I found this helpful & edifying. As an Orthodox convert believer in the US, it’s difficult to navigate political priorities & practicalities. To be in the world but not of the world. To care but not be attached. Your ending refocused: the Cross must be our prism. God grant us a truly cleansing Lent.
American Catholic here… I remember for a long time sympathizing with Putin’s criticism of the West. I pray for a miracle of humility and peace in Putin’s heart, peace for Ukraine, and the turning away of the West from moral decay and back to Christ. 🙏✝️🇺🇦🇷🇺🇺🇸
@@jelenasoljaga1995 Yes we must pray for Both Ukraine and Russia. The waist and slaughter of human life is a sin and of course contrary to the principles of Orthodoxy. We must pray.
Very insightful! The message of Christ (gospel) vs a "authoritarian/gnostic" manipulation of Orthodoxy. May God watch over Fr. Cyril and his brother & family.
Thank you both for this video -- it explains so much. We are praying for you, Father, your brother & the people of Ukraine. May The Lord bring peace and healing to Ukraine & Europe. The world is praying for you and Ukraine and for peace. God Bless you and us all, Amen:)
Thank you Sr. As a Catholic, I greatly enjoy your work and your show. I keep you and the Orthodox Church ever in my prayers. May God continue to bless you and your viewers. Blessings for this coming Lent, and may we keep our peace and pray for the peace of the world together, as one Mystical Body of Christ! Pax et Bonum
Excited about your book. I'm a mere aspirant trying to grow a private practice. The nearest mission is an hour away. Keeping (at least a couple of) the Hours and reading the daily lessons seems like a good beginning. Much love Sister.
this is helpful and intriguing indeed. ! by Thurs. night 2/24, Patriarch Kirill had made a statement which seemed timid and disappointing, unfortunately, and not in synch with that of Metrop.. Onufri.
Thank you for this very good Podcast, thank you for this excellent explanations. For me as a protestant grown up in the tradition of Zwingli, It is very interessting. My prayers and thoughts are with you, with Ucrain, with Russia and the whole world including the West and East. Thank you very much. God bless you
Lucky you are orthodox in "the west" when you live in Russia, your free voice was cracked from the regime . Let us pray for all the innocent civilians in Ukrain.
Good discussion. In my opinion if we can focus our attention and place all our hopes and give our utmost attention not on mere fallen man but the divine one. Christ crucified and risen, All things are possible through him, truly when the storms come it pours down on the good and the bad, we all have to trust and bear that in Gods greater providence in everything that happens that it can and could be a blessing in the end. My prayer for Russia and the Ukraine is that the people and their leaders will see the light and understand that God is Love, and gave us the greatest gift of all, that of free will, to choose how we manifest his Love in our lives. However, it seems to me that Russia's leaders have a problem understanding that God given liberties are not just for one but all peoples. God does not play favoritism As for the MP, who are choosing to remain silent in this unfolding horror, understand that God is not a Politician! There will be consequence's to pay for innocent blood shed on both sides Dimitri
With the deepest respect to the guest, Orthodoxy can navigate and frame this crisis without having to adopt German protestant categories that are steeped in Hegelian existentialism. The two view the crucifixion--and what we can say about God in His essence--very differently.
"Hegelian existentialism"??? It sounds like you are conflating different - and conflicting - critiques of the West. In the decades preceding the October Revolution, Russian theology was heavily influenced by German Idealism - i.e., Hegel. Bulgakov was the culmination of this theological strain.
@Arimathean I'm talking about his initial discussion of importing very specific categories from Jürgen Moltmann when talks about "theology in light of Auschwitz" which is a specific form of protestant liberation theology that leans heavily on Kant and Hegel directly for most of its presuppositions. My critique is that this specific system he directly advocated tends to push too far against the impassabiliy of God and tread father beyond the apophatic nature of orthodox theology. It also over-focuses on a staurocentric theology (like in his "The Crucified God") rather than the resurection-focused orientation in the east. The two are not as compatible as that portion of the video makes it sound.
@@arimathean4128 ...and, as a further aside, a significant number of thinkers who have expounded on these ideas of Moltmann have concluded that many patristic sources are irredeemably influenced by heretical philosophies from the hellenic period. There are many opportunities for ecumenical dialogue between east and west with much common ground.... I don't think Moltmann is one of those touchpoints.
My heart goes out to Fr. Hovorun with the most profound empathy. Like he and Moltmann, I have been in the middle of war zones. Like Moltmann, I have watched people die (though I would not pretend to have seen it on the scale that Moltmann did). I pray that Fr. Hovorun avoids this terrible burden. Even like Moltmann, I have had to share in the collective shame of being a soldier in the army of an unjust agressor. With that common history, I have tried to say in this thread that one doesn't need to invent or hybridize theological systems to heal from the horror of war or speak to the powers that cause them.
This is great for a lapsed CofE member. Its a wonderful thing that the Abrahamic and other religions of the Earth are spiritually moving together to a multi polar nature
Sister Vassa, I just stumbled upon this video, more than a year after this horrible war started. Is Fr. Cyril OK? Have you done any follow up videos? Thank you for this program.
If the mind is given to schism, then that is what will prevail. Im Orthodox, we do not have the mind of the saints. If your light shines bright even the flies will be drawn to your light.
As an Arab Muslim: I am not involved in the Christian-Christian debates. However, I liked your dress. It is very modest and looks like The Islamic Hijab which is now demonized by the Western propaganda especially in France: the enemy of Allah .. What I like about Russia is the relative Religious freedom and Tolerance comparing to the West. I Will see the podcast Insha Allah.
There is little religious freedom in Russia, whereas Ukraine enjoys religious freedom. A lot of religious practices of the Eastern Christians were adopted by Muslims, which is why you might see some resemblance with the Islamic tradition.
@@robinpage2730 Russia has 23 millions of Muslims. They are original citizen , not immigrants. As I know, They are practicing Islam freely there. May be the Russian government are only against Islamic seperative movements, not anti-Muslim.
basically you have to assume that Putin is a little mad by his metaphysical mindset and quite primitive in his imperialistic actions masked by a false piety best to pray...in any case if someone is offended while thousands of innocent lives are senselessly lost on both sides is irrelevant but i'm not in your shoes; thank you for placing such a crucial topic in the spotlight
Thank you Sister and Father Kyrill for sharing your perspectives on Putin . I'm wondering if we are not overlooking , at times , the role of the demonic in these matters ?
Thanks, Brad. I think it's quite impossible not to see the demonic in these matters. I posted on Facebook (on my page, Vassa Larin) about the creepy "Z" if you want to check that out.
Unfortunately religion, historically in general has been a tool of manipulation for the masses, especially where there’s geopolitical interests. Orthodox Christmas on the other hand have to choose between nationalism and their faith. Praying for all to come to their senses in peace.
Spiritual successor of the Holy Roman Empire. When Rome fell the capital moved to Constantinople, and when Constantinople fell, it moved to Moscow. Moscow is often thought of, as the third Rome.
@@hampshireconnoly675 You're welcome. If you're into all this as part of personal study, or reading as hobby in general, and you like these topics, here are a few that have come across my path: There's a book, I'm not sure if it's still in print, by Matthew Raphael Johnson, it's called "The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism & Orthodoxy". There's also a couple of works by John Meyendorff called "Rome, Constantinople, Moscow: Historical and Theological Studies", as well as "Byzantium and the rise of Russia". Also, by Fr. Spyridon Bailey called "In Search of Holy Russia". And lastly, Holy Rus': The rebirth of Orthodoxy in the new Russia, by John P Burgess
The Jews were a well organized religion by the time Christ came on earth. Israel, the people that was brought out of Egypt to the promised land , that was given the law and the prophets and instructions regarding the temple and the sacrifices by God, did not receive the Lord Jesus Christ when he first came. John 1:11 He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. This shows that a religion could have the form but not the essence. When this happens spiritual darkness sets in. Let me suggest that it is very possible to practice a religion without having gone through a real transformation. If you do not appreciate the Lord Jesus Christ for what he is and what he has done for you, you cannot love him . Matthew 7:23-34 Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’ My advice is don't go by a religion, go by the Word of God, don't fall in that pitfall of loving your "religion" and failing to love the Lord Jesus Christ. Seek the leadership of God himself and let his Spirit that lives in you, if you belong to Christ, instruct you to gather and edify each other in the ways the first believers of the early church did as shown in the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles. God is well disposed toward us all and willing to instruct those that diligently seek him. Regarding Mr. Putin and orthodoxy, it looks like the forerunner of the Antichrist and the prophet of the end times. The challenge for Russia and the world is to get out of spiritual darkness, and this starts with you and me. Matthew 5:13 “You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot." Sadly, what has happened with Israel is happening to the churches now.
@@georgeargiriadis112 The Psychology of Religion is fascinating. More so since the God/s were removed by Anthropologists, Psychologists, Biologists. But these constructs are comforting of course.
@@miketomlin6040 Something sounds, maybe not "wrong", but still not quite right about saying scientists "removed gods". For sure, the sciences are well served by the scientific method and with skepticism. It's also true that faith is not helpful in the sciences in any capacity, i.e. no good scientist has "faith" in any scientific idea. They rely on ideas that are sports by evidence. To say they "believe" something does not mean the same thing as a religious belief. I think we'd also agree that using a god as an explanation for a scientific idea would be laughable. It doesn't even qualify as bad science... It's just not science at all. The thing is, science doesn't cover all of the human experience. It is a critical part of how we live but it's not life itself. There are aspects of life not governed by science. An example besides faith is the experience of emotion, not the study of emotion mind you but the actual experience of being alive as an emotional creature. The scientific method can't do much for you in the experiences of love or anger or fear unless you are trying to extinguish the feeling. There are lots of theist apologists who contend that you can prove the existence of God. I'm not one of them. Partly because a lot of their arguments are terrible. It's hard for me to explain why I believe in God but I do. I'm sure this is what you mean when you say "the psychology of religion is fascinating" but the paradox is right there. Psychology is a science. It's appropriately governed by what you can observe and test. It doesn't have the language or any real method to study or understand faith. I think maybe we can say faith is, in a way, similar to the experience of emotion. It's not a logical thing. It's just human.
@@georgeargiriadis112 By ''removed'' I mean we now know who invented the various Gods, or God if you adopt a Monotheist , where, when and why. It's not that complex, once the Sapien brain became more capable of abstractive or symbolic thinking, or imagining, the sky was a 'logical' place, mysterious/unknown, to project deity into. Psychologists nowadays explore the neural circuitry of these beliefs, ideations, faiths. As you say ''faith'' which is crucial as religion requires this, if there was evidence it would no longer be faith or a religious idea/l. Are there God/s - no, but is a belief in one or more of utility, is another question, or moral conundrum. One can argue for some folks the hope of a better ''after life'' keeps one going, as it were, especially if born into nasty circumstances. i.e this incarnation is a living hell, to coin a phrase.
@@miketomlin6040 I think you parse "invent" and "discover" with undue and inappropriate certainty for three reasons: * The first thing that comes to mind is that it's not constructive conversation. I think the logical fallacy "begging the question" doesn't only apply when you are making a formal argument. If, for example, I'm talking to an Angels fan about anything, whether or not it applies to baseball, I don't take as a given that the Angels are a terrible team no matter how obviously true that is. (BTW I'm joking, I don't actually care that much about baseball). I argue that this is also non-constructive when theists do the same thing. I think there are times when theists mean to maintain faithfulness to God but because of personal flaws and biases they stumble into being jerks to other people. For example, there is the trope that "atheists hate God". That's a pointless and statement that does not support healthy dialogue. It's also not at all what faithfulness to God looks like * The second reason I think your distinction between "invent" and "discover" is not quite right is that the line between those ideas is actually somewhat fuzzy. There are clear inventions like a fictional character in a particular story. There are also clear discoveries like finding the rogue french fry in the bottom of the McDonalds bag (you can't make it up; it's clearly provably there). There are also abstract ideas that are epiphenomenal to the concrete reality that we are sharing right now. For example, would you say numbers were "invented" or "discovered". I'm fine with calling numbers an invention that we use to create our paradigm of reality, but my point here is that, in contrast to a particular fictional character in a story, the idea of a number is so basic, so universal and so rigidly linked to observable reality that it is not unique to a particular person. I think you can also fairly say that numbers were discovered. When you say "we now know who invented the various Gods, or God if you adopt a Monotheist, where, when and why", once again you are referring to the science of anthropology. The science deals entirely in observable phenomena like how the first evidence of monotheism was attributed to Akhenaten in 14 century BCE Egypt, etc. There is tremendous value in that observation, but we have to add tons of inference to make any statement about the motivation and experience of those people. We don't know if Akhenaten had any sort of perceived personal religious experience or if he was entirely a fraud that used religion to control his people. Even if he was a fraud there is something epiphenomenal about how and why religion as a scheme works. We can study the evidence of what happened around the world and how indigenous people everywhere seemed to have religious experiences, but we have to infer why it seems like such a natural human characteristic to reach out to a god or gods. And that's just talking about the psychology and the epiphenomena in people's minds. I've said nothing about the actual existence of God and I have no idea how to approach that at all in fair neutral scientific terms. I honestly don't think the words or concepts exist for that. * The last reason I think the certainty in how you use "invent" over "discover" is inappropriate is that it seems to turn the usual atheist trope on its head. What I usually hear and read from atheist apologists is how the burden of proof is on the theist because it is the theist that is making the assertion that God exists, and that "a-theist" means non-belief in God rather than the belief that there is no god. The usual trope is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and theists are inherently making the claim and therefore have the burden of proof. Basically, they assert that this very conversation doesn't happen, where you are asserting that God is "invented"... yet here we are. Incidentally, if the goal is to instigate conversation, I'm consciously leaning way into it because I think more comments help Sr Vassa's channel and I'm in for that.
I found this helpful & edifying. As an Orthodox convert believer in the US, it’s difficult to navigate political priorities & practicalities. To be in the world but not of the world. To care but not be attached. Your ending refocused: the Cross must be our prism. God grant us a truly cleansing Lent.
American Catholic here… I remember for a long time sympathizing with Putin’s criticism of the West. I pray for a miracle of humility and peace in Putin’s heart, peace for Ukraine, and the turning away of the West from moral decay and back to Christ.
🙏✝️🇺🇦🇷🇺🇺🇸
Thank you. Praying for Ukraine.
@@jelenasoljaga1995 Yes we must pray for Both Ukraine and Russia. The waist and slaughter of human life is a sin and of course contrary to the principles of Orthodoxy. We must pray.
Very insightful! The message of Christ (gospel) vs a "authoritarian/gnostic" manipulation of Orthodoxy. May God watch over Fr. Cyril and his brother & family.
Thank you both for this video -- it explains so much. We are praying for you, Father, your brother & the people of Ukraine. May The
Lord bring peace and healing to Ukraine & Europe. The world is praying for you and Ukraine and for peace. God Bless you and us all, Amen:)
Thank you Sr. As a Catholic, I greatly enjoy your work and your show. I keep you and the Orthodox Church ever in my prayers. May God continue to bless you and your viewers. Blessings for this coming Lent, and may we keep our peace and pray for the peace of the world together, as one Mystical Body of Christ! Pax et Bonum
What a refreshing discussion, and view into how Orthodox think among themselves! Thanks!
Excited about your book. I'm a mere aspirant trying to grow a private practice. The nearest mission is an hour away. Keeping (at least a couple of) the Hours and reading the daily lessons seems like a good beginning. Much love Sister.
Thank you - I have learned so much over the last hour. Ukraine - and Russian people who are standing up to Putin are so brave. You are in my prayers.
Thank-you, Fr. Cyril and Sister Vassa for this stimulating and informative conversation.
this is helpful and intriguing indeed. ! by Thurs. night 2/24, Patriarch Kirill had made a statement which seemed timid and disappointing, unfortunately, and not in synch with that of Metrop.. Onufri.
Guys, I beg you pray for us. I'm from Ukraine. I beg you.. Only God is our hope, and His Virgin Mother with saints
Thank you. Praying for both Ukraine and Russia.
Thank you for this very good Podcast, thank you for this excellent explanations. For me as a protestant grown up in the tradition of Zwingli, It is very interessting. My prayers and thoughts are with you, with Ucrain, with Russia and the whole world including the West and East. Thank you very much. God bless you
Lucky you are orthodox in "the west" when you live in Russia, your free voice was cracked from the regime . Let us pray for all the innocent civilians in Ukrain.
Good discussion. In my opinion if we can focus our attention and place all our hopes and give our utmost attention not on mere fallen man but the divine one. Christ crucified and risen, All things are possible through him, truly when the storms come it pours down on the good and the bad, we all have to trust and bear that in Gods greater providence
in everything that happens that it can and could be a blessing in the end.
My prayer for Russia and the Ukraine is that the people and their leaders will see the light and understand that God is Love, and gave us the greatest gift of all, that of free will, to choose how we manifest his Love in our lives. However, it seems to me
that Russia's leaders have a problem understanding that God given liberties are not just for one but all peoples. God does not play favoritism As for the MP, who are choosing to remain silent in this unfolding horror, understand that God is not a Politician!
There will be consequence's to pay for innocent blood shed on both sides
Dimitri
I will buy this book.
With the deepest respect to the guest, Orthodoxy can navigate and frame this crisis without having to adopt German protestant categories that are steeped in Hegelian existentialism. The two view the crucifixion--and what we can say about God in His essence--very differently.
"Hegelian existentialism"??? It sounds like you are conflating different - and conflicting - critiques of the West.
In the decades preceding the October Revolution, Russian theology was heavily influenced by German Idealism - i.e., Hegel. Bulgakov was the culmination of this theological strain.
@Arimathean I'm talking about his initial discussion of importing very specific categories from Jürgen Moltmann when talks about "theology in light of Auschwitz" which is a specific form of protestant liberation theology that leans heavily on Kant and Hegel directly for most of its presuppositions.
My critique is that this specific system he directly advocated tends to push too far against the impassabiliy of God and tread father beyond the apophatic nature of orthodox theology. It also over-focuses on a staurocentric theology (like in his "The Crucified God") rather than the resurection-focused orientation in the east. The two are not as compatible as that portion of the video makes it sound.
@@arimathean4128 ...and, as a further aside, a significant number of thinkers who have expounded on these ideas of Moltmann have concluded that many patristic sources are irredeemably influenced by heretical philosophies from the hellenic period. There are many opportunities for ecumenical dialogue between east and west with much common ground.... I don't think Moltmann is one of those touchpoints.
My heart goes out to Fr. Hovorun with the most profound empathy. Like he and Moltmann, I have been in the middle of war zones. Like Moltmann, I have watched people die (though I would not pretend to have seen it on the scale that Moltmann did). I pray that Fr. Hovorun avoids this terrible burden. Even like Moltmann, I have had to share in the collective shame of being a soldier in the army of an unjust agressor.
With that common history, I have tried to say in this thread that one doesn't need to invent or hybridize theological systems to heal from the horror of war or speak to the powers that cause them.
This is great for a lapsed CofE member. Its a wonderful thing that the Abrahamic and other religions of the Earth are spiritually moving together to a multi polar nature
❤ Hello from San Francisco Bay Area
Can’t wait for the book!
Thank you for all this information 🙏
Sister Vassa, I just stumbled upon this video, more than a year after this horrible war started. Is Fr. Cyril OK? Have you done any follow up videos? Thank you for this program.
Faith over Fear 💗 YEAH!
Excellent and thoughtful!
Look forward to your book!!! Thanks
If the mind is given to schism, then that is what will prevail. Im Orthodox, we do not have the mind of the saints. If your light shines bright even the flies will be drawn to your light.
As an Arab Muslim: I am not involved in the Christian-Christian debates.
However, I liked your dress. It is very modest and looks like The Islamic Hijab which is now demonized by the Western propaganda especially in France: the enemy of Allah ..
What I like about Russia is the relative Religious freedom and Tolerance comparing to the West. I Will see the podcast Insha Allah.
There is little religious freedom in Russia, whereas Ukraine enjoys religious freedom. A lot of religious practices of the Eastern Christians were adopted by Muslims, which is why you might see some resemblance with the Islamic tradition.
Russia is very anti-muslim, and Putin has criminalized dissent from the government to a point reminiscent of Soviet times.
@@robinpage2730
Russia has 23 millions of Muslims. They are original citizen , not immigrants. As I know, They are practicing Islam freely there. May be the Russian government are only against Islamic seperative movements, not anti-Muslim.
@@tijojoseph3315
Women modesty is noticed among Muslim women in all over the world. I doubt that Muslim "adopted" Eastern Christian practices.
Hello from Alabama, USA.
basically you have to assume that Putin is a little mad by his metaphysical mindset and quite primitive in his imperialistic actions masked by a false piety
best to pray...in any case if someone is offended while thousands of innocent lives are senselessly lost on both sides is irrelevant but i'm not in your shoes; thank you for placing such a crucial topic in the spotlight
Thank you Sister and Father Kyrill for sharing your perspectives on Putin . I'm wondering if we are not overlooking , at times , the role of the demonic in these matters ?
Thanks, Brad. I think it's quite impossible not to see the demonic in these matters. I posted on Facebook (on my page, Vassa Larin) about the creepy "Z" if you want to check that out.
❤️
What does the Saints say about war?
Unfortunately religion, historically in general has been a tool of manipulation for the masses, especially where there’s geopolitical interests. Orthodox Christmas on the other hand have to choose between nationalism and their faith. Praying for all to come to their senses in peace.
Great and clear answer. It was and is during 2000 years always a risk to be a christian. It is a longlife strugle. We pray for eachother.
@@br.samuel4754 ❤️
Жаль, что не понимаю английский!
Sister VAsa,
Is Russia the successor state to Byzantine empire which fell in 1453?
Spiritual successor of the Holy Roman Empire. When Rome fell the capital moved to Constantinople, and when Constantinople fell, it moved to Moscow. Moscow is often thought of, as the third Rome.
@@mrlozano
Ok thanks for the clarification because when Constantinople fell many of the elders emigrated to Russia.
@@hampshireconnoly675 You're welcome. If you're into all this as part of personal study, or reading as hobby in general, and you like these topics, here are a few that have come across my path:
There's a book, I'm not sure if it's still in print, by Matthew Raphael Johnson, it's called "The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism & Orthodoxy".
There's also a couple of works by John Meyendorff called "Rome, Constantinople, Moscow: Historical and Theological Studies", as well as "Byzantium and the rise of Russia".
Also, by Fr. Spyridon Bailey called "In Search of Holy Russia".
And lastly, Holy Rus': The rebirth of Orthodoxy in the new Russia, by John P Burgess
I was under the impression that the Ukranian Orthodox are no longer recognised by Moscow due to the recent schism.
The Jews were a well organized religion by the time Christ came on earth. Israel, the people that was brought out of Egypt to the promised land , that was given the law and the prophets and instructions regarding the temple and the sacrifices by God, did not receive the Lord Jesus Christ when he first came.
John 1:11
He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him.
This shows that a religion could have the form but not the essence. When this happens spiritual darkness sets in. Let me suggest that it is very possible to practice a religion without having gone through a real transformation. If you do not appreciate the Lord Jesus Christ for what he is and what he has done for you, you cannot love him .
Matthew 7:23-34
Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you workers of lawlessness!’
My advice is don't go by a religion, go by the Word of God, don't fall in that pitfall of loving your "religion" and failing to love the Lord Jesus Christ. Seek the leadership of God himself and let his Spirit that lives in you, if you belong to Christ, instruct you to gather and edify each other in the ways the first believers of the early church did as shown in the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistles.
God is well disposed toward us all and willing to instruct those that diligently seek him.
Regarding Mr. Putin and orthodoxy, it looks like the forerunner of the Antichrist and the prophet of the end times.
The challenge for Russia and the world is to get out of spiritual darkness, and this starts with you and me.
Matthew 5:13
“You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled underfoot."
Sadly, what has happened with Israel is happening to the churches now.
Pray? It's 2022 not 1022! The God constructs are long gone!
And yet here we are, commenting on a channel run by someone who has dedicated her life to God followed by lots of people who pray. Fascinating, huh?
@@georgeargiriadis112 The Psychology of Religion is fascinating. More so since the God/s were removed by Anthropologists, Psychologists, Biologists. But these constructs are comforting of course.
@@miketomlin6040 Something sounds, maybe not "wrong", but still not quite right about saying scientists "removed gods".
For sure, the sciences are well served by the scientific method and with skepticism. It's also true that faith is not helpful in the sciences in any capacity, i.e. no good scientist has "faith" in any scientific idea. They rely on ideas that are sports by evidence. To say they "believe" something does not mean the same thing as a religious belief.
I think we'd also agree that using a god as an explanation for a scientific idea would be laughable. It doesn't even qualify as bad science... It's just not science at all.
The thing is, science doesn't cover all of the human experience. It is a critical part of how we live but it's not life itself. There are aspects of life not governed by science. An example besides faith is the experience of emotion, not the study of emotion mind you but the actual experience of being alive as an emotional creature. The scientific method can't do much for you in the experiences of love or anger or fear unless you are trying to extinguish the feeling.
There are lots of theist apologists who contend that you can prove the existence of God. I'm not one of them. Partly because a lot of their arguments are terrible. It's hard for me to explain why I believe in God but I do.
I'm sure this is what you mean when you say "the psychology of religion is fascinating" but the paradox is right there. Psychology is a science. It's appropriately governed by what you can observe and test. It doesn't have the language or any real method to study or understand faith.
I think maybe we can say faith is, in a way, similar to the experience of emotion. It's not a logical thing. It's just human.
@@georgeargiriadis112 By ''removed'' I mean we now know who invented the various Gods, or God if you adopt a Monotheist , where, when and why. It's not that complex, once the Sapien brain became more capable of abstractive or symbolic thinking, or imagining, the sky was a 'logical' place, mysterious/unknown, to project deity into. Psychologists nowadays explore the neural circuitry of these beliefs, ideations, faiths. As you say ''faith'' which is crucial as religion requires this, if there was evidence it would no longer be faith or a religious idea/l. Are there God/s - no, but is a belief in one or more of utility, is another question, or moral conundrum. One can argue for some folks the hope of a better ''after life'' keeps one going, as it were, especially if born into nasty circumstances. i.e this incarnation is a living hell, to coin a phrase.
@@miketomlin6040 I think you parse "invent" and "discover" with undue and inappropriate certainty for three reasons:
* The first thing that comes to mind is that it's not constructive conversation. I think the logical fallacy "begging the question" doesn't only apply when you are making a formal argument. If, for example, I'm talking to an Angels fan about anything, whether or not it applies to baseball, I don't take as a given that the Angels are a terrible team no matter how obviously true that is. (BTW I'm joking, I don't actually care that much about baseball).
I argue that this is also non-constructive when theists do the same thing. I think there are times when theists mean to maintain faithfulness to God but because of personal flaws and biases they stumble into being jerks to other people. For example, there is the trope that "atheists hate God". That's a pointless and statement that does not support healthy dialogue. It's also not at all what faithfulness to God looks like
* The second reason I think your distinction between "invent" and "discover" is not quite right is that the line between those ideas is actually somewhat fuzzy. There are clear inventions like a fictional character in a particular story. There are also clear discoveries like finding the rogue french fry in the bottom of the McDonalds bag (you can't make it up; it's clearly provably there).
There are also abstract ideas that are epiphenomenal to the concrete reality that we are sharing right now. For example, would you say numbers were "invented" or "discovered". I'm fine with calling numbers an invention that we use to create our paradigm of reality, but my point here is that, in contrast to a particular fictional character in a story, the idea of a number is so basic, so universal and so rigidly linked to observable reality that it is not unique to a particular person. I think you can also fairly say that numbers were discovered.
When you say "we now know who invented the various Gods, or God if you adopt a Monotheist, where, when and why", once again you are referring to the science of anthropology. The science deals entirely in observable phenomena like how the first evidence of monotheism was attributed to Akhenaten in 14 century BCE Egypt, etc. There is tremendous value in that observation, but we have to add tons of inference to make any statement about the motivation and experience of those people. We don't know if Akhenaten had any sort of perceived personal religious experience or if he was entirely a fraud that used religion to control his people. Even if he was a fraud there is something epiphenomenal about how and why religion as a scheme works. We can study the evidence of what happened around the world and how indigenous people everywhere seemed to have religious experiences, but we have to infer why it seems like such a natural human characteristic to reach out to a god or gods. And that's just talking about the psychology and the epiphenomena in people's minds. I've said nothing about the actual existence of God and I have no idea how to approach that at all in fair neutral scientific terms. I honestly don't think the words or concepts exist for that.
* The last reason I think the certainty in how you use "invent" over "discover" is inappropriate is that it seems to turn the usual atheist trope on its head. What I usually hear and read from atheist apologists is how the burden of proof is on the theist because it is the theist that is making the assertion that God exists, and that "a-theist" means non-belief in God rather than the belief that there is no god. The usual trope is that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and theists are inherently making the claim and therefore have the burden of proof. Basically, they assert that this very conversation doesn't happen, where you are asserting that God is "invented"... yet here we are.
Incidentally, if the goal is to instigate conversation, I'm consciously leaning way into it because I think more comments help Sr Vassa's channel and I'm in for that.