The miraculous elements of the Gospels are based on the authority and veracity of Catholicism. I do argue that those elements are true, because I argue that the authority of the Church is valid due to philosophy. Those are my grounds.
There is plenty of medical evidence of instantaneous cures at Lourdes which have been recognised by experts as scientifically inexplicable. The case of Jack Traynor is amusing because although he was completely restored to health he continued to receive a disability pension. Allowances for miracles are not taken into account by the British bureaucracy!
Well I took the effort of looking up the source text for all four historical accounts of Caesar crossing the Rubicon, plus a poetic account. Only Suetonius and the poetic account tell of an apparition.
So there’s that. Suetonius’ account, written in 121 A.D., 170 years after the event occurred, says:
So there you have it. One poetic, dramatic account written a century after the event says a female image of Rome appeared and challenged Caesar’s crossing. A historical account written 170 years after the event says a male being played a reed, snatched a trumpet and triumphantly led the army across the river.
You’ve got it very wrong, my friend. Catholicism is a historical religion about a Creator who involved himself personally in human history. If the stuff we say about Jesus didn’t actually happen, then our religion is bunk. If Matthew 16:17-19 was never uttered by Jesus, for example, then say goodbye to the papacy.
You are misrepresenting the gospel account. It says that many saints appeared to many. It does not say a horde of zombies swept the city. It does not say a swarm of zombies. It does not say to whom they appeared.
Who knows? Neither of us has any way to quantify it, and you need to quantify it in order to make your point.I never said that. I said that there are two dimensions to Catholicism. One is the religious aspect, and one is the philosophic aspect. The religious aspect is concerned with Catholicism as made known by revelation, and the philosophic aspect is concerned with Catholicism as known by reason. Some things, like the Gospels, are part of the religious aspect. This doesn’t mean they aren’t true, or that the things recounted in them never happened. It just means that the Gospels are known by revelation, and therefore rely on the authority of the Church. Other things, like the existence of God, are known by reason and therefore do not rely directly on revelation. These two aspects reinforce each other- for reason establishes the reliability of the revelation, and revelation fleshes out the proposition into something that can include things that we otherwise wouldn’t know, and it makes the proposition more than cold hard logic.
Interesting, but from what I’m reading, some tens (or hundreds) of millions of people have visited the shrine. The Catholic Church has recognized 67 miracles (correct me if I am wrong). That’s an extremely low ratio of miracles to visitors, enough that could be explained by chance, the placebo effect, or natural remission (note that none of the miracles are clear and unambiguous, such as a person regrowing their limbs).There is plenty of medical evidence of instantaneous cures at Lourdes which have been recognised by experts as scientifically inexplicable. The case of Jack Traynor is amusing because although he was completely restored to health he continued to receive a disability pension. Allowances for miracles are not taken into account by the British bureaucracy!
Prayer is the only possible explanation at present but the alternative is to have faith in science as capable of ultimately explaining everything. How would you justify that?..
A person with a missing limb is not diseased.
If a man’s spine is damaged and he is paralyzed, he is not diseased, yet there are claims of the paralyzed being able to walk.
Can I use your statement in another thread on design vs chance?
Sure, if you like.Can I use your statement in another thread on design vs chance?
My fidelity to Christ is based essentially on his Sermon on the Mount. And some of his parables, most particularly the Good Samaritan. Remember how the lawyer asked him how to gain eternal life? Jesus said nothing about any church or any creed. He didn't mention believe this or that. He said love God and one another.
When the lawyer wanted to know more Jesus told of the man who was robbed and beaten. Here were two representative of 'the church', a priest and a Levite, who passed by Some wise and brilliant theologians, like Bultmann, have investigated this whole myth subject and I recommend that we give them open-minded attention. And we have the great work of Campbell, also. To find mythology in the Bible need not destroy our faith, unless we worship a book instead of God.
I worry more about myths in the Old Testament than in the New, frankly. That Noah story. God created man in his own image and saw that he was good. Then, guess what, man became bad and God regretted that he had created him! So he tells Noah to construct this ark to hold eight adults and two of all animals for the 150 days the waters remained on the earth. Then God drowned all the rest, children, babies in the womb, everybody. What an atrocity worthy of Hitler and Stalin but a slander against the God of Christ who is loving, forgiving, patient, who gave us the Ten Commandments ("Thou shalt not commit murder") and told us to even love our enemies!The feeding of the five thousand was recorded in all four gospels and was perhaps the most public miracle, so I’m not sure why you consider that a doubtful one.
In addition there was another feeding.The feeding of the five thousand was recorded in all four gospels and was perhaps the most public miracle, so I’m not sure why you consider that a doubtful one.
Catholics believe that Jesus did institute a Church as he said he would (Matt 16:18). We also believe Jesus’ message was much more than “do good to others,” and that he taught us specifically how to love God and inherit eternal life. It’s more correct to say that Christianity is a religion about a person than a person’s message. If you wish to be in the physical presence of that person, you can go into your nearest Catholic church and kneel in adoration before him.
The fact that so few miracles have been recognised is partly due to the stringency of the criteria but mainly because most people do not return to Lourdes to submit to the interrogations and medical tests that are required. What do they have to gain? Publicity - often unwelcome - but no financial reward. They are more intent on enjoying their newfound way of life. There have been convincing reports of people who have recovered from incurable illnesses as a result of prayer without even going to Lourdes - and without being Catholics.
There are documented cases of the** instantaneous** fusion of bones and other physical effects.
It remains an act of faith on your part…
The myths are not doctrines of the Church to be taken literally! The concept of God was primitive in some of the most ancient books in the Old Testament.
I say this as a Catholic, but this line of reasoning, while often used, does not sound strong to me.
There’s a difference between dying for one’s religious beliefs (which we do see in other religions) and dying for something known to be a lie (which the apostles did if the resurrection was a fraud).