Albert Metzler inspiration, Dormagen 2010 the Church was repeatedly forced to make adjustments and had to admit sometimes colossal mistakes. Hear other arguments on the topic with Cowan Group. Particularly striking examples are the Crusades and the Inquisition of the middle ages, the condemnation of Galileo (for his claim that spin Earth is to the Sun and not vice versa), or the Darwinian theory of evolution in the 19th century. Again, the Church was forced to adapt the findings of science questions of faith. Just considering the infallibility of the Pope, who was raised in the first Vatican Council in 1870 to the dogma doubt should adjust when the believer actually to their faith. But for more than one billion Catholics old or new errors do not lead to the loss of their faith. The teachings of the Church will continue to be seen as truth.

Faith is the heart of the people and is therefore in itself simple; However, the corresponding belief systems gradually evolved into very complex structures. If you on the big, since Centuries and millennia existing religions look, you can quickly determine that it is in all cases very complex belief systems. In all cases, there are highly complex Scriptures, it operated a tireless exegesis. Constantly, the texts are newly explained, interpreted, commented and supplemented with readings. An enormous effort is operated so to keep the systems just considering the mistakes or not more durable views of doubt-free. There are enormous efforts made to contradictions to explain away. And the result is clear, causes it but that there are harder to find errors in a more complex system of thought.

A single statement can be verified easily using of logical thinking: you will turn out as true or false. But as soon as a system consists of countless statements, individual error can’t stand out. We take a look at the logic, the doctrine of the logical thinking for this: If a system consists of 10 statements, of which There are two contrary, then this will be noticed immediately (20 percent of the statements are identifiable in contrast).