I thought for sure you had some kind of relationship with God.
That's what I thought too. Now I feel as though it was all in my head.
I do not understand how God could be 'all' to you and then just because of a biology degree totally change??? Thats why I said I do not think you really knew God personally. When one knows Christ as a personal Savior....it's real; not that one understands His mysteries all the time, but having meager understanding does not make Him less real.
It wasn't the degree that did it per se. What did it was when I started critically looking into my faith. The biology just nudged it along a bit.
why don't you look up proof of the existence of the flood, I know its out there.
Tried this every way I know how. The more I looked, the more convinced I became that there was no flood. There doesn't appear to be any evidence of any kind. There are no layers of the earth that randomly contain animals and humans with no pattern. We don't see evidence of the genetic bottlenecks that should've resulted when all of the world's species went nearly extinct. There is nothing to suggest a global flood in dendrochronological records, which go back more than 10000 years ago. Same deal for ice cores. I can go on. This is not to mention the seemingly irreconcilable ecological problems that would have happened as a result of this flood (How are certain diseases still around? How did predators survive with only two individuals of their prey species left to eat? Or, if the predators survived, how did the prey survive?) and so on). There is also the observation that flood myths are common all over the world, and these are very different from the Noah's Ark story. So, unless there's something major I'm missing, the most reasonable conclusion I can draw is that it never happened.
God is science.
A year or two ago I would've agreed with this.
K-man, your just choosing to believe other teachings than Biblical teachings, its not that 'science' books have more proof of their validity than the Holy Bible does.
This is simply not true.
Have you ever prayed to Pope Kyrillos VI about this matter?
Yes actually. When after a while it seemed God wouldn't answer me or nudge me in a certain direction, I assumed I was being arrogant to ask him directly. So I went to Pope Kyrillos next. I have a lot of books of miracles of his, so I thought if anyone would help me it was him. But that didn't happen (or it hasn't happened yet). And in the meantime, I keep finding out more and more, and it's not looking good.
K-man, I assume that you are a biology major and definitely you might have more knowledge than us when it comes to theory of evolution and I am pretty much sure you are exposed to the arguments for the existence of God and just like you, I am a science student, but with different major and I was really surprised your faith is withered away with your exposure to knowledge.
The one crucial point you have to remember is, which one has more evidence, the theory of evolution or the evidence for the existence of God? Both are claims that can’t be proven and both needs a leap of faith to believe in them, but I am confident in claiming that evidence for the existence of God is more than for the theory of evolution .
The Universe being finely tuned predominantly suggests that it is designed, instead of accidently existed and I heard about the lame multiverse hypothesis, but either way, what do you think of the fine-tuned Universe being a good evidence for the existence of the supernatural? like wise DNA is a very good evidence for the theory of evolution.
It's your ego that's making you not believe K-man, that's what I think anyway.The more you get to know about this world the more your ego will be satisfied. I pray that one you will grow out of it.
[quote author=sordoeht link=topic=13328.msg156396#msg156396 date=1338921822] K-man, I assume that you are a biology major and definitely you might have more knowledge than us when it comes to theory of evolution and I am pretty much sure you are exposed to the arguments for the existence of God and just like you, I am a science student, but with different major and I was really surprised your faith is withered away with your exposure to knowledge.
Yeah, so was I. And yes, bio major.
The one crucial point you have to remember is, which one has more evidence, the theory of evolution or the evidence for the existence of God? Both are claims that can’t be proven and both needs a leap of faith to believe in them, but I am confident in claiming that evidence for the existence of God is more than for the theory of evolution .
I have to completely disagree with this conclusion, and also with the assertion that evolution requires a leap of faith. It's science, not magic. Whether you believe it or not is entirely up to you, but to suggest that it requires a leap of faith implies that there is insufficient or no evidence supporting it, which could not be farther from the truth.
The Universe being finely tuned predominantly suggests that it is designed, instead of accidently existed and I heard about the lame multiverse hypothesis, but either way, what do you think of the fine-tuned Universe being a good evidence for the existence of the supernatural? like wise DNA is a very good evidence for the theory of evolution.
Mmm, good question.
Ok, so you can take Fine Tuning Argument to state that “The physical parameters of the universe are such that even slight deviations would not permit life to form”. In this case, a possible counterargument is the anthropic principle. This basically states that if the parameters were not within these limits, we would not be around to observe it in the first place. Or, put another way, ‘‘what we can expect to observe must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers’’. Because this is the case, the probability of our being alive to observe such a universe is the same regardless of how it got here (God vs chance or whatever you want to call it). Mind you, everything I’ve just said is an oversimplification.
If instead you take the Fine Tuning argument to mean “When considering all (theoretically) possible universes, the set of life-permitting universes is infinitesimal compared to the total set of possible universes”, then the anthropic principle can’t be invoked as a response. But I’m not sure whether we know enough about physics to actually know whether the statement in quotes is true. Though I do agree with you that the multiverse hypothesis is weak at best.
Anyway, the end result, at least as far as I see it, is that the Fine Tuning argument doesn’t get us very far one way or the other. What are your thoughts?
It's your ego that's making you not believe K-man, that's what I think anyway.The more you get to know about this world the more your ego will be satisfied.
Yeah, I keep wondering if this is true myself.....
+H.H. Pope Shenouda III discussed this in so many of his sermons. Here is a guiding start: stmarkla.org/download > Arabic Sermons > His Holiness Pope Shenouda III
Specifically, please take time to listen to (but not limited to): - 1980 > Be for me as You said (H.H. speaks about knowledge vs faith throughout the sermon) - 1998 > Open O Lord the eyes of young man (Faith in the unseen) - Theology > Faith (detailed explanation and comparison of Faith)
Life of Faith By H.H. Pope Shenouda III, pages 128-130, 137, 140: 3- Submitting Faith To The Mind The mind has limits which can not be overcome and that faith is at a higher level than that. But there are people who want their minds to perceive the unlimited, the miracles, and what is beyond their understanding or else, they refuse all this! They want theology to be submitted to scientific research and this is logically impossible. It is not reasonable that the mind, which is limited, subdues to the unlimited. Maybe as an example of this, is what is known today as the 'New Theology', in some of the institutes, where they want to submit the soul and miracle to pure scientific research or to symbolic explanations. Thus they deny many of the miracles and many stories told in the Bible and mix it with Mythology! Really, the mind is lost if it tries to think highly of itself more than it ought to (Rom. 12:3), and thus it strays away from faith and tries to lead others in the same obliquity.
4- Associating With Doubtful People: Just as associating with men of faith strengthens the faith, also associating with doubtful people plants doubt in minds and hearts. If it was persisting, or if, it has a deep effect or if the level submitting knowledge to doubts is lower than the mind, or if it was not deep enough in the faith. For this reason the Bible prevents the association with apostates. Saint John, the apostle, says “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.. ” (2 John 1:10). That is why the church prevented the association with the heretics and the banished. How many people associate with non Christian groups like the Jehovah witnesses for example, and the result is that they lose their directions. How many church members associated with strange groups or heretics and their beliefs where deeply affected. Considering behaviour and spiritualities, the association with doubtful people weakens the faith: You may be faced with a test or a problem and you accept it in faith, and you submit the matter to God thanking Him for everything. Then, a person with little faith visits you, and he keeps on explaining how dangerous the matter is and frightens you of its results, until you lose your peace of heart. It also weakens your faith in God's care and you get worried. Be careful with whom you associate and with whom you mix your ideas.
10-Doubt: Doubt weakens the faith and a weak faith produces doubt... This is exactly what we said about fear. Each of them causes the other or results from the other. Doubt was one of the wars the devil fought against our first parents to lose their faith. He told them “Has God indeed said … you will surely not die?” (Gen. 3:1-4). If you are faced with doubts concerning the existence of God or other principle beliefs then do not fear. These are from the enemy's wars and not your denial of faith, and especially, if your heart was refusing it. In such circumstances, you have to pray so that God lifts up these wars from you, and that you change your way of thinking, and occupy yourself with another subject. But if the doubts are from you and you are convinced with them so you have to treat them with a pure spiritual understanding by asking the specialists in theology, and by reading useful books in your subject. Faith kills fear and doubt. Fear and doubt on the other side kill the faith. Hold on to your faith because it is a strong and victorious element. You will then live in joy, peace, tranquillity, without fear, and without any doubt all the days of your life.
Ten Concepts By H.H. Pope Shenouda III, page 137 Another kind of harmful knowledge is doubt. A scientist once said, 'It is easy for doubt to enter one's mind. But it is difficult to cast it out.' So, if you give an ear to someone who throws doubt in your heart regarding a certain person, by making false accusations, or if you indulge in reading harmful material which might make you suspicious concerning your faith or the Scriptures, you will have to exert much effort to rid yourself of such suspicions. This doubtfulness might last a long time, until God's grace visits you and relieves you of your suspicions. A person should, therefore, be careful in choosing the source of his knowledge. Keep your mind pure and do not blot it with harmful knowledge. Be very careful regarding what you read, hear or see; and be careful in choosing the friends who impart knowledge or bring you harmful experiences, harmful information or inappropriate thoughts. Do not let such knowledge abide in your mind except after being completely assured of it and after ascertaining what is true and what is false.
K-man, What I meant with the leap of faith is reasonable because, even though there are ample amount of evidences for theories, we conclude it is true based on our logical reasoning and assumptions regardless of we experimented it or physically experienced it ourselves and that’s why in most realms of science excluding mathematics needs some sort of faith, by saying these don’t assume that I reject the theories of evolution or other scientific theories. Let me give you one example regarding our belief, Let’s take the country India as an example and I have never been there in my life, but I have heard and learned about it and with my leap of faith, I believe it exists, like wise I have never seen God before, based on my reasoning, gathering information and personal experience, I concluded “He is who He is”.
The Anthropic principle is a philosophical scape goat for avoiding the argument for supernaturally designed universe, During the inception of the universe, there are more than 10 physical constants which should be in there exact parameters for life to and one astrobiologist told me that our universe won a cosmic lottery and it is not surprising if a guy win one of the mega millions, but really! This is another trickery of avoiding the argument for design, because what about the other more than 9 physical constants? A person can win a lottery one time, but not 10 times the mega millions and the other physical constants are interdependent of one another, so do your research on the fine tuning of the universe from unbiased physicists.
K-man, What I meant with the leap of faith is reasonable because, even though there are ample amount of evidences for theories, we conclude it is true based on our logical reasoning and assumptions regardless of we experimented it or physically experienced it ourselves and that’s why in most realms of science excluding mathematics needs some sort of faith,
I think I see what you mean. But are you saying the science leap is equal to the leap of faith needed to believe in God? I don't see that as being more than false equivalence.
by saying these don’t assume that I reject the theories of evolution or other scientific theories.
Ah. Sorry for jumping to conclusions.
Let me give you one example regarding our belief, Let’s take the country India as an example and I have never been there in my life, but I have heard and learned about it and with my leap of faith, I believe it exists, like wise I have never seen God before, based on my reasoning, gathering information and personal experience, I concluded “He is who He is”.
The India leap and the God leap are not equivalent.
There are a number of fundamental differences between India and God, the most important of which is that if it somehow turned out India were actually fictional, our lives would probably not be affected in any significant way. Neither of us probably has any stake in the matter. I might be shocked, but no other changes would occur. I’d get over it eventually.
God is an entirely different question. I am literally being asked to bet my life on his existence and identity. So this is something I will examine a thousand times more rigorously than the existence of India, or anything else.
Secondly, God is, by definition, supernatural. Geographical locations are not. We at least have a reference frame for the second one.
Thirdly, either of us could just go to India if we wanted and see it for ourselves, and resolve the problem forever. I just did the same thing with Chicago a few months ago. We can’t do the same with God (some may argue that we actually can, but that’s in a different sense than what I’m describing here).
Fourth, if there’s no India, where does delicious Indian food come from? Checkmate.
(that one was a joke)
The Anthropic principle is a philosophical scape goat for avoiding the argument for supernaturally designed universe, During the inception of the universe, there are more than 10 physical constants which should be in there exact parameters for life to and one astrobiologist told me that our universe won a cosmic lottery and it is not surprising if a guy win one of the mega millions, but really! This is another trickery of avoiding the argument for design, because what about the other more than 9 physical constants?
I think it’s actually way more than 10.
Don’t misunderstand, I’m not disputing that the universe shows fine tuning. It does.
But, because we are in the universe, this is what we must observe regardless of how the universe initially came into existence. If we are alive, then it must logically follow that the parameters of the universe are suited for our being alive. We could not possibly be here otherwise. Likewise, if the parameters were not suited for life, no one would be around to know the difference. Both of these are true regardless of how or by whom the universe was initially formed, and thus the fine tuning argument doesn’t get us any closer to solving the question. I don’t see how the anthropic principle dodges the issue. It doesn’t claim that the universe is not fine-tuned, just that we are victims of a selection bias.
the other physical constants are interdependent of one another
Do you mean independent of one another?
do your research on the fine tuning of the universe from unbiased physicists.
In none of the articles I have read was I able to tell the person’s stance on fine tuning. That’s about as unbiased as it gets.
[quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156467#msg156467 date=1339109075] Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence! If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
[quote author=Copticandproud link=topic=13328.msg156469#msg156469 date=1339114949] [quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156467#msg156467 date=1339109075] Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence! If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Also known as the Pascal Wager...
Which is the worst possible foundation for someone's faith that's ever been thought of.
[quote author=George_Mina link=topic=13328.msg156474#msg156474 date=1339127398] [quote author=Copticandproud link=topic=13328.msg156469#msg156469 date=1339114949] [quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156467#msg156467 date=1339109075] Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence! If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Also known as the Pascal Wager...
Which is the worst possible foundation for someone's faith that's ever been thought of.
[quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156475#msg156475 date=1339128602] well for K-man its better then no foundation of faith at all.
No, quite the opposite. If the entire basis of my faith is fear of consequences, where is my relationship with God? Why even bother? So this is not the way to do it. It's going backwards.
K man, there comes a point sometimes when it's not possible for a forum to answer your question but rather it's up to you. I admire your zeal to find the truth and so I really suggest you dedicate like two or three days to honestly put everything aside and just pray to God asking Him to help you feel His presence. When I had this same issue a long time ago this is what worked for me and it shows you that God is more than willing to reveal Himself to those who honestly seek Him. So I suggest we put all words aside and let actions speak for themselves and I promise you that you won't regret doing this. God really loves you and He is waiting for you to meet Him.
Geo, I don't think we're at the point where we can't answer (or at least significantly address) Kman's inquiry in this forum.
In addition Pascal's wager is not meant to be interpreted as the exclusive motivator for faith in God. It has more significant use to help us understand pragmatic ambiguity. I will get to that in my next post. Hang in there everyone. We may all learn something together.
You're right about one thing Remnkemi, you guys can sure keep answering. I don't mean that offensively, but seriously it is evident by page 4 that this is a non-fruitful thread, and we are past that, we are on page 10 and counting. K-man just needs a push in the right direction not an explanation to which he can keep theorizing and finding an excuse for it. Just seek God and things will come. I had this problem and I was very close to giving up and becoming an atheist but when i solely set time alone to find God again inspiration came and it came strongly, to the point where i couldn't deny that God was existent. Just a push in the right direction goes a long way, sometimes you can't just keep talking because it absolutely leads no where, and if it leads somewhere there is a dead end shortly after.
Those are my two cents, from experience, but there are wiser people here so i will be interested to see where this thread ends up.
You intitled the thread: Complete loss of faith, and you have given your reasons. I'm not sure what I or any one can do as faith is of hope, and hope comes from the spirit. Are reasoning and hope the same with the same ends? We can give you a reason to hope but it isn't anything other than hope in Christ.
St. Hesychios the Priest: "When we are in trouble or despair or have lost hope, we should do what David did: pour out our hearts to God and tell Him of our needs and troubles, just as they are. It is because He can deal with us wisely that we confess to God: He can make our troubles easy to bear, if this is for our benefit, and can save us from the dejection which destroys and corrupts."
St Gregory of Sinai: "Grace abides in us from the time of our holy baptism; but, through our inattention, vanity and the wrong life we lead it is stifled, or buried. When a man resolves to lead a righteous life and is zealous for salvation, the fruit of his whole labour is, therefore, the restoration in force of this gift of grace. It comes to pass in a two-fold manner: first, this gift becomes revealed through many labours in following the commandments; insofar as a man succeeds in following the commandments, this gift becomes more radiant and brilliant. Secondly, it manifests and reveals itself through constant invocation of the Lord Jesus in prayer. The first method is powerful, but the second is more so, so that even the first method gains power through it. Thus, if we sincerely wish to open the seed of grace concealed in us, let us hasten to train ourselves in this latter exercise of the heart, and let us have only this work of prayer in our heart, without forms, without images, till it warms our heart and makes it burn with ineffable love of the Lord."
St. Hesychios the Priest: "The delighted intellect delights in the light of the Lord when, free from concepts, it enters into the dawn of spiritual knowledge. By continually denying itself, it advances from the wisdom necessary for the practice of the virtues to an ineffable vision in which it contemplates holy and ineffable things. Then the heart is filled with perceptions of infinite and divine realities and sees the God of gods in its own depths, so far as this is possible. Astounded, the intellect lovingly glorifies God, the Seer and the Seen, and the Saviour of those who contemplate Him in this way."
- Fulfilled Prophecies and Martyrdom of EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES [/b] Historical, extra-biblical evidence exist that many people were killed for the eyewitness testimony about what they say they saw and heard Christ do and say, including His Miracles and resurrection. They did not die just for what they believed but for their eyewtiness testimony of the foundation of Christianity. They had everything to lose and nothing to gain by sticking to their testimony. Notice that they did not die for what they believed, they died for their eyewitness testimony of the miracles of Christ, including His Resurrection and for saying that they witnessed the fulfillment of those prophesies.
-People do not voluntarily give up their lives for testimony they are not sure of. If someone says they saw X and heard Y with their own sense and given a chance to change their minds or say they might be mistaken about the miracles they saw and heard otherwise they would lose everything and be tortured and killed- and they choose to stick to their story- then in all likelihood those people really saw X and heard Y as miraculous foundations of the faith. No other faith or tradition has these legs to stand on-- fulfilled prophecies and eyewitness testimony. For example, there are no eyewitnesses to the Archangel Gabriel dictating the Qur'an to Mohammed and if they were, there are no eyewitnesses who volutnarily were given the chance to recant and chose instead to die for that eyewitness testimony.
-If you are able to be convinced based in part on the above evidence once researched, then you have an objective leg to stand on to trust the Scriptures of the New Testament. Remember that Christ prayed that we believe in Him Through Their (the disciples) word. And He knew their word would be credible for us if they died for their word (eyewtiness testimony) that is why He told them that you they will be delivered to kings and priests and will be killed for the testimony they give about him.
-If you are then convinced about Christ's resurrection and the events related to His life by the Apostles and their credibility based on their martyrdom for their eyewtiness testimony, then you can trust Christ's words as reported in those Gospels. Those words of Christ mention the "Flood". The existence of "Able" whose' blood, He stated, the Pharisees would be guilty of. He also spoke of Moses and the Law and of David. If you are convinced of Christ, then you believe in Him as God incarnate, and He believed in the events of the OT, then you also have an authority you can rely on to assure you of the events of the OT, remembering that most of these events were miraculous and therefore, not always obeying the natural laws of physics, thereby not necessarily leaving, empiracle physical traces thereof.
-Regarding evolution/creationism: There is a priest named Father Thomas Hopko, I think from the Russian Orthodox Church who termed the debate between Creation and Evolution as "Stupid".
We know God created all things seen and unsees. How He did this, specificaly and scientifically, other that to say He did it, and He did it by His Word and His Spirit, we do not know. The scientific process of creation, as a mirculous act of God from nothing, may not ever be completely open to us, in as much as asking if we can discover the scientific process of how Jesus walked on water, raised the dead, became incarnate or created the universe out of nothing.
Remember also that not too long ago, Einstein and much of the world thought that the universe was eternal and static and anyone who questioned this scientific knowledge was considered a fool, I think. Today, the opposite is True the discovery of the universe exapanding, "I the Lord Stretch out the HEavens" based on redshifts of waves from galaxies in all direction travelling further apart, the Cosmic Mircorwave Background Radiation along with other evidence proves to moder day scientists and actually shuts up ancient cultures wisdom up to the early 20th Century who believe in an eternal constant universe, and proved to them the contrary that the Universe DID have a beginning. That the very first words of the Bible, "IN THE BEGINNING..." is True. There was a beginning. The universe is not eternal as many cultures and scientists believed for thousands of years. They can now believe empirically, "In the Beginning...." and not put down the Bible because of these first three words. And if we can confirm this not only with the revealed word, but with our senses as we have through telescopes, we can trust the next words, "In the Beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. IF God created biological life through some biological, evolutionary processes, this really has no bearing on the Truth of Christianity.. It was still He who did it. Adam and Eve still existed and God breathed into them His Image and likeness. Evolutionary Theory speculates about populations... it does not and indeed can not... pinpoint individuals such as Adam and Eve.
Finally, The message of Christ is one where you fall in love with the Christ who loves you and became incarnate to take your nature. There is a struggle in WANTING HIM to be true and loving His message. You still have to Choose Him and choose to believe based on the evidence provided. It is not empiricle proof, but it is reasonable proof that He left us to believe in Him and to safely fall in Love with Him and grow from there. Faith is required, not empirical proof, otherwise it would not be faith. And you have several objective basis to stand on for Choosing faith in Christ as opposed to any other faith.
"God is not under space, time, or material. However, we [humans] are limited by these. Therefore, you can not place God into a category of your mind." Hegumen of the Church
[quote author=caji link=topic=13328.msg156689#msg156689 date=1339602272] "God is not under space, time, or material. However, we [humans] are limited by these. Therefore, you can not place God into a category of your mind." Hegumen of the Church
I understand what you're trying to say, but these types of answers are the least helpful. This is essentially telling me the problem will go away if I just stop thinking about it.
Comments
I'm running on very little sleep right now, so apologies if my response comes off as abrupt.
[quote author=Purity2 link=topic=13328.msg156298#msg156298 date=1338607667]
I thought for sure you had some kind of relationship with God.
That's what I thought too. Now I feel as though it was all in my head. It wasn't the degree that did it per se. What did it was when I started critically looking into my faith. The biology just nudged it along a bit. Tried this every way I know how. The more I looked, the more convinced I became that there was no flood. There doesn't appear to be any evidence of any kind. There are no layers of the earth that randomly contain animals and humans with no pattern. We don't see evidence of the genetic bottlenecks that should've resulted when all of the world's species went nearly extinct. There is nothing to suggest a global flood in dendrochronological records, which go back more than 10000 years ago. Same deal for ice cores. I can go on.
This is not to mention the seemingly irreconcilable ecological problems that would have happened as a result of this flood (How are certain diseases still around? How did predators survive with only two individuals of their prey species left to eat? Or, if the predators survived, how did the prey survive?) and so on). There is also the observation that flood myths are common all over the world, and these are very different from the Noah's Ark story.
So, unless there's something major I'm missing, the most reasonable conclusion I can draw is that it never happened. A year or two ago I would've agreed with this. This is simply not true. Yes actually. When after a while it seemed God wouldn't answer me or nudge me in a certain direction, I assumed I was being arrogant to ask him directly. So I went to Pope Kyrillos next. I have a lot of books of miracles of his, so I thought if anyone would help me it was him. But that didn't happen (or it hasn't happened yet). And in the meantime, I keep finding out more and more, and it's not looking good.
The one crucial point you have to remember is, which one has more evidence, the theory of evolution or the evidence for the existence of God? Both are claims that can’t be proven and both needs a leap of faith to believe in them, but I am confident in claiming that evidence for the existence of God is more than for the theory of evolution .
The Universe being finely tuned predominantly suggests that it is designed, instead of accidently existed and I heard about the lame multiverse hypothesis, but either way, what do you think of the fine-tuned Universe being a good evidence for the existence of the supernatural? like wise DNA is a very good evidence for the theory of evolution.
It's your ego that's making you not believe K-man, that's what I think anyway.The more you get to know about this world the more your ego will be satisfied. I pray that one you will grow out of it.
K-man, I assume that you are a biology major and definitely you might have more knowledge than us when it comes to theory of evolution and I am pretty much sure you are exposed to the arguments for the existence of God and just like you, I am a science student, but with different major and I was really surprised your faith is withered away with your exposure to knowledge.
Yeah, so was I. And yes, bio major. I have to completely disagree with this conclusion, and also with the assertion that evolution requires a leap of faith. It's science, not magic. Whether you believe it or not is entirely up to you, but to suggest that it requires a leap of faith implies that there is insufficient or no evidence supporting it, which could not be farther from the truth.
Mmm, good question.
Ok, so you can take Fine Tuning Argument to state that “The physical parameters of the universe are such that even slight deviations would not permit life to form”. In this case, a possible counterargument is the anthropic principle. This basically states that if the parameters were not within these limits, we would not be around to observe it in the first place. Or, put another way, ‘‘what we can expect to observe must be restricted by the conditions necessary for our presence as observers’’. Because this is the case, the probability of our being alive to observe such a universe is the same regardless of how it got here (God vs chance or whatever you want to call it). Mind you, everything I’ve just said is an oversimplification.
If instead you take the Fine Tuning argument to mean “When considering all (theoretically) possible universes, the set of life-permitting universes is infinitesimal compared to the total set of possible universes”, then the anthropic principle can’t be invoked as a response. But I’m not sure whether we know enough about physics to actually know whether the statement in quotes is true. Though I do agree with you that the multiverse hypothesis is weak at best.
Anyway, the end result, at least as far as I see it, is that the Fine Tuning argument doesn’t get us very far one way or the other. What are your thoughts?
It's your ego that's making you not believe K-man, that's what I think anyway.The more you get to know about this world the more your ego will be satisfied.
Yeah, I keep wondering if this is true myself..... Thank you.
Here is a guiding start: stmarkla.org/download > Arabic Sermons > His Holiness Pope Shenouda III
Specifically, please take time to listen to (but not limited to):
- 1980 > Be for me as You said (H.H. speaks about knowledge vs faith throughout the sermon)
- 1998 > Open O Lord the eyes of young man (Faith in the unseen)
- Theology > Faith (detailed explanation and comparison of Faith)
Life of Faith By H.H. Pope Shenouda III, pages 128-130, 137, 140:
3- Submitting Faith To The Mind
The mind has limits which can not be overcome and that faith is at a higher level than that. But there are people who want their minds to perceive the unlimited, the miracles, and what is beyond their understanding or else, they refuse all this!
They want theology to be submitted to scientific research and this is logically impossible. It is not reasonable that the mind, which is limited, subdues to the unlimited. Maybe as an example of this, is what is known today as the 'New Theology', in some of the institutes, where they want to submit the soul and miracle to pure scientific research or to symbolic explanations. Thus they deny many of the miracles and many stories told in the Bible and mix it with Mythology!
Really, the mind is lost if it tries to think highly of itself more than it ought to (Rom. 12:3), and thus it strays away from faith and tries to lead others in the same obliquity.
4- Associating With Doubtful People:
Just as associating with men of faith strengthens the faith, also associating with doubtful people plants doubt in minds and hearts. If it was persisting, or if, it has a deep effect or if the level submitting knowledge to doubts is lower than the mind, or if it was not deep enough in the faith. For this reason the Bible prevents the association with apostates.
Saint John, the apostle, says “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him; for he who greets him shares in his evil deeds.. ” (2 John 1:10). That is why the church prevented the association with the heretics and the banished.
How many people associate with non Christian groups like the Jehovah witnesses for example, and the result is that they lose their directions. How many church members associated with strange groups or heretics and their beliefs where deeply affected.
Considering behaviour and spiritualities, the association with doubtful people weakens the faith:
You may be faced with a test or a problem and you accept it in faith, and you submit the matter to God thanking Him for everything. Then, a person with little faith visits you, and he keeps on explaining how dangerous the matter is and frightens you of its results, until you lose your peace of heart. It also weakens your faith in God's care and you get worried.
Be careful with whom you associate and with whom you mix your ideas.
10-Doubt:
Doubt weakens the faith and a weak faith produces doubt... This is exactly what we said about fear. Each of them causes the other or results from the other.
Doubt was one of the wars the devil fought against our first parents to lose their faith. He told them “Has God indeed said … you will surely not die?” (Gen. 3:1-4). If you are faced with doubts concerning the existence of
God or other principle beliefs then do not fear. These are from the enemy's wars and not your denial of faith,
and especially, if your heart was refusing it. In such circumstances, you have to pray so that God lifts up these
wars from you, and that you change your way of thinking, and occupy yourself with another subject. But if the doubts are from you and you are convinced with them so you have to treat them with a pure spiritual understanding by asking the specialists in theology, and by reading useful books in your subject.
Faith kills fear and doubt. Fear and doubt on the other side kill the faith.
Hold on to your faith because it is a strong and victorious element. You will then live in joy, peace, tranquillity, without fear, and without any doubt all the days of your life.
Ten Concepts By H.H. Pope Shenouda III, page 137
Another kind of harmful knowledge is doubt. A scientist once said, 'It is easy for doubt to enter one's mind. But it is difficult to cast it out.' So, if you give an ear to someone who throws doubt in your heart regarding a certain person, by making false accusations, or if you indulge in reading harmful material which might make you suspicious concerning your faith or the Scriptures, you will have to exert much effort to rid yourself of such suspicions. This doubtfulness might last a long time, until God's grace visits you and relieves you of your suspicions. A person should, therefore, be careful in choosing the source of his knowledge. Keep your mind pure and do not blot it with harmful knowledge. Be very careful regarding what you read, hear or see; and be careful in choosing the friends who impart knowledge or bring you harmful experiences, harmful information or inappropriate thoughts. Do not let such knowledge abide in your mind except after being completely assured of it and after ascertaining what is true and what is false.
The Anthropic principle is a philosophical scape goat for avoiding the argument for supernaturally designed universe, During the inception of the universe, there are more than 10 physical constants which should be in there exact parameters for life to and one astrobiologist told me that our universe won a cosmic lottery and it is not surprising if a guy win one of the mega millions, but really! This is another trickery of avoiding the argument for design, because what about the other more than 9 physical constants? A person can win a lottery one time, but not 10 times the mega millions and the other physical constants are interdependent of one another, so do your research on the fine tuning of the universe from unbiased physicists.
The India leap and the God leap are not equivalent.
There are a number of fundamental differences between India and God, the most important of which is that if it somehow turned out India were actually fictional, our lives would probably not be affected in any significant way. Neither of us probably has any stake in the matter. I might be shocked, but no other changes would occur. I’d get over it eventually.
God is an entirely different question. I am literally being asked to bet my life on his existence and identity. So this is something I will examine a thousand times more rigorously than the existence of India, or anything else.
Secondly, God is, by definition, supernatural. Geographical locations are not. We at least have a reference frame for the second one.
Thirdly, either of us could just go to India if we wanted and see it for ourselves, and resolve the problem forever. I just did the same thing with Chicago a few months ago. We can’t do the same with God (some may argue that we actually can, but that’s in a different sense than what I’m describing here).
Fourth, if there’s no India, where does delicious Indian food come from? Checkmate.
(that one was a joke)
I think it’s actually way more than 10.
Don’t misunderstand, I’m not disputing that the universe shows fine tuning. It does.
But, because we are in the universe, this is what we must observe regardless of how the universe initially came into existence. If we are alive, then it must logically follow that the parameters of the universe are suited for our being alive. We could not possibly be here otherwise. Likewise, if the parameters were not suited for life, no one would be around to know the difference. Both of these are true regardless of how or by whom the universe was initially formed, and thus the fine tuning argument doesn’t get us any closer to solving the question. I don’t see how the anthropic principle dodges the issue. It doesn’t claim that the universe is not fine-tuned, just that we are victims of a selection bias. Do you mean independent of one another? In none of the articles I have read was I able to tell the person’s stance on fine tuning. That’s about as unbiased as it gets.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence!
If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence!
If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Also known as the Pascal Wager...
[quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156467#msg156467 date=1339109075]
Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence!
If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Also known as the Pascal Wager...
Which is the worst possible foundation for someone's faith that's ever been thought of.
[quote author=Copticandproud link=topic=13328.msg156469#msg156469 date=1339114949]
[quote author=markmarcos link=topic=13328.msg156467#msg156467 date=1339109075]
Lets say that evolution was real and their was NO GOD. That means that there is nothing after death. And there are no consequences like Hell.
Now let’s say GOD EXISTS there will be something after death and there are consequences like Hell after death.
If you don’t believe in God their will be a consequence!
If you don’t believe in evolution then there is no consequence.
Now which one would you pick? Just to be safe then sorry.
Also known as the Pascal Wager...
Which is the worst possible foundation for someone's faith that's ever been thought of.
My thoughts exactly.
I will send you a PM.
pray for me,
mena
well for K-man its better then no foundation of faith at all.
No, quite the opposite. If the entire basis of my faith is fear of consequences, where is my relationship with God? Why even bother? So this is not the way to do it. It's going backwards.
I don't think we're at the point where we can't answer (or at least significantly address) Kman's inquiry in this forum.
In addition Pascal's wager is not meant to be interpreted as the exclusive motivator for faith in God. It has more significant use to help us understand pragmatic ambiguity. I will get to that in my next post. Hang in there everyone. We may all learn something together.
Those are my two cents, from experience, but there are wiser people here so i will be interested to see where this thread ends up.
You intitled the thread: Complete loss of faith, and you have given your reasons. I'm not sure what I or any one can do as faith is of hope, and hope comes from the spirit. Are reasoning and hope the same with the same ends? We can give you a reason to hope but it isn't anything other than hope in Christ.
St Gregory of Sinai: "Grace abides in us from the time of our holy baptism; but, through our inattention, vanity and the wrong life we lead it is stifled, or buried. When a man resolves to lead a righteous life and is zealous for salvation, the fruit of his whole labour is, therefore, the restoration in force of this gift of grace. It comes to pass in a two-fold manner: first, this gift becomes revealed through many labours in following the commandments; insofar as a man succeeds in following the commandments, this gift becomes more radiant and brilliant. Secondly, it manifests and reveals itself through constant invocation of the Lord Jesus in prayer. The first method is powerful, but the second is more so, so that even the first method gains power through it. Thus, if we sincerely wish to open the seed of grace concealed in us, let us hasten to train ourselves in this latter exercise of the heart, and let us have only this work of prayer in our heart, without forms, without images, till it warms our heart and makes it burn with ineffable love of the Lord."
St. Hesychios the Priest: "The delighted intellect delights in the light of the Lord when, free from concepts, it enters into the dawn of spiritual knowledge. By continually denying itself, it advances from the wisdom necessary for the practice of the virtues to an ineffable vision in which it contemplates holy and ineffable things. Then the heart is filled with perceptions of infinite and divine realities and sees the God of gods in its own depths, so far as this is possible. Astounded, the intellect lovingly glorifies God, the Seer and the Seen, and the Saviour of those who contemplate Him in this way."
Peace and grace to you in Christ.
Reasons to Believe in Christ:
- Fulfilled Prophecies and Martyrdom of EYEWITNESS TESTIMONIES [/b] Historical, extra-biblical evidence exist that many people were killed for the eyewitness testimony about what they say they saw and heard Christ do and say, including His Miracles and resurrection. They did not die just for what they believed but for their eyewtiness testimony of the foundation of Christianity. They had everything to lose and nothing to gain by sticking to their testimony. Notice that they did not die for what they believed, they died for their eyewitness testimony of the miracles of Christ, including His Resurrection and for saying that they witnessed the fulfillment of those prophesies.
-People do not voluntarily give up their lives for testimony they are not sure of. If someone says they saw X and heard Y with their own sense and given a chance to change their minds or say they might be mistaken about the miracles they saw and heard otherwise they would lose everything and be tortured and killed- and they choose to stick to their story- then in all likelihood those people really saw X and heard Y as miraculous foundations of the faith. No other faith or tradition has these legs to stand on-- fulfilled prophecies and eyewitness testimony. For example, there are no eyewitnesses to the Archangel Gabriel dictating the Qur'an to Mohammed and if they were, there are no eyewitnesses who volutnarily were given the chance to recant and chose instead to die for that eyewitness testimony.
-If you are able to be convinced based in part on the above evidence once researched, then you have an objective leg to stand on to trust the Scriptures of the New Testament. Remember that Christ prayed that we believe in Him Through Their (the disciples) word. And He knew their word would be credible for us if they died for their word (eyewtiness testimony) that is why He told them that you they will be delivered to kings and priests and will be killed for the testimony they give about him.
-If you are then convinced about Christ's resurrection and the events related to His life by the Apostles and their credibility based on their martyrdom for their eyewtiness testimony, then you can trust Christ's words as reported in those Gospels. Those words of Christ mention the "Flood". The existence of "Able" whose' blood, He stated, the Pharisees would be guilty of. He also spoke of Moses and the Law and of David. If you are convinced of Christ, then you believe in Him as God incarnate, and He believed in the events of the OT, then you also have an authority you can rely on to assure you of the events of the OT, remembering that most of these events were miraculous and therefore, not always obeying the natural laws of physics, thereby not necessarily leaving, empiracle physical traces thereof.
-Regarding evolution/creationism: There is a priest named Father Thomas Hopko, I think from the Russian Orthodox Church who termed the debate between Creation and Evolution as "Stupid".
We know God created all things seen and unsees. How He did this, specificaly and scientifically, other that to say He did it, and He did it by His Word and His Spirit, we do not know. The scientific process of creation, as a mirculous act of God from nothing, may not ever be completely open to us, in as much as asking if we can discover the scientific process of how Jesus walked on water, raised the dead, became incarnate or created the universe out of nothing.
Remember also that not too long ago, Einstein and much of the world thought that the universe was eternal and static and anyone who questioned this scientific knowledge was considered a fool, I think. Today, the opposite is True the discovery of the universe exapanding, "I the Lord Stretch out the HEavens" based on redshifts of waves from galaxies in all direction travelling further apart, the Cosmic Mircorwave Background Radiation along with other evidence proves to moder day scientists and actually shuts up ancient cultures wisdom up to the early 20th Century who believe in an eternal constant universe, and proved to them the contrary that the Universe DID have a beginning. That the very first words of the Bible, "IN THE BEGINNING..." is True. There was a beginning. The universe is not eternal as many cultures and scientists believed for thousands of years. They can now believe empirically, "In the Beginning...." and not put down the Bible because of these first three words. And if we can confirm this not only with the revealed word, but with our senses as we have through telescopes, we can trust the next words, "In the Beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. IF God created biological life through some biological, evolutionary processes, this really has no bearing on the Truth of Christianity.. It was still He who did it. Adam and Eve still existed and God breathed into them His Image and likeness. Evolutionary Theory speculates about populations... it does not and indeed can not... pinpoint individuals such as Adam and Eve.
Finally, The message of Christ is one where you fall in love with the Christ who loves you and became incarnate to take your nature. There is a struggle in WANTING HIM to be true and loving His message. You still have to Choose Him and choose to believe based on the evidence provided. It is not empiricle proof, but it is reasonable proof that He left us to believe in Him and to safely fall in Love with Him and grow from there. Faith is required, not empirical proof, otherwise it would not be faith. And you have several objective basis to stand on for Choosing faith in Christ as opposed to any other faith.
God bless you.
"God is not under space, time, or material. However, we [humans] are limited by these. Therefore, you can not place God into a category of your mind." Hegumen of the Church
I understand what you're trying to say, but these types of answers are the least helpful. This is essentially telling me the problem will go away if I just stop thinking about it.