"And then a miracle happened"


#1

I’ve spent a lot of time on this, but I haven’t yet found how brilliant apologists like Feser go from Aquinas’s ways to the Bible. I know the Bible in parts has been verified as describing real events however even so there is so much to be explained. So much of what I’ve read seems like premature closure.


#2

Well, yes, it is a great big jump from theism to orthodox Christianity


#3

Who’s Feser? I’ve never heard of them.


#4

He’s a Thomist who mostly deals with philosophical proofs for God. I’ve read some of his easier stuff and it’s worth reading.


#5

@noncontingent If you’re looking for something less philosophical I recommend Peter Kreeft, Brandt Pitre, Scott Hahn, or even N.T. Wright (Anglican). All excellent.


#6

Look at https://edwardfeser.blogspot.com/2014/05/pre-christian-apologetics.html and you’ll see how much work can be done before one gets to the Bible. One can certainly specialise in that work.

By the way, St. Thomas Aquinas himself wrote commentaries on some books of the Bible. For example, https://dhspriory.org/thomas/ lists several (on Psalms, on Job etc.).


#7

Once you have classical theism, you know that there is a being who can cause miraculous events in the rational order. Have there been any? To be Christian is to be rooted in Christ’s resurrection and subsequent explosion of the Church from witnesses of this as a demonstration that Christ is who he said he was. Is the Quran, for example, a miracle of a similar sort? Certainly a theophany presenting dictating divine scripture would be a miracle, but one would already have to accept Islam as true before considering it divinely inspired, whereas one could come to belief for historical reasons in the Resurrection first (whether or not the gospels and Paul’s epistles are divinely inspired doesn’t need to be accepted first; one could start with accepting them as first century texts (which they are, excepting perhaps the Gospel of John)), attesting to something happening in the first centiry and evaluate from there, and first centiry Christian history, whether you find them creditable as witness to an actual Resurrection.


#8

Thanks everyone for the replies. It’s good to see that there are people interested in this. I’ll have to look up some of the authors and works suggested. I’ve gone down the ID route and that was sufficient enough for me because I’d already had a background in biology/sociobiology to understand the arguments for macro-micro evolution and the real difficulties in climbing mount improbable. Which to me was never accomplished by Dawkins, but rather was more like a lot of inky words which he used to try to distract the reader from realizing he’d never accomplished what he set out to accomplish. What’s difficult for me is placing all the artifacts uncovered like Golbekli Tepe and the Neanderthals/Denisovans and as it seems even another human species in the context of the Bible accounts. It seems like a seriously truncated account. No to mention also the rationale for the period of time from the beginning to the final judgement. I feel like I’m trying to force-fit human history into the Bible like a shoe salesman trying to force a size 6 shoe on a size 11 person. It doesn’t feel like it fits. Yes, I believe in God, but simple theism isn’t enough for me. I’m working my way for the umpteenth time through the Bible trying to extract behavioral principles for me to follow so I can at least find some peace of mind, but as I do so on my mental knees as it were, I find myself pausing and wondering “What is THIS all for?”


#9

If I see footprints in the snow I need no more detail to know I’m not alone.


#10

This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.


DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.