- Status
W
wasmit
Guest
B
BCH
Guest
Christianity is in no way a proposal of a theory, quite the opposite.
Christianity is based on a person, Jesus. The proposal is that He is the eternal Son of God. God is now revealed in Jesus, not hidden like you suggest. It’s not some theory hdden in some man’s mind. It is God (real, visible and walking the earth.)
The world suffers from pluralism, everyone is just as right as everyone else. No one can really know the Truth. This too is false. The Catholic Church is based on God revealing Himself to the world, not man contemplating on the existance of God.
God asks me an you the same question:
“Who do you say that I am?”
B
BCH
Guest
Fair enough, I like your honesty. Just being plain honest is a great start to getting to know our Lord.
Here is a serious challenge, but a friendly one.
Make a sincere prayer, based on your honest doubt, and ask God to reveal Himself to you. Truly, invite Him into your life.
God will not force Himself into your life. But, if you give Him permission to enter, “Whoa Boy!”…
At most, you risk feelling a little silly
If you are sincere He will answer your prayer. And, I am not talking wishful thinking here. God will make it very clear that He exists and has a personal love and interest in you.
Jesus will enter the house of anyone who Invites Him in.
R
rookieonedge
Guest
At the risk of sounding “crazy and delusional”, I’d just like to make a few remarks after reading several pages of this thread.
Every judgment, every analysis, every argument, rationale is understood by our limited view through our own set of myopic lenses. In other words, we have tunnel vision and are stuck in a human paradigm that misses the obvious. Jesus tells us the Kingdom of Heaven is understood by children meaning to be like little children (in their openess and purity of heart).
God gives us free will to choose to accept Him and His will for us or not. We are not pre-destined although He knows each and every one of our choices before we were even conceived. In fact, as an omnicient God, He sees each one of us not merely as we exist now in time but at each moment of our existence ALL AT ONCE. He sees our conception and our last breath in one glance, so to speak. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; and before you were born I consecrated you.” (Jeremiah 1:5)Therefore, it behooves us to hear what He has to say. What He has spoken is through the prophets and the Ten Commandments. He first came for the Jews since His only-begotten Son was born into the Israelite nation. But He calls all of His children to His side. “If today you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts.”
Pascal’s Wager is spoken from a Christian viewpoint with the idea that it’s better to live one’s life according to the faith and come out triumphantly than to bet that it isn’t necessary as IF there is no God.
As for constructing a physical proof or collecting scientific evidence of the existence of God and His creation of the universe, the proof is all around us. Probably, the most fundamental argument (other than philosphy and Aquinas’ postulants) would be Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity and Special Theory of Relativity. The universe does not increase indefinately; it is a finite system, which means that a being outside the confines of our little system, our paradigm, our grain of sand (in God’s eyes) made it. It’s just like entering a room and seeing it furnished neatly, we exclaim that someone did a good job. Applying the principle of general relativity to our cosmos reveals that it is not static.
“Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) demonstrated in 1928 that the Universe is expanding, showing beyond reasonable doubt that the Universe sprang into being a finite time ago. The most common contemporary interpretation of this expansion is that this began to exist from the moment of the Big Bang some 13.7 billion years ago. However this is not the only plausible cosmological model which exists in academia, and many creation physicists such as Russell Humphreys and John Hartnett have devised models operating with a biblical framework, which – to date – have withstood the test of criticism from the most vehement of opponents.”
allaboutscience.org/theory-of-relativity.htm
Arguments were presented that wrestled with a variety of questions, circumstances, beliefs. However, they are the same as the old philosophical debate about the number of angels that could be on the head of a pin.
Quote: “The epitome of any particular class of things need not exist.” True, but the fact that we can envision an “epitome” demonstrates an understanding in our minds that there is a Supreme (being – the epitome of all being) somewhere, somehow. But maybe we are not meant to understand completely in this life.
As a college student, I had fallen away from the Chruch (as so many of us re-verts have done), but through the grace of God, much study and desire to find TRUTH, I returned. “When you seek Me with all your heart, you will find me.” (Actually, the Lord, Himself, came after me – He keeps after us and draws us ever closer and closer). (There’s a book I think is called “Hind’s Feet in High Places” that I read which had this as a theme.)
As a newbie, I just tried to give my humble opinion. I’m certainly (and obviously) no theologian or qualified in biblical exegesis.
Every judgment, every analysis, every argument, rationale is understood by our limited view through our own set of myopic lenses. In other words, we have tunnel vision and are stuck in a human paradigm that misses the obvious. Jesus tells us the Kingdom of Heaven is understood by children meaning to be like little children (in their openess and purity of heart).
God gives us free will to choose to accept Him and His will for us or not. We are not pre-destined although He knows each and every one of our choices before we were even conceived. In fact, as an omnicient God, He sees each one of us not merely as we exist now in time but at each moment of our existence ALL AT ONCE. He sees our conception and our last breath in one glance, so to speak. “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; and before you were born I consecrated you.” (Jeremiah 1:5)Therefore, it behooves us to hear what He has to say. What He has spoken is through the prophets and the Ten Commandments. He first came for the Jews since His only-begotten Son was born into the Israelite nation. But He calls all of His children to His side. “If today you hear His voice, do not harden your hearts.”
Pascal’s Wager is spoken from a Christian viewpoint with the idea that it’s better to live one’s life according to the faith and come out triumphantly than to bet that it isn’t necessary as IF there is no God.
As for constructing a physical proof or collecting scientific evidence of the existence of God and His creation of the universe, the proof is all around us. Probably, the most fundamental argument (other than philosphy and Aquinas’ postulants) would be Albert Einstein’s General Theory of Relativity and Special Theory of Relativity. The universe does not increase indefinately; it is a finite system, which means that a being outside the confines of our little system, our paradigm, our grain of sand (in God’s eyes) made it. It’s just like entering a room and seeing it furnished neatly, we exclaim that someone did a good job. Applying the principle of general relativity to our cosmos reveals that it is not static.
“Edwin Hubble (1889-1953) demonstrated in 1928 that the Universe is expanding, showing beyond reasonable doubt that the Universe sprang into being a finite time ago. The most common contemporary interpretation of this expansion is that this began to exist from the moment of the Big Bang some 13.7 billion years ago. However this is not the only plausible cosmological model which exists in academia, and many creation physicists such as Russell Humphreys and John Hartnett have devised models operating with a biblical framework, which – to date – have withstood the test of criticism from the most vehement of opponents.”
allaboutscience.org/theory-of-relativity.htm
Arguments were presented that wrestled with a variety of questions, circumstances, beliefs. However, they are the same as the old philosophical debate about the number of angels that could be on the head of a pin.
Quote: “The epitome of any particular class of things need not exist.” True, but the fact that we can envision an “epitome” demonstrates an understanding in our minds that there is a Supreme (being – the epitome of all being) somewhere, somehow. But maybe we are not meant to understand completely in this life.
As a college student, I had fallen away from the Chruch (as so many of us re-verts have done), but through the grace of God, much study and desire to find TRUTH, I returned. “When you seek Me with all your heart, you will find me.” (Actually, the Lord, Himself, came after me – He keeps after us and draws us ever closer and closer). (There’s a book I think is called “Hind’s Feet in High Places” that I read which had this as a theme.)
As a newbie, I just tried to give my humble opinion. I’m certainly (and obviously) no theologian or qualified in biblical exegesis.
W
wasmit
Guest
This contradicts the catholic idea that their god is both omniscient and omnipotent.
W
wasmit
Guest
no it doesn’t (burden of proof)
W
wasmit
Guest
No it doesn’t (burden of proof)
does this also demonstrate that there is a smelliest thing in existence, because we can imagine it?
A
anon5216
Guest
There is also the possibility that the universe continually expands and then contracts with alternating big-bang and big-collapse.
And that the universe itself is God alternately manifesting and withdrawing into himself.
And that the universe itself is God alternately manifesting and withdrawing into himself.
W
wasmit
Guest
Young Earth Creationism - LOL !
With the bolded, you are either mistaken or lying.
W
wilbur006
Guest
I have to thank Rookieonedge for putting some intellectual logic and knowledge resulting from some recent discussions.
Some have generally strayed quite far from the subject and apologetics of what the Catholic Church believes and proofs for those beliefs. One member has drawn you into purely philosophical arguments, all of which could be properly discussed with a sufficient knowledge of The Summa Theologica, which is the leading basis for proofs in discussions regarding proofs of the existence of God, God’s nature, how God is known to us, etc.
Unless one really wants to learn about that side of philosophical knowledge, it is foolish to present the skeptic with small portions of the well known proofs, since the skeptic will always come back with shallow meaningless questions or assertions. The skeptic would generally be prevented from any disagreement or frivolous arguments since those arguments most likely have already been revealed as false by Acquinas and other philosophers.
It is very evident that those who want to argue over good answers given, such as proofs of the existence of God, how did creation occur, etc., have never read any of the works of Acquinas.
It is rather easy for an apologetics expert to explain from the bible and historical evidence why the Catholic Church is the correct church. In sufficient time and space this is quite easy. However, when a person questions every sound and historical evidence provided in a short discussion as we have, and only uses small portions of scripture to support their erroneous position, it then becomes folly to discuss truth with someone who really has no desire to learn the truth; but wants primarily to always take a disagreeable position. I’ve seen that happen about two months ago, and it is a disservice to those who truly want to learn.
My suggestion to those who really want to learn the truth about religion is to properly evaluate the comments made by many of the proficient apologetic scholars on this site.
For any person who really wants firm evidence that reveals The Catholic Church is the only true Church founded by Jesus, that type of apologetics can be provided by requesting it through a separate personal request, either in book form or from a lengthly discourse that I have on that subject.
I do not mean to discourage any member who truly seeks answers to religious questions on this fine site, but seeking the truth does not entail continued frivolous disagreement. God wants all to seek the truth, and we should all be open to receive it. God bless all who want to follow Jesus and His Church.
Some have generally strayed quite far from the subject and apologetics of what the Catholic Church believes and proofs for those beliefs. One member has drawn you into purely philosophical arguments, all of which could be properly discussed with a sufficient knowledge of The Summa Theologica, which is the leading basis for proofs in discussions regarding proofs of the existence of God, God’s nature, how God is known to us, etc.
Unless one really wants to learn about that side of philosophical knowledge, it is foolish to present the skeptic with small portions of the well known proofs, since the skeptic will always come back with shallow meaningless questions or assertions. The skeptic would generally be prevented from any disagreement or frivolous arguments since those arguments most likely have already been revealed as false by Acquinas and other philosophers.
It is very evident that those who want to argue over good answers given, such as proofs of the existence of God, how did creation occur, etc., have never read any of the works of Acquinas.
It is rather easy for an apologetics expert to explain from the bible and historical evidence why the Catholic Church is the correct church. In sufficient time and space this is quite easy. However, when a person questions every sound and historical evidence provided in a short discussion as we have, and only uses small portions of scripture to support their erroneous position, it then becomes folly to discuss truth with someone who really has no desire to learn the truth; but wants primarily to always take a disagreeable position. I’ve seen that happen about two months ago, and it is a disservice to those who truly want to learn.
My suggestion to those who really want to learn the truth about religion is to properly evaluate the comments made by many of the proficient apologetic scholars on this site.
For any person who really wants firm evidence that reveals The Catholic Church is the only true Church founded by Jesus, that type of apologetics can be provided by requesting it through a separate personal request, either in book form or from a lengthly discourse that I have on that subject.
I do not mean to discourage any member who truly seeks answers to religious questions on this fine site, but seeking the truth does not entail continued frivolous disagreement. God wants all to seek the truth, and we should all be open to receive it. God bless all who want to follow Jesus and His Church.
A
anon5216
Guest
This is all well and fine for discussing within the Christian tradition and trying to convert
non-Catholic Christians to Catholicism.
However, outside of Christianity in general, the Bible is not accepted as the definitive and undistorted “Word of God”.
Apologetics experts don’t even begin to address that issue in anything but a superficial manner. They simply start with the assumption that you already believe the Bible is the “Word of God”.
B
BCH
Guest
Wasmit,
After reading some of the simple acts that you have already done, it appears that your original question is just a continuation of your search for God. I don’t think anything could be said to change your mind much. You don’t want words or pious thoughts. You want God himself. This is at the deepest center of every person.
God may be in the very act of preparing your heart to receive Him, in a Big Way. “Do not give up your search and keep looking up!”
What is needed now is the Grace that only God can give.
Many times when our pride is defeated and we finally realize that (by our own efforts) we cannot pierce the veil of the heaven and ascend to God and that it is only God that can reveal Himself to us, we are at the beginning of true Humility.
Bruce
After reading some of the simple acts that you have already done, it appears that your original question is just a continuation of your search for God. I don’t think anything could be said to change your mind much. You don’t want words or pious thoughts. You want God himself. This is at the deepest center of every person.
God may be in the very act of preparing your heart to receive Him, in a Big Way. “Do not give up your search and keep looking up!”
What is needed now is the Grace that only God can give.
Many times when our pride is defeated and we finally realize that (by our own efforts) we cannot pierce the veil of the heaven and ascend to God and that it is only God that can reveal Himself to us, we are at the beginning of true Humility.
Bruce
W
wilbur006
Guest
Reply to anon5216’s following statement:
Apologetics experts don’t even begin to address that issue in anything but a superficial manner. They simply start with the assumption that you already believe the Bible is the “Word of God”.
This is really an inaccurate understanding of a true expert in Apologetics. As I said in my article, the" Bible and historical evidence is used". The available historical evidence, properly used, fully supports the historical bible and it’s truths. Most apologetics merely focus on the bible to prove Catholicism, which is insufficient. And to prove all about God, we use Philosophy as well as the bible.
I do commend all who truly attempt to spread the truth as Jesus commanded, since converting Souls is our prime mission.
Apologetics experts don’t even begin to address that issue in anything but a superficial manner. They simply start with the assumption that you already believe the Bible is the “Word of God”.
This is really an inaccurate understanding of a true expert in Apologetics. As I said in my article, the" Bible and historical evidence is used". The available historical evidence, properly used, fully supports the historical bible and it’s truths. Most apologetics merely focus on the bible to prove Catholicism, which is insufficient. And to prove all about God, we use Philosophy as well as the bible.
I do commend all who truly attempt to spread the truth as Jesus commanded, since converting Souls is our prime mission.
S
steve_b
Guest
J
jmcrae
Guest
Buddhism makes no claim to Truth. It doesn’t even claim to be a religion, as such.
G
gtaliente
Guest
Wasmit, Your Russell’s Teapot link was interesting, but doesn’t disprove the existence of God. All it proves is that you would have to take Bertand Russells’s claim on pure faith that there actually is a teapot floating in space. How do we know that matter cannot be created nor destroyed? Unless you were the person who discovered this or have subsequently tested and proved it, you are believing someone else. I choose to believe that God exists, that he created everything, that he loves me and sent his Son to redeem my sins, and that if I live according to his teachings, I may one day reach Heaven. You can either choose to believe it or not. The great thing about God is that it is always YOUR choice. I choose to believe because the thought of his not existing is too frightening.
S
steve_b
Guest
Rather than an infinite regression of causes, trying to get to the 1st cause of everything, God is just known as the un caused cause, the 1st cause of everything.
was:
The big bang was an effect. It wasn’t a/the cause . Therefore
- the cause of the big bang has to be addressed first.
- the cause of singularity MUST be addressed.
It would be intellectually dishonest of science to just expect the assumption singularity was always there, just waiting for things to happen from it, like the big bang. I would suggest, That’s faith posing as science. And as you know that is not allowed in science.
A
anon5216
Guest
I must correct you on an important fact.
The available historical evidence has only been used to prove that there were texts written around the time claimed - some of which were used in compiling the Bible.
There has never been proof that the copies are true to the originals (we have no originals). There has never been proof that the alleged quotes of Jesus were actually his words (this is not even possible to prove). It is also not possible to prove that the Holy Spirit insured accuracy in all or any of these selected writings.
Given that, I still believe it is possible to achieve spiritual results within Catholicism.
It is, however, not the only way, and not necessarily even the best way for many people.
It would remain a valid spiritual path without the unsupportable claims of inerrancy/infallibility/exclusiveness/etc.
It would actually become a much better path without those things.
- Status