Why wouldn’t it be a catastophe? The Catholic Church rightly claims to be the one true Church. The Lutheran sects are void of valid sacraments, especially Confession. I would be a Lutheran just because it works for me, or because I live a few blocks from a LCMS church.
Christianity is reasonable, especially Catholicism. But, they might be reasonable because it is a religion that survived natural selection at time when a literacy abounds to produce apologetics, etc.
Tell me what would be catastrophic about it.
It doesn’t need to be easier. Life is probably just sometimes cruel.
Yes, it is reasonable. And people make decisions based on what’s reasonable.
No, it isn’t. But I was responding to this post of yours:
So you are doing what you say is easier (kind of like the whole “it works for me” thing you say most of us do, even as you also say you’re really thought this through).
You seem to put a lot of stock in anthropological research. As a scientist, you undoubtedly are aware of the fact that science is continually discovering new data; refining, revising, and discarding old theories, while formulating new ones; and undergoing paradigm shifts. In short, what if anthropology is wrong? My point is you may never know what is true (if there is one truth) and what is false in this life, or even beyond this life. Still, to lead some kind of normal life, you must take risks, make choices, assume responsibility for those choices, and at the same time be willing to have a mind open enough to consider changing those choices on the basis of a variety of sometimes contradictory sources, which include science, religion, philosophy, and your own reason, intuition, common sense, and faith.
I think after 100+ posts and right before Thanksgiving we are getting to the bottom of this!!!
This is interesting.
This is good, and dare I say, reasonable.
No, I’m not afraid of being wrong, because I’ve done and am still doing my homework, searching other religious perspectives, and not only Catholicism and other forms of Christianity, but also Hinduism, Buddhism, and so on. I try to have always an open mind even though I’ve made choices in my life in terms of religion, moral values, politics, aesthetics, etc. One choice I’ve made is that life is a process of discovery, a quest, which does not mean, however, that one is eternally skeptical of everything. I do find a certain degree of skepticism to be healthy, but this does not preclude my forming opinions and beliefs about many things.
Wow. This is amazing. You can be skeptical and still form religious opinions. I will consider this. Non -religion is still an opinion formed, but even then I will still have formed my own opinions.
You’re welcome. I hope I’ve helped a little. And thank you for this interesting thread.
Who is stronger? The Nazi atheist who killed Maximilian Kolbe, or the brave man who stepped forward to die in place of a terrified man who had a family to live for (the same Maximilian Kolbe).
This makes no sense whatsoever. It takes greater courage to be a moral person and believe in God than it does to wish-wash your way through life following every trend that comes along.
I know about Kolbe. I used to attach a Miraculous Medal to my scapular. I dont think the Nazi did that specifically in the name of atheism…not sure.
Nazism is an atheistic philosophy.
The individual doesn’t, but society does. The individual gets his morals from society. You are old enough to have been taught the Ten Commandments, but what will happen to non-religious children today, who will never hear of them? They will never know that it is wrong to covet, wrong to kill, wrong to commit adultery, wrong to swear falsely, or to tell lies - and guess what - they don’t see anything the matter with these things.
From societies that operate according to religious principles, such as the Ten Commandments.
Such morals may be the result of non-biological natural selection. They are behaviors that worked and survived. Later when humans developed organized religion, those morals could have been codified by religion.
Of course you don’t need religion to be* moral.* I daresay there are some atheists (esp. some on this forum) that I’d rather have my back than some Christians I’ve been in dialogue with (esp. some on this forum.)
Are you implying that any religion is OK and religion alone is the means by which we learn morals? When I am convinced Theism is not a human invention (as I have suggested continually based on anthropology/history) I will re-enter Catholicism. Wherever these morals came from, do you think it is impossible to experience/learn them with religion?
and makes more money than me.