Skip to main content

5 Thoughts For The Day

5. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

4. If it is broke, fix it.

3. If you can't fix it, get help.

2. If you don't want to get help, you can't whine that it's broken.

1. If there is no God, there is no morality. Why? Because every human thing is therefore subject to the charge of self-interest and arbitrariness, ad infinitum. This is why it's actually a short trip from the supposition of ecclesial fallibility to pure atheism. It's a little amusing to hear the atheists of the day proclaiming a "kinder, gentler" atheism, as if it matters. What do the words mean, ultimately, if there is no origin, no reference point from which the term derives its meaning? I could easily find fault with any group's definition, and so it goes. You may suppose to have done justly, but I may believe you have not. Even if terms are defined by mutual agreement, this is tenuous. Consent is soft ground for the noblest ideals. I see the will to power as the unavoidable end of the notion that particular things and instances have no real relation to universal concepts. And existentialism is cold comfort for those who harbor desires beyond description or fashioning. It's little wonder that so many ended their lives; it is the only reasonable choice, if this life is all there is, so obviously full of suffering it is. Once the charm of fleeting pleasure fades, not much remains. I admit, this is blindingly obvious to me. I'm not a theist from a fearful weakness, but from a considered strength. I frankly suggest that if these thoughts have not occurred, one does not think clearly enough.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Friend I Once Had, And The Dogmatic Principle

 I once had a friend, a dear friend, who helped me with personal care needs in college. Reformed Presbyterian to the core. When I was a Reformed Presbyterian, I visited their church many times. We were close. I still consider his siblings my friends. (And siblings in the Lord.) Nevertheless, when I began to consider the claims of the Catholic Church to be the Church Christ founded, he took me out to breakfast. He implied--but never quite stated--that we would not be brothers, if I sought full communion with the Catholic Church. That came true; a couple years later, I called him on his birthday, as I'd done every year for close to ten of them. He didn't recognize my number, and it was the most strained, awkward phone call I have ever had. We haven't spoken since. We were close enough that I attended the rehearsal dinner for his wedding. His wife's uncle is a Catholic priest. I remember reading a blog post of theirs, that early in their relationship, she told him of the p
Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con

Just Sayin.' Again.

One interesting objection to this chart has been to say that one gets stuck in a "loop" that doesn't resolve. This is a thinly-veiled way of putting forward the argument that we don't need absolute certainty in religious dogma. But Fred Noltie already dealt with this in the comments on another post. And to the specific objector, no less. I'll be blunt: The only principled thing to do is put down your Bible, resign your pulpit, and lead tours in Europe. Because a man must be able to distinguish dogma from human opinion, and this epistemology doesn't allow us to do that. One of dogma's distinguishing characteristics is infallibility; another is certainty. Without this, essential characteristics of God Himself are put into question. If we say that the most important Person any person could know is God, and the content of that knowledge (doctrine) is the means by which we know Him, it must be certain. This Reformed argument that certainty is a dangerous or un