Billions of people have HD video cameras in their pockets: why aren't we seeing lots of miracles on video?

[e_c]

Again, knowing something by reason alone IS NOT THE SAME thing as having 100% certitude.

I can know some things about you by using my intellect and powers of reason and deduction, but I DO NOT HAVE 100% certainty of these things.

So what percentage did Vatican I mean? 99% certain? 67%? 51%? Can you imagine Pius IX sitting there with an abacus? Come on…

It is “certain,” plain and simple. Just like the square triangle example… The perfect certainty of the existence of God is a direct result of apprehending the most basic truths about the laws of being and what they immediately lead to. It is decidedly different from your other examples, which are plainly NOT certain, but are just extremely likely. As Thomas tells us, once you understand it, it becomes SELF EVIDENT.

The difference between “knowledge” and “certain knowledge” would come down to the way the “truth” element can be verified in the definition I offered (justified true belief formed virtuously in a favorable environment)… Can it simply be verified by examining the actual formation of the belief itself? If so, then it is certain. If not, then it is not certain, and it must be verified empirically in order for one to be sure of his knowledge. Then it would become certain, I suppose, but in a different way.

PR - It might be easier for you to admit simply that you made a mistake.

 

[estesbob]

Annnnnd here it is, folks. Exactly why the “I’ll believe when a miracle occurs in front of me” is just a smokescreen.

It’s a setup.

There is no situation which couldn’t be construed as a fake by someone who is adamantine that the Church is wrong.

I suspect if he saw a video of an amputated limb being restored he would claim it was. Photoshoped

*“To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible.”

― Thomas Aquinas*

 

[Little_Tiger]

The problem with the claim of “certainty, not 100% certainty” is twofold my friend: firstly, it is a baseless assertion. There is no why. Two, we must remember what philosophers mean when they say “demonstrate”. If some truth is philosophically “demonstrated” it is shown through a chain of reasoning to be 100% certain. Again, see the link from Strange Notions- he makes it quite clear, in fact using bold print, that he is not offering a probabilistic, 99% likely **argument. It is 100%.
Here is a quote from Pope Pius XII’s Humani Generis-
"[H]uman reason by its own natural force and light can arrive at a true and certain knowledge of the one personal God, Who by His providence watches over and governs the world…
t falls to reason to demonstrate with certainty the existence of God, personal and one…"
That last italicized phrase is key. In philosophy, the word demonstrate is not taken lightly. anything which is actually demonstrated is 100% certain.
I suspect you think I am putting reason above faith, or attempting to eliminate faith altogether. Don’t worry, I am not. Faithfulness to the Magisterium is extremely important to me, and I would never consciously say something to undermine Catholic Truth. And correct me if I am wrong, which I may be, but I think you might have a mistaken notion of faith. Faith is simply our assent to the truths God reveals because He can neither deceive nor be deceived. But before we can arrive at the assent of faith, we must know with certainty that God has in fact spoken, otherwise our assent will be irrational. And this is where the motives of credibility are key. As Pope Leo XIII said in Aeterni Patris, the motives of credibility provide us “definite proof of a definite truth”. But that might be going on a bit of a tangent. Also, the Catechism does settle the question on certainty:
"Faith is certain. It is more certain than all human knowledge because it is founded on the very word of God who cannot lie. To be sure, revealed truths can seem obscure to human reason and experience, but “the certainty that the divine light gives is greater than that which the light of natural reason gives.” “Ten thousand difficulties do not make one doubt.”
Indeed, we have 100% percent certainty, through reason and faith, faith being the assent to God’s revelation, which is posterior to reason determining with certitude that God has, in fact, made a revelation that He wishes to be believed. God bless you! Also, I have one more link that appeases your desire to see the exact phrase, 100% certainty
Hold on just a minute for that one.

 

[Little_Tiger]

So what percentage did Vatican I mean? 99% certain? 67%? 51%? Can you imagine Pius IX sitting there with an abacus? Come on…

It is “certain,” plain and simple. Just like the square triangle example… The perfect certainty of the existence of God is a direct result of apprehending the most basic truths about the laws of being and what they immediately lead to. It is decidedly different from your other examples, which are plainly NOT certain, but are just extremely likely. As Thomas tells us, once you understand it, it becomes SELF EVIDENT.

The difference between “knowledge” and “certain knowledge” would come down to the way the “truth” element can be verified in the definition I offered (justified true belief formed virtuously in a favorable environment)… Can it simply be verified by examining the actual formation of the belief itself? If so, then it is certain. If not, then it is not certain, and it must be verified empirically in order for one to be sure of his knowledge. Then it would become certain, I suppose, but in a different way.

PR - It might be easier for you to admit simply that you made a mistake.

Thank you again, you are spot on my friend!!!

 

[Little_Tiger]

PRmerger
Here it is, from right here at CA - catholic.com/magazine/articles/a-proof-of-the-existence-of-god
God bless you!

 

[PRmerger]

No, not at all.
Why would a miracle prove the existence of a God?
As per definition, a miracle isn’t necessarily linked to Gods.

.

Then why are we having this discussion?

What is the significance of a miracle then, as far as religious discussions go?

 

[PRmerger]

PRmerger
Here it is, from right here at CA - catholic.com/magazine/articles/a-proof-of-the-existence-of-god
God bless you!

Can you quote the part that talks about 100% certitude please?

Thank you.

 

[e_c]

Yep. And there was one simple miracle.

And yet it wasn’t enough to convince everyone.

Speaks volumes, doesn’t it, about the recusance of folks?

I am 100% certain that it’s not “I want a miracle to show me that God exists” which is holding you back–but an emotional one.

It is odd how this 100% thing has changed in your posts. You aren’t 100% certain of God’s existence, but you are 100% sure of someone’s inner thoughts? Strange.

Unless it’s a joke. I’m not 100% certain.

Miracles do not create faith, they only dispose.

Also recall the phenomenon at Nazareth, when Our Lord could not work many miracles because of a lack of faith. I’ve posted twice about Vianney in the past few hours, let me post a third time - his insistence on faith for prayers for the miraculous was absolute… He basically said “don’t bother” if you’re not going to believe that God can and will do what you are asking for. This is also the teaching of the Gospel.

 

[PRmerger]

Which miracle are you talking about?

.

Christ’s resurrection.

 

[PRmerger]

My friend, the Vatican Council did in fact say “certainty”. Do you expect an Ecumenical Council from the 19th century to use the terminology “100%”. No, they simply did not speak that way, particularly in Church documents. So, the Council was very clear on this subject. But there are other Magisterial documents, hold on

Ah, so we are agreed then.

We have certainty of God’s existence.

Just not 100% certainty.

Perhaps you should retract, then?

 

[e_c]

Can you quote the part that talks about 100% certitude please?

Thank you.

We can conclude, then, that even if all of your sense perceptions are false, even if you are nothing but a brain in a vat being manipulated by scientists into believing that you are reading this article right now when in fact you are not, there are two things you can know with absolute, 100 percent certainty: (1) You exist, and (2) God exists.

On the other hand…

James Kidd is the editorial assistant for This Rock. He writes from La Mesa, California.

He is not the Church, he does not write from the Chair.

I’ve noticed you’ve not addressed my last few posts. That doesn’t make them go away…

 

[ThePoorInSpirit]

Yes. See for example:

individual.utoronto.ca/mfkolarcik/texts/WDeverArchaeology_ConquestABD.html

So after 3300 years, you (the archaeologists) dig around a dozen or so sites, you put together and read a few ancient texts and now you know everything about who lived where and at what time. Did you ever hear the parable about the five blind men touching five different parts of an elephant and coming up with five different outcomes as to what they were touching? Little secret for you, none of them came up with it being an elephant.

 

[PRmerger]

Oh, *that *miracle!

Well, the difficulty with that miracle is…not a lot of people witnessed it.
And many don’t feel that the gospels, written so many decades later and thousands of years ago by anonymous writers with the agenda to convert people, are solid sources.

There is good reason for many to doubt the gospels. Pumpkin Cookie is talking about a miracle that leaves little doubt, that we can *all *see and get behind.

.

.

Irrelevant.

A miracle occurred, and even back then, it wasn’t enough to convince folks.

For the recusant and the adamantine, there is nothing that will convince.

This is what it means to be a fundamentalist.

 

[Little_Tiger]

Ah, so we are agreed then.

We have certainty of God’s existence.

Just not 100% certainty.

Perhaps you should retract, then?

I cannot retract truth my friend, and frankly I would die first.
You may have misunderstood what I said. I said that the terminology would not be used at that time period. I did not say that the meaning was not intended. e_c said it superbly - what level of certainty? 99%? 99.5% No, demonstrative certainty. I must return to stressing the meaning of the word demonstrate in philosophy, a word which Pope Pius XII utilizes while writing with the guidance of the Holy Spirit. This word, when used philosophically, necessarily implies absolute, 100% certitude. A sound philosophical demonstration (of the type that James Kidd gives us) leaves room for no doubt, not only no reasonable doubt. Please take another look at the James Kidd link, the Peter Kreeft link, the Strange Notions link, and there is also a series of videos by Catholic Answers apologist Karlo Broussard which demonstrate the existence of God, which I will link you to in a moment.
God bless you my friend!

 

[Little_Tiger]

I’ve noticed you’ve not addressed my last few posts. That doesn’t make them go away…

e_c, do you mean me or PRmerger? Thanks!

 

[e_c]

Oh, *that *miracle!

Well, the difficulty with that miracle is…not a lot of people witnessed it.
And many don’t feel that the gospels, written so many decades later and thousands of years ago by anonymous writers with the agenda to convert people, are solid sources.

.

Paul said hundreds saw it. And that you could go and talk to them about it.

Friend, I live here in Rome, where an empire was crippled by this message. I walk on streets that were once covered in the blood of the men (and women!) who apparently just “made it up.” I can tell you that when I look at the city from the top of the Gianiculum, at all the churches where pagan temples once stood, it is just plain obvious that what you are saying is ridiculous. These were not anonymous people, they were REAL PEOPLE who risked their lives, and usually lost them. And for what? For what they believed to have “seen and touched,” as 1 John puts it.

 

[e_c]

e_c, do you mean me or PRmerger? Thanks!

PR, of course.

DaddyGirl - A lot of people don’t get advanced math either. It doesn’t make it untrue. The difference here is that there is a challenge to a person’s whole way of life.

 

[Little_Tiger]

Philosophy and thoughts are not *demonstrative *proof. They’re, like, the opposite of demonstrative.

Don’t you think htat if %100 percent proof existed, everyone would be theists?

.

No, demonstrative proof is a philosophical chain of reasoning which begins with absolutely certain premises (for example, the fact that I exist) and through deductive reasoning arrives at a certain conclusion. I invite you to read the variety of links I have posted on the subject, as well as the books I mentioned, and to watch the series of videos I am about to post for PRmerger. You and PR may also want to check out the book New Proofs for the Existence of God by Father Robert Spitzer, Ph.D.
No, I do not think so. Do most people spend their spare time investigating philosophical proofs for God’s existence? No. One has to discover the proofs before they can assent to them. If one does not seek, one will not find, and I think I might be right when I say most people don’t do a whole lot of research into demonstrative philosophical proofs for the existence of God. Also, as Tim Staples says in his blog post “Miracles and Evangelism”, there is more to this thing than being persuaded intellectually- the will sometimes gets in the way.
God bless you my friend!

 

[Little_Tiger]

PR, of course.

DaddyGirl - A lot of people don’t get advanced math either. It doesn’t make it untrue. The difference here is that there is a challenge to a person’s whole way of life.

Again, thank you for the insight my friend!

 

[e_c]

Here’s another gem:

From Matthew 28:

12 When the chief priests had met with the elders and devised a plan, they gave the soldiers a large sum of money, 13 telling them, “You are to say, ‘His disciples came during the night and stole him away while we were asleep.’ 14 If this report gets to the governor, we will satisfy him and keep you out of trouble.” 15 So the soldiers took the money and did as they were instructed. And this story has been widely circulated among the Jews to this very day.

Did you catch that? THEY BELIEVED HE ROSE AND YET DID NOT FOLLOW HIM.

Miracles do not create faith. Read the “narrative” sections of the Book of Exodus.