The problem with “FactCheck.org” and similar projects

It’s a FACT that God exists. It’s a FACT that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and died for our sins. It’s a FACT that Jesus Christ established the Catholic Church and the Sacraments. These are not uncertain “beliefs”, opinions, fairy tales or wishful thinking. These are historical facts that I know to be true just as much as I know that Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon or Alexander the Great was educated by Aristotle or Cyrus the Great ended the Babylonian Exile.

The fact that some people choose to ignore the historical evidence for these events–and the Bible alone provides more historical evidence for many events than we have for other things secular historians take for granted, even ignoring the vast field of Biblical archaeology and the corroborations of the Bible in secular histories and extra-canonical religious works from the Biblical era–does not make them any less factual than they are.

Any organization, book, website or school which claims to teach fact without teaching these facts is promoting ignorance. They would balk at the idea of not teaching evolution as scientific fact, yet why do they not teach the Bible as historical fact?

Advertisements

5 responses to “The problem with “FactCheck.org” and similar projects

  1. I linked to this on my site http://www.rootofjesse2.wordpress.com. Well said!

  2. Actually, there is no proof that there is a god, or any number of gods (after all, not all religions apparently believe in the same one). Also, the bible itself is not “corroborated” in all of its facts. Any Jew or Muslim or Buddhist would take you to task for claiming that your good book is better than their good book.

    • There is plenty of proof; you just ignore it.
      The *logical* proof for monotheism is to be found in St. Augustine’s _De Civitate Dei_, and in a truncated form in C. S. Lewis’s _Mere Christianity_, and if you’ve never read either of them, you have no business saying there’s no proof of God.

      Why would the Jews object when their “holy book” is part of mine? I’m arguing for the truth of Judaism as much as Catholicism: it’s the same history.
      As for Buddhism, where does Buddhism have *a* “holy book*? Buddha was an historical figure with a moral teaching, but there is no historical evidence of a deity revealing Himself to the Buddhists and performing public miracles to prove that revelation.

      As for Islam, history shows us that Mohammed basically made up everything in the Koran.

      You’re obviously ignorant of history.

    • Put another way, you’re missing my point: I DON’T CARE.
      I’m sick of being told I have to care about the feelings of Jews or Muslims or Buddhists or atheists. You’re all *wrong*. Insisting on believing in atheism or in a false religion is like a person insisting on believing in a flat earth, the sun revolving around the earth, moon landing hoax, etc. The methods used to defend atheism are the same methods used to defend those equally unscientific positions: you just deny the evidence.

      Like I said, I can’t reject the Bible without rejecting all ancient history. The same methods by which we accept the truth of the Bible are the same methods used to accept all historical texts–and to answer your other objection, yes there are superficial inconsistencies, but that applies to *ALL* historical documents. Give me five modern biographies of the same modern person, and I’ll show you five inconsistencies between those biographies.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s