Heh. This reminds me of something I thought this morning. I awoke to the news that President Bush will be at John Paul's funeral. I know that many (not all, but many) of the "evangelical bloc" that had a large part in electing Bush are also the type who have heartily bought into the time-worn early Reformation propaganda that all Catholics are going to hell. I wonder how those folks feel about Bush going to the funeral of the head of the Catholic Church.

I wonder if Kerry was invited - or is his lack of Communion worse than Bush's Protestant apostacy?

jason

 

Agreed - very well said. I intend to respond, but it will take a bit of typing, so I'll save it when it not on my employers time . Check back tonight.

 

This is my opinion (some of you may have read this opinion before in other threads/sections of the forums):

If there is a singular god that controls who does and doesn't get into heaven, then noone on this planet who practices an organized religion will go to heaven. Every organized religion has been tied to horrible acts of violence, prejudice, etc, that 'god' would certainly be pissed about. And by practicing a given religion, you are condoning everything they have done and will do (because you think that they are the correct religion, so god must like everything they do...). In this way, anyone who actively practices Christianity (in all its forms including Catholicism), Judaism, or Islam is going to hell because the establishments themselves have been corrupted. The only people who will NOT go to hell are those that, regardless of their personal beliefs, treat everyone they encounter with respect and additionally have a high appreciation for life. So, while I see that the pope lived his life in such a way that should get him in to heaven, he made the mistake of becoming the figure head for one of the most morally corrupt establishments in the history of human life. Therefore, he will go to hell because he was the leader of the Catholic church...even though he lived his life with compassion, respect, and appreciation for human life.

 

You do realize that "organization" has nothing to do with your argument? Every human being has been tied to horrible acts of violence, prejudice, etc, that God would certainly be pissed about. This would imply then that existing as a human being has pre-condenmed us all, by your own standard. But since you have an obvious gripe about organized religion, I'll respond accordingly...

In religions other than Christianity (I realizing I am generalizing), god expects that people try harder, and if they don't there's a problem in the relationship between god and humanity. In this dynamic you have a cruel cycle of a god creating people to follow him, they fail, he gets "pissed", So this god designs a way for them to be absolved... only for them to sin again. He gets "pissed". So this god designs a way... etc... etc. In this format humanity persues this god. Humanity is always trying to make itself acceptable to this god. Usually the the coming of heaven is defined by some time when humanity finally gets it right and everyone finally figures out through grim determination how to love one another and some messianic age begins.

Christianity is the opposite. In the Christian faith, in full realization that humanity is incapable of being true to himself, God still pursues humanity in every self-extending way. He's not judging by behavior but by allegience. Suddenly you have the freedom to fail. This is not some license to do whatever you please - rememeber we're talking about allegiance to God. So success or failure is not the keys to Heaven or Hell, but merely to want to be with God and to be allied with God is what makes us heavenly. The problem is that we prone to worship success, effectiveness and perfection that we cannot accept that a spiritual walk is a process of changing from old allegiances to new allegiances. They think if you say "Jesus is Lord", you'd better be perfect from that moment on. Well you should be, but God already is aware of our actual ability. I know at this point people want to throw verses at me that say "Go and sin no more", but then you can go back and read the things in previous posts I said about theological context and all that. So the Christian version of the coming of heaven is based upon promises that God has already made and not humanity's grim determination to be good people. So Heaven ins't come down by our actions, but by the actions that God has already done in Jesus Christ. So everything is the work of God - even the sin of humanity does not stop what he's accomplishing. Even horrible acts of violence, prejudice, etc. are not going to stop God from using the people he has pursued.

jason

p.s. If you think "merely to want to be with God and to be allied with God is what makes us heavenly" sounds too easy and full of fluff, think about how much your cherish your "freedom" to do what you want, when you want, how you want and to whom you want, to live life with your personal goals, to choose morality as you see fit, etc. Now think about what is like to give up those rights because you believe that God has already figured out those things by design. Suddenly wanting to be with and be allied with God sounds very offensive to your American sensibilities, doesn't it?

 

Organization has everything to do with my argument. Being born a human is not a choice. Therefore all humans are not joined by the same type of 'bond' that members of a religion are, and so the acts of all humans do not reflect on all other humans. And so being human has not pre-condemned us all. Religions, however, are voluntary. By joining a religion, you condone everything that religion has done over the course of history (because you believe that your religion is the only correct one...)
An example: The **** party. You can't call yourself a **** and expect people will like you, because we will never forgive what they did. Just like we should never forgive the Catholic church for being so corrupt as to have priests that molest children. Or how we should never forgive all of Christianity for the Crusades (which were just as bloody and prejudice as the **** regime's actions...)

The act of organizing a religion inherently gives a small group of people power over a much larger group of people based on faith in a higher being. This leads, invariably, to someone taking advantage of that power and corrupting the system/establishment/church. This has happened with every organized religion without fail. If 'god' does exist, he wouldn't endorse any of the organized religions for the very fact that they are organized.

On a personal level, religion can be an infinitely valuble tool for self-enrichment and for creating a universal respect for each other. Organizing religion corrupts it completely and irreversibly.

 

i believe this is what is known as his "unconditional love" for mankind

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...s_050404160051

 

how can you forget those who would bomb and terrorize other countries and uses their religion(islam) and Allah as defense for their actions

i did not know that the **** party was considered a religion??

 

**** is not a religion, that's why the comparison works. It was an organization of men who all thought they were doing what was right. But some of them did really really bad things. So to be afiliated with that organization is bad.
Just like the Catholic church is an organization of men who think they are doing what's right. But some of them did (and still do) really really bad things. So, in my opinion, to be afiliated with that organization is bad.

And you're right, I am condeming Islam as well. I didn't forget them. They're wrong to use their religion to justify killing. But so were the Christians on the crusades. And so are the Palestinians and Jews for killing eachother over their respective religions.

Read my first post, I said that all organized religions (by that I mean all types of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hindu...) are bad.

 

So are you an Atheist???

 

You argument contains the idea that everyone in a group is a single organism, without dissent or individual responsibility. If you want to be called a ****, well inhernt are all the things inherent in hitlerism" ( since being a "national socialst" is not necessarily being a **** of the Hitler sort.). So, yes, you cannot call yourself a **** without identifying with hate and genocide, etc. However, being a Catholic does not mean you are instantly a direct party to all the terrible things the Catholic Church has done over time. It would simple be stupid to say that Saint Augustine or Saint Francis of Assissi, or Mother Theresa (to name some you probaly have heard of) are equatable with infamous Inquisitor Bernard Gui as depicted in The Name of the Rose. It would also be stupid to say that the Catholic Church of 1340 is the same Catholic Church of 2005. The development of doctrine and character abounds! What you are saying is tantamount to saying that all Germans are *****, i.e. all Catholics are hateful. Many, many Germans in WWII were very patriotic and loved their country but hated what the Hitler regime was up to. It is the same in Catholicism. There are many Catholics who love their faith and hate the evil from evil people who have made their way up the ranks. Its a human institution.

Look, I'm not saying human history is devoid of precedent for what you say. Any human instituion is susceptable to human frailty and corruption. But this idea that you have that individuals are some sort of autonomous angels is rediculous. Believe it or not, there are child molestors who are not part of organized religion. Really, to me, it sounds like you've had some bad experiences, a selective reading of history and have some very personal bones to pick. While perhaps some Catholics believe you have to agree with everything the Catholic Church has ever done, that is simply not actual Catholic doctrine. Catholics are faith-bound to find the doctrine of Cathiolicism infallable, but that is a far cry from condoning its actions as an institution. Catholicism has apologized for and recanted statements and actions throughout history that it has later seen as wrong.

Lastly, your experience with "organized" religion is either very small or grossly one sided. I know of countless religious congregations where corruption is not the standard, and usually non-existant. But, on the other hand, where you find people working together, who live transparently purposefully to fight private, personal corruption... which in turn nips communal (organized) corruption in the bud. There are large chunks of my experience which are the opposite of yours. Your statements are not universally true.

jason

 

Aparently one of two that saw this other thread:

https://www.i-club.com/forums/showth...hlight=atheist

 

You know what gets me about this, is that condoms are 99% effective. So that's millions of opportunities every day for AIDS to spread, even if everyone used condoms. On the other hand, if for 2 generations people had sex with only one partner, whatever your sexual orientation, AIDS would disappear. 100% effective.

If people actually were that concerned about AIDS they'd follow the most effective course for doing away with it. Blaming the edpidemic on a lack of condoms is just a scapegoat for personal responsibility against the spread of AIDS. To whine and say "its an unreasonable expectation" is just another way to say "I refuse to expect people to do whats best for themselves to not get AIDS".

jason

p.s. please dont tell me about fringe case of mysterious contraction or blood transfuctions etc...

 

Well, guess that makes me bad then...
All i know is that no matter what your affiliations are, if you kill, rape, steal, or commit any sin...you have done wrong and should repent for such sin.
And those not affiliated and even you....not being affiliated to any of them, would still be bad if you killed or raped and should repent and suffer whatever consequence. So to generalize against these religions as "bad", who has a few bad apples mixed within them (just like every affiliations known to man, religion or not) is wrong.

not all catholics are corrupt and killers, not all muslims, hindus, protestants are molesters, or murderers...because if we were all what you say we are based on our choice of faith and spirituality, i don't know what the world would be like right now. Mankind would have been non existent right after these different faiths were established. With all the violence and hate, we would wipe each other out.

But we are still here.....

 

No it doesn't, it says that every member of a group represents the whole of the group and if that person does not want to be associated with the bad parts of that group, they should not call themsleves a member of that group.


Yes, I know that bad things are not done exclusively by members of certain churches. I also know that there have been some great people that were Catholic.

But the Catholic church is a corrupt organization. Corrupt organizations that aren't religions are considered evil. But somehow religious organizations, despite being among the most corrupt organizations of all time, are somehow excused from being labeled as evil. That's really what my point is.

Actually, I've had no bad experiences with religion. I've taken 4 history of religion classes (all of my GE classes... so you're right I'm not a theocratic expert). And I have nothing personal against any of my friends/relatives/aquantinces that are religious. I just think that if a singular god does exist, he would HATE all the churches and religions that have been set up in his name because they have contributed so heavily to the evil side of humanity.