rkwright Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 What arguments do you know of that Christianity is a true religion? I guess also included in this are arguments that Jesus was in fact divine. I have heard the argument, if Christianity is all a myth then it must be the biggest lie ever - to carry on for over 2000 years. Yet this has recently become unpersuasive to me. In a sense we claim that Islam is a "Myth" and yet it has "duped" millions of people for hundreds of years. I have also heard that if Christianity was a lie, why would the first apostles (I guess the creators of the lie) go to such extremes as to sacrifice their lives for it. Yet couldn't the same be said of the Muslims? Thoughts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 The Apostles didn't go conquering people and forcing them to be christians, the same cannot be said of Mohamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkwright Posted September 3, 2009 Author Share Posted September 3, 2009 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='03 September 2009 - 03:24 PM' timestamp='1252009453' post='1960466'] The Apostles didn't go conquering people and forcing them to be christians, the same cannot be said of Mohamed. [/quote] No, but that seems to only prove that the method of conversion was different - does it prove the religion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinytherese Posted September 3, 2009 Share Posted September 3, 2009 I recommend reading... The Case for Christ Mere Christianity Fundamentals of the Faith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 [quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='03 September 2009 - 04:24 PM' timestamp='1252009453' post='1960466'] The Apostles didn't go conquering people and forcing them to be christians, the same cannot be said of Mohamed. [/quote] The Apostles didn't, but later leaders of the Christian world did. [/Advocatus diaboli] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregorius Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I recommend [u]At the origin of the Christian Claim.[/u] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregorius Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 I recommend [u]At the origin of the Christian Claim.[/u] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonkers Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 [quote name='rkwright' date='03 September 2009 - 03:21 PM' timestamp='1252009289' post='1960465'] What arguments do you know of that Christianity is a true religion? I guess also included in this are arguments that Jesus was in fact divine. I have heard the argument, if Christianity is all a myth then it must be the biggest lie ever - to carry on for over 2000 years. Yet this has recently become unpersuasive to me. In a sense we claim that Islam is a "Myth" and yet it has "duped" millions of people for hundreds of years. I have also heard that if Christianity was a lie, why would the first apostles (I guess the creators of the lie) go to such extremes as to sacrifice their lives for it. Yet couldn't the same be said of the Muslims? Thoughts? [/quote] Every religion has its own set of proofs, and every other religion has its counter arguments. There is no way of knowing for sure your religion is the true one, except through blind faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Winchester Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) That's only if all arguments and counterarguments are equally wrong or equally right. It's a position based upon gross generalization. And "blind" is the grossest of that generalization. Edited September 4, 2009 by Winchester Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirklawd Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='tinytherese' date='03 September 2009 - 06:24 PM' timestamp='1252016669' post='1960516'] I recommend reading... The Case for Christ Mere Christianity Fundamentals of the Faith [/quote] It really comes down to this. and "Orthodoxy" by Chesterton. Christianity is right because its ideals are right and its philosophy is right. The wrong things are wrong and the right things are right. It doesnt transform reality, or make you look sideways at reality. It's what is. The trick is that it's hard to believe on face value, that's why more converts are gained through actually experiencing the personal side of faith, instead of just thinking about it. personal, i wouldnt use "christianity is the one true faith" as way to try to evangelize or as the opening gambit in a debate. If someone is arguing that point with you, i would drop the debate down into specifics. Start with comparing morality (and thus the principals and values that are the foundation of that morality). There are also tons of resources out there defending the fact that Jesus DID live, and DID say what he did and did die. You dont NEED to believe in his miracles to believe in him and what he said and did. (which alot of people assume is necessary at the first step of conversion). Similarly conversion isnt a switch. Faith is a journey, one step at a time. Edited September 4, 2009 by Sirklawd Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 The attempts to use reason alone in order to "prove" that God exists or that Christianity is the one true religion -- at least to a certain degree -- are predicated on a form of Pelagian naturalism. Faith is an unmerited divine gift, and not the end result of rational arguments devised by created human reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 [quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 September 2009 - 02:42 PM' timestamp='1252093356' post='1960928'] The attempts to use reason alone in order to "prove" that God exists [. . .] are predicated on a form of Pelagian naturalism. [/quote] St. Thomas Aquinas didn't seem to think so (nor did the First Ecumenical Vatican Council for that matter). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 [quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 September 2009 - 02:24 PM' timestamp='1252095881' post='1960939'] St. Thomas Aquinas didn't seem to think so (nor did the First Ecumenical Vatican Council for that matter). [/quote] Actually, Aquinas and Vatican I assert the same thing I asserted . . . faith is a form of knowledge that is beyond the powers of created reason. Aquinas' "proofs" are not strictly speaking "proofs," because God's existence is beyond discursive demonstration, and this fact was affirmed at Vatican I, which said that, ". . . faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the Catholic Church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Resurrexi Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Apotheoun' date='04 September 2009 - 03:32 PM' timestamp='1252096363' post='1960941'] ". . . faith, which is the beginning of human salvation, the Catholic Church professes to be a supernatural virtue, by means of which, with the grace of God inspiring and assisting us, we believe to be true what He has revealed, not because we perceive its intrinsic truth by the natural light of reason, but because of the authority of God himself, who makes the revelation and can neither deceive nor be deceived." [/quote] I was aware of this. Nevertheless, it is not Pelagian or semi-Pelagian to state that God's existence can be proved through natural reason, and you seemed (to me) to be saying that it is. Edited September 4, 2009 by Resurrexi Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apotheoun Posted September 4, 2009 Share Posted September 4, 2009 (edited) [quote name='Resurrexi' date='04 September 2009 - 02:38 PM' timestamp='1252096698' post='1960945'] I was aware of this. Nevertheless, it is not Pelagian or semi-Pelagian to state that God's existence can be proved through natural reason, and you seemed (to me) to be saying that it is. [/quote] It depends on what you mean by the word "proved." Creation reveals its Creator's activity, but not His being, for that would involve making God a being among beings (cf. St. Gregory of Nyssa, [i]Sixth Sermon on the Beatitudes[/i]). Edited September 4, 2009 by Apotheoun Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now