Despite what Lula or KFC says, it's my observation that there is relativsm when it comes to morals (right/wrong). This is largely due to the numerous cultures, religions, inidivuals, et al. in society. It's just a fact that some don't understand.  I'm not saying that I personally favor doing whatever the hell I want, I have my parameters. Still though, the perceived "right and wrong" that societies or cultures or any massive group, is merely social pressure. It's what society (or faith, etc.) as a whole has decided is right. Does that make it universal? Yes and no. If one wants to confine and define themsevleves in their culture's/society's, etc. terms, then okay.

God.

Keep His commandments, especially the command to love your neighbor (who is anyone in the whole wide world) and you'll be doing good.

Yes, no doubt, there are people within the Church who have done evil but I no where have I ever defended the conduct of bad priests or bad people, nor would I. I say the CC is the one true Church even though not all of her individual members are true to her teachings which are Christ's teachings. No valid argument can be based upon the conduct of individuals.

As for the truth of the CC, it can be proved historically that Christ lived, that He was God, and that He founded an imperishable Church which was to be one, holy, catholic and apostolic. Find that Chruch and you will have the true religion of Christ.

First, all Scripture is inspired of God and so each writer's word is definitive.

Second, like the other Gospel writers who quoted Christ, St.Paul got his teaching from the Master Himself.

You mis-spoke or misunderstand. Jesus didn't take our sins as His own...if the meaning were that, then there would be no punishment for sin now that He has died. And there is punishment for sin..the wages of sin is death, both physical death and eternal death.

Is not the CC the body of it's members?  The church would surely not exist without them.  And if parts of the body are corrupt is not the whole body also?  It is after all the whole that allows the few to operate.

Where is the evidence that Jesus existed?  To my knowledge no such evidence exists.   The apostles also got their teachings from Jesus did they not?  And who's to say that St. Paul received his teachings directly from Jesus?  Were there witnesses to the event?

..

Yes, the CC is the Mystical Body of Christ. As to your last question, we don't condemn the whole family if one of its children went wrong. Believe me when I say that when any of the religious (priests, nuns, or deacons) go wrong, all Catholics are hurt...for we are one body see Eph. 4:4-6.

History itself and therefore history books would be evidence that Jesus Christ existed.

We have writings by 5 reputable historians, the 4 Evangelists and St.Paul. Their writings are just as historical as any others.

Tacticus, the Roman historian who wrote about 70 years after His death mentions Him...as does Josephus, the Jewish historian. 

And it's no answer to speculate that the Gospels are fable...as Tennyson said, Jesus' personality was His greatest miracle. Try making up a character that men will die for, not just today, but hundreds of years from now.

Jesus can be denied, blasphemed, reduced to jokes, whatever, but after 2000 some years, even though Christ never wrote a word, His words retain the power to convert. 

St.Paul certainly had an encounter with the Risen Christ...remember He asked St.Paul, "Why do you persecute Me?" when all the time St.Paul (then Saul) was persecuting the Church.

We have the details of Scripture and we know about St. Paul's life more than any other of the Apostles even of St.Peter or St.John. Acts 7 recalls the matyrdom of St.Stephen whom the Chruch regards as the first Christian martyr. v. 58 has it that after he was stoned to death, his clothes were laid at the feet of Saul.

Like Jesus, St.Stephen dies commending his soul to God and praying for his persecutors..one of whom was Saul who consented to his death (chapter 8).  We see later that Saul soon experiences the benefit of St.Stephen's intercession. St.Augustine wrote that if St.Stephen would not have prayed for Saul, then the Chruch would not have had St.Paul.

Acts 9 is the account of Saul's conversion. V.15-16 Our Lord calls St.Paul his chosen instrument and tell Ananias how much he will have to suffer on His account. V. 18 Saul is baptized by Ananias and teaches him the Christian faith. We know that in Baptism, the Holy Ghost confers sanctifying grace upon our soul and in Acts we read that St. Paul fulfills his mission.

There is an objective way to figure out what is right and wrong.

There are different cultures with different views of what is right and wrong. But those cultures can be compared by various objective standards.

I myself use "stones". The fewer stones used by the culture to kill women who did something "wrong", the better the culture. Whichever cultures use the fewest stones to kill women are closest to the true definition of what is right and what is wrong and the world should listen to them and not the others.

Quite simple really.

So while moral relativism exists, there is absolutely no reason to pay attention to it.

Just count the stones you used last to punish a woman who did something you considered wrong. If the number is zero, congratulate yourself: you know what's right and wrong. Everything else can be discussed.

Mmm, well that's your choice. Personally I choose to look at the cultures in their terms, not an ethnocentric one.

What about cultures that practice female circumcision?

look around, the real world reveals its appalling results of evil and sin...we see destroyed lives all around us and its moral relativism that says in spite of what evil one does to himself or to another, they are still OK....lighten up can't we just move on?

We must pay attention to it or otherwise we are doomed.

Take the list of public officials who have thrown away their family for the pleasure of sin of sexual infidelity...and then there is drunkeness, drug addiction, pornography, killing our own progeny by abortion, and the list goes on...and on and on.

I think lulapilgrim should be lulapuritan.

Any rules or laws in the OT were intended for Jews.

How do you know all of those things aren't part of God's plan? How do you know things aren't turning out the way he knew they would from the beginning?

What does fear or slippery slopes have to do with any of this lula? I agree, I don't personally agree with some of the things you mentioned, but does that mean that such things as getting drunk completely wrong according to joe blow down the street? To you yes, to him, not necessarily.

Moral relativism doesn't imply that things are okay, or right. That comes down to the individual. Moral relativism simply means that moral/ethical propositions do not come down to objective and/or universal truths, but instead are claims/make claims based on cultural, social, historical, etc. circumstances.

So, it's simply an acknowledgement that each person has their own - different - set of values. What we see as "right" in the United States may not be "right" in, say, China or Russia. It simply just is the way things are.

Never mind. Deletable post.

lula posts:

I'm not talking about occasionally getting drunk. I'm talking about drinking purposely to get drunk and that being a habitual occurence. It causes pain, suffering and disease to the individual actually do the drinking and to those close to him as well as to the greater society.

Infidel posts:

Oh for Pete's sake...who of you would say that any of these items I mentioned is actually good? In your heart of hearts you all know it's only common sense.

The 10 Commandments may have first been given to the Isrealites, but they were written in stone for a good reason...they are universal and meant for all time. Everyone of those sins I mentioned above is a committment to sin and breaks one of the 10 Commandments. Committment to sin turns the hardened sinner away from God and aversion to God is not natural at all. We all have the natural law (Moral law--our conscience or intuition) written upon our hearts.

AldericJ posts:

Have we gone so far off the track that we can make up for ourselves what is right and what is wrong?

For whose sake? Do you worship someone named Pete more than you worship God? Is Pete someone you made up in your head?

This is just a sign of my frustration...is this the first time you've heard that saying?

No. Do you ever say "for Christ's sake" or "for God's sake"?