If you had absolute proof there would be no need for Faith

If you had absolute proof there would be no need for Faith

Nah, just need faith for aliens.

Funny from the same guy who posted this when asked if he believed in other intelligent life in the universe.

 

Yes, without a doubt. Widespread intelligent life in the universe. Millions, if not billions of civilizations.

 

And yes, being in and around central and eastern Kentucky most of my life, most all intelliegent life in the Universe would be FAR ADVANCED from what we know. Likely no religions on the most advanced civilizations.

 

By your self imposed paramaters for ability to be scientifically proven, seems like you pick and choose where you impose said parameters.

 

So far humanity does not know whether or not there is intelligent life on other planets.

 

So far humanity does not know if an unseen deity created us, gave us a book of rules to follow, or if there is an afterlife.

 

So far believing in either is merely surmising.

 

Using human life as an example that intelligent does exist in the Universe, it's not completely far fetched to extrapolate that there is a possibility of intelligent life elsewhere as our existence is actually proof that intelligent life does indeed exist.

 

Does it? We don't know.

Can it? We know that it can.

 

On the other hand we as humanity still have no indisputable knowledge that an unseen deity exist, so no one can offer any evidence of one, and any extrapolation that suggest that there must be one because we can not imagine any other explanation considering this is what we were raised to believe, is still just a guess based on no indisputable proof, or anything that can really offer us anything to go on to connect the dots.

 

Does a deity exist? We don't know.

Can it? We don't know.

Meh.

 

Buddhism doesn't damage anyone else either. That doesn't make it Christianity.

 

Poor Hindus, Jews, Muslums etc...

 

If they just only could've been born into a family of Christians so that they could follow the only true faith.

 

Tough luck I guess?

 

Tough luck too to all the Protestants Christians, if they just could've been raised in a Catholic family, the only true branch of a Christian religion.

 

No one ever said that God had to make any sense when he created all of us.

^I don't disagree with anything you've said. However, when someone comes on here with a history of banging the drum for the proof of science and math, then professes to believe in one thing yet not another when both fall in the same category, it shoots a hole in their entire modus operandi. So, I call bullcrap on the gentlemen who plays both ends of the spectrum to suit his personal agenda.

My difference with Carter, I guess, is that Carter believes wholeheartedly in a man named Jesus. I maintain that there is no real evidence that such a man ever existed. Maybe he lived and died, maybe he didn't. None of us can say for sure. If he lived, he very well may have been a really good dude. What he didn't do, in my opinion, is live, die, and live again. That would be supernatural and I've never seen any scientific evidence of a supernatural occurrence. Not even one event. Whenever I witness a truly supernatural event, then I will be more than open to the possibility of a supernatural savior. Until then, I 'll come down on the side of math and science. Who was the old guy back in the seventies and eighties that went around on national TV debunking all these psychics and supernatural claims? He offered up big money to anyone who could prove they were legit. Not a single person was ever able to claim the money. The Amazing Randy...that was his name. Gray beard and glasses.

 

I thought you were talking about Professor Irwin Corey for a second. (The old timers will know who I mean.)

Tough luck too to all the Protestants Christians, if they just could've been raised in a Catholic family, the only true branch of a Christian religion.

I would argue that the church that Jesus established had no branches. He died for it, it carries his name, and you can't join it. All who follow his plan of salvation are added to the church by God. Man has twisted and turned it a million different directions, but my singular goal is to follow him and be a Christian, only.

 

I know that is off topic a bit, LOL. Shoot me.

Poor Hindus, Jews, Muslums etc...

 

If they just only could've been born into a family of Christians so that they could follow the only true faith.

 

Tough luck I guess?

 

Tough luck too to all the Protestants Christians, if they just could've been raised in a Catholic family, the only true branch of a Christian religion.

 

No one ever said that God had to make any sense when he created all of us.

 

Someone used the argument that homosexual acts don't hurt anyone, so Jesus would accept it. I don't believe that as part of Christian teaching. Just because it doesn't harm others doesn't make it Christian.

 

I wasn't attempting to bash Buddhists.

 

FWIW, my church doesn't exclude people of other faiths from salvation.

I would argue that the church that Jesus established had no branches. He died for it, it carries his name, and you can't join it. All who follow his plan of salvation are added to the church by God. Man has twisted and turned it a million different directions, but my singular goal is to follow him and be a Christian, only.

 

I know that is off topic a bit, LOL. Shoot me.

 

If the point was perhaps missed, I was presenting a purposeful sarcastic statement here that I myself do not believe, all for the sake of painting how ridiculous some can be with regard to religious beliefs and how some people can discard other religious belief systems because they are so certain that the one they follow is the real true one, and even within Christianity some branches have been known to turn their nose up at other branches as if their branch is the only true branch.

 

Yes, I agree...man has twisted and turned it a million different directions.

Someone used the argument that homosexual acts don't hurt anyone, so Jesus would accept it. I don't believe that as part of Christian teaching. Just because it doesn't harm others doesn't make it Christian.

 

I wasn't attempting to bash Buddhists.

 

FWIW, my church doesn't exclude people of other faiths from salvation.

 

Just as long as they ultimately convert to the real true religion, right?

Just as long as they ultimately convert to the real true religion, right?

 

Yes, correct. It's in Catholic teaching that people who live by morals can receive salvation. I think the "pearly gates" get quite a few converts.

 

I'm not looking for an argument or anything. I'm sorry if I stepped on your toes.

Poor Hindus, Jews, Muslums etc...

 

If they just only could've been born into a family of Christians so that they could follow the only true faith.

 

Tough luck I guess?

 

Tough luck too to all the Protestants Christians, if they just could've been raised in a Catholic family, the only true branch of a Christian religion.

 

No one ever said that God had to make any sense when he created all of us.

 

Just as long as they ultimately convert to the real true religion, right?

 

You're awfully heavy-handed there, honestly. And for what it's worth, the Catholic Church, although undoubtedly claiming to be the truest of Christian faiths, still has very clearly said that people of other faiths are most definitely able to receive salvation. It was laid out in one of the most essential documents to come out of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium.

 

The Church-speak in Lumen Gentium may be a bit difficult for some folks to decipher (myself included), and one of the most succinct summaries I've ever been able to come across for all of matters addressed by the Second Vatican II Council was published back in the 90s by a Catholic non-profit group called Christus Rex. Here's the summary of the points on salvation to non-Catholics:

 

"

The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God's word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize."

 

The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church."

 

 

 

Also, just a general question I'm curious to ask. Is it wrong for any church to consider itself to be the right faith...or the truest faith?

Edited August 27, 201511 yr by Colonels_Wear_Blue

Yes, correct. It's in Catholic teaching that people who live by morals can receive salvation. I think the "pearly gates" get quite a few converts.

 

I'm not looking for an argument or anything. I'm sorry if I stepped on your toes.

 

Not to worry... you didn't step on my toes, as I've heard it all before. I'm not sure what made you think that you had.

 

I understand the human nature and tendency of human religions to believe that their truth is the only real truth, for otherwise why would they even bother. If they taught elements of doubt within their belief system it could only stand to threaten the core when you want your followers believe without question.

 

One personal example of this when being raised by devout Catholic parents is that I never once heard while my parents were alive that my grandfather on my Dad's side was raised a Baptist. I can only surmise that my Dad kept this quiet to avoid additional questions from me or my siblings, and wanted to paint a picture that our family was Catholic to the core. I don't blame him as this was his parenting decision and my parents were pretty old school about a lot of things. They had their hearts in the right place, loved me unconditionally, and more than not taught values that I could only wish that many today could be exposed and adhere to.

 

Knowing that religions operate with the intentions of convincing its followers that they're serving the truth is one thing, but what puzzles me is how so very effective they are in doing so to keep their devout ones void of free rational thinking.

 

But then again with some sectors of society I guess that I really shouldn't be all that surprised. I've now lived long enough to have seen it time and again, and know that it will likely always be. I used to get worked up and frustrated by it, but now mostly I just find it peculiar and humorous.

You're awfully heavy-handed there, honestly. And for what it's worth, the Catholic Church, although undoubtedly claiming to be the truest of Christian faiths, still has very clearly said that people of other faiths are most definitely able to receive salvation. It was laid out in one of the most essential documents to come out of Vatican II, Lumen Gentium.

 

The Church-speak in Lumen Gentium may be a bit difficult for some folks to decipher (myself included), and one of the most succinct summaries I've ever been able to come across for all of matters addressed by the Second Vatican II Council was published back in the 90s by a Catholic non-profit group called Christus Rex. Here's the summary of the points on salvation to non-Catholics:

 

"

The Catholic Church professes that it is the one, holy catholic and apostolic Church of Christ; this it does not and could not deny. But in its Constitution the Church now solemnly acknowledges that the Holy Ghost is truly active in the churches and communities separated from itself. To these other Christian Churches the Catholic Church is bound in many ways: through reverence for God's word in the Scriptures; through the fact of baptism; through other sacraments which they recognize."

 

The non-Christian may not be blamed for his ignorance of Christ and his Church; salvation is open to him also, if he seeks God sincerely and if he follows the commands of his conscience, for through this means the Holy Ghost acts upon all men; this divine action is not confined within the limited boundaries of the visible Church."

 

 

 

Also, just a general question I'm curious to ask. Is it wrong for any church to consider itself to be the right faith...or the truest faith?

 

For starters hopefully you could see that my comments were sarcastic to drive a point related to ThrillVille Cardinal51 indicating that Christianity was where it's at.

 

I realize that post Vatican II opened Catholics up to not be so shallow regarding these matters, but I just threw it in there to more so emphasize how ridiculous it sounded.

 

The only reason that I even knew that Catholics once believed this concept is because I was raised by pre-Vatican II Catholic Parents, and to this day some old school Catholics still talk and believe in this manner.

 

I really wasn't taking a shot at the Catholic religion as my focus was to sound pathetically backward and ridiculous regarding those who think that their religion is the one and only.

 

Regarding your last question in your post, I coincidentally addressed that in my last response post to ThrillVille Cardinal51

 

I said this:

 

I understand the human nature and tendency of human religions to believe that their truth is the only real truth, for otherwise why would they even bother. If they taught elements of doubt within their belief system it could only stand to threaten the core when you want your followers believe without question.

 

One personal example of this when being raised by devout Catholic parents is that I never once heard while my parents were alive that my grandfather on my Dad's side was raised a Baptist. I can only surmise that my Dad kept this quiet to avoid additional questions from me or my siblings, and wanted to paint a picture that our family was Catholic to the core. I don't blame him as this was his parenting decision and my parents were pretty old school about a lot of things. They had their hearts in the right place, loved me unconditionally, and more than not taught values that I could only wish that many today could be exposed and adhere to.

 

Knowing that religions operate with the intentions of convincing its followers that they're serving the truth is one thing, but what puzzles me is how so very effective they are in doing so to keep their devout ones void of free rational thinking.

 

But then again with some sectors of society I guess that I really shouldn't be all that surprised. I've now lived long enough to have seen it time and again, and know that it will likely always be. I used to get worked up and frustrated by it, but now mostly I just find it peculiar and humorous.

 

Also, just a general question I'm curious to ask. Is it wrong for any church to consider itself to be the right faith...or the truest faith?

 

Don't we all think that what we personally believe is the truth? Why would I believe something that I did not think was the truth? And if someone believes the opposite of what I believe, I of course would think that I am right and that they are wrong. If I thought that I was wrong and that they were right, I would change what I believe (and I have done that about a few things before). I have changed what I believe about certain things and now I think that what I previously believed was wrong.