On finding God

[Della]

Della, RCIA? google Ah.

Sorry for not writing Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults instead of RCIA.

I’m kind of convinced that is not the place that will give me exactly what I want or need… but it’s a starting point. I’m not exactly sure it’s apologetics I need either - well, partly but what I’d really appreciate is someplace to TALK to people, IRL. Internet is good! but IRL still is something else… RCIA won’t be exactly that. The teaching, the people, the surroundings can point to other places and occasions, perhaps. We’ll see.

In RCIA you will find people at very different points in their spiritual/knowledge about the Church stages. Some come from strong Protestant Christian backgrounds, such as Lutheranism. Others have had little to no teaching about anything religious and others will be eager to “get on with it” and be received into the Church. I’m not sure you’ll find people to talk to with your concerns/questions. RCIA is definitively structured. Some programs (each parish/diocese runs its own version) are quite informative while others are more about how people feel about becoming Catholic and some aren’t as orthodox or informative as they ought to be. It can be a mixed bag. I’m just letting you know not trying to discourage you from going. By all means go. But we’ll be here if you have questions you can’t raise in class (lack of time for it or other such reasons).

I went through confirmation in my Lutheran church, in early teens which was the age when you were expected to. At the time I didn’t find the classes/studying in the least interesting and why I eventually went through with it all I honestly can’t explain. So in a way I want to redo those classes, now that I am interested. The RCIA was by far the most structured and thorough version I could find, around here. The days also fit my schedule, so I jumped at it. Most probably I’ll drop out after the first part, either to return to the agnostic state or to investigate the church I come from and/or other churches. I’ll have to do that, really - investigate where I “come from”. The Catholic church has a strong intellectual history and there’s plenty of explaining the church, faith and teaching in the light of church history which is very, very appealing. That probably can be found in Lutheranism as well. You’ll have to search harder for it, though.

The Lutheran synods have much in common with the Catholic Church, as do the Anglican/Episcopal churches. The major differences between the CC and these others are being looked into by ecumenical conferences, as we write. Some agreements have been reached. The Church cannot compromise its teachings nor can she acknowledge apostolic succession where it doesn’t exist. But there are hopes that reconciliation between communions can come about one day, God willing.

The notion that Christianity does not have to be in opposition to science is another very appealing side of Catholicism. The reason it came up here was because religion traditionally has answered many of the questions about the world that today you really don’t need religion for - to me, that’s what the “proof of God’s existance” are. The various Lutheran churches around me can roughly be sorted into two categories: those who interpret the Bible very literally and reject any talk about, for instance, evolution. I’ve seen people drop out from biology program since it was “so much talk about evolution” - well if you reject the concept of evolution you’ll have to reject modern biology in its entirety, sorry but you have to! The other version is those whose faith depend a lot on emotional things and individual revelations (pentecostal, etc). Those, frankly, I am a little bit afraid of.

The Church is only interested in so far as it concerns matters of faith and morals. Otherwise, it’s a lot of fuss over “horse breeding,” as G. K. Chesterton put it. IOW, what difference does it make unless those who expound it stray into theology to make declarations that have little to nothing to do with science. Certain persons have done so and have not made converts to their atheism people who have solid understanding of sound theology because such persons have little to no understanding of theology. In a phrase, it’s a simple fact that one can be a profound Catholic or a profound atheist and still be a good scientist.

OTOH there certainly are things in Catholicism that are difficult for me. I won’t list them here, mainly because I don’t feel like going into a debate about them. Some of them I probably have in common with most people who come from “the protestant camp”, others with most people who approach Catholicism from the secularized world.

There are answers to them all, as many earnestly seeking Protestants, including me (I’m a “convert”) have discovered. Start new threads to discuss them and we’ll gladly give you what we know or give you resources.

continued next post:

 

[Della]

(The idea of intercession, and indeed also to pray for things you yourself think you need, has always been one of the things I don’t really understand about Christianity. There has been wars where both sides prayed to the same God about success. I somehow doubt that God would choose side because of those prayers. I am also not sure that God would choose side even if just one side was praying to him. Would he? Should he? And as for intercession, why should a God who is worthy of that title be more interested in someone’s wellbeing just because plenty of people happen to care about this very individual? If someone is isolated and doesn’t have many friends, and hence few people who pray for him or her, who should this person stand lesser chances? Incomprehensible to me.)

Like many well-meaning people you have this inside out and backwards–although you don’t know it. God isn’t persuaded by more people praying. Rather he wants us all to pray for one another out of love for one another. He wants us to care for each other as fellow human beings on our road to him. It’s for our sake that he asks us to pray, not to get him to do what he would not otherwise do. It shows gratitude, faith, love and compassion to pray for others. God needs nothing from us, but we need him. We ask in faith and in humility putting our needs before him knowing that he will care for us. In asking questions about God one has to start out recognizing that God is God and we aren’t God. He does what he does from his infinite knowledge and love. It it up to us to conform ourselves to him, not he to us.

 

[AtDawn]

Sorry for not writing Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults instead of RCIA.

No worry. I would’ve had to google that too what I’ll be going to isn’t called that. The language isn’t English, nor is the title a very good match. When I check RCIA on Wikipedia I see it must be the equivalent, so let’s call it RCIA.

In RCIA you will find people at very different points in their spiritual/knowledge about the Church stages. Some come from strong Protestant Christian backgrounds, such as Lutheranism. Others have had little to no teaching about anything religious and others will be eager to “get on with it” and be received into the Church. I’m not sure you’ll find people to talk to with your concerns/questions. RCIA is definitively structured. Some programs (each parish/diocese runs its own version) are quite informative while others are more about how people feel about becoming Catholic and some aren’t as orthodox or informative as they ought to be. It can be a mixed bag. I’m just letting you know not trying to discourage you from going. By all means go. But we’ll be here if you have questions you can’t raise in class (lack of time for it or other such reasons).

It sounds like your RCIA wasn’t a totally happy experience?

I can think of plenty of reasons of not wanting to raise all my questions in class. There won’t be time for them all, for starters some of my questions probably fit well here, others not, of which some probably fit better here. I think I have a fairly good idea of what kind of people will be coming, due to local religious demography and local Christian environment. I expect to feel like the strange bird.

Unless they’ve changed everything from a couple of years ago, it looks very structured. It’s the first time I’ll be placing my foot in the parish’s buildings, which I see as a step forward… I’m not really ready for Catholic mass. (I’m welcome as long as I don’t try to receive communion, I know… but not yet.)

 

[Della]

No worry. I would’ve had to google that too what I’ll be going to isn’t called that. The language isn’t English, nor is the title a very good match. When I check RCIA on Wikipedia I see it must be the equivalent, so let’s call it RCIA.

That’s what the discernment/formation classes are called in America. I have no idea what other countries call it.

It sounds like your RCIA wasn’t a totally happy experience?

I went through RCIA at a parish which at the time was ministered to by a rather “liberal” (bordering on heterodox) religious order. I often felt more Catholic than the people running the program. But, I got through it and of what they taught that was orthodox, I learned quite a lot.

I can think of plenty of reasons of not wanting to raise all my questions in class. There won’t be time for them all, for starters some of my questions probably fit well here, others not, of which some probably fit better here. I think I have a fairly good idea of what kind of people will be coming, due to local religious demography and local Christian environment. I expect to feel like the strange bird.

I too felt like a cuckoo in the nest because I was coming from an anti-Catholic cult-like faith group thus my issues were vastly different from most others there. So, in a way, I can relate.

Unless they’ve changed everything from a couple of years ago, it looks very structured. It’s the first time I’ll be placing my foot in the parish’s buildings, which I see as a step forward… I’m not really ready for Catholic mass. (I’m welcome as long as I don’t try to receive communion, I know… but not yet.)

Well, going to Mass is good because it gives you an idea of how Catholicism is practiced. You should take note of how the liturgy is structured–how it closely resembles the OT model for worship, including offering sacrifice (the one sacrifice of Christ re-presented on the altar). A good book on the topic is Scott Hahn’s: The Lamb’s Supper.

 

[fhansen]

Well, I haven’t read this particular atheist yet (I will, not only for atheist/religious reasons, he is interesting in many ways and has written om many other subjects). So I shouldn’t pretend to know what he meant by that… but in my mind, evolution doesn’t fool anybody. It just is.

Man can fool himself, no doubt. And maybe sometimes, it is beneficial for man to do so. If so, a genetic disposition for this specific kind of fooling oneself makes the individual “the fittest” who is more likely to survive, and pass their genes on.

It is wellknown that in times of hardship or crises, people who otherwise aren’t very religious prey. I did that, once. The feeling of not being alone in a crises, that’s just one thing that could make a disposition towards religion evolutionary beneficial, even if religion in itself isn’t true.

Oh, OK. Can’t even trust nature, I guess. There’s just way to much finaglin’ necessary in order to make these theories fit IMO. But if we* can* figure out what she’s doing to fool us, then she hasn’t done a very effective job after all. But what do I know? Just an old farmer and all.

 

[MPat]

You see, I have prayed - in some way. The plans for prayer I make up always seem to fail. I don’t follow them up in the long run, but sometimes it has been more spontaneous. I have experienced some things that I could very well interpret as answer - if I want to. The question is, do I want to?

Well, if the question is not “Is it true?”, but only “Do I want to?”, perhaps you can make something like Pascal’s wager…?

Human beings long for patterns. We search for them, everywhere. We exaggerate it. That’s part of being human.

Wouldn’t that be a pattern found by humans as well…? Are you completely sure that this pattern is not actually exaggerated…?

That is, finding out that a human has found a pattern is not enough to dismiss it. You should investigate further.

I can find so many other explanations for these experiences, which I find more credible.

Wait, is it just that you think you can find other explanations, or have you actually found them? Anyway, it might be a good idea to make an actual list of those explanations. Then check how likely each of them looks when written down, which of them contradict each other and which of them are likely to “work together”…

As for mental experiences (or whatever I should call it), I could very well be making it all up, in my head.

Do you have a good reason to think that you are doing so?

Finally, remember that same Pascal’s wager: the “default” position should be that Catholicism is true, not false. It shows that it is not a good idea to reject Catholicism without having a really good reason to do so.

 

[AtDawn]

Finally, remember that same Pascal’s wager: the “default” position should be that Catholicism is true, not false.

From an agnostic point of view, that is not a natural position. No more than I should assume that Lutheranism is true, or Buddhism, or Bahai. That may be the Catholic position, but I will have to start my journey where I stand. Starting from someplace else just isn’t possible.

I understand that these issues look vastly different for believers who have doubts and would like to erase them, and to us who come from an agnostic background. Actually I’ve been calling myself an atheist for quite some years (except when I didn’t want to be mixed up with those aggressive atheist who I find extremely annoying, just as some Christians who have no fingerspitsgefühl in their tries to spread the Gospel.)

 

[MPat]

From an agnostic point of view, that is not a natural position. No more than I should assume that Lutheranism is true, or Buddhism, or Bahai. That may be the Catholic position, but I will have to start my journey where I stand. Starting from someplace else just isn’t possible.

I understand that these issues look vastly different for believers who have doubts and would like to erase them, and to us who come from an agnostic background. Actually I’ve been calling myself an atheist for quite some years (except when I didn’t want to be mixed up with those aggressive atheist who I find extremely annoying, just as some Christians who have no fingerspitsgefühl in their tries to spread the Gospel.)

I didn’t mean that you should start the investigation being Catholic already. I meant that once you are ready to look for conclusions of the investigation, you should not reject Catholicism “just because you can”. That is, if, by any chance, you will reach a “draw” (something like “It is all so complicated! How can one decide?”), it is more reasonable to accept Catholicism “just in case” than to reject it “just in case”.

 

[AtDawn]

I didn’t mean that you should start the investigation being Catholic already. I meant that once you are ready to look for conclusions of the investigation, you should not reject Catholicism “just because you can”.

If there are some things that points towards conclusion A and some that points towards conclusion B, the result is “no conclusion”. Not B.

But as several people have pointed out, logics only takes me so far. I realise that. The rest is up to - something else. Believe it or not but I actually got some help from good ol’ Luther here, in his Small Catechism. It’s not all that different…

 

[Mystophilus]

Regarding moral things, there are things in the teachers of the Catholic Church that everyone agrees on (don’t steal, don’t kill). That’s in most religions, and all the big ones. So those are in themselves not a good reason to turn to the Christian God. Then there are teachings of the Church that many people in the modern world don’t agree with. Some of them make me very much doubt that the Catholic understanding of God - if he exists - is the correct one.

A good many of the claims made about religion, including by non-religious people, are designed less to convince others than to reaffirm the speakers themselves: they depend upon a priori acceptance of certain premisses and/or values, q.v. First Cause arguments which attribute sentience and goodness to that first cause.

Yes, I have some kind of experience that I could interpret as answer to my prayers… if I want to. But there’s so many other ways to interpret them, including wishful thinking and creating emotional experiences in my own head.

Agreed (q.v. Pahnke’s Marsh Chapel Experiment).

In short, I fail to logically find Christan faith credible.

Credible, or compelling? Do you find it unbelievable, or just not necessarily believable?

Still I find myself drawn to it, for reasons that I can’t explain. A wellknown atheist once said that many atheists don’t understand that religion exists because humans have an evolunary created need for religion. Hence religion is natural, but (in his opinion) not true. I kind of want him to be wrong.

Since we cannot prove anything in metaphysics, we cannot prove him wrong. However, the same is true on the other side: God cannot be disproved. As you are no doubt aware, the basic conundrum for the agnostic is the fact that metaphysical conclusions cannot be demonstrated from physical data, and we only have physical data. At that point, we face the knowledge that the question of God’s existence is not solvable by mere logic.

From there, one can choose to believe whatsoever is most tolerable/appealing, which is where we come back to “credible” versus “compelling”: the issue is less about what must be true (or, as Hume famously pointed out, what “ought” to be true), than about what could be true, and which of the possibilities is the more preferable belief.

So, what I would have suggested is what you are already doing: looking into various forms of belief, and seeing what seems preferable as an explanation of the world around you.

 

[AtDawn]

Like many well-meaning people you have this inside out and backwards–although you don’t know it. God isn’t persuaded by more people praying. Rather he wants us all to pray for one another out of love for one another. He wants us to care for each other as fellow human beings on our road to him. It’s for our sake that he asks us to pray, not to get him to do what he would not otherwise do. It shows gratitude, faith, love and compassion to pray for others. God needs nothing from us, but we need him. We ask in faith and in humility putting our needs before him knowing that he will care for us. In asking questions about God one has to start out recognizing that God is God and we aren’t God. He does what he does from his infinite knowledge and love. It it up to us to conform ourselves to him, not he to us.

You know… this is the topic for an entire thread. Maybe it already exists?

If not, may I use this quote from you, to start a thread with?

 

[Philthy]

Hi

Regarding moral things, there are things in the teachers of the Catholic Church that everyone agrees on (don’t steal, don’t kill). That’s in most religions, and all the big ones. So those are in themselves not a good reason to turn to the Christian God.

Correct, but the universality of morality is a reason for believing in a “good” that transcends humanity. Morality, BTW, is outside the world of science. That can be a starting point for theism.

Then there are teachings of the Church that many people in the modern world don’t agree with. Some of them make me very much doubt that the Catholic understanding of God - if he exists - is the correct one. That is not a path for me to find God.

Sorry, but it’s quite illogical to claim that God might not exist and simultaneously claim that if He did, that you would be able to correctly judge His attributes.

Then there’s personal experience, of various kinds. Knowing how we humans search for patterns and generally interpret random events and proof of some kind of system, I am very sceptical of this.

Searching for understanding is another uniquely human attribute that points to a fundamental difference between humanity and the rest of creation. Why do we search for truth? Why do humans - universally and throughout all time - have a sense that there is more to know?

In short, I fail to logically find Christan faith credible. Still I find myself drawn to it, for reasons that I can’t explain.

Not only can’t you explain it, but science can’t either. Religion can.

A wellknown atheist once said that many atheists don’t understand that religion exists because humans have an evolutionary created need for religion.

That’s laughable. He’s locked himself in the “evolution explains everything” box and then created an “evolutionary need for religion” to explain it. It’s logically invalid due to circular reasoning.

Hence religion is natural, but (in his opinion) not true. I kind of want him to be wrong. If you, people on this forum, can come up with something that can make me think he is, then I will be truly impressed and grateful.

Why are you searching for meaning in life? Why do you care either way? Science has no explanation for this - and, again, it is a universal thing that has always confronted mankind since the beginning of history. Science and atheism do not have the slightest idea why that is the case. Theism does - and Catholicism explains it best IMHO.

Blessings

Phil

 

[AtDawn]

Sorry, but it’s quite illogical to claim that God might not exist and simultaneously claim that if He did, that you would be able to correctly judge His attributes.

If it was God who gave me my brain then certainly He meant that I should use it. If your God asked you to jump off the cliff… or kill your own child… would you? shrugging your shoulders, saying “I can’t judge if this is good or not, but God can?” I doubt it. Most Christians accept the so called “Christian values” because they somehow make sense to them. (I’m sure, though, that there are exceptions.)

Abraham did go against his own conscience, or prepared himself to. Then God stopped him. Well, that’s the Old Testament so I’m not sure how relevant it is - the God of Old Testament certainly isn’t a God I want to pray to, regardless or if he exists or not.

That’s laughable. He’s locked himself in the “evolution explains everything” box and then created an “evolutionary need for religion” to explain it. It’s logically invalid due to circular reasoning.

Since he wasn’t in this case trying to prove anything - just explaining his views - there is nothing logically invalid and no circular reasoning. BTW this particular atheist considers his atheism - I don’t think you’d translate it to faith, but a belief, an important belief. He willingly admits that his views can’t be proved either. (If we are to discuss him, we should read his books first then get back to the subject.)

Why are you searching for meaning in life?

Now this is interesting. Why are you assuming that I am?

I am not. I never understood why life should have any particular, pre-made “meaning”, any more than the sea has a meaning, or the hawk’s flight om empty sky.

I don’t understand the Christian want for eternal life either. Never understood it. One life seems just fine to me. And I’m not afraid of death. I don’t want to die so maybe I’ll be afraid when I’m there, but so far I haven’t been.

BTW, the flippant tone with “sorry, but”, and “that’s laughable” - in my mind it matches badly the “blessings” you seemingly want to impose on me. The Christian language with various nuances of holiness can be used in so many ways. For instance, I have noticed that people who fight others on the internet sometimes might say “I’ll pray for you” as an insult, with the subtext “since you are so clearly misguided I’ll pray that God leads you back on the right tracks”… using “holy” words doesn’t necessarily make the action holy.

 

[AtDawn]

You must realize that Faith in the Catholic Church, in Holy Scripture pivoting around the Person of Jesus Christ is a gift of grace. All the reason in the world can not enlighten you to this reality. It can lead you to the doorstep of Christian faith. Our understanding of “Conversion” centers upon our belief and acceptance of Jesus Christ as our redeemer, God-man, The Son of God. the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity sent by the Father to give us His Holy Spirit who sanctifies us, and makes us adopted children of God by Baptism sincerely received.

We can give reasons for our faith, the doctrines of our faith,philosophy and apologetics and experiences (witnesses) they can all predispose you to accepting the faith, but the supernatural force and influence of grace is the active ingredient necessary and this only comes from an encounter with Jesus Christ. So I would seek to know Christ, and knowing Him is to love Him. Once this happens, the rest flows like living water. All we can do is point you in the right direction, the rest is up to God and you.

nod

Right.

I’m partly trying to search. And a part of me is saying “I don’t want to”. It seems intellectually dishonest to act as though there’s a God who has something to offer me, while I still find the most logical explanation that Man created God in his own image. The act of believing… if it is an act… seems to have something of capitulation involved. I can’t wrap my head around that.

 

[ynotzap]

A good many of the claims made about religion, including by non-religious people, are designed less to convince others than to reaffirm the speakers themselves: they depend upon a priori acceptance of certain premisses and/or values, q.v. First Cause arguments which attribute sentience and goodness to that first cause.

Ans: It is aposteriori that metaphysics proves that God exists, the argument goes from effect to cause. Cause to effect is a real objective phenomenon that exists in the real world, it is not just subjective thinking, a creation of the mind of man. It is a real observation By going from effect to first cause it becomes necessary to affirm an uncause-cause who we call God We attain certainty by being objective in our judgements using sound logical arguments. We go from the particular to the general by the inductive method Once the existence of God is established then this God is identified by our Faith, Jesus Christ who is the I Am Who Am. ST. Paul affirms this when he stated that we can know God through His creation. As I stated reason won’t give what only God can give in Jesus Christ, the grace of conversion, a gift. We do show our faith is reasonable, and doesn’t conflict with reason. We give an account for our Faith.

 

[AtDawn]

Well, going to Mass is good because it gives you an idea of how Catholicism is practiced. You should take note of how the liturgy is structured–how it closely resembles the OT model for worship, including offering sacrifice (the one sacrifice of Christ re-presented on the altar).

The liturgy of the Lutheran church where I was baptised is fairly Catholic-ish - that’s what people say, although what they teach is party different. So I don’t expect the liturgy to be all that new to me. What makes me fear I’ll feel “I’m not a part of this, get me out of here!” is… Not the incense (not sure to what extent that is used in Catholic churches nowadays). And not the kneeling - I have very little idea about how much that is used, but that actually for some reason seams appealing (don’t ask me why, I have no clue).

As a child and young adult I had severe problems with church (the few times we went there) since I didn’t really want to be a part of rituals in something I didn’t believe in. The creed was the hardest part, for a long long time. Rituals where you state something mean something. This is a statement “I believe”, and I honestly didn’t understand - and still don’t! why so many Christians believers seem to find it perfectly OK that people join in without it meaning anything to them.

Before I took grown-up decisions on what I wanted to do and not, I did too much I wasn’t comfortable with. Before my confirmation, which I for some weird reason went through with, I visited 10 or 12 church Sunday services. And reading that &#% creed. As a grownup I realised I can just shut my mouth, I don’t have to read it. Hymns have been both tougher and easier than the creed since I do sing. Not singing along with others when I have a chance is kind of alien to me. OTOH one sings so many songs where one not necessarily means every word, but I have had moments when I didn’t want to participate in the hymns either.

Now, for some reason, I can go through it all including the creed, without any internal opposition. I can’t say I believe every word, but after realising I somehow am longing for something… I suppose I just decided to give it a shot.

If I go to a Cathlic mass there’s a bit of stuff that is new. Standing up and sitting down isn’t, though. (I have understood through some posts on this board that to some protestants it is very alien.) Kneeling is new, I’m not sure how much is used though? but I have no internal opposition to kneeling. But I won’t cross myself until I know what it “is”. And the creed involves something in the line of asking Mary to pray for you. Sure, I wouldn’t have to read it… but if I need to somehow distance myself it is better I go the Lutheran churches where I don’t have to brace myself against something.

Actually, I have been to a Catholic service once, in my teens. My elder sister must have been curious on Catholicism, in one way or another, because she suggested we go there “just to see how it is”. I realise now she probably had some kind of interest in searching, later she ended up in zen and a bunch of related practices. But I went there with the mindset of “it’s a study visit”. Probably that is part of the reason why it didn’t feel troublesome, not like really participating.

The kids took part in the beginning and the end of the service. In the meanwhile, they had Sunday school. I don’t suppose this is “the general Catholic way to do it” but it was new to me and I found it a very clever way to organise things. The only things I remember as odd or unusual was the priest taking a couple of gulps of the wine, while the congregation just got bread. I still can remember that image of him, at the altar with the cup. I was like WHAT? And also the greeting among people in the pews. Someone extents your hand to you and smiles - resisting is simply impossible, in all ways. Well you say something about God, that must have been slightly troublesome for me at the time. I vaguely remember thinking “should we do this?” but it didn’t feel odd. The smiling people around me probably convinced me.

There must have been people crossing themselves. I don’t remember it - OTOH, that’s the basic concept of “Catholicism”, what everyone knows that Catholics do, so that was no surprise. If there was any kneeling I can’t remember it. I should have, really, since it was not in my concept of Catholicism and I haven’t seen it in the Lutheran churches, except possibly kneeling at the ring around the altar for the eucharist (if that word should be used in Lutheran context. English is not my first language and the word I naturally use doesn’t seem to have an obvious English counterpart.) OTOH this was more than 20 years ago.

When we entered the church, there must have been someone greeting us. I feel quite certain that my sister explained why we were there and asked if it was okay, and got a thoroughly positive answer. Without the explicit statement that it was okay for us to be there, the experience might have been more mixed. So that is something I’ll need before going to a Catholic mass. I really would like to exchange a couple of words with someone in that particular church before, about creeds and Mary and stuff.

OTOH, I could choose to rest in my newly found acceptance of actually participating in the worship in the church where I was baptised. At least for now.

 

[Philthy]

If it was God who gave me my brain then certainly He meant that I should use it.

We are obligated to use all of the gifts God has given us for good, including our reason.

If your God asked you to jump off the cliff… or kill your own child… would you?

I don’t know - why do you ask? If my life - and all life and all of creation - is ultimately God’s, on what basis would I have a right to refuse?

shrugging your shoulders, saying “I can’t judge if this is good or not, but God can?” I doubt it. Most Christians accept the so called “Christian values” because they somehow make sense to them. (I’m sure, though, that there are exceptions.)

There is no contradiction between my reason and my faith. If you are attempting to argue that only things which “make sense” are what Christians will accept then you are mistaken. There are some things which transcend our understanding, which we accept by faith because they have been revealed to us. The Trinity is one such reality; the Real Presence of Christ in the Eucharist is another; that grace is communicated by the Sacraments is another. They don’t contradict our reason, but they surpass it. Big difference.

Abraham did go against his own conscience, or prepared himself to. Then God stopped him. Well, that’s the Old Testament so I’m not sure how relevant it is - the God of Old Testament certainly isn’t a God I want to pray to, regardless or if he exists or not.

Does the you, with imperfect knowledge and understanding, recognize that what you “want” will not necessarily allow you to know that your “want” is an emotion based on faulty information and imperfect reason?

I have lots more to say, but I’m out of time for now - leaving for a week or so. Here’s what I’ll say before I leave:

The Catholic faith does not contradict reason - it unites it to the full truth of reality.

blessings

Phil

 

[ynotzap]

nod

Right.

I’m partly trying to search. And a part of me is saying “I don’t want to”. It seems intellectually dishonest to act as though there’s a God who has something to offer me, while I still find the most logical explanation that Man created God in his own image. The act of believing… if it is an act… seems to have something of capitulation involved. I can’t wrap my head around that.

Your reaction is human and understandable, within our nature we are very complexed, like we are pulled in two directions, our weak nature is saying, I don’t desire or feel like pursuing this course of action, and yet there is something in us that causes a longing. We were made for better things, it is a spiritual longing, and one that gives purpose and fulfillment, really it’s a longing for God, love, truth and happiness. We all have it, it’s planted in us, only some do not recognize it for what it is. It’s also a grace, a calling. Some get so involved in the world of activity that they miss, or ignore the calling.

You spoke of capitulation, a surrender. This if seen in the proper light is a very beautiful thing. It often involves the act of humility. We humans are a proud bunch, we can’t help it, we are born with a lot of handicaps. You will find this out when learning more about Christian Faith There is a profound truth that every Christian comes to realize, “God gives grace to the humble (those that capitulate to Him) and resists the proud” It is a divine act of love. How do we respond to the call?

 

[MPat]

If there are some things that points towards conclusion A and some that points towards conclusion B, the result is “no conclusion”. Not B.

The problem is that those conclusions have further consequences. For example, they will lead to different answers to question “Should I go to Mass this Sunday?”. Belief “Catholicism is false.” leads to answer “No.”, belief “Catholicism is true.” - to “Yes.”. Different kinds of Pascal’s wager are meant to show that “No conclusion.” should lead to the same actions as “Catholicism is true.”.

But as several people have pointed out, logics only takes me so far. I realise that. The rest is up to - something else. Believe it or not but I actually got some help from good ol’ Luther here, in his Small Catechism. It’s not all that different…

Yes, you will need a lot of grace as well. But this subforum does not specialise in providing that.

Now, for some reason, I can go through it all including the creed, without any internal opposition. I can’t say I believe every word, but after realising I somehow am longing for something… I suppose I just decided to give it a shot.

Well, Pascal’s wager is meant to show that that’s not just something that happened, but also something that is perfectly rational.

I’m partly trying to search. And a part of me is saying “I don’t want to”. It seems intellectually dishonest to act as though there’s a God who has something to offer me, while I still find the most logical explanation that Man created God in his own image. The act of believing… if it is an act… seems to have something of capitulation involved. I can’t wrap my head around that.

Well, if you are an agnostic, you are not sure if God exists, right? So, why would acting as if you were sure that God exists be more dishonest than acting as if you were sure that God doesn’t exist? And you do not have any other alternative.

To take a different example, if you are not sure if you are sick, there is nothing dishonest about going to see a doctor. And if a doctor is not sure if you are sick, there is nothing dishonest about asking you to stay in the hospital for a while - just in case. Actually, that is something that is rational (using a reasoning similar to Pascal’s wager) and recommended.

If your God asked you to jump off the cliff… or kill your own child… would you? shrugging your shoulders, saying “I can’t judge if this is good or not, but God can?” I doubt it.

Well, let’s take the part about jumping off the cliff. Take a clip from “My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic” second episode of the first season: youtube.com/watch?v=eqfkgVvHIX0. It does include a pony (Applejack) telling another pony (Twilight Sparkle) to do just that - jump off a cliff. Now, do you agree that it all ended well and, given the circumstances, that was the right and rational thing to do…? If so, do you think that it would become any less rational if Applejack was replaced with God…?

 

[AtDawn]

Philthy, the rest of your post looks like you understood why I mentioned Abraham, but anyway. I did it to illustrate that most people’s conscience set limits to what they can accept in a religion or from their god. Nobody - OK, there’s people for everything. But very, very few would join a religion in which they disagree with all the intrinsic moral values.

Blessed Cardinal Newman held that the authority of conscience could not be trumped by any bishops or pope. I’ll have to read his works.