Thread: Catholic? Devoted or will you Disavow your evil doctrine?

^
Bless you my son, now say 3 Hail Mary's and 1 Our father you are forgiven.

Originally Posted by Iceman123

^
Bless you my son, now say 3 Hail Mary's and 1 Our father you are forgiven.

Can I just pay an indulgence of a 1,000 baht instead?

Originally Posted by Backspin

You don't know what you are talking about.

Originally Posted by Iceman123

now say 3 Hail Mary's

Letting him off lightly . . .

Originally Posted by DrWilly

Original sin, and therefore Catholic guilt

I am not a theological scholar of your erudition Willy but having gone to 2 Catholic schools (which meant all my friends were Catholics) and Mass ever Sunday for nearly 2 decades I do not recall being aware of the average Catholic having any more of a guilty conscience about their existence than the average Protestant.

If anything I would say Protestants seemed to radiate a sterner tone on the guiltiness vibe and the brimstone wages of sin than Cafflics did.

I don't recall the doctrine of original sin ever being expounded in an RE class at school or a sermon at Mass. I think it is commonly regarded as a historical doctrinal relic.

Originally Posted by DrWilly

the indulgences

Indulgences were from 5 centuries ago and are not really a thing these days, which is a shame as you could have a lot of fun with that one.

Originally Posted by DrWilly

infalliblity of the pope

His Holiness the Pope of Rome is 100% infallible.

That is a FACT, fer shure.

Originally Posted by Backspin

So you aren't a real athiest then.

I don't think you have the intellectual capability to discuss the philosophy of free will in the context of religion, however, I'll bite. Tell us all about your view of free will and how it affects the Catholic religion. Tell us why we are ignorant and stupid because we don't know about free will.

Explain in your own words ... and keep it to around 500 words as a preliminary.

Originally Posted by Troy

I don't think you have the intellectual capability to discuss the philosophy of free will in the context of religion, however, I'll bite. Tell us all about your view of free will and how it affects the Catholic religion. Tell us why we are ignorant and stupid because we don't know about free will.

Explain in your own words ... and keep it to around 500 words as a preliminary.

That’s a tough one for Backspin. Your post contains sentences. Note the use of the plural.

Its also likely to be your own work too. That’s him stuffed then. No obscure videos or google references in your post either.
I think you could be accused of bullying him, by using common sense and logic. Life is so unfair for pre-pubescent teenagers. He never enjoyed the luxury of having a library card and searching for answers the normal way. Using computers for research is all he has ever known. That throws up millions of possible answers. These are answers that your generation has quickly learned to filter.

That he was born stupid, and his generation only believes that there is only one source of information available to his limited intellect, is unfortunate. His poor neurological background will always leave him at a disadvantage.
Ya big bully.

I'll paraphrase Backspit's response

Originally Posted by Backspit

. YOU don't know free will, incel beta cuck, because of the Malthusian construct.
Ok, in my own words:

Free will is the ability to make choices without external coersion. There are debates as to what extent this free will is to be understood as it relates to people. There are two main views: compatibilism and libertarianism.
The compatibilist view is the position that a person’s freedom is restricted by his nature as is described in Scripture. In other words, he can only choose what his nature (sinful or regenerate) will allow him to choose. Therefore, such verses as 1 Cor. 2:14; Rom. 3:10-12; Rom. 6:14-20 are used to demonstrate that, for example, the unbeliever is incapable of choosing God of his own free will since they say that the unbeliever cannot receive spiritual things, does no good, and is a slave to sin. …
The biblical position is compatibilism. Since the Bible clearly teaches us that the unbeliever is restricted to making sinful choices (1 Cor. 2:14; Rom. 3:10-12; Rom. 6:14-20), then we must conclude that anyone who believes in God (John 3:16; 3:36) does so because God has granted that he believe (Phil. 1:29), has caused him to be born again (1 Pet. 1:3), and chosen him for salvation (2 Thess. 2:13).

No need to check, I writted this myself

Skidmark

Originally Posted by panama hat

I'll paraphrase Backspit's response

That’s all very well in principle, but how can free will be influenced by something that consists of fiction?

Originally Posted by DrWilly

Can I just pay an indulgence of a 1,000 baht instead?

Careful that's what set off Martin Luther and we ended up with Protestants and the gradule decline of Catholicism.

Originally Posted by Hugh Cow

gradule decline of Catholicism.
Reply

Silver lining

You are a babbling brook of shite.

Originally Posted by Backspin

All I was getting at here is that I don't see how you can be an atheist and believe in free will at the same time. That is just hypocritical.

Also, the whole western ethic seems to be built on the idea that free will is paramount to everything. It is all based on the idea that we have control of everything. When really , we have control of nothing. We didn't choose our genes. We didn't choose the country we were born in. We are just a rock rolling down a hill. Randomness and chaos is what rules. Not free will

Take the most evil person you can think of. Say Saddam Husseins son. At what point did he become liable of being an asshole ? When he turned 18 ? He was Saddam Hussien son ffs.

There is so much that you don’t see. Truth and reality for example.

Absolutely no conflict between free will and atheism.

Random chaos explains your choices, and your lifestyle, even most of your posts. That and the fact that you are a bit dense.

If only you had a broader education, and your travel choices were not driven by hedonism, you might be able to exercise free will and choice!

Originally Posted by Backspin

I don't see how you can be an atheist and believe in free will at the same time. That is just hypocritical.

Here's a hint:
Don't read one sentence,
like it - even if you don't understand it -
repeat it twenty times accusing others of not understanding
be shown that you're an imbecile
double down
be shown that you're a ridiculous halfwit
double down
. . . change the subject

Every
Single
Malthusian
Time

Originally Posted by panama hat

Every
Single
Malthusian
Time

Free will is an illusion, as our erudite friend Backspin rightly asserts.

Your various brain modules have evolved to drive your behaviour for evolutionary ends. These modules vie with each other for control of your behaviour and one or some combination of them succeed w.r.t. any given project or enterprise.

Your conscious self is a spectator of your behaviour. Your 'self' acts as retrospective press secretary to explain to the rest of the world the rationalisation for the behaviour which your dominant modules recently exhibited. Your 'self' does this so that you can impress upon the world how reasonable and rational you are and therefore how worthy a friend and collaborative colleague you make.

You don't choose your behaviour, you retrospectively explain and justify your behaviour for the benefit of maintaining your social standing in the world.

Free will is a bizarrely convincing self-delusion.

Not only is free will an illusion but your 'self' is also an illusion.

There is no 'self' who is in control of your life. There is merely an illusion of self. This 'self' is another evolved mental module. It has evolved specifically for the task of retrospectively explaining your behaviour. It cunningly convinces you that you are in control and that you choose your behaviour. But this is an illusion. We need to convince other people that we are in control of our behaviour in order to make alliances and thrive as a social animal.

What better way to convince other people of our self-control than to first convince our 'self' that we are in control.

Then following that logic criminals are not responsible for their behaviour, as they had no choice?

I find it difficult to separate self from behaviour.

However if your theory is correct it follows that Catholiscm is redundant as no free will, it was all pre determined.