Why do people start to believe in God? Should modern man believe in God? Biblical values do not match modern ones
Reading time: 3 min
For centuries, humanity has believed in God. No matter what continents or countries people live in, they all visit temples, worshiping higher powers. Why do people do this, why do they believe in God? The answer is simple: the population of a particular country was already born with a certain faith, for example, Hindus, Muslims, Greek Catholics, etc. People are not allowed to doubt their faith by convincing them of the existence of God.
In addition, some other social situations arise due to which believers adhere strictly to established religious rules. Every church creates community and gives members a sense of support when needed. Many areas of pragmatic life have reduced their values to zero, and religious communities have filled such voids. Belief in God convinces people that this is how they can find a mentor in difficult times.
Most people, when analyzing the complexity of the creation of the universe or contemplating the beauty of nature, realize that there is something more in our universe that could create such magnificence, as well as the physical world around us.
In the past, all religions have put forward their opinions about the history of the origin of life. Each of them states that everything was created by a higher power - God. However, this is one of the most answers why people believe in God.
Perhaps the main reason for believing in God comes from the personal experience of an individual. It is possible that someone heard an answer to prayers, someone received a warning at a dangerous moment, grace descended on someone, and he recovered, becoming a happy person; someone, having received a blessing, successfully completed the work he began. This creates a feeling of happiness and peace, this encourages you to go to church and get acquainted with the sacred scriptures.
At the moment, a colossal number of people, despite countless advances in technology, are in a depressive, unhappy state. This happens due to social problems and some kind of deprivation in life, as well as due to the desire of the majority to compare their personal lives with the lives of successful people.
Also, people believe in God in order to become happy, to understand. Some individuals need strict rules that allow them to control their actions, while others, on the contrary, require more self-expression and freedom. Belief in God allows a person to understand his goals and values. Faith makes it possible to predetermine your priorities, rethink relationships with loved ones, and requirements for yourself and society.
Religion helps you find the answer: what is the meaning of life. For each individual, this question remains the main one throughout life. This spiritual problem has to do with determining the ultimate purpose of existence. Not everyone is able to answer what the meaning of existence is. And even having realized the meaning, not every person manages to substantiate it. But what is interesting is that in every individual there is a need to find meaning and rationally justify it. When deciding the question of the meaning of life, the human is faced with the inevitability of choosing one of two probable alternatives, since many worldviews are ultimately limited to two directions: religion or atheism. A person has to choose between religion and atheism.
It is difficult to define what religion is. However, one can definitely say: religion is a fact of social life. The word “religion” literally means harnessing, binding. It is likely that initially this term denoted the attachment of a person to something unchangeable and sacred.
The concept of religion was first used in the speeches of a Roman politician and orator of the 1st century. BC e. Cicero, who contrasted religion with another word meaning superstition (mythical, dark belief).
The very concept of “religion” came into use for the first time in the century of Christianity and denoted a philosophical, moral and deep system.
The initial element of any religion is faith. Faith has been and will be an important property of an individual’s consciousness, the main measure of spirituality.
Any religion exists thanks to religious activities. Theologians compose works, teachers teach the basics of religion, missionaries spread the faith. However, the core of religious activity is cult (from Latin - veneration, cultivation, care).
The cult includes an understanding of the entire set of actions performed by believers for the purpose of worshiping God or some supernatural forces. These include prayers, rituals, religious holidays, services, and sermons.
Religious objects, priesthood, and temples may be absent in some religions. There are religions where the cult is given insignificant importance or may be invisible. Although in general in religion the role of the cult itself is very significant. People, carrying out worship, communicate, exchanging information and emotions, contemplate magnificent works of painting and architecture, listen to sacred texts, prayer music. All this helps to increase the religious feelings of parishioners, unites them, helping to achieve spirituality. At the same time, the church imposes its judgments and rules, which can negatively affect the psyche of people.
Pros and cons of religion
For centuries, religion has successfully enveloped human consciousness in a “web” of impracticables, constructions of the universe, an afterlife, etc. Thus becoming stronger in the minds of people and in the memory of generations, becoming part of the cultural potential, religion received some cultural, ethical and socio-political functions.
The functions of religion are understood as ways of religious influence on the life of society. The functions of religion give rise to both pros and cons.
The advantage of any religion is that faith helps believers to more easily endure negative emotions. In other words, religion provides consolation by leveling negative emotions (despair, grief, sadness, loneliness, etc.). Religious consolation is a specific form of psychotherapy, both effective and cheap. Thanks to such consolation, humanity was able to survive in the historical past, and is still surviving today.
The second advantage of the function of religion is that it promotes communication between people with a common worldview.
Communication is a significant need and value in life. Limited communication or lack thereof makes people suffer.
Most pensioners are especially acutely experiencing a lack of communication, but it happens that young people also fall into this number. Religion helps everyone overcome this negative side of life.
Only historians note the disadvantages of religion, since theologians are convinced that religion has no disadvantages.
Historians consider alienation of people based on ideological grounds as a disadvantage. This means that parishioners of different faiths treat each other either indifferently or hostilely. The more strongly the idea of chosenness in religion is propagated, the more pronounced the alienation between believers of different faiths occurs. However, there is a religion (Baha'ism) whose moral code condemns such behavior and classifies it as a moral vice.
The second disadvantage, according to historians, is the decrease in the level of social activity of believers.
Social activity is a non-religious activity, the purpose of which is to serve society, for example, socially useful work, political activity, scientific and cultural activity.
Religions, due to their ideological function, interfere with people’s participation in socio-political activities (participation in rallies, elections, demonstrations, etc.). This happens through direct prohibitions, but often due to the fact that there is no time left for social activities, since personal time is devoted to prayers, rituals, study and distribution of religious literature.
Atheists, trying to understand believers, ask themselves what motivates people to believe in God.
Sometimes religious individuals think about this, observing the diversity of religious movements.
Some believe that belief in God is a matter of personal preference, others believe that without faith a person becomes an inferior person, others prefer to remain silent due to the belief that people themselves invented faith in God. All opinions are contradictory, behind each there is a conviction that reflects the individual’s view of faith in the creator.
So, people begin to believe in God for the following reasons:
- birth into a believing family. Religion depends on the area in which the family lives (for example, Hindus live in India, Catholics live in Italy, Islamists live in Morocco, etc.);
- Some individuals come to faith because they feel the need for God. They are consciously interested in religion, the creator, thus making up for what they lack. They are convinced that the emergence of humanity is not accidental, everyone has a purpose. Such faith is not a temporary impulse, but a deep conviction;
- even an individual distant from religion, having experienced life’s trials, turns to God, for example, during a period of serious illness;
- some, having understood the answer to their prayers, begin to believe in God out of personal desire, expressing their gratitude to him;
- pushes a person to faith. He may not actually have faith, but will pretend to be a believer out of fear of being judged by others or believe out of fear of what will happen to him after death.
The reasons why people believe in God can be listed endlessly, but it all boils down to the fact that an individual can have superficial or deep faith. This will be reflected or not in his words and decisions, and the words spoken out loud “I believe in God” are not always true.
Speaker of the Medical and Psychological Center "PsychoMed"
And so, some “stand their ground” to the last and die without repentance and communion. Neither the persuasion of children or grandchildren who have become church members, nor the tangible presence of the Church in the information space helps. Others, even at the end of their days, open their hearts to God, begin to go to church, and prepare for eternal life.
And when you stand at a funeral, the question “why does a person believe or not believe in God?” does not seem at all abstractly philosophical. And the thought “how much depends on the person himself - to believe or not to believe?” does not seem at all idle.
Archpriest Alexy Herodov, rector of the Church of the Holy Martyr Vladimir in Vinnitsa, says:
– It is my deep conviction that a person believes in God for only one reason: such a person needs God, and the person wants God to exist. And people don’t really care whether Gagarin saw God in space or not. Such a person does not need proof. The proof for him is his ardent desire, and only then the whole world, which eloquently testifies that without God he could not exist.
A believer seeks God all his life, although he does not see with his eyes. He understands perfectly well that he does not see, but his heart knows that God exists. The initiative of faith always comes only from man. The first and most important step is taken by a person himself. And in response to this, God gives a person help, which the person feels personally. Non-believers are wrong to think that God deprived them of something and did not give them faith. I am deeply convinced that there was simply nowhere to put this faith. Our heart is open before God.
– Does a person have a special gift of faith, the ability to do this?
- Eat. Exclusively everyone has this gift. We create all the good pathos in our lives ourselves according to our desire. But we don’t synthesize. Building material is equally available to everyone, but everyone acts according to the word of the Savior: “A good man brings forth good from the good storehouse of his heart, and an evil man from evil brings forth evil.”
– Why do many people want to believe but cannot?
– Because in a person’s life there are unimaginable and unthinkable things. There are many phenomena that we have heard about, and we want to get them, but we don’t know what they look like. It is a fact. The Gospel calls the way to gain something. It says: “The Kingdom of God is in need and the needy things delight it.” This principle is not accidental. We see it in Scripture many times. God, as it were, sets a task and leaves man to solve it by working. For example, he brings out animals in front of Adam so that he, in turn, gives them names. Or he says to Adam and Eve “be fruitful and multiply,” and does not tell how, so that they themselves fill it with meaning, so that it is their life, and not someone else’s. So the Gospel creates a space that is quite strange at first glance, so that a person can personally fill it with his love. So that a person does not have a reason to feel bitterness over the fact that the treasure of his heart was not stolen by the fact that it was told to him in advance, and his place was not given for his personal love.
– Is there a criterion for the authenticity of faith? This– believes sincerely, and this one– pretends? Moreover, he is deceiving himself.
– There are definitely criteria, but it’s better to answer this question from my previous comment. A person recognizes only those things that he himself has experienced and is familiar to him. Therefore, someone else’s experience of faith, although useful, can also be understood only through personal work. It is labor, not work. You find out later that it was work, but while you’re looking, it’s like you’re moving mountains.
It can be difficult to distinguish a believer from an unbeliever. For one very important reason. Many people become churchgoers as if from the bottom up - from church tradition to Christ, instead of correctly becoming churchgoers - from Christ to tradition. Tradition in itself does not lead anywhere, and at the same time it is very high in calories, so that you can get all sorts of “digestive” disorders. And that is why people who become churches through tradition act, as they think, prudently. First, they eat themselves to the point of disgust with tradition, then they become “philosophers,” but never reach Christ. “They can’t do it anymore.” Like Vovochka’s girlfriend, who doesn’t drink or smoke because she can’t do it anymore.
– What do people who don’t believe in God count on? And those who say that God is in their souls, that all religions are equal, and God is one for all?
– My conviction is that such people, as well as atheists, and even suicides, which, in general, are the same thing, are simply being original before God. They think that God will definitely be “deceived” by the “beauty of their soul.” Thus, they contrast themselves with everyone around them, pose, and think that God will definitely pay attention to them in this way. This is a crafty calculation, and its end is death. Unfortunately, these “witty” ones learn the result of their cunning too late, beyond the threshold of death. It’s scary to even imagine how much they would like to return. To experience such melancholy - and you no longer need any hell.
– What will be the posthumous fate of non-believers and those who did not go to church and did not partake of the Mysteries of Christ?
– I believe that they will not inherit any salvation, but I am far from forbidding God to come up with something for them at His Righteous Discretion. If I see them in the Kingdom of Heaven, I will not be offended.
Prepared by Marina Bogdanova
People believe in the evil eye, conspiracy theories, racial superiority, aliens and guardian angels. Why are we programmed to believe in the first place? Because that's how the human brain works. Disbelief, skepticism and the scientific approach require effort to overcome this innate mechanism of believing. Science is guided by the principle “everything new is false until it is confirmed,” the brain is configured to the opposite: “everything that I noticed is true until it is refuted.”
We owe this gullibility to the frontal lobes, which are able to build logical connections, or patterns. If we see a pair of shoes and a briefcase at the edge of a bridge, we immediately imagine a person who jumped off this bridge. But this mechanism suffers from the verification department: we willingly believe in the observed patterns, but with great difficulty and errors we can separate real patterns from fictitious ones.
There are two types of errors, they are explained by the famous example of a tiger in the grass. Let's say we are an ancient man walking through the savannah in search of prey. Suddenly we notice red spots in the grass and hear a rustling sound. An error of the first kind (type I error), a false positive, is when we mistake these spots and rustling for a tiger and run away, but in fact it was the wind and flowers. We came up with a logical chain that doesn't exist. What is the price of such a mistake? Not much - we'll run a little.
But there are errors of the second type (type II error): if it is really a tiger, and we do not collect the red spots and noise into a coherent picture, we will be immediately eaten. The price for a type 2 error is death. At such prices, natural selection will promote the prosperity of creatures who willingly believe in everything and in whom errors of the first type dominate.
Believing in something is the discovery of dependence. As real - I believe that this mister is watching me, because he follows me on my heels. So is the fictional one: this Mr. was cured of cancer because his wife prayed for him. Fictitious addiction is an error of the first type - there is no serious connection between prayer and recovery, but the wife believes in this connection.
There is an evolutionary explanation for the constant search for patterns (tiger in the grass): this is how we survive and reproduce better. But there is another aspect: a person feels very insecure in a situation that he does not understand. Chaos is an extremely uncomfortable intellectual environment for us.
Science is an excellent method for sifting out real patterns from unreal ones, but it is extremely young, seriously, it is a couple of hundred years old. Before this, nothing that man saw around him could be explained: lightning, plague, earthquakes, illness and healing - everything required at least some kind of explanation.
Our belief in the supernatural directly depends on how manageable we think our lives are. People with an external locus, who feel like they have no control over anything, are much more likely to believe just about anything. The spirit that you can appease is already an element of control. Beliefs exist to create the illusion of control over the situation.
What happens in our brain when we believe? Belief in the supernatural is associated with the activity of certain neurotransmitters in the brain, most notably dopamine. Peter Brugger and colleagues at the University of Bristol found that people with higher dopamine levels are more likely to see connections in unrelated events and detect patterns that don't exist.
This happens because, as Brugger suggested, dopamine changes the so-called signal-to-noise ratio. Noise is the entire amount of information that a person receives, a signal is a significant part of this information. The more dopamine there is, the more real and imagined addictions we see. A person with an average level of dopamine will associate the noise in the underground with mice, and a person with a high level will associate the noise in the underground with mice, and a person with a high level will associate it with his great-grandmother's stories about the Indian cemetery.
Dopamine improves the ability of neurons to transmit signals, thereby improving, for example, our learning and ability to creatively solve problems. But in high doses it can lead to psychosis and hallucinations. And here lies one of the possible connections between genius and madness, as Michael Shermer, editor-in-chief of the Skeptic magazine, suggests. If there is too much dopamine, the signal-to-noise ratio will be too close to one - all information will be interpreted as meaningful. And then psychosis begins.
As examples of two such types - “patterns just right” and “patterns too much” - Schremer cites two Nobel laureates: the sensible, witty and social Feynman and the insanely talented John Nash - a hallucinating paranoid. Feynman saw just enough patterns to make discoveries and cut off connections that didn't exist. Nash believed that everything around him was a significant pattern (he made many Type I errors), which led to persecution delusions, imaginary friends, and conspiracy theories.
In any conversation about faith, a logical question always arises: let people believe in whatever they want, even in unicorns, what harm will it do? But the herbalist's belief that his decoction cures cancer is by no means harmless. Like the belief that “our nation is better”, or “all troubles come from the Jews”, or the faith that pushed people to shoot Pentagon guards in order to find out the “secret of 9/11”.
The belief is so stable because the brain is extremely clever in looking for explanations for the pattern found, so it is easy to believe that aliens exist: Texas housewives are being kidnapped, crop circles are multiplying, UFOs are flying in two stripes. When we try to explain and rationalize a belief, we make another common cognitive mistake: as soon as we see a match (even a remote one) with our theory, we immediately shout “There, I told you so!” We don't pay attention to discrepancies. So, if one prediction of a soothsayer comes true, we will immediately forget about a hundred that did not come true.
Believing is a natural state of the body, and people can only make every effort to separate real connections from fictitious ones, so as not to harm themselves and others. So far, there is only one universal and extremely effective method for this - science.
Lesha Ivanovsky
T&P
| Comments: 3 |
If you lock a pigeon in a cage and give it food only after it pecks the button, it will quickly understand what is required of it. But after some time he will think: why are they feeding him? Apparently, something is required of him in order to receive food. He will begin to flap his wings before pressing the button. And he will believe that they give him food because he flaps his wings...
Belief in the inexplicable is quite understandable. Why are we strong in hindsight, believe in spirits and can easily explain the causes of the economic crisis? With the beginning of the cognitive revolution in psychology (and social sciences in general), many researchers began to wonder: is it possible to use discoveries in the field of human consciousness to explain religious thinking? One of these discoveries was precisely the moment of truth.
Pashkovsky V. E.
This book is a brief clinical guide that outlines modern ideas about mental disorders associated with the religious-archaic factor. Until now, such manuals by domestic authors have not been published in Russia. The book provides a clinical description of mental disorders of archaic and religious-mystical content: religious-mystical states, delusions of possession and witchcraft, depression with a religious plot of delirium, delusions of messianism. A separate chapter is devoted to the problem of psychiatric aspects of destructive cults. The book contains data on the history of religion and introduces the reader to modern religious ideas, which should help in working with religious patients.
Nikolai Mikhailovich Amosov (December 6, 1913, near Cherepovets - December 12, 2002, Kyiv) - Soviet and Ukrainian cardiac surgeon, medical scientist, writer. Author of innovative techniques in cardiology, author of a systematic approach to health (“method of restrictions and stresses”), discussion works on gerontology, problems of artificial intelligence and rational planning of social life (“social engineering”). Academician of the Academy of Sciences of the Ukrainian SSR (1969) and the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Hero of Socialist Labor (1973).
Faith, Hope, Love... I wonder if anyone has ever wondered why we always use these meaningful names in this and not in any other order? Is this a random consonance, a harmonious rhyme, or is it true that for Russians faith always comes before hope and even love? Scientists from the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences do not take anything for granted and check any harmony with their algebra: shares, percentages, statistics, permissible limits of error. This is what happened in this case too. Sociologists from the Institute of Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences tried to measure the “level of religiosity” of Russian citizens and drew very interesting conclusions.
Psychologist Justin Barrett compares religious people to three-year-old children who "believe that other people know almost everything." Dr. Barrett is a Christian, editor of the journal Cognition and Culture, and author of Why Anyone Believe in God? According to him, children's belief in the omniscience of others decreases as they grow older due to experience. However, this attitude, necessary for a person's socialization and productive interaction with other people, persists as far as belief in God is concerned.
With the help of belief in the irrational and supernatural, people cope with stress and danger, scientists note. In the short term, little things like wearing a talisman can improve performance and give a feeling of self-confidence. That is why, the researchers emphasize, under unfavorable economic conditions, the number of articles on astrology and other parapsychological phenomena increases.
Once upon a time I lived - a prisoner in the world of atheism. For as long as I have been living in this world, I have been told that there is no God. I studied at the best university, found a good job, made a solid career, got married - in general, like everyone else, I enjoy life. Material life. After all, this is what I achieved with my atheism.
One day, returning from work, I accidentally saw on a familiar bench two people I didn’t know, who were passionately talking about faith in God. I became interested and asked to listen to their conversation for a few minutes. One of them claimed that he was a believer and tried in every possible way to prove that he was right, while his interlocutor condemned everything that was said about faith in God. In general, he was my like-minded person. Before, somehow I didn’t have to argue about faith, since all the time my thoughts were occupied with work and home, and this dialogue became interesting to me primarily because I wanted to assert myself in my views on life.
I decided to join the dialogue. My first question was: “Why does a person need faith in God? Is faith a dream with which a person tries to fill the void? Our opponent was not at a loss, adequately parrying my statement. He replied: “Faith is a feeling that is embedded in a person’s consciousness. No matter how much he opposes it, he still believes in something.” I was a little surprised by this answer, and according to my views, I said: “I am a modern person! Why do I need faith? I have everything, I'm happy with life. Why should I waste time on something that does not benefit me?
I already thought that I would throw my interlocutor into a stupor, but he had no intention of backing down. His answer shocked me to the core. He said: “Do you, being a modern man, deny any signs of faith? This can't be! You, for example, believe in the laws of physics, chemistry or biology. There are many phenomena and things that you do not see, but you believe in their existence. Air, wind, sound waves, electric current - all this you recognize and believe in their existence. You believe it! You also believe in the existence of good and evil, justice and injustice. You deny faith because you do not want to improve your unique feelings that are in your consciousness. By denying faith in God, goodness and justice become a formality for you that you want to pass on to your children, but faith allows you to feel with all your soul how precious all these qualities are.”
His words made me flinch. There was a moment when I wanted to strangle him for his stubbornness, but inside myself I began to realize that I was stubborn, not he. And somehow spontaneously it burst out from me: “I don’t need life after death, neither in heaven nor in hell - I just live and don’t bother anyone.” Again, I had some kind of imaginary confidence that I would prevail over him. “Why is faith needed?” was spinning in my head. After all, I have always walked through life, rejoicing in my successes, and then some stranger makes me doubt my established views. It’s really annoying that I can’t adequately refute his answer.
To my statement, the believer also had an answer that was unexpected for me: “Do you deny heaven and hell (He smiled)? Heaven and hell you see and feel every day. You want to relax comfortably - this is heaven, someone oppresses or insults you - this is hell, no one wants this for themselves. A person’s faith allows him to see heaven and hell everywhere, considering this a great test in life. Just because you live and don't bother anyone doesn't mean you don't pass the test. The entire worldly life of a person is a test: today he may experience mental torment, tomorrow he will remain in grace, while thanking his Creator for the mercy shown. Death is just a transition from this world to the eternal world, where the best benefits that the human soul accepts will be rewarded.”
I somehow didn’t have to think about trials, although I related everything that happened in my life to fate. But still I decided not to retreat. My parents taught me to solve my problems myself without the help of God. Why am I worse than a believer? My like-minded person sat in silence: apparently he did not want to interfere with our conversation, since he was desperate to convince a believer. Having collected all my thoughts, I asked my interlocutor, perhaps, the main question: “Why does a person need faith? Why believe in God?
Before answering, my interlocutor ran his hand over his face. Then he directed his gaze somewhere to the side. What’s remarkable is that I didn’t notice any fatigue during the entire time of our conversation; I even, one might say, enjoyed it. But my head was racing with thoughts, looking for worthy arguments to refute. The answer to the last question surprised me. He said: “You know, if a person did not have faith in God, he would constantly fight with his own kind. I know that my arguments make you boil, and this boil is a short-term awakening of your faith, which God has placed in you. If there were no faith, then a person would not show such emotions and would treat everything with indifference. But your questions and interest in this issue and, as a result, the manifestation of emotions in search of a refutation is the same spiritual awakening that is inherent in every person, no matter how he views such a concept as faith. If a person does not seek the truth and meaning of life, then he sees himself as lost. But he may not feel this, because he considers this loss to be correct, showing an inclination towards material wealth.”
Am I really a lost man? Emotions overwhelmed me because I could not think in a way that could logically refute everything he said. I wanted to run away from here, but where? Even after this conversation, his words never left me. I may never meet him again, but he gave me the opportunity to rethink some of my principles. I’ll have to think about it, since GOD gave me such an ability as a person.
Arguments for the existence of God[edit]
"God of White Spots"
Main article: God of white spots
Proof of God's existence based on gaps in scientific or plausible natural explanations.
Proof of perfection
“In our conscience there is an unconditional demand for the moral law. Morality is from God. »
From the observation that most people follow certain moral laws, that is, they are aware of what is good and what is bad, a conclusion is drawn about the existence of objective morality, but since good people commit bad deeds, and bad people are capable of good , a source of morality independent of man is needed. It concludes that the source of objective morality can only be a supreme being, that is, God.
The fact that a person has a moral law - conscience (which differs from earthly laws only in greater accuracy and inexorability), and an internal conviction of the need for the ultimate triumph of justice, indicates the existence of a legislator. Torment of conscience sometimes leads to the fact that the criminal, having the opportunity to hide his crime forever, comes and announces himself.
Cosmological
“Everything must have a reason. The chain of reasons cannot be endless; there must be the very first reason. Some people call the first cause of everything “God.” »
It is found, in part, already in Aristotle, who distinguished the concepts of being random and necessary, conditional and unconditional, and declared the need to recognize, among the relative causes, the first principle of any action in the world.
Avicenna mathematically formulated the cosmological argument for the existence of God as the single and indivisible cause of all things. A very similar rationale is given by Thomas Aquinas as a second proof of the existence of God, although his formulation is not as strict as that of Avicenna. This proof was subsequently simplified and formalized by William Hatcher.
The cosmological argument looks something like this:
Every thing in the universe has its cause outside itself (children have their cause in their parents, parts are made in a factory, etc.);
The universe, as consisting of things having their cause outside themselves, must itself have its cause outside itself;
Since the universe is matter existing in time and space and possessing energy, it follows that the cause of the universe must be outside these four categories.
Therefore, there is an immaterial cause of the Universe, not limited by space and time, not possessing energy [not in the source].
Conclusion: God exists. From the third point it follows that he is an immaterial spirit, outside of space (that is, omnipresent [not in the source]), outside of time (eternal), and does not depend on energy [not in the source] (omnipotent) [not in the source].
Genesis[edit | edit wiki text]
The problem of the relationship between being and non-being is considered as an initial philosophical problem. The central question of this problem is: what serves as the beginning and foundation of the world - being or non-being. Within the framework of the paradigm of the philosophy of being, it is argued that being is absolute and non-being is relative. According to the philosophy of non-being, non-being is original, and being is derivative and limited by non-being. For Abrahamic religions, the question of what is the most basic is answered by the book of Genesis (Genesis 1.1): “In the beginning God created the heavens (spiritual, angelic world) and the earth (visible, material world)…”.
Eternity[edit | edit wiki text]
Eternity - a sign of transcendental existence, certainly supertemporal - is found in Indian theosophy, in some of the Upanishads; this concept was also developed in Greek philosophy (especially among the Neoplatonists) and became a favorite topic of thought for both Eastern and Western mystics and theosophists. We first meet him in the revelation of the eternal God among the Jews.
Varieties of cosmological argument[edit | edit wiki text]
Kalamic argument[edit | edit wiki text]
In light of the Big Bang theory, the cosmological argument goes like this:
Everything that ever happened has a reason
The universe appeared
Therefore the Universe has a cause
This type of cosmological argument, due to its origins in Islamic theology, is called the kalām cosmological argument.
Leibniz's cosmological argument[edit | edit wiki text]
For Leibniz, the cosmological argument takes a slightly different form. He claims that every single thing in the world is “accidental”; in other words, it means that it is logically possible that it does not exist; and this is true not only in relation to each individual thing, but also in relation to the entire Universe. Even when we assume that the Universe has existed forever, then there is nothing inside the Universe that would show why it exists. But according to Leibniz's philosophy, everything must have a sufficient reason, therefore the Universe as a whole must have a sufficient reason, which is located outside of it. This sufficient reason is God.
Teleological[edit | edit wiki text]
“The world is too complex to arise by chance. »
The ancient Greek philosopher Anaxagoras, observing the purposeful structure of the world, came to the idea of the “supreme mind” (Νοΰσ). Also, Socrates and Plato saw in the structure of the world proof of the existence of a higher mind.
The essence of this argument can be stated as follows:
Indeed, the extreme complexity of the structure of the universe testifies to the Great Master, who created such a complex mass of the world and filled it with such complex settings that it is simply impossible to explain it by chance. If an ordinary video camera hardly approaches the level of complexity of the eye, then how could our eye create a blind case? If echolocation cannot be explained by chance in humans, how can it be explained by chance in bats? This is sheer stupidity!
Thus, the universe, which has a very complex structure, must have an intelligent creator. The anthropic principle is also very interesting here.
This argument is also called the “watchmaker’s argument”: “If there is a watch, then there is a watchmaker who made it.” It was developed, among other things, by the British scientist William Paley (1743-1805), who wrote: “If you were to find a clock in an open field, then, based on the obvious complexity of its design, you would come to the inevitable conclusion about the existence of a watchmaker.”
Representatives of patristics also spoke about this, for example, Gregory the Theologian in word 28: “For how could the Universe be formed and stand if it were not for God who carried out and contained everything? Whoever sees a beautifully decorated harp, its excellent design and arrangement, or hears the harp itself being played, imagines nothing else other than the one who made the harp or who plays it, and his thoughts go back to him, although perhaps he does not know him personally.” .
A special case of this argument are arguments that rely on the existence of complex structures found in nature (for example, the DNA molecule, the structure of the wings of insects, or the eyes of birds or humans; as well as complex social properties inherent in humans, such as language). It is stated that such complex structures could not have developed during independent evolution, and, therefore, were created by a higher intelligence.
Ontological[edit | edit wiki text]
Main article: Ontological argument
“What is more perfect is what exists both in imagination and in reality. »
From the concept of God inherent in human consciousness, he concludes the real existence of God. God appears to be an all-perfect being. But to imagine God as all-perfect and to attribute to him existence only in human imagination means to contradict one’s own idea of the all-perfection of God’s being, because what exists both in imagination and in reality is more perfect than what exists in imagination alone. Thus, we must conclude that God, as a being represented as all-perfect, has existence not only in our imagination, but also in reality. Anselm expressed the same thing in another form: God, in theory, is an all-real being, the totality of all realities; being is one of the realities; therefore it is necessary to admit that God exists.
Psychological[edit | edit wiki text]
The main idea of this argument was expressed by St. Augustine and developed by Descartes. Its essence lies in the assumption that the idea of God as an all-perfect being exists eternally and could not be formed as a result of the purely mental activity of a person (his psyche) from the impressions of the external world, and therefore its source belongs to God himself. A similar idea was expressed earlier by Cicero, who wrote:
When we look at the sky, when we contemplate celestial phenomena, does it not become quite clear, quite obvious that there is some deity of the most excellent intelligence who controls it all?<…>If anyone doubts this, then I don’t understand why he doesn’t also doubt whether there is a sun or not! Why is one more obvious than the other? If this were not contained in our souls as known or assimilated, then it would not remain so stable, would not be confirmed over time, could not take root so much with the change of centuries and generations of people. We see that other opinions, false and empty, disappeared over time. Who, for example, now thinks that a hippocentaur or a chimera existed? Is there an old woman so out of her mind that she would now be afraid of those monsters of the underworld in which they also once believed? For time destroys false inventions, but confirms the judgments of nature.
This argument is somewhat complementary to the historical argument.
Historical[edit | edit wiki text]
This argument is based on the idea that there is no state without religion, and was proposed mainly at a time when there really were no states with an overwhelming majority of non-religious citizens.
Possible formulations of this argument are as follows:
“There is no people without religion, which means that religious veneration is natural for man. This means there is a Divinity.”
“The universality of faith in God has been known since the time of Aristotle, the greatest Greek scientist... And now, when scientists know all the peoples without exception who inhabited and inhabit our land, it has been confirmed that all peoples have their own religious beliefs, prayers, temples and sacrifices. “Ethnography does not know irreligious peoples,” says the German geographer and traveler Ratzel.”
The ancient Roman writer Cicero also said: “All people of all nations, in general, know that there are gods, for this knowledge is innate in everyone and, as it were, imprinted in the soul.”
According to Plutarch: “Go around all countries, and you can find cities without walls, without writing, without rulers, without palaces, without wealth, without coins, but no one has ever seen a city devoid of temples and gods, a city in which prayers were sent, they did not swear in the name of the deity.”
“The fact that a person is drawn to God and feels the need for religious worship indicates that the Divine really exists; that which does not exist does not attract. F. Werfel said: “Thirst is the best proof of the existence of water.”
Religiously experienced[edit | edit wiki text]
Near-Death Experiences - Some people who have near-death experiences report seeing deceased relatives, floating above their physical body, or experiencing other supernatural experiences. Such evidence is considered by believers to be proof of the immortality of the soul and the existence of the afterlife.
Answer
Comment