The Soonet BBS - Religion http://www.soonet.ca/ Religion section - Please no Bashing en Wed, 19 Jun 2013 07:08:58 GMT vBulletin 60 http://www.soonet.ca/images/misc/rss.png The Soonet BBS - Religion http://www.soonet.ca/ <![CDATA[Today's Atheists are Shallow]]> http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51113-Today-s-Atheists-are-Shallow&goto=newpost Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:51:52 GMT I love the remark made by one Oxford don about another: ‘On the surface, he’s profound, but deep down, he’s superficial.’ That sentence has more than... I love the remark made by one Oxford don about another: ‘On the surface, he’s profound, but deep down, he’s superficial.’ That sentence has more than once come to mind when reading the new atheists.

Future intellectual historians will look back with wonder at the strange phenomenon of seemingly intelligent secularists in the 21st century believing that if they could show that the first chapters of Genesis are not literally true, that the universe is more than 6,000 years old and there might be other explanations for rainbows than as a sign of God’s covenant after the flood, the whole of humanity’s religious beliefs would come tumbling down like a house of cards and we would be left with a serene world of rational non-believers getting on famously with one another.

Whatever happened to the intellectual depth of the serious atheists, the forcefulness of Hobbes, the passion of Spinoza, the wit of Voltaire, the world-shattering profundity of Nietzsche? Where is there the remotest sense that they have grappled with the real issues, which have nothing to do with science and the literal meaning of scripture and everything to do with the meaningfulness or otherwise of human life, the existence or non-existence of an objective moral order, the truth or falsity of the idea of human freedom, and the ability or inability of society to survive without the rituals, narratives and shared practices that create and sustain the social bond?

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/...he-barbarians/ ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51113-Today-s-Atheists-are-Shallow A Lament for Skepticism http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51112-A-Lament-for-Skepticism&goto=newpost Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:46:00 GMT ...The problem with the evidentialist objection, however, is that the evidentialist purports to know exactly how every individual should go about... ...The problem with the evidentialist objection, however, is that the evidentialist purports to know exactly how every individual should go about fulfilling his or her epistemic duty: you should examine each of your beliefs to see whether you can come up with sufficient reasons to believe what you do, and if the evidence is found to be lacking, you should discard those beliefs. In other words, you should assume that all of your beliefs are guilty unless proven innocent. You can only be considered rational after careful reflection upon all your beliefs.

There might not seem to be anything wrong with this position until one asks the question of why all our beliefs should be guilty until proven innocent as opposed to the other way around. Isn’t it a quite pessimistic picture of the way our intellectual faculties work? Indeed, under this picture of humanity, the skeptic seems to be given more epistemic credence than someone who just takes things at face value. We even have a name (and indeed, a whole category of jokes that go along with it) for the person who naively takes beliefs to be innocent until proven guilty: gullible. How did things get this way? Why are we so pessimistic about our abilities to know things about the world?

http://manna.mycpanel.princeton.edu/...or-skepticism/ ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51112-A-Lament-for-Skepticism Common Fault Lines in Maintaining an Evangelical Approach to Homosexuality http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51111-Common-Fault-Lines-in-Maintaining-an-Evangelical-Approach-to-Homosexuality&goto=newpost Mon, 17 Jun 2013 13:34:56 GMT (an abridged version here,click the link to read the entire piece) *Argument #1: Jesus Never Said Anything About Homosexuality* The problem... (an abridged version here,click the link to read the entire piece)

Argument #1: Jesus Never Said Anything About Homosexuality

The problem with this line of thinking is threefold.

First, an evangelical understanding of inspiration does not allow us to prize instructions in the gospel more than instructions elsewhere in Scripture. If we read about homosexuality from the pen of Paul in Romans it has no less than authority or relevance than if we read it from the lips of Jesus in Matthew. All Scripture is breathed out by God, not just the red letters.

Second, it’s hopelessly anachronistic to expect Jesus to directly address all our contemporary concerns. Jesus never said anything explicitly about child abuse, domestic abuse, bestiality, abortion or dozens of other sins

Third, the fact is Jesus spoke about sexual sin often. He warned against lust and infidelity. He confronted the woman at the well. He told the woman caught in adultery to go and sin no more. Likewise, Jesus condemned the sin of porneia (Mark 7:21) which is defined by a leading New Testament lexicon as “unlawful sexual intercourse, prostitution, unchastity, fornication” (BDAG)

Argument #2: We Are Hypocrites Because We Aren’t As Passionate About Divorce.

Wehner contends that we “employ something of a double standard” because we do not show the same fierce opposition to divorce, even though it has been far more devastating to society. I’ve written about this before: comparing evangelical attitudes to homosexuality with evangelical attitudes to divorce is comparing apples and oranges. Admittedly, many evangelicals are complicit in our culture’s lackadaisical attitude toward divorce. Where that’s the case, we ought to condemn the complicity outright. But the analogy with divorce is ultimately misleading. According to the traditional Protestant understanding, which is centuries old, divorce is permissible on certain biblical grounds. This alone makes divorce different from homosexuality. The latter is always wrong in the Bible; the former is sometimes acceptable.

Argument #3: This Is Why Evangelicals Have a Bad Reputation

Arguments like this readily strike a chord with evangelicals. But should they? Bradley Wright, a sociology professor, tackles this question in Christian are Hate-Filled Hypocrites…And Other Lies You’ve Been Told. He argues that (1) negative stereotypes persist for many reasons, often rooted in ignorance or the media, (2) relatively few non-Christians have negative feelings toward “Baptists” even though evangelicals are largely comprised of Baptists, indicating that labeling is the chief culprit, and (3) from 1990-2007 (the best study available at the time) attitudes toward Christians actually improved in the United States. Some people will like us (and most non-Christians probably get along just fine with the evangelicals they know personally). And some people won’t

Argument #4: The Use of Imprecise Language

It’s a subtle thing, but little word choices can make a big difference. And in several places, I found Wehner’s choice of language to be just imprecise enough to be misleading. For example, Wehner contends that Jesus was very concerned about “how a society treats the poor.” This can mean “Jesus loved the poor and admonished the rich who cheated the poor,” which he certainly talked about, but the word “society” (which Jesus never uses!) starts to bring us into the realm of social justice and state-sponsored programs. It’s hard to know what Wehner means. It sounds good and true that Jesus was concerned with “how a society treats the poor” but depending on our definitions Jesus may have actually said very little about the subject.

http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/...homosexuality/ ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51111-Common-Fault-Lines-in-Maintaining-an-Evangelical-Approach-to-Homosexuality Too Casual for Church http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51100-Too-Casual-for-Church&goto=newpost Wed, 12 Jun 2013 20:02:59 GMT Agree with him or not, you have to admit this priest has a creative sense of humor The priest of Holy Ghost Catholic Church in Hammond, LA,... Agree with him or not, you have to admit this priest has a creative sense of humor




The priest of Holy Ghost Catholic Church in Hammond, LA, would like for his parishioners to know:

[from the parish bulletin]

PLANS FOR PARISH SWIMMING POOL SCRAPPED!

After much study, our finance committee has determined it would not be feasible to construct an indoor swimming pool in our church. As a result, we can now announce with certainty that those who have been arriving for Mass as if dressed for the pool need not do so. Also, we hope to keep the air conditioning cranking until well into October. So you do not need to wear shorts, tube‐tops, spaghetti straps, camis, or mini shirts to Mass.

http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/ ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51100-Too-Casual-for-Church <![CDATA[Secularist Re-Writing of 'Middle Ages' Takes a Hit]]> http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51087-Secularist-Re-Writing-of-Middle-Ages-Takes-a-Hit&goto=newpost Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:52:39 GMT http://www.prageruniversity.com/History/Were-the-Middle-Ages-Dark.html http://www.prageruniversity.com/Hist...Ages-Dark.html ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51087-Secularist-Re-Writing-of-Middle-Ages-Takes-a-Hit Post-Christian Canada http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51086-Post-Christian-Canada&goto=newpost Wed, 05 Jun 2013 18:24:28 GMT Looking at the national numbers for the last 10 years, the non-religious sector is growing fast (64 per cent), but not as fast as the population of... Looking at the national numbers for the last 10 years, the non-religious sector is growing fast (64 per cent), but not as fast as the population of Hindus (68 per cent) and Muslims (73 per cent). Islam nearly doubled its adherents in the past decade, edging past the one million mark. Christianity is the only major religion that is in significant decline in Canada, dropping 10 percentage points in 10 years.

In particular the main Protestant churches are collapsing. Numbers of Anglican and United Church Christians dropped 20 and 30 per cent, respectively. Catholics dropped slightly (0.5 per cent); Orthodox numbers managed to grow by about 15 per cent overall.

http://www.hintonparklander.com/2013...christian-tide ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51086-Post-Christian-Canada An Interesting Question http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51084-An-Interesting-Question&goto=newpost Tue, 04 Jun 2013 19:51:56 GMT Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? Seems there is no easy answer here, and both sides make cogent points: ... Do Christians and Muslims worship the same God? Seems there is no easy answer here, and both sides make cogent points:

http://www.firstthings.com/onthesqua...d-of-the-bible ]]> Religion RWGR http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51084-An-Interesting-Question Vatican refutes infallible Pope Francis: Atheists still going to hell http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51079-Vatican-refutes-infallible-Pope-Francis-Atheists-still-going-to-hell&goto=newpost Sun, 02 Jun 2013 22:49:22 GMT ---Quote--- According to a May 28 report on The Independent...
Quote:
According to a May 28 report on The Independent, the powers that be at the Vatican have come forward to publicly correct what Pope Francis said about atheists last week. Apparently, despite what Pope Francis said last week, atheists are still going to hell. The Catholic Church maintains that the pope is infallible in matters of faith and doctrine and speaks as the Vicar of Christ on earth. So, this statement canceling the pope's message is so very unprecedented

The eternal salvation of atheists and even non-Catholics is at issue. The pope had surprised the world by decreeing that good works without a belief in the existence of God would permit entry into heaven.

The Christian Church through the centuries has been based on the doctrine that humans are not capable of meeting God's standards through good works, requiring a saving faith in the shed blood of Jesus Christ. The pope explained his doctrinal view that the blood of Jesus Christ redeems even those who do not believe in God at all.
http://www.examiner.com/article/the-...-going-to-hell

I see two very big questions here:

1. Are the Pope's pronouncements about doctrine infallible or not?

2. Why would Pope Francis teach something that is a direct contradiction to what's written in the bible?

John 14 says, "Jesus said unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man comes unto the Father, but by me." ]]> Religion KDawg http://www.soonet.ca/showthread.php?51079-Vatican-refutes-infallible-Pope-Francis-Atheists-still-going-to-hell