OrthodoxChristianity.net
August 01, 2014, 04:27:42 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: To Keep the Faith, Don't Get Analytical  (Read 1873 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #45 on: April 29, 2012, 02:59:44 AM »

I mean extra stuff like "Two Natures"... "Of One Essence, Light from Light, God from God" via the Nicene Creed.   Not Jesus himself, but all of those doctrines which were hammered out later..
Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,769


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #46 on: April 29, 2012, 03:00:08 AM »

"Those whose faith has reached the experiential level".  Are you referring to hesychasm?   I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils. 
I don't know how you linked hesychasm with the ecumenical councils.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,769


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #47 on: April 29, 2012, 03:00:31 AM »

I mean extra stuff like "Two Natures"... "Of One Essence, Light from Light, God from God" via the Nicene Creed.   Not Jesus himself, but all of those doctrines which were hammered out later..
Hammered out to combat the attacks of bad neoplatonists, that is.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 03:00:48 AM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #48 on: April 29, 2012, 03:05:06 AM »

"Those whose faith has reached the experiential level".  Are you referring to hesychasm?   I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils. 
I don't know how you linked hesychasm with the ecumenical councils.

"Are you referring to hesychasm?" was meant to be separated in context from "I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils."   

My bad, typing errors.   police
Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,769


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #49 on: April 29, 2012, 03:09:04 AM »

"Those whose faith has reached the experiential level".  Are you referring to hesychasm?   I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils.
I don't know how you linked hesychasm with the ecumenical councils.

"Are you referring to hesychasm?" was meant to be separated in context from "I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils."    

My bad, typing errors.   police

Fair enough.

The ecumenical councils weren't really meant to be a source of experiencing God. They made statements designed to guard against heresy.

Con-fusing the two is sort of like trying to analyse Da Vinci's artistic style by staring very hard at the watchman guarding the Mona Lisa.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 03:09:35 AM by NicholasMyra » Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,311


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #50 on: April 29, 2012, 10:10:20 AM »

As far as I understand it, it is not that religious belief (specifically) developed in humans because of evolution, but rather, belief as a rudimentary ability developed in all primates because of evolution, and then much later on humans took this ability to believe and refined it (through more powerful cognitive capabilities, through language, through culture on some level), and applied it to religion.

This would be a purely secular theory, of course.
I doubt it's "purely" secular. Asterikos' theory could be seen as describing how the God-created laws of nature made it possible (via evolution) for living organisms to develop the capacity to acknowledge the Source of Being (God) via their cognitive (and emotional and physical) abilities. Perhaps molecules like dopamine, as well as the genetic structure of Homo sapiens in general, are the physical pre-conditions for communing with Divinity.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #51 on: April 29, 2012, 10:12:40 AM »

As far as I understand it, it is not that religious belief (specifically) developed in humans because of evolution, but rather, belief as a rudimentary ability developed in all primates because of evolution, and then much later on humans took this ability to believe and refined it (through more powerful cognitive capabilities, through language, through culture on some level), and applied it to religion.

This would be a purely secular theory, of course.
I doubt it's "purely" secular. Asterikos' theory could be seen as describing how the God-created laws of nature made it possible (via evolution) for living organisms to develop the capacity to acknowledge the Source of Being (God) via their cognitive (and emotional and physical) abilities. Perhaps molecules like dopamine, as well as the genetic structure of Homo sapiens in general, are the physical pre-conditions for communing with Divinity.

A theory that is contrary to the understanding of "first" humans, a soul (there was once a creature that was not human... and then it's kid earned a soul for being smart enough??), sin and death, etc.

« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 10:15:54 AM by Aindriú » Logged


I'm going to need this.
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,311


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #52 on: April 29, 2012, 10:25:47 AM »

As far as I understand it, it is not that religious belief (specifically) developed in humans because of evolution, but rather, belief as a rudimentary ability developed in all primates because of evolution, and then much later on humans took this ability to believe and refined it (through more powerful cognitive capabilities, through language, through culture on some level), and applied it to religion.

This would be a purely secular theory, of course.
I doubt it's "purely" secular. Asterikos' theory could be seen as describing how the God-created laws of nature made it possible (via evolution) for living organisms to develop the capacity to acknowledge the Source of Being (God) via their cognitive (and emotional and physical) abilities. Perhaps molecules like dopamine, as well as the genetic structure of Homo sapiens in general, are the physical pre-conditions for communing with Divinity.

A theory that is contrary to the understanding of "first" humans, a soul (there was once a creature that was not human... and then it's kid earned a soul for being smart enough??)....
I think Genesis 1 (the chapter in Genesis that contains a narrative most similar to the evolution narrative of modern science) is pretty vague about exactly how humans were created by God. Genesis 1 doesn't say God created Man ex nihilo, or from the earth, or (for that matter) from non-human creatures -- but all those are viable, possible ways of interpreting human origins from a reading of that first chapter.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2012, 10:26:46 AM by Jetavan » Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Justin Kissel
Formerly Asteriktos
Protospatharios
****************
Offline Offline

Posts: 29,383



« Reply #53 on: April 29, 2012, 10:27:15 AM »

A theory that is contrary to the understanding of "first" humans, a soul (there was once a creature that was not human... and then it's kid earned a soul for being smart enough??), sin and death, etc.

All animals have souls. Some even say plants have souls, though I think that goes a bit too far. Christians managed to grapple with heliocentrism, and now we'd laugh at the idea that such a thing would pose a challenge to religious faith. The same will eventually happen with evolution...
Logged

"Change is the process of becoming more like who we are."
Aindriú
Faster! Funnier!
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Cynical
Jurisdiction: Vestibule of Hell
Posts: 3,918



WWW
« Reply #54 on: April 29, 2012, 10:43:17 AM »

A theory that is contrary to the understanding of "first" humans, a soul (there was once a creature that was not human... and then it's kid earned a soul for being smart enough??), sin and death, etc.

All animals have souls. Some even say plants have souls, though I think that goes a bit too far. Christians managed to grapple with heliocentrism, and now we'd laugh at the idea that such a thing would pose a challenge to religious faith. The same will eventually happen with evolution...

Is this the same for all articles of faith? If it appears contrary, we must be ready to reject it?

Why is current scientific though automatically correct? In contrast to a heliocentric universe, we have less evidence, and many more counter-theories.
Logged


I'm going to need this.
Opus118
Site Supporter
OC.net guru
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1,427



« Reply #55 on: April 29, 2012, 12:10:33 PM »

A theory that is contrary to the understanding of "first" humans, a soul (there was once a creature that was not human... and then it's kid earned a soul for being smart enough??), sin and death, etc.

All animals have souls. Some even say plants have souls, though I think that goes a bit too far. Christians managed to grapple with heliocentrism, and now we'd laugh at the idea that such a thing would pose a challenge to religious faith. The same will eventually happen with evolution...

Is this the same for all articles of faith? If it appears contrary, we must be ready to reject it?

Why is current scientific though automatically correct? In contrast to a heliocentric universe, we have less evidence, and many more counter-theories.

Actually, I am stubbornly waiting to read something that refutes the geocentric compatibility of Einstein's theory of general relativity. For example, from Martin Gardner's book, Relativity Simply Explained (Dover Books 1997; p.158):

"One could just as legitimately assume the Earth to be fixed and the entire universe, with its great spherical cloud of black-body radiation, to be moving. The equations are the same. Indeed, from the standpoint of relativity the choice of reference frame is arbitrary. Naturally, it is simpler to assume the universe is fixed and the Earth moving than the other way around, but the two ways of talking about the Earth’s relative motion are two ways of saying the same thing."

Of course Sauron would probably just say that Martin Gardner is an idiot and leave it at that. There is a simplistic elegance to this argument but it is not fulfilling.

Logged
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,769


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #56 on: April 29, 2012, 05:11:05 PM »


All animals have souls.
All animals ARE souls.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"You are philosophical innovators. As for me, I follow the Fathers." -Every heresiarch ever
Andrew Crook
formerly known as AveChriste11
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Posts: 523



« Reply #57 on: April 29, 2012, 05:35:48 PM »

"Those whose faith has reached the experiential level".  Are you referring to hesychasm?   I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils.
I don't know how you linked hesychasm with the ecumenical councils.

"Are you referring to hesychasm?" was meant to be separated in context from "I fail to see how anyone can actually know God through all of that Greek philosophy which was employed by the Oecumenical Councils."    

My bad, typing errors.   police

Fair enough.

The ecumenical councils weren't really meant to be a source of experiencing God. They made statements designed to guard against heresy.

Con-fusing the two is sort of like trying to analyse Da Vinci's artistic style by staring very hard at the watchman guarding the Mona Lisa.

I can understand your answer.  However, what makes something a heresy is unclear to me. Even though the Apostles were said to have had disciples, and they became ordained as Bishops later to lead the churches across the known world -- it's still easily possible for things to get lost in translation.  Just imagine a bunch of kids at a party, whispering a rumor in each other's ear.. and by the time it gets back to your ears, it was nothing at all like what you had actually stated.  Humans are naturally faulty creatures like that..
Logged

Whosoever will be saved, before all things it is necessary that he hold the catholic faith; Which faith except every one do keep whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish everlastingly. And the catholic faith is this: That we worship one God in Trinity, and Trinity in Unity
NightOwl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 596



« Reply #58 on: April 29, 2012, 05:46:18 PM »

Of course, it goes without saying that the faithful do not need proof and the for skeptics there will never be enough proof.

Quite a bind someone like me is in then, huh? I entertain the option of giving religion another chance (knowing that I came out of a very miserable and twisted form of religion, of my own making), but because I've lost faith and require rationale (and it's hard to describe what, exactly, I'm looking for... but there's this part in my mind where faith used to be and I need to fill that with something I consider more "concrete"), it's impossible for me to return.
....
There's some evidence that the tendency to "believe" may be influenced by one's genes.
Sounds like the parable of the talents. No conflict there...
Logged
Jetavan
Most Humble Servant of Pan-Vespuccian and Holocenic Hominids
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christic
Jurisdiction: Dixie
Posts: 6,311


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #59 on: April 29, 2012, 06:11:17 PM »

Of course, it goes without saying that the faithful do not need proof and the for skeptics there will never be enough proof.

Quite a bind someone like me is in then, huh? I entertain the option of giving religion another chance (knowing that I came out of a very miserable and twisted form of religion, of my own making), but because I've lost faith and require rationale (and it's hard to describe what, exactly, I'm looking for... but there's this part in my mind where faith used to be and I need to fill that with something I consider more "concrete"), it's impossible for me to return.
....
There's some evidence that the tendency to "believe" may be influenced by one's genes.
Sounds like the parable of the talents. No conflict there...
I agree.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
GabrieltheCelt
Hillbilly Extraordinaire
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 6,983


Chasin' down a Hoodoo...


« Reply #60 on: April 29, 2012, 07:15:34 PM »

I entertain the option of giving religion another chance...
I assumed there was a reason you're participating on an Orthodox forum. 

(knowing that I came out of a very miserable and twisted form of religion, of my own making), but because I've lost faith and require rationale...
I'm glad you decided to leave your old religion, esp. if you were miserable.  That's one of the reason's I left my old religion.  If you want faith, you will acquire it for, as Blaise Pascal noted, "Faith is different from proof; the latter is human, the former is a Gift from God."  And there's nothing wrong with using our intellect, it's just that our intellect will only take us so far. 

... it can easily be extended (again, not your words or your meaning) that some cannot be saved because they refuse to embrace faith.
Orthodox Christians cannot say who is or who will be saved.  Our Lord and Savior, Jesus the Christ, will see the heart and mind of all and will judge us differently than we judge each other.

Logged

"The Scots-Irish; Brewed in Scotland, bottled in Ireland, uncorked in America."  ~Scots-Irish saying
Ortho_cat
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: AOCA-DWMA
Posts: 5,392



« Reply #61 on: April 29, 2012, 09:13:38 PM »


All animals have souls.
All animals ARE souls.

i think there is some disconnect here based on what definition of "soul" we are using...
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #62 on: April 30, 2012, 01:06:01 AM »

"a new study finds that prompting people to engage in analytical thinking can cause their religious beliefs to waver"


Thats why its called FAITH!

Lets face it our religion and many others are not Logical and do not stand up to rational analitical thinking.
i don't agree with that. There are many areas where analytical thought will strengthen one's faith, rather than weaken it. Take for example, the existence of consciousness in the universe. Looking at it analytically, I don't see where consciousness or self reflection can arise from a bunch of hydrogen atoms. Or take the beginning of the universe. As we know, the universe is inflating and going back in time brings us to the big bang. But how and why did this big bang start? The use of  analytical reasoning alone can show, via the Borde Guth Vilenkin theorem, that, given our current assumptions about the universe, the universe did have a beginning.
Logged
Delphine
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 136



« Reply #63 on: April 30, 2012, 01:30:23 PM »

Wouldn't encouraging analytical thinking in anything cause a person to express their opinion on a matter more conservatively? If you're thinking analytically, you're opening yourself up to the idea that you could be wrong. This doesn't mean that, after the exercise, you won't conclude that you're right. Like the article said, this experiment didn't make atheists out of anybody.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: « 1 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.091 seconds with 46 queries.