Prove It.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Prove to me, without scripture (since I don't believe in it), that the Catholic Church is the only true religion, that Jesus was God, and all the other stuff you believe in. If it's absolute truth, and if it's the only true path, then it must be easy to prove, because surely a merciful God wouldn't make the only true way to salvation something difficult to believe in. Right?

This request is a bit lofty!!! I'm kind of a sucker so I will try to give some kind of reply. I could write all night on this topic so I will try to condense my answer as much as possible. I hope it is somewhat intelligible, it's a lofty question afterall.

The basic tension of human philosophical and religious thought (and of our being really) is the reconciliation of contrary essences (ie., time & eternity, finite & infinite, plurality & unity), ultimately the fundamental plurality of all existence and the unity of all existence. This tension exists, unresolved in Hinduism, Buddhism, Marxism, Positivism, Post-modernism, classical philosophy, etc.

Man is a being with concepts of eternity, unity, infinity, the Absolute, etc. Though these concepts ultimately imply one another and are reducible to the one, the finitude of the mind's intellective power differentiates through logical distinction. The mind however, grasps by analogy and contuition the One Essence of these ideas.

This would seem to indicate that man is situated and constituted, in his personal essence and fundamental consciousness of being, as it were at the convergence of these contrary essences. A crude diagram might look something like this:

Infinity | Eternity | One | Unity | Absolute Being | Necesity

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Man | Personal Existence | Intentionality | the "I" | Consciousness | Essence

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Finitude | Time | Multiplicity | Plurality | Limited Being | Contingency

The primary accidental modes of finite being correspond to logical distinctions (made by our finite mind in it's intermediary mode of being) which describe the Divine Essence or Absolute Being. For example the accident of quantity corresponds to infinite immensity, time corresponds to eternity, etc. The accident of relationality is unique in finite being in that while other accidents modify a substance and include a reference to the substance in which they adhere, relationality also includes a reference to a being outside the substance to which it adheres. The implication in this context is a fundamental substantive relationality in Absolute Being. The highest form of relationality in finite being is our personal constitution in it's intermediary mode of being and relation of intentionality as intimated before. Thus in the Absolute a corresponding logical distinction must be possible. This is expressed in terms of the First Principle which, as self-diffusive necessitates a second Hypostasis or Supposit which is the complete expression of the infinitude of the First Principle. Absolute Being can be said to have a third Hypostasis or Supposit not by necessity but by virtue of the perfect harmony between the First Principle and the expressed Hypostasis of the infinitude of possibilities in the First Principle of which it is the perfect Image, thus expressing the perfection of absolute, substantive relationality. In this model the first Hypostasis or Supposit is the First Principle and the principle of Absolute Fullness and Absolute emptiness (understood as kenosis and 'gift'), the third Hypostasis is the substantive relation of the first and second and is, by analogy Absolute receptivity (although there is no receptivity in Absolute Being in the strict sense in relation to Finite Being), the second Hypostasis is expressed infinite possibility in relation to the First Principle and as expressed relates the first and third Supposits.

Since the second Hypostasis is the expression of the infinite possibilities (ideas) of the First Principle, and is in the center of the relation between the first and third supposits, it follows that the second Hypostasis is in relation to finite being (or existence expressed through limiting essence), as the convergence analogous to man's personal costitution in relation to impersonal being and the Absolute.

Man is a conscious subject, in relation to finite being through intentionality and to Infinite Being through the second Hypostasis which is the exemplary cause of his being.

The contingent essences necessitate a kind of fulfillment in the Absolute Essence. This fulfillment, or reconciliation, it would follow, is in the relation to the Exemplar, or second Hypostasis which is the Coincidence of Opposites at the heart of existence.

So, while it's hard to explain in a little post, the fulfillment of our personal existence is the supra-personal dynamism of the Divine Essence (Absolute Being) which originates and completes finite being as a limited expression or image of the Divine Essence. The reconciliation of the existence of contrary essences is the second Supposit or Hypostasis (Person) of the Divine Essence (Absolute Being) which is the Exemplar of our being and the Coincidence of Opposites.

So the fundamental relationality of being, the Coincidence of Opposites as the reconciliation of contrary essences, and the constitution of man as the closest image of these realities in the world of our experience imply some substantial links between all of these realities. What emerges is the fulfillment of our essence (as a finite, limited being with a personal dimension which is at the convergence of the contrary essences) in the second Hypostasis or coincidence of opposites in the substantive relationality of Absolute Being. To put it in colloquial terms, the human and the Divine, creation and the First Principle reconciled in a Hypostatic Union.

In Christian terminology, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God... And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us", "Though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God something to be grasped at, but rather he emptied himself, taking the form of a slave, being born in the likeness of men", "He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created... He is before all things, and in him all things have their being... For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth of in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross."

I'm not laying claim to a definitive proof, this is more of a very brief sketch. But I do hold that all of creation (the material universe, being as being, man's constitution, etc.) points toward the reality of God and even to the Triune nature of God and the unique relation of creation to the second Person of the Trinity. This is supported by the fact that many very penetrating and diverse philosophers (ancient Greek, ancient Asian- Indian & Chinese, Jewish, Moslem, Modern) have through reason alone come to percieve reality in ways that come very, very close to this understanding. I also hold that it is most reasonable, for a variety of reasons, that this second Person, as the reconciliator of contraries, would become Incarnate.

It should be noted that the fundamental self-diffusive nature of God that was described in such a cold and abstract way, is actually the fact of God's Goodness. The Divine Essence is Love. Relationality, Gift, and Self-Diffusive Goodness.

I would argue (maybe later we can get into it) that the philosophies, religions, mythologies, arts, etc. the basic longings of the human heart and the expressions or manifestations of those innate, dynamic intimations of the reality of man's existence point toward the fact of God's self revelation in Jesus the Nazarean who is called the Christ. At that point Catholicism just makes sense because it's doctrine, life, history and practice the most clearly and radiantly embody these revealed truths. The lives and writings of the mystics reveal in profound ways, the reality of this supernatural life that is available to us as personal beings in relation to the Absolute.

Edited January 27, 2004 by Laudate_Dominum

[Laudate_Dominum]

I hate that when you spend such a long time writing a post that by the time you submit it the discussion is over and your post is irrelavant.

God bless you Speech! I will pray for you for sure.

Peace.

[dUSt]

But I'm still not coming back to the Church, because whether or not it's true makes very little difference to me. Carry on.

Yeah you will. Yes it does.

In fact, here's my prediction: You'll come back to the Church, then leave again, then come back, and then leave, and then come back, and then leave, and then come back again, and then leave.

I know this because I study history.

The way I figure, you got a 50/50 chance of dying at just the right time.

[hyperdulia again]

lm*o@dUSt's prediction...

Charles I figured out a new twist on Paschal's wager...he lived like an atheist and died like a Catholic...methinks he was on to something.

[dUSt]

Charles I figured out a new twist on Paschal's wager...he lived like an atheist and died like a Catholic...methinks he was on to something.

This is similar to my firm belief that we should all time our deaths with the maxing out of all our credit cards.

[BLAZEr]

Please read Brideshead Revisited . . . it's my favorite book. And its so beaver dam real. Seriously. It's amesome. Read it. You will identify. I know I did.

Seriously, I would apostasize every other day if I didn't think it was futile. God I love this Holy Church, despite all the jerks in it.

[Azriel]

None of us can say that during our walk of faith that we never have any doubts or wanted "proof".

You're not crazy. You are quite human.

Prayers for you.

[Good Friday]

Thank you all for your responses.

I'll be using this screen name again now.

Talk amongst yourselves.

[Azriel]

"I'm a little verklempt! Talk amongst yourselves..I'll give you a topic: Rhode Island, it's not a road, nor an island...discuss!"

[Jake Huether]

Speech,

I just thought I'd throw in my 2 pennies even though its already been mentioned in one way or another.

For faith to exist, then proof must not exist. Once proof exists, then faith fails you. You cannot have faith in something that has been proven, because the defition of faith is a belief in something for which there is no proof.

So, in a sense we cannot ask you to have faith in our system and also be requred to prove it to you. This denys the whole consept of you having "faith".

One has faith that gravity won't stop. Can you honestly prove that gravity won't just dissappear one day? Or that the sun won't come up one day. Proof is really a relative turm, that is based on experience. Really our whole existance is faith based. We have faith that when we turn the oven on, it will cook meat. But what if heat stopped flowing?? What if energy coudn't convect, radiate, or conduct. It has only been "proven" that so far it does what it's supposed to do. But it has never been proven that it "can't" not do what it's supposed to do.

Hearts have been known to stop, minds fail, and at times the blind have been restored to sight. Without proof.

If what you are looking for is proof, you won't find it. If however, you would be satisfied with evidence (that is, not difinitive proof - but a hint), then consider reading the lives of the Saints. Consider the uncorruptable bodies of Saints. Consider that out of all the Churches, Christian and non-Christian the Catholic Church is unceacingly under attack from all sides. Why? Why would the Catholic Church be attacked by Christians and Pagans alike? The answer is that it is not of this world. If the world doesn't know something, it rejects it. Same with Jesus.

God bless you, and my prayers are with you.

[ironmonk]

Thank you all for your responses.

I'll be using this screen name again now.

Talk amongst yourselves.

Please check your PM's on the other one....

Just know that your doubts are normal... doubts do not make you crazy. Most of us have them.

God Bless, Your Servant in Christ,

ironmonk :huh:

[p0lar_bear]

Speech,

I'm too lazy to read the entire thread, so I apologize if I'm repeating anything.

Your question is a valid one. Saying that Christianity is true simply because the Bible says it is doesn't work. After all, the Koran says Islam is true and I'm sure Buddism and Hinduism have sacred writings that "prove" they are true.

When it comes right down to it, no one can really prove Catholicism. This is partially because one cannot prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that God exists. One can offer compelling reasons and proofs, but in the end, there has to be an element of faith. (My personal favorite proof is "something exists, therefore God exists.")

So, I guess rather than trying to 'prove' Catholicism all at once, we should begin with 'proving' the existence of God...

Regardless of what arguments I or others present, it will be more along the lines of convincing arguments or evidence than empirical proof.

Are you willing?

[Aloysius]

Thank you all for your responses.

I'll be using this screen name again now.

Talk amongst yourselves.

I'm so glad you're back on that sn...

now we just gotta get that SN back into the correct group ^_^ ;)

[Bruce S]

When it comes right down to it, no one can really prove Catholicism. This is partially because one cannot prove "beyond a shadow of a doubt" that God exists. One can offer compelling reasons and proofs, but in the end, there has to be an element of faith. (My personal favorite proof is "something exists, therefore God exists.")

Grin. We don't "Prove Anything"

We are LEAD to believe. It is a universal trait, all cultures, from advanced to primitive have a concept of God. That, is pretty much a proof, now UNDERSTANDING God is quite a different matter.

For me, it is a trial and error system.

First you...doubt.

Then you begin a quest. There is an agent, one left here for all of us, perhaps the agent was here long ago, I think He was, and Is still operative. That agent is not a denomination, nor, for that matter words in a book, it is ephermal, elusive, but is it REAL?

You test it.

Go down on unbelieving knees, open up, PRETEND this might be real. ASK...really ask, with your entire being for SOMETHING...ANYTHING to happen.

Then sit back, and observe.

For most, astonishing things begin to happen, unwelcome things, along with wanted things.

Weird actually. But, you then spend the rest of your life moving in directions that you never, ever, would consider before.

For most, we quickly want some more, and that book we all have is a good place.

[Aloysius]

hey, Good Friday is ours!.. stop tryin to get him with your non-denominational mumbo jumbo

i'm pretty sure he realizes that if he were to b Christian again though, Catholocism is the way to go... right? i mean, he used to be so convinced about that...

St. Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle, be our defense against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. and do thou oh Prince of the Heavenly Host, by the Power of GOD ALMIGHTY, cast into hell all the evil spirits who prowl about this world seeking the ruin of souls.

Go down on unbelieving knees, open up, PRETEND this might be real. ASK...really ask, with your entire being for SOMETHING...ANYTHING to happen.

that's not bad advice.

i love you Good Friday, don't be discouraged by anyone, follow God wherever He leads you, you know in your heart what you have to do.

[Anna]

Good Friday is good. :)

[Bruce S]

Grin. That is the Pentecostal part of me ...

They really do the BEST "Altar Calls"

The Catholic Church really should get the AC in at the end of every Mass.

If you do, we want royalties too, we never got our check when you tried to steal back tounges after a thousand years of inactivity, and we never saw a DIME from the singing you stole ... and never got right.

Hey, how about we FRANCHISE Pentecostalism and then we can stop tithing and just take some of the Peter's Pence loot?

:drool:

[Aloysius]

Katholikos: "Catholics, don't believe that Bruce S is sincere in this thread. -- He's a snake, as slithery and treacherous as Satan was in the Garden of Eden!

[ironmonk]

Grin. That is the Pentecostal part of me ...

They really do the BEST "Altar Calls"

The Catholic Church really should get the AC in at the end of every Mass.

If you do, we want royalties too, we never got our check when you tried to steal back tounges after a thousand years of inactivity, and we never saw a DIME from the singing you stole ... and never got right.

Hey, how about we FRANCHISE Pentecostalism and then we can stop tithing and just take some of the Peter's Pence loot?

Tongues was not inactive, it's just real in the CC.

Pentacostal churches started back in 1906.

In Christ,

ironmonk

[Good Friday]

i'm pretty sure he realizes that if he were to b Christian again though, Catholocism is the way to go... right? i mean, he used to be so convinced about that...

With no offense to our separated brothers and sisters, I would never be anything other than Catholic if I were to be a mainstream Christian again (I never stopped being Christian -- just, not a very good Christian). Cheryl (cmotherofpirl) has said upon occasion that if she had to choose something to be other than Catholic, she would be Jewish. I don't know that I would go that far, since I would want to believe in Christ, but like her I can't imagine what Christianity would be like without the Catholic Church.

That said, I really thank Bruce for his response. I'm glad we could find something over which we don't have to debate. Like all of you, Bruce wants me to be close to Christ. Unfortunately, he probably doesn't think that can happen as a Catholic. But we should always be looking for common ground when we dialogue, and there is common ground here: all of you, including Bruce, care about my spiritual well-being and my fidelity to God. We shouldn't question his motives in this. Until proven otherwise, we should assume that he is sincere. By questioning his sincerity, we claim to know his mind and heart -- something that God alone can know. That kind of judgmentalism is uncalled for. I understand that many disagree with him over many things, and that there have been harsh words and hurt feelings on both sides. But he has been as kind to me in this thread as all of you have been, and I'm grateful.

Comments questioning his sincerity and comparing him to Satan will in no way help him. If the goal is to insult and divide, that will do it. I don't think that's the intended goal here, and I think that Phatmass would do a lot better if people would step back once in a while and see what the intended goal is. I'm more guilty of ignoring the goal of the phorum than anyone else, probably, but we should all -- including me -- start to think more about that. The goal is not insult and division.