Proving God And Scripture to Non-Beilevers?


#1

Hallo,

What would be a good way to prove:
1)To an Athiest:
A) That God Exists,
a) That the God that exists is the Christain/Jewish God
b) That the God(s) of other religions are not Gods
B) The Scripture that is Accepted is indeed divine,

2)To a Pagan:
A) The True God,
a)That our God is the real God
b)That their God(s) are not real God(s)
B)Scripture that…,

3)To a Moslems:
A)Muhhamad is not a phrophet of God
B)Their Qura’an is not right
C)The Scripture…

Using The best possible deductive, inductive, abductive reasoning, alygisms and any other -tive or -ism that I might have forgoten that would be useful. Thank You and God bless.


#2

I don’t believe you will get a substantial reply to your question on the forum because it is very, very broad. Entire books could be written in response to your questions (and many have - check out the CA bookstore).


#3

Practice the Spiritual and Corporal works of Mercy- basically, know the Faith, love it, and live it. If you do all these things, people will be inspired by you. You see how fired up about their faith evangelicals are- can you imagine what would happen if even one of those megachurches in the bible belt had a total conversion to Catholicism all at once? They would rock the world!


#4

[quote=m134e5]…can you imagine what would happen if even one of those megachurches in the bible belt had a total conversion to Catholicism all at once? They would rock the world!
[/quote]

I’m not so sure. I come from the Bible-Belt and I am very familiar with those megachurches and their mindset.

Many folks in those congregations have the idea “bigger is better.” They flock to the church because it is big (locally, of course). The preacher is a HIGHLY skilled orator (and hired by the vestry of that church for that reason), and the choir is exceptional (and, often, paid) and the entire program is carefully laid out and planned in a manner which would not be foreign to a movie or concert producer. Most of these megachurches have theatrical effects such as rotating/elevating stages, smoke, etc.

It’s a lot of show with little substance. If these folks became Catholic, they would not value such things as highly (the rather quiet and un-theatrical Tabernacle would, hopefully, become much more meaningful).

Most of these folks have all the enthuasism of an audience at any concert or performance. They cheer wildly (that’s the point!) during the show, but they go home and live out their ordinary lives.


#5

[quote=Montie Claunch]Hallo,

What would be a good way to prove:
1)To an Athiest:
A) That God Exists,
a) That the God that exists is the Christain/Jewish God
b) That the God(s) of other religions are not Gods
B) The Scripture that is Accepted is indeed divine,

2)To a Pagan:
A) The True God,
a)That our God is the real God
b)That their God(s) are not real God(s)
B)Scripture that…,

3)To a Moslems:
A)Muhhamad is not a phrophet of God
B)Their Qura’an is not right
C)The Scripture…

Using The best possible deductive, inductive, abductive reasoning, alygisms and any other -tive or -ism that I might have forgoten that would be useful. Thank You and God bless.
[/quote]

There is a way to kind of sweep through everything at once, but it takes work, and most Christians and non-Christians do not want to do the work. In addition to instant-on TV, they want instant-on religion.

The Bible features a large series of typological word-pictures, or symbols, foreshadowing the New Testament salvation process. Everything about these typological word-pictures is wondrous. Even though the Bible was written by maybe 80 people over a period of about 1,500 years, in ancient Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, by Hebrews/Jews from a variety of different cultures, all of the books of the Bible use the exact same system of symbols, as though one mind – the Holy Spirit – were behind it.Additionally, the events of the New Testament are foreshadowed with wondrous accuracy, * frequently more than 1,500 years before they occur.*


#6

I am a “non believer” according to your definition, so I thought I’d pipe up.

I have a non Catholic religion. So think about it like this. What would it take for someone to convince YOU that your god was not the true god? Then reverse that.

If the person, like me, has a faith that meets their needs, answers their questions, addresses their sense of wonder…then you are going to have a hard time of it.

If they are searching,then you may have an easier time, if what you share can fill those spaces in their lives.

When I was searching, I was willing to try out other people’s ideas. But when I found my faith, then there really wasn’t a need to take other’s ideas as a serious replacement for my own, because I already have something that works.

Even a really great looking piece of cake wont tempt someone who’s tummy is full.

I think that is hard to see from some religious perspectives, because it is so obvious to you that what you believe is “real” and what they believe is “false”, but you have to stop and recognize the same is true for them. Your beliefs seem like so much foolishness to them, they won’t see any reason to give them the time of day, except as an intellectual exercise.

cheddar


#7

I’d really like to see, how you would prove that

[quote=Montie Claunch]B) The Scripture that is Accepted is indeed divine,
[/quote]

without assuming a priori that God exists, if that’s what you want to conclude from the statement.


#8

[quote=DavidFilmer]I don’t believe you will get a substantial reply to your question on the forum because it is very, very broad. Entire books could be written in response to your questions (and many have - check out the CA bookstore).
[/quote]

What would be some good books to look for?


#9

[quote=AnAtheist]I’d really like to see, how you would prove that

B) The Scripture that is Accepted is indeed divine,

without assuming a priori that God exists, if that’s what you want to conclude from the statement.
[/quote]

AnAtheist,

How do you account for the fulfillment of the Messianic Prophesies?

I’ll anticipate you may reply with the notion that the prophesies were self-fulfilled by the fictional accounts of the Gospels and the fictional accounts of the rest of the New Testament. Which would mean someone (or someones) gathered all text that may be intrepreted as Messianic in nature and concocted a story to fit around them like a glove. AND collaborated with others in doing so. For what purpose?

If my anticipation is correct, to what do you account for what would appear (if the NT is fiction) the collaboration effort that must have occured? (I hope that questions was clear, I’m not much of a wordsmith).

AnAtheist, the entirety of the Bible is a story, I think you’ll agree. Christians, as you know, believe the story to be the redeemtion story layed down by God. Although I know that the Bible was written by man, and compiled by man, I am awestruck as to how the “story” was written over many hunderds of years, as though, it were composed by one (what would be a truely remarkable) story-teller.

It was either a collaborated effort of which the members of the society of authors lives didn’t even overlap. How could this collaboration have occured, how could it have been succesful and not have broken down? Especially given the nature of the times, i.e. no written press, no internet, no electronic media.

How do you account for the magnificance of the story? It’s depth, it’s profound meaning and teachings? You may responfd you don’t find it magnificent. AnAthiest, I’d claim that if it is fiction it is even more magnificent. The story from Adam and Eve, through Noah, Abraham and Issac, The Kings, David, Isahia, the birth of Christ, the three years of teachings and miracles, Christs Passion, the Acts of the Apostles, the letters of St Paul…Revelation!

How do you account for the fact that it can easily be extracted from the OT and NT that history unfolded as prophesized. One may dispute each and every alleged prophesy by altered interpretation but there are so many. All would have to wrong. Hundreds of Phropesies, Messianic and otherwise.

I’m far from a biblical scholar. Yet from my knowledge of the Bible, I simply cannot believe it was somehow composed totally by the hand of man given how it was composed by many authors over many hundreds of years, all under the umbrella of one main theme…redeemtion of man.

How do you account for mordern day Isreal, for the fact that the Jews have withstood what they have withstood for thousands of years (as prophesised)? How do you account for the Bible??


#10

[quote=Mijoy2]How do you account for the fulfillment of the Messianic Prophesies?
I’ll anticipate you may reply with the notion that the prophesies were self-fulfilled by the fictional accounts of the Gospels and the fictional accounts of the rest of the New Testament. Which would mean someone (or someones) gathered all text that may be intrepreted as Messianic in nature and concocted a story to fit around them like a glove. AND collaborated with others in doing so. For what purpose?
[/quote]

Exactly so.
For what purpose? To promote their new religion.

If my anticipation is correct, to what do you account for what would appear (if the NT is fiction) the collaboration effort that must have occured?

The whole NT is made up by 5,6 ? authors, all copying from each other and/or from a possible single source (“Q”). The collaboration effort was minimal.

How do you account for the magnificance of the story? It’s depth, it’s profound meaning and teachings?

It is magnificent, yes. But other books are also magnificent, why should the Bible be divine.

How do you account for the fact that it can easily be extracted from the OT and NT that history unfolded as prophesized.

There are plenty of unfulfilled, wrong, and not-at-all-because-they were-written-after-the-event prophecies plus a lot of of errors and contradictions in the Bible. A divine book should at least be error-free.

How do you account for mordern day Isreal, for the fact that the Jews have withstood what they have withstood for thousands of years (as prophesised)?

That is indeed remarkable.


#11

[quote=AnAtheist]Exactly so.
For what purpose? To promote their new religion.

.
[/quote]

Why? For celebrity and fame? Because they thought it would help the world as it moved forward? Meaning Mark, Matthew, Luke and John all realized that from thier realtively very short Gospel stories the entire world from that point forward would essentially evolve (pardon the expression) from these short little books?

I don’t understand, our entire world is shaped by Jesus’s life. Not touched by His life, totally composed, painted and directed by what happened at Calgary. I don’t think you or anyone can deny this. Christianity and how it pertains to the world has not had minimal efect on the world. It has had paramount efect on the world. Mark, Matthew, Luke and John sure were smart men if they were simly looking to start a new false religion. They did a heck of a job.


#12

Montie Claunch,

You’ve got a tall order…

For atheists, I would recommend books by Peter Kreeft and C.S. Lewis. Peter Kreeft has some good, short essays on his website discussing the existence of God (Aquinas’ “five ways” and some others). Go to www.peterkreeft.com They’re under “Selected Writings”. C.S. Lewis used to be an atheist himself, so his book “Surprised by Joy” is an interesting account of his conversion. Another author who is very good is Fr. Stanley Yaki. He’s a priest and physicist, and is a brilliant intellectual (I met him at a couple of Chesterton conferences)—a very sharp cookie. He’s written a lot about science, and an honest atheist who is really looking for answers will find his atheism on shaky ground. Many of the atheists I know are more likely to entertain arguments that are based on logic rather than personal emotional experiences, though it’s not always the case. It depends, too, on whether or not the atheist is an atheist because they accept the culture’s perception (erroneous) that atheism is the intellectually superior position. In those cases, there may be some insecurity about their own intellectual capabilities, and so personal experiences aren’t as effective. They may be hanging on to the atheism as a way to show others how smart they are, and they may not really be interested in intellectual arguments: as long as society sees them as smart, they may not care about the intellectual arguments you can present. Those people need prayers, and time to emotionally mature, before you can get very far. I used to be an atheist myself, so am somewhat familiar with the mindset.


#13

Yes, it is. And by Muhammed’s, Buddha’s, Charlemagne’s, Hitler’s, Napoleon’s, Caesar’s, Confutius’ and lots of others lifes.


#14

I suggest:

Handbook of Christian Apologetics
By: Peter Kreeft & Ronald K. Tacelli


#15

[quote=AnAtheist]Yes, it is. And by Muhammed’s, Buddha’s, Charlemagne’s, Hitler’s, Napoleon’s, Caesar’s, Confutius’ and lots of others lifes.
[/quote]

This simply is not true. All of the names you mentioned had an influence in the world we live in certainly. But they are merely a drop of water compared to a bucket with respect to the influence of Jesus and the entire redemption story.

Think about the respective differences. The entire western world was not only shaped but formed based on Christian beliefs. Muhammed, as you mentioned is Islams answer to the correction of Christianity (hence a by-product, albiet misguided of). The others cannot even be compared. EVERYTHING, EVERYBODY, EVERYPLACE, has been dramatically influenced by Jesus Christs few years on earth.

I take that as further evidence of the divinity of the story (the Bible). You take it as the misguided evolution of a fictional and concocted story written by four simple men in the first century.

Which, is more believeable?

Please think, long and hard about the impact of Christianity on the world over the last two thousand years. Weight that against all the other evidence. Prophecy, Apparitions, conversion stories, Saints, miracles…etc etc. Only one of these things need to be genuine for God to exist.

All must be false for Him to not exist. ALL!!!


#16

[quote=Mijoy2]… Weight that against all the other evidence. Prophecy, Apparitions, conversion stories, Saints, miracles…etc etc. Only one of these things need to be genuine for God to exist….
[/quote]

The problem with this line of thinking is that other religions also have prophecies, conversions, holy men, scriptures, miraculous events etc.

Has Christianity had a profound effect on world history? Sure, but so have the other major religions…and remember that 2/3 of the world is non-Christian. So its truth is not inherently obvious to a lot of people. Our beliefs may seem as strange to them as theirs do to us.

cheddarsox has it correct that if you want to convince/convert someone you have to make it personally relevant and a fulfill a need thy might have.


#17

[quote=Mijoy2]The entire western world was not only shaped but formed based on Christian beliefs.
[/quote]

No, it is not. Most western legal system is based on the republican lex Romana. The UK and US legal system is still somewhat based on Celtic/Germanic and thus pagan traditions. Modern democracies are based on Greek philosophy and secaular movements dating back to 18th century. Undeniably Christianity had a huge impact on the western world, perhaps even the biggest, but it was most certainly NOT THE ONLY ONE.

EVERYTHING, EVERYBODY, EVERYPLACE, has been dramatically influenced by Jesus Christs few years on earth.

Pardon me, but in China, India and Japan most people don’t care at all about Jesus. Australian Aboriniges were influenced in no way. Wait, that’s wrong, there were from the 19th century onwards, when they were killed by the scores by Christians. It was not the divine story that propagates itself to everybody and everywhere. It were Christians who brought it to a 1/3 of the worlds, often enough with questionable methods diplomatically speaking.

But we’re getting offtopic here. What about my question regarding obvious errors and contradictions in the Bible? How does that comply with a divinely inspired book?


#18

[quote=AnAtheist] Undeniably Christianity had a huge impact on the western world, perhaps even the biggest, but it was most certainly NOT THE ONLY ONE.

Pardon me, but in China, India and Japan most people don’t care at all about Jesus. Australian Aboriniges were influenced in no way. Wait, that’s wrong, there were from the 19th century onwards, when they were killed by the scores by Christians. It was not the divine story that propagates itself to everybody and everywhere. It were Christians who brought it to a 1/3 of the worlds, often enough with questionable methods diplomatically speaking.

But we’re getting offtopic here. What about my question regarding obvious errors and contradictions in the Bible? How does that comply with a divinely inspired book?
[/quote]

I’m not implying Chrisitianity is the only religion to impact the world. I would however say that it is the only religion to impact the majority of the world as a whole. I’d also say the origin of Chrisitanity has virtually directed the entire world, save a few.

Back to my original point; if te Gospels are fiction, the impact they have had has been seemingly miraculous. Yet since they are real, they are truly miraculous ;).

You don’t consider the option of the divine push-along (we’d say guidence of the Holy Spirit) of the Gospel stories?

Do you think the writers of the Gospels had any idea of the long range impact of thier fairy-tale?

My point in bringing this up in the first place was in regard to the divinity of the bible. Was the bible composed by man with no divine intervention or was the bible divinely inspired? I tried to make the point that there is convincing (my opinion overwhelmingly) evidence to support it is divinely inspired. My point of Chrisitianity’s impact on the world for over 2000 years, along with the concept f the story, still unfolding as told , I claim, lays claim to this inspiration.

This isn’t the brightest light shining. The Truth of Christianity, to me shines the brightest.

As far as contradictions and falsehoods…again, I am not a biblical scholar. I only wish I had time to be but I have hungry mouths awaiting food at my table to feed. I hope to continue to learn more and more so that I can answer all your contradiction implications.

Although I have read and heard debates regarding this issue. I’ve yet to be convinced of a contradiction or a falsehood.


#19

[quote=Mijoy2]You don’t consider the option of the divine push-along (we’d say guidence of the Holy Spirit) of the Gospel stories?
[/quote]

No. But then, I don’t consider any divinity at all.

Do you think the writers of the Gospels had any idea of the long range impact of thier fairy-tale?

I guess, they didn’t. I fail to see the relevance though…

Although I have read and heard debates regarding this issue. I’ve yet to be convinced of a contradiction or a falsehood.

One of my favourites is: When was Jesus born? During the reign of Herodes (Matthew) or during Quirinius’ census (Luke)? Herodes died in 4 BC, the census took place in 6 or 7 AD.
The latter is much more likely, as that coincides with the star of Bethlehem, which might have been a conjuction of Jupiter and Saturn. The whole story with Herodes, the baby slaughter and the flight to Egypt is most probably just made up to have just another Messianic prophecy fulfilled (Hosea 11:1).

Oh, btw, regarding prophecies and Jewish history unfolding, what you mentioned earlier. Matthew wrote his gospel somewhere between 60 and 80 AD. The Temple was destroyed in 70 AD. Now, was Jesus talking about the destruction (Matt 24,2) really a prophecy, or did Matthew record current news and put it into Jesus’ mouth? What is more likely?


#20

It took ten years to complete a tax census. Overlap.


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.