Can we really expect Atheists (and non-Catholics) to come to Catholicism

[OurLadyofSorrows]

Did you only examine scripture and the rare times when the Pope speaks infallibly, or did you look elsewhere.
Did you look at miracles, the existence of evil ?

Job does not explain how the universe was formed. In a dialogue between God and Job, God is rebuking Job and asking Job a few questions about events we see in nature.

All above are unverified claims.

There is a miracle that can happen annually with the Eucharist where it liquifies on a given date, then returns to solid.

There were the apparitions of Fatima. Three wooden statues of Our Lady of Fatima were made, and travelled the world. One of these would emit fluids from the eyes. At Akita in another apparition by Our Lady, the wooden statue there would emit fluids.

Then there is one witnessed by thousands at a place called Zeitoun in Egypt.

Have a look at each of these and tell me what verifiable data you would use to examine each event

 

[Dan_Defender]

Long story short, I contacted a spirit via occult means, out of bored curiosity and not knowing anything out of the ordinary would happen. This led me to learn that the supernatural is real. At the same time, God was reaching out to me, with a number of external signs that led me to him and ultimately, away from the spirit who was trying to deceive me.

That is interesting. Some atheists though act like they don’t want God to exist. Meaning, that even in the face of evidence, there is a hardness of heart that they will not get past. I am glad you found your path to God.

 

[Freddy]

Then there is one witnessed by thousands at a place called Zeitoun in Egypt.

That would be many hundreds of thousands. Some say millions. Which is where we might say Fred’s Law kicks in: The easier it is to verify a miracle, the less chance there is of it being accepted as such. It sounds counterintuitive until you consider the implications of not following it.

It wasn’t a one off. It happened many times over a period of months and the vision on the roof of a church was there for all to see for quite some time each time. You’d think someone would have taken a decent photo. Or even a film. Or even climbed the stairs up to the roof to check it out.

 

[OurLadyofSorrows]

That would be many hundreds of thousands. Some say millions. Which is where we might say Fred’s Law kicks in: The easier it is to verify a miracle, the less chance there is of it being accepted as such. It sounds counterintuitive until you consider the implications of not following it.

It wasn’t a one off. It happened many times over a period of months and the vision on the roof of a church was there for all to see for quite some time each time. You’d think someone would have taken a decent photo. Or even a film. Or even climbed the stairs up to the roof to check it out.

Are you ‘Fred’s Law’?

It was the 60s, there is quite a bit of visual record online.
Think 1960s, Egypt and its technology

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

That would be many hundreds of thousands. Some say millions. Which is where we might say Fred’s Law kicks in: The easier it is to verify a miracle, the less chance there is of it being accepted as such. It sounds counterintuitive until you consider the implications of not following it.

It wasn’t a one off. It happened many times over a period of months and the vision on the roof of a church was there for all to see for quite some time each time. You’d think someone would have taken a decent photo. Or even a film. Or even climbed the stairs up to the roof to check it out.

Are you ‘Fred’s Law’?

It was the 60s, there is quite a bit of visual record online.
Think 1960s, Egypt and its technology

See if you can find a decent photo. There must be thousands to choose from. It was seen by people from all over the world. There were even tv crews there.

Then tell me after so many witnesses saw it (hundreds of thousands!) why the church thought better of declaring it a bona fide miracle. Hint: Fred’s Law.

 

[OurLadyofSorrows]

See if you can find a decent photo. There must be thousands to choose from. It was seen by people from all over the world. There were even tv crews there.

Then tell me after so many witnesses saw it (hundreds of thousands!) why the church thought better of declaring it a bona fide miracle. Hint: Fred’s Law.

There is even some good film, there are some pretty good clear photos, just google it.

Why hasnt Rome been involved in its investigation?
Hint: Egyptian Coptic Church, go looking there.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

See if you can find a decent photo. There must be thousands to choose from. It was seen by people from all over the world. There were even tv crews there.

Then tell me after so many witnesses saw it (hundreds of thousands!) why the church thought better of declaring it a bona fide miracle. Hint: Fred’s Law.

There is even some good film, there are some pretty good clear photos, just google it.

Why hasnt Rome been involved in its investigation?
Hint: Egyptian Coptic Church, go looking there.

Not seen any film at all. If you know where I can see some, I’d be interested. And the photos that I’ve seen, considering that they must be the best of many tens of thousands that must have been taken, are laughably inept. And I use that word in the meaning that it’s normally used.

And when I say ‘church’, I mean yours. If the Roman Catholic church has decided that multiple apparitions of the actual Virgin Mary lasting up to an hour and appearing over a period of many months is not what it is claimed, then there’d be a reason for that. And ‘someone got there before us’ isn’t it.

 

[CaptainPrudeman]

And when I say ‘church’, I mean yours. If the Roman Catholic church has decided that multiple apparitions of the actual Virgin Mary lasting up to an hour and appearing over a period of many months is not what it is claimed, then there’d be a reason for that. And ‘someone got there before us’ isn’t it.

As far as I know, the Catholic Church doesn’t investigate it because it’s “out of our jurisdiction,” so to speak. Since it happened with another church, it isn’t to be touched. It’s their thing.

What I found was a complete mess of one fantastic story after another, totally impossible to have verified, mixed with all kinds of ancient philosophy that has absolutely no support in observations.

Congratulations, you’ve literally described all of ancient history!

 

[Michaelangelo]

Did you only examine scripture and the rare times when the Pope speaks infallibly, or did you look elsewhere.

Don’t confuse the concept of papal infalibility with the concept of infallibility of the magisterium. The former has only a few instances of being exercised where’s the latter has has many. I think scripture has to have a central role in investigating the claims of the church. And to me, scripture has more holes than a termite infested cottage.

Did you look at miracles, the existence of evil ?

Miracles are claimed events that can’t be explained using our current understanding of nature. That’s it. Which for starters does not in any way prove the existence of something outside the universe. Nor are the vast majority of these claimed mairaculous events proven to have happened at all. Most are anecdotes with no or very poor documentation.
Esistence of evil. What do you mean by that? Define evil to start with. Then we can dicuss eventual existence of evil.

Job does not explain how the universe was formed. In a dialogue between God and Job, God is rebuking Job and asking Job a few questions about events we see in nature.

If you think the book of Job is a historical document of actual events you need to read up on what the church actually teach about this book. Hint: there was no dialogue between God and Job.

There is a miracle that can happen annually with the Eucharist where it liquifies on a given date, then returns to solid.

There is no documented instance of a piece of bread liquifying and then back to bread again. So define first what solid is the starting point for this miraculous transformation. And what is the liquid endpoint? As you see more data is needed.

There were the apparitions of Fatima.

Anecdotes without empirical support. Let’s just leave it at that.

Three wooden statues of Our Lady of Fatima were made, and travelled the world. One of these would emit fluids from the eyes. At Akita in another apparition by Our Lady, the wooden statue there would emit fluids.

Without looking into this specifically, because I’m fed up with the general halabaloo about Fatima, wood emitting liquid does not even make a top thousand of the things I would look for as evidence for god.
Then there is one witnessed by thousands at a place called Zeitoun in Egypt.

Have a look at each of these and tell me what verifiable data you would use to examine each event

Let me think a little a come back shortly with an answer.

 

[Michaelangelo]

Congratulations, you’ve literally described all of ancient history!

The difference between Judeo-christian mythology and general ancient history is that the former have very few to no independent sources. While the latter have a much better support when it comes to independent sources. But I agree that ancient history is lacking a lot in terms of empirical support. At the same time in no expert in history in general or ancient history in particular.

 

[rosejmj]

I would honestly think intelligence makes it harder to come to Catholicism. A person who is less intelligent, in that they wouldn’t explore Catholicism on an intellectual level or question it much, would be more likely to convert if they experience Catholicism in a positive way. For most people, God simply is a concept- while he may exist, there is no way to truly know for sure until we die.

While sin might keep some people away, I think that there are many better reasons that people become or stay atheist, whether that might be from a bad experience they’ve had with the Church, or not having their questions and doubts answered , and coming to that conclusion through intellectual reasoning. I do find it a bit problematic to claim that there is no way there is a God though, because if you can’t prove it, you can’t disprove it either, although you may lean one way. Agnosticism makes much more sense, accepting that there is no way to truly know and then just living your life as best you can.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

And when I say ‘church’, I mean yours. If the Roman Catholic church has decided that multiple apparitions of the actual Virgin Mary lasting up to an hour and appearing over a period of many months is not what it is claimed, then there’d be a reason for that. And ‘someone got there before us’ isn’t it.

As far as I know, the Catholic Church doesn’t investigate it because it’s “out of our jurisdiction,” so to speak. Since it happened with another church, it isn’t to be touched. It’s their thing.

I’ve never found anything to suggest that they couldn’t verify it themselves. In any case, this was meant to be the mother of Jesus. If it was true, it would be the biggest event in human history (if you discount the ascension). Something tells me they would have done something more that say ‘Hey guys, you can check it out if you like. We’ll pass’.

What if Jesus returns but only makes an appearance in the Suleymaniye Mosque?

 

[o_mlly]

According to scripture miracles were performed precisely to provide verification. Because without that verification people would not have had any reason to listen to Jesus. After that verification was provided people had a reason to actually listen to him and trust him about the other things he said. That is when faith comes into the picture.

What need of faith do those who will not believe until they witness a backyard Resurrection? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed (John 20:29). When did you stop praying?

 

[rosejmj]

Which would also explain why people convert to Catholicism or any religion without much intellectual reason

 

[rosejmj]

I find private miracles to be a bad way to prove any religion. The fact that they occur outside of Catholicism is one reason. The Church also does not declare most “miracles” to be from God and when they do, they make it a private matter and not something Catholics have to believe.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Also, how come such smart people don’t come to Catholicism if it is true?

Plenty of “smart people” such as doctors and scientists have “come to Catholicism”. There are conversion stories online or in books about some of them. But many others have conversion stories that aren’t publicized simply because it’s part of their private life, not something they go around putting on billboards.

In addition, there are a lot of people who the world would consider “smart” such as professionals and businessmen who are already practicing Catholics. The Church contains people with all levels of education and accomplishment.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I find private miracles to be a bad way to prove any religion. The fact that they occur outside of Catholicism is one reason. The Church also does not declare most “miracles” to be from God and when they do, they make it a private matter and not something Catholics have to believe.

Our Lady of Sorrows didn’t offer those miracles to “prove any religion”, she responded to someone else who made a comment about “unverified claims”.

Also, the fact is that even though the Church doesn’t require Catholics to believe in miracles, they do end up converting some people, and deepening the faith of some other people.

 

[OurLadyofSorrows]

Not seen any film at all. If you know where I can see some,

Google is your friend, dig deeper.

And when I say ‘church’, I mean yours. If the Roman Catholic church has decided that multiple apparitions of the actual Virgin Mary lasting up to an hour and appearing over a period of many months is not what it is claimed, then there’d be a reason for that. And ‘someone got there before us’ isn’t it.

Again, hint : Egyptian Coptic Church.

When you posted this below

Then tell me after so many witnesses saw it (hundreds of thousands!) why the church thought better of declaring it a bona fide miracle. Hint: Fred’s Law.

It suggested you had researched this event and would know whether the Latin Rite Roman Catholic or the Egyptian Coptics were the Rite that have primary concern for this apparition, and why.

Fred’s law fails to stand as robust if its research base is so thin.

Hmm am I Latin Rite Roman Catholic, Egyptian Coptic, or another rite? Which as you say

“And when I say ‘church’, I mean yours.”

is mine.

 

[OurLadyofSorrows]

Don’t confuse the concept of papal infalibility with the concept of infallibility of the magisterium. The former has only a few instances of being exercised where’s the latter has has many. I think scripture has to have a central role in investigating the claims of the church. And to me, scripture has more holes than a termite infested cottage.

Lets not go there -infallibility in this thread, it is off topic and would derail the thread. A new thread would be better.

I dispute the claims that you assert regarding Scripture purely on lack of demonstrated knowledge regarding themes we have already discussed here. Reading books in their original language, and translating them would also feature in research before such an assertion could be taken as a seriously robust assertion.
The word day in Biblical Hebrew an example of that.

As a scientist you would understand and appreciate accuracy and precision, in all things. As do I.

 

[OurLadyofSorrows]

If you think the book of Job is a historical document of actual events you need to read up on what the church actually teach about this book. Hint: there was no dialogue between God and Job.

Hint : read Job again.

Let us establish accuracy and precision before going further , and refrain from assuming what another thinks. Scientists are concerned with hypothesis formed by ? that becomes theory if ? occurs?

Btw God being a proper noun in this case, requires a capital G. I altered it in the quote.