Trying to remain faithful amongst contradicting philosophies

[AnimalSpirits]

And I wish you hadn’t interferred, there are plenty of threads you could experess these thoughts. You probably don’t recognize you have a problem, but you do. And part of your problem is you lack humility. Ben’s problem is far different from yours and I hope he has sense to completely ignore your comments

What about the Christians before the age of philosophy, before the age of science? Do you think they were idiots? Read the Fathers and tell me they were idiots, that they had no reason for their faith.

Linus2nd

Ignoring my comments would not be sufficient- he’d have to ignore every comment in this thread aside from yours. Everyone else is encouraging healthy behavior- seeking evidence, considering views that support his beliefs and those that don’t. Had nobody said 'just don’t think about it if it leads to doubt", I doubt I would have said anything.

I have not said that I think anyone is an idiot. The church fathers did not retreat from debate and refuse to consider what others thought. I don’t think they were idiots, but a lot of people that weren’t idiots disagreed with them, and they didn’t always agree with each other. If you’re going to figure out what to believe, you need to think critically about the evidence and how others have interpreted it. Almost all posters in this thread are encouraging OP to do exactly this. I may not agree with all what they’re presenting, but I’m not here to argue with them about whether or not a particular argument holds- just that refusing to critically analyze your beliefs is A. Unhealthy and B. Doomed to fail.

 

[Ben_Sinner]

I will ask this…

I worry that I will be the ‘first’ to think a certain thought that could be evidence against the faith.

*Can I assume that whatever thought this could be…has been thought over millions of times throughout the centuries by the greatest minds ever?
*

So basically, nothing I fear philosophically will be anything new?

 

[ynotzap]

Take heart from the great scientists of the past who have no quarrel with the existence of God. If they are all wrong, why is the New Atheism so right?

SCIENTISTS ON RELIGION

Nicolaus Copernicus Heliocentric Theory of the Solar System

“The universe has been wrought for us by a supremely good and orderly Creator.”

Johannes Kepler Kepler’s Laws of Planetary Motions

“[May] God who is most admirable in his works … deign to grant us the grace to bring to light and illuminate the profundity of his wisdom in the visible (and accordingly intelligible) creation of this world.”

Galileo Galilei Laws of Dynamics

“The Holy Bible and the phenomenon of nature proceed alike from the divine Word.”

Isaac Newton Laws of Thermodynamics, Optics, etc.

“This most beautiful system [the solar system] could only proceed from the dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.” Isaac Newton

Benjamin Franklin Electricity, Bifocals, etc.

”Here is my creed. I believe in one God, the creator of the universe. That he governs by his providence. That he ought to be worshipped.

James Clerk Maxwell Electromagnetism, Maxwell’s Equations

“I have looked into most philosophical systems and I have seen none that will not work without God.”

Lord William Kelvin Laws of Thermodynamics, absolute temperature scale

“I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism.”

Charles Darwin Theory of Evolution

“There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.” Origin of the Species, 1872 (last edition before Darwin’s death).

Louis Pasteur Germ Theory

“The more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator.”

Max Planck Father of Quantum Physics

“There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for the one is the complement of the other.”

J.J. Thompson Discoverer of the Electron

“In the distance tower still higher peaks which will yield to those who ascend them still wider prospects and deepen the feeling whose truth is emphasized by every advance in science, that great are the works of the Lord.”

Werner Heisenberg Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle

“In the course of my life I have been repeatedly compelled to ponder the relationship of these two regions of thought (science and religion), for I have never been able to doubt the reality of that to which they point.”

Arthur Compton Compton Effect, Quantum Physicist

“For myself, faith begins with the realization that a supreme intelligence brought the universe into being and created man.”

Max Born Quantum Physicist
“Those who say that the study of science makes a man an atheist must be rather silly.”

Paul A.M. Dirac Quantum Physicist, Matter-Anti-Matter

“God is a mathematician of a very high order and He used advanced mathematics in constructing the universe.”

George LeMaitre Father of the Big Bang Theory,
“There is no conflict between religion and science.” Reported by Duncan Aikman, New York Times, 1933

Albert Einstein Special and General Theories of Relativity

“The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who—in their grudge against traditional religion as the ‘opium of the masses’—cannot hear the music of the spheres.”

 

[OneSmallFlower]

I think that in many cases, especially with intelligent people, doubt seems to be more of a sensation or feeling than an intellectual problem. I personally have found that, for instance, that sensation of doubt is strong when it comes to the Holy Eucharist, and yet, I am Catholic first and foremost because of my faith in the Holy Eucharist. I know in my head with absolute certainty that It HAS to be Jesus, because it follows logically that IF God can do all things (which He can) and IF He wants bread to turn into Himself (which He does), THEN it must follow that the Eucharist really is Jesus (this is a very very basic explanation, BTW). Even so, when I look at the Blessed Sacrament, It looks to me for all the world like a little piece of bread. I know, intellectually, that the Eucharist is Jesus, but I don’t necessarily “feel” that certainty emotionally. Why? Perhaps because God wants me to have to choose to have faith, whereas having a sensation of belief wouldn’t require much act of the will.

I think the lesson to be learned here is that, if you have actual questions that need answers, it’s a-okay to go looking for those answers. But don’t expect a sensation of belief to come flooding into you upon finding them, because that’s not always how faith works. If it does, great; the Lord is blessing you with consolations. If not, continue to pray, go to Mass and confession, and remain close to our Lady. And don’t be afraid of the Devil, because then he wins. Make the Devil afraid of you.

 

[AnimalSpirits]

I will ask this…

I worry that I will be the ‘first’ to think a certain thought that could be evidence against the faith.

*Can I assume that whatever thought this could be…has been thought over millions of times throughout the centuries by the greatest minds ever?
*

So basically, nothing I fear philosophically will be anything new?

You might- but you might also come up with new arguments to support catholicism or refute other views. Both are highly unlikely. Like you wouldn’t think that you’d derive a new meaningful mathematical theorem on your own without years of study.

 

[djchez]

I will ask this…

I worry that I will be the ‘first’ to think a certain thought that could be evidence against the faith.

*Can I assume that whatever thought this could be…has been thought over millions of times throughout the centuries by the greatest minds ever?
*

So basically, nothing I fear philosophically will be anything new?

Why would you hold the greatest of philosopher’s ideas above He Who Is the Way, the Truth and the Life? Jesus claimed to be God, He did many works testifying to Who He Is. He rose from the dead. His disciples saw Him, and most of them died rather than renounce that witness. It’s easy to spiral into philosophical confusion, but how many choose to die for that cause?

 

[edarlitrix]

First:

He who begins by loving Christianity [insert whatever belief/religion/worldview you hold] better than Truth, will proceed by loving his own sect or Church better than Christianity, and end loving himself better than all. (Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Aids to Reflection aphorism 25).

But then, do not let your emotions of dread and being overwhelmed by different philosophies control you:

Out of damp and gloomy days, out of solitude, out of loveless words directed at us, conclusions grow up in us like fungus: one morning they are there, we know not how, and they gaze upon us, morose and grey. Woe to the thinker who is not the gardener but only the soil of the plants that grow in him! (Friedrich Nietzsche, Daybreak aphorism 382).

you must think for yourself, not let these philosophies think for you.

See what the different ideas are, but see also what people say in response to these different ideas.

Always go too far, for that’s where you’ll find the truth. - Albert Camus

 

[ynotzap]

Animal Spirits: Faith is not passed on, the truths of the Faith can be. Faith is a supernatural gift, it is not taught. It comes from and “encounter with Christ” It does not result from all the philosophy in the world. If your faith depends on how much sense philosophy makes to you and depends on it, your faith is not genuine and neither is anyone else’s You must be moved by God to receive it, and if you are sincere, you can receive it., Basically it is a turning from sin and turning to Christ, Something must happen to you to cause you to do this. The Church calls it “Actual Grace”, a lot of people call it “Amazing Grace” When you receive it,then all you are taught is absorbed, you assimilate the truths of the Faith. Pray for this gift of real conversion that does not depend on any philosophy, or any human endeavor, but on the action of God. I will pray that you receive it.

 

[JuanFlorencio]

So I’m pretty sure its been noticeable the last couple of days…

I have been struggling with all kinds of different theories that contradict the church. I don’t know how I got myself in this situation.

So I ask…how can I trust the church over all these philosophers?

How can I just say ‘no’ to these theories? Solipsism, Nominalism, “God is impossibly logical”, etc. etc.

There are so many out there that seem to prove that our religion is illogical.

I’m not a philosopher (nor intend to be), so my intelligence is far below these guys and I’m worried that there is a sufficient argument for every claim to faith I have.

What is one remedy I could use even amongst the bleakest of times where I can trust the church?

Ben,

How could you say “yes” to any of those theories if you do not understand them?!!! If you assume one of them, then you would be acting by faith; but I guess that it is precisely what you don’t want.

Are there many out there saying that our religion is illogical? There are many that say it is not! Is that to be decided democratically? I think you don’t have other option but to face the task you have in front of you. You say that you don’t know how you got into this situation, but it does not matter any more. Now, you have to work hard to solve it. Put your thoughts in order, Ben, and go ahead with profound sincerity.

Regards
JuanFlorencio

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Ignoring my comments would not be sufficient- he’d have to ignore every comment in this thread aside from yours. Everyone else is encouraging healthy behavior- seeking evidence, considering views that support his beliefs and those that don’t. Had nobody said 'just don’t think about it if it leads to doubt", I doubt I would have said anything.

I have not said that I think anyone is an idiot. The church fathers did not retreat from debate and refuse to consider what others thought. I don’t think they were idiots, but a lot of people that weren’t idiots disagreed with them, and they didn’t always agree with each other. If you’re going to figure out what to believe, you need to think critically about the evidence and how others have interpreted it. Almost all posters in this thread are encouraging OP to do exactly this. I may not agree with all what they’re presenting, but I’m not here to argue with them about whether or not a particular argument holds- just that refusing to critically analyze your beliefs is A. Unhealthy and B. Doomed to fail.

Your comments have not been helpful. You recommended a certain path, and look where it got you. And I don’t want Ben or anyone else to go down that path.

Linus2nd

 

[inocente]

There are so many out there that seem to prove that our religion is illogical.

I’m not a philosopher (nor intend to be), so my intelligence is far below these guys and I’m worried that there is a sufficient argument for every claim to faith I have.

What is one remedy I could use even amongst the bleakest of times where I can trust the church?

Philosophers never agree on anything. Pick any subject and you’ll find philosophers with completely opposite views. So straight off, that tells you that logic alone can’t feed you certainties about life. Ultimately there’s no way to be certain that any philosopher is right about anything. But philosophy does open your mind to possibilities, and that’s its value.

I agree with St Paul that the message of the Cross transcends logic, it is a philosophy which no earthly philosopher could invent, a possibility beyond the possible, a logic beyond logic:

“Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. Jews demand signs and Greeks look for wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than human wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than human strength.” - 1 Cor 1

 

[Bahman]

So I’m pretty sure its been noticeable the last couple of days…

I have been struggling with all kinds of different theories that contradict the church. I don’t know how I got myself in this situation.

So I ask…how can I trust the church over all these philosophers?

How can I just say ‘no’ to these theories? Solipsism, Nominalism, “God is impossibly logical”, etc. etc.

There are so many out there that seem to prove that our religion is illogical.

I’m not a philosopher (nor intend to be), so my intelligence is far below these guys and I’m worried that there is a sufficient argument for every claim to faith I have.

What is one remedy I could use even amongst the bleakest of times where I can trust the church?

Why you are trying to be faithful to something contradictory?

 

[M-Dent]

I have been struggling with all kinds of different theories that contradict the church. I don’t know how I got myself in this situation.​

What is one remedy I could use even amongst the bleakest of times where I can trust the church?

I also agree, pray. Sit in adoration and quietly tell God how letdown you are - being in a state of confusion. Ask God for faith. Get a booklet of Catholic prayers and reflect on their meaning.

But be aware this is something we have been warned about,

How many winds of doctrine have we known in recent decades, how many ideological currents, how many ways of thinking. The small boat of the thought of many Christians has often been tossed about by these waves - flung from one extreme to another: from Marxism to liberalism, even to libertinism; from collectivism to radical individualism; from atheism to a vague religious mysticism; from agnosticism to syncretism and so forth.

Every day new sects spring up, and what St Paul says about human deception and the trickery that strives to entice people into error (cf. Eph 4: 14) comes true.
Today, having a clear faith based on the Creed of the Church is often labeled as fundamentalism. Whereas relativism, that is, letting oneself be “tossed here and there, carried about by every wind of doctrine”, seems the only attitude that can cope with modern times. We are building a dictatorship of relativism that does not recognize anything as definitive and whose ultimate goal consists solely of one’s own ego and desires.

We, however, have a different goal: the Son of God, the true man. He is the measure of true humanism. An “adult” faith is not a faith that follows the trends of fashion and the latest novelty; a mature adult faith is deeply rooted in friendship with Christ. It is this friendship that opens us up to all that is good and gives us a criterion by which to distinguish the true from the false, and deceipt from truth.

vatican.va/gpII/documents/homily-pro-eligendo-pontifice_20050418_en.html

An adult faith can’t sustain without prayer. And a prayerfulness trusts God will act in our benefit. Even when we feel letdown.

 

[petra22]

Take heart from the great scientists of the past who have no quarrel with the existence of God. If they are all wrong, why is the New Atheism so right?

What a LIST! Thank you for your research!!!

 

[Contarini]

So I’m pretty sure its been noticeable the last couple of days…

I have been struggling with all kinds of different theories that contradict the church. I don’t know how I got myself in this situation.

So I ask…how can I trust the church over all these philosophers?

How can I just say ‘no’ to these theories? Solipsism, Nominalism, “God is impossibly logical”, etc. etc.

There are so many out there that seem to prove that our religion is illogical.

I’m not a philosopher (nor intend to be), so my intelligence is far below these guys and I’m worried that there is a sufficient argument for every claim to faith I have.

What is one remedy I could use even amongst the bleakest of times where I can trust the church?

Well. first of all many of these philosophies contradict each other.

While I’m not as big a fan of G. K. Chesterton’s book on Aquinas as some folks are, I think he does make a really good point about modern philosophy: every modern philosophy seems to take one radical assumption about the universe and develop everything from it. And they all devour each other. That doesn’t mean they should be dismissed. But since you admit that your acquaintance with them is pretty shallow, I’m not sure why they are bothering you so much. It doesn’t seem as if you are at the point where you can even start to deal with any real challenges they pose to the Faith.

And your examples aren’t really modern philosophies. Solipsism isn’t a serious philosophical position, I think. Nominalism is compatible with belief in God, and maybe with Catholicism (though that’s up for debate). Most modern philosophers, at least in the “Anglo-American” tradition, seem to assume it, but it isn’t itself a modern philosophy.

If by “God is impossibly logical” you mean arguments purporting to show that the existence of God is logically impossible–well, if you want to discuss some such arguments, do so. I’m just not sure why the mere existence of arguments worries you. There are all kinds of arguments for all kinds of things. Worry about the ones you understand and find convincing, not in general about the possibility that some of them out there might be convincing and incompatible with the Faith. (Also, many things that seem incompatible with the Faith aren’t. Thomism, the central tradition of Western Catholicism, originated in a serious examination of Aristotelian philosophy with the aim of reconciling what was true in it with the Faith.)

Edwin

 

[Bahman]

Well. first of all many of these philosophies contradict each other.

While I’m not as big a fan of G. K. Chesterton’s book on Aquinas as some folks are,** I think he does make a really good point about modern philosophy: every modern philosophy seems to take one radical assumption about the universe and develop everything from it. And they all devour each other.** That doesn’t mean they should be dismissed. But since you admit that your acquaintance with them is pretty shallow, I’m not sure why they are bothering you so much. It doesn’t seem as if you are at the point where you can even start to deal with any real challenges they pose to the Faith.

And your examples aren’t really modern philosophies. Solipsism isn’t a serious philosophical position, I think. Nominalism is compatible with belief in God, and maybe with Catholicism (though that’s up for debate). Most modern philosophers, at least in the “Anglo-American” tradition, seem to assume it, but it isn’t itself a modern philosophy.

If by “God is impossibly logical” you mean arguments purporting to show that the existence of God is logically impossible–well, if you want to discuss some such arguments, do so. I’m just not sure why the mere existence of arguments worries you. There are all kinds of arguments for all kinds of things. Worry about the ones you understand and find convincing, not in general about the possibility that some of them out there might be convincing and incompatible with the Faith. (Also, many things that seem incompatible with the Faith aren’t. Thomism, the central tradition of Western Catholicism, originated in a serious examination of Aristotelian philosophy with the aim of reconciling what was true in it with the Faith.)

Edwin

I like what you said in the bold part. Keep it up.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

While I’m not as big a fan of G. K. Chesterton’s book on Aquinas as some folks are, I think he does make a really good point about modern philosophy: every modern philosophy seems to take one radical assumption about the universe and develop everything from it. And they all devour each other.

Edwin

I agree with you. Chesterton was a great thinker in his own right, but when he gets into elucidating the thoughts of others he tends to be on the minimalist side. Not to say he doesn’t say some pretty important things about Aquinas, but he doesn’t seem to really get into Aquinas the way others have, such as Gilson and Maritain. Still, he performed a great service for the lay philosophers among us just by tipping his hat to the Dumb Ox. :tiphat:

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Philosophers never agree on anything. Pick any subject and you’ll find philosophers with completely opposite views. So straight off, that tells you that logic alone can’t feed you certainties about life. Ultimately there’s no way to be certain that any philosopher is right about anything. But philosophy does open your mind to possibilities, and that’s its value.

I don’t agree that philosophers never agree on anything. We simply don’t have a way to show how much agreement there is among them. Nobody that I know of has assumed that task. But I do believe that philosophers disagree on too much, so that if you get caught up in the whirlwind of all these competing philosophical systems you can get confused and begin to lose faith in the power of reason to settle anything really significant.
Even Jesus tried to demonstrate truth with logical parallels. The story of the Prodigal Son is a perfect example of demonstrating that when we repudiate the Father and substitute our foolish will for his, we bring havoc and possibly despair into our lives. Yet if we return to the Father, all will be forgiven, as any Father forgives a penitent son. Jesus was not only a savior, he was also a teacher of philosophy, the best philosophy ever taught.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

Chesterton seems to have well summed up the pathetic state of the quarrelling modern philosophies when he said:

“Most modern philosophies are not philosophy but philosophic doubt; that is doubt about whether there can be any philosophy.” Orthodoxy

When the human heart is separated from God, the human mind always loses its anchor of certainty.

 

[ynotzap]

Animal Spirits: Faith is not passed on, the truths of the Faith can be. Faith is a supernatural gift, it is not taught. It comes from and “encounter with Christ” It does not result from all the philosophy in the world. If your faith depends on how much sense philosophy makes to you and depends on it, your faith is not genuine and neither is anyone else’s You must be moved by God to receive it, and if you are sincere, you can receive it., Basically it is a turning from sin and turning to Christ, Something must happen to you to cause you to do this. The Church calls it “Actual Grace”, a lot of people call it “Amazing Grace” When you receive it,then all you are taught is absorbed, you assimilate the truths of the Faith. Pray for this gift of real conversion that does not depend on any philosophy, or any human endeavor, but on the action of God. I will pray that you receive it.

This post was intended for Ben Sinner, sorry Animalspirits (but it does apply to everyone)