Why not hedonism?

Started by Daniel, January 13, 2019, 12:21:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Xavier

Conscience, compared to the Holy Spirit, is a very weak guide, although not one to be totally rejected; conscience only bears witness to the eternal law God decreed from of old, what God spoke long ago, and in a certain sense, only what God prohibits e.g. Thou shalt not kill. But the Holy Spirit, in a much more perfect and wonderful way, after He begins to indwell us Christians in Baptism and by our faith and love of Christ Crucified, He also tells us what God wishes us to do, e.g. to love God and our neighbor, positively, and also in specific situations of life, guides us by His signal graces and so on. Conscience is good, but only a natural guide. As grace builds on and perfects nature, so the Holy Spirit perfects the natural faculty of conscience by the light of faith by which He enlightens our mind, and the fire of His love that inflames our hearts with love of God.

Quote from: DanielDo you just mean living a life in obedience to the Catholic Church, or do you mean something else? If the former, I'm not seeing how that's reconcilable to the more-intuitive idea that we ought to live our lives out of love for God

Daniel, who told you that loving God above all things is the highest ideal of all (which is true, and a good thing)? Was it your conscience? Very good. In such a case, you can be almost certain that Jesus Christ is God, since He explains this is the heart and purpose of the law, better than even the best rabbis ever could. "[33] And the multitudes hearing it, were in admiration at his doctrine. [34] But the Pharisees hearing that he had silenced the Sadducees, came together: [35] And one of them, a doctor of the law, asking him, tempting him: [36] Master, which is the greatest commandment in the law? [37] Jesus said to him: Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind. [38] This is the greatest and the first commandment. [39] And the second is like to this: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. [40] On these two commandments dependeth the whole law and the prophets." http://www.drbo.org/chapter/47022.htm

So also is the Catholic Church certainly the means God has used for all to come to love of Him, since no one else has ever taught the world that God has done so much for man, and most richly deserves the love of our whole hearts and more. If, therefore you are sure God is to be loved with our whole hearts and that the purest motive for all our actions is love of God (which is true), then you should consider being Catholic, since only the Catholic Church has ever and most perfectly taught this. E.g. from Trent's Catechism: "In the first three Commandments, which have been explained, God, the supreme good, is, as it were, the subject matter; in the others, it is the good of our neighbour. The former require the highest love, the latter the love next to the highest. The former have to do with our last end, the latter with those things that lead us to our end. Again, the love of God terminates in God Himself, for God is to be loved above all things for His own sake; but the love of our neighbour originates in, and is to be regulated by, the love of God. If we love our parents, obey our masters, respect our superiors, our ruling principle in doing so should be that God is their Creator, and wishes to give pre-eminence to those by whose cooperation He governs and protects other men; and as He requires that we yield a dutiful respect to such persons, we should do so, because He deems them worthy of this honour. If, then, we honour our parents, the tribute is paid to God rather than to man." http://www.catholicapologetics.info/thechurch/catechism/TenCommandments-fourth.shtml God bless.
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Tales

QuoteI don't see how most of this couldn't be said for a Muslim.  He follows an organized religion by listening and doing, and receiving and living it. Are you just saying "by God's grace YOU happen to be following the right religion, so stop thinking about it"?

I am talking with a man whom is so deeply, deeply mired in his thoughts that he cannot see the obvious realities around him, such as that torturing children is wrong.  He has to get outside of his mind before he's ever going to leave the quagmire he's put himself into.  I am not much discussing theology with him, for it only feeds his problem.  I see obviously where your comment is coming from, but its misplaced.

Daniel's problem is not going to be fixed by more detailed theological discussion.  This dance has been ongoing for years and it seems to only get worse (again, we've now reached the point where he doesn't know that torturing children is wrong.  Last month he asked if cannibalism is wrong.  At this rate, during Lent he'll want to discuss the morality of eating children).  Shall we discuss theology with him some more, or is it time to change tact?

I used to discuss politics with leftists for a good long while before finally realizing how fruitless it is.  Their problems will not be fixed head-on with more debate and argument.  They will only come to sense once they live it - let them fail in their leftism or let them mature out of it via cummulative life experiences.  But talk is pointless.  If Daniel cannot think his way out of the hole of intense skepticism he's dug himself into, then he needs to try something radically different.  By the way, I give this example not to say that Daniel is a leftist.

Greg's analysis for the flat-earthers was correct - and his solution to their problem was not to construct better arguments fo convince them.

Daniel would be far better served by putting the energy he puts into thinking about theology into doing something else.  For most men that would entail forming a family, working hard as a father, praying hard and working in the community.  Magically then one is not so concerned about dotting every i and crossing every t in Christian theology.  He'd be free to live the Christian life without this endless and debilitating theological scrupulosity he's stuck in.

:pray1:

Kreuzritter

#197
Quote from: Daniel on February 28, 2019, 06:27:15 PM
Quote
Not an idea. The knowledge is not that of a system of signs somehow corresponding to reality like that of the rational intellect, nor even a verbally unexpressed idea, but is immediate; the heart knows its own acts, what it wills and what it does.
What do you mean by 'immediate'?

I mean knowledge isn't always in the form of true propositions about reality. What the rational intellect does in dealing with the world, to be brief, is form concepts among concepts which it then imposes upon it as a system, and then in relation to the internal rules of that system and how it relates to reality, it judges if some particular statements made within that system "apply", "correspond" or "are the case". When we're judging the truth of statements involving concepts, we're not judging or dealing directly with reality. Rather, we're judging a representation of a conceptual scheme and thus only mediately dealing with reality.

It's somewhat analagous to how abstract musical notation relates to an actual piece of music; the "sheet music" may, according to the rules of musical notation, "correctly" denote the piece of music and allow for others who understand these rules and have experience of the phenomena the signs point to to find and reproduce it; but the sheet music is not the actual music somehow "once again", and to one who hears the music, he has actual, immediate knowledge of that music in itself, a knowledge that doesn't involve any statements or judgments of their truth.

Quote
Quote]My intention was to present it as a economy of salvation. I wanted only to express that "ignorance" of the "wrongness" of intrinsic evils does not change what is in the heart of the man who commits them. Evil does as evil is, and what is evil cannot unite with God.
I think I get what you're saying. Good deeds follow from good people, and evil deeds follow from evil people. Each man is either good or evil, and there's nothing he can do about it (he can't even know whether or not he is evil). But didn't the Catholic Church condemn all this?

But you're taking what I've said out of the context of grace. Men without God are lost, and all of us are wicked, by degree. God, through an act of prevenient grace, announces himself to the spirit and frees the human subject to make a choice in favour of or against him. "Good" here means one who, by grace, chooses God, and begin to be transformed by him, because despite his sins, despite his evil desires, he embraces a love for God, good, truth, beauty and tries to fight against his fallen nature. It's not that the reprobate can't, due to a deficiency of power, change his ways and choose good; it's that he won't.

Quote
But regardless, if our judgements can be wrong then our experiences still cannot bring us knowledge.

Experiences constitute knowledge in themselves. Just not knowledge that can necessarily be expressed in a language or fitted into a system.

Kreuzritter

Quote from: Non Nobis on February 28, 2019, 02:09:42 AM
Quote from: Kreuzritter on February 27, 2019, 07:02:44 AM
I wanted only to express that "ignorance" of the "wrongness" of intrinsic evils does not change what is in the heart of the man who commits them. Evil does as evil is, and what is evil cannot unite with God.

If I KNOW the intrinsic evil of abortion, and don't do it (or wish it), I have no evil in my heart (regarding that matter).  If I claim I don't KNOW the intrinsic evil of abortion, and do it, then because it is in fact intrinsic the heart really "knows" in its way what I am doing, and "evil does as evil is" and cannot unite with God.

But if I DON'T know that abortion is intrinsically evil (or claim I don't), I still may not do it at all, but also I don't condemn others for doing it, or protest them, or stay away from occasions that would tempt me (sex outside of marriage), or pray for help for myself or others.

At the actual moment of an intrinsically evil act, intellectual knowledge of its objective evil is too late, but the heart knows the evil it is doing as it is done. That seems reasonable. But intellectual knowledge (or a forceful reminder) that an act is intrinsically evil can help you not to get to that moment. I think this is one reason why God tells us "Thou shalt not kill".

Does this make some sense?

Makes sense to me.

As I said, I'm really concerned with over-intellectualising morality, and I'm also completely dismissive of the central enterprise of ethics to "discover" and "prove" value and moral commandments through applied reason. I'm in no wise criticisng explicit commandments or the various practical reasons I can think of for their existence.

Daniel

#199
Quote from: Kreuzritter on March 01, 2019, 04:00:51 PMI mean knowledge isn't always in the form of true propositions about reality. What the rational intellect does in dealing with the world, to be brief, is form concepts among concepts which it then imposes upon it as a system, and then in relation to the internal rules of that system and how it relates to reality, it judges if some particular statements made within that system "apply", "correspond" or "are the case". When we're judging the truth of statements involving concepts, we're not judging or dealing directly with reality. Rather, we're judging a representation of a conceptual scheme and thus only mediately dealing with reality.

It's somewhat analagous to how abstract musical notation relates to an actual piece of music; the "sheet music" may, according to the rules of musical notation, "correctly" denote the piece of music and allow for others who understand these rules and have experience of the phenomena the signs point to to find and reproduce it; but the sheet music is not the actual music somehow "once again", and to one who hears the music, he has actual, immediate knowledge of that music in itself, a knowledge that doesn't involve any statements or judgments of their truth.

[. . .]

Experiences constitute knowledge in themselves. Just not knowledge that can necessarily be expressed in a language or fitted into a system.
So basically, 'immediate knowledge' is raw sense data? But if that's the case, how are we to gain access to it? As soon as we make any sort of judgement, the pure knowledge becomes corrupted by our judgement and ceases to be knowledge.


QuoteBut you're taking what I've said out of the context of grace. Men without God are lost, and all of us are wicked, by degree. God, through an act of prevenient grace, announces himself to the spirit and frees the human subject to make a choice in favour of or against him. "Good" here means one who, by grace, chooses God, and begin to be transformed by him, because despite his sins, despite his evil desires, he embraces a love for God, good, truth, beauty and tries to fight against his fallen nature. It's not that the reprobate can't, due to a deficiency of power, change his ways and choose good; it's that he won't.
How can the evil man change his character and his actions if he does not first know that he's evil? If 'good' is defined as conformity with God, and if God is unknowable, then it's basically hit or miss. Or perhaps I'm misunderstanding you.

Or consider me, as an example. I profess to love God. My love for God is the very reason that I am unwilling to submit to the Catholic Church, because for all I know the Catholic Church may not be from God (at worst, the Catholic Church could be a deliberate deceiver and enemy of God, and at best the Catholic Church would be an incompetent teacher whose false teachings come between us and God. In either case it would be bad to submit).
Yet the Catholic Church, without any proof of her divine authority, claims that I am evil. As if I somehow know or should know that she is from God, and as if my unwillingness to submit to her is the same thing as an unwillingness to submit to God. She then further threatens me with hell if I don't believe her dogmas, obey her laws and moral teachings, and receive her sacraments.
I sincerely do not know whether the Catholic Church is right. It's not that I have the knowledge and am pretending not to have it... I honestly don't have the knowledge. Or if I do, I don't know that I do. In either case, I don't know which course of action to take. So given my current lack of knowledge, I literally can't do the right thing. (Unless the "right thing" is nothing more than to take an educated guess and hope to get lucky.)

Tales

QuoteOr consider me, as an example. I profess to love God. My love for God is the very reason that I am unwilling to submit to the Catholic Church, because for all I know the Catholic Church may not be from God

Are you a Christian whom doubts the Church or just a deist?

Daniel

#201
Quote from: Davis Blank - EG on March 02, 2019, 09:07:18 PM
QuoteOr consider me, as an example. I profess to love God. My love for God is the very reason that I am unwilling to submit to the Catholic Church, because for all I know the Catholic Church may not be from God

Are you a Christian whom doubts the Church or just a deist?
With regard to my baptism (assuming there is such a thing as baptism), I am a Christian.

With regard to my beliefs, I am currently neither a Christian nor a deist.

I 'would' believe in whichever religion is the true religion. But I can't, since I don't know which of the religions that is. I'm pretty sure it's beyond man's power to ever know... even if man lived for a million years, and knew everything there was to know about every religion which has ever existed and which ever will exist, he will still not be able to figure out which one is true. (He might be able to eliminate some of them. But even if we suppose that he narrowed the list down to a single religion, he's still in no position to know whether or not that particular religion is true.) Either the knowledge must be given to him immediately by God (and in such a way that he knows, unmistakably, that the knowledge has come from God), or else he can simply never know. But so long as he doesn't know, he shouldn't claim that he knows. And neither should he risk offending God by blindly wagering his mind and heart on a religion which might be offensive to God. He should just wait around, not committing himself to any sort of religion or set of beliefs, until God chooses to give him the knowledge he needs. If and only if God gives him that knowledge, then can he practice the true religion and hold that religion's dogmas to be true.
edit - But I realize that what I just said may be hypocritical, since I have no way of knowing that what I just said is true and that what I just said doesn't offend God. But I think this might be unavoidable... maybe we just can't not offend God. Still, I'd think that believing in something false is worse than withholding belief. Because when you withhold belief, at least you're still open to the truth. And when you withhold belief, you aren't sacrificing to idols rather than to God.

edit - Sorry for the wall of text.

Tales

QuoteDaniel's wall of analysis paralysis

Allow me to paralyze you further.

How do you know that your hypothetical god does not equally care about the seemingly mundane actions of the day?  You assume he's greatly offended by worshipping idols and the like, but why do you not also assume he's just as offended when you wear that blue shirt instead of the green one he planned for you from all eternity?  Perhaps this offends him even more.

Do you hold this standard for all areas of your life?  You do not even know if your hypothetical god or afterlife even exist, but there are other things you do know.  You know you will die one day (or is this in doubt too?).  Why not then require similar standards of certainty towards the actions of the day which, perhaps, could result in death.  For example, that midnight McDonalds run might result in death, do you know for certain it will not?  Death is far more certain to you than this hypothetical god of which you speak, yet you do not let uncertainty over life-or-death decisions prevent you from making them.  Why do you carve out a needless exception for God which paralyzes you?

God prepared the Jews for the coming of His Son.  He held their hands for thousands of years to prepare them.  When He came, most did not know it was Him, at least not to the standards of certainty that you require of this knowledge.  Why do you expect higher certainty now then when Jesus Himself walked amongst the Jews?

Non Nobis

Quote from: Davis Blank - EG on March 01, 2019, 07:20:55 AM
QuoteI don't see how most of this couldn't be said for a Muslim.  He follows an organized religion by listening and doing, and receiving and living it. Are you just saying "by God's grace YOU happen to be following the right religion, so stop thinking about it"?

I am talking with a man whom is so deeply, deeply mired in his thoughts that he cannot see the obvious realities around him, such as that torturing children is wrong.  He has to get outside of his mind before he's ever going to leave the quagmire he's put himself into.  I am not much discussing theology with him, for it only feeds his problem.  I see obviously where your comment is coming from, but its misplaced.

Daniel's problem is not going to be fixed by more detailed theological discussion.  This dance has been ongoing for years and it seems to only get worse (again, we've now reached the point where he doesn't know that torturing children is wrong.  Last month he asked if cannibalism is wrong.  At this rate, during Lent he'll want to discuss the morality of eating children).  Shall we discuss theology with him some more, or is it time to change tact?

I used to discuss politics with leftists for a good long while before finally realizing how fruitless it is.  Their problems will not be fixed head-on with more debate and argument.  They will only come to sense once they live it - let them fail in their leftism or let them mature out of it via cummulative life experiences.  But talk is pointless.  If Daniel cannot think his way out of the hole of intense skepticism he's dug himself into, then he needs to try something radically different.  By the way, I give this example not to say that Daniel is a leftist.

Greg's analysis for the flat-earthers was correct - and his solution to their problem was not to construct better arguments fo convince them.

Daniel would be far better served by putting the energy he puts into thinking about theology into doing something else.  For most men that would entail forming a family, working hard as a father, praying hard and working in the community.  Magically then one is not so concerned about dotting every i and crossing every t in Christian theology.  He'd be free to live the Christian life without this endless and debilitating theological scrupulosity he's stuck in.

:pray1:

Sorry; I was reading the post I answered outside of the full context of this thread. I think your thoughts above make a lot of sense.

It is hard to know how to help someone whose thinking has gone amuck.  If you just say, go do something different, and leave him, he may just continue his favorite activity of thinking and go further amuck. Do you have to go "cold turkey" on directly considering the actual things he says, when he is saying them to you?

That being said, I think you are right that he needs a radical change away from endless theological speculation. 

I appreciate your exchange with Daniel (above; I haven't read it all).  You obviously aren't only saying "go do something different" but are also engaging with Daniel about his own thinking. Maybe we have to do both.  But I think we have to pray for SOME kind of radical change... or maybe God will just help Daniel slowly "drift away" from his nonsense, due to a variety of things in his life.
[Matthew 8:26]  And Jesus saith to them: Why are you fearful, O ye of little faith? Then rising up he commanded the winds, and the sea, and there came a great calm.

[Job  38:1-5]  Then the Lord answered Job out of a whirlwind, and said: [2] Who is this that wrappeth up sentences in unskillful words? [3] Gird up thy loins like a man: I will ask thee, and answer thou me. [4] Where wast thou when I laid up the foundations of the earth? tell me if thou hast understanding. [5] Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

Jesus, Mary, I love Thee! Save souls!

Daniel

Quote from: Davis Blank - EG on March 03, 2019, 10:36:12 PM
QuoteDaniel's wall of analysis paralysis

Allow me to paralyze you further.

How do you know that your hypothetical god does not equally care about the seemingly mundane actions of the day?  You assume he's greatly offended by worshipping idols and the like, but why do you not also assume he's just as offended when you wear that blue shirt instead of the green one he planned for you from all eternity?  Perhaps this offends him even more.

Do you hold this standard for all areas of your life?  You do not even know if your hypothetical god or afterlife even exist, but there are other things you do know.  You know you will die one day (or is this in doubt too?).  Why not then require similar standards of certainty towards the actions of the day which, perhaps, could result in death.  For example, that midnight McDonalds run might result in death, do you know for certain it will not?  Death is far more certain to you than this hypothetical god of which you speak, yet you do not let uncertainty over life-or-death decisions prevent you from making them.  Why do you carve out a needless exception for God which paralyzes you?

I don't know... maybe those trivial things do offend God.

But what's the solution? Seems to me that this is reason to just give up on God altogether. Just do whatever we want, and we'd probably also want to hate God, because He's a monster.
But you have something else in mind?


QuoteGod prepared the Jews for the coming of His Son.  He held their hands for thousands of years to prepare them.  When He came, most did not know it was Him, at least not to the standards of certainty that you require of this knowledge.  Why do you expect higher certainty now then when Jesus Himself walked amongst the Jews?
Maybe most of them were damned. Or maybe many of them knew more than you think they knew.

Xavier

#205
Daniel has said he doesn't pray. That's where things begin to go wrong, because we can't save our soul without prayer: "One day you admonished me: "Ani, you will be lost if you don't pray more." In truth I prayed very little, and always reluctantly and with annoyance. You were undoubtedly right ... Prayer is the first step toward God. It is always decisive, especially prayer to her who is the Mother of God, whose name we are not permitted to say. Devotion to her draws innumerable souls away from the devil, souls whose sins would otherwise have cast them into his hands ...      Praying is the easiest thing on earth, and justly so, for God linked salvation to this simplest of actions. To those who pray assiduously, God grants, bit by bit, so much light and strength that even a drowning sinner is able to raise himself up definitively through prayer, even though he be immersed in mud up to his chest. In fact, in my last years of life I no longer prayed, and thus deprived myself of the graces without which no one can be saved." Link

Daniel, if you do not wish to take even simple 15 minutes to pray 5 decades of the Rosary every day, which you should try to do, at least wear the Scapular, say an Our Father, 3 Hail Marys, the Glory Be, and some other short and simple prayers (even in your own words) whenever we can. It may well be a start and help you save your soul. We're discussing these things here only to help you save your soul in charity, and so we hope you will at least begin to do that. Jesus and Mary have shown a million times that they accept all who come to Them. God will give you His grace, blessings and help, if you call on the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary often, with love and reverence.

So to say praying to God is too risky and such things is a trap. A trap for your soul laid by the enemy. Pray, always pray. Even in simple words. Whenever you can. Speak to God as if He were your Father. Yes, God's Majesty is great and He is our King, but He is also our Most Loving Father. And so, in spite of our sins, God loves us and waits for us to call on Him, and if we do in sincere love, He comes to us. Jesus is our great High Priest and atoned for our sins; Mother Mary intercedes powerfully. Call on Jesus and Mary and you will know. Make one good confession and everything will be all right. Don't wait till it may be too late. Love God, do good, pray, and seek the Truth.

QuoteEven though I trod tortuous byways, God sought me out. I prepared the way for grace by means of works of natural charity I often did by the natural inclination of my character. At times, too, God beckoned me to a church. When, despite work at the office during the day, I took care of my sick mother, no small sacrifice for me, I strongly felt these attractions of God ... The pleasures of the world, however, flowed over this grace like a torrent. The thorns choked out the wheat. Rationalizing that religion is sentimentalism, according to the manner it was discussed in the office, I cast this grace to the ground, like so many others ... Once you reprimanded me because in church, rather than genuflecting, I made only a hasty nod of my head ... I already no longer believed in the presence of Christ in the Blessed Sacrament. I now believe it, though only naturally, in the manner that one believes in a storm, the signs and effects of which one perceives ... In the interim, I had arranged a religion for myself. The general opinion in the office, that after death souls would return to this world in other beings and would pass through yet other beings in an endless succession, pleased me. With this, I banished the distressing problem of the hereafter to the point that it no longer troubled me. Why did you not remind me of the parable of the rich man and poor Lazarus, in which the narrator, Christ, immediately after their deaths, sent one to Hell and the other to Paradise? But, what would this reminder have accomplished? Nothing more than your pious advice ... Bit by bit I found a god, one privileged enough to be called a god, and distant enough that I didn't have to deal with him ...      Strange! On that very [final] morning, the idea that I could, after all, go to Mass again came to me unexpectedly. It sounded to me like a supplication. Clear and determined, my "No!" nipped the thought in the bud. I must finish with this once and for all, and I assumed all the consequences."
Bible verses on walking blamelessly with God, after being forgiven from our former sins. Some verses here: https://dailyverses.net/blameless

"[2] He that walketh without blemish, and worketh justice:[3] He that speaketh truth in his heart, who hath not used deceit in his tongue: Nor hath done evil to his neighbour: nor taken up a reproach against his neighbours.(Psalm 14)

"[2] For in many things we all offend. If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man."(James 3)

"[14] And do ye all things without murmurings and hesitations; [15] That you may be blameless, and sincere children of God, without reproof, in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation; among whom you shine as lights in the world." (Phil 2:14-15)

Tales

QuoteI don't know... maybe those trivial things do offend God.

But what's the solution? Seems to me that this is reason to just give up on God altogether. Just do whatever we want, and we'd probably also want to hate God, because He's a monster.
But you have something else in mind?

I am glad you asked.

You do the same thing you do about the rest of your life.  It is truly a possibility that any action you take could kill you - if you walk to the bathroom now and that's the moment an airplane engine crashes through onto the commode, then you are toast whereas you would not be had you remained here chatting with little old me.  But do you let this uncertainty paralyze you to the state that you grab a water bottle to relieve yourself in?  We all pray you don't.  And besides, perhaps if only you had gone to the bathroom, the meteorite which is about to land on your office chair would not have struck you down.  So inaction is no safe way out either.

Death is something you are absolutely certain about.  The old joke is about death and taxes, right?  Any action you take or do not take might result in this inevitable death and yet this paralyzes you not.  And as your lack of certainty in the outcome of your actions does not paralyze you, nor should your lack of absolute certainty paralyze your faith.  And paralysis and your wishy-washy position might be even more offensive to your hypothetical god than believing an untruth.  When we play the maybe game the sky's the limit.

My dad taught me one school lesson - I made an error doing math and he asked me why I did this.  I said I assumed this meant that.  He wrote down the word assume on the paper and said to me, "When you assume, you make an ass out of you and me (ass  u   me)."  You are making all of these assumptions about this hypothetical god and, well, now you know what assuming does.  You are borrowing beliefs from Christianity without believing Christianity.  You think god wants you to love him, why?  You believe he cares about you, why?  You believe he'll judge you on this matter, why?  These are Catholic beliefs but then you reject Catholicism.  Like all other heresies, you borrow some, but reject the whole, and end up in a mess.

What to do.  Treat this quest for god as you would anything else.  Hold it to the same standards of uncertainty you would any other important decision you make.  Examine the evidence up and down.  If you think there is something there, then believe and live the faith.  Do not request of this these unimaginable standards of certainty (that are truly unimaginable, as our friend PDR at least states he cannot imagine what such certainty would even be like).  Taking Catholicism as an example, do you find the miracles to be supportive of the Church's claims?  How about the beauty of her history, her music, her liturgy, her culture (ignoring the abnormality of post VII)?  The stories of the saints, the lives changed?  Kreuzritter's mystical meeting?  My atheist philosopher friend (John C. Wright) turned Catholic after visits from Jesus and our Lady?

If you think this all looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck... then believe its a duck.  Then LIVE the faith, not THINK the faith, and see how that fits you.

Jesus brings peace.

Daniel

#207
.

Daniel

#208
Quote from: Davis Blank - EG on March 04, 2019, 06:40:24 AMIf you think this all looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck... then believe its a duck.  Then LIVE the faith, not THINK the faith, and see how that fits you.
But this is the problem: it doesn't look like a duck. I don't find miracles to be all that convincing, and I see all sorts of other pieces of evidence indicating that the Catholic religion is probably just a manmade religion, not from God. If I were to just treat my religious beliefs like anything else then I'd have already abandoned the Catholic Church long ago, as soon as it started looking false. Maybe I'd become a Neoplatonist or something, or maybe I'd just give up on religion altogether. And maybe I'd return to the Catholic Church some day, if new evidence were to come to my attention to make me reconsider. But in the meantime there'd be no reason for me to take the Catholic Church seriously, and there'd be no sense in me allowing the Catholic Church to constantly disrupt my life with all its burdensome laws.

Tales

It sounds like you have no belief in Catholicism.  Why are you interested in it then?  Are there some aspects that are still valuable to you, or is it just your paranoia of "what-ifs" that keeps you loosely attached?  If the former then let's discuss that.  If the latter then that's another animal.