What Religion Do You Practice/Not Practice and Why?

[EcK]

Oh, I know it is unsubstantiated by scientific fact. I'm actually a Catholic convert.
It's very easy to reconcile it is the right religion when your faith teaches that, while it may be the best representation of God's will on earth, it is not the only representation.

The Catholic faith does not teach that living on in the afterlife is reserved only for Catholics, or even only for people of Abrahamic faiths. God is taught to be the judge of a person's true intent. Anybody, whether they are Hindu, Atheist, or anything else can be able to live on in 'Heaven' if they are of truly good intent in their souls. The Faith teaches that God is complete mercy. 'Hell' may very well be empty.

I agree that it could be terribly hard to belong to a religion that wants to say that only they themselves deserve 'Heaven', or whatever they may call it.

But regardless, I don't believe in the existence of God because of science. I have believe in the existence of God through faith, because I am open to the possibility that there are things we cannot discover through natural, physical science.

(I see you're another ENTP :hi: You seem to have taken the more standard ENTP route in your beliefs, or lack thereof. More power to you!)

Thx for the feedback. I wasn't attacking you just discussing, thx for seeing it for what it was. Usually people get angry. It's boring.

 

[DoctorCroupy#9]

Thx for the feedback. I wasn't attacking you just discussing, thx for seeing it for what it was. Usually people get angry. It's boring.

No problem! And thanks for not seeing my rebuttal as an attack.
We ENTPs get each other haha

 

[jcloudz]

Hail satan

 

[Mole]

I'm actually a Catholic convert.

Protestantism teaches justification by Faith alone, while Catholicism scandalises Protestantism by teaching justification by Faith, Reason, and Good Works.

 

[DoctorCroupy#9]

Protestantism teaches justification by Faith alone, while Catholicism scandalises Protestantism by teaching justification by Faith, Reason, and Good Works.

Well that's a pretty simplified way of looking at these things

First of all, there are many, many kinds of Protestantism, and not all Protestantism is of the "by faith alone" brand.

Secondly, that statement makes it sound like Catholics believe you must work your way into Heaven, and that just isn't representative of the Catholic faith at all.

I'd like to point out that a very large portion of Protestantism believes that those who never accept Jesus as their personal savior in this life (whether they had the chance to hear of Christianity in their culture or not) are going straight to Hell.

Meanwhile, Catholicism puts no limitations on God's mercy for who is/is not saved. Catholic doctrine actually says that ANY person has the possibility of Heaven, regardless of if they are Catholic or not.
Just because Catholics believe that with true faith should come good works because of belief in the faith (Reasonable assumption, I'd say ), doesn't mean that one must do certain "Good Works" to get to Heaven. There are many different, unknown paths to Heaven.

Hence why I follow Catholic beliefs rather than Protestant beliefs: I believe that God is merciful, unlimited, and well beyond our simplistic knowledge.

Just to set the record straight

 

[Kanra Jest]

I believe in Truth Seeking...

I gather knowledge from every source and see what little value (but still value) is there.

I am a very open minded skeptic with a largely abnormal view on things, yet logically sound.

I am all things. And yet I am nothing.

I. Am.

 

[Lark]

I think hedonism, not even a good sort of it either, is the unacknowledged religion of the world at present.

 

[Mole]

Well that's a pretty simplified way of looking at these things

First of all, there are many, many kinds of Protestantism, and not all Protestantism is of the "by faith alone" brand.

Secondly, that statement makes it sound like Catholics believe you must work your way into Heaven, and that just isn't representative of the Catholic faith at all.

I'd like to point out that a very large portion of Protestantism believes that those who never accept Jesus as their personal savior in this life (whether they had the chance to hear of Christianity in their culture or not) are going straight to Hell.

Meanwhile, Catholicism puts no limitations on God's mercy for who is/is not saved. Catholic doctrine actually says that ANY person has the possibility of Heaven, regardless of if they are Catholic or not.
Just because Catholics believe that with true faith should come good works because of belief in the faith (Reasonable assumption, I'd say ), doesn't mean that one must do certain "Good Works" to get to Heaven. There are many different, unknown paths to Heaven.

Hence why I follow Catholic beliefs rather than Protestant beliefs: I believe that God is merciful, unlimited, and well beyond our simplistic knowledge.

Just to set the record straight

Well, to set the record straight, it seems you are confusing Protestantism and Catholicism.

To understand Protestantism and Catholicism it is necessary to understand their histories and their historical interactions.

And it seems to me that you neither understand the history nor the dogma of Protestantism or Catholicism.

Yet with great self confidence you pontificate on the meaning of both.

And although you claim to be Catholic convert, it seems you are informed by a combination of American Protestantism and New Age philosophy.

 

[DoctorCroupy#9]

Well, to set the record straight, it seems you are confusing Protestantism and Catholicism.

To understand Protestantism and Catholicism it is necessary to understand their histories and their historical interactions.

And it seems to me that you neither understand the history nor the dogma of Protestantism or Catholicism.

Yet with great self confidence you pontificate on the meaning of both.

And although you claim to be Catholic convert, it seems you are informed by a combination of American Protestantism and New Age philosophy.

Well, that's an interesting response! Now that you've made it clear you believe I'm wrong, care to show me how I'm wrong?

I have a pretty good knowledge of Christian history, though this isn't really a historical debate; It's more of a theological/philosophical one.

Regardless, here are some quotes from the Catholic Catechism, so you can correct yourself and understand that what I've said thus far is consistent with Catholic belief:





For the truths that concern the relations between God and man wholly transcend the visible order of things, and, if they are translated into human action and influence it, they call for self-surrender and abnegation. The human mind, in its turn, is hampered in the attaining of such truths, not only by the impact of the senses and the imagination, but also by disordered appetites which are the consequences of original sin. So it happens that men in such matters easily persuade themselves that what they would not like to be true is false or at least doubtful (CCC 37)

...Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. (CCC 846)
this affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. (CCC 847)




As you can see, in CCC 37, The Catholic Catechism teaches that humans can easily persuade themselves that there is nothing past the physical, scientific world, and thus believe there is no God.
In CCC 846-847, the Catechism goes on to say that those who are ignorant of the faith and God, but still follow God's will by listening to their conscience and living good lives, may also have eternal life.
Hence me saying that non Catholics of all kinds can possibly achieve eternal life depending on their individual circumstances and character.

If you doubt this, go online or to a local parish and ask a priest
(Heck, just from a quick google, I've already seen an "ask a priest" style search result, where a priest of the Franciscan order answers the question in agreement with me )




Meanwhile, the majority Protestant denominations believe in "faith only" salvation, which is exactly what it says; one must have faith in Jesus Christ as their personal savior to have eternal life. No exceptions ("faith only" also means "only those with faith will be saved" )

Don't believe me? Ask a Southern Baptist or a Pentecostal, or some denominations of Presbyterians and Lutherans (All four of those groups rank as the largest Protestant denominations out there, after Anglicans and Methodists [which, it's worth noting that some Anglican and Methodist denominations agree with "faith alone"]).

Of course, not all Protestant denominations hold that limited view of God's mercy.





Regardless, I hope this shows you that it is, in fact, you who is confused here.




No offense, but your surface-level reading of what "Protestants believe" and "Catholics believe" truly is inaccurate.

I question how much research you actually did before making your claims... Not that I hold your misunderstandings on the subject against you.

You are a secular humanist, after all, and this stuff isn't exactly common knowledge for people outside of the faith (though you may have at one time been a Catholic, I don't know; if you were, it appears you weren't properly catechized).




EDIT: Also, sorry for writing a novel here didn't realize how long it was. When I'm right about something, I get carried away (ENTP, here). Plus, this is a subject I love discussing.

 

[Thalassa]

Well that's a pretty simplified way of looking at these things

First of all, there are many, many kinds of Protestantism, and not all Protestantism is of the "by faith alone" brand.

Secondly, that statement makes it sound like Catholics believe you must work your way into Heaven, and that just isn't representative of the Catholic faith at all.

I'd like to point out that a very large portion of Protestantism believes that those who never accept Jesus as their personal savior in this life (whether they had the chance to hear of Christianity in their culture or not) are going straight to Hell.

Meanwhile, Catholicism puts no limitations on God's mercy for who is/is not saved. Catholic doctrine actually says that ANY person has the possibility of Heaven, regardless of if they are Catholic or not.
Just because Catholics believe that with true faith should come good works because of belief in the faith (Reasonable assumption, I'd say ), doesn't mean that one must do certain "Good Works" to get to Heaven. There are many different, unknown paths to Heaven.

Hence why I follow Catholic beliefs rather than Protestant beliefs: I believe that God is merciful, unlimited, and well beyond our simplistic knowledge.

Just to set the record straight

Yes see, I did think that what I believe is closer to Catholicism. I just cannot deal with all of the Constantine hokey pokey.

 

[Thalassa]

Protestantism teaches justification by Faith alone, while Catholicism scandalises Protestantism by teaching justification by Faith, Reason, and Good Works.

Well to be fair, the Catholic emphasis on good works makes them less likely to be corporate humping American "I haz Jeezus" jerks who could apparently not only not care less about the needy, but who apparently openly despise the poor, sick and lost. This weird emphasis some Evangelicals have on faith alone is exactly what leads them to condemn others to hell fire, even as they eat the carcasses of the destitute with a super size cola.

I'm not in any way defending pedophilia, or excommunication, or any of that - but I really have to applaud Catholics for having a much more transcendental understanding of ethics, morality and the sacredness of life.

James 2: 14-26

Faith Without Works Is Dead

14 What does it profit, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can faith save him? 15 If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, 16 and one of you says to them, “Depart in peace, be warmed and filled,” but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit? 17 Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your[a] works, and I will show you my faith by my works. 19 You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble! 20 But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?[c] 21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered Isaac his son on the altar? 22 Do you see that faith was working together with his works, and by works faith was made perfect? 23 And the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.”[d] And he was called the friend of God. 24 You see then that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only.

25 Likewise, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out another way?

26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also."

 

[Thalassa]

Well, that's an interesting response! Now that you've made it clear you believe I'm wrong, care to show me how I'm wrong?

I have a pretty good knowledge of Christian history, though this isn't really a historical debate; It's more of a theological/philosophical one.

Regardless, here are some quotes from the Catholic Catechism, so you can correct yourself and understand that what I've said thus far is consistent with Catholic belief:





For the truths that concern the relations between God and man wholly transcend the visible order of things, and, if they are translated into human action and influence it, they call for self-surrender and abnegation. The human mind, in its turn, is hampered in the attaining of such truths, not only by the impact of the senses and the imagination, but also by disordered appetites which are the consequences of original sin. So it happens that men in such matters easily persuade themselves that what they would not like to be true is false or at least doubtful (CCC 37)

...Hence they could not be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it. (CCC 846)
this affirmation is not aimed at those who, through no fault of their own, do not know Christ and his Church: Those who, through no fault of their own, do not know the Gospel of Christ or his Church, but who nevertheless seek God with a sincere heart, and, moved by grace, try in their actions to do his will as they know it through the dictates of their conscience—those too may achieve eternal salvation. (CCC 847)




As you can see, in CCC 37, The Catholic Catechism teaches that humans can easily persuade themselves that there is nothing past the physical, scientific world, and thus believe there is no God.
In CCC 846-847, the Catechism goes on to say that those who are ignorant of the faith and God, but still follow God's will by listening to their conscience and living good lives, may also have eternal life.
Hence me saying that non Catholics of all kinds can possibly achieve eternal life depending on their individual circumstances and character.

If you doubt this, go online or to a local parish and ask a priest
(Heck, just from a quick google, I've already seen an "ask a priest" style search result, where a priest of the Franciscan order answers the question in agreement with me )




Meanwhile, the majority Protestant denominations believe in "faith only" salvation, which is exactly what it says; one must have faith in Jesus Christ as their personal savior to have eternal life. No exceptions ("faith only" also means "only those with faith will be saved" )

Don't believe me? Ask a Southern Baptist or a Pentecostal, or some denominations of Presbyterians and Lutherans (All four of those groups rank as the largest Protestant denominations out there, after Anglicans and Methodists [which, it's worth noting that some Anglican and Methodist denominations agree with "faith alone"]).

Of course, not all Protestant denominations hold that limited view of God's mercy.





Regardless, I hope this shows you that it is, in fact, you who is confused here.




No offense, but your surface-level reading of what "Protestants believe" and "Catholics believe" truly is inaccurate.

I question how much research you actually did before making your claims... Not that I hold your misunderstandings on the subject against you.

You are a secular humanist, after all, and this stuff isn't exactly common knowledge for people outside of the faith (though you may have at one time been a Catholic, I don't know; if you were, it appears you weren't properly catechized).




EDIT: Also, sorry for writing a novel here didn't realize how long it was. When I'm right about something, I get carried away (ENTP, here). Plus, this is a subject I love discussing.

Thank you for posting this. I also want to say that it's likely the Catholic emphasis on Reason or education (as [MENTION=3325]Mole[/MENTION] so lovingly pointed out) that leads them to apparently be able to actually read the Bible. ..because part of the reason for the way *some* Protestants behave or believe is due to picking and choosing verses out of context. I mean I just saw John 3:16 on a Forever 21 shopping bag, like that's all I need to know in life. Again *some* protestants and in America this absolutely has perverted things to a point to be hardly even recognizable to the life of Christ. I wonder if it occurred to many of these individuals that the verse that says no one comes to the Father except through the Son to stop and think that means trying to emulate Jesus' compassion rather than it meaning that everyone else is going to hell in a hand basket.

 

[Entp/infjGal]

I am weird. I have been Catholic in belief for the longest time. But I am also very fond of certain forms of Buddhist meditation like metta. I think it's is compatible with the Catholic definition of love. The catechism teaches: To love is to will the good of another. We have an obligation to will the good of all people without exception. Whenever we find ourselves desiring another's suffering, that is hate and always evil or intrinsically evil to use Catholic language. That agrees with the practice of metta which is a focused form of "willing the good of all". I personally believe these two to be complementary.

I was drawn to and became Catholic very young because of the unparalleled (to me) emphasis on unconditional love as the ultimate good and the primary spiritual law. This primacy of love is the lense through which catholic interpretstion of scripture is done and how catholic doctrine has been built overvthe centuries. Catholic saints live and breathe this like their own special oxygen.

But Catholic emphasis and practice is I think lacking when it comes to our relationship with ourselves! To be a devout and faithful Catholic means to be completely subordinated to an interior obligation NEVER TO DELIBERATELY HARM OR DESIRE THE HARM OF OTHERS. To do that is to go contrary to the beat of Jesus' heart whose entire message and life was capital LOVE. But unhealthy elements come in because some then tend to hate the Self while loving the other. This is not part of the faith but a real tendency that I think comes up because of a vacuum in the emphases and practices.

I love Buddhism and especially meta because I think it teaches well how to live with oneself. And this also agrees with Catholic faith which teaches us that being itself, existence, is good. The Catholic definition of evil is an absence of goodness where it should be. Catholics don't believe evil has being. So hate is the condition of lacking good will etc. This means that we can accept ourselves as part of that goodness God has made, unconditionally without falling into pride...the sin every devout Catholic fears or the ultimate sin per Catholic spiritual view. Catholics fear loving on self in the way Lucifer did. But i think this is fear of narcissism and a good deal of pop psychology confirms their worst fears since it encourages narcissism.

I love Buddhist metta because it teaches self acceptance in a way that avoids the narcissistic trap catholics fear. In metta, the idea is that one cannot love others well while hating or rejecting oneself. Freeing ourselves through acceptance allows us to will for others just as we will for ourselves.

So one first wishes oneself the four wishes: Happiness, health, Life of ease (not lack), wellness, or whatever one currently conceives as goodness or happiness. You say "may I be happy, may I be well..." etc etc. A Catholic can easily see in this a prayer. So these wishes may be easily directed to that benevolent one from whom we expect all provision. In metta, one actually cultivates genuine feeling of good will by first focusing on things we already feel such sweetness for such as our child, pet, even a baby on the Internet that we don't know. Whatever is easy to give this straight positive feeling to. For many people it is themsekves and for many others, they hate thrmselves so chose somethjnb else. Then one adds more and more persons into this pool of positive regard or compassion, until one comes to add people we find it hardest to like, progressively towards those we may even hate and eventally the whole world. I once did this and found it be a genuine practice of the "love others as yourself" command. Because one wishes for others, including those seriously disliked, exactly that same goodness they wish for themselves!

Many catholics would caution my spiritual adventurism. Right now, I am in a weird spiritual space and sort of reconsidering some things. But I am so deeply attached to my Catholic identity. I love being Catholic. I also sort of love being some form of Buddhist-flavoured Catholic.

 

[Yama]

I'm not religious. I don't consider myself to be an atheist or agnostic either. Just "None." I have 0 interest in the subject. It bores me to tears.

If it's your cup of tea that's great for you though. As long as it doesn't affect my life.

 

[Thalassa]

I am weird. I have been Catholic in belief for the longest time. But I am also very fond of certain forms of Buddhist meditation like metta. I think it's is compatible with the Catholic definition of love. The catechism teaches: To love is to will the good of another. We have an obligation to will the good of all people without exception. Whenever we find ourselves desiring another's suffering, that is hate and always evil or intrinsically evil to use Catholic language. That agrees with the practice of metta which is a focused form of "willing the good of all". I personally believe these two to be complementary.

I was drawn to and became Catholic very young because of the unparalleled (to me) emphasis on unconditional love as the ultimate good and the primary spiritual law. This primacy of love is the lense through which catholic interpretstion of scripture is done and how catholic doctrine has been built overvthe centuries. Catholic saints live and breathe this like their own special oxygen.

But Catholic emphasis and practice is I think lacking when it comes to our relationship with ourselves! To be a devout and faithful Catholic means to be completely subordinated to an interior obligation NEVER TO DELIBERATELY HARM OR DESIRE THE HARM OF OTHERS. To do that is to go contrary to the beat of Jesus' heart whose entire message and life was capital LOVE. But unhealthy elements come in because some then tend to hate the Self while loving the other. This is not part of the faith but a real tendency that I think comes up because of a vacuum in the emphases and practices.

I love Buddhism and especially meta because I think it teaches well how to live with oneself. And this also agrees with Catholic faith which teaches us that being itself, existence, is good. The Catholic definition of evil is an absence of goodness where it should be. Catholics don't believe evil has being. So hate is the condition of lacking good will etc. This means that we can accept ourselves as part of that goodness God has made, unconditionally without falling into pride...the sin every devout Catholic fears or the ultimate sin per Catholic spiritual view. Catholics fear loving on self in the way Lucifer did. But i think this is fear of narcissism and a good deal of pop psychology confirms their worst fears since it encourages narcissism.

I love Buddhist metta because it teaches self acceptance in a way that avoids the narcissistic trap catholics fear. In metta, the idea is that one cannot love others well while hating or rejecting oneself. Freeing ourselves through acceptance allows us to will for others just as we will for ourselves.

So one first wishes oneself the four wishes: Happiness, health, Life of ease (not lack), wellness, or whatever one currently conceives as goodness or happiness. You say "may I be happy, may I be well..." etc etc. A Catholic can easily see in this a prayer. So these wishes may be easily directed to that benevolent one from whom we expect all provision. In metta, one actually cultivates genuine feeling of good will by first focusing on things we already feel such sweetness for such as our child, pet, even a baby on the Internet that we don't know. Whatever is easy to give this straight positive feeling to. For many people it is themsekves and for many others, they hate thrmselves so chose somethjnb else. Then one adds more and more persons into this pool of positive regard or compassion, until one comes to add people we find it hardest to like, progressively towards those we may even hate and eventally the whole world. I once did this and found it be a genuine practice of the "love others as yourself" command. Because one wishes for others, including those seriously disliked, exactly that same goodness they wish for themselves!

Many catholics would caution my spiritual adventurism. Right now, I am in a weird spiritual space and sort of reconsidering some things. But I am so deeply attached to my Catholic identity. I love being Catholic. I also sort of love being some form of Buddhist-flavoured Catholic.

Wow excellent post. I learned to do that meditation in a vinyasa restorative yoga class.

Love others as you love yourself. ..so if you don't love yourself very much, what sort of love can you give to others, is it a dreary, grudging drudgery, something sad and full of deprivation? I honestly think that's the issue many, many non-believers have...and some religious people do as well, which is why they feel victimized.

I think that's how abuse creeps into religion. When people forget to love others AS THEMSELVES not "instead of themselves."

Thank you so much for your post. It's right on, at least with what I perceive.

I think the fear/danger comes in when people also don't see the big picture. One of the problems I began to have with the church of liberalism (I used to be a very mainstream liberal agnostic spiritual shopper) is that it tends to abuse the concept in the direction of narcissism, even though well meaning. Like I have seen people blow a fuse over my suggestion that perhaps people shouldn't be buying red meat with food stamps - this makes me an evil conservative. They apparently not understanding that I am a vegetarian myself and the very idea that we can all be gluttons in equality is killing nearly a billion other people in other parts of the world of starvation.

I think Pope Francis'Laudato Si is absolutely brilliant. Even if he doesn't support non-traditional marriage, it's just brilliant.

 

[Cowardly]

I was raised in Catholicism. Abandoned it in my early teens. The controlling nature of Christianity is not something I'll tolerate in my personal life as long as I have a choice.

I'm an agnostic today. I have identified as an atheist previously but I abandoned it. It doesn't suit my beliefs.

Having said that, I'm very interested in ancient religions.

 

[Lark]

I was raised in Catholicism. Abandoned it in my early teens. The controlling nature of Christianity is not something I'll tolerate in my personal life as long as I have a choice.

I'm an agnostic today. I have identified as an atheist previously but I abandoned it. It doesn't suit my beliefs.

Having said that, I'm very interested in ancient religions.

I'm sorry you found it controlling, I wont deny some people experience it that way and I think its a shame, since my experience is the opposite.

 

[Mole]

I question how much research you actually did before making your claims... Not that I hold your misunderstandings on the subject against you.

You are a secular humanist, after all, and this stuff isn't exactly common knowledge for people outside of the faith (though you may have at one time been a Catholic, I don't know; if you were, it appears you weren't properly catechized).

I notice catholicism is very keen on healing the victims of child sexual abuse. Indeed they have a vehicle for their victims called Towards Healing.

But this is sheer chutzpah and deeply perverse as it is catholicism itself that has covered up child sexual abuse for hundreds of years. And so it is catholicism that is diseased and needs healing.

So catholicism has not repented massive child sexual abuse over centuries and still blames the victims and exonerates the abusing bishops. And not one bishop has been sent to goal.

But don't take my word for it, read one of your own, directly involved in taking care of child abusing priests. Click on Interview with Richard Sipe

 

[Smilephantomhive]

I'm very agnostic. Some days I'm like maybe God does exist, but other days I am quite certain that there is none. I was raised a Christian, but I never went to church or read the bible. I'm agnostic because there is not evidence, and it's hard to believe something without any proof.

 

[fetus]

Is it possible to be an agnostic Christian? If so, that's what I am.