Must one believe in God on the basis of reasons, arguments, proofs etc.

[dms1972]

I tend at times towards fideism, ie just believing in God without valid reasons, something like what Francis Schaeffer described as an "upper story" leap. If one "just believes" does it not end up in subjectivity - or faith in faith if one has no reasons for believing? However postmodernism and the idea there is no objective truth or reality also dogs my thinking.

Kierkegarrd is probably best known for fideism - and rejecting proofs of God existence. "I reason from existence, not towards existence."

Søren Kierkegaard, "God's Existence Cannot Be Proved"

Pascal also proposed his famous wager - that if one believes in God and lives accordingly and it turns out God does exist one gains eternal life - and if he doesn't one hasn't lost anything - but if one disbelives and lives for oneself - and it turns out God is real - one loses everything, ends up in hell - something like that if I recall it correctly.

Kant as far as I understand ended in agnosticism as regards knowledge of God by pure reason. He seems to however have regarded God as a necessary postulate of practical reason.

What path is there back from postmodernism, or (if that is the wrong term) a rejection of objective truth and reality - back to reality - this has really dogged me for years - I had a breakdown some years ago because of the whole question of reality and how it seemed the world was completely absurd. How does one connect with reality? If the world seems completely absurd how does one live? I can see how if one doesn't believe in God one could come to the conclusion of absurdism - and that belief in God would keep one from reaching that point - but what if through not believing you reach that point of thinking everything is absurd - how does one get back from that place?

 

[public hermit]

How does one connect with reality?

My suggestion? Stop thinking. Take up a contemplative practice. Shut down the committee that is your mind and simply sit in the ubiquitous presence of God. Continually turn your attention to God, lose yourself for the sake of Christ.

I really believe the truth is found in that still moment. Our minds pollute the present.

I have read and understood until I'm saturated. There are only so many important questions and only a collection of less than certain answers. It is good for inquiring minds to spend some time on the apophatic way. My opinion, of course.

 

[dms1972]

My suggestion? Stop thinking. Take up a contemplative practice. Shut down the committee that is your mind and simply sit in the ubiquitous presence of God.

But might that just be me sitting in the presence of my idol or self (self-God)? - I am not sure I have faith - What is faith in Jesus Christ? I mean is it more than just believing Jesus exists or is alive?

You see I'm either modern or postmodern or new age in some way. I don't believe but I try to believe but this kind of causes a split because I guess I still don't really believe (maybe the "upper story" leap?)

 

[renniks]

What path is there back from postmodernism, or (if that is the wrong term) a rejection of objective truth and reality - back to reality - this has really dogged me for years - I had a breakdown some years ago because of the whole question of reality and how it seemed the world was completely absurd. How does one connect with reality? If the world seems completely absurd how does one live? I can see how if one doesn't believe in God one could come to the conclusion of absurdism - and that belief in God would keep one from reaching that point - but what if through not believing you reach that point of thinking everything is absurd - how does one get back from that place?

Quit thinking so much.
Seriously, God has to be felt more than understood. I experience God by sitting by the ocean better than being given a lecture about him.

 

[public hermit]

But might that just be me sitting in the presence of my idol - I am not sure I believe in the God of the Bible anymore.

Or, it could be just you and your ego. And, with time, maybe just you. When you ask yourself questions, who are you asking? This is the committee, of the mind, that needs to take a break, every now and then, I say. Spend some time sitting with yourself until you forget long enough to focus, and then revisit the questions. I'm willing to bet they won't have the same sting.

 

[dms1972]

I am not sure my beliefs conform to any particular philosophy - and are probably a incoherent hodgepodge of ideas I have picked up - Hegel, Heidegger, Freud, Jung, Lyotard, Christianity, Barth, New age , Postmodernism, you name it I have looked into it!

 

[dms1972]

Or, it could be just you and your ego. And, with time, maybe just you. When you ask yourself questions, who are you asking? This is the committee, of the mind, that needs to take a break, every now and then, I say. Spend some time sitting with yourself until you forget long enough to focus, and then revisit the questions. I'm willing to bet they won't have the same sting.

I spend a lot of time just trying without success to figure out where I am at, going over things I used to believe or think in the past and wondering am I out of that or not? At one time I seemed quite solipistic and struggled with that. Its a bit of a nightmare - never sure who to talk to about it all - only person I sometimes share things with is my mum.

 

[public hermit]

I spend a lot of time just trying without success to figure out where I am at, going over things I used to believe or think in the past and wondering am I out of that or not?

Well, I wish you the best. It's a hard row to hoe being in limbo, not knowing for sure and yet certainty is all you really want. Maybe trying to understand is overrated? At any rate, be well.

 

[dms1972]

Well, I wish you the best. It's a hard row to hoe being in limbo, not knowing for sure and yet certainty is all you really want. Maybe trying to understand is overrated? At any rate, be well.

Thanks - to be honest at times its felt not like limbo - but the void - I had a horrible feeling at one time of being in a void - not sure if I am still there and just dissociating from it. Other times I felt like others were outside my world or reality.

 

[Paulomycin]

I tend at times towards fideism, ie just believing in God without valid reasons, something like what Francis Schaeffer described as an "upper story" leap. If one "just believes" does it not end up in subjectivity - or faith in faith if one has no reasons for believing? However postmodernism and the idea there is no objective truth or reality also dogs my thinking.

Kierkegarrd is probably best known for fideism - and rejecting proofs of God existence. "I reason from existence, not towards existence."

Søren Kierkegaard, "God's Existence Cannot Be Proved"

Pascal also proposed his famous wager - that if one believes in God and lives accordingly and it turns out God does exist one gains eternal life - and if he doesn't one hasn't lost anything - but if one disbelives and lives for oneself - and it turns out God is real - one loses everything, ends up in hell - something like that if I recall it correctly.

Kant as far as I understand ended in agnosticism as regards knowledge of God by pure reason. He seems to however have regarded God as a necessary postulate of practical reason.

What path is there back from postmodernism, or (if that is the wrong term) a rejection of objective truth and reality - back to reality - this has really dogged me for years - I had a breakdown some years ago because of the whole question of reality and how it seemed the world was completely absurd. How does one connect with reality? If the world seems completely absurd how does one live? I can see how if one doesn't believe in God one could come to the conclusion of absurdism - and that belief in God would keep one from reaching that point - but what if through not believing you reach that point of thinking everything is absurd - how does one get back from that place?

Historically, fideism is the result of how most of Western Civilization was basically being fooled into believing that David Hume was right. Kant then has to smuggle theism in from a side-door, Lessing's Ditch is dug, and Kierkegaard leaps over it into the irrational.

*erasing blackboard*

Hume was wrong. Period. Empiricism is not a dogma unto itself. As a philosophy, it is fundamentally flawed:

1. Empiricism cannot resolve Is/Ought dilemma.
2. Empiricism reduces law of causality to a question-begging fallacy.
3. Empiricism cannot be accounted for empirically.
4. Empiricism cannot resolve Problem of Induction.

Deductive reason is the only reliable reason there is. Only deduction yields epistemic certainty.

Thus, the classical proofs of the existence of God remain intact. Dusty? Yes. But still inviolate. You can trust them. You don't have to be a fideist. Actually, fideism is atheist-bait. You wanna get stronger than that. Don't let the bullies push you around! Romans 1:18-20 is true. If Paul is right, then there is no such thing as a Kierkegaardian "leap."

Be encouraged. I'm willing to help whenever you need.

 

[dms1972]

Thus, the classical proofs of the existence of God remain intact. Dusty? Yes. But still inviolate. You can trust them.

But is there not some validity to Kierkegarrd's saying that he "reasons from existence, not towards existence"

 

[Paulomycin]

But is there not some validity to Kierkegarrd's saying that he "reasons from existence, not towards existence"

Yes, but merely based on the assumed premises given. Everyone was simply convinced that existentialism was the only game in town. Even up to my generation we were fooled into believing that there was this vast and impassable chasm between the noumenal and phenomenal, or nature and supernature. Because we assumed Empiricism "won."

No, Empiricism cheated. A lot. The pain of existentialism, the loss of meaning itself, is a big red flag that we made an error somewhere earlier in the journey. We took a wrong turn somewhere. Some people blame John Locke, some blame Descartes, but I blame Hume. Existentialism is nothing more than "human reason." It is not reason according to objective truth. All truth is God's truth.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I tend at times towards fideism, ie just believing in God without valid reasons, something like what Francis Schaeffer described as an "upper story" leap. If one "just believes" does it not end up in subjectivity - or faith in faith if one has no reasons for believing? However postmodernism and the idea there is no objective truth or reality also dogs my thinking.

Kierkegarrd is probably best known for fideism - and rejecting proofs of God existence. "I reason from existence, not towards existence."

Søren Kierkegaard, "God's Existence Cannot Be Proved"

Pascal also proposed his famous wager - that if one believes in God and lives accordingly and it turns out God does exist one gains eternal life - and if he doesn't one hasn't lost anything - but if one disbelives and lives for oneself - and it turns out God is real - one loses everything, ends up in hell - something like that if I recall it correctly.

Kant as far as I understand ended in agnosticism as regards knowledge of God by pure reason. He seems to however have regarded God as a necessary postulate of practical reason.

What path is there back from postmodernism, or (if that is the wrong term) a rejection of objective truth and reality - back to reality - this has really dogged me for years - I had a breakdown some years ago because of the whole question of reality and how it seemed the world was completely absurd. How does one connect with reality? If the world seems completely absurd how does one live? I can see how if one doesn't believe in God one could come to the conclusion of absurdism - and that belief in God would keep one from reaching that point - but what if through not believing you reach that point of thinking everything is absurd - how does one get back from that place?

I don't think any true believer is quite completely fideist. When God says, "lean not on your own understanding", he doesn't say, "shut your mind down".

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls."

 

[Mark Quayle]

But might that just be me sitting in the presence of my idol or self (self-God)? - I am not sure I have faith - What is faith in Jesus Christ? I mean is it more than just believing Jesus exists or is alive?

You see I'm either modern or postmodern or new age in some way. I don't believe but I try to believe but this kind of causes a split because I guess I still don't really believe (maybe the "upper story" leap?)

I hope you get the chance to find out from Scripture (eat it up) where Faith (saving faith) comes from. That might help to understand what it is. Romans is huge concerning this, but a long-string logic and may be tedious to you. It is worth the effort though.

 

[Unqualified]

The world is absurd or is it just you. Gods world has order because he is orderly as it is written. His word grounds you on the earth. He says be still and know that I am God. He wants us to trust him. Sure it doesn’t make sense, it’s crazy what people say and do. But the wisdom of man is foolishness to God. He created this earth every hill and river and space with His finger. That’s the wisdom of God. He is so great and unfathomable that we need to trust him. Give our minds a break from figuring Him out. Because there is conflict between man and God. Psalm2.

 

[Palmfever]

You can't get something from nothing. Science is the study of creation.

 

[dms1972]

Yes, but merely based on the assumed premises given. Everyone was simply convinced that existentialism was the only game in town. Even up to my generation we were fooled into believing that there was this vast and impassable chasm between the noumenal and phenomenal, or nature and supernature. Because we assumed Empiricism "won."

No, Empiricism cheated. A lot. The pain of existentialism, the loss of meaning itself, is a big red flag that we made an error somewhere earlier in the journey. We took a wrong turn somewhere. Some people blame John Locke, some blame Descartes, but I blame Hume. Existentialism is nothing more than "human reason." It is not reason according to objective truth. All truth is God's truth.

I think there is something in what you are saying in regard to Hume. Let me see if I am understanding it right - Hume rejects divine revelation? What if one has accepted Hume's view of things, how can one come to faith - how does one get out of that Humeian mindset?

 

[Unqualified]

Read your bible, take those thoughts captive repent and believe God and the creation story. It’s a day to day battle. Don’t hold hume in such high esteem. God is greater. Love God more. Think with heart not so much rational mind. KISS

 

[Paulomycin]

I think there is something in what you are saying in regard to Hume. Let me see if I am understanding it right - Hume rejects divine revelation?

Yes.

What if one has accepted Hume's view of things, how can one come to faith - how does one get out of that Humeian mindset?

If it's just Divine Revelation (and not the Divine altogether), then you start at the evidence of the Resurrection. We only need historical proof of one miracle here. If Jesus really did rise from the dead, then it confirms everything He ever said about Himself, which would include the rest of Divine Revelation, since He was an orthodox Jew.

I always recommend Gary Habermas' minimal facts argument for the resurrection. He takes all the historical facts that only secular non-believing scholars will accept, and then reconstructs the resurrection based on only those facts exclusively. A truly brilliant move, imo.

 

[Bob Crowley]

I sometimes get a bit sick of reading about the intellectual and philosophical proofs for God. But then I've got an advantage in that I've had a number of "spiritual" experiences which indicated to me that God is there.

I became Christian in late 1982, aged 28. A bit over a year later I was helping out at what we call a "Scripture Union Beach Mission" at a place called Forest Glen Caravan Park, just south of a town called Nambour. It was around Christmas 1983.

I wasn't in a good mood - I was out of my depth in a strange environment as new Christian, had recently gone through a divorce, been chewed out by the boss at work before I left for the camp, had to sell the house due to the divorce etc. etc. I was feeling pretty narky.

I remember thinking to myself "How do I know all this is true and not just a psychological crutch??"

Anyway we used to have a Bible Study session each afternoon at 3pm for the camp "leaders" of whom I was supposed to be one. This was held under a marquis. It gets pretty warm in summer here (subtropical climate) and I was lolling around in a seat listening to the camp leader lead the session. But then he quoted words relating to David "... a man after my own heart...". Precisely as he said that, this "double whammy" hit me - it's like a breath going through you in waves from head to foot, very strong, very clear, and it sure didn't come from me.

I got such a shock I just about fell off the seat. I'd been contacted!! It was real!!

After the camp was over, I mentioned this to my old pastor, who responded "I think God just wanted to encourage you. He knew you'd had a difficult time and wanted to give you some encouragement." That same phenomenon happened twice more, both times unexpectedly, and probably that same year later in 1984. Although by the time the third one hit, I'd been going through so many demonic counterfeits, I'd gotten a bit cynical. But even demonic counterfeits indicate the real thing is out there.

One was a reference to Saint Paul, and the other a reference to CS Lews. And it hasn't happened again since.

Since then I've never been able to doubt God exists, even if His ways can be very frustrating at times. We had a song at mass tonight which included words indicating his ways are so far above us it's not funny. We'll never be able to figure out what He's up to, with the occasional light bulb going off in hindsight, after a particular event is well and truly over.

I've got that advantage. But that experience is not transferable. I can tell someone about it, and that's it. I can't use it to prove to them that God is real.

If I were the OP, I'd be asking God for a definite sign of His existence. If He does give the OP something, it will be out of the blue, but unmistakable when it happens.

Meanwhile we can go through all the philosophical labyrinths we want, but in the end it boils down to faith, coupled with experience.

If it was that easy, then why did Christ say to Saint (Doubting) Thomas ... NIV John 20:29...

"... Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed...""

The implication is that it is not always going to be easy, and that was hot off the press from Christ Himself.