It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Intelligence Squared Debate - Is the Catholic Church a force for good in the World?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:14 AM
link   
reply to post by eight bits
 





I undertand faith to be the claim of personally justified categorical belief about some supernatural question.

In simple terms, to accept something as truth without requiring evidence.






It is my impression that you profess to know, or to believe with a practical certainty, whether or nor God exists. That is a supernatural question.



I don't profess to know anything in relation to the supernatural, the supernatural is what it is because it is unknown, when it becomes known then it is no longer supernatural.

So were are taking about an unknown quanta, if you give an unknown quanta a number this does not make it real you've just given it a number.

You believe the unknown quanta is there and claim that you know it is. I simply observe that you have not provided any proof of it being there. As I observe there being nothing there and you fail to provide proof of it being there although you claim otherwise, is not evidence of me having faith in anything .





It does describe the views of at least one of speakers mentioned in your original post, Mr Hitchens, who is a well-known evangelist of the faith in question.


The only person that can clarify CHs position is himself how you choose to interpret his choices of word is up to you, perhaps it would be prudent to email him for an explanation.




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
There you go doing the hate thing again, I don't hate anybody my friend I don't know why you persist with this false idea.


oh no, i think you've misunderstood, i didn't mean to suggest you hate any particular person, what i meant is that you "hate what christians do" and you seem to spend a lot of time attempting to get other people to "hate what christians do", essentially, you spend a lot of your time spreading the hate. is that a bit clearer?

as for the determination as to weather you are a force for good in the world, or not, as the case may be, if you're unable to determine that by whatever moral code you use, then that should be your answer.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 12:52 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 


"


hate what christians do" and you seem to spend a lot of time attempting to get other people to "hate what christians do", essentially, you spend a lot of your time spreading the hate. is that a bit clearer?


That appears to be somewhat ridiculous, people make their own choices dude and one would have thought these choices are made using critical thinking skills not by accepting my criticisms.

Nevertheless isn't it somewhat hypocritical to criticize when xtians go around hating what other people do and then spread that hate ?

The are a lot more xtians going round extolling the virtues jesusyahwehgods hatred of what homosexuals to for example, than there are moocowmen,, doing essentially what they are doing no ?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 





as for the determination as to weather you are a force for good in the world, or not, as the case may be, if you're unable to determine that by whatever moral code you use, then that should be your answer.

I make no claims as to being a force of good in the world, I merely observe that if the jesusyawhe god is real then I must be.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:15 PM
link   
moocowman


In simple terms, to accept something as truth without requiring evidence.

Yes. For example, to accept as truth that there is no god, without requiring evidence.


You believe the unknown quanta is there and claim that you know it is.

Actually, I don't. I'm an agnostic.

As to the rest, if you are saying that you assert nothing about the existence of God, then I covered that in an earlier post. If the atheist shoe doesn't fit, then don't wear it.

As to Mr Hitchens' religion, since he is an evangelist, his faith is a matter of public record. If an example of him reciting his creed is needed, then

www.washingtonpost.com...

A personal email to him would simply waste bandwidth, making just as little sense as emailing the Pope to ask whether he is a Catholic.

I am surprised you aren't bursting with pride to number Mr Hitchens as a co-religionist. Although I don't share his faith, I often read Mr Hitchens with pleasure and respect for his rhetorical skill.

TarzanBeta


As long as it [the Bible] is what we have to go on, that is what us Christians will go on.

As I explained in my post, the majority of Christians belong to churches which supplement the Bible with other sources of religious faith. It is simply a fact that Christian cannot reasonably be defined as adherence to sola scriptura. To do so is ludicrous in a thread whose announced subject is the Roman Catholic Church.

As to the rest, I don't see where I have made any argument about the Bible one way or the other. I observed that some Christians believe something about the Bible that other Christians don't. "InterNicene squabbles" are legion; this is one of them.

So far as I am aware, all Christians rely on the Bible to some extent, but not necessarily to the extent, nor in the way, that the OP proposed as being definitional of Christian. Therefore, I objected to the proposed definition.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by spellbound
reply to post by moocowman
 


If you pick someone up it is not love, it is kindness - another one of Jesus's things.

I could turn you to Jesus couldn't I? I just have this feeling that I could.


I could fall asleep under a tree for hours, then call myself enlightened, it still doesn't mean I am Buddha.

Jesus' teaching were similar to Buddhist teachings, until you factor in the fact that Jesus believed in the almighty Father.

As a Christian, I believe Catholics should kick the Vatican out of power and redistribute the wealth amongst the poor; the Vatican being the main regime in the Catholic church. The Vatican has many hidden secrets which will change how the world views it. If they were truly holy, they would have brought forth everything that is secret and begin anew.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
That appears to be somewhat ridiculous, people make their own choices dude and one would have thought these choices are made using critical thinking skills not by accepting my criticisms.


again, i think you've misunderstood, it doesn't matter weather you persuade anyone or not, all i am commenting on is the time and energy you seem to spend on spreading hatred. it's about your efforts, not the result.


Nevertheless isn't it somewhat hypocritical to criticize when xtians go around hating what other people do and then spread that hate ?


it's not hypocritical in the slightest. it would be if i was going around spreading hate, i'm not.


The are a lot more xtians going round extolling the virtues jesusyahwehgods hatred of what homosexuals to for example, than there are moocowmen,, doing essentially what they are doing no ?


dunno, i never met any, have you?

either way, i'll critisise them as quickly as i critisise you, spreading hate is wrong, i don't really care what sad pathetic excuse you use to justify it.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by eight bits
 





I am surprised you aren't bursting with pride to number Mr Hitchens as a co-religionist. Although I don't share his faith, I often read Mr Hitchens with pleasure and respect for his rhetorical skill.


Why on earth would I be bursting with pride dude even if I did know the guy, well I don't relate to the pride bit ?

Your insistence on my being a co- religionist will it would appear not end, so if I agreed with you so what ? Does it make the custard any thicker ?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:29 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 





all i am commenting on is the time and energy you seem to spend on spreading hatred. it's about your efforts, not the result


Dude, I spend a period of time criticizing religion, that is not spreading hatred.

I make my view on the actions of xtians pretty clear in my sig up front no different to having a copy of the bibles in my window.

If I remove my sig my opinion will still be the same in that I'm criticizing an action or actions not people, no different to what xtians do .

Since when has hating an action become spreading the hatred, I'm not asking anyone else to do the same ?

I hate it when cats crap on my lawn are you implying I'm spreading hatred by having a sign upon my door declaring so ?

I've no doubt you'd like to push this for the sake of Moderator attention, carry on .



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
Is there a conspiracy in here somewhere?\

Wasn't that a requirement at one time or another for this sub-forum?

Are we now free to post our general thoughts about religion in CiR? Is renaming this area a good idea? How about 'General Angst About Religion'?


Eric



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
I make my view on the actions of xtians pretty clear in my sig up front no different to having a copy of the bibles in my window.


to me it looks more like having a sign up in your window that says "i don't hate fags, i hate what they do". it's just distasteful.

but back to the question at hand, being a force for good in the world. the debate questions weather the catholic church is a force for good in the world and it was clearly argued that it isn't. the oppose side won the debate. no arguement there. the thing is, a debate doesn't measure an argument, it measures the ability of the debaters to argue.

i believe that there is no person or organisation that can reasonably conclusively be called a force for good in the world.

your thread shows nothing except that stephen fry's word is more reliable than some priest's, watching father ted followed by QI will tell you that? you can't disagree with stephen fry, it makes you look stupid, while agreeing with dougall is just insanity.

[edit on 17/11/09 by pieman]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:17 PM
link   
reply to post by pieman
 





you can't disagree with stephen fry, it makes you look stupid, while agreeing with dougall is just insanity.

Pieman I just pissed myself laughing that has to be the first time I've seen you display a sense of humour, more please



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by EricD
 





Are we now free to post our general thoughts about religion in CiR? Is renaming this area a good idea? How about 'General Angst About Religion'?


there are many who are not religious that consider many religions conspiracies themselves.

Main Entry: con·spire
Pronunciation: \kən-ˈspī(-ə)r\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): con·spired; con·spir·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French conspirer, from Latin conspirare to be in harmony, conspire, from com- + spirare to breathe
Date: 14th century
transitive verb
: plot, contrive
intransitive verb
1 a : to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or an act which becomes unlawful as a result of the secret agreement b : scheme
2 : to act in harmony toward a common end



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


If there is a point in your post, I'm missing it.

If you are saying that since some people opine that religions are by their very nature conspiracies that all discussions of religion belong in this sub-forum than I'm at a loss.

Quite clearly there is a reason why this area is called what it is.

Eric



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:53 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


As far as real christianity, Jesus was the son of God. he was here on earth and as far as I know, had no intention in being worshiped, idolized, or ever revered. I think his message was real clear and he thought that we should know his dad liked us and wanted us to be good to each other. The perversion that followed is what you see that has evolved today. I think that there are still good people and still people who try to do the right thing, but it seems that a lot of people spend their energy judging others and claiming to be "holier than thou" when that wasn't what Jesus had in mind at all. I think the Buddhist aspect is a valid one and it would make sense that Jesus would have attempted to gain as much knowledge of what we believe and think as he could. Taking a bit of each religion and putting it all into perspective seemed to be the way he ended up talking about. So in the end, nobody is any better than anybody else, nobody knows who is getting into heaven, and nobody has any business telling you what to believe. (IMHO) Everyone has a God given right to talk to him and try to be the best person they can.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by network dude]

edit cuz I cant spel.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by network dude]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:02 PM
link   
reply to post by loner007
 


Buddhism isn't the only religion like that. Confucianism and Taoism are similar because they're more philosophies than religions.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:14 PM
link   
reply to post by spellbound
 





BUT - just because a lot of people and a lot of churches call themselves 'Christian' - please do not lump Christ in there with them. They do NOT follow the teachings of Christ. He would be horrified - probably is.


Y'know... seeing as how everyone doing horrible things to people who want to believe, and somehow getting away with it, I kinda question how horrified Jesus actually is. 'Cause if he was TRULY horrified and mortified, we'd be seeing some serious punishment of bad Christians.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by wylekat]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:32 PM
link   
reply to post by TarzanBeta
 





If you want to determine who is a follower of Christ, don't go based on denominations, or which Scripture they credit more, or human opinion. Check out their integrity. Make sure they are not bowing down to other people as a means of keeping peace, because that is NOT what Jesus did. He kept peace with silence, not kissing ass. Check out their fortitude. How much crap can they take without getting offended. How much does it take to make them run away? How much can you be wrong before they have to tell you that they are right?


Wanna hear something extremely sad, yet funny? I did this in my quest for a wife. I did it in a measured, careful way- and I have gotten nothing but offended, whining, hand wringing, complaining, not- worth -my -time -or -effort bunch of women I wouldn't put a ring on, let alone anything else! The slightest, tiniest offense was enough to set them off. Any opportunity had me with a knife in my back. Others' results may vary... This is NC I am dealing in here. I am beginning to think there is not a single, solitary single woman who goes to church I would dare trust... One of the worst things I ever witnessed was this Christian woman who ripped a friend of mine to shreds- I didn't say anything for his sake (because I'd have turned her into puree', and he's trying to be nice to her for whatever reason). In my opinion, NO woman (or anyone else) has the right to say to someone who has been nice to them "You're OLD!". I don't have enough fingers and toes in this house (including pets) of the amount of Christian women who have said things like this and far worse to me.

Just another reason why I quit being a Christian, and deciding God is a fairy tale.



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by network dude
 





The perversion that followed is what you see that has evolved today.


And this is why I believe I'm justified in posting the video, to my mind christianity led by the roman catholic church has been the biggest conspiracy of all time.





I think that there are still good people and still people who try to do the right thing
,

And I would not disagree with you here, as I have stated in many of my posts I have close friends who are xtians or ex xtians who have always had good intentions but have been caught up in the delusion and brainwashing.




but it seems that a lot of people spend their energy judging others and claiming to be "holier than thou" when that wasn't what Jesus had in mind at all.


We only have to take a look at the scriptures to see a thread of good intent, unfortunately the conspiracy for power seems to start there.


Not to go too far off topic I've been heavily criticized for posting the videos which debates whether the catholic church is a force for good.

All I'm doing is giving other people who may not have seen the debate, an opportunity to observe the representatives of catholisim fail miserably to justify its existence.

What we (those that seek to live in a secular society free of religious intrusion) have to bare in mind, is that many defenders of this repugnant religion (denomination) have positioned themselves in positions of influence in governments etc.

The likes of Anne Widdecombe would have us jailed for speaking out against her god and believe it or not also Allah !

Day in day out I here xtians denouncing Catholicism as the antichrist and demons etc, I would expect these people at least to have appreciated the opportunity to see their enemy humiliate itself.

What is most interesting in relation to the debate is that, having heard the churchs pathetic attempt to justify it's existence. 774 people were obviously repulsed enough to reject it.



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by EricD
reply to post by moocowman
 


If there is a point in your post, I'm missing it.

If you are saying that since some people opine that religions are by their very nature conspiracies that all discussions of religion belong in this sub-forum than I'm at a loss.

Quite clearly there is a reason why this area is called what it is.

Eric

Dude with respect you appear to be attempting to derail the thread, if you have an issue as to where threads belong perhaps you should take it up with the mods and not continue to whine about it in thread.

I've no doubt if the Intelligence squared debate was debating whether Islam is a force for good,you would probably not be complaining.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join