A better sapient / sentient being

[Abrosz]

No, it is the only thing that can save us, approach.

In a utilitarian way. By the way, every time I see the word “save”, I need to smile… Save from whom or what? Don’t hurry with your answer. Think it over.

There is nothing that can happen against God’s either active or permissive will. If God has a desk, it would have the sign on it: “The buck stops here!”

So everything that happens is either willed or permitted by God. And there is no significant difference between the two! The alleged free will that we have, does not exonerate God’s full and total responsibility.

 

[Benadam]

Read Hebrew 11.1 And your “faith” not evidence for me.

What physical evidence would suffice? Say God does a miracle right in front of your eyes. You name the miracle. The event will pass and become a memory and a matter of faith. He makes coagulated centuries old dried blood liquify on certain dathes of the year. Will that do. Oh there’s been alot of Eucharistic miracles given to certain experts to test it and find out what it is. all the labs that received samples report AB blood type and it’s a piece of the heart. Given that the science and results are good isn’t that solid physical evidence? I suppose anything can be chocked up to " we just haven’t discovered how this ihappens".

 

[Abrosz]

What physical evidence would suffice?

Oh, a simple conversation would be fine. No need for something like performing a “miracle”, even though it might help. There are several questions which only God could answer. As long as the assumption of omniscience and omnipotence is valid.

 

[goout]

IWantGod:

No, it is the only thing that can save us, approach.

In a utilitarian way. By the way, every time I see the word “save”, I need to smile… Save from whom or what? Don’t hurry with your answer. Think it over.

There is nothing that can happen against God’s either active or permissive will. If God has a desk, it would have the sign on it: “The buck stops here!”

So everything that happens is either willed or permitted by God. And there is no significant difference between the two! The alleged free will that we have, does not exonerate God’s full and total responsibility.

So is there anything positive going on in your life?
One thing is obvious to anyone reading:
It’s good that you are intuiting the dead end of atheism and working it out here on a Catholic website. Your preoccupation with God is good, I hope it bears fruit.

 

[Abrosz]

So is there anything positive going on in your life?

Sure. A lot. Even though I am aware of the line in one of Jethro Tull’s song: “Shorter of breath, one day closer to death”. (Album: The dark side of the Moon).

Now this fact annoys me. There are so many possibilities I would like to explore. But, as they say, "Death and paying taxes are both unavoidable, but at least they are mutually exclusive - as far as we can ascertain today.

It’s good that you are intuiting the dead end of atheism and working it out here on a Catholic website. Your preoccupation with God is good, I hope it bears fruit.

Sorry, I am quite satisfied with my atheism. But, since I am just a fallible human being, I am aware that I can be wrong, and I am willing to learn. Besides it is an interesting way to exercise m mind.

However, I am sad to report, that so far I have not seen anything, any argument that would convince me, that you are correct and I am wrong.

 

[Benadam]

I think I understand. I pray you get that conversation. I think you need to surrender to God your relationship with Him. I think your expectations are obstacles to the Grace you seek.

Grace and Peace

 

[Abrosz]

I think I understand. I pray you get that conversation. I think you need to surrender to God your relationship with Him. I think your expectations are obstacles to the Grace you seek.

I am not antagonistic to God, I have expectations - once I learn that God exists. After all it might be dangerous to give respect or allegiance to an impostor, wouldn’t it?

 

[goout]

I think I understand. I pray you get that conversation. I think you need to surrender to God your relationship with Him. I think your expectations are obstacles to the Grace you seek.

Grace and Peace

This right here.
Keep being persistent @Abrosz . The answers you are looking for take time, like any other worthwhile endeavor.

 

[IWantGod]

By the way, every time I see the word “save”, I need to smile… Save from whom or what? Don’t hurry with your answer. Think it over.

God will only create a world that will allow for the greatest number of souls to be saved. That is the greatest possible world there can be. Our physical limitations may be a necessary side effect of that goal.

 

[Abrosz]

God will only create a world that will allow for the greatest number of souls to be saved.

Sorry, makes no sense. God could create every “soul” directly into heaven, bypassing this “vale of tears”, where a certain number (majority according to Jesus??) will never make it to heaven.

Our physical limitations maybe be a necessary side effect of that goal.

This “maybe” is just an empty assumption, without merit. After all, God is supposed to be omnipotent, and as such he can create everything (except logical contradictions) and thus creating everyone into heaven would be possible. There is no logical impossibility in creating every soul directly into heaven.

 

[IWantGod]

Sorry, makes no sense.

It does make sense. Love is freely given, but it must also be freely accepted. Freewill.

There is no logical impossibility in creating every soul directly into heaven.

It’s impossible because of freewill. God will not force anyone to love God. It is good that we have a choice.

 

[Abrosz]

It does make sense. Love is freely given, but it must also be freely accepted. Freewill.

Not to me, it does not. First, there is no sign of God’s love for us. Then, we don’t need to have the freedom and ability to perform rape, murder and mayhem. It is enough to stay neutral toward God, to stay at home instead of worshipping at the church.

It’s impossible because of freewill.

Nonsense. God can do anything except creating “married bachelors”. To be created directly into heaven is not logically contradictory.

 

[Gorgias]

Just think about it. We have no direct experience concerning God. So, how smart is God? As smart as the apologists are.

The people of 1st century Palestine who encountered Jesus certainly had “direct experience”!

In a utilitarian way.

(It feels that way to me, too. I’m not quite getting what @IWantGod is laying down, either…)

So everything that happens is either willed or permitted by God. And there is no significant difference between the two! The alleged free will that we have, does not exonerate God’s full and total responsibility.

There’s a huge difference! Think about it: if you have children, then you have an analogous ‘power’ over them, and we could make the argument that everything that they do is “either willed or permitted” by you. Do you, then, get punished for their misdeeds? If it doesn’t work down here, you cannot extrapolate it to God!

 

[IWantGod]

God can do anything except creating “married bachelors”

It is also impossible for God to act against his nature, and because his nature is love he cannot force us to love God because that would be against his nature which is love, and this is the source of freewill.

God cannot force us to love because that is impossible. A being can only truly love if he or she has the freedom to do so; otherwise it is not truly love. This also means that a human being has the freedom to act against love and therefore express the possibility of evil.

If you cannot see the value of freewill because of it’s negative possibilities then we will have to agree to disagree. The dignity of a creature is in his or her freedom to make real choices, bad or good.

God did not create slaves.

 

[IWantGod]

(It feels that way to me, too. I’m not quite getting what @IWantGod is laying down, either…)

God permits imperfection in-order to achieve a greater good, because that is the only possible way to achieve that end.

I don’t see that as necessarily being utilitarian. It just means that the greater good is more important than the desire to remove all imperfection because the desire to remove all imperfection does not in itself and by itself lead to the greater good.

 

[Gorgias]

God permits imperfection in-order to achieve a greater good

This I’m cool with.

[Imperfection] is the only possible way to achieve that end.

This is the part that doesn’t seem to hold up to scrutiny. Especially when you take it to its logical end, which is that God was constrained to making this universe in this way. We’d say that it was God’s plan to do it this way, or that it was fitting, but not necessary as such, right?

I don’t see that as necessarily being utilitarian. It just means that the greater good is more important than the desire to remove all imperfection because the desire to remove all imperfection does not in itself and by itself lead to the greater good.

Umm… “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”, you mean?

 

[IWantGod]

but not necessary as such, right?

God only does that which is necessary to the greater good, and that factors in to the creation of a universe and the divine destiny of God’s creatures. God didn’t just arbitrarily decide to create a universe with imperfections. Everything is happening for a good reason. Because it’s necessary for the kind of beings that we are.

Umm… “the greatest good for the greatest number of people”, you mean?

God wants to save the greatest number of people and i believe that the particular world we are in with all it’s imperfection factors into that equation in some way or another. In that sense this is the best possible world.

 

[Gorgias]

God only does that which is necessary to the greater good

That’s a problematic way of putting it. It makes it seem that God is constrained rather than free.

God wants to save the greatest number of people and i believe that the particular world we are in with all it’s imperfection factors into that equation in some way or another. In that sense this is the best possible world.

Still, you realize that this is the canonical expression of what ‘utilitarianism’ is, right?

 

[IWantGod]

That’s a problematic way of putting it. It makes it seem that God is constrained rather than free.

If doing only the that which is necessary to the greatest good means that God is not free, then i don’t know what to say to you. God can only do his nature. He cannot do what is not the greatest good, because he is in all respects goodness itself, and in respect to his creatures the greatest good would be our union with God which includes our freedom to choose and determines the kind of universe that God would create with that end in mind.

 

[Gorgias]

If doing only the that which is necessary to the greatest good means that God is not free, then i don’t know what to say to you. God can only do his nature. He cannot do what is not the greatest good,

I wouldn’t put it in terms of what God “can only do” or what He “cannot do”. That’s the language of a lack of freedom.