New member, looking for discussion

[onelife1]

youtube.com/watch?v=gtkotAWI2Ug&feature=player_embedded

This is for inspiration

After comming back to my Catholic faith, On the third day…I was unsure if I should go to communion. A little boy about the age of 4… held out his arms…just as Jesus’ does…at this toddler stage in the video. This was my sign from God…signifying Love. I knew, I was to go to communion. I have never seen the little boy, or his father again.

 

[rookieonedge]

Using the word ‘soul’ is quite reasonable.
Am I saying the soul only continues to exist IF a person is conscious of it? No.

It sounds like you agree that the soul, (and not the mind, the emotions, the body, etc.)
is the part that is immortal.

I’m saying that the mind, the emotions, the body, etc. do cease to exist upon physical death.
It therefore follows that if all a person is conscious of, is their body/emotions/mind, then everything they are aware of does cease to exist after physical death.

Remember, if we agree that the soul is the only part of a human being that is immortal, then not knowing that part of ourselves is tantamount to not knowing the most important thing possible.

Agreed is that the soul is the part of a human being that is immortal. However, defining the soul is of utmost importance as you agree that “not knowing that part of ourselves is tantamount to not knowing the most important thing possible.”

In times past, St. Teresa of Avila (a doctor of the Church) as well as theologians of her time considered that the intellect and will were members of the soul with the emotions on a lower level dependent upon the senses. (If I’m wrong, somebody correct me please!)

My Webster’s dictionary defines soul as #1: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life; #2: the spiritual principle embodied in human being, all rational and spiritual being; #3: a person’s total self; #4: an active or essential part; #5: man’s moral and emotional nature, the quality that arouses emotion and sentiment, spiritual or moral force. . .

(Sounds rather all-encompassing to me.)

This, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
"The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the ‘form’ of the body; i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures untited, but rather their union forms a single nature. . .

"Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people ‘wholly’, with ‘spirit and soul and body’ kept sound and blameless at he Lord’s coming. The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul. ‘Spirit’ signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God.

“The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God.”

 

[rookieonedge]

youtube.com/watch?v=gtkotAWI2Ug&feature=player_embedded

This is for inspiration

Cool video! I like that song, Adorate. Thanks for posting.

 

[onelife1]

Cool video! I like that song, Adorate. Thanks for posting.

Your welcome, I know I am not an apologetics…but I felt the need to try to help.

 

[rookieonedge]

Hi, welcome to board ! I am pretty new to this forum.Looking here for intract with others.

Hi and welcome! I’m pretty much of a newbie myself. Just ask a question and/or present an argument. God bless you and yours!

 

[wasmit]

Childlike faith

You need to pray with childlike faith. A person with childlike faith expects prayers to be answered. The sophisticated person says “That will not happen”. Remember the words of the Archangel Gabriel to the Blessed Virgin Mary regarding her relative Elizabeth who was expecting a baby for the first time in her old age and who people called barren: With God all things are possible" (Luke 1:37).

expectant faith

When you pray for a favour expect results. The following story stretches the point a bit, but will help you get the general idea. A parish priest in outback Australia was greatly concerned about the extended drought. He informed his parishioners that a novena was going to be held to pray for rain. On the first day of the novena all the farmers and their families came to the church. The parish priest looked around in disgust. He then went up to the microphone and made the following announcement. “What a lack of faith! You have all come here to pray for rain and not one of you brought an umbrella!”

A sign to an unbelieving world

If a miracle is worked and is plainly obvious to an unbeliever, this places him in the position of being able to rethink his ideas in regard to the existence of God and God’s place in his life.

The Will of God

When you ask God for a favour or miracle that you hope to receive, you must be prepared to say, and really mean it “Your will be done”. This is the way that Jesus prayed to His Father in the garden of Gethsemane (Matthew 26:29).

God may grant exactly what you ask for, or something more appropriate. Regarding this Our Lord asks us in the Gospels “What father among you would give stones when asked for bread, or a serpent, when asked for a fish?” God knows exactly what you need (Luke 11:11).

Bathe seven times in the Jordan – simplicity of prayer

Many simple novenas obtain stunning results. One man, mentioned in the Old Testament of the Bible, was asked to bathe seven times in the Jordan, in order to be healed of his illness. He was disgusted by such a simple instruction. He wanted to bathe in one of the “better quality rivers” in his own country (4 Kings 5:10). Simple novenas said with faith achieve good results. Complicated novenas are not necessary.

What was the main purpose of Our Lord’s miracles during His public ministry?

The main purpose of Our Lord’s miracles during his public Ministry was the confirmation of his teaching and proof of his divinity. This was also the main purpose of the miracles which were performed by the Apostles. Acts 5:12, Mark 16:20. When our Lord says “Your faith has saved you”, it must be remembered that this is supernatural faith, grace given by God, not the person’s merely thinking correctly about things.

Offering up suffering

Sometimes offering up your suffering in union with the passion and death of Our Lord can bring about alleviation or even the entire healing of a sickness or situation

How do these quotes provide evidence for, or demonstration of, the supernatural claims of christianity/catholocism?

 

[wasmit]

The prayers don’t actually do anything that affects the other person.

templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP_paper.pdf

Results: In the two groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52% (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51% (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.15). Complications occurred in 59% (352/601) of patients certain of receiving intercessory prayer compared with the 52% (315/604) of those uncertain of receiving intercessory prayer (relative risk 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.28). Major events and 30-day mortality were similar across the 3 groups.

Conclusions: Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from coronary artery bypass graft CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

 

[wasmit]

1. Assume an omnipotent omniscient god that created all humans.
2. he knows everything that occurred at all times, past, present and future. He can change anything at any time. (omniscience, omnipotence)

Then he is not omnipotent, as he cannot change a decision made with free will. He is also not omniscient, as he cannot see the result (i’m not sure if you are actually saying this?).

3. He can change a future event by changing any prior cause of that event. (omnipotence)

Once the thing is created, it exists from start to finish. If God were to change something in your past, the you that is now (and thus, the you that has been you from the time of your conception) would cease to exist - would cease, indeed, ever to have existed. God doesn’t do that. Once you are created, that’s it. He doesn’t go back and edit your life - He doesn’t “un-create” you and replace you with a look-alike that made different decisions.

Point (3) says nothing about what god does do, or does not do. Merely that he can do this. i.e. He has the ability to do this.

Therefore, it still stands.

4. At the moment of creation of humans, he knew every decision that every human would make. (omniscience)

Yes.

ok

5. At the moment of creation of humans, he could have changed any decision made by any human by editing the act of creation of humans. (omnipotence, 3)

But chooses not to, because of the gift of free will. He doesn’t manipulate us into making particular decisions. He sets the paths before us, and allows us to choose freely.

Point (5) says nothing about what god does do, or does not do. Merely that he can do this. i.e. He has the ability to do this.

6. Further, he must have consciously chosen each decision, as even if god created all humans and then did nothing further, he was tacitly agreeing to all future decisions, as he knew about them. (5, omniscience)

He has revealed to us His law. (The ten commandments, etc.) But we are free to violate them. Of course, when we choose to violate them, we set ourselves on a path away from communion with Him. But He does not manipulate us into choosing Him. He wants us to choose Him freely, because He doesn’t want puppets - He wants lovers.

This argument is not specifically about the christian god, it is about any deity. Perhaps the first point could be rewritten as “Assume an omnipotent omniscient god named Lord Xenu that created all humans” in order to avoid the cultural associations with the word “God”.

Further, you are simply contradicting me with no written reasoning or justification. When you say “He has revealed to us His law. But we are free to violate them.” and “But He does not manipulate us into choosing Him.” and “Of course, when we choose to violate them”, these quotes can be reduced to say “You’re wrong.”. Your words don’t actually show that I am wrong, they just claim that I am.

7. each decision that is ever made by humans was therefore made by god in the act of creation, as he had the power to change any decision, therefore he chose the outcome of every decision.(5 and 6)

No. God sets out the paths. He says, “I have set before you life and death. Therefore, choose life.” But He does not force us to choose the way of life. We are free, if we want to, to choose the way of death. He will not interfere.

This is contradiction, not an argument. Your words don’t actually show that I am wrong, they just claim that I am.

8. every decision that is ever made by humans was actually made by god (7)

Wrong.

This is contradiction, not an argument. Your words don’t actually show that I am wrong, they just claim that I am.

9. there is no free will.

Wrong.

This is contradiction, not an argument. Your words don’t actually show that I am wrong, they just claim that I am.

 

[wilbur006]

Friends. Wasmit is not in the least interested in learning what some of you have expertly explained, and he is continually using intellectual nonsense to what appears to be his primary goal of never accepting any concrete argument. He would even disagree with EVERY argument St Thomas used in his Summa, therefore taking the position that he in on par with that brilliant mind of Aquinas. That is why I have decided that I will take no more part of this type of discussion. Wasmit appears incapable of intellectual truth; and if he is capable, he then has taken the position to use all his efforts to make all of us frustrated for some twisted enjoyment.

At some point in the Apostles teachings they had to shake the dust off of their sandals and move on.

 

[wasmit]

If we didn’t have free will, we would NOT be culpable for anything we do…right OR wrong.

If we didn’t have free will, there would be NO sin or even degrees of right or wrong. Anymore than an animal has such a restriction.

But that’s NOT how it is for humanity.

The fact God wants us to choose correctly, and He already knows what we’ll choose before we make our choices, doesn’t mean we have no free will to make those choices… We really DO have free will to choose otherwise that statement “choose life” given the options, would make no sense… And as a result, unlike animals, we are responsible for our choices.

What your # 8 has done is basically show you don’t understand God, OR the faith you once claim to have had and left.

I’ve heard it said that atheism isn’t an intellectual problem as much as it’s a moral problem within the individual.

Is that true?

I stopped replying because you were deliberately misunderstanding my points in a vain attempt to frustrate me, and evading the questions I posed to you. Take for example this veiled insust:

I’ve heard it said that atheism isn’t an intellectual problem as much as it’s a moral problem within the individual.

Is that true?

Nevertheless, i will politely respond to your point about morals requiring religion.

Religion and morality go together like boiled beef and carrots. You often find them together but it is perfectly possible to have one without the other.

Many people have swallowed the idea that morality started with religion to such an extent that they cannot separate the two. I myself was under the impression that religion had a significant causative link to morality until quite recently when I came to see the truth.

Man is a primate. All primates have innate morality. A moral sense is vitally important to the efficient running of any society or group. There are no amoral primate groups anywhere. The Mafia have morals, baboons have codes. There are differences between the various groups and their codes of morality but all primate groups have some morals and standards of behaviour. Religion is also very common but it is not universal and it did not cause the codes or the instinct to observe them. These are facts that need to be clearly stated. Morality does not require religion.

In Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union millions of people were brought up during the middle decades of the twentieth century in a state that was thoroughly atheist and many of the households and communities within those states were also atheist. There was no collapse of morality. You were not more likely to be robbed, raped, murdered or cheated in Leningrad than you were in Manchester. Why? Why did people freed from the fear of divine retribution not suddenly start behaving like amoral animals? Because we are animals. We are political animals, animals that need to live within societies and feel respected by them.

Religion is not the bulwark of morality any more than the cockerel crowing if the cause of the dawn or the virgin sacrifices are the cause of the volcano keeping quiet. This trick has been perpetrated on people for centuries and people continue to fall for it. It is very reminiscent of the great Santa Claus conspiracy. The surest way to lose a job on television is to state clearly that there is no such person as Santa Claus. No adult believes in Santa Claus, but most are part of the conspiracy. We mustn’t let children know that there is no Santa Claus because … er, well, because. And we mustn’t let the people, especially the poor, know there is no God because, well, because. We wouldn’t want to face those consequences would we?

What is there to be afraid of in the truth that God is just as much an imaginary being as the bogeyman, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy? None whatsoever. Morality in our species does not rest upon fear of God. We act morally because to do so makes us feel good about ourselves and makes us better friends and allies. Being good and moral is the right thing to do for your own selfish self interest. The best thing we can do as a society to make morality more widespread and more potent is to strip away all aspects of religion from it. Being good is the right thing to do because it simply is the right thing. We as a species have an innate sense of morality just as we have an innate ability to learn language. We need it. We are political animals. We have an innate sense of what is or is not fair. We need respect and the esteem of our neighbours, friends and colleagues. This makes us behave morally.

 

[wasmit]

continued…

Our morality breaks down with anonymity. It is no surprise that the biggest cities in the world have the most selfish drivers. If you drive in a small town in Kansas you see people being polite and well mannered not because they fear the wrath of God but simply because in small communities people expect to interact again with you at another time. In contrast in New York, Hong Kong or Rome the rule of the road is to curse and never trust the other driver.

The way to keep morality and lose the encumbrances of religion is to promote morality in and of itself. We as a species know what morality is and we recognize moral behaviour when we see it. We are naturally moral because we have developed complex instincts to help us in social situations. These instincts work as long as we allow them instead of burying them in external threats and admonishments. The ten commandments do not help us discover ultimate morality. We all know it when we see it. The way to get people to behave in a moral way is to trust them, to integrate them and to allow them to develop fully as individuals in a caring society. People will only act as amoral criminals if they fall into a criminal subculture, are mentally deficient in morality (rare conditions do exist that cause these problems) or are in a situation in which crime really does pay in a way that can become a life choice.

However you cannot create a moral society with nothing but kindness. We also need something else, something deeply unfashionable but vital to the healthy running of any society: intolerance. We must promote intolerance of criminality and cheating. We as social animals naturally despise the cheat and the thief, but too many liberal bed-wetter types have been telling us that the thief only steals because of what we do to him. This line must be resisted and fought from both ends. We must both minimize the lure of cheating by ensuring that all can live without falling into crime and at the same time promote natural justice in the community. Criminals must be ostracized.

How many crimes have been prevented by the fear of God? Do Christians never commit crime or sin? Do atheists spend all their days stealing from charity collection boxes, murdering strangers and sexually abusing children? There is no link between belief in the supernatural and God and morality. If the only reason a Christian can give for continued belief in his incredible theory is the idea that such a belief is a useful tool to keep the poor from falling into immorality then his religion is morally bankrupt. Surely the poor and the dangerous will be inclined to listen more clearly if we treat them as adults rather than simply threatening them with the bogeyman again?

 

[anon5216]

One of you could develop the faith and discipline of Padre Pio and perhaps some of his abilities such as bilocation and reading souls, and simply show up at wasmit’s home and demonstrate Truth.

 

[onelife1]

youtube.com/watch?v=lMW2kHHGPa8

I began to pray.

I pray for you wasmit!

The Bible is the proof!..

why did you choose the name wasmit? and
what gives you great joy in life?

 

[anon5216]

youtube.com/watch?v=lMW2kHHGPa8

This video looks/sounds like basic fear-mongering to me.

I doubt if the full length video this ad is selling is any more than that.

 

[anon5216]

Agreed is that the soul is the part of a human being that is immortal. However, defining the soul is of utmost importance as you agree that “not knowing that part of ourselves is tantamount to not knowing the most important thing possible.”

In times past, St. Teresa of Avila (a doctor of the Church) as well as theologians of her time considered that the intellect and will were members of the soul with the emotions on a lower level dependent upon the senses. (If I’m wrong, somebody correct me please!)

My Webster’s dictionary defines soul as #1: the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life; #2: the spiritual principle embodied in human being, all rational and spiritual being; #3: a person’s total self; #4: an active or essential part; #5: man’s moral and emotional nature, the quality that arouses emotion and sentiment, spiritual or moral force. . .

(Sounds rather all-encompassing to me.)

This, according to the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
"The unity of soul and body is so profound that one has to consider the soul to be the ‘form’ of the body; i.e., it is because of its spiritual soul that the body made of matter becomes a living, human body; spirit and matter, in man, are not two natures untited, but rather their union forms a single nature. . .

"Sometimes the soul is distinguished from the spirit: St. Paul for instance prays that God may sanctify his people ‘wholly’, with ‘spirit and soul and body’ kept sound and blameless at he Lord’s coming. The Church teaches that this distinction does not introduce a duality into the soul. ‘Spirit’ signifies that from creation man is ordered to a supernatural end and that his soul can gratuitously be raised beyond all it deserves to communion with God.

“The spiritual tradition of the Church also emphasizes the heart, in the biblical sense of the depths of one’s being, where the person decides for or against God.”

The various definitions in use is why I didn’t use the word ‘soul’ the first post. As you brought it up to use as a term for the part of the being that is immortal - as opposed to the part of the being that is not; I agreed to using the term in that sense. To now go and introduce other uses of that term to refute what I said of the immortal part of our being is somewhat disingenuous.

If a person is conscious as the soul (defined as the immortal part of our being), then that person can know and experience the things an immortal soul knows and experiences. If a person does not know and experience (in the sense of direct experience - not just 2nd hand things they were taught to believe) the things that an immortal soul knows and experiences, then everything aspect of themselves they are aware of will cease to exist at physical death.

 

[anon5216]

Two thumbs way up on Wasmit’s recent post on morality and religion!

 

[Cinette]

Hi,

I created an account here to get some viewpoints on god and the beliefs of others.

Some background about me: from ages 5 – 17 I went to christian(Roman catholic) schools, then to a secular university. I am in my mid 20’s. I believed in god, jesus, the bible, etc… until I was about 15 because authority figures (parents, teachers) told me that it was true. Around that time I looked more closely and critically at the religion and dismissed it as silly for many reasons. The reasons mainly centred around proof, evidence, feasibility, reality, etc…

I would describe myself as a 99% atheist; i.e. agnostic but leaning heavily towards atheism.

I am looking for clear, rational, arguments for the existence of a god, or the christian god, or to show that something in the bible is true. I have an open mind, and if you show something to be true, or almost certainly true, I must believe it.

I have recently read Aquinas’ 5 proofs, but counter-arguments have dismissed them.

I am coming here in good faith, hoping to be convinced or persuaded, looking at both sides of the argument.

I hope this is in the right section.

Thanks for your time.

I have just look into this thread and read your posting only and before I go out I have a couple of things to say.

Firstly, no explanation of the Christian Faith will get you to believe. St Augustine said:

*"Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. " *

One believes through Faith and not through Proof.

You need Faith and Reason (common sense) - these two elements are needed in order to believe.

You need to Trust God and if you do not believe in Him then what is the point?

My husband was an atheist for years and he came to believe in God through a Jewish Scientist. Science is not a bad route to take because you contemplate creation and the wonders of the Universe created by God.

Jesus told us “Seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened, ask and it shall be given you.” It is amazing what can get a person to believe in God. God is very creative and each person’s experience is different - like DNA.

So my friend I wish you “happy hunting” for the truth - it is a worthwhile activity.

I almost forgot - PRAYER - the most important element.

I have to go out now but will come back and see what other people have posted.

 

[jmcrae]

At some point in the Apostles teachings they had to shake the dust off of their sandals and move on.

You are right. There are more profitable pursuits to be had. I’m going to go make a painting of “The Wedding at Cana” for some friends of mine who recently got married.

 

[rookieonedge]

I have just look into this thread and read your posting only and before I go out I have a couple of things to say.

Firstly, no explanation of the Christian Faith will get you to believe. St Augustine said:

*"Seek not to understand that you may believe, but believe that you may understand. " *

One believes through Faith and not through Proof.

You need Faith and Reason (common sense) - these two elements are needed in order to believe.

You need to Trust God and if you do not believe in Him then what is the point?

My husband was an atheist for years and he came to believe in God through a Jewish Scientist. Science is not a bad route to take because you contemplate creation and the wonders of the Universe created by God.

Jesus told us “Seek and you shall find, knock and it shall be opened, ask and it shall be given you.” It is amazing what can get a person to believe in God. God is very creative and each person’s experience is different - like DNA.

So my friend I wish you “happy hunting” for the truth - it is a worthwhile activity.

I almost forgot - PRAYER - the most important element.

I have to go out now but will come back and see what other people have posted.

It is often necesssary to make the first step to seek God.
“But if from thence thou shalt seek the Lord thy God, thou shalt find Him, if thou seek him with all they heart and with all thy soul.”
(Deut. 4:29)

“Our hearts are not at rest until they rest in Thee, O Lord.”
St. Augustine (who was once a heretic and unbeliever himself).

“For one who believes, no explanation is necessary.
For one who does not believe, no explanation is sufficient.”
(unknown)
It really takes “a leap of faith” to cross over to belief. But with the grace and mercy of our God, we can leap because He will aid us.

Praying is the answer. Prayer, which is talking to God, will bridge the gap. Yes, He is looking for “lovers” as posted on this thread, because He is the LOVER supreme, the UBERLOVER who laid down His life for us. “What greater love than this, that one would lay down his life for his friends.” “You are my friends if you keep my Commandments.”

 

[rookieonedge]

templeton.org/pdfs/press_releases/060407STEP_paper.pdf

Results: In the two groups uncertain about receiving intercessory prayer, complications occurred in 52% (315/604) of patients who received intercessory prayer versus 51% (304/597) of those who did not (relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.92-1.15). Complications occurred in 59% (352/601) of patients certain of receiving intercessory prayer compared with the 52% (315/604) of those uncertain of receiving intercessory prayer (relative risk 1.14, 95% confidence interval 1.02-1.28). Major events and 30-day mortality were similar across the 3 groups.

liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/1075553041323803

Conclusions: Intercessory prayer itself had no effect on complication-free recovery from coronary artery bypass graft CABG, but certainty of receiving intercessory prayer was associated with a higher incidence of complications.

http://www.freethoughtpedia.com/images/Prayer_motivational.jpg

Just googling, you can find that most studies show some benefit of intercessory prayer. It appears, though, that the most scholarly studies show that those with the highest rate of healing actually believed they would be healed. It’s the same thing when Jesus was walking around the towns preaching. Scripture states that in some town He didn’t perform many cures because of a lack of belief. Therefore, faith plays a role in rate of cure of various illnesses.