What to do when contradiction happens?

[Abrosz]

except that the human mind is incapable of communicating on God’s level.

It looks like that God is “incapable” to communicate on the human level.

context and sacred tradition. People who have issues with Sacred Scripture are often ignorant of the importance of Sacred Tradition.

If that is sufficient for you, so be it. But it is not sufficient for the skeptics. I also heard that God is concerned with the fate of the “wayward sheep”. So one would expect that the message is more geared toward the needs of the “sinners”, so they can “mend their ways”. Let’s be “honest and precise”. A good teacher must be able to communicate on the level of ALL the students. Not just a selected few.

 

[vsedriver]

It looks like that God is “incapable” to communicate on the human level.

um, the Bible is evidence that God is communicating on a human level.

But it is not sufficient for the skeptics

short of God standing in your presence there is probably nothing what would be sufficient for a skeptic.

**[Luke 16:31]“He said to him, ’ If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets , they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead .’”

A good teacher must be able to communicate on the level of ALL the students. Not just a selected few.

A student who won’t be open to the lesson won’t learn no matter how good the teacher is.

 

[Abrosz]

um, the Bible is evidence that God is communicating on a human level.

Hah. Not on the level required for the skeptics. I would not want to insult you or hurt your feelings, but the bible operates on the same level as any fairy tale - as far as the skeptics are concerned.

short of God standing in your presence there is probably nothing what would be sufficient for a skeptic.

Well, you cannot know that. And it is not even true. I can visualize many scenarios that would be sufficient for me. But, let’s suppose you are correct. What is wrong for God to manifest himself for everyone… tailored to the needs of the person.

A student who won’t be open to the lesson won’t learn no matter how good the teacher is.

That is an insult. To accuse the skeptic to refuse to listen, no matter what the “lesson is”. A good teacher can tailor the message to the needs of the student. To quote 1984: there is a “room-one-oh-one” for everyone. Something that cannot be ignored or misinterpreted. As an allegory (not to be taken verbatim): “no one can deny a good smack of a baseball bat”.

 

[Dovekin]

You missed my point, that sometimes an author might want to convey imprecise numbers. In that case, a precise number would be wrong.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

But, please understand that for someone that wasn’t raised to consider the Bible as a written collection of the word of God, it sure comes across nowadays as legends and myths in much of it.

That’s a problem with the individual person’s faith. It’s not a problem with the Bible or the Word of God.

If a person doesn’t have faith or an open mind to consider all the possible explanations for why something is written a certain way and why it is included in the Bible, then they aren’t going to get very far.

I realize this is frustrating to people who seem to think there is some logical path to understanding everything, but God’s kingdom is ultimately not of this world, and not all of His words are going to fit neatly into human logical reasoning . Ultimately, Catholic belief is always going to be something that looks like myths and legends to somebody who doesn’t have faith.

 

[whatistrue]

Ever since are the factual inaccuracies preferable to actual reality?

What part of “not relevant” was unclear?

But the question is much more problematic.

Actually, it isn’t. God gave us brains and expects us to use them. If your thought process leads you to believe that the Bible is bunk, that’s on you. It really doesn’t affect me and your assertions are not in the least impressive or original. If you really care, then there is a plethora of information out there should you decide to use it.

 

[Abrosz]

What part of “not relevant” was unclear?

What is not relevant in your eyes is very pertinent for others.

If you really care, then there is a plethora of information out there should you decide to use it.

Is there any independent, objective information to support the claims of the bible? I am an ex-believer, who would very much like to be wrong! But there is one way that leads to that result: “reason, facts and logic”. Of course I used the value of “pi” because it is obviously, mathematically incorrect. Of course it is almost irrelevant in the greater scheme of things (except as a principle).

The real problems are the biological, physical, chemical errors, like the virgin birth, resurrection, feeding a multitude of people with one piece of fish… in one words, the alleged MIRACLES. Not just those I mentioned, in general.

 

[whatistrue]

What is not relevant in your eyes is very pertinent for others.

How is the value of pi relevant to salvation?

I am an ex-believer , who would very much like to be wrong ! But there is one way that leads to that result: “reason, facts and logic”.

Exactly. That is how I went from fundamentalist Protestant to agnostic to Catholic over the course of 60 or so years. First I simply accepted what I was told, then I threw it all away based on what I fondly believed were profound thoughts much like what you are asserting, then I took another look and saw the logic that a belief in God was reasonable and that His existence was more likely than His non-existence. After digesting that, and researching the various claims of various churches and landing on the Catholic Church as the most likely to hold the truth, accepting that God Incarnate could multiply bread and fish, raise people from the dead, be born to a woman who had never had sexual intercourse, and heal normally incurable diseases was an easy step.

 

[vsedriver]

Not on the level required for the skeptics.

because the skeptics are looking for something that fits their criteria. As scripture says, some will not believe even if they see a man rise from the dead.

Believe or don’t believe. It is your choice. Perhaps you need to take a ‘leap of faith’?

What is wrong for God to manifest himself for everyone… tailored to the needs of the person.

you assume he isn’t doing that already. You obviously ‘want’ to believe or you wouldn’t be here. If you truly believe that the Bible is a fairy tale why bother with it at all? You can go about your life and never give it another thought. It’s as if you want us to do all the heavy lifting for you. It doesn’t work that way.

That is an insult. To accuse the skeptic to refuse to listen, no matter what the “lesson is”

It’s not an insult, it is a fact. Ask any teacher. Some students aren’t ready to learn. Some can only take in part of the lesson. Some cling to their own understanding and can’t accept what is being presented to them. Reminds me of a fellow student in a philosophy class. He simply couldn’t set aside his own perceptions to entertain a different way of thinking. He couldn’t think outside the box of his reality.

It’s true, God could deliver a good smack of a baseball bat. He did it for St. Paul. If that is the kind of revelation you wish for then start praying for it. Perhaps God is waiting for you to make the first move. He knows you better than you know yourself.

but if it is all a fairy tale then I suggest you might want to use your time for better things.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Actually, it isn’t. God gave us brains and expects us to use them. If your thought process leads you to believe that the Bible is bunk, that’s on you. It really doesn’t affect me and your assertions are not in the least impressive or original. If you really care, then there is a plethora of information out there should you decide to use it.

Amen.
People who have a “Bible problem” or a “Mary problem” or whatever don’t ever seem to accept that it is THEIR problem. It’s not MY problem. I don’t have a problem with whatever is bugging them.

Of course I would like to encourage them to think differently or reason their way out of their problem, so if there’s an apologetic I can make or a resource I can guide them to, then I do so.
But many people are already capable of finding such materials on their own, or have already read them, and rejected them, and keep on harping about the “problem with the Bible”, “problem with Mary” etc.

Often these discussions just turn into the person who has the “problem” making all the arguments in support of his position and getting frustrated when the believers dismiss all the arguments as being the same old same old.

 

[o_mlly]

Believe or don’t believe. It is your choice. Perhaps you need to take a ‘leap of faith’?

Faith, a theological virtue, cannot be achieved by us on our own, i.e., by pulling ourselves up by our own bootstraps. However, those who have not attained through their own fault the human virtue of humility effectively block God’s gift of faith. Pride and arrogance before God was the Original Sin. And remains today as the primary vices that separate us from God.

 

[Abrosz]

How is the value of pi relevant to salvation?

It only relevant to show that the bible was written by ignorant humans.

That is how I went from fundamentalist Protestant to agnostic to Catholic over the course of 60 or so years.

My road was the exact opposite. Small child, who indiscriminately “swallowed” everything that the authority tells. All the way to become a skeptic.

…Catholic Church as the most likely to hold the truth, accepting that God Incarnate could multiply bread and fish, raise people from the dead, be born to a woman who had never had sexual intercourse, and heal normally incurable diseases was an easy step.

That is again the exact opposite. To believe something on the words of some (self-proclaimed) authority is the ultimate irrationality - as far as I am concerned. You said that God gave us brains, and expects us to use it. Critically! So I use it, every day. No “authority” is sacrosanct until they can give reasons to trust them.

 

[whatistrue]

My road was the exact opposite. Small child, who indiscriminately “swallowed” everything that the authority tells. All the way to become a skeptic.

Did you read what I wrote? This was the first part of my journey, not the opposite of it.

To believe something on the words of some (self-proclaimed) authority

Again, reading comprehension is your friend. I stated plainly that I researched the claims and determined that the Catholic Church was most likely to hold the truth. No blind acceptance at his point.

If, as I said, your thinking leads you here, that is on you, but to come in here and make a point of being rude and dismissive to those of faith does not make your position any stronger or more true. If that is how you feel, then own it and leave others to their opinions. In silence.

 

[Abrosz]

because the skeptics are looking for something that fits their criteria.

Of course. Why are you surprised? You do the same, except your criteria are different.

As scripture says, some will not believe even if they see a man rise from the dead.

So, let’s see something that cannot be denied. Is that “dead” already decomposing, or reduced to a pile of bones? Fully reversing entropy would be something very hard to deny. Have a smashed vase to re-assemble itself in front of my eyes (and recorded objectively), and I will be impressed.

Believe or don’t believe. It is your choice.

No, it is NOT a choice. If you don’t understand this, we are wasting our time.

It’s true, God could deliver a good smack of a baseball bat. He did it for St. Paul. If that is the kind of revelation you wish for then start praying for it. Perhaps God is waiting for you to make the first move. He knows you better than you know yourself.

I did. And nothing happened. Please do not accuse me of “giving up too fast”.

 

[goout]

whatistrue:

How is the value of pi relevant to salvation?

It only relevant to show that the bible was written by ignorant humans.

That is how I went from fundamentalist Protestant to agnostic to Catholic over the course of 60 or so years.

My road was the exact opposite. Small child, who indiscriminately “swallowed” everything that the authority tells. All the way to become a skeptic.

…Catholic Church as the most likely to hold the truth, accepting that God Incarnate could multiply bread and fish, raise people from the dead, be born to a woman who had never had sexual intercourse, and heal normally incurable diseases was an easy step.

That is again the exact opposite. To believe something on the words of some (self-proclaimed) authority is the ultimate irrationality - as far as I am concerned. You said that God gave us brains, and expects us to use it. Critically! So I use it, every day. No “authority” is sacrosanct until they can give reasons to trust them.

Ok, we get it. You had a bad experience with fundamentalism.
What is your point. Like another poster said above:
you could spend your time doing something productive rather than tilting at windmills.

You are obviously angry. I’m sorry for whatever part Christians played in your anger, but you ought to now begin taking responsibility by owning your beliefs instead of railing against the beliefs of others.

 

[Abrosz]

I stated plainly that I researched the claims and determined that the Catholic Church was most likely to hold the truth.

You said so. Fine. But what does have to do with anything for me?

If, as I said, your thinking leads you here, that is on you, but to come in here and make a point of being rude and dismissive to those of faith does not make your position any stronger or more true.

Rude and dismissive? Opposing view is not “rude” on its own. IF I would have said something like: “those dumb believers swallow any junk pushed down on their idiotic throat” - THAT would rude. But I take pains to stay polite.

 

[goout]

whatistrue:

I stated plainly that I researched the claims and determined that the Catholic Church was most likely to hold the truth.

You said so. Fine. But what does have to do with anything for me?

If, as I said, your thinking leads you here, that is on you, but to come in here and make a point of being rude and dismissive to those of faith does not make your position any stronger or more true.

Rude and dismissive? Opposing view is not “rude” on its own. IF I would have said something like: “those dumb believers swallow any junk pushed down on their idiotic throat” - THAT would rude. But I take pains to stay polite.

You might be polite, but you are also radically obstinate here, which pretty much negates your claim to politeness.
And we are into ad hominems now of course, because all the material has been covered 8 times, and there is no listening happening.
Have a good day and I hope you find something fulfilling to do.

 

[Abrosz]

Ok, we get it. You had a bad experience with fundamentalism.

No, I did not. I had some wonderful experiences with the most kind an lovable members of the clergy, no molestation, no problems, whatsoever.

What is your point. Like another poster said above:
you could spend your time doing something productive rather than tilting at windmills.

I simply try to give the benefit of doubt. Maybe it is not productive, but it allows me to learn new things.

You are obviously angry.

It is very hard for me to respond to this in a polite manner. I would really like to lash out and use vulgar words. But I will not. I only had very good experiences with Christians. I was also mistaken to be one of them.

 

[whatistrue]

You said so. Fine. But what does have to do with anything for me?

Correcting your misstatement.

Opposing view is not “rude” on its own

Correct. However, using phrases like “swallowing anything”, “ignorant humans”, and “Hah. Not on the level required…” is, in my view, rude and dismissive. If this is you taking pains to be polite then I have nothing further to say to you and I leave you to it.

 

[Abrosz]

Correcting your misstatement.

Actually you presented your opinion.

Correct. However, using phrases like “swallowing anything”, “ignorant humans”, and “Hah. Not on the level required…” is, in my view, rude and dismissive.

Could you present the link to these statements, so I can review them in context. Though to call some humans ignorant is not rude.