is the claim of infallibility to gain members moral if it is not true?

rickym

is the claim of infallibility to gain members moral if it is not true?

does the end justify the means?

havok47

As long as the claimant believes that it is moral to do so, then it is subjectively so. Although there is a strong possibility that the claimant will contradict himself in the long run.

Objectively, as long as the claimant believes that it is the truth, then it is so. If he knows that it is false but is continuing to hold onto it...

Then he is a fool, avoid him.

Marianna_Ulap

rickym wrote: »

is the claim of infallibility to gain members moral if it is not true?

does the end justify the means?

No, if they already knew that it's simply a "claim". That would mean they're deceiving the people to take interest in their claim that their group is perfect.

Does the end justify the means. If the people seemed to have been enlightened and it has improved their lives, that's good. But is it moral? Since we have the right to information, I doubt it's moral. They violate that right.

vincex

It's obviously immoral. That's actually similar to politics.

But the ones who should be ashamed aren't the immoral ones, but the ones who were fooled.

rickym

havok47 wrote: »

As long as the claimant believes that it is moral to do so, then it is subjectively so. Although there is a strong possibility that the claimant will contradict himself in the long run.

Objectively, as long as the claimant believes that it is the truth, then it is so. If he knows that it is false but is continuing to hold onto it...

Then he is a fool, avoid him.

is it moral to delude ones self so that one will not be committing a sin?

nikeairviturin

Who will tell if the claim is true or false?

rickym

nikeairviturin wrote: »

Who will tell if the claim is true or false?

well if the afterlife and hell is true, i wouldn't blame god for bringing that guy straight to hell for lying to millions of people.

tonton

rickym wrote: »

is the claim of infallibility to gain members moral if it is not true?

does the end justify the means?

Immoral by all means.

tonton

nikeairviturin wrote: »

Who will tell if the claim is true or false?

Sane people.

csco80

Why do non-Catholics question the infallibility vested to the pope. For more than 2500 years, it was only used by the pope a few times. The popes never abused it, FYI.

Marianna_Ulap

nikeairviturin wrote: »

Who will tell if the claim is true or false?

YOU, would be a nice answer. You should judge a thing if it is true or false. You have the ability to do that. I think it's important that you study about that thing so that your questions on that will be satisfied. It's important that an individual study about a thing that's confusing him, then analyze the information that he got, and consider all sides, then decide which one seems more favorable to him. From there, he can make a stand on that thing.

In short, you have the right to question, to be informed, and to conclude. In the end, you can judge if the claim is true or false.

rickym

csco80 wrote: »

Why do non-Catholics question the infallibility vested to the pope. For more than 2500 years, it was only used by the pope a few times. The popes never abused it, FYI.

if the pope said something and claimed infallibility on what he said and he very well he was not infallible but did it anyway for what he believed was the greater good was it an immoral act?

for example. what if he claimed he talked to god and god said that rh bill is immoral and he claimed that he was sure it was god he talked to but he knew he was lying. did he commit an immoral act?

Totnak

rickym wrote: »

if the pope said something and claimed infallibility on what he said and he very well he was not infallible but did it anyway for what he believed was the greater good was it an immoral act?

for example. what if he claimed he talked to god and god said that rh bill is immoral and he claimed that he was sure it was god he talked to but he knew he was lying. did he commit an immoral act?

as long as he knew that he was lying, then that's an immoral act.....

tonton

The pope uses his infallibility mode only on things that cannot be verified. Ex. Mary is the mother of God.

Totnak

tonton wrote: »

The pope uses his infallibility mode only on things that cannot be verified. Ex. Mary is the mother of God.

actually, the Pope only summons his infallibility jutso when authorized by the Magestrium.....also, if you believe that Jesus is God (which most christians do), then Mary is indeed the mother of God, right?

charcan

Marianna_Ulap wrote: »

YOU, would be a nice answer. You should judge a thing if it is true or false. You have the ability to do that. I think it's important that you study about that thing so that your questions on that will be satisfied. It's important that an individual study about a thing that's confusing him, then analyze the information that he got, and consider all sides, then decide which one seems more favorable to him. From there, he can make a stand on that thing.

In short, you have the right to question, to be informed, and to conclude. In the end, you can judge if the claim is true or false.

gullible people lang ang naniniwala agad
sa mga sabi sabi
infallible ang isang pope or the christian bible
o kahit man ang pinaka dios:D

Marianna_Ulap

Yung religion kasi masyadong dominante para sa ibang tao, tinatakot ang tao o kaya magaling lang talagang magpahayag, kaya tuloy feeling ng ibang tao wala na silang karapatang mag isip at mag decide kung tatanggapin ba nila yung religion o hindi.

X_like_Malcolm

The person who's about to believe have 2 clues.

There are only 2 being who're Infallible. Pope and God.

If the person believed to the person if he is neither the Pope nor God, then the person is fool.

X_like_Malcolm

And I forgot! The Supreme Court is also deemed infallible.

"The Supreme Court is final not because it's infallible, but rather, it's infallible beacuse it's final."

ascorbicacid31

Foolish is the one who trust in man.
Foolish is the one who trust infallibility in a man.
Foolish is the man who says he is infallible.

A fool only follows a fool.
For a fool gave up reasoning and understanding.
And an infallible fool will only multiply foolishness.

For the ditch is big and many fall into it.

havok47

rickym wrote: »

is it moral to delude ones self so that one will not be committing a sin?

If Mother Teresa truly became an atheist and continued living as a nun in order to preserve her charitable institutions and the ideologies (e.g. compassion, piety, mercy) of her organization, it would ultimately mean squat whether I label her moral or immoral as she has lost her absolute moral compass. Is she lying to herself? Yup. Is that a sin or is it not because it's for a greater good? I don't know if her atheistic persona would label it as such.

rickym wrote: »

if the pope said something and claimed infallibility on what he said and he very well he was not infallible but did it anyway for what he believed was the greater good was it an immoral act?

for example. what if he claimed he talked to god and god said that rh bill is immoral and he claimed that he was sure it was god he talked to but he knew he was lying. did he commit an immoral act?

Under the Catholic paradigm, it would absolutely be frowned upon. It would be immoral as it violates the 8th commandment.