Defence Of Catholic Teaching

[tightbreeks]

I think religion has got to have a lot to do with timing. once we became interested in the question of justifying our existence, we looked upwards to try and find an explanation for human kind, and with our limited scientific knowledge, icons, symbology and a charismatic story teller propelled a certain mr jesus who had it all.

 

in far more recent times, Ghandi and martin luther king showed that timing and charisma are winners.

 

the brother in law's dad is Italian, and like many Italians resents the wealth of the Vatican, and also the dodgy self-policing on suspect priests.

 

on the other hand if it gives you comfort then good stuff.

 

what about dinosaurs, that wasn't really on the agenda way back when jeebus was hanging out with his entourage.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Perhaps you can enlighten us to the science that the catholic church has contributed to.

 

You mean you are on here shouting the odds, while you really dont know?

 

The Church has made massive contribution in every field.

 

Just off the top of my head: Catholic clerics:

 

- invented the big bang theory (Fr Georges Lamaitre)

 

- invented modern genetics theory (Fr Gregor Mendel)

 

- formulated a comprehensive heliocentric cosmology which displaced the Earth from the centre of the universe. (Fr Nicholas Copernicus - thats right, Galileos work was not complete).

 

- developed Astronomy (many stars are named after the Jesuit Priests who first discovered them). The Jesuits were the first to observe Saturns rings and many other space phenomenon.

 

- developed Seismology (which is coloquially known as "The Jesuit Science").

 

- the Jesuit Order was described as "the single most important contributor to experimental physics in the seventeenth century", helping with the development of pendulum clocks, pantographs, barometers, reflecting telescopes and microscopes.

 

The Church contribution to science - from both lay people and clergymen - is phenomenal. Here is some info to start to get you up to speed:

 

"Many Roman Catholic clerics throughout history have made significant contributions to science. These cleric-scientists include such illustrious names as Nicolaus Copernicus, Gregor Mendel, Georges Lemaître, Albertus Magnus, Roger Bacon, Pierre Gassendi, Roger Joseph Boscovich, Marin Mersenne, Bernard Bolzano, Francesco Maria Grimaldi, Nicole Oresme, Jean Buridan, Robert Grosseteste, Christopher Clavius, Nicolas Steno, Athanasius Kircher, Giovanni Battista Riccioli, William of Ockham, and others listed below. The Catholic Church has also produced many lay scientists and mathematicians"

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Catholic_cleric-scientists

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Catholic_scientists

 

Putting Gallileo under house arrest for suggesting the earth revolved around the sun wouldn't be one of course.

 

You cant use one single instance to discredit the entire contribution - talk about cheap shots.

 

Thats like someone rubbishing all science, based on the fact science was previously wrong that the universe had always existed.

 

Only a rise of 40k Catholics in 10 years how does that equate as a percentage of the population?

 

It was the exact same rise % as the overall population experienced, meaning the Catholic population has stayed constant at 16% of the overall population.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

A wee google of "Glasgow City Council Catholic Mafia" would seem it's not just about the company I keep as it is something that is said.

Perhaps you just lead a sheltered life in your wee christian bubble.

 

 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/07/rang-j01.html

 

Whether there is any agenda in that name or something else but it is not an agenda I have.

 

I wouldnt say that an unsubtantated single sentence on a socialist (communist) website is adequate proof that Glasgow is or was controlled by a "Catholic Mafia".

 

You know, people in Scotland used to say the Pope wore a dress to hide his cloven hooves, but thats not true either.

 

I once saw a recording of a debate at Glasgow University, (from the 1980s) where it was suggested by a Protestant Clergyman (Jack Glass) that the main point of Catholic schools was to provide recruits for the P.I.R.A. It turns out that isnt true either.

 

I guess the moral is - dont believe everything you hear!

 

Edit - people in Scotland also used to say that Catholics were not allowed to read the Bible. My wife has two friends who go to the Church of Scotland, and they were shocked to learn that I owned a Bible. And - most sincerely - they asked my wife "and is he allowed to read it?"

 

I told her to tell them that I wasnt allowed to read it, and that the priest came around weekly to check the cellophane wrapper was still on it

 

Its not true that Catholics arent allowed to read the Bible

[Clydeside_Sheep]

CS - What's the church's stance on Catholics marrying non-Catholics?? Thought that didn't go down well...

 

You can marry a non-Catholic if you want (they are not really that bad :laughing).

 

I did. So did my sister. And my mum. And my gran. And indeed over 50% of all Scottish Catholics.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

He's started a thread called 'Defence of Catholic Teaching' and has only gone on to do a fine job in highlighting just how ridiculous, bigoted and backwards the religion really is. There's no point in having this thread because he'd attempt to argue that pigs could fly if the catholic church said they could.

 

Oh im hurt,. and after the effort I put in to clearly explaning and justifying Catholic morality on sexuality - which is,after all, only really common sense.

 

You dont have many counter arguments, only bluster and name calling.

 

Me, I prefer facts and data, when it comes to analysing these things.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Hilarious coming from an organisation that hoards gold and wealth like Scrooge McDuck.

 

 

And why is it that, in your view, Catholics are not allowed to build beautiful buildings or 'things' in honour of God?

 

You know how:

 

- the Church provides 25% of the worlds total healthcare provision

- the Church is the largest non-governmental body in the world

- the Church spends billions on the poor/needy per annum

 

weeeeell.....I dunno how to break it to you......but......these things cost money.

 

Therefore, we need a bit of money.

 

The annual turn-over of the Vatican is comfortably less than that of a top-rank European football club (eg Real Madrid or Man U) and it is not uncommon for it to post an annual deficit.

 

But you would only know these things if you gave the Church a fair crack of the whip.....which you dont!

[Clydeside_Sheep]

I have been to St Peters a few times and although architecturally it is awesome it is disturbing how much money has been put into it.

 

The money for Catholic Churches is donated by the Catholic faithful.

 

Do you resent this? Why?

 

You admit its a beautiful building - surely then, mankind is the better for its existence?

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Catholics = inequitable distribution of wealth

 

Jings what an oaf. See these 2010/11 figures:

 

Real Madrid FC turnover: £433 million

 

Barcelona FC turnover: £407 million

 

Manchester FC turnover: £331.4 million

 

Vatican turnover: £200.15 million ($326 million)

 

http://www.worldstatesmen.org/Vatican.html

http://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/business/business-news/manchester-united-stay-top-of-uk-1218181

 

Clearly we can see who is rolling in money and who spends millions on utter frivolity.

 

Its always a good idea to be informed about things, before opening your mouth

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Not really Catholicism, but here'll do:

 

 

Hi Harcus

 

I agree with the court decision, you cant refuse people goods and services based on who they are.

 

But - hypocritically - there are many "gay only" hotels and establishments in places like London / Brighton etc.

 

I think there should be one rule for all, I dont think anyone should get special treatment.

[tightbreeks]

do you think devil worshipping, or what ever it's official name is, is a bona fide religion. after-all you can't have one without the other, so it's really 50/50 which team you're on.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

He's started a thread called 'Defence of Catholic Teaching'

 

I started it at your request, dickwad!

[Clydeside_Sheep]

do you think devil worshipping, or what ever it's official name is, is a bona fide religion.

 

Well, I suppose it was, up until they were liquidated last year

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Maybe some Catholic would be kind enough to explain the imagery behind this

 

Its an exceptionally ugly piece of modern art, which sould be melted down and made into chains.

 

These chains should then be padlocked to the artist, shortly before s/he is thrown into the sea as punishment for offences against art.

[fatjim]

 

I wouldnt say that an unsubtantated single sentence on a socialist (communist) website is adequate proof that Glasgow is or was controlled by a "Catholic Mafia".

 

You know, people in Scotland used to say the Pope wore a dress to hide his cloven hooves, but thats not true either.

 

I once saw a recording of a debate at Glasgow University, (from the 1980s) where it was suggested by a Protestant Clergyman (Jack Glass) that the main point of Catholic schools was to provide recruits for the P.I.R.A. It turns out that isnt true either.

 

I guess the moral is - dont believe everything you hear!

 

Edit - people in Scotland also used to say that Catholics were not allowed to read the Bible. My wife has two friends who go to the Church of Scotland, and they were shocked to learn that I owned a Bible. And - most sincerely - they asked my wife "and is he allowed to read it?"

 

I told her to tell them that I wasnt allowed to read it, and that the priest came around weekly to check the cellophane wrapper was still on it

 

Its not true that Catholics arent allowed to read the Bible

 

Another example off you being disingenuous. I merely pointed out that the council is sometimes known as the catholic mafia. You then had a go at me for the people I hang around with. I then show you an example of it being called that and stated that it wasn't my agenda but just that I heard that it was known as that. The content of the site I posted is irrelevant but the use of the term is proof that it is said.

 

Your sweet wee tale about having a bible and reading it doesn't really seem to have improved your reading skills.

 

As for the moral about not believing everything hear. Have you ever used that in church?

[Clydeside_Sheep]

many Italians resents the wealth of the Vatican

Is it really possible to resent the donations which people give to an organisation of their choice?

 

If they resent the Vaticans wealth, what must they think of football clubs? See the info I posted above.

on the other hand if it gives you comfort then good stuff.

Comfort, yes, but more important clarity.

 

Look at how secular society regards abortion, sexuality etc - its not accurate views, its self-interested pish, which denies reality to harmful effect.

 

On the other hand, 'our' view is demosntrably accurate and crystal clear.

 

Think that was the last post to field for now - Im off home!

[fatjim]

 

The money for Catholic Churches is donated by the Catholic faithful.

 

Do you resent this? Why?

 

You admit its a beautiful building - surely then, mankind is the better for its existence?

Why would opulence be beneficial to mankind?

 

Maybe as an example of how people can be greedy cunts in the name of their imaginary friend. Yes.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Another example off you being disingenuous. I merely pointed out that the council is sometimes known as the catholic mafia. You then had a go at me for the people I hang around with. I then show you an example of it being called that and stated that it wasn't my agenda but just that I heard that it was known as that. The content of the site I posted is irrelevant but the use of the term is proof that it is said.

I didnt have a go at you. I only pointed out that the things you hear relate to the quality of company you keep. Thats an accurate statement.

 

I can only advise you that, if you think there is some kind of discriminatory scheme in place at Glasgow City Council, to report this to the Police with all haste.

[fatjim]

I didnt have a go at you. I only pointed out that the things you hear relate to the quality of company you keep. Thats an accurate statement.I can only advise you that, if you think there is some kind of discriminatory scheme in place at Glasgow City Council, to report this to the Police with all haste.

You can advise that if you like but never at any point did I suggest such a thing.

 

You seem to make leaps very quickly. I guess a precedent was made with your leap of faith based on no evidence.

 

Again you comment on things you hear and yet you believe in god solely based on what you have heard.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Why would opulence be beneficial to mankind?

You didnt answer the question, but attempted to avoid it with another.

 

Normal people usually regard beautiful, awe-inspiring buiuldings as a positive, uplifing things. I can only pity those who dont. I suppose they are the nhilists who fail to see the good in anything.

 

Do you hate all impressive buildings - the Taj Mahal, The Alhambra Palace, The Blue Mosque, The Golden Temple, the Houses of Parliament, the Reichstag, Pittodrie Stadium etc - or is your ire reserved for this particular one?

Maybe as example of how people can be greedy cunts

Who is being a greey c*nt? No individual owns St Peters Basillica, it is no-one private property.

 

In a religious sense, you could say it belongs to all 1.2 billion Catholics.

 

In a cultural sense, it belongs to humanity.

 

It is part of the sum total of all human acheievement. Millions of people (of all faiths and none) enjoy visiting it every year.

 

If humans didnt build beautiful or impressive things, what would we visit when on our holidays?

[Master_of_Soulls]

Hey There C_S.

 

Was wanting to ask you this. In the thread previously, evolution was stated by a poster and how the CC stance is with it (or to that effect). You gave a brief mention to it before stating the subject didn't interest you - Why is that? Is it due to it conflicting with what you have been taught or what you believe - Not having a go here - I'm just curious.

 

Evolution helps explain, and gives thousands of examples, of the bio-diversity that we have on Earth. It also is the most logical explanation of how we (and other animals) got to this stage - Are the CC loathed to state that we are a higher form of primate that has evolved naturally?

[Clydeside_Sheep]

You can advise that if you like but never at any point did I suggest such a thing.

 

You seem to make leaps very quickly. I guess a precedent was made with your leap of faith based on no evidence.

 

Again you comment on things you hear and yet you believe in god solely based on what you have heard.

I didnt suggest that you had suggested such a thing, I only gave advicee based on what to do if that was indeed your opinion. (sophistry is tiring).

 

I dont believe in God solely based on "what I have heard" - speak for yourself about 'making leaps'.

 

Here and elsewhere I have talked of the various ways which people can find God, which includes philosophy, prayer, reflection etc.

 

Why is it that you are so obsessed with / threatend by the religious belief of others? I find this bizarre.

 

If you dont believe, why not just get on with your life? (like I did).

[fatjim]

You didnt answer the question, but attempted to avoid it with another.Normal people usually regard beautiful, awe-inspiring buiuldings as a positive, uplifing things. I can only pity those who dont. I suppose they are the nhilists who fail to see the good in anything.Do you hate all impressive buildings - the Taj Mahal, The Alhambra Palace, The Blue Mosque, The Golden Temple, the Houses of Parliament, the Reichstag, Pittodrie Stadium etc - or is your ire reserved for this particular one?Who is being a greey c*nt? No individual owns St Peters Basillica, it is no-one private property.In a religious sense, you could say it belongs to all 1.2 billion Catholics.In a cultural sense, it belongs to humanity.It is part of the sum total of all human acheievement. Millions of people (of all faiths and none) enjoy visiting it every year.If humans didnt build beautiful or impressive things, what would we visit when on our holidays?

It seemed more like a rhetorical question.

 

If you had asked. Do you think mankind is better off for its existence? Then I would have answered neither yes nor no. A building can be interesting to me in an architectural capacity but it is not for me to say that mankind has benefited from its existence as we will never know what things would have been like if it had never existed. It's just a facility to reel in more followers and more money to their cult. Is mankind better off with cults fleecing them out of their money on the basis that if they don't believe then a vengeful god will make eternity pretty shit

 

Not sure hate is a good word to use about my visit to the Vatican as if I hated it why did I go back a second and third time?

The deluded make it amusing though.

[fatjim]

I didnt suggest that you had suggested such a thing, I only gave advicee based on what to do if that was indeed your opinion. (sophistry is tiring).I dont believe in God solely based on "what I have heard" - speak for yourself about 'making leaps'.Here and elsewhere I have talked of the various ways which people can find God, which includes philosophy, prayer, reflection etc.Why is it that you are so obsessed with / threatend by the religious belief of others? I find this bizarre.If you dont believe, why not just get on with your life? (like I did).

Why are you obsessed with expressing your religion as if it actually means something?

 

So you read some philosophy, you made some prayers and you reflected, etc. you still took on those things due ostensibly to what you had initially heard from your indoctrination.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Hey There C_S.

Hi mate

Was wanting to ask you this. In the thread previously, evolution was stated by a poster and how the CC stance is with it (or to that effect). You gave a brief mention to it before stating the subject didn't interest you - Why is that?

Good question. It loose language to say I "wasnt interested". Of course I am. What I meant was that, it isnt an esepcially important topic for me, with regard to my faith or daily life. Often I feel it is held up as a deciding argument for one point of view or another.

 

Often when the subject comes up, it is a battleground between fundamentalist protestants and atheist people. Usually there is not much of a debate and the two sides simply both pour derision over each other. I think the concept is hijacked often to support various outlooks, both religious and atheist.

 

The way the topic is generally handled / kicked about doesnt interest me, is what I should have said. I have no interest in fights over knowledge, for me it would be much better if humanity worked together to try to understand (this and everything). Thats why I like the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, it is an international body of people of various faith and none, who work together to promote science and understanding, for the benefit of all.

 

In my view - If evolution is true, great. If its not, great. Life goes on in both cases. I dont see that it would change my view on anything, either way.

Is it due to it conflicting with what you have been taught or what you believe - Not having a go here - I'm just curious.

1st - do not worry about "having a go" - I do not take offence at questions, or different opinions. If you think (any) religion a load of bollocks, you are perfectly entitled to that opinion and I can have no complaint!

 

I attended Catholic primary and secondary schools. I am grateful for the quality education I received there, and - looking back as someone who hopes to try to start a family soon - also for the type of learning environment these schools provided.

 

At no point during this schooling was I ever taught anything remotely dubious, in terms of science. I wasnt taught anything much about Catholicism either (!) beyond that we humans should try be nice to one another. The schools follow the same national curriculum as other schools, the identity aspect manifests much more in terms of the ethos of the school.

 

So, no conflict in terms of what I have been taught by Catholic institutions.

 

As for what I believe: I believe God created the Universe and everything in it. If evolution is the practical mechanism of this end, or if it is not, is of no major consequence wrt faith, in my view.

Evolution helps explain, and gives thousands of examples, of the bio-diversity that we have on Earth. It also is the most logical explanation of how we (and other animals) got to this stage - Are the CC loathed to state that we are a higher form of primate that has evolved naturally?

Absolutely not - in fact the Church explicitly allows for the possibility that our physical bodies developed from previous biological forms.

 

I agree evolution is a logical explanation, in terms of explaning development after the big bang. (I did a bit of Astronomy as an elective class at uni - how planets and stars form and all that jazz).

 

It is interesting that the fossil record shows the opposite of what evolution predicts, and wonder if this is skirted over because other parts make sense. But then maybe we will discover a reason why the fossil record is different. I have no strong feeling either way.

 

I actually have a booklet summarising a scientific critique of evolution, from the Spienza University of Rome (a state funded instituion) from November 2008. I havent got round to reading it yet (!) but the topics are:

 

- experiments in stratification do not support the theory of evolution

- are radioactive dating methods reliable?

- the 2nd law of thermodynamics and evolution

- the concept of evolution in biology

- race formations and mutations do not constitute steps in evolution

 

As a Chemical Engineer, I will be particularly interested in the thermodynamics chapter. I have heard it said that evolution is impossible, according to the 2nd law. I have heard two different rebuttals, but think both of them are flawed:

 

1) The 2nd law only applies to closed systems and the earth is not a closed system (receives energy from the sun). But surely the true system we are considering here is the universe, not just planet earth (a tiny part of it).

 

2) Aspects of the 2nd law can be contradicted by man made machines, such water wheels and pumps. But surely these do not apply to a wholly natural environment? Or perhaps aspects of their operations do?

 

Anyway I have only heard brief snippets of these arguments and will be interested to see what this document says.

 

Cheers!

CS

[Clydeside_Sheep]

It seemed more like a rhetorical question.

No, it was genuine!

If you had asked. Do you think mankind is better off for its existence? Then I would have answered neither yes nor no. A building can be interesting to me in an architectural capacity but it is not for me to say that mankind has benefited from its existence as we will never know what things would have been like if it had never existed.

I would argue that if something (anything) has caused you to be interested (in any capacity), or somehow appreciative, then that fact alone means mankind is the better for it.

It's just a facility to reel in more followers and more money to their cult.

I see it as a human expression: of beauty, of design, of achievement, of aspiration, of hope, of faith.

Is mankind better off with cults fleecing them out of their money on the basis that if they don't believe then a vengeful god will make eternity pretty shit

I can only speak for myself, but that isnt my experience.

 

There is never any requirement to donation money, though if Catholics didnt, it would mean they wouldnt have any Churches or priests. The money collected in parishes is for the upkeep of the building, feeding the priest and charitable donations: I have never felt I am being fleeced.

 

The Church spends a lot of money in the fields of healthcare, education, development and disaster relief. Especially to people who would otherwise go without these basic rights (education / health).

 

For example, in Pakistans' Swat Valley - a battleground between the taliban, pakistani army and American drone aircraft - Catholics nuns educate 200 muslim girls, because often their own islamic communities will not grant female citizens their right to education. The nuns have already had to rebuild their school once, after the Taliban bombed it. Before the bombing they had capacity for 1000 girls.

 

See http://www.news.va/en/news/asiapakistan-more-than-200-muslim-girls-enrolled-i

 

I am proud of the Catholic contribution to the world in this way. This is where the money goes. Yes, we have some beautiful churches alright, but I am proud of those too. I got married in a beautiful church.

 

I think popular evaluation of the Catholic Church overlooks the massive good it does and concentrates on nitpicking over human sexual behaviour, because the Church talks about responsibility, common sense and restraint in these matters.

 

I'd be the first to be admit we've been invovled in some sh*t over the years, but then we are only human and you dont last 2000 years without breaking a few eggs (or something?! lol).

Not sure hate is a good word to use about my visit to the Vatican as if I hated it why did I go back a second and third time?

Fair doos, it was just a lazy word I used.

 

I am glad you thought it worthwhile seeing anyway - it is something else, eh? I have been visited to see the Basillica and Museums, and also to attend a weekly audience of Pope Benedict XVI. Great days.

 

The Tombs of the last members of the Stuart Dynasty of Scotland are at the Vatican, but sadly I didnt see them. A nice Scottish connection. This was the Scottish line of British royalty deposed by the Huns favourite, William of Orange. I consdier myself a Jacobite lol

 

http://www.jacobite.ca/gazetteer/Vatican/Stuart_tomb.htm

 

Cheers

CS

[Ke1t]

 

And why is it that, in your view, Catholics are not allowed to build beautiful buildings or 'things' in honour of God?

 

You know how:

 

- the Church provides 25% of the worlds total healthcare provision

- the Church is the largest non-governmental body in the world

- the Church spends billions on the poor/needy per annum

 

weeeeell.....I dunno how to break it to you......but......these things cost money.

 

Therefore, we need a bit of money.

 

The annual turn-over of the Vatican is comfortably less than that of a top-rank European football club (eg Real Madrid or Man U) and it is not uncommon for it to post an annual deficit.

 

But you would only know these things if you gave the Church a fair crack of the whip.....which you dont!

 

'Things' can be built at minimum cost, even religious 'things'.

 

Imagine how many starving children could be fed, how many diseases could be cured, and how many homeless given a roof over their heads if you were to take just the gold from the Vatican and use it for something other than thrones, plates, cultlery, candlesticks, icons, or any one of a thousand essentially useless purposes to which they are currently set.

 

As for 'Top ranked football clubs', they aren't religious organisations, nor are they charitable organisations. To compare them to a religious organisation, one which allegedly holds charity as an important part of its dogma, is somewhat odd.

 

I will mention that Barcelona, for example, pays Unicef to advertise the charity on their shirts, even though Barcelona is not a charity.

 

'Things' do indeed cost money... but there are 'things' that have no place in a church, such as solid gold bric-a-brac.

 

...another thing churches don't need is a giant throne room.

 

If I were a member of any organisation, religious, secular, or otherwise, and the CEO had a vast throne-room, backed by a giant... I still don;t know what the fuck that is, but it looks like nothing 'godly; that I could ever envisage.... then I'd query... well, I'd query a great many things.

 

Looking at the Pope's throne room... are there any concerns or queries you have about it? Anything that makes you even slightly uneasy or uncomfortable? And I'm not just talking from a financial aspect, becasue clearly the Vatican hoarding billions, and having stock in capitalist organisations gives you no qualms whatsoever, so there's no sort of ethical problem presenting itself to you with a Pope sitting on a throne, a church sitting on billions of dollars, while kids die of starvation, ... but on a spiritual level do you have anything going on at all that would make you go... "This isn't right."

 

It's very easy for the Catholic church to give to charity, because they're raking in vast amounts of money, tax free, from their adherents.

 

I wonder how the Vatican would feel if all that cash went instead to people who actually needed it.

[tightbreeks]

it might have been dindun. what doesn't sit well with me is all the allegations of abuse time and again. if you put in in terms of per head of an organisation, i'm sure the companies of equivalent size in Scotland don't have the same volume of allegations, cover ups and scandal.

 

or maybe it's rife and it's one big plague pit.

[Clydeside_Sheep]

Why are you obsessed with expressing your religion as if it actually means something?

You answered a question with a question again!

So you read some philosophy, you made some prayers and you reflected, etc. you still took on those things due ostensibly to what you had initially heard from your indoctrination.

But that isnt a fair analysis - you are reducing to either there is no God, or you are indoctrinated (thats what kelt does too).

 

I dont see that you can proscribe freedom of thought to eliminate the conclusion of belief in God.

 

And btw in my own experience: indoctrination was the last thing you could accuse the schools of. Nothing of the sort, I was wholly disinterested as youth. Sure, as a child it was fun to be in a nativity play, or go through the sacraments with all you mates, a happy family event. But I never had any deep knowledge or whatever.

 

At high school I even officially asked not to be considered for the chance of a free trip to rome (2 pupils per school) to see (Scottish) Cardinal Winning get his red hat. Couldnt have been less interested. No way I was going to Rome to "sit through hours of that crap". I didnt resent it, just was not interested. I stopped going to Church at 16 because I got a job in McDonalds (sat and sun) and was quite smug about this.

 

I didnt think about it for one second for many years, (a decade or more), but then started to experience an occasional longing to go back, off and on, in my mid/late 20s. I eventually did when I was about 29, and as it turns out I have been quite chuffed with the whole business to be honest

 

Perhaps we should call a truce for now lol, I am conscious of boring/irritating other forum users. (though if not then by all means, chat away).

 

Fair play to you Sir!

Cheers!

CS

[fatjim]

Fuck the other forum users.

 

It doesn't matter how much you were disinterested at a younger age you were indoctrinated.

 

My parents were hippies and instilled no religion in me. Despite my grand parents being missionaries in Africa.

I would concede that not being given any religious guidance may have had an effect to my current worldview but as they were hippy fucks they did tell me about all religions and let me make up my own mind. I quickly realised it all amounts to nothing as there is nothing to support any of it.

 

However I do find all religion fascinating and continue to educate myself on it. I especially find the comparisons of the Jesus mythology with other older mythology in other religions interesting. Not to mention other similar bible stories borrowed from older faiths.

[Ke1t]

You answered a question with a question again!But that isnt a fair analysis - you are reducing to either there is no God, or you are indoctrinated (thats what kelt does too).

 

 

 

It certainly isn't what I do.

 

You ARE indoctrinated, that much is perfectly evident, however, to break it down into simple language as I always seem to have to do....

 

Your belief in and adherence to specific Catholic doctrine means....?

 

You have been indoctrinated into the Catholic faith. You only become aware of doctrine through indoctrination, so if you're claiming to be an adherent to Catholic dogma then you have, by deinition, been indoctrinated.

 

As for me saying that god doesn't exist, this is also incorrect. I'm saying there's no compelling evidence... or even half-arsed evidence... available to suggest to me that there is a god. Therefore there is no reason to suppose there is a god.

 

People wrongly assume that agnosticim is the default position for the human mind... this is untrue. While it IS true that we cannot know (not even theists) if there is or isn;t a god, the principle of not being able to disprove a negative means that we don't have to vascillate. If you come to me and say there's a flying spaghetti monster who touches us with his noodly appendage (praise be to the FSM) then I can quite rationally say, in the absence of evidence, "Away and shite.". The default position is NOT to maybe believe that there could be a flying spaghetti monster... the default position is 'Prove you're not talking shite or your ludicrous suggestion is dismissed entirely."

 

Thus is the case with your catholic god. You are entirely incapable of bringing forth any sort of compelling, extraordinary evidence to support your claims, ergo your extraordinary claims of flying spaghetti monsters.. sorry, your extraordinary claims of an invisible wizard,,, can be dismissed in their entirety.

 

As exhaustively gone over again and again, and I really don't know why this isn't getting through, but if someone wants to come to the table and prove that their particular deity exists, be that the Catholic, Viking, Roman, or Ancient Greek god, then fine... show us the extraordinary evidence that supports your extraordinary claim.

 

It's not for me to prove or disprove your Yaweh, Odin, Zeus, or Jupiter... it's up to you to show that your claims of noodly appendagery are anything but the mad ramblings of the mass delusion.

 

It's been a couple thousand years, no-one has done so yet... so I don't hold much hope that someone on AFC Mad is going to carry forth the wondrous revelations of pastafarian Truth (with a capital T)... sorry, Catholic Truth (with a capital T)