Catholic Answers Focus, the world's premier podcast on Catholic apologetics, helps you explain and defend the Catholic Faith. If you want to take a deep dive into the reasons behind Church teaching, Catholic Answers Focus is for you.
Manage episode 289604114 series 1336455
Av Catholic Answers oppdaget av Player FM og vårt samfunn — opphavsrett er eid av utgiveren, ikke Plaer FM, og lyd streames direkte fra deres servere. Trykk på Abonner knappen for å spore oppdateringer i Player FM, eller lim inn feed URLen til andre podcast apper.
Jimmy takes weird and wacky questions, answering from a Catholic perspective. Questions Covered: 03:20 – How would someone participate in the Resurrection at the Second Coming if they were to have fallen into a black hole or gone near enough to one that time stopped for them, relative to everyone else? It has been my impression that the Resurrection is supposed to happen for everyone simultaneously (maybe I am wrong), but how can this be given that time is relative? 11:24 – What would have happened if Adam and Eve had children before they fell? 14:25 – In the season finale of a popular TV show, a philosophical paradox known as “The Ship of Theseus” was alluded to. Having never heard of this, I did a web search. From what I can gather, it goes something like this: If you take the ship of Theseus and you begin replacing its parts, piece by piece, wooden board by wooden board, by the time you’ve replaced the entire ship, is it still the same ship? Is there a particular way the well-formed Catholic would approach this question with our understanding of form, nature, and the soul? I understand that our physical bodies undergo a similar, ongoing process. Shedding and recycling out old, dead cells and replacing them with new and better cells, yet I’m still me. 20:10 – I’ve been pondering a question and I suspect only you are equipped to answer in a way I can understand. Recently, on an episode, you explained Olbers’ paradox. Since I first read about this idea several years ago in one of Stephen Hawking’s books, I cannot help but think that it is in error. Mr. Akin, please tell me where I’ve gone wrong. It would seem to me that if the universe was of infinite size, and had no beginning, and the concentration of light sources throughout the universe is the same as we observe in our visible universe, then the night sky would look the same or very similar to what we see now. This would be due to the fact that, as more and more stars exist, further and further away from us, the light from those distant stars is increasingly dim. Ultimately, the light reaching us from those stars becomes infinitesimally small and imperceivable to the human eye. The rate of light reaching us on a nightly basis would be only marginally changed from what we see now, as distant stars could have rates of light sent to the earth at 1 photon/year, decade, century, etc. I have trouble believing that I’m right about this and that you, Steven Hawking, and Heinrich Olbers are wrong about this. I also don’t believe we live in an infinite physical universe with no beginning, I just don’t see how Olbers’ paradox lends any support to that belief. 29:04 – Not being an expert on Thomas Aquinas this one caught me off guard. I was asked if Thomas views God as being “outside of time” and therefore if there is time in heaven. I wasn’t quite sure where to find the answer, but the question is basically if the conclusion of Thomas’ belief about motion, meant that heaven would be an eternal moment, so I guess everyone would be sitting around in front of God frozen like statues. Is this anywhere close to what can reasonably be understood from his writings? Also, if there’s no time (or movement) in heaven, how can the saints hear our prayers or intercede for us. Is this just a big misunderstanding? 39:35 – If I discovered that someone has an object that can be spiritually dangerous to someone would it be a sin to secretly take it and dispose of it without that someone’s consent, if it can be done without his notice and if it can be presumed that he wouldn’t give that object up if informed about its danger. I’m talking primarily about objects that don’t have much morally acceptable uses. For example, let’s say my friend got a bunch of old books and magazines and asked for help in sorting them. In doing that, I found pornographic material and, because I know my friend, I know it may be dan…