A question for Christians who aren't bible fundamentalists.

[SolitaryWalker]

Yes, you are right. Roman Catholics do believe in miracles. And yes they do believe God has revealed himself to us. However they also believe that revelation must be subject to reason.

Of course how well they do this is open to question.

My point is that Catholics believe that reason and faith both should play a role in their religious practices, however, faith serves a much more significant purpose. In other words, Catholics think that to some degree religious views must be questioned; yet in many other cases they must be accepted as correct solely on authority or by virtue of revelation. The latter approach (faith or acceptance of views on authority) appears to be much more pronounced than the former )or the practice of using reason to question the religious teachings).

 

[Mole]

the Big Bang theory suggests a singularity of mass prior to the expansion of existence. However, if there was a singularity, there must have been a cause for the singularity.

The sum of all the energy in the universe is zero. Therefore the universe came from nothing.

 

[Mole]

My point is that Catholics believe that reason and faith both should play a role in their religious practices, however, faith serves a much more significant purpose. In other words, Catholics think that to some degree religious views must be questioned; yet in many other cases they must be accepted as correct solely on authority or by virtue of revelation. The latter approach (faith or acceptance of views on authority) appears to be much more pronounced than the former )or the practice of using reason to question the religious teachings).

Sure, and eventually the Trinity will join Zeus and Poseidon in the history of religion.

 

[Lark]

Sure, and eventually the Trinity will join Zeus and Poseidon in the history of religion.

Either that or Atheism will join the canon of modern day errors.

 

[Totenkindly]

My proposition is more like this: "Given that a person is a Christian, what is the most effective method of approaching Christianity?" Then I answer this question by saying that believing in miracles is more effective than not believing in miracles.

I guess I just have issues with choosing to believe something just because you want to believe it. So the sort of proposition you are making seems very irrelevant to me in general; I'm most interested in making sure things I invest in eternally and base my life on are true to begin with, not really trying to maximize the impact of a system that could easily be as wrong as right.

Authenticity is of primary important to me in the pursuit of Truth.
Making something work just because I've chosen to believe it, less so.
If what you choose to believe isn't true, why does it even matter if you maximize its potential?

 

[Mole]

Either that or Atheism will join the canon of modern day errors.

In the 19th Century Modernism itself was declared a heresy. But then in the 20th Century Vatican II modernised itself.

And when the Trinity joins Zeus and Poseidon in the history of religion, it is almost certain that the Trinity will be replaced by a new God, just as Zeus and Poseidon were replaced by the Trinity.

And we will snigger at those who once believed in the Trinity, just as we snigger at those who once believed in Zeus and Poseidon.

So atheism is a moveable feast - for those who no longer believe in Zeus and Poseidon are atheists, just as those who may not believe in the Trinity are atheists.

There are all kinds of atheists - it just depends on what God you don't believe in or worship.

 

[Tiltyred]

There is something in us that wants a triune god. The concept is eternal. We just change the names. You have to look at the essence of the idea, not the face it assumes. The surfaces change but the essence doesn't.
Check the wiki: Category:Triune gods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Mole]

There is something in us that wants a triune god.

But wishing doesn't make it so.

 

[Nyx]

In the 19th Century Modernism itself was declared a heresy. But then in the 20th Century Vatican II modernised itself.

Yeah... too bad the Vatican does not contain the whole Truth about Christianity. It is just another corrupted interpretation of it. Beyond that, it claims it has the Truth and styles itself a monarchy with Pope which causes many, many problems including questionable dogmas. We can go back to the roots of Christianity and understand why. Many traditional Catholics are opposed to Vatican II and Modernism with its "Cult of Progress".

 

[Mole]

Many traditional Catholics are opposed to Vatican II and Modernism with its "Cult of Progress".

And these same traditional catholics support the tradition of anti-semitism, quite unlike the modern, progressive Church.

 

[Nyx]

And these same traditional catholics support the tradition of anti-semitism, quite unlike the modern, progressive Church.

No. Anti-Zionism, perhaps... but that is for political reasons... Also, a lot of Zionists think the Vatican and the Jesuits are the root of all worldly evil. I'm not a trad Catholic, just reporting my findings.

 

[wren]

i am going to christmas eve service even though i'm a cast away now that i don't believe that jesus is the son of god. not trying to be flippant or anything, this position was made by pondering my situation and current feelings about my christian faith. i'm going to sit in a pew surrounded by my fellow christians and listen to some beautiful christmas music, share in something traditional with my neighbors and my kids, i'm going to enjoy myself, i think.

 

[Ginkgo]

The sum of all the energy in the universe is zero. Therefore the universe came from nothing.

You aren't doing this speculative hypothesis any justice. Your use of the word "nothing" is actually a descriptor for quantum fluctuations, which were questionably existent before the birth of the universe. O ye faithful.

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I guess I just have issues with choosing to believe something just because you want to believe it. So the sort of proposition you are making seems very irrelevant to me in general; I'm most interested in making sure things I invest in eternally and base my life on are true to begin with, not really trying to maximize the impact of a system that could easily be as wrong as right.

Authenticity is of primary important to me in the pursuit of Truth.
Making something work just because I've chosen to believe it, less so.
If what you choose to believe isn't true, why does it even matter if you maximize its potential?

No one can make something true just by believing it. E.g. I cannot make my car run by filling the gas tank full of water, even if I really want it to run on water. Belief does not make false things become true. Rather belief shows what is false and what is true. E.g. if I fill my gas tank with water and then try to drive the car, then I will find out that my belief is false. Or if I fill the gas tank with gasoline and drive the car, then I will find out my belief in gasoline is true.

So if I tie this back into our discussion I would say that authenticity is of primary import to me in the pursuit of Truth. I would never hold a belief in something that I knew to be false, while I could place a secure foundation upon beliefs that I knew to be true. Furthermore, since my religious beliefs do have a measurable impact, then I know they are based upon true principles. However, even if my beliefs are based upon true principles, that does not necessarily mean that someone else's different beliefs are based upon false principles.

 

[wren]

No one can make something true just by believing it. E.g. I cannot make my car run by filling the gas tank full of water, even if I really want it to run on water. Belief does not make false things become true. Rather belief shows what is false and what is true. E.g. if I fill my gas tank with water and then try to drive the car, then I will find out that my belief is false. Or if I fill the gas tank with gasoline and drive the car, then I will find out my belief in gasoline is true.

So if I tie this back into our discussion I would say that authenticity is of primary import to me in the pursuit of Truth. I would never hold a belief in something that I knew to be false, while I could place a secure foundation upon beliefs that I knew to be true. Furthermore, since my religious beliefs do have a measurable impact, then I know they are based upon true principals. However, even if my beliefs are based upon true principals, that does not necessarily mean that someone else's different beliefs are based upon false principals.

and how do you know what you just said is true and not false?

 

[The_Liquid_Laser]

and how do you know what you just said is true and not false?

A person who makes no assumptions will never reach any conclusions. However a priori assumptions are considered as true.

 

[Mole]

You aren't doing this speculative hypothesis any justice. Your use of the word "nothing" is actually a descriptor for quantum fluctuations, which were questionably existent before the birth of the universe. O ye faithful.

May I make an addendum?

If the total energy in the universe is zero, then rather than coming from nothing, the universe is nothing.

 

[Mycroft]

Furthermore, since my religious beliefs do have a measurable impact, then I know they are based upon true principles.

What about the ruthless, single-minded dictator whose life is greatly improved by his unwavering belief that he is, say, destined to become the king of the world?

Just to cite one obvious example.

The proposition that positive personal impact of belief in a thing is evidence that its tenants are true is a comparable to the toddler's belief that covering his eyes makes the world disappear.

 

[Ginkgo]

May I make an addendum?

If the total energy in the universe is zero, then rather than coming from nothing, the universe is nothing.

Haha. Well, there is a constant flux of energy being reciprocated within the universe. Furthermore, the universe is not only energy, but also matter. So, unless there is an equal amount of antimatter, then there is not a reciprocal for the matter.

Either, way, this does not discount the universe as nothing. It just means the universe is caught in neutrality.

 

[Ginkgo]

What about the ruthless, single-minded dictator whose life is greatly improved by his unwavering belief that he is, say, destined to become the king of the world?

The proposition that positive personal impact of belief in a thing is evidence that its tenants are true is a comparable to the toddler's belief that covering his eyes makes the world disappear.