How can any of us respond to "show me the evidence", when it comes to believing in Jesus Christ?

[Sy_Noe]

Our Catholic faith is eminently reasonable. That is, it can be proven.

Our Catholic faith always has an apologia–a defense for what we believe.

If it couldn’t be proven, then why would our first pope, in one of his encyclicals, enjoin us to “Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have”?

I have no doubt it is reasonable to you and to the many faithful Catholics around the world. But it still can not be so called “proven” without faith… Faith in the defenses so to speak. And many do not share that same faith… and some not even a faith in God… and there are as well many others of faith but not in a risen Savior Christ Jesus. Faith encompasses belief, trust, and confidence in. But one thing I know for certain is that faith and belief are not proof. Certainly not without the faith to begin with. So I shall stand by my statement with regard to faith and you can believe about it as you wish as well. Peaceful blessings along your walk and faith journey.

 

[PRmerger]

I have no doubt it is reasonable to you and to the many faithful Catholics around the world. But it still can not be so called “proven” without faith… Faith in the defenses so to speak. And many do not share that same faith… and some not even a faith in God… and there are as well many others of faith but not in a risen Savior Christ Jesus. Faith encompasses belief, trust, and confidence in. But one thing I know for certain is that faith and belief are not proof. Certainly not without the faith to begin with. So I shall stand by my statement with regard to faith and you can believe about it as you wish as well. Peaceful blessings along your walk and faith journey.

I am not sure what your point is, Sy.

If you are saying that we need to use Faith AND Reason to come to a fuller understanding of God then you are very Catholic.

If you are saying that must deny our reason, then you are not articulating that which Catholics believe.

If you are saying that faith alone is what we use to come to an understanding of our God, then you are articulating a heresy which we reject.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I am not sure what your point is, Sy.

If you are saying that we need to use Faith AND Reason to come to a fuller understanding of God then you are very Catholic.

If you are saying that must deny our reason, then you are not articulating that which Catholics believe.

If you are saying that faith alone is what we use to come to an understanding of our God, then you are articulating a heresy which we reject.

I’m saying faith and reason together are good things. But that the reality is this: People of faith not only have differing faiths (or in the case of atheists no faith at all in even a God). But I’m also saying people reason differently as well. Faithful Catholics do not hold a monopoly on faith and reason. Episcopalians as just one example stress faith and reason as well. Yet Catholics and Episcopalians, both in good faith, do come to different beliefs and conclusions. That’s just a fact of life and the result of faith and belief and reason. Btw since I don’t practice your faith, I don’t suggest to be an articulator of the Catholic position.

 

[Randy_Carson]

Faith can’t be proven.

What is faith? St. Thomas Aquinas defined it this way:

The Act of believing is an act of the intellect assenting to the Divine truth at the command of the will moved by the grace of God. (Summa Theologica II-II.2.9)

In this definition, there are three things at work:

1. 
   *]God’s grace initiating a response from the person;
   *]The human will responding to God’s grace and, in turn, acting upon the intellect;
   *]The human intellect, responding to the command of the will, assenting to a divinely revealed truth.
   
   The grace of God is primary and precedes an act of faith. The will makes a free choice to respond to the grace of God. The intellect responds to the command of the will and assents to a divinely revealed truth.
   
   Faith is not based upon emotions or upon a lack of reasoning but a choice to believe something is true because a trustworthy authority has told us it is true. Divine Faith is believing something to be true based upon the fact that God said so.
   
   Most of what we know in life is based upon our human faith that someone else who tells us something is a trustworthy authority. For example, we trust our doctors to tell the truth about our health, we trust scientists to tell us about the world around us, and we trust historians to tell us what has happened in the past. In the same way, we exercise divine faith when we trust in something that God has said to be true.
   
   The Crucial Question
   
   How do we really know that God has spoken? Specifically, how do we know that Christianity is true and other religions are false? Aquinas said that Christianity is reasonable to believe for three reasons:
   
   1. 
      *]Some of the beliefs of Christianity can be known by natural reason alone apart from faith: that God exists, that there is only one God and that He is the creator of all things. Demonstrating that these parts of the Christian faith are true lends credibility to the rest of Christian belief.
      *]Other aspects of the Christian faith cannot be demonstrated by reason, but it can be shown that they are not in conflict with reason. For example, the doctrine of the Trinity cannot be demonstrated from reason, but the Trinity can be defended by reason which can show that the doctrine of the Trinity is not unreasonable.
      *]The Christian faith can be shown to have come from a Divine Source due to the miracles and prophecies that accompany it.
      
      So, are there miracles and prophecies that accompany the teachings of Christianity? Jesus seemed to think so.
      
      John 10:37-38
      If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me. But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father.”

 

[PRmerger]

I’m saying faith and reason together are good things. But that the reality is this: People of faith not only have differing faiths (or in the case of atheists no faith at all in even a God). But I’m also saying people reason differently as well. Faithful Catholics do not hold a monopoly on faith and reason.

All of the above: very Catholic

Episcopalians as just one example stress faith and reason as well. Yet Catholics and Episcopalians, both in good faith, do come to different beliefs and conclusions.

Moon landing hoaxers and my husband both examined the evidence and come to different conclusions. My husband concluded: we did truly land on the moon.

Are you saying that because people come to different beliefs and conclusions after examining the same evidence that there’s not an objective truth? We actually can’t conclude that we landed on the moon because there’s a group of folks who believe we didn’t?

That’s just a fact of life and the result of faith and belief and reason. Btw since I don’t practice your faith, I don’t suggest to be an articulator of the Catholic position.

Indeed. But I think you ought to know a bit of what the Catholic faith teaches if you are going to be in discussions with Catholics on a Catholic forum.

 

[kimg901]

I’m not sure if I am saying this right but I was once told by a poster here to ask an unbeliever to start with the biggest particle and continue to backtrack from there and soon enough you have nothing. So we know that nothing cannot become something so there had to have (and is) a Creator. Only God could make things so perfect. Think about where and how our planet sits. A degree or 2 closer to the sun would make our planet uninhabitable. With God, anything is possible!!!

 

[Sy_Noe]

Are you saying that because people come to different beliefs and conclusions after examining the same evidence that there’s not an objective truth? We actually can’t conclude that we landed on the moon because there’s a group of folks who believe we didn’t?

No I’m not saying that at all. First of all I’m saying human understanding of such an infinite being as God and indeed knowing the one ultimate truth is not at all comparable to a moon landing or anything else you can come up with. We didn’t walk in Biblical times. I can’t even say with certainty that humans who did in the earliest times got everything right about God and truth. Let alone those interpreters that followed. So what I’m saying is finite humans can not possibly truly know for certain the one truth. Sure Catholics and others can certainly believe they know. With faith. But that’s a far cry from actually knowing for sure. There’s a difference. And I shall leave it at that.

 

[Micosil]

I’m not sure if I am saying this right but I was once told by a poster here to ask an unbeliever to start with the biggest particle and continue to backtrack from there and soon enough you have nothing. So we know that nothing cannot become something so there had to have (and is) a Creator. Only God could make things so perfect. Think about where and how our planet sits. A degree or 2 closer to the sun would make our planet uninhabitable. With God, anything is possible!!!

That kind of reminds me of the argument from contingency (not exactly, but has elements of it) in Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologiae.

 

[PRmerger]

No I’m not saying that at all. First of all I’m saying human understanding of such an infinite being as God and indeed knowing the one ultimate truth is not at all comparable to a moon landing or anything else you can come up with. We didn’t walk in Biblical times. I can’t even say with certainty that humans who did in the earliest times got everything right about God and truth. Let alone those interpreters that followed. So what I’m saying is finite humans can not possibly truly know for certain the one truth. Sure Catholics and others can certainly believe they know. With faith. But that’s a far cry from actually knowing for sure. There’s a difference. And I shall leave it at that.

And yet, peculiarly, I note that you also assert things with great certainty.

To wit:

In Jn 6:37 he did say he would not turn away any who came to him.

Sy_Noe:

Even Jesus surrounded Himself with sinners.

He said none of us are in the position. Matthew 7:4 “how can you say to your neighbor, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while the log is in your own eye?”

Curious that when Jesus happens to agree with your argument, you reference the Word of God to back you up.

I think it would be proper for all those in dialogue with you to say, “But you’re not really even sure that He said this, right?”

 

[PseuTonym]

Most of what we know in life is based upon our human faith that someone else who tells us something is a trustworthy authority. For example, we trust our doctors to tell the truth about our health, we trust scientists to tell us about the world around us, and we trust historians to tell us what has happened in the past.

I understand that you do not rely upon these specific examples to reach any conclusions. However, I disagree with your specific examples.

First, doctors are experts in disease and injury. If you are in good health and make an appointment to see a doctor, and say, “I simply want to enjoy the best possible health”, then it is unlikely that the doctor will be able to help you.

Second, historians are experts in the written past. They are not archaeologists. They are not experts in deciphering ancient scripts of unrecognizable languages.

Now, the crucial point: “the world around us.” To whom should we go for answers on that topic? Who are the experts?

I assert that the topic of “the world around us” is simply too big and includes too much variety for us to say that the experts on that topic are “scientists.” Do you disagree with my assertion?

You are free to stick to what you originally wrote, but I am curious about what you will say now that I have simply objected. You can probably think of a more persuasive argument against what you wrote than I can, but I don’t need to think of one if you have already abandoned it.

 

[PRmerger]

Now, the crucial point: “the world around us.” To whom should we go for answers on that topic? Who are the experts?

I assert that the topic of “the world around us” is simply too big and includes too much variety for us to say that the experts on that topic are “scientists.” Do you disagree with my assertion?

You are correct in that the topic is “simply too big”.

Perhaps if you posited a more specific question we could address “who are the experts” in that particular discipline to whom we would appeal for answers.

 

[Sy_Noe]

And yet, peculiarly, I note that you also assert things with great certainty.

To wit:

Curious that when Jesus happens to agree with your argument, you reference the Word of God to back you up.

I think it would be proper for all those in dialogue with you to say, “But you’re not really even sure that He said this, right?”

Right sure I have no problem with that whatsoever since even I myself never ever say about me that I am 100% sure I know. And I’m perfectly fine and at peace with that. I have no uneasiness whatsoever accepting that I’m human like everyone else on this earth with a finite understanding of an infinite God’s truth. And that I might be wrong. I have no innate need to think or believe otherwise. Nor to have everything spelled out for me in black and white. I’m very much at ease and at peace with gray. I merely in faith trust in God’s mercy and understanding of my heart, mind, my reasoning, and soul. And walk and journey in faith and my beliefs in the meantime. As you do yours. Ours just differ is all. Peace as you walk yours.

 

[PRmerger]

Right sure I have no problem with that whatsoever since even I myself never ever say about me that I am 100% sure I know. And I’m perfectly fine and at peace with that. I have no uneasiness whatsoever accepting that I’m human like everyone else on this earth with a finite understanding of an infinite God’s truth. And that I might be wrong. I have no innate need to think or believe otherwise. I merely in faith trust in God’s mercy and understanding of my heart, mind and soul. And walk by my faith and beliefs in the meantime. As you do yours. Ours just differ is all. Peace as you walk yours.

I don’t have a problem with any of the above.

We all have the problem of not being 100% sure of anything (except, of course, death and taxes )

So there’s no need to preface anything you say with, “But we can’t be sure”.

It’s as if 2 fish were in conversation and one kept saying, “But we’re in water, you know.”

You are as certain/uncertain that Jesus said he would not turn anyone away from him as you are that Jesus rose from the dead, that Mary was his mother, that your sins were forgiven at your baptism because of the atoning death of Christ.

It’s all the same degree of certainty/uncertainty.

So you need not offer, as you so often do when things are posited to which you disagree, “We don’t know for sure”.

Unless you do the same for the things which support whichever position you’re arguing for.



#fair

 

[Randy_Carson]

I understand that you do not rely upon these specific examples to reach any conclusions. However, I disagree with your specific examples.

First, doctors are experts in disease and injury. If you are in good health and make an appointment to see a doctor, and say, “I simply want to enjoy the best possible health”, then it is unlikely that the doctor will be able to help you.

Second, historians are experts in the written past. They are not archaeologists. They are not experts in deciphering ancient scripts of unrecognizable languages.

Now, the crucial point: “the world around us.” To whom should we go for answers on that topic? Who are the experts?

I assert that the topic of “the world around us” is simply too big and includes too much variety for us to say that the experts on that topic are “scientists.” Do you disagree with my assertion?

You are free to stick to what you originally wrote, but I am curious about what you will say now that I have simply objected. You can probably think of a more persuasive argument against what you wrote than I can, but I don’t need to think of one if you have already abandoned it.

No, my intent was not to glorify scientists per se but only to point out that we all look to others for their expertise - even if that expertise come from our parents of whom we inquire about our grandparents.

I rely on the knowledge of local residents when I travel to another city in order to find a nice restaurant. I rely on the experience of my car dealership when deciding whether to repair or trade my old clunker.

The point I was trying to make is that we do not personally verify everything we know; it would be impossible for us to do so. Consequently, it is not unreasonable for us to rely on others who are knowledgeable and trustworthy.

 

[Sy_Noe]

I don’t have a problem with any of the above.

We all have the problem of not being 100% sure of anything (except, of course, death and taxes )

So there’s no need to preface anything you say with, “But we can’t be sure”.

So if Catholics have the same problem of not being 100% sure, why then do Catholics insist so much that they know for sure they are the ones with the truth and the truth lies only with them? I hear and see Catholics so often, whether on EWTN, here on CAF, or elsewhere, use the word truth so much as if they are 100% sure when as you said we all have the problem of not being sure of anything except death and taxes. It actually is a turnoff to me with regard to the faith. But then maybe that’s because like I’ve said my personality is such that I’m not one who needs matters of faith spelled out for me so much in black and white. I’m quite comfortable in gray. Others though I do realize may be in more comfortable attire when things are black and white for them.

 

[PRmerger]

So if Catholics have the same problem of not being 100% sure, why then do Catholics insist so much that they know for sure they are the ones with the truth and the truth lies only with them? I hear and see Catholics so often, whether on EWTN, here on CAF, or elsewhere, use the word truth so much as if they are 100% sure when as you said we all have the problem of not being sure of anything except death and taxes.

Firstly, let me answer for Catholicism, not for individual Catholics and why they say what they say.

Catholicism professes to have the fullness of truth with the same degree of certainty that you profess that Jesus said he would not turn anyone away from Him.

You seem quite sure of that statement. You repeat it often, yes?

You seem quite sure, although not 100% certain. You’d take it to the bank that Jesus wouldn’t turn anyone away.

Same with Catholicism. She can take it to the bank that she has the fullness of truth.

It actually is a turnoff to me with regard to the faith. But then maybe that’s because like I’ve said my personality is such that I’m not one who needs matters of faith spelled out for me so much in black and white. I’m quite comfortable in gray.

Except when you permit yourself the luxury of making black and white statements.

Why do you object to having things “spelled out” in black and white, yet, peculiarly, make so many black and white statements?

In fact, let me ask you something:

Is this a black and white answer–Is it true that ALL things are black and white?

I suspect that your answer is going to be…black and white.

Your answer is going to be: NO. All things are NOT black and white. Some things are gray.

Curious, isn’t it, that you see things in black and white yet object to black and white lenses.

 

[Sy_Noe]

Firstly, let me answer for Catholicism, not for individual Catholics and why they say what they say.

Catholicism professes to have the fullness of truth with the same degree of certainty that you profess that Jesus said he would not turn anyone away from Him.

You seem quite sure of that statement. You repeat it often, yes?

You seem quite sure, although not 100% certain. You’d take it to the bank that Jesus wouldn’t turn anyone away.

Same with Catholicism. She can take it to the bank that she has the fullness of truth.

Except when you permit yourself the luxury of making black and white statements.

Why do you object to having things “spelled out” in black and white, yet, peculiarly, make so many black and white statements?

In fact, let me ask you something:

Is this a black and white answer–Is it true that ALL things are black and white?

I suspect that your answer is going to be…black and white.

Your answer is going to be: NO. All things are NOT black and white. Some things are gray.

Curious, isn’t it, that you see things in black and white yet object to black and white lenses.

I have my beliefs sure. But the distinction I think is, or at least I pray I show enough humility to not go around insisting as much that I know I have the truth and I’m right and everyone else is wrong. Which I actually think is a good thing since we agree all of us have the same problem of not being certain. And in that light may I make a suggestion? That perhaps it would be better if Catholics said something like “We believe we know we have the fullness of truth.” IOW emphasize the belief and faith part. And less so the “knowing” part of the equation. That might go far in promoting a positive environment in Catholic - non Catholic dialogue. Anyways on that note, it’s been a pleasure and God’s blessings and continue peace be with you always.

 

[PRmerger]

I have my beliefs sure. But the distinction I think is, or at least I pray I show enough humility to not go around insisting as much that I know I have the truth and I’m right and everyone else is wrong.

Do you think it’s wrong for someone to say that Jesus turns away some folks who come to him? Maybe someone who’s guilty of a sexual sin? Jesus turns her away?

I’m sure you would say they are wrong.

So, again, you seem to be reserving for yourself what you object to in others.

Which I actually think is a good thing since we agree all of us have the same problem of not being certain. And in that light may I make a suggestion? That perhaps it would be better if Catholics said something like “We believe we know we have the fullness of truth.” IOW emphasize the belief and faith part. And less so the “knowing” part of the equation. That might go far in promoting a positive environment in Catholic - non Catholic dialogue. Anyways on that note, it’s been a pleasure and God’s blessings and continue peace be with you always.

If that’s your paradigm, I hope you start with yourself and preface everything you assert here with, “I believe, but I could certainly be wrong!” As in: “I believe, but I certainly could be wrong, that Jesus surrounded himself with sinners. Hey, maybe he only surrounded himself with the holiest people. I certainly can’t be sure of that!”

 

[Telstar]

I have my beliefs sure. But the distinction I think is, or at least I pray I show enough humility to not go around insisting as much that I know I have the truth and I’m right and everyone else is wrong. Which I actually think is a good thing since we agree all of us have the same problem of not being certain. And in that light may I make a suggestion? That perhaps it would be better if Catholics said something like “We believe we know we have the fullness of truth.” IOW emphasize the belief and faith part. And less so the “knowing” part of the equation. That might go far in promoting a positive environment in Catholic - non Catholic dialogue. Anyways on that note, it’s been a pleasure and God’s blessings and continue peace be with you always.

Actually, Catholics (individual members of the Church) can never claim that they know the whole truth, even if they know a lot about what the Church teaches. One person could never really know it all (except Jesus). But, the Catholic Church does have the “fullness of truth”, meaning that She contains the most truth amongst all other ‘churches’ (religions, etc.). She cannot teach error because She is protected from teaching error by the Holy Spirit, so we can be sure that everything She teaches, is 100% true.

But, does anyone actually know the entire truth? Jesus promised that the Holy Spirit would lead the Apostles and His Church into all truth. I tend to believe that it’s an ongoing process, and it will continue to unfold until He comes, again. But, in the meantime, the Catholic Church already contains the fullness of truth about God that is currently known in the whole world, without exception.

 

[808Catholic]

So if Catholics have the same problem of not being 100% sure, why then do Catholics insist so much that they know for sure they are the ones with the truth and the truth lies only with them? I hear and see Catholics so often, whether on EWTN, here on CAF, or elsewhere, use the word truth so much as if they are 100% sure when as you said we all have the problem of not being sure of anything except death and taxes. It actually is a turnoff to me with regard to the faith. But then maybe that’s because like I’ve said my personality is such that I’m not one who needs matters of faith spelled out for me so much in black and white. I’m quite comfortable in gray. Others though I do realize may be in more comfortable attire when things are black and white for them.

Hence the Catholic Profession of Faith:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

Who, for us men for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father [and the Son]; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.