Ask a Catholic

[Randy Carson]

Seriously, what kind of proof would you find convincing, Jorm? Are you open to logical proofs?

I find logical proofs generally unpersuasive.  Even when well-constructed, they lack the capacity to move the unconvinced.  And I think that's not without good reason.  I think one should be skeptical of logical proofs like the ontological or cosmological proofs.  Too many grand principles are invoked with so little real world support.  Would you find a logical proof of the imperfection of God persuasive?  Probably not.  That's just the nature of the beast.

Someone quoted the tale of the suffering servant from...  Isaiah (?) recently.  I must confess I was a bit shaken as it seemed a very unimpeachable example of prophesy.  Then I read some other things that claim Isaiah was referring to Israel herself in the passage and some of the glamour faded.  I should probably read the whole book to fairly judge it, but I won't.  But I'm more moved by unexplainables in the bible than I am by any logical proof, or for that matter, the bulk of apologetics concerned with the historical reliability of the New Testament.  Such arguments tend to dent easily, and lack the requisite final punch which something like proof of the resurrection would provide.

So, in a nutshell, I'm approachable, but I've started to tire of the slick word game apologetics which fill many of these debates.

If I became convinced by prophecy, I would be tempted.  But I just left Hinduism, so I'm not up for converting to anything anytime soon.

jorm-

One important thing to consider: Israel was a type of Christ. Therefore, the prophet Isaiah WAS speaking of Israel (which he was conscious of) and of Jesus (whom he knew nothing about) simultaneously.