The obstacles which prevent faith

  • Thread starter Thread starter mhmtas63
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
niceatheist said:
Well, there are obstacles even in atheism. The one I wrest with these days is the origins of the fundamental laws of nature. While science has by and large discarded any consideration of metaphysics (and not without good reason, Hume’s rather grim view of metaphysics is one I share, a lot of words, verbiage and specialized language designed, it seems, to say nothing at all).

Atheism for me has been more about the problems I have even figuring out where God is supposed to fit in. I tend towards the notion that the Universe is finite in time, but that there is no T0, the closer you go back to the starting point, the steeper the curve. You can get close but never quite get to where it all began (the analogy would be like trying to accelerate to the speed of light, you can, with lots and lots of energy, get very close to c , but it would require an infinite amount of energy to actually accelerate to c ). In such a scenario, where is there room for any creative event?

…

This is why my atheism is of the weakest variety. I keep feeling that if the right argument came along, if the right set of logical steps were put before me, then I might become some sort of theist, deist or pantheist. But at every turn, I end up seeing the same paradox, the same “intellectual singularity”. At least science has an inherent honesty which amounts to “Maybe we can never know the ultimate truth.”
Click to expand...
"Maybe we can never know the ultimate truth.” Right. Because we are limited. And we never can grasp an eternal being. But that do not mean that we cannot comprehend the existence of that eternal being.

The universe is not infinite but for us it is.

33- O company of jinn and mankind, if you are able to pass beyond the regions of the heavens and the earth, then pass. You will not pass except by authority [from Allah]. (Qur’an: Ar-Rahman 55)

Is there an end for smallness? No. dx can be infinite! But we know the bound is there somewhere.

There are always some obscure points in faith. If we assimilate the faith as a castle so there are hundreds open gates to get in. But we look at it from a distance so some doors look closed. If we stare on that closed doors so we will thought that we cannot get into that castle. But there are many open doors and we can go through them very easily.
 
But invoking an eternal being to me is still just the kind of intellectual “blink” that I’m talking about. We have no real evidence for such a being, just a series of Aristotlean metaphysical arguments stacked one upon the other, that may or may not have anything to do with how the actual universe functions. Declaring there’s an “unmoving mover” is just a bit rhetorical gymnastics, handwaving in place of answering the question.
 
niceatheist said:
But invoking an eternal being to me is still just the kind of intellectual “blink” that I’m talking about. We have no real evidence for such a being, just a series of Aristotlean metaphysical arguments stacked one upon the other, that may or may not have anything to do with how the actual universe functions. Declaring there’s an “unmoving mover” is just a bit rhetorical gymnastics, handwaving in place of answering the question.
Click to expand...
Phylosophical arguments just try to explain the case. They are not firs hand evidences. People who lived during times of prophets saw miracles and were convinced. Revelations from God are there!

Can we(science) find an actual answer for start of everything? Whtere did energy and matter come from? Is there an actual scientific answer? There were no natural laws before the universe were not in present form so what made or set the laws? Were there laws in intrinsic structure of “Nothing” or initial matter/energy of everything? You see science is not so actual to answer. What we call science is our understanding of functions of universe. We can understand the very orderly running of machine by investigations. And that machine run by a programme. If we say that the programme do everything so that is to be an unjustice thought for about the designer of machine. But the designer is not seen!
 
I don’t think there can be any tangible evidence for such a being. Because such a being would have to be apprehensible to human beings in order to actually prove such a being exists. Instead, we are compelled to admit His existence 1) from His signs and 2) from Him bearing witness to His own existence.

If you want to, let’s try a thought experiment.
 
mhmtas63 said:
If you have not faith that points there are some obstacles between you and faith.
Click to expand...
I want to travel to the next town. The distance and terrain are obstacles, overcome by roads, bridges, and vehicles. But there first must exist a desire, travel to the next town in this case for an obstacle to exist.

If I have no desire to travel to that town then the obstacles effectively don’t pertain to me.
 
SalamKhan said:
I don’t think there can be any tangible evidence for such a being. Because such a being would have to be apprehensible to human beings in order to actually prove such a being exists. Instead, we are compelled to admit His existence 1) from His signs and 2) from Him bearing witness to His own existence.

If you want to, let’s try a thought experiment.
Click to expand...
The problem here always is that one has to rest one’s belief heavily on some sort of dogma. I have no reason to think the Talmud, New Testament or the Qu’ran actually represent God’s intent. I’m not the kind of person to simply take anyone’s word for any of it, and I think all three holy books, as sacred as they are to their faithful, have enough inherent textual and interpretative issues that I’d have a very hard time putting the full weight of any belief system I adopted upon them. My biggest issue is that the God of these books is all too recognizable, not that He isn’t comprehensible at all, and He seems more determined to support the prejudices of those who wrote and compiled His alleged words than proclaiming any universal truths.
 
Last edited:
I take it then you’re not interested in the thought experiment. That’s fine.

Instead, I’ll recommend a couple of books:

‘No God but God’ by Reza Aslan

‘The Great Theft’ by Khaled Abou El Fadl

The above two, in my opinion are must reads, both for Muslims and non Muslims interested in Islam.

One more recommendation:

‘The Proofs of Prophecy’ originally written by the 10th century Fatimid missionary Abu Hatim al Razi, translated by Tarif Khalidi.

Not everything in it is relevant today, but I found it to be an incredibly fascinating work.
 
HerCrazierHalf said:
I want to travel to the next town. The distance and terrain are obstacles, overcome by roads, bridges, and vehicles. But there first must exist a desire, travel to the next town in this case for an obstacle to exist.

If I have no desire to travel to that town then the obstacles effectively don’t pertain to me.
Click to expand...
Exactly this.

The idea that there are “obstacles” to something implies that we want to get there. Faith (ie belief without evidence) is not something I see as desirable or productive.
mhmtas63 said:
People did not invented or fabricated the idea there must be a God.
Click to expand...
I literally could not disagree with you more. All the evidence points towards gods being entirely a product of humans’ desire to explain the world around them before they had the tools to do so. Indeed, that’s why there are so many gods.
God revealed some chosen people to preach that fact. And some of these chosen people performed miracles. There are many evidences for existence of God.
Click to expand...
Name one. Assuming that by “evidence” you subscribe to the scientific definition of that word, rather than heresay, assertion and arguments from incredulity.
But you cannot find those just by logic. We are not just a logical being but also we have some spiritual attributions. If billions people claim that there is God then it is very worthy to regard.
Click to expand...
Which god? And why is it worthy just because lots of people think it’s true? Just because an idea is tenacious that doesn’t make it worthy, or true.
 
FredBloggs said:
Name one. Assuming that by “evidence” you subscribe to the scientific definition of that word, rather than heresay, assertion and arguments from incredulity.
Click to expand...
History? We cannot reject our history. Thousands affirmed life of prophets from Adam.
 
mhmtas63 said:
History
Click to expand...
History? Do you have the slightest understanding of how ignorant and superstitious humanity was before the Enlightenment? People weren’t stupid, the just didn’t have the knowledge or tools that we have now. All they could do was perform thought experiments and didn’t understand how their biases effected their conclusions.

Before science gave us tools/rules most people only had stories and miracles which they fully believed happened and “proved” their beliefs. The veracity of a miracle was demonstrated by the apparent trustworthiness of the teller, not the investigation of the claims.

I have not witnessed these miracles so I can discount them as I also don’t know the trustworthiness of the teller. Every miracle claimed now has either been disproven or has problems with the evidence and can’t be scientifically investigated. I’m not supposed to ask God for a miracle and yet it’s the only way I could believe in one. I feel I’m in a catch 22.

All gods are hidden. Why? If it’s so important for my salvation and others have claimed to receive this revelation, why can’t I expect the same?
 
SalamKhan said:
  1. from Him bearing witness to His own existence.
Click to expand...
What does that mean? Are you saying that we are to believe this entity exists because there are reports of this entity saying he exists? If so, there are great many deities you and I both agree do not exist which others have claimed have existed.
 
FredBloggs said:
I think the question is wrong to begin with.

The idea of there being “obstacles” to faith implies that one must want to find faith but find things in the way which prevent it. That’s the wrong way to look at it. Or rather, it’s a believer’s way to look at it.

I - and most atheists I know - disbelieve for one reason only: we have come to the rational conclusion that there is no reason to believe in gods - any gods. There is no evidence, and the “logical proofs” are not, in fact, logical - all are flawed and beg the question in one way or another.

There are no “obstacles” to faith for me, as religious faith is not a goal I consider worthy of pursuit. Which faith would I pursue? And why? To what end?

I presume nothing and let the evidence take me where it will. That approach has proved profoundly successful in providing reliable information about the world. I see no reason to abandon that simply because it might in some way provide me with false comfort that someone is watching over me.
Click to expand...
I propose that you are ignoring the active influence of enlightenment ideology to suppress your natural capacity to ‘wonder’. The most basic human curiousity is really about who made me and why did they make me. The esteem of the intellect that came with the ‘age of reason’ had the effect of dismissing answers that came through contemplation that couldn’t be verified by science or academic methodology.

That rejection is most evident in the events of post enlightenment attacks on mysticism of any sort.
 
I am a Catholic believer. But I do have niggling doubts. Here’s one. Why, in a universe so vast, are we humans so important that God would create us in His image?
 
Science taught through the secular public education system opened the door for obstacles to come into my life. Evolution was taught as though it was a replacement for Creationism rather than a development in understanding. Rationalism was taught as though it was a replacement for faith rather than an expression of our developing understanding. By the time I got to college, the anti-Christ nature of my education was not even being masked. Parents, if there’s only one thing you can instill into your children attending public schools and secular colleges, I suggest it should be that human understanding is never black and white, but more of a growing awareness of colors, both seen and unseen.
 
Here’s a question from a different perspective: Apart from Jesus Christ, would God ever have suggested that He has an image? (I am not suggesting that God can be apart from Jesus Christ… I am only suggesting that those who penned Genesis held a faith that had not yet been fulfilled in Jesus Christ.)
 
Last edited:
@CompvergingLunatrix:

I’m confused. Jesus is co-eternal with the Father and the Holy Spirit. So how can Jesus be an image of the Father?
 
We can’t be certain there aren’t other intelligent lifeforms in the myriad of planets in this vast universe. And they don’t necessarily resemble us or live in an environment compatible with ours. The Angels certainly didn’t need a plant like ours if they are intelligent spirit beings … so we simply don’t know who else is out their and what form being made in God’s image takes with these other races if they exist. And why not in such an immense universe? Scientifcally we don’t know, and cant prove or disprove their possible/probable? existence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top