Man Cannot Be Suitably Moral or Good without God. Here's why:

I posted what you originally said. Lie about it again, and you're on perma-iggy. I don't have time for trolls

That's no different than, it teaches the only way to be with G-d when you perish is to believe Christ is G-d and the son of G-d and that died for our sins and was resurrected.

Run away if you need to, I'll still point that out.
 
Correction sounds like hate to those who sorely need it. Funny how that works. Atheists are going the wrong way. They need to be told.

Which takes us full circle to where I started. My faith teaches your faith is doomed to keeping you from being with G-d. So according to you, me telling you that is just me correcting you and you resisting my attempts to help you as though it's hate and not me trying to correct your evil ways.
 
Which takes us full circle to where I started. My faith teaches your faith is doomed to keeping you from being with G-d. So according to you, me telling you that is just me correcting you and you resisting my attempts to help you as though it's hate and not me trying to correct your evil ways.
Atheists don't have standing to correct practicing Christians. Would you have Satan correct Jesus? Ridiculous, right? Please don't be ridiculous.
 
but if they absolutely reject the Catholic Church, they are objectively rejecting Christ

Not true. If you never set foot in a church, here is the truth:

Romans 10:9-10“If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved”.

The Catholic Church is not a requirement for your salvation. A mouth and a heart are...
 
Atheists don't have standing to correct practicing Christians. Would you have Satan correct Jesus? Ridiculous, right? Please don't be ridiculous.

I said nothing about atheists. Pointing out the flaws in your thinking really scares the shit out of you, huh?
 
One of the common things I've heard from atheists is "You don't need God in order to be moral". In fact, I've met atheists/irreligious who were friendly and helpful and appeared on the surface to be perhaps as Christlike as some Christians in their behavior. I knew a guy named Richard just like that who owned a store in my hometown. Very friendly and nice, but totally irreligious. I always wondered how this was so.

This conundrum was explained to be in the sermon at Mass this evening. The short answer is atheists are sinful and unfit for Heaven until they find God. Being overtly nice is not enough. Here's why:
St. Paul says humans are innately sinful. Without assistance from God, atheists have no way to escape their sinful nature. You have to be pure sexually. You can't gossip about others, you can't be prone to anger. Here is the full list:

Galations 5: 19-24
Now the works of the flesh are evident: sexual immorality, impurity, sensuality, idolatry, sorcery, enmity, strife, jealousy, fits of anger, rivalries, dissensions, divisions, envy,[d] drunkenness, orgies, and things like these. I warn you, as I warned you before, that those who do[e] such things will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, self-control; against such things there is no law. And those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the flesh with its passions and desires.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm here to tell you it's difficult to overcome some of these vices. How easy is it to gossip about someone, or get angry, or sow discord, or envy someone, or be caught up in worldly desires such as wanting a fine car or home, trying to attain riches or to satisfy sexual urges in immoral ways. It's hard enough for practicing Christians to avoid these things even with consistent prayer. It is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid them without prayer and without God. It is impossible for atheists to have all the positive characteristics in the Galatians passage above and none of the negative. Nobody in this forum or anywhere else knows an atheist who follows all these laws.

My friend Richard? Turns out in his store, he rented out extremely X-rated nasty videos on the side. Beneath his friendly veneer were a lot of problems. A lot of sexual deviancy. And he had nothing to fight them with. He didn't enlist God's help to fight them. He had no chance.

So to the question of "Why do you need God in order to be a good person"? The answer is; because man is innately sinful, and if left alone without God, will remain in those sins.
Yet the church had the Inquisition, and the crusades.
 
A great part of the problem with what Jesus said is that people have a very limited capacity for exploring all the meaning. We are thus often stuck with interpretations that exclude much broader view. This is made worse by institutional insistence upon formulaic standardization.
Just for one example; the last supper. Speaking of the most common elements of meals, Jesus associated his being with them and admonished that at each occurrence of their consumption it be remembered that they were part of him. This has been condensed by religion to a special occasion in a special building where a mystical thing happens. If the words are taken more literally, Jesus (in keeping with previous of his statements) is placing himself at one with the source of all and that, therefore, he is all. Jesus said that the most important commandment was to remember the YHWH is One. The food one eats is Jesus, every time. "As often as you do this (eat and drink), remember me". It is only belief in separation that creates separation.
It is satisfying and consoling that ceremonial bread and wine be consumed by a gathering of people with a desire for communal feeling, but insisting that bread becomes human flesh and wine becomes human blood is not only a stumbling block, it reduces the significance of the message.
Allow me to say that this is, itself, an interpretation. It is, nevertheless, at least as valid as the interpretation that the R.C.C. and many Protestants maintain.
 
A great part of the problem with what Jesus said is that people have a very limited capacity for exploring all the meaning. We are thus often stuck with interpretations that exclude much broader view. This is made worse by institutional insistence upon formulaic standardization.
Just for one example; the last supper. Speaking of the most common elements of meals, Jesus associated his being with them and admonished that at each occurrence of their consumption it be remembered that they were part of him. This has been condensed by religion to a special occasion in a special building where a mystical thing happens. If the words are taken more literally, Jesus (in keeping with previous of his statements) is placing himself at one with the source of all and that, therefore, he is all. Jesus said that the most important commandment was to remember the YHWH is One. The food one eats is Jesus, every time. "As often as you do this (eat and drink), remember me". It is only belief in separation that creates separation.
It is satisfying and consoling that ceremonial bread and wine be consumed by a gathering of people with a desire for communal feeling, but insisting that bread becomes human flesh and wine becomes human blood is not only a stumbling block, it reduces the significance of the message.
Allow me to say that this is, itself, an interpretation. It is, nevertheless, at least as valid as the interpretation that the R.C.C. and many Protestants maintain.
The RCC has it right. 2000 years worth of right.
 
Yet the church had the Inquisition, and the crusades.
I certainly wouldn't presume that christians should be lecturing anyone about a moral compass. The history of Christianity includes some of the most horrible cruelties to humanity. Wars, conquest, enslavement, forced conversion, unspeakable horrors that define its history.

The history of this country is a nightmare of Christian hatreds and biases. The various sects of Christianity were completely at odds with one another as colonial states. Catholics couldn't live in one state, Quakers were executed if they went to another, Protestants were reviled in still others, and so on. These documents still exist. Anyone can research the laws of the original 13 colonies.

 
That's your truth. At least you finally admit I'm right about that after you denied it.
Ok that's it. You're trolling by lying about what I said. Off to perma-iggy for you. You're the 13th leftwing atheist iggied troll. I gave all 13 a warning. All of them failed.
This makes my forum experience better and better with each discarded troll. The other 12 were classless and doubled down with a parting shot. Let's see if you're the same as all of them or better. I predict you'll be the same. I'll announce which one you are.
 
Last edited:
Ok that's it. You're trolling by lying about what I said. Off to perma-iggy for you. You're the 13th leftwing atheist iggied troll. I gave all 13 a warning. All of them failed.
This makes my forum experience better and better with each discarded troll. The other 12 were classless and doubled down with a parting shot. Let's see if you're the same as all of them or better. I predict you'll be the same. I'll announce which one you are.

LOLOLOL

You gave a warning! :lmao:

Moron, only idiots who can't effectively argue their positions put others on ignore. And it doesn't stop me from putting you in your place, it only prevents you from defending your bullshit, which is clearly your only interest -- to preach, not to debate. A pity you can't take the heat.
 
Ok that's it. You're trolling by lying about what I said. Off to perma-iggy for you. You're the 13th leftwing atheist iggied troll. I gave all 13 a warning. All of them failed.
This makes my forum experience better and better with each discarded troll. The other 12 were classless and doubled down with a parting shot. Let's see if you're the same as all of them or better. I predict you'll be the same. I'll announce which one you are.
LOLOLOL

You gave a warning! :lmao:

Moron, only idiots who can't effectively argue their positions put others on ignore. And it doesn't stop me from putting you in your place, it only prevents you from defending your bullshit, which is clearly your only interest -- to preach, not to debate. A pity you can't take the heat.
Called it. That was an easy call. Classless like the rest.
Enjoy iggyland.
 

Forum List

Back
Top