’m a duck, and I’m no duck.

I’m actually a Catholic who is on the way out of the Church, but here are my reasons:

1. There is no evidence that God exists.
2. There is little reason to believe that God exists.
3. Religion seems to cause more harm than good.

When beer was my hobby 1 & 2 made most sense too. Go figure

#3 only seems that way if you only watch Jerry Springer & cable news too much.

 

[ribozyme]

If you are 17 I’m a duck, and I’m no duck.

What? What’s that supposed to mean?

 

[Antwill]

Benedictus wrote: “Then I began to wonder why God doesn’t answer prayers. Although I rarely prayed for anything specific, praying to God seemed to have the same effect as praying to a bowling pin. Sometimes you get what you pray for and sometimes you don’t. If you do get what you asked for, there’s no way of knowing if it was just a coincidence. Sometimes you learn to accept that certain things are going to happen or are inevitable (e.g., a sick person’s death).”

I am saddened to read your post about becoming an agnostic. The above quote indicates to me that your faith seems to be much more about “what’s in it for you” rather than giving God the honor, respect, and love that He justly deserves. A selfish faith will not stand.

You will be in my prayers.

 

[Contarini]

If you are 17 I’m a duck, and I’m no duck.

He sounds like a teenager to me.

Edwin

 

[Efrain]

“struggled”? I prefer what Jesus said about her when He said, “Rather, blessed are those who hear the word of God and keep it.” and “Whosoever does the Will of My Father ARE my brothers and my mother.”

The exact words of our Savior trumps all others.

Mary did do the will of the Father. Jesus right there and then blessed His mother just how we all through the ages call her blessed. How is this contradictory?

 

[kujo313]

Yes, but you focus on only the scriptures you want to focus on.

You do too. The only difference between the Scripture you focus on and the ones I focus on is that mine have back-up.

Mine, the proof is more and more people doing the Will of God. Your one scripture has no action behind it.

 

[kujo313]

Mary did do the will of the Father. Jesus right there and then blessed His mother just how we all through the ages call her blessed. How is this contradictory?

Huh?

Check the origional transcripts. The word “blessed” is the same word used when Jesus spoke the “sermon on the mount”. Just as “blessed” we are! Your trouble is that you only hold it to just one person when it’s for every believer.

 

[kujo313]

Yet you conveniently ignore that Mary was an integral part of his way. He worked his first miracle at her request, and almost his last thoughts on the Cross were of her welfare when he put her into the care of John. And it is planned so from the beginning, when God promises Eve to defeat the serpent through the enmity of BOTH the woman AND her seed. BOTH Mary AND Jesus. There isn’t any sort of competition between them, but complementarity.

Of course I don’t love Mary MORE than I love Jesus, or even the same as Jesus. She is a creature, he is creator, she is human he is God. No comparison. I’m totally offended by the ignorant implication that I or any of us do love her more than him.

Wrong wrong wrong. Go back to the original language. The word used didn’t mean ‘instead of’, it meant ‘in addition’. As in Mary IS blessed (of course) by being his mother, and ADDITIONALLY blessed by the extent to which she followed God’s will.

Ummm … yeah. Mary or any mother is no more than wrapping paper boy you must seriously hate your mother to think so lowly of the institution of motherhood! And you must think very poorly of Jesus to think so lowly of HIS mother too.

And of course it’s impossible for me to admire BOTH the paper AND the present. You may be too blind and stupid to focus on more than one thing at a time, I’m not.

And call his mother mere wrapping paper? Great respect for him to dismiss her, great focus on him to ignore her - who was an essential part of his life - like she’s chopped liver. I don’t know any son worthy of the name who’d tolerate such a dismissive attitude towards his mother.

The “wrapping paper” thing was just a point. Jesus did what God told Him to, not Mary.
As far as focusing on one thing: Jesus is the (only) Way, the (only) Truth and the (only) Life. That’s a good thing to focus on. take your own “detours”, I’m not getting off the path.

 

[kujo313]

We defend Mary because she is our spirtiual mother and our most holy queen. The same way we would defend our own mothers.

It is the Catholic religion that Jesus himself started. The Pope is the Vicar of Christ, the occupent of the throne of st. Peter who Christ said unto “Feed my lambs”, he can do ONLY God’s will. And if God’s will is that Mary be our Co-Mediatrix, SO BE IT. God is one being in three divine persons, and the one who brought God into the world as flesh is Queen. Mary is daughter, mother, and host (Probably not the right word there) to God, therefore she has obtained graces beyond imagination To have given birth to God is not a task any mere woman could do. Does the bible not say “Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God”? Well Mary was pure in heart, and soul to carry God. “Blessed art thou among women” Anoughter quote “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you.” God knew that Mary would bare his son, so he made her free of sin. God has the power to do so, and Jesus has the power to crown his mother. “A woman clothed in sun with the moon at her feet and upon her head a crown of twelve stars”

O holy Mary, mother of God
queen of heaven and earth
I humbley beseech you
from the bottom of my heart
Aid me in my need
There are none that can withstand your power.

You quote Revelation 12. That “woman” is Israel. Israel is where Jesus was born. We follow a Jewish Messiah.
If Mary is the “mother of God”, then John 1 and Genesis 1 is false. I’d bet that the Scriptures there are true instead.

If God made Mary free of sin, then Jesus’ death on the cross was not needed for Mary. That is blasphemous.

“There are none that can withstand your power” is wrong, too.

I’m tired of this man-made religion. The catholic denomination is man making God into his own image.
If the pope declares Mary as “co-Mediatrix”, then it would contradict Scripture.

The catholic religion is worse than Islam.

 

[kujo313]

Yes, but you focus on only the scriptures you want to focus on.

The Scriptures I want to focus on are written in red letters meaning the words of Jesus.

It’s a good thing for you that they’re written in red. That way, you can ignore them easier.

I like to focus on not only the red letters, but to what the people around Him did after He spoke.

 

[pedja]

You quote Revelation 12. That “woman” is Israel. Israel is where Jesus was born. We follow a Jewish Messiah.
If Mary is the “mother of God”, then John 1 and Genesis 1 is false. I’d bet that the Scriptures there are true instead.

If God made Mary free of sin, then Jesus’ death on the cross was not needed for Mary. That is blasphemous.
“There are none that can withstand your power” is wrong, too.

I’m tired of this man-made religion. The catholic denomination is man making God into his own image.
If the pope declares Mary as “co-Mediatrix”, then it would contradict Scripture.

The catholic religion is worse than Islam.

Agreed 100%

 

[contramundum7]

I like to focus on not only the red letters, but to what the people around Him did after He spoke.

Then you will no doubt want to consult the ones who followed those who were around Him… namely the Apostles and their successors, the Popes.

 

[contramundum7]

1. Richard Lynn (for showing that race differences in intelligence exists and I believe this is calamity that is inconsistent with a benevolent God. Why didn’t God make us equal in that respect?)
2. Robert Shapiro (for allowing me to appreciate the value of skeptcism)
3. Gerald Joyce (for showing that the all flora and fuana are a product of the iterative dystelological process of Darwinian evolution)

God did make us “equal” in value. He doesn’t love one person more than another, no matter what the genetic make-up. Who is Richard Lynn to say or imply otherwise?
I know who he is… a human being.

Robert Shapiro is too skeptical… and probably an intellectual snob… Again, who is he? A human being…
Also, about skeptism: I heard a priest once say “Be open minded, but not so open minded your brains fall out.”

Don’t know of any Gerald Joyce. I know one thing about him - He’s a human being…
…equal in value to all other human beings… superior to some in some ways, inferior in other ways… like everyone…

Darwin… same thing. Ho hum… :yawn:

 

[kujo313]

Then you will no doubt want to consult the ones who followed those who were around Him… namely the Apostles and their successors, the Popes.

In the letters from the Apostles, there is nothing saying that we ALL need to accept Mary as our “mother” or “queen of heaven” or whatever. James 1:27 describes what John did with Mary. It is not recorded that any body else did so.

The successors to the Apostles cannot be trusted and an example of that can be found in Genesis.

God told Adam in Genesis 2:16-17

And the LORD God commanded the man (Adam), saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

In Genesis 3:2-3, Eve misquotes Adam

And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

God never said not to touch the tree. Swing on the branches, climb up it, sit in the shade under it… whatever. JUST DON’T EAT THE FRUIT OF IT.

The words written in the Gospels are FIRST-HAND… quoting our Savior’s exact words.
The writings of those who came after the Apostles are their own version of what was said. Just as Eve misquoted God and Adam, your “popes” and “saints” misquote the Apostles.
Maybe one of those guys really, REALLY loves his mommy and maybe was a “mommy’s boy.” He’d favor his mother and would of take his center of focus off of God and onto one of His creations.

Your one person in Italy is quoting a “mommy’s boy” and not a Son who’s into His Father’s business. Scripture is tried and true.

 

[kujo313]

Then you will no doubt want to consult the ones who followed those who were around Him… namely the Apostles and their successors, the Popes.

In the letters from the Apostles, there is nothing saying that we ALL need to accept Mary as our “mother” or “queen of heaven” or whatever. James 1:27 describes what John did with Mary. It is not recorded that any body else did so.

The successors to the Apostles cannot be trusted and an example of that can be found in Genesis.

God told Adam in Genesis 2:16-17

And the LORD God commanded the man (Adam), saying, “Of every tree of the garden you may freely eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die.”

In Genesis 3:2-3, Eve misquotes Adam

And the woman said to the serpent, “We may eat the fruit of the trees of the garden; but of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God has said, ‘You shall not eat it, nor shall you touch it, lest you die.’”

God never said not to touch the tree. Swing on the branches, climb up it, sit in the shade under it… whatever. JUST DON’T EAT THE FRUIT OF IT.

The words written in the Gospels are FIRST-HAND… quoting our Savior’s exact words.
The writings of those who came after the Apostles are their own version of what was said. Just as Eve misquoted God and Adam, your “popes” and “saints” misquote the Apostles.
Maybe one of those guys really, REALLY loves his mommy and maybe was a “mommy’s boy.” He’d favor his mother and would of take his center of focus off of God and onto one of His creations.

Your one person in Italy is quoting a “mommy’s boy” and not a Son who’s into His Father’s business. Scripture is tried and true.