Why I am catholic

[traillius]

I ask myself a series of questions which goes like this:

1. Is there a God?
   I say yes, because without a God, there would be no purpose to anything. Randomness, which is the only alternative to a God, cannot explain the human struggle for purpose.
2. Is there more than one God?
   In the past people considered the possibility of more than one God. This would be based on explaining how the world works. But referencing the above purpose question, the nature of deity is for most people in the world a question of why rather than of how. Science can explain how, eliminating the " gods " of nature. Since creation cannot contradict the creator, There is no contradiction between science and God. So, there aren’t gods for everything, but the search for purpose indicates there must be one or more Gods. There can’t be more than one. So there is only one God.
3. SInce there is but one God, what approach is best. Monotheism is the only choice. Polytheism is not about purpose but mechanism, which is a function of science and not religion
   Pantheism would lead to the conclusion that God created part of himself/herself/itself when creating the universe. This fails to explain the quest for God. If God is present everywhere and in everything, why would part of him/her/it seek oneself elsewhere?
4. there are only 3 truly monotheistic, non pantheistic, religions in the world: Which one is right?
   All three have texts, systems of worship, and people claiming to speak for God

However only one has a person claiming, or believed, to BE God, which is christianity.
If one had to choose which one is the best way to God, which is the ultimate purpose, the safest bet would be to go to the one that claims to actually have GOD himself directly available.
There is historic non-biblical evidence for Jesus historically. So the question is do you believe what He said. Either he is God, or he was lying, or he was insane
He didn’t exhibit the signs of insanity, apart from the statements of being one with the father, etc. Those alone, with no other symptoms, aren’t enough to indicate insanity.
Again, his torture and death are public events, corroborated by extra biblical evidence.
The justification for his arrest, torture, and death was the charge of blasphemy. If he were lying, it would be unlikely that he would remain faithful to a lie, to the point of death. So unlikely, in fact that it would negligible. So I conclude he did not lie. Therefore I conclude he is God, based on what he said, and his willingness to die for it.
Since Jesus is God, I am bound to be christian, since it is the only religion espousing that belief.
Now of all the christian sects, only one has historical evidence of being founded by jesus, and continuing that tradition in all the years from then till now, and on to the future. Every other church that exists, broke from this original church, or from some other church, based on human decisions. This original church is the RCC. That is why I am catholic, because the original, and oldest church is most likely to have the most complete truth and be most faithful to Jesus’s teaching.

 

[Proallen]

I ask myself a series of questions which goes like this:

1. Is there a God?
   I say yes, because without a God, there would be no purpose to anything. Randomness, which is the only alternative to a God, cannot explain the human struggle for purpose.
2. Is there more than one God?
   In the past people considered the possibility of more than one God. This would be based on explaining how the world works. But referencing the above purpose question, the nature of deity is for most people in the world a question of why rather than of how. Science can explain how, eliminating the " gods " of nature. Since creation cannot contradict the creator, There is no contradiction between science and God. So, there aren’t gods for everything, but the search for purpose indicates there must be one or more Gods. There can’t be more than one. So there is only one God.
3. SInce there is but one God, what approach is best. Monotheism is the only choice. Polytheism is not about purpose but mechanism, which is a function of science and not religion
   Pantheism would lead to the conclusion that God created part of himself/herself/itself when creating the universe. This fails to explain the quest for God. If God is present everywhere and in everything, why would part of him/her/it seek oneself elsewhere?
4. there are only 3 truly monotheistic, non pantheistic, religions in the world: Which one is right?
   All three have texts, systems of worship, and people claiming to speak for God

However only one has a person claiming, or believed, to BE God, which is christianity.
If one had to choose which one is the best way to God, which is the ultimate purpose, the safest bet would be to go to the one that claims to actually have GOD himself directly available.
There is historic non-biblical evidence for Jesus historically. So the question is do you believe what He said. Either he is God, or he was lying, or he was insane
He didn’t exhibit the signs of insanity, apart from the statements of being one with the father, etc. Those alone, with no other symptoms, aren’t enough to indicate insanity.
Again, his torture and death are public events, corroborated by extra biblical evidence.
The justification for his arrest, torture, and death was the charge of blasphemy. If he were lying, it would be unlikely that he would remain faithful to a lie, to the point of death. So unlikely, in fact that it would negligible. So I conclude he did not lie. Therefore I conclude he is God, based on what he said, and his willingness to die for it.
Since Jesus is God, I am bound to be christian, since it is the only religion espousing that belief.
Now of all the christian sects, only one has historical evidence of being founded by jesus, and continuing that tradition in all the years from then till now, and on to the future. Every other church that exists, broke from this original church, or from some other church, based on human decisions. This original church is the RCC. That is why I am catholic, because the original, and oldest church is most likely to have the most complete truth and be most faithful to Jesus’s teaching.

I’d be curious to hear what an Eastern Orthodox would have to say about that.

 

[SSTeacher]

I’d be curious to hear what an Eastern Orthodox would have to say about that.

I would suggest that the conclusion reached by the Original Poster could be reached only if one presupposes that the conclusion is true before one approaches the keyboard.

Perhaps a better title for this thread would be:

Please read all about my assumptions.

Schismatically,
Mick

 

[Ignatius]

I’d be curious to hear what an Eastern Orthodox would have to say about that.

The logic is excellent. However, I’d say that a person could, using the same logical process, legitimately reach the same conclusion with regard to an Orthodox Church. So, the only logical choice is between the Orthodox and Catholic.

 

[Proallen]

The logic is excellent. However, I’d say that a person could, using the same logical process, legitimately reach the same conclusion with regard to an Orthodox Church. So, the only logical choice is between the Orthodox and Catholic.

Which would leave one scratching their head over the difference in which each of the two churches has a different Canon. That’s for another thread though I am sure.

 

[Ignatius]

Which would leave one scratching their head over the difference in which each of the two churches has a different Canon. That’s for another thread though I am sure.

It will possibly be a moot point as restoration of unity is the stated goal of the Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill I**, ** Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Bartholomew I and Pope Benedict XVI. Seeking to find differences rather than commonality between the Catholic and Orthodox communions is counter productive.

You do bring up an interesting point as to the cannon, however it is not a problem. fortunately this issue has been dealt with because when communion was restored with the Coptic, Byzantine, Syriac and Assyrian Churches it was discovered that there actually is no conflict. Since these communions encompass the entire spectrum of OT scriptural variants there is no reason to expect any problem in this regard.