According to catholics....refusing to follow the Logos, who is Truth.
But I think ( again ) you are making it way too complicated.
Be a catholic, protestant, lutheran, jw, whatever, - live a good life, love and protect those close to you, do for others as you do for those closest to you, try and leave the world a little better'd for your presence.
On reflection that sounds like Buddhism
-
Originally Posted by lafrica
If you know right from wrong can you live without religion?
Actually thats almost all religions - minus the deity part.Be a catholic, protestant, lutheran, jw, whatever, - live a good life, love and protect those close to you, do for others as you do for those closest to you, try and leave the world a little better'd for your presence.
On reflection that sounds like Buddhism
Well depends on what right and wrong you referring to I guess, if you talking about morals, that comes from society not the bible, if you referring to not eating pork or such its another story.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
If Oprah and Dr Phil and Dr Oz and Dr Dre and Dr Pepper wrote a book and a group of people like those people from Jonestown followed this book as a way of life and "did unto others as you would have them do unto you" and they died happy in their old age, where would they end up?
Religion should really be far simpler than we make it out to be -
The ONE Commandment: Don't be an arsehole.
What more do we need.
-
Well the one I originally came from only had one.
Love your neighbor as yourself and god above all else. <-- that was it, none of this hailmeries or baptized or must go to church crap all the others come up with.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
That was on the first 2 tablets God gave Moses which was broken. When God gave Moses the second edition it was edited out.
Sorry, forgot this part of your Q.
Yes and no.
Not if you in the end reach the destination. But will you? What is the path? How do you know?
So Yes, it matters, because truth matters a very great deal. Truth in some way is the destination, for it is nothing less than God himself, and God is Truth.
Paths can also determine destinations, as we know only too well.
The reason why truth matters needs some elucidation.
For the explanatory language to make any sense, I quickly need to define a few key terms:
* Intellect. The faculty of reason, by which we know and apprehend reality under the species of truth. The term of the intellect is truth. Its end is being (hence ontology); its mechanism is ratio (hence epistemology).
* Will. The faculty by which we choose, ie embrace a value. Is the faculty by which we love. The term of the will is the good.
* Person: that kind of being which has intellect and will. God. Angels. Humans. Personhood is necessarily non-material (ie spiritual).
Intellect and will, then, are the twin powers of the soul (the Imago Dei in us). Though intimately related, they are not the same.
We can only love what we know. To have false or wrong knowledge means that our love is stunted or mitigated to that extent, because the object/subject of our love is blurred and not in focus, and thus the will cannot embrace that value with the clarity and vigour that is proper to love.
Sin is the essential barrier to God and the Kingdom. Sin originates in the will, not the intellect. Sin in essence is choosing a lower good at the expense of a higher good.
Now the intellect presents a choice to the will. But the intellect doesn't actually make the choice, for that is the domain of what a will is -- it is the choosing faculty. And the will is always free to choose something that even the intellect tells it is irrational or wrong or untrue. If the will could not choose freely, then its choice of the 'rational' is necessary, ie unfree - and that would make love impossible, for love requires freedom. To illustrate the point: Which would you choose - a 1959 Morris for R100m, or this 1kg gold bar for R1? The intellect will tell you the latter is rational, reasonable, attractive, etc. But the will is still free to choose the former no matter what the intellect tells it. The intellect can also misrepresent the true value of something, leading the will to make an error - one can only judge the culpability of such a choice by having deep knowledge as to why the person has the mistaken beliefs they have. (This distinction between intellect and will, by the way, explains why education alone cannot solve the problem of evil in the world. Education addresses the intellect. What today addresses the will?)
Knowing the truth is a necessary and very important first step. But it is not sufficient. The good that is the truth must also be embraced, ie loved. Satan knows that God is real and true and that Jesus is the Eternal Word made flesh. Satan is not saved by knowing this truth, because his distortion lies in his will, not his intellect. (That is another reason why the doctrine of "salvation by faith alone" is a false christianity.)
Now in Christian theology (and others), the only barrier to God and the Kingdom is sin. Sin is an act of the will, not the intellect. Informing people (eg through education) cannot by itself make better people, or 'save' them.
Knowing the truth can lead you make better choices. Informed choices. Choices where you both know and love the truth. It can provide many more reasons for delighting in the splendour of creation.
It is a great joy to know why the sky is blue, and that the sun is 93 million miles away, and the astonishing music in the spheres and the mechanics of Newton and the even more astonishing mechanics of atoms and quarks and so on and so forth. Love seeks understanding, and understanding requires knowledge -- and both again provide more reasons for love, in an ever-ascending/descending spiral of being and truth and light. Etcetera.
So, it is better for us to know than not to know. It is better for us to have truth than to live in ignorance. It is better to understand than to be perplexed and confused. In the end we come to see that the truth is not just a thing or an attribute but in fact a Person, a divine person, Yeshua. And as he said, his mission was to bear witness to the truth.
Having said all that, to answer you: It is better to know the full truth about Jesus Christ and His Church than not to know it. The Catholic Church -- despite the many and scandalous failures of its adherents -- teaches the full and whole truth about Christ. That many or even most ignore it is to their shame, and God alone can judge them. But the truth is there for the having. It is free. And it is glorious!
Last edited by Arthur; 26-06-2012 at 06:32 PM.
And we right back to my problem re truth™
You claim your denomination carries/teach this(So does everyone of them) but when I look at the original texts/myth/folklore this claim can not be upheld.
Full Circle for the win!
As for the explanations, that's more philosophy than actual religion, hence my original claim that modern day religion is nothing but Philosophy bolted onto ancient lore to make it work/feel right. To be honest you can do the same with any old story out there, be it the 3 bears and the house of stone or Loawnu the Wise Woman.
Its just pure luck that when they "designed" the original religion they picked Judaism as base instead of one of the Celtic religions. Well bar the fact that there is more than enough of Pagan traditions in there anyway so that they could include druids as well.
Last edited by Elimentals; 26-06-2012 at 06:46 PM.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
Yep - that is an informed conviction, not a fact.The Catholic Church -- despite the many and scandalous failures of its adherents -- teaches the full and whole truth about Christ.
And muslims also have informed convictions...
-
Hehe
I sometimes wonder whether you actually know how large the circle is and whether you've actually bothered to travel its circumference. There's a lot more there than you think. The trip alone means you never end up at the same place.
Oh I know there is a lot more, and I know I have traveled miles to where I am now, but I can ask you the same, as it seems you cling to the philosophy instead of the actual book, something that can be found outside the religion as well.Hehe
I sometimes wonder whether you actually know how large the circle is and whether you've actually bothered to travel its circumference. There's a lot more there than you think. The trip alone means you never end up at the same place.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
I agree with elimentals philosophy must be scripture based if it is not then it is not from God.
I and the voice inside my head(vis a vis my conscience) both agree that Jehovas partenalistic rulership is better than Satans liberal anarchy.
Well kinda, that's what I liked about Old Apostolic. You did not need any funny translations or degrees to try and understand a message. All you had to do was replace the metaphors and you where sorted, it did not matter if you took the missing books or the ones included the philosophy stayed the same.I agree with elimentals philosophy must be scripture based if it is not then it is not from God.
Example's
Whenever the bible talked about water it meant teaching/knowledge (Salt water = bad, pure water = knowledge from god), ground was foundation, light was always the teacher or guide.
So when we start with say Genesis the creation was not physical but the creation of your spirit/soul. When god created light = when you got the 1st idea, separation of waters = separation of good and bad knowledge. Creation of dry land = foundation to build your faith and creating the sun moon and stars = your teachers. Jesus turning water into wine = preaching in a way people would understand/sweetening the lesson so people would listen, Leading the Jews from Egypt through the dry river = keep people to the foundation of god.
I can go on but I am sure you get the idea.
.... and thanks for all the fish.
Or perhaps it was just talking about water ?Whenever the bible talked about water it meant teaching/knowledge
-
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks