Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-10-2013, 09:59 AM
Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1zMf_8hkCdc

In this video, popular Catholic leader Fr. Barron decides to tell his flock what atheists believe. As you might imagine, it has nothing to do with what atheists actually believe.

Why don't we visit his video and educate him?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vulpix's post
31-10-2013, 10:02 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
(31-10-2013 09:59 AM)Vulpix Wrote:  Why don't we visit his video and educate him?
Educate him?

Sorry, but you'd probably have a better chance of getting into a snowball fight in the middle of a volcano.
Tongue

[Image: 21omssh.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like LostLocke's post
31-10-2013, 10:36 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
It was interesting until he started spouting about atheist saying things pop out of nothing. As if his explanation "god is something whose essence is to be" means anything else than "things pop out of nothing"

[Image: sigvacachica.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nach_in's post
31-10-2013, 11:01 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
Funny how he relies on Thomas Aquinas but that is just one philosopher's opinion and presents it as almost fact. Science, he says, cannot find god because god isn't within the physical realm. I thought the bible was the ultimate authority and (1) it really doesn't get into the "nature' of god and (2) the bible does describe god as an individual who was active in the affairs of man (at least for a particular period of time in history) which seems in contradiction to his statement that god is outside the material realm. He just conveniently discards all that in favor of some extra definitional bullshit definition. He appeals to some intuition of god to explain the reason "things are".

This whole video was mental masturbation of the highest order.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like devilsadvoc8's post
31-10-2013, 11:15 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
(31-10-2013 11:01 AM)devilsadvoc8 Wrote:  Funny how he relies on Thomas Aquinas but that is just one philosopher's opinion and presents it as almost fact. Science, he says, cannot find god because god isn't within the physical realm. I thought the bible was the ultimate authority and (1) it really doesn't get into the "nature' of god and (2) the bible does describe god as an individual who was active in the affairs of man (at least for a particular period of time in history) which seems in contradiction to his statement that god is outside the material realm. He just conveniently discards all that in favor of some extra definitional bullshit definition. He appeals to some intuition of god to explain the reason "things are".

This whole video was mental masturbation of the highest order.

I agree with this assessment 100%.

I suggest leaving comments on the video (and maybe a dislike or two while you're there) to let them know what atheists actually think.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2013, 11:16 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
(31-10-2013 10:36 AM)nach_in Wrote:  It was interesting until he started spouting about atheist saying things pop out of nothing. As if his explanation "god is something whose essence is to be" means anything else than "things pop out of nothing"
Exactly.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2013, 11:41 AM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
This guy paints his god in purely imaginary terms. He has painted an imaginary god over the natural landscape.
His god is nothing more than paint. It has no mind. It has no will and it has no existence.

Insanity - doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2013, 12:30 PM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2013 09:10 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
Barron actually contradicts Aquinas. He also lies, and unfortunately, he's well known (even among Catholics), to not be exactly the brightest bulb in their lamp. He says "to a person", the "new atheists" this and the "new atheists" that. He has not met all (new ) atheists, so he is lying, and no clue what he's talking about. He says his god is the "condition of the possibility" for all that is. That is precisely what Aquinas says his god is not. Aquinas say his deity is actualized reality, without potential. Barron's religion says their god is a person, not "person". As long as their theology does that limiting thing, it's self-refuting. No one cares whether science "can eliminate" the gods. Barron cannot cook up a coherent definition of a god, and certainly HIS god (Yahweh Sabaoth) is out of the question. No one cares whether the gods can be the subject of scientific inquiry. What is left is logic, which has been proven to been useless, in the determination of what is real. What appears to be logical to human brains is useful, only in a ceratin bandwidth. Barron says "authentic religion" begins in an "intuition of the contingency of the universe". So, his deity is essentially a "god of the gaps", (explanation of "contingency"), and he admits his "philosophical intuition" ('that's god"), is his deity. He posits duality, with the same old tired (debunked) bs. He keeps reverting to the "sciences, try as they might", (and there is NO ONE IN SCIENCE TODAY, whose lab is working on the problem of whether a deity exists or not), as a straw-man, since he can't really argue for his OWN point, effectively. Science is well aware that the gods are not an appropriate subject for scientific examination, (and no real scientist says they are). However what humans use and "do" when they make religious claims, and think religious thoughts, can very well be examined, (and are legitimately), by Neuro-science and it's tools, and there is NO instance of human religious behavior(s) that cannot be examined and studied.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
31-10-2013, 02:10 PM (This post was last modified: 31-10-2013 02:39 PM by houseofcantor.)
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
(31-10-2013 09:59 AM)Vulpix Wrote:  ...and educate him?

Is that a euphemism for "terminate with extreme prejudice?" Consider

*watches vid, recalls ninjas*

Pfft. He's harmless. Not to their side, but... and he's likeable, decent, and allows comments. No "education" required. Tongue

[Image: klingon_zps7e68578a.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-10-2013, 08:57 PM
RE: Fr. Barron comments on Who God Is and Who God Is Not
(31-10-2013 02:10 PM)houseofcantor Wrote:  
(31-10-2013 09:59 AM)Vulpix Wrote:  ...and educate him?

Is that a euphemism for "terminate with extreme prejudice?" Consider

*watches vid, recalls ninjas*

Pfft. He's harmless. Not to their side, but... and he's likeable, decent, and allows comments. No "education" required. Tongue

Excellent point on him allowing comments. Regardless of his flawed logic, allowing comments shows that he is a cut above the run of the mill theist on youtube especially the crackpots at AiG.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: