Knowing, believing, etc

[St_Francis]

I was discussing Catholicism with a group of people online, and they really really really believe what they believe, just as I do for Catholicism. I feel like there’s nothing any human person could say to shake their belief, just as there’s nothing anyone could say to shake mine.

At the same time, I have also had a different conversation, in which the topic of knowing came up. It seemed like the other person thought that I chose to believe in the Catholic Faith despite evidence to the contrary. Well, I’ve btdt (been non-religious), and experienced that emptiness, so I don’t think my being Catholic is that way.

But he said that --it’s hard for me to explain what he said; it was clear at the time but not so much now!-- if I couldn’t imagine some sort of evidence which if someone gave me it would shake my faith, then I was just blindly following? And overall acting as if I was refusing to consider someone else’s point of view because I was so convinced that Catholicism is correct, but I am wrong to be in that position.

Since a similar issue had come up years before, in which I was challenged to argue for a view of which I hold the opposite, and my inability and unwillingness to do so annoyed the other person. I can say, That group of people believes… and this is why… but I can’t really put myself on their side and argue for something I totally disagree with!.

Anyway, this all seems to others to be a flaw in me and indicates something which makes them not take what I say seriously, altho it seems they might if I got rid of the flaw. I think this is some strange sort of fallacy on their part.

In fact, I think that they make up their belief and have faith, ultimately, in themselves and in their own thinking, and so they are willing to concede their argument to a superior thinker.

I don’t want to get into a *deep *philosophical discussion, but who is right and if I am, how can I explain that I know my beliefs to be true because I trust in God? And if I’m wrong, what should I do about it?

 

[pianistclare]

I was discussing Catholicism with a group of people online, and they really really really believe what they believe, just as I do for Catholicism. I feel like there’s nothing any human person could say to shake their belief, just as there’s nothing anyone could say to shake mine.

At the same time, I have also had a different conversation, in which the topic of knowing came up. It seemed like the other person thought that I chose to believe in the Catholic Faith despite evidence to the contrary. Well, I’ve btdt (been non-religious), and experienced that emptiness, so I don’t think my being Catholic is that way.
They assume their evidence is correct. you don’t have to buy into that assumption, right?

But he said that --it’s hard for me to explain what he said; it was clear at the time but not so much now!-- if I couldn’t imagine some sort of evidence which if someone gave me it would shake my faith, then I was just blindly following? And overall acting as if I was refusing to consider someone else’s point of view because I was so convinced that Catholicism is correct, but I am wrong to be in that position.

Since a similar issue had come up years before, in which I was challenged to argue for a view of which I hold the opposite, and my inability and unwillingness to do so annoyed the other person. I can say, That group of people believes… and this is why… but I can’t really put myself on their side and argue for something I totally disagree with!.

Some folks find this easy to do precisely because they don’t have the "knowing part’. It’s an exercise in "anything goes, so long as you’re a good person. Fine for them, but perhaps you desire more. Assuredness. Confidence. Trust. Knowledge. Faith. Acceptance.
Nothing wrong with that.


Perhaps they are trying to change your mind. Good to resist.

Anyway, this all seems to others to be a flaw in me NO. and indicates something which makes them not take what I say seriously, altho it seems they might if I got rid of the flaw. I think this is some strange sort of fallacy on their part.

In fact, I think that they make up their belief and have faith, ultimately, in themselves and in their own thinking, and so they are willing to concede their argument to a superior thinker.
**You just answered your own question. **

I don’t want to get into a *deep *philosophical discussion, but who is right and if I am, how can I explain that I know my beliefs to be true because I trust in God? And if I’m wrong, what should I do about it?

Depends. Do you want to convert them, or defend yourself from the onslaught of “you crazy Catholics?”

Likely they won’t be moved. Smile. Be cordial. Respect the dialog. Shoe them that Catholics are capable of real apologetics.

 

[Origen52]

My belief is founded on the blood of the martyrs, especially the ultimate witnessing of the apostles. They did not die declaring a set of beliefs, many others have done that. They died proclaiming an historical reality, the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. One, or two men might have died due to a delusional belief, but not all and so many of the disciples as well.

So my belief is based on an historical fact, Jesus resurrected. I go along with his early followers, this is proof he was the son of God. So the only way to disprove my faith is to prove there was no resurrection. Many have tried, none have yet succeeded.

 

[ThinkingSapien]

I don’t want to get into a *deep *philosophical discussion, but who is right and if I am, how can I explain that I know my beliefs to be true because I trust in God? And if I’m wrong, what should I do about it?

There are others that will say they know their beliefs, which may be incompatible with yours, also to be true because of their trust in God. At best all any one can do is say what they think and **try **to explain what motivates them to think that way. Though even a well meaning person with honest intentions could possibly give a reasons that are not their actual motivation for being convinced from post hoc rationalization.

 

[St_Francis]

Depends. Do you want to convert them, or defend yourself from the onslaught of “you crazy Catholics?”

Likely they won’t be moved. Smile. Be cordial. Respect the dialog. Show them that Catholics are capable of real apologetics.

Thank you so much for your reply, which is very reassuring esp the part about their maybe not believing what they believe as much.

I want different things for different people. Thinking it over, I see that possibly discussing with die-hard anti-Catholics does not have much of a point–those positions are too well-defended! As for the others, the people are closer to me and right now the most helpful thing will be prayer, but conversations do come up.

 

[St_Francis]

My belief is founded on the blood of the martyrs, especially the ultimate witnessing of the apostles. They did not die declaring a set of beliefs, many others have done that. They died proclaiming an historical reality, the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. One, or two men might have died due to a delusional belief, but not all and so many of the disciples as well.

So my belief is based on an historical fact, Jesus resurrected. I go along with his early followers, this is proof he was the son of God. So the only way to disprove my faith is to prove there was no resurrection. Many have tried, none have yet succeeded.

Yes, our Faith is grounded in a reality which makes it more real than the philosophical notions some rely on! Thank you!

 

[St_Francis]

There are others that will say they know their beliefs, which may be incompatible with yours, also to be true because of their trust in God. At best all any one can do is say what they think and **try **to explain what motivates them to think that way. Though even a well meaning person with honest intentions could possibly give a reasons that are not their actual motivation for being convinced from post hoc rationalization.

Yes, you are right and I do not doubt their sincerety. And maybe because I do not doubt their sincerity that I am puzzled by the existence of a disparity of belief. Before I came to my belief in Catholicism, I always had a feeling of something being missing or wrong or incomplete, so I wonder that they seem not to have that feeling.

But in any case, altho I engage in discussions, I generally do not expect change as a result.

 

[SonOfMan]

My belief is founded on the blood of the martyrs, especially the ultimate witnessing of the apostles. They did not die declaring a set of beliefs, many others have done that. They died proclaiming an historical reality, the resurrection of Jesus the Christ. One, or two men might have died due to a delusional belief, but not all and so many of the disciples as well.

So my belief is based on an historical fact, Jesus resurrected. I go along with his early followers, this is proof he was the son of God**. So the only way to disprove my faith is to prove there was no resurrection. Many have tried, none have yet succeeded.**

or to prove that the Apostles were never martyred. In fact, scholars believe that stories of early Christian martyrdom are largely exaggerated.

or if the Apostles were simply executed/assassinated as opposed to martyred.

How do you respond to those things if they are true?

 

[pianistclare]

or to prove that the Apostles were never martyred. In fact, scholars believe that stories of early Christian martyrdom are largely exaggerated.

or if the Apostles were simply executed/assassinated as opposed to martyred.

How do you respond to those things if they are true?

If they were executed, they were certainly executed because of their faith…which is the definition of martyrdom.

The facts of the early church are pretty well documented.

As the OP says, we run into people who are obstinately firm on refusal to accept the teachings of the Church.
Fine for them, but that does not mean that we should bail on our own beliefs.
There comes a time when one has to just do their best, apologetically, to explain our beliefs. Changing hearts and minds is not a one time discussion sort of thing.
It at least opens the door to the notion. The Holy Spirit takes care of the rest.

 

[Origen52]

or to prove that the Apostles were never martyred. In fact, scholars believe that stories of early Christian martyrdom are largely exaggerated.

or if the Apostles were simply executed/assassinated as opposed to martyred.

How do you respond to those things if they are true?

There are always outliners who come up with historical theories based on a creative reading of historical data. Those who are claiming the stories of Christian martyrdom are exaggerated have mainly cherry picked and distorted facts. What I have read is as “historically” accurate as Dan Brown’s “DaVinci Code”.

 

[Flopfoot]

The question “Can you imagine a piece of evidence that would change your beliefs” is not exactly the same as “Do you think it’s possible for a piece of evidence to exist that could change your beliefs”. I might think it’s possible for the evidence to exist, but not be able to imagine what it might be.

Also, if someone comes up to you and says “I have an explanation for why what you believe might not be true”, you’re within your rights to say “I don’t want to hear it right now”. It doesn’t mean you have a blind faith or arrived at your position without using reason, just not everyone wants to constantly be challenged or involved in philosophical debates. It’s kind of like when a girl says “I’m not looking for a boyfriend right now” when you ask her on a date.

 

[schaeffer]

At the same time, I have also had a different conversation, in which the topic of knowing came up. It seemed like the other person thought that I chose to believe in the Catholic Faith despite evidence to the contrary. Well, I’ve btdt (been non-religious), and experienced that emptiness, so I don’t think my being Catholic is that way.

…

I don’t want to get into a *deep *philosophical discussion, but who is right and if I am, how can I explain that I know my beliefs to be true because I trust in God? And if I’m wrong, what should I do about it?

How did you go from feeling empty, to belief in the Catholic faith? What exactly led you to accept/embrace Catholicism. Maybe exploring that will help them understand. What brought YOU to a place of knowing/believing?

 

[SonOfMan]

If they were executed, they were certainly executed because of their faith…which is the definition of martyrdom.

Not quite. If they were given a chance to recant and didnt, knowing death would follow, that is martyrdom.

But, if they were simply killed with no questions asked , unexpectedly, or for trespassing, that isnt really martyrdom.

 

[SonOfMan]

There are always outliners who come up with historical theories based on a creative reading of historical data. Those who are claiming the stories of Christian martyrdom are exaggerated have mainly cherry picked and distorted facts. What I have read is as “historically” accurate as Dan Brown’s “DaVinci Code”.

Isnt it true that the Church has canonized saints and martyrs who never even existed? A simple Google search will provide you with a list of people.

 

[St_Francis]

Isnt it true that the Church has canonized saints and martyrs who never even existed? A simple Google search will provide you with a list of people.

Not at all. There are saints who have been venerated for many centuries for whom we have no records and for whom there is no evidence, bit there is no proof they never existed.

 

[St_Francis]

How did you go from feeling empty, to belief in the Catholic faith? What exactly led you to accept/embrace Catholicism. Maybe exploring that will help them understand. What brought YOU to a place of knowing/believing?

GK Chesterton wrote, at the beginning of *Orthodoxy *iirc, that he was like a man who set out on a sea voyage and discovered a new place, only to find, when he landed, that he had “discovered” Brighton, a famous seaside town in England.

I was like that. Baptized Catholic, but educated in the chaos of the 1960s, thus completely ignorant of even the most basic theology. I really felt the lack of profound Truth in my education so when I discovered Catholic theology (in Home Sweet Rome), it filled a myriad of empty “slots” inside me.

But I was aware of that emptiness. They seem not to be aware of the emptiness of non-Catholic thinking–I’m talking about a range which includes Protestants to today’s secular materialists. So I think my experience and theirs is too different.