Why do so many protestants not consider church attendance an important part of their faith?

[PRmerger]

I am honest and no I will not concede in something as far fetched as that. I believe in the whole Bible and worship God very well.

I can see that you have not fully developed your understanding of who is the final authority in determining what’s a sin.

You claim it is God, yet have not been able to articulate anything which supports your paradigm.

In the end, you have made YOURSELF the ultimate authority, despite your protests to the contrary.

Now, you can come back with your standard proud rejoinders about being a “tough old broad” (I think actually your posts belie a wounded, hurting spirit, IMHO) or “I am not stupid” (incidentally, the only one who’s used the word “stupid” previously in this thread has been you ), or “I really don’t care what you think” (the mantra of someone who actually gets offended quite easily) or “Thank you for judging” (actually, a very judgmental statement in itself!) but you will not be able to provide anything substantive to support your proposition.

While I have no doubt that you love God with your entire heart, soul and strength–God bless you for that!!–I believe that you have not pondered enough the command to “Love God with your entire MIND.” You seem to think it doesn’t really matter what we understand about God with our MIND as long as our heart loves him. This contradicts Scripture.

Anyway, I am done. In my many years on the forum and in my many dealings with lots of different folks I have put only one other lady on “ignore.” :sad_yes:

 

[PRmerger]

My point is that human beings are ratifying and acquiescing to, generally, things they already believe in when they sign up for a religion. I admit that about myself quite frankly. I’m pro life, anti-abortion, pro traditional marriage, anti-gay marriage, believe in the Real Presence, believe in apostolic succession, believe in the three-fold ministry, etc. so I could never be anything other than a Catholic, Orthodox, or Anglican, etc. I have a narrow field that fits my views. Who’s deciding what is right for me?..me in the end. It’s a bit circular.

Not exactly.

In the end, the question is: do you conform your views to the Truth, or do you make “truth” conform to your views? One is what we’re called to do, the other is creating a religion in our own image and likeness.

 

[PRmerger]

I already answered this, twice. I use a combination of (name removed by moderator)uts. Different (name removed by moderator)uts take on the most important role at different times in different situations. Sometimes I listen to the voice of a parent. Sometimes a poet. Sometimes a friend. Sometimes Jesus. Sometimes the narrator of the Tao. Sometimes my “gut”. Sometimes my wife. Sometimes my students, because I must remember to suffer the children.

Then you are doing exactly what the CC teaches we are to do.

But, in the end, what’s the final authority for your morality?

 

[tweetymom]

I can see that you have not fully developed your understanding of who is the final authority in determining what’s a sin.

You claim it is God, yet have not been able to articulate anything which supports your paradigm.

In the end, you have made YOURSELF the ultimate authority, despite your protests to the contrary.

Now, you can come back with your standard proud rejoinders about being a “tough old broad” (I think actually your posts belie a wounded, hurting spirit, IMHO) or “I am not stupid” (incidentally, the only one who’s used the word “stupid” previously in this thread has been you ), or “I really don’t care what you think” (the mantra of someone who actually gets offended quite easily) or “Thank you for judging” (actually, a very judgmental statement in itself!) but you will not be able to provide anything substantive to support your proposition.

While I have no doubt that you love God with your entire heart, soul and strength–God bless you for that!!–I believe that you have not pondered enough the command to “Love God with your entire MIND.” You seem to think it doesn’t really matter what we understand about God with our MIND as long as our heart loves him. This contradicts Scripture.

Anyway, I am done. In my many years on the forum and in my many dealings with lots of different folks I have put only one other lady on “ignore.” :sad_yes:/QU

Thank you and God Bless

 

[larkin31]

Then you are doing exactly what the CC teaches we are to do.

But, in the end, what’s the final authority for your morality?

What do you mean by “final authority”? All morality is man-made, so I presume you mean who is responsible for morality? Humans, of course. But no one but myself determines my actions or selects my morals. No one but myself is responsible for my actions. The buck stops here.

Is this what you are asking?

I am agnostic on the existence of God, so I cannot place any responsibility or authority on an entity that I am not sure exists. I must hold myself to a set of standards, the same way that a Catholic must hold himself to those he ascribes to. The challenge and expectations are the same, regardless of whether there is a God or not, regardless of whether one has faith.

 

[jmcrae]

The argument, “Because there is no absolute, there is nothing” is a false line of reasoning. It is stated from weakness and ignorance. I expect better of adults. Honestly, I really do. Do you tell children that you expect all atheists to be murderers? Cheaters? Thieves? Really? If you don’t, then what you just stated here is a bunch of rhetorical poppycock that you don’t actually mean. Unless what you mean to say is that YOU yourself need an absolute or YOU will be “bound by nothing.” That is, of course, a confession of another kind.

Most atheists follow what they consider to be an absolute moral code of some kind, whether it’s grounded in the theories of Darwin, or whether it’s what seems practical to them, or simply based on not making other people to be mad at them, and to get along peacefully with the neighbors.

Just because they don’t think God is watching, doesn’t mean they don’t think there are predictable consequences for their actions. For example, some atheists will say, “You can’t lie to the steel - if there isn’t enough of it, the bridge will give way.” Honesty, therefore, is an important value for atheists, too, for practical reasons.

 

[PRmerger]

What do you mean by “final authority”

When considering what’s right and wrong in a particular situation, you said you consider a number of variables (what your wife thinks, what you students say, etc etc). If they all disagree and provide you with contrary advice, who is it that you listen to?

 

[larkin31]

Most atheists follow what they consider to be an absolute moral code of some kind, whether it’s grounded in the theories of Darwin, or whether it’s what seems practical to them, or simply based on not making other people to be mad at them, and to get along peacefully with the neighbors.

Just because they don’t think God is watching, doesn’t mean they don’t think there are predictable consequences for their actions. For example, some atheists will say, “You can’t lie to the steel - if there isn’t enough of it, the bridge will give way.” Honesty, therefore, is an important value for atheists, too, for practical reasons.

I wouldn’t disagree, except for the “absolute” part. “Absolutes” tend mostly to be for the religious.

 

[larkin31]

When considering what’s right and wrong in a particular situation, you said you consider a number of variables (what your wife thinks, what you students say, etc etc). If they all disagree and provide you with contrary advice, who is it that you listen to?

depends; there is no absolute rule. And this scenario rarely happens. Most religions and peoples and cultures share the same core values. Ethics aren’t rocket science, although the gray areas can be difficult. Even the 10 commandments is pretty basic stuff (and doesn’t cover homosexuality at all).

 

[jmcrae]

I wouldn’t disagree, except for the “absolute” part. “Absolutes” tend mostly to be for the religious.

Is there a situation where shorting the amount of steel in the bridge, will not cause the bridge to fail? Ensuring the correct amount of steel would seem to be an “absolute” requirement, to me.

 

[larkin31]

Is there a situation where shorting the amount of steel in the bridge, will not cause the bridge to fail? Ensuring the correct amount of steel would seem to be an “absolute” requirement, to me.

Why are we talking about steel? What is your point?

 

[jmcrae]

Why are we talking about steel? What is your point?

There is an Atheist saying (pertaining to honesty in general) is “You can’t fool the steel” which relates to a story about bridge-building.

My point is that you don’t have to believe in God, or even in anything supernatural, to be able believe that there are moral absolutes. Simple observation of the physical world can result in the same moral code.

 

[larkin31]

There is an Atheist saying (pertaining to honesty in general) is “You can’t fool the steel” which relates to a story about bridge-building.

My point is that you don’t have to believe in God, or even in anything supernatural, to be able believe that there are moral absolutes. Simple observation of the physical world can result in the same moral code.

I agree. I was pointing out that in experience, most moral absolutists are religious.

But I still don’t see the relevance of steel building. But that is ok. We are talking about morality, anyway, not physics.

 

[adrift]

I can see that you have not fully developed your understanding of who is the final authority in determining what’s a sin.

You claim it is God, yet have not been able to articulate anything which supports your paradigm.

In the end, you have made YOURSELF the ultimate authority, despite your protests to the contrary.

Now, you can come back with your standard proud rejoinders about being a “tough old broad” (I think actually your posts belie a wounded, hurting spirit, IMHO) or “I am not stupid” (incidentally, the only one who’s used the word “stupid” previously in this thread has been you ), or “I really don’t care what you think” (the mantra of someone who actually gets offended quite easily) or “Thank you for judging” (actually, a very judgmental statement in itself!) but you will not be able to provide anything substantive to support your proposition.

While I have no doubt that you love God with your entire heart, soul and strength–God bless you for that!!–I believe that you have not pondered enough the command to “Love God with your entire MIND.” You seem to think it doesn’t really matter what we understand about God with our MIND as long as our heart loves him. This contradicts Scripture.

Anyway, I am done. In my many years on the forum and in my many dealings with lots of different folks I have put only one other lady on “ignore.” :sad_yes:

Well stated and I too have put her on ignore. Although she claims she follows the bible, she actually follows man’s interpretation of the bible not what the bible actually says. I hope you remember to pray for her.

 

[larkin31]

Well stated and I too have put her on ignore. Although she claims she follows the bible, she actually follows man’s interpretation of the bible not what the bible actually says. I hope you remember to pray for her.

You guys are chat forum wimps. Why come to a thread that asks for Protestant opinion and defense and then put someone on ignore for giving Protestant opinion?

 

[adrift]

You guys are chat forum wimps. Why come to a thread that asks for Protestant opinion and defense and then put someone on ignore for giving Protestant opinion?

Read carefully what PRmerger wrote. How did you come to the conclusion that it was for an opinion?

I guess you missed also that she goes to a Catholic church with her husband. She indicates that if it weren’t for her husband she would go elsewhere.

She also says that she teaches at the Catholic Church which offends many here since she does not hold any Catholic thought.

The forum is for a dialogue which she refuses to engage. Instead she makes snipes and comments that convey a poor little me syndrome.

It is because she uses God Bless you as a curse. Refuses to contribute anything other than one line insults and gets offended easily while hurling offenses at others is why she is on my ignore.

 

[larkin31]

Read carefully what PRmerger wrote. How did you come to the conclusion that it was for an opinion?

I guess you missed also that she goes to a Catholic church with her husband. She indicates that if it weren’t for her husband she would go elsewhere.

She also says that she teaches at the Catholic Church which offends many here since she does not hold any Catholic thought.

The forum is for a dialogue which she refuses to engage. Instead she makes snipes and comments that convey a poor little me syndrome.

It is because she uses God Bless you as a curse. Refuses to contribute anything other than one line insults and gets offended easily while hurling offenses at others is why she is on my ignore.

:bighanky:

I think that it is you who reads wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

I agree. I was pointing out that in experience, most moral absolutists are religious.

And all scientists are absolutists. As are engineers. And mathematicians. And chemists. And teachers.

Oh, and parents are, too. (We good ones, anyway)

But I still don’t see the relevance of steel building. But that is ok. We are talking about morality, anyway, not physics.

You keep making a distinction between morality and other objective data. There is no distinction when we’re talking about Truth.

(Well, you make the distinction when others bring it up, yet reserve the right to use non-moral examples (like the hot/cold temperature thing) when it suits you.)

 

[larkin31]

And all scientists are absolutists. As are engineers. And mathematicians. And chemists. And teachers.

Not morally. And that is what we are talking about.

 

[PRmerger]

Not morally. And that is what we are talking about.

We are talking about Truth.