STREWTH! ......

............. it's 'pick on Robert time again.

Robert (the apathetic sinner) has been talking about 'truth' a lot recently.

It's a good example of an oxymoron when he puts it in the context of the Bible, the Catechism and the Catholic Church propaganda that he expounds ......

          ...... no, that can't be right. The definition of 'expound' is:

Expound (verb)

Present and explain (a theory or idea) in detail.
"he was expounding a powerful argument"

Explain the meaning of (a literary or doctrinal work).
"the abbess expounded the scriptures to her nuns"

I don't think that applies to Robert. Maybe 'regurgitate' is the word that I'm looking for as in: "Robert regurgitated what he heard in the sermon at church".

Here are some recent posts made by Robert under his 'apathetic sinner' persona.

          Good luck! 

 

Relativism

Relativism is a belief that moral codes can change from culture to culture, or individual to individual.
We've all come across it.
Schopenhauer (Curmudgeon's alias) said truth is a paradox that can neither sit on the throne of error nor time.
Schopenhauer got it wrong. Truth can be absolute. That's why relativism is wrong also.
We must challenge relativism when ever possible.
People who use relativism often begin with "I feel..".
A common example of relativism often used by pro choicers is it is a woman's choice.
When discussing Jacinta I often hear she is so nice.
So next time you hear someone using relativism have the courage to challenge with Truth!

          - Robert the apathetic sinner 25 September 2020.

Plastic can not create plastic

Plastic was invented or created by someone who was not plastic. If she had cut of a plastic finger and said look I created plastic the world would laugh.
Likewise the finite universe which is composed of matter can not have been created by an entity that was itself material. The creator had to be of another substance or else it would not be a creator as it was merely reproducing matter.
This is an example of the cosmological proof of one God.
Anything that creates can not be of the substance of its creation.
There is always a cause and effect.
This can not be an infinite chain.

                    - Robert the apathetic sinner 16 September 2020. 

The Catholic church is the one true church

I just heard the recycling man. I wonder if his name is used by men and women.
There are lots of names that apply to and are used by both sexes.

That's it.

Oh yes and the Catholic church is the one true church.

           - Robert the apathetic sinner 6 September 2020. 

You need a doctrine.

As he drove Kylie and I discussed abortion, euthanasia and capital punishment.
I thought about it all as we cleaned.
On the way back I expelled a treatise.

My treatise went that first we must establish a truth that any individual follows or further argument is pointless.
In my case I have the Apostles creed and two thousand years of inspired thinkers who composed the Catechism of the Catholic Church via the Council of Trent.
Meaning that I believe in one God the Father almighty creator of heaven and earth...
I suggested that most people do not have a creed these days.
It went unsaid that people have an irrational emotive reason to vote either side of the fence.

- Robert the apathetic sinner 27 August 2020

 

START MAKING SENSE

 STOP MAKING SENSE - DAVID BYRNE

Well, David Byrne almost got it right. I agree with him hitting himself on the forehead though. I feel like doing the same when Robert makes silly god and religious statements on his blog.

Reading Robert's blog and the Catholic Apologists' links he provides, confirms with me that religion is either a big hoax or the product of monumental mistakes. I lean towards the latter.

The Bible is a good case in point. This 'written' book is really the product of handed down stories and lore through generations until some people, many centuries later with the development of writing and then printing, wrote and printed the legends, myths, stories and lies. Now I don't for the life of me believe that these transcribers from the 4th to the 18th century were experts in spelling and grammar so many mistakes must have been made.

We all know the story of the Sinner's Bible:

Wicked Bible, sometimes called Adulterous Bible or Sinners' Bible, is an edition of the Bible published in 1631 by the royal printers in London, meant to be a reprint of the King James Bible. The name is derived from a mistake made by the compositors: in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:14), the word "not" in the sentence "Thou shalt not commit adultery" was omitted, thus changing the sentence into "Thou shalt commit adultery". 

          - From Wikipedia.

And the Monty Python film The Life of Brian captured this well in the Sermon on the Mount with:

Blessed are the Cheesemakers

The Greek will inherit the earth

Here's my take on what, to me, are other forms of misprint and misinterpretation. I'm using some quotes from Robert's blog (until it gets deleted) as my bible (the old family one) is being used to prop up one of the bookshelves.

God is life.

This makes no sense at all. I think what was intended was 'Life is good' and this was at first misspelled - 'good' to 'god' and then transposed - 'Life is good' to Good is life'

It's not surprising really given that the quotes were handed down by word of mouth before being transcribed by some people with dodgy grammar skills and would have had to have been translated from several different languages, some of which were extinct.

God is Spirit.

Again, this is odd but turns up repeatedly in the Catechism - 'The Holy Spirit' for example.

In the early days - pre Jesus, there were a lot of mystical religions that celebrated ancestors and 'ghosts' but these were disparaged by the Catholic church so it's unlikely that the early teachings would have condoned  their god as a ghost.

In Latin however 'spiritus' means 'breathing' so the earliest lore-makers were probably just saying 'god's alive' or something like that which makes sense of Nietzsche reversing it later and saying "god is dead"

I believe in one God the Father almighty creator of heaven and earth...

A bit of early to later christian gobbledygook this. It's a Catechism catch-all to disparage other religions and, as Richard Dawkins said is an attempt to get away with not understanding science and the real world.

Jesus is present in the Eucharist

It's pretty unlikely that even the earliest and uneducated christians would have believed that Jesus was actually inside the bread that they ate at church services. That is ridiculous. It was only invented much later by some possibly schizophrenic and starving monk who may have eaten some magic mushrooms by mistake in his foraging. The original lore might have been that Jesus was making a present of bread and other food to anyone who wanted to gather and listen to him.

Forgive, or at least pray for the other, and forget.

This is pure Robert this and obviously makes no sense.

It's possible that he was alluding to the old 'Jesus forgives' motto that he wheels out occasionally - the most recent when saying that women who, for whatever reason, have abortions, will suffer terribly until they confess their 'sin' and then jesus will forgive them.
The earliest christians most likely recounted that Jesus, on the eve of his arrest knew that he was likely to be executed and 'forgave' the apostles and disciples the debts they owed him. Remember that he kicked the money-lenders out of the temple and most likely took over the instant loan business himself.

God is the Word.

Jesus was a carpenter. You knew that. In his travels he most likely promoted the family firm so it's not out of the question that he said things like 'Wood is good". As he most likely said this a lot the early evangelists, using his words would have recounted his most favourite sayings. Later transcribers may have doubly misspelled this before transposing 'Wood is good' to 'God is the word'.

I hope that this has been helpful.

MEA CULPA (AGAIN)

 

Guilt is a concept that was instilled in us Catholic lads from an early age, reinforced by the application of wooden rulers and leather belts of the nuns and the bamboo canes of the brothers and priests - just in case the theorism didn't get through to our young and unformed consciences.

The Internet informs me that:

Guilt is an emotional experience that occurs when a person believes or realizes—accurately or not—that they have compromised their own standards of conduct or have violated universal moral standards and bear significant responsibility for that violation.

Sorry about the American spelling (although I do wonder why they use a 'z' in realize but not in compromised).

Associated with guilt is expiation which the Oxford dictionary informs me is:

The act of making amends or reparation for guilt or wrongdoing; atonement.
"an act of public expiation"

All good and links in with my theme of 'Mea culpa'.

So - why guilt?

After dinner tonight I switched the TV on to Youtube music  and watched a recording of Van Morrison performing TB Sheets, one of his visceral classics from the 1960s:

TB Sheets - Van Morrison

This song has always tugged at me from the first time I heard it when I was still at school (being 'instructed' via canes by priests in the late 1960s) and for the rest of my life. Van has captured the conflict of doing the right thing versus doing what you prefer to do so well. It's remarkable from a man who was so young when he wrote this song.

It still upsets me when I hear it.

**************

Given Robert's sermonising (or, regurgitating what he has heard from the latest sermon at his church) where he sometimes touches on guilt, responsibility and culpability. I'm interested in his take on this song.