|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Good Question For Catholics and Others
Imagine the following scenario: The present Pope is giving an important speech on worldwide TV and in front of a live audience, when all of a sudden he claims to feel a divine presence. He then goes on to do something truly astonishing, seemingly impssible. What it is, doesn't matter, except that it appears beyond the capabilities of even magicians.
After doing the feat he quickly settles back to normalacy and admits he can't explain how he did what he did and that it must be a sign from God. For weeks Catholics, as well as other Christians, and others as well, feel awe inspired and vindicated in their beliefs in a supreme being. Then one day the Amazing Randi holds a news conference where he shows how he has figured out a way to duplicate the feat using the tricks of a magician including sophisticated devices. It was far from easy but he did it. Meanwhile he cannot prove that the Pope used the same technique to accomplish the feat. But if the Pope did use his technique, it was clearly pre planned trickery, and the Pope would be marked as a liar and a super world class magician to boot. After Randi's news conference how sure would you be, as a Catholic, that the Pope's astonishing feat was done without using an obvious trick? A. Almost Positive B. Pretty Sure C. About 50-50 D. Doubtful E. Highly Doubtful I'd also like to know how Protestants and others feel. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
E. Highlydoubtful
I don't think a message from God would be able to be replicated. And if I were the Amazing Randi after the incident I would fear for my life. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
The change in belief (before and after Randi's explanation) would be interesting as well.
Personally, when someone does something that appears impossible on tv then I'm highly doubtful of its veracity even without an explanation. It's reproducibility that is persuasive. chez |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
[ QUOTE ]
The change in belief (before and after Randi's explanation) would be interesting as well. Personally, when someone does something that appears impossible on tv then I'm highly doubtful of its veracity even without an explanation. It's reproducibility that is persuasive. chez [/ QUOTE ] So, basically, you deny the once-in-a-lifetime miracle based on the inherent aspect of that miracle not being reproducible. Because if it is reproducible -- it ain't a friggin' miracle any more is it?! |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] The change in belief (before and after Randi's explanation) would be interesting as well. Personally, when someone does something that appears impossible on tv then I'm highly doubtful of its veracity even without an explanation. It's reproducibility that is persuasive. chez [/ QUOTE ] So, basically, you deny the once-in-a-lifetime miracle based on the inherent aspect of that miracle not being reproducible. Because if it is reproducible -- it ain't a friggin' miracle any more is it?! [/ QUOTE ] Yep, I seriously doubt any miraculous claim even if I can't currently explain it. chez |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
I'm not totally sure what you're asking. Are you asking if man's ability to reproduce God's miracles would diminish people's belief in Him?
Man can dig big wholes in the ground, but I don't think that it diminishes anyone's awe of the Grand Canyon. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
E.
But I am skeptical by nature. I am anticipating Bigdaddy's response. He seems to have alot of faith in the pope. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
Now Thomas, one of the twelve, called the Twin, was not with them when Jesus came. So the other disciples told him, "We have seen the Lord." But he said to them, "Unless I see in his hands the print of the nails, and place my finger in the mark of the nails, and place my hand in his side, I will not believe."
Eight days later, his disciples were again in the house, and Thomas was with them. The doors were shut, but Jesus came and stood among them, and said, "Peace be with you." Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." -John 20:24-29 |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
[ QUOTE ]
Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." [/ QUOTE ] Why do you suppose it's so important to God that man deny the very common sense He instilled in him in the first place? Would you give your child a gift and then punish her because she used your gift? |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Good Question For Catholics and Others
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." [/ QUOTE ] Why do you suppose it's so important to God that man deny the very common sense He instilled in him in the first place? Would you give your child a gift and then punish her because she used your gift? [/ QUOTE ] It is you who are making assumptions, namely that God having given man reason expects him not to make use of it. There are certain protestant posters here who make that implicit assumption, but not us catholics. The point of Jesus' teaching is that one should accept the testimony of credible witnesses as well as the teachings of God and His prophets. And it is perfectly acceptable and necessary to apply one's reason to those teachings to derive their full logical meaning, although again many protestants seem to have a problem with that. |
|
|