If you were born into a different religion...

muppeteer

philologos wrote: »

muppeteer: I guess I don't find your argument as convincing, because I know people who were raised Muslims who now are Christians here in the UK. I also know people who were brought up in secular homes who are now Christians. There's numerous examples of this happening. Especially outside of the West where Christianity is growing significantly, most of those people never would have been from a Christian background.

This weakens your argument somewhat.

There are indeed numerous examples, which are the exception but not the rule. I'm even an exception myself as I recieved much the same Catholic upbringing as my peers, who are mostly still somewhat Christain.
Christianity growning outside the west, as large as it is, still only shows a minority proportion of the local adult population changing from their origional religion to a new one.

ISAW

muppeteer wrote: »

There are indeed numerous examples, which are the exception but not the rule. I'm even an exception myself as I recieved much the same Catholic upbringing as my peers, who are mostly still somewhat Christain.
Christianity growning outside the west, as large as it is, still only shows a minority proportion of the local adult population changing from their origional religion to a new one.

You would be wrong on this>
Jenkings is qa good source>
http://history.psu.edu/directory/jpj1
For at least half the history of the Church the majority were outside the West and it will shift back that way by 2050>

muppeteer

ISAW wrote: »

You would be wrong on this>
Jenkings is qa good source>
http://history.psu.edu/directory/jpj1
For at least half the history of the Church the majority were outside the West and it will shift back that way by 2050>

Wrong on what exactly?

Cato Maior

I was raised as a Catholic and even went as far to train as a priest for a while but am no longer a Catholic. People can and do change, perhaps not often, but it is not rare either. If people are open to listening to and considering other ideas they may change their minds or it may confirm them in their current beliefs.

lmaopml

Cato Maior wrote: »

I was raised as a Catholic and even went as far to train as a priest for a while but am no longer a Catholic. People can and do change, perhaps not often, but it is not rare either. If people are open to listening to and considering other ideas they may change their minds or it may confirm them in their current beliefs.

I think you are right Cato, perhaps this is more prevelant today too with the speed of information and communication? Perhaps the theory of geographic location is getting smaller and more defunct, inline with the availability to persue and read and absorb and of course communicate too.

philologos

muppeteer wrote: »

There are indeed numerous examples, which are the exception but not the rule. I'm even an exception myself as I recieved much the same Catholic upbringing as my peers, who are mostly still somewhat Christain.
Christianity growning outside the west, as large as it is, still only shows a minority proportion of the local adult population changing from their origional religion to a new one.

We have a different experience, insofar I would say the majority of my friends from school were atheist / agnostic.

As for Christianity growing outside of the West, I'm not sure you're aware of the actual impact of this. More Christians attend church regularly in China than they do in the entire European continent. Christianity isn't really dying any time soon, largely sustained by people outside of the West who are discovering Jesus.

Your argument is fading into irrelevance globally, and it is based on a Eurocentric viewpoint.

muppeteer

philologos wrote: »

We have a different experience, insofar I would say the majority of my friends from school were atheist / agnostic.

That's why we don't rely on our own experience because they vary too much. That's why we rely on the data posted earlier.

As for Christianity growing outside of the West, I'm not sure you're aware of the actual impact of this. More Christians attend church regularly in China than they do in the entire European continent. Christianity isn't really dying any time soon, largely sustained by people outside of the West who are discovering Jesus.

Your argument is fading into irrelevance globally, and it is based on a Eurocentric viewpoint.

Yes I'm aware of the growing Chinese Christianity which doesn't really damage the position that people mostly do not stray far from their parents religion.
For Christianity to become a majority in China, the growth, as large as it is, will take a generation or two to really take off, as the children of the current Christians marry and have kids of their own and secondary conversions add to the momentum.

An aside:
Perhaps PDN might have a better insight into this but would it be fair to say that many Chinese would have a slight spiritual vacuum due to state suppression of religions? They may have atheistic views currently that would have to be overcome by Christianity's worldview but they may lack an existing spiritual framework which might make it easier to introduce a Christian one. In other countries Christianity may have a harder time of it due displacing existing spiritual frameworks and so conversion in China may be easier. /speculation:)

philologos

muppeteer wrote: »

That's why we don't rely on our own experience because they vary too much. That's why we rely on the data posted earlier.

That data didn't show what you wanted to. Rather what is showed is that a sizeable portion of people can and do change their minds. Likewise the US figures I provided earlier back this up.

muppeteer wrote: »

Yes I'm aware of the growing Chinese Christianity which doesn't really damage the position that people mostly do not stray far from their parents religion.
For Christianity to become a majority in China, the growth, as large as it is, will take a generation or two to really take off, as the children of the current Christians marry and have kids of their own and secondary conversions add to the momentum.

I don't agree with you either on an anecdotal level, or on the basis of what statistics I've provided. Also, your argument presumes that if people don't change, that it is out of blind allegiance to their parents. I think that's false, on the basis of 5 years+ active Christian experience, and seeing people by and large work out their beliefs for themselves as I did.

muppeteer wrote: »

An aside:
Perhaps PDN might have a better insight into this but would it be fair to say that many Chinese would have a slight spiritual vacuum due to state suppression of religions? They may have atheistic views currently that would have to be overcome by Christianity's worldview but they may lack an existing spiritual framework which might make it easier to introduce a Christian one. In other countries Christianity may have a harder time of it due displacing existing spiritual frameworks and so conversion in China may be easier. /speculation:)

I don't think that PDN is going to back up your argument, but let's see if he wants to chip in.

muppeteer

philologos wrote: »

That data didn't show what you wanted to. Rather what is showed is that a sizeable portion of people can and do change their minds. Likewise the US figures I provided earlier back this up.

The data shows exactly what it shows, not what you or I want it to. I'm actually agreeing with you here, a sizable chunk can and do change their minds within Christianity and a much smaller chunk change to different world religions. I fail to see why you disagree here.

I don't agree with you either on an anecdotal level, or on the basis of what statistics I've provided. Also, your argument presumes that if people don't change, that it is out of blind allegiance to their parents. I think that's false, on the basis of 5 years+ active Christian experience, and seeing people by and large work out their beliefs for themselves as I did.

We can dismiss 5 years of anecdotes but not the data I posted.
Blind allegiance is not my presumption and I haven't really offered one other that to say it might be that it is caused by people being far more exposed to the religion of their parents or peers. If people change it can be for a multitude of reasons, which have little bearing on the data showing most don't stray too far outside of changing denominations.

I don't think that PDN is going to back up your argument, but let's see if he wants to chip in.

Well it's not so much an argument as a side train of thought that I might look into more later.

snafuk35

If I had been born into any other religion my constant questioning of "is this right" would ultimately have led me to converting to Catholicism.

Even if you were never exposed to it?

In probabilistic terms the next most likely religion to have been born into would be Islam and while its Abrahamaic and believes in God ultimately it is not a religion of peace and that is a problem for humankind. If it presents a problem then it cannot be right and true.

A Muslim would say the same about Christianity e.g. Crusades etc.

If I had been born into Judaism my questioning nature would have led me to the study of Jesus Christ and any study of Jesus leads ultimately to joining His Church.

How do you explain the phenomena of Muslim and Jews theologians who have studied Christian texts or Christians theologians who have become atheists?

With Buddhism I imagine I would have had problems with its attitude to marriage and with its lack of a God, who is more and more evident the deeper one delves into science.

Yet how many Buddhists have converted to Catholicism?

I could go one but essentially any exploration of why the Church teaches what it does leads to one place and one place only.

That's self-evidently false. I have read the Catechism of the Catholic Church, I was brought up a Catholic and I have left the faith.

The only question remaining is whether you accept it or reject it.

You have just contradicted you entire post.
You have basically protrayed the Catholic faith as the one and true religion and you claim that anyone who is exposed to Catholic teaching will inevitably convert. And you claim that if you were born anywhere in the world and no matter what religion you were born into - you would still be a Catholic today?

Festus

snafuk35 wrote: »

How do you explain the phenomena of Muslim and Jews theologians who have studied Christian texts or Christians theologians who have become atheists?

They find lies attractive and it suits them to ignore the truth.

snafuk35 wrote: »

You have just contradicted you entire post.
You have basically protrayed the Catholic faith as the one and true religion and you claim that anyone who is exposed to Catholic teaching will inevitably convert.

That is not what I said. You introduced the term "exposed" and attempted to apply it to what I said. I said explored.

I've been exposed to Protestantism, Judaeism, Buddhism, atheism and a few more. I've explored them and found them lacking.

snafuk35 wrote: »

And you claim that if you were born anywhere in the world and no matter what religion you were born into - you would still be a Catholic today?

Yes. I have an inquisitive nature.

Cato Maior

Festus wrote: »

I've been exposed to Protestantism, Judaeism, Buddhism, atheism and a few more. I've explored them and found them lacking.

Oddly, I explored Catholicism to the extent of being a seminarian for three and a half years. Even after I left I continued to study and explore. I prayed daily, continuing the practice of praying the Office, and attended mass at least weekly.

Yet in the end, I became convinced that it was not true across the course of one day.

Interesting that we should have had such different outcomes.

tommy2bad

Cato Maior wrote: »

Yet in the end, I became convinced that it was not true across the course of one day.

What was it that clinched it, if you don't mind me asking?

Cato Maior

tommy2bad wrote: »

What was it that clinched it, if you don't mind me asking?

I spent the day systematically doubting my beliefs (I had been re-reading Descartes) and testing them. I found that the arguments and evidence for believing that a god exists were insufficient and so rejected the hypothesis. It came as a shock and the struggle between heart and mind went on for some time, but reason won in the end.

We should probably leave it there as this is not the thread for such discussions. I only mentioned changing my beliefs in the context of this thread and in response to another on-topic poster.

lmaopml

Cato Maior wrote: »

I spent the day systematically doubting my beliefs (I had been re-reading Descartes) and testing them. I found that the arguments and evidence for believing that a god exists were insufficient and so rejected the hypothesis. It came as a shock and the struggle between heart and mind went on for some time, but reason won in the end.

We should probably leave it there as this is not the thread for such discussions. I only mentioned changing my beliefs in the context of this thread and in response to another on-topic poster.

Cato you became a 'stoic' yes? One who regards their behaviour constantly, and is aware of it constantly too....

Cato Maior

lmaopml wrote: »

Cato you became a 'stoic' yes? One who regards their behaviour constantly, and is aware of it constantly too....

Aye, although the aim is really to form a 'habit' of virtuous behaviour through attention to one's actions, thoughts, judgements, and character formation. Mindfulness is important, as is a daily 'reckoning' of one's behaviour during the day.

lmaopml

Cato Maior wrote: »

Aye, although the aim is really to form a 'habit' of virtuous behaviour through attention to one's actions, thoughts, judgements, and character formation. Mindfulness is important, as is a daily 'reckoning' of one's behaviour during the day.

I like this philosophy that is self examined, and very much 'aware' of themselves - although I can't entirely agree that Christianity doesn't incorporate it, or indeed rewrite it in ways sometimes?

We fail very badly sometimes, perhaps as much as the stoic philosophy of life, that died out long ago to any great degree - but we live with eachother and learn too from eachother...The 'stoics' are age old - I'm sad about you Cato, but if you are honest in your belief than I don't know, I think somebody let you down, or people in general, I had this to deal with - but not Christ.

Cato Maior

lmaopml wrote: »

I like this philosophy that is self examined, and very much 'aware' of themselves - although I can't entirely agree that Christianity doesn't incorporate it, or indeed rewrite it in ways sometimes?

We fail very badly sometimes, perhaps as much as the stoic philosophy of life, that died out long ago to any great degree - but we live with eachother and learn too from eachother...The 'stoics' are age old - I'm sad about you Cato, but if you are honest in your belief than I don't know, I think somebody let you down, or people in general, I had this to deal with - but not Christ.

Oh Christianity does incorporate elements of Stoic philosophy - natural law for example. Stoic practice and techniques are not really found in Christianity, but they have re-emerged in CBT, and the creator of that acknowledged his debt to the Stoics.

I'm not entirely clear on your meaning in the second part of your post. Yes we fail to live up to our standards, but Stoicism has no equivalent of sin - one simply aims to learn, improve and move on from one's errors (taking responsibility for wrongs to others and seeking to right them). The wrong-doing does not burden one though - that would be foolish.

As I said, elements of Stoicism have re-emerged in CBT but they have raised their head from time to time throughout the history of ideas in Europe. It did not die off entirely with the Roman Stoics.

As to being let down - no, not to any great or significant degree and on the whole I am positive about people in general.

lmaopml

Cato Maior wrote: »

Oh Christianity does incorporate elements of Stoic philosophy - natural law for example. Stoic practice and techniques are not really found in Christianity, but they have re-emerged in CBT, and the creator of that acknowledged his debt to the Stoics.

I'm not entirely clear on your meaning in the second part of your post. Yes we fail to live up to our standards, but Stoicism has no equivalent of sin - one simply aims to learn, improve and move on from one's errors (taking responsibility for wrongs to others and seeking to right them). The wrong-doing does not burden one though - that would be foolish.

As I said, elements of Stoicism have re-emerged in CBT but they have raised their head from time to time throughout the history of ideas in Europe. It did not die off entirely with the Roman Stoics.

As to being let down - no, not to any great or significant degree and on the whole I am positive about people in general.

You sing your praise in a choir - so do I Cato -