|
I have a possibly overdone question if anyone is willing and interested in providing a source. I'd say probably the one overriding intellectual obstacle I have to being able to actually believe in any religion is the problem of evil. I figure there's likely other ones but that alone I think is capable of rendering me completely unable to see any sort of concept of God as a thing I can get involved with, and it's frankly rather for me to hard to think past it. However, I obviously don't make a habit of kicking down the door on one of the many local churches and demanding the vicar explain their life to me. And as the few openly practicing liturgical Christians I have ever met have been really quite nice people, I also never felt inclined to interrogate them either, as from my perspective obviously they're doing something extremely difficult and I don't want to throw a spanner in the works. So taking advantage of the passive nature of forum communication, I was wondering if anyone interested in the subject had perhaps a favorite philosophical or theological examination of the problem, which they believe provides the best answer to it, that they'd be willing to point me at?
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:20 |
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:thank you everyone: it'll be a couple years yet before i'd even be able to enter, so i have some time to figure out whether this is my calling. i know the jesuits themselves have no problem with it institutionally (and in fact are the only major religious order who don't have a significant institutional problem with admitting men who are openly gay), but as people have said, the issue would be that yeah there are some very conservative young novices entering, and mostly i don't want to be the whipping boy for some snot-nosed 22-year-old's prejudices. hopefully a couple more years of prayer and spiritual direction will clear up my path. Best of luck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 20:43
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I have a possibly overdone question if anyone is willing and interested in providing a source. The book of Job.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:31
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I have a possibly overdone question if anyone is willing and interested in providing a source. Greetings, OwlFancier! Indeed, the problem of evil gets brought up a lot in both history and this thread. I've accepted that the limitations of my rational mind probably prevents me from knowing and having the perfect answer. It's frustrating, but maybe it's something that I'm just not going to "think past it," as you put it. However, I don't consider this to be a completely fatal intellectual obstacle, either. The value of a belief in any religion isn't in neatly answering intellectual riddles; the true value comes from whether the belief has enriched the life of the believer. In the context of evil, I'd say it's more important if one's beliefs have steered one away from committing evil and towards healing the wounds that evil has made. When the problem of evil is discussed, I like to bring up Man's Search for Meaning. The author, Viktor Frankl, was an Austrian psychiatrist and a Jew when the Nazis were in power. He was arrested in the Holocaust, sent to the concentration camps where he and his fellow prisoners are worked to death. In the book, whose title in German is Nevertheless, Say Yes to Life, Frankl talks about how he and his prisoners dealt with the despair of being victims of evil. Frankl himself states that no psychiatrist can answer questions like "Why is there suffering," or "Why me?", but dwelling on these questions is less helpful than finding the meaning to life at every living moment, which, in my personal experience, religion and spirituality have had the profound ability to expand.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
karma is probably one of the best responses to theodicy i've ever seen, just saying, since you mentioned any religion there
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 21:51
|
|
|
quote:Socrates: ...And amid evils such as these will not he who is ill-governed in his own person --the tyrannical man, I mean --whom you just now decided to be the most miserable of all --will not he be yet more miserable when, instead of leading a private life, he is constrained by fortune to be a public tyrant? He has to be master of others when he is not master of himself: he is like a diseased or paralytic man who is compelled to pass his life, not in retirement, but fighting and combating with other men. http://www.rawstory.com/2017/02/he-doesnt-like-this-sht-trump-reportedly-hates-his-job-and-his-staff-after-less-than-a-month/ HEY GUNS fucked around with this message at 23:37 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:gently caress yes The world needs more jesuits, and I'm certain your theoretical 22 year old opponent will find himself sorely outclassed on the jesuit field of battle: debate. If God wills it, you'll know, so best of luck!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 22:43
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:karma is probably one of the best responses to theodicy i've ever seen, just saying, since you mentioned any religion there The problem with Karma is that people use it to justify being dicks to people with disabilities because "Obviously in a past life, you were bad, so I can act like a dick to you now" or "You were born as a peasant because you were poo poo in the last life. I was very good so that means I can set fire to everything!" And as a brief answer to you owlfancier, I don't have an answer to the Problem of evil. But it is one of those problems that needs the most thinking about by everyone. Josef bugman fucked around with this message at 22:59 on Feb 10, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 22:45
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:The problem with Karma is that people use it to justify being dicks to people with disabilities because "Obviously in a past life, you were bad, so I can act like a dick to you now" or "You were born as a peasant because you were poo poo in the last life. I was very good so that means I can set fire to everything!" that's not how karma works. there is no "you" that persists between births; it's more like the karma you've inherited has led you to being handicapped, but there is nothing you did as an individual to deserve that because they were literally someone ontologically different remember; karma is not ethics. the accumulation of positive and negative karma is a consequence of how we live our lives and is an inescapable consequence of it. being a man, for instance, has karmic benefits but that doesn't mean men are more moral than women and in the end buddhism is not about accumulating merit but escaping samsara, which is the karmic chains of death and rebirth the theodicy therefore is that there is evil and suffering because that is what living in samsara entails, and therefore it is necessary to escape that cycle. in other words, the existence of evil and suffering does not undermine the argument; it proves it
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2017 23:50
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:that's not how karma works. there is no "you" that persists between births; it's more like the karma you've inherited has led you to being handicapped, but there is nothing you did as an individual to deserve that because they were literally someone ontologically different Do you think the sort of arsehole who is always going to think up reasons to act like a dick towards people weaker than themselves is going to prop up anything more than a fig leaf between their lust for harm and their reasoning? People will say stuff like "oh ontologically it isn't "you" who were bad" but will then act like a toss pot anyway if they want to, it simply provides an excuse. As a minor question on the nature of the soul though, if your soul is continually recreated from things done in a previous life and the number of humans is almost always on the increase does that mean we have encountered a great deal more righteous animals in the past? And another question to the Christians reading but where does the soul come from/ when does it appear. Bearing in mind, of course, that we don't want to get on to the thorniest subject.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Appreciate the responses all.Caufman posted:Greetings, OwlFancier! I would be inclined to agree thoroughly with the power of religion to be a positive force in the world and also that working towards good is more important than figuring out precisely why there is evil, unless the latter serves as a means to extirpate it. I guess the reason I ask is because while I may find a lot of common ground with someone who is motivated by their faith to act morally, I think the mechanisms by which we reach that conclusion must be quite different. I suppose it just seems wrong to be fundamentally incapable of really understanding what motivates so many people to live as they do. That book looks fascinating though and reminds me of growing up a little bit. Senju Kannon posted:that's not how karma works. there is no "you" that persists between births; it's more like the karma you've inherited has led you to being handicapped, but there is nothing you did as an individual to deserve that because they were literally someone ontologically different My knowledge of Buddhism is very limited but I would probably not try to apply the problem of evil to it, given that it would seem not to really apply to a belief system that primarily tries to describe an existing system without necessarily trying to justify why it's that way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:16
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I would be inclined to agree thoroughly with the power of religion to be a positive force in the world and also that working towards good is more important than figuring out precisely why there is evil, unless the latter serves as a means to extirpate it. I'd personally disagree. One cannot make a "choice" to believe in something if they suspect it is not true. At best it would be self-delusional, but a minor thing that can motivate you to do good things. At worst? It's supporting the idea of a Faith because it provides a certain amount of societal or personal control that can be used by those in charge and keeps the hoi polloi happy. The latter is found quite a bit in some of the touchstones for the more modern movement Conservatism that is currently en vogue in the USA. I don't think we can fully understand why people act in certain ways. At least not exactly, being able to predict (to a greater or lesser extent) what it is people are going to do in response to certain stimuli or how people reason is relatively easy, but to actually fully understand that person? I'd personally put a bet on that being nigh on impossible. It's a good book, not one I neccesarily agree with, but it was good when I read it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:25
|
|
|
You can't (or probably shouldn't, I doubt it's healthy) make yourself believe something by sheer force of will, no. However modification of your starting premises, even for the purposes of a thought experiment, can allow you to take alternate deductive paths, as others may do. It would be very nice to be able to better understand how a great many people view the world, and true understanding requires, I think, ability to identify with the thing you are trying to understand. I don't have any need for a god, but many people believe in one, and I think I do have a need to understand my fellow humans better. It may not be complete but I would hope I could do better than a complete inability to get one of the most basic fundamentals into my brain.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:39
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:Do you think the sort of arsehole who is always going to think up reasons to act like a dick towards people weaker than themselves is going to prop up anything more than a fig leaf between their lust for harm and their reasoning? People will say stuff like "oh ontologically it isn't "you" who were bad" but will then act like a toss pot anyway if they want to, it simply provides an excuse. quote:As a minor question on the nature of the soul though, if your soul is continually recreated from things done in a previous life and the number of humans is almost always on the increase does that mean we have encountered a great deal more righteous animals in the past? first of all, there is no soul. the teaching of the buddha is very clear on that. what moves between lives is a karmic chain of being, but not a soul. second, you seem to say this as though you think this points out a flaw in reincarnation. it doesn't. there are uncountable realms of existence, with gods and devas, devils and ghosts, and everything in between humans and animals, such that any change in population is barely a blip on the radar, all things being equal. there are more humans now than there were previously? okay. like.. it doesn't bother me at all? i don't know what you want here, do i have an answer? no. is there an answer? maybe. is it a question that really matters? not really. more important is how to escape samsara, not why there are so many people now.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:40
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:You can't (or probably shouldn't, I doubt it's healthy) make yourself believe something by sheer force of will, no. However modification of your starting premises, even for the purposes of a thought experiment, can allow you to take alternate deductive paths, as others may do. It would be very nice to be able to better understand how a great many people view the world, and true understanding requires, I think, ability to identify with the thing you are trying to understand. True, but the way in which people reason tends to be so personal that I am not sure anyone would be able to do so. Trying to understand why people reason in certain ways is good. Senju Kannon posted:you can literally say this about anything. like "oh sure you like dogs, but an rear end in a top hat can train one to kill people," or "sure architecture is nice but someone can design a building that isn't wheelchair accessible." like if it wasn't for the fact that someone being able to take a teaching like karma and use it as a whip is actually still showcasing the truth about dukkha this would be True enough, but it's just pointing out that Karma has a lot of the same problems we can see in Job with the whole "miserable comforters you are" section. Any system designed to "prove" that evil either is not happening or happens for a reason or is part of something larger runs that risk in my opinion. I am not trying to argue it like "well it's not perfect ergo it's trash" but I am trying to say that it might not be a perfect answer for the problem of evil for everyone. Senju Kannon posted:first of all, there is no soul. the teaching of the buddha is very clear on that. what moves between lives is a karmic chain of being, but not a soul. second, you seem to say this as though you think this points out a flaw in reincarnation. it doesn't. there are uncountable realms of existence, with gods and devas, devils and ghosts, and everything in between humans and animals, such that any change in population is barely a blip on the radar, all things being equal. there are more humans now than there were previously? okay. like.. it doesn't bother me at all? i don't know what you want here, do i have an answer? no. is there an answer? maybe. is it a question that really matters? not really. more important is how to escape samsara, not why there are so many people now. What is the difference between the Karma chain and a soul? Sorry that probably sounded flippant, what I mean is why would a person get a particular "karma chain" or is it that there is no "you" as it were and instead it is just a collection of events that have happened? Oh no not to point out flaws, but from my very, very limited reading I thought certain subsets of Buddhism believed that animals could move through the Dharma chain and become human. I thought that that might be an explanation for why there are so many more people, because animals used to be nicer! I realise that maybe didn't come across too well. Sorry about that Josef bugman fucked around with this message at 01:10 on Feb 11, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 00:50
|
|
|
Josef bugman posted:And another question to the Christians reading but where does the soul come from/ when does it appear. Bearing in mind, of course, that we don't want to get on to the thorniest subject. I'll just link the theopedia page There's basically no consensus out there regarding this. Well except the idea of the preexistence of souls (Origen). That's definitely considered a heresy and was condemned. But the early church was traducian, mostly. Now the Catholic Church is creationist. Luther was a traducian, Calvin was a creationist, etc. Really both views have major problems. Traducianism creates the infinite from the finite, and creationism means you can't really have the concept of Original Sin because how is a new soul being created by God somehow stained by the sin of Adam? This is basically like a theological trivia question though, nobody really thinks about it too much.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:jesuit gay, so what. "father gay, so what"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 06:56
|
|
|
HEY GAIL posted:excuse me: "father gay, ess-jay, so what"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2017 08:42
|
|
|
>wear boots you put on your boots of +2 against protestants.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 00:56
|
|
|
Preaching tomorrow. Pray for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
WerrWaaa posted:Preaching tomorrow. Pray for me. I'll be in the front row with a sign DO YOU HAVE STAIRS IN YOUR PULPIT Good luck! St. John Chrysostom is patron of preachers.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 03:17
|
|
|
Bel_Canto posted:i'm not sure which ones make me drink more: the he-man "let's be manly catholic men" bros or the ones who read lots of chesterton and affect accents and smoke pipes and say colonialism was great all while living in suburban ohio Noted anti-colonialist GK Chesterton?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 03:33
|
|
|
WerrWaaa posted:Preaching tomorrow. Pray for me. Sure, gotchu fam. You can get a nice fire and brimstone sermon out of the readings for tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:Sure, gotchu fam.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
Should be. Episcopalians use the Revised Common Lectionary (which we also used at my last church until we moved to the Narrative Lectionary) which is basically just the same as what we're doing in the land of Catholicism, except the reading from Sirach can be switched out because it's deuterocanonical.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 04:11
|
|
|
Senju Kannon posted:that's not how karma works. there is no "you" that persists between births; it's more like the karma you've inherited has led you to being handicapped, but there is nothing you did as an individual to deserve that because they were literally someone ontologically different That's how you understand karma, and perhaps how some Buddhist thinkers have understood karma, but it is not the only definition of karma in use, and I would dare say it is the minority view of karma as karma is commonly understood. And if it's not about accumulating merit, then what of the fourfold path? How is a lay person supposed to escape samsara without the annihilation of ego?
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 04:28
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:Noted anti-colonialist GK Chesterton? i didn't say they read him consistently
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 04:38
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:That's how you understand karma, and perhaps how some Buddhist thinkers have understood karma, but it is not the only definition of karma in use, and I would dare say it is the minority view of karma as karma is commonly understood. And if it's not about accumulating merit, then what of the fourfold path? How is a lay person supposed to escape samsara without the annihilation of ego? Well in Theravada a lay person is not expected to escape Samsara without becoming a monk first. If you can't be a monk in this life there's still the next one. In Mahayana there's a variety of opinions on what a layperson can do, up to and including "sudden enlightenment" where you can reach enlightenment in one instant, which is what one school of Chan / Zen aims at. On the other end, some pure land schools believe you can't escape Samsara in this world at all, which is what the pure land is for. The layperson rules (five precepts, eightfold path) are about forming your mind towards enlightenment or maybe setting you up to be reborn as a monk depending on who you ask. Accumulating merit is more of a traditional thing than something that's central to the teaching, and it's more about ensuring a good rebirth rather than about enlightenment. Some traditions don't acknowledge merit at all. This may be different still in the vajrayana system as demonstrated by the story about the hungry tigress, but I don't know much about that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 07:06
|
|
|
poo poo pidan i was literally getting ready to post about that and there you hit the main things i was going to say. you even mentioned pure land! i was gonna be all "rely on amida's infinite grace and recit ethe nembutsu with a pure heart" but there you go and preempt my poo poo
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 07:30
|
|
|
I have no idea what happened at Mass this morning; so as I've said we use the Mass of Redemption setting which has a part for a flute in the score but we've never used one. Until today. When I guess the music director decided to hand a random person an oboe and tell them to go at it. Except they must've never played it before or maybe even listened to music for that matter, because all throughout Mass they just played entirely off-key earsplitting squawks at seemingly random intervals. Just so happens it's also the parish council meeting today so I imagine that will be the first and last time a woodwind instrument ever pops up during Mass.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
Hey guys I know I've been in here posting and clogging up the thread with my silly musings. Since this is mostly a thread about a particular religion and all its facets, I decided to make my own thread over in ask/tell. A thread where I pray for you, and try my best to hear God's answer. So if you ever had a question for God now is your chance to ask it!
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 18:28
|
|
|
Please get professional help.
|
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 19:51
|
|
|
Thanks for the advice! No need to worry about me, I am not a danger to myself or others. I'm harmless, I just like posting (: I apologize if my optimistic attitude is annoying, dad 
I LIKE COOKIE fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Feb 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 12, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Not even the prophets of old claimed to talk to God (and get an answer) as much as you do.my dad posted:Please get professional help. Really, really this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:06
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:Not even the prophets of old claimed to talk to God (and get an answer) as much as you do. It's a running theme in the Old Testament that most of them were reluctant and freaked out by it. Same with angels appearing to them, although to be honest the Ophanim (also called Thrones sometimes) are...not something you'd generally be okay with appearing out of nowhere.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:38
|
|
|
Ceciltron posted:Really, really this. Saying I once read that I think might be applicable in this case: Believe those who say they seek the truth. Flee from those who say they found it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
hot theory: he's a math debater rereg
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:53
|
|
|
was that the guy obsessed with masturbation
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
sacramentals in the Catholic tradition include the rosary, holy water, the stations of the cross, and j/o crystals
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 01:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2024 14:20 |
|
|
The Phlegmatist posted:It's a running theme in the Old Testament that most of them were reluctant and freaked out by it. Same with angels appearing to them, although to be honest the Ophanim (also called Thrones sometimes) are...not something you'd generally be okay with appearing out of nowhere. I was afraid at first too, but I learned that fear is something you subscribe to. It's possible to have no fear. I do not fear God, or death, or anything really. My brain is hosed up and now I'm not afraid of anything. I'm a little bit shy for Love but I wouldn't call that fear. I understand all the doubt. Only a fool would blindly follow some idiot on an internet forum. Follow Jesus! He was The Messiah. Not sure why my opinion is less valuable than any other persons. I'm begging you guys to tell me I'm wrong. I just want to know if it's real, is all. If I'm wrong, I'm okay with it. I can move on. If I'm correct, I don't think I will ever stop talking. For the sake of humanity as a whole, I just want to inspire positive change in others, does that make me a heretic? I don't think I'm wrong, but I'm biased. Sooooooo help me goons!
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2017 02:12
|
|