The old version of proof for God's existence is the analogy of wind. You cannot see the wind, but you believe in it. This argument can hold up for some time, but eventually the other party will realize the apparent flaw in the analogy. Though you cannot see the wind, you can still experience it via touch. It is experienced by a sense. They would say that you cannot draw the analogy because a person cannot experience God by a sense (sight, taste, touch, hearing, smelling). I have thought about this for a while and thought of an argument to the opposing side's argument.
Man was created in God's image. That is one belief that is nearly a fundamental in the Christian world. The hard part is figuring out what it means. I have heard it said that we have emotion, and that separates us from the animal kingdom. The problem is, that animals also experience emotion. You know when your dog or cat is angry, scared, or happy. Science has even observed what seems to be "love" in chimps. Therefore, I do not believe that emotion is the quality that makes man an image bearer of the creator. What separates man from the animal kingdom is passion (worship), and unpredictable will.
If emotion is not a spiritual, image bearer act (though it can be fueled spiritually), it must be a physical phenomena. No doubt our emotions are light-years ahead of any other animal, but they still have their roots in the brain for the use of primal protection.
If a person is experiencing great trial in his life, he will be distraught. If his wife left him, he lost his job, and his home, it would seem that all hope is lost. But when that man has the emotion that everything is going to be all right, we call that 'God.' It is a spiritual, miraculous intervention from God Himself in the physical aspect of emotion. There is no way to disprove that it happened if it is a personal experience by the man.
Thus, God is experienced by the physical realm.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nick,
ReplyDeleteYour definition of emotion seems a tad off. Emotion is not a physica event/action. You can't tell your finger to "happy," or your ear to foot to "sullen." Emotion is psychological (ψυχη). You can have a psychosomatic response in your body to emotion, but your thumbs don't emote.
It seems very peculiar that you call an optimistic view of life "God." Many atheists are optimistic. God definitely breaks into the physical, but your definition isn't describing that. You seem to present a pantheistic view of life (which you may or may not intend). I would consider using logic a little more precisely.
God's existence is not provable by logic - otherwise every logical person out there would automatically convert. God is trusted by faith alone.
You also cannot tell your eyes to smell, your tongue to hear, nor your hands to see. Your brain feels by chemicals and such. The feelings are brought on by outside phenomena.
ReplyDeleteIn all fairness, I should probably be more specific. I am not simply talking about having a more optimistic view on life. It is when the man is in deep depression because of his circumstances, and all of a sudden he gets a rush of hope that tells him everything is going to be all right. That is an act of God. God provides the miracle that acts with his mind, and changes his emotion.
About faith. Of course God is believed by faith alone. I cannot think of anything that is not. We all have to have faith to trust even our senses. We believe our perception without fear. That is faith. So the man must have faith that his reassurance comes from God. Now, this situation does not happen often. Most people may never experience it. It is purely hypothetical. The people who have not experienced it must have the faith that it could happen, and those who HAVE experienced it must have the faith that it was from God.
About pantheism. I am an independent, fundamental baptist. Make the assumptions necessary.
Question for you, though, Mr. Preacher (I love google search): Did they have any other word in the Greek for things psychological other than ψυχη?
ReplyDeleteνοῦς is the psychological faculty of understanding, reasoning, thinking, or deciding
ReplyDeleteκαρδία is the causitive source of a person's psychological life in its various aspects, but with special emphasis on thoughts.
ψυχή is the essence of life in terms of thinking, willing, and feeling.
As far as semantic domain, these three words have a lot of overlap. They are synonymous in some contexts, but they each have areas unique to themselves.
It is a real blessing to see some young ind. baptists posting material beneficial for others to read. I hope your argumentation continues to gain precision, enabling your effective communication of truth. Maybe I'll check up on you once or twice in the future...
ReplyDeleteWell, Mr. Proclaimer, I don't know who you are, but that is very encouraging! Thank you, sir.
ReplyDeleteGod bless you.