Author Topic: Why do people worship things that dont exist? (Read 2664 times)

Daegus · « **Reply #10 on:** October 17, 2012, 02:22:44 PM »

Quote from: Capt McQuigg

Daegus raised a very good point.

First, he's wrong about talent not existing unless he means to say that "talent separate from God" vs. "talent as a gift from God" - he didn't note this in his post.

However, he is correct in saying we should not worship talent.

Quote from: Daegus

I don't believe in "talent" as it's typically understood, because it's supposed to be some sort of an innate ability you're born with. When people usually say that word, they're speaking in reference to being able to do things like sing and dance and what have you.

No one comes out of the womb being able to do anything great short of God's infinite power and specific involvement. People who sing well are not born singers. They may have an aptitude towards it and sound good from the very start, but that does not mean they are good. By using the word "talent", people often neglect the fact that much hard work goes into becoming a skilled individual.

Many of the liars in Hollywood would love to convince everyone that they were born "talented". The truth of the matter is that they're not really important or special (anymore so than anyone else) like they would like to make themselves believe. Not even Mozart was born a perfect composer. His father before him was a genius who corrected him and guided him. Usain Bolt was not born a sprinter. Adele was not born a singer. Gordon Ramsay was not born a cook and so on and so forth.

Perhaps there are "talents", but I don't believe there are any you were born with. I don't believe anyone is born with perfect anything, save Our Lord and His Blessed Mother. Even if you were born with "talent", it wouldn't really matter if you weren't willing to work hard to perfect it.

There is an old Zimbabwean proverb that is as follows: "If you can talk you can sing; if you can walk you can dance", or something to that effect.

Talent is something anyone is capable of. I don't believe in Hollywood's definition of talent. All I'm saying is that I believe in hard work and dedication--- not "talent". Talent seems like a poor excuse for those not wanting to work hard for what they want (even though what they want may be Satanic, mind you)

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #11 on:** October 17, 2012, 02:29:38 PM »

:smile:

Lover of Truth · « **Reply #12 on:** October 17, 2012, 02:44:49 PM »

Furthermore, I would like to inform everyone that I will no longer identify myself with the term 'Sede vacante'. My opinion on the matter (pertaining to Benedict XVI and his predecessors) shall be as follows: Sedes non opus est determinare.

Can you tell me what "Sedes non opus est determinar" means?

Thank you.

The following is unrelated but as sedevacantist whenever I am asked what religion I am I unhesitatingly respond "Catholic". That is it.

But I believe the term sede vacante is a very accurate term to describe the current situation. Precise and clear. It is not like I joined a religion where I must always believe the Chair is vaccant no matter what. I'm a sedevacantist now for obvious reasons not because it is my religion.

I do get the point they make though. They prefer to say they are a "wide-awake Catholic" and do not like to be labeled. They also are tired of "isms" like sedevacantism. But IMO that is not a reason to avoid a precise term.

Again that all may not be related to your text above. But I like to blabber.

Daegus · « **Reply #13 on:** October 17, 2012, 03:36:36 PM »

Quote from: Lover of Truth

Furthermore, I would like to inform everyone that I will no longer identify myself with the term 'Sede vacante'. My opinion on the matter (pertaining to Benedict XVI and his predecessors) shall be as follows: Sedes non opus est determinare.

Can you tell me what "Sedes non opus est determinar" means?

Thank you.

The following is unrelated but as sedevacantist whenever I am asked what religion I am I unhesitatingly respond "Catholic". That is it.

But I believe the term sede vacante is a very accurate term to describe the current situation. Precise and clear. It is not like I joined a religion where I must always believe the Chair is vaccant no matter what. I'm a sedevacantist now for obvious reasons not because it is my religion.

I do get the point they make though. They prefer to say they are a "wide-awake Catholic" and do not like to be labeled. They also are tired of "isms" like sedevacantism. But IMO that is not a reason to avoid a precise term.

Again that all may not be related to your text above. But I like to blabber.

Why are people noticing my signature only now? I've had it like this for months now.

All it means is that the chair does not need to be determined. Does that mean I believe that Benedict is the pope? Of course not. All it means is that I'm choosing not to label myself as sedevacantist because I have the option of not doing so.

Neil Obstat · « **Reply #14 on:** October 17, 2012, 07:29:56 PM »

Quote from: Daegus

All it means is that the chair does not need to be determined. Does that mean I believe that Benedict is the pope? Of course not. All it means is that I'm choosing not to label myself as sedevacantist because I have the option of not doing so.

You can call yourself what you like, but it won't stop others from passing
their judgments upon you and proclaiming that you are a sedevacantist
even if you claim otherwise, because you deny B16 is the Pope. And you
can't stop them from doing that. I'll be surprised if it does NOT happen.

A lot will depend on how you take it when they do so.