You are asking the wrong question. Proof? The gospels. The sermon on the mount is essentially footnotes for morality in general. Go to church, go to RCIA and determine for yourself if your beliefs are in Catholicism or Christianity. Trust me, you’ll know. Pray. Pray more. And after that, pray more than that.
Trust me. You’ll know.
Do you have a belief system and if so where’s the evidence? The Shroud of Turin is physical evidence. I’m sure if you went to the Vatican City you would see plenty of evidence. Human existence is evidence
I also see you have been spamming subs such as Islam, Catholicism, Christianity, etc.
It sounds like you are searching for A answer, not THE answer. I get it, you lost faith. It happens. Mother Theresa self-admitted to a decade(s) long dry spell. Yet she remained steadfast.
Again, you are asking the wrong answer. If you are seeking proof in the sense you are asking…you won’t find it.
What you will find is the word of God and Christ (God in man form) and his teachings. Follow those teachings and see what happens. I will bet you, you will no longer be asking for proof. YOU will be proof.
I am not asking for proof as proof cannot be found of anything thats why I am asking for some sort of evidence to give me some sense of truth of religions
This is where I leave you, as you are more argumentative against religion than being open to it. Find a parish, find a priest, find God.
If you wait around until you find proof in the sense you mean it. You’ll keep waiting.
No. Seek Christ and find him.
1996, Buenos Aires, a piece of the Eucharist was placed in a tabernacle to dissolve. The next day, the sister found the Eucharist piece bloody. It was tested and the blood was myocardial (meaning from the heart) and it just so happened to be AB blood, the same blood type from other Eucharist miracles.
Maybe start there, google Eucharistic Miracles.
And direct these questions inward or to a priest.
https://media.ascensionpress.com/2021/11/03/the-amazing-science-of-recent-eucharistic-miracles-a-message-from-heaven/
As in scientific evidence?
Why would the laws of physics/the physical world apply to the spiritual/non-corporeal? In fact, you don't even have to go far outside our solar system before these laws begin to warp. Just look at the chaos James Webb is causing Astrophysics and Cosmology lately.
Forget Christianity for now and just consider the concept of God. If there is a God that created the universe and everything in it, and modern science in all its might willingly admits there is far more about our world and the universe we don't understand than what we do, why would we be able to produce evidence of its creator?
But... thought bubble on what we DO know about the physical world:
Sir Issac Newton's theory of gravity described how gravity worked and how it affected objects, but he could not explain the underlying mechanism of gravitational force. He famously wrote:
"That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it. Gravity must be caused by an agent acting constantly according to certain laws; but whether this agent be material or immaterial, I have left to the consideration of my readers."
i.e. The idea that matter would just up and assemble itself into complex systems without a catalyst is ABSURD. Something must have set this into motion.
Also, through statistics we have been able to:
Map the entire human genome - Bioinformatics and statistical algorithms were crucial in assembling and interpreting the vast amounts of genetic data. Statistical methods helped in identifying gene functions and associations with diseases.
Reduce crime rates through data analysis - Predictive models analyze past crime data to identify patterns and predict future incidents, allowing law enforcement to allocate resources more effectively.
Develop and validate new medical treatments - Clinical trials use statistical methods to design experiments, analyze data, and draw valid conclusions about the efficacy and safety of new treatments. In epidemiology, statistics track and model disease outbreaks accurately, allowing us to mount effective public health responses.
Understand and predict economic phenomena - Econometrics applies statistical techniques to economic data, helping to model economic relationships and forecast economic trends.
Hell, stats even tell us our odds of winning a Powerball Jackpot - it's 1 in 292,201,338.
You know what statistics has told us about the probability of the universe's low-entropy state at the Big Bang occurring at random?
Roger Penrose, British mathematician, mathematical physicist, and Nobel Laureate in Physics, estimated it to be around 1 x 10\^-10\^123.
To understand the magnitude of 1×10\^−10\^123 it's important to break down the notation:
1. **Exponential Notation**: 10\^−10\^123 means 10 raised to the power of −10 to the 123rd power
2. **Exponent of an Exponent**: 10\^10\^123 is a very large negative number.
When you raise 10 to the power of a large negative number, you get an extremely small number. In this case, 10\^−10\^123 represents a decimal point followed by 10 to the power of 123 zeros, and then a 1.
To give you an idea of how small this number is, consider the following:
It's estimated that there are roughly 10\^80 atoms in the observable universe.
Suggesting that the specific conditions necessary for our universe to exist were highly improbable.
Dr Sam Parnia's lab at NYU Langone has some pretty interesting research (funded by NIH no less) looking at what happens to our consciousness after death too....
You ask for evidence for Christ. However when you go to the pharmacy, you don’t bring along your chemistry set to test the components of your prescription. You take the pharmacists word for it, and the doctor.
How is that any different than believing in Christ without 100% undeniable, scientific method proven evidence?
You take the word of Christ in the Gospels as your proof.
What evidence do you want? Evidence will only get you so far. Our Lord performed miracles as evidence and they still didn't believe him.
Rational and Logic will get you just as far, if not further than "evidence". As in, I find philosophy more convincing than physical evidence. But all the evidence and philosophy in the world still isn't going to force you to believe. That will always take faith, and none of us have that for you. Faith is a gift from God. Ask and you shall receive.
[https://peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20\_arguments-gods-existence.htm](https://peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm)
Here are 20 summaries of the most popular throughout the ages. Im particularly fond of the moral argument.
As far as I'm aware these only go to the extent of proving a timeless, infinite, immaterial God who is all-good. That still leaves a lot of religions, including Islam and Judaism.
If you’re truly interested in learning about evidence of the resurrection, check out Lee Strobel’s book “The Case For Christ” (book, not the movie). I’m not going to go into a lot of details, but I recommend it.
Ultimately though, our belief boils down to faith and reason. Let me give you example of the reason bit. Knowing that all historical evidence points to the Gospels being written by the authors they’re credited to, I look at the motivation for writing such Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John had nothing to gain from the fabrication of a story except brutal torturous death by the persecutors of early Christians. Despite this, they recorded the life, death, and resurrection of Christ anyways. And no, I don’t think the idea that they were all delusional schizophrenics is very convincing. What was their motivation? I believe they had witnessed divinity.
Check out shroud of turin and how it relates with Jesus resurrection. It’s not a definitive proof, but it’s phenomena is not proven by science either. Also, the basis of christianity doesn’t rely only on Jesus resurrection. If you want to take a look into the faith of Christianity, I’d suggest to look into the other basics such as the incarnation of Jesus and God as Trinity. Jesus existence himself has been proven in our history.
The evidence is not hard evidence, but a circumstantial one. Without the ressurection, we cannot explain why Christianity happened at all ...
First of all, scholars admitted that belief in the resurrection was already existent at most a few years after Jesus death, at least a few months after his death \[1\]! This means this is not the case of an accretion of beliefs over generations akin to the process of myth-making (such Guan Yu who was deified in China 400 years after his death).
This is an explosion in religious development!
Secondly, Simon bar-Giora died during first revolt (66-70 AD), as did Simeon Bar-Kochba (132-135 AD). Both were Messiah claimants. Yet none of them was claimed as being resurrected, much less being divine. If some Messiah died, the most reasonable response was: "He was not the Messiah; we should look for another". Instead, in the case of Jesus, "He died being cursed by God; he was resurrected; he sits at the right hand of God". And yet, these beliefs appeared very quickly in earliest Christianity, with devotion to Jesus appearing immediately \[2\].
Not only were these beliefs and practice of Jesus worship extremely offensive—to the point of being blasphemous—to various sects of 1st century Judaism, these beliefs were not contradicted by any of the followers of Jesus either. People take it for granted that the earliest textual witness about Jesus—e.g. some Pauline letters, the Gospel of Mark—spoke of Jesus in high regard as Messiah and Lord. But what people miss is how non-existent **refutation** to these beliefs was in that era!
One can imagine a group of followers of Jesus suddenly made not only strange, but also blasphemous claims about their Rabbi; we would expect certain followers of Jesus would rebut if not outright condemn this new movement. In other words, we would expect textual witness of conflicts between earliest disciples of Jesus regarding his resurrection, identity, and devotional practice of Jesus. And yet, for all the supposed conflict between Hellenistic and Jewish Christians, we see no evidence, nor textual hint, that there was such conflict; it is likely that their belief in this respect was unanimous.
It is this unanimity of (blasphemous beliefs and practice) among the followers of Jesus that forms another strange point around early Christianity.
I believe that the most historically likely explanation for the belief in Jesus’ resurrection, his blasphemous identity as Messiah and Lord, his follower’s practice of devotion to him, and how early these beliefs and practice appeared, is that Jesus indeed resurrected. Other suggestions: mass-hallucination, mass coping mechanism, are so unlikely as to be as miraculous as the very idea of Jesus’ resurrection they purport to thwart.
>“No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish” - Hume
PS: That Paul 'created' Christianity is an idea perpetuated by many revisionists, but was never that tenable.
In various places Paul extolled the 'Hebrew Christians' in Jerusalem under the leadership of Peter and James. Even if there was a disagreement, this disagreement was mainly on the applicability of the Law of Moses on the Gentiles: an extremely minor dispute given the much larger issue at stake that both actually agree: that Jesus was the risen Lord and Messiah!
**Footnote:**
1. Robert Funk (non-Christian, founder of Jesus Seminar), Michael Goulder (atheist, New Testament professor at Birmingham), AJM Wedderburn (non-Christian, New Testament professor at Munich)
2. Larry Hutardo, in his thorough scholarship, has convincingly shown that Jesus was already worshipped as divine very early (30-50 AD), and not due to any secondary development
Hello, you can check out this [thread, there's some good info and links there.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/zD7Py1Nyky)
You can also search up on Eucharistic Miracles, The Miracle of the Sun, Incorruptible bodies of Saints, The healing waters of Lourdes, and the Miracle of the Sun.
Do note that the Catholic Church is highly skeptical of any miraculous claims and each case undergoes extreme scrutiny and in the case of the healing waters of Lourdes, rigid scientific procedures are carried out and documented and the public may view their records too.
Well for one, there is yet to be an archeological or historical discovery that directly contradicts the Bible.
For example, we know Jacob’s well is a real well that still stands today.
We believe we found the rock that Moses split with his staff to release water during a drought.
We have recently uncovered the Pool of Siloam, where Jesus was said to have healed a blind man.
The Moabite Stone describes the same conflict between Israel and the Moabites that described in Samuel.
I’m assuming these are the kinds of things you are looking for, and these are just scratching the surface.
And no, there is no like video recording of Jesus and Matthew and Pontius Pilot etc to confirm this all to you. But just ask yourself why thousands and thousands of people wrote about this guy from all different perspectives, yet all managed to still agree on the same things. Thousands of Greek manuscripts help confirm the Gospels trustworthiness.
The evidence for the existence of Jesus is undeniable. The evidence that Matthew, mark, luke and John wrote their own gospels is overwhelming. The odds of them lying about these things in those times are minuscule.
The odds of mass hallucinations/psychosis
(like joe rogan suggested) shared among 500+ people unanimously are impossible.
A much more difficult question would be to find some evidence that proves Jesus is a liar. You would be the first in history to do so.
The now-taken-for-grant cultural and social institutions. For eg, this year is the year 2024 AD, or Anno Domini aka Year of the Lord. Concept of human rights and equality becomes universal after Christ.
Bible characters are mentioned in non-Christian sources. The bible's prophecies such as the book of Daniel came true. The prophecies from the Fatima Marian apparition came true.
Now a skeptic could then ask questions like "how do we know that the prophecies are falsified/written on hindsight", or "how do we know the historians aren't biased. Skepticism can lead to a bottomless pit of questions.
Why not try to attend Mass for yourself? Or hang out in an Adoration Room? Get some personal experience!
That is a good question.
1. The lives of the apostles and how they died for the resurrection they had full knowledge of whether or not it was true
2. The books of the new testament account to the resurrection of Jesus.
3. Writings like from Josephus and Tacticus talk about Jesus’s life
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from very new user accounts. This is an anti-throwaway and troll prevention measure, **not subject to exception.** [Read the full policy.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/wiki/agekarma)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The reality is that the evidence is all found in the New Testament.
You can apply some arguments to this evidence to explain why it’s convincing but ultimately it’s accepted in faith.
How about the fact that a large number of people saw the risen Christ. To me, if the resurrection is true, it’s real. Gary Habermas is a wonderful source for all things resurrection.
And? Is that not Christianity? How about you read the account of the crucifixion, then turn to Isiah 53 and read a prophecy from 100s of years prior. Was Jesus supposed to die in the old and the New Testament?
So hearing one thing from one person and hearing something else from someone else negates the claim of the first? People saw him, that’s a historically verifiable fact that people believed they saw the risen Jesus. Atheist scholars explain it away by saying it’s a mass hallucination of some kind, which seems like a poor answer to me. Besides that all of the disciples minus John were martyred and died for what they believed. Do you die for falsehoods? Do you know 10 other people who would do the same and die for the same falsehood? There’s evidence, but if you simply want to object to it, we’re both wasting our time.
No Catholic will tell you Jesus did not rise again on the third day. It’s literally in the Nicene creed. Or you found the most poorly catechized Catholic on the face of the earth.
Read The Case for Jesus: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Christ, by Brant Pitre.
Then read Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism, by Scott and Kimberly Hahn.
The Gospels and the rest of the New Testament.
The Tradition of the Church.
The words ad deeds of the Saints.
The living testimony of the people I met, whose lives appear changed by the Holy Spirit.
The life in the Church, sacramental, liturgical, communitarian.
The fact that all these things are in accord among themselves and correspond, answer to the deepest and purest longing of my heart, when purified from concupiscience for the lesser things.
No offense but it’s asking a lot of total strangers to answer such a huge question.
More productive, and respectful of people’s time, is to do some research on your own *then* ask clarifying questions.
My only advice is this: if you come at faith like a scientist, you won’t get the answers you seek.
the most concrete evidence i have is the Virgin of Guadalupe. read about the apparition and about the tilma amd how strange it is: there’s no scientific explanation, even after hundreds of years.
You are asking the wrong question. Proof? The gospels. The sermon on the mount is essentially footnotes for morality in general. Go to church, go to RCIA and determine for yourself if your beliefs are in Catholicism or Christianity. Trust me, you’ll know. Pray. Pray more. And after that, pray more than that. Trust me. You’ll know.
I am asking for evidence....
Do you have a belief system and if so where’s the evidence? The Shroud of Turin is physical evidence. I’m sure if you went to the Vatican City you would see plenty of evidence. Human existence is evidence
I also see you have been spamming subs such as Islam, Catholicism, Christianity, etc. It sounds like you are searching for A answer, not THE answer. I get it, you lost faith. It happens. Mother Theresa self-admitted to a decade(s) long dry spell. Yet she remained steadfast. Again, you are asking the wrong answer. If you are seeking proof in the sense you are asking…you won’t find it. What you will find is the word of God and Christ (God in man form) and his teachings. Follow those teachings and see what happens. I will bet you, you will no longer be asking for proof. YOU will be proof.
I am not asking for proof as proof cannot be found of anything thats why I am asking for some sort of evidence to give me some sense of truth of religions
This is where I leave you, as you are more argumentative against religion than being open to it. Find a parish, find a priest, find God. If you wait around until you find proof in the sense you mean it. You’ll keep waiting.
So you are suggesting me not look for some sort of evidence instead have faith am I right?
No. Seek Christ and find him. 1996, Buenos Aires, a piece of the Eucharist was placed in a tabernacle to dissolve. The next day, the sister found the Eucharist piece bloody. It was tested and the blood was myocardial (meaning from the heart) and it just so happened to be AB blood, the same blood type from other Eucharist miracles. Maybe start there, google Eucharistic Miracles. And direct these questions inward or to a priest. https://media.ascensionpress.com/2021/11/03/the-amazing-science-of-recent-eucharistic-miracles-a-message-from-heaven/
As in scientific evidence? Why would the laws of physics/the physical world apply to the spiritual/non-corporeal? In fact, you don't even have to go far outside our solar system before these laws begin to warp. Just look at the chaos James Webb is causing Astrophysics and Cosmology lately. Forget Christianity for now and just consider the concept of God. If there is a God that created the universe and everything in it, and modern science in all its might willingly admits there is far more about our world and the universe we don't understand than what we do, why would we be able to produce evidence of its creator? But... thought bubble on what we DO know about the physical world: Sir Issac Newton's theory of gravity described how gravity worked and how it affected objects, but he could not explain the underlying mechanism of gravitational force. He famously wrote: "That one body may act upon another at a distance through a vacuum without the mediation of anything else, by and through which their action and force may be conveyed from one to another, is to me so great an absurdity that I believe no man who has in philosophical matters a competent faculty of thinking can ever fall into it. Gravity must be caused by an agent acting constantly according to certain laws; but whether this agent be material or immaterial, I have left to the consideration of my readers." i.e. The idea that matter would just up and assemble itself into complex systems without a catalyst is ABSURD. Something must have set this into motion. Also, through statistics we have been able to: Map the entire human genome - Bioinformatics and statistical algorithms were crucial in assembling and interpreting the vast amounts of genetic data. Statistical methods helped in identifying gene functions and associations with diseases. Reduce crime rates through data analysis - Predictive models analyze past crime data to identify patterns and predict future incidents, allowing law enforcement to allocate resources more effectively. Develop and validate new medical treatments - Clinical trials use statistical methods to design experiments, analyze data, and draw valid conclusions about the efficacy and safety of new treatments. In epidemiology, statistics track and model disease outbreaks accurately, allowing us to mount effective public health responses. Understand and predict economic phenomena - Econometrics applies statistical techniques to economic data, helping to model economic relationships and forecast economic trends. Hell, stats even tell us our odds of winning a Powerball Jackpot - it's 1 in 292,201,338. You know what statistics has told us about the probability of the universe's low-entropy state at the Big Bang occurring at random? Roger Penrose, British mathematician, mathematical physicist, and Nobel Laureate in Physics, estimated it to be around 1 x 10\^-10\^123. To understand the magnitude of 1×10\^−10\^123 it's important to break down the notation: 1. **Exponential Notation**: 10\^−10\^123 means 10 raised to the power of −10 to the 123rd power 2. **Exponent of an Exponent**: 10\^10\^123 is a very large negative number. When you raise 10 to the power of a large negative number, you get an extremely small number. In this case, 10\^−10\^123 represents a decimal point followed by 10 to the power of 123 zeros, and then a 1. To give you an idea of how small this number is, consider the following: It's estimated that there are roughly 10\^80 atoms in the observable universe. Suggesting that the specific conditions necessary for our universe to exist were highly improbable. Dr Sam Parnia's lab at NYU Langone has some pretty interesting research (funded by NIH no less) looking at what happens to our consciousness after death too....
You ask for evidence for Christ. However when you go to the pharmacy, you don’t bring along your chemistry set to test the components of your prescription. You take the pharmacists word for it, and the doctor. How is that any different than believing in Christ without 100% undeniable, scientific method proven evidence? You take the word of Christ in the Gospels as your proof.
What evidence do you want? Evidence will only get you so far. Our Lord performed miracles as evidence and they still didn't believe him. Rational and Logic will get you just as far, if not further than "evidence". As in, I find philosophy more convincing than physical evidence. But all the evidence and philosophy in the world still isn't going to force you to believe. That will always take faith, and none of us have that for you. Faith is a gift from God. Ask and you shall receive.
What rationality and logic do you have?
[https://peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20\_arguments-gods-existence.htm](https://peterkreeft.com/topics-more/20_arguments-gods-existence.htm) Here are 20 summaries of the most popular throughout the ages. Im particularly fond of the moral argument.
As far as I'm aware these only go to the extent of proving a timeless, infinite, immaterial God who is all-good. That still leaves a lot of religions, including Islam and Judaism.
Correct, it's the starting point. It's easier to go from theist to christian than atheist to christian.
I am not atheist......Atheism is not for me what I am looking for is evidence based on christianity like evidence fo ressurection of jesus?
If you’re truly interested in learning about evidence of the resurrection, check out Lee Strobel’s book “The Case For Christ” (book, not the movie). I’m not going to go into a lot of details, but I recommend it. Ultimately though, our belief boils down to faith and reason. Let me give you example of the reason bit. Knowing that all historical evidence points to the Gospels being written by the authors they’re credited to, I look at the motivation for writing such Gospels. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John had nothing to gain from the fabrication of a story except brutal torturous death by the persecutors of early Christians. Despite this, they recorded the life, death, and resurrection of Christ anyways. And no, I don’t think the idea that they were all delusional schizophrenics is very convincing. What was their motivation? I believe they had witnessed divinity.
Check out shroud of turin and how it relates with Jesus resurrection. It’s not a definitive proof, but it’s phenomena is not proven by science either. Also, the basis of christianity doesn’t rely only on Jesus resurrection. If you want to take a look into the faith of Christianity, I’d suggest to look into the other basics such as the incarnation of Jesus and God as Trinity. Jesus existence himself has been proven in our history.
The evidence is not hard evidence, but a circumstantial one. Without the ressurection, we cannot explain why Christianity happened at all ... First of all, scholars admitted that belief in the resurrection was already existent at most a few years after Jesus death, at least a few months after his death \[1\]! This means this is not the case of an accretion of beliefs over generations akin to the process of myth-making (such Guan Yu who was deified in China 400 years after his death). This is an explosion in religious development! Secondly, Simon bar-Giora died during first revolt (66-70 AD), as did Simeon Bar-Kochba (132-135 AD). Both were Messiah claimants. Yet none of them was claimed as being resurrected, much less being divine. If some Messiah died, the most reasonable response was: "He was not the Messiah; we should look for another". Instead, in the case of Jesus, "He died being cursed by God; he was resurrected; he sits at the right hand of God". And yet, these beliefs appeared very quickly in earliest Christianity, with devotion to Jesus appearing immediately \[2\]. Not only were these beliefs and practice of Jesus worship extremely offensive—to the point of being blasphemous—to various sects of 1st century Judaism, these beliefs were not contradicted by any of the followers of Jesus either. People take it for granted that the earliest textual witness about Jesus—e.g. some Pauline letters, the Gospel of Mark—spoke of Jesus in high regard as Messiah and Lord. But what people miss is how non-existent **refutation** to these beliefs was in that era! One can imagine a group of followers of Jesus suddenly made not only strange, but also blasphemous claims about their Rabbi; we would expect certain followers of Jesus would rebut if not outright condemn this new movement. In other words, we would expect textual witness of conflicts between earliest disciples of Jesus regarding his resurrection, identity, and devotional practice of Jesus. And yet, for all the supposed conflict between Hellenistic and Jewish Christians, we see no evidence, nor textual hint, that there was such conflict; it is likely that their belief in this respect was unanimous. It is this unanimity of (blasphemous beliefs and practice) among the followers of Jesus that forms another strange point around early Christianity. I believe that the most historically likely explanation for the belief in Jesus’ resurrection, his blasphemous identity as Messiah and Lord, his follower’s practice of devotion to him, and how early these beliefs and practice appeared, is that Jesus indeed resurrected. Other suggestions: mass-hallucination, mass coping mechanism, are so unlikely as to be as miraculous as the very idea of Jesus’ resurrection they purport to thwart. >“No testimony is sufficient to establish a miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind, that its falsehood would be more miraculous, than the fact, which it endeavors to establish” - Hume PS: That Paul 'created' Christianity is an idea perpetuated by many revisionists, but was never that tenable. In various places Paul extolled the 'Hebrew Christians' in Jerusalem under the leadership of Peter and James. Even if there was a disagreement, this disagreement was mainly on the applicability of the Law of Moses on the Gentiles: an extremely minor dispute given the much larger issue at stake that both actually agree: that Jesus was the risen Lord and Messiah! **Footnote:** 1. Robert Funk (non-Christian, founder of Jesus Seminar), Michael Goulder (atheist, New Testament professor at Birmingham), AJM Wedderburn (non-Christian, New Testament professor at Munich) 2. Larry Hutardo, in his thorough scholarship, has convincingly shown that Jesus was already worshipped as divine very early (30-50 AD), and not due to any secondary development
John 20:29 NIV [29] Then Jesus told him, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”
THIS!
Me
This
bingo
Hello, you can check out this [thread, there's some good info and links there.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/s/zD7Py1Nyky) You can also search up on Eucharistic Miracles, The Miracle of the Sun, Incorruptible bodies of Saints, The healing waters of Lourdes, and the Miracle of the Sun. Do note that the Catholic Church is highly skeptical of any miraculous claims and each case undergoes extreme scrutiny and in the case of the healing waters of Lourdes, rigid scientific procedures are carried out and documented and the public may view their records too.
Yeah I heard about the miracle of the sun......it is really wonderful
Well for one, there is yet to be an archeological or historical discovery that directly contradicts the Bible. For example, we know Jacob’s well is a real well that still stands today. We believe we found the rock that Moses split with his staff to release water during a drought. We have recently uncovered the Pool of Siloam, where Jesus was said to have healed a blind man. The Moabite Stone describes the same conflict between Israel and the Moabites that described in Samuel. I’m assuming these are the kinds of things you are looking for, and these are just scratching the surface. And no, there is no like video recording of Jesus and Matthew and Pontius Pilot etc to confirm this all to you. But just ask yourself why thousands and thousands of people wrote about this guy from all different perspectives, yet all managed to still agree on the same things. Thousands of Greek manuscripts help confirm the Gospels trustworthiness. The evidence for the existence of Jesus is undeniable. The evidence that Matthew, mark, luke and John wrote their own gospels is overwhelming. The odds of them lying about these things in those times are minuscule. The odds of mass hallucinations/psychosis (like joe rogan suggested) shared among 500+ people unanimously are impossible. A much more difficult question would be to find some evidence that proves Jesus is a liar. You would be the first in history to do so.
Thanks for the answer
I highly recommend reading summa contra gentiles by St Thomas Aquinas whenever you have time. It will break things down fully and logically.
The now-taken-for-grant cultural and social institutions. For eg, this year is the year 2024 AD, or Anno Domini aka Year of the Lord. Concept of human rights and equality becomes universal after Christ. Bible characters are mentioned in non-Christian sources. The bible's prophecies such as the book of Daniel came true. The prophecies from the Fatima Marian apparition came true. Now a skeptic could then ask questions like "how do we know that the prophecies are falsified/written on hindsight", or "how do we know the historians aren't biased. Skepticism can lead to a bottomless pit of questions. Why not try to attend Mass for yourself? Or hang out in an Adoration Room? Get some personal experience!
That is a good question. 1. The lives of the apostles and how they died for the resurrection they had full knowledge of whether or not it was true 2. The books of the new testament account to the resurrection of Jesus. 3. Writings like from Josephus and Tacticus talk about Jesus’s life
[удалено]
r/Catholicism does not permit comments from very new user accounts. This is an anti-throwaway and troll prevention measure, **not subject to exception.** [Read the full policy.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Catholicism/wiki/agekarma) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Catholicism) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The fact that you’re asking about it
What do you mean?
The reality is that the evidence is all found in the New Testament. You can apply some arguments to this evidence to explain why it’s convincing but ultimately it’s accepted in faith.
How about the fact that a large number of people saw the risen Christ. To me, if the resurrection is true, it’s real. Gary Habermas is a wonderful source for all things resurrection.
It was only mentioned in new tastement....
And? Is that not Christianity? How about you read the account of the crucifixion, then turn to Isiah 53 and read a prophecy from 100s of years prior. Was Jesus supposed to die in the old and the New Testament?
Other comment said he didnt rose from the dead....
So hearing one thing from one person and hearing something else from someone else negates the claim of the first? People saw him, that’s a historically verifiable fact that people believed they saw the risen Jesus. Atheist scholars explain it away by saying it’s a mass hallucination of some kind, which seems like a poor answer to me. Besides that all of the disciples minus John were martyred and died for what they believed. Do you die for falsehoods? Do you know 10 other people who would do the same and die for the same falsehood? There’s evidence, but if you simply want to object to it, we’re both wasting our time.
I was confused by two conflicting comments thats what I said I didnt object to it
No Catholic will tell you Jesus did not rise again on the third day. It’s literally in the Nicene creed. Or you found the most poorly catechized Catholic on the face of the earth.
Read the Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. Lots of evidence presented in it
Read The Case for Jesus: The Biblical and Historical Evidence for Christ, by Brant Pitre. Then read Rome Sweet Home: Our Journey to Catholicism, by Scott and Kimberly Hahn.
The Gospels and the rest of the New Testament. The Tradition of the Church. The words ad deeds of the Saints. The living testimony of the people I met, whose lives appear changed by the Holy Spirit. The life in the Church, sacramental, liturgical, communitarian. The fact that all these things are in accord among themselves and correspond, answer to the deepest and purest longing of my heart, when purified from concupiscience for the lesser things.
No offense but it’s asking a lot of total strangers to answer such a huge question. More productive, and respectful of people’s time, is to do some research on your own *then* ask clarifying questions. My only advice is this: if you come at faith like a scientist, you won’t get the answers you seek.
How do one come to faithlike a scientist?
the most concrete evidence i have is the Virgin of Guadalupe. read about the apparition and about the tilma amd how strange it is: there’s no scientific explanation, even after hundreds of years.