Reason is superior to faith

But that is not the same as human reasoning which it limited and flawed.
We can know God through love better than through rational cogitation.


Theories of dialectical reason. Ponder that. Who wrote it and what was their world view?

I totally disagree. The god of greek philophers is not the true God, but only an empty concept, and God is not a concept. God is in essence is inconceivable and beyond the capacities of our mind and reason. We can know the only true God through Christ because in Christ, God had made Himself knowledgeable. Christ has reveaed who God is and we can know Him by meeting Him in prayer.

By the way, greek philosophers didn’t understand pratically nothing about nature and their wrong ideas have prevented any scientific progress for more than 2000 years.
Il was Galileo’s rebellion against their philosophic view of nature that allows modern science to begin. As a physicist, I am really surprised that today there are still people interested in greek philosophy; personally, I consider greek philosophy totally useless.

1 Like

I can’t believe a physicist would fail to understand that the ptolemaic model is ultimately as sound as the Copernican, since the motion of bodies is entirely relative. You don’t even know what science is, much less philosophy. “Physicists” from newton on have always been useful idiots. I guess it would be easy for a modern physicist to have blind faith though.

Some “philosophers” are actually Olympic-class trap shooters. Toss up an idea and it will quickly be shot down. Wonder what powers that impulse?

1 Like

Of course, our view of the universe is exactly the same as the ptolemaic model with itscelestial spheres and the same as the aristotelian explanation of gravity with all bodies moving toward their natural place.
You are being ridiculous.

You can’t be a catholic and deny the telos of creation. Also, do you still believe in the newtonian conception of gravity and substance? Do you still believe in atomism? Give me a break.

. . . . Newton’s gravity and inertia was just a Whig reconceptualizing of Empedocles’ forces of “love and strife”, which he learned about from his decades long obsession with alchemy. The obsolete physics you champion was just a return to the presocratics.

“Knowing God” and “knowing of God” are two distinct notions, and hardly the same thing. I think I’d respond that you cannot equate the two in the way you’re attempting to do.

So, I reject your assertion on the basis of an invalid presumption.


Methinks that someone in this thread is too smart by half.

1 Like

I dont follow, whats the implication here?

Faith is a virtue because it requires trust in God which is a good thing. Reason should help inform our faith.

I think, if you think that, you’ve failed at both.

1 Like

Don’t worry, I am one of them and I know we shouldn’t be trusted :wink:

It is different.

Obviously it is different in the sense that one truth in principle you can get by yourself and the other cannot be reached. However:

  1. Both are truths, and what is important is to know the truth, the way you are approaching it is not so important.
  2. In case of taking some truths on the authority of other humans, we need to see, at least in principle, that the reasoning can be made by man because we cannot trust fellow men unconditionally and this is one of the “safety checks”. However if the God gives us some truths, as long as we know it is from him, we can be sure that he is neither deceived nor deceiving us.

By the way I think you are underestimating amount of knowledge accumulated in sciences. I doubt if in any field it is really possible nowadays to throughtfully go from first principles to let’s say descriptions which are widespread consensus in given field (tu rule out crazy new hypotheses) in the course of one person life.

Just a general observation, and not directed at anyone in particular:

Have you ever noticed around here that, when an article of faith that someone doesn’t believe in is mentioned, it’s denigrated as “blind faith”, but when it’s something that the person himself accepts, it’s never “blind faith”?


This topic was automatically closed after 27 hours. 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