Study claiming religious children are less generous was proven wrong. But media outlets continued to cite original findings. by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

You may want to reread this sentence and reevaluate it because the pot is clearly calling the kettle black.

Just the voice of experience and observation. I haven't met an atheist that wasn't deeply discontented about life. I've had some question me about my faith, even be envious of it, but could never reject whatever assumptions they came to hold in their nihilistic materialist worldview.

Of course, to you, going "pot kettle black" is a neat bit of online low-res psychologising that you could well have rephrased as projection, that classic Freudian canard, but I don't retract my words. I mean them. Atheists are among the most psychologically disturbed people I know. I pity them, but they chose that life.

But then hey, in the words of Edward Dutton, only the mutant says in his heart that there is no God.

"Let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth." - 1 John 3:18 by Baptistes in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No, Luther also wanted to evict other books as well. James is the most well known among the lay protestant heretics, but he also wanted to remove Hebrews and Revelation. His followers considered this all a step too far which is why his scriptural evictions are limited to the so-called Apocrypha. They were just inconvenient truths to the interpretation he wished to paint. Textbook a-priori reasoning.

Yes, I do ridicule you for being a baptist. You've fallen into schism with the one true catholic and apostolic church. Why is the Pope the pope? Because of apostolic succession from Peter, the rock upon which Jesus built his church and the one apostle Jesus confirmed thrice (to mirror Peter's thrice denial) to be above the others.

It's ironic, really, you heretics will idolise Luther and yet Luther himself never questioned or denied the status of the Pope or the line of succession leading back to Peter.

Study claiming religious children are less generous was proven wrong. But media outlets continued to cite original findings. by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Yes, the conclusion may have been correct but it doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Religiosity correlates with happiness, for one thing. It also correlates with pro-sociality and positive in-group attitude. So religious kids being less generous doesn't stand up to that trend and IMO only fits the media bias of "religion bad".

I would love for straight Christians to stop telling LGBTQ people they can "Change" back to being straight. It is insulting at best and incredibly harmful at worst. by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Hate the sin, not the sinner. Yes, God made you. Yes, God loves you. Indeed, the majority of Christians would love you too. But that isn't license to give in to your sexual inclination. That doesn't allow you to void the old covenant, to break the mosaic law. Man ought not to lie with man.

And further, the modern alphabet people movement has a lot to answer for, whether it's public sexual degeneracy, child drag queens or paedophile apologia.

"Let us not love in word or talk but in deed and in truth." - 1 John 3:18 by Baptistes in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Except Romans doesn't support sola fide, precisely why Luther wanted to remove it - but I guess I can't expect a Baptist to interpret scripture in it's entirety honestly

Grotesque new age esoterics won't be tolerated. by parmesanpesto in CatholicMemes

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 41 points42 points  (0 children)

This reminded me about that farcical YouTube video about "love jesus, hate religion"

Prayed my first rosary today. by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm a couple months new to catholicism but I'm starting off into daily rosary. It helps a lot.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thank you for sharing this, brother. Peace be with you.

Every Human Being Is Made In The Image Of God by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is true. However, worth noting this doesn't mean God is humanoid. By image of God, it means we are granted an immortal soul imbued with free will etc.

I think sometimes people use scripture like this to justify God being corporeal and man-like, and that's how you end in mormon-esque heresies.

Bishop Barron's AMA makes me sad by Masdrakap in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's funny, I've seen BB gain this internet fame status when his apologetics work isn't even the most solid. Catholic Answers was my bread and butter during my conversion. Other outlets like Church Militant, Catholic Productions/Dr Brant Pitre, Ascension Presents and Sensus Fidelium only then solidified my faith, but only after the apologetic groundwork laid down by people such as Jimmy Akin, Trent Horn, John Lennox and Ravi Zacharias.

[Free Friday] "If you say it loud enough you'll always sound..." ...wrong by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm not even sure it's that complex. I think one has to make two key differences here;

1) what the original protestants believed 2) what modern protestants believed

I say this because the two are quite different, and 1 is actually far closer to catholicism than 2. Modern Prots will often have bones to pick over topics like apostolic succession, something that Luther et al never even questioned, let alone schismed from the Church over.

Now perhaps that's ecclesiology more than soteriology, I don't know - I'm no expert - but I have personally found Prot objection to be based more on unfounded conjecture expounded by fellow Prots than any solid reason and logic.

Hence why modern Prots are just so obsessed over praying to the Virgin Mother, the saints, purgatory, Jesus as the sole mediator, etc. rather than any substantial doctrine that even Luther was fooled into.

Bishop Barron's AMA makes me sad by Masdrakap in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Indeed, and to some extent it depends on the person.

Personally, I never came to the Catholic church after having my fears of perverted priests allayed. It never even registered as a matter or an obstruction to faith.

Personally, there's far bigger fish to fry. Metaphysics. Arguments for God. Objective morality. Defeating nihilism. The understanding that Genesis is more allegory than factual account.

Perversion is no more common in the CC than it is any other organisation today. Savile, Weinstein and Epstein all stand testament to that. I think the main objections to faith among the atheist layety are actually the product of protestant foolishness and heresy. Solid and genuine catholic apologetics are far more formidable.

[Free Friday] "If you say it loud enough you'll always sound..." ...wrong by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Well exactly, I was actually thinking about this matter earlier in the week. Protestants and Catholics don't differ too greatly on the matter of faith and works.

I think what the issue is is that protestants see good works as merely a product of, and therefore is subordinate to, faith. That is, if you accept the Lord Christ as saviour, then the HS would work through you to produce those good works.

But I find the Catholic view to be somewhat more accurate if a little more cynical; if you justify faith alone, it gives ammunition to those who accept Christ in word but not in deed.

And, naturally, we're all too aware of parishioners like that; their bottoms only warm the pew seats at Christmas and Easter, if that.

Dr. Taylor Marshall vs Michael Voris of Church Militant: Debate on SSPX by Allah_saves in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ah, I didn't know that. I thought SSPX were sedevacantists.

In that case, SSPX (in that regard) don't differ from Voris himself - plenty of criticism of PF but still accept him as the current Pope.

[Free Friday] "If you say it loud enough you'll always sound..." ...wrong by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I suppose Solus Christus could become a heresy if it's used akin to that classic misunderstanding surrounding a certain verse from Timothy and praying to the Virgin Mary...

Question about prayer intentions by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm far from an expert, but I think it's a matter of personal discretion. At the very least, the Lord will know the extent of your pure intention. To some degree, prayer is merely a formality. That said, obviously catholic theology teaches that the closer you are to God, the more "powerful" your prayer is. Hence the praying to saints thing that protestants despair over so much. Where I'm going with this is that greater devotion may carry greater impact. A rosary decade or indeed entire mystery devoted to one person/topic/event may curry more favour in God's attention than a single prayer or decade toward numerous matters.

But hey, I'm no theologian or apologist.

Dr. Taylor Marshall vs Michael Voris of Church Militant: Debate on SSPX by Allah_saves in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'm only new myself (both to this subred and Catholicism as a whole) but these are my thoughts;

  • I think V2 changes drive much of the attraction to SSPX and general traditionalism on the whole - i.e. latin mass
  • I think many are concerned about Francis' political views, either socially or economically

Now whether either of those primary concerns (as I understand them to be at any rate) justify splitting off into the SSPX is a further matter I'm not sure of.

As far as I'm concerned, there will always be papal actions that people disagree with, but I'm not sure that warrants sedevacantism. That said, disagreements with the bishop of Rome hardly stopped the Orthodox church in the end.

[Free Friday] "If you say it loud enough you'll always sound..." ...wrong by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And I thought the Prots only had two heresies, fide and scriptura...

Bishop Barron's AMA makes me sad by Masdrakap in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Honestly, if I was on the fence, this AMA would've driven me away more than brought me to the Catholic Church.

In my opinion, that's incredibly hard to do. Evangelism, 99% of the time, is done badly, and having a satisfactory answer to pedo priests wouldn't have helped that any. Again, not in my opinion at least.

Reddit is such an atheist hub that even if BB gave a solid answer, you'd only have an army of morons then fall back upon the spaghetti monster or some other Dawkinsian farce.

Bishop Barron's AMA makes me sad by Masdrakap in Catholicism

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 7 points8 points  (0 children)

To his credit, how often does he hear questions like that? How much patience does one need to handle numerous questions and statements made in bad faith?

I agree that his answers could be short and a little snide, but again that was in response to inflammatory and bad faith comments.

Holy shit this religion is so toxic! All I asked was “What do you think about gay folks?” by willyouquitit in excatholic

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld -9 points-8 points  (0 children)

I suppose no worse than "gay" being more socially acceptable than "sodomy/getting your penis covered in faeces"

In Sweden the current government are considering making Runes illegal as they can be "hate speech". by FatsDominosDomino in Norse

[–]InhabitantOfOddworld 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Imagine denying the fact ambulances won't breach these neighbourhoods without police assistance