Will we survive religion?

[Mirdath]

1. Your assertion equals chaos.
2. What good have the non-religious done?
3. If there is no “religion” thus no God then who cares what will happen in the future since we all become non-existent?

Dostoyevski said, “If God does not exist, everything is permissable.”

1. The assertion that religion will eventually bring about chaos (ie, apocalypse)? Theorizing that eventually religion will no longer hold the significance it does now does not necessarily mean a descent into madness.
2. Quite a lot. Deists were among the founding fathers of America; non-theists have been scientists and scholars for a long time. And they’ve made plenty of contributions to art, literature, music, the furtherance of human knowledge and philosophy, even such things as charity and humanitarianism.
3. If there is no religion people care about what happens here and now. And if they stop to think about it, the golden rule applies just as much if there is no afterlife. People will always get along better by treating each other well, whether or not a deity is involved anywhere in their lives.
4. Dostoyevsky’s a great read, but he’s got issues. Everything may be permissible from a metaphysical standpoint – there’s no punishment in the afterlife – but that doesn’t make it a good idea in the real world, and there may well be punishment for it here via social contracts. And the conscience will still exist; it’s not wholly dependent on religion.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

If there is no religion people care about what happens here and now

Well, can you prove two things about this:

1. That it really happens a majority of the time with a majority of the people. Did all the people in communist China, to give an example, over the last 60 years care about what happens here and now? There should be plenty of primary sources to prove this. Don’t forget Soviet Russia from 1917 on as well.
2. Even more importantly, is there any proof whatsoever that the ‘here and now’ is the most important thing for humanity or even any given human? That sure seems to fly in the face of recorded human behavior. Humanity has always written about, thought about, worked for and cared for ‘beyond’ the here and now. Sure we care about the here and now particularly for those who suffer, but if we aren’t looking at the big picture, at the ‘before’ to understand why things are as they are, and at the ‘after’ to know how to make things better, then we aren’t really benefiting anybody, least of all ourselves.

 

[Valke2]

1. Your assertion equals chaos.
2. What good have the non-religious done?
3. If there is no “religion” thus no God then who cares what will happen in the future since we all become non-existent?

Dostoyevski said, “If God does not exist, everything is permissable.”

Dostoyevski said a lot of things.

1. People of faith generally believe that unless one follows their way, they are following an inferior way.
2. People who are true believers often will sacrifice thier lives, or the lives of others, in defense of their unverifiable beliefs, which were originally developed at a time when people believed a sneeze expelled demons.
3. We live in a time when mother’s celebrate the deaths of their children for dying in the name of a religious principle.
4. Religion flew planes into our buildings on 9/11.
5. THere is no negotiation, other than captiulation to the religous beliefs of the aggressor, which can effectively stop a religious war. You can’t negotiate with someone who views your way of life as a sin against God and a threat to their children’s ability to have a share in paradise/heaven/the world to come.

 

[Mirdath]

Well, can you prove two things about this:

1. That it really happens a majority of the time with a majority of the people. Did all the people in communist China, to give an example, over the last 60 years care about what happens here and now? There should be plenty of primary sources to prove this. Don’t forget Soviet Russia from 1917 on as well.

Actually, given that a lot of Soviet Russians were making stew out of motor oil and machine parts, they cared quite a lot – their leaders just did not afford them the chance to do anything about it. You’re talking about billions of people, who can say what all of them had on their minds – except possibly a good meal and trying to stay out of the gulags? That’s pretty here-and-now.

1. Even more importantly, is there any proof whatsoever that the ‘here and now’ is the most important thing for humanity or even any given human? That sure seems to fly in the face of recorded human behavior. Humanity has always written about, thought about, worked for and cared for ‘beyond’ the here and now. Sure we care about the here and now particularly for those who suffer, but if we aren’t looking at the big picture, at the ‘before’ to understand why things are as they are, and at the ‘after’ to know how to make things better, then we aren’t really benefiting anybody, least of all ourselves.

Planning for a better future in this world is great, and is knowably relevant as it will be here-and-now soon enough; but a hypothetical afterlife is cold comfort to many.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Awesome, you can take what I said, mold it to your own desires, and then still not manage to defend what you said.

You step into the thread and tell me I’m blathering reiterating the same point over and over without thought?

Then you actually ask me to treat you as an ignorant heathen?

Oneiron:

I have no clue whatsoever what absolutely relative means. You said it, I’d figure you knew what you were talking about. Apparently I was wrong.

Grrrrrrr!

Oneiron:

And you have this thing for thinking we non-Christians believe you think us all heathens.

What on earth are you talking about? :whacky:

First you ask me to treat you as an ignorant heathen.

And then, when I refuse to do this, you still accuse me of thinking that all non-Christians think they are incorrectly perceived by Christians as ignorant heathens?.

At this point, I have absolutely no idea what you’re actually asking me for.

Oneiron:

I told you to treat me like one, and explain it to me. Stop taking my words and making it sound like I have some anti-Christian agenda.

Then stop asking me to treat you like something that I do not think you are. You’ve assumed that I think that non-Christians are heathens or worse-- or that heathens are simply too stupid to really grasp much of anything unless it’s explained to them in simplistic terms.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

It is still regrettable, is it not? Remember what happened when Peter cut off the slave’s ear in Gethsemane.

Remember what happened when, according to the Scriptural account, God regretted making humanity?

Mirdath:

Yeah, the Old Testament God was a pretty scary guy. He didn’t just command his followers to kill aggressors, he actively sent them up to commit genocide against the Caananite tribes! Somehow I fail to see the good in that.

The Caananite tribes engaged in all kinds of deplorable inhuman activities, such as child sacrifice for example. They engaged in ritual sex which dehumanized all they interacted with. They were also fully aware of the fact that God had given the land to the Israelites. In fact, they knew for over 40 years that they had to leave this land, and that God had expelled them specifically because of their wickedness. In addition to this, they regularly attacked the Israelites when presented the chance and were fairly well dedicated to destroying the Israelites if they could.

After God had given them many chances, it finally became evident that these people were not going to listen. They persisted in their aggression and God finally said, “I’ve had enough! Go get 'em boys! Wipe them out!”

Mirdath:

I’ve said it before, Catholic teaching is that by committing a mortal sin one severs oneself from God’s grace. Jesus is just rubberstamping it.

Yes. And he is giving the rubberstamp of damnation upon them specifically because of their motal sins. This is his ‘seal of disapproval’ so to speak.

Mirdath:

If you get your philosophy from Michelangelo (it’s a great painting, but it isn’t the word of God). According to John he’s going to send two prophets who are going to be killed and resurrected after a few days, and sometime after that the world ends as angels pour things out over it. John himself makes incredibly heavy use of metaphor – the Beast as Nero Caesar, seven horns for the hills of Rome, etc. etc. If you take him absolutely literally, there are only 144,000 elect (who are, by the way, all Jews) who get to go to Heaven. Given just how many Jews and Christians there have been, I’d say trying to get in now just doesn’t offer very good odds. The Apocalypse is not a book to take at face value, but rather what lies beneath it.

Some is metaphor. Some is not.

And Michelangelo’s paintings reflect the writings of the Scriptures, the early Church Fathers, and even the Doctors of the Church-- because they all unanimously agree that Christ will literally return to judge the nations.

None of them present this second coming in ‘politically correct’ language. And it’s not going to be pretty either-- Catholicism teaches that Jesus will literally come again to judge the nations of the earth on the last day.

Many of the other passages I quoted were not even from the Book of the Apocalyspe-- and yet they definitely portray the return of Christ in such a way that it is undeniable that he will meet out justice.

Mirdath:

That would seem to be the case. I do actually think there’s good in everyone

Yes. You just refuse to see the good in the Crusaders, right?

No wait. You also refuse to see the good in fanatics and zealots too, right?

Mirdath:

I was speaking to you, not for you. I’ve asked you to clarify, presenting the options I think there are.

No. You were speaking for me, and accusing me of distorting Catholic teachings Mirdath.

Yep…I’m pretty sure this threads going to get locked fairly soon. If you can’t engage in a civil debate without calling into question the faith of the person involved, then you can’t actually debate in the first place.

Mirdath:

Sure, life isn’t multiple-choice, but there can be yes-no questions as in what I presented to you re: Judaism still being considered valid by Christians, or one religion having the same power to save as another. You still haven’t answered, by the way.

How’s this for an answer regarding Judaism from within Catholicism?

You might want to check out the official statement here.

Mirdath:

It’s only tarnishing if it’s true Yeah, I’ve been calling you out, simply because I believe the Church teaches differently. If you can reconcile what you’ve said with that, or prove to me that it teaches otherwise – be my guest!

Good. Then you won’t mind if I report your post, right?

 

[Mirdath]

Remember what happened when, according to the Scriptural account, God regretted making humanity?

And then promised never to do it again, and then sent his son as a sacrifice and taught ‘love thy enemy’?

The Caananite tribes engaged in all kinds of deplorable inhuman activities, such as child sacrifice for example. They engaged in ritual sex which dehumanized all they interacted with. They were also fully aware of the fact that God had given the land to the Israelites. In fact, they knew for over 40 years that they had to leave this land, and that God had expelled them specifically because of their wickedness. In addition to this, they regularly attacked the Israelites when presented the chance and were fairly well dedicated to destroying the Israelites if they could.

The Israelites had just returned from slavery in Egypt, unless you’ve got a version of Exodus I’m not familiar with.

Maybe the Israelite deity said ‘the Caananites are expelled from this land!’, but I doubt many of the Caananites themselves thought of that as the word of God.

After God had given them many chances, it finally became evident that these people were not going to listen. They persisted in their aggression and God finally said, “I’ve had enough! Go get 'em boys! Wipe them out!”

Their aggression like residing and living in and around Jericho? Or like coming to try to sneak in an offer of peace when they saw the genocide the nation of Israel inflicted on cities which would not yield to siege?

Yes. And he is giving the rubberstamp of damnation upon them specifically because of their motal sins. This is his ‘seal of disapproval’ so to speak.

So he rubberstamps; the direct harm is something they’ve done to themselves.

Yes. You just refuse to see the good in the Crusaders, right?

I do not see any good in the motives behind the Crusades. I’m sure many of them were by and large good people fighting an unpleasant, unnecessary, and unjust war.

No wait. You also refuse to see the good in fanatics and zealots too, right?

They have good in them, but they are also extremely dangerous and unbalanced.

No. You were speaking for me, and accusing me of distorting Catholic teachings Mirdath.

I’ve accused you of being mistaken in several ways, and perhaps confused; and you’ve done the same to me. Isn’t that why we’re having this discussion?

How’s this for an answer regarding Judaism from within Catholicism?

You might want to check out the official statement here.

‘Recognition, understanding and respect for each other’s beliefs, without having to accept them’ does not say to me ‘yeah, the other guys are right too’.

Good. Then you won’t mind if I report your post, right?

Go right ahead; however, I’d prefer it if you could civilly debate with me and make your points instead of threatening to pull me off the stage with a crook.

I’m curious as to what you’d report me for though…?

 

[nby]

I have had enough of this thread. The last thing I want to say is the truth will come out and all the lies will be exposed.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

And then promised never to do it again, and then sent his son as a sacrifice and taught ‘love thy enemy’?

Right, but he did actually allow this destruction to happen. And, like the great deluge, he promises that another great destruction will come upon the earth. The first time it was by water. The last time it will be by fire…

But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. He is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.

But the day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare.

Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be?

You ought to live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed its coming. That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire, and the elements will melt in the heat. But in keeping with his promise we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, the home of righteousness.

This isn’t allegory. This is talking about a literal event which will come about at the Lord’s second coming, on the last day. As such, it agrees with everything that the Church, Scriptures, Early Fathers, and Doctors of the Church have said in regards to the Lord’s second coming. This is not going to be a fun time for anyone, believer and non-beleiver alike.

Many Catholic visionaries have discussed how the last days will play out, using ideas such as hurricanes of fire sweeping across the landscape for example, or a terrible calamity overtaking the earth in a way not much different from the great deluge, except that it is in the form of fire and not water.

For example, on October 13th, 1973, Sr. Agnes Sasagawa heard the following…

“My dear daughter, listen well to what I have to say to you. You will inform your superior.”

After a short silence, she heard…

“As I told you, if men do not repent and better themselves, the Father will inflict a terrible punishment on all humanity. It will be a punishment greater than the deluge, such as one will never seen before. Fire will fall from the sky and will wipe out a great part of humanity, the good as well as the bad, sparing neither priests nor faithful. The survivors will find themselves so desolate that they will envy the dead. The only arms which will remain for you will be the Rosary and the Sign left by My Son. Each day recite the prayers of the Rosary. With the Rosary, pray for the Pope, the bishops and priests.”

My apologies Mirdath, but these aren’t merely metaphors. And many of these apprations have been approved by the Catholic Church too. For example, in June, 1988, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI of course) gave a definitive judgement on these Akita events described above-- and he concluded that the messages were reliable and worthy of belief.

continued…

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

…continued.

Mirdath:

The Israelites had just returned from slavery in Egypt, unless you’ve got a version of Exodus I’m not familiar with.

Yes. But the Israelites were wandering in the wilderness for 40 years. Likewise, word of the great calamities which God caused to liberate the Israelites had spread far and wide too.

The Scriptures explain it as such here…
Joshua 2:8-13:

Before the spies lay down for the night, she went up on the roof and said to them,

"**I know that the LORD has given this land to you and that a great fear of you has fallen on us, so that all who live in this country are melting in fear because of you. **

We have heard how the LORD dried up the water of the Red Sea for you when you came out of Egypt, and what you did to Sihon and Og, the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan, whom you completely destroyed.

When we heard of it, our hearts melted and everyone’s courage failed because of you, for the LORD your God is God in heaven above and on the earth below.

Now then, please swear to me by the LORD that you will show kindness to my family, because I have shown kindness to you. Give me a sure sign that you will spare the lives of my father and mother, my brothers and sisters, and all who belong to them, and that you will save us from death."

This didn’t come as a suprise to anyone when the Israelites stormed through their land. There were plenty of signs that this was coming to pass. But these nations, in their stubborness and hardness of heart, rebelled against the warning signs they were given well in advance.

Mirdath:

Maybe the Israelite deity said ‘the Caananites are expelled from this land!’, but I doubt many of the Caananites themselves thought of that as the word of God.

The Caananites knew this was coming too. It was announced everywhere before, during and after their deliverance from Egypt…
Exodus 3:17:

And I have promised to bring you up out of your misery in Egypt into the land of the Canaanites, Hittites, Amorites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—a land flowing with milk and honey.’

And look at the events which came prior to their deliverance…
Exodus 12:29-31:

At midnight the LORD struck down all the firstborn in Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh, who sat on the throne, to the firstborn of the prisoner, who was in the dungeon, and the firstborn of all the livestock as well. Pharaoh and all his officials and all the Egyptians got up during the night, and there was loud wailing in Egypt, for there was not a house without someone dead.

…So word of events like this tend to spread quickly throughout the region, which is what Rahab was talking about. The same thing could be seen here in the Scriptures…

Ask now about the former days, long before your time, from the day God created man on the earth; ask from one end of the heavens to the other.

Has any other people heard the voice of God speaking out of fire, as you have, and lived?

Has any god ever tried to take for himself one nation out of another nation, by testings, by miraculous signs and wonders, by war, by a mighty hand and an outstretched arm, or by great and awesome deeds, like all the things the LORD your God did for you in Egypt before your very eyes?

Consequently, since these pagan nations were quite aware of what happened in Egypt, it is well within their reason to understand what was going to happen to them if they resisted the coming of the Israelites, just as Rahab indicated.

God gave them that land. He also made it very clear to all the nations around the area that he was giving the Israelites that land too. Incidently, I think that land still belongs to the Israelites to this very day. God’s covenants have not been revoked. They are eternal, and there is nothing within the Catholic faith which has revoked this eternal covenant that God made with them-- and I think the Muslims within the Holy Land would do well to remember this too.

Nonetheless, if the non-Jewish nations didn’t listen, it wasn’t because they didn’t hear. It’s because they did not believe– and it’s specifically because they did not believe which ultimately resulted in their destruction (exactly like the Christian Scriptures portray the second coming of Christ).

There was ultimately either two choices: believe and convert just as Rahab did, or else disbelieve and perish exactly like the Caananites did. A third temporary option was available too-- leave the land and let the Israelites live there. But this is only a temporary fix since the Lord’s will is going to catch up with them no matter where they flee to. It will ultimately eventually come back to the first two options I noted above: believe or disbelieve.

 

[Mirdath]

My apologies Mirdath, but these aren’t merely metaphors. And many of these apprations have been approved by the Catholic Church too. For example, in June, 1988, then Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger (now Pope Benedict XVI of course) gave a definitive judgement on these Akita events described above-- and he concluded that the messages were reliable and worthy of belief.

Okay, I’m not going to question that – I’ll just believe it if and when I see it.

This didn’t come as a suprise to anyone when the Israelites stormed through their land. There were plenty of signs that this was coming to pass. But these nations, in their stubborness and hardness of heart, rebelled against the warning signs they were given well in advance.

Their land. Even you use that term. I’m sorry, but I have a hard time reconciling the concept of a just and loving God with kicking native people out to make room for a favorite clan.

The Caananites knew this was coming too. It was announced everywhere before, during and after their deliverance from Egypt…

The deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt probably got there; but the knowledge that they were coming to take over Palestine by the sword? I don’t recall any messengers from God coming to Jericho and saying ‘get out or die’. And even if they had, the Caananite reaction would probably have been (and eventually was) the same as that of Spain to the Moorish invading force – retaliation.

Let’s say, hypothetically, that Islam is in fact the chosen religion of God right now; then Ferdinand and Isabella, the Catholic monarchs of Spain, deserved to have their cities crumble around their ears for defying the will of Allah. If Muslims were the chosen people of God, would you support their inhabitation of the Iberian peninsula now, in hindsight?

Consequently, since these pagan nations were quite aware of what happened in Egypt, it is well within their reason to understand what was going to happen to them if they resisted the coming of the Israelites, just as Rahab indicated.

After the Israelites began warring upon them, maybe. All they would have known is that ‘hey, these people are laying siege to us!’ By the time they got to Jericho their reputation preceded them – look where Rahab notes what they did to the Ammonites. However, to the Caananites, the Israelites were invaders, marauders, and pagans.

God gave them that land. He also made it very clear to all the nations around the area that he was giving the Israelites that land too. Incidently, I think that land still belongs to the Israelites to this very day. God’s covenants have not been revoked. They are eternal, and there is nothing within the Catholic faith which has revoked this eternal covenant that God made with them-- and I think the Muslims within the Holy Land would do well to remember this too.

The Israelites said God gave them that land, at least; the Caananites probably thought Baal gave them the land. The same principle was at work in 19th century America, when it was called Manifest Destiny. I don’t see many people supporting the ideals behind that nowadays, but then it’s all done and over with, while Zionism is alive and well.

Nonetheless, if the non-Jewish nations didn’t listen, it wasn’t because they didn’t hear. It’s because they did not believe-- and it’s specifically because they did not believe which ultimately resulted in their destruction (exactly like the Christian Scriptures portray the second coming of Christ).

Apparently so.

There was ultimately either two choices: believe and convert just as Rahab did, or else disbelieve and perish exactly like the Caananites did. A third temporary option was available too-- leave the land and let the Israelites live there. But this is only a temporary fix since the Lord’s will is going to catch up with them no matter where they flee to. It will ultimately eventually come back to the first two options I noted above: believe or disbelieve.

So, convert or die, or die a little later? And you’re ragging on the extremist Muslims for this? Sounds like you’ve got more in common than you’d like to admit.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Their aggression like residing and living in and around Jericho?

Are you aware of the practices that those who lived in Jericho were engaged in?

Mirdath:

Or like coming to try to sneak in an offer of peace when they saw the genocide the nation of Israel inflicted on cities which would not yield to siege?

Did they have any real intention to convert and believe like Rahab did?

Or were they merely trying to appease the Israelites without actually changing their lives?

Were they even being honest when they offered the terms of peace?

Or were they going to lie in wait until they could get the opportunity to do so, just as many non-Israelite nations did in fact often do?

Didn’t the Gibeonites actually trick them into the peace negotiations to begin with?

If so, why wouldn’t they later attempt to trick them when they had the upper hand?

However, when the people of Gibeon heard what Joshua had done to Jericho and Ai, they resorted to a ruse:

They went as a delegation whose donkeys were loaded with worn-out sacks and old wineskins, cracked and mended. The men put worn and patched sandals on their feet and wore old clothes. All the bread of their food supply was dry and moldy.

Then they went to Joshua in the camp at Gilgal and said to him and the men of Israel, “We have come from a distant country; make a treaty with us.”

The men of Israel said to the Hivites, “But perhaps you live near us. How then can we make a treaty with you?”

“We are your servants,” they said to Joshua.

But Joshua asked, “Who are you and where do you come from?”

They answered: "Your servants have come from a very distant country because of the fame of the LORD your God. For we have heard reports of him: all that he did in Egypt, and all that he did to the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan—Sihon king of Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth.

And our elders and all those living in our country said to us, 'Take provisions for your journey; go and meet them and say to them, “We are your servants; make a treaty with us.” ’

This bread of ours was warm when we packed it at home on the day we left to come to you. But now see how dry and moldy it is. And these wineskins that we filled were new, but see how cracked they are. And our clothes and sandals are worn out by the very long journey."

The men of Israel sampled their provisions but did not inquire of the LORD. Then Joshua made a treaty of peace with them to let them live, and the leaders of the assembly ratified it by oath.

Three days after they made the treaty with the Gibeonites, the Israelites heard that they were neighbors, living near them. So the Israelites set out and on the third day came to their cities: Gibeon, Kephirah, Beeroth and Kiriath Jearim. But the Israelites did not attack them, because the leaders of the assembly had sworn an oath to them by the LORD, the God of Israel.

Please note, even though they were attempting to trick the Israelites, the Gibeonites had still nonetheless heard the reports of all that God had done for his chosen people in Egypt. The Israelite’s reputation was certainly preceeding their appearance-- everybody knew what was coming if they went against them too.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Mirdath:

So he rubberstamps; the direct harm is something they’ve done to themselves.

No. When he comes, both believers and non-believers will be destroyed by his coming. The Scriptures are clear on this. The Early Fathers are clear on this. The Doctors of the Church are clear on this. Catholic visionaries are clear on this. And I’m clear on this too.

Destruction, in this sense, however, is two-fold. This it the part that is not so easilly understood and agreed upon.

In the positive sense, the destruction is more of a re-creation that painfully break them down to their very elements and reassembles them into the glory and likeness of Christ…

But someone may ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?”

How foolish!

What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body.

All flesh is not the same: Men have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another.

There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

So will it be with the resurrection of the dead.

The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

So it is written:

“The first man Adam became a living being”; the last Adam, a life-giving spirit.

The spiritual did not come first, but the natural, and after that the spiritual. The first man was of the dust of the earth, the second man from heaven. As was the earthly man, so are those who are of the earth; and as is the man from heaven, so also are those who are of heaven.

And just as we have borne the likeness of the earthly man, so shall we bear the likeness of the man from heaven.

Now, in the negative sense, the destruction is more of a literal destruction that painfully breaks them down to their very elements and sets them adrift into the void of hell, the place where God is eternally not present, his presence is cut off from them due to their sins.

In this sense, I suppose the body resurrected in unforgiven moral sin would be cast into the chaos of the quantum foam-like nothingness that did not actually exist prior to the creation event…

All fledgling theories of quantum gravity also make a more general and even weirder prediction: the structure of space and time is very different from the gentle curves predicted by general relativity. The American physicist John Wheeler realised in the 1950s that if you look at things on a scale of about 10-35 metres, quantum fluctuations become powerful enough to play tricks with the geometry of the Universe. Space and time break down into “fuzziness” or “foaminess”. A spaceship that size could find itself negotiating virtual black holes, or getting sucked into one wormhole after another and tossed back and forth in time and space.

I honestly can’t think of a better description of hell to be fair

Consequently, since black holes never end, and since souls never completely die either, the destruction of their body and soul within this hellish realm would be perpetual and never actually end. So soul that sins will indeed die. But the soul lives forever-- so their death and desruction will never end. cf., an unending death by an eternal never-ending annihilation.

This is not a pleasant thought by any stretch of the imagination. And yet God is quite aware of what these people are heading toward too. In fact, he allows this to happen and he has warmed people over and over gain that it would happen too.

"And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.

If your hand causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life maimed than with two hands to go into hell, where the fire never goes out.

And if your foot causes you to sin, cut it off. It is better for you to enter life crippled than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.

And if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out. It is better for you to enter the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where…

their worm does not die,
and the fire is not quenched.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

I’ve accused you of being mistaken in several ways, and perhaps confused; and you’ve done the same to me.

No. You’ve essentially accused me of being heterodox, which is pretty damn ignorant when someone’s actually trying to take the time to politely explain something to you.

You, on the other hand, do not actually believe what the Catholic Church teaches. Furthermore, since you do not believe, it stands to reason that you might not actually understand what Catholicism teaches.

What’s most important for us as Catholics is to remember that what enables us to see the supernatural truth and reality of the Church so clearly, is not our intelligence. It’s not our experience, but rather, the faith that is a gift of God.

Our faith is from beginning to end, a gift of God.

Fulton Sheen gives an illustration. Think of the most beautiful stained glass cathedral windows and how different their appearance to insiders is from outsiders. Standing on the outside, the windows appear to be a meaningless mass of lead and dull colors, but their beautiful colors and vibrant designs captivate you once you step inside.

The higher truth of the Church is like that, like the glorious Host enthroned upon the altar. One man sees a wafer, while another sees the Eternal God made man under the form and appearances of bread and wine.

The reason for the difference is the light of faith. This scandal, this stumbling block is an extension of the same scandal or stumbling block that Jesus presented 2000 years ago. One man would see a 33-year-old Palestinian Jew with incredible and extraordinary wonder-working powers, while Peter would see the Son of the Living God.

Mirdath:

Isn’t that why we’re having this discussion?

The reason why we’re having this discussion is because, whether you believe it or not, the Lord brought you here so that he might reach you and bring you back into the Catholic faith.

 

[Mirdath]

Are you aware of the practices that those who lived in Jericho were engaged in?

Yes I am, and no I don’t really care. Their actions in their lives does not excuse the actions of the Israelites towards them. If God wants them out of the way, let him rain down brimstone like he threatened to do with Nineveh – he doesn’t need human armies.

Please note, even though they were attempting to trick the Israelites, the Gibeonites had still nonetheless heard the reports of all that God had done for his chosen people in Egypt. The Israelite’s reputation was certainly preceeding their appearance-- everybody knew what was coming if they went against them too.

‘We have heard what you did at Jericho and Ai’. The Gibeonites knew that the Israelites were coming to conquer by the reports of the fall of the first two cities of Caanan.

In the positive sense, the destruction is more of a re-creation that painfully break them down to their very elements and reassembles them into the glory and likeness of Christ…

Now, in the negative sense, the destruction is more of a literal destruction that painfully breaks them down to their very elements and sets them adrift into the void of hell, the place where God is eternally not present, his presence is cut off from them due to their sins.

In this sense, I suppose the body resurrected in unforgiven moral sin would be cast into the chaos of the quantum foam-like nothingness that did not actually exist prior to the creation event…

Actually according to Aquinas, the bodies of all people are transfigured; those of the blessed are remade perfect and go to heaven, while those of the damned are remade just as vulnerable as once they were (yet incapable of dying) and sent to hell. I don’t know where you got a requirement that it be a painful process for all.

No. You’ve essentially accused me of being heterodox, which is pretty damn ignorant when someone’s actually trying to take the time to politely explain something to you.

Ow.

You, on the other hand, do not actually believe what the Catholic Church teaches. Furthermore, since you do not believe, it stands to reason that you might not actually understand what Catholicism teaches.

Might, yes. However, I thinkI have a pretty solid understanding of it in spite of my disagreements with it. My lack of faith is not an invitation to ad-hominem attacks, just as your boundless faith is not. Questioning that you are mistaken in what you have faith in is no such attack, nor is it an accusation of heterodoxy: it’s merely a guileless inquiry as to whether you misunderstand some things or are confused, which as I’ve said is why we’re debating this – we each think the other is mistaken.

The reason why we’re having this discussion is because, whether you believe it or not, the Lord brought you here so that he might reach you and bring you back into the Catholic faith.

I’m not discounting that possibility But at least as far as I know, I came here to try to understand a specific point of view I was raised to share but couldn’t accept.

 

[Oneiron]

You step into the thread and tell me I’m blathering reiterating the same point over and over without thought?

At this point, I have absolutely no idea what you’re actually asking me for.

Okay, let’s make this simple, I was being slightly inflamatory because you avoided answering my question.

I did not step into the thread and tell you you’re blathering the same things over and over again. I stepepd in and asked you a question. When you reiterated the same things you’ve already said to Mirdath, then I accused you of saying the same thing over and over again. When I asked you again you simply dissected what I said to make me sound like a bad guy. And then again.

My question to you is thus: What does Abolutely Relative mean?

I don’t understand that concept, and I’ve been grappling with it all day to see if I can understand it. My childish remarks aside, I really do want that answer.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Okay, I’m not going to question that – I’ll just believe it if and when I see it.

Hopefully it won’t be too late.

Their land. Even you use that term. I’m sorry, but I have a hard time reconciling the concept of a just and loving God with kicking native people out to make room for a favorite clan.

Yes. I know. But you also seem to have a problem with a loving God allowing us to defend ourselves when we are attacked-- seem to be assuming that God commands that we always die in order to dsplay our true faith for him. He doesn’t.

Laying down one’s life is the greater good if indeed he calls you to it. But if he hasn’t called you to it, then it’s not as good as you claim it is-- espcially if loved one are left uncared for for example. In some cases using equivalent force is indeed good too, to the extent that God has determined that he wills you to continue to preach his message too.

Mirdath:

The deliverance of the Israelites from Egypt probably got there; but the knowledge that they were coming to take over Palestine by the sword? I don’t recall any messengers from God coming to Jericho and saying ‘get out or die’.

I think there’s sufficient indication in the Scriptures to point toward the fact that people were well aware of what was coming to them.

I already gave the example of Rahab. But there’s also this for example…
Joshua 5:1:

Now when all the Amorite kings west of the Jordan and all the Canaanite kings along the coast heard how the LORD had dried up the Jordan before the Israelites until we had crossed over, their hearts melted and they no longer had the courage to face the Israelites.

And this…
Joshua 9:9-11:

They answered: "Your servants have come from a very distant country because of the fame of the LORD your God. For we have heard reports of him: all that he did in Egypt, and all that he did to the two kings of the Amorites east of the Jordan—Sihon king of Heshbon, and Og king of Bashan, who reigned in Ashtaroth. And our elders and all those living in our country said to us, 'Take provisions for your journey; go and meet them and say to them, “We are your servants; make a treaty with us.” ’

And this…
Joshua 10:1-3:

Now Adoni-Zedek king of Jerusalem heard that Joshua had taken Ai and totally destroyed it, doing to Ai and its king as he had done to Jericho and its king, and that the people of Gibeon had made a treaty of peace with Israel and were living near them. He and his people were very much alarmed at this, because Gibeon was an important city, like one of the royal cities; it was larger than Ai, and all its men were good fighters.

And, as I already ponted out in Joshua 5:1, all the Amorite kings west of the Jordan and all the Canaanite kings along the coast did indeed hear how the LORD had dried up the Jordan before the Israelites until they had crossed over.

People all around this area knew something big was coming.

 

[BobCatholic]

I’m not holding to both definitions. Fanaticism by my definition is unequivocally immoral and evil. It’s possible to be really into something without being a fanatic.

So according to you, both the sports fanatic who riot and don’t riot are equally evil.

I do not include them in my definition of fanatic

Why not?

Extreme sports fanatics do fit the definition.

So are you speaking English or are you now making up new words? Sorry, I’ll stick to the definition in the dictionary, thank you very much.

Fanaticism and zealotry, in the senses in which I am using the words, are evil. All of it, all the time.

Really? So if zealots are evil. zeal must be evil too.

zeal /zil/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[zeel] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation,
–noun
fervor for a person, cause, or object; eager desire or endeavor; enthusiastic diligence; ardor.

So anyone who has any kind of fervor for a person, cause or object, is evil. There go anti-war protesters. There go lots of leftists. There go lots of people who hate religion.

And a definition for fanatic:

marked by excessive enthusiasm for and intense devotion to a cause or idea

After all, if someone can be an extreme [insert team name] fan who riots, must be evil, and those who do not riot (according to your definition) also must be evil, right?

Now, let’s look at the definition of evil:

Morally bad or wrong; wicked

OK, so what is morally wrong about the sports fanatic who has extreme zeal for his sports team but does not riot? His team is the best, and he’s really into this sports team.

Just because there were fanatics and zealots who DID evil doesn’t mean ALL of them are evil. This is a dangerous standard you are setting.

This is what I’m defending: I’m defending not painting every person with zeal with the same brush.

Please, stop hating religion for ten minutes and actually realize not all people are identical. Using your definition, you’re acting very fanatical about hating religion.

 

[Mirdath]

Yes. I know. But you also seem to have a problem with a loving God allowing us to defend ourselves when we are attacked-- seem to be assuming that God commands that we always die in order to dsplay our true faith for him. He doesn’t.

Laying down one’s life is the greater good if indeed he calls you to it. But if he hasn’t called you to it, then it’s not as good as you claim it is-- espcially if loved one are left uncared for for example. In some cases using equivalent force is indeed good too, to the extent that God has determined that he wills you to continue to preach his message too.

Violence is always regrettable and carries some burden of sin with it, particularly killing another whatever the reason. Defense is an excuse for necessary violence, but that burden is still there – and that excuse is used entirely too liberally.

I think there’s sufficient indication in the Scriptures to point toward the fact that people were well aware of what was coming to them.

And, as I already ponted out in Joshua 5:1, all the Amorite kings west of the Jordan and all the Canaanite kings along the coast did indeed hear how the LORD had dried up the Jordan before the Israelites until they had crossed over.

People all around this area knew something big was coming.

Do we have any documentation from the Caananite side? The bible may be the word of God but it’s hardly an unbiased political history. Playing up the nation of Israel is a pretty big theme in the Old Testament, and it’s not like the Caananite rulers were able to give their side to the authors of the Torah.

 

[BobCatholic]

It’s usually not the religions that are at fault, but rather the
way some folks fail to live up to their own religion.

AMEN!

This is one of the points I’m trying to make.

There are people who CLAIM to follow a religion but don’t. Yes, they are a scandal to their religion. And if they do evil, there are those who are quick to blame the religion when that person wasn’t following their religion in the first place!

Evil people hide behind religion, charities, hospitals, [insert any good thing here] to do their evil.

Using the standard that religion is to blame for the evil people claiming to be religious cause, should we outlaw science because there were scientists doing evil? I know, let’s quickly outlaw universities, hospitals, libraries, basically everything, because evil people hid behind them to do their evil.

I’ve read an article about a city code enforcement official, who was married and had 2 kids, who, while in the office, RAPED a 14 year old girl. Yup. According to the standard we just saw presented in this thread, we must fight against city code enforcement, because city code enforcement is EEEEEEEEEEEEVIL