And Rusty Shackleford lives!
Posted on 03/22/2014 5:46:52 PM PDT by Diago
While I had doubts about the existence of God before entering college, I considered myself a Christian and checked off the Protestant Methodist box on my application. Still, I had some apprehension in attending Boston College—a religious, Jesuit, Catholic institution. So, it came much to my surprise that nearly as soon as I stepped on campus, my faith in Christianity and God started to wane.
I took both sections of Philosophy of the Person my first year at BC, not because I was interested in the subject, but solely as a means to fulfill the Core curriculum that’s a major part of BC’s Jesuit identity. I hadn’t previously taken a philosophy course, though I quickly came to enjoy the deep and abstract thinking required of the class as a contrast to the quantitative work present in my economics and finance courses.
We read a number of proofs for the existence of God, and as any good intro philosophy class allows, we examined each side of the argument. After both class discussions and my own thinking, I realized I sided more with arguments against God. I recall writing an essay disputing St. Thomas Aquinas’ five proofs of existence, my finishing line reading, “Couldn’t God have left more compelling evidence [for his existence]?” Little did I know this marked an important turning point in my educational journey—it was the first time I seriously considered the distinct possibility that God didn’t exist.
These thoughts continued during a two-semester Religious Quest class my sophomore year that compared Islam and Christianity. It was my first exposure to Islam besides what I’d seen and read in the news, and I also learned extensively about Christianity. Never before had I gained such a detailed perspective on the origins, sects, and traditions of the two religions. The power of community provided by each faith throughout history was immense, and based on their shared teachings of peace and worship, it was easy to see why each has thrived and accumulated millions of members worldwide.
A major point of the class was how similar the religions are, and indeed, they are more similar than I’d have ever thought. But by examining them so closely, I also studied their many differences. And those differences, most historians agree, have contributed to millions of deaths around the world—not only between the two religions (The Crusades), but also due to intra-religious conflicts between Catholics and Protestants (30 Years’ War) and Sunni and Shiite Muslims (Iran vs. Saudi Arabia & Iraq).
After a great deal of reflection undertaken both as a requirement inside the classroom and on my own, I came away with two conclusions. One, no higher being would ever tolerate millions of people being killed over the right way to worship him. Two, the differences between each religion made it unlikely that followers of both could be accepted into the same afterlife, meaning that, if there were a God, millions would be left out of eternal life—in my view, an unjust punishment for having the “wrong” belief.
Due to those two required core classes, by the second half of my sophomore year I had enough qualitative reasons for not believing in God. A class I took the following semester supplied me with more technical explanations. I enrolled in evolutionary economics, a course that discussed how humans have developed certain traits through evolution. Evolutionary psychologists believe that sexual selection and preference has shaped much of how we behave today, explaining behaviors such as riskier tendencies in men compared to women, outward displays of fitness to attract mates, and, ultimately, the development of a creative and intelligent human mind.
As one can imagine, the class required intensive reflection on views of human behavior that we’d previously considered to be quite basic. We also expanded our knowledge by reading a number of evolutionary passages, including a section from Richard Dawkins’ book, The Selfish Gene (emphasis on gene). His work, in addition to meticulously explaining how natural selection works down to the genetic level, offered a solid explanation of how life began without a creator.
By the end of the semester, I fully believed evolution as a fact for the first time. Further, as someone who finds the existence of God and evolution mutually exclusive, it was much harder for me to identify with the Christian faith. But I was not yet committed to saying I didn’t believe in God.
That changed the next semester, the first of my junior year. I registered for Philosophy of Existence to fulfill my minor in the subject—a route I would never have pursued had I gone to a different school. We studied a number of existentialist philosophers, some who based their philosophies in religion, and others who didn’t. Two of the latter were Sartre and Nietzsche, known atheist scholars. Sartre wrote that the essence of being human is being free, while Nietzsche famously said, “God is dead … and we have killed him.” They both provided a view of the world in which mankind had created the notion of God.
By the end of the class, and after deep contemplation, I finally realized what I truly believed—there is no God. Both the idea of a higher being, and the many religions of the world, were founded by man to inspire hope and influence human behavior.
Despite entering college as a Christian, two months from now I will graduate this Jesuit, Catholic school as an atheist. Ironically, the basis of that belief was developed in classes I was required to take based on Jesuit values and ideals —the education of the whole person through BC’s core curriculum. The Jesuits don’t teach students what to think. They teach them how to think. Above all else, that’s what college is for. And I’m grateful that I chose BC as the place to learn that.
Editor’s Note: The views presented in this column are those of the author alone and do not represent the views of The Heights.
Yes. Yes, we do.
Through everything God made, they can clearly see his invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature. So they have no excuse for not knowing God.It's possible to come to a limited understanding of God through unaided reason. The ancient Greeks did. Why would that be wrong?
For as I passed along and observed the objects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription, ‘To the unknown god.’ What therefore you worship as unknown, this I proclaim to you.Truth is truth, even if proclaimed by pagans like Aristotle.
There's a reason why Luther shortened the Bible.
“Thus he made atonement for the dead that they might be freed from sin.” (2 Maccabees 12:46)But he neglected to remove the following verses, which require a little bit of deduction.
"anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come." (Matt. 12:32)Jesus implies that sins can be forgiven "in the age to come."
Paul tells us that, when we are judged, each man’s work will be tried. And what happens if a righteous man’s work fails the test? "He will suffer loss, though he himself will be saved, but only as through fire" (1 Cor 3:15). Now this loss, this penalty, can’t refer to consignment to hell, since no one is saved there; and heaven can’t be meant, since there is no suffering ("fire") there. The Catholic doctrine of purgatory alone explains this passage.
And Rusty Shackleford lives!
Good analysis. You a shrink?:)
Particularly, the Church teaches:
There are those who although in a state of grace, do have venial sin (mortal/venial sin, see 1 John 5:16-17), or penance yet to be paid for forgiven sin on their soul. It is for those in the state of venial sin, or the “middle ground”, that Purgatory is intended.
To understand scripture one must compare scripture with scripture...The bible is not written like a novel... No it doesn't explain purgatory at all....We will not be saved thru fire...We will be saved as by fire...
2Jn 1:8 Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward.
We can gain less than a full reward if we put stock in things that don't matter to God...
1Co 3:12 Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble;
1Co 3:13 Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is.
1Co 3:14 If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. 1Co 3:15 If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire.b>
We are saved by the fire because the fire burns up the bad works we might otherwise be condemned with...No purgatory anywhere....
we don't get burned...We don't even get warm...
Rom_4:8 Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.
There is no sin to be judged to purgatory for...The sin gets burned up, not the sinner...No purgatory...No payment...No penance...
So what do we lose??? What do we suffer??? We suffer by not gaining all of the available rewards when we get to heaven...
This is NOT the White Throne Judgment...No one goes into outer darkness at this judgment...This judgment is strictly for Christians...And God does not condemn Christians...
Particularly, the Church teaches:
There are those who although in a state of grace, do have venial sin (mortal/venial sin, see 1 John 5:16-17), or penance yet to be paid for forgiven sin on their soul. It is for those in the state of venial sin, or the “middle ground”, that Purgatory is intended.
Your church is wrong again...The age to come is the Millennial age where people will live to be hundreds of years old, lions will sleep with lambs...Children will play with wild Lions...
It's all very simple if one would just believe what God says to us in the scriptures...
Its clear from the short article he never really believed anything at all, rather he just accepted what he was told without question and then the first time he had to actually think about it, God didn’t somehow immediately conform to what the PC TV/MSM culture had molded into his psyche while he was growing up. This is why a firm foundation in the word is required,
It’s not only colleges that breed this kind, many mainstream denominations create listless believers by being nothing more than a social club of good works, no spirit in them at all,
Its always our arrogance that blinds (any of) us from coming to an understanding of his truth, seeing only in the flesh, attempting to step above where everything around us relating to sin has been normalized in our modern culture. How can anyone ever hope to see in the spirit. Young people today have little to fall back on if they didn’t hear it from their parents or grandparents, if their left to this world for instruction in faith,
“And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth: But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root, it withered away.” Mark 4:5-6
The Word does not argue for itself that God exists, its a given, we’re told that we should believe from the things that are:
“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: “ Romans 1:20
This is a spiritual deception, being blinded, seeing only in the flesh, the natural world, its nothing new,
I had a similar conversation several months back with a relative, it was about a youtube video of an atheist addressing the members of some church, apparently the misguided pastor brought him in as part of some ‘understanding’ rubbish. Jesus said let the dead bury the dead.
I said before we watched the presentation together, I suspect we’ll see there are certain lines he wont cross, these will be out of bounds, despite the ‘understanding bit’ but everything else will be generally just fine, anything anti-christ is also fine,
Just like mainstream cults, atheists don’t want to hear certain things,
1. dont tell them that Jesus is the only way, Son of the living God having come in the flesh,
2 dont quote scripture to them,
3. dont talk about end times events, that is, don’t bring up what is occurring right now in current events as having been foretold, they will have none of that,
He was a very good speaker, well spoken, articulate, presented his case with all manner of worldly wisdom, easily made the pastor look foolish, but I was surprised by how closely he evidenced the three items above, when he did, you could see his entire demeanor change, he was noticeably reticent, flashes of anger, very unlike the rest of his presentation,
When believers reject the truth, its interesting to later see what they ultimately replace it with, what they will take up instead of the cross,
Why cant they perceive, discuss or accept prophecy? Because it requires his spirit for them to see it,
” . . for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” Revelation 19:10
At the close of the age, these are the ones that will seek death but not be able to find it, desire to die but death will flee from them that we’re told about in Revelation chapter 9,
Comparative Religion 101 does tend to have this effect.
I wonder if it’s intentional?
There is a spectrum of orthodoxy among Jesuit priests. There are some very solid ones. Fr. Mitch Pacwa of EWTN is one, for example -- he was a friend of Walter Martin's. The late Fr. John Hardon, who was one of the most orthodox and solid American Catholic thinkers of the last century, was another.
American Jesuit colleges, on the other hand, go from sort of okay, to bad, to awful. (BC is in the bad to awful range.)
Most of them sold their soul to big time athletics a long time ago, and are Catholic only as an afterthought. I've personally heard Peter Kreeft joke that the difference between Franciscan U of Steubenville and BC is that "BC is a Jesuit college, and Franciscan is a Catholic college".
Really? What did I get wrong?
I just checked wikipedia. Nirvana is extinguishing all desire. I just restated it a different way. Nirvana is the ultimate state the buddist is trying to achieve to avoid being reborn because life is suffering.
It must be the part about the spirit losing it's indviduality and rejoining the mother spirit. Maybe that's from hinduism. According to wikipedia, there is no immortal soul for the buddist.
Maybe I'm reading it wrong, but it looks to me like the goal for the buddist is to die to desires to that you quit being reborn and thus really die once for all and avoid the cycle of suffering.
As for me, I desire life and life more abundantly. Not absence of desire, which to me sounds like death.
Yep...
“As for me, I desire life and life more abundantly. Not absence of desire, which to me sounds like death.”
Personal desire isn’t a good way to determine what is true.
How to be a Better You
Faith IS a gift. Not everyone has it. An opinion.
That's true.
But surely life is preferable to death. Buddists offer death. Jesus offers life.
If you choose Buddism you die even if you are right. If you reject Buddism and it's right, you are reborn and have to suffer through another life.
If you choose Jesus, you live more abundantly in this life. And if you are right, you live forever. Reject Jesus and you're wrong, then you die the second death, which is what the buddist was hoping for all along.
There is no doubt in my mind.l But just saying, logic points you to Jesus.
But let's get back to desire. Man's heart has evil in it, which is why we are not to trust our own desires.
Judeo-Christianity sets a standard to align our desires with that is far higher than any other religion. We're called to love God and to love our fellow man. Buddism's standard is to get rid of hatred, but that is not love. In fact, if I understand buddist's standard correctly, love would result in desire and the Buddist thinks that is something to be avoided. Jesus tells us to embrace love not avoid it.
“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables.”
2 Timothy 4:3-4
You’re looking at the creation of a human life as an addition - something existing that did not before.
But Buddhism teaches the opposite method -that infinite consciousness reduced itself to make a human.
So in Buddhism, letting go of desire means letting go of desires that continue that limitation of consciousness, so that the nirvana of infinite consciousness can be experienced once again.
It’s really not such a bizarre concept - Christian mystics have fled to the wilderness, or pursued poverty, for millennia.
Sounds like an OSAS doctrine.
"I don't want to set the world on fire...
I just want to give it a good start..."
.jpg)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.