“When a Russian cosmonaut returned from space and reported that he had not found God, C. S. Lewis responded that this was like Hamlet going into the attic of his castle and looking for Shakespeare.”
@@rhwinner The Communists didn’t kill religion, they just suppressed it. I find it inspiring how many Russians kept their faith in spite of the repression.
When you sense the press of Truth itself; when you experience the breakthrough of the Good itself, you are in the presence of what I'm calling the unconditioned.
Your very persistent participation in this discussion is proving my point! You have a curious mind, which is another way of saying a restless mind, always looking for greater and greater truth. And I trust that you have a restless will. Follow those leads, and you will come to what I mean by "God."
~13 years later~ What if you're not a Christian or a Priest? The assertion, or, widely held belief among philosophers that God is Truth is a very American idea, and a very enlightenment idea: the idea that God is an idea, or perhaps more appropriately, the idea. In existing, a monotheistic God necessarily brings into being an objective truth due to singleness and superiority. This is not an agreed upon truth, however, it is merely a truth one is subservient to. We are asked to live in the spirit, or, live a spiritual life, or, we simply _want_ to live a spiritual life. This is not of the flesh? We reject the world... and... in a sense... this is a path to higher philosophy (and truth, maybe?), but, also, a path towards utopia, away from reality, which is, probably, definitionally, not the truth. _Quid est veritas? What is truth?_ The truth is _not_ whatever airy hippie garbage is subjectively floating around in your head. *God is authority* and he sets his subjective truth, _which is naturally perfect,_ as _the_ objective truth, because he has the authority to do so, because he's God. The ideal of truth may be non-functional and non-descriptive of our non-heavenly world. Thusly, by defending God's existence with the claim that he is the truth, all you really do is sink heaven with God. This... 'spiritism', is easily dispatched as emotional nonsense asserted as divine inspiration hidden behind *two* layers of open admissions that you have no idea what's going on before asserting that you are basically King David's right hand man. 1) belief/faith: so you dont know whats going on 2) God is the truth aka someone other than me is the truth... i don't personally know what's going on... now let me assert what the truth is 🙄 Following the rules and obeying a chain of command is good, and will get you everywhere, but, at the same time, it misses one of the central themes of Christianity: that being the personal way in which Jesus Christ instructs his followers. I work backwards from scriptural truth, gospel inerrancy, i guess. The way Christianity works is via personal subjective Christs coalescing into a person. He is the truth, aka, we are (the truth). God is authority, and you thinking that's the truth might just mean you're a statist (or Catholic). And before you say trinitarianism- gospel inerrancy. Basically... post-protestant philosophy thinks God is the truth, but it's just an enlightenment Judeo-Christian fasttrack to atheism, with designs on developing empiricism. You just think you've made a solid argument because truth resonates with Captain America, and because near-on nobody can ascend to your plane of intellectual prowess. You: God is truth. Me: That's infallibility nonsense having to with The Catholic Church. You're atheists and your Jewish L.A.R.P. is so outdated it hasn't heard about Jesus Christ.
@@SpiritualFox Hey man, I was just reading your comment. Can you give me a summary of what you are saying because I am interested in what you are trying to argue here, but it is kind of hard to read (maybe because I have the reading ability of a 5th grader). Thanks in advance.
Yes I do. God permits certain evils in order to bring about goods that couldn't be produced in any other way. This happens in human affairs all the time. We permit the pain of surgery in order to bring about long-term health; we permit the suffering caused by a strict diet in order to bring about weight loss, etc., etc.
Great job Father! Amidst all the criticisms and verbal persecutions, I encourage you to keep doing what you do, stay strong, and unite yourself even more so to our Lord Jesus Christ. You are setting this world on fire with Christ's love and truth through this ministry. God bless :)
Is your mind ever satisfied by the truths that you discover through science or philosophy? Is your will ever fully satisfied by the goods you can attain in this world? The permanent restlessness of the human spirit is a function of our desire for the unconditioned or absolute expression of truth and goodness. And friend, if you really thought that truth is just "a human concept," a subjective whim, you wouldn't be engaging me in this conversation!
God deigns to work through secondary causes. This means that he works through flawed, finite, and sinful creatures. That's why things aren't as neat as you seem to want them to be. But as Paul said, "we hold a treasure in earthen vessels."
Fr., thanks for the great video. It explains to me why a person in deep, personal, intense prayer finds peace, healing, and love. It is because he or she has connected with Truth itself, Peace itself, Love itself. The will has found its home and is filled with everything it could ever want.
Don't think of "God" as a being other than Goodness itself or Beauty itself. Precisely as the unconditioned source of existence, God is the Good and the Beautiful. In the measure that you intuit those things in their properly unconditioned form, you are intuiting God.
This argument hinges on the nature of the unconditioned. I'm saying that we do indeed have an experience of the unconditioned, under the forms of Being Itself, Beauty Itself, Truth Itself, etc. Now the unconditioned, by definition, cannot be sequestered in the arena of subjectivity alone, since that would make it conditioned. Therefore, the desire for the Unconditioned does indeed prove the existence of such a reality.
Here's what is behind your caricature in regard to the argument from desire: We all desire the transcendentals in their unconditioned form. This means that we have some inchoate knowledge of goodness itself, beauty itself, and truth itself. What is properly unconditioned cannot be simply sequestered in the realm of subjectivity, for that would condition it. Hence, to know the unconditioned is to know it precisely as transcending the subjective/objective split.
Human beings are a bad lot. I agree with you. We do terrible things. But to blame this exclusively on religion, after Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot is just incomprehensible to me.
@Kachikwulu AKABOGU Hitler wouldn't quote the Bible if was pretending to be Christian or justify acting against Jews with the bible. It's arguable. But then, I could just mention the crusades, the inquisition, the purge, and many others with plain non arguable Christianity.
I do not want " attack " you but your faith must not depend of one Man or one Situation even when all the really horrific things done by priest that does not change the messege of God neither make the church less true , the church Is all of us ( church comes from greek and can be translate as community ) we all are siners AND priest , bishops and even the Pope are not diferent we share the belief that christ Is our lord AND Savior he has founded the church for siners like me or everyone to be able to be in comunion whit God that does not mean that anyone can fail
Here's the difference. To desire space-elves is indeed to have real contact at least with the idea of space elves, for you can't desire what you don't know. To desire the unconditioned is to have a real idea of the unconditioned. But this cannot be simply an "idea" as opposed to an objective reality, since to limit it in that way would be to render it conditioned. Therefore, to desire the properly unconditioned is indeed to know it as something real.
@deffan84 Why do you think that the answers developed by religion and philosophy are necessarily wrong? Not every kind of question can be addressed through "science." What is the beautiful? What is justice? What is a good life? Why is there something rather than nothing? These are all valid questions and wise people have provided some very interesting answers to them. You'd discover that if you read outside the sciences.
@AcidWacker Mark was a companion of St. Peter who was an intimate disciple of Jesus. John was either the disciple himself or a close associate of his. Luke was a companion of Paul, who saw the risen Christ. And friend, where do you think the eye-witnesses went after the resurrection? Did they all just die or disappear? No, they continued to be a powerful source within the community of believers, passing on their memories and experiences. These formed the basis for the Gospels.
You're right: you won't get it in this life. But admit that you want it, that you would like to have it. Follow that desire all the way, and you will come to what I mean by "God."
To say that God cannot be defined doesn't imply for a moment that he can't be described or gestured toward rationally. If you want, God is Ipsum Esse, the sheer act of to be itself. He is the non-contingent ground of contingent reality.
How did you figure that out though? Its like a math problem you cant just write your answer underneath the question and expect anyone to understand how you got it, what are the steps you took to reach that conclusion? I realize im replying 5 years late but it helps to write out the things im thinking as i think.
God is not one thing among many. He does not belong to a genus or a species, and hence he cannot be defined. He is not the highest being, but rather Being Itself (Ipsum Esse). He is the unconditioned source of conditioned reality, or in more Biblical terms, the Creator.
Isn't the word God made to describe the scriptural god "Yaway"? From what I understand, people would use the word God or the letters Yod, Hey, Vav, Hey to refer to Yaway to not use his name is vane. I'm awhere that the scriptures actually means the mention of him rather then just the name though. Personally, I think I'd make more sense to just call him father as respect. I'm not really involved in these kinds of subjects, but I'd like to know your thoughts.
@@markfultonorg Come on, Mark. There's not a real argument in sight here, just a lot of anti-religious blather. I've made an argument, namely, that contingent reality can be explained only through recourse to some reality which is non-contingent. Let's start there. Tell me precisely where you think this argument fails.
Well first of all "religion" isn't the same as God. And of course God loves everyone unconditionally, but this implies that his love calls all of us to conversion, for all of us fall short, to varying degrees, of the joy that God wants us to have.
@stevenweir76 You know, I'd appreciate your dropping the sarcasm. I don't know how it advances the argument at all. The whole point of the argument is that contingency requires, finally, a non-contingent ground, something which exists simply because it is its nature to exist. Otherwise, we are faced with an infinite regress of contingent causes. "God" is the name that Catholic philosophy gives to that self-subsisting, non-contingent cause.
Dear Father Barron, I have been listening to your comments for a long time now and I have to stay I'm impressed with your intellectual thinking and your choice of words to reach who is willing to listen and accept Lord Jesus into their lifes!. greetings from a Coptic Orthodox admirer. God bless you 🙏 ❤️
So you are utterly satisfied with the truth you have attained or could attain through the sciences, philosophy, etc? And you're utterly satisfied with the justice you've seen attained so far? And your will is utterly content with the good that it has achieved? If the answer to these questions is no (and it has to be), then you do indeed implicitly desire the unconditioned good, true, and just. And the reason you don't really desire the things you mentioned is that you know they aren't real.
@AletheianAeon Friend, I don't deny for a moment that science and spirituality can go hand in hand. In fact, I spend a lot of time on these forums defending their fundamental compatibility. That said, there is a legitimate distinction between science and religion and the types of questions that they entertain. To say that science cannot adjudicate questions of ultimate meaning and purpose is not to denigrate science in any way. It is simply to insist on its limits.
A curious mind is one that is never satisfied with the truth that it has. It keeps (restlessly) looking for more and more truth. Leave "god" out of it for the moment. I just want you to see that the trajectory of your mind is toward the fullness of truth, toward knowing, as Lonergan put it, "everything about everything." That properly unconditioned truth is what Catholic theology means by "the beatific vision," or seeing God face to face.
Well, call it whatever you want. But that's what the Catholic Church means by God. But keep in mind that that which is truly unconditioned must be absolute and unlimited in its being.
@Brownwith0 Well, by definition, there can't be more than one unconditioned, for plurality always involves negativity: one is not the other. Secondly, Yahweh is the one who named himself as "I am who I am." I might translate that into philosophical language as follows: my essence is my existence. And this identity can be true only of the unconditioned.
Thank you! So you have finally admitted that your will is indeed ordered to the unconditioned good and your mind toward the unconditioned truth. Now search out the full implications of the word "unconditioned." What you can't say is that this is just a subjective fantasy, for the minute you've done that, you've effectively rendered it conditioned, less than absolute, and you've involved yourself in a formal contradiction. For the details, take a look at St. Anselm's ontological argument.
@FranklinsLighthouse Friend, would you really expect to find the architect in the building that he has made? Or Michelangelo in the Sistine Ceiling? The Creator of space and time is not an object within space and time.
The question I constantly asked myself and I would usually ask myself this question after praying to our Heavenly Father matter of fact is, “Why do I and others say if they lived a life without God that life would meaningless, pointless, etc?” And also I would sometimes ask myself, “Why do I believe in God in the first place?” And by no means am I ever gonna stop following in Gods footsteps, but sometimes I feel that I am uncertain about who God really is and sometimes forget why I am praying in the first place and sometimes have questions about how would life be pointless and unsatisfying without God. But after watching this video I feel like I have a better understanding of who God is and why I truly pray to Him, follow Him, and believe in Him. I still have a lot of learning to do but this was a good informative video about why people believe in God and continue to believe in God throughout their lives.
God is the unconditioned act of being itself, which means that he is, concomitantly, unconditioned goodness, beauty, and truth, since the good, the true and the beautiful are transcendental properties of being. As for the Bible, it might be a good idea, friend, to get a basic book on scriptural hermeneutics so that you might be better able to interpret the passages in question.
Why are people atheists? Let's see: because they refuse to pose the deepest questions about the existence of a contingent world; because they don't want to surrender their autonomy; because they don't want to accept moral absolutes. See, anyone can play the psychological game, but it doesn't really get us anywhere, for it doesn't address the truth of falsity of the claims in question. It's what's called in logic "the genetic fallacy."
Hi, 1) Our ability to explain and predict physical behavior follows from a process of observation and objective reasoning (i.e. the scientific method). This process can not disprove the existence of God because the very process has deliberately left God, or any deeper driving force, out of the question. For example, the development of Newtonian physics was never dependent on our understanding of quantum mechanics. The claim that our ability to predict nature disproves the existence of God is like saying that our ability to make predictions via Newtonian physics disproves quantum mechanics. 2) A society can make technological and scientific advancements while still believing in God; indeed, this has been much of the case up to today. A lot of the scientific development in the past occurred under the guidance of religious institutions, and they continue to play a role today. Also science does not provide us with morality; it was explicitly decoupled from the question. This exaltation of science above all else leaves you with a base materialism at best, and is misguided.
Scientific Naturalism I'm sorry, in your first comment your premise and conclusion have no logical relationship. Your second point has many modern day examples that contradict your statement. Your reasoning is unsound. I'm sorry
@AcidWacker Friend, no serious scholar thinks that Jesus' historicity is in question. Even those who emphatically deny that he is divine hold that he existed. We have far more reliable information about Jesus than we do about practically any other figure from ancient times. A better question is this: why do you automatically doubt the witness of the four Gospels?
@NoobyDavid No. And he can't "make" 2 + 2 = 5 either. To say that God is omnipotent is to say that he can do anything. The rock in question and the equation in question are not things.
@Relativisticism I'm arguing that God is the properly unconditioned good and that every moral agent has an at least inchoate sense of that unconditioned good. Drop the word "God" if you want (like many, you seem allergic to it), and speak of Goodness Itself. It wouldn't change anything essential.
@bluewatermonster I'm talking about the mind as such, or the mind in its pure form. You're quite right in suggesting that the unconditioned desire for truth gets covered over or obscured by lots of things. This is why, by the way, the church says that the mind is as fallen as the will. But we shouldn't take the fallen or compromised mind as paradigmatic. Are you seeking something as banal as "comfort" in writing this response to me for example?
@MW3Insomnia Well, there are some answers that are available to us. One of them is this: there has to be, finally, a non-contingent ground for the contingent universe. Nothing in the universe explains itself. Everything has its being from another. Thus, nothing would exist unless the universe were, ultimately, grounded in some reality whose very nature is to be. And this is what Catholic philosophy means by "God."
Nonsense! God has absolutely no need of the world. The very definition of a "master" is that he needs his slaves. God wants us to follow his law, not for his own sake, but precisely for ours, since in that law is our happiness.
@deffan84 "In the end, everything boils down to science." Hmmm...how did you determine the truth of that proposition through "science?" Which empirical observations did you make? Which experiments did you perform? You're involving yourself, friend, in a delicious operational contradiction, I'm afraid.
Then why should I pay the slightest attention to you?! If there is no objective standard of truth, why are you arguing with me and trying to get me to see things your way? On your reading, we just have subjective, incommensurable opinions.
Bishop Barron's talk on catholism and beauty is a standard of truth goodness and beauty !! Will we ever be able to hear Dylan's tangle up in blue the same !!! What a gift you are to us all keep going !!!!
I'm constantly struggling with having faith...my logic always gets in the way and it is truly frustrating and disheartening. I desire to believe steadfastly but just can't seem to. There are so many questions and so few answers at times. 😞
Right there with you Jeanette, and it is agony. I just keep praying and reading scripture, apologetics, you name it. Nobody has a perfect answer. But, I choose to believe and keep seeking God. I suppose I just make a list of axioms for myself, starting with 1: We are not here by accident. Faith is a tough thing, and being a seeker is a royal bitch sometimes. (pardon my language). God Bless!
Not sure if it helps. But it is true, that no one truly knows God until we are introduced to him, much like everything else in this life. Do not see logic as a barrier to faith, but rather a constituent part of faith. True faith, in my opinion, does not throw logic out of the window (that is superstition) but it goes beyond our logic. It is why we are prompted to approach God humbly "as a child" for though we logically can explain his existence (like the arguments from this video) we as fleeting peoples can never fully take onto ourselves the true and full meaning of God. In other words, we can never know all about existence, as he can. We are limited, in many many ways. Prayer and our repentance and our value to "walk with God" will bring you peace. I have found that I have found the way of grace in my life as I have aimed to know God more deeply, and to follow him. I see his hand in my life, and his presence now is unmistakable in some very certain spiritual moments. Do not, in my opinion, remove doubt or logic from your faith, it is such things that keeps faith alive and so powerful. We as people know at all times that we propel ourselves toward a future, as you align it with God, you will feel his hand in your life, after all it is always outstretched. Hope that helps. God Bless ! خُدا حافِ
@Nette, how's faith going? You might want to look a bit into Aquinas for faith and logic. I'm also digging around for the truth, and I don't think that asking questions is a bad thing. Write them down, do research, and ask for the help of others when you need it. But yeah I fully get what you're saying and struggle with it too. I think my brain is starting to logic God out before having faith, since I can't really trust what I understand. But hey, it's been really fruitful thus far and I don't want to leave religion just cause I have questions that I haven't found answers to.
Hi - greetings from South Africa. Been watching your videos for sometime now , and I am grateful that I discovered your videos. I am not Catholic , but I believe that Christ died on the cross for all of us. Going through an intense stage of doubt with regards to my faith in God , but I know He will never forsake me - it is me who has to be strong ( to be quite frank , it's difficult for me.....) thank you for the effort in uploading your videos - it's appreciated .
Friend, any serious text requires interpretation. Do you think Hamlet, Moby Dick, the Wasteland, and the Divine Comedy are as lucid in their meaning as a children's book? Why should the Word of God be any different? And the Catholic Church holds that there is a magisterial teaching authority that prevents the Bible from being read any old way.
@niles136 How do you explain the fact that contingent things exist? You can't appeal endlessly to other contingent things. You must come, finally, to some reality which exists through the power of its own essence. This is what I mean by "God."
@cristoffwarren Nothing created God, since God's very nature is to be. And the creation of human beings in God's image means that we have, like God, intellect, will, and freedom.
Well actually, you don't desire those things. But you most certainly desire unconditioned truth, justice, and goodness. Now tease out the full implications of the word "unconditioned," and you'll see what I'm driving at.
@nsofast Properly understood, the ontological argument is extremely powerful. So much of modern philosophy bought into Kant's critique of it, but Kant barely understood it. Show me, please, how the words I'm using here (semantics) aren't describing reality--especially in its unconditioned form.
@GoingGoingGalt I know exactly what you mean; I just happen to think it's false. The practical universality of belief in God across the ages is a demonstration that a sense of the sacred is in-born. I explain this as the longing for the unconditioned good, true, and beautiful.
@bradyhater1 God didn't create sin; we did. The Christian belief is that God entered into sin--going all the way into godforsakenness--in order to transform it from within. That's the "sacrifice" which the Father finds satisfying.
That's too starkly stated. Faith, properly defined, is a surrender beyond reason. Thus, it is never opposed to what reason can demonstrate, just the contrary. And I have no idea why you think that a rational demonstration of God's existence would make him less important to us.
@Nodelusionnow Well I agree that both science and religion are interested in questions of causality, science in proximate causality and religion in ultimate causality.
@niles136 Come on friend. I'm not a creationist, and the Big Bang theory was first proposed by a Catholic priest! "Science" cannot possibly adjudicate the question of the universe's existence, for it is a properly philosophical or religious question. I would invite you to respond to the argument from contingency that I offered in my last post.
@AfSaco20 Why are rocks, trees, and birds all characterized by a stunning level of mathematically describable intelligibility? The sciences of geology, biology and ornythology would never get off the ground unless their practitioners assumed that the objects of their study were formal in structure. That's interesting, I think, and begs for an explanation.
We believe in God because he does exist. Our own being and the creations all around us is proof of His existence. What thoughts come to mind when we observe the starry, seemingly endless heavens, or the many and varied forms of life on earth? Are we moved to on the ‘source’ of these things? This is called reasoning from “effect” to “cause.” Reasoning on the existing “effect,” creation, makes it evident that there must be some “cause” behind it. Have we ever known life to come from any source other than life? Those who question God’s existence generally try to evade this simple question. Belief in God is also necessary to explain conscience in man. Why do we say that? A brief examination of the subject reveals the reason. Wherever and whenever men have lived, there has been an inborn sense of right and wrong, also sometimes called moral law or natural law, to guide their actions. Who put those laws in man? Or did they just happen out of the blue? The Bible, too, is proof that God exists. How is that? Much of the Bible contains detailed prophecies or predictions. If there is no God, how can these be explained? A case in point: How could the Bible have foretold hundreds of years in advance where Jesus would be born? (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:1-6) His family line? (Genesis 22:15-18; 49:10; 2 Samuel 7:8-16; Matthew 1:1, 2, 6) When he would appear as Messiah? (Daniel 9:24-27) Certainly Jesus himself could do very little to control these factors. Yet these and hundreds of other prophecies of this nature in the Bible came true. How could this be, unless there is a farseeing God? No man has such ability to peer into the future. Further, what the Bible does for people who ‘actually apply its principles’ proves there is a God. Some may think that God has been responsible for death and suffering. But would that give life a satisfying purpose? Interestingly, the Bible does not teach that God is responsible for suffering and death. Quite the contrary, in its opening book the Bible shows that ‘man’ has brought suffering and death on himself. Further, the Bible shows that rather than allow present wicked conditions like those to continue, God will shortly end them and restore paradise to this earth. Most of those who have died will be ‘brought back to life’ by a resurrection. But, only a belief in God makes such a heart-cheering understanding possible. (Genesis 3:3, 17-19; Ecclesiastes 7:29; John 5:28, 29; Revelation 21:3, 4) How reasonable, therefore, to accept belief in God! Life then can have true meaning and purpose!
There is no moral law, he exists only in your imagination. He is a manifestation gateway to your desire and excuses. Its not reasonable to believe in God. Gods that cause people to fear and wage wars at each other. People who believe this much only wish to die and when they do they hope that they can take alot of people with them.
WhiteWolfos Maybe he exists only in YOUR imagination but to me he actually does exist. It is very reasonable to believe in God. Especially when you see all he said would occur is happening right in front of our eyes. He said that the ruler of this world which the Bible identifies as 'Satan' is making people believe that God doesn't care much less exist. There are many different reasons why ppl chose to not believe in God, but no matter what their reasons are it only strengthens our faith in God because all his words are coming to realization.
Strong Heart You might want to rethink that satan part bit. He was introduced until the Greek influence came along with Hades. Satan pretty much works for god. And its annoying when people delete my replies.
***** thou shall not kill (people)is something that should come naturally to you as well as other things. You dont need the to learn ten commandments to know that.
Yes let's believe in a being that condemns you for the bad things you do. But hooray, it's ok because you can repent and ask for forgiveness. SO LET THE HYPOCRISY RAIN.
I think that people are afraid of not knowing what's gonna happen to them after they pass. So that's why they believe in something to give them something to look forward too when ever they do pass.
What about religious concepts were afterlife is worse than life (e.g. Hell in Christianity or Samsara for Hindus), where there is no afterlife (e.g. Pirahã tribe and other animistic groups) or where it is not that important (e.g. Jews or ancient Greeks)? 🤔 Reasonable anthropology proved this kind of fragment to be wrong.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19 I like your point of view sir . But the thing is , The main problem in this day and age is People lack knowledge. They aren't very well educated. And I think that's the downfall of our human race.
@mthouser123 Bracket the word "God." I'm arguing that a non-contingent ground has to be found for contingent existence. In regard to 1) I'm indifferent to the time question; it doesn't effect the ontological priority of the non-contingent. 2) Time can be finite or infinite: it doesn't effect the issue at hand. 3) "The universe" is just shorthand for the sum total of contingent things. Thus it can't "explain itself." 4) I'll get to this eventually.
@arizonaviking Well, if Freud and Darwin said it, it must be true! Hmmmm... I'm making rational arguments, and you're appealing to authorities. And I'm supposed to be the representative of a primitve superstition?!
@deffan84 Absolutely not! That's just weird scientistic imperialism. "Science" doesn't decide anything in regard to aesthetics, politics, morality, metaphysics, or epistemology. I love the sciences, but you're making completely extravagent claims for them.
@RageAndQuit Well friend, I've offered a rather straightforward argument. There are things that don't explain themselves. In trying to explain them, we can't endlessly appeal to other things that also need to be explained. We have to come, finally, to some source of existence that doesn't need to be explained, whose very nature it is to be. This is the God who said of himself in Exodus 3:14, "I am who I am." Tell me precisely where you think this argument is faulty.
No but what I and Fr. Barron are saying is that it's a good place to start for those searching for God or those who are interested in this particular topic.
@twistedH3L1X Well, that's just silly. I'm trying to explain why we (believers) find belief in God rationally compelling. I don't see how you could interpret that as arrogant. Would you be "arrogant" if you offered an explanation for your atheism?
@mjduke27 But we're not in control of our lives! Did you determine when and how you'd be born? Will you determine when and how you will die? Can you live for more than a few seconds without breathing or for more than a few days without eating and drinking?! These are all indicators of your radical contingency. I'm not "afraid" of admitting something; I'm just acknowledging fundamental facts.
@eeeaten Okay enemy, explain to me precisely how the unconditioned reality, the ground of all finite existence, the infinite God could possibly be described as "a cloud man." You are stuck in your fourth grade catechism class. It's time to graduate!
@ayyawark Well, for one thing, there can be no Falseness itself or Evil itself, since those words name absences not presences. Evil and Falsehood are always parasitic on goodness and truth. And that's why you can't call the object of your deepest longing "the Devil," unless you're using that term simply as a proper name.
@Brownwith0 I'm arguing that this infinite desire actually orders us toward that objective truth and goodness which alone can satisfy it. So I am indeed offering a demonstration of God's existence.
“When a Russian cosmonaut returned from space and reported that he had not found God, C. S. Lewis responded that this was like Hamlet going into the attic of his castle and looking for Shakespeare.”
The cosmonauts were using the wrong ' instruments' to find God in space, and looking in the wrong places
@@bosnia-number-one Weren't they all atheists back then?
@@rhwinner Some communist party members were religious (like Yuri) but most were atheist.
@@rhwinner The Communists didn’t kill religion, they just suppressed it. I find it inspiring how many Russians kept their faith in spite of the repression.
he was only orbiting the earth..the universe is much biger.Jesus was possibly doing mission work on another planet...(possibly correct ?)
Thanks for the support! Please keep me in prayer.
J M J
When you sense the press of Truth itself; when you experience the breakthrough of the Good itself, you are in the presence of what I'm calling the unconditioned.
We do so by reading the Bible, not on our own, but in and through the Church.
Truth is the intelligible; Goodness is the desirable; justice is rendering to each his due.
Your very persistent participation in this discussion is proving my point! You have a curious mind, which is another way of saying a restless mind, always looking for greater and greater truth. And I trust that you have a restless will. Follow those leads, and you will come to what I mean by "God."
@excel958 I've read both Feuerbach and Marx. In fact, I did my Masters thesis in philosophy on Marx. I'm still a Christian and still a priest.
~13 years later~
What if you're not a Christian or a Priest? The assertion, or, widely held belief among philosophers that God is Truth is a very American idea, and a very enlightenment idea: the idea that God is an idea, or perhaps more appropriately, the idea. In existing, a monotheistic God necessarily brings into being an objective truth due to singleness and superiority. This is not an agreed upon truth, however, it is merely a truth one is subservient to.
We are asked to live in the spirit, or, live a spiritual life, or, we simply _want_ to live a spiritual life. This is not of the flesh? We reject the world... and... in a sense... this is a path to higher philosophy (and truth, maybe?), but, also, a path towards utopia, away from reality, which is, probably, definitionally, not the truth.
_Quid est veritas? What is truth?_ The truth is _not_ whatever airy hippie garbage is subjectively floating around in your head. *God is authority* and he sets his subjective truth, _which is naturally perfect,_ as _the_ objective truth, because he has the authority to do so, because he's God.
The ideal of truth may be non-functional and non-descriptive of our non-heavenly world. Thusly, by defending God's existence with the claim that he is the truth, all you really do is sink heaven with God.
This... 'spiritism', is easily dispatched as emotional nonsense asserted as divine inspiration hidden behind *two* layers of open admissions that you have no idea what's going on before asserting that you are basically King David's right hand man. 1) belief/faith: so you dont know whats going on 2) God is the truth aka someone other than me is the truth... i don't personally know what's going on... now let me assert what the truth is 🙄
Following the rules and obeying a chain of command is good, and will get you everywhere, but, at the same time, it misses one of the central themes of Christianity: that being the personal way in which Jesus Christ instructs his followers.
I work backwards from scriptural truth, gospel inerrancy, i guess.
The way Christianity works is via personal subjective Christs coalescing into a person. He is the truth, aka, we are (the truth). God is authority, and you thinking that's the truth might just mean you're a statist (or Catholic).
And before you say trinitarianism- gospel inerrancy.
Basically... post-protestant philosophy thinks God is the truth, but it's just an enlightenment Judeo-Christian fasttrack to atheism, with designs on developing empiricism. You just think you've made a solid argument because truth resonates with Captain America, and because near-on nobody can ascend to your plane of intellectual prowess.
You: God is truth.
Me: That's infallibility nonsense having to with The Catholic Church. You're atheists and your Jewish L.A.R.P. is so outdated it hasn't heard about Jesus Christ.
@@SpiritualFox Hey man, I was just reading your comment. Can you give me a summary of what you are saying because I am interested in what you are trying to argue here, but it is kind of hard to read (maybe because I have the reading ability of a 5th grader). Thanks in advance.
@@SpiritualFox I'll take "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life" for $500, Alex.
Those things in their unconditioned form I call "God." Justice itself, Goodness itself, Truth itself.
Yes I do. God permits certain evils in order to bring about goods that couldn't be produced in any other way. This happens in human affairs all the time. We permit the pain of surgery in order to bring about long-term health; we permit the suffering caused by a strict diet in order to bring about weight loss, etc., etc.
so god is not omnipotent then ?
Great job Father! Amidst all the criticisms and verbal persecutions, I encourage you to keep doing what you do, stay strong, and unite yourself even more so to our Lord Jesus Christ. You are setting this world on fire with Christ's love and truth through this ministry. God bless :)
Is your mind ever satisfied by the truths that you discover through science or philosophy? Is your will ever fully satisfied by the goods you can attain in this world? The permanent restlessness of the human spirit is a function of our desire for the unconditioned or absolute expression of truth and goodness. And friend, if you really thought that truth is just "a human concept," a subjective whim, you wouldn't be engaging me in this conversation!
God deigns to work through secondary causes. This means that he works through flawed, finite, and sinful creatures. That's why things aren't as neat as you seem to want them to be. But as Paul said, "we hold a treasure in earthen vessels."
The young Robert Barron.. already brilliant. This man alone sky-rocketed my love for God and His Church. Bless you!
I'm a Protestant who loves watching your videos. The way you explain things is so clear and informative. Thank you 😊
yes..but most of it is superstitious nonsense ..amen
Fr., thanks for the great video. It explains to me why a person in deep, personal, intense prayer finds peace, healing, and love. It is because he or she has connected with Truth itself, Peace itself, Love itself. The will has found its home and is filled with everything it could ever want.
I needed this massage more than you'll ever know. Thank you God and thank you Bishop Barron for your guidance and knowledge!
if it helps..good ..not necessarily true but that is not the point if it helps...
Don't think of "God" as a being other than Goodness itself or Beauty itself. Precisely as the unconditioned source of existence, God is the Good and the Beautiful. In the measure that you intuit those things in their properly unconditioned form, you are intuiting God.
This argument hinges on the nature of the unconditioned. I'm saying that we do indeed have an experience of the unconditioned, under the forms of Being Itself, Beauty Itself, Truth Itself, etc. Now the unconditioned, by definition, cannot be sequestered in the arena of subjectivity alone, since that would make it conditioned. Therefore, the desire for the Unconditioned does indeed prove the existence of such a reality.
Here's what is behind your caricature in regard to the argument from desire: We all desire the transcendentals in their unconditioned form. This means that we have some inchoate knowledge of goodness itself, beauty itself, and truth itself. What is properly unconditioned cannot be simply sequestered in the realm of subjectivity, for that would condition it. Hence, to know the unconditioned is to know it precisely as transcending the subjective/objective split.
Human beings are a bad lot. I agree with you. We do terrible things. But to blame this exclusively on religion, after Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot is just incomprehensible to me.
Hitler was Christian. The rest believed themselves were god or believed in some kind of God.
@Kachikwulu AKABOGU Hitler wouldn't quote the Bible if was pretending to be Christian or justify acting against Jews with the bible. It's arguable.
But then, I could just mention the crusades, the inquisition, the purge, and many others with plain non arguable Christianity.
Bishop Barron is one of the reasons I remain Catholic even in these scandalous times of betrayal and corruption.
I believe that our belief shouldn't be based on a person, it should solely based upon Jesus.
I do not want " attack " you but your faith must not depend of one Man or one Situation even when all the really horrific things done by priest that does not change the messege of God neither make the church less true , the church Is all of us ( church comes from greek and can be translate as community ) we all are siners AND priest , bishops and even the Pope are not diferent we share the belief that christ Is our lord AND Savior he has founded the church for siners like me or everyone to be able to be in comunion whit God that does not mean that anyone can fail
@mikelfnm A person of the Trinity, yes.
I think he means the people that sin. Who fail. Jesus, as he is God, does not fail us.
@mikelfnm God is not a person, but Jesus is a person in the form of God
Amen
@Daniel151jesus I'm coming to Australia in March of 2012. Thanks for your kind words.
@SweRaider1993 Sure! We need to be saved too. That's why we need religion, which is meant to move us off of our egos and on to God.
Here's the difference. To desire space-elves is indeed to have real contact at least with the idea of space elves, for you can't desire what you don't know. To desire the unconditioned is to have a real idea of the unconditioned. But this cannot be simply an "idea" as opposed to an objective reality, since to limit it in that way would be to render it conditioned. Therefore, to desire the properly unconditioned is indeed to know it as something real.
Now that's what I call a convincing argument!
@deffan84 Why do you think that the answers developed by religion and philosophy are necessarily wrong? Not every kind of question can be addressed through "science." What is the beautiful? What is justice? What is a good life? Why is there something rather than nothing? These are all valid questions and wise people have provided some very interesting answers to them. You'd discover that if you read outside the sciences.
Thanks a lot Fr. Barron, this help me "recognized" many things about our Catholic Faith...I shall support you with my prayers. God be with you!
@AcidWacker Mark was a companion of St. Peter who was an intimate disciple of Jesus. John was either the disciple himself or a close associate of his. Luke was a companion of Paul, who saw the risen Christ. And friend, where do you think the eye-witnesses went after the resurrection? Did they all just die or disappear? No, they continued to be a powerful source within the community of believers, passing on their memories and experiences. These formed the basis for the Gospels.
You're right: you won't get it in this life. But admit that you want it, that you would like to have it. Follow that desire all the way, and you will come to what I mean by "God."
To say that God cannot be defined doesn't imply for a moment that he can't be described or gestured toward rationally. If you want, God is Ipsum Esse, the sheer act of to be itself. He is the non-contingent ground of contingent reality.
How did you figure that out though? Its like a math problem you cant just write your answer underneath the question and expect anyone to understand how you got it, what are the steps you took to reach that conclusion?
I realize im replying 5 years late but it helps to write out the things im thinking as i think.
God is not one thing among many. He does not belong to a genus or a species, and hence he cannot be defined. He is not the highest being, but rather Being Itself (Ipsum Esse). He is the unconditioned source of conditioned reality, or in more Biblical terms, the Creator.
Isn't the word God made to describe the scriptural god "Yaway"? From what I understand, people would use the word God or the letters Yod, Hey, Vav, Hey to refer to Yaway to not use his name is vane. I'm awhere that the scriptures actually means the mention of him rather then just the name though. Personally, I think I'd make more sense to just call him father as respect.
I'm not really involved in these kinds of subjects, but I'd like to know your thoughts.
Why is god a “he”?
@@elainehiggins2380 it's a reference point God is neither she or he , God Is!
@@markfultonorg We can know some things about God, but we can’t know him thoroughly.
@@markfultonorg Come on, Mark. There's not a real argument in sight here, just a lot of anti-religious blather. I've made an argument, namely, that contingent reality can be explained only through recourse to some reality which is non-contingent. Let's start there. Tell me precisely where you think this argument fails.
Well first of all "religion" isn't the same as God. And of course God loves everyone unconditionally, but this implies that his love calls all of us to conversion, for all of us fall short, to varying degrees, of the joy that God wants us to have.
@stevenweir76 You know, I'd appreciate your dropping the sarcasm. I don't know how it advances the argument at all. The whole point of the argument is that contingency requires, finally, a non-contingent ground, something which exists simply because it is its nature to exist. Otherwise, we are faced with an infinite regress of contingent causes. "God" is the name that Catholic philosophy gives to that self-subsisting, non-contingent cause.
@AcidWacker I've read practically all of them. That's why I hold the positions that I do!
Dear Father Barron,
I have been listening to your comments for a long time now and I have to stay I'm impressed with your intellectual thinking and your choice of words to reach who is willing to listen and accept Lord Jesus into their lifes!.
greetings from a Coptic Orthodox admirer. God bless you 🙏 ❤️
So you are utterly satisfied with the truth you have attained or could attain through the sciences, philosophy, etc? And you're utterly satisfied with the justice you've seen attained so far? And your will is utterly content with the good that it has achieved? If the answer to these questions is no (and it has to be), then you do indeed implicitly desire the unconditioned good, true, and just. And the reason you don't really desire the things you mentioned is that you know they aren't real.
@AletheianAeon Friend, I don't deny for a moment that science and spirituality can go hand in hand. In fact, I spend a lot of time on these forums defending their fundamental compatibility. That said, there is a legitimate distinction between science and religion and the types of questions that they entertain. To say that science cannot adjudicate questions of ultimate meaning and purpose is not to denigrate science in any way. It is simply to insist on its limits.
A curious mind is one that is never satisfied with the truth that it has. It keeps (restlessly) looking for more and more truth. Leave "god" out of it for the moment. I just want you to see that the trajectory of your mind is toward the fullness of truth, toward knowing, as Lonergan put it, "everything about everything." That properly unconditioned truth is what Catholic theology means by "the beatific vision," or seeing God face to face.
Thank you Father for your beautiful articulation of our faith! This provides us simple Catholics with "reasons for our hope."
Well, call it whatever you want. But that's what the Catholic Church means by God. But keep in mind that that which is truly unconditioned must be absolute and unlimited in its being.
@Brownwith0 Well, by definition, there can't be more than one unconditioned, for plurality always involves negativity: one is not the other. Secondly, Yahweh is the one who named himself as "I am who I am." I might translate that into philosophical language as follows: my essence is my existence. And this identity can be true only of the unconditioned.
Thank you! So you have finally admitted that your will is indeed ordered to the unconditioned good and your mind toward the unconditioned truth. Now search out the full implications of the word "unconditioned." What you can't say is that this is just a subjective fantasy, for the minute you've done that, you've effectively rendered it conditioned, less than absolute, and you've involved yourself in a formal contradiction. For the details, take a look at St. Anselm's ontological argument.
@FranklinsLighthouse Friend, would you really expect to find the architect in the building that he has made? Or Michelangelo in the Sistine Ceiling? The Creator of space and time is not an object within space and time.
The question I constantly asked myself and I would usually ask myself this question after praying to our Heavenly Father matter of fact is, “Why do I and others say if they lived a life without God that life would meaningless, pointless, etc?” And also I would sometimes ask myself, “Why do I believe in God in the first place?”
And by no means am I ever gonna stop following in Gods footsteps, but sometimes I feel that I am uncertain about who God really is and sometimes forget why I am praying in the first place and sometimes have questions about how would life be pointless and unsatisfying without God. But after watching this video I feel like I have a better understanding of who God is and why I truly pray to Him, follow Him, and believe in Him. I still have a lot of learning to do but this was a good informative video about why people believe in God and continue to believe in God throughout their lives.
God is the unconditioned act of being itself, which means that he is, concomitantly, unconditioned goodness, beauty, and truth, since the good, the true and the beautiful are transcendental properties of being. As for the Bible, it might be a good idea, friend, to get a basic book on scriptural hermeneutics so that you might be better able to interpret the passages in question.
Why are people atheists? Let's see: because they refuse to pose the deepest questions about the existence of a contingent world; because they don't want to surrender their autonomy; because they don't want to accept moral absolutes. See, anyone can play the psychological game, but it doesn't really get us anywhere, for it doesn't address the truth of falsity of the claims in question. It's what's called in logic "the genetic fallacy."
Hi,
1) Our ability to explain and predict physical behavior follows from a process of observation and objective reasoning (i.e. the scientific method). This process can not disprove the existence of God because the very process has deliberately left God, or any deeper driving force, out of the question. For example, the development of Newtonian physics was never dependent on our understanding of quantum mechanics. The claim that our ability to predict nature disproves the existence of God is like saying that our ability to make predictions via Newtonian physics disproves quantum mechanics.
2) A society can make technological and scientific advancements while still believing in God; indeed, this has been much of the case up to today. A lot of the scientific development in the past occurred under the guidance of religious institutions, and they continue to play a role today. Also science does not provide us with morality; it was explicitly decoupled from the question.
This exaltation of science above all else leaves you with a base materialism at best, and is misguided.
Scientific Naturalism I'm sorry, in your first comment your premise and conclusion have no logical relationship.
Your second point has many modern day examples that contradict your statement.
Your reasoning is unsound. I'm sorry
@AcidWacker Friend, no serious scholar thinks that Jesus' historicity is in question. Even those who emphatically deny that he is divine hold that he existed. We have far more reliable information about Jesus than we do about practically any other figure from ancient times. A better question is this: why do you automatically doubt the witness of the four Gospels?
@NoobyDavid No. And he can't "make" 2 + 2 = 5 either. To say that God is omnipotent is to say that he can do anything. The rock in question and the equation in question are not things.
@Relativisticism I'm arguing that God is the properly unconditioned good and that every moral agent has an at least inchoate sense of that unconditioned good. Drop the word "God" if you want (like many, you seem allergic to it), and speak of Goodness Itself. It wouldn't change anything essential.
@bluewatermonster I'm talking about the mind as such, or the mind in its pure form. You're quite right in suggesting that the unconditioned desire for truth gets covered over or obscured by lots of things. This is why, by the way, the church says that the mind is as fallen as the will. But we shouldn't take the fallen or compromised mind as paradigmatic. Are you seeking something as banal as "comfort" in writing this response to me for example?
@MW3Insomnia Well, there are some answers that are available to us. One of them is this: there has to be, finally, a non-contingent ground for the contingent universe. Nothing in the universe explains itself. Everything has its being from another. Thus, nothing would exist unless the universe were, ultimately, grounded in some reality whose very nature is to be. And this is what Catholic philosophy means by "God."
Nonsense! God has absolutely no need of the world. The very definition of a "master" is that he needs his slaves. God wants us to follow his law, not for his own sake, but precisely for ours, since in that law is our happiness.
Hi what happens after death
But he does like the smell of burnt flesh. That's for his own sake, that one.
I'm a believer and a submitter who is studying Quran and here listening to your lectures and enjoying it immensly
Yes if its true
I don't understand Muslims who believe in one of the 360 idols of the Qureshis.
@@mattblaise9160 I don’t either
Thank you and God Bless you Bishop Barron🙏🏻♥️🙌🏻 may you continue bringing us closer to God, Jesus, and our Mother Mary. Amen
Friend, these objections are utterly beside the point. Please scroll down and you'll see that I've answered them dozens of times.
I have a PROFOUND admiration for you, priest! On top of your intelligence and eloquence, you seem like a really nice guy!
Greetings from Brazil!
@deffan84 "In the end, everything boils down to science." Hmmm...how did you determine the truth of that proposition through "science?" Which empirical observations did you make? Which experiments did you perform? You're involving yourself, friend, in a delicious operational contradiction, I'm afraid.
The observation would be that nothing escaping science's grasp has ever been produced. Then, an inference was made.
Then why should I pay the slightest attention to you?! If there is no objective standard of truth, why are you arguing with me and trying to get me to see things your way? On your reading, we just have subjective, incommensurable opinions.
You are really good Fr. Barron. The perspectives and analysis you present are hardly ever heard in the world today. Keep up the good work!
Bishop Barron's talk on catholism and beauty is a standard of truth goodness and beauty !! Will we ever be able to hear Dylan's tangle up in blue the same !!! What a gift you are to us all keep going !!!!
I'm constantly struggling with having faith...my logic always gets in the way and it is truly frustrating and disheartening. I desire to believe steadfastly but just can't seem to. There are so many questions and so few answers at times. 😞
Right there with you Jeanette, and it is agony. I just keep praying and reading scripture, apologetics, you name it. Nobody has a perfect answer. But, I choose to believe and keep seeking God. I suppose I just make a list of axioms for myself, starting with 1: We are not here by accident. Faith is a tough thing, and being a seeker is a royal bitch sometimes. (pardon my language). God Bless!
Not sure if it helps. But it is true, that no one truly knows God until we are introduced to him, much like everything else in this life. Do not see logic as a barrier to faith, but rather a constituent part of faith. True faith, in my opinion, does not throw logic out of the window (that is superstition) but it goes beyond our logic. It is why we are prompted to approach God humbly "as a child" for though we logically can explain his existence (like the arguments from this video) we as fleeting peoples can never fully take onto ourselves the true and full meaning of God. In other words, we can never know all about existence, as he can. We are limited, in many many ways. Prayer and our repentance and our value to "walk with God" will bring you peace. I have found that I have found the way of grace in my life as I have aimed to know God more deeply, and to follow him. I see his hand in my life, and his presence now is unmistakable in some very certain spiritual moments. Do not, in my opinion, remove doubt or logic from your faith, it is such things that keeps faith alive and so powerful. We as people know at all times that we propel ourselves toward a future, as you align it with God, you will feel his hand in your life, after all it is always outstretched. Hope that helps. God Bless ! خُدا حافِ
@Nette, how's faith going? You might want to look a bit into Aquinas for faith and logic. I'm also digging around for the truth, and I don't think that asking questions is a bad thing. Write them down, do research, and ask for the help of others when you need it. But yeah I fully get what you're saying and struggle with it too. I think my brain is starting to logic God out before having faith, since I can't really trust what I understand. But hey, it's been really fruitful thus far and I don't want to leave religion just cause I have questions that I haven't found answers to.
Hi - greetings from South Africa. Been watching your videos for sometime now , and I am grateful that I discovered your videos. I am not Catholic , but I believe that Christ died on the cross for all of us. Going through an intense stage of doubt with regards to my faith in God , but I know He will never forsake me - it is me who has to be strong ( to be quite frank , it's difficult for me.....) thank you for the effort in uploading your videos - it's appreciated .
Friend, any serious text requires interpretation. Do you think Hamlet, Moby Dick, the Wasteland, and the Divine Comedy are as lucid in their meaning as a children's book? Why should the Word of God be any different? And the Catholic Church holds that there is a magisterial teaching authority that prevents the Bible from being read any old way.
@Stitchman3875 I don't mind at all. I'm delighted. Thanks for doing it.
Thank you so much !!!! Your logic has broke thru my limited modern education this revert phd psychologist is so so grateful to you !
KATHY VILARDI God bless you!
Simply Beautiful!
@niles136 How do you explain the fact that contingent things exist? You can't appeal endlessly to other contingent things. You must come, finally, to some reality which exists through the power of its own essence. This is what I mean by "God."
@cristoffwarren Nothing created God, since God's very nature is to be. And the creation of human beings in God's image means that we have, like God, intellect, will, and freedom.
Well actually, you don't desire those things. But you most certainly desire unconditioned truth, justice, and goodness. Now tease out the full implications of the word "unconditioned," and you'll see what I'm driving at.
@nsofast Properly understood, the ontological argument is extremely powerful. So much of modern philosophy bought into Kant's critique of it, but Kant barely understood it. Show me, please, how the words I'm using here (semantics) aren't describing reality--especially in its unconditioned form.
thank you Father ...I found this helpful.
Not an argument in sight, friend. Just a lot of name-calling.
@RageAndQuit Well, respond to the argument from contingency. Tell me where you think it falls short.
@Mystagogia87 Because our sense of moral demand is not merely conditioned but properly unconditioned.
@GoingGoingGalt I know exactly what you mean; I just happen to think it's false. The practical universality of belief in God across the ages is a demonstration that a sense of the sacred is in-born. I explain this as the longing for the unconditioned good, true, and beautiful.
@bradyhater1 God didn't create sin; we did. The Christian belief is that God entered into sin--going all the way into godforsakenness--in order to transform it from within. That's the "sacrifice" which the Father finds satisfying.
That's too starkly stated. Faith, properly defined, is a surrender beyond reason. Thus, it is never opposed to what reason can demonstrate, just the contrary. And I have no idea why you think that a rational demonstration of God's existence would make him less important to us.
Friend, if you really think that Mr. Cynical Skeptic "owned" me, you have no idea what constitutes a cogent argument.
@Nodelusionnow Well I agree that both science and religion are interested in questions of causality, science in proximate causality and religion in ultimate causality.
The Word speaks to me that he wants us all in His Church, the Roman Catholic Church.
No one knows for sure, but it's in life's pains and plights that one finds the need for God.
@niles136 Come on friend. I'm not a creationist, and the Big Bang theory was first proposed by a Catholic priest! "Science" cannot possibly adjudicate the question of the universe's existence, for it is a properly philosophical or religious question. I would invite you to respond to the argument from contingency that I offered in my last post.
@JAB63096 NO! Please read anything by Thomas Aquinas or John Henry Newman in order to get these confusions cleared up.
I must admit, these are one of the better arguments for God that I have heard.
@AfSaco20 Why are rocks, trees, and birds all characterized by a stunning level of mathematically describable intelligibility? The sciences of geology, biology and ornythology would never get off the ground unless their practitioners assumed that the objects of their study were formal in structure. That's interesting, I think, and begs for an explanation.
We believe in God because he does exist. Our own being and the creations all around us is proof of His existence.
What thoughts come to mind when we observe the starry, seemingly endless heavens, or the many and varied forms of life on earth? Are we moved to on the ‘source’ of these things? This is called reasoning from “effect” to “cause.” Reasoning on the existing “effect,” creation, makes it evident that there must be some “cause” behind it.
Have we ever known life to come from any source other than life? Those who question God’s existence generally try to evade this simple question.
Belief in God is also necessary to explain conscience in man. Why do we say that? A brief examination of the subject reveals the reason.
Wherever and whenever men have lived, there has been an inborn sense of right and wrong, also sometimes called moral law or natural law, to guide their actions. Who put those laws in man? Or did they just happen out of the blue?
The Bible, too, is proof that God exists. How is that?
Much of the Bible contains detailed prophecies or predictions. If there is no God, how can these be explained? A case in point: How could the Bible have foretold hundreds of years in advance where Jesus would be born? (Micah 5:2; Matthew 2:1-6) His family line? (Genesis 22:15-18; 49:10; 2 Samuel 7:8-16; Matthew 1:1, 2, 6) When he would appear as Messiah? (Daniel 9:24-27) Certainly Jesus himself could do very little to control these factors. Yet these and hundreds of other prophecies of this nature in the Bible came true. How could this be, unless there is a farseeing God? No man has such ability to peer into the future.
Further, what the Bible does for people who ‘actually apply its principles’ proves there is a God.
Some may think that God has been responsible for death and suffering. But would that give life a satisfying purpose? Interestingly, the Bible does not teach that God is responsible for suffering and death. Quite the contrary, in its opening book the Bible shows that ‘man’ has brought suffering and death on himself. Further, the Bible shows that rather than allow present wicked conditions like those to continue, God will shortly end them and restore paradise to this earth. Most of those who have died will be ‘brought back to life’ by a resurrection. But, only a belief in God makes such a heart-cheering understanding possible. (Genesis 3:3, 17-19; Ecclesiastes 7:29; John 5:28, 29; Revelation 21:3, 4)
How reasonable, therefore, to accept belief in God! Life then can have true meaning and purpose!
There is no moral law, he exists only in your imagination. He is a manifestation gateway to your desire and excuses. Its not reasonable to believe in God. Gods that cause people to fear and wage wars at each other. People who believe this much only wish to die and when they do they hope that they can take alot of people with them.
WhiteWolfos
Maybe he exists only in YOUR imagination but to me he actually does exist. It is very reasonable to believe in God. Especially when you see all he said would occur is happening right in front of our eyes. He said that the ruler of this world which the Bible identifies as 'Satan' is making people believe that God doesn't care much less exist. There are many different reasons why ppl chose to not believe in God, but no matter what their reasons are it only strengthens our faith in God because all his words are coming to realization.
*****
Thank you :)
Strong Heart You might want to rethink that satan part bit. He was introduced until the Greek influence came along with Hades. Satan pretty much works for god.
And its annoying when people delete my replies.
***** thou shall not kill (people)is something that should come naturally to you as well as other things. You dont need the to learn ten commandments to know that.
catholic for life!
+cath oholic Possibly 4ever?
@sundevilification we'll find out
Yes let's believe in a being that condemns you for the bad things you do. But hooray, it's ok because you can repent and ask for forgiveness. SO LET THE HYPOCRISY RAIN.
I think that people are afraid of not knowing what's gonna happen to them after they pass. So that's why they believe in something to give them something to look forward too when ever they do pass.
What about religious concepts were afterlife is worse than life (e.g. Hell in Christianity or Samsara for Hindus), where there is no afterlife (e.g. Pirahã tribe and other animistic groups) or where it is not that important (e.g. Jews or ancient Greeks)? 🤔 Reasonable anthropology proved this kind of fragment to be wrong.
@@TheGeneralGrievous19 I like your point of view sir . But the thing is , The main problem in this day and age is People lack knowledge. They aren't very well educated. And I think that's the downfall of our human race.
You are wonderfully eloquent...
@mthouser123 Bracket the word "God." I'm arguing that a non-contingent ground has to be found for contingent existence. In regard to 1) I'm indifferent to the time question; it doesn't effect the ontological priority of the non-contingent. 2) Time can be finite or infinite: it doesn't effect the issue at hand. 3) "The universe" is just shorthand for the sum total of contingent things. Thus it can't "explain itself." 4) I'll get to this eventually.
@arizonaviking Well, if Freud and Darwin said it, it must be true! Hmmmm... I'm making rational arguments, and you're appealing to authorities. And I'm supposed to be the representative of a primitve superstition?!
Bishop Robert Barron nice one Bishop.
@deffan84 Absolutely not! That's just weird scientistic imperialism. "Science" doesn't decide anything in regard to aesthetics, politics, morality, metaphysics, or epistemology. I love the sciences, but you're making completely extravagent claims for them.
@Relativisticism "Obviously, we can't both be right." Thank you: we've come to common ground, and you've abandoned your radical relativism!
@RageAndQuit Well friend, I've offered a rather straightforward argument. There are things that don't explain themselves. In trying to explain them, we can't endlessly appeal to other things that also need to be explained. We have to come, finally, to some source of existence that doesn't need to be explained, whose very nature it is to be. This is the God who said of himself in Exodus 3:14, "I am who I am." Tell me precisely where you think this argument is faulty.
No but what I and Fr. Barron are saying is that it's a good place to start for those searching for God or those who are interested in this particular topic.
@twistedH3L1X Well, that's just silly. I'm trying to explain why we (believers) find belief in God rationally compelling. I don't see how you could interpret that as arrogant. Would you be "arrogant" if you offered an explanation for your atheism?
Reply to the person
@mjduke27 But we're not in control of our lives! Did you determine when and how you'd be born? Will you determine when and how you will die? Can you live for more than a few seconds without breathing or for more than a few days without eating and drinking?! These are all indicators of your radical contingency. I'm not "afraid" of admitting something; I'm just acknowledging fundamental facts.
@eeeaten Okay enemy, explain to me precisely how the unconditioned reality, the ground of all finite existence, the infinite God could possibly be described as "a cloud man." You are stuck in your fourth grade catechism class. It's time to graduate!
@ayyawark Well, for one thing, there can be no Falseness itself or Evil itself, since those words name absences not presences. Evil and Falsehood are always parasitic on goodness and truth. And that's why you can't call the object of your deepest longing "the Devil," unless you're using that term simply as a proper name.
@Brownwith0 I'm arguing that this infinite desire actually orders us toward that objective truth and goodness which alone can satisfy it. So I am indeed offering a demonstration of God's existence.