Russell's teapot

[ribozyme]

The reason why she did not find another branch of Christianity coming from Calvary Chapel, generally is because they are taught to study but not question. Though Calvary Chapel is very rigid, most of its adherents don’t feel it is as they really work on a feel good community. So it generally feels good to be there and people don’t notice the tunnel vision as they are the real Christians.

Generally the mentality is to not trust anyone else, and this is drilled into the group so that if someone questions and it gets uncomfortable then it must be from the devil. The thought is, since we are right why should we discuss it? Why cause division?

And the solution is to study the Bible more, read commentaries and pray. You need to focus on your spiritual side if you have doubts. Constantly the focus is on the person and their relationship.

No Calvary Chapel person who has spent much time in that group would trust Catholics for advice or dialogue. Catholics are the absolute worst, Atheists second, Orthodox maybe third if they even acknowledge their existence and then so on. This varies from pastor to pastor but this is my personal experience.

God Bless
Scylla

I think you countered my point regarding this specific deconversion quite well as you provided a plausible explanation.

You make it sound like it is a pseudocult, but I think you stressed the point aptly. They are forced to learn, but never to question. From personal experience, this is not how science works; it is not a body of information, but rather a method of inquiry where skepticism is encouraged.

I think this quote will help to illuminate the point:

“Mythical accounts and religious beliefs give humans enormous comfort in the face of adversity. To be effective, however, they must be held firmly, and not the subject to doubt. Unresolved questions, unclear answers, and changing views work in the opposite direction. They raise anxiety in us about our safety and destiny. For many of us, any firm answer which conveys a sense of purpose is better than no answer at all.” (Shapiro, Robert. Origins: A Skeptic’s Guide to the Creation of Life on Earth. New York, New York: Summit Books, 1986. Pg. 35.)

But I am curious though, how does the Catholic Church differ from Calvary Chapel? How does it promote skepticism and critical inquiry.

 

[scylla]

The difference is the the Catholic Church is based upon an affirmation of truth.
Calvary Chapel is based upon a rejection of the Catholic Church and an affirmation of one man’s personal interpretation of the Bible.

Now concerning the Catholic Church and reason\faith.

**159 **Faith and science: “Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth.” “Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are.”

This from the Catechism you can search science here.
ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=science&s=SS

Which illustrates the Catholic Church belief that we have nothing to fear from inquiry or study in all areas as long as respect for human dignity and life is preserved.

This would carry over into historical and critical research of our faith, which is why even Pantheism is mentioned in the CCC.
ccc.scborromeo.org.master.com/texis/master/search/?sufs=0&q=inquiry&s=SS

I have the freedom to read outside the Bible and look at all historical documents to understand historical background to our worldview.

Though faith is necessary, as it is in all things even for Atheists, philosophy, and scepticism is not excluded as they are necessary to identify truth.
An Atheist relies on faith to live or else any action would need to be proved before relying on anything to proceed with life, faith is necessary for our very existence if we are to exist with some sanity.
I would then agree that scepticism is necessary to identify truth and is used all the time in Catholicism and encouraged.
Or else how would we identify error?

God Bless
Scylla

BTW, did you read the LULU link?

 

[niktheatheist]

russells teapot was not to disprove god but to inspire Catholic followers (and those of other faiths of course) to search for proof much as the person who claimed knowledge of the said teapot would have to do to prove it to you that it existed or else you would be a permanent skeptic.

 

[Gorgias]

russells teapot was not to disprove god but to inspire Catholic followers (and those of other faiths of course) to search for proof much as the person who claimed knowledge of the said teapot would have to do to prove it to you that it existed or else you would be a permanent skeptic.

Nik,

Welcome to CAF!

This is an eight-year-old thread; around here, the preference is to not dredge up old threads. (Probably, when the mods see that an oldie has been responded to, they’ll likely close it.)

But, if you’d like to start another discussion about Russell’s Teapot, please feel free to start a new thread!

Blessings,
G.

 

[Kaninchen]

The truly scary thing about this piece of CAF archaeology (rather than history) is that I was a CAF member at the time (just).