Fellow atheists/agnostics with young kids. What’s your play?
- Thread starter General Roman Malaise
- Start date
Hey @BrianNole777, just an fyi, aquinas relics will be in dc on 11/29-30 and in Charlottesville with a whole day of events on 12/2Read some Thomas Aquinas and see if it's all "child-like beliefs."
I was raised Methodist but am agnostic, while my wife is an ex-Catholic turned non-denominational. She does the same thing you do, but I tend to focus on the valuable earthly life lessons about loss being the price of love, about taking time to stop and appreciate the little moments that make life great, etc. Any time I can avoid the trap or spiritual mumbo jumbo, I do. And the only religious lesson I give my kids (besides answering their questions on religions) is that it’s probably flawed logic to assume that any one group of people on Earth has really any clue about the divine mechanisms of the universe, and especially that you’re more likely to have divine truth because of the geographic region you were born in. I find that the height of arrogance.
That argument can go both ways, though. You could have been born into the true religion and rejected it.
That would be a massive error.
This thread went exactly how I thought it would when I read the first post.
I have always had this question (will present in a series of points & comments):
1) Universe/Earth is billions of years old (or whatever the number may be) & created by big bang theory
2) So 10000% of the current living organisms on the planet today from the blade of grass to the human being all started from the same "seed" if you will (all came from square one after the big bang where all gases, molecules, etc formed the very first amoebas or whatever)
3) So for the sake of argument, all living organisms in the known world started with the same advantages, so why after billions of years is there only one single living creature (humans) with full blown conscious thought and are as advanced as we are (yes I know animals have feelings and all that, but they aren't inventing the lightbulb).
The God view makes sense for me here in that it would appear there was some intervention somewhere to make Humans what we are today.
BUT
The scientific view could also be that to our simple human brains we are very different than say a dog or cow or whatever but at the end of the day, technically very similar in that we all have limbs, eyes, hearts, lungs, etc......so maybe the spectrum of evolution is just so vast we can't comprehend it and it just happens to be where we are at today in our little blip on earth.
I just don't know.
Thoughts?
there have been multiple humanoid species over the course of time
the process of evolution/competition/breeding between the species has resulted in one species remaining
Agreed.
All those Native Americans living in the 1200's in what is now the united States who didn't know white man existed or the pacific islander people who never saw a white person really got the shaft for not being able to accept Jesus Christ as their savior and have to spend their eternity in hell.
***this is coming from someone who is Christian by definition, but organized religion in the form of Catholic vs Methodist vs Lutheran, etc. is for silliness. How Jesus spoke and interacted could not be farther from sitting on a wood bench on Sunday mornings performing all the ritualistic things......just my 2 cents.
And I am not saying I would disagree with that......
But that is saying the humanoid "line" if you will has continued to evolve to where we are today.
My question is why has it been the humanoid line? Why not a large predatory cat line or something?
Physically there are thousands of species better equipped to handle physical survival so why has only the humanoid line evolved mentally enough to make up for all those short comings?
This was one of the things I started thinking about in high school that made me question religion in general. It didn't make sense to me then and still doesn't make sense to me now.
yes, humanoid species have evolved to where we are today
other than that, not really sure what you're asking
That's not my view at all! Nor is it the view of most Christians. There's a theological concept called "invincible ignorance."
People that have never heard of Christ have the possibility of salvation as well.
@JustSayOV
Vincible Ignorance and Invincible Ignorance
“The Word of God is a light for our path. We must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. This is how moral conscience is formed.” (CCC 1802)
People that lived before Jesus can certainly go to Heaven. Read up on "invincible ignorance."
Also, without a Church, there wouldn't be a Bible. Jesus's message wouldn't get out. The "rituals" are based on Jesus's teachings.
How come out of the billions of living organisms since the big bang, there has only been one branch or line (humanoids) that have evolved mentally to where we are today.
That's my question.
Every living thing on the planet got its start from the same point billions of years ago and the earth seems plenty big enough to support more than one mentally advanced species no?
Like why isn't there was some 4 legged creature in Asia that has also developed a written language or figured out how to start a fire?
I don't know about other denominations, but as far as catholicism goes, that is not in fact the doctrine.
That's not my view at all! Nor is it the view of most Christians. There's a theological concept called "invincible ignorance."
People that have never heard of Christ have the possibility of salvation as well.
@JustSayOV
Vincible Ignorance and Invincible Ignorance
“The Word of God is a light for our path. We must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. This is how moral conscience is formed.” (CCC 1802)www.google.com
But @BrianNole777 .....thats the whole point. That link reads more like something "the church" came up with fill in this plot hole. Just seems awfully convenient.
Saying "they know not what they do" and "they don't know the right hand from the left" indeed implies ignorance of people, but i don't neccessarily feel those comments are intended to mean "yes the indian from 1200 AD can be saved becasue of this."
Heck for the first 1000 years AD I would say the people in the early Church and all that woudl nto of even knows that the other half of the world existed (pacific islanders, native americans in future US, etc)
The sign of the cross and the systematic kneeling and not kneeling during catholic service and all the other recited weekly things are SOMEONE ELSE'S interpretations of how they wanted to base things on Jesus's teaching.
Jesus was not catholic, methodist, lutheran, etc. Thats my point.
You're not completely wrong in your description -- but that shouldn't make it hard. The nature of theology is that as it develops, tensions and other hard questions are identified, and then people think about them for a couple of hundred years to either (i) discard the original premise, or (ii) determine whether a potential "solution" reconciles with the basic original thinking. (Jaro Pelikan wrote a whole book about how one of things that always had to be 'solved for' in the development of christian doctrine was whether it could be reconciled with baseline principles about mary; some propositions couldn't and were discarded.) This is no different from other aspects of christian doctrine, or for that matter, 'science'.
As to the ignorance of APIs/NAs, etc., so what? They had an equally if not more difficult conundrum to solve for -- the likes of Plato and Aristotle.
Last edited:
I don't think i'd put you in this category, but there are those that confuse ritual with doctrine. Various christian sects have rituals, just as they exist for a whole variety of civic events (national anthem before a football game?). A ritual is not magic. But what a ritual is intended to do is remind you of something underlying it that is, in fact, important. For example, kneeling is more simply recognizing the reverence for God (and particularly so during the communion rite, where we believe in His presence). Just as an anthem during a football game reminds us of the freedoms which allow us to recreate, and standing for it underscore that.. In either case, if you don't follow it, you don't suddenly burst into flames, but you're probably missing something good too.
Because we were the first. We were the first to master the use of fire. We were the first to use tools. We were the first to make weapons. We were the first to create language. Then we used those things to wipe out or domesticate the competition. We won evolution on this planet.
I meant the Sacraments like baptism, Eucharist, Confession, etc.
Those were instituted by Jesus.
Sacraments
Sacraments, outward signs of inward grace, instituted by Christ for our sanctification (Catechismus concil. Trident., II, n. 4, ex S. August “De catechizandis rudibus”).
No, it doesn't make sense. Is the OT - except as specifically revised by Jesus - the Word of God or isn't it?
Are we supposed to guess or have faith?
Neat
The only reason Hell exists is because people choose it. I've talked to tons of atheists that said they prefer Hell over Heaven because Heaven would be "boring."
I always wondered if the Earth is billions of years old, why hasn’t the Earth been pulverized into oblivion by asteroids? The last known major hit was 67 million years ago. Say a planet killer only comes around every 100 million years, then we should have been hit hard 70-80x by now rendering the planet into space dust.
Maybe we are just that lucky…but what are the odds of that?
The Bible teaches a final revelation will occur at the end. So anyone past or present that have not had a chance to receive Christ will still have that opportunity. There is a pattern in the Bible of God giving people multiple opportunities.
if you are right, why would any planets exist? they'd all be pulverized into space dust
I appreciate your posts @Aardvark86 , I have been a fan since The Master and Margarita......
I think maybe a simpler version of what I am implying (or trying to imply is....and I am married to a Catholic by the way and have gone to more Catholic services than any other) is I guess it always kind of bothered me the use of "ritual" or doctrine or whatever during services seems like more of a cover up or a way to check a box for some (definitely not for all) to say "yep i am a good Christian", but I guess in my simplistic view, if I spend time each week listening to the gospels while driving to work and/or having self reflection on what they mean to me, in some cases that is viewed as "not as good" as the every Sunday church goer (regardless of if they are getting anything our of church or not).
So ultimately the "based on Christ's teaching" or implication that todays Church is definitely how Jesus wanted us to do it is ignorant.
I have zero issues with anyone that likes it....if its what works for them great, I just don't like when implications are made so definitively on something that honestly none of us truly know the right answer
Those are great questions. You can search "Catholic Answers" for thousands of free answers if you're interested.
It's a radio show in San Diego. They also have tons of free videos on YouTube.
www.catholic.com
Not all planets are solid. I would imagine Jupiter (with its stronger gravity) pulls more into it than us but also has the ability to burn up larger asteroids than Earth’s atmosphere. But yes, if the universe is that old, solids would eventually hit other solids creating dust that would then eventually condense to form larger solids that eventually hit each other and so on so forth.
So . . . just disregard the the first part? That's what God wants?
And where do you stand on the nutty Book of Revelation? You can't tell me that Jesus had anything to do with that abomination.
I don't disregard it all.
The Book of Revelation is basically good news in that God wins in the end.
With the way the world is going, we may be a couple decades from it happening.
Aren't we supposed to be ruled by the Antichrist first? Or is that another part of scripture you disregard?
If the end is nigh, that must mean the AC is already here. So who is it?
no doubt, ritual does not make a good christian, full stop.
if you want to see a really interesting short vid, watch bishop barron's review of the coen's True Grit. A fundamental problem with today's church is there are too many maddies and not enough roosters, and worse yet, not enough people who are both maddie and rooster.
Can't be Trump. I mean the AC certainly wouldn't lose a mere election once he had power - would he?
Given all the support Biden poured into genocide, he might look like a good candidate - except he lost power, too. So that can't be.
Putin is a possibility. Certainly a bad actor. But he's a rather minor player. Ditto for Netanyahu.
Xi has a lot of power and is growing it, but he doesn't seem all that terrible. Then again, the real AC probably wouldn't seem all that bad, would he?
