Atheist refutation of Fátima help!

  • Thread starter Thread starter Struggling1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Struggling1

Guest
So an atheist friend of mine is attempting to refute Fátima by saying that since not everyone saw the same thing and everyone expected something to happen that there is evidence of wishful thinking which caused people to experience something much like hypnosis on a stage. How do I even begin to refute this since we have no accounts from anywhere outside Fátima, no video of the event, and no pictures showing anything bizarre in photos?
 
There’s lots of photos online, it was mentioned in newspapers all over the world. Jacinta’s body was also found in-corrupt.
 
Have your friend read the book “Meet the Witnesses of the Miracle of the Sun” by John Haffert. That’s all you need to do. If he doesn’t want to believe after reading that, then he’s never going to believe and you will simply be wasting your time. If he is truly curious, and not just the typical argumentative atheist, he will read the book and you two can discuss it.

http://johnhaffert.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Meet-the-Witnesses-91511.pdf
 
The advantage you have is that you believe. The disadvantage he has is that he claims to know. Just ask him to prove what he’s saying and he’ll be done. You can still believe without knowing. He can do neither.
 
Last edited:
There are reports that it was seen some thirty miles away, but by and large, the phenomenon was meant for the pilgrims to Fatima. It actually makes sense that it was meant to be seen only in Fatima, to reward those who bothered to show up. That is how faith works. You have to show up.
 
Fatima is something that doesn’t need to proved or refuted ultimately. Fatima is a private revelation that does not require assent of faith even by Catholics… It can’t be proven one way or another, so I would simply state that you are free to believe it happened, or not. No harm, no foul either way
 
Struggling1, it seems many of your posts and your atheist friends are about very particular Catholic beliefs. And Fatima and specific miraculous phenomena are not even required beliefs – except the Resurrection, etc.

I would instead recommend dealing with God first and then Christ. Frankly, I don’t think you’ll win your friend over by dealing with the particulars of the faith first. Go to reason, first. God and Christ can be discussed over using philosophy, history, and so on. Whereas particular Catholic beliefs are based on what Christ has revealed – so we accept those on faith.
 
You are 100% correct the issue is that I am surrounded by atheists and it’s true I’m trying to help them believe but maybe I need to have my foundation first before I try to help others.
 
Struggling1 said:
So an atheist friend of mine is attempting to refute Fátima
Click to expand...
First step: if he’s trying to refute something, ask him to explain what exactly he is trying to refute and why. Atheists attacking strawmen aren’t exactly unheard of.
Struggling1 said:
saying that since not everyone saw the same thing and everyone expected something to happen that there is evidence of wishful thinking which caused people to experience something much like hypnosis on a stage.
Click to expand...
Then he is free to try to reproduce the same experience. Shouldn’t be too hard, if he’s right. 🙂

Of course, it is not just that he has no evidence showing that this is what happened, he also has no way to reproduce it (even using technology unavailable at that time), nor any explanation of how it could be reproduced.

And if this experience can’t be reproduced so easily (or even at all) - is there some reason why we shouldn’t think it to be miraculous?

Which is why you should ask what exactly he is trying to refute. As I said, atheists attacking strawmen aren’t exactly unheard of. And this one seems to be attacking a strawman “The Sun physically moved for this miracle.”.

But no one claims that. The claim is that the Sun appeared to move.
Struggling1 said:
How do I even begin to refute this since we have no accounts from anywhere outside Fátima, no video of the event, and no pictures showing anything bizarre in photos?
Click to expand...
That’s a wrong question. Why should you present any evidence at all at this point? Did he show any ability to use the evidence he already has?

If you show too much eagerness in presenting the evidence, you will only reinforce the impression that the atheist is some sort of a “judge”, impartial and honest by definition, who only has to rule on evidence that is given him without any effort on his part.

But that impression is completely wrong. It is his job to investigate, not your job. And he doesn’t get to just assume he’s perfectly impartial and honest - he should make an effort to be impartial and honest.

And thus at some point it might be a good idea to ask him if he thinks he’s impartial and honest - and why. What precautions has he taken to stay impartial and honest? Just know in advance that he isn’t going to like this question, as he is, um, unlikely to have good answers.

For now, you might wish to ask him where did he look for the evidence, and what evidence would he expect to find if Catholic claim was true. And why.
 
Confirmation bias at work. If the very same “evidence” were presented for a Muslim miracle very few of us Catholics would believe it and actively seek ways to debunk it.
 
KevinK said:
Confirmation bias at work. If the very same “evidence” were presented for a Muslim miracle very few of us Catholics would believe it and actively seek ways to debunk it.
Click to expand...
“us Catholics”? 🙂 You do not seem to claim you’re a Catholic in profile… 🙂 The last time something similar ended up discussed (Beliefs not subject to will) the evidence was also pointing the other way. Do you want to explicitly claim to be a Catholic now?
KevinK said:
If the very same “evidence” were presented for a Muslim miracle
Click to expand...
Now that’s a telling sentence. True, we do not have Muslim miracles with “the very same ‘evidence’”. 🙂
KevinK said:
If the very same “evidence” were presented for a Muslim miracle very few of us Catholics would believe it and actively seek ways to debunk it.
Click to expand...
Actually, when we do have claims for miracles in other religions with some evidence, Catholics do not “actively seek ways to debunk it”. They mostly do not care.

And why should we care? There are 4 possibilities:
  1. Fraud
  2. Mistake
  3. Work of spirits other than God or His angels
  4. Genuine miracle
All four are compatible with Catholicism - sometimes even the fourth (is there some reason why God can’t possibly choose to heal someone from another religion?).

In fact, Bible notes that Egyptians were able to reproduce some miracles in Exodus.

But only the first two options are compatible with atheism. And that’s why atheists have to try to prove every single claim of miracle to fit into them.
 
The truth of the Catholic Church does not hinge on Fatima.
Its private revelation and belief is optional.

Having said that a truly unbiased atheist would be open to causality by spiritual entities when the balance of evidence reasonably demonstrates a hidden spiritual causality rather than a hidden/unknown material causality.

The problem is most atheists do not realise they are not actually open to hidden spiritual entities. Even when hidden material causality is not identified they just end up grasping very unlikely material explanations and then say it must be so, regardless of how unlikely, because they cannot in fact accept even the possibility of miracles or hidden spiritual entities.
Its a flat earther syndrome (there’s always a weird explanation as to why proof for a spherical earth is false).

Re Fatima it is a fact that some saw and some did not. And Fatima was no respecter of Catholics - some did not see while some atheists did.

Personally I believe the hypothesis that the phenomenon was due to a rare but documented lensing effect of the atmosphere caused by differentials in air pressure at different layers.

The public miracle then was not the phenomenon. The miracle was that it was predicted on this day at this place weeks in advance. Its nature was not predicted, but a wondrous phenomenon was. For me that “coincidence” cannot reasonably be explained by material causes. It is reasonable to assume the spiritual entity claimed by the seers was real.

Of course such wonders do not force belief even in the sincere. There is always enough static or poor quality of communicated information to enable disbelief, either culpable or not. Very incredible claims require a very high standard of factual evidence. Outside of the witnesses themselves that standard falls off rapidly with time and communicated “distance”.

For Fatima an atheist could accept he above hypothesis yet still say it was just a very rare coincidence. That is true, it is possible. But is it a reasonable explanation compared to that offered by a spiritual explanation?

There is no objective way to determine that. The only court that can judge the matter is in the heart of every person who faces the Fatima phenomenon.

All we can do is present the evidence and leave it at that.
It is counter productive to try and “refute” or ague the case further.

The truth of Catholicism does not stand of fall on Fatima.
 
Struggling, as always I’m going to suggest you find some way of stopping yourself from constantly getting your mind poisoned by your athiest friend. Clearly it’s not helping you.
 
Very true. It’s so hard to give up a friendship just cause of these issues! I need to just man up and do it.
 
godisgood77 said:
Fatima is something that doesn’t need to proved or refuted ultimately. Fatima is a private revelation that does not require assent of faith even by Catholics… It can’t be proven one way or another, so I would simply state that you are free to believe it happened, or not. No harm, no foul either way
Click to expand...
Private revelation is like a beautiful hymn. It either touches someone’s heart, or it doesn’t. There are no arguments that can “prove” a hymn is beautiful, nor any private revelation to be meaningful to a given person.

A good starting point with atheists is Reason (not about private revelations, but about what is true, what is right, and how do we know that). 150 years ago atheists would argue they believe in Reason not Faith. Today society, especially higher education, has somewhat forgotten Reason. Today the Church defends Reason as well as Faith.

I suggest talking about Reason, which atheists still can admire, in principle.
How do we know, what we know? Who defines Truth, or Goodness? That is a potentially productive line of thinking. Trying to “prove” Fatima is real, or trying to “prove” a given painting is beautiful, gets you nowhere.
 
You don’t have to give up your friendship with this person. I have friends that don’t agree with me on religious matters, and I don’t write them off as friends. Just don’t discuss religion, but show your friend by your deeds that you are a believer, and maybe he will follow.
 
Struggling1 said:
Very true. It’s so hard to give up a friendship just cause of these issues! I need to just man up and do it.
Click to expand...
I think if he refuses to talk about anything but how he doesn’t believe in God, and that appears to be the case, then yes it may be best to stop the friendship. It would be something else if he would talk about anything else, but I just don’t get that vibe
Also, why is the ball always on your court? Can he explain how something is able to be created out if nothing? I think it would be best to say you’ll pray for him, and leave it at that. The Catholic faith maybe can’t be proven but it can’t be disproven either. It is faith. why argue if he isn’t there yet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top