Author Topic: Best evidenceproof of Catholicism (Read 1523 times)

Cathedra · « **on:** July 09, 2013, 11:55:00 PM »

I am of course 100% Catholic and i believe in everything, but lately i was thinking, what would be the best evidence/proof one could use to refute/convert the atheists/pagans/evolutionists/seculars/etc. that it is indeed all true and that Catholicism is the only true revealed religion by God and that all must submit to the Church or be damned?

It's not that i myself am not convinced, but what i mean is, what is enough for me to believe, may not be enough for others and i would like to know/use the strongest arguments for Catholicism so that i don't look like a fool and am not afraid to speak up to whoever it is.

I know the Bible is there, but, isn't there something else other than the Bible that serves as better evidence/proof for Catholicism?

Like, what would a fully trained Priest/Saint use to attempt to convert the "modern" people of today who believe in evolution and are atheists etc.? How does the Church best prove Her claims?

There's an apologetic book by the theologian Berry that i may end up getting later, but it costs like $40 and i can't buy it at the moment.

poche · « **Reply #1 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:02:47 AM »

As a starting point you could point out that the Catholic church is the only institution of any kind to have been around since the time of the Roman Empire.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #2 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:04:20 AM »

If you're talking about strictly natural proofs, how about the longevity of the Church? It is the oldest organization in the world, began with 12 men who succesfully spread it to every corner of the world, endured persecutions, heresies, bad leaders, wars, etc.?

To say the Church isn't divinely guided in the face of everything it's endured is ignorant.

Cathedra · « **Reply #3 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:16:39 AM »

Quote from: poche

As a starting point you could point out that the Catholic church is the only institution of any kind to have been around since the time of the Roman Empire.

Quote from: Mithrandylan

If you're talking about strictly natural proofs, how about the longevity of the Church? It is the oldest organization in the world, began with 12 men who succesfully spread it to every corner of the world, endured persecutions, heresies, bad leaders, wars, etc.?

To say the Church isn't divinely guided in the face of everything it's endured is ignorant.

I had thought about that, and i believe i must have read it somewhere, but they will probably just shrug it off and say "so what? Hasn't Buddhism and other religions been around even longer than the Church?"

I know the truth is that actually the Catholic is the first religion of all because it's a continuation of the Covenants God has made since Adam and Eve, but that will go back to the Bible. "Oh that's just a book and no one can verify that was true and no one today was a live then" etc.

Actually it must be a good argument of course but then you would really have to know just what the Church went through and really know about the history to really say that it is a miracle that it is here and it rose as it did.

poche · « **Reply #4 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:20:17 AM »

Quote from: Cathedra

Quote from: poche
As a starting point you could point out that the Catholic church is the only institution of any kind to have been around since the time of the Roman Empire.

Quote from: Mithrandylan
If you're talking about strictly natural proofs, how about the longevity of the Church? It is the oldest organization in the world, began with 12 men who succesfully spread it to every corner of the world, endured persecutions, heresies, bad leaders, wars, etc.?

To say the Church isn't divinely guided in the face of everything it's endured is ignorant.

I had thought about that, and i believe i must have read it somewhere, but they will probably just shrug it off and say "so what? Hasn't Buddhism and other religions been around even longer than the Church?"

I know the truth is that actually the Catholic is the first religion of all because it's a continuation of the Covenants God has made since Adam and Eve, but that will go back to the Bible. "Oh that's just a book and no one can verify that was true and no one today was a live then" etc.

Actually it must be a good argument of course but then you would really have to know just what the Church went through and really know about the history to really say that it is a miracle that it is here and it rose as it did.

Buddhism as a philosophy may appear to have been around longer. But the individual institutions really haven't been around as long as you would think.

Mithrandylan · « **Reply #5 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:28:44 AM »

Quote from: Cathedra

Quote from: poche
As a starting point you could point out that the Catholic church is the only institution of any kind to have been around since the time of the Roman Empire.

Quote from: Mithrandylan
If you're talking about strictly natural proofs, how about the longevity of the Church? It is the oldest organization in the world, began with 12 men who succesfully spread it to every corner of the world, endured persecutions, heresies, bad leaders, wars, etc.?

To say the Church isn't divinely guided in the face of everything it's endured is ignorant.

I had thought about that, and i believe i must have read it somewhere, but they will probably just shrug it off and say "so what? Hasn't Buddhism and other religions been around even longer than the Church?"

I know the truth is that actually the Catholic is the first religion of all because it's a continuation of the Covenants God has made since Adam and Eve, but that will go back to the Bible. "Oh that's just a book and no one can verify that was true and no one today was a live then" etc.

Actually it must be a good argument of course but then you would really have to know just what the Church went through and really know about the history to really say that it is a miracle that it is here and it rose as it did.

People will say a lot of things. Nowadays most people don't want to be Catholic, and the natural arguments for our faith which worked for centuries don't have as much sway, because man has swallowed the psychedelic pill of liberalism.

Is there a particular reason you don't want to use scripture?

Croix de Fer · « **Reply #6 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:43:26 AM »

Most of them, in face of any evidence if it were provided, will continue to deny Christ and His Church. Lucifer absolutely knew the existence of God and His Truth, for the evidence was right in front of him, but he still denied God.

Also, keep in mind that "agnostic" and "atheist" is just a front label for many Jєωs' hatred for Christ. I'm not saying all agnostics and atheists are Jєωs, but many are... and they just dress themselves with that label to conceal their real source of hatred for Christ and His Truth.

Frances · « **Reply #7 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:49:55 AM »

God requires a blood Sacrifice for sin. Which institution lays claim to fulfilling God's requirement? The Catholic Church alone has the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. The Catholic Church alone has a LITERAL Sacrifice. The Catholic Church alone applies that Sacrifice to the individual soul by the Real Presence of Jesus Christ, Body, Blood, Soul, Divinity in the Holy Eucharist.
Of course, if a person does not accept that he is a sinner, or that sin exists, or that there is such a thing as Objective Truth, even the Holy Ghost can't help him.

Cathedra · « **Reply #8 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:57:41 AM »

Quote from: poche

Buddhism as a philosophy may appear to have been around longer. But the individual institutions really haven't been around as long as you would think.

Good point.

Quote from: Mithrandylan

People will say a lot of things. Nowadays most people don't want to be Catholic, and the natural arguments for our faith which worked for centuries don't have as much sway, because man has swallowed the psychedelic pill of liberalism.

Yeah. "People were stupid/ignorant/naive/superstitious."

I know that the real reason that atheists don't want to believe is because then they would have to be held accountable for what they do and answer to a God and that the prospect of going to Hell is there, that's the real reason, they don't want to be told they have to live a certain way and that they can't do certain things and whatever they want, because, instead, if the real god were one who would say to all mankind "Everyone can do whatever anyone wants and in the end everyone will be saved and will go to Heaven and be with Me no matter what! No one has to be afraid to give an account for anything they do so don't worry about anything and do what thou wilt!", then no one would have any problem to believe in such a god and no one would deny and resist him of course.

Quote from: Mithrandylan

Is there a particular reason you don't want to use scripture?

Well, i would still use the Bible anyways but i was thinking of using it later as even more evidence, and i just wonder if there is something else besides the Bible that could be used.

I see that there is of course a difference between those times when the Apostles were living and now, when they're gone.

I read 80-something pages of the book How the Catholic Church Built Western Civilization (i couldn't finish it because i had to return it) but i saw all the videos of it on youtube, and there is some very good info there, but i wonder, is all that is said there 100% true? Could you really go out and proclaim without fear all that this book says? Because im afraid to go out and say all that the book says, and then have some atheist tell me "Huh? What are you talking about? The Church starting the universities? The legal system coming from Canon Law?" and then have the atheist proceed to show evidence and history which disproves what the book says. Is that book truly irrefutable?

Stephen Francis · « **Reply #9 on:** July 10, 2013, 08:26:04 AM »

+JMJ+

Buddhism has been around for about 2500 years if you figure that Siddhartha Gautama lived about 500 years before Our Lord.

Buddhism, however, was itself an offshoot of the Vedantic philosophy which spawned what we now know as Hinduism.

Hinduism, so-called, is impossible to peg as one specific set of beliefs or practices. Likewise, Buddhism has fractured into many sects and groups which often conflict strongly with one another.

The proof that the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church is the pillar and ground of THE truth is simply that EVERY OTHER philosophy and religion (which were all man-made) has collapsed into sectarianism and conflicting denominations. The reason is that individual private interpretation of philosophy or 'scripture' (their writings, not the Church's) always leads to division, confusion and ultimately irrelevance to society and impotence to save or change anyone.

Divine Monarchy and the Sovereignty and absolute Kingship of Almighty God, and thus the recognition of sovereign authority invested in His Church and His ministers, is the safeguard of the soul. The King dictates His Will by His commands, His ministers are bound to obey and keep said commands UNALTERED, and they are sworn to transmit those commands in their entirety. The subjects of that King must submit to His Rule through His Church and His ministers and are guaranteed blessings in this life and promised the reward of the Beatific Vision of their King in Heaven for their obedience. Disobedience brings punishment, the possibility of banishment and the threat of eternal death and suffering.

No other religion, ESPECIALLY THOSE WHICH TRY TO USURP OR IMITATE Our Lord's Church, can possibly be valid before God because none of them GUARANTEE promises as a result of obedience to DEMANDS. The best they can offer is an intellectual threat, but none of these religions can pronounce judgment because the fractious nature of their beginnings and the continued devolution of their structures guarantee their ultimate irrelevance to the lives of their adherents.

Immaculate Heart of Mary, triumph soon!

Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, have mercy on us.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #10 on:** July 10, 2013, 12:54:54 PM »

Quote from: poche

As a starting point you could point out that the Catholic church is the only institution of any kind to have been around since the time of the Roman Empire.

And, to add to this, that the Catholic Church was in the world before the New Testament was. I'm loosely quoting Cardinal Manning.

Capt McQuigg · « **Reply #11 on:** July 10, 2013, 01:04:26 PM »

Cathedra,

First, you can't convince anyone of the truths of the Catholic Church. You can only present the facts and the examples of the lives of the saints. If you go around trying to convince people and trying to convert people, you will bump your head into a lot of walls and, if you seem to be successful, your head will swell and that's even worse than bumping your head into a wall.

Well then, what should you do? Right?

Pray. Pray every day morning, noon and night. Assist at Mass as often as you can on week days. Pray the rosary every single day. Do novenas.

You must go to confession regularly so doing an examination of conscience on a daily basis is a must. You must work on your own sanctification through prayer and Mass.

Then, include a rosary intention for those you wish to see the light.

Do novenas for them too.

Always present your side with a smile. If they disagree, use open ended terminology.

I truly think marriage is the primary means of adding more Catholic souls to our darkened and fallen world.

As for your atheist buddies, study their particular objections but do all the sanctifying practices first!

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #12 on:** July 10, 2013, 01:10:08 PM »

I'm not finding any of the proposed answers very convincing. Both Hinduism and Judaism have been around a lot longer than Catholicism, so age isn't the answer. While those religions may be fractured, with various factions claiming to be the true expression, what of Catholicism? Not taking into account Eastern Catholic Churches, let's just look at the Roman Catholic Church. Even the so-called Trads are fractured -- SSPX, SSPX Resistance, CMRI, SSPV, Independent non-sedevacantist, Independent sedevacantist, FSSP, diocesan SP, etc., etc., and then there is liberal NO, conservative NO, charismatic NO, middle of the road NO, etc., etc. Vatican II shattered the Faith like a broken mirror. No doubt there are valid shards, but it was a tragedy.

Cathedra · « **Reply #13 on:** July 10, 2013, 01:17:42 PM »

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus

I'm not finding any of the proposed answers very convincing. Both Hinduism and Judaism have been around a lot longer than Catholicism, so age isn't the answer. While those religions may be fractured, with various factions claiming to be the true expression, what of Catholicism? Not taking into account Eastern Catholic Churches, let's just look at the Roman Catholic Church. Even the so-called Trads are fractured -- SSPX, SSPX Resistance, CMRI, SSPV, Independent non-sedevacantist, Independent sedevacantist, FSSP, diocesan SP, etc., etc., and then there is liberal NO, conservative NO, charismatic NO, middle of the road NO, etc., etc. Vatican II shattered the Faith like a broken mirror. No doubt there are valid shards, but it was a tragedy.

That is why, only if you hold the sedevacantist position, can you truly defend the Faith in these days.

Because if you don't, even non-Catholics will pick up on the glaring inconsistencies, whether you are Novus Ordo or R&R.

MiserereMeiDeus · « **Reply #14 on:** July 10, 2013, 02:05:08 PM »

Quote from: Cathedra

Quote from: MiserereMeiDeus
I'm not finding any of the proposed answers very convincing. Both Hinduism and Judaism have been around a lot longer than Catholicism, so age isn't the answer. While those religions may be fractured, with various factions claiming to be the true expression, what of Catholicism? Not taking into account Eastern Catholic Churches, let's just look at the Roman Catholic Church. Even the so-called Trads are fractured -- SSPX, SSPX Resistance, CMRI, SSPV, Independent non-sedevacantist, Independent sedevacantist, FSSP, diocesan SP, etc., etc., and then there is liberal NO, conservative NO, charismatic NO, middle of the road NO, etc., etc. Vatican II shattered the Faith like a broken mirror. No doubt there are valid shards, but it was a tragedy.

That is why, only if you hold the sedevacantist position, can you truly defend the Faith in these days.

Because if you don't, even non-Catholics will pick up on the glaring inconsistencies, whether you are Novus Ordo or R&R.

Well, it's easier to defend the sv position from a polemical perspective, but that doesn't prove that it's the correct position.