Which is your belief. The Catholic Catechism teaches differently, as does Judaism.
Well it’s not my belief, but you’re right these are different perspectives.
They are also contradictory…they cannot all be correct.
It’s not straining out anything…it’s directly responding to the assertion you were making that because material things are impermanent, there’s no value investing in them…so you should instead invest in “eternal things”.
We’re not straining gnats…we’re addressing the logic behind you assertion that impermanent things aren’t valuable and pointing out that this is faulty.
Your implicit assumption as well is that eternal things exist, when there is zero evidence they do.
I have been. This is part of a larger critique of your homily which you manage to clip out of every response.
I’m not sure you’re interested in actually moving the discussion forward.
We do know, from St Paul, who won’t be going to Heaven:
“Do not be deceived; neither the immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God”
I am a substitute teacher, which I means I am in many different classrooms at several different schools. Each classroom, each school has different rules, different beliefs on what works best. It could be said they cannot all be correct…yet they all work…because different things work for different people.
My advise has always been to forget about the search for what is correct. God’s ways are so far apart from our ways, the person or the faith who is most correct will be an entire half-step ahead of the rest of us. Search for what works for you. In my family there are Catholics, Protestants, Buddhists, Atheists, and one is currently (because I encouraged it) studying Judaism. Not one of us ever crows, “We can’t all be correct!” Instead we see what is working for each unique individual. What I see? They all work, so I have no concern over which is the most “correct”. For my husband, it is atheism, and he does very well with it.
That is why when you moved the topic to heaven I totally ignored it.
Was there another part of the discussion you wished to advance? If I missed it, please redirect me, and I’ll take another look. Like everyone else, I’m involved with real life so my entire focus cannot always be here.
And just like that, “God” is now a superfluos concept.
Literally, a real live deity is unnecessary to what you just said. Excise him from your post, and everything else in the post is precisely the same.
We are on different trains of thought.
Train #1: Why does the Commandment tell us to put put God first? Putting God first doesn’t mean nothing else has any value, and I never claimed this. You jumped onto a second train, and I remained on the first.
I would never argue material things have no value. I am simply saying that for those who believe in God, God has more value. Those who don’t believe in God, can choose whatever they want to value most.
As I’ve explained many times, there is no evidence for spiritual things and the spiritual realm, because evidence requires something physical. Since I will never find anything physical in the spiritual realm, I never waste time on “evidence.” It is a waste of time to ask me (or anyone) to provide it. Agreed?
In human thinking and knowing, we have what is objective (physical) and what is subjective. One is not always true, the other is not necessarily false. Both are simply different ways of knowing. Exploration of the spiritual realm requires letting go of physical objects to move forward else we remain bound to the physical realm. Neither is a bad thing, merely choices people make on where and how to spend their time, what each finds most worthwhile.
The Kingdom of God does not equate to heaven. The Kingdom of God that Jesus (and therefore Paul) taught was a way of living this life. It is an eternal life that continues after our death. Jesus taught the Kingdom of God was turning away from sin to obey God. In essence Paul is saying that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You cannot continue in the ways of sin while you walk the path of not sinning. Its just common sense.
Now you are getting it. I, too, am superfluous. I can remove myself from the post, and everything remains as it has always been. Atheists remove God from what is, and what is, still remains. I leave the house, the house still remains.
Paul…just another Joseph Smith, Mohhamed, L. Ron Hubbard.
You could say that. It is also true that each person you mention is a unique individual. Of the four, I would say Paul was one who did not have an ulterior motive.
What do you see as Paul’s ulterior motive?
The same as the other three…power over others.
Not to mention the three times he was whipped by Romans, the time he was stoned, and the time he spent in prison…
I didn’t move the topic to heaven at all. I only asked more about what you brought up.
No reason to believe in things for which there is no evidence.
And again, Christianity does not claim to be a purely spiritual religion. It claims to be an evidentiary religion, with God who took on a physical form in Jesus. And who in the OT manifested in physical form, or who sent angels in physical form. And intervened in history.
You too have claimed an objective experience of God. Objective implies evidence that other people can examine.
If no such evidence exists, then your experience was subjective, not objective.